From ekroposki at charter.net Mon Jun 1 12:38:57 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 12:38:57 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] For Rik's enjoyment... Message-ID: I received the following and thought that Rik would enjoy it: Our Major Surprise in Asia Minor by Robert Higgs by Robert Higgs Although forced population movements are not unique to the twentieth century, as anyone of Cherokee, Creek, Seminole, Chickasaw, or Choctaw ancestry can attest, such atrocities are among the greatest disgraces of the past century. One of the earliest such movements in this era was the population exchange between Turkey and Greece under the terms of the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne, which settled the conflict from which the modern Republic of Turkey emerged. Like most Americans, I know little about Turkey or the history of the territories its present government controls. So I consider the way in which I spent the evening of Monday, May 25, as one of my life's wholly unexpected experiences. On that occasion, my wife Elizabeth and I found ourselves in the village of S,irince, high on a mountainside about nine kilometers from the town of Sel?uk, which itself is about three kilometers from the ruins of the fabulous city of Ephesus, one of the greatest metropolises of the ancient world. By a series of events unlikely to have happened to anyone but a certain lovely, vivacious, and outgoing Louisianan (a.k.a. my wife), Elizabeth, who had gone to Sel?uk earlier on Sunday while I was still occupied with business elsewhere in Turkey, had become acquainted with an affable carpet dealer by the name of Aydin. Through him, we met Metin, a young man who works with or for Aydin. (In Turkey it seems that everybody works with or for a great many others, who are described in most cases as brothers, cousins, uncles, or nephews.) Both Aydin and Metin speak good English and have spent time in the United States. Metin had previously kept a shop in Sirince, and he took us there on Monday evening, when Aydin, who had promised to take us, was diverted by business dealings. The village was nearly deserted when we arrived just after sundown, and almost all of the shops had closed. Metin informed us that the village had been inhabited for many generations by Greeks, whose houses were built in the customary Greek style (the style in which they remain today, at least on the outside). In the early days of Mustafa Kemal's (Kemal Atat?rk's) reign as modern Turkey's founding strong man, these Orthodox Christian people had been expelled in the great population exchange and replaced by Muslim Turks who had previously lived in Greece. With no tourists swarming in the streets, our stroll around the village before dinner was pleasant and unimpeded. We then sat down to have dinner at a restaurant whose menu was extensive and inviting and in which for an hour or more no one else was being served. In response to our questions about present-day relations between Turks and Greeks, Metin indicated that he had nothing against Greeks. "Problem is not people," he averred. "Problem is always governments." In reaction to this delightfully unexpected libertarian statement, we expressed our wholehearted agreement. When Metin inquired as to how we liked President Barack Obama, we replied that we dislike all politicians. He nodded as if he understood and agreed with our sentiment. Then, after a brief pause, he said. "But there is one who is different." After pausing again, as if he were searching his mind, he said simply: "Ron Paul." Quickly following up, he declared emphatically: "I love Ron Paul!" Nearly struck dumb by this amazing declaration, we asked how he knew about Dr. Paul. He said that everybody in Turkey knows about him, and many Turks like him better than other politicians. When we informed him that we are personally acquainted with Dr. Paul, it was almost as if we had told him we are personally acquainted with some world-famous celebrity. Elizabeth confessed to him that although she normally steers clear of politics, she had joined a meetup group to promote Dr. Paul's Republican presidential candidacy and had placed a big Ron Paul sign in front of our house. Instant solidarity! On Tuesday, we talked about Ron Paul with Aydin, who shares Metin's enthusiasm for the Texas congressman and expressed a desire to bring him to Turkey to be elected president. I daresay Turkey could use such a leader, under whom there certainly would be no collectivist state atrocities such as the heartrending Greek-Turkish population relocations of 1923. As we left Aydin's shop for our final departure from Sel?uk, we could hear him speaking to another man. Although we could not understand what he was saying in Turkish, we did catch the recurrent words "Ron Paul." submitted by Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090601/7d9e953a/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Mon Jun 1 16:47:32 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 16:47:32 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Some facts speak for themselves Message-ID: <94098A5F4AC94D9E8DD410F709F14179@YOURB88038198E> The Global Islamic population is approximately 1,200,000,000 ONE BILLION TWO HUNDRED MILLION or 20% of the world's population. They have received the following Nobel Prizes....... Literature: 1988 - Najib Mahfooz Peace: 1978 - Mohamed Anwar El-Sadat 1994 - Yaser Arafat: 1990 - Elias James Corey 1999 - Ahmed Zewai Economics: (zero) Physics: (zero) Medicine: 1960 - Peter Brian Medawar 1998 - Ferid Mourad TOTAL: 7 SEVEN The Global Jewish population is approximately 14,000,000 Only FOURTEEN MILLION or about 0.02% of the world's population. They have received the following Nobel Prizes: Literature: 1910 - Paul Heyse 1927 - Henri Bergson 1958 - Boris Pa sternak 1966 - Shmuel Yosef Agnon 1966 - Nelly Sachs 1976 - Saul Bellow 1978 - Isaac Bashevis Singer 1981 - Elias Canetti 1987 - Joseph Brodsky 1991 - Nadine Gordimer World Peace: 1911 - Alfred Fried 1911 - Tobias Michael Carel Asser 1968 - Rene Cassin 1973 - Henry Kissinger 1978 - Menachem Begin 1986 - Elie Wiesel 1994 - Shimon Peres 1994 - Yitzhak Rabin Physics: 1905 - Adolph Von Baeyer 1906 - Henri Moissan 1907 - Albert Abraham Michelson 1908 - Gabriel Lippmann 1910 - Otto Wallach 1915 - Richard Willstaetter 1918 - Fritz Haber 1921 - Albert Einstein 1922 - Niels Bohr 1925 - James Franck 1925 - Gustav Hertz 1943 - Gustav Stern 1943 - George Charles de Hevesy 1944 - Isidor Issac Rabi 1952 - Felix Bloch 1954 - Max Born 1958 - Igor Tamm 1959 - Emilio Segre 1960 - Don ald A. Glaser 1961 - Robert Hofstadter 1961 - Melvin Calvin 1962 - Lev Davidovich Landau 1962 - Max Ferdinand Perutz 1965 - Richard Phil lips Feynman 1965 - Julian Schwinger 1969 - Murray Gell-Mann 1971 - Dennis Gabor 1972 - William Howard Stein 1973 - Brian David Joseph son 1975 - Benjamin Mottleson 1976 - Burton Richter 1977 - Ilya Prigogine 1978 - Arno Allan Penzias 1978 - Peter L Kapitza 1979 - Stephen Weinberg 1979 - Sheldon Glashow 1979 - Herbert Charles Brown 1980 - Paul Berg 1980 - Walter Gilbert 1981 - Roald Hoffmann 1982 - Aaron Klug 1985 - Albert A. Hauptman 1985 - Jerome Karle 1986 - Dudley R. Herschbach 1988 - Robert Huber 1988 - Leon Lederman 1988 - Melvin Schwartz 1988 - Jack Steinberger 1989 - Sidney Altman 1990 - Jerome Friedman 1992 - Rudolph Marcus 1995 - Martin Perl 2000 - Alan J. Heeger Economics: 1970 - Paul Anthony Samuelson 1971 - Simon Kuznets 1972 - Kenneth Joseph Arrow 1975 - Leonid Kantorovich 1976 - Mil ton Friedman 1978 - Herb ert A. Simon 1980 - Lawrence Robert Klein 1985 - Franco Modigliani 1987 - Robert M. Solow 1990 - Harry Markowitz 1 990 - Merton Miller 1992 - Gary Becker 1993 - Robert Fogel Medicine: 1908 - Elie Metchnikoff 1908 - Paul Erlich 1914 - Robert Barany 1922 - Otto Meyerhof 1930 - Karl Landsteiner 1931 - Otto Warburg 1936 - Otto Loewi 1944 - Joseph Erlanger 1944 - Herb ert Spencer Gasser 1945 - Ernst Boris Chain 1946 - Hermann Joseph Muller 1950 - Tadeus Reichstein 1952 - Selman Abra ham Waksman 1953 - Hans Krebs 1953 - Fritz Albert Lipmann 1958 - Joshua Lederberg 1959 - Arthur Kornberg 1964 - Konrad Bloch 1965 - Francois Jacob 1965 - Andre Lwoff 1967 - George Wald 1968 - Marshall W. Nirenberg 1969 - Salvador Luria 1970 - Julius Axelrod 1970 - Sir Bernard Katz 1972 - Gerald Maurice Ed elman 1975 - Howard Martin Temin 1976 - Baruch S. Blumberg 1977 - Roselyn Sussman Yalow 1978 - Daniel Nathans 1980 - Baruj Benacerraf 1984 - Cesar Milstein 1985 - Michael Stuart Brown 1985 - Joseph L. Goldstein 1986 - Stanley Cohen [& Rita Levi-Montalcini] 1988 - Gertrude Elion 1989 - Harold Varmus 1991 - Erwin Neher 1991 - Bert Sakmann 1993 - Richard J. Roberts 1993 - Phillip Sharp 1994 - Alfred Gilman 1995 - Ed ward B. Lewis TOTAL: 129 ONE HUNDRED TWENTY NINE! The Jews are NOT promoting brain washing children in military training camps, or teaching them how to blow themselves up and cause maximum deaths of Jews and other non Muslims! The Jews don't hijack planes, nor kill athletes at the Olympics, or blow themselves up in German restaurants. There is NOT one single Jew that has destroyed a church. There is NOT a single Jew that protests by killing people. Jews don't traffic slaves, nor have leaders calling for Jihad and death to all the Infidels. Perhaps the world's Muslims should consider investing more in standard education and less in blaming the Jews for all their problems. Muslims must ask 'what can they do for humankind' before they demand that humankind respects them!! Regardless of your feelings about the crisis between Israel and the Palestinians and Arab neighbors, even if you believe there is more culpability on Israel 's part, the following two sentences really say it all: 'If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel' -Benjamin Netanyahu I'm not asking you to forward this.......on the other hand, IT WOULDN'T HURT IF YOU DID! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090601/49413e79/attachment-0001.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Jun 1 23:39:12 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 22:39:12 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] For Rik's enjoyment... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6634e19e0906012039m1bfe9d7fufa93306d038ed5b6@mail.gmail.com> Ed, Ron Paul .... President of Turkey .... I love it As much as I hope Aydin and Metin are able to find a man with the principles of Dr. Paul to be their president, I really must insist that they not try to take him from us. What we really need in this country is a couple hundred more men in the legislature with the guts and good sense that Ron Paul exibits every time he stands up to the podium. Ron Paul for President ..... Long live Ron Paul!!! Rik On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Ed Kroposki wrote: > I received the following and thought that Rik would enjoy it: > > *Our Major Surprise in Asia Minor* > > *by Robert Higgs > **by Robert Higgs* > > > > > > Although forced population movements are not unique to the twentieth > century, as anyone of Cherokee, Creek, Seminole, Chickasaw, or Choctaw > ancestry can attest, such atrocities are among the greatest disgraces of the > past century. One of the earliest such movements in this era was the population > exchange between Turkey and Greece > under the terms of the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne, which settled the > conflict from which the modern Republic of Turkey > emerged. > > Like most Americans, I know little about Turkey or the history of the > territories its present government controls. So I consider the way in which > I spent the evening of Monday, May 25, as one of my life?s wholly unexpected > experiences. On that occasion, my wife Elizabeth and I found ourselves in > the village of S,irince, high on a mountainside about nine kilometers from > the town of Sel?uk, which itself is about three kilometers from the ruins of > the fabulous city of Ephesus, one of the greatest metropolises of the > ancient world. > > By a series of events unlikely to have happened to anyone but a certain > lovely, vivacious, and outgoing Louisianan (a.k.a. my wife), Elizabeth, who > had gone to Sel?uk earlier on Sunday while I was still occupied with > business elsewhere in Turkey, had become acquainted with an affable carpet > dealer by the name of Aydin. Through him, we met Metin, a young man who > works with or for Aydin. (In Turkey it seems that everybody works with or > for a great many others, who are described in most cases as brothers, > cousins, uncles, or nephews.) Both Aydin and Metin speak good English and > have spent time in the United States. > > Metin had previously kept a shop in Sirince, and he took us there on > Monday evening, when Aydin, who had promised to take us, was diverted by > business dealings. The village was nearly deserted when we arrived just > after sundown, and almost all of the shops had closed. Metin informed us > that the village had been inhabited for many generations by Greeks, whose > houses were built in the customary Greek style (the style in which they > remain today, at least on the outside). In the early days of Mustafa > Kemal?s (Kemal Atat?rk?s) reign > as modern Turkey?s founding strong man, these Orthodox Christian people > had been expelled in the great population exchange and replaced by Muslim > Turks who had previously lived in Greece. > > With no tourists swarming in the streets, our stroll around the village > before dinner was pleasant and unimpeded. We then sat down to have dinner at > a restaurant whose menu was extensive and inviting and in which for an hour > or more no one else was being served. In response to our questions about > present-day relations between Turks and Greeks, Metin indicated that he had > nothing against Greeks. ?Problem is not people,? he averred. ?Problem is > always governments.? In reaction to this delightfully unexpected libertarian > statement, we expressed our wholehearted agreement. > > > > When Metin inquired as to how we liked President Barack Obama, we replied > that we dislike all politicians. He nodded as if he understood and agreed > with our sentiment. Then, after a brief pause, he said. ?But there is one > who is different.? After pausing again, as if he were searching his mind, he > said simply: ?Ron Paul.? Quickly following up, he declared emphatically: ?I > love Ron Paul!? Nearly struck dumb by this amazing declaration, we asked how > he knew about Dr. Paul. He said that everybody in Turkey knows about him, > and many Turks like him better than other politicians. When we informed him > that we are personally acquainted with Dr. Paul, it was almost as if we had > told him we are personally acquainted with some world-famous celebrity. > Elizabeth confessed to him that although she normally steers clear of > politics, she had joined a meetup group to promote Dr. Paul?s Republican > presidential candidacy and had placed a big Ron Paul sign in front of our > house. Instant solidarity! > > On Tuesday, we talked about Ron Paul with Aydin, who shares Metin?s > enthusiasm for the Texas congressman and expressed a desire to bring him to > Turkey to be elected president. I daresay Turkey could use such a leader, > under whom there certainly would be no collectivist state atrocities such as > the heartrending Greek-Turkish population relocations of 1923. > As we left Aydin?s shop for our final departure from Sel?uk, we could hear > him speaking to another man. Although we could not understand what he was > saying in Turkish, we did catch the recurrent words ?Ron Paul.? > > > > submitted by Ed K > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090601/2a6334ad/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Tue Jun 2 11:21:48 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 11:21:48 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] This is right up Bill's alley Message-ID: <84D5AFB556BE4D0D98747E2B1E4BD00A@YOURB88038198E> A Free Press For A Free People Is Barack Obama Crazy? By Joseph Farah, editor and CEO of WorldNetDaily I KNOW. "Is Barack Obama Crazy?" is a pretty provocative subject for an email. I admit, I don't know the answer to the question. But, given Barack Obama's actions in the first few months of his administration, it's a valid question. And so, the May issue of WorldNetDaily's acclaimed monthly Whistleblower magazine takes it on. Let's examine some of the evidence: If you held a job and people were questioning your qualifications, and all you had to do to put an end to those questions, not to mention more than a dozen lawsuits filed against you, was to produce a valid birth certificate you claimed to possess, would you refuse to take that simple step? Or would you, as Obama has done, spend at least $1 million to fight the lawsuits? I think most people would agree that someone who chose the latter is either crazy or doesn't have a valid birth certificate. Let's say you got a job in which you succeeded someone with whom you disagreed passionately.Would you try to have that person prosecuted over those differences, knowing that some day, someone with whom you disagree would succeed you and possibly contemplate the same course of action? That's what Obama talked about doing in the case of his disagreement with George W. Bush over the practice of coercive interrogations - policies, I might point out, that were employed not just by his immediate predecessor, but by every war-time president in the history of the United States. Or what do you make of Obama's efforts to ban the use of the words "terror" and "terrorism" from his administration's lexicon? The administration prefers to call attacks on terrorists "overseas contingency operations." And terrorist attacks at home are referred to as "man-caused disasters." These new terms are apparently considered less offensive to terrorists. While there are hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens voluntarily serving in arms overseas, the Obama administration put out a report to law enforcement agencies throughout the country to be wary of returning veterans, because they might be more inclined to get involved in "right-wing extremist" activities. Obama presides - legitimately or illegitimately - over a nation founded on the ideals of "independence" and "national sovereignty." Yet, in a speech given in Prague, what was his prescription for making the world a better place? "All nations must come together to build a stronger, global regime," he said. How about his solution to an economic crisis spurred by too much indebtedness? More debt. Let's say you're the first black president. Do you appoint a black attorney general who indicts the people who just elected you as a "nation of cowards" on matters of race? Imagine appointing to a top policy position at the Defense Department, a columnist from the Los Angeles Times who believes U.S. policies were to blame for the 9/11 attacks by al-Qaida. That would be Rosa Brooks, who also previously referred to Obama's immediate predecessor as "our torturer in chief " and a "psychotic who need(s) treatment" while comparing Bush's arguments for waging a war on terrorism to Adolf Hitler's use of political propaganda. I could go on, but I think you get the picture. I don't know if any of these actions mean the president is crazy. But I do know they mean he is dangerous to the security and prosperity of the nation. For a more complete diagnosis, I refer you to the May issue of WND's acclaimed Whistleblower magazine, titled NARCISSIST IN CHIEF: Experts explain what makes Barack Obama tick. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=97201 In NARCISSIST IN CHIEF, Whistleblower's formidable team of experts - including psychiatrists, psychologists and astute political analysts - tackle this question, and in the process, serve up some stunning information and insights for readers. "This is surely one of the most fascinating - and possibly most important - Whistleblower issues we've ever produced," said David Kupelian, editor of Whistleblower and managing editor of WorldNetDaily. "Some of the articles, including the ones by narcissism expert Sam Vaknin, Ph.D., and forensic psychiatrist Lyle Rossiter, M.D., are nothing short of brilliant. They make it crystal clear for the reader exactly what's going on inside the brains of those leading America today. This is definitely a paradigm-busting edition of Whistleblower." Other highlights from this month's issue include: "American idolatry" by David Kupelian, on why experts believe we're becoming a nation of egomaniacs "Psychobamanalysis" by Brian Russell, Ph.D., in which the well-known psychologist explains how Barack Obama thinks "Barack Obama: Narcissist or merely narcissistic?" by Sam Vaknin, Ph.D., a comprehensive expert look at how the president's behavior matches many markers of the troubling disorder "New study: Narcissists crave power" "Poll: Obama beats Jesus as American 'hero'" by Chelsea Schilling "Farrakhan on Obama: 'The Messiah is absolutely speaking'" by Bob Unruh, on why the anti-Semitic Black Muslim leader says, "Barack has captured the youth" and will bring about "universal change" "Youth movements are bad news" by Dennis Prager, who explains why Obama's powerful appeal to young people does not bode well. "Understanding Obama's cult of personality" by Ali Sina, in which the Iranian ex-Muslim author recalls similar widespread public ecstasy over the charismatic Ayatollah Khomeini "'Disturbed personalities' leading America today" by Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr., M.D., in which the veteran forensic psychiatrist explains the psychodynamics of today's radical liberal mind "The Obama Doctrine: 'Don't blame me'" by Ben Shapiro, on the dangers of a president being obsessed with his own greatness "Oratory - or hypnotic induction?" Some analysts claim Obama's eloquence is augmented by hypnosis techniques "The strange roots of political correctness" by Reb Bradley, who explains how raising coddled, narcissistic kids leads naturally to PC madness "Liberalism is a mental disorder" by Michael Savage, in which the top radio talker invites confused Americans to "throw off their chains" "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" by Ellis Washington, in which the law professor highlights what he calls Obama's "infantile, overarching, all-consuming sense of entitlement." Each monthly issue of Whistleblower, which many readers call "the world's best newsmagazine," focuses cover-to-cover on one crucial issue - usually an issue twisted beyond recognition or totally avoided by the establishment press. Whistleblower has recently adopted to a very attractive, glossy, color format. If you haven't seen Whistleblower lately, you have no idea what you're missing. It's not only powerful, it's also beautiful. I urge all WND readers to subscribe to Whistleblower. It's simply essential reading. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090602/6ba9f7f9/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Thu Jun 4 22:12:58 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 21:12:58 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] June 4th Message-ID: <400985d70906041912l254ab81cke373aead33319403@mail.gmail.com> Lost in Gulfport chasing down a thousand nit-noy details, but I didn't forget what day today is - http://motivatedphotos.com/?id=3437 Brad From ekroposki at charter.net Fri Jun 5 07:33:41 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 07:33:41 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] PSALM 2008-2012 Message-ID: <656484750A8A4873BFA1222BFAC29E44@YOURB88038198E> PSALM 2008-2012 FROM THE FIRST BOOK OF DEMOCRAT OBAMA IS MY SHEPHERD, I SHALL NOT WANT. HE LEADETH ME BESIDE STILL FACTORIES. HE RESTORETH MY FAITH IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. HE GUIDETH ME IN THE PATH OF UNEMPLOYMENT. YEA, THOUGH I WALK THRU THE VALLEY OF THE BREAD LINE I SHALL NOT GO HUNGRY. OBAMA HAS ANOINTED MY INCOME WITH TAXES, MY EXPENSES RUNNETH OVER MY INCOME, SURELY, POVERTY AND HARD LIVING WILL FOLLOW ME ALL THE DAYS OF HIS TERM. FROM HENCE FORTH WE WILL LIVE ALL THE DAYS OF OUR LIVES IN A RENTED HOME WITH AN OVERSEAS LANDLORD. BUT I AM GLAD I AM AN AMERICAN, I AM GLAD THAT I AM FREE. BUT I WISH I WAS A DOG AND OBAMA A TREE.. Today's Quote "Americans grew tired of being thought to be dumb by the rest of the world, so they went to the polls and removed all doubt." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090605/ffde8a79/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sat Jun 6 08:58:12 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 07:58:12 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Feeling automated lately? Message-ID: <6634e19e0906060558y3f416b31tc296edf626854405@mail.gmail.com> Good Morning, All Found this from the Mises Institute this morning. I was thinking about making copies of it to give to every high school graduate (or any other graduate) I know. If the generation coming up could begin to understand the world from this point of view, we might just be able to return to the prosperity we have enjoyed during most of my lifetime. If not ..... I reckon it's downhill from here .... Ayn Rand would have liked this guy. Rik http://mises.org/story/3429 ______________________ Rights for Robots *Mises Daily* by Sir Ernest Benn| Posted on 6/4/2009 12:00:00 AM [This essay appears in *Essays on Liberty,* (volume 1, 1952).[image: Download PDF] It is condensed from a 1950 address.] I understand that in the United States there are still those who think that the machinery of government can be used as a substitute for personal responsibility on the part of the governed. This idea, as we know only too well in Britain, is the open road to disaster. It changes persons with responsibilities into robots with rights. And while you fortunate Americans will last a little longer than the rest of us, your doom is also assured if you, like us, rely upon politics and collective action to relieve you of the normal and natural responsibilities of healthy men. For socialism is not a system; it is a disease. The "something for nothing" mentality is, in fact, an economic cancer. In England we have suffered nearly five years of effective socialist government. But that is only the end of the story; we are merely completing 50 years of a sloppy sentimentalism in public affairs of which the present socialism is merely the logical outcome. In the process we have murdered old virtues with new deals. Well-meaning, shallow thinking, kindly people, aware of the scriptural injunction that "the greatest of these is charity,"have failed to notice the distinction between the real article and the giving away of other people's money. So, having lost our faith, we come to the end of the story; we have accepted false hopes and practiced a charity that is nothing of the kind. A Drab Existence You will remember that 50 years ago at the end of Victoria's reign, we had achieved in Britain, notwithstanding many shortcomings and blemishes, a high general standard of living. From that proud position we have now descended to the point where American tourists coming to Europe go to the countries conquered by Hitler to escape the drab austerity of utopian Britain. We have had enough experience to know exactly what "security" means: It is a prior government claim upon salaries and wages. It is austerity rations bought with Marshall Plan aid. It is more and more paper money, and less and less of anything to buy. This government-guaranteed "security" is steadily reducing output per man in our industries. There are, of course, glorious minority exceptions. But in general, our people have believed the promises of 1945 and have concentrated on their supposed rights and forgotten their responsibilities. Most thinking people among us now realize that while it is easy to make the *rich* poor, it is quite another matter to make the *poor* rich. The Long View There is little purpose to be served in wearying you with the details of our life, especially business life, in Britain today. To argue about taxes, pensions, houses, or even groundnuts is merely to scratch the surface. You will be more interested in the longer view and the lessons to be learned from it. In the short period of 50 years we have traveled the whole road, starting when government had almost nothing to do with trade, and ending where all trade is under the dead hand of the state. America, as I understand, is about halfway along this road to disaster. Among the disasters resulting from governmental planning in the economic field, I put at the top of the list the loss of the market. We have no such thing that counts for much in England today. Exchange by willing buyers and willing sellers has, for practical purposes, disappeared. Governmental buying, fixed prices, subsidies, and purchase taxes have substituted force for willingness. Goodwill is a thing of the past. Price, properly the result of a compromise between the willing buyer and the willing seller, is now replaced by an official abstraction arrived at for political rather than economic reasons. The word "willing" is not to be found in any official vocabulary. The sanctity of contract is also a thing of the past, and that again shows how far we have departed from the principles upon which civilization was constructed. Governments, here and elsewhere, fail to set much value on their pledged word. Perhaps the biggest of all the changes in this connection is the destruction of the price mechanism. Before the politicians usurped the right of the citizen to provide for himself, the price mechanism indicated with speed and certainty the degree of plenty or of scarcity. It did not require committees of experts and official inquirers to discover changes in production and consumption, and the need for adjusting action accordingly. The price mechanism has been put so completely out of action that we now pay a series of varying prices for the same article at the same time. Freedom Of Choice $18 $16 The natural process, named by economists "the law of supply and demand," insures the freedom of choice that is essential to the worthwhile life of free citizens. Socialism tries to put the matter the other way around. Some authority, claiming to know what the people want, issues orders for supply without being able to know the requirements of the buyers or demanders. This theory ignores completely the forces that govern the ordinary actions of the ordinary man. The natural order of things requires that the maker shall produce his goods and display them for the inspection of the buyer who is, at all times, free not to buy. The right to buy or not to buy is vital to economic well-being and, of course, to personal liberty. It is only now that we are beginning to reap the inevitable fruits of wrong thinking. Millions of our people now look to the government much in the same fashion that their fathers of Victorian times looked to God. Political authority has taken the place of heavenly guidance. Herbert Spencer in that wonderful prophecy, *The Man Versus the State*, explained in detail what would happen. He foretold with exactitude the present rush of the weaklings for jobs as planners and permitters, telling other people what *not* to do. You will have noticed that while we are all under the thumb of authority, authority becomes composed of those who, lacking the courage to stand on their own feet and accept their share of personal responsibility, seek the safety of official positions where they escape the consequences of error and failure. Active, energetic, and progressive persons, instead of leading the rest, are allowed to move only by the grace and favor of that section of the population which from its very nature lacks all the qualities needed to produce the desired results. Authority is the power to say *no,* which requires little or no ability. On a broad view, the all-important issue in the world today is * individualism* versus *collectivism.* The Individualist thinks of millions of single human souls, each with a spark of divine genius, and visualizes that genius applied to the solution of his own problems. His conception is infinitely higher than that of the politician or planner who at best regards these millions as material for social or political experiment or, at worst, cannon fodder. The Individualist believes self-help to be twice blest. For not only does it provide the help required, but it also gives a self-respecting satisfaction in accomplishment which can never attach to help that is received. Character Must Be Earned When a man is on his own, an individual responsible for himself, he must earn a character ? a personal character that is perhaps his first necessity. Others may then learn and imitate his qualities and capabilities. In a planned society he has no need of a character, for no such thing is wanted. No national or universal plan can afford to take the least notice of his personal character. As an individual responsible for himself, a man must also acquire credit. Others must be convinced that he is creditworthy, that he can be trusted, that what he undertakes he will perform to the limits of his ability. But when he is planned, nothing so troublesome is in the least necessary. The individual responsible for himself must try to avoid the loss that results from mistakes. But if he is the planner or the planned, the loss comes out of the public purse, and he is relieved of personal responsibility. He can then waste and lose just as much as his inherent laziness may dictate. The individual responsible for himself must strive to do better ? better than his previous performance and better than others. But in a planned society, the only upward route available to a person is into the ranks of the planners where he can presume to arrange the affairs of others. The socialist advances the supposition that the individual can be so trained and managed as to cause his every act to be performed in the interests of society as a whole. The idea of the socialist is to substitute for the enormously constructive natural power of the self-interest of each of us, a manufactured force composed of the theoretical interests of the state. To the individualist this socialist idea is utter nonsense ? a view much strengthened by the losses and disasters of the last five years in England alone. Honesty The Best Policy Perhaps, above all, I am an individualist because it makes for honesty. In a society of free men, each acting on his own responsibility, honesty is the best policy. But as we move further from the individualist position into compulsory associations, unions, districts, counties, nations, and states, we tend to lose touch with that essentially personal quality ? honesty. Honesty may be described as a force governing dealings between individuals. When the transactions are between masses, they tend to become less honest; when between nations, there is, indeed, little pretense of honesty about them. That simple circumstance arises not from evil intent but from the very nature of man's conduct. $10 $7 All this concerns a philosophy; a point of view from which to start. And if only individualism could get these foundations well laid in the minds of the people, we could then proceed with our voluntary social services and other humanitarian plans for the comfort of the less fortunate minority. As it is ? without these foundations ? charity, good feeling, desire to help, sympathy, and many other virtues have been brushed aside. And in their place there has been set up the mean, unworthy, degrading, and destructive notion of rights for robots, which is mankind under complete government planning. You happy people in the comparatively cleaner atmosphere of the United States are better able to recognize these greater, all-pervading considerations. And you are in a better position to reverse this mad rush to turn persons into robots by means of the "planned economy" and the "welfare state." May God guide you in your decision. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090606/1ac189b9/attachment.html From bill at effros.com Sat Jun 6 09:02:46 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2009 09:02:46 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] UAW trust to get up to 20 percent of GM shares In-Reply-To: <81ECF1AA226841BC8C54BC4E51EA3C29@ebsoffice> References: <81ECF1AA226841BC8C54BC4E51EA3C29@ebsoffice> Message-ID: <4A2A68F6.7070503@effros.com> I'm a little late on this, but, Ask the pilots how this is going to play out. (Do we know any pilots?) Let's see. We used to buy 15 million cars a year, but now we buy only 10 million. We are going to dismantle GM, but the owners of each part think they will get 100% of the market share they had in a market only 2/3 the size in terms of purchases, but the same size in terms of capacity. The autoworkers wound up with a large stake in the production capacity least likely to survive the coming fallout. But as owners, they will have to manage themselves out of jobs, health care, and pensions. It's a death of a thousand cuts. Serves them all right. B. Michael D. Weisner wrote: > As Sidney Freeman said so eloquently, "Ladies and gentlemen, take my > advice..." GM is definitely on the thin ice. > > IF THIS WORKS, at least GM will be out of the UAW healthcare > business. Ford is watching very carefully. > > Mike > > > UAW trust to get up to 20 percent of GM shares > > By TOM KRISHER > AP Auto Writer > > DETROIT (AP) -- A cost-cutting deal between the United Auto Workers > and General Motors Corp. will give a union-run health care trust fund > up to 20 percent of the company's shares and a seat on the board, but > it also could be the catalyst that allows the company to restructure > outside of bankruptcy court... > > http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_GM_UAW?SITE=OHRAV&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090606/2949dc1c/attachment-0001.html From ekroposki at charter.net Sat Jun 6 10:20:42 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 10:20:42 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Feeling automated lately? Message-ID: Rik, Imagine where we be without the internet. As a small group, we each share information. We come up with the old or historical information that the main stream media cares nothing about. However, we have it our capacity to point out that others have spoken out in the past. As I have pointed out after I was told by some on the Rhodes List to quite writing about Socialism, I departed. Some on this forum stay with them. I encourage you to not to stop writing about your feelings about freedom and economic thoughts to the Rhodes List and others. Your post from the Mises Institute is meaningful, albeit, just a few will read and less understand. So again I encourage you to post copies everywhere. Have courage, stand up, speak out. Recently I had a good post sent to me by Hank of the Rhodes List. I invited him and encouraged him to post it on this forum. I encourage others still the Rhodes List to ask Hank to join this forum and post the informative email he took time to send me. At the very least, send him your post from the "essays on liberty". Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090606/65f50982/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Sat Jun 6 10:50:03 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 10:50:03 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Rik's Post Message-ID: Rik, In the past, sales was an important part of the American Economy. Sucessful companies regularly conducted sales training and motivational meetings. I attended many such motivational meetings. They did increase sucess. Your post from the Mises Institute was better than a Sunday Sermon. Your post was better than Vince Lombardi. Most of us need to be reminded of such things. It is easy to slide down the slippery slope. Thank you for your reminder of important things... Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090606/d6c5eb12/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sat Jun 6 19:42:09 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 18:42:09 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] UAW trust to get up to 20 percent of GM shares In-Reply-To: <4A2A68F6.7070503@effros.com> References: <81ECF1AA226841BC8C54BC4E51EA3C29@ebsoffice> <4A2A68F6.7070503@effros.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906061642w2a86edd3u8d748cc8e767398a@mail.gmail.com> Bill, Oh yes! The United boys - they were all pretty smug in the late 90's, but flying airplanes and running an airline are two different skill-sets. I'm glad to see Saturn get spun-off from GM. It's a good car and the people who work there (outside of Nashville) are happy campers. Roger Penske is a good businessman/car man (he owns 25% of Hino trucks along with Toyota) and Saturn should make it alone. Shanghai Buick builds a fine car and the factory is super efficient and the car is popular in China. US Government Motors? They'll be tits-up in three years even with subsidies, tax breaks, and huge 'gubmint' purchase orders. Think Trabant. Brad On 6/6/09, Bill Effros wrote: > I'm a little late on this, but, > > Ask the pilots how this is going to play out. (Do we know any pilots?) > > Let's see. We used to buy 15 million cars a year, but now we buy only > 10 million. We are going to dismantle GM, but the owners of each part > think they will get 100% of the market share they had in a market only > 2/3 the size in terms of purchases, but the same size in terms of capacity. > > The autoworkers wound up with a large stake in the production capacity > least likely to survive the coming fallout. > > But as owners, they will have to manage themselves out of jobs, health > care, and pensions. > > It's a death of a thousand cuts. > > Serves them all right. > > B. > > > > Michael D. Weisner wrote: >> As Sidney Freeman said so eloquently, "Ladies and gentlemen, take my >> advice..." GM is definitely on the thin ice. >> >> IF THIS WORKS, at least GM will be out of the UAW healthcare >> business. Ford is watching very carefully. >> >> Mike >> >> >> UAW trust to get up to 20 percent of GM shares >> >> By TOM KRISHER >> AP Auto Writer >> >> DETROIT (AP) -- A cost-cutting deal between the United Auto Workers >> and General Motors Corp. will give a union-run health care trust fund >> up to 20 percent of the company's shares and a seat on the board, but >> it also could be the catalyst that allows the company to restructure >> outside of bankruptcy court... >> >> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_GM_UAW?SITE=OHRAV&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From ekroposki at charter.net Sat Jun 6 20:18:08 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 20:18:08 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Rik - FYI Message-ID: Circulating the internet: The Fed is worried about Ron Paul The central bank of the United States government--the Federal Reserve--thinks it needs a lobbyist, to work in Congress against Ron Paul. The Bloomberg story doesn't mention Ron, but instead interviews some ex-Fed hack in DC. But it is Ron Paul the Fed fears. What a great achievement of Ron's, to make what Andrew Jackson called "the Monster," the all-powerful, globe-dominating, special-interest funding, bankster-enabling, dollar-depreciating, business cycle-generating central bank worry about its image, for the first time since 1913. His presidential campaign alerted millions to the fact that we are being ripped-off by the Fed. His Audit the Fed bill (183 cosponsors!) scares the heck out of them. And wait until his End the Fed manifesto is published this summer! They'll need a whole corps of lobbyists, not that they will be able to protect what is in essence a criminal counterfeiting gang. Click on the links for details. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090606/54946dd6/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sat Jun 6 21:01:53 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 20:01:53 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Rik - FYI In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6634e19e0906061801r1a551bfbuaa94cd10ff6f4a47@mail.gmail.com> Ed, If you want to keep track of Dr. Paul's progress here's their blog page http://www.dailypaul.com/ This is just up today. Rik _______________________________________ UPDATE - HR 1207 Now Up To 190 co-sponsors! Posted May 12th, 2009 by sunny Updated on June 5. On record so far on www.thomas.gov. Title: To amend title 31, United States Code, to reform the manner in which the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is audited by the Comptroller General of the United States and the manner in which such audits are reported, and for other purposes. Sponsor: Rep Paul, Ron [TX-14] (introduced 2/26/2009) Cosponsors (190) Latest Major Action: 2/26/2009 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services. Here's 3 related (WORKING) links for easy access: - 1159 comments - Read more On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Ed Kroposki wrote: > Circulating the internet: The Fed is worried about Ron Paul > > The central bank of the United States government--the Federal > Reserve--thinks it needs a lobbyist, > to work in Congress against Ron Paul. > > The Bloomberg story doesn't mention Ron, but instead interviews some > ex-Fed hack in DC. But it is Ron Paul the Fed fears. What a great > achievement of Ron's, to make what Andrew Jackson called "the Monster," the > all-powerful, globe-dominating, special-interest funding,bankster-enabling, dollar-depreciating, business cycle-generating central > bank worry about its image, for the first time since 1913. > > His presidential campaign alerted millions to the fact that we are being > ripped-off by the Fed. His Audit the Fed bill (183 cosponsors!) scares the > heck out of them. And wait until his End the Fed > manifesto is published this summer! They'll need a whole corps of > lobbyists, not that they will be able to protect what is in essence a > criminal counterfeiting gang. > > Click on the links for details. > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090606/d3d9bed3/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Jun 7 06:59:18 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 05:59:18 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] The Reckoning Message-ID: <400985d70906070359v5a2fe3avf42633184aa5e257@mail.gmail.com> Just got back from a few days on the coast. Metal prices are way down and labor is available so we're re-roofing our other shop building and re-skinning our smaller shop (we already re-roofed the smaller one when prices were at their peak because we had to). On every visit there's people who stop by the shop to say hello and "chew the fat". One visitor was a building contractor who uses us for all his dirt work. The first job we ever did for him was building a pad and he tried to short us on payment for "inferior work". My brother jumped on the backhoe and started loading dirt back on the truck. "No, no, no! Here's your money" (the plumber later told us it was the most level pad he'd ever worked on). An older fellow we've all but adopted invited me in for dinner. Our first encounter with him started much the same way - he complained about our demolition of his house and we threatened to move it back on his property. He now "bird dogs" for us in his part of town and got us two jobs just this week. My point is, you have to have pretty thick skin in our business and be ready to fight, literally. My brother and I have playing "good cop/bad cop" down to a science except for dealing with our Vietnamese client base - they still whip us on the front end with negotiations every time but you never have to worry about collecting your money. I was reminded of all this by Dr. Hansen's latest essay (below). My oldest son learned the hard way that much of the theory he learned at the Sam Walton School of Business at the U of Arkansas - Fayetteville didn't work in the rough-and-tumble post Katrina environment. He called me in the midst of our one and only 'gubmint' job on the coast (picking up tens of thousands of dead chickens) and said, "Dad, this doesn't make any sense". "It doesn't have to make sense, Son, it's your government at work spending your money. Just make sure we get paid". Well, our government is "at work", and we'll pay for it - dearly. Brad -------------- The Reckoning Posted By Victor Davis Hanson On June 5, 2009 Obama Versus the Way of the Universe I wish the President well, but he is butting up against human nature. And that is a fight one cannot win. If one runs up nearly a $2 trillion annual deficit, and then persists in such red-ink to the point of adding another $9 trillion, all to reach an aggregate $20 trillion national debt, there are not too many options. If there were, everyone-both states and individuals-would simply spend, call it stimuli, and then find academics to offer contorted explanations why it was OK and the money need not really have to be paid back. Does Obama think his debt is like buying a house in a down market with an up market inevitable??that is, we borrow to the max and then count on our equity to come to bail us out? But houses do not always go up, and we can?t quite sell off the US to capture our speculative profit. So we all know the old rules, because the universe works according to time-honored precepts: we either must tax all of us (there are not enough of those evil ?they? who make between $200-500K or even enough of the noble generous rich who make over $10 million a year and think Obama should increase inheritance taxes so that their children get only $1 billion instead of $2, while the hardware store owner?s kids sell the business) in insidious ways; OR simply cut government expenditures elsewhere to pay the annual interest payments, OR print money and screw the Chinese, European, etc. , debtors, inflating our way out via the late 1970s. Sorry, there are no other real alternatives. The only mystery? How the choice of payment is rhetoricized in the hope and change mode. Deficit Foreign Policy Too So it is with foreign policy as well. Obama?s make-over will have positive short-term effects, as he reminds the world ad nauseam that he is black, sorta, kinda from a Muslim family, and the son of an African who is more like the world than he like most Americans-and not George Bush and not a thieving capitalist and not a warmongering imperialist and not (fill in the blanks). (My favorite Cairo line was the apology on Gitmo where inmates have laptops and Mediterranean food, spoken to millions whose societies kill and maim tens of thousands in Gulags on a yearly basis.) But in the long run? He hits against human nature. Most of you readers-in business, law, the professions-don?t continually praise your friends, competitors, and enemies (e.g., ?Glad you got that job, Home Depot-we at Lowes didn?t really need it; what a wonderful bid you submitted, Hilton, much better than ours here at the Four Seasons; it was my fault here at Goldman Sachs that I didn?t match your better offer at Credit Suisse; I grew up working for the Royals, and can empathize why you Yankees don?t like us; it?s time we at Citibank apologized to Chase for our past cutthroat competition; we are just too arrogant over here at Delta and wanted to let you guys at United know that.?) Sorry The world sadly does not work that way. If one were to do that, we know the outcome: a group of rival execs would say ?Hmmm, time to steal market share from Citibank, or Hilton isn?t really up to the arena anymore, let?s move in on its Western region, etc.? Only someone who has not been in the real world, but only marketed rhetoric without consequences (e.g., if Obama had a bad day organizing, or legislating, was he fired?) could believe such things. A Farmer?s Tale In short, Obama reminds me a little of myself?at 26. I had left the farm for 9 years to get a BA in classics, PhD in classical philology, and live in Athens for two years of archaeological study-all on scholarships, TAships, research-ships and part-time summer and school jobs tucked under the aegis of the academic, no-consequences world. By the end of endless seminars, papers, theses, debates, discussions, academic get-togethers, I had forgotten much of the culture of the farm where I spent years 1-18. The Return Then after the requisite degrees I left academia, and returned to farm 180 acres with my brother and cousin-and sadly was quickly disabused of the world of the faculty lounge. Oh yes, I came back to Selma thinking, ?I am not going to be the grouch my grandfather was, yelling at neighbors, worried all the time, nervous, seeing the world as rather hostile, hoarding a tiny stash of savings, worried as if bugs, the government, hired men, weather, and markets were out to destroy him. I?ll farm with my Bay Area manners and sort of think, ?I will reset the farm, and things will at last work as they should? (not thinking that my grandfather raised three daughters, sent them to college while mortgaging the farm in the Depression, and spent on himself last, and was a saint compared to my pampered existence in the university).? One small example of my late coming of age. A rather brutal neighbor (now dead and not to be mentioned by name (de mortuis nil nisi bonum dicendum est)), an immigrant from an impoverished country, a self-made man, veteran of infamous fights and various bullying, shared a communal ditch. We talked and exchanged pleasantries?at first?at the standpipe gate. He lamented how rude my late grandfather had been to him, and even had made unfounded accusations that he was less than honest (he was also sort of playing the race card, remarking about the prejudicial nature of California agrarian culture). Hope and Change I was shocked to hear that, and assured him that there would be no such incitements on my part on the new age of the Davis farm. No more ?me first?, no more disdain for newcomers and upstarts. And then after about 3 months of sizing me up (at 26, I confess looking back I was not 1/8th the man my grandfather was at 86) he began stealing water in insidious ways: taking an extra day on his turn, cutting in a day early on mine, siphoning off water at night, destroying my pressure settings, watering his vineyards on days that were on my allotment. Stealing no less! And in 1980! Here?s how I rushed into action. First, I gave a great Obama speech on communal sharing and why the ditch would not work if everyone did what he did. Farmers simply would perish if they did not come together, and see their common shared interests. He nodded and smiled-and stole more the next week. The Enlightenment To the Rescue Then I appealed to his minority status, and remarked how wonderful it was that he came from dire poverty abroad and now farmed over 500 acres. He growled-and stole even more. I took the UN route and warned that that I would be forced to go get the ditch tender (a crusty, old hombre who enjoyed watching fights like these for blood sport); he pointed out that the tender was, in fact, on the alleyway across the street watching us, and meeting him for coffee in an hour. Multilateralism I went to the irrigation district and filed a formal complaint. Nice people with smiles and monogrammed hats promised they?d look into it, but pointed out the season was half over anyway, and I should ?get used to it? and start anew next year. Meanwhile, I noticed by July my vineyard was starting to be stressed, and his was lush. He watered so much that he began to flood the entire vineyard middle, the water lapping out the furrows and reaching berm to berm. Hmmm For a while I went the Clement Attlee mode and rationalized, ?Hmmm, maybe all that watering is going to give his vines more mildew, while my dusty dry vines will aerate more. Do I really need my water? Did I offend him in some way? Do I really want to lower myself to his troglodyte methods?? A few meetings went well with his, ?OK, it?s a misunderstanding.? I heard ?No problem? about a zillion times the next two weeks. Then by July 15, after three months of such aggrandizement I tried the empathetic route with the neighbor, ?If you don?t stop this, I?ll have to turn on my pumps and spend hundreds of dollars to supply the water I?m supposed to get by virtue of my irrigation taxes. You know that?s not fair!? He laughed at the use of ?by virtue of?. I felt sorry for him, really did, that he had reduced a dispute over something as mundane as ?water? into some sort of existential issue of regional peace. What did he wish me to do-descend down to his level, to become exactly like him, to settle differences on the basis of primate strength? I thought about this for yet another seven days, compulsively so as I looked out at the parched vines. Couldn?t I just pay the power bill, pump for 10 days, and feel as his moral better that I had not descended to his cave-dwelling status? Oddly, I began to hear a once familiar voice in my head whisper, ?He?ll take your crew next right when you need it. He?ll take over your alleyway. He?ll drive on your place like he owns it. He?ll??). The Inevitable Overreaction? Then in a trance-like fashion, I went out to restore deterrence. I got a massive chain and lock, and simply shut down his communal lateral. Locked the gate so tight, he couldn?t even get a quarter-turn. He?d be lucky if he got a 100 gallons in a week. Then I got a veritable arsenal of protective weaponry, got in my pickup, drove back over to the gate, and waited with ammo, clubs, shovels, etc. In an hour he drove up in a dust cloud. He was going to smash me, get his football playing son to strangle me, sue me, bankrupt me, hunt me down, etc. He swore and yelled-I was a disgrace to my family, a racist, a psycho, worse than my grandfather. He was going to lock my gates, steal all my water, and indeed he leveled all sorts of threats (remember the scene in Unforgiven when Eastwood walks out and screams threats to the terrified town?-that was my neighbor). I got out with large vine stake and said something to the effect (forgive me if I don?t have the verbatim transcript-it has been 29 years since then), ?It?s locked until you follow the rules. Anytime you don?t, it?s locked again. Do it one more time and I weld it shut. Not a drop. So sue me.? He got up, screeched his tires, blew a dust cloud in my face, and raced down the alleyway-honking even as he left. Pax For the next ten years until his death, he was the model neighbor. He would stop me with, ?Victor, I shut off tomorrow, half-a day early-why not take my half day to jump start your turn?? And indeed we finally began to have philosophical discussions (he was widely read) about Sun-Maid, Carter, Reagan, the US, literature, etc. Here was his final compliment, one that apparently connected my once elite disdain for his grubby world of the muscular classes with my inevitable failure and bankruptcy to come. It went something like this, though after three decades I have forgotten his exact phraseology: ?Victor, I used to drive by your grandfather?s house, and see you up there on the scaffold, scraping off the old paint. I?d say to my friends-look at that young fool, he?s painting my house. You see, I knew you?d go broke, and I?d buy your place. Always wanted it, and knew you were getting it ready for me. Why not let you finish before I took it?? (I didn?t tell him, that in fact he used to say that not just to friends, but to me as I was chipping away.) Postmortem He died about a month later. I still miss him, and grew to, if not trust him, in a strange way like him. Obama will come to his senses with his ?Bush did it?, reset button, moral equivalency, soaring hope and change, with these apologies to Europeans, his Arab world Sermons on the Mount to Al Arabiya, in Turkey, in Cairo, etc., his touchy-feely videos to Iran, his ?we are all victims of racism? sops to Ortega, Chavez, and Morales. It is only a matter of when, under what conditions, how high the price we must pay, and whether we lose the farm before he gains wisdom about the tragic universe in which we live. A sojourn at an elite university, you see, can sometimes become a very dangerous thing indeed. From ekroposki at charter.net Sun Jun 7 07:54:39 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 07:54:39 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Pirates - FYI Message-ID: MMA ALUMNI: Inside story of Somali pirate attack By Rob Walker BBC, Hargeisa As he looked at the radar screen Captain Andrey Nozhkin immediately feared the worst. A small vessel was closing fast from the stern. "It was like a firecracker had gone off inside my head," he recalled. " There was total chaos " Capt Andrey Nozhkin CEC Future The Danish-owned merchant ship, the CEC Future, had been on high alert since it entered the Gulf of Aden, the narrow strip of water between Somalia and Yemen. Fire hoses had been made ready to help repel a possible attack by pirates who infest the area. The crew were maintaining constant contact with coalition naval forces. Then within minutes the suspicious vessel was visible: a speedboat, crammed with armed men trailing a wake of white foam. "We knew it was pirates. They were coming towards us at an angle so we accelerated, and changed direction to make it harder for them to catch up," said Capt Nozhkin. But then a rocket-propelled grenade zipped across the CEC Future's bows. Capt Nozhkin looked down and saw the pirates re-loading. "They were now aiming directly at us in the bridge." He knew further resistance was pointless. This was 7 November last year. It was the start of a two-month ordeal for the 13 crew members. The full details of what happened to the ship and the story of the pirate gang that hijacked it are now emerging. Crew threatened Once the pirates were on board, they directed the captain to head to Eyl, the now notorious Somali pirate port. The ship's owners could do nothing but sit and wait. "Sure enough, Monday morning the ship drops anchor at Eyl and we had our first contact from pirates. He called one of my colleagues, and introduced himself as 'Mr Ali', and would we please pay $7m (?4.27m)," said Per Gullestrup, CEO of Clipper Projects, the ship's owners. " The crew are foremost for us, so when we heard the captain's distress it was difficult " Per Gullestrup CEO of Clipper Projects "Mr Ali" was recruited by the pirates as a translator and negotiator because of his fluent English, the result of living for 29 years in America, before returning to Somalia. I managed to contact him and he agreed to meet me in Hargeisa, the capital of Somaliland. He told me his real name is Ali Mohamed Ali. "For 36 hours we did not get any feedback from the company so we sent them a fax. The pirates were saying if we don't get an answer from you within a few hours we will be forced to capsize the ship," he said. The company responded with an offer of $300,000 (?183,000). The pirates countered with $5m (?3.05m), but refused to come any lower. "We decided it wasn't going anywhere. We told the pirates we didn't see any point continuing discussing. They could call us back when they decided to go below $2m (?1.22m)," said Mr Gullestrup. 'Jokes are finished' The pirates then began to threaten the crew. Clipper Projects have given the BBC access to the recordings of the conversations they held with the pirates and the crew during the hijack. At one point all 13 crew members are crammed together on the bridge in a space a few metres wide, and held there for 24 hours. Then the Russian captain is forced to call the company. He says: "Very soon the pirates plan to remove us to the shore... that means the jokes are finished, please, please I ask you please, let's do something." The strain in the captain's voice is clear, and close by another voice can be heard, prompting him what to say. "The crew are foremost for us, so when we heard the captain's distress it was difficult," said Mr Gullestrup. But the private security company retained by Clipper advised the company this was a standard part of the pirates' operating procedure, and the crew were unlikely to be harmed. Then finally, after two months, with the crew close to breaking point, an unexpected development occurred. "I was having a cup of tea at home with my wife when my mobile phone goes, and it was Ali introducing himself," said Mr Gullestrup. Up to this point, Clipper's CEO had been advised not to become directly involved in the negotiations. Most dangerous phase "I said to him: 'Nothing's happening, I want you and me to do the deal,'" said Mr Ali, remembering the call. The pirates were ready to reduce their demands and within days a deal was reached. The company will say only that the figure was somewhere between $1m (?610,000) to $2m (?1.22m). With the help of the private security company, the money was parachuted to the ship from a light aircraft, sealed in a watertight container. HOW THE RANSOM WAS PAID For the crew, there was relief at finally seeing the ransom float towards them. They did not realise the most dangerous phase of the hijack was about to begin. "It was very hot, 10 in morning. All of the pirates came into the captain's cabin. Everybody with a gun," said Ali Mohamed. Dozens more people from the port of Eyl had also crowded onto the ship, shopkeepers, businessmen and creditors. Knife fights They had been supplying the ship for the past two months and now wanted to be paid. But in return for providing everything on credit they were charging inflated prices and bitter arguments broke out. " It costs up to $6,000 (?3,600) to send a team, it goes on buying food, ammunition, fuel - RPGs can be rented " Ali Mohamed Ali Pirate negotiator "There was total chaos," said Capt Nozhkin. "Those accused of trying to take too much had their hands slammed in doors as a punishment. Then some of the pirates started shooting, some were fighting with knives. "Then other boats started arriving trying to get on board and people on the boat began shooting at them." Sixteen hours later, the shopkeepers and money lenders left, between them several hundred thousand dollars richer. Then the pirates divided the rest of the ransom and after 68 days finally disembarked from the ship. Mr Ali, the pirates' negotiator and translator, is now back in his home town of Hargeisa. Over hot, sweet Somali tea in his favourite cafe, he told me more about how the pirates are organized. 'Wannabes need not apply' It is "investors" who play a crucial role, he said. In the case of the CEC Future, two men put up the initial seed money. "It costs up to $6,000 (?3,600) to send a team," he said. "It goes on buying food, ammunition, fuel. Then RPGs and speedboats can be rented. Mother boats are also very important." Investors have to be prepared to fund several failed attempts and to wait weeks until the team succeeds. But Mr Ali says they can expect to take about 30% of the ransom money. "That's a return which does not happen anywhere." But good investors also have to know who to recruit. "A seasoned veteran is much better than a 'wannabe'." 'Good for the CV' The most skilled pirates, the ones who prove themselves by being the first to board a hijacked ship, are paid more, and are more in demand. "That guy doing the jumping, he gets $5,000 (?3,050) extra because he's taken the risk of getting hit by anything coming from the crew. And it's something good for his CV, to show to other investors." Mr Ali maintains that he only agreed to work for the pirates because he wanted to learn more about how they operate and then explain it to the world. It is difficult for me to believe that this was his only motivation. As we finish talking he tells me something else. The two leaders of the pirates that hijacked the CEC Future have since been killed. One of them was shot dead by his own men as soon as he reached the shore in a battle over the ransom money. But with such huge rewards on offer, others will already have taken their place. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Alumni Talk Mailing List **************************** To post to this group, send email to MMA-Alumni-Talk at googlegroups.com . To unsubscribe from this group, send email to MMA-Alumni-Talk-unsubscribe at googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/MMA-Alumni-Talk For Help or to report problems, e-mail: Skid Schermerhorn -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090607/7f253fff/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Sun Jun 7 08:32:03 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 08:32:03 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] The Reckoning Message-ID: <8026918372C04B199D2034DCB4384F9E@YOURB88038198E> Point of Analysis of Brad's Post of Hanson's Post of 5-5-09: Hansen is overly optimistic. He says, "Obama will come to his senses,". I suggest that this may be unfounded optimism. A quick analysis of his teachers does not show any of them coming to their senses nor changing. Rather they are like Al quaida willing to die for their cause. In particular, I point to the church's web site that Obama attended. Before Obama was really an acepted candidate, the writings of W. E. B. Dubose were recommended readings. Study Dubose and his writings. Keep in mind he left the USA and went to the Soviet Union then went to Africa and died there. He believe in Communism (i.e., Black Marxism and espoused it till his death). Marxism is a religion to its believers. People die for their religious beliefs. Other peoples rights and beliefs are of no consequence to those guys. With Obama as President, America has a problem and I do not know the solution. Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090607/deaa075f/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Jun 7 14:50:20 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 13:50:20 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] UAW trust to get up to 20 percent of GM shares In-Reply-To: <81ECF1AA226841BC8C54BC4E51EA3C29@ebsoffice> References: <81ECF1AA226841BC8C54BC4E51EA3C29@ebsoffice> Message-ID: <400985d70906071150m713ca39ai6b698f38f0276922@mail.gmail.com> Mike, George Will is not a favorite of mine, but occasionally he get's it right (he did write a couple of good books on baseball). This article caught my eye because of his reference to New Coke. I took a job flying for the Chairman of the Coca-Cola Bottler's Association a week before New Coke was introduced. It was one of the worst jobs I ever had but fortunately my current employer called with a class date just a few months later. New Coke was a disaster (and my New Boss a first class a-hole). Fond memories! Brad -------------- June 7, 2009 Have We Got a Deal For You at GM By George Will WASHINGTON -- "I," said the president, who is inordinately fond of the first-person singular pronoun, "want to disabuse people of this notion that somehow we enjoy meddling in the private sector." He said that in March, when the government already owned 80 percent of AIG, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. "When a difficult decision has to be made on matters like where to open a new plant or what type of new car to make, the new GM, not the United States government, will make that decision." But the government is GM's largest shareholder, customer, tax collector, regulator, partner in determining employees' compensation, protector of dealers and pension guarantor. GM's other large owner, the United Auto Workers, is increasingly a government dependant. Yet Steve Rattner and Ron Bloom, two of the president's fixers of Detroit, recently wrote in USA Today that government "will play no role" in running GM. They were not under oath. "What we are not doing -- what I have no interest in doing -- is running GM," says the president who, when not firing GM's CEO, purging its board of directors and picking new members, is designing new products (imposing fuel economy requirements that will control size, weight, passenger capacity and safety). The president, overcoming his professed reluctance to run GM, resembles the journalist Don Marquis when, after a month on the wagon, he ordered a double martini and exclaimed: "I've conquered my goddam willpower." Washington mandates that Detroit must build cars for which there is much less demand than Washington demands that there be. Then Washington tries to manufacture demand with a $7,500 tax credit for purchasers of the electric Chevrolet Volt, supposedly GM's salvation. So, GM is to be saved by a product people will not buy without a cash incentive larger than the income tax paid by 83.4 percent of America's families. It is reasonable to assume that GM will become profitable -- if you make unreasonable assumptions about annual vehicle sales and GM's share of the market. Besides, the government that runs Amtrak (which has lost $23 billion, in today's dollars, just since 1990) vows to make GM efficient. But one reason Amtrak runs on red ink is that legislators treat it as their toy train set, preventing it from cutting egregiously unprofitable routes. Will Congress passively accept auto plant-closing decisions? Rattner says Washington's demure vow is: "No plant decisions, no dealer decisions, no color-of-the-car decisions." He is one-third right. Last week, under the headline "Senators Blast Automakers Over Dealer Closings," The Washington Post reported, "Because the federal government is slated to own most of General Motors and 8 percent of Chrysler, some of the senators said they have a responsibility, as major shareholders do, to review company decisions." The pressure to politicize the economy is spreading. John Sweeney, head of the AFL-CIO, and Gerald McEntee, head of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees -- which is government organized as an interest group to lobby itself -- have demanded the resignation of two directors of Citigroup. Their premise is that businesses receiving direct government subventions should conform to the wishes of the president's allies. GM is adopting new ways to lose money: Responsive to its UAW masters, GM is moving from China to America the production of some components of one Chevrolet model. Says UAW President Ron Gettelfinger, "It should be built here if it's going to be sold here." That principle, now successfully asserted, means economic autarky -- the end of international trade, and of prosperity. The government's $50 billion -- so far -- acquisition of the shadow of GM will injure, with unfair financial advantages, the surprisingly healthy U.S. auto company, Ford. Of course, the government does not intend that injury, any more than it intended to cause protests in Mexico over the high price of corn tortillas, a result of Washington's mandate that Americans burn corn (ethanol) in their cars. Washington's "rescue" of GM began because GM is "too big to fail," and bankruptcy is (well, was) "unthinkable." Big? GM's market capitalization, $375.8 million on Wednesday, is about the size of California Pizza Kitchen's ($340 million) -- is it too big to fail? -- and one-eleventh that of Harley-Davidson ($4.3 billion). Fail? If GM has not already failed, New Coke was a success. The administration is determined to prop up GM as a jobs program for the UAW and Midwestern states rich in electoral votes. This frenzy will intensify as the administration's decisions deepen the debacle. georgewill at washpost.com On 5/26/09, Michael D. Weisner wrote: > As Sidney Freeman said so eloquently, "Ladies and gentlemen, take my > advice..." GM is definitely on the thin ice. > > IF THIS WORKS, at least GM will be out of the UAW healthcare business. Ford > is watching very carefully. > > Mike > > > UAW trust to get up to 20 percent of GM shares > By TOM KRISHER > AP Auto Writer > > DETROIT (AP) -- A cost-cutting deal between the United Auto Workers and > General Motors Corp. will give a union-run health care trust fund up to 20 > percent of the company's shares and a seat on the board, but it also could > be the catalyst that allows the company to restructure outside of bankruptcy > court... > > http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_GM_UAW?SITE=OHRAV&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT From ekroposki at charter.net Sun Jun 7 19:19:31 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 19:19:31 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Two web references: Global warming by Noaa and Conservative web site Message-ID: <1E4820914BD04A41ABB9DF94A4459449@YOURB88038198E> Somebody at NOAA is going to be in trouble: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/milankovitch.html Wrong reasons for global warming. And a heretofore unreferenced conservative web site: http://patriotpost.us/subscribe.php [a lot of heavy reading] Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090607/13bdcd36/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Jun 8 07:56:32 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 06:56:32 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] The Reckoning In-Reply-To: <8026918372C04B199D2034DCB4384F9E@YOURB88038198E> References: <8026918372C04B199D2034DCB4384F9E@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <400985d70906080456k7ab3cdc8y8f71ce02fca2eea9@mail.gmail.com> Ed, "With Obama as President, America has a problem and I do not know the solution." I don't either, but I have a prediction - Jimmy Carter's economy, only worse. A co-worker of mine based in Hong Kong was over for dinner last night and asked for my opinions on where the US was headed. She's too young to remember the Carter years and besides, was living in Mainland China at the time (she was also was too young to remember the Cultural Revolution which might explain her being so liberal). She does have a graduate degree in economics so I did a quick review of the "stimulus" with her (borrowing from a site I'd just read) - 1 - extra spending means extra taxes (a wash) 2 - more spending means more debt which equals higher interest rates 3 - money will have to be printed, ie, inflation - any "growth" will be illusory We moved on to health care and (her being a liberal) she's in favor of universal health care based on her friends experience in Canada and New Zealand. We had to respectfully disagree on the quality and availability of health care in those countries. I raised the issue of the proposed tax on health care benefits for those of us that have it (she's got the same plan I have) and the eventual effect it will have on employers (she was unaware there was a tax in the works). Did I mention she's a liberal? She's also smart and replied, "employers will eliminate health care benefits if they can't expense it and employees are taxed for its value". Zackly! Now where is that money going to be raised? All those "best and brightest" educated at Harvard and Yale should ask for their money back - they seem to lack the most basic understanding of economics and human nature. But then, if your leader is a "Trojan Horse" Marxist, none of that matters. Brad On 6/7/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > Point of Analysis of Brad's Post of Hanson's Post of 5-5-09: > > Hansen is overly optimistic. He says, "Obama will come to his senses,". I > suggest that this may be unfounded optimism. A quick analysis of his > teachers does not show any of them coming to their senses nor changing. > Rather they are like Al quaida willing to die for their cause. > > In particular, I point to the church's web site that Obama attended. Before > Obama was really an acepted candidate, the writings of W. E. B. Dubose were > recommended readings. Study Dubose and his writings. Keep in mind he left > the USA and went to the Soviet Union then went to Africa and died there. He > believe in Communism (i.e., Black Marxism and espoused it till his death). > > Marxism is a religion to its believers. People die for their religious > beliefs. Other peoples rights and beliefs are of no consequence to those > guys. With Obama as President, America has a problem and I do not know the > solution. > > Ed K From bill at effros.com Mon Jun 8 08:38:08 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2009 08:38:08 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Help is On the Way Message-ID: <4A2D0630.5010100@effros.com> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: SNAG-0003 6-8-2009.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 32278 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090608/0271441a/attachment-0001.jpg From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Jun 8 08:45:56 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 07:45:56 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Obamacare Message-ID: <400985d70906080545u35c9aab0g24f829cd5e8b3953@mail.gmail.com> For those of you who would like to know what's in the Obamacare bill, here's a searchable database - http://patientsunitednow.com/?q=node/233 Look at this - Sec. 3102 Financial Integrity ?(1) In general - A State shall keep an accurate accounting of all activities, receipts, and expenditures of any Gateway operating in such State and shall annually submit to the Secretary a report concerning such accountings. ?(2) Investigations - The Secretary may investigate the affairs of a Gateway, may examine the properties and records of a Gateway, and may require periodical reports in relation to activities undertaken by a Gateway. A Gateway shall fully cooperate in any investigation conducted under this paragraph. Remember all the screaming and chest thumping about warrantless wiretaps in years gone by? "Gateway" means your doctor. For the past 37 years, I've been required by law to disclose every single visit to a doctor or pharmacist so this is nothing new to me, but if you don't think giving low level government employees access to your health care records can create problems you've obviously forgotten "Joe the Plumbers" personal records being divulged for political purposes. Don't be fooled by this bill, it is not health insurance. This will be the creation of a massive bureaucracy. My hangarmate is going through this right now for a medical issue he resolved over a year ago - an "audit" if you will. If you think the US Post Office and the IRS are "mean-and-lean", well run agencies, you'll really love this one! Care to bet whether this bill will be read before it's voted on? Time to fire-up the phones! Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Jun 8 09:01:01 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 08:01:01 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Government Motors Lies! Message-ID: <400985d70906080601v1f9af7b3j3fc7107ac6c15e48@mail.gmail.com> This is lengthy so I'll just link - http://tinyurl.com/ozwwe4 The Maobama folks just had "BULLSHIT!" called on them. Brad From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Jun 8 09:14:51 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 08:14:51 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Obamacare In-Reply-To: <400985d70906080545u35c9aab0g24f829cd5e8b3953@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906080545u35c9aab0g24f829cd5e8b3953@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0906080614hd0b8787h9cb772963dad059e@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Looks like 'ol Ted is gonna' try to stick us one last good one on this healthcare thing before he finally tips over. I generally try hard to give people the benefit of the doubt, but honestly, in my mind 'ol Ted has used up his (and a few other's) share of doubt. I guess anymore, I think we'd all have been better off if he'da drowned with Mary Jo. Rik http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/kennedys-healthcare-bill-will-increase.html ______________________ Kennedy's Healthcare Bill Will Increase Expenses, Decrease Employment and Encourage Outsourcing Ted Kennedy believes everyone should have a plethora of good options on healthcare. However, other than raising taxes on businesses, Kennedy refuses to say how his proposals will be paid. Moreover, he is too blind to see (or too political to admit), the myriad of disastrous consequences that his health care proposal will entail, especially on small and medium sized businesses. His bill is political demagoguery at its finest. Please consider the details as presented in Kennedy Health Bill Mandates Public Plan, Coverage for All . Under a draft bill to overhaul the U.S. health-care system all employers would be required to supply health insurance for workers or contribute to the cost. The bill, by Senator Edward M. Kennedy, would create a public health plan to compete with private insurers, a priority of President Barack Obama?s that is opposed by Republicans. It would provide all Americans with health benefits, penalize those who don?t buy them and bar insurers from limiting coverage. The ?America Health Choices Act,? circulated in Washington late yesterday, offered the first detailed glimpse of legislation being discussed in Congress. Many of its provisions would expand coverage for uninsured Americans. ?It is the sense of the Senate that Congress should establish a means for all Americans to enjoy affordable choices in health benefit plans,? the bill said. Obama set aside $635 billion in his 2010 budget proposal to act as a ?down payment? on the cost of reconstructing the health-care system and expanding coverage to the estimated 46 million uninsured Americans. Kennedy?s draft did not include details of how its proposals would be paid for. Kennedy?s bill opened with an affirmation of a patient?s rights to choose his or her doctor and the importance of the patient-doctor relationship. ?Doctors, nurses and other health professionals have the right to judge what is best for their patients,? the bill stated. America Health Choices Act Provisions Government subsidies will be provided to people with income up to 500 percent of the poverty level. Doctors and hospitals paid at Medicare rates, plus 10 percent. Medicaid, expanded to cover uninsured people earning up to 150 percent of the poverty level. Essential? benefits, include hospital care, maternity and newborn care, prescription drugs, mental-health and substance-abuse services and doctors? services. The bill establishes protections for ?fair? insurance coverage, setting limits on how much premiums can vary. Insurers would be forbidden from turning away customers due to pre-existing conditions. Each health insurer that offers coverage in the individual or group market in a state would have to accept every employer and individual in the state that applied for coverage. Companies that provide coverage for children through their parents will have to extend ?dependent? coverage for those children through the age of 26. America Health Choices Act Consequences 1) Every employer thinking about hiring someone is going to think twice about it, then not do it. 2) Every employer struggling to maintain jobs in the US with a choice of outsourcing will have another huge incentive to outsource. 3) Many employers struggling to maintain solvency will go bankrupt after this bill passes. 4) Corporate profits across the board are going to drop. 5) The stock market will drop along with corporate profits. 6) Health care companies will have an incentive to not offer plans in states with poor demographics. 7) Government mandates about how much insurers can charge will bankrupt insurers and/or cause rationing of services. 8) Businesses will have an incentive to fire workers and instead offer contract work to individuals. Banks and financial institutions will be among the first to consider this option. Programmers have another reason to start worrying about their jobs. 9) Businesses unable to outsource or make use of contractors will bear the brunt of this legislation. The group hardest hit will be retailers like Walmart, Target, and Costco, and restaurants like McDonalds and Pizza Hut. 10) This bill will weigh on business expansion plans. Retail stores are already saturated. This bill provides one more reason for businesses not to expand further. Business Owners Should Be Scared To Death In general: The bill has a negative effect on hiring, a negative effect on business expansion, a negative effect on corporate profits, and it promotes outsourcing. Moreover, it will delay the recovery of the stock market and it puts the brunt of the burden on businesses that cannot outsource. If you are not scared to death by those consequences, you are not paying attention to what is happening. Requiring businesses to pick up the tab will slow hiring and the recovery. Monetizing medical expenses will cheapen the dollar. Requiring taxpayers to foot the bill will take away from discretionary spending. It is axiomatic that someone must pay. There is no such thing as a free lunch or free health care either. I have come up with 10 easy to see consequences. I am sure there are many unforeseen consequences, some of which will be even worse. For those who want more for their money in these deflationary times, here is a bonus 11th consequence: It will encourage the employment of illegal aliens under the table paid in cash and all kinds of underground barter transactions that also will not be taxed. Standards of Measurement of Good Health Care Please consider what Raoul Pal of Spain wrote John Mauldin in the June 5 Frontline Thoughts called The New, New Normal . In its simplest terms a healthcare system is there to extend the longevity of live of the population. It is the single best and simplest way to judge it because we can all find examples of where one country is better than another but the longevity stats don't lie. When we use that framework the picture is incredibly different. The US has many of the best doctors and medical care in the world but it doesn't work for the population as a whole and therein lies the problem. "According to the Economist the total US spend on healthcare is 15.4% of GDP including both state and private . With that it gets 2.6 doctors per 1,000 people, 3.3 hospital beds and its people live to an average age of 78.2 "UK - spends 8.1% of GDP, gets 2.3 doctors, 4.2 hospital beds and live to an average age of 79.4. So for roughly half the cost their citizens overall get about the same benefit in terms of longevity of life. "Canada - spends 9.8% of GDP on healthcare, gets 2.1 doctors, 3.6 hospital beds and live until they are 80.6 yrs "Now if we look at the more social model in Europe the results become even more surprising: "France - spends 10.5%, 3.4 docs, 7.5 beds and live until they are 80.6 "Spain - spends 8.1% , 3.3 docs , 3.8 beds and live until they are 81 "As a whole Europe spends 9.6% of GDP on healthcare, has 3.9 doctors per 1,000 people, 6.6 hospital beds and live until they are 81.15 years old. "The list goes on. The truth is that in many cases as is pointed out the healthcare system is better in the US than in some other countries BUT US citizens must therefore get ill more often than any other country in the West in order to achieve the truly appalling statistic that they are the 41 longest living nation on earth with France, Spain, Norway, Switzerland, Italy, Austria, Andorra, Holland, Greece and Sweden all featuring in the top 20 longest living nations and the UK and Germany at 22. "This is the big failure of the US system. It is unforgivable. You may get a better chance of recovering from certain diseases but as a whole you will die younger in the US than most developed countries. ... Something is severely broken." Something Is Severely Broken Something is indeed broken and Kennedy's bill sure is not going to fix it. ?America Health Choices Act? is a horrible piece of legislation that does nothing to reduce costs but instead increases them on businesses. A better name for it would be "Delayed Recovery And Outsourcing Encouragement Program" or DRAOEP. I tried to come up with a name that would equate to DROPDEAD (because that is what Kennedy's plan says to businesses) but could not quite make it. If you are a business owner you better be flooding your representatives with faxes and phone calls (see Speak Out!for a detailed list of fax numbers) if you know what is good for you, because I can ensure you, this isn't. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 7:45 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > For those of you who would like to know what's in the Obamacare bill, > here's a searchable database - > > http://patientsunitednow.com/?q=node/233 > > Look at this - > > Sec. 3102 Financial Integrity > > ?(1) In general - A State shall keep an accurate accounting of all > activities, receipts, and expenditures of any Gateway operating in > such State and shall annually submit to the Secretary a report > concerning such accountings. > > ?(2) Investigations - The Secretary may investigate the affairs of > a Gateway, may examine the properties and records of a Gateway, and > may require periodical reports in relation to activities undertaken by > a Gateway. A Gateway shall fully cooperate in any investigation > conducted under this paragraph. > > Remember all the screaming and chest thumping about warrantless > wiretaps in years gone by? "Gateway" means your doctor. For the past > 37 years, I've been required by law to disclose every single visit to > a doctor or pharmacist so this is nothing new to me, but if you don't > think giving low level government employees access to your health care > records can create problems you've obviously forgotten "Joe the > Plumbers" personal records being divulged for political purposes. > > Don't be fooled by this bill, it is not health insurance. This will > be the creation of a massive bureaucracy. My hangarmate is going > through this right now for a medical issue he resolved over a year ago > - an "audit" if you will. If you think the US Post Office and the IRS > are "mean-and-lean", well run agencies, you'll really love this one! > > Care to bet whether this bill will be read before it's voted on? Time > to fire-up the phones! > > Brad > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090608/a381a504/attachment-0001.html From bill at effros.com Mon Jun 8 09:34:45 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2009 09:34:45 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Government Motors Lies! In-Reply-To: <400985d70906080601v1f9af7b3j3fc7107ac6c15e48@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906080601v1f9af7b3j3fc7107ac6c15e48@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A2D1375.6070006@effros.com> Brad, As you may remember, Obama was too busy campaigning to come back to Washington when this hit the fan. "The Senate knows what to do -- they'll take care of it -- McCain is an idiot for leaving the campaign trail to try to help work this out." B. Brad Haslett wrote: > This is lengthy so I'll just link - > > http://tinyurl.com/ozwwe4 > > The Maobama folks just had "BULLSHIT!" called on them. > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Jun 8 09:46:00 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 08:46:00 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Obamacare In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0906080614hd0b8787h9cb772963dad059e@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906080545u35c9aab0g24f829cd5e8b3953@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906080614hd0b8787h9cb772963dad059e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906080646wbbd9e2dk66533f7290bb7364@mail.gmail.com> Rik, As the article points out, spending more money on health doesn't equate to better health. As Sarah Palin stated in her 2009 Alaska State-of-the-State address, health care is something individuals have a great deal of control over with by their lifestyle. Here's something many people just don't get; health insurance doesn't equal health. It's insurance. Does your car insurance include free oil changes and new tires? Does your homeowners insurance include maid service? Health insurance is there to help you avoid bankruptcy or early death in case of a major health issue. Your "Little Johnny" farting cross-wise or you getting a cold is your problem (or should be). We're re-inventing the wheel here, this has all been done before in Tennessee and it didn't work. Governor Bredesen (democrat and former health-care executive) worked the problem backward - "OK, this is how much money the State has, what can we buy with the funds available"? TennCare is not a "gold plated" health insurance plan but it is affordable TO THOSE WHO WANT IT! If someone wants something better, they can always compete for a job with an employer that offers something better. You can put all the lipstick on this pig you want, this bill is socialism! You want a better health care system? Fine! Leave the two of us alone for an hour with a case of beer and we'll have one for you! But, that's not the point. This is not about better health, it is all about 'gubment' control. Don't people get enough of that shit in their lives? One last thought - there's STILL $600 million dollars sitting on the shelf available for developers to build housing for Katrina victims. It will be there 10 years from now. No private developer is going to touch that money with all the strings attached to it. Show me one successful public housing project, anywhere. Ask Obambi about his friends in the private-public housing arena. So, somehow, we're going to get this right with health care? I call BS on that, not that it matters. Brad On 6/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Looks like 'ol Ted is gonna' try to stick us one last good one on this > healthcare thing before he finally tips over. I generally try hard to give > people the benefit of the doubt, but honestly, in my mind 'ol Ted has used > up his (and a few other's) share of doubt. I guess anymore, I think we'd all > have been better off if he'da drowned with Mary Jo. > > Rik > > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/kennedys-healthcare-bill-will-increase.html > ______________________ > > Kennedy's Healthcare Bill Will Increase Expenses, Decrease Employment and > Encourage > Outsourcing > > Ted Kennedy believes everyone should have a plethora of good options on > healthcare. > > However, other than raising taxes on businesses, Kennedy refuses to say how > his proposals will be paid. Moreover, he is too blind to see (or too > political to admit), the myriad of disastrous consequences that his health > care proposal will entail, especially on small and medium sized businesses. > > His bill is political demagoguery at its finest. > > Please consider the details as presented in Kennedy Health Bill Mandates > Public Plan, Coverage for > All > . > > Under a draft bill to overhaul the U.S. health-care system all employers > would be required to supply health insurance for workers or contribute to > the cost. > > The bill, by Senator Edward M. Kennedy, would create a public health plan to > compete with private insurers, a priority of President Barack Obama?s that > is opposed by Republicans. It would provide all Americans with health > benefits, penalize those who don?t buy them and bar insurers from limiting > coverage. > > The ?America Health Choices Act,? circulated in Washington late yesterday, > offered the first detailed glimpse of legislation being discussed in > Congress. Many of its provisions would expand coverage for uninsured > Americans. ?It is the sense of the Senate that Congress should establish a > means for all Americans to enjoy affordable choices in health benefit > plans,? the bill said. > > Obama set aside $635 billion in his 2010 budget proposal to act as a ?down > payment? on the cost of reconstructing the health-care system and expanding > coverage to the estimated 46 million uninsured Americans. > > Kennedy?s draft did not include details of how its proposals would be paid > for. > > Kennedy?s bill opened with an affirmation of a patient?s rights to choose > his or her doctor and the importance of the patient-doctor relationship. > ?Doctors, nurses and other health professionals have the right to judge what > is best for their patients,? the bill stated. > > America Health Choices Act Provisions > > Government subsidies will be provided to people with income up to 500 > percent of the poverty level. > > Doctors and hospitals paid at Medicare rates, plus 10 percent. > > Medicaid, expanded to cover uninsured people earning up to 150 percent of > the poverty level. > > Essential? benefits, include hospital care, maternity and newborn care, > prescription drugs, mental-health and substance-abuse services and doctors? > services. > > The bill establishes protections for ?fair? insurance coverage, setting > limits on how much premiums can vary. Insurers would be forbidden from > turning away customers due to pre-existing conditions. > > Each health insurer that offers coverage in the individual or group market > in a state would have to accept every employer and individual in the state > that applied for coverage. > > Companies that provide coverage for children through their parents will have > to extend ?dependent? coverage for those children through the age of 26. > > America Health Choices Act Consequences > > 1) Every employer thinking about hiring someone is going to think twice > about it, then not do it. > > 2) Every employer struggling to maintain jobs in the US with a choice of > outsourcing will have another huge incentive to outsource. > > 3) Many employers struggling to maintain solvency will go bankrupt after > this bill passes. > > 4) Corporate profits across the board are going to drop. > > 5) The stock market will drop along with corporate profits. > > 6) Health care companies will have an incentive to not offer plans in states > with poor demographics. > > 7) Government mandates about how much insurers can charge will bankrupt > insurers and/or cause rationing of services. > > 8) Businesses will have an incentive to fire workers and instead offer > contract work to individuals. Banks and financial institutions will be among > the first to consider this option. Programmers have another reason to start > worrying about their jobs. > > 9) Businesses unable to outsource or make use of contractors will bear the > brunt of this legislation. The group hardest hit will be retailers like > Walmart, Target, and Costco, and restaurants like McDonalds and Pizza Hut. > > 10) This bill will weigh on business expansion plans. Retail stores are > already saturated. This bill provides one more reason for businesses not to > expand further. > > Business Owners Should Be Scared To Death > > In general: The bill has a negative effect on hiring, a negative effect on > business expansion, a negative effect on corporate profits, and it promotes > outsourcing. Moreover, it will delay the recovery of the stock market and it > puts the brunt of the burden on businesses that cannot outsource. > > If you are not scared to death by those consequences, you are not paying > attention to what is happening. > > Requiring businesses to pick up the tab will slow hiring and the recovery. > Monetizing medical expenses will cheapen the dollar. Requiring taxpayers to > foot the bill will take away from discretionary spending. > > It is axiomatic that someone must pay. There is no such thing as a free > lunch or free health care either. > > I have come up with 10 easy to see consequences. I am sure there are many > unforeseen consequences, some of which will be even worse. > > For those who want more for their money in these deflationary times, here is > a bonus 11th consequence: It will encourage the employment of illegal aliens > under the table paid in cash and all kinds of underground barter > transactions that also will not be taxed. > > Standards of Measurement of Good Health Care > > Please consider what Raoul Pal of Spain wrote John Mauldin in the June 5 > Frontline Thoughts called The New, New > Normal > . > > In its simplest terms a healthcare system is there to extend the longevity > of live of the population. It is the single best and simplest way to judge > it because we can all find examples of where one country is better than > another but the longevity stats don't lie. When we use that framework the > picture is incredibly different. The US has many of the best doctors and > medical care in the world but it doesn't work for the population as a whole > and therein lies the problem. > > "According to the Economist the total US spend on healthcare is 15.4% of GDP > including both state and private . With that it gets 2.6 doctors per 1,000 > people, 3.3 hospital beds and its people live to an average age of 78.2 > > "UK - spends 8.1% of GDP, gets 2.3 doctors, 4.2 hospital beds and live to an > average age of 79.4. So for roughly half the cost their citizens overall get > about the same benefit in terms of longevity of life. > > "Canada - spends 9.8% of GDP on healthcare, gets 2.1 doctors, 3.6 hospital > beds and live until they are 80.6 yrs > > "Now if we look at the more social model in Europe the results become even > more surprising: > > "France - spends 10.5%, 3.4 docs, 7.5 beds and live until they are 80.6 > > "Spain - spends 8.1% , 3.3 docs , 3.8 beds and live until they are 81 > > "As a whole Europe spends 9.6% of GDP on healthcare, has 3.9 doctors per > 1,000 people, 6.6 hospital beds and live until they are 81.15 years old. > > "The list goes on. The truth is that in many cases as is pointed out the > healthcare system is better in the US than in some other countries BUT US > citizens must therefore get ill more often than any other country in the > West in order to achieve the truly appalling statistic that they are the 41 > longest living nation on earth with France, Spain, Norway, Switzerland, > Italy, Austria, Andorra, Holland, Greece and Sweden all featuring in the top > 20 longest living nations and the UK and Germany at 22. > > "This is the big failure of the US system. It is unforgivable. You may get a > better chance of recovering from certain diseases but as a whole you will > die younger in the US than most developed countries. ... Something is > severely broken." > > Something Is Severely Broken > > Something is indeed broken and Kennedy's bill sure is not going to fix it. > > ?America Health Choices Act? is a horrible piece of legislation that does > nothing to reduce costs but instead increases them on businesses. A better > name for it would be "Delayed Recovery And Outsourcing Encouragement > Program" or DRAOEP. > > I tried to come up with a name that would equate to DROPDEAD (because that > is what Kennedy's plan says to businesses) but could not quite make it. > > If you are a business owner you better be flooding your representatives with > faxes and phone calls (see Speak > Out!for > a detailed list of fax numbers) if you know what is good for you, > because I can ensure you, this isn't. > > Mike "Mish" Shedlock > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com > > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 7:45 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> For those of you who would like to know what's in the Obamacare bill, >> here's a searchable database - >> >> http://patientsunitednow.com/?q=node/233 >> >> Look at this - >> >> Sec. 3102 Financial Integrity >> >> ?(1) In general - A State shall keep an accurate accounting of all >> activities, receipts, and expenditures of any Gateway operating in >> such State and shall annually submit to the Secretary a report >> concerning such accountings. >> >> ?(2) Investigations - The Secretary may investigate the affairs of >> a Gateway, may examine the properties and records of a Gateway, and >> may require periodical reports in relation to activities undertaken by >> a Gateway. A Gateway shall fully cooperate in any investigation >> conducted under this paragraph. >> >> Remember all the screaming and chest thumping about warrantless >> wiretaps in years gone by? "Gateway" means your doctor. For the past >> 37 years, I've been required by law to disclose every single visit to >> a doctor or pharmacist so this is nothing new to me, but if you don't >> think giving low level government employees access to your health care >> records can create problems you've obviously forgotten "Joe the >> Plumbers" personal records being divulged for political purposes. >> >> Don't be fooled by this bill, it is not health insurance. This will >> be the creation of a massive bureaucracy. My hangarmate is going >> through this right now for a medical issue he resolved over a year ago >> - an "audit" if you will. If you think the US Post Office and the IRS >> are "mean-and-lean", well run agencies, you'll really love this one! >> >> Care to bet whether this bill will be read before it's voted on? Time >> to fire-up the phones! >> >> Brad >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Jun 8 09:58:39 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 08:58:39 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Government Motors Lies! In-Reply-To: <4A2D1375.6070006@effros.com> References: <400985d70906080601v1f9af7b3j3fc7107ac6c15e48@mail.gmail.com> <4A2D1375.6070006@effros.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906080658s45324fd7t35e676d172f79c55@mail.gmail.com> Bill, McCain was an idiot and I doubt he had a clue what to do, but at least he was attempting to do what the people of Arizona elected him to do. What would TeleprompterJesus know about that? He didn't accomplish anything in either the Illinois or US Senate but groom himself for higher office. He's still all talk, most of it self-absorbed and vapid. The MSM let's him get away with it, even cheer leads for him. The 40% who don't fund the system (more like 60% when you include government employees) could care less. Hey, if I lived in China, I'd want to be a government employee - life is good! We're rapidly approaching the same system here but for one small factor, China has 1.3 billion people who support a small percentage who hold power. Those numbers just don't work for us. BTW, who are you voting for as President of the UAW? Since we're all UAW members now, we do get to vote, don't we? Brad On 6/8/09, Bill Effros wrote: > Brad, > > As you may remember, Obama was too busy campaigning to come back to > Washington when this hit the fan. "The Senate knows what to do -- > they'll take care of it -- McCain is an idiot for leaving the campaign > trail to try to help work this out." > > B. > > > > Brad Haslett wrote: >> This is lengthy so I'll just link - >> >> http://tinyurl.com/ozwwe4 >> >> The Maobama folks just had "BULLSHIT!" called on them. >> >> Brad >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > From bill at effros.com Mon Jun 8 10:31:23 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2009 10:31:23 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Government Motors Lies! In-Reply-To: <400985d70906080658s45324fd7t35e676d172f79c55@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906080601v1f9af7b3j3fc7107ac6c15e48@mail.gmail.com> <4A2D1375.6070006@effros.com> <400985d70906080658s45324fd7t35e676d172f79c55@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A2D20BB.1020207@effros.com> Brad, It's unraveling. I was in a bank Friday. They're just not lending any money to anybody. Mortgage rates are up 1% in 10 days. T-Bill tied loans are going to soar. You can't get refinancing. Let's see, the US Population in 1932 was 125,000,000. Unemployment was 25%. So we could say 32,000,000 Americans were hurting at the peak of the "Great Depression" in terms of unemployment. Today the Population is around 300,000,000 and the unemployment rate is 9.4%. So we could say 28,500,000 Americans are now hurting. Yesterday I was in room full of Jews. 78% of them voted for Obama. 50% are now very worried about Obama's Egypt speech. And so it goes. Hold onto your wallet. B. I was in a room full of Brad Haslett wrote: > Bill, > > McCain was an idiot and I doubt he had a clue what to do, but at least > he was attempting to do what the people of Arizona elected him to do. > What would TeleprompterJesus know about that? He didn't accomplish > anything in either the Illinois or US Senate but groom himself for > higher office. He's still all talk, most of it self-absorbed and > vapid. The MSM let's him get away with it, even cheer leads for him. > The 40% who don't fund the system (more like 60% when you include > government employees) could care less. Hey, if I lived in China, I'd > want to be a government employee - life is good! We're rapidly > approaching the same system here but for one small factor, China has > 1.3 billion people who support a small percentage who hold power. > Those numbers just don't work for us. > > BTW, who are you voting for as President of the UAW? Since we're all > UAW members now, we do get to vote, don't we? > > Brad > > > On 6/8/09, Bill Effros wrote: > >> Brad, >> >> As you may remember, Obama was too busy campaigning to come back to >> Washington when this hit the fan. "The Senate knows what to do -- >> they'll take care of it -- McCain is an idiot for leaving the campaign >> trail to try to help work this out." >> >> B. >> >> >> >> Brad Haslett wrote: >> >>> This is lengthy so I'll just link - >>> >>> http://tinyurl.com/ozwwe4 >>> >>> The Maobama folks just had "BULLSHIT!" called on them. >>> >>> Brad >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090608/6080b158/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Jun 8 11:35:50 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 10:35:50 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Government Motors Lies! In-Reply-To: <4A2D20BB.1020207@effros.com> References: <400985d70906080601v1f9af7b3j3fc7107ac6c15e48@mail.gmail.com> <4A2D1375.6070006@effros.com> <400985d70906080658s45324fd7t35e676d172f79c55@mail.gmail.com> <4A2D20BB.1020207@effros.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906080835s14d89b36j425182ed27530061@mail.gmail.com> Bill, While I was buying my new VW TDI I asked the business manager how things were going. He described Memphis as a "credit challenged" market, and now it was all but impossible to finance anyone but the most creditworthy customers. Not only do the banks have their own financial worries, they fear more regulation and accusations of predatory lending practices. I read Caroline Glick of the JP to keep tabs on the pulse in Israel - http://www.carolineglick.com/ Glick grew-up in Obama's neighborhood before joining the IDF (and she's "kind too the eyes" for what that's worth - too much so for my own good for me). Israel doesn't have the logistical base to fight a sustained battle without US support (something Nixon recognized and reacted to under his watch). After you cut through through all the "did I mention I'm half-African?" post-racial BS and "I'm kinda, sort of, a Muslim myself" part of the Cairo speech, what TeleJesus really did is throw Israel under the bus. You're right, it's all unraveling. Sad that more people don't recognize it that way. Brad On 6/8/09, Bill Effros wrote: > Brad, > > It's unraveling. > > I was in a bank Friday. They're just not lending any money to anybody. > Mortgage rates are up 1% in 10 days. T-Bill tied loans are going to > soar. You can't get refinancing. > > Let's see, the US Population in 1932 was 125,000,000. Unemployment was > 25%. So we could say 32,000,000 Americans were hurting at the peak of > the "Great Depression" in terms of unemployment. > > Today the Population is around 300,000,000 and the unemployment rate is > 9.4%. So we could say 28,500,000 Americans are now hurting. > > Yesterday I was in room full of Jews. 78% of them voted for Obama. 50% > are now very worried about Obama's Egypt speech. > > And so it goes. > > Hold onto your wallet. > > B. > > > > I was in a room full of > > Brad Haslett wrote: >> Bill, >> >> McCain was an idiot and I doubt he had a clue what to do, but at least >> he was attempting to do what the people of Arizona elected him to do. >> What would TeleprompterJesus know about that? He didn't accomplish >> anything in either the Illinois or US Senate but groom himself for >> higher office. He's still all talk, most of it self-absorbed and >> vapid. The MSM let's him get away with it, even cheer leads for him. >> The 40% who don't fund the system (more like 60% when you include >> government employees) could care less. Hey, if I lived in China, I'd >> want to be a government employee - life is good! We're rapidly >> approaching the same system here but for one small factor, China has >> 1.3 billion people who support a small percentage who hold power. >> Those numbers just don't work for us. >> >> BTW, who are you voting for as President of the UAW? Since we're all >> UAW members now, we do get to vote, don't we? >> >> Brad >> >> >> On 6/8/09, Bill Effros wrote: >> >>> Brad, >>> >>> As you may remember, Obama was too busy campaigning to come back to >>> Washington when this hit the fan. "The Senate knows what to do -- >>> they'll take care of it -- McCain is an idiot for leaving the campaign >>> trail to try to help work this out." >>> >>> B. >>> >>> >>> >>> Brad Haslett wrote: >>> >>>> This is lengthy so I'll just link - >>>> >>>> http://tinyurl.com/ozwwe4 >>>> >>>> The Maobama folks just had "BULLSHIT!" called on them. >>>> >>>> Brad >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Jun 8 11:41:54 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 10:41:54 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Obamacare In-Reply-To: <400985d70906080646wbbd9e2dk66533f7290bb7364@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906080545u35c9aab0g24f829cd5e8b3953@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906080614hd0b8787h9cb772963dad059e@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70906080646wbbd9e2dk66533f7290bb7364@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0906080841g16284845pf7c78c4985d039d2@mail.gmail.com> Brad, I'll bet the doctors/clinics/hospitals are real pleased to see all this too. The other day, I took Sandy to the clinic. We got her normal blood tests and had a 20 minute conversation with our usual doctor. Sandy became eligible for medicare as of the first of the year. Before M/C, when I was paying out of pocket, this would have cost $387.00. Now that the gov't is paying it's $147.90. Yipes ..... a 60%+ cut in pay for the clinic/doctor. This is certainly better for us personally, but you gotta wonder how long the clinic will be around ...... I think I see some unemployment in the future for our medical schools .... more unintended consequences Rik. On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > As the article points out, spending more money on health doesn't > equate to better health. As Sarah Palin stated in her 2009 Alaska > State-of-the-State address, health care is something individuals have > a great deal of control over with by their lifestyle. > > Here's something many people just don't get; health insurance doesn't > equal health. It's insurance. Does your car insurance include free > oil changes and new tires? Does your homeowners insurance include > maid service? Health insurance is there to help you avoid bankruptcy > or early death in case of a major health issue. Your "Little Johnny" > farting cross-wise or you getting a cold is your problem (or should > be). We're re-inventing the wheel here, this has all been done before > in Tennessee and it didn't work. Governor Bredesen (democrat and > former health-care executive) worked the problem backward - "OK, this > is how much money the State has, what can we buy with the funds > available"? TennCare is not a "gold plated" health insurance plan but > it is affordable TO THOSE WHO WANT IT! If someone wants something > better, they can always compete for a job with an employer that offers > something better. You can put all the lipstick on this pig you want, > this bill is socialism! You want a better health care system? Fine! > Leave the two of us alone for an hour with a case of beer and we'll > have one for you! But, that's not the point. This is not about > better health, it is all about 'gubment' control. Don't people get > enough of that shit in their lives? > > One last thought - there's STILL $600 million dollars sitting on the > shelf available for developers to build housing for Katrina victims. > It will be there 10 years from now. No private developer is going to > touch that money with all the strings attached to it. Show me one > successful public housing project, anywhere. Ask Obambi about his > friends in the private-public housing arena. So, somehow, we're going > to get this right with health care? > > I call BS on that, not that it matters. > > Brad > > On 6/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > Looks like 'ol Ted is gonna' try to stick us one last good one on this > > healthcare thing before he finally tips over. I generally try hard to > give > > people the benefit of the doubt, but honestly, in my mind 'ol Ted has > used > > up his (and a few other's) share of doubt. I guess anymore, I think we'd > all > > have been better off if he'da drowned with Mary Jo. > > > > Rik > > > > > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/kennedys-healthcare-bill-will-increase.html > > ______________________ > > > > Kennedy's Healthcare Bill Will Increase Expenses, Decrease Employment and > > Encourage > > Outsourcing< > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/kennedys-healthcare-bill-will-increase.html > > > > > > Ted Kennedy believes everyone should have a plethora of good options on > > healthcare. > > > > However, other than raising taxes on businesses, Kennedy refuses to say > how > > his proposals will be paid. Moreover, he is too blind to see (or too > > political to admit), the myriad of disastrous consequences that his > health > > care proposal will entail, especially on small and medium sized > businesses. > > > > His bill is political demagoguery at its finest. > > > > Please consider the details as presented in Kennedy Health Bill Mandates > > Public Plan, Coverage for > > All > > . > > > > Under a draft bill to overhaul the U.S. health-care system all employers > > would be required to supply health insurance for workers or contribute to > > the cost. > > > > The bill, by Senator Edward M. Kennedy, would create a public health plan > to > > compete with private insurers, a priority of President Barack Obama?s > that > > is opposed by Republicans. It would provide all Americans with health > > benefits, penalize those who don?t buy them and bar insurers from > limiting > > coverage. > > > > The ?America Health Choices Act,? circulated in Washington late > yesterday, > > offered the first detailed glimpse of legislation being discussed in > > Congress. Many of its provisions would expand coverage for uninsured > > Americans. ?It is the sense of the Senate that Congress should establish > a > > means for all Americans to enjoy affordable choices in health benefit > > plans,? the bill said. > > > > Obama set aside $635 billion in his 2010 budget proposal to act as a > ?down > > payment? on the cost of reconstructing the health-care system and > expanding > > coverage to the estimated 46 million uninsured Americans. > > > > Kennedy?s draft did not include details of how its proposals would be > paid > > for. > > > > Kennedy?s bill opened with an affirmation of a patient?s rights to choose > > his or her doctor and the importance of the patient-doctor relationship. > > ?Doctors, nurses and other health professionals have the right to judge > what > > is best for their patients,? the bill stated. > > > > America Health Choices Act Provisions > > > > Government subsidies will be provided to people with income up to 500 > > percent of the poverty level. > > > > Doctors and hospitals paid at Medicare rates, plus 10 percent. > > > > Medicaid, expanded to cover uninsured people earning up to 150 percent of > > the poverty level. > > > > Essential? benefits, include hospital care, maternity and newborn care, > > prescription drugs, mental-health and substance-abuse services and > doctors? > > services. > > > > The bill establishes protections for ?fair? insurance coverage, setting > > limits on how much premiums can vary. Insurers would be forbidden from > > turning away customers due to pre-existing conditions. > > > > Each health insurer that offers coverage in the individual or group > market > > in a state would have to accept every employer and individual in the > state > > that applied for coverage. > > > > Companies that provide coverage for children through their parents will > have > > to extend ?dependent? coverage for those children through the age of 26. > > > > America Health Choices Act Consequences > > > > 1) Every employer thinking about hiring someone is going to think twice > > about it, then not do it. > > > > 2) Every employer struggling to maintain jobs in the US with a choice of > > outsourcing will have another huge incentive to outsource. > > > > 3) Many employers struggling to maintain solvency will go bankrupt after > > this bill passes. > > > > 4) Corporate profits across the board are going to drop. > > > > 5) The stock market will drop along with corporate profits. > > > > 6) Health care companies will have an incentive to not offer plans in > states > > with poor demographics. > > > > 7) Government mandates about how much insurers can charge will bankrupt > > insurers and/or cause rationing of services. > > > > 8) Businesses will have an incentive to fire workers and instead offer > > contract work to individuals. Banks and financial institutions will be > among > > the first to consider this option. Programmers have another reason to > start > > worrying about their jobs. > > > > 9) Businesses unable to outsource or make use of contractors will bear > the > > brunt of this legislation. The group hardest hit will be retailers like > > Walmart, Target, and Costco, and restaurants like McDonalds and Pizza > Hut. > > > > 10) This bill will weigh on business expansion plans. Retail stores are > > already saturated. This bill provides one more reason for businesses not > to > > expand further. > > > > Business Owners Should Be Scared To Death > > > > In general: The bill has a negative effect on hiring, a negative effect > on > > business expansion, a negative effect on corporate profits, and it > promotes > > outsourcing. Moreover, it will delay the recovery of the stock market and > it > > puts the brunt of the burden on businesses that cannot outsource. > > > > If you are not scared to death by those consequences, you are not paying > > attention to what is happening. > > > > Requiring businesses to pick up the tab will slow hiring and the > recovery. > > Monetizing medical expenses will cheapen the dollar. Requiring taxpayers > to > > foot the bill will take away from discretionary spending. > > > > It is axiomatic that someone must pay. There is no such thing as a free > > lunch or free health care either. > > > > I have come up with 10 easy to see consequences. I am sure there are many > > unforeseen consequences, some of which will be even worse. > > > > For those who want more for their money in these deflationary times, here > is > > a bonus 11th consequence: It will encourage the employment of illegal > aliens > > under the table paid in cash and all kinds of underground barter > > transactions that also will not be taxed. > > > > Standards of Measurement of Good Health Care > > > > Please consider what Raoul Pal of Spain wrote John Mauldin in the June 5 > > Frontline Thoughts called The New, New > > Normal > > . > > > > In its simplest terms a healthcare system is there to extend the > longevity > > of live of the population. It is the single best and simplest way to > judge > > it because we can all find examples of where one country is better than > > another but the longevity stats don't lie. When we use that framework the > > picture is incredibly different. The US has many of the best doctors and > > medical care in the world but it doesn't work for the population as a > whole > > and therein lies the problem. > > > > "According to the Economist the total US spend on healthcare is 15.4% of > GDP > > including both state and private . With that it gets 2.6 doctors per > 1,000 > > people, 3.3 hospital beds and its people live to an average age of 78.2 > > > > "UK - spends 8.1% of GDP, gets 2.3 doctors, 4.2 hospital beds and live to > an > > average age of 79.4. So for roughly half the cost their citizens overall > get > > about the same benefit in terms of longevity of life. > > > > "Canada - spends 9.8% of GDP on healthcare, gets 2.1 doctors, 3.6 > hospital > > beds and live until they are 80.6 yrs > > > > "Now if we look at the more social model in Europe the results become > even > > more surprising: > > > > "France - spends 10.5%, 3.4 docs, 7.5 beds and live until they are 80.6 > > > > "Spain - spends 8.1% , 3.3 docs , 3.8 beds and live until they are 81 > > > > "As a whole Europe spends 9.6% of GDP on healthcare, has 3.9 doctors per > > 1,000 people, 6.6 hospital beds and live until they are 81.15 years old. > > > > "The list goes on. The truth is that in many cases as is pointed out the > > healthcare system is better in the US than in some other countries BUT US > > citizens must therefore get ill more often than any other country in the > > West in order to achieve the truly appalling statistic that they are the > 41 > > longest living nation on earth with France, Spain, Norway, Switzerland, > > Italy, Austria, Andorra, Holland, Greece and Sweden all featuring in the > top > > 20 longest living nations and the UK and Germany at 22. > > > > "This is the big failure of the US system. It is unforgivable. You may > get a > > better chance of recovering from certain diseases but as a whole you will > > die younger in the US than most developed countries. ... Something is > > severely broken." > > > > Something Is Severely Broken > > > > Something is indeed broken and Kennedy's bill sure is not going to fix > it. > > > > ?America Health Choices Act? is a horrible piece of legislation that does > > nothing to reduce costs but instead increases them on businesses. A > better > > name for it would be "Delayed Recovery And Outsourcing Encouragement > > Program" or DRAOEP. > > > > I tried to come up with a name that would equate to DROPDEAD (because > that > > is what Kennedy's plan says to businesses) but could not quite make it. > > > > If you are a business owner you better be flooding your representatives > with > > faxes and phone calls (see Speak > > Out!< > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/speak-out-audit-fed-then-end-it.html > >for > > a detailed list of fax numbers) if you know what is good for you, > > because I can ensure you, this isn't. > > > > Mike "Mish" Shedlock > > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 7:45 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> For those of you who would like to know what's in the Obamacare bill, > >> here's a searchable database - > >> > >> http://patientsunitednow.com/?q=node/233 > >> > >> Look at this - > >> > >> Sec. 3102 Financial Integrity > >> > >> ?(1) In general - A State shall keep an accurate accounting of all > >> activities, receipts, and expenditures of any Gateway operating in > >> such State and shall annually submit to the Secretary a report > >> concerning such accountings. > >> > >> ?(2) Investigations - The Secretary may investigate the affairs of > >> a Gateway, may examine the properties and records of a Gateway, and > >> may require periodical reports in relation to activities undertaken by > >> a Gateway. A Gateway shall fully cooperate in any investigation > >> conducted under this paragraph. > >> > >> Remember all the screaming and chest thumping about warrantless > >> wiretaps in years gone by? "Gateway" means your doctor. For the past > >> 37 years, I've been required by law to disclose every single visit to > >> a doctor or pharmacist so this is nothing new to me, but if you don't > >> think giving low level government employees access to your health care > >> records can create problems you've obviously forgotten "Joe the > >> Plumbers" personal records being divulged for political purposes. > >> > >> Don't be fooled by this bill, it is not health insurance. This will > >> be the creation of a massive bureaucracy. My hangarmate is going > >> through this right now for a medical issue he resolved over a year ago > >> - an "audit" if you will. If you think the US Post Office and the IRS > >> are "mean-and-lean", well run agencies, you'll really love this one! > >> > >> Care to bet whether this bill will be read before it's voted on? Time > >> to fire-up the phones! > >> > >> Brad > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090608/17d980b5/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Jun 8 11:57:47 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 10:57:47 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Obamacare In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0906080841g16284845pf7c78c4985d039d2@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906080545u35c9aab0g24f829cd5e8b3953@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906080614hd0b8787h9cb772963dad059e@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70906080646wbbd9e2dk66533f7290bb7364@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906080841g16284845pf7c78c4985d039d2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906080857l16fab918s854be05f0c755cd2@mail.gmail.com> Rik, You've hit exactly on the weakness with any price-fixing/rationing scheme (what gubment health-care really is) in a market economy. Nixon discovered this with his price controls - you create "bottle-necks" in the system and vendors/providers withhold services. My parents have lived with this system on Medicare for almost three decades. They're pretty good at negotiating and have supplemental insurance, but sometimes don't get the doctors and hospitals they want because some "won't play the game". The wealthy Canadians game the system by coming to the US. The rich Chinese use political influence or go to Thailand. Where will we go, Cuba? I've got a quick and simple solution where everyone wins - let people like Anne from the old list provide 90% of routine health-care. Between her and my first wife, Nurse Sandy, I can get most of our routine health care questions answered without seeing a doctor. Let WalMart open walk-up clinics in stores and watch prices fall! This whole debate isn't about providing better health care, it's all about equal access to equally shitty health care. Brad On 6/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > I'll bet the doctors/clinics/hospitals are real pleased to see all this too. > > The other day, I took Sandy to the clinic. We got her normal blood tests and > had a 20 minute conversation with our usual doctor. Sandy became eligible > for medicare as of the first of the year. Before M/C, when I was paying out > of pocket, this would have cost $387.00. Now that the gov't is paying it's > $147.90. Yipes ..... a 60%+ cut in pay for the clinic/doctor. This is > certainly better for us personally, but you gotta wonder how long the clinic > will be around ...... > > I think I see some unemployment in the future for our medical schools .... > more unintended consequences > > Rik. > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> As the article points out, spending more money on health doesn't >> equate to better health. As Sarah Palin stated in her 2009 Alaska >> State-of-the-State address, health care is something individuals have >> a great deal of control over with by their lifestyle. >> >> Here's something many people just don't get; health insurance doesn't >> equal health. It's insurance. Does your car insurance include free >> oil changes and new tires? Does your homeowners insurance include >> maid service? Health insurance is there to help you avoid bankruptcy >> or early death in case of a major health issue. Your "Little Johnny" >> farting cross-wise or you getting a cold is your problem (or should >> be). We're re-inventing the wheel here, this has all been done before >> in Tennessee and it didn't work. Governor Bredesen (democrat and >> former health-care executive) worked the problem backward - "OK, this >> is how much money the State has, what can we buy with the funds >> available"? TennCare is not a "gold plated" health insurance plan but >> it is affordable TO THOSE WHO WANT IT! If someone wants something >> better, they can always compete for a job with an employer that offers >> something better. You can put all the lipstick on this pig you want, >> this bill is socialism! You want a better health care system? Fine! >> Leave the two of us alone for an hour with a case of beer and we'll >> have one for you! But, that's not the point. This is not about >> better health, it is all about 'gubment' control. Don't people get >> enough of that shit in their lives? >> >> One last thought - there's STILL $600 million dollars sitting on the >> shelf available for developers to build housing for Katrina victims. >> It will be there 10 years from now. No private developer is going to >> touch that money with all the strings attached to it. Show me one >> successful public housing project, anywhere. Ask Obambi about his >> friends in the private-public housing arena. So, somehow, we're going >> to get this right with health care? >> >> I call BS on that, not that it matters. >> >> Brad >> >> On 6/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: >> > Brad, >> > >> > Looks like 'ol Ted is gonna' try to stick us one last good one on this >> > healthcare thing before he finally tips over. I generally try hard to >> give >> > people the benefit of the doubt, but honestly, in my mind 'ol Ted has >> used >> > up his (and a few other's) share of doubt. I guess anymore, I think we'd >> all >> > have been better off if he'da drowned with Mary Jo. >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > >> http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/kennedys-healthcare-bill-will-increase.html >> > ______________________ >> > >> > Kennedy's Healthcare Bill Will Increase Expenses, Decrease Employment >> > and >> > Encourage >> > Outsourcing< >> http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/kennedys-healthcare-bill-will-increase.html >> > >> > >> > Ted Kennedy believes everyone should have a plethora of good options on >> > healthcare. >> > >> > However, other than raising taxes on businesses, Kennedy refuses to say >> how >> > his proposals will be paid. Moreover, he is too blind to see (or too >> > political to admit), the myriad of disastrous consequences that his >> health >> > care proposal will entail, especially on small and medium sized >> businesses. >> > >> > His bill is political demagoguery at its finest. >> > >> > Please consider the details as presented in Kennedy Health Bill Mandates >> > Public Plan, Coverage for >> > All >> > . >> > >> > Under a draft bill to overhaul the U.S. health-care system all employers >> > would be required to supply health insurance for workers or contribute >> > to >> > the cost. >> > >> > The bill, by Senator Edward M. Kennedy, would create a public health >> > plan >> to >> > compete with private insurers, a priority of President Barack Obama?s >> that >> > is opposed by Republicans. It would provide all Americans with health >> > benefits, penalize those who don?t buy them and bar insurers from >> limiting >> > coverage. >> > >> > The ?America Health Choices Act,? circulated in Washington late >> yesterday, >> > offered the first detailed glimpse of legislation being discussed in >> > Congress. Many of its provisions would expand coverage for uninsured >> > Americans. ?It is the sense of the Senate that Congress should establish >> a >> > means for all Americans to enjoy affordable choices in health benefit >> > plans,? the bill said. >> > >> > Obama set aside $635 billion in his 2010 budget proposal to act as a >> ?down >> > payment? on the cost of reconstructing the health-care system and >> expanding >> > coverage to the estimated 46 million uninsured Americans. >> > >> > Kennedy?s draft did not include details of how its proposals would be >> paid >> > for. >> > >> > Kennedy?s bill opened with an affirmation of a patient?s rights to >> > choose >> > his or her doctor and the importance of the patient-doctor relationship. >> > ?Doctors, nurses and other health professionals have the right to judge >> what >> > is best for their patients,? the bill stated. >> > >> > America Health Choices Act Provisions >> > >> > Government subsidies will be provided to people with income up to 500 >> > percent of the poverty level. >> > >> > Doctors and hospitals paid at Medicare rates, plus 10 percent. >> > >> > Medicaid, expanded to cover uninsured people earning up to 150 percent >> > of >> > the poverty level. >> > >> > Essential? benefits, include hospital care, maternity and newborn care, >> > prescription drugs, mental-health and substance-abuse services and >> doctors? >> > services. >> > >> > The bill establishes protections for ?fair? insurance coverage, setting >> > limits on how much premiums can vary. Insurers would be forbidden from >> > turning away customers due to pre-existing conditions. >> > >> > Each health insurer that offers coverage in the individual or group >> market >> > in a state would have to accept every employer and individual in the >> state >> > that applied for coverage. >> > >> > Companies that provide coverage for children through their parents will >> have >> > to extend ?dependent? coverage for those children through the age of 26. >> > >> > America Health Choices Act Consequences >> > >> > 1) Every employer thinking about hiring someone is going to think twice >> > about it, then not do it. >> > >> > 2) Every employer struggling to maintain jobs in the US with a choice of >> > outsourcing will have another huge incentive to outsource. >> > >> > 3) Many employers struggling to maintain solvency will go bankrupt after >> > this bill passes. >> > >> > 4) Corporate profits across the board are going to drop. >> > >> > 5) The stock market will drop along with corporate profits. >> > >> > 6) Health care companies will have an incentive to not offer plans in >> states >> > with poor demographics. >> > >> > 7) Government mandates about how much insurers can charge will bankrupt >> > insurers and/or cause rationing of services. >> > >> > 8) Businesses will have an incentive to fire workers and instead offer >> > contract work to individuals. Banks and financial institutions will be >> among >> > the first to consider this option. Programmers have another reason to >> start >> > worrying about their jobs. >> > >> > 9) Businesses unable to outsource or make use of contractors will bear >> the >> > brunt of this legislation. The group hardest hit will be retailers like >> > Walmart, Target, and Costco, and restaurants like McDonalds and Pizza >> Hut. >> > >> > 10) This bill will weigh on business expansion plans. Retail stores are >> > already saturated. This bill provides one more reason for businesses not >> to >> > expand further. >> > >> > Business Owners Should Be Scared To Death >> > >> > In general: The bill has a negative effect on hiring, a negative effect >> on >> > business expansion, a negative effect on corporate profits, and it >> promotes >> > outsourcing. Moreover, it will delay the recovery of the stock market >> > and >> it >> > puts the brunt of the burden on businesses that cannot outsource. >> > >> > If you are not scared to death by those consequences, you are not paying >> > attention to what is happening. >> > >> > Requiring businesses to pick up the tab will slow hiring and the >> recovery. >> > Monetizing medical expenses will cheapen the dollar. Requiring taxpayers >> to >> > foot the bill will take away from discretionary spending. >> > >> > It is axiomatic that someone must pay. There is no such thing as a free >> > lunch or free health care either. >> > >> > I have come up with 10 easy to see consequences. I am sure there are >> > many >> > unforeseen consequences, some of which will be even worse. >> > >> > For those who want more for their money in these deflationary times, >> > here >> is >> > a bonus 11th consequence: It will encourage the employment of illegal >> aliens >> > under the table paid in cash and all kinds of underground barter >> > transactions that also will not be taxed. >> > >> > Standards of Measurement of Good Health Care >> > >> > Please consider what Raoul Pal of Spain wrote John Mauldin in the June 5 >> > Frontline Thoughts called The New, New >> > Normal >> > . >> > >> > In its simplest terms a healthcare system is there to extend the >> longevity >> > of live of the population. It is the single best and simplest way to >> judge >> > it because we can all find examples of where one country is better than >> > another but the longevity stats don't lie. When we use that framework >> > the >> > picture is incredibly different. The US has many of the best doctors and >> > medical care in the world but it doesn't work for the population as a >> whole >> > and therein lies the problem. >> > >> > "According to the Economist the total US spend on healthcare is 15.4% of >> GDP >> > including both state and private . With that it gets 2.6 doctors per >> 1,000 >> > people, 3.3 hospital beds and its people live to an average age of 78.2 >> > >> > "UK - spends 8.1% of GDP, gets 2.3 doctors, 4.2 hospital beds and live >> > to >> an >> > average age of 79.4. So for roughly half the cost their citizens overall >> get >> > about the same benefit in terms of longevity of life. >> > >> > "Canada - spends 9.8% of GDP on healthcare, gets 2.1 doctors, 3.6 >> hospital >> > beds and live until they are 80.6 yrs >> > >> > "Now if we look at the more social model in Europe the results become >> even >> > more surprising: >> > >> > "France - spends 10.5%, 3.4 docs, 7.5 beds and live until they are 80.6 >> > >> > "Spain - spends 8.1% , 3.3 docs , 3.8 beds and live until they are 81 >> > >> > "As a whole Europe spends 9.6% of GDP on healthcare, has 3.9 doctors per >> > 1,000 people, 6.6 hospital beds and live until they are 81.15 years old. >> > >> > "The list goes on. The truth is that in many cases as is pointed out the >> > healthcare system is better in the US than in some other countries BUT >> > US >> > citizens must therefore get ill more often than any other country in the >> > West in order to achieve the truly appalling statistic that they are the >> 41 >> > longest living nation on earth with France, Spain, Norway, Switzerland, >> > Italy, Austria, Andorra, Holland, Greece and Sweden all featuring in the >> top >> > 20 longest living nations and the UK and Germany at 22. >> > >> > "This is the big failure of the US system. It is unforgivable. You may >> get a >> > better chance of recovering from certain diseases but as a whole you >> > will >> > die younger in the US than most developed countries. ... Something is >> > severely broken." >> > >> > Something Is Severely Broken >> > >> > Something is indeed broken and Kennedy's bill sure is not going to fix >> it. >> > >> > ?America Health Choices Act? is a horrible piece of legislation that >> > does >> > nothing to reduce costs but instead increases them on businesses. A >> better >> > name for it would be "Delayed Recovery And Outsourcing Encouragement >> > Program" or DRAOEP. >> > >> > I tried to come up with a name that would equate to DROPDEAD (because >> that >> > is what Kennedy's plan says to businesses) but could not quite make it. >> > >> > If you are a business owner you better be flooding your representatives >> with >> > faxes and phone calls (see Speak >> > Out!< >> http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/speak-out-audit-fed-then-end-it.html >> >for >> > a detailed list of fax numbers) if you know what is good for you, >> > because I can ensure you, this isn't. >> > >> > Mike "Mish" Shedlock >> > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 7:45 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> For those of you who would like to know what's in the Obamacare bill, >> >> here's a searchable database - >> >> >> >> http://patientsunitednow.com/?q=node/233 >> >> >> >> Look at this - >> >> >> >> Sec. 3102 Financial Integrity >> >> >> >> ?(1) In general - A State shall keep an accurate accounting of all >> >> activities, receipts, and expenditures of any Gateway operating in >> >> such State and shall annually submit to the Secretary a report >> >> concerning such accountings. >> >> >> >> ?(2) Investigations - The Secretary may investigate the affairs of >> >> a Gateway, may examine the properties and records of a Gateway, and >> >> may require periodical reports in relation to activities undertaken by >> >> a Gateway. A Gateway shall fully cooperate in any investigation >> >> conducted under this paragraph. >> >> >> >> Remember all the screaming and chest thumping about warrantless >> >> wiretaps in years gone by? "Gateway" means your doctor. For the past >> >> 37 years, I've been required by law to disclose every single visit to >> >> a doctor or pharmacist so this is nothing new to me, but if you don't >> >> think giving low level government employees access to your health care >> >> records can create problems you've obviously forgotten "Joe the >> >> Plumbers" personal records being divulged for political purposes. >> >> >> >> Don't be fooled by this bill, it is not health insurance. This will >> >> be the creation of a massive bureaucracy. My hangarmate is going >> >> through this right now for a medical issue he resolved over a year ago >> >> - an "audit" if you will. If you think the US Post Office and the IRS >> >> are "mean-and-lean", well run agencies, you'll really love this one! >> >> >> >> Care to bet whether this bill will be read before it's voted on? Time >> >> to fire-up the phones! >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From ekroposki at charter.net Mon Jun 8 12:00:29 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 12:00:29 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Obamacare Message-ID: <6D8D9F32336B45CF840A875A91AD5B7A@YOURB88038198E> Check this provision out: "Each health insurer that offers coverage in the individual or group market in a state would have to accept every employer and individual in the state that applied for coverage." Together with: Under a draft bill to overhaul the U.S. health-care system all employers would be required to supply health insurance for workers or contribute to the cost. Hum, no new employers, that is start ups, and all insurance companies closing down. What is the logical conclusion? Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090608/16dfa3fb/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Jun 8 12:31:09 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 11:31:09 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Obamacare In-Reply-To: <6D8D9F32336B45CF840A875A91AD5B7A@YOURB88038198E> References: <6D8D9F32336B45CF840A875A91AD5B7A@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <400985d70906080931y630f904jd6990440fff1652e@mail.gmail.com> Ed, What is the logical conclusion? Just what you said! Every employee has x dollars of intrinsic value. The money has to come from somewhere. If the employer MUST contribute to health care, it will come at the expense of employee wages or consumer prices. That is precisely how employer provided health care got started - during WW2, wages and prices were fixed so employers provided health insurance to attract workers. Either way, everyone pays. How well did collective agriculture work for the Soviet Union or China? Is food a right? No, it is a need that falls under "the pursuit of happiness". I happen too enjoy flying better than farming so I trade one skill-set for another. I like having "gold plated" health insurance so I encourage my union to trade wages for premium costs. You can't have it both ways - it's been tried - it failed. If you're an illegal alien, well, you're illegal. You don't get health care. Think about that before you sneak into the country. If you're unemployed by choice, you should get substandard health care (meaning, both ends of the tail are cut off for you, you wait in line for the routine stuff that you'll be fine without anyway, and you won't get a gazillion dollars spent on you in your last 6 weeks of life). I'm all for creating a system that allows everyone access to some kind of health care at some level, but how will we pay for a system where everyone is equal? It has never worked anywhere, anytime, in the history of mankind for any single economic activity. Here's the problem in a nutshell: 40% of our population doesn't financially support the benefits they receive that the other 60% produce. We're near the tipping point. If housing is a right, health care is a right, food is a right, what the hell else is their to work for? The IRS took over the Bunny Ranch and couldn't run a business that sold booze and pussy. Enough said? Or, could those items be a right as well? Hell, I might be a Marxist and not realize it yet. Brad On 6/8/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > Check this provision out: > > "Each health insurer that offers coverage in the individual or group market > in a state would have to accept every employer and individual in the state > that applied for coverage." > > Together with: > > Under a draft bill to overhaul the U.S. health-care system all employers > would be required to supply health insurance for workers or contribute to > the cost. > > Hum, no new employers, that is start ups, and all insurance companies > closing down. What is the logical conclusion? > > Ed K > > > > From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Jun 8 13:41:53 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 12:41:53 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Sarah - We Told Ya Message-ID: <400985d70906081041w33cde947gd651728e6be12d62@mail.gmail.com> Sarah will be on Hannity tonight. You remember Sarah, that hick, hocky-mom graduate from some no-name university - 'TOLD YA SO' Mon Jun 08 2009 10:29:02 ET Sarah Palin hits FOXNEWS tonight for the big 'Told Ya So' interview, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned. As President Obama vows to spend the 'stimulus' faster, Governor Palin tells host Sean Hannity: 'You gotta quit digging that hole!' MORE HANNITY: What do you make of ? look at the state of the economy now... PALIN: Well, when you consider that the federal government is about eleven trillion dollars in debt, and we?re borrowing more to spend more.. it defies any sensible economic policy that any of us ever learned through college. It defies economy practices and principles that tell ya ?you gotta quit digging that hole when you are in that financial hole? Palin continues: "America is digging a deeper hole and how are we paying for this government largesse. We?re borrowing. We?re borrowing from China and we consider that now we own sixty percent of GENERAL MOTORS ? or the U.S. government does? But who is the U.S. government becoming more indebted to? It?s China. So that leads you to have to ask who is really going to own our car industry than in America." HANNITY: You know but it goes back - It does go back a little to the campaign. I mean, ?spread the wealth, patriotic duty?? PALIN: Kind of a ?we told ya so?. HANNITY: Well, is that how you feel? PALIN: That?s how I feel! I feel like? and I think that more and more constituents are going to open their eyes now and open their ears to hear what is really going on and realize ok? Maybe we didn?t have a good way of expressing that, or articulating that message of ?here is what America could potentially become if we grow government to such a degree that we cannot pay for it and we have to borrow money from other countries, some countries that don?t necessarily like America. And this many months into the new administration, quite disappointed, quite frustrated with not seeing those actions to rein in spending, slow down the growth of government. Instead Sean it is the complete opposite. It?s expanding at such a large degree that if Americans aren?t paying attention, unfortunately our country could evolve into something that we do not even recognize. HANNITY: Socialism? PALIN: Well, that is where we are headed. That is where we have to be blunt enough and candid enough and honest enough with Americans to let them know that if we keep going down these roads? nationalizing many of our services, our projects, our businesses, yes that is where we would head. And that is why Americans have to be paying attention. And we have to have our voices heard. And ultimately it need to be our will, the American people?s will imposed on Washington, instead of the other way around. The interview is set to air tonight on FOXNEWS, 9 PM ET. Developing... From ekroposki at charter.net Mon Jun 8 14:35:19 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 14:35:19 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Obamaland Message-ID: man is sitting in a bar far from home when Barack Obama comes on TV. The man looks at the TV and says, "Obama is a horse's ass." Out of nowhere, a local jumps up and punches him in the face, knocking the first guy off his bar stool, then stomps out. He gets up, rubbing his cheek and orders another beer. Shortly after, Michelle Obama appears on the TV. He looks at the TV and says, "She is a horse's ass too!" Out of nowhere, another local punches him on the other side of the face, knocking him off his bar stool again. He gets back up and looks at the bartender,"I take it this is Obama country?" "Nope." replies the bartender. "Horse country -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090608/b579b718/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Jun 8 22:39:53 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 21:39:53 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Air France Message-ID: <400985d70906081939t6198160asd2401f8c2636ef90@mail.gmail.com> As a general rule, I don't speculate on these things, at least not early on. The press coverage is usually so shoddy it isn't worth reading. That hasn't changed. Today's coverage shows a photo of a complete Airbus 330 tail section. No other parts of the plane, just the tail. This is eerily like American Airlines in New York shortly after 9/11. I'll give you 50/50 odds that the 'glue' came loose on another Airbus vertical stab. "If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going!" Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Jun 8 22:41:52 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 21:41:52 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] New GM Ad Message-ID: <400985d70906081941g73087b5docda1f17bff5013c6@mail.gmail.com> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFV1vQwMlpU&feature=player_embedded From flybrad at gmail.com Tue Jun 9 07:41:52 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 06:41:52 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Obamacare In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0906080841g16284845pf7c78c4985d039d2@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906080545u35c9aab0g24f829cd5e8b3953@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906080614hd0b8787h9cb772963dad059e@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70906080646wbbd9e2dk66533f7290bb7364@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906080841g16284845pf7c78c4985d039d2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906090441l121b0318k86496c5f33ff8aa3@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Here's a view from Canada (below). Brad ------------- * JUNE 9, 2009 Canada's ObamaCare Precedent Governments always ration care by making you wait. That can be deadly. By DAVID GRATZER Congressional Democrats will soon put forward their legislative proposals for reforming health care. Should they succeed, tens of millions of Americans will potentially be joining a new public insurance program and the federal government will increasingly be involved in treatment decisions. Not long ago, I would have applauded this type of government expansion. Born and raised in Canada, I once believed that government health care is compassionate and equitable. It is neither. My views changed in medical school. Yes, everyone in Canada is covered by a "single payer" -- the government. But Canadians wait for practically any procedure or diagnostic test or specialist consultation in the public system. [Canada's ObamaCare Precedent] Martin Kozlowski The problems were brought home when a relative had difficulty walking. He was in chronic pain. His doctor suggested a referral to a neurologist; an MRI would need to be done, then possibly a referral to another specialist. The wait would have stretched to roughly a year. If surgery was needed, the wait would be months more. Not wanting to stay confined to his house, he had the surgery done in the U.S., at the Mayo Clinic, and paid for it himself. Such stories are common. For example, Sylvia de Vries, an Ontario woman, had a 40-pound fluid-filled tumor removed from her abdomen by an American surgeon in 2006. Her Michigan doctor estimated that she was within weeks of dying, but she was still on a wait list for a Canadian specialist. Indeed, Canada's provincial governments themselves rely on American medicine. Between 2006 and 2008, Ontario sent more than 160 patients to New York and Michigan for emergency neurosurgery -- described by the Globe and Mail newspaper as "broken necks, burst aneurysms and other types of bleeding in or around the brain." Only half of ER patients are treated in a timely manner by national and international standards, according to a government study. The physician shortage is so severe that some towns hold lotteries, with the winners gaining access to the local doc. Overall, according to a study published in Lancet Oncology last year, five-year cancer survival rates are higher in the U.S. than those in Canada. Based on data from the Joint Canada/U.S. Survey of Health (done by Statistics Canada and the U.S. National Center for Health Statistics), Americans have greater access to preventive screening tests and have higher treatment rates for chronic illnesses. No wonder: To limit the growth in health spending, governments restrict the supply of health care by rationing it through waiting. The same survey data show, as June and Paul O'Neill note in a paper published in 2007 in the Forum for Health Economics & Policy, that the poor under socialized medicine seem to be less healthy relative to the nonpoor than their American counterparts. Ironically, as the U.S. is on the verge of rushing toward government health care, Canada is reforming its system in the opposite direction. In 2005, Canada's supreme court struck down key laws in Quebec that established a government monopoly of health services. Claude Castonguay, who headed the Quebec government commission that recommended the creation of its public health-care system in the 1960s, also has second thoughts. Last year, after completing another review, he declared the system in "crisis" and suggested a massive expansion of private services -- even advocating that public hospitals rent facilities to physicians in off-hours. And the medical establishment? Dr. Brian Day, an orthopedic surgeon, grew increasingly frustrated by government cutbacks that reduced his access to an operating room and increased the number of patients on his hospital waiting list. He built a private hospital in Vancouver in the 1990s. Last year, he completed a term as the president of the Canadian Medical Association and was succeeded by a Quebec radiologist who owns several private clinics. In Canada, private-sector health care is growing. Dr. Day estimates that 50,000 people are seen at private clinics every year in British Columbia. According to the New York Times, a private clinic opens at a rate of about one a week across the country. Public-private partnerships, once a taboo topic, are embraced by provincial governments. In the United Kingdom, where socialized medicine was established after World War II through the National Health Service, the present Labour government has introduced a choice in surgeries by allowing patients to choose among facilities, often including private ones. Even in Sweden, the government has turned over services to the private sector. Americans need to ask a basic question: Why are they rushing into a system of government-dominated health care when the very countries that have experienced it for so long are backing away? Dr. Gratzer, a physician, is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. Please add your comments to the Opinion Journal Forum. On 6/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > I'll bet the doctors/clinics/hospitals are real pleased to see all this too. > > The other day, I took Sandy to the clinic. We got her normal blood tests and > had a 20 minute conversation with our usual doctor. Sandy became eligible > for medicare as of the first of the year. Before M/C, when I was paying out > of pocket, this would have cost $387.00. Now that the gov't is paying it's > $147.90. Yipes ..... a 60%+ cut in pay for the clinic/doctor. This is > certainly better for us personally, but you gotta wonder how long the clinic > will be around ...... > > I think I see some unemployment in the future for our medical schools .... > more unintended consequences > > Rik. > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> As the article points out, spending more money on health doesn't >> equate to better health. As Sarah Palin stated in her 2009 Alaska >> State-of-the-State address, health care is something individuals have >> a great deal of control over with by their lifestyle. >> >> Here's something many people just don't get; health insurance doesn't >> equal health. It's insurance. Does your car insurance include free >> oil changes and new tires? Does your homeowners insurance include >> maid service? Health insurance is there to help you avoid bankruptcy >> or early death in case of a major health issue. Your "Little Johnny" >> farting cross-wise or you getting a cold is your problem (or should >> be). We're re-inventing the wheel here, this has all been done before >> in Tennessee and it didn't work. Governor Bredesen (democrat and >> former health-care executive) worked the problem backward - "OK, this >> is how much money the State has, what can we buy with the funds >> available"? TennCare is not a "gold plated" health insurance plan but >> it is affordable TO THOSE WHO WANT IT! If someone wants something >> better, they can always compete for a job with an employer that offers >> something better. You can put all the lipstick on this pig you want, >> this bill is socialism! You want a better health care system? Fine! >> Leave the two of us alone for an hour with a case of beer and we'll >> have one for you! But, that's not the point. This is not about >> better health, it is all about 'gubment' control. Don't people get >> enough of that shit in their lives? >> >> One last thought - there's STILL $600 million dollars sitting on the >> shelf available for developers to build housing for Katrina victims. >> It will be there 10 years from now. No private developer is going to >> touch that money with all the strings attached to it. Show me one >> successful public housing project, anywhere. Ask Obambi about his >> friends in the private-public housing arena. So, somehow, we're going >> to get this right with health care? >> >> I call BS on that, not that it matters. >> >> Brad >> >> On 6/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: >> > Brad, >> > >> > Looks like 'ol Ted is gonna' try to stick us one last good one on this >> > healthcare thing before he finally tips over. I generally try hard to >> give >> > people the benefit of the doubt, but honestly, in my mind 'ol Ted has >> used >> > up his (and a few other's) share of doubt. I guess anymore, I think we'd >> all >> > have been better off if he'da drowned with Mary Jo. >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > >> http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/kennedys-healthcare-bill-will-increase.html >> > ______________________ >> > >> > Kennedy's Healthcare Bill Will Increase Expenses, Decrease Employment >> > and >> > Encourage >> > Outsourcing< >> http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/kennedys-healthcare-bill-will-increase.html >> > >> > >> > Ted Kennedy believes everyone should have a plethora of good options on >> > healthcare. >> > >> > However, other than raising taxes on businesses, Kennedy refuses to say >> how >> > his proposals will be paid. Moreover, he is too blind to see (or too >> > political to admit), the myriad of disastrous consequences that his >> health >> > care proposal will entail, especially on small and medium sized >> businesses. >> > >> > His bill is political demagoguery at its finest. >> > >> > Please consider the details as presented in Kennedy Health Bill Mandates >> > Public Plan, Coverage for >> > All >> > . >> > >> > Under a draft bill to overhaul the U.S. health-care system all employers >> > would be required to supply health insurance for workers or contribute >> > to >> > the cost. >> > >> > The bill, by Senator Edward M. Kennedy, would create a public health >> > plan >> to >> > compete with private insurers, a priority of President Barack Obama?s >> that >> > is opposed by Republicans. It would provide all Americans with health >> > benefits, penalize those who don?t buy them and bar insurers from >> limiting >> > coverage. >> > >> > The ?America Health Choices Act,? circulated in Washington late >> yesterday, >> > offered the first detailed glimpse of legislation being discussed in >> > Congress. Many of its provisions would expand coverage for uninsured >> > Americans. ?It is the sense of the Senate that Congress should establish >> a >> > means for all Americans to enjoy affordable choices in health benefit >> > plans,? the bill said. >> > >> > Obama set aside $635 billion in his 2010 budget proposal to act as a >> ?down >> > payment? on the cost of reconstructing the health-care system and >> expanding >> > coverage to the estimated 46 million uninsured Americans. >> > >> > Kennedy?s draft did not include details of how its proposals would be >> paid >> > for. >> > >> > Kennedy?s bill opened with an affirmation of a patient?s rights to >> > choose >> > his or her doctor and the importance of the patient-doctor relationship. >> > ?Doctors, nurses and other health professionals have the right to judge >> what >> > is best for their patients,? the bill stated. >> > >> > America Health Choices Act Provisions >> > >> > Government subsidies will be provided to people with income up to 500 >> > percent of the poverty level. >> > >> > Doctors and hospitals paid at Medicare rates, plus 10 percent. >> > >> > Medicaid, expanded to cover uninsured people earning up to 150 percent >> > of >> > the poverty level. >> > >> > Essential? benefits, include hospital care, maternity and newborn care, >> > prescription drugs, mental-health and substance-abuse services and >> doctors? >> > services. >> > >> > The bill establishes protections for ?fair? insurance coverage, setting >> > limits on how much premiums can vary. Insurers would be forbidden from >> > turning away customers due to pre-existing conditions. >> > >> > Each health insurer that offers coverage in the individual or group >> market >> > in a state would have to accept every employer and individual in the >> state >> > that applied for coverage. >> > >> > Companies that provide coverage for children through their parents will >> have >> > to extend ?dependent? coverage for those children through the age of 26. >> > >> > America Health Choices Act Consequences >> > >> > 1) Every employer thinking about hiring someone is going to think twice >> > about it, then not do it. >> > >> > 2) Every employer struggling to maintain jobs in the US with a choice of >> > outsourcing will have another huge incentive to outsource. >> > >> > 3) Many employers struggling to maintain solvency will go bankrupt after >> > this bill passes. >> > >> > 4) Corporate profits across the board are going to drop. >> > >> > 5) The stock market will drop along with corporate profits. >> > >> > 6) Health care companies will have an incentive to not offer plans in >> states >> > with poor demographics. >> > >> > 7) Government mandates about how much insurers can charge will bankrupt >> > insurers and/or cause rationing of services. >> > >> > 8) Businesses will have an incentive to fire workers and instead offer >> > contract work to individuals. Banks and financial institutions will be >> among >> > the first to consider this option. Programmers have another reason to >> start >> > worrying about their jobs. >> > >> > 9) Businesses unable to outsource or make use of contractors will bear >> the >> > brunt of this legislation. The group hardest hit will be retailers like >> > Walmart, Target, and Costco, and restaurants like McDonalds and Pizza >> Hut. >> > >> > 10) This bill will weigh on business expansion plans. Retail stores are >> > already saturated. This bill provides one more reason for businesses not >> to >> > expand further. >> > >> > Business Owners Should Be Scared To Death >> > >> > In general: The bill has a negative effect on hiring, a negative effect >> on >> > business expansion, a negative effect on corporate profits, and it >> promotes >> > outsourcing. Moreover, it will delay the recovery of the stock market >> > and >> it >> > puts the brunt of the burden on businesses that cannot outsource. >> > >> > If you are not scared to death by those consequences, you are not paying >> > attention to what is happening. >> > >> > Requiring businesses to pick up the tab will slow hiring and the >> recovery. >> > Monetizing medical expenses will cheapen the dollar. Requiring taxpayers >> to >> > foot the bill will take away from discretionary spending. >> > >> > It is axiomatic that someone must pay. There is no such thing as a free >> > lunch or free health care either. >> > >> > I have come up with 10 easy to see consequences. I am sure there are >> > many >> > unforeseen consequences, some of which will be even worse. >> > >> > For those who want more for their money in these deflationary times, >> > here >> is >> > a bonus 11th consequence: It will encourage the employment of illegal >> aliens >> > under the table paid in cash and all kinds of underground barter >> > transactions that also will not be taxed. >> > >> > Standards of Measurement of Good Health Care >> > >> > Please consider what Raoul Pal of Spain wrote John Mauldin in the June 5 >> > Frontline Thoughts called The New, New >> > Normal >> > . >> > >> > In its simplest terms a healthcare system is there to extend the >> longevity >> > of live of the population. It is the single best and simplest way to >> judge >> > it because we can all find examples of where one country is better than >> > another but the longevity stats don't lie. When we use that framework >> > the >> > picture is incredibly different. The US has many of the best doctors and >> > medical care in the world but it doesn't work for the population as a >> whole >> > and therein lies the problem. >> > >> > "According to the Economist the total US spend on healthcare is 15.4% of >> GDP >> > including both state and private . With that it gets 2.6 doctors per >> 1,000 >> > people, 3.3 hospital beds and its people live to an average age of 78.2 >> > >> > "UK - spends 8.1% of GDP, gets 2.3 doctors, 4.2 hospital beds and live >> > to >> an >> > average age of 79.4. So for roughly half the cost their citizens overall >> get >> > about the same benefit in terms of longevity of life. >> > >> > "Canada - spends 9.8% of GDP on healthcare, gets 2.1 doctors, 3.6 >> hospital >> > beds and live until they are 80.6 yrs >> > >> > "Now if we look at the more social model in Europe the results become >> even >> > more surprising: >> > >> > "France - spends 10.5%, 3.4 docs, 7.5 beds and live until they are 80.6 >> > >> > "Spain - spends 8.1% , 3.3 docs , 3.8 beds and live until they are 81 >> > >> > "As a whole Europe spends 9.6% of GDP on healthcare, has 3.9 doctors per >> > 1,000 people, 6.6 hospital beds and live until they are 81.15 years old. >> > >> > "The list goes on. The truth is that in many cases as is pointed out the >> > healthcare system is better in the US than in some other countries BUT >> > US >> > citizens must therefore get ill more often than any other country in the >> > West in order to achieve the truly appalling statistic that they are the >> 41 >> > longest living nation on earth with France, Spain, Norway, Switzerland, >> > Italy, Austria, Andorra, Holland, Greece and Sweden all featuring in the >> top >> > 20 longest living nations and the UK and Germany at 22. >> > >> > "This is the big failure of the US system. It is unforgivable. You may >> get a >> > better chance of recovering from certain diseases but as a whole you >> > will >> > die younger in the US than most developed countries. ... Something is >> > severely broken." >> > >> > Something Is Severely Broken >> > >> > Something is indeed broken and Kennedy's bill sure is not going to fix >> it. >> > >> > ?America Health Choices Act? is a horrible piece of legislation that >> > does >> > nothing to reduce costs but instead increases them on businesses. A >> better >> > name for it would be "Delayed Recovery And Outsourcing Encouragement >> > Program" or DRAOEP. >> > >> > I tried to come up with a name that would equate to DROPDEAD (because >> that >> > is what Kennedy's plan says to businesses) but could not quite make it. >> > >> > If you are a business owner you better be flooding your representatives >> with >> > faxes and phone calls (see Speak >> > Out!< >> http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/speak-out-audit-fed-then-end-it.html >> >for >> > a detailed list of fax numbers) if you know what is good for you, >> > because I can ensure you, this isn't. >> > >> > Mike "Mish" Shedlock >> > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 7:45 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> For those of you who would like to know what's in the Obamacare bill, >> >> here's a searchable database - >> >> >> >> http://patientsunitednow.com/?q=node/233 >> >> >> >> Look at this - >> >> >> >> Sec. 3102 Financial Integrity >> >> >> >> ?(1) In general - A State shall keep an accurate accounting of all >> >> activities, receipts, and expenditures of any Gateway operating in >> >> such State and shall annually submit to the Secretary a report >> >> concerning such accountings. >> >> >> >> ?(2) Investigations - The Secretary may investigate the affairs of >> >> a Gateway, may examine the properties and records of a Gateway, and >> >> may require periodical reports in relation to activities undertaken by >> >> a Gateway. A Gateway shall fully cooperate in any investigation >> >> conducted under this paragraph. >> >> >> >> Remember all the screaming and chest thumping about warrantless >> >> wiretaps in years gone by? "Gateway" means your doctor. For the past >> >> 37 years, I've been required by law to disclose every single visit to >> >> a doctor or pharmacist so this is nothing new to me, but if you don't >> >> think giving low level government employees access to your health care >> >> records can create problems you've obviously forgotten "Joe the >> >> Plumbers" personal records being divulged for political purposes. >> >> >> >> Don't be fooled by this bill, it is not health insurance. This will >> >> be the creation of a massive bureaucracy. My hangarmate is going >> >> through this right now for a medical issue he resolved over a year ago >> >> - an "audit" if you will. If you think the US Post Office and the IRS >> >> are "mean-and-lean", well run agencies, you'll really love this one! >> >> >> >> Care to bet whether this bill will be read before it's voted on? Time >> >> to fire-up the phones! >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From flybrad at gmail.com Tue Jun 9 08:21:03 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 07:21:03 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] More GM Silliness Message-ID: <400985d70906090521wf519140n34e4c80fc667694a@mail.gmail.com> This whole GM thing gets sillier by the day. So the 'gubment' is going to give $7500 tax credits to people who buy Chevy Volts. Forty per cent of US citizens don't pay federal taxes so this is meaningless to them. The people who would be most motivated to buy a Volt because of a tax credit are those who pay more than $7500 in federal income taxes (see article below). Chances are, these are the same people who currently drive Suburbans because they can afford it and that's what they want to drive. Any marginal MBA student can spot the flaw in the "New GM's" theory immediately. But remember, the "car czar" is a 31 year-old with no automobile manufacturing or selling experience that "almost" has a law degree from Yale. Then there is this - only 42% of GM owners will buy another one - http://tinyurl.com/kq6wzm That doesn't leave much of a market for GM. Don't think for a moment that Hyundai in Alabama, or Toyota in MS, TX., and KY, or Honda in Ohio, and all the other "American" car companies can't build an auto to compete with the Volt if indeed a market develops for such a car. And then there's Volkswagen in Chattanooga, TN coming on line. What's so special about hybrids? My 1980 diesel VW Rabbit got better mileage. My new mid-size station wagon (which came with a $1300 tax credit) does just as well with a whole lot more acceleration and a lot less noise. You'd think they would be flying out the door. They're not, and neither will Chevy Volts. Silliness! Brad ---------------------- Car Quandary Political and economic contradictions of the 'new GM' Tuesday, June 9, 2009 POOR BOB LUTZ. The vice chairman of General Motors loves "muscle cars" like the Camaro. He knows that, unless fuel prices go much higher and stay there, the American market for big cars is likely to exceed the market for small cars. Yet he has to build a little four-seat plug-in electric hybrid called the Chevrolet Volt, roll it out next year and try to sell it for $40,000 (not counting a likely $7,500 federal tax rebate). It doesn't make much sense economically, and the few thousand Volts that GM plans to produce at first won't dent U.S. carbon emissions much either. But, as Mr. Lutz told The Post's Michael Leahy, he feels pressure from Washington to do something spectacular on the electric car front. The Volt, he says, "is an important symbol. We need it. It has a chance to change our image." When GM was still a privately owned company, this latest episode of Detroit agonistes would be no one's problem but GM's and its stockholders'. But soon, if they become owners of 60 percent of the company, taxpayers could be on the hook for the Volt. And Mr. Lutz's quandary epitomizes the political and economic contradictions of the "new GM." The taxpayers' interest is to get GM out of the red and back in private hands as soon as possible, consistent with environmental and fuel-efficiency standards. By that logic, the automaker's only goal would be to make what people want to buy; expensive "image" projects such as the Volt would wait. Yet the political pressures that drove GM to build the Volt in the first place -- namely, Congress's demand for a U.S.-made answer to the Toyota Prius -- are stronger than ever now that the government is about to own the company. So GM will build the Volt, even if it loses money, taxpayer money. And members of Congress will delve into other aspects of the car companies' business. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Banking Committee, has already prevailed on GM to extend the life of a plant in his district. GM and Chrysler dealers, thousands of whom are set to close in order to streamline the companies' sales efforts, have flocked to Capitol Hill demanding relief. In response, House members of both parties have introduced a bill that would block the closure of GM and Chrysler dealerships. If this proposal ever makes it to his desk, President Obama should veto it. America can have nationalized auto companies with a chance, however slim, of someday turning a profit. Or it can have nationalized firms subject to constant political tinkering. It can't have both. From ekroposki at charter.net Tue Jun 9 08:37:43 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 08:37:43 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Bush, Cheney & water torture Message-ID: <4419BBCEBDB44D878300701AAF1AC1F9@YOURB88038198E> See attached picture... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090609/761c6ffe/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Water torture.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 46038 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090609/761c6ffe/attachment-0001.jpg From sanderico1 at gmail.com Tue Jun 9 09:02:52 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 08:02:52 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Obamacare In-Reply-To: <400985d70906090441l121b0318k86496c5f33ff8aa3@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906080545u35c9aab0g24f829cd5e8b3953@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906080614hd0b8787h9cb772963dad059e@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70906080646wbbd9e2dk66533f7290bb7364@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906080841g16284845pf7c78c4985d039d2@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70906090441l121b0318k86496c5f33ff8aa3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0906090602g347e4185q87463c777502a907@mail.gmail.com> Brad, "Americans need to ask a basic question: Why are they rushing into a system of government-dominated health care when the very countries that have experienced it for so long are backing away?" Why, because to Many MANY Americans, it is perceived as FREE. Don't we all know it's better to shop price first and whine about quality later?? Hell, if I went to the doctor every time I stubbed my toe or had a sniffle, I couldn't afford the doctors help either. But honestly, when I am out at say Mickey D's (which isn't real often) for lunch and I watch some of the 400 lb porkers sit down to stuff their faces I sure am glad that I don't have to pay for their *FREE* healthcare. Rik On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 6:41 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > Here's a view from Canada (below). > > Brad > > ------------- > > * JUNE 9, 2009 > > Canada's ObamaCare Precedent > Governments always ration care by making you wait. That can be deadly. > > > By DAVID GRATZER > > Congressional Democrats will soon put forward their legislative > proposals for reforming health care. Should they succeed, tens of > millions of Americans will potentially be joining a new public > insurance program and the federal government will increasingly be > involved in treatment decisions. > > Not long ago, I would have applauded this type of government > expansion. Born and raised in Canada, I once believed that government > health care is compassionate and equitable. It is neither. > > My views changed in medical school. Yes, everyone in Canada is covered > by a "single payer" -- the government. But Canadians wait for > practically any procedure or diagnostic test or specialist > consultation in the public system. > [Canada's ObamaCare Precedent] Martin Kozlowski > > The problems were brought home when a relative had difficulty walking. > He was in chronic pain. His doctor suggested a referral to a > neurologist; an MRI would need to be done, then possibly a referral to > another specialist. The wait would have stretched to roughly a year. > If surgery was needed, the wait would be months more. Not wanting to > stay confined to his house, he had the surgery done in the U.S., at > the Mayo Clinic, and paid for it himself. > > Such stories are common. For example, Sylvia de Vries, an Ontario > woman, had a 40-pound fluid-filled tumor removed from her abdomen by > an American surgeon in 2006. Her Michigan doctor estimated that she > was within weeks of dying, but she was still on a wait list for a > Canadian specialist. > > Indeed, Canada's provincial governments themselves rely on American > medicine. Between 2006 and 2008, Ontario sent more than 160 patients > to New York and Michigan for emergency neurosurgery -- described by > the Globe and Mail newspaper as "broken necks, burst aneurysms and > other types of bleeding in or around the brain." > > Only half of ER patients are treated in a timely manner by national > and international standards, according to a government study. The > physician shortage is so severe that some towns hold lotteries, with > the winners gaining access to the local doc. > > Overall, according to a study published in Lancet Oncology last year, > five-year cancer survival rates are higher in the U.S. than those in > Canada. Based on data from the Joint Canada/U.S. Survey of Health > (done by Statistics Canada and the U.S. National Center for Health > Statistics), Americans have greater access to preventive screening > tests and have higher treatment rates for chronic illnesses. No > wonder: To limit the growth in health spending, governments restrict > the supply of health care by rationing it through waiting. The same > survey data show, as June and Paul O'Neill note in a paper published > in 2007 in the Forum for Health Economics & Policy, that the poor > under socialized medicine seem to be less healthy relative to the > nonpoor than their American counterparts. > > Ironically, as the U.S. is on the verge of rushing toward government > health care, Canada is reforming its system in the opposite direction. > In 2005, Canada's supreme court struck down key laws in Quebec that > established a government monopoly of health services. Claude > Castonguay, who headed the Quebec government commission that > recommended the creation of its public health-care system in the > 1960s, also has second thoughts. Last year, after completing another > review, he declared the system in "crisis" and suggested a massive > expansion of private services -- even advocating that public hospitals > rent facilities to physicians in off-hours. > > And the medical establishment? Dr. Brian Day, an orthopedic surgeon, > grew increasingly frustrated by government cutbacks that reduced his > access to an operating room and increased the number of patients on > his hospital waiting list. He built a private hospital in Vancouver in > the 1990s. Last year, he completed a term as the president of the > Canadian Medical Association and was succeeded by a Quebec radiologist > who owns several private clinics. > > In Canada, private-sector health care is growing. Dr. Day estimates > that 50,000 people are seen at private clinics every year in British > Columbia. According to the New York Times, a private clinic opens at a > rate of about one a week across the country. Public-private > partnerships, once a taboo topic, are embraced by provincial > governments. > > In the United Kingdom, where socialized medicine was established after > World War II through the National Health Service, the present Labour > government has introduced a choice in surgeries by allowing patients > to choose among facilities, often including private ones. Even in > Sweden, the government has turned over services to the private sector. > > Americans need to ask a basic question: Why are they rushing into a > system of government-dominated health care when the very countries > that have experienced it for so long are backing away? > > Dr. Gratzer, a physician, is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. > > Please add your comments to the Opinion Journal Forum. > On 6/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > I'll bet the doctors/clinics/hospitals are real pleased to see all this > too. > > > > The other day, I took Sandy to the clinic. We got her normal blood tests > and > > had a 20 minute conversation with our usual doctor. Sandy became eligible > > for medicare as of the first of the year. Before M/C, when I was paying > out > > of pocket, this would have cost $387.00. Now that the gov't is paying > it's > > $147.90. Yipes ..... a 60%+ cut in pay for the clinic/doctor. This is > > certainly better for us personally, but you gotta wonder how long the > clinic > > will be around ...... > > > > I think I see some unemployment in the future for our medical schools > .... > > more unintended consequences > > > > Rik. > > > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> Rik, > >> > >> As the article points out, spending more money on health doesn't > >> equate to better health. As Sarah Palin stated in her 2009 Alaska > >> State-of-the-State address, health care is something individuals have > >> a great deal of control over with by their lifestyle. > >> > >> Here's something many people just don't get; health insurance doesn't > >> equal health. It's insurance. Does your car insurance include free > >> oil changes and new tires? Does your homeowners insurance include > >> maid service? Health insurance is there to help you avoid bankruptcy > >> or early death in case of a major health issue. Your "Little Johnny" > >> farting cross-wise or you getting a cold is your problem (or should > >> be). We're re-inventing the wheel here, this has all been done before > >> in Tennessee and it didn't work. Governor Bredesen (democrat and > >> former health-care executive) worked the problem backward - "OK, this > >> is how much money the State has, what can we buy with the funds > >> available"? TennCare is not a "gold plated" health insurance plan but > >> it is affordable TO THOSE WHO WANT IT! If someone wants something > >> better, they can always compete for a job with an employer that offers > >> something better. You can put all the lipstick on this pig you want, > >> this bill is socialism! You want a better health care system? Fine! > >> Leave the two of us alone for an hour with a case of beer and we'll > >> have one for you! But, that's not the point. This is not about > >> better health, it is all about 'gubment' control. Don't people get > >> enough of that shit in their lives? > >> > >> One last thought - there's STILL $600 million dollars sitting on the > >> shelf available for developers to build housing for Katrina victims. > >> It will be there 10 years from now. No private developer is going to > >> touch that money with all the strings attached to it. Show me one > >> successful public housing project, anywhere. Ask Obambi about his > >> friends in the private-public housing arena. So, somehow, we're going > >> to get this right with health care? > >> > >> I call BS on that, not that it matters. > >> > >> Brad > >> > >> On 6/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > >> > Brad, > >> > > >> > Looks like 'ol Ted is gonna' try to stick us one last good one on this > >> > healthcare thing before he finally tips over. I generally try hard to > >> give > >> > people the benefit of the doubt, but honestly, in my mind 'ol Ted has > >> used > >> > up his (and a few other's) share of doubt. I guess anymore, I think > we'd > >> all > >> > have been better off if he'da drowned with Mary Jo. > >> > > >> > Rik > >> > > >> > > >> > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/kennedys-healthcare-bill-will-increase.html > >> > ______________________ > >> > > >> > Kennedy's Healthcare Bill Will Increase Expenses, Decrease Employment > >> > and > >> > Encourage > >> > Outsourcing< > >> > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/kennedys-healthcare-bill-will-increase.html > >> > > >> > > >> > Ted Kennedy believes everyone should have a plethora of good options > on > >> > healthcare. > >> > > >> > However, other than raising taxes on businesses, Kennedy refuses to > say > >> how > >> > his proposals will be paid. Moreover, he is too blind to see (or too > >> > political to admit), the myriad of disastrous consequences that his > >> health > >> > care proposal will entail, especially on small and medium sized > >> businesses. > >> > > >> > His bill is political demagoguery at its finest. > >> > > >> > Please consider the details as presented in Kennedy Health Bill > Mandates > >> > Public Plan, Coverage for > >> > All > >> > . > >> > > >> > Under a draft bill to overhaul the U.S. health-care system all > employers > >> > would be required to supply health insurance for workers or contribute > >> > to > >> > the cost. > >> > > >> > The bill, by Senator Edward M. Kennedy, would create a public health > >> > plan > >> to > >> > compete with private insurers, a priority of President Barack Obama?s > >> that > >> > is opposed by Republicans. It would provide all Americans with health > >> > benefits, penalize those who don?t buy them and bar insurers from > >> limiting > >> > coverage. > >> > > >> > The ?America Health Choices Act,? circulated in Washington late > >> yesterday, > >> > offered the first detailed glimpse of legislation being discussed in > >> > Congress. Many of its provisions would expand coverage for uninsured > >> > Americans. ?It is the sense of the Senate that Congress should > establish > >> a > >> > means for all Americans to enjoy affordable choices in health benefit > >> > plans,? the bill said. > >> > > >> > Obama set aside $635 billion in his 2010 budget proposal to act as a > >> ?down > >> > payment? on the cost of reconstructing the health-care system and > >> expanding > >> > coverage to the estimated 46 million uninsured Americans. > >> > > >> > Kennedy?s draft did not include details of how its proposals would be > >> paid > >> > for. > >> > > >> > Kennedy?s bill opened with an affirmation of a patient?s rights to > >> > choose > >> > his or her doctor and the importance of the patient-doctor > relationship. > >> > ?Doctors, nurses and other health professionals have the right to > judge > >> what > >> > is best for their patients,? the bill stated. > >> > > >> > America Health Choices Act Provisions > >> > > >> > Government subsidies will be provided to people with income up to 500 > >> > percent of the poverty level. > >> > > >> > Doctors and hospitals paid at Medicare rates, plus 10 percent. > >> > > >> > Medicaid, expanded to cover uninsured people earning up to 150 percent > >> > of > >> > the poverty level. > >> > > >> > Essential? benefits, include hospital care, maternity and newborn > care, > >> > prescription drugs, mental-health and substance-abuse services and > >> doctors? > >> > services. > >> > > >> > The bill establishes protections for ?fair? insurance coverage, > setting > >> > limits on how much premiums can vary. Insurers would be forbidden from > >> > turning away customers due to pre-existing conditions. > >> > > >> > Each health insurer that offers coverage in the individual or group > >> market > >> > in a state would have to accept every employer and individual in the > >> state > >> > that applied for coverage. > >> > > >> > Companies that provide coverage for children through their parents > will > >> have > >> > to extend ?dependent? coverage for those children through the age of > 26. > >> > > >> > America Health Choices Act Consequences > >> > > >> > 1) Every employer thinking about hiring someone is going to think > twice > >> > about it, then not do it. > >> > > >> > 2) Every employer struggling to maintain jobs in the US with a choice > of > >> > outsourcing will have another huge incentive to outsource. > >> > > >> > 3) Many employers struggling to maintain solvency will go bankrupt > after > >> > this bill passes. > >> > > >> > 4) Corporate profits across the board are going to drop. > >> > > >> > 5) The stock market will drop along with corporate profits. > >> > > >> > 6) Health care companies will have an incentive to not offer plans in > >> states > >> > with poor demographics. > >> > > >> > 7) Government mandates about how much insurers can charge will > bankrupt > >> > insurers and/or cause rationing of services. > >> > > >> > 8) Businesses will have an incentive to fire workers and instead offer > >> > contract work to individuals. Banks and financial institutions will be > >> among > >> > the first to consider this option. Programmers have another reason to > >> start > >> > worrying about their jobs. > >> > > >> > 9) Businesses unable to outsource or make use of contractors will bear > >> the > >> > brunt of this legislation. The group hardest hit will be retailers > like > >> > Walmart, Target, and Costco, and restaurants like McDonalds and Pizza > >> Hut. > >> > > >> > 10) This bill will weigh on business expansion plans. Retail stores > are > >> > already saturated. This bill provides one more reason for businesses > not > >> to > >> > expand further. > >> > > >> > Business Owners Should Be Scared To Death > >> > > >> > In general: The bill has a negative effect on hiring, a negative > effect > >> on > >> > business expansion, a negative effect on corporate profits, and it > >> promotes > >> > outsourcing. Moreover, it will delay the recovery of the stock market > >> > and > >> it > >> > puts the brunt of the burden on businesses that cannot outsource. > >> > > >> > If you are not scared to death by those consequences, you are not > paying > >> > attention to what is happening. > >> > > >> > Requiring businesses to pick up the tab will slow hiring and the > >> recovery. > >> > Monetizing medical expenses will cheapen the dollar. Requiring > taxpayers > >> to > >> > foot the bill will take away from discretionary spending. > >> > > >> > It is axiomatic that someone must pay. There is no such thing as a > free > >> > lunch or free health care either. > >> > > >> > I have come up with 10 easy to see consequences. I am sure there are > >> > many > >> > unforeseen consequences, some of which will be even worse. > >> > > >> > For those who want more for their money in these deflationary times, > >> > here > >> is > >> > a bonus 11th consequence: It will encourage the employment of illegal > >> aliens > >> > under the table paid in cash and all kinds of underground barter > >> > transactions that also will not be taxed. > >> > > >> > Standards of Measurement of Good Health Care > >> > > >> > Please consider what Raoul Pal of Spain wrote John Mauldin in the June > 5 > >> > Frontline Thoughts called The New, New > >> > Normal > >> > . > >> > > >> > In its simplest terms a healthcare system is there to extend the > >> longevity > >> > of live of the population. It is the single best and simplest way to > >> judge > >> > it because we can all find examples of where one country is better > than > >> > another but the longevity stats don't lie. When we use that framework > >> > the > >> > picture is incredibly different. The US has many of the best doctors > and > >> > medical care in the world but it doesn't work for the population as a > >> whole > >> > and therein lies the problem. > >> > > >> > "According to the Economist the total US spend on healthcare is 15.4% > of > >> GDP > >> > including both state and private . With that it gets 2.6 doctors per > >> 1,000 > >> > people, 3.3 hospital beds and its people live to an average age of > 78.2 > >> > > >> > "UK - spends 8.1% of GDP, gets 2.3 doctors, 4.2 hospital beds and live > >> > to > >> an > >> > average age of 79.4. So for roughly half the cost their citizens > overall > >> get > >> > about the same benefit in terms of longevity of life. > >> > > >> > "Canada - spends 9.8% of GDP on healthcare, gets 2.1 doctors, 3.6 > >> hospital > >> > beds and live until they are 80.6 yrs > >> > > >> > "Now if we look at the more social model in Europe the results become > >> even > >> > more surprising: > >> > > >> > "France - spends 10.5%, 3.4 docs, 7.5 beds and live until they are > 80.6 > >> > > >> > "Spain - spends 8.1% , 3.3 docs , 3.8 beds and live until they are 81 > >> > > >> > "As a whole Europe spends 9.6% of GDP on healthcare, has 3.9 doctors > per > >> > 1,000 people, 6.6 hospital beds and live until they are 81.15 years > old. > >> > > >> > "The list goes on. The truth is that in many cases as is pointed out > the > >> > healthcare system is better in the US than in some other countries BUT > >> > US > >> > citizens must therefore get ill more often than any other country in > the > >> > West in order to achieve the truly appalling statistic that they are > the > >> 41 > >> > longest living nation on earth with France, Spain, Norway, > Switzerland, > >> > Italy, Austria, Andorra, Holland, Greece and Sweden all featuring in > the > >> top > >> > 20 longest living nations and the UK and Germany at 22. > >> > > >> > "This is the big failure of the US system. It is unforgivable. You may > >> get a > >> > better chance of recovering from certain diseases but as a whole you > >> > will > >> > die younger in the US than most developed countries. ... Something is > >> > severely broken." > >> > > >> > Something Is Severely Broken > >> > > >> > Something is indeed broken and Kennedy's bill sure is not going to fix > >> it. > >> > > >> > ?America Health Choices Act? is a horrible piece of legislation that > >> > does > >> > nothing to reduce costs but instead increases them on businesses. A > >> better > >> > name for it would be "Delayed Recovery And Outsourcing Encouragement > >> > Program" or DRAOEP. > >> > > >> > I tried to come up with a name that would equate to DROPDEAD (because > >> that > >> > is what Kennedy's plan says to businesses) but could not quite make > it. > >> > > >> > If you are a business owner you better be flooding your > representatives > >> with > >> > faxes and phone calls (see Speak > >> > Out!< > >> > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/speak-out-audit-fed-then-end-it.html > >> >for > >> > a detailed list of fax numbers) if you know what is good for you, > >> > because I can ensure you, this isn't. > >> > > >> > Mike "Mish" Shedlock > >> > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com > >> > > >> > > >> > On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 7:45 AM, Brad Haslett > wrote: > >> > > >> >> For those of you who would like to know what's in the Obamacare bill, > >> >> here's a searchable database - > >> >> > >> >> http://patientsunitednow.com/?q=node/233 > >> >> > >> >> Look at this - > >> >> > >> >> Sec. 3102 Financial Integrity > >> >> > >> >> ?(1) In general - A State shall keep an accurate accounting of all > >> >> activities, receipts, and expenditures of any Gateway operating in > >> >> such State and shall annually submit to the Secretary a report > >> >> concerning such accountings. > >> >> > >> >> ?(2) Investigations - The Secretary may investigate the affairs of > >> >> a Gateway, may examine the properties and records of a Gateway, and > >> >> may require periodical reports in relation to activities undertaken > by > >> >> a Gateway. A Gateway shall fully cooperate in any investigation > >> >> conducted under this paragraph. > >> >> > >> >> Remember all the screaming and chest thumping about warrantless > >> >> wiretaps in years gone by? "Gateway" means your doctor. For the > past > >> >> 37 years, I've been required by law to disclose every single visit to > >> >> a doctor or pharmacist so this is nothing new to me, but if you don't > >> >> think giving low level government employees access to your health > care > >> >> records can create problems you've obviously forgotten "Joe the > >> >> Plumbers" personal records being divulged for political purposes. > >> >> > >> >> Don't be fooled by this bill, it is not health insurance. This will > >> >> be the creation of a massive bureaucracy. My hangarmate is going > >> >> through this right now for a medical issue he resolved over a year > ago > >> >> - an "audit" if you will. If you think the US Post Office and the > IRS > >> >> are "mean-and-lean", well run agencies, you'll really love this one! > >> >> > >> >> Care to bet whether this bill will be read before it's voted on? > Time > >> >> to fire-up the phones! > >> >> > >> >> Brad > >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> > >> > > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090609/76bad319/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Tue Jun 9 09:03:01 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 08:03:01 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Economics 101 Message-ID: <400985d70906090603g60f8ddc4u8827c7c83e0cca7b@mail.gmail.com> I need to quit reading the business "news" and go the hangar to maintain my sanity. Reading Chairman Mao's "Little Red Book" makes more sense than analyzing the latest Obama economic policies. First, the Chinese have for the 'gazillionth' time (again this week) warned us about the dollar. China has reason to be worried. They only buy short-term US debt as it is, they're demanding higher interest rates, and next-up is demanding payment in RNB. Who can blame them? http://tinyurl.com/lw4de8 Then, along comes a completely unrelated random event, AirBus loses an airframe in the Atlantic. As sad as that may be, it has already resulted in a bounce for Boeing stock. So what would Chocolate Baby Jesus do? He'd slap bigger taxes and more regs on US based Boeing and other companies (see below). Look at Boeing's sales book and where they sell the most airplanes. At some point, it will make sense to just pack-up the Chicago office and the Seattle plant and ship them to the Pacific Rim. Multiply the effects on this single economic entity nationwide and get back to me on how this is going to have a positive effect in the long term using basic Econ101 principles. Some mornings I feel like I'm living in an alternative universe. So much education gone to waste - I could have just re-read the "Little Red Book" in about 30 minutes and saved thousands on textbooks. Brad ----------------------- Obama Tells American Businesses to Drop Dead: Kevin Hassett Share | Email | Print | A A A Commentary by Kevin Hassett June 8 (Bloomberg) -- I?ve finally figured out the Obama economic strategy. President Barack Obama and his team have been having so much fun wielding dictatorial power while rescuing ?failed? firms, that they have developed a scheme to gain the same power over every business. The plan is to enact policies that are so anticompetitive that every firm needs a bailout. Once that happens, their new pay czar Kenneth Feinberg can set the wage for everybody and Rahm Emanuel can stack the boards of all of our companies with his political cronies. I know, it sounds like an exaggeration. But look at it this way. If there were a power ranking of U.S. companies, like the ones compiled by football writers for National Football League teams, Microsoft would surely be first or second to Google. But last week, Microsoft Chief Executive Officer Steve Ballmer came to Washington to announce what Microsoft would do if Obama?s multinational tax policy is enacted. ?It makes U.S. jobs more expensive,? Ballmer said, ?We?re better off taking lots of people and moving them out of the U.S.? If Microsoft, perhaps our most competitive company, has to abandon the U.S. in order to continue to thrive, who exactly is going to stay? At issue is Obama?s policy to end the deferral of multinational taxation. The U.S. now has about the highest combined corporate tax rate, second only to Japan among industrialized countries. That rate is so high that U.S. firms have an enormous disadvantage versus competitors. The average corporate tax rate for the major developed countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in 2008 was about 27 percent, more than 10 percentage points lower than the U.S. rate. Tax Burden U.S. firms have nonetheless prospered because our tax code allows a business to set up a subsidiary in a low-tax country. When that subsidiary earns profits, they are taxed at the rate of that country, and don?t face U.S. tax until the money is mailed home. The economically illiterate partisan Democratic view is that this practice is unpatriotic and bleeds jobs from the U.S. The economic reality is that American companies use this approach to acquire market share overseas. The alternative is losing the business to foreign competitors. Don?t just take my word for it. A recent paper by Harvard economists Mihir Desai and C. Fritz Foley and Berkeley economist James Hines and published in the distinguished American Economic Review, gathered data on American multinationals to explore the impact of foreign investments on domestic U.S. activity. Encourage Overseas Sales Their conclusion was striking. The authors found that ?10 percent greater foreign capital investment is associated with 2.2 percent greater domestic investment, and that 10 percent greater foreign employee compensation is associated with 4 percent greater domestic employee compensation. Changes in foreign and domestic sales, assets, and numbers of employees are likewise positively associated; the evidence also indicates that greater foreign investment is associated with additional domestic exports and R&D spending.? So when firms expand their operations abroad, taking advantage of the lower foreign tax rates, it helps their workers in the U.S. Higher sales abroad (surprise, surprise) are good for domestic workers. It is worth noting that this study, which is confirmed by a boatload of evidence elsewhere, was coauthored by the same James Hines who recently wrote a sweeping review of international tax policy with Obama?s top economist, Larry Summers. Summers has to know what the literature says. Inexplicable Stance So the question is, why does Obama advocate a policy that so flies in the face of everything that economists have learned? How could Obama possibly say, as he did last month, that he wants ?to see our companies remain the most competitive in the world. But the way to make sure that happens is not to reward our companies for moving jobs off our shores or transferring profits to overseas tax havens?? Further, how could Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner call a practice that top scholarship has shown increases wages and employment in the U.S. ?indefensible?? I have to admit I am at a loss. Maybe it is good politics to bash American corporations, and Obama isn?t really serious about making this change happen. But if the change is enacted, and domestic corporate taxes aren?t reduced to offset the big tax hike, the result will be a flight from the U.S. that rivals in scale the greatest avian arctic migrations. If that occurs, the firms that stay in the U.S. will be at such a huge tax disadvantage that they will absolutely need a ?rescue.? (Kevin Hassett, director of economic-policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, is a Bloomberg News columnist. He was an adviser to Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona in the 2008 presidential election. The opinions expressed are his own.) To contact the writer of this column: Kevin Hassett at khassett at bloomberg.net Last Updated: June 8, 2009 00:01 EDT From flybrad at gmail.com Tue Jun 9 09:13:56 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 08:13:56 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Obamacare In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0906090602g347e4185q87463c777502a907@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906080545u35c9aab0g24f829cd5e8b3953@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906080614hd0b8787h9cb772963dad059e@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70906080646wbbd9e2dk66533f7290bb7364@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906080841g16284845pf7c78c4985d039d2@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70906090441l121b0318k86496c5f33ff8aa3@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906090602g347e4185q87463c777502a907@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906090613q6e88853bo4efd62f0b72e63b4@mail.gmail.com> Rik, MaoBama must be reading your mind! Here's the latest news report - http://tinyurl.com/nkz4cf Brad On 6/9/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > "Americans need to ask a basic question: Why are they rushing into a > system of government-dominated health care when the very countries > that have experienced it for so long are backing away?" > > Why, because to Many MANY Americans, it is perceived as FREE. Don't we all > know it's better to shop price first and whine about quality later?? > > Hell, if I went to the doctor every time I stubbed my toe or had a sniffle, > I couldn't afford the doctors help either. But honestly, when I am out at > say Mickey D's (which isn't real often) for lunch and I watch some of the > 400 lb porkers sit down to stuff their faces I sure am glad that I don't > have to pay for their *FREE* healthcare. > > Rik > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 6:41 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> Here's a view from Canada (below). >> >> Brad >> >> ------------- >> >> * JUNE 9, 2009 >> >> Canada's ObamaCare Precedent >> Governments always ration care by making you wait. That can be deadly. >> >> >> By DAVID GRATZER >> >> Congressional Democrats will soon put forward their legislative >> proposals for reforming health care. Should they succeed, tens of >> millions of Americans will potentially be joining a new public >> insurance program and the federal government will increasingly be >> involved in treatment decisions. >> >> Not long ago, I would have applauded this type of government >> expansion. Born and raised in Canada, I once believed that government >> health care is compassionate and equitable. It is neither. >> >> My views changed in medical school. Yes, everyone in Canada is covered >> by a "single payer" -- the government. But Canadians wait for >> practically any procedure or diagnostic test or specialist >> consultation in the public system. >> [Canada's ObamaCare Precedent] Martin Kozlowski >> >> The problems were brought home when a relative had difficulty walking. >> He was in chronic pain. His doctor suggested a referral to a >> neurologist; an MRI would need to be done, then possibly a referral to >> another specialist. The wait would have stretched to roughly a year. >> If surgery was needed, the wait would be months more. Not wanting to >> stay confined to his house, he had the surgery done in the U.S., at >> the Mayo Clinic, and paid for it himself. >> >> Such stories are common. For example, Sylvia de Vries, an Ontario >> woman, had a 40-pound fluid-filled tumor removed from her abdomen by >> an American surgeon in 2006. Her Michigan doctor estimated that she >> was within weeks of dying, but she was still on a wait list for a >> Canadian specialist. >> >> Indeed, Canada's provincial governments themselves rely on American >> medicine. Between 2006 and 2008, Ontario sent more than 160 patients >> to New York and Michigan for emergency neurosurgery -- described by >> the Globe and Mail newspaper as "broken necks, burst aneurysms and >> other types of bleeding in or around the brain." >> >> Only half of ER patients are treated in a timely manner by national >> and international standards, according to a government study. The >> physician shortage is so severe that some towns hold lotteries, with >> the winners gaining access to the local doc. >> >> Overall, according to a study published in Lancet Oncology last year, >> five-year cancer survival rates are higher in the U.S. than those in >> Canada. Based on data from the Joint Canada/U.S. Survey of Health >> (done by Statistics Canada and the U.S. National Center for Health >> Statistics), Americans have greater access to preventive screening >> tests and have higher treatment rates for chronic illnesses. No >> wonder: To limit the growth in health spending, governments restrict >> the supply of health care by rationing it through waiting. The same >> survey data show, as June and Paul O'Neill note in a paper published >> in 2007 in the Forum for Health Economics & Policy, that the poor >> under socialized medicine seem to be less healthy relative to the >> nonpoor than their American counterparts. >> >> Ironically, as the U.S. is on the verge of rushing toward government >> health care, Canada is reforming its system in the opposite direction. >> In 2005, Canada's supreme court struck down key laws in Quebec that >> established a government monopoly of health services. Claude >> Castonguay, who headed the Quebec government commission that >> recommended the creation of its public health-care system in the >> 1960s, also has second thoughts. Last year, after completing another >> review, he declared the system in "crisis" and suggested a massive >> expansion of private services -- even advocating that public hospitals >> rent facilities to physicians in off-hours. >> >> And the medical establishment? Dr. Brian Day, an orthopedic surgeon, >> grew increasingly frustrated by government cutbacks that reduced his >> access to an operating room and increased the number of patients on >> his hospital waiting list. He built a private hospital in Vancouver in >> the 1990s. Last year, he completed a term as the president of the >> Canadian Medical Association and was succeeded by a Quebec radiologist >> who owns several private clinics. >> >> In Canada, private-sector health care is growing. Dr. Day estimates >> that 50,000 people are seen at private clinics every year in British >> Columbia. According to the New York Times, a private clinic opens at a >> rate of about one a week across the country. Public-private >> partnerships, once a taboo topic, are embraced by provincial >> governments. >> >> In the United Kingdom, where socialized medicine was established after >> World War II through the National Health Service, the present Labour >> government has introduced a choice in surgeries by allowing patients >> to choose among facilities, often including private ones. Even in >> Sweden, the government has turned over services to the private sector. >> >> Americans need to ask a basic question: Why are they rushing into a >> system of government-dominated health care when the very countries >> that have experienced it for so long are backing away? >> >> Dr. Gratzer, a physician, is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. >> >> Please add your comments to the Opinion Journal Forum. >> On 6/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: >> > Brad, >> > >> > I'll bet the doctors/clinics/hospitals are real pleased to see all this >> too. >> > >> > The other day, I took Sandy to the clinic. We got her normal blood tests >> and >> > had a 20 minute conversation with our usual doctor. Sandy became >> > eligible >> > for medicare as of the first of the year. Before M/C, when I was paying >> out >> > of pocket, this would have cost $387.00. Now that the gov't is paying >> it's >> > $147.90. Yipes ..... a 60%+ cut in pay for the clinic/doctor. This is >> > certainly better for us personally, but you gotta wonder how long the >> clinic >> > will be around ...... >> > >> > I think I see some unemployment in the future for our medical schools >> .... >> > more unintended consequences >> > >> > Rik. >> > >> > On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> Rik, >> >> >> >> As the article points out, spending more money on health doesn't >> >> equate to better health. As Sarah Palin stated in her 2009 Alaska >> >> State-of-the-State address, health care is something individuals have >> >> a great deal of control over with by their lifestyle. >> >> >> >> Here's something many people just don't get; health insurance doesn't >> >> equal health. It's insurance. Does your car insurance include free >> >> oil changes and new tires? Does your homeowners insurance include >> >> maid service? Health insurance is there to help you avoid bankruptcy >> >> or early death in case of a major health issue. Your "Little Johnny" >> >> farting cross-wise or you getting a cold is your problem (or should >> >> be). We're re-inventing the wheel here, this has all been done before >> >> in Tennessee and it didn't work. Governor Bredesen (democrat and >> >> former health-care executive) worked the problem backward - "OK, this >> >> is how much money the State has, what can we buy with the funds >> >> available"? TennCare is not a "gold plated" health insurance plan but >> >> it is affordable TO THOSE WHO WANT IT! If someone wants something >> >> better, they can always compete for a job with an employer that offers >> >> something better. You can put all the lipstick on this pig you want, >> >> this bill is socialism! You want a better health care system? Fine! >> >> Leave the two of us alone for an hour with a case of beer and we'll >> >> have one for you! But, that's not the point. This is not about >> >> better health, it is all about 'gubment' control. Don't people get >> >> enough of that shit in their lives? >> >> >> >> One last thought - there's STILL $600 million dollars sitting on the >> >> shelf available for developers to build housing for Katrina victims. >> >> It will be there 10 years from now. No private developer is going to >> >> touch that money with all the strings attached to it. Show me one >> >> successful public housing project, anywhere. Ask Obambi about his >> >> friends in the private-public housing arena. So, somehow, we're going >> >> to get this right with health care? >> >> >> >> I call BS on that, not that it matters. >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> On 6/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: >> >> > Brad, >> >> > >> >> > Looks like 'ol Ted is gonna' try to stick us one last good one on >> >> > this >> >> > healthcare thing before he finally tips over. I generally try hard to >> >> give >> >> > people the benefit of the doubt, but honestly, in my mind 'ol Ted has >> >> used >> >> > up his (and a few other's) share of doubt. I guess anymore, I think >> we'd >> >> all >> >> > have been better off if he'da drowned with Mary Jo. >> >> > >> >> > Rik >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/kennedys-healthcare-bill-will-increase.html >> >> > ______________________ >> >> > >> >> > Kennedy's Healthcare Bill Will Increase Expenses, Decrease Employment >> >> > and >> >> > Encourage >> >> > Outsourcing< >> >> >> http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/kennedys-healthcare-bill-will-increase.html >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Ted Kennedy believes everyone should have a plethora of good options >> on >> >> > healthcare. >> >> > >> >> > However, other than raising taxes on businesses, Kennedy refuses to >> say >> >> how >> >> > his proposals will be paid. Moreover, he is too blind to see (or too >> >> > political to admit), the myriad of disastrous consequences that his >> >> health >> >> > care proposal will entail, especially on small and medium sized >> >> businesses. >> >> > >> >> > His bill is political demagoguery at its finest. >> >> > >> >> > Please consider the details as presented in Kennedy Health Bill >> Mandates >> >> > Public Plan, Coverage for >> >> > All >> >> > . >> >> > >> >> > Under a draft bill to overhaul the U.S. health-care system all >> employers >> >> > would be required to supply health insurance for workers or >> >> > contribute >> >> > to >> >> > the cost. >> >> > >> >> > The bill, by Senator Edward M. Kennedy, would create a public health >> >> > plan >> >> to >> >> > compete with private insurers, a priority of President Barack Obama?s >> >> that >> >> > is opposed by Republicans. It would provide all Americans with health >> >> > benefits, penalize those who don?t buy them and bar insurers from >> >> limiting >> >> > coverage. >> >> > >> >> > The ?America Health Choices Act,? circulated in Washington late >> >> yesterday, >> >> > offered the first detailed glimpse of legislation being discussed in >> >> > Congress. Many of its provisions would expand coverage for uninsured >> >> > Americans. ?It is the sense of the Senate that Congress should >> establish >> >> a >> >> > means for all Americans to enjoy affordable choices in health benefit >> >> > plans,? the bill said. >> >> > >> >> > Obama set aside $635 billion in his 2010 budget proposal to act as a >> >> ?down >> >> > payment? on the cost of reconstructing the health-care system and >> >> expanding >> >> > coverage to the estimated 46 million uninsured Americans. >> >> > >> >> > Kennedy?s draft did not include details of how its proposals would be >> >> paid >> >> > for. >> >> > >> >> > Kennedy?s bill opened with an affirmation of a patient?s rights to >> >> > choose >> >> > his or her doctor and the importance of the patient-doctor >> relationship. >> >> > ?Doctors, nurses and other health professionals have the right to >> judge >> >> what >> >> > is best for their patients,? the bill stated. >> >> > >> >> > America Health Choices Act Provisions >> >> > >> >> > Government subsidies will be provided to people with income up to 500 >> >> > percent of the poverty level. >> >> > >> >> > Doctors and hospitals paid at Medicare rates, plus 10 percent. >> >> > >> >> > Medicaid, expanded to cover uninsured people earning up to 150 >> >> > percent >> >> > of >> >> > the poverty level. >> >> > >> >> > Essential? benefits, include hospital care, maternity and newborn >> care, >> >> > prescription drugs, mental-health and substance-abuse services and >> >> doctors? >> >> > services. >> >> > >> >> > The bill establishes protections for ?fair? insurance coverage, >> setting >> >> > limits on how much premiums can vary. Insurers would be forbidden >> >> > from >> >> > turning away customers due to pre-existing conditions. >> >> > >> >> > Each health insurer that offers coverage in the individual or group >> >> market >> >> > in a state would have to accept every employer and individual in the >> >> state >> >> > that applied for coverage. >> >> > >> >> > Companies that provide coverage for children through their parents >> will >> >> have >> >> > to extend ?dependent? coverage for those children through the age of >> 26. >> >> > >> >> > America Health Choices Act Consequences >> >> > >> >> > 1) Every employer thinking about hiring someone is going to think >> twice >> >> > about it, then not do it. >> >> > >> >> > 2) Every employer struggling to maintain jobs in the US with a choice >> of >> >> > outsourcing will have another huge incentive to outsource. >> >> > >> >> > 3) Many employers struggling to maintain solvency will go bankrupt >> after >> >> > this bill passes. >> >> > >> >> > 4) Corporate profits across the board are going to drop. >> >> > >> >> > 5) The stock market will drop along with corporate profits. >> >> > >> >> > 6) Health care companies will have an incentive to not offer plans in >> >> states >> >> > with poor demographics. >> >> > >> >> > 7) Government mandates about how much insurers can charge will >> bankrupt >> >> > insurers and/or cause rationing of services. >> >> > >> >> > 8) Businesses will have an incentive to fire workers and instead >> >> > offer >> >> > contract work to individuals. Banks and financial institutions will >> >> > be >> >> among >> >> > the first to consider this option. Programmers have another reason to >> >> start >> >> > worrying about their jobs. >> >> > >> >> > 9) Businesses unable to outsource or make use of contractors will >> >> > bear >> >> the >> >> > brunt of this legislation. The group hardest hit will be retailers >> like >> >> > Walmart, Target, and Costco, and restaurants like McDonalds and Pizza >> >> Hut. >> >> > >> >> > 10) This bill will weigh on business expansion plans. Retail stores >> are >> >> > already saturated. This bill provides one more reason for businesses >> not >> >> to >> >> > expand further. >> >> > >> >> > Business Owners Should Be Scared To Death >> >> > >> >> > In general: The bill has a negative effect on hiring, a negative >> effect >> >> on >> >> > business expansion, a negative effect on corporate profits, and it >> >> promotes >> >> > outsourcing. Moreover, it will delay the recovery of the stock market >> >> > and >> >> it >> >> > puts the brunt of the burden on businesses that cannot outsource. >> >> > >> >> > If you are not scared to death by those consequences, you are not >> paying >> >> > attention to what is happening. >> >> > >> >> > Requiring businesses to pick up the tab will slow hiring and the >> >> recovery. >> >> > Monetizing medical expenses will cheapen the dollar. Requiring >> taxpayers >> >> to >> >> > foot the bill will take away from discretionary spending. >> >> > >> >> > It is axiomatic that someone must pay. There is no such thing as a >> free >> >> > lunch or free health care either. >> >> > >> >> > I have come up with 10 easy to see consequences. I am sure there are >> >> > many >> >> > unforeseen consequences, some of which will be even worse. >> >> > >> >> > For those who want more for their money in these deflationary times, >> >> > here >> >> is >> >> > a bonus 11th consequence: It will encourage the employment of illegal >> >> aliens >> >> > under the table paid in cash and all kinds of underground barter >> >> > transactions that also will not be taxed. >> >> > >> >> > Standards of Measurement of Good Health Care >> >> > >> >> > Please consider what Raoul Pal of Spain wrote John Mauldin in the >> >> > June >> 5 >> >> > Frontline Thoughts called The New, New >> >> > Normal >> >> > . >> >> > >> >> > In its simplest terms a healthcare system is there to extend the >> >> longevity >> >> > of live of the population. It is the single best and simplest way to >> >> judge >> >> > it because we can all find examples of where one country is better >> than >> >> > another but the longevity stats don't lie. When we use that framework >> >> > the >> >> > picture is incredibly different. The US has many of the best doctors >> and >> >> > medical care in the world but it doesn't work for the population as a >> >> whole >> >> > and therein lies the problem. >> >> > >> >> > "According to the Economist the total US spend on healthcare is 15.4% >> of >> >> GDP >> >> > including both state and private . With that it gets 2.6 doctors per >> >> 1,000 >> >> > people, 3.3 hospital beds and its people live to an average age of >> 78.2 >> >> > >> >> > "UK - spends 8.1% of GDP, gets 2.3 doctors, 4.2 hospital beds and >> >> > live >> >> > to >> >> an >> >> > average age of 79.4. So for roughly half the cost their citizens >> overall >> >> get >> >> > about the same benefit in terms of longevity of life. >> >> > >> >> > "Canada - spends 9.8% of GDP on healthcare, gets 2.1 doctors, 3.6 >> >> hospital >> >> > beds and live until they are 80.6 yrs >> >> > >> >> > "Now if we look at the more social model in Europe the results become >> >> even >> >> > more surprising: >> >> > >> >> > "France - spends 10.5%, 3.4 docs, 7.5 beds and live until they are >> 80.6 >> >> > >> >> > "Spain - spends 8.1% , 3.3 docs , 3.8 beds and live until they are 81 >> >> > >> >> > "As a whole Europe spends 9.6% of GDP on healthcare, has 3.9 doctors >> per >> >> > 1,000 people, 6.6 hospital beds and live until they are 81.15 years >> old. >> >> > >> >> > "The list goes on. The truth is that in many cases as is pointed out >> the >> >> > healthcare system is better in the US than in some other countries >> >> > BUT >> >> > US >> >> > citizens must therefore get ill more often than any other country in >> the >> >> > West in order to achieve the truly appalling statistic that they are >> the >> >> 41 >> >> > longest living nation on earth with France, Spain, Norway, >> Switzerland, >> >> > Italy, Austria, Andorra, Holland, Greece and Sweden all featuring in >> the >> >> top >> >> > 20 longest living nations and the UK and Germany at 22. >> >> > >> >> > "This is the big failure of the US system. It is unforgivable. You >> >> > may >> >> get a >> >> > better chance of recovering from certain diseases but as a whole you >> >> > will >> >> > die younger in the US than most developed countries. ... Something is >> >> > severely broken." >> >> > >> >> > Something Is Severely Broken >> >> > >> >> > Something is indeed broken and Kennedy's bill sure is not going to >> >> > fix >> >> it. >> >> > >> >> > ?America Health Choices Act? is a horrible piece of legislation that >> >> > does >> >> > nothing to reduce costs but instead increases them on businesses. A >> >> better >> >> > name for it would be "Delayed Recovery And Outsourcing Encouragement >> >> > Program" or DRAOEP. >> >> > >> >> > I tried to come up with a name that would equate to DROPDEAD (because >> >> that >> >> > is what Kennedy's plan says to businesses) but could not quite make >> it. >> >> > >> >> > If you are a business owner you better be flooding your >> representatives >> >> with >> >> > faxes and phone calls (see Speak >> >> > Out!< >> >> >> http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/speak-out-audit-fed-then-end-it.html >> >> >for >> >> > a detailed list of fax numbers) if you know what is good for you, >> >> > because I can ensure you, this isn't. >> >> > >> >> > Mike "Mish" Shedlock >> >> > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 7:45 AM, Brad Haslett >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> For those of you who would like to know what's in the Obamacare >> >> >> bill, >> >> >> here's a searchable database - >> >> >> >> >> >> http://patientsunitednow.com/?q=node/233 >> >> >> >> >> >> Look at this - >> >> >> >> >> >> Sec. 3102 Financial Integrity >> >> >> >> >> >> ?(1) In general - A State shall keep an accurate accounting of >> >> >> all >> >> >> activities, receipts, and expenditures of any Gateway operating in >> >> >> such State and shall annually submit to the Secretary a report >> >> >> concerning such accountings. >> >> >> >> >> >> ?(2) Investigations - The Secretary may investigate the affairs >> >> >> of >> >> >> a Gateway, may examine the properties and records of a Gateway, and >> >> >> may require periodical reports in relation to activities undertaken >> by >> >> >> a Gateway. A Gateway shall fully cooperate in any investigation >> >> >> conducted under this paragraph. >> >> >> >> >> >> Remember all the screaming and chest thumping about warrantless >> >> >> wiretaps in years gone by? "Gateway" means your doctor. For the >> past >> >> >> 37 years, I've been required by law to disclose every single visit >> >> >> to >> >> >> a doctor or pharmacist so this is nothing new to me, but if you >> >> >> don't >> >> >> think giving low level government employees access to your health >> care >> >> >> records can create problems you've obviously forgotten "Joe the >> >> >> Plumbers" personal records being divulged for political purposes. >> >> >> >> >> >> Don't be fooled by this bill, it is not health insurance. This will >> >> >> be the creation of a massive bureaucracy. My hangarmate is going >> >> >> through this right now for a medical issue he resolved over a year >> ago >> >> >> - an "audit" if you will. If you think the US Post Office and the >> IRS >> >> >> are "mean-and-lean", well run agencies, you'll really love this one! >> >> >> >> >> >> Care to bet whether this bill will be read before it's voted on? >> Time >> >> >> to fire-up the phones! >> >> >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From bill at effros.com Tue Jun 9 09:17:03 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2009 09:17:03 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] More GM Silliness In-Reply-To: <400985d70906090521wf519140n34e4c80fc667694a@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906090521wf519140n34e4c80fc667694a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A2E60CF.1050805@effros.com> Oh, please.... Brad, The problem with the Volt is that it won't work! All the car companies with decent engineers already know this, and all management should know it too. I drive a Camry Hybrid. I've also owned diesels. The Camry Hybrid is the best car I've ever owned because the efficiency is maintained by an on-board computer programmed to solve non-linear mathematical problems. It's an elegant solution, and Toyota figured out how to make it work. The Volt tries to solve the problem in a linear fashion that everyone should know can't possibly work. The Camry is a great car because there are no compromises (except trunk space) for the fuel efficiency. It is essentially the small Lexus -- extremely quiet, with a comparatively small battery, and an efficient charging mechanism that runs all the appliances electrically, not mechanically. The brilliance is in the software that keeps the battery charged with the least use of the engine. The premise of the Volt is that most trips in cars are less than 40 miles, and the huge battery can be charged at home for most uses without every resorting to the little on-board generator. But not at night! -- at night you have to turn on your headlights, and that saps the battery -- you won't get 40 miles at night. And not in winter! -- in winter you want heat, and that saps the battery -- you won't get 40 miles in the winter. And not in summer! -- in summer you want A/C and that saps the battery -- you won't get 40 miles in the summer. And not if you listen to the radio. And not if you need to use your windshield wipers. And not if you get stuck in traffic. And not if you have more than 1 person in the car. And...get the idea? So, at that point, the on-board generator turns on to drive the wheels directly. It does not attempt to recharge the battery -- you must wait until you can plug it in, and not use the car for six and a half hours-- it just drives the wheels. I would guess you have to turn off the A/C at that point, and the lights? and the windshield wipers? The generator does not seem to be computer controlled. Once the battery goes below 30% the generator comes on and stays on. It only has a 5 or 6 gallon gas tank. That's supposed to be good for 400 miles -- but only if you top it off every time you use it, and run it until it is completely out of gas, and don't use any of the output for anything else than driving the wheels in overdrive without any on board electrical appliances in use. This car will be one colossal pain to drive--you will never take it on long trips--If you routinely need a car for more than 20 miles a day, this car is not for you...it's a bad joke. I love my Camry because there are no compromises (except for that small truck, which I can live with.) It is large, comfortable, powerful, quick, and most important to me because I drive a lot, it has a 550 mile range doing 90 miles an hour in 100 degree heat. (Actual -- Texas) The Japanese must be laughing their asses off. B. Brad Haslett wrote: > This whole GM thing gets sillier by the day. So the 'gubment' is > going to give $7500 tax credits to people who buy Chevy Volts. Forty > per cent of US citizens don't pay federal taxes so this is meaningless > to them. The people who would be most motivated to buy a Volt > because of a tax credit are those who pay more than $7500 in federal > income taxes (see article below). Chances are, these are the same > people who currently drive Suburbans because they can afford it and > that's what they want to drive. Any marginal MBA student can spot the > flaw in the "New GM's" theory immediately. But remember, the "car > czar" is a 31 year-old with no automobile manufacturing or selling > experience that "almost" has a law degree from Yale. > > Then there is this - only 42% of GM owners will buy another one - > > http://tinyurl.com/kq6wzm > > That doesn't leave much of a market for GM. Don't think for a moment > that Hyundai in Alabama, or Toyota in MS, TX., and KY, or Honda in > Ohio, and all the other "American" car companies can't build an auto > to compete with the Volt if indeed a market develops for such a car. > And then there's Volkswagen in Chattanooga, TN coming on line. What's > so special about hybrids? My 1980 diesel VW Rabbit got better > mileage. My new mid-size station wagon (which came with a $1300 tax > credit) does just as well with a whole lot more acceleration and a lot > less noise. You'd think they would be flying out the door. They're > not, and neither will Chevy Volts. > > Silliness! > > Brad > > ---------------------- > > Car Quandary > Political and economic contradictions of the 'new GM' > > Tuesday, June 9, 2009 > > POOR BOB LUTZ. The vice chairman of General Motors loves "muscle cars" > like the Camaro. He knows that, unless fuel prices go much higher and > stay there, the American market for big cars is likely to exceed the > market for small cars. Yet he has to build a little four-seat plug-in > electric hybrid called the Chevrolet Volt, roll it out next year and > try to sell it for $40,000 (not counting a likely $7,500 federal tax > rebate). It doesn't make much sense economically, and the few thousand > Volts that GM plans to produce at first won't dent U.S. carbon > emissions much either. But, as Mr. Lutz told The Post's Michael Leahy, > he feels pressure from Washington to do something spectacular on the > electric car front. The Volt, he says, "is an important symbol. We > need it. It has a chance to change our image." > > When GM was still a privately owned company, this latest episode of > Detroit agonistes would be no one's problem but GM's and its > stockholders'. But soon, if they become owners of 60 percent of the > company, taxpayers could be on the hook for the Volt. And Mr. Lutz's > quandary epitomizes the political and economic contradictions of the > "new GM." The taxpayers' interest is to get GM out of the red and back > in private hands as soon as possible, consistent with environmental > and fuel-efficiency standards. By that logic, the automaker's only > goal would be to make what people want to buy; expensive "image" > projects such as the Volt would wait. Yet the political pressures that > drove GM to build the Volt in the first place -- namely, Congress's > demand for a U.S.-made answer to the Toyota Prius -- are stronger than > ever now that the government is about to own the company. So GM will > build the Volt, even if it loses money, taxpayer money. > > And members of Congress will delve into other aspects of the car > companies' business. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the > House Banking Committee, has already prevailed on GM to extend the > life of a plant in his district. GM and Chrysler dealers, thousands of > whom are set to close in order to streamline the companies' sales > efforts, have flocked to Capitol Hill demanding relief. In response, > House members of both parties have introduced a bill that would block > the closure of GM and Chrysler dealerships. If this proposal ever > makes it to his desk, President Obama should veto it. America can have > nationalized auto companies with a chance, however slim, of someday > turning a profit. Or it can have nationalized firms subject to > constant political tinkering. It can't have both. > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > From flybrad at gmail.com Tue Jun 9 10:03:17 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 09:03:17 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] More GM Silliness In-Reply-To: <4A2E60CF.1050805@effros.com> References: <400985d70906090521wf519140n34e4c80fc667694a@mail.gmail.com> <4A2E60CF.1050805@effros.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906090703v48745b7cxd8cbec9b73b85eee@mail.gmail.com> Bill, Like a lot of folk's car purchases, this was an impulse buy for me. The original plan was to drive the 15 year-old Lexus (gussied-up Camry) that I've had for 10 years another 5 years and 100K miles (it had 152K already). It had a dozen or so "nit-noy" squawks but nothing serious. My oldest son, a VW and diesel fan, came to visit and we test drove the re-introduced turbo-diesel on a whim. I fell in love and the rest is history. Hyundai has developed a hybrid drivetrain (or maybe they just bought it) and the original plan was to wait for its introduction in a Sonata and see how well it compared to the others. The one thing I'd forgotten about owning a diesel was how messy the refueling is (I carry handi-wipes in the back). Other than that, I'm extremely pleased with the car. We drove to my parents last weekend and got 42+ mpg at 70 mph with the A/C going and I'm getting about 34 mpg around town. I love the way the low-end torque works in traffic and the 6-speed auto transmission is smoother than anything I've ever driven. Ask me again at 100K miles if I'm still happy. The Germans build some great driving cars but they can figure out electricity for shit! Electrical gremlins have been the downfall of every German car I've owned, including my old Mercedes diesel. The GM Volt will be a flop. But guess what? We're paying for it, or to quote Sarah Palin, "the Chinese are actually buying GM since they're loaning us the money". What a mess! Brad On 6/9/09, Bill Effros wrote: > Oh, please.... > > Brad, > > The problem with the Volt is that it won't work! All the car companies > with decent engineers already know this, and all management should know > it too. > > I drive a Camry Hybrid. I've also owned diesels. The Camry Hybrid is > the best car I've ever owned because the efficiency is maintained by an > on-board computer programmed to solve non-linear mathematical problems. > It's an elegant solution, and Toyota figured out how to make it work. > > The Volt tries to solve the problem in a linear fashion that everyone > should know can't possibly work. > > The Camry is a great car because there are no compromises (except trunk > space) for the fuel efficiency. It is essentially the small Lexus -- > extremely quiet, with a comparatively small battery, and an efficient > charging mechanism that runs all the appliances electrically, not > mechanically. The brilliance is in the software that keeps the battery > charged with the least use of the engine. > > The premise of the Volt is that most trips in cars are less than 40 > miles, and the huge battery can be charged at home for most uses without > every resorting to the little on-board generator. > > But not at night! -- at night you have to turn on your headlights, and > that saps the battery -- you won't get 40 miles at night. > > And not in winter! -- in winter you want heat, and that saps the battery > -- you won't get 40 miles in the winter. > > And not in summer! -- in summer you want A/C and that saps the battery > -- you won't get 40 miles in the summer. > > And not if you listen to the radio. > > And not if you need to use your windshield wipers. > > And not if you get stuck in traffic. > > And not if you have more than 1 person in the car. > > And...get the idea? > > So, at that point, the on-board generator turns on to drive the wheels > directly. It does not attempt to recharge the battery -- you must wait > until you can plug it in, and not use the car for six and a half hours-- > it just drives the wheels. > > I would guess you have to turn off the A/C at that point, and the > lights? and the windshield wipers? > > The generator does not seem to be computer controlled. Once the battery > goes below 30% the generator comes on and stays on. It only has a 5 or > 6 gallon gas tank. That's supposed to be good for 400 miles -- but only > if you top it off every time you use it, and run it until it is > completely out of gas, and don't use any of the output for anything else > than driving the wheels in overdrive without any on board electrical > appliances in use. > > This car will be one colossal pain to drive--you will never take it on > long trips--If you routinely need a car for more than 20 miles a day, > this car is not for you...it's a bad joke. > > I love my Camry because there are no compromises (except for that small > truck, which I can live with.) It is large, comfortable, powerful, > quick, and most important to me because I drive a lot, it has a 550 mile > range doing 90 miles an hour in 100 degree heat. (Actual -- Texas) > > The Japanese must be laughing their asses off. > > B. > > > > Brad Haslett wrote: >> This whole GM thing gets sillier by the day. So the 'gubment' is >> going to give $7500 tax credits to people who buy Chevy Volts. Forty >> per cent of US citizens don't pay federal taxes so this is meaningless >> to them. The people who would be most motivated to buy a Volt >> because of a tax credit are those who pay more than $7500 in federal >> income taxes (see article below). Chances are, these are the same >> people who currently drive Suburbans because they can afford it and >> that's what they want to drive. Any marginal MBA student can spot the >> flaw in the "New GM's" theory immediately. But remember, the "car >> czar" is a 31 year-old with no automobile manufacturing or selling >> experience that "almost" has a law degree from Yale. >> >> Then there is this - only 42% of GM owners will buy another one - >> >> http://tinyurl.com/kq6wzm >> >> That doesn't leave much of a market for GM. Don't think for a moment >> that Hyundai in Alabama, or Toyota in MS, TX., and KY, or Honda in >> Ohio, and all the other "American" car companies can't build an auto >> to compete with the Volt if indeed a market develops for such a car. >> And then there's Volkswagen in Chattanooga, TN coming on line. What's >> so special about hybrids? My 1980 diesel VW Rabbit got better >> mileage. My new mid-size station wagon (which came with a $1300 tax >> credit) does just as well with a whole lot more acceleration and a lot >> less noise. You'd think they would be flying out the door. They're >> not, and neither will Chevy Volts. >> >> Silliness! >> >> Brad >> >> ---------------------- >> >> Car Quandary >> Political and economic contradictions of the 'new GM' >> >> Tuesday, June 9, 2009 >> >> POOR BOB LUTZ. The vice chairman of General Motors loves "muscle cars" >> like the Camaro. He knows that, unless fuel prices go much higher and >> stay there, the American market for big cars is likely to exceed the >> market for small cars. Yet he has to build a little four-seat plug-in >> electric hybrid called the Chevrolet Volt, roll it out next year and >> try to sell it for $40,000 (not counting a likely $7,500 federal tax >> rebate). It doesn't make much sense economically, and the few thousand >> Volts that GM plans to produce at first won't dent U.S. carbon >> emissions much either. But, as Mr. Lutz told The Post's Michael Leahy, >> he feels pressure from Washington to do something spectacular on the >> electric car front. The Volt, he says, "is an important symbol. We >> need it. It has a chance to change our image." >> >> When GM was still a privately owned company, this latest episode of >> Detroit agonistes would be no one's problem but GM's and its >> stockholders'. But soon, if they become owners of 60 percent of the >> company, taxpayers could be on the hook for the Volt. And Mr. Lutz's >> quandary epitomizes the political and economic contradictions of the >> "new GM." The taxpayers' interest is to get GM out of the red and back >> in private hands as soon as possible, consistent with environmental >> and fuel-efficiency standards. By that logic, the automaker's only >> goal would be to make what people want to buy; expensive "image" >> projects such as the Volt would wait. Yet the political pressures that >> drove GM to build the Volt in the first place -- namely, Congress's >> demand for a U.S.-made answer to the Toyota Prius -- are stronger than >> ever now that the government is about to own the company. So GM will >> build the Volt, even if it loses money, taxpayer money. >> >> And members of Congress will delve into other aspects of the car >> companies' business. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the >> House Banking Committee, has already prevailed on GM to extend the >> life of a plant in his district. GM and Chrysler dealers, thousands of >> whom are set to close in order to streamline the companies' sales >> efforts, have flocked to Capitol Hill demanding relief. In response, >> House members of both parties have introduced a bill that would block >> the closure of GM and Chrysler dealerships. If this proposal ever >> makes it to his desk, President Obama should veto it. America can have >> nationalized auto companies with a chance, however slim, of someday >> turning a profit. Or it can have nationalized firms subject to >> constant political tinkering. It can't have both. >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > From bill at effros.com Tue Jun 9 11:24:11 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2009 11:24:11 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] More GM Silliness In-Reply-To: <400985d70906090703v48745b7cxd8cbec9b73b85eee@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906090521wf519140n34e4c80fc667694a@mail.gmail.com> <4A2E60CF.1050805@effros.com> <400985d70906090703v48745b7cxd8cbec9b73b85eee@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A2E7E9B.7050308@effros.com> As I understand it, Toyota engineers are the only ones who have really figured out how to build them. Everybody else rents their technology -- which Toyota only sells 1 generation behind what they're currently offering. My Toyota is generation III. It will get 45 mpg at 75 w A/C, and has a 17.4 gallon tank. It weighs 3500 lbs as I remember, and gas mileage doesn't seem to change as more people and cargo get in. The electric motor will kick in at 90 mph if the computer thinks that's what my driving style wants. It learns your style as you drive it. It's really a fascinating car, and it doesn't work anything like what you've read "The electric motor gets it rolling, then the little gas motor takes over..." I get an honest 38.5 city or country. Traffic or no traffic. Loaded or empty. Summer or Winter. The only thing that hurts gas mileage is a tank full of tiny short trips. (The system has to adjust itself using the motor-- just as all systems are go, you pull into a parking lot, and by the time you drive again it has to adjust all over again. Milage will go as low as 33.5) I owned a diesel car, my Kubota is a diesel, and I've driven a lot of diesels in Europe. I do like them. But I think the Japanese will get better and better at the kind of hybrids they have settled on, and I think they rejected the Volt concept years ago. I put an electric motor on my boat to experiment with the Volt concept. I have never used my motor very much. I have a little Honda generator on board. The jury is still out. Anybody know how the Toyotas start their gas motors? You never hear a starter motor, and the whole thing is so silent you don't know when you are on electric and when on gas. B. Brad Haslett wrote: > Bill, > > Like a lot of folk's car purchases, this was an impulse buy for me. > The original plan was to drive the 15 year-old Lexus (gussied-up > Camry) that I've had for 10 years another 5 years and 100K miles (it > had 152K already). It had a dozen or so "nit-noy" squawks but nothing > serious. My oldest son, a VW and diesel fan, came to visit and we > test drove the re-introduced turbo-diesel on a whim. I fell in love > and the rest is history. Hyundai has developed a hybrid drivetrain > (or maybe they just bought it) and the original plan was to wait for > its introduction in a Sonata and see how well it compared to the > others. The one thing I'd forgotten about owning a diesel was how > messy the refueling is (I carry handi-wipes in the back). Other than > that, I'm extremely pleased with the car. We drove to my parents last > weekend and got 42+ mpg at 70 mph with the A/C going and I'm getting > about 34 mpg around town. I love the way the low-end torque works in > traffic and the 6-speed auto transmission is smoother than anything > I've ever driven. Ask me again at 100K miles if I'm still happy. The > Germans build some great driving cars but they can figure out > electricity for shit! Electrical gremlins have been the downfall of > every German car I've owned, including my old Mercedes diesel. > > The GM Volt will be a flop. But guess what? We're paying for it, or > to quote Sarah Palin, "the Chinese are actually buying GM since > they're loaning us the money". > > What a mess! > > Brad > > > On 6/9/09, Bill Effros wrote: > >> Oh, please.... >> >> Brad, >> >> The problem with the Volt is that it won't work! All the car companies >> with decent engineers already know this, and all management should know >> it too. >> >> I drive a Camry Hybrid. I've also owned diesels. The Camry Hybrid is >> the best car I've ever owned because the efficiency is maintained by an >> on-board computer programmed to solve non-linear mathematical problems. >> It's an elegant solution, and Toyota figured out how to make it work. >> >> The Volt tries to solve the problem in a linear fashion that everyone >> should know can't possibly work. >> >> The Camry is a great car because there are no compromises (except trunk >> space) for the fuel efficiency. It is essentially the small Lexus -- >> extremely quiet, with a comparatively small battery, and an efficient >> charging mechanism that runs all the appliances electrically, not >> mechanically. The brilliance is in the software that keeps the battery >> charged with the least use of the engine. >> >> The premise of the Volt is that most trips in cars are less than 40 >> miles, and the huge battery can be charged at home for most uses without >> every resorting to the little on-board generator. >> >> But not at night! -- at night you have to turn on your headlights, and >> that saps the battery -- you won't get 40 miles at night. >> >> And not in winter! -- in winter you want heat, and that saps the battery >> -- you won't get 40 miles in the winter. >> >> And not in summer! -- in summer you want A/C and that saps the battery >> -- you won't get 40 miles in the summer. >> >> And not if you listen to the radio. >> >> And not if you need to use your windshield wipers. >> >> And not if you get stuck in traffic. >> >> And not if you have more than 1 person in the car. >> >> And...get the idea? >> >> So, at that point, the on-board generator turns on to drive the wheels >> directly. It does not attempt to recharge the battery -- you must wait >> until you can plug it in, and not use the car for six and a half hours-- >> it just drives the wheels. >> >> I would guess you have to turn off the A/C at that point, and the >> lights? and the windshield wipers? >> >> The generator does not seem to be computer controlled. Once the battery >> goes below 30% the generator comes on and stays on. It only has a 5 or >> 6 gallon gas tank. That's supposed to be good for 400 miles -- but only >> if you top it off every time you use it, and run it until it is >> completely out of gas, and don't use any of the output for anything else >> than driving the wheels in overdrive without any on board electrical >> appliances in use. >> >> This car will be one colossal pain to drive--you will never take it on >> long trips--If you routinely need a car for more than 20 miles a day, >> this car is not for you...it's a bad joke. >> >> I love my Camry because there are no compromises (except for that small >> truck, which I can live with.) It is large, comfortable, powerful, >> quick, and most important to me because I drive a lot, it has a 550 mile >> range doing 90 miles an hour in 100 degree heat. (Actual -- Texas) >> >> The Japanese must be laughing their asses off. >> >> B. >> >> >> >> Brad Haslett wrote: >> >>> This whole GM thing gets sillier by the day. So the 'gubment' is >>> going to give $7500 tax credits to people who buy Chevy Volts. Forty >>> per cent of US citizens don't pay federal taxes so this is meaningless >>> to them. The people who would be most motivated to buy a Volt >>> because of a tax credit are those who pay more than $7500 in federal >>> income taxes (see article below). Chances are, these are the same >>> people who currently drive Suburbans because they can afford it and >>> that's what they want to drive. Any marginal MBA student can spot the >>> flaw in the "New GM's" theory immediately. But remember, the "car >>> czar" is a 31 year-old with no automobile manufacturing or selling >>> experience that "almost" has a law degree from Yale. >>> >>> Then there is this - only 42% of GM owners will buy another one - >>> >>> http://tinyurl.com/kq6wzm >>> >>> That doesn't leave much of a market for GM. Don't think for a moment >>> that Hyundai in Alabama, or Toyota in MS, TX., and KY, or Honda in >>> Ohio, and all the other "American" car companies can't build an auto >>> to compete with the Volt if indeed a market develops for such a car. >>> And then there's Volkswagen in Chattanooga, TN coming on line. What's >>> so special about hybrids? My 1980 diesel VW Rabbit got better >>> mileage. My new mid-size station wagon (which came with a $1300 tax >>> credit) does just as well with a whole lot more acceleration and a lot >>> less noise. You'd think they would be flying out the door. They're >>> not, and neither will Chevy Volts. >>> >>> Silliness! >>> >>> Brad >>> >>> ---------------------- >>> >>> Car Quandary >>> Political and economic contradictions of the 'new GM' >>> >>> Tuesday, June 9, 2009 >>> >>> POOR BOB LUTZ. The vice chairman of General Motors loves "muscle cars" >>> like the Camaro. He knows that, unless fuel prices go much higher and >>> stay there, the American market for big cars is likely to exceed the >>> market for small cars. Yet he has to build a little four-seat plug-in >>> electric hybrid called the Chevrolet Volt, roll it out next year and >>> try to sell it for $40,000 (not counting a likely $7,500 federal tax >>> rebate). It doesn't make much sense economically, and the few thousand >>> Volts that GM plans to produce at first won't dent U.S. carbon >>> emissions much either. But, as Mr. Lutz told The Post's Michael Leahy, >>> he feels pressure from Washington to do something spectacular on the >>> electric car front. The Volt, he says, "is an important symbol. We >>> need it. It has a chance to change our image." >>> >>> When GM was still a privately owned company, this latest episode of >>> Detroit agonistes would be no one's problem but GM's and its >>> stockholders'. But soon, if they become owners of 60 percent of the >>> company, taxpayers could be on the hook for the Volt. And Mr. Lutz's >>> quandary epitomizes the political and economic contradictions of the >>> "new GM." The taxpayers' interest is to get GM out of the red and back >>> in private hands as soon as possible, consistent with environmental >>> and fuel-efficiency standards. By that logic, the automaker's only >>> goal would be to make what people want to buy; expensive "image" >>> projects such as the Volt would wait. Yet the political pressures that >>> drove GM to build the Volt in the first place -- namely, Congress's >>> demand for a U.S.-made answer to the Toyota Prius -- are stronger than >>> ever now that the government is about to own the company. So GM will >>> build the Volt, even if it loses money, taxpayer money. >>> >>> And members of Congress will delve into other aspects of the car >>> companies' business. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the >>> House Banking Committee, has already prevailed on GM to extend the >>> life of a plant in his district. GM and Chrysler dealers, thousands of >>> whom are set to close in order to streamline the companies' sales >>> efforts, have flocked to Capitol Hill demanding relief. In response, >>> House members of both parties have introduced a bill that would block >>> the closure of GM and Chrysler dealerships. If this proposal ever >>> makes it to his desk, President Obama should veto it. America can have >>> nationalized auto companies with a chance, however slim, of someday >>> turning a profit. Or it can have nationalized firms subject to >>> constant political tinkering. It can't have both. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090609/224a92cd/attachment-0001.html From bill at effros.com Tue Jun 9 11:27:01 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2009 11:27:01 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Conservative Bumper Stickers Message-ID: <4A2E7F45.9030205@effros.com> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Jokes mailing list Jokes at mail.2rad.net http://mail.2rad.net/mailman/listinfo/jokes -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090609/b160f57e/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 16174 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090609/b160f57e/attachment-0012.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 10142 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090609/b160f57e/attachment-0013.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 20989 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090609/b160f57e/attachment-0014.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 17946 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090609/b160f57e/attachment-0015.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 15676 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090609/b160f57e/attachment-0016.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 18934 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090609/b160f57e/attachment-0017.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 20567 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090609/b160f57e/attachment-0018.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 14951 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090609/b160f57e/attachment-0019.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 17680 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090609/b160f57e/attachment-0020.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 22304 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090609/b160f57e/attachment-0021.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 18777 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090609/b160f57e/attachment-0022.jpe -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 18891 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090609/b160f57e/attachment-0023.jpe From sanderico1 at gmail.com Tue Jun 9 12:12:52 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 11:12:52 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Obamacare In-Reply-To: <400985d70906090613q6e88853bo4efd62f0b72e63b4@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906080545u35c9aab0g24f829cd5e8b3953@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906080614hd0b8787h9cb772963dad059e@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70906080646wbbd9e2dk66533f7290bb7364@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906080841g16284845pf7c78c4985d039d2@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70906090441l121b0318k86496c5f33ff8aa3@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906090602g347e4185q87463c777502a907@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70906090613q6e88853bo4efd62f0b72e63b4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0906090912m5be8be33wa045b8fe0f2b5044@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Ha ha ..... a less disgusting shithole .... a worthy goal if I ever heard one, eh. Rik On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 8:13 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > MaoBama must be reading your mind! Here's the latest news report - > > http://tinyurl.com/nkz4cf > > Brad > > > On 6/9/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > "Americans need to ask a basic question: Why are they rushing into a > > system of government-dominated health care when the very countries > > that have experienced it for so long are backing away?" > > > > Why, because to Many MANY Americans, it is perceived as FREE. Don't we > all > > know it's better to shop price first and whine about quality later?? > > > > Hell, if I went to the doctor every time I stubbed my toe or had a > sniffle, > > I couldn't afford the doctors help either. But honestly, when I am out at > > say Mickey D's (which isn't real often) for lunch and I watch some of the > > 400 lb porkers sit down to stuff their faces I sure am glad that I don't > > have to pay for their *FREE* healthcare. > > > > Rik > > > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 6:41 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> Rik, > >> > >> Here's a view from Canada (below). > >> > >> Brad > >> > >> ------------- > >> > >> * JUNE 9, 2009 > >> > >> Canada's ObamaCare Precedent > >> Governments always ration care by making you wait. That can be deadly. > >> > >> > >> By DAVID GRATZER > >> > >> Congressional Democrats will soon put forward their legislative > >> proposals for reforming health care. Should they succeed, tens of > >> millions of Americans will potentially be joining a new public > >> insurance program and the federal government will increasingly be > >> involved in treatment decisions. > >> > >> Not long ago, I would have applauded this type of government > >> expansion. Born and raised in Canada, I once believed that government > >> health care is compassionate and equitable. It is neither. > >> > >> My views changed in medical school. Yes, everyone in Canada is covered > >> by a "single payer" -- the government. But Canadians wait for > >> practically any procedure or diagnostic test or specialist > >> consultation in the public system. > >> [Canada's ObamaCare Precedent] Martin Kozlowski > >> > >> The problems were brought home when a relative had difficulty walking. > >> He was in chronic pain. His doctor suggested a referral to a > >> neurologist; an MRI would need to be done, then possibly a referral to > >> another specialist. The wait would have stretched to roughly a year. > >> If surgery was needed, the wait would be months more. Not wanting to > >> stay confined to his house, he had the surgery done in the U.S., at > >> the Mayo Clinic, and paid for it himself. > >> > >> Such stories are common. For example, Sylvia de Vries, an Ontario > >> woman, had a 40-pound fluid-filled tumor removed from her abdomen by > >> an American surgeon in 2006. Her Michigan doctor estimated that she > >> was within weeks of dying, but she was still on a wait list for a > >> Canadian specialist. > >> > >> Indeed, Canada's provincial governments themselves rely on American > >> medicine. Between 2006 and 2008, Ontario sent more than 160 patients > >> to New York and Michigan for emergency neurosurgery -- described by > >> the Globe and Mail newspaper as "broken necks, burst aneurysms and > >> other types of bleeding in or around the brain." > >> > >> Only half of ER patients are treated in a timely manner by national > >> and international standards, according to a government study. The > >> physician shortage is so severe that some towns hold lotteries, with > >> the winners gaining access to the local doc. > >> > >> Overall, according to a study published in Lancet Oncology last year, > >> five-year cancer survival rates are higher in the U.S. than those in > >> Canada. Based on data from the Joint Canada/U.S. Survey of Health > >> (done by Statistics Canada and the U.S. National Center for Health > >> Statistics), Americans have greater access to preventive screening > >> tests and have higher treatment rates for chronic illnesses. No > >> wonder: To limit the growth in health spending, governments restrict > >> the supply of health care by rationing it through waiting. The same > >> survey data show, as June and Paul O'Neill note in a paper published > >> in 2007 in the Forum for Health Economics & Policy, that the poor > >> under socialized medicine seem to be less healthy relative to the > >> nonpoor than their American counterparts. > >> > >> Ironically, as the U.S. is on the verge of rushing toward government > >> health care, Canada is reforming its system in the opposite direction. > >> In 2005, Canada's supreme court struck down key laws in Quebec that > >> established a government monopoly of health services. Claude > >> Castonguay, who headed the Quebec government commission that > >> recommended the creation of its public health-care system in the > >> 1960s, also has second thoughts. Last year, after completing another > >> review, he declared the system in "crisis" and suggested a massive > >> expansion of private services -- even advocating that public hospitals > >> rent facilities to physicians in off-hours. > >> > >> And the medical establishment? Dr. Brian Day, an orthopedic surgeon, > >> grew increasingly frustrated by government cutbacks that reduced his > >> access to an operating room and increased the number of patients on > >> his hospital waiting list. He built a private hospital in Vancouver in > >> the 1990s. Last year, he completed a term as the president of the > >> Canadian Medical Association and was succeeded by a Quebec radiologist > >> who owns several private clinics. > >> > >> In Canada, private-sector health care is growing. Dr. Day estimates > >> that 50,000 people are seen at private clinics every year in British > >> Columbia. According to the New York Times, a private clinic opens at a > >> rate of about one a week across the country. Public-private > >> partnerships, once a taboo topic, are embraced by provincial > >> governments. > >> > >> In the United Kingdom, where socialized medicine was established after > >> World War II through the National Health Service, the present Labour > >> government has introduced a choice in surgeries by allowing patients > >> to choose among facilities, often including private ones. Even in > >> Sweden, the government has turned over services to the private sector. > >> > >> Americans need to ask a basic question: Why are they rushing into a > >> system of government-dominated health care when the very countries > >> that have experienced it for so long are backing away? > >> > >> Dr. Gratzer, a physician, is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. > >> > >> Please add your comments to the Opinion Journal Forum. > >> On 6/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > >> > Brad, > >> > > >> > I'll bet the doctors/clinics/hospitals are real pleased to see all > this > >> too. > >> > > >> > The other day, I took Sandy to the clinic. We got her normal blood > tests > >> and > >> > had a 20 minute conversation with our usual doctor. Sandy became > >> > eligible > >> > for medicare as of the first of the year. Before M/C, when I was > paying > >> out > >> > of pocket, this would have cost $387.00. Now that the gov't is paying > >> it's > >> > $147.90. Yipes ..... a 60%+ cut in pay for the clinic/doctor. This is > >> > certainly better for us personally, but you gotta wonder how long the > >> clinic > >> > will be around ...... > >> > > >> > I think I see some unemployment in the future for our medical schools > >> .... > >> > more unintended consequences > >> > > >> > Rik. > >> > > >> > On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Brad Haslett > wrote: > >> > > >> >> Rik, > >> >> > >> >> As the article points out, spending more money on health doesn't > >> >> equate to better health. As Sarah Palin stated in her 2009 Alaska > >> >> State-of-the-State address, health care is something individuals have > >> >> a great deal of control over with by their lifestyle. > >> >> > >> >> Here's something many people just don't get; health insurance doesn't > >> >> equal health. It's insurance. Does your car insurance include free > >> >> oil changes and new tires? Does your homeowners insurance include > >> >> maid service? Health insurance is there to help you avoid bankruptcy > >> >> or early death in case of a major health issue. Your "Little Johnny" > >> >> farting cross-wise or you getting a cold is your problem (or should > >> >> be). We're re-inventing the wheel here, this has all been done > before > >> >> in Tennessee and it didn't work. Governor Bredesen (democrat and > >> >> former health-care executive) worked the problem backward - "OK, this > >> >> is how much money the State has, what can we buy with the funds > >> >> available"? TennCare is not a "gold plated" health insurance plan > but > >> >> it is affordable TO THOSE WHO WANT IT! If someone wants something > >> >> better, they can always compete for a job with an employer that > offers > >> >> something better. You can put all the lipstick on this pig you want, > >> >> this bill is socialism! You want a better health care system? Fine! > >> >> Leave the two of us alone for an hour with a case of beer and we'll > >> >> have one for you! But, that's not the point. This is not about > >> >> better health, it is all about 'gubment' control. Don't people get > >> >> enough of that shit in their lives? > >> >> > >> >> One last thought - there's STILL $600 million dollars sitting on the > >> >> shelf available for developers to build housing for Katrina victims. > >> >> It will be there 10 years from now. No private developer is going to > >> >> touch that money with all the strings attached to it. Show me one > >> >> successful public housing project, anywhere. Ask Obambi about his > >> >> friends in the private-public housing arena. So, somehow, we're > going > >> >> to get this right with health care? > >> >> > >> >> I call BS on that, not that it matters. > >> >> > >> >> Brad > >> >> > >> >> On 6/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > >> >> > Brad, > >> >> > > >> >> > Looks like 'ol Ted is gonna' try to stick us one last good one on > >> >> > this > >> >> > healthcare thing before he finally tips over. I generally try hard > to > >> >> give > >> >> > people the benefit of the doubt, but honestly, in my mind 'ol Ted > has > >> >> used > >> >> > up his (and a few other's) share of doubt. I guess anymore, I think > >> we'd > >> >> all > >> >> > have been better off if he'da drowned with Mary Jo. > >> >> > > >> >> > Rik > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/kennedys-healthcare-bill-will-increase.html > >> >> > ______________________ > >> >> > > >> >> > Kennedy's Healthcare Bill Will Increase Expenses, Decrease > Employment > >> >> > and > >> >> > Encourage > >> >> > Outsourcing< > >> >> > >> > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/kennedys-healthcare-bill-will-increase.html > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > Ted Kennedy believes everyone should have a plethora of good > options > >> on > >> >> > healthcare. > >> >> > > >> >> > However, other than raising taxes on businesses, Kennedy refuses to > >> say > >> >> how > >> >> > his proposals will be paid. Moreover, he is too blind to see (or > too > >> >> > political to admit), the myriad of disastrous consequences that his > >> >> health > >> >> > care proposal will entail, especially on small and medium sized > >> >> businesses. > >> >> > > >> >> > His bill is political demagoguery at its finest. > >> >> > > >> >> > Please consider the details as presented in Kennedy Health Bill > >> Mandates > >> >> > Public Plan, Coverage for > >> >> > All< > http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aLaFojFVR704> > >> >> > . > >> >> > > >> >> > Under a draft bill to overhaul the U.S. health-care system all > >> employers > >> >> > would be required to supply health insurance for workers or > >> >> > contribute > >> >> > to > >> >> > the cost. > >> >> > > >> >> > The bill, by Senator Edward M. Kennedy, would create a public > health > >> >> > plan > >> >> to > >> >> > compete with private insurers, a priority of President Barack > Obama?s > >> >> that > >> >> > is opposed by Republicans. It would provide all Americans with > health > >> >> > benefits, penalize those who don?t buy them and bar insurers from > >> >> limiting > >> >> > coverage. > >> >> > > >> >> > The ?America Health Choices Act,? circulated in Washington late > >> >> yesterday, > >> >> > offered the first detailed glimpse of legislation being discussed > in > >> >> > Congress. Many of its provisions would expand coverage for > uninsured > >> >> > Americans. ?It is the sense of the Senate that Congress should > >> establish > >> >> a > >> >> > means for all Americans to enjoy affordable choices in health > benefit > >> >> > plans,? the bill said. > >> >> > > >> >> > Obama set aside $635 billion in his 2010 budget proposal to act as > a > >> >> ?down > >> >> > payment? on the cost of reconstructing the health-care system and > >> >> expanding > >> >> > coverage to the estimated 46 million uninsured Americans. > >> >> > > >> >> > Kennedy?s draft did not include details of how its proposals would > be > >> >> paid > >> >> > for. > >> >> > > >> >> > Kennedy?s bill opened with an affirmation of a patient?s rights to > >> >> > choose > >> >> > his or her doctor and the importance of the patient-doctor > >> relationship. > >> >> > ?Doctors, nurses and other health professionals have the right to > >> judge > >> >> what > >> >> > is best for their patients,? the bill stated. > >> >> > > >> >> > America Health Choices Act Provisions > >> >> > > >> >> > Government subsidies will be provided to people with income up to > 500 > >> >> > percent of the poverty level. > >> >> > > >> >> > Doctors and hospitals paid at Medicare rates, plus 10 percent. > >> >> > > >> >> > Medicaid, expanded to cover uninsured people earning up to 150 > >> >> > percent > >> >> > of > >> >> > the poverty level. > >> >> > > >> >> > Essential? benefits, include hospital care, maternity and newborn > >> care, > >> >> > prescription drugs, mental-health and substance-abuse services and > >> >> doctors? > >> >> > services. > >> >> > > >> >> > The bill establishes protections for ?fair? insurance coverage, > >> setting > >> >> > limits on how much premiums can vary. Insurers would be forbidden > >> >> > from > >> >> > turning away customers due to pre-existing conditions. > >> >> > > >> >> > Each health insurer that offers coverage in the individual or group > >> >> market > >> >> > in a state would have to accept every employer and individual in > the > >> >> state > >> >> > that applied for coverage. > >> >> > > >> >> > Companies that provide coverage for children through their parents > >> will > >> >> have > >> >> > to extend ?dependent? coverage for those children through the age > of > >> 26. > >> >> > > >> >> > America Health Choices Act Consequences > >> >> > > >> >> > 1) Every employer thinking about hiring someone is going to think > >> twice > >> >> > about it, then not do it. > >> >> > > >> >> > 2) Every employer struggling to maintain jobs in the US with a > choice > >> of > >> >> > outsourcing will have another huge incentive to outsource. > >> >> > > >> >> > 3) Many employers struggling to maintain solvency will go bankrupt > >> after > >> >> > this bill passes. > >> >> > > >> >> > 4) Corporate profits across the board are going to drop. > >> >> > > >> >> > 5) The stock market will drop along with corporate profits. > >> >> > > >> >> > 6) Health care companies will have an incentive to not offer plans > in > >> >> states > >> >> > with poor demographics. > >> >> > > >> >> > 7) Government mandates about how much insurers can charge will > >> bankrupt > >> >> > insurers and/or cause rationing of services. > >> >> > > >> >> > 8) Businesses will have an incentive to fire workers and instead > >> >> > offer > >> >> > contract work to individuals. Banks and financial institutions will > >> >> > be > >> >> among > >> >> > the first to consider this option. Programmers have another reason > to > >> >> start > >> >> > worrying about their jobs. > >> >> > > >> >> > 9) Businesses unable to outsource or make use of contractors will > >> >> > bear > >> >> the > >> >> > brunt of this legislation. The group hardest hit will be retailers > >> like > >> >> > Walmart, Target, and Costco, and restaurants like McDonalds and > Pizza > >> >> Hut. > >> >> > > >> >> > 10) This bill will weigh on business expansion plans. Retail stores > >> are > >> >> > already saturated. This bill provides one more reason for > businesses > >> not > >> >> to > >> >> > expand further. > >> >> > > >> >> > Business Owners Should Be Scared To Death > >> >> > > >> >> > In general: The bill has a negative effect on hiring, a negative > >> effect > >> >> on > >> >> > business expansion, a negative effect on corporate profits, and it > >> >> promotes > >> >> > outsourcing. Moreover, it will delay the recovery of the stock > market > >> >> > and > >> >> it > >> >> > puts the brunt of the burden on businesses that cannot outsource. > >> >> > > >> >> > If you are not scared to death by those consequences, you are not > >> paying > >> >> > attention to what is happening. > >> >> > > >> >> > Requiring businesses to pick up the tab will slow hiring and the > >> >> recovery. > >> >> > Monetizing medical expenses will cheapen the dollar. Requiring > >> taxpayers > >> >> to > >> >> > foot the bill will take away from discretionary spending. > >> >> > > >> >> > It is axiomatic that someone must pay. There is no such thing as a > >> free > >> >> > lunch or free health care either. > >> >> > > >> >> > I have come up with 10 easy to see consequences. I am sure there > are > >> >> > many > >> >> > unforeseen consequences, some of which will be even worse. > >> >> > > >> >> > For those who want more for their money in these deflationary > times, > >> >> > here > >> >> is > >> >> > a bonus 11th consequence: It will encourage the employment of > illegal > >> >> aliens > >> >> > under the table paid in cash and all kinds of underground barter > >> >> > transactions that also will not be taxed. > >> >> > > >> >> > Standards of Measurement of Good Health Care > >> >> > > >> >> > Please consider what Raoul Pal of Spain wrote John Mauldin in the > >> >> > June > >> 5 > >> >> > Frontline Thoughts called The New, New > >> >> > Normal > >> >> > . > >> >> > > >> >> > In its simplest terms a healthcare system is there to extend the > >> >> longevity > >> >> > of live of the population. It is the single best and simplest way > to > >> >> judge > >> >> > it because we can all find examples of where one country is better > >> than > >> >> > another but the longevity stats don't lie. When we use that > framework > >> >> > the > >> >> > picture is incredibly different. The US has many of the best > doctors > >> and > >> >> > medical care in the world but it doesn't work for the population as > a > >> >> whole > >> >> > and therein lies the problem. > >> >> > > >> >> > "According to the Economist the total US spend on healthcare is > 15.4% > >> of > >> >> GDP > >> >> > including both state and private . With that it gets 2.6 doctors > per > >> >> 1,000 > >> >> > people, 3.3 hospital beds and its people live to an average age of > >> 78.2 > >> >> > > >> >> > "UK - spends 8.1% of GDP, gets 2.3 doctors, 4.2 hospital beds and > >> >> > live > >> >> > to > >> >> an > >> >> > average age of 79.4. So for roughly half the cost their citizens > >> overall > >> >> get > >> >> > about the same benefit in terms of longevity of life. > >> >> > > >> >> > "Canada - spends 9.8% of GDP on healthcare, gets 2.1 doctors, 3.6 > >> >> hospital > >> >> > beds and live until they are 80.6 yrs > >> >> > > >> >> > "Now if we look at the more social model in Europe the results > become > >> >> even > >> >> > more surprising: > >> >> > > >> >> > "France - spends 10.5%, 3.4 docs, 7.5 beds and live until they are > >> 80.6 > >> >> > > >> >> > "Spain - spends 8.1% , 3.3 docs , 3.8 beds and live until they are > 81 > >> >> > > >> >> > "As a whole Europe spends 9.6% of GDP on healthcare, has 3.9 > doctors > >> per > >> >> > 1,000 people, 6.6 hospital beds and live until they are 81.15 years > >> old. > >> >> > > >> >> > "The list goes on. The truth is that in many cases as is pointed > out > >> the > >> >> > healthcare system is better in the US than in some other countries > >> >> > BUT > >> >> > US > >> >> > citizens must therefore get ill more often than any other country > in > >> the > >> >> > West in order to achieve the truly appalling statistic that they > are > >> the > >> >> 41 > >> >> > longest living nation on earth with France, Spain, Norway, > >> Switzerland, > >> >> > Italy, Austria, Andorra, Holland, Greece and Sweden all featuring > in > >> the > >> >> top > >> >> > 20 longest living nations and the UK and Germany at 22. > >> >> > > >> >> > "This is the big failure of the US system. It is unforgivable. You > >> >> > may > >> >> get a > >> >> > better chance of recovering from certain diseases but as a whole > you > >> >> > will > >> >> > die younger in the US than most developed countries. ... Something > is > >> >> > severely broken." > >> >> > > >> >> > Something Is Severely Broken > >> >> > > >> >> > Something is indeed broken and Kennedy's bill sure is not going to > >> >> > fix > >> >> it. > >> >> > > >> >> > ?America Health Choices Act? is a horrible piece of legislation > that > >> >> > does > >> >> > nothing to reduce costs but instead increases them on businesses. A > >> >> better > >> >> > name for it would be "Delayed Recovery And Outsourcing > Encouragement > >> >> > Program" or DRAOEP. > >> >> > > >> >> > I tried to come up with a name that would equate to DROPDEAD > (because > >> >> that > >> >> > is what Kennedy's plan says to businesses) but could not quite make > >> it. > >> >> > > >> >> > If you are a business owner you better be flooding your > >> representatives > >> >> with > >> >> > faxes and phone calls (see Speak > >> >> > Out!< > >> >> > >> > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/speak-out-audit-fed-then-end-it.html > >> >> >for > >> >> > a detailed list of fax numbers) if you know what is good for you, > >> >> > because I can ensure you, this isn't. > >> >> > > >> >> > Mike "Mish" Shedlock > >> >> > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 7:45 AM, Brad Haslett > >> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> For those of you who would like to know what's in the Obamacare > >> >> >> bill, > >> >> >> here's a searchable database - > >> >> >> > >> >> >> http://patientsunitednow.com/?q=node/233 > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Look at this - > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Sec. 3102 Financial Integrity > >> >> >> > >> >> >> ?(1) In general - A State shall keep an accurate accounting of > >> >> >> all > >> >> >> activities, receipts, and expenditures of any Gateway operating in > >> >> >> such State and shall annually submit to the Secretary a report > >> >> >> concerning such accountings. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> ?(2) Investigations - The Secretary may investigate the affairs > >> >> >> of > >> >> >> a Gateway, may examine the properties and records of a Gateway, > and > >> >> >> may require periodical reports in relation to activities > undertaken > >> by > >> >> >> a Gateway. A Gateway shall fully cooperate in any investigation > >> >> >> conducted under this paragraph. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Remember all the screaming and chest thumping about warrantless > >> >> >> wiretaps in years gone by? "Gateway" means your doctor. For the > >> past > >> >> >> 37 years, I've been required by law to disclose every single visit > >> >> >> to > >> >> >> a doctor or pharmacist so this is nothing new to me, but if you > >> >> >> don't > >> >> >> think giving low level government employees access to your health > >> care > >> >> >> records can create problems you've obviously forgotten "Joe the > >> >> >> Plumbers" personal records being divulged for political purposes. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Don't be fooled by this bill, it is not health insurance. This > will > >> >> >> be the creation of a massive bureaucracy. My hangarmate is going > >> >> >> through this right now for a medical issue he resolved over a year > >> ago > >> >> >> - an "audit" if you will. If you think the US Post Office and the > >> IRS > >> >> >> are "mean-and-lean", well run agencies, you'll really love this > one! > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Care to bet whether this bill will be read before it's voted on? > >> Time > >> >> >> to fire-up the phones! > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Brad > >> >> >> > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> > >> > > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090609/b6c5a720/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Tue Jun 9 12:55:38 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 11:55:38 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Obamacare In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0906090912m5be8be33wa045b8fe0f2b5044@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906080545u35c9aab0g24f829cd5e8b3953@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906080614hd0b8787h9cb772963dad059e@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70906080646wbbd9e2dk66533f7290bb7364@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906080841g16284845pf7c78c4985d039d2@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70906090441l121b0318k86496c5f33ff8aa3@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906090602g347e4185q87463c777502a907@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70906090613q6e88853bo4efd62f0b72e63b4@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906090912m5be8be33wa045b8fe0f2b5044@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906090955u312cc6wb1cb4e7b8492d6e7@mail.gmail.com> Rik, I do see some benefits to Obamacare if it includes a uniform system of medical record keeping. For example, Bambi could probably produce a valid birth certificate under Obamacare. Brad On 6/9/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Ha ha ..... a less disgusting shithole .... a worthy goal if I ever heard > one, eh. > > Rik > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 8:13 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> MaoBama must be reading your mind! Here's the latest news report - >> >> http://tinyurl.com/nkz4cf >> >> Brad >> >> >> On 6/9/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: >> > Brad, >> > >> > "Americans need to ask a basic question: Why are they rushing into a >> > system of government-dominated health care when the very countries >> > that have experienced it for so long are backing away?" >> > >> > Why, because to Many MANY Americans, it is perceived as FREE. Don't we >> all >> > know it's better to shop price first and whine about quality later?? >> > >> > Hell, if I went to the doctor every time I stubbed my toe or had a >> sniffle, >> > I couldn't afford the doctors help either. But honestly, when I am out >> > at >> > say Mickey D's (which isn't real often) for lunch and I watch some of >> > the >> > 400 lb porkers sit down to stuff their faces I sure am glad that I don't >> > have to pay for their *FREE* healthcare. >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 6:41 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> Rik, >> >> >> >> Here's a view from Canada (below). >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> ------------- >> >> >> >> * JUNE 9, 2009 >> >> >> >> Canada's ObamaCare Precedent >> >> Governments always ration care by making you wait. That can be deadly. >> >> >> >> >> >> By DAVID GRATZER >> >> >> >> Congressional Democrats will soon put forward their legislative >> >> proposals for reforming health care. Should they succeed, tens of >> >> millions of Americans will potentially be joining a new public >> >> insurance program and the federal government will increasingly be >> >> involved in treatment decisions. >> >> >> >> Not long ago, I would have applauded this type of government >> >> expansion. Born and raised in Canada, I once believed that government >> >> health care is compassionate and equitable. It is neither. >> >> >> >> My views changed in medical school. Yes, everyone in Canada is covered >> >> by a "single payer" -- the government. But Canadians wait for >> >> practically any procedure or diagnostic test or specialist >> >> consultation in the public system. >> >> [Canada's ObamaCare Precedent] Martin Kozlowski >> >> >> >> The problems were brought home when a relative had difficulty walking. >> >> He was in chronic pain. His doctor suggested a referral to a >> >> neurologist; an MRI would need to be done, then possibly a referral to >> >> another specialist. The wait would have stretched to roughly a year. >> >> If surgery was needed, the wait would be months more. Not wanting to >> >> stay confined to his house, he had the surgery done in the U.S., at >> >> the Mayo Clinic, and paid for it himself. >> >> >> >> Such stories are common. For example, Sylvia de Vries, an Ontario >> >> woman, had a 40-pound fluid-filled tumor removed from her abdomen by >> >> an American surgeon in 2006. Her Michigan doctor estimated that she >> >> was within weeks of dying, but she was still on a wait list for a >> >> Canadian specialist. >> >> >> >> Indeed, Canada's provincial governments themselves rely on American >> >> medicine. Between 2006 and 2008, Ontario sent more than 160 patients >> >> to New York and Michigan for emergency neurosurgery -- described by >> >> the Globe and Mail newspaper as "broken necks, burst aneurysms and >> >> other types of bleeding in or around the brain." >> >> >> >> Only half of ER patients are treated in a timely manner by national >> >> and international standards, according to a government study. The >> >> physician shortage is so severe that some towns hold lotteries, with >> >> the winners gaining access to the local doc. >> >> >> >> Overall, according to a study published in Lancet Oncology last year, >> >> five-year cancer survival rates are higher in the U.S. than those in >> >> Canada. Based on data from the Joint Canada/U.S. Survey of Health >> >> (done by Statistics Canada and the U.S. National Center for Health >> >> Statistics), Americans have greater access to preventive screening >> >> tests and have higher treatment rates for chronic illnesses. No >> >> wonder: To limit the growth in health spending, governments restrict >> >> the supply of health care by rationing it through waiting. The same >> >> survey data show, as June and Paul O'Neill note in a paper published >> >> in 2007 in the Forum for Health Economics & Policy, that the poor >> >> under socialized medicine seem to be less healthy relative to the >> >> nonpoor than their American counterparts. >> >> >> >> Ironically, as the U.S. is on the verge of rushing toward government >> >> health care, Canada is reforming its system in the opposite direction. >> >> In 2005, Canada's supreme court struck down key laws in Quebec that >> >> established a government monopoly of health services. Claude >> >> Castonguay, who headed the Quebec government commission that >> >> recommended the creation of its public health-care system in the >> >> 1960s, also has second thoughts. Last year, after completing another >> >> review, he declared the system in "crisis" and suggested a massive >> >> expansion of private services -- even advocating that public hospitals >> >> rent facilities to physicians in off-hours. >> >> >> >> And the medical establishment? Dr. Brian Day, an orthopedic surgeon, >> >> grew increasingly frustrated by government cutbacks that reduced his >> >> access to an operating room and increased the number of patients on >> >> his hospital waiting list. He built a private hospital in Vancouver in >> >> the 1990s. Last year, he completed a term as the president of the >> >> Canadian Medical Association and was succeeded by a Quebec radiologist >> >> who owns several private clinics. >> >> >> >> In Canada, private-sector health care is growing. Dr. Day estimates >> >> that 50,000 people are seen at private clinics every year in British >> >> Columbia. According to the New York Times, a private clinic opens at a >> >> rate of about one a week across the country. Public-private >> >> partnerships, once a taboo topic, are embraced by provincial >> >> governments. >> >> >> >> In the United Kingdom, where socialized medicine was established after >> >> World War II through the National Health Service, the present Labour >> >> government has introduced a choice in surgeries by allowing patients >> >> to choose among facilities, often including private ones. Even in >> >> Sweden, the government has turned over services to the private sector. >> >> >> >> Americans need to ask a basic question: Why are they rushing into a >> >> system of government-dominated health care when the very countries >> >> that have experienced it for so long are backing away? >> >> >> >> Dr. Gratzer, a physician, is a senior fellow at the Manhattan >> >> Institute. >> >> >> >> Please add your comments to the Opinion Journal Forum. >> >> On 6/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: >> >> > Brad, >> >> > >> >> > I'll bet the doctors/clinics/hospitals are real pleased to see all >> this >> >> too. >> >> > >> >> > The other day, I took Sandy to the clinic. We got her normal blood >> tests >> >> and >> >> > had a 20 minute conversation with our usual doctor. Sandy became >> >> > eligible >> >> > for medicare as of the first of the year. Before M/C, when I was >> paying >> >> out >> >> > of pocket, this would have cost $387.00. Now that the gov't is paying >> >> it's >> >> > $147.90. Yipes ..... a 60%+ cut in pay for the clinic/doctor. This is >> >> > certainly better for us personally, but you gotta wonder how long the >> >> clinic >> >> > will be around ...... >> >> > >> >> > I think I see some unemployment in the future for our medical schools >> >> .... >> >> > more unintended consequences >> >> > >> >> > Rik. >> >> > >> >> > On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 8:46 AM, Brad Haslett >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Rik, >> >> >> >> >> >> As the article points out, spending more money on health doesn't >> >> >> equate to better health. As Sarah Palin stated in her 2009 Alaska >> >> >> State-of-the-State address, health care is something individuals >> >> >> have >> >> >> a great deal of control over with by their lifestyle. >> >> >> >> >> >> Here's something many people just don't get; health insurance >> >> >> doesn't >> >> >> equal health. It's insurance. Does your car insurance include free >> >> >> oil changes and new tires? Does your homeowners insurance include >> >> >> maid service? Health insurance is there to help you avoid >> >> >> bankruptcy >> >> >> or early death in case of a major health issue. Your "Little >> >> >> Johnny" >> >> >> farting cross-wise or you getting a cold is your problem (or should >> >> >> be). We're re-inventing the wheel here, this has all been done >> before >> >> >> in Tennessee and it didn't work. Governor Bredesen (democrat and >> >> >> former health-care executive) worked the problem backward - "OK, >> >> >> this >> >> >> is how much money the State has, what can we buy with the funds >> >> >> available"? TennCare is not a "gold plated" health insurance plan >> but >> >> >> it is affordable TO THOSE WHO WANT IT! If someone wants something >> >> >> better, they can always compete for a job with an employer that >> offers >> >> >> something better. You can put all the lipstick on this pig you >> >> >> want, >> >> >> this bill is socialism! You want a better health care system? >> >> >> Fine! >> >> >> Leave the two of us alone for an hour with a case of beer and we'll >> >> >> have one for you! But, that's not the point. This is not about >> >> >> better health, it is all about 'gubment' control. Don't people get >> >> >> enough of that shit in their lives? >> >> >> >> >> >> One last thought - there's STILL $600 million dollars sitting on the >> >> >> shelf available for developers to build housing for Katrina victims. >> >> >> It will be there 10 years from now. No private developer is going >> >> >> to >> >> >> touch that money with all the strings attached to it. Show me one >> >> >> successful public housing project, anywhere. Ask Obambi about his >> >> >> friends in the private-public housing arena. So, somehow, we're >> going >> >> >> to get this right with health care? >> >> >> >> >> >> I call BS on that, not that it matters. >> >> >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> >> >> On 6/8/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: >> >> >> > Brad, >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Looks like 'ol Ted is gonna' try to stick us one last good one on >> >> >> > this >> >> >> > healthcare thing before he finally tips over. I generally try hard >> to >> >> >> give >> >> >> > people the benefit of the doubt, but honestly, in my mind 'ol Ted >> has >> >> >> used >> >> >> > up his (and a few other's) share of doubt. I guess anymore, I >> >> >> > think >> >> we'd >> >> >> all >> >> >> > have been better off if he'da drowned with Mary Jo. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Rik >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/kennedys-healthcare-bill-will-increase.html >> >> >> > ______________________ >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Kennedy's Healthcare Bill Will Increase Expenses, Decrease >> Employment >> >> >> > and >> >> >> > Encourage >> >> >> > Outsourcing< >> >> >> >> >> >> http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/kennedys-healthcare-bill-will-increase.html >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Ted Kennedy believes everyone should have a plethora of good >> options >> >> on >> >> >> > healthcare. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > However, other than raising taxes on businesses, Kennedy refuses >> >> >> > to >> >> say >> >> >> how >> >> >> > his proposals will be paid. Moreover, he is too blind to see (or >> too >> >> >> > political to admit), the myriad of disastrous consequences that >> >> >> > his >> >> >> health >> >> >> > care proposal will entail, especially on small and medium sized >> >> >> businesses. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > His bill is political demagoguery at its finest. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Please consider the details as presented in Kennedy Health Bill >> >> Mandates >> >> >> > Public Plan, Coverage for >> >> >> > All< >> http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aLaFojFVR704> >> >> >> > . >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Under a draft bill to overhaul the U.S. health-care system all >> >> employers >> >> >> > would be required to supply health insurance for workers or >> >> >> > contribute >> >> >> > to >> >> >> > the cost. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > The bill, by Senator Edward M. Kennedy, would create a public >> health >> >> >> > plan >> >> >> to >> >> >> > compete with private insurers, a priority of President Barack >> Obama?s >> >> >> that >> >> >> > is opposed by Republicans. It would provide all Americans with >> health >> >> >> > benefits, penalize those who don?t buy them and bar insurers from >> >> >> limiting >> >> >> > coverage. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > The ?America Health Choices Act,? circulated in Washington late >> >> >> yesterday, >> >> >> > offered the first detailed glimpse of legislation being discussed >> in >> >> >> > Congress. Many of its provisions would expand coverage for >> uninsured >> >> >> > Americans. ?It is the sense of the Senate that Congress should >> >> establish >> >> >> a >> >> >> > means for all Americans to enjoy affordable choices in health >> benefit >> >> >> > plans,? the bill said. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Obama set aside $635 billion in his 2010 budget proposal to act as >> a >> >> >> ?down >> >> >> > payment? on the cost of reconstructing the health-care system and >> >> >> expanding >> >> >> > coverage to the estimated 46 million uninsured Americans. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Kennedy?s draft did not include details of how its proposals would >> be >> >> >> paid >> >> >> > for. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Kennedy?s bill opened with an affirmation of a patient?s rights to >> >> >> > choose >> >> >> > his or her doctor and the importance of the patient-doctor >> >> relationship. >> >> >> > ?Doctors, nurses and other health professionals have the right to >> >> judge >> >> >> what >> >> >> > is best for their patients,? the bill stated. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > America Health Choices Act Provisions >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Government subsidies will be provided to people with income up to >> 500 >> >> >> > percent of the poverty level. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Doctors and hospitals paid at Medicare rates, plus 10 percent. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Medicaid, expanded to cover uninsured people earning up to 150 >> >> >> > percent >> >> >> > of >> >> >> > the poverty level. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Essential? benefits, include hospital care, maternity and newborn >> >> care, >> >> >> > prescription drugs, mental-health and substance-abuse services and >> >> >> doctors? >> >> >> > services. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > The bill establishes protections for ?fair? insurance coverage, >> >> setting >> >> >> > limits on how much premiums can vary. Insurers would be forbidden >> >> >> > from >> >> >> > turning away customers due to pre-existing conditions. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Each health insurer that offers coverage in the individual or >> >> >> > group >> >> >> market >> >> >> > in a state would have to accept every employer and individual in >> the >> >> >> state >> >> >> > that applied for coverage. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Companies that provide coverage for children through their parents >> >> will >> >> >> have >> >> >> > to extend ?dependent? coverage for those children through the age >> of >> >> 26. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > America Health Choices Act Consequences >> >> >> > >> >> >> > 1) Every employer thinking about hiring someone is going to think >> >> twice >> >> >> > about it, then not do it. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > 2) Every employer struggling to maintain jobs in the US with a >> choice >> >> of >> >> >> > outsourcing will have another huge incentive to outsource. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > 3) Many employers struggling to maintain solvency will go bankrupt >> >> after >> >> >> > this bill passes. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > 4) Corporate profits across the board are going to drop. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > 5) The stock market will drop along with corporate profits. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > 6) Health care companies will have an incentive to not offer plans >> in >> >> >> states >> >> >> > with poor demographics. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > 7) Government mandates about how much insurers can charge will >> >> bankrupt >> >> >> > insurers and/or cause rationing of services. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > 8) Businesses will have an incentive to fire workers and instead >> >> >> > offer >> >> >> > contract work to individuals. Banks and financial institutions >> >> >> > will >> >> >> > be >> >> >> among >> >> >> > the first to consider this option. Programmers have another reason >> to >> >> >> start >> >> >> > worrying about their jobs. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > 9) Businesses unable to outsource or make use of contractors will >> >> >> > bear >> >> >> the >> >> >> > brunt of this legislation. The group hardest hit will be retailers >> >> like >> >> >> > Walmart, Target, and Costco, and restaurants like McDonalds and >> Pizza >> >> >> Hut. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > 10) This bill will weigh on business expansion plans. Retail >> >> >> > stores >> >> are >> >> >> > already saturated. This bill provides one more reason for >> businesses >> >> not >> >> >> to >> >> >> > expand further. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Business Owners Should Be Scared To Death >> >> >> > >> >> >> > In general: The bill has a negative effect on hiring, a negative >> >> effect >> >> >> on >> >> >> > business expansion, a negative effect on corporate profits, and it >> >> >> promotes >> >> >> > outsourcing. Moreover, it will delay the recovery of the stock >> market >> >> >> > and >> >> >> it >> >> >> > puts the brunt of the burden on businesses that cannot outsource. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > If you are not scared to death by those consequences, you are not >> >> paying >> >> >> > attention to what is happening. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Requiring businesses to pick up the tab will slow hiring and the >> >> >> recovery. >> >> >> > Monetizing medical expenses will cheapen the dollar. Requiring >> >> taxpayers >> >> >> to >> >> >> > foot the bill will take away from discretionary spending. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > It is axiomatic that someone must pay. There is no such thing as a >> >> free >> >> >> > lunch or free health care either. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > I have come up with 10 easy to see consequences. I am sure there >> are >> >> >> > many >> >> >> > unforeseen consequences, some of which will be even worse. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > For those who want more for their money in these deflationary >> times, >> >> >> > here >> >> >> is >> >> >> > a bonus 11th consequence: It will encourage the employment of >> illegal >> >> >> aliens >> >> >> > under the table paid in cash and all kinds of underground barter >> >> >> > transactions that also will not be taxed. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Standards of Measurement of Good Health Care >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Please consider what Raoul Pal of Spain wrote John Mauldin in the >> >> >> > June >> >> 5 >> >> >> > Frontline Thoughts called The New, New >> >> >> > Normal >> >> >> > . >> >> >> > >> >> >> > In its simplest terms a healthcare system is there to extend the >> >> >> longevity >> >> >> > of live of the population. It is the single best and simplest way >> to >> >> >> judge >> >> >> > it because we can all find examples of where one country is better >> >> than >> >> >> > another but the longevity stats don't lie. When we use that >> framework >> >> >> > the >> >> >> > picture is incredibly different. The US has many of the best >> doctors >> >> and >> >> >> > medical care in the world but it doesn't work for the population >> >> >> > as >> a >> >> >> whole >> >> >> > and therein lies the problem. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > "According to the Economist the total US spend on healthcare is >> 15.4% >> >> of >> >> >> GDP >> >> >> > including both state and private . With that it gets 2.6 doctors >> per >> >> >> 1,000 >> >> >> > people, 3.3 hospital beds and its people live to an average age of >> >> 78.2 >> >> >> > >> >> >> > "UK - spends 8.1% of GDP, gets 2.3 doctors, 4.2 hospital beds and >> >> >> > live >> >> >> > to >> >> >> an >> >> >> > average age of 79.4. So for roughly half the cost their citizens >> >> overall >> >> >> get >> >> >> > about the same benefit in terms of longevity of life. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > "Canada - spends 9.8% of GDP on healthcare, gets 2.1 doctors, 3.6 >> >> >> hospital >> >> >> > beds and live until they are 80.6 yrs >> >> >> > >> >> >> > "Now if we look at the more social model in Europe the results >> become >> >> >> even >> >> >> > more surprising: >> >> >> > >> >> >> > "France - spends 10.5%, 3.4 docs, 7.5 beds and live until they are >> >> 80.6 >> >> >> > >> >> >> > "Spain - spends 8.1% , 3.3 docs , 3.8 beds and live until they are >> 81 >> >> >> > >> >> >> > "As a whole Europe spends 9.6% of GDP on healthcare, has 3.9 >> doctors >> >> per >> >> >> > 1,000 people, 6.6 hospital beds and live until they are 81.15 >> >> >> > years >> >> old. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > "The list goes on. The truth is that in many cases as is pointed >> out >> >> the >> >> >> > healthcare system is better in the US than in some other countries >> >> >> > BUT >> >> >> > US >> >> >> > citizens must therefore get ill more often than any other country >> in >> >> the >> >> >> > West in order to achieve the truly appalling statistic that they >> are >> >> the >> >> >> 41 >> >> >> > longest living nation on earth with France, Spain, Norway, >> >> Switzerland, >> >> >> > Italy, Austria, Andorra, Holland, Greece and Sweden all featuring >> in >> >> the >> >> >> top >> >> >> > 20 longest living nations and the UK and Germany at 22. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > "This is the big failure of the US system. It is unforgivable. You >> >> >> > may >> >> >> get a >> >> >> > better chance of recovering from certain diseases but as a whole >> you >> >> >> > will >> >> >> > die younger in the US than most developed countries. ... Something >> is >> >> >> > severely broken." >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Something Is Severely Broken >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Something is indeed broken and Kennedy's bill sure is not going to >> >> >> > fix >> >> >> it. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > ?America Health Choices Act? is a horrible piece of legislation >> that >> >> >> > does >> >> >> > nothing to reduce costs but instead increases them on businesses. >> >> >> > A >> >> >> better >> >> >> > name for it would be "Delayed Recovery And Outsourcing >> Encouragement >> >> >> > Program" or DRAOEP. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > I tried to come up with a name that would equate to DROPDEAD >> (because >> >> >> that >> >> >> > is what Kennedy's plan says to businesses) but could not quite >> >> >> > make >> >> it. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > If you are a business owner you better be flooding your >> >> representatives >> >> >> with >> >> >> > faxes and phone calls (see Speak >> >> >> > Out!< >> >> >> >> >> >> http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/05/speak-out-audit-fed-then-end-it.html >> >> >> >for >> >> >> > a detailed list of fax numbers) if you know what is good for you, >> >> >> > because I can ensure you, this isn't. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Mike "Mish" Shedlock >> >> >> > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 7:45 AM, Brad Haslett >> >> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> For those of you who would like to know what's in the Obamacare >> >> >> >> bill, >> >> >> >> here's a searchable database - >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://patientsunitednow.com/?q=node/233 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Look at this - >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Sec. 3102 Financial Integrity >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ?(1) In general - A State shall keep an accurate accounting of >> >> >> >> all >> >> >> >> activities, receipts, and expenditures of any Gateway operating >> >> >> >> in >> >> >> >> such State and shall annually submit to the Secretary a report >> >> >> >> concerning such accountings. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ?(2) Investigations - The Secretary may investigate the >> >> >> >> affairs >> >> >> >> of >> >> >> >> a Gateway, may examine the properties and records of a Gateway, >> and >> >> >> >> may require periodical reports in relation to activities >> undertaken >> >> by >> >> >> >> a Gateway. A Gateway shall fully cooperate in any investigation >> >> >> >> conducted under this paragraph. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Remember all the screaming and chest thumping about warrantless >> >> >> >> wiretaps in years gone by? "Gateway" means your doctor. For the >> >> past >> >> >> >> 37 years, I've been required by law to disclose every single >> >> >> >> visit >> >> >> >> to >> >> >> >> a doctor or pharmacist so this is nothing new to me, but if you >> >> >> >> don't >> >> >> >> think giving low level government employees access to your health >> >> care >> >> >> >> records can create problems you've obviously forgotten "Joe the >> >> >> >> Plumbers" personal records being divulged for political purposes. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Don't be fooled by this bill, it is not health insurance. This >> will >> >> >> >> be the creation of a massive bureaucracy. My hangarmate is going >> >> >> >> through this right now for a medical issue he resolved over a >> >> >> >> year >> >> ago >> >> >> >> - an "audit" if you will. If you think the US Post Office and >> >> >> >> the >> >> IRS >> >> >> >> are "mean-and-lean", well run agencies, you'll really love this >> one! >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Care to bet whether this bill will be read before it's voted on? >> >> Time >> >> >> >> to fire-up the phones! >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From flybrad at gmail.com Tue Jun 9 15:06:20 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 14:06:20 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] More GM Silliness In-Reply-To: <4A2E7E9B.7050308@effros.com> References: <400985d70906090521wf519140n34e4c80fc667694a@mail.gmail.com> <4A2E60CF.1050805@effros.com> <400985d70906090703v48745b7cxd8cbec9b73b85eee@mail.gmail.com> <4A2E7E9B.7050308@effros.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906091206v318a4b98kc2d2684a1ff5d3f8@mail.gmail.com> Here's an interesting spin on the new Corvette - http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/automotive_news/4320856.html I practice 'eco-driving' by default (driving like there was an egg between your foot and the gas and brake pedal). My mother let me drive to the airport for flying lessons when I was too young for a driver's license and my initial flight instructor, Norm Lankow, was anal/retentive about being smooth. We'll see who's technology plays out best in the long term. My employer is betting on their experience with the Eaton hybrid trucks they co-developed. I'm betting on straight diesels. Either way, China can produce both vehicles for less with Japanese management practices. Brad On 6/9/09, Bill Effros wrote: > As I understand it, Toyota engineers are the only ones who have really > figured out how to build them. Everybody else rents their technology -- > which Toyota only sells 1 generation behind what they're currently > offering. My Toyota is generation III. It will get 45 mpg at 75 w A/C, > and has a 17.4 gallon tank. It weighs 3500 lbs as I remember, and gas > mileage doesn't seem to change as more people and cargo get in. The > electric motor will kick in at 90 mph if the computer thinks that's what > my driving style wants. It learns your style as you drive it. > > It's really a fascinating car, and it doesn't work anything like what > you've read "The electric motor gets it rolling, then the little gas > motor takes over..." > > I get an honest 38.5 city or country. Traffic or no traffic. Loaded or > empty. Summer or Winter. The only thing that hurts gas mileage is a > tank full of tiny short trips. (The system has to adjust itself using > the motor-- just as all systems are go, you pull into a parking lot, and > by the time you drive again it has to adjust all over again. Milage > will go as low as 33.5) > > I owned a diesel car, my Kubota is a diesel, and I've driven a lot of > diesels in Europe. I do like them. But I think the Japanese will get > better and better at the kind of hybrids they have settled on, and I > think they rejected the Volt concept years ago. > > I put an electric motor on my boat to experiment with the Volt concept. > I have never used my motor very much. I have a little Honda generator > on board. The jury is still out. > > Anybody know how the Toyotas start their gas motors? You never hear a > starter motor, and the whole thing is so silent you don't know when you > are on electric and when on gas. > > B. > > > > Brad Haslett wrote: >> Bill, >> >> Like a lot of folk's car purchases, this was an impulse buy for me. >> The original plan was to drive the 15 year-old Lexus (gussied-up >> Camry) that I've had for 10 years another 5 years and 100K miles (it >> had 152K already). It had a dozen or so "nit-noy" squawks but nothing >> serious. My oldest son, a VW and diesel fan, came to visit and we >> test drove the re-introduced turbo-diesel on a whim. I fell in love >> and the rest is history. Hyundai has developed a hybrid drivetrain >> (or maybe they just bought it) and the original plan was to wait for >> its introduction in a Sonata and see how well it compared to the >> others. The one thing I'd forgotten about owning a diesel was how >> messy the refueling is (I carry handi-wipes in the back). Other than >> that, I'm extremely pleased with the car. We drove to my parents last >> weekend and got 42+ mpg at 70 mph with the A/C going and I'm getting >> about 34 mpg around town. I love the way the low-end torque works in >> traffic and the 6-speed auto transmission is smoother than anything >> I've ever driven. Ask me again at 100K miles if I'm still happy. The >> Germans build some great driving cars but they can figure out >> electricity for shit! Electrical gremlins have been the downfall of >> every German car I've owned, including my old Mercedes diesel. >> >> The GM Volt will be a flop. But guess what? We're paying for it, or >> to quote Sarah Palin, "the Chinese are actually buying GM since >> they're loaning us the money". >> >> What a mess! >> >> Brad >> >> >> On 6/9/09, Bill Effros wrote: >> >>> Oh, please.... >>> >>> Brad, >>> >>> The problem with the Volt is that it won't work! All the car companies >>> with decent engineers already know this, and all management should know >>> it too. >>> >>> I drive a Camry Hybrid. I've also owned diesels. The Camry Hybrid is >>> the best car I've ever owned because the efficiency is maintained by an >>> on-board computer programmed to solve non-linear mathematical problems. >>> It's an elegant solution, and Toyota figured out how to make it work. >>> >>> The Volt tries to solve the problem in a linear fashion that everyone >>> should know can't possibly work. >>> >>> The Camry is a great car because there are no compromises (except trunk >>> space) for the fuel efficiency. It is essentially the small Lexus -- >>> extremely quiet, with a comparatively small battery, and an efficient >>> charging mechanism that runs all the appliances electrically, not >>> mechanically. The brilliance is in the software that keeps the battery >>> charged with the least use of the engine. >>> >>> The premise of the Volt is that most trips in cars are less than 40 >>> miles, and the huge battery can be charged at home for most uses without >>> every resorting to the little on-board generator. >>> >>> But not at night! -- at night you have to turn on your headlights, and >>> that saps the battery -- you won't get 40 miles at night. >>> >>> And not in winter! -- in winter you want heat, and that saps the battery >>> -- you won't get 40 miles in the winter. >>> >>> And not in summer! -- in summer you want A/C and that saps the battery >>> -- you won't get 40 miles in the summer. >>> >>> And not if you listen to the radio. >>> >>> And not if you need to use your windshield wipers. >>> >>> And not if you get stuck in traffic. >>> >>> And not if you have more than 1 person in the car. >>> >>> And...get the idea? >>> >>> So, at that point, the on-board generator turns on to drive the wheels >>> directly. It does not attempt to recharge the battery -- you must wait >>> until you can plug it in, and not use the car for six and a half hours-- >>> it just drives the wheels. >>> >>> I would guess you have to turn off the A/C at that point, and the >>> lights? and the windshield wipers? >>> >>> The generator does not seem to be computer controlled. Once the battery >>> goes below 30% the generator comes on and stays on. It only has a 5 or >>> 6 gallon gas tank. That's supposed to be good for 400 miles -- but only >>> if you top it off every time you use it, and run it until it is >>> completely out of gas, and don't use any of the output for anything else >>> than driving the wheels in overdrive without any on board electrical >>> appliances in use. >>> >>> This car will be one colossal pain to drive--you will never take it on >>> long trips--If you routinely need a car for more than 20 miles a day, >>> this car is not for you...it's a bad joke. >>> >>> I love my Camry because there are no compromises (except for that small >>> truck, which I can live with.) It is large, comfortable, powerful, >>> quick, and most important to me because I drive a lot, it has a 550 mile >>> range doing 90 miles an hour in 100 degree heat. (Actual -- Texas) >>> >>> The Japanese must be laughing their asses off. >>> >>> B. >>> >>> >>> >>> Brad Haslett wrote: >>> >>>> This whole GM thing gets sillier by the day. So the 'gubment' is >>>> going to give $7500 tax credits to people who buy Chevy Volts. Forty >>>> per cent of US citizens don't pay federal taxes so this is meaningless >>>> to them. The people who would be most motivated to buy a Volt >>>> because of a tax credit are those who pay more than $7500 in federal >>>> income taxes (see article below). Chances are, these are the same >>>> people who currently drive Suburbans because they can afford it and >>>> that's what they want to drive. Any marginal MBA student can spot the >>>> flaw in the "New GM's" theory immediately. But remember, the "car >>>> czar" is a 31 year-old with no automobile manufacturing or selling >>>> experience that "almost" has a law degree from Yale. >>>> >>>> Then there is this - only 42% of GM owners will buy another one - >>>> >>>> http://tinyurl.com/kq6wzm >>>> >>>> That doesn't leave much of a market for GM. Don't think for a moment >>>> that Hyundai in Alabama, or Toyota in MS, TX., and KY, or Honda in >>>> Ohio, and all the other "American" car companies can't build an auto >>>> to compete with the Volt if indeed a market develops for such a car. >>>> And then there's Volkswagen in Chattanooga, TN coming on line. What's >>>> so special about hybrids? My 1980 diesel VW Rabbit got better >>>> mileage. My new mid-size station wagon (which came with a $1300 tax >>>> credit) does just as well with a whole lot more acceleration and a lot >>>> less noise. You'd think they would be flying out the door. They're >>>> not, and neither will Chevy Volts. >>>> >>>> Silliness! >>>> >>>> Brad >>>> >>>> ---------------------- >>>> >>>> Car Quandary >>>> Political and economic contradictions of the 'new GM' >>>> >>>> Tuesday, June 9, 2009 >>>> >>>> POOR BOB LUTZ. The vice chairman of General Motors loves "muscle cars" >>>> like the Camaro. He knows that, unless fuel prices go much higher and >>>> stay there, the American market for big cars is likely to exceed the >>>> market for small cars. Yet he has to build a little four-seat plug-in >>>> electric hybrid called the Chevrolet Volt, roll it out next year and >>>> try to sell it for $40,000 (not counting a likely $7,500 federal tax >>>> rebate). It doesn't make much sense economically, and the few thousand >>>> Volts that GM plans to produce at first won't dent U.S. carbon >>>> emissions much either. But, as Mr. Lutz told The Post's Michael Leahy, >>>> he feels pressure from Washington to do something spectacular on the >>>> electric car front. The Volt, he says, "is an important symbol. We >>>> need it. It has a chance to change our image." >>>> >>>> When GM was still a privately owned company, this latest episode of >>>> Detroit agonistes would be no one's problem but GM's and its >>>> stockholders'. But soon, if they become owners of 60 percent of the >>>> company, taxpayers could be on the hook for the Volt. And Mr. Lutz's >>>> quandary epitomizes the political and economic contradictions of the >>>> "new GM." The taxpayers' interest is to get GM out of the red and back >>>> in private hands as soon as possible, consistent with environmental >>>> and fuel-efficiency standards. By that logic, the automaker's only >>>> goal would be to make what people want to buy; expensive "image" >>>> projects such as the Volt would wait. Yet the political pressures that >>>> drove GM to build the Volt in the first place -- namely, Congress's >>>> demand for a U.S.-made answer to the Toyota Prius -- are stronger than >>>> ever now that the government is about to own the company. So GM will >>>> build the Volt, even if it loses money, taxpayer money. >>>> >>>> And members of Congress will delve into other aspects of the car >>>> companies' business. Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the >>>> House Banking Committee, has already prevailed on GM to extend the >>>> life of a plant in his district. GM and Chrysler dealers, thousands of >>>> whom are set to close in order to streamline the companies' sales >>>> efforts, have flocked to Capitol Hill demanding relief. In response, >>>> House members of both parties have introduced a bill that would block >>>> the closure of GM and Chrysler dealerships. If this proposal ever >>>> makes it to his desk, President Obama should veto it. America can have >>>> nationalized auto companies with a chance, however slim, of someday >>>> turning a profit. Or it can have nationalized firms subject to >>>> constant political tinkering. It can't have both. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> > From flybrad at gmail.com Tue Jun 9 15:40:47 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 14:40:47 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Tipping Point! Message-ID: <400985d70906091240ud6a959am5c3699f072b7f43d@mail.gmail.com> OK, this is it for me. I've read "1984", "Mein Kampf", "The Little Red Book", "Das Capital". "This takes the cake" (forthoseofyouunfamilarwiththeexpressionthiswasafunraisingtechniquethatschoolsusedtoraisemoneybyplayingmusicalchairswithacakeastheprize). So now we're going to "PayGo". I call BULLSHIT! We can't possibly "pay as we go". Forgive if from this point forward if I get a little "hard-edged". No, FUCK forgiveness and my apologies to Bill E for my promises to keep this blog family suitable. This is NUTS! If sane and rational people don't respond to this then it will go the way of "it's only a shower". I don't want to go to my grave like my old Nazi drinking buddies did saying, "we didn't know". BULLSHIT! You knew, you either didn't pay attention or you didn't care. Bullshit! Pay as you go? Goebbels wasn't this good. Stop it! Stop it now! Write! Write your Congressman, your Senator, your Governor. Write anyone who will listen. This is BULLSHIT! Don't be fooled by this rhetoric! We are spending more money than any government in the history of mankind. Don't use the lame excuse 10 years from now that, "I didn't know". Brad ------------------ Obama pitches pay-as-you-go plan for Congress By BEN FELLER, Associated Press Writer Ben Feller, Associated Press Writer 1 hr 25 mins ago WASHINGTON ? President Barack Obama on Tuesday challenged Congress to force itself to pay for new spending as it goes rather than sink the nation deeper into a debt, calling it a matter of public responsibility. Republicans lashed back that Obama is no voice of fiscal restraint as the deficit soars. The president's plan would require Congress to pay for new increases to federal benefit programs such as health care by raising taxes or coming up with budget cuts ? a "pay-as-you-go" system that would have the force of law. Under the proposal, if new spending or tax reductions are not offset, there would be automatic cuts in so-called mandatory programs ? although Social Security payments and some other programs would be exempt. Not noted by the president: Tuesday's plan is a watered-down version of the so-called "PAYGO" rules proposed just last month in his own budget plan. That version would have required, on average, all affected legislation to be paid for in the very first year. The new plan only requires such legislation to be financed over the coming decade. That mirrors congressional rules and reflects the likelihood that health care reform will add to the deficit in the early years. Obama said the principle is simple: Congress can only spend a dollar if it saves a dollar somewhere else. "It is no coincidence that this rule was in place when we moved from record deficits to record surpluses in the 1990s ? and that when this rule was abandoned, we returned to record deficits that doubled the national debt," Obama said, flanked at the White House by supportive Democratic lawmakers. "Entitlement increases and tax cuts need to be paid for," he said. "They're not free, and borrowing to finance them is not a sustainable long-term policy." Republican leaders, critical of the Obama-championed $787 billion stimulus package and other deficit spending, called the president disingenuous. "It's as if the administration and these Democrat leaders are living in an alternate universe," said House Republican Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia. "The quickest way to save money is to stop recklessly spending it." Obama's call for binding legislation comes as a reward to moderate-to-conservative "Blue Dog" Democrats who are big believers in pay-as-you go. Their votes were crucial to passing a congressional budget blueprint that generally follows Obama's budget. The House and Senate already have their own PAYGO rules, but have routinely found ways around them. For example, a bill to effectively double GI Bill education benefits was enacted last year because of a loophole in congressional rules. Obama's "PAYGO" plan would also require future tax cuts to be financed by tax increases elsewhere in the code, though exceptions are made for extending President George W. Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, as well as other tax cuts that are scheduled to expire. The federal deficit is on pace to explode past $1.8 trillion this year, more than four times last year's all-time high. The deficit figures flow from the deep recession, the Wall Street bailout and the cost of the economic stimulus bill. Obama has defended the massive stimulus plan as essential to helping pump some life back in the economy, one that is still shedding jobs but showing more signs of life in recent weeks. "The fact is, there are few who aren't distressed by deficits," Obama said. He said restoring a pay-as-you-go method under law would force lawmakers to deal not just with the politics and crises of the day, but also remain fixed on the nation's long-term financial health. ___ Associated Press writer Andrew Taylor contributed to this story. From sanderico1 at gmail.com Tue Jun 9 21:45:35 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 20:45:35 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Tipping Point! In-Reply-To: <400985d70906091240ud6a959am5c3699f072b7f43d@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906091240ud6a959am5c3699f072b7f43d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0906091845s1b83a2a0l3a73f0e70630a91a@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Good grief, do you suppose the man is bi-polar??? Rik On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > OK, this is it for me. I've read "1984", "Mein Kampf", "The Little > Red Book", "Das Capital". > > "This takes the cake" > > > (forthoseofyouunfamilarwiththeexpressionthiswasafunraisingtechniquethatschoolsusedtoraisemoneybyplayingmusicalchairswithacakeastheprize). > > So now we're going to "PayGo". I call BULLSHIT! We can't possibly > "pay as we go". Forgive if from this point forward if I get a little > "hard-edged". No, FUCK forgiveness and my apologies to Bill E for my > promises to keep this blog family suitable. This is NUTS! If sane > and rational people don't respond to this then it will go the way of > "it's only a shower". I don't want to go to my grave like my old Nazi > drinking buddies did saying, "we didn't know". BULLSHIT! You knew, > you either didn't pay attention or you didn't care. > > Bullshit! > > Pay as you go? Goebbels wasn't this good. Stop it! Stop it now! > Write! Write your Congressman, your Senator, your Governor. Write > anyone who will listen. This is BULLSHIT! > > Don't be fooled by this rhetoric! > > We are spending more money than any government in the history of > mankind. Don't use the lame excuse 10 years from now that, "I didn't > know". > > Brad > > ------------------ > > Obama pitches pay-as-you-go plan for Congress > By BEN FELLER, Associated Press Writer Ben Feller, Associated Press > Writer 1 hr 25 mins ago > > WASHINGTON ? President Barack Obama on Tuesday challenged Congress to > force itself to pay for new spending as it goes rather than sink the > nation deeper into a debt, calling it a matter of public > responsibility. Republicans lashed back that Obama is no voice of > fiscal restraint as the deficit soars. > > The president's plan would require Congress to pay for new increases > to federal benefit programs such as health care by raising taxes or > coming up with budget cuts ? a "pay-as-you-go" system that would have > the force of law. Under the proposal, if new spending or tax > reductions are not offset, there would be automatic cuts in so-called > mandatory programs ? although Social Security payments and some other > programs would be exempt. > > Not noted by the president: Tuesday's plan is a watered-down version > of the so-called "PAYGO" rules proposed just last month in his own > budget plan. > > That version would have required, on average, all affected legislation > to be paid for in the very first year. The new plan only requires such > legislation to be financed over the coming decade. That mirrors > congressional rules and reflects the likelihood that health care > reform will add to the deficit in the early years. > > Obama said the principle is simple: Congress can only spend a dollar > if it saves a dollar somewhere else. > > "It is no coincidence that this rule was in place when we moved from > record deficits to record surpluses in the 1990s ? and that when this > rule was abandoned, we returned to record deficits that doubled the > national debt," Obama said, flanked at the White House by supportive > Democratic lawmakers. > > "Entitlement increases and tax cuts need to be paid for," he said. > "They're not free, and borrowing to finance them is not a sustainable > long-term policy." > > Republican leaders, critical of the Obama-championed $787 billion > stimulus package and other deficit spending, called the president > disingenuous. > > "It's as if the administration and these Democrat leaders are living > in an alternate universe," said House Republican Whip Eric Cantor of > Virginia. "The quickest way to save money is to stop recklessly > spending it." > > Obama's call for binding legislation comes as a reward to > moderate-to-conservative "Blue Dog" Democrats who are big believers in > pay-as-you go. Their votes were crucial to passing a congressional > budget blueprint that generally follows Obama's budget. > > The House and Senate already have their own PAYGO rules, but have > routinely found ways around them. For example, a bill to effectively > double GI Bill education benefits was enacted last year because of a > loophole in congressional rules. > > Obama's "PAYGO" plan would also require future tax cuts to be financed > by tax increases elsewhere in the code, though exceptions are made for > extending President George W. Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, as well > as other tax cuts that are scheduled to expire. > > The federal deficit is on pace to explode past $1.8 trillion this > year, more than four times last year's all-time high. > > The deficit figures flow from the deep recession, the Wall Street > bailout and the cost of the economic stimulus bill. Obama has defended > the massive stimulus plan as essential to helping pump some life back > in the economy, one that is still shedding jobs but showing more signs > of life in recent weeks. > > "The fact is, there are few who aren't distressed by deficits," Obama > said. He said restoring a pay-as-you-go method under law would force > lawmakers to deal not just with the politics and crises of the day, > but also remain fixed on the nation's long-term financial health. > > ___ > > Associated Press writer Andrew Taylor contributed to this story. > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090609/9688bbec/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Tue Jun 9 21:53:24 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 20:53:24 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Tipping Point! In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0906091845s1b83a2a0l3a73f0e70630a91a@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906091240ud6a959am5c3699f072b7f43d@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906091845s1b83a2a0l3a73f0e70630a91a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906091853q59cc8027je32ad53f8bb0a070@mail.gmail.com> Rik, There's a couple of good books in my library that might shed some light on this, I'm not sure which to re-read first, "Life and Death in Shanghai" or "Inside the Third Reich". In both narratives, life became surreal. I find myself reading the China Daily more these days for objective reporting instead of pure entertainment. What the hell is going on in this country? Brad On 6/9/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Good grief, do you suppose the man is bi-polar??? > > Rik > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> OK, this is it for me. I've read "1984", "Mein Kampf", "The Little >> Red Book", "Das Capital". >> >> "This takes the cake" >> >> >> (forthoseofyouunfamilarwiththeexpressionthiswasafunraisingtechniquethatschoolsusedtoraisemoneybyplayingmusicalchairswithacakeastheprize). >> >> So now we're going to "PayGo". I call BULLSHIT! We can't possibly >> "pay as we go". Forgive if from this point forward if I get a little >> "hard-edged". No, FUCK forgiveness and my apologies to Bill E for my >> promises to keep this blog family suitable. This is NUTS! If sane >> and rational people don't respond to this then it will go the way of >> "it's only a shower". I don't want to go to my grave like my old Nazi >> drinking buddies did saying, "we didn't know". BULLSHIT! You knew, >> you either didn't pay attention or you didn't care. >> >> Bullshit! >> >> Pay as you go? Goebbels wasn't this good. Stop it! Stop it now! >> Write! Write your Congressman, your Senator, your Governor. Write >> anyone who will listen. This is BULLSHIT! >> >> Don't be fooled by this rhetoric! >> >> We are spending more money than any government in the history of >> mankind. Don't use the lame excuse 10 years from now that, "I didn't >> know". >> >> Brad >> >> ------------------ >> >> Obama pitches pay-as-you-go plan for Congress >> By BEN FELLER, Associated Press Writer Ben Feller, Associated Press >> Writer 1 hr 25 mins ago >> >> WASHINGTON ? President Barack Obama on Tuesday challenged Congress to >> force itself to pay for new spending as it goes rather than sink the >> nation deeper into a debt, calling it a matter of public >> responsibility. Republicans lashed back that Obama is no voice of >> fiscal restraint as the deficit soars. >> >> The president's plan would require Congress to pay for new increases >> to federal benefit programs such as health care by raising taxes or >> coming up with budget cuts ? a "pay-as-you-go" system that would have >> the force of law. Under the proposal, if new spending or tax >> reductions are not offset, there would be automatic cuts in so-called >> mandatory programs ? although Social Security payments and some other >> programs would be exempt. >> >> Not noted by the president: Tuesday's plan is a watered-down version >> of the so-called "PAYGO" rules proposed just last month in his own >> budget plan. >> >> That version would have required, on average, all affected legislation >> to be paid for in the very first year. The new plan only requires such >> legislation to be financed over the coming decade. That mirrors >> congressional rules and reflects the likelihood that health care >> reform will add to the deficit in the early years. >> >> Obama said the principle is simple: Congress can only spend a dollar >> if it saves a dollar somewhere else. >> >> "It is no coincidence that this rule was in place when we moved from >> record deficits to record surpluses in the 1990s ? and that when this >> rule was abandoned, we returned to record deficits that doubled the >> national debt," Obama said, flanked at the White House by supportive >> Democratic lawmakers. >> >> "Entitlement increases and tax cuts need to be paid for," he said. >> "They're not free, and borrowing to finance them is not a sustainable >> long-term policy." >> >> Republican leaders, critical of the Obama-championed $787 billion >> stimulus package and other deficit spending, called the president >> disingenuous. >> >> "It's as if the administration and these Democrat leaders are living >> in an alternate universe," said House Republican Whip Eric Cantor of >> Virginia. "The quickest way to save money is to stop recklessly >> spending it." >> >> Obama's call for binding legislation comes as a reward to >> moderate-to-conservative "Blue Dog" Democrats who are big believers in >> pay-as-you go. Their votes were crucial to passing a congressional >> budget blueprint that generally follows Obama's budget. >> >> The House and Senate already have their own PAYGO rules, but have >> routinely found ways around them. For example, a bill to effectively >> double GI Bill education benefits was enacted last year because of a >> loophole in congressional rules. >> >> Obama's "PAYGO" plan would also require future tax cuts to be financed >> by tax increases elsewhere in the code, though exceptions are made for >> extending President George W. Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, as well >> as other tax cuts that are scheduled to expire. >> >> The federal deficit is on pace to explode past $1.8 trillion this >> year, more than four times last year's all-time high. >> >> The deficit figures flow from the deep recession, the Wall Street >> bailout and the cost of the economic stimulus bill. Obama has defended >> the massive stimulus plan as essential to helping pump some life back >> in the economy, one that is still shedding jobs but showing more signs >> of life in recent weeks. >> >> "The fact is, there are few who aren't distressed by deficits," Obama >> said. He said restoring a pay-as-you-go method under law would force >> lawmakers to deal not just with the politics and crises of the day, >> but also remain fixed on the nation's long-term financial health. >> >> ___ >> >> Associated Press writer Andrew Taylor contributed to this story. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From ekroposki at charter.net Wed Jun 10 07:10:36 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 07:10:36 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Rik will enjoy this guy Message-ID: Rik, I think you might enjoy this guy. The guys posting it to utube are under the impression that it might be removed: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpQOCvthw-o Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090610/6b08f314/attachment-0001.html From ekroposki at charter.net Wed Jun 10 07:21:10 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 07:21:10 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] And this for Brad to analysis and fuss over Message-ID: <3ED528C072E146FEA11D18E03C973DB0@YOURB88038198E> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbvXH05dot0 Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090610/03a06b19/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Jun 10 07:40:09 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 06:40:09 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] And this for Brad to analysis and fuss over In-Reply-To: <3ED528C072E146FEA11D18E03C973DB0@YOURB88038198E> References: <3ED528C072E146FEA11D18E03C973DB0@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <400985d70906100440l14357c5en11ae70593b4833ad@mail.gmail.com> Ed, The American media is bankrupt, both financially and morally. You can get more objective news coverage from Pravda and the China Daily. Dr. King's dream of having his children judged by the content of their heart and not the color of their skin has died in the MSM. China is laughing - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUl9DedlQJw&feature=player_embedded I'll be there in three weeks and will let you know how much fun it is to be the butt of the joke. The essence of the reporters thesis in the video you posted is that Obama has brought us new respect in the world. That's the big lie! The Chinese are laughing at us out loud, unusual for their culture. The Europeans are muted for now, but that won't last long either. Maybe the Muslim world takes Obama seriously but I doubt it - they see weakness and sooner or later, they'll pounce. God be with Israel. Brad On 6/10/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbvXH05dot0 > > > Ed K From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Jun 10 08:34:07 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 07:34:07 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Debt Message-ID: <400985d70906100534x70651f7cy9068852233f57022@mail.gmail.com> There's nothing new here you didn't already know - http://tinyurl.com/llwtha I think the next few weeks are perilous. The power to turn this train wreck around lies in the hands of the Blue Dogs. If they don't come to their senses, 2010 may be too late and 2012 almost certainly is. Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Jun 10 13:08:42 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:08:42 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Them Jews Message-ID: <400985d70906101008s25fe856u409919ff64c975e5@mail.gmail.com> He's back! In case you've forgotten his message, here's a quick video review - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2EVd9WDio0&feature=player_embedded Dear Leader only spent 20 years listening to this but never heard any of the "inflammatory" sermons. Now this (see below). Brad dailypress.com/news/dp-local_wright_0610jun10,0,7603283.story dailypress.com Rev. Wright says he doesn't regret severed relationship with president By DAVID SQUIRES 247-4639 June 10, 2009 HAMPTON ? Click here to find out more! The Rev. Jeremiah Wright says he does not feel any regrets over his severed relationship with President Barack Obama, a former member of the Chicago church in which Wright was the longtime pastor. Wright also said that he had not spoken to his former church member since Obama became president, implying that the White House won't allow Obama to talk to him. He did not indicate whether he had tried to reach Obama. "Regret for what... that the media went back five, seven, 10 years and spent $4,000 buying 20 years worth of sermons to hear what I've been preaching for 20 years? "Regret for preaching like I've been preaching for 50 years? Absolutely none," Wright said. Wright said that when he went to the polls, he did not hold any grudge against Obama. "Of course I voted for him; he's my son. I'm proud of him," Wright said. "I've got five biological kids. They all make mistakes and bad choices. I haven't stopped loving any of them. "He made mistakes. He made bad choices. I've got kids who listen to their friends. He listened to those around him. I did not disown him." Asked if he had spoken to the President, Wright said: "Them Jews aren't going to let him talk to me. I told my baby daughter, that he'll talk to me in five years when he's a lame duck, or in eight years when he's out of office. ... "They will not let him to talk to somebody who calls a spade what it is. ... I said from the beginning: He's a politician; I'm a pastor. He's got to do what politicians do." Wright also said Obama should have sent a U.S. delegation to the World Conference on Racism held recently in Geneva, Switzerland, but that the president did not do so for fear of offending Jews and Israel. "Ethic cleansing is going on in Gaza. Ethnic cleansing of the Zionist is a sin and a crime against humanity, and they don't want Barack talking like that because that's anti-Israel," Wright said. Wright is in Hampton this week attending Hampton University's 95th Annual Ministers Conference. The son of a pastor, Wright said he has attended the conference since he was a child ? though he was not spotted at the conference in 2008 during the heat of the debate over comments he made that many in the media branded racially divisive. Perhaps without the Wright controversy, the issue of race might not have become a part of the 2008 Presidential campaign. After the initial rounds of the controversy, Obama made his famous speech in Philadelphia on race relations, in which he said he could no more disown Wright than his own grandmother. But the issue heated up after more comments by Wright at the National Press Club and from other controversial speakers at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. Obama eventually distanced himself from the church. Copyright ? 2009, Newport News, Va., Daily Press From ekroposki at charter.net Wed Jun 10 15:56:02 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:56:02 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] In Chuck Schumers state? Message-ID: <6E489E45721246A08757FE21D8065CAB@YOURB88038198E> Read: http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/08/revolt-could-imperil-democratic-control-of-senate/?hp Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090610/06189085/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Jun 10 17:34:51 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:34:51 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] In Chuck Schumers state? In-Reply-To: <6E489E45721246A08757FE21D8065CAB@YOURB88038198E> References: <6E489E45721246A08757FE21D8065CAB@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <400985d70906101434h76aa0a44ne3de8e6eff4dc177@mail.gmail.com> Ed, This may not last long, both of these guys look like losers. But, there does seem to be a mood swing in NY. The speculation is Rudy will run for governor. What's interesting is how the NY Times handled these two when they got into trouble as Democrats. They virtually ignored them. The NYT's is for all intents and purposes a house organ for the Democrat party. Here's what another paper had to say about Monserrate - http://tinyurl.com/ce4hf8 Sounds to me like he'll be toast soon enough. The GOP has enough problems without taking on these two. On the national level, the GOP has a really deep bench with a lot of promising talent. I'm really pulling for Eric Cantor but I just made another donation to SarahPac and also donated to her legal defense fund. She's driving the left nuts but she's also causing great consternation at GOP national. Good. Maybe she can pin a few GOP hides on the wall in DC like she did in Juneau. Steele I'm not so sure about, he's a nice guy but I'm not sure he's up to the job. He sure has made a lot of early mistakes. Your Gov sounds good too, what are his chances? Brad On 6/10/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > Read: > > http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/08/revolt-could-imperil-democratic-control-of-senate/?hp > > Ed K From flybrad at gmail.com Thu Jun 11 11:30:16 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 10:30:16 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Reading Comprehension Message-ID: <400985d70906110830h3b8fd8b9idb8d363c81264e3d@mail.gmail.com> Help me out here, I'm struggling with this article - New jobless claims drop to 601K; retail sales rise By CHRISTOPHER S. RUGABER, AP Economics Writer Christopher S. Rugaber, Ap Economics Writer 9 mins ago WASHINGTON ? The number of newly laid-off Americans filing jobless claims fell more than expected last week and retail sales grew in May for the first time in three months. But a rise in the number of people continuing to receive jobless aid signaled that an economic recovery is still far off. The Labor Department said Thursday that initial claims for unemployment benefits fell last week by 24,000 to a seasonally adjusted 601,000. That's below analysts' estimates of 615,000. -- so, the way I understand this, the actual number of unemployed didn't actually drop, it rose -- Still, the number of people claiming benefits for more than a week rose by 59,000 to more than 6.8 million, the highest on records dating to 1967. The department also revised last week's data on continuing claims, replacing what had been a drop of 15,000 with an increase of 6,000. -- OK, so the headline is a bit misleading, the number of jobless actually rose by 59K -- That means continuing claims have set records for 19 straight weeks. The data lag initial claims by a week. Retail sales rose for the first time in three months in May, as a rebound in demand at auto dealerships and gas stations helped offset weakness at department stores. The Commerce Department said retail sales increased by 0.5 percent last month, in line with economists' expectations. It was the largest increase since sales rose 1.7 percent in January following six straight declines. -- forgive me for asking a stupid question, but didn't gas prices just take a substantial price increase? Was this "rebound in demand" an increase in gallons or dollars? (I know the answer and can reference you to the WSJ but I'm too lazy). Offset weakness at department stores? Just a hunch here, but could gas prices have risen on inelastic demand but department store prices have fallen on very elastic demand? (I know the answer to that too, my wife has been shopping like crazy and having a ball buying expensive dresses 10 cents on the dollar) One more stupid idea, did sales at car dealerships rise because closed dealerships dump their inventory? Just asking. -- Excluding autos, retail sales also grew 0.5 percent in May, better than the 0.2 percent gain that economists had expected. -- didn't I just read that auto sales increased, and gas prices rose? Help me, I'm confused -- Wall Street welcomed the drop in new jobless claims and growth in retail sales. The Dow Jones industrial average added about 75 points in morning trading, and broader indices also rose. -- growth in retail sales? I thought department store sales were down. What did I miss? Duh! Gas prices. -- Consumers may be spending a bit more and layoffs may be slowing, but companies are reluctant to hire amid the longest recession since World War II. That makes it harder for the unemployed to find work. -- longest since WW2? I'll have to check on that and get back to you. The late 80's was a long time ago and I've mostly forgotten about it but for the part about 21% interest rates and 14% inflation. -- Jobless claims are a measure of the pace of layoffs and are seen as a timely, if volatile, indicator of the economy's health. -- Define volatile. Does that mean unreliable? So, it could mean "happy days are here again" or "shit is about to hit the fan". The four-week average of claims, which smooths out fluctuations, fell to 621,750, down from a high of about 658,000 in early April. Many economists see the decline as a sign that layoffs have peaked and the recession is bottoming out. -- layoffs peaked? Isn't 'peaked' a past tense word? Peaked compared to what time frame? Does the writer have a crystal ball? Doesn't the writer really mean (assuming he/she knows, that the rate has peaked, not the actual numbers? -- Still, the levels are far above what is customary in a healthy economy. Initial claims stood at 388,000 a year ago. -- Oh my. Isn't the important metric the new jobs versus claims? You know, "created or saved". I'm losing it! -- The department said last week that companies eliminated a net total of 345,000 jobs in May. While steep, that's about half the monthly average of jobs lost in the first quarter. -- have we peaked or not? -- Yet the unemployment rate jumped to 9.4 percent in May, a 25-year high, as hundreds of thousands of people entered the labor market and began looking for work but couldn't find it, the department said. -- Yet? Yet according to what? I thought the stimuli was supposed to cap at 8.5%. -- As college graduates and other new entrants start searching for a dwindling number of jobs, economists expect the unemployment rate to rise even as layoffs subside. -- Damn it! I'm really confused now, I thought we peaked! -- Some economists project the rate could near 11 percent by the middle of next year. And many families are saving more as they deal with layoff fears, as well as shrunken home equity and retirement accounts. -- 11%? How the hell can we 'peak' if were going from 9.4% to 11%? I'm confused! -- Because rising gasoline prices aided last month's retail sales gain, "a meaningful consumer recovery remains some way off," Paul Dales, U.S. economist at Capital Economics in Toronto, wrote in a research note. "It usually takes a few months for households to curtail their discretionary spending in response to the higher cost of gas." -- Oh Shit! Gasoline prices are rising? Could that be responsible for the "increase in demand" measured in dollars, not gallons. Oh Dear I'm so confused! -- Also Thursday, the Commerce Department said businesses cut inventories 1.1 percent in April as they struggle to get stockpiles more in line with falling sales. Inventories have fallen for eight straight months, the longest stretch since there were 15 consecutive declines in 2001-2002, a period that covered the last recession. -- I thought demand was rising, maybe I should go back and re-read the data. -- Troubles in the automotive sector could cause unexpected fluctuations in jobless claims. General Motors Corp. filed for bankruptcy protection June 1, joining Chrysler LLC, which filed April 30. GM said it will close about a dozen plants as part of its restructuring. The closings, which will take place through the end of 2010, will cost up to 20,000 workers their jobs. In addition, the company said Monday that it plans to cut a production shift at a plant in Wentzville, Mo., in August, resulting in up to 900 layoffs. -- er, I drove by that plant last weekend on the way to Six Flags. It's shuttered. Maybe they got better data than I do, I'm just sayin' ... -- Among the states, Connecticut had the largest increase in claims of 816, followed by Louisiana, Tennessee, Arizona and Nebraska. The state data lag initial claims by a week. Florida had the largest drop in claims of 6,655, which it attributed to fewer layoffs in the construction, service and manufacturing industries. The next largest decreases were in Illinois, Michigan, California, and Texas. _____ AP Economics Writer Martin Crutsinger contributed to this report. I'll be the first to admit, I sucked at math in HS. Thank goodness for the SRA reading program to compensate on the SAT and ACT tests. Or, am I just smoking crack and suffering from a faulty memory? The USA Today is written at the sixth-grade level. AP? This is starting to worry me - I can't make sense of newspapers that my 7 year-old daughter will understand in 5 years. Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Thu Jun 11 11:49:24 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 10:49:24 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Put The Heat On CBS (full list of sponsors at the end) Message-ID: <400985d70906110849y46738d8eg23baa734f670ab22@mail.gmail.com> Dear Mr. Brad Haslett, Thank you for contacting Lexus Customer Satisfaction. We are dedicated to providing superior service. Lexus is sensitive to the opinions of its customers, and regrets The David Letterman Show has offended you. The advertising was never intended to depict a negative or controversial situation. We respect your honest feedback, and have documented your comments for consideration with future advertisements. If you require further assistance, please respond to this e-mail, or contact Lexus Customer Satisfaction at 1-800-255-3987, Monday through Friday, 5:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., or Saturday, 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Pacific Time. Sincerely, Walter Castellanos Lexus Customer Satisfaction Customer (Brad Haslett) 06/10/2009 10:55 AM As a proud Lexus owner, I have derived great pleasure from my experience with such a great product and fantastic company. Lexus is a sponsor of the Letterman show on the CBS network. Twice in one week, David Letterman has joked about having sex with a 14 year-old. Unless Lexus immediately pulls their ads from the CBS Letterman show, I will never, ever consider buying another Lexus or Toyota product and will influence everyone I can to do likewise. Brad Haslett ---------------- TV.com On The Border Restaurants Best Western Intel CBSports.com JohnFreida.com DiTech Lexus Earn My Degree True Credit by TransUnion Lifelock Bowflex Mars Candy Capitol One LasikPlus Embassy Suites EBay ancestry.com From bill at effros.com Thu Jun 11 12:53:48 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 12:53:48 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Put The Heat On CBS (full list of sponsors at the end) In-Reply-To: <400985d70906110849y46738d8eg23baa734f670ab22@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906110849y46738d8eg23baa734f670ab22@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A31369C.9040204@effros.com> In the 60s we used to organize letter writing campaigns like this, except we never specified exactly what the issue was, because there was no real issue, only a flood of complaints. We got back letters like the one you got and they tried to follow up until they finally figured out it was just one big joke. B. Brad Haslett wrote: > Dear Mr. Brad Haslett, > > Thank you for contacting Lexus Customer Satisfaction. We are dedicated > to providing superior service. > > Lexus is sensitive to the opinions of its customers, and regrets The > David Letterman Show has offended you. The advertising was never > intended to depict a negative or controversial situation. We respect > your honest feedback, and have documented your comments for > consideration with future advertisements. > > If you require further assistance, please respond to this e-mail, or > contact Lexus Customer Satisfaction at 1-800-255-3987, Monday through > Friday, 5:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., or Saturday, 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., > Pacific Time. > > > Sincerely, > > Walter Castellanos > Lexus Customer Satisfaction > Customer (Brad Haslett) 06/10/2009 10:55 AM > As a proud Lexus owner, I have derived great pleasure from my > experience with such a great product and fantastic company. Lexus is a > sponsor of the Letterman show on the CBS network. Twice in one week, > David Letterman has joked about having sex with a 14 year-old. Unless > Lexus immediately pulls their ads from the CBS Letterman show, I will > never, ever consider buying another Lexus or Toyota product and will > influence everyone I can to do likewise. > > Brad Haslett > > ---------------- > > TV.com > On The Border Restaurants > Best Western > Intel > CBSports.com > JohnFreida.com > DiTech > Lexus > Earn My Degree > True Credit by TransUnion > Lifelock > Bowflex > Mars Candy > Capitol One > LasikPlus > Embassy Suites > EBay > ancestry.com > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > From ekroposki at charter.net Thu Jun 11 13:09:26 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:09:26 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] yesterdays post by Newt Message-ID: <00ADDECE0F874939840F0EC96CE715C7@YOURB88038198E> http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32212 Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090611/699727eb/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Thu Jun 11 13:39:26 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 12:39:26 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Put The Heat On CBS (full list of sponsors at the end) In-Reply-To: <4A31369C.9040204@effros.com> References: <400985d70906110849y46738d8eg23baa734f670ab22@mail.gmail.com> <4A31369C.9040204@effros.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906111039v710b0537lea94ba726cb554e3@mail.gmail.com> Bill, Sarah Palin is a big girl, she's fair game. When Al Gore's adult son got arrested for drunk driving in a Prius at 100 mph, I remained silent, as well as I did when Joe Biden's 28 year-old daughter recently got caught sniffing coke on tape. They weren't operatives in the campaign, and as a parent, I empathize with both the children and the parents. There is no excuse for Letterman. The jokes about Chelsea, AND Amy Carter were in bad taste. The Bush Twins? Well, they were of age and pretty hot. That doesn't make it fair, just in bounds. Palin's oldest daughter has been pretty brave in her public statements and is on record of talking about her experience. She's fair game as a result, as distasteful as it may be. The younger daughters? No excuses! Palin is "one hot chick". Is she smart? Is she Presidential material? I'll leave that to every individual to figure out. I'm not politically correct so I won't judge others on PC. BUT, I am the father of a daughter. If Letterman had any balls he'd invite Todd on the show, not Gov Sarah. I'm guessing one of them would leave the stage minus 'nads' and it wouldn't be Todd. I know what I would do, but then, I'm probably just a marginally educated redneck just like Todd Palin. Brad On 6/11/09, Bill Effros wrote: > In the 60s we used to organize letter writing campaigns like this, > except we never specified exactly what the issue was, because there was > no real issue, only a flood of complaints. We got back letters like the > one you got and they tried to follow up until they finally figured out > it was just one big joke. > > B. > > > > Brad Haslett wrote: >> Dear Mr. Brad Haslett, >> >> Thank you for contacting Lexus Customer Satisfaction. We are dedicated >> to providing superior service. >> >> Lexus is sensitive to the opinions of its customers, and regrets The >> David Letterman Show has offended you. The advertising was never >> intended to depict a negative or controversial situation. We respect >> your honest feedback, and have documented your comments for >> consideration with future advertisements. >> >> If you require further assistance, please respond to this e-mail, or >> contact Lexus Customer Satisfaction at 1-800-255-3987, Monday through >> Friday, 5:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., or Saturday, 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., >> Pacific Time. >> >> >> Sincerely, >> >> Walter Castellanos >> Lexus Customer Satisfaction >> Customer (Brad Haslett) 06/10/2009 10:55 AM >> As a proud Lexus owner, I have derived great pleasure from my >> experience with such a great product and fantastic company. Lexus is a >> sponsor of the Letterman show on the CBS network. Twice in one week, >> David Letterman has joked about having sex with a 14 year-old. Unless >> Lexus immediately pulls their ads from the CBS Letterman show, I will >> never, ever consider buying another Lexus or Toyota product and will >> influence everyone I can to do likewise. >> >> Brad Haslett >> >> ---------------- >> >> TV.com >> On The Border Restaurants >> Best Western >> Intel >> CBSports.com >> JohnFreida.com >> DiTech >> Lexus >> Earn My Degree >> True Credit by TransUnion >> Lifelock >> Bowflex >> Mars Candy >> Capitol One >> LasikPlus >> Embassy Suites >> EBay >> ancestry.com >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > From flybrad at gmail.com Thu Jun 11 21:06:48 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:06:48 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Zac Sunderland Message-ID: <400985d70906111806u75cadf78n5bc6b21be38dc373@mail.gmail.com> You may remember when we were raising money for Zac? He's almost home! http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?id=4233223 From flybrad at gmail.com Fri Jun 12 07:33:18 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 06:33:18 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] How to Bankrupt a Nation Message-ID: <400985d70906120433h4799230fmd464e9d496547698@mail.gmail.com> Here's a question I keep asking myself, if health care costs can be overhauled by implementing Dear Leader's ideas, why doesn't he just share them with us now so we can start using them now? Why do we have to turn 17% of our economy over to the government and then "see the plan"? Are these the "cost savings" measures he introduced into the Illinois Senate? The US Senate? Did he and Michelle discuss these concepts over dinner and then she launched them to great success at the U of Chicago hospital where she was a very generously paid executive? Why all the secrecy? Now comes this, you can't even discuss opposing views without being labeled an enemy combatant and being frozen out of the process - http://www.rollcall.com/issues/54_144/news/35773-1.html That sure sounds like "the Chicago Way". No sane and rational person can give a simple explanation as to how we're going to work our way out of the current deficit without inflating our way out, as do most banana republics. The rest of the capitalist world recognizes it, that's why they want trade denominated in something other than dollars. Oil is currently rising partly to speculation as investors move to commodities (China is investing in gold and oil), but it will rise even more as OPEC countries demand more dollars to compensate for the falling value of the US currency. Everything in economics is theory, but this is theory like "the theory of gravity". At the risk of sounding like a broken record, these ideas about universal health care are not new. They've been tried and they failed. Tennessee attempted it and it almost bankrupted the state. Gov. Bredesen worked the problem backward. He's a Democrat, why not call him and ask him what works and what doesn't? Or does Dear Leader really care about what works? Could there be an ulterior motive? (read below) I can think of a half-dozen ideas off the top of my head that would enhance access to health care for every citizen. Some would have access to better care than others, but everyone would have something and no individual or state would have to worry about poor health driving them into bankruptcy. But that's not the point of all this, is it? Brad -------------------- How to Bankrupt a Country Posted By Jeffrey H. Anderson On June 12, 2009 @ 12:00 am In . Feature 01, Health, Money, Politics, US News | 1 Comment What if you found that your personal income this year will be $55,000, but you will spend $100,000 ? even though you had no prior savings? And what if next year?s picture looked similar, and the year after that, and so on? If President Obama were your personal financial advisor, he?d say, ?You?re on the path to prosperity.? However, he would add, with some urgency, ?But we also need to keep in mind that it?s very important that you take whatever it is that you are overspending on the most, and spend more on it.? And, he?d tell you, it?s very important to do so right away: ?Spending more is going to be a heavy lift. I think everybody understands that. But I?m also confident that we can get this done this year.? At least, that?s the advice that the president is currently giving to the American people about U.S. federal spending, particularly federal spending on health care. Only $55,000 of every $100,000 in federal spending this year is being paid for by federal revenues. Incredibly, the rest is being borrowed against the future. We are spending $4.0 trillion this year. Federal revenues make up just over half of that: $2.2 trillion. The other $1.8 trillion is deficit spending ? borrowed against future tax-revenues, with interest. Since 1970, federal spending has risen almost 50% as a percentage of our gross domestic product (GDP). During that same period, federal spending on Medicare and Medicaid has more than quadrupled versus GDP. In comparison, defense spending has dropped by more than half versus GDP. I am not making an argument for or against defense spending. I am merely stating a fact: Since 1970, spending on Medicare and Medicaid has risen eightfold versus defense spending and has tripled versus federal spending as a whole. It?s clear what?s driving the deficit bus. President Obama?s own White House budget director, Peter Orszag, agrees. Orszag says that every other federal program?s impact on future deficits will be ?swamped? by the effects of Medicare and Medicaid. Enthusiasts of government-run health care like to try to explain away Medicare?s skyrocketing costs by noting that health-care costs are rising nationwide. They are ? but not nearly as fast as Medicare?s. Since 1970, Medicare?s costs have risen more than 1/3 more, per patient, than the combined costs of all health care in America apart from Medicare and Medicaid ? the vast majority of which is run by the private sector. To make matters worse, Medicare?s soaring costs will soon be paid by a shrinking pool of people. With the baby boomers? retirement, the number of workers per Medicare beneficiary will fall from today?s figure of nearly 4, to just 2 1/2. Far fewer people will pay far higher costs. And yet the president?s advice to the American people is not to worry. The only thing we need to do is increase federal spending on health care. We need to launch a new government-run health-care program, a form of ?Medicare for all? called a ?public option.? If we do that, our federal spending will somehow be brought under control. This has to be among the most mind-boggling pieces of advice ever given by any financial advisor or president. The United States government is running horrendous deficits. Medicare and Medicaid are driving those deficits. All we need to do to fix this is to launch another huge Medicare-like program. Can any reasonable mind follow this train of logic? Just how bad are our deficits without adding a massive new federal health-care program? Current deficits look worse in actual dollars because of inflation. They also look bad in real (inflation-adjusted) dollars because, as GDP has risen, government spending has also risen. So let?s be kind and look at them in the most favorable light: as a percentage of GDP. Even in that light, our deficits over the next several years will be higher than any of the earlier deficits run during the two Bush presidencies, which were not exactly eras of frugality and fiscal restraint. This year?s deficit is not only higher, but twice as high (12% of GDP versus 6% of GDP) as the highest deficit of the Reagan-era Cold War defense buildup (money well spent, but still spent). It is higher than any deficit since the Great Depression. And, incredibly, it is higher ? even as a percentage of GDP ? than any deficit we ran during the Great Depression itself! Take 1933, when the Great Depression was at its worst and the GDP had dropped by almost half since 1929. Our GDP is now about 250 times higher than it was then. But our deficit is now about 400times higher than it was then. I?m not talking about our cumulative debt, which today is staggering. I?m talking about a straight year-to-year comparison. In that comparison, our 2009 deficit is higher, even as a percentage of GDP, than our deficit was in 1933, amidst the full flurry of Franklin Delano Roosevelt?s New Deal spending at the height of the Great Depression. To be running higher deficits than the worst deficits we have even run outside of fighting world wars or a civil war, higher even than during the Great Depression itself, is almost unfathomable. And yet it gets remarkably little publicity. Perhaps this is because both parties share the blame. Congress passed this budget under President Bush and increased it under President Obama. So neither party wants to draw attention to it. But it demands attention, and now. We can?t control where we are, but we can control where we?re headed. Like an overextended private citizen who is spending way beyond his or her means, we can make a change, or compound our error. We can listen to President Obama?s financial advice, or let sanity and reason reign. We can acquiesce, or we can fight ObamaCare, viewing it as something that would do at least as much damage to our country as any idea we?ve heard in the last quarter-century. From flybrad at gmail.com Fri Jun 12 08:01:16 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 07:01:16 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] yesterdays post by Newt In-Reply-To: <00ADDECE0F874939840F0EC96CE715C7@YOURB88038198E> References: <00ADDECE0F874939840F0EC96CE715C7@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <400985d70906120501y49c064e2o7ca7f469f4fa92a8@mail.gmail.com> Ed, Perhaps (as others have suggested) we should ask everyone displaying an Obama bumper sticker on their car that isn't a Chrysler or GM product to be "patriotic" and trade in their Volvo, or whatever. Brad On 6/11/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32212 > > Ed K > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Fri Jun 12 08:59:42 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 07:59:42 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] How to Bankrupt a Nation In-Reply-To: <400985d70906120433h4799230fmd464e9d496547698@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906120433h4799230fmd464e9d496547698@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0906120559i3496f2afp5721b91cd43faca5@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Well, here's the problem with having a boss (President) who doesn't understand simple supply and demand. Until the people who receive medical care have to justify the value they receive against their ability to pay there will be no price control. In other words, nobody gives a shit how much something costs when somebody else is buying!! Want to bring down medical costs?? Let the people who receive the service(s) get some skin back in the game. Prices WILL drop until people can afford them. Nobody lives forever and if you're gonna try .... it ain't gonna be cheap. Rik On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 6:33 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Here's a question I keep asking myself, if health care costs can be > overhauled by implementing Dear Leader's ideas, why doesn't he just > share them with us now so we can start using them now? Why do we have > to turn 17% of our economy over to the government and then "see the > plan"? Are these the "cost savings" measures he introduced into the > Illinois Senate? The US Senate? Did he and Michelle discuss these > concepts over dinner and then she launched them to great success at > the U of Chicago hospital where she was a very generously paid > executive? Why all the secrecy? Now comes this, you can't even > discuss opposing views without being labeled an enemy combatant and > being frozen out of the process - > > http://www.rollcall.com/issues/54_144/news/35773-1.html > > That sure sounds like "the Chicago Way". No sane and rational person > can give a simple explanation as to how we're going to work our way > out of the current deficit without inflating our way out, as do most > banana republics. The rest of the capitalist world recognizes it, > that's why they want trade denominated in something other than > dollars. Oil is currently rising partly to speculation as investors > move to commodities (China is investing in gold and oil), but it will > rise even more as OPEC countries demand more dollars to compensate for > the falling value of the US currency. Everything in economics is > theory, but this is theory like "the theory of gravity". > > At the risk of sounding like a broken record, these ideas about > universal health care are not new. They've been tried and they > failed. Tennessee attempted it and it almost bankrupted the state. > Gov. Bredesen worked the problem backward. He's a Democrat, why not > call him and ask him what works and what doesn't? Or does Dear Leader > really care about what works? Could there be an ulterior motive? > (read below) I can think of a half-dozen ideas off the top of my head > that would enhance access to health care for every citizen. Some > would have access to better care than others, but everyone would have > something and no individual or state would have to worry about poor > health driving them into bankruptcy. But that's not the point of all > this, is it? > > Brad > > -------------------- > > How to Bankrupt a Country > > Posted By Jeffrey H. Anderson On June 12, 2009 @ 12:00 am In . Feature > 01, Health, Money, Politics, US News | 1 Comment > > What if you found that your personal income this year will be $55,000, > but you will spend $100,000 ? even though you had no prior savings? > And what if next year?s picture looked similar, and the year after > that, and so on? > > If President Obama were your personal financial advisor, he?d say, > ?You?re on the path to prosperity.? However, he would add, with some > urgency, ?But we also need to keep in mind that it?s very important > that you take whatever it is that you are overspending on the most, > and spend more on it.? And, he?d tell you, it?s very important to do > so right away: ?Spending more is going to be a heavy lift. I think > everybody understands that. But I?m also confident that we can get > this done this year.? > > At least, that?s the advice that the president is currently giving to > the American people about U.S. federal spending, particularly federal > spending on health care. > > Only $55,000 of every $100,000 in federal spending this year is being > paid for by federal revenues. Incredibly, the rest is being borrowed > against the future. We are spending $4.0 trillion this year. Federal > revenues make up just over half of that: $2.2 trillion. The other $1.8 > trillion is deficit spending ? borrowed against future tax-revenues, > with interest. > > Since 1970, federal spending has risen almost 50% as a percentage of > our gross domestic product (GDP). During that same period, federal > spending on Medicare and Medicaid has more than quadrupled versus GDP. > In comparison, defense spending has dropped by more than half versus > GDP. I am not making an argument for or against defense spending. I am > merely stating a fact: Since 1970, spending on Medicare and Medicaid > has risen eightfold versus defense spending and has tripled versus > federal spending as a whole. It?s clear what?s driving the deficit > bus. > > President Obama?s own White House budget director, Peter Orszag, > agrees. Orszag says that every other federal program?s impact on > future deficits will be ?swamped? by the effects of Medicare and > Medicaid. > > Enthusiasts of government-run health care like to try to explain away > Medicare?s skyrocketing costs by noting that health-care costs are > rising nationwide. They are ? but not nearly as fast as Medicare?s. > Since 1970, Medicare?s costs have risen more than 1/3 more, per > patient, than the combined costs of all health care in America apart > from Medicare and Medicaid ? the vast majority of which is run by the > private sector. > > To make matters worse, Medicare?s soaring costs will soon be paid by a > shrinking pool of people. With the baby boomers? retirement, the > number of workers per Medicare beneficiary will fall from today?s > figure of nearly 4, to just 2 1/2. Far fewer people will pay far > higher costs. > > And yet the president?s advice to the American people is not to worry. > The only thing we need to do is increase federal spending on health > care. We need to launch a new government-run health-care program, a > form of ?Medicare for all? called a ?public option.? If we do that, > our federal spending will somehow be brought under control. > > This has to be among the most mind-boggling pieces of advice ever > given by any financial advisor or president. The United States > government is running horrendous deficits. Medicare and Medicaid are > driving those deficits. All we need to do to fix this is to launch > another huge Medicare-like program. Can any reasonable mind follow > this train of logic? > > Just how bad are our deficits without adding a massive new federal > health-care program? Current deficits look worse in actual dollars > because of inflation. They also look bad in real (inflation-adjusted) > dollars because, as GDP has risen, government spending has also risen. > So let?s be kind and look at them in the most favorable light: as a > percentage of GDP. > > Even in that light, our deficits over the next several years will be > higher than any of the earlier deficits run during the two Bush > presidencies, which were not exactly eras of frugality and fiscal > restraint. This year?s deficit is not only higher, but twice as high > (12% of GDP versus 6% of GDP) as the highest deficit of the Reagan-era > Cold War defense buildup (money well spent, but still spent). It is > higher than any deficit since the Great Depression. And, incredibly, > it is higher ? even as a percentage of GDP ? than any deficit we ran > during the Great Depression itself! > > Take 1933, when the Great Depression was at its worst and the GDP had > dropped by almost half since 1929. Our GDP is now about 250 times > higher than it was then. But our deficit is now about 400times higher > than it was then. I?m not talking about our cumulative debt, which > today is staggering. I?m talking about a straight year-to-year > comparison. In that comparison, our 2009 deficit is higher, even as a > percentage of GDP, than our deficit was in 1933, amidst the full > flurry of Franklin Delano Roosevelt?s New Deal spending at the height > of the Great Depression. > > To be running higher deficits than the worst deficits we have even run > outside of fighting world wars or a civil war, higher even than during > the Great Depression itself, is almost unfathomable. And yet it gets > remarkably little publicity. Perhaps this is because both parties > share the blame. Congress passed this budget under President Bush and > increased it under President Obama. So neither party wants to draw > attention to it. > > But it demands attention, and now. We can?t control where we are, but > we can control where we?re headed. Like an overextended private > citizen who is spending way beyond his or her means, we can make a > change, or compound our error. We can listen to President Obama?s > financial advice, or let sanity and reason reign. We can acquiesce, or > we can fight ObamaCare, viewing it as something that would do at least > as much damage to our country as any idea we?ve heard in the last > quarter-century. > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090612/e8d180c5/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Fri Jun 12 09:55:45 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 08:55:45 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] How to Bankrupt a Nation In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0906120559i3496f2afp5721b91cd43faca5@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906120433h4799230fmd464e9d496547698@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906120559i3496f2afp5721b91cd43faca5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906120655j43fcc5ft9922d2c382193a02@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Here's an example of how simple the problem really is and how elegantly simple one solution can be. How many people don't have health insurance? The number I remember from the campaign trail is 50 million. Frankly, I think that number is way too high, but let's use it to keep the math simple. How many people are in the top 5% of income earners? Roughly 6 million plus is the answer. Now nothing is fair in life, including Presidents getting elected on Marxist ideals and class warfare. For the sake of argument, let's say the top 5% really do owe something to the 50 million without health insurance. That means every one in that income bracket would have to cover the costs for around 8 people. Here in Tennessee, the cost from the state for a bare-bones health care policy is around $180. Let's say with a bigger pool we could get that cost down to $150, that means a 5 percenter would be on the hook for $1200 per month (8 x 150). Just to make things "fair", let's give the 5 percenter some relief. He or she could forfeit everything they've ever contributed to Social Security and all future benefits and drop out of the system to help pay their $1200/month "we owe you something" obligation. Considering that many of these 5 percenters have chosen to live well below their means and have accumulated substantial nest eggs, they might consider this a bargain compared to what will happen to their savings when hyper-inflation kicks-in. Now mind you, I don't really like this solution, it's just an alternative. I ran this idea by my wife (who knows a thing or two about wealth re-distribution schemes) and she asked, who will pay for Social Security? "Those who participate" was my answer. OK, she's right, it won't work, too capitalistic. So, forget the SS angle, just pony-up $1200 per month for being successful. Will Obama consider it? No! He's a Marxist, pure and simple. He wants the control. This is not about access to health care. The man wants to destroy the nation as we know it! Brad On 6/12/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Well, here's the problem with having a boss (President) who doesn't > understand simple supply and demand. > > Until the people who receive medical care have to justify the value they > receive against their ability to pay there will be no price control. In > other words, nobody gives a shit how much something costs when somebody else > is buying!! > > Want to bring down medical costs?? Let the people who receive the service(s) > get some skin back in the game. Prices WILL drop until people can afford > them. > > Nobody lives forever and if you're gonna try .... it ain't gonna be cheap. > > Rik > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 6:33 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Here's a question I keep asking myself, if health care costs can be >> overhauled by implementing Dear Leader's ideas, why doesn't he just >> share them with us now so we can start using them now? Why do we have >> to turn 17% of our economy over to the government and then "see the >> plan"? Are these the "cost savings" measures he introduced into the >> Illinois Senate? The US Senate? Did he and Michelle discuss these >> concepts over dinner and then she launched them to great success at >> the U of Chicago hospital where she was a very generously paid >> executive? Why all the secrecy? Now comes this, you can't even >> discuss opposing views without being labeled an enemy combatant and >> being frozen out of the process - >> >> http://www.rollcall.com/issues/54_144/news/35773-1.html >> >> That sure sounds like "the Chicago Way". No sane and rational person >> can give a simple explanation as to how we're going to work our way >> out of the current deficit without inflating our way out, as do most >> banana republics. The rest of the capitalist world recognizes it, >> that's why they want trade denominated in something other than >> dollars. Oil is currently rising partly to speculation as investors >> move to commodities (China is investing in gold and oil), but it will >> rise even more as OPEC countries demand more dollars to compensate for >> the falling value of the US currency. Everything in economics is >> theory, but this is theory like "the theory of gravity". >> >> At the risk of sounding like a broken record, these ideas about >> universal health care are not new. They've been tried and they >> failed. Tennessee attempted it and it almost bankrupted the state. >> Gov. Bredesen worked the problem backward. He's a Democrat, why not >> call him and ask him what works and what doesn't? Or does Dear Leader >> really care about what works? Could there be an ulterior motive? >> (read below) I can think of a half-dozen ideas off the top of my head >> that would enhance access to health care for every citizen. Some >> would have access to better care than others, but everyone would have >> something and no individual or state would have to worry about poor >> health driving them into bankruptcy. But that's not the point of all >> this, is it? >> >> Brad >> >> -------------------- >> >> How to Bankrupt a Country >> >> Posted By Jeffrey H. Anderson On June 12, 2009 @ 12:00 am In . Feature >> 01, Health, Money, Politics, US News | 1 Comment >> >> What if you found that your personal income this year will be $55,000, >> but you will spend $100,000 ? even though you had no prior savings? >> And what if next year?s picture looked similar, and the year after >> that, and so on? >> >> If President Obama were your personal financial advisor, he?d say, >> ?You?re on the path to prosperity.? However, he would add, with some >> urgency, ?But we also need to keep in mind that it?s very important >> that you take whatever it is that you are overspending on the most, >> and spend more on it.? And, he?d tell you, it?s very important to do >> so right away: ?Spending more is going to be a heavy lift. I think >> everybody understands that. But I?m also confident that we can get >> this done this year.? >> >> At least, that?s the advice that the president is currently giving to >> the American people about U.S. federal spending, particularly federal >> spending on health care. >> >> Only $55,000 of every $100,000 in federal spending this year is being >> paid for by federal revenues. Incredibly, the rest is being borrowed >> against the future. We are spending $4.0 trillion this year. Federal >> revenues make up just over half of that: $2.2 trillion. The other $1.8 >> trillion is deficit spending ? borrowed against future tax-revenues, >> with interest. >> >> Since 1970, federal spending has risen almost 50% as a percentage of >> our gross domestic product (GDP). During that same period, federal >> spending on Medicare and Medicaid has more than quadrupled versus GDP. >> In comparison, defense spending has dropped by more than half versus >> GDP. I am not making an argument for or against defense spending. I am >> merely stating a fact: Since 1970, spending on Medicare and Medicaid >> has risen eightfold versus defense spending and has tripled versus >> federal spending as a whole. It?s clear what?s driving the deficit >> bus. >> >> President Obama?s own White House budget director, Peter Orszag, >> agrees. Orszag says that every other federal program?s impact on >> future deficits will be ?swamped? by the effects of Medicare and >> Medicaid. >> >> Enthusiasts of government-run health care like to try to explain away >> Medicare?s skyrocketing costs by noting that health-care costs are >> rising nationwide. They are ? but not nearly as fast as Medicare?s. >> Since 1970, Medicare?s costs have risen more than 1/3 more, per >> patient, than the combined costs of all health care in America apart >> from Medicare and Medicaid ? the vast majority of which is run by the >> private sector. >> >> To make matters worse, Medicare?s soaring costs will soon be paid by a >> shrinking pool of people. With the baby boomers? retirement, the >> number of workers per Medicare beneficiary will fall from today?s >> figure of nearly 4, to just 2 1/2. Far fewer people will pay far >> higher costs. >> >> And yet the president?s advice to the American people is not to worry. >> The only thing we need to do is increase federal spending on health >> care. We need to launch a new government-run health-care program, a >> form of ?Medicare for all? called a ?public option.? If we do that, >> our federal spending will somehow be brought under control. >> >> This has to be among the most mind-boggling pieces of advice ever >> given by any financial advisor or president. The United States >> government is running horrendous deficits. Medicare and Medicaid are >> driving those deficits. All we need to do to fix this is to launch >> another huge Medicare-like program. Can any reasonable mind follow >> this train of logic? >> >> Just how bad are our deficits without adding a massive new federal >> health-care program? Current deficits look worse in actual dollars >> because of inflation. They also look bad in real (inflation-adjusted) >> dollars because, as GDP has risen, government spending has also risen. >> So let?s be kind and look at them in the most favorable light: as a >> percentage of GDP. >> >> Even in that light, our deficits over the next several years will be >> higher than any of the earlier deficits run during the two Bush >> presidencies, which were not exactly eras of frugality and fiscal >> restraint. This year?s deficit is not only higher, but twice as high >> (12% of GDP versus 6% of GDP) as the highest deficit of the Reagan-era >> Cold War defense buildup (money well spent, but still spent). It is >> higher than any deficit since the Great Depression. And, incredibly, >> it is higher ? even as a percentage of GDP ? than any deficit we ran >> during the Great Depression itself! >> >> Take 1933, when the Great Depression was at its worst and the GDP had >> dropped by almost half since 1929. Our GDP is now about 250 times >> higher than it was then. But our deficit is now about 400times higher >> than it was then. I?m not talking about our cumulative debt, which >> today is staggering. I?m talking about a straight year-to-year >> comparison. In that comparison, our 2009 deficit is higher, even as a >> percentage of GDP, than our deficit was in 1933, amidst the full >> flurry of Franklin Delano Roosevelt?s New Deal spending at the height >> of the Great Depression. >> >> To be running higher deficits than the worst deficits we have even run >> outside of fighting world wars or a civil war, higher even than during >> the Great Depression itself, is almost unfathomable. And yet it gets >> remarkably little publicity. Perhaps this is because both parties >> share the blame. Congress passed this budget under President Bush and >> increased it under President Obama. So neither party wants to draw >> attention to it. >> >> But it demands attention, and now. We can?t control where we are, but >> we can control where we?re headed. Like an overextended private >> citizen who is spending way beyond his or her means, we can make a >> change, or compound our error. We can listen to President Obama?s >> financial advice, or let sanity and reason reign. We can acquiesce, or >> we can fight ObamaCare, viewing it as something that would do at least >> as much damage to our country as any idea we?ve heard in the last >> quarter-century. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From ekroposki at charter.net Sun Jun 14 21:03:36 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 21:03:36 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] another coastal find Message-ID: <81EBD7FF29ED4418ACFD6C5FE088A0A3@YOURB88038198E> Wilst visiting North Myrtle Beach I found something that might interest any who visit the Grand Strand: http://www.enchantedsailingcharters.com/ Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090614/7c4b9c14/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Mon Jun 15 09:03:35 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 09:03:35 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] The Character of Nations Message-ID: For your enjoyment is an exerpt from: The Character of Nations by Thomas Sowell 6-10-09: While nations differ, particular kinds of behavior produce particular kinds of results in country after country. Moreover, American society in recent years has been imitating behavior patterns that have produced negative - and sometimes catastrophic - consequences in many other countries around the world. Among these patterns have been a concentration of decision-making power in government officials, an undermining of the role of the family, a "non-judgmental" attitude toward behavior and a dissolution of the common bonds that hold a society together, leading to atomistic self-indulgences and group-identity politics that increasingly pits different segments of society against each other. Those among the intelligentsia who say that we should "learn from other countries" almost invariably mean that we should imitate what other countries have done. Angelo Codevilla argues that we should learn from other countries' mistakes, especially when those same mistakes have repeatedly produced bad results in many countries and among many very different peoples, living under very different political systems. Putting ever more economic decisions in the hands of those with political power is just one of those mistakes with a track record of painful repercussions in many countries around the world. These repercussions have included not only serious economic losses but, even more important, a loss of personal freedom and self-respect, as ever wider segments of the population become supplicants and sycophants of those with the power to dispense largess or to make one's life miserable with legalistic or bureaucratic harassment. We in America have taken large steps in that direction in recent years, and are accelerating our moves in that direction this year. Getting some clearer sense of what this risks is just one of many reasons to read "The Character of Nations". -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090615/4c70ec7b/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Jun 15 13:28:51 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 12:28:51 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] The Character of Nations In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <400985d70906151028o54bda119v9fbfba1c76dcdcaf@mail.gmail.com> Ed, Everyone should remember that the four cornerstones of capitalism are land, labor, capital, and entrepreneurship. Of the four, capital is the quickest to flee to the nearest safe-haven. The US is certainly not that safe-haven these days under our new 'Dear Leader' as the treatment of the Chrysler bondholders has exposed. Combine the coming inflation with one of the highest tax rates (going even higher) in the industrialized world and one can easily see where this is going. Waste valuable agricultural land resources to produce ethanol fuel (which can't possibly compete growing corn versus sugar like Brazil does) and we're left with "one leg to stand on", so to speak. The entrepreneurs of Silicon Valley have already turned on "The One" TM (that didn't take long). What is our labor advantage? Mexicans? We Americans have been coasting on arrogance derived from the ashes of WW2 for a long time. What we still have in our favor is the "rule of law", rapidly being trashed - http://tinyurl.com/nabbha Rome failed largely because of multiculturalism. China led the world in scientific advancement until the fall of the Ming Dynasty and the embrace of insularity and "trade protectionism". So now we have 'Dear Leader' and his "model" based on what? Kenya? Cuba? Europe? Chicago? The Chinese ain't buyin' it! And, they hold the cards. Brad On 6/15/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > For your enjoyment is an exerpt from: > > The Character of Nations by Thomas Sowell 6-10-09: > > > > > > While nations differ, particular kinds of behavior produce particular kinds > of results in country after country. Moreover, American society in recent > years has been imitating behavior patterns that have produced negative - and > sometimes catastrophic - consequences in many other countries around the > world. > > > > > Among these patterns have been a concentration of decision-making power in > government officials, an undermining of the role of the family, a > "non-judgmental" attitude toward behavior and a dissolution of the common > bonds that hold a society together, leading to atomistic self-indulgences > and group-identity politics that increasingly pits different segments of > society against each other. > > > > > Those among the intelligentsia who say that we should "learn from other > countries" almost invariably mean that we should imitate what other > countries have done. Angelo Codevilla argues that we should learn from other > countries' mistakes, especially when those same mistakes have repeatedly > produced bad results in many countries and among many very different > peoples, living under very different political systems. > > > > > Putting ever more economic decisions in the hands of those with political > power is just one of those mistakes with a track record of painful > repercussions in many countries around the world. These repercussions have > included not only serious economic losses but, even more important, a loss > of personal freedom and self-respect, as ever wider segments of the > population become supplicants and sycophants of those with the power to > dispense largess or to make one's life miserable with legalistic or > bureaucratic harassment. > > > > > We in America have taken large steps in that direction in recent years, and > are accelerating our moves in that direction this year. Getting some clearer > sense of what this risks is just one of many reasons to read "The Character > of Nations". > > > From ekroposki at charter.net Mon Jun 15 17:53:57 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 17:53:57 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] historical information circulating the internet Message-ID: <936946BC6AFC47049AE9859471560E89@YOURB88038198E> President Barack Obama said in Turkey : "We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values." Do you know the Preamble for your state? . . Alabama 1901, Preamble, We the people of the State of Alabama , invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish the following Constitution.. Alaska 1956, Preamble We, the people of Alaska , grateful to God and to those who founded our nation and pioneered this great land. Arizona 1911, Preamble We, the people of the State of Arizona , grateful to Almighty God for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution... Arkansas 1874, Preamble We, the people of the State of Arkansas , grateful to Almighty God for the privilege of choosing our own form of government... California 1879, Preamble We, the People of the State of California , grateful to Almighty God for our freedom... Colorado 1876, Preamble We, the people of Colorado , with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of Universe... Connecticut 1818, Preamble. The People of Connecticut, acknowledging with gratitude the good Providence of God in permitting them to enjoy. Delaware 1897, Preamble Through Divine Goodness all men have, by nature, the rights of worshipping and serving their Creator according to the dictates of their consciences... Florida 1885, Preamble We, the people of the State of Florida , grateful to Almighty God for our constitutional liberty, establish this Constitution... Georgia 1777, Preamble We, the people of Georgia , relying upon protection and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish this Constitution... Hawaii 1959, Preamble We , the people of Hawaii , Grateful for Divine Guidance ... Establish this Constitution. Idaho 1889, Preamble We, the people of the State of Idaho , grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings. Illinois 1870, Preamble We, the people of the State of Illinois, grateful to Almighty God for the civil , political and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors. Indiana 1851, Preamble We, the People of the State of Indiana , grateful to Almighty God for the free exercise of the right to choose our form of government. Iowa 1857, Preamble We, the People of the St ate of Iowa , grateful to the Supreme Being for the blessings hitherto enjoyed, and feeling our dependence on Him for a continuation of these blessings, establish this Constitution. Kansas 1859, Preamble We, the people of Kansas , grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious privileges establish this Constitution. Kentucky 1891, Preamble.. We, the people of the Commonwealth are grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties.. Louisiana 1921, Preamble We, the people of the State of Louisiana , grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties we enjoy. Maine 1820, Preamble We the People of Maine acknowledging with grateful hearts the goodness of the Sovereign Ruler of the Universe in affording us an opportunity .. And imploring His aid and direction. Maryland 1776, Preamble We, the people of the state of Maryland , grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberty... Massachusetts 1780, Preamble We...the people of Massachusetts, acknowledging with grateful hearts, the goodness of the Great Legislator of the Universe In the course of His Providence, an opportunity and devoutly imploring His direction Michigan 1908, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Michigan , grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of freedom, establish this Constitution. Minnesota, 1857, Preamble We, the people of the State of Minnesota, grateful to God for our civil and religious liberty, and desiring to perpetuate its blessings: Missouri 1845, Preamble We, the people of Missouri , with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of the Universe, and grateful for His goodness . Establish this Constitution... Montana 1889, Preamble. We, the people of Montana , grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of liberty establish this Constitution .. Nebraska 1875, Preamble We, the people, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom . Establish this Constitution.. Nevada 1864, Preamble We the people of the State of Nevada , grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, establish this Constitution... New Hampshire 1792, Part I. Art. I. Sec. V Every individual has a natural and unalienable right to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience. New Jersey 1844, Preamble We, the people of the State of New Jersey, grateful to Almighty God for civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors. New Mexico 1911, Preamble We, the People of New Mexico, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of liberty... New York 1846, Preamble We, the people of the State of New York , grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure its blessings. North Carolina 1868, Preamble We the people of the State of North Carolina, grateful to Almighty God, the Sovereign Ruler of Nations, for our civil, political, and religious liberties, and acknowledging our dependence upon Him for the continuance of those... North Dakota 1889, Preamble We , the people of North Dakota , grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, do ordain... Ohio 1852, Preamble We the people of the state of Ohio , grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings and to promote our common. Oklahoma 1907, Preamble Invoking the guidance of Almighty God, in order to secure and perpetuate the blessings of liberty, establish this Oregon 1857, Bill of Rights, Article I Section 2. All men shall be secure in the Natural right, to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their consciences 00.Pennsylvania 1776, Preamble We, the people of Pennsylvania, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, and humbly invoking His guidance.... Rhode Island 1842, Preamble. We the People of the State of Rhode Island grateful to Almighty God for the civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing... South Carolina , 1778, Preamble We, the people of he State of South Carolina grateful to God for our liberties, do ordain and establish this Constitution. South Dakota 1889, Preamble We, the people of South Dakota , grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberties ... Tennessee 1796, Art. XI..III. That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their conscience... Texas 1845, Preamble We the People of the Republic of Texas , acknowledging, with gratitude, the grace and beneficence of God. Utah 1896, Preamble Grateful to Almighty God for life and liberty, we establish this Constitution. Vermont 1777, Preamble Whereas all government ought to enable the individuals who compose it to enjoy their natural rights, and other blessings which the Author of Existence has bestowed on man .. Virginia 1776, Bill of Rights, XVI Religion, or the Duty which we owe our Creator can be directed only by Reason and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian Forbearance, Love and Charity towards each other Washington 1889, Preamble We the People of the State of Washington, grateful to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution West Virginia 1872, Preamble Since through Divine Providence we enjoy the blessings of civil, political and religious liberty, we, the people of West Virginia reaffirm our faith in and constant reliance upon God ... Wyoming 1890, Preamble We, the people of the State of Wyoming , grateful to God for our civil, political, and religious liberties, establish this Constitution... After reviewing acknowledgments of God from all 50 state constitutions, one is faced with the prospect that maybe, the ACLU and the out-of-control federal courts are wrong! If you found this to be 'Food for thought' send to as many as you think will be enlightened as I hope you were. (Please note that at no time is anyone told that they MUST worship God.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090615/6ae9c869/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Mon Jun 15 18:10:51 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 18:10:51 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Bill E., have you been talking to this guy? Message-ID: Newsmax.com Rabbi: Obama Breeds Climate of Hate Against Jews Wednesday, June 10, 2009 9:12 PM By: Rabbi Dr. Morton H. Pomerantz Our new president did not tell a virulent anti-Semite to travel to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington to kill Jews, but he is most certainly creating a climate of hate against us. It is no coincidence that we are witnessing this level of hatred toward Jews as President Barack Obama positions America against the Jewish state. Just days ago Obama traveled to Cairo, Egypt. It was his second trip in a short time to visit Muslim countries. He sent a clear message by not visiting Israel. But this was code. In Cairo, Obama said things that pose a grave danger to Jews in Israel, in America and everywhere. And if his views are not vigorously opposed they will help create a danger as great as that posed by the Nazis to the Jewish people. Just last week, Obama told his worldwide audience - more than 100 million people - that the killing of six million Jews during the Holocaust was the equivalent of Israel's actions in dealing with the Palestinians. This remark is incredible on its face, an insult to the six million Jews who died as a result of Hitler's genocide - and it is a form of revisionism that will bode evil for Jews for years to come. While Obama acknowledged that "six million Jews were killed - more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today" - his discussion about the Holocaust was followed by this statement: "On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people - Muslims and Christians - have suffered in pursuit of a homeland." "On the other hand . . . "? Obama's clever construct comparing the mass genocide of six million Jews to the Palestinian struggle will not be lost on the estimated 100 million Muslims who tuned into to hear him. Perhaps it was not lost on James W. von Brunn, the 88-year-old white supremacist identified as the alleged attacker Wednesday at the Holocaust Museum. He apparently felt that he could easily take retribution against the Jews for the atrocities Obama implies they are guilty of. At first blush Mr. Obama's speech seemed rosy, optimistic - one that espoused tolerance and understanding. If you scratch the surface it is a dangerous document that history will view as a turning point for America and Israel - one that will lead to dangerous times ahead for both Jews and believing Christians. The immediate danger posed by Obama's speech is in its incredible re-writing of the history of Jews, Christians and Muslims from Medieval times to the present. Obama, continually throughout his speech, talks of Islam's peaceful intent. And while there are certainly Koranic verses that support this interpretation, Islam has a long and bloody history of violence against fellow Muslims, Jews and Christians. Has Obama not heard about the Muslim's violent conquest of the Middle East, Spain and half of Western Europe? Was he never taught that the Crusades sought to turn back this Muslim onslaught that demanded subjugated populations convert or die? In his almost hour-long speech, there is not a single word about Islam's well known and checkered past. Ironically, the American president offered plenty of references to what he sees are America's evils, such as its "colonialism" and history of slavery. "For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation," Obama told his audience, citing a litany of American shortcomings. He failed to mention that Arab Muslims were the greatest slave traders in the history of humanity. According to Obama, Israelis, too, are guilty of wrongdoing, especially when it comes to their supposed maltreatment of the Palestinians. Isn't it odd an American president would go to a foreign country and slander his own country and its long-time ally? At the same time he praises - unconditionally - a religion and culture that has a long history of being antithetical to the very values that have made America a great nation? Mr. Obama even has the unbelievable gall, when talking about the treatment of Muslim women, to condemn Western countries for attempting to stop Muslim women from using the full facial cover, or hijab. This is a symbol of Muslim subjugation of women. Listen to what Obama said: "Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit - for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear." And Obama not only ignores the gross subjugation of women in many Arab societies - he does not mention even once the almost total religious intolerance throughout the Muslim world against Christians and Jews. In his speech, Obama's only plea for Muslim women living in Muslim countries is that they should be afforded an education. How about a discussion of the beheading of Arab women for "crimes" such as adultery? How about the malicious treatment of women in Muslim countries who choose not to wear the hijab? Obama insists that Islam has promoted tolerance and that in Islamic societies such ideals have flourished. Obama claimed that "as a student of history" he understands more than most the truth about "civilization's debt to Islam." He added, "And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality." Does he not know that a Jew or Christian would be beheaded in Saudi Arabia for practicing their religion today, now, this minute? Of course, Obama offers not one example of where religious freedom is truly tolerated in the Muslim world. Yet, he proudly told his audience that in every state of the union and throughout the U.S. there exist more than 1,200 mosques. But why, Mr. President, is there no Christian Church or Jewish synagogue operating within the borders of Saudi Arabia? Not even one. Why in many countries, including your host Egypt, Christian churches have suffered vicious and continual persecution? Why is a once vibrant Cairo Jewish community - a home for the likes of Maimonides - today practically extinct? Why, dear president, has the ancient Christian community in the West Bank and places like Bethlehem been almost completely wiped out by the modern Muslim onslaught? "On the other hand," to quote you Mr. President, you avoided mentioning some other truths. Let's start with the Israeli Arabs who can claim one of the highest standards of living in the Arab world. Indeed, they have more rights than Arabs in any Muslim country, their religious freedom is completely protected, and they even vote in free elections. Tell me what Muslim country matches Israel's record in protecting its minorities? Even Arabs in the West Bank, during the time of Israeli control, saw their standard of living rise dramatically. Today, Arabs there are among the best educated in the world, thanks to Israel. In your revisionist view, Israel has acted to harm these people. But it was not Israel that could not abide by United Nations resolutions clearly setting borders for both the state of Israel and an entity that had never existed before named Palestine. You cleverly omitted any discussion of these facts, or the continual attacks against the state of Israel over six decades by its Muslim neighbors. Nor is it the Israelis who persecute from time to time the Coptic Christians of Egypt. No, Mr. President, I do not accept your assertion that you are seeking religious tolerance or that you are seeking to protect Jews. I do not accept it because you are inventing a false history to fit your own agenda. Mr. President, I am deeply disturbed that you would offer such a distortion of truth in the hopes of creating a lasting peace. A lasting peace cannot be created out of lies, distortions and half truths. You profess to be a Christian. But you seem more intent on protecting Muslims. In your speech you talked openly of your Muslim heritage, your admiration of their way of life, and so forth. You said in your speech that you have made one of your chief aims of your presidency repairing the image of Islam. Why did you hide these views from the American public during the recent presidential campaign? Why, as president, did you fully bow to the Saudi king, who refuses to allow any religious freedom for any Christian or Jew? You have made clear, by your words and assertions, that you are re-positioning the United States away from Israel, America's lone democratic ally in the Mid-East. You have made clear through your statements and those of your minions that Israel should, under no circumstances, prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons. And yes, you have promised to retaliate against Iran if it ever attacks Israel with nuclear weapons. But you know full well that if Iran succeeds in its admitted goal of "wiping the Jewish state off the map" - and hits this tiny nation with nuclear warheads - there will be no Israel for the U.S. to retaliate on behalf of. Some Jews may be na?ve, but we are not stupid. Rabbi Dr. Morton H. Pomerantz is a member of the Reform movement of Judaism and serves as a chaplain for the State of New York. A former Navy and Marine Corps officer and chaplain, he has also served as deputy national chaplain for the Jewish War Veterans of the United States. ? 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090615/c1e9b5e1/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 18564 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090615/c1e9b5e1/attachment-0001.jpe From ekroposki at charter.net Mon Jun 15 18:10:51 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 18:10:51 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Bill E., have you been talking to this guy? Message-ID: Newsmax.com Rabbi: Obama Breeds Climate of Hate Against Jews Wednesday, June 10, 2009 9:12 PM By: Rabbi Dr. Morton H. Pomerantz Our new president did not tell a virulent anti-Semite to travel to the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington to kill Jews, but he is most certainly creating a climate of hate against us. It is no coincidence that we are witnessing this level of hatred toward Jews as President Barack Obama positions America against the Jewish state. Just days ago Obama traveled to Cairo, Egypt. It was his second trip in a short time to visit Muslim countries. He sent a clear message by not visiting Israel. But this was code. In Cairo, Obama said things that pose a grave danger to Jews in Israel, in America and everywhere. And if his views are not vigorously opposed they will help create a danger as great as that posed by the Nazis to the Jewish people. Just last week, Obama told his worldwide audience - more than 100 million people - that the killing of six million Jews during the Holocaust was the equivalent of Israel's actions in dealing with the Palestinians. This remark is incredible on its face, an insult to the six million Jews who died as a result of Hitler's genocide - and it is a form of revisionism that will bode evil for Jews for years to come. While Obama acknowledged that "six million Jews were killed - more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today" - his discussion about the Holocaust was followed by this statement: "On the other hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people - Muslims and Christians - have suffered in pursuit of a homeland." "On the other hand . . . "? Obama's clever construct comparing the mass genocide of six million Jews to the Palestinian struggle will not be lost on the estimated 100 million Muslims who tuned into to hear him. Perhaps it was not lost on James W. von Brunn, the 88-year-old white supremacist identified as the alleged attacker Wednesday at the Holocaust Museum. He apparently felt that he could easily take retribution against the Jews for the atrocities Obama implies they are guilty of. At first blush Mr. Obama's speech seemed rosy, optimistic - one that espoused tolerance and understanding. If you scratch the surface it is a dangerous document that history will view as a turning point for America and Israel - one that will lead to dangerous times ahead for both Jews and believing Christians. The immediate danger posed by Obama's speech is in its incredible re-writing of the history of Jews, Christians and Muslims from Medieval times to the present. Obama, continually throughout his speech, talks of Islam's peaceful intent. And while there are certainly Koranic verses that support this interpretation, Islam has a long and bloody history of violence against fellow Muslims, Jews and Christians. Has Obama not heard about the Muslim's violent conquest of the Middle East, Spain and half of Western Europe? Was he never taught that the Crusades sought to turn back this Muslim onslaught that demanded subjugated populations convert or die? In his almost hour-long speech, there is not a single word about Islam's well known and checkered past. Ironically, the American president offered plenty of references to what he sees are America's evils, such as its "colonialism" and history of slavery. "For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip as slaves and the humiliation of segregation," Obama told his audience, citing a litany of American shortcomings. He failed to mention that Arab Muslims were the greatest slave traders in the history of humanity. According to Obama, Israelis, too, are guilty of wrongdoing, especially when it comes to their supposed maltreatment of the Palestinians. Isn't it odd an American president would go to a foreign country and slander his own country and its long-time ally? At the same time he praises - unconditionally - a religion and culture that has a long history of being antithetical to the very values that have made America a great nation? Mr. Obama even has the unbelievable gall, when talking about the treatment of Muslim women, to condemn Western countries for attempting to stop Muslim women from using the full facial cover, or hijab. This is a symbol of Muslim subjugation of women. Listen to what Obama said: "Likewise, it is important for Western countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion as they see fit - for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim woman should wear." And Obama not only ignores the gross subjugation of women in many Arab societies - he does not mention even once the almost total religious intolerance throughout the Muslim world against Christians and Jews. In his speech, Obama's only plea for Muslim women living in Muslim countries is that they should be afforded an education. How about a discussion of the beheading of Arab women for "crimes" such as adultery? How about the malicious treatment of women in Muslim countries who choose not to wear the hijab? Obama insists that Islam has promoted tolerance and that in Islamic societies such ideals have flourished. Obama claimed that "as a student of history" he understands more than most the truth about "civilization's debt to Islam." He added, "And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality." Does he not know that a Jew or Christian would be beheaded in Saudi Arabia for practicing their religion today, now, this minute? Of course, Obama offers not one example of where religious freedom is truly tolerated in the Muslim world. Yet, he proudly told his audience that in every state of the union and throughout the U.S. there exist more than 1,200 mosques. But why, Mr. President, is there no Christian Church or Jewish synagogue operating within the borders of Saudi Arabia? Not even one. Why in many countries, including your host Egypt, Christian churches have suffered vicious and continual persecution? Why is a once vibrant Cairo Jewish community - a home for the likes of Maimonides - today practically extinct? Why, dear president, has the ancient Christian community in the West Bank and places like Bethlehem been almost completely wiped out by the modern Muslim onslaught? "On the other hand," to quote you Mr. President, you avoided mentioning some other truths. Let's start with the Israeli Arabs who can claim one of the highest standards of living in the Arab world. Indeed, they have more rights than Arabs in any Muslim country, their religious freedom is completely protected, and they even vote in free elections. Tell me what Muslim country matches Israel's record in protecting its minorities? Even Arabs in the West Bank, during the time of Israeli control, saw their standard of living rise dramatically. Today, Arabs there are among the best educated in the world, thanks to Israel. In your revisionist view, Israel has acted to harm these people. But it was not Israel that could not abide by United Nations resolutions clearly setting borders for both the state of Israel and an entity that had never existed before named Palestine. You cleverly omitted any discussion of these facts, or the continual attacks against the state of Israel over six decades by its Muslim neighbors. Nor is it the Israelis who persecute from time to time the Coptic Christians of Egypt. No, Mr. President, I do not accept your assertion that you are seeking religious tolerance or that you are seeking to protect Jews. I do not accept it because you are inventing a false history to fit your own agenda. Mr. President, I am deeply disturbed that you would offer such a distortion of truth in the hopes of creating a lasting peace. A lasting peace cannot be created out of lies, distortions and half truths. You profess to be a Christian. But you seem more intent on protecting Muslims. In your speech you talked openly of your Muslim heritage, your admiration of their way of life, and so forth. You said in your speech that you have made one of your chief aims of your presidency repairing the image of Islam. Why did you hide these views from the American public during the recent presidential campaign? Why, as president, did you fully bow to the Saudi king, who refuses to allow any religious freedom for any Christian or Jew? You have made clear, by your words and assertions, that you are re-positioning the United States away from Israel, America's lone democratic ally in the Mid-East. You have made clear through your statements and those of your minions that Israel should, under no circumstances, prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons. And yes, you have promised to retaliate against Iran if it ever attacks Israel with nuclear weapons. But you know full well that if Iran succeeds in its admitted goal of "wiping the Jewish state off the map" - and hits this tiny nation with nuclear warheads - there will be no Israel for the U.S. to retaliate on behalf of. Some Jews may be na?ve, but we are not stupid. Rabbi Dr. Morton H. Pomerantz is a member of the Reform movement of Judaism and serves as a chaplain for the State of New York. A former Navy and Marine Corps officer and chaplain, he has also served as deputy national chaplain for the Jewish War Veterans of the United States. ? 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090615/f2cbc515/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 18564 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090615/f2cbc515/attachment-0001.jpe From bill at effros.com Tue Jun 16 09:54:27 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 09:54:27 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Bill E., have you been talking to this guy? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4A37A413.7020207@effros.com> Ed, The Rabbis have caught on ... somewhat belatedly. They were all supporting Obama during the election, and wouldn't even discuss the obvious conflict between Obama's stated position on Israel, and their own. Let's say 78% of the people in any given Jewish gathering agreed with them. Now the rabbis are all going out with messages similar to the one below. Roughly 50% of the people in any given Jewish gathering agree with them. It's kind of fun to watch them all stewing in their own juices, and I expect the same thing to happen in many other groups who voted against their stated principals while pretending not to see...or care. B. Ed Kroposki wrote: > > > Newsmax.com > > > Rabbi: Obama Breeds Climate of Hate Against Jews > > Wednesday, June 10, 2009 9:12 PM > > *By:* Rabbi Dr. Morton H. Pomerantz > > Our new president did not tell a virulent anti-Semite to travel to the > U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington to kill Jews, but he is > most certainly creating a climate of hate against us. > > It is no coincidence that we are witnessing this level of hatred > toward Jews as President Barack Obama positions America against the > Jewish state. > > Just days ago Obama traveled to Cairo, Egypt. It was his second trip > in a short time to visit Muslim countries. He sent a clear message by > not visiting Israel. > > But this was code. > > In Cairo, Obama said things that pose a grave danger to Jews in > Israel, in America and everywhere. > > And if his views are not vigorously opposed they will help create a > danger as great as that posed by the Nazis to the Jewish people. > > Just last week, Obama told his worldwide audience --- more than 100 > million people --- that the killing of six million Jews during the > Holocaust was the equivalent of Israel's actions in dealing with the > Palestinians. > > This remark is incredible on its face, an insult to the six million > Jews who died as a result of Hitler's genocide --- and it is a form of > revisionism that will bode evil for Jews for years to come. > > While Obama acknowledged that "six million Jews were killed --- more > than the entire Jewish population of Israel today" --- his discussion > about the Holocaust was followed by this statement: "On the other > hand, it is also undeniable that the Palestinian people --- Muslims > and Christians --- have suffered in pursuit of a homeland." > > "On the other hand . . . "? > > Obama's clever construct comparing the mass genocide of six million > Jews to the Palestinian struggle will not be lost on the estimated 100 > million Muslims who tuned into to hear him. > > Perhaps it was not lost on James W. von Brunn, the 88-year-old white > supremacist identified as the alleged attacker Wednesday at the > Holocaust Museum. He apparently felt that he could easily take > retribution against the Jews for the atrocities Obama implies they are > guilty of. > > At first blush Mr. Obama's speech seemed rosy, optimistic --- one that > espoused tolerance and understanding. > > If you scratch the surface it is a dangerous document that history > will view as a turning point for America and Israel --- one that will > lead to dangerous times ahead for both Jews and believing Christians. > > The immediate danger posed by Obama's speech is in its incredible > re-writing of the history of Jews, Christians and Muslims from > Medieval times to the present. > > Obama, continually throughout his speech, talks of Islam's peaceful > intent. And while there are certainly Koranic verses that support this > interpretation, Islam has a long and bloody history of violence > against fellow Muslims, Jews and Christians. > > Has Obama not heard about the Muslim's violent conquest of the Middle > East, Spain and half of Western Europe? Was he never taught that the > Crusades sought to turn back this Muslim onslaught that demanded > subjugated populations convert or die? > > In his almost hour-long speech, there is not a single word about > Islam's well known and checkered past. > > Ironically, the American president offered plenty of references to > what he sees are America's evils, such as its "colonialism" and > history of slavery. > > "For centuries, black people in America suffered the lash of the whip > as slaves and the humiliation of segregation," Obama told his > audience, citing a litany of American shortcomings. He failed to > mention that Arab Muslims were the greatest slave traders in the > history of humanity. > > According to Obama, Israelis, too, are guilty of wrongdoing, > especially when it comes to their supposed maltreatment of the > Palestinians. > > Isn't it odd an American president would go to a foreign country and > slander his own country and its long-time ally? > > At the same time he praises --- unconditionally --- a religion and > culture that has a long history of being antithetical to the very > values that have made America a great nation? > > Mr. Obama even has the unbelievable gall, when talking about the > treatment of Muslim women, to condemn Western countries for attempting > to stop Muslim women from using the full facial cover, or hijab. This > is a symbol of Muslim subjugation of women. > > Listen to what Obama said: "Likewise, it is important for Western > countries to avoid impeding Muslim citizens from practicing religion > as they see fit - for instance, by dictating what clothes a Muslim > woman should wear." > > And Obama not only ignores the gross subjugation of women in many Arab > societies --- he does not mention even once the almost total religious > intolerance throughout the Muslim world against Christians and Jews. > > In his speech, Obama's only plea for Muslim women living in Muslim > countries is that they should be afforded an education. > > How about a discussion of the beheading of Arab women for "crimes" > such as adultery? How about the malicious treatment of women in Muslim > countries who choose not to wear the hijab? > > Obama insists that Islam has promoted tolerance and that in Islamic > societies such ideals have flourished. > > Obama claimed that "as a student of history" he understands more than > most the truth about "civilization's debt to Islam." > > He added, "And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through > words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial > equality." > > Does he not know that a Jew or Christian would be beheaded in Saudi > Arabia for practicing their religion today, now, this minute? > > Of course, Obama offers not one example of where religious freedom is > truly tolerated in the Muslim world. Yet, he proudly told his audience > that in every state of the union and throughout the U.S. there exist > more than 1,200 mosques. > > But why, Mr. President, is there no Christian Church or Jewish > synagogue operating within the borders of Saudi Arabia? Not even one. > > Why in many countries, including your host Egypt, Christian churches > have suffered vicious and continual persecution? Why is a once vibrant > Cairo Jewish community --- a home for the likes of Maimonides --- > today practically extinct? > > Why, dear president, has the ancient Christian community in the West > Bank and places like Bethlehem been almost completely wiped out by the > modern Muslim onslaught? > > "On the other hand," to quote you Mr. President, you avoided > mentioning some other truths. > > Let's start with the Israeli Arabs who can claim one of the highest > standards of living in the Arab world. Indeed, they have more rights > than Arabs in any Muslim country, their religious freedom is > completely protected, and they even vote in free elections. > > Tell me what Muslim country matches Israel's record in protecting its > minorities? > > Even Arabs in the West Bank, during the time of Israeli control, saw > their standard of living rise dramatically. Today, Arabs there are > among the best educated in the world, thanks to Israel. > > In your revisionist view, Israel has acted to harm these people. But > it was not Israel that could not abide by United Nations resolutions > clearly setting borders for both the state of Israel and an entity > that had never existed before named Palestine. > > You cleverly omitted any discussion of these facts, or the continual > attacks against the state of Israel over six decades by its Muslim > neighbors. Nor is it the Israelis who persecute from time to time the > Coptic Christians of Egypt. > > No, Mr. President, I do not accept your assertion that you are seeking > religious tolerance or that you are seeking to protect Jews. I do not > accept it because you are inventing a false history to fit your own > agenda. > > Mr. President, I am deeply disturbed that you would offer such a > distortion of truth in the hopes of creating a lasting peace. A > lasting peace cannot be created out of lies, distortions and half truths. > > You profess to be a Christian. But you seem more intent on protecting > Muslims. In your speech you talked openly of your Muslim heritage, > your admiration of their way of life, and so forth. You said in your > speech that you have made one of your chief aims of your presidency > repairing the image of Islam. > > Why did you hide these views from the American public during the > recent presidential campaign? > > Why, as president, did you fully bow to the Saudi king, who refuses to > allow any religious freedom for any Christian or Jew? > > You have made clear, by your words and assertions, that you are > re-positioning the United States away from Israel, America's lone > democratic ally in the Mid-East. > > You have made clear through your statements and those of your minions > that Israel should, under no circumstances, prevent Iran from getting > nuclear weapons. > > And yes, you have promised to retaliate against Iran if it ever > attacks Israel with nuclear weapons. > > But you know full well that if Iran succeeds in its admitted goal of > "wiping the Jewish state off the map" --- and hits this tiny nation > with nuclear warheads --- there will be no Israel for the U.S. to > retaliate on behalf of. > > Some Jews may be na?ve, but we are not stupid. > > *Rabbi Dr. Morton H. Pomerantz is a member of the Reform movement of > Judaism and serves as a chaplain for the State of New York. A former > Navy and Marine Corps officer and chaplain, he has also served as > deputy national chaplain for the Jewish War Veterans of the United > States.* > > ? 2009 Newsmax. All rights reserved. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090616/ec498874/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 18564 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090616/ec498874/attachment-0001.jpe From ekroposki at charter.net Tue Jun 16 13:23:45 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 13:23:45 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] copy of email paraphrasing Charles Krauthammer especially for Brad's review Message-ID: <806D0EB8942C4997B58DDD17E6A24F73@YOURB88038198E> America needs to pay attention to what Charles Krauthammer had to say last Monday. Subj: Charles Krauthammer Speech/Comments on the 'New Economy' & Barack Obama Last Monday was a profound evening, hearing Dr. Charles Krauthammer speak to the Center for the American Experiment. He is a brilliant intellectual, seasoned & articulate. He is forthright & careful in his analysis, & never resorts to emotions or personal insults. He is NOT a fearmonger nor an extremist in his comments & views. He is a fiscal conservative, & has a Pulitzer prize for writing. He is a frequent contributor to Fox News & writes weekly for the Washington Post. The entire room was held spellbound during his talk. I have shared this w/ many of you & several have asked me to summarize his comments, as we are living in uncharted waters economically & internationally. Even two Dims at my table agreed w/ everything he said! If you feel like forwarding this to those who are open minded & have not 'drunk the Kool-Aid', feel free. Here is his resume from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Krauthammer A summary of his comments: 1. Mr. Obama is a very intellectual, charming individual. He is not to be underestimated. He is a 'cool customer' who doesn't show his emotions. It's very hard to know what's 'behind the mask'. Taking down the Clinton dynasty from a political neophyte was an amazing accomplishment. The Clintons still do not understand what hit them. Obama was in the perfect place at the perfect time. 2. Obama has political skills comparable to Reagan & Clinton. He has a way of making you think he's on your side, agreeing w/ your position, while doing the opposite. Pay no attention to what he SAYS; rather, watch what he DOES! 3. Obama has a ruthless quest for power. He did not come to Washington to make something out of himself, but rather to change everything, including dismantling capitalism. He can't be straightforward on his ambitions, as the public would not go along. He has a heavy hand and wants to 'level the playing field' w/ income redistribution and punishment of the achievers of society. He would like to model the USA to Great Britain or Canada. 4. His 3 main goals are to control ENERGY, PUBLIC EDUCATION, and NATIONAL HEALTHCARE by the Federal govt. He doesn't care about the auto or financial services industries, but got them as an early bonus. The cap and trade will add costs to everything and stifle growth. Paying for FREE college education is his goal. Most scary is healthcare program, because if you make it FREE & add 46,000,000 people to a Medicare-type single-payer system, the costs will go through the roof. The only way to control costs is with massive RATIONING of services, like in Canada. God forbid. 5. He's surrounded himself with mostly far-left academic types. No one around him has ever run even a candy store. But they're going to try and run the auto, financial, banking and other industries. This obviously can't work in the long run. Obama's not a socialist; rather a far-left secular progressive bent on nothing short of revolution. He ran as a moderate, but will govern from the hard left. Again, watch what he does, not what he says. 6. Obama doesn't really see himself as President of the USA but more as a ruler over the world. He sees himself above it all, trying to orchestrate and coordinate various countries and their agendas. He sees moral equivalency in all cultures. His apology tour in Germany and England was a prime example of how he sees America, as an imperialist nation that has been arrogant, rather than a great noble nation that has at times made errors. This is the first President ever who has chastised our allies and appeased our enemies! 7. He's now handing out goodies. He hopes that the bill (and pain) will not 'come due' until after he's reelected in 2012. He'd like to blame all problems on Bush from the past, and hopefully his successor in the future. He has a huge ego, and Dr. Krauthammer believes he is a narcissist. 8. Republicans are in the wilderness for a while, but will emerge strong. We're 'pining' for another Reagan, but there'll never be another like him. He believes Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty & Bobby Jindahl (except for his terrible speech in Feb.) are the future of the party. Newt Gingrich is brilliant, but has baggage. Sarah Palin is sincere and intelligent, but needs to really be seriously boning up on facts and information if she's to be a serious candidate in the future. We need to return to the party of lower taxes, smaller government, personal responsibility, strong national defense, and states' rights. 9. The current level of spending is irresponsible and outrageous. We're spending trillions that we don't have. This could lead to hyper inflation, depression or worse. No country has ever spent themselves into prosperity. The media is giving Obama, Reid, and Pelosi a pass because they love their agenda. But eventually the bill will come due and people will realize the huge bailouts didn't work; nor will the stimulus package. These were trillion-dollar payoffs to Obama's allies, unions, and the Congress to placate the left, so he can get support for #4 above. 10. The election was over in mid-Sept. when Lehman brothers failed. Fear and panic swept in, we had an unpopular President, and the war was grinding on indefinitely without a clear outcome. The people were in pain, and the mantra of 'change' caused people to act emotionally. Any Dem would have won this election; it was surprising is was as close as it was. 11. In 2012, if the unemployment rate is over 10%, Republicans will be swept back into power. If it's under 8%, the Dems continue to roll. If it's between 8-10%, it'll be a dogfight. It'll all be about the economy. I hope this gets you really thinking about what's happening in Washington & Congress. There's a left-wing revolution going on, according to Krauthammer, & he encourages us to keep the faith & join the loyal resistance. The work will be hard, but we're right on most issues & can reclaim our country, before it's far too late. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090616/94736443/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Tue Jun 16 13:25:17 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 13:25:17 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] And now to aggrivate Rik, more circulating the internet Message-ID: AP- WASHINGTON D.C. - In a move certain to fuel the debate over Obama's qualifications for the presidency, the group Americans for Freedom of Information has Released copies of President Obama's college transcripts from Occidental College. Released today, the transcript indicates that Obama, under the name Barry Soetoro, received financial aid as a foreign student from Indonesia as an undergraduate at the school. The transcript was released by Occidental College in compliance with a court order in a suit brought by the group in the Superior Court of California. The transcript shows that Obama (Soetoro) applied for financial aid and was awarded a fellowship for foreign students from the Fulbright Foundation Scholarship program. To qualify, for the scholarship, a student must claim foreign citizenship. This document would seem to provide the smoking gun that many of Obama's detractors have been seeking. Along with the evidence that he was first born in Kenya and there is no record of him ever applying for US citizenship, this is looking pretty grim. The news has created a firestorm at the White House as the release casts increasing doubt about Obama's legitimacy and qualification to serve as president. When reached for comment in London, where he has been in meetings with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Obama smiled but refused comment on the issue. Britain's Daily Mail has also carried the story in a front-page article titled, Obama Eligibility Questioned leading some to speculate that the story may overshadow economic issues on Obama's first official visit to the U.K. In a related matter, under growing pressure from several groups, Justice Antonin Scalia announced that the Supreme Court agreed on Tuesday to hear arguments concerning Obama's legal eligibility to serve as President in a case brought by Leo Donofrio of New Jersey. This lawsuit claims Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. Donofrio's case is just one of 18 suits brought by citizens demanding proof of Obama's citizenship or qualification to serve as president. Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation has released the results of their investigation of Obama's campaign spending. This study estimates that Obama has spent upwards of $950,000 in campaign funds in the past year with eleven law firms in 12 states for legal resources to block disclosure of any of his personal records. Mr. Kreep indicated that the investigation is still ongoing but that the final report will be provided to the U.S. Attorney General, Eric Holder. Mr. Holder has refused to comment on the matter. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090616/33f7f39c/attachment-0001.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Tue Jun 16 14:11:48 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 13:11:48 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] And now to aggrivate Rik, more circulating the internet In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6634e19e0906161111g7484ea55r57906d7992178463@mail.gmail.com> Ed, What I'm having a hard time with is, how is it that this man has already been president for almost six months and we are just now finding out about this stuff? If he in fact spent 950,000 dollars keeping the details of his life hidden, how is it that there has been no public outcry over this secrecy? That alone (hiring lawyers to keep his secrets) would disqualify him in my mind. Obviously I don't know the man personally. I wish I did. It doesn't take long to figure out those that are all talk, if you can be around them for a while. From the vantage point I am allowed, it certainly seems that if bullshit was pennies, he would be a very wealthy individual. It's pretty damned obvious he knows absolutely nothing about business or the economy, or even picking associates that do. And, after his "performance" in Egypt, he doesn't understand much about who his friends and enemies are either. It's certainly no wonder that gun sales are through the roof. Anybody who isn't nervous right now probably isn't sane.... or maybe they're just not conscious. Rik On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 12:25 PM, Ed Kroposki wrote: > AP- WASHINGTON D.C. - In a move certain to fuel the debate over > Obama?s qualifications for the presidency, the group Americans for > Freedom of Information has Released copies of President Obama?s > college transcripts from Occidental College. Released today, the > transcript indicates that Obama, under the name Barry Soetoro, > received financial aid as a foreign student from Indonesia as an > undergraduate at the school. The transcript was released by > Occidental College in compliance with a court order in a suit > brought by the group in the Superior Court of California. The > transcript shows that Obama (Soetoro) applied for financial aid and > was awarded a fellowship for foreign students from the Fulbright > Foundation Scholarship program. To qualify, for the scholarship, a > student must claim foreign citizenship. This document would seem to > provide the smoking gun that many of Obama?s detractors have been > seeking. > > Along with the evidence that he was first born in Kenya and there is > no record of him ever applying for US citizenship, this is looking > pretty grim. The news has created a firestorm at the White House as > the release casts increasing doubt about Obama?s legitimacy and > qualification to serve as president. When reached for comment in > London, where he has been in meetings with British Prime Minister > Gordon Brown, Obama smiled but refused comment on the issue. > > Britain's Daily Mail has also carried the story in a front-page > article titled, Obama Eligibility Questioned leading some to > speculate that the story may overshadow economic issues on Obama?s > first official visit to the U.K. > > In a related matter, under growing pressure from several groups, > Justice Antonin Scalia announced that the Supreme Court agreed on > Tuesday to hear arguments concerning Obama?s legal eligibility to > serve as President in a case brought by Leo Donofrio of New Jersey. > This lawsuit claims Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from > serving as president. Donofrio?s case is just one of 18 suits > brought by citizens demanding proof of Obama?s citizenship or > qualification to serve as president. > > Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation has released the > results of their investigation of Obama?s campaign spending. This > study estimates that Obama has spent upwards of $950,000 in campaign > funds in the past year with eleven law firms in 12 states for legal > resources to block disclosure of any of his personal records. Mr. > Kreep indicated that the investigation is still ongoing but that the > final report will be provided to the U.S. Attorney General, Eric > Holder. Mr. Holder has refused to comment on the matter. > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090616/45a2186b/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Tue Jun 16 15:58:46 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 15:58:46 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Rik, a reply Message-ID: <70D52AAC46754176AB23D2E24DEB2E49@YOURB88038198E> Rik said, "That alone (hiring lawyers to keep his secrets) would disqualify him in my mind." If he really was born in Hawaii and wanted to keep it quiet, then I doubt that it is illegal for him to keep it quite. And I guess if there was some sort of wrong doing claiming foreign citizenship when he really had U. S. citizenship, then that is for the courts. Naturally, a valid and good birth certificate would resolve much of this... However, if he was trying to get money to go to college and lived in Indonesia and could get a nice fat scholarship by claiming duel citizenship, well, while that is wrong, it is way in his past. Would that just be wrong or is there some real criminality by doing that? Go on the Rhodes list and ask the lawyers... Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090616/098edfc6/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Tue Jun 16 23:25:43 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 22:25:43 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] copy of email paraphrasing Charles Krauthammer especially for Brad's review In-Reply-To: <806D0EB8942C4997B58DDD17E6A24F73@YOURB88038198E> References: <806D0EB8942C4997B58DDD17E6A24F73@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <400985d70906162025k363eff30rdf6ed3c971a6eb66@mail.gmail.com> Ed, Some Kool-Aide drinkers are waking-up from their idol worship, some never will. O-hole has hung out with radicals his entire life. What did people expect? Iran is at a tipping point. It should be obvious to everyone that the Iranians want 'Hope and Change'. What are they getting from Mr. HopenChange? Nothing, nada, zero. Think about what a new government in Iran could mean for Israel and the World. Posted below is a short snippet from Reagan on the crackdown on Solidarity in Poland versus words from Barry al Hussein on Iran (borrowed from another site). Interesting times we live in, huh? Brad ------------------ >From Reagan?s speech. I cannot find one time he refers to himself. He refers to our nation or the Polish people or to those who love freedom. We?re not naive. We view the current situation in Poland in the gravest of terms We call upon all free people We?ve always been ready to do our share to assist Our nation was born in resistance to arbitrary power So we feel The false messiah?s speech. It?s all about himself. And I want I am I?ve been I think I see I think My understanding is I can?t I can say I think I?ve always believed I consider I think I think for me I would say I would say I want On 6/16/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > America needs to pay attention to what Charles Krauthammer had to say last > Monday. > > Subj: Charles Krauthammer Speech/Comments on the 'New Economy' & Barack > Obama > > Last Monday was a profound evening, hearing Dr. Charles Krauthammer speak to > the Center for the American Experiment. He is a brilliant intellectual, > seasoned & articulate. He is forthright & careful in his analysis, & never > resorts to emotions or personal insults. He is NOT a fearmonger nor an > extremist in his comments & views. He is a fiscal conservative, & has a > Pulitzer prize for writing. He is a frequent contributor to Fox News & > writes weekly for the Washington Post. The entire room was held spellbound > during his talk. I have shared this w/ many of you & several have asked me > to summarize his comments, as we are living in uncharted waters economically > & internationally. Even two Dims at my table agreed w/ everything he said! > If you feel like forwarding this to those who are open minded & have not > 'drunk the Kool-Aid', feel free. > > Here is his resume from Wikipedia: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Krauthammer > > A summary of his comments: > > 1. Mr. Obama is a very intellectual, charming individual. He is not to be > underestimated. He is a 'cool customer' who doesn't show his emotions. It's > very hard to know what's 'behind the mask'. Taking down the Clinton dynasty > from a political neophyte was an amazing accomplishment. The Clintons still > do not understand what hit them. Obama was in the perfect place at the > perfect time. > > 2. Obama has political skills comparable to Reagan & Clinton. He has a way > of making you think he's on your side, agreeing w/ your position, while > doing the opposite. Pay no attention to what he SAYS; rather, watch what he > DOES! > > 3. Obama has a ruthless quest for power. He did not come to Washington to > make something out of himself, but rather to change everything, including > dismantling capitalism. He can't be straightforward on his ambitions, as > the public would not go along. He has a heavy hand and wants to 'level the > playing field' w/ income redistribution and punishment of the achievers of > society. He would like to model the USA to Great Britain or Canada. > > 4. His 3 main goals are to control ENERGY, PUBLIC EDUCATION, and NATIONAL > HEALTHCARE by the Federal govt. He doesn't care about the auto or financial > services industries, but got them as an early bonus. The cap and trade will > add costs to everything and stifle growth. Paying for FREE college education > is his goal. Most scary is healthcare program, because if you make it FREE > & add 46,000,000 people to a Medicare-type single-payer system, the costs > will go through the roof. The only way to control costs is with massive > RATIONING of services, like in Canada. God forbid. > > 5. He's surrounded himself with mostly far-left academic types. No one > around him has ever run even a candy store. But they're going to try and run > the auto, financial, banking and other industries. This obviously can't work > in the long run. Obama's not a socialist; rather a far-left secular > progressive bent on nothing short of revolution. He ran as a moderate, but > will govern from the hard left. Again, watch what he does, not what he says. > > 6. Obama doesn't really see himself as President of the USA but more as a > ruler over the world. He sees himself above it all, trying to orchestrate > and coordinate various countries and their agendas. He sees moral > equivalency in all cultures. His apology tour in Germany and England was a > prime example of how he sees America, as an imperialist nation that has been > arrogant, rather than a great noble nation that has at times made errors. > This is the first President ever who has chastised our allies and appeased > our enemies! > > 7. He's now handing out goodies. He hopes that the bill (and pain) will not > 'come due' until after he's reelected in 2012. He'd like to blame all > problems on Bush from the past, and hopefully his successor in the future. > He has a huge ego, and Dr. Krauthammer believes he is a narcissist. > > 8. Republicans are in the wilderness for a while, but will emerge strong. > We're 'pining' for another Reagan, but there'll never be another like him. > He believes Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty & Bobby Jindahl (except for his > terrible speech in Feb.) are the future of the party. Newt Gingrich is > brilliant, but has baggage. Sarah Palin is sincere and intelligent, but > needs to really be seriously boning up on facts and information if she's to > be a serious candidate in the future. We need to return to the party of > lower taxes, smaller government, personal responsibility, strong national > defense, and states' rights. > > 9. The current level of spending is irresponsible and outrageous. We're > spending trillions that we don't have. This could lead to hyper inflation, > depression or worse. No country has ever spent themselves into prosperity. > The media is giving Obama, Reid, and Pelosi a pass because they love their > agenda. But eventually the bill will come due and people will realize the > huge bailouts didn't work; nor will the stimulus package. These were > trillion-dollar payoffs to Obama's allies, unions, and the Congress to > placate the left, so he can get support for #4 above. > > 10. The election was over in mid-Sept. when Lehman brothers failed. Fear and > panic swept in, we had an unpopular President, and the war was grinding on > indefinitely without a clear outcome. The people were in pain, and the > mantra of 'change' caused people to act emotionally. Any Dem would have won > this election; it was surprising is was as close as it was. > > 11. In 2012, if the unemployment rate is over 10%, Republicans will be > swept back into power. If it's under 8%, the Dems continue to roll. If > it's between 8-10%, it'll be a dogfight. It'll all be about the economy. > > I hope this gets you really thinking about what's happening in Washington & > Congress. There's a left-wing revolution going on, according to Krauthammer, > & he encourages us to keep the faith & join the loyal resistance. The work > will be hard, but we're right on most issues & can reclaim our country, > before it's far too late. > From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Jun 17 07:20:56 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 06:20:56 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Putin on Taxes Message-ID: <400985d70906170420j7bc0b607t5e91a02e4f15f7ac@mail.gmail.com> The world has gone mad! Little did I know while practicing fallout shelter drills as a kid that some day we'd be getting lectures from Russia on capitalism. Brad ------------------ The Moscow Times ? Issue 4167 ? Business Putin Slams Obama Tax Proposal 16 June 2009The Moscow TimesPrime Minister Vladimir Putin on Monday criticized U.S. President Barack Obama's plan to raise taxes on U.S. companies' foreign operations, saying it would amount to double taxation that will hurt the global economy. "This is a serious decision for the world economy," Putin said at a meeting of the Presidium, the government said on its web site. "If taxes are imposed on all companies working abroad, then it will mean the total destruction of the system for avoiding double taxation." Putin instructed Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin to hold discussions on the plan with Obama's administration. Kudrin met with finance ministers from the Group of Eight over the weekend and signed an agreement with Italy outlining a system for avoiding double taxation. Obama has proposed canceling a provision of the tax code that allows foreign subsidiaries of U.S. corporations to defer tax payments on money that is reinvested in local operations. "It's a tax code that says you should pay lower taxes if you create a job in Bangalore, India, than if you create one in Buffalo, New York," he said in May, referring to the current state of the U.S. tax code, media reported. Obama is scheduled to make his first official visit to Moscow on July 6-8. From ekroposki at charter.net Wed Jun 17 08:02:47 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 08:02:47 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Reply to Brad on Iran Message-ID: <25D204020CDC400580846897A034C763@YOURB88038198E> Actually I think that sitting on the fence is what has to be done in the current situation in Iran. As of the moment, the Mullahs control Iran. And they have physical power to continue. If we comment in support of the defeated candidate we will not only be on the losing side, but will be put up for by the Mullahs as the Great Satin. The U. S. will become an evil strawman. However, Brad raises an import question: Does education broaden ones ability to understand or does it restrict and narrow ones view of the world. In today's world, those who ask hard or pointed questions are demurred as crass and just do not understand. While Obama has a valid reason for sitting on the fence, that is the Mullahs will likely win and he will still need to work with them, the way in which he says things, explains things, gives us understanding of the man. And from Brad's post, analysis shows that his way of doing things is dictatorial and self centered. He is not a leader in that a leader leads other free men but rather his style is controlling and dictatorial. Whereas, Reagan did not offer intervention, but a positive support of people. Reagan offers good reasoning for others to understand and follow his lead. This was a very powerful comparison. Brad's post goes to the heart of Obama. Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090617/c789dc76/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Jun 17 09:16:31 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 08:16:31 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Reply to Brad on Iran In-Reply-To: <25D204020CDC400580846897A034C763@YOURB88038198E> References: <25D204020CDC400580846897A034C763@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <400985d70906170616o5860c4bbj8005f7b6250d7f19@mail.gmail.com> Ed, Obama is "voting present" on Iran. Why would he fear making a statement of support for the moderates protesting in the streets of Tehran? Maybe he's thinking of facing a revolution of his own some day when the inevitable results of reckless spending become fully known. What risk is there angering the Mullahs or being considered "The Great Satin"? We've been at war with the government of Iran since 1979. What possible benefit is there to be gained from "Cairo Speech" style apologies to a government that hangs homosexuals and stones "adulteress" women? Reagan didn't offer guns, or armed intervention in support of Solidarity or against the "Evil Empire" at the Brandenburg Gate. He offered words. Powerful words. Hope filled words. And, he won! Obama doesn't want to meddle? He certainly doesn't mind meddling in Israel. I have a deep sense of foreboding for Iran. Just two weeks ago we observed the 20th anniversary of Tienanmen. This will end badly. Brad On 6/17/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > Actually I think that sitting on the fence is what has to be done in the > current situation in Iran. As of the moment, the Mullahs control Iran. And > they have physical power to continue. If we comment in support of the > defeated candidate we will not only be on the losing side, but will be put > up for by the Mullahs as the Great Satin. The U. S. will become an evil > strawman. > > However, Brad raises an import question: Does education broaden ones > ability to understand or does it restrict and narrow ones view of the world. > In today's world, those who ask hard or pointed questions are demurred as > crass and just do not understand. While Obama has a valid reason for > sitting on the fence, that is the Mullahs will likely win and he will still > need to work with them, the way in which he says things, explains things, > gives us understanding of the man. > > And from Brad's post, analysis shows that his way of doing things is > dictatorial and self centered. He is not a leader in that a leader leads > other free men but rather his style is controlling and dictatorial. > > Whereas, Reagan did not offer intervention, but a positive support of > people. Reagan offers good reasoning for others to understand and follow his > lead. > > This was a very powerful comparison. Brad's post goes to the heart of Obama. > > Ed K From ekroposki at charter.net Wed Jun 17 19:21:41 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:21:41 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] What is uber-conservative? Message-ID: <11DB58B5AFBD4F10A72784DA140C9E9B@YOURB88038198E> Brad, What is uber-conservative? http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2009/06/marco_rubio_backed_by_most_rid.php http://www.ask.com/web?q=senator+jim+demint+endorsement&qsrc=0&o=0&l=dir Gee, wait till I call him an Uber... Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090617/9d575093/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Wed Jun 17 19:29:44 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:29:44 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Iran Message-ID: Brad, Well Obama's tip toeing does not matter, he is getting the Mullas attention: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/world/ap/48191662.html Now the question is Messiah or Satin? Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090617/02d4c13d/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Wed Jun 17 21:33:16 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:33:16 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Iran In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6634e19e0906171833w7c40a12ev8c3471f759e2a67f@mail.gmail.com> Ed, Do you suppose they've got a wall someplace???? Maybe our anointed One could tell them to knock it down. Rik On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Ed Kroposki wrote: > Brad, > > Well Obama's tip toeing does not matter, he is > getting the Mullas attention: > > http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/world/ap/48191662.html > > Now the question is Messiah or Satin? > > Ed K > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090617/379f17e3/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Thu Jun 18 09:19:03 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 09:19:03 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Iran Message-ID: <521FAB53D08349438111BC0847E44D0A@YOURB88038198E> It has the makings of Brad's Tienanmen Square rather than the Berlin Wall. Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090618/98d6d288/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Thu Jun 18 09:45:05 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 08:45:05 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Iran In-Reply-To: <521FAB53D08349438111BC0847E44D0A@YOURB88038198E> References: <521FAB53D08349438111BC0847E44D0A@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <6634e19e0906180645o6846e2efib15bfe5f74060b49@mail.gmail.com> Ed, Agreed. I was just trying to find something useful for the president to do. Rik On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Ed Kroposki wrote: > It has the makings of Brad's Tienanmen Square rather than the Berlin > Wall. > > Ed K > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090618/8bea4124/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Thu Jun 18 10:16:46 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 10:16:46 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Facism - does this stuff sound familiar? Message-ID: Leon Trotsky's FASCISM What It Is and How To Fight It First compilation under title "FASCISM: What it is and how to fight it" by Pioneer Publishers in August 1944 and reprinted in 1964. This revised compilation was published in April 1969. Transcribed for the Internet by Zodiac, the former diretor of the Marx-Engels Internet Archive, in August 1993. This pamphlet is not copyrighted. PAMPHLET CONTENTS a.. 1969 Introduction by George Lavan Weissman b.. Fascism -- What Is It? c.. How Mussolini Triumphed d.. The Fascist Danger Looms in Germany e.. An Aesop Fable f.. The German Cops and Army g.. Bourgeoisie, Petty Bourgeoisie, and Proletariat h.. The Collapse of Bourgeois Democracy i.. Does the Petty Bourgeoisie Fear Revolution? j.. The Workers' Militia and Its Opponents k.. The Perspective in the United States l.. Build the Revolutionary Party! 1969 PAMPHLET INTRODUCTION By George Lavan Weissman * * * Liberals and even most of those who consider themselves Marxists are guilty of using the world fascist very loosely today. They fling it around as an epithet or political swearword against right-wing figures whom they particularly despise, or against reactionaries in general. Since WWII, the fascist label has been applied to such figures and movements as Gerald L. K. Smith, Senator Joseph McCarthy, Senator Eastland, Barry Goldwater, the Minutemen, the John Birch Society, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and George Wallace. Now, were all these fascist, or just some? If only some, then how does one tell which are and which aren't? Indiscriminate use of the term really reflects vagueness about its meaning. Asked to define fascism, the liberal replies in such terms as dictatorship, mass neurosis, anti-Semitism, the power of unscrupulous propaganda, the hypnotic effect of a mad-genius orator on the masses, etc. Impressionism and confusion on the part of liberals is not surprising. But Marxism's superiority consists of its ability to analyze and differentiate among social and political phenomena. that so many of those calling themselves marxists cannot define fascism any more adequately than the liberals is not wholly their fault. Whether they are aware of it or not, much of their intellectual heritage comes from the social-democratic (reformist socialist) and Stalinist movements, which dominated the left in the 1930s when fascism was scoring victory after victory. These movements not only permitted Nazism to come to power in Germany without a shot being fired against it, but they failed abysmally in understanding the nature and dynamics of fascism and the way to fight it. After fascism's triumphs, they had much to hide and so refrained from making a Marxist analysis which would, at least, have educated subsequent generations. But there is a Marxist analysis of fascism. It was made by Leon Trotsky not as a postmortem, but during the rise of fascism. This was one of Trotsky's great contributions to Marxism. He began the task after Mussolini's victory in Italy in 1922 and brought it to a high point in the years preceding Hitler's triumph in Germany in 1933. In his attempts to awaken the German Communist Party and the Communist International (Comintern) to the mortal danger and to rally a united-front against Nazism, Trotsky made a point-by-point critique of the policies of the social-democratic and Stalinist parties. This constitutes a compendium of almost all the mistaken, ineffective, and suicidal positions that workers' organizations can take regarding fascism, since the positions of the German parties ranged from opportunistic default and betrayal on the right (social democratic) to ultra-left abstentionism and betrayal (Stalinist). The Communist movement was still on its ultra-left binge (the so-called Third Period) when the Nazi movement began to snowball. To the Stalinists, every capitalist party was automatically "fascist". Even more catastrophic than this disorienting of the workers was Stalin's famous dictum that, rather than being opposites, fascism and social democracy were "twins". The socialists were thereupon dubbed "social fascists" and regarded as the main enemy. Of course, there could be no united front with social-fascist organizations, and those who, like Trotsky, urged such united fronts, were also labeled social fascists and treated accordingly. How divorced from reality the Stalinist line was may be illustrated be recalling its translation into American terms. In the 1932 elections, American Stalinists denounced Franklin Roosevelt as the fascist candidate and Norman Thomas as the social-fascist candidate. What was ludicrous as applied to US politics was tragic in Germany and Austria. (Recently [1969], the term social fascism had begun cropping up in articles by members of the new left. Do those using it imagine that they have invented the term? Or, if they are aware of its history, are they indifferent to its connotations?) After the Nazis came to power, the Stalinists boasted that their line had been 100 per cent correct, that Hitler could only last a few months, and that a Soviet Germany would then emerge. The time limit for this miracle was extended from three, six, to nine months, and then the idle boasts dwindled into silence. The magnitude of the defeat suffered by the working class, the special character of fascism, distinguishing it from other reactionary regimes or dictatorships, became apparent to all, and the threat to the Soviet Union or a rearmed German imperialism began to take on reality. This brought about a change in Moscow's line in 1935 and the Communist parties throughout the world thereupon zigzagged far to the right, to the right even of the social-democrats. This was their stance in the face of the spreading fascist danger in France and Spain. The military ruin of German and Italian fascism in WWII convinced most people that fascism had been destroyed for good and was so utterly discredited that it could never again entice any followers. Events since then, particularly the emergence of new fascist groups and tendencies in almost every capitalist country,have dispelled such wishful thinking. The illusion that WWII was fought to make the world safe from fascism has gone the way of the earlier illusion that WWI was fought to make the world safe for democracy. The germ of fascism is endemic in capitalism; a crisis can raise it to epidemic proportions unless drastic countermeasures are applied. Since forewarned is forearmed, we offer this new compilation -- a small selection from Trotsky's writings on the subject -- as a weapon for the anti-fascist arsenal. FASCISM -- WHAT IS IT? Extracts from a letter to an English comrade, November 15 1931; printed in The Militant, January 16, 1932 * * * What is fascism? The name originated in Italy. Were all the forms of counter-revolutionary dictatorship fascist or not (That is to say, prior to the advent of fascism in Italy)? The former dictatorship in Spain of Primo de Rivera, 1923-30, is called a fascist dictatorship by the Comintern. Is this correct or not? We believe that it is incorrect. The fascist movement in Italy was a spontaneous movement of large masses, with new leaders from the rank and file. It is a plebian movement in origin, directed and financed by big capitalist powers. It issued forth from the petty bourgeoisie, the slum proletariat, and even to a certain extent from the proletarian masses; Mussolini, a former socialist, is a "self-made" man arising from this movement. Primo de Rivera was an aristocrat. He occupied a high military and bureaucratic post and was chief governor of Catalonia. he accomplished his overthrow with the aid of state and military forces. The dictatorships of Spain and Italy are two totally different forms of dictatorship. It is necessary to distinguish between them. Mussolini had difficulty in reconciling many old military institutions with the fascist militia. This problem did not exist for Primo de Rivera. The movement in Germany is analogous mostly to the Italian. It is a mass movement, with its leaders employing a great deal of socialist demagogy. This is necessary for the creation of the mass movement. The genuine basis (for fascism) is the petty bourgeoisie. In italy, it has a very large base -- the petty bourgeoisie of the towns and cities, and the peasantry. In Germany, likewise, there is a large base for fascism.... It may be said, and this is true to a certain extent, that the new middle class, the functionaries of the state, the private administrators, etc., can constitute such a base. But this is a new question that must be analyzed.... In order to be capable of foreseeing anything with regard to fascism, it is necessary to have a definition of that idea. What is fascism? What are its base, its form, and its characteristics? How will its development take place? It is necessary to proceed in a scientific and Marxian manner. HOW MUSSOLINI TRIUMPHED >From What Next? Vital Question for the German Proletariat, 1932 * * * At the moment that the "normal" police and military resources of the bourgeois dictatorship, together with their parliamentary screens, no longer suffice to hold society in a state of equilibrium -- the turn of the fascist regime arrives. Through the fascist agency, capitalism sets in motion the masses of the crazed petty bourgeoisie and the bands of declassed and demoralized lumpenproletariat -- all the countless human beings whom finance capital itself has brought to desperation and frenzy. >From fascism the bourgeoisie demands a thorough job; once it has resorted to methods of civil war, it insists on having peace for a period of years. And the fascist agency, by utilizing the petty bourgeoisie as a battering ram, by overwhelming all obstacles in its path, does a thorough job. After fascism is victorious, finance capital directly and immediately gathers into its hands, as in a vise of steel, all the organs and institutions of sovereignty, the executive administrative, and educational powers of the state: the entire state apparatus together with the army, the municipalities, the universities, the schools, the press, the trade unions, and the co-operatives. When a state turns fascist, it does not mean only that the forms and methods of government are changed in accordance the patterns set by Mussolini -- the changes in this sphere ultimately play a minor role -- but it means first of all for the most part that the workers' organizations are annihilated; that the proletariat is reduced to an amorphous state; and that a system of administration is created which penetrates deeply into the masses and which serves to frustrate the independent crystallization of the proletariat. Therein precisely is the gist of fascism.... * * * Italian fascism was the immediate outgrowth of the betrayal by the reformists of the uprising of the Italian proletariat. From the time the [first world] war ended, there was an upward trend in the revolutionary movement in Italy, and in September 1920 it resulted in the seizure of factories and industries by the workers. The dictatorship of the proletariat was an actual fact; all that was lacking was to organize it and draw from it all the necessary conclusions. The social democracy took fright and sprang back. After its bold and heroic exertions, the proletariat was left facing the void. The disruption of the revolutionary movement became the most important factor in the growth of fascism. In September, the revolutionary advance came to a standstill; and November already witnessed the first major demonstration of the fascists (the seizure of Bologna). [NOTE: The fascist campaign of violence began in Bologna, November 21, 1920. When the social-democratic councilmen, victorious in the municipal elections, emerged from city hall to present the new mayor, they were met by gunfire in which 10 were killed and 100 wounded. The fascists followed up with "punitive expeditions" into the surrounding countryside, a stronghold of the "Red Leagues". Blackshirt "action squadrons" in vehicles supplied by big landowners, took over villages in lightning raids, beating and killing leftist peasants and labor leaders, wrecking radical headquarters, and terrorizing the populace. Emboldened by their easy successes, the fascists then launched large-scale attacks in the big cities.] True, the proletariat, even after the September catastrophe, was capable of waging defensive battles. But the social democracy was concerned with only one thing: to withdraw the workers from combat at the cost of one concession after another. The social democracy hoped that the docile conduct of the workers would restore the "public opinion" of the bourgeoisie against the fascists. Moreover, the reformists even banked strongly upon the help of King Victor Emmanuel. To the last hour, they restrained the workers with might and main from giving battle to Mussolini's bands. It availed them nothing. The crown, along with the upper crust of the bourgeoisie, swung over to the side of fascism. Convinced at the last moment that fascism was not to be checked by obedience, the social democrats issued a call to the workers for a general strike. But their proclamation suffered a fiasco. The reformists had dampened the powder so long, in their fear lest it should explode, that when they finally with a trembling hand did apply a burning fuse to it, the powder did not catch. Two years after its inception, fascism was in power. It entrenched itself thanks to the facts the first period of its overlordship coincided with a favorable economic conjuncture, which followed the depression of 1921-22. The fascists crushed the retreating proletariat by the onrushing forces of the petty bourgeoisie. But this was not achieved at a single blow. Even after he assumed power, Mussolini proceeded on his course with due caution: he lacked as yet ready-made models. During the first two years, not even the constitution was altered. The fascist government took on the character of a coalition. In the meantime, the fascist bands were busy at work with clubs, knives, and pistols. Only thus was the fascist government created slowly, which meant the complete strangulation of all independent mass organizations. Mussolini attained this at the cost of bureaucratizing the fascist party itself. After utilizing the onrushing forces of the petty bourgeoisie, fascism strangled it within the vise of the bourgeois state. Mussolini could not have done otherwise, for the disillusionment of the masses he had united was precipitating itself into the most immediate danger ahead. Fascism, become bureaucratic, approaches very closely to other forms of military and police dictatorship. It no longer possesses its former social support. The chief reserve of fascism -- the petty bourgeoisie -- has been depicted. Only historical inertia enables the fascist government to keep the proletariat in a state of dispersion and helplessness.... In its politics as regards Hitler, the German social democracy has not been able to add a single word: all it does is repeat more ponderously whatever the Italian reformists in their own time performed with greater flights of temperament. The latter explained fascism as a postwar psychosis; the German social democracy sees in it a "Versailles" or crisis psychosis. In both instances, the reformists shut their eyes to the organic character of fascism as a mass movement growing out of the collapse of capitalism. [NOTE: The Versailles Treaty, imposed on Germany after WWI; its most hated feature was the unending tribute to the victorious allies in the form of "reparations" for war damages and losses. The "crisis" referred to in the above paragraph was the economic depression that swept the capitalist world after the Wall Street crash of 1929.] Fearful of the revolutionary mobilization of the workers, the Italian reformists banked all their hopes of the "state". Their slogan was, "Help! Victor Emmanuel, exert pressure!" The German social democracy lacks such a democratic bulwark as a monarch loyal to the constitution. So they must be content with a president -- "Help! Hindenburg, exert pressure!" [NOTE: Field Marshal Paul von Hindenburg (1847-1934), Junker general who gained fame in World War I and later became president of the Weimar Republic. In 1932, the social democrats supported him for re-election as a "lesser evil" to the Nazis. He appointed Hitler chancellor in January 1933.] While waging battle against Mussolini, that is, while retreating before him, Turati let loose his dazzling motto, "One must have the manhood to be a coward." [Filippo Turati (1857-1937), leading reformist theoretician of the Italian Socialist Party.] The German reformists are less frisky with their slogans. They demand "Courage under unpopularity" (Mut zur Unpopularitaet) -- which amounts to the same thing. One must not be afraid of the unpopularity which has been aroused by one's own cowardly temporizing with the enemy. Identical causes produce identical effects. Were the march of events dependent upon the social-democratic party leadership, Hitler's career would be assured. One must admit, however, that the German Communist Party has also learned little from the Italian experience. The Italian Communist Party came into being almost simultaneously with fascism. But the same conditions of revolutionary ebb tide, which carried the fascists to power, served to deter the development of the Communist Party. It did not give itself an accounting as to the full sweep of the fascist danger; it lulled itself with revolutionary illusions; it was irreconcilably antagonistic to the policy of the united front; in short, it was stricken with all the infantile diseases. Small wonder! It was only two years old. In its eyes, fascism appeared to be only "capitalist reaction". The particular traits of fascism which spring from the mobilization of the petty bourgeoisie against the proletariat, the Communist Party was unable to discern. Italian comrades inform me that, with the sole exception of Gramsci, the Communist Party would not even allow for the possibility of the fascists' seizing power. Once the proletarian revolution had suffered defeat, once capitalism had held its ground and the counter-revolution had triumphed, how could there be any further kind of counter-revolutionary upheaval? How could the bourgeoisie rise up against itself! Such was the gist of the political orientation of the Italian Communist Party. Moreover, one must not lose sight of the fact that Italian fascism was then a new phenomenon, just in the process of formation; it would not have been an easy task even for a more experienced party to distinguish its specific traits. [NOTE: Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937): a founder of the Italian Communist Party, imprisoned by Mussolini in 1926, he died in prison 11 years later. He sent a letter from prison, in the name of the Italian party's political committee, protesting Stalin's campaign against the Left Opposition. Taglatti, then in Moscow as the Italian representative to the Comintern, suppressed the letter. Throughout the Stalin era, Gramsci's memory was deliberately effaced. In the period of de-Stalinization, however, he was "rediscovered" by the Italian Communist Party and officially enshrined as a hero and martyr. Since, there has been considerable international acclaim of his theoretical writings, particularly his prison notebooks.] The leadership of the German Communist Party today reproduces almost literally the position from which the Italian Communists took their point of departure; fascism is nothing else but capitalist reaction; from the point of view of the proletariat, the difference between divers types of capitalist reaction are meaningless. This vulgar radicalism is the less excusable because the German party is much older than the Italian was at a corresponding period; in addition, Marxism is enriched now by the tragic experience in Italy. To insist that fascism is already here, or to deny the very possibility of its coming to power, amounts politically to one and the same thing. By ignoring the specific nature of of fascism, the will to fight against it inevitably becomes paralyzed. The brunt of the blame must be borne, of course, by the leadership of the Comintern. Italian Communists above all others were duty-bound to raise their voices in alarm. But Stalin, together with Manuilsky, compelled them to disavow the most important lessons of their own annihilation. [NOTE: Dmitri Manuilsky (1883-1952): Headed the Comintern from 1929 to 1934; his removal heralded switch from ultra-leftism to the opportunism of the Popular Front period. Later appeared on diplomatic stage, as delegate to United Nations.] We have already observed with what diligent alacrity Ercoli switched over to the position of social fascism -- i.e., to the position of passively waiting for the fascist victory in Germany. [NOTE: Ercoli. Comintern pen name of Palmiro Togliatti (1893-1964). Headed Italian Communist Party after Gramsci's imprisonment. He survived all zigzags in Comintern line, but after Stalin's death he criticized Stalin's rule as well some of its continuing features in the USSR and International Communist movement.] THE FASCIST DANGER LOOMS IN GERMANY >From The Turn in the Communist International and the German Situation, 1930 * * * The official press of the Comintern is now depicting the results of the [September 1930] German elections as a prodigious victory of Communism, which places on the order of the day the slogan of Soviet Germany. The bureaucratic optimists do not want to reflect upon the meaning of the relation of forces which is disclosed by the election statistics. They examine the figure of the increased Communist vote independently of the revolutionary tasks created by the situation and the obstacles it sets up. The Communist Party received around 4,600,000 votes as against 3,300,000 in 1928. From the viewpoint of "normal" parliamentary mechanics, the gain of 1,300,000 votes is considerable, even if we take into consideration the rise in the total number of voters. But the gain of the party pales completely beside the leap of fascism from 800,000 to 6,400,000 votes. Of no less important significance for evaluation the elections is the fact that the social democracy, in spite of substantial losses, retained its basic cadres and still received a considerably greater number of workers' votes [8,600,000] than the Communist Party. Meanwhile, if we should ask ourselves, "What combination of international and domestic circumstances could be capable of turning the working class towards Communism with greater velocity?" we could not find an example of more favorable circumstances for such a turn than the situation in present-day Germany: Young's noose, the economic crisis, the disintegration of the rules, the crisis of parliamentarism, the terrific self-exposure of the social democracy in power. From the viewpoint of these concrete historical circumstances, the specific gravity of the German Communist Party in the social life of the country, in spite of the gain of 1,300,000 votes, remains proportionately small. [NOTE: "Young's noose": a reference to the Young Plan. After Owen D. Young, American big businessman, who was Agent-General for the German Reparations during the 1920s. In summer of 1929, he was chairman of the conference which adopted his plan, which replaced the unsuccessful Dawes Plan, to "facilitate" Germany's payment of reparations as per the Treaty of Versailles.] The weakness of the position of Communism, inextricably bound up with the policy and regime of the Comintern, is revealed more clearly if we compare the present social weight of the Communist Party with those concrete and unpostponable tasks which the present historical circumstances put before it. It is true that the Communist Party itself did not expect such a gain. But this proves that under the blows of mistakes and defeats, the leadership of the Communist parties has become unused to big aims and perspectives. If yesterday it underestimated its own possibilities,then today it once more underestimates the difficulties. In this way, one danger is multiplied by another. In the meantime, the first characteristic of a really revolutionary party is -- to be able to look reality in the face. * * * In order that the social crisis may bring about the proletarian revolution, it is necessary that, besides other conditions, a decisive shift of the petty bourgeois classes occurs in the direction of the proletariat. This gives the proletariat a chance to put itself at the head of the nation as its leader. The last election revealed -- and this is where its principle symptomatic significance lies -- a shift in the opposite direction. Under the blow of the crisis, the petty bourgeoisie swung, not in the direction of the proletarian revolution, but in the direction of the most extreme imperialist reaction, pulling behind it considerable sections of the proletariat. The gigantic growth of National Socialism is an expression of two factors: a deep social crisis, throwing the petty bourgeois masses off balance, and the lack of a revolutionary party that would be regarded by the masses of the people as an acknowledged revolutionary leader. If the communist Party is the party of revolutionary hope, then fascism, as a mass movement, is the party of counter-revolutionary despair. When revolutionary hope embraces the whole proletarian mass, it inevitably pulls behind it on the road of revolution considerable and growing sections of the petty bourgeoisie. Precisely in this sphere the election revealed the opposite picture: counter-revolutionary despair embraced the petty bourgeois mass with such a force that it drew behind it many sections of the proletariat.... Fascism in Germany has become a real danger, as an acute expression of the helpless position of the bourgeois regime, the conservative role of the social democracy in this regime, and the accumulated powerlessness of the Communist Party to abolish it. Whoever denies this is either blind or a braggart.... The danger acquires particular acuteness in connection with the question of the tempo of development, which does not depend upon us alone. The malarial character of the political curve revealed by the election speaks for the fact that the tempo of development of the national crisis may turn out to be very speedy. In other words, the course of events in the very near future may resurrect in Germany, on a new historical plane, the old tragic contradiction between the maturity of a revolutionary situation, on the one hand, and the weakness and strategical impotence of the revolutionary party, on the other. This must be said clearly, openly and, above all, in time. > * * * Can the strength of the conservative resistance of the social-democratic workers be calculated beforehand? It cannot. In the light of the events of the past year, this strength seems to be gigantic. But the truth is that what helped most of all to weld together social democracy was the wrong policy of the Communist Party, which found its highest generalization in the absurd theory of social fascism. To measure the real resistance of the social democratic ranks, a different measuring instrument is required, that is, a correct Communist tactic. With this condition -- and it is not a small condition -- the degree of internal unity of the social democracy can be revealed in a comparatively brief period. In a different form, what has been said above also applies to fascism: It emanated, aside from the other conditions present, in the tremblings of the Zinoviev-Stalin strategy. What is its force for offensive? What is its stability? has it reached its culminating point, as the optimists ex-officio [Comintern and Communist Party officials] assure us, or is it only on the first step of the ladder? This cannot be foretold mechanically. It can be determined only through action. Precisely in regard to fascism, which is a razor in the hands of the class enemy, the wrong policy of the Comintern may produce fatal results in a brief period. On the other hand, a correct policy -- not in such a short period, it is true -- can undermine the positions of fascism.... [NOTE: "Zinoviev-Stalin strategy": Gregory Y. Zinoviev (1883-1936), chairman of the Comintern from its founding in 1919 till his removal by Stalin in 1926. After Lenin's death, Zinoviev and Kamenev made a bloc with Stalin (the Troika) against Trotsky and dominated the Soviet party. In the period of the Zinoviev-Stalin domination of the Comintern, an opportunist line led to a series of defeats and missed opportunities, most notably the calling off of the German revolution of 1923. After breaking with Stalin, Zinoviev united his following with the Trotskyist Left Opposition. But in 1928, after the expulsion from the party of the United Opposition, Zinoviev capitulated to Stalin. Readmitted to the party, he was expelled again in 1932. After disavowal of all critical views, he was again readmitted, but in 1934, he was expelled and imprisoned. He "confessed" at the first of the great Moscow Trials in 1936 and was executed.] If the Communist Party, in spite of the exceptionally favorable circumstances, has proved powerless seriously to shake the structure of the social democracy with the aid of the formula of "social fascism", then real fascism now threatens this structure, no longer with wordy formulae of so-called radicalism, but with the chemical formulas of explosives. No matter how true it is that the social democracy by its whole policy prepared the blossoming of fascism, it is no less true that fascism comes forward as a deadly threat primarily to that same social democracy, all of whose magnificence is inextricably bound with parliamentary-democratic-pacifist forms and methods of government... The policy of a united front of the workers against fascism flows from this situation. It opens up tremendous possibilities to the Communist Party. A condition for success, however, is the rejection of the theory and practice of "social fascism", the harm of which becomes a positive measure under the present circumstances. The social crisis will inevitably produce deep cleavages within the social democracy. The radicalization of the masses will affect the social democrats. We will inevitably have to make agreements with various social-democratic organizations and factions against fascism, putting definite conditions in this connection to the leaders, before the eyes of the masses.... We must return from the empty official phrase about the united front to the policy of the united front as it was formulated by Lenin and always applied by the Bolsheviks in 1917. AN AESOP FABLE >From What Next? Vital Question for the German Proletariat, 1932 * * * A cattle dealer once drove some bulls to the slaughterhouse. And the butcher came night with his sharp knife. "Let us close ranks and jack up this executioner on our horns," suggested one of the bulls. "If you please, in what way is the butcher any worse than the dealer who drove us hither with his cudgel?" replied the bulls, who had received their political education in Manuilsky's institute. [The Comintern.] "But we shall be able to attend to the dealer as well afterwards!" "Nothing doing," replied the bulls firm in their principles, to the counselor. "You are trying, from the left, to shield our enemies -- you are a social-butcher yourself." And they refused to close ranks. THE GERMAN COPS AND ARMY >From What Next? Vital Question for the German Proletariat, 1932 * * * In case of actual danger, the social democracy banks not on the "Iron Front" but on the Prussian police. It is reckoning without its host! The fact that the police was originally recruited in large numbers from among social-democratic workers is absolutely meaningless. Consciousness is determined by environment even in this instance. The worker who becomes a policeman in the service of the capitalist state, is a bourgeois cop, not a worker. Of late years, these policemen have had to do much more fighting with revolutionary workers than with Nazi students. Such training does not fail to leave its effects. And above all: every policeman knows that though governments may change, the police remains. [NOTE: "The Iron Front": A bloc between several big trade unions and bourgeois "republican" groups with little or no following or prestige among the masses. It was created by the social democrats toward the end of 1931. Combat groups called the Iron Fist were set up within the unions, and workers' sports organizations were brought into the Iron Front. However, its first parades and rallies, at which thousands of workers raised their fists, shouted "Freedom", and swore to defend democracy. The masses in the Social Democratic Party and unions really believed that this organization would be used to stop Hitler. It was not.] In its New Year's issue, the theoretical organ of the social democracy, Dar Freie Wort (what a wretched sheet!), prints an article in which the policy of "toleration" is expounded in its highest sense. Hitler, it appears, can never come to power against the police and the Reichswehr [German army]. Now, according to the constitution, the Reichswehr is under the command of the president of the Republic. Therefore fascism, it follows, is not dangerous so long as a president faithful to the constitution remains at the head of the government. Bruening's regime must be supported until the presidential elections so that a constitutional president may then be elected, through an alliance with the parliamentary bourgeoisie; and thereby Hitler's road to power will be blocked for another seven years.... [NOTE: Heinrich Bruening was chancellor from 1930-32. Regular parliamentary government in Germany ended in March 1930. There followed a series of Bonapartist regimes -- Bruening, von Papen, von Schleicher, i.e., chancellors ruling not by ordinary parliamentary procedures but by "emergency" decrees. These Bonapartist figures presented themselves as political saviors needed to get the country through its crisis, and thus as above class and party. They depended not on the old bourgeois democratic party system but on their command of the police, army, and government bureaucracy. Pretending to be saving the nation from the dangers on both the left (socialists and communists) and the right (fascists), they struck their heaviest blows against the left, since their primary interest was saving capitalism.] The politicians of reformism, these dexterous wire-pullers, artful intriguers and careerists, expert parliamentary and ministerial machinators, are no sooner thrown out of their habitual sphere by the course of events, no sooner are the placed face to face with momentous contingencies than they reveal themselves to be -- there is no milder expression for it -- inept bodies. To rely upon a president is only to rely upon "the government"! Faced with the impending clash between the proletariat and the fascist petty bourgeoisie -- two camps which together comprise the crushing majority of the German nation -- these Marxists from the Vorwaerts [principal social-democratic newspaper] yelp for the nightwatchman to come to their aid, "Help! Government, exert pressure!" (Staat, greif zu!) BOURGEOISIE, PETTY BOURGEOISIE, AND PROLETARIAT >From The Only Road for Germany written September 1932, published in the USA April 1933 * * * Any serious analysis of the political situation must take as its point of departure the mutual relations among the three classes: the bourgeoisie, the petty bourgeoisie (including the peasantry), and the proletariat. The economically powerful big bourgeoisie, in itself, represents an infintesimal minority of the nation. To enforce its domination, it must ensure a definite mutual relationship with the petty bourgeoisie and, through its mediation, with the proletariat. To understand the dialectic of the relation among the three classes, we must differentiate three historical stages: at the dawn of capitalistic development, when the bourgeoisie required revolutionary methods to solve its tasks; in the period of bloom and maturity of the capitalist regime, when the bourgeoisie endowed its domination with orderly, pacific, conservative, democratic forms; finally, at the decline of capitalism, when the bourgeoisie is forced to resort to methods of civil war against proletariat to protect its right of exploitation. The political programs characteristic of these three stages -- JACOBINISM [left wing of petty bourgeois forces in Great French Revolution; in most revolutionary phase, led by Robespierre], reformist DEMOCRACY (social democracy included), and FASCISM -- are basically programs of petty bourgeois currents. This fact alone, more than anything else, shows of what tremendous -- rather, of what decisive -- importance the self-determination of the petty bourgeois masses of the people is for the whole fate of bourgeois society. Nevertheless, the relationship between the bourgeoisie and its basic social support, the petty bourgeoisie, does not at all rest upon reciprocal confidence and pacific collaboration. In its mass, the petty bourgeoisie is an exploited and disenfranchised class. It regards the bourgeoisie with envy and often with hatred. The bourgeoisie, on the other hand, while utilizing the support of the petty bourgeoisie, distrusts the latter, for it very correctly fears its tendency to break down the barriers set up for it from above. While they were laying out and clearing the road for bourgeois development,the Jacobins engaged, at every step, in sharp clashes with the bourgeoisie. They served it in intransigent struggle against it. After they had culminated their limited historical role, the Jacobins fell, for the domination of capital was predeterminated. For a whole series of stages, the bourgeoisie entrenched its power under the form of parliamentary democracy. Even then, not peacefully and not voluntarily. The bourgeoisie was mortally afraid of universal suffrage. But in the last instance, it succeeded, with the aid of a combination of violent measures and concessions, of privations and reforms, in subordinating within the framework of formal democracy not only the petty bourgeoisie but in considerable measure also the proletariat, by means of the new petty bourgeoisie -- the labor aristocracy. In August 1914, the imperialist bourgeoisie was able, with the means of parliamentary democracy, to lead millions of workers and peasants into the war. [NOTE: August 4, 1914: collapse of the Second International. The German Social-Democratic Party representatives in the Reichstag voted for the war budget of the imperialist governments; on the same day, representatives of the French Socialist Party did likewise in the Chamber of Deputies.] But precisely with the war begins the distinct decline of capitalism and, above all, of its democratic form of domination. It is now no longer a matter of new reforms and alms, but of cutting down and abolishing the old ones. Therewith the bourgeoisie comes into conflict into only with the institutions of proletarian democracy (trade unions and political parties) but also with parliamentary democracy, within the framework of which arose the labor organizations. Therefore, the campaign against "Marxism" on the one hand and against democratic parliamentarism on the other. But just as the summits of the liberal bourgeoisie in its time were unable, by their own force alone, to get rid of feudalism, monarchy, and the church, so the magnates of finance capital are unable, by their force alone, to cope with the proletariat. They need the support of the petty bourgeoisie. For this purpose, it must be whipped up, put on its feet, mobilized, armed. But this method has its dangers. While it makes use of fascism, the bourgeoisie nevertheless fears it. Pilsudski was forced, in May 1926, to save bourgeois society by a coup d'etat directed against the traditional parties of the Polish bourgeoisie. The matter went so far that the official leader of the Polish Communist Party, Warski, who came over from Rosa Luxemburg not to Lenin but to Stalin, took the coup d'etat of Pilsudski to be the road of the "revolutionary democratic dictatorship" and called upon the workers to support Pilsudski. [NOTE: Joseph Pilsudski (1876-1935): Originally a socialist with nationalistic views, in 1920 he led the anti-Soviet forces in Poland; in 1926, he led a coup d'etat and established a fascist dictatorship. Warski: Friend of Rosa Luxemburg, he supported her differences with the Bolsheviks. When Comintern zigzagged to the left in its "Third Period" phase, Warski was demoted from leadership in the Polish Communist Party, but not expelled. He disappeared in the USSR during the great purge of 1936-38. Rosa Luxemburg (1870-1919): Great revolutionary theoretician and leader. Originally active in socialist movement of her native Poland, she later became a leader of the left wing of the German Social-Democratic Party. She and Karl Liebknecht were imprisoned for opposing World War I. After their release, they led the Spartakusbund. Both were arrested and assassinated during the unsuccessful revolution of 1919.] At the session of the Polish Commission of the Executive Committee of the Communist International on July 2, 1926, the author of these lines said on the subject of the events in Poland: "Taken as a whole, the Pilsudski overthrow is the petty bourgeois, 'plebian' manner of solving the burning problems of bourgeois society in its state of decomposition and decline. We have here already a direct resemblance to Italian fascism. "These two currents indubitably possess common features: they recruit their shock troops first of all from the petty bourgeoisie; Pilsudski as well as Mussolini worked with extra-parliamentary means, with open violence, with the methods of civil war; both were concerned not with the destruction but with the preservation of bourgeois society. While they raised the petty bourgeoisie on its feet, they openly aligned themselves, after the seizure of power, with the big bourgeoisie. Involuntarily, a historical generalization comes up here, recalling the evaluation given by Marx of Jacobinism as the plebian method of settling accounts with the feudal enemies of the bourgeoisie.... That was in the period of the rise of the bourgeoisie. Now we must say, in the period of the decline of bourgeois society, the bourgeoisie again needs the 'plebian' method of resolving its no longer progressive but entirely reactionary tasks. In this sense, fascism is a caricature of Jacobinism. "The bourgeoisie is incapable of maintaining itself in power by the means and methods of the parliamentary state created by itself; it needs fascism as a weapon of self-defense, at least in critical instances. Nevertheless, the bourgeoisie does not like the 'plebian' method of resolving its tasks. It was always hostile of Jacobinism, which cleared the road for the development of bourgeois society with its blood. The fascists are immeasurably closer to the decadent bourgeoisie than the Jacobins were to the rising bourgeoisie. Nevertheless, the sober bourgeoisie does not look very favorably even upon the fascist mode of resolving its tasks, for the concussions, although they are brought forth in the interests of bourgeois society, are linked up with dangers to it. Therefore, the opposition between fascism and the bourgeois parties. "The big bourgeoisie likes fascism as little as a man with aching molars likes to have his teeth pulled. The sober circles of bourgeois society have followed with misgivings the work of the dentist Pilsudski, but in the last analysis they have become reconciled to the inevitable, though with threats, with horse-trades and all sorts of bargaining. Thus the petty bourgeoisie's idol of yesterday becomes transformed into the gendarme of capital." To this attempt at marking out the historical place of fascism as the political reliever of the social democracy, there was counterposed the theory of social fascism. At first it could appear as a pretentious, blustering, but harmless stupidity. Subsequent events have shown what a pernicious influence the Stalinist theory actually exercised on the entire development of the Communist International. Does it follow from the historical role of Jacobinism, of democracy, and of fascism, that the petty bourgeoisie is condemned to remain a tool in the hands of capital to the end of its days? It things were so, then the dictatorship of the proletariat would be impossible in a number of countries in which the petty bourgeoisie constitutes the majority of the nation and, more than that, it would be rendered extremely difficult in other countries in which the petty bourgeoisie represents an important minority. Fortunately, things are not so. The experience of the Paris Commune [first "dictatorship of the proletariat", March 18, 1871] first showed, at least within the limits of one city, just as the experience of the October Revolution [Russian Revolution of 1917] has shown after it on a much larger scale and over an incomparably longer period, that the alliance of the petty bourgeoisie and the big bourgeoisie is not indissoluble. Since the petty bourgeoisie is incapable of an independent policy (that is also why the petty bourgeois "democratic dictatorship" is unrealizable), no other choice is left for it than that between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. In the epoch of the rise, the growth, and the bloom of capitalism, the petty bourgeoisie, despite acute outbreaks of discontent, generally marched obediently in the capitalist harness. Nor could it do anything else. But under the conditions of capitalist disintegration, and of the impasse in the economic situation, the petty bourgeoisie strives, seeks, attempts to tear itself loose from the fetters of the old masters and rulers of society. It is quite capable of linking up its fates with that of the proletariat. For that, only one thing is needed: the petty bourgeoisie must acquired faith in the ability of the proletariat to lead society onto a new road. The proletariat can inspire this faith only by its strength, by the firmness of its actions, by a skillful offensive against the enemy, by the success of its revolutionary policy. But, woe, if the revolutionary party does not measure up to the height of the situation! The daily struggle of the proletariat sharpens the instability of bourgeois society. The strikes and the political disturbances aggravated the economic situation of the country. The petty bourgeoisie could reconcile itself temporarily to the growing privations, if it arrived by experience at the conviction that the proletariat is in a position to lead it onto a new road. But if the revolutionary party, in spite of a class struggle becoming incessantly more accentuated, proves time and again to be incapable of uniting the working class about it, if it vacillates, becomes confused, contradicts itself, then the petty bourgeoisie loses patience and begins to look upon the revolutionary workers as those responsible for its own misery. All the bourgeois parties, including the social democracy, turn its thoughts in this very direction. When the social crisis takes on an intolerable acuteness, a particular party appears on the scene with the direct aim of agitating the petty bourgeoisie to a white heat and of directing its hatred and its despair against the proletariat. In Germany, this historical function is fulfilled by national Socialism (Nazism), a broad current whose ideology is composed of all the putrid vapors of disintegrating bourgeois society. THE COLLAPSE OF BOURGEOIS DEMOCRACY >From Whither France?, 1934 * * * After the war, a series of brilliantly victorious revolutions occurred in Russia, Germany, Austria-Hungary, and later in Spain. But it was only in Russia that the proletariat took full power into its hands, expropriated its exploiters, and knew how to create and maintain a workers' state. Everywhere else the proletariat, despite its victory, stopped halfway because of the mistakes of its leadership. As a result, power slipped from its hands, shifted from left to right, and fell prey to fascism. In a series of other countries, power passed into the hands of a military dictatorship. Nowhere were the parliaments capable of reconciling class contradictions and assuring the peaceful development of events. Conflicts were solved arms in hand. The French people for a long time thought that fascism had nothing whatever to do with them. They had a republic in which all questions were dealt with by the sovereign people through the exercise of universal suffrage. But on February 6, 1934, several thousand fascists and royalists, armed with revolvers, clubs, and razors, imposed upon the country the reactionary government of Doumergue, under whose protection the fascist bands continue to grow and arm themselves. What does tomorrow hold? [NOTE: Gaston Doumergue: Bonapartist premier of France. Succeeded Edouard Daladier. Daladier government fell the day after the fascist riots of February 6, 1934.] Of course, in France, as in certain other European countries (England, Belgium, Holland, Switzerland, the Scandinavian countries), there still exist parliaments, elections, democratic liberties, or their remnants. But in all these countries, the same historic laws operate, the laws of capitalist decline. If the means of production remain in the hands of a small number of capitalists, there is no way out for society. It is condemned to go from crisis to crisis, from need to misery, from bad to worse. In the various countries, the decrepitude and disintegration of capitalism are expressed in diverse forms and at unequal rhythms. But the basic features of the process are the same everywhere. The bourgeoisie is leading its society to complete bankruptcy. It is capable of assuring the people neither bread nor peace. This is precisely why it cannot any longer tolerate the democratic order. It is forced to smash the workers and peasants by the use of physical violence. The discontent of the workers and peasants, however, cannot be brought to an end by the police alone. Moreover, if it often impossible to make the army march against the people. It begins by disintegrating and ends with the passage of a large section of the soldiers over to the people's side. That is why finance capital is obliged to create special armed bands, trained to fight the workers just as certain breeds of dog are trained to hunt game. The historic function of fascism is to smash the working class, destroy its organizations, and stifle political liberties when the capitalists find themselves unable to govern and dominate with the help of democratic machinery. The fascists find their human material mainly in the petty bourgeoisie. The latter has been entirely ruined by big capital. There is no way out for it in the present social order, but it knows of no other. Its dissatisfaction, indignation, and despair are diverted by the fascists away from big capital and against the workers. It may be said that fascism is the act of placing the petty bourgeoisie at the disposal of its most bitter enemies. In this way, big capital ruins the middle classes and then, with the help of hired fascist demagogues, incites the despairing petty bourgeoisie against the worker. The bourgeois regime can be preserved only by such murderous means as these. For how long? Until it is overthrown by proletarian revolution. DOES THE PETTY BOURGEOISIE FEAR REVOLUTION? >From Whither France?, 1934 * * * Parliamentary cretins, who consider themselves connoisseurs of the people, like to repeat: "One must not frighten the middle classes with revolution. They do not like extremes." In this general form, this affirmation is absolutely false. Naturally, the petty proprietor prefers order so long as business is going well and so long as he hopes that tomorrow it will go better. But when this hope is lost, he is easily enraged and is ready to give himself over to the most extreme measures. Otherwise, how could he have overthrown the democratic state and brought fascism to power in Italy and Germany? The despairing petty bourgeois sees in fascism, above all, a fighting force against big capital, and believes that, unlike the working-class parties which deal only in words, fascism will use force to establish more "justice". The peasant and the artisan are in their manner realists. They understand that one cannot forego the use of force. It is false, thrice false, to affirm that the present petty bourgeoisie is not going to the working-class parties because it fears "extreme measures". Quite the contrary. The lower petty bourgeoisie, its great masses, only see in the working-class parties parliamentary machines. They do not believe in their strength, nor in their capacity to struggle, nor in their readiness this time to conduct the struggle to the end. And if this is so, is it worth the trouble to replace the democratic capitalist representatives by their parliamentary confreres on the left? That is how the semi-exploited, ruined, and discontented proprietor reasons of feels. Without an understanding of this psychology of the peasants, the artisans, the employees, the petty functionaries, etc. -- a psychology which flows from the social crisis -- it is impossible to elaborate a correct policy. The petty bourgeoisie is economically dependent and politically atomized. That is why it cannot conduct an independent policy. It needs a "leader" who inspires it with confidence. This individual or collective leadership, i.e., a personage or party, can be given to it by one or the other of the fundamental classes -- either the big bourgeoisie or the proletariat. Fascism unties and arms the scattered masses. Out of human dust, it organizes combat detachments. It thus gives the petty bourgeoisie the illusion of being an independent force. It begins to imagine that it will really command the state. It is not surprising that these illusions and hopes turn the head of the petty bourgeoisie! But the petty bourgeoisie can also find a leader in the proletariat. This was demonstrated in Russia and partially in Spain. In Italy, in Germany, and in Austria, the petty bourgeoisie gravitated in this direction. But the parties of the proletariat did not rise to their historic task. To bring the petty bourgeoisie to its side, the proletariat must win its confidence. And for that it must have confidence in its own strength. It must have a clear program of action and must be ready to struggle for power by all possible means. Tempered by it revolutionary party for a decisive and pitiless struggle, the proletariat says to the peasants and petty bourgeoisie of the cities: "We are struggling for power. Here is our program. We are ready to discuss with you changes in this program. We will employ violence only against big capital and its lackeys, but with you toilers, we desire to conclude an alliance on the basis of a given program." The peasants will understand such language. Only, they must have faith in the capacity of the proletariat to seize power. But for that it is necessary to purge the united front of all equivocation, of all indecision, of all hollow phrases. It is necessary to understand the situation and to place oneself seriously on the revolutionary road. THE WORKERS' MILITIA AND ITS OPPONENTS >From Whither France?, 1934 * * * To struggle, it is necessary to conserve and strengthen the instrument and the means of struggle -- organizations, the press, meetings, etc. Fascism [in France] threatens all of that directly and immediately. It is still too weak for the direct struggle for power, but it is strong enough to attempt to beat down the working-class organizations bit by bit, to temper its bands in its attacks, and to spread dismay and lack of confidence in their forces in the ranks of the workers. Fascism finds unconscious helpers in all those who say that the "physical struggle" is impermissible or hopeless, and demand of Doumergue the disarmament of his fascist guard. Nothing is so dangerous for the proletariat, especially in the present situation, as the sugared poison of false hopes. Nothing increases the insolence of the fascists so much as "flabby pacificism" on the part of the workers' organizations. Nothing so destroys the confidence of the middle classes in the working-class as temporizing, passivity, and the absence of the will to struggle. Le Populaire [the Socialist Party paper] and especially l'Humanite [the Communist Party newspaper] write every day: "The united front is a barrier against fascism"; "the united front will not permit..."; "the fascists will not dare", etc. These are phrases. It is necessary to say squarely to the workers, Socialists, and Communists: do not allow yourselves to be lulled by the phrases of superficial and irresponsible journalists and orators. It is a question of our heads and the future of socialism. It is not that we deny the importance of the united front. We demanded it when the leaders of both parties were against it. The united front opens up numerous possibilities, but nothing more. In itself, the untied front decides nothing. Only the struggle of the masses decides. The untied front will reveal its value when Communist detachments will come to the help of Socialist detachments nd vice versa in the case of an attack by the fascist bands against Le Populaire or l'Humanite. But for that, proletarian combat detachments must exist and be educated, trained, and armed. And if there is not an organization of defense, i.e., a workers' militia, Le Populaire or l'Humanite will be able to write as many articles as they like on the omnipotence of the united front, but the two papers will find themselves defenseless before the first well-prepared attack of the fascists. We propose to make a critical study of the "arguments" and the "theories" of the opponents of the workers' militia who are very numerous and influential in the two working-class parties. "We need mass self-defense and not the militia," we are often told. But what is this "mass self-defense" without combat organizations, without specialized cadres, without arms? To give over the defense against fascism to unorganized and unprepared masses left to themselves would be to play a role incomparably lower than the role of Pontius Pilate. To deny the role of the militia is to deny the role of the vanguard. Then why a party? Without the support of the masses, the militia is nothing. But without organized combat detachments, the most heroic masses will be smashed bit by bit by the fascist gangs. It is nonsense to counterpose the militia to self-defense. The militia is an organ of self-defense. "To call for the organization of a militia," say some opponents who, to be sure, are the least serious and honest, "is to engage in provocation." This is not an argument but an insult. If the necessity for the defense of the workers' organizations flows from the whole situation, how then can one not call for the creation of the militia? Perhaps they mean to say that the creation of a militia "provokes" fascist attacks and government repression. In that case, this is an absolutely reactionary argument. Liberalism has always said to the workers that by their class struggle they "provoke" the reaction. The reformists repeated this accusation against the Marxists, the Mensheviks against the Bolsheviks. These accusations reduced themselves, in the final analysis, to the profound thought that if the oppressed do not balk, the oppressors will not be obliged to beat them. This is the philosophy of Tolstoy and Gandhi but never that of Marx and Lenin. If l'Humanite wants hereafter to develop the doctrine of "non-resistance to evil by violence", it should take for its symbol not the hammer and sickle, emblem of the October Revolution, but the pious goat, which provides Gandhi with his milk. "But the arming of the workers is only opportune in a revolutionary situation, which does not yet exist." This profound argument means that the workers must permit themselves to be slaughtered until the situation becomes revolutionary. Those who yesterday preached the "third period" do not want to see what is going on before their eyes. The question of arms itself has come forward only because the "peaceful", "normal", "democratic" situation has given way to a stormy, critical, and unstable situation which can transform itself into a revolutionary, as well as a counter-revolutionary, situation. [NOTE: "The Third Period": According to the Stalinist schema, this was the "final period of capitalism", the period of its immediately impending demise and replacement by soviets. The period is notable for the Communists' ultra-left and adventurist tactics, notably the concept of social-fascism.] This alternative depends above all on whether the advanced workers will allow themselves to be attacked with impunity and defeated bit by bit or will reply to every blow by two of their own, arousing the courage of the oppressed and uniting them around their banner. A revolutionary situation does not fall from the skies. It takes form with the active participation of the revolutionary class and its party. The French Stalinists now argue that the militia did not safeguard the German proletariat from defeat. Only yesterday they completely denied any defeat in Germany and asserted that the policy of the German Stalinists was correct from beginning to end. Today, they see the entire evil in the German workers' militia (Rote Front) [i.e., Red Front Fighters: Communist-dominated militia banned by the social- democratic government after the Berlin May Day riots of 1929]. Thus, from one error they fall into a diametrically opposite one, no less monstrous. The militia, in itself, does not settle the question. A correct policy is necessary. Meanwhile,the policy of Stalinism in Germany ("social fascism is the chief enemy"), the split in the trade unions, the flirtation with nationalism, putschism) fatally led to the isolation of the proletarian vanguard and to its shipwreck. With an utterly worthless strategy, no militia could have saved the situation. It is nonsense to say that, in itself, the organization of the militia leads to adventures, provokes the enemy, replaces the political struggle by physical struggle, etc. In all these phrases, there is nothing but political cowardice. The militia, as the strong organization of the vanguard, is in fact the surest defense against adventures, against individual terrorism, against bloody spontaneous explosions. The militia is at the same time the only serious way of reducing to a minimum the civil war that fascism imposes upon the proletariat. Let the workers, despite the absence of a "revolutionary situation", occassionally correct the "papa's son" patriots in their own way, and the recruitment of new fascist bands will become incomparably more difficult. But here the strategists, tangled in their own reasoning, bring forward against us still more stupefying arguments. We quote textually: "If we reply to the revolver shots of the fascists with other revolver shots," writes l'Humanite of October 23 [1934], "we lose sight of the fact that fascism is the product of the capitalist regime and that in fighting against fascism it is the entire system which we face." It is difficult to accumulate in a few lines greater confusion or more errors. It is impossible to defend oneself against the fascists because they are -- "a product of the capitalist regime". That means, we have to renounce the whole struggle, for all contemporary social evils are "products of the capitalist system". When the fascists kill a revolutionist, or burn down the building of a proletarian newspaper, the workers are to sigh philosophically: "Alas! Murders and arson are products of the capitalist system", and go home with easy consciences. Fatalist prostration is substituted for the militant theory of Marx, to the sole advantage of the class enemy. The ruin of the petty bourgeoisie is, of course, the product of capitalism. The growth of the fascist bands is, in turn, a product of the ruin of the petty bourgeoisie. But on the other hand, the increase in the misery and the revolt of the proletariat are also products of capitalism, and the militia, in its turn, is the product of the sharpening of the class struggle. Why, then, for the "Marxists" of l'Humanite, are the fascist bands the legitimate product of capitalism and the workers' militia the illegitimate product of -- the Trotskyists? It is impossible to make head or tail of this. "We have to deal with the whole system," we are told. How? Over the heads of human beings? The fascists in the different countries began with their revolvers and ended by destroying the whole "system" of workers' organizations. How else to check the armed offensive of the enemy if not by an armed defense in order, in our turn, to go over to the offensive. L'Humanite now admits defense in words, but only in the form of "mass self-defense". The militia is harmful because, you see, it divides the combat detachments from the masses. But why then are there independent armed detachments among the fascists who are not cut off from the reactionary masses but who, on the contrary, arouse the courage and embolden those masses by their well-organized attacks? Or perhaps the proletarian mass is inferior in combative quality to the declassed petty bourgeoisie? Hopelessly tangled, l'Humanite finally begins to hesitate: it appears that mass self-defense requires the creation of special "self-defense groups". In place of the rejected militia, special groups or detachments are proposed. It would seem at first sight that there is a difference only in the name. Certainly, the name proposed by l'Humanite means nothing. One can speak of "mass self-defense" but it is impossible to speak of "self-defense groups" since the purpose of the groups is not to defend themselves but the workers' organizations. However, it is not, of course, a question of the name. The "self-defense groups", according to l'Humanite , must renounce the use of arms in order not to fall into "putschism". These sages treat the working-class like an infant who must not be allowed to hold a razor in his hands. Razors, moreover, are the monopoly, as we know, of the Camelots du Roi [French monarchists grouped around Charles Maurras' newspaper, Action Francaise, which was violently anti-democratic], who are a legitimate "product of capitalism" and who, with the aid of razors, have overthrown the "system" of democracy. In any case, how are the "self-defense groups" going to defend themselves against the fascist revolvers? "Ideologically", of course. In other words: they can hide themselves. Not having what they require in their hands, they will have to seek "self-defense" in their feet. And the fascists will in the meanwhile sack the workers' organizations with impunity. But if the proletariat suffers a terrible defeat, it will at any rate not have been guilty of "putschism". This fraudulent chatter, parading under the banner of "Bolshevism", arouses only disgust and loathing. During the "third period" of happy memory -- when the strategists of l'Humanite were afflicted with barricade delirium, "conquered" the streets every day and stamped as "social fascist" everyone who did not share their extravagances -- we predicted: "The moment these gentlemen burn the tips of their fingers, they will become the worst opportunists." That prediction has now been completely confirmed. At a time when within the Socialist Party the movement in favor of the militia is growing and strengthening, the leaders of the so-called Communist Party run for the hose to cool down the desire of the advanced workers to organize themselves in fighting columns. Could one imagine a more demoralizing or more damning work than this? In the ranks of the Socialist Party sometimes this objection is heard: "A militia must be formed but there is no need of shouting about it." One can only congratulate comrades who wish to protect the practical side of the business from inquisitive eyes and ears. But it would be much too naive to think that a militia could be created unseen and secretly within four walls. We need tens, and later hundreds, of thousands of fighters. They will come only if millions of men and women workers, and behind them the peasants, understand the necessity for the militia and create around the volunteers an atmosphere of ardent sympathy and active support. Conspiratorial care can and must envelop only the technical aspect of the matter. The political campaign must be openly developed, in meetings, factories, in the streets and on the public squares. The fundamental cadres of the militia must be the factory workers grouped according to their place of work, known to each other and able to protect their combat detachments against the provocations of enemy agents far more easily and more surely than the most elevated bureaucrats. Conspirative general staffs without an open mobilization of the masses will at the moment of danger remain impotently suspended in midair. Every working-class organization has to plunge into the job. In this question, there can be no line of demarcation between the working-class parties and the trade unions. Hand in hand, they must mobilize the masses. The success of the people militia will then be fully assured. "But where are the workers going to get arms" object the sober "realists" -- that is to say, frightened philistines -- "the enemy has rifles, cannon, tanks, gas, and airplanes. The workers have a few hundred revolvers and pocket knives." In this objection, everything is piled up to frighten the workers. On the one hand, our sages identify the arms of the fascists with the armament of the state. On the other hand, they turn towards the state and demand that it disarm the fascists. Remarkable logic! In fact, their position is false in both cases. In France, the fascists are still far from controlling the state. On February 6, they entered in armed conflict with the state police. that is why it is false to speak of cannon and tanks when it is a matter of the immediate armed struggle against the fascists. The fascists, of course, are richer than we. It is easier for them to buy arms. But the workers are more numerous, more determined, more devoted, when they are conscious of a firm revolutionary leadership. In addition to other sources, the workers can arm themselves at the expense of the fascists by systematically disarming them. This is now one of the most serious forms of the struggle against fascism. When workers' arsenals will begin to stock up at the expense of the fascist arms depots, the banks nd trusts will be more prudent in financing the armament of their murderous guards. It would even be possible in this case -- but in this case only -- that the alarmed authorities would really begin to prevent the arming of the fascists in order not to provide an additional sources of arms for the workers. We have known for a long time that only a revolutionary tactic engenders, as a by-product, "reforms" or concessions from the government. But how to disarm the fascists? Naturally, it is impossible to do so with newspaper articles alone. Fighting squads must be created. An intelligence service must be established. Thousands of informers and friendly helpers will volunteer from all sides when they realize that the business has been seriously undertaken by us. It requires a will to proletarian action. But the arms of the fascists are, of course, not the only source. In France, there are more than one million organized workers. Generally speaking, this number is small. But it is entirely sufficient to make a beginning in the organization of a workers' militia. If the parties and unions armed only a tenth of their members, that would already be a force of 100,000 men. there is no doubt whatever that the number of volunteers who would come forward on the morrow of a "united front" appeal for a workers' militia would far exceed that number. The contributions of the parties and unions, collections and voluntary subscriptions, would within a month or two make it possible to assure the arming of 100,000 to 200,000 working-class fighters. The fascist rabble would immediately sink its tail between its legs. The whole perspective of development would become incomparably more favorable. To invoke the absence of arms or other objective reasons to explain why no attempt has been made up to now to create a militia, is to fool oneself and others. The principle obstacle -- one can say the only obstacle -- has its roots in the conservative and passive character of the leaders of the workers' organizations. The skeptics who are the leaders do not believe in the strength of the proletariat. They put their hope in all sorts of miracles from above instead of giving a revolutionary outlet to the energies pulsing below. The socialist workers must compel their leaders to pass over immediately to the creation of the workers' militia or else give way to younger, fresher forces. A strike is inconceivable without propaganda and without agitation. It is also inconceivable without pickets who, when they can, use persuasion, but when obliged, use force. The strike is the most elementary form of the class struggle which always combines, in varying proportions, "ideological" methods with physical methods. The struggle against fascism is basically a political struggle which needs a militia just as the strike needs pickets. Basically, the picket is the embryo of the workers' militia. He who thinks of renouncing "physical" struggle must renounce all struggle, for the spirit does not live without flesh. Following the splendid phrase of the great military theoretician Clausewitz, war is the continuation of politics by other means. This definition also fully applies to civil war. It is impermissable to oppose one to the other since it is impossible to check at will the political struggle when it transforms itself, by force of inner necessity, into a political struggle. The duty of a revolutionary party is to foresee in time the inescapability of the transformation of politics into open armed conflict, and with all its forces to prepare for that moment just as the ruling classes are preparing. The militia detachments for defense against fascism are the first step on the road to the arming of the proletariat, not the last. Our slogan is: "Arm the proletariat and the revolutionary peasants!" The workers' militia must, in the final analysis, embrace all the toilers. To fulfill this program completely would be possible only in a workers' state into whose hands would pass all the means of production and, consequently, also all the means of destruction -- i.e., all the arms and the factories which produce them. However, it is impossible to arrive at a workers' state with empty hands. Only political invalids like Renaudel can speak of a peaceful, constitutional road to socialism. The constitutional road is cut by trenches held by the fascist bands. There are not a few trenches before us. The bourgeoisie will not hesitate to resort to a dozen coups d'etat. aided by the police and the army, to prevent proletariat from coming to power. [NOTE: Pierre Renaudel (1871-1935): Prior to WWI, socialist leader Jean Jaures' righthand man and editor of l'Humanite. During the war, a right-wing social patriot. In the 1930s, he and Marcel Deat led revisionist "neo-socialist" tendency. Voted down at the July 1933 convention, this tendency split from the Socialist Party. After the fascist riots of February 6, 1934, most of the "neos" joined the Radical Party, the main party of French capitalism.] A workers' socialist state can be created only by a victorious revolution. Every revolution is prepared by the march of economic and political development, but it is always decided by open armed conflicts between hostile classes. A revolutionary victory can become possible only as a result of long political agitation, a lengthy period of education and organization of the masses. But the armed conflict itself must likewise be prepared long in advance. The advanced workers must know that they will have to fight and win a struggle to the death. They must reach out for arms, as a guarantee of their emancipation. THE PERSPECTIVE IN THE UNITED STATES >From "Some Questions on American Problems", Fourth International, October 1940 * * * The backwardness of the United State working class is only a relative term. In very many important respects, it is the most progressive working class of the world, technically and in its standard of living.... The American workers are very combative -- as we have seen during the strikes. They have had the most rebellious strikes in the world. What the American worker misses is a spirit of generalization, or analysis, of his class position in society as a whole. This lack of social thinking has its origin in the country's whole history.... About fascism. In all the countries where fascism became victorious, we had, before the growth of fascism and its victory, a wave of radicalism of the masses -- of the workers and the poorer peasants and farmers, and of the petty bourgeois class. In Italy, after the war and before 1922, we had a revolutionary wave of tremendous dimensions; the state was paralyzed, the police did not exist, the trade unions could do anything they wanted -- but there was not party capable of taking the power. As a reaction came fascism. In Germany, the same. We had a revolutionary situation in 1918; the bourgeois class did not even ask to participate in the power. The social democrats paralyzed the revolution. Then the workers tried again in 1922-23-24. This was the time of the bankruptcy of the Communist Party -- all of which we have gone into before. Then in 1929-30-31, the German workers began again a new revolutionary wave. There was a tremendous power in the Communists and in the trade unions, but then came the famous policy (on the part of the Stalinist movement) of social fascism, a policy invented to paralyze the working class. Only after these three tremendous waves did fascism become a big movement. There are no exceptions to this rule -- fascism comes only when the working class shows complete incapacity to take into its own hands the fate of society. In the United States you will have the same thing. Already, there are fascist elements, and they have, of course, the examples of Italy and germany. They will, therefore, work in a more rapid tempo. But you also have the examples of other countries. The next historic wave in the United States will be the wave of radicalism of the masses, not fascism. Of course, the war can hinder the radicalization for some time, but then it will give to the radicalization a more tremendous tempo and swing. We must not identify war dictatorship -- the dictatorship of the military machine, of the staff, of finance capital -- with a fascist dictatorship. For the latter, there is first necessary a feeling of desperation of large masses of the people. When the revolutionary parties betray them, when the vanguard of workers shows it incapacity to lead the people to victory -- then the farmers, the small business men, the unemployed, the soldiers, etc., become capable of supporting a fascist movement, but only then. A military dictatorship is purely a bureaucratic institution, reinforced by the military machine and based upon the disorientation of the people and their submission to it. After some time their feelings can change and they can become rebellious against the dictatorship. BUILD THE REVOLUTIONARY PARTY! * * * In every discussion of political topics the question arises: Shall we succeed in creating a strong party for the moment when the crisis comes? Might not fascism anticipate us? Isn't a fascist stage of development inevitable? The successes of fascism easily make people lose all perspective, lead them to forget the actual conditions which made the strengthening and the victory of fascism possible. Yet a clear understanding of these conditions is of especial importance to the workers of he United States. We may set it down as a historical law: fascism was able to conquer only in those countries where the conservative labor parties prevented the proletariat from utilizing the revolutionary situation and seizing power. In Germany two revolutionary situations were involved: 1918-1919 and 1923-1924. Even in 1929, a direct struggle for power on the part of the proletariat was still possible. In all these three cases, the social democracy and the Comintern [the Stalinists] criminally and viciously disrupted the conquest of power and thereby placed society in an impasse. Only under these conditions and in this situation did the stormy rise of fascism and its gaining of power prove possible. * * * Insofar as the proletariat proves incapable, at a given stage, of conquering power, imperialism begins regulating economic life with its own methods; the fascist party which becomes the state power is the political mechanism. The productive forces are in irreconcilable contradiction not only with private property but also with national state boundaries. Imperialism is the very expression of this contradiction. Imperialist capitalism seeks to solve this contradiction through an extension of boundaries, seizure of new territories, and so on. The totalitarian state, subjecting all aspects of economic, political, and cultural life to finance capital, is the instrument for creating a supernationalist state, an imperialist empire, the rule over continents, the rule over the whole world. All these traits of freedom we have analyzed, each one by itself and all of them in their totality, to the extent that they became manifest or came to the forefront. Both theoretical analysis as well as the rich historical experience of the last quarter of a century have demonstrated with equal force that fascism is each time the final link of a specific political cycle composed of the following: the gravest crisis of capitalist society; the growth of the radicalization of the working class; the growth of sympathy toward the working class, and a yearning for change on the part of the rural and urban petty bourgeoisie; the extreme confusion of the big bourgeoisie; its cowardly and treacherous maneuvers aimed at avoiding the revolutionary climax; the exhaustion of the proletariat; growing confusion and indifference; the aggravation of the social crisis; the despair of the petty bourgeoisie, its yearning for change; the collective neurosis of the petty bourgeoisie, its readiness to believe in miracles, its readiness for violent measures; the growth of hostility towards the proletariat, which has deceived its expectations. These are the premises for a swift formation of a fascist party and its victory. It is quite self-evident that the radicalization of the working class in the United States has passed through only its initial phases, almost exclusively, in the sphere of the trade union movement (the CIO). The prewar period, and then the war itself, may temporarily interrupt this process of radicalization, especially if a considerable number of workers are absorbed into war industry. But this interruption of the process of radicalization cannot be of a long duration. The second stage of radicalization will assume a more sharply expressive character. The problem of forming an independent labor party will be put on the order of the day. Our transitional demands will gain great popularity. On the other hand, the fascist, reactionary tendencies will withdraw to the background, assuming a defensive position, awaiting a more favorable moment. This is the nearest perspective. No occupation is more completely unworthy than that of speculating whether or not we shall succeed in creating a powerful revolutionary leader-party. Ahead lies a favorable perspective, providing all the justification for revolutionary activism. It is necessary to utilize the opportunities which are opening up and to build the revolutionary party. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090618/73efb288/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 13511 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090618/73efb288/attachment-0001.jpe From flybrad at gmail.com Thu Jun 18 11:39:53 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 10:39:53 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Airplanes Message-ID: <400985d70906180839i6b0e2b95k6d0b9baef8fc7954@mail.gmail.com> Lot's of stuff to do here - leaving for a quick trip to the MS coast with my oldest son first thing in the morning to look over the details of the re-roof of our second shop building and the re-skin of the main shop, plus, I'm converting the corner office into a small apartment because after 3+ years of sharing a camper, I want my own space.. We're leaving for China in a week and I've got at least a hundred nit-noy details left to take care of on the Bonanza before departure. Blogging will be light for JUN/JUL. This just crossed my radar and perhaps you'll find it interesting as well. About a third of my Bonanza list is active or retired airline pilots and they can be a tough crowd. A consensus is developing that a second "tail" has fallen off an AirBus. AirBus is of course European and like much in Europe, elites think they have all the answers for the peons versus Boeing philosophy where the pilot primarily controls his/her destiny. (see below from a Bo lister). I'm really looking forward to going to school on the 777 this fall - should be a wonderful airplane! Brad ------------- This came via an NTSB Accident Investigator. You saw him on TV when Kennedy Jr. dumped his plane in the Atlantic . Hello all: The press is having a field day turning "Sully" Sullenberger into a Lindbergh-like hero. I attended his welcoming home reception in Danville , CA last weekend... me and the estimated 3000 other attendees. All credit is given to him and his crew, but they will be the first to tell you, "they just did their jobs." They did them well, but when your job entails holding the lives of hundreds of people in your hands every time you fly, then doing your job well is the minimum acceptable standard. I don't, and I doubt if more than just a handful of other pilots, begrudge Sully his day in the sun. What I am concerned about is how the real cause of this accident is being glossed over and, on the part of Airbus Industries, actually lied about. There are stories circulating now about how the flight computers helped "save" the aircraft by insuring the ditching was done properly. The stories themselves are absolute nonsense and the contention that the flight computers ensured the proper attitude was maintained for ditching is pure fabrication. So what's wrong with Airbus wanting to steal a little glory for their computerized drones? There is a good chance it was the computers that put the aircraft into the water! I readily admit I heartily dislike Airbus because of their design philosophy, I will never set foot in an A-380 (the superjumbo) as I consider it a really bad accident looking for a place to happen. I am not much happier with the rest of them but especially the A-320 which has killed several folks, while the engineers try to perfect software that can replace a human brain that has a talent for flying... something that I, rather naturally, don't believe possible. It is well known that I love Boeings. I love to fly them. Beyond the sheer joy of just flying the Boeing, I also believe in their design philosophy that the last word has to be with the pilot, not the machine. No pilot, no matter how hard he tries, can turn an A-320 upside down. It just won't do it. Airbus believes it has designed a computer that is smarter than a pilot (the evidence of dead bodies scattered around Mulhouse , France to the contrary) and gives the last word to the computer. If a pilot moves the controls so as to turn the airplane upside down, the computer will refuse. I can turn the B777 upside down. Once I get it upside down, if I let go of the controls, it will turn itself right-side up (smart airplane). I don't believe I will ever be in a situation where I will need to turn the airplane upside down, but I feel good knowing I have the control to do it. That's why I'm not really kidding when I say: "if it ain't a Boeing; I ain't going". What follows is an e-mail from a retired US Air Pilot who has flown the Airbus A320 just like the one that ended up in the Hudson . It was written in response to a friend asking him if he knew the pilot who did the ditching. It is most illuminating and worth the read... Dear Chuck, I don't know him. I've seen him in the crew room and around the system but never met him. He was former PSA and I was former Piedmont and we never had the occasion to fly together. The dumb shit press just won't leave this alone. Most airliner ditchings aren't very successful since they take place on the open ocean with wind, rough seas, swells and rescue boats are hours or days away. This one happened in fresh smooth water, landing with the current and the rescue boats were there picking people up while they were still climbing out of the airplane. It also happened on a cold winter day when all the pleasure boats were parked. Had this happened in July it would be pretty hard not to whack a couple of little boats. Sully did a nice job but so would 95% of the other pilots in the industry. You would have done a nice job. Don't be surprised if the Airbus fly by wire computers didn't put a perfectly good airplane in the water. In an older generation airplane like the 727 or 737-300/400, the throttles are hooked to the fuel controllers on the engine by a steel throttle cable just like a TBM or a Comanche. On the Airbus nothing in the cockpit is real. Everything is electronic. The throttles, rudder and brake pedals and the side stick are hooked to rheostats who talk to a computer who talks to a electric hydraulic servo valve which in turn hopefully moves something. In a older generation airplane when you hit birds the engines keep screaming or they blow up but they don't both roll back to idle simultaneously like happened to Flt. 1549. All it would take is for bird guts to plug a pressure sensor or knock the pitot probe off or plug it and the computers would roll the engines back to idle thinking they were over boosting because the computers were getting bad data. The Airbus is a real pile of shit. I don't like riding on them. Google the Airbus A320 Crash at the Paris Airshow in 1998. Watch the video of an airbus A320 crash into a forest because the computers wouldn't allow a power increase following a low pass. The computers wouldn't allow a power increase because they determined that the airspeed was too low for the increase requested so the computers didn't give them any. Pushing the throttles forward in a Airbus does nothing more than request a power increase from the computer. If the computer doesn't like all the airplane and engine parameters you don't get a power increase. Airbus blamed the dead crew since they couldn't defend themselves. A Boeing would still be flying. From bill at effros.com Thu Jun 18 11:58:54 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 11:58:54 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Airplanes In-Reply-To: <400985d70906180839i6b0e2b95k6d0b9baef8fc7954@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906180839i6b0e2b95k6d0b9baef8fc7954@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A3A643E.1080600@effros.com> It's a bad day for pilots. B. Brad Haslett wrote: > Lot's of stuff to do here - leaving for a quick trip to the MS coast > with my oldest son first thing in the morning to look over the details > of the re-roof of our second shop building and the re-skin of the main > shop, plus, I'm converting the corner office into a small apartment > because after 3+ years of sharing a camper, I want my own space.. > We're leaving for China in a week and I've got at least a hundred > nit-noy details left to take care of on the Bonanza before departure. > Blogging will be light for JUN/JUL. This just crossed my radar and > perhaps you'll find it interesting as well. About a third of my > Bonanza list is active or retired airline pilots and they can be a > tough crowd. A consensus is developing that a second "tail" has > fallen off an AirBus. AirBus is of course European and like much in > Europe, elites think they have all the answers for the peons versus > Boeing philosophy where the pilot primarily controls his/her destiny. > (see below from a Bo lister). > > I'm really looking forward to going to school on the 777 this fall - > should be a wonderful airplane! > > Brad > > ------------- > > > This came via an NTSB Accident Investigator. You saw him on TV when > Kennedy Jr. dumped his plane in the Atlantic . > > Hello all: > > The press is having a field day turning "Sully" Sullenberger > into a Lindbergh-like hero. I attended his welcoming home reception > in Danville , CA last weekend... me and the estimated 3000 other > attendees. All credit is given to him and his crew, but they will be > the first to tell you, "they just did their jobs." They did them well, > but when your job entails holding the lives of hundreds of people in > your hands every time you fly, then doing your job well is the minimum > acceptable standard. > > I don't, and I doubt if more than just a handful of other > pilots, begrudge Sully his day in the sun. What I am concerned about > is how the real cause of this accident is being glossed over and, on > the part of Airbus Industries, actually lied about. > > There are stories circulating now about how the flight > computers helped "save" the aircraft by insuring the ditching was done > properly. The stories themselves are absolute nonsense and the > contention that the flight computers ensured the proper attitude was > maintained for ditching is pure fabrication. > > So what's wrong with Airbus wanting to steal a little glory > for their computerized drones? There is a good chance it was the > computers that put the aircraft into the water! > > I readily admit I heartily dislike Airbus because of their > design philosophy, I will never set foot in an A-380 (the superjumbo) > as I consider it a really bad accident looking for a place to happen. > I am not much happier with the rest of them but especially the A-320 > which has killed several folks, while the engineers try to perfect > software that can replace a human brain that has a talent for > flying... something that I, rather naturally, don't believe possible. > > It is well known that I love Boeings. I love to fly them. > Beyond the sheer joy of just flying the Boeing, I also believe in > their design philosophy that the last word has to be with the pilot, > not the machine. > > No pilot, no matter how hard he tries, can turn an A-320 > upside down. It just won't do it. Airbus believes it has designed a > computer that is smarter than a pilot (the evidence of dead bodies > scattered around Mulhouse , France to the contrary) and gives the last > word to the computer. If a pilot moves the controls so as to turn the > airplane upside down, the computer will refuse. > > I can turn the B777 upside down. Once I get it upside down, > if I let go of the controls, it will turn itself right-side up (smart > airplane). I don't believe I will ever be in a situation where I will > need to turn the airplane upside down, but I feel good knowing I have > the control to do it. That's why I'm not really kidding when I say: > "if it ain't a Boeing; I ain't going". > > What follows is an e-mail from a retired US Air Pilot who > has flown the Airbus A320 just like the one that ended up in the > Hudson . It was written in response to a friend asking him if he knew > the pilot who did the ditching. It is most illuminating and worth the > read... > > Dear Chuck, > > I don't know him. I've seen him in the crew room and around > the system but never met him. He was former PSA and I was former > Piedmont and we never had the occasion to fly together. > > The dumb shit press just won't leave this alone. Most > airliner ditchings aren't very successful since they take place on the > open ocean with wind, rough seas, swells and rescue boats are hours or > days away. This one happened in fresh smooth water, landing with the > current and the rescue boats were there picking people up while they > were still climbing out of the airplane. It also happened on a cold > winter day when all the pleasure boats were parked. Had this > happened in July it would be pretty hard not to whack a couple of > little boats. Sully did a nice job but so would 95% of the other > pilots in the industry. You would have done a nice job. > > Don't be surprised if the Airbus fly by wire computers > didn't put a perfectly good airplane in the water. In an older > generation airplane like the 727 or 737-300/400, the throttles are > hooked to the fuel controllers on the engine by a steel throttle cable > just like a TBM or a Comanche. > > On the Airbus nothing in the cockpit is real. Everything is > electronic. The throttles, rudder and brake pedals and the side stick > are hooked to rheostats who talk to a computer who talks to a electric > hydraulic servo valve which in turn hopefully moves something. > > In a older generation airplane when you hit birds the > engines keep screaming or they blow up but they don't both roll back > to idle simultaneously like happened to Flt. 1549. All it would take > is for bird guts to plug a pressure sensor or knock the pitot probe > off or plug it and the computers would roll the engines back to idle > thinking they were over boosting because the computers were getting > bad data. > > The Airbus is a real pile of shit. I don't like riding on > them. Google the Airbus A320 Crash at the Paris Airshow in 1998. > Watch the video of an airbus A320 crash into a forest because the > computers wouldn't allow a power increase following a low pass. The > computers wouldn't allow a power increase because they determined that > the airspeed was too low for the increase requested so the computers > didn't give them any. Pushing the throttles forward in a Airbus does > nothing more than request a power increase from the computer. If the > computer doesn't like all the airplane and engine parameters you don't > get a power increase. Airbus blamed the dead crew since they couldn't > defend themselves. > > A Boeing would still be flying. > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > From flybrad at gmail.com Thu Jun 18 13:55:59 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:55:59 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Airplanes In-Reply-To: <400985d70906180839i6b0e2b95k6d0b9baef8fc7954@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906180839i6b0e2b95k6d0b9baef8fc7954@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906181055w1ad4d2cehf83afdfb832dbb8a@mail.gmail.com> Bill, What an asshole! Do you have any idea how much paperwork that kinda-thing will generate? Selfish Bastard! What was his seniority number anyway? Brad On 6/18/09, Brad Haslett wrote: > Lot's of stuff to do here - leaving for a quick trip to the MS coast > with my oldest son first thing in the morning to look over the details > of the re-roof of our second shop building and the re-skin of the main > shop, plus, I'm converting the corner office into a small apartment > because after 3+ years of sharing a camper, I want my own space.. > We're leaving for China in a week and I've got at least a hundred > nit-noy details left to take care of on the Bonanza before departure. > Blogging will be light for JUN/JUL. This just crossed my radar and > perhaps you'll find it interesting as well. About a third of my > Bonanza list is active or retired airline pilots and they can be a > tough crowd. A consensus is developing that a second "tail" has > fallen off an AirBus. AirBus is of course European and like much in > Europe, elites think they have all the answers for the peons versus > Boeing philosophy where the pilot primarily controls his/her destiny. > (see below from a Bo lister). > > I'm really looking forward to going to school on the 777 this fall - > should be a wonderful airplane! > > Brad > > ------------- > > > This came via an NTSB Accident Investigator. You saw him on TV when > Kennedy Jr. dumped his plane in the Atlantic . > > Hello all: > > The press is having a field day turning "Sully" Sullenberger > into a Lindbergh-like hero. I attended his welcoming home reception > in Danville , CA last weekend... me and the estimated 3000 other > attendees. All credit is given to him and his crew, but they will be > the first to tell you, "they just did their jobs." They did them well, > but when your job entails holding the lives of hundreds of people in > your hands every time you fly, then doing your job well is the minimum > acceptable standard. > > I don't, and I doubt if more than just a handful of other > pilots, begrudge Sully his day in the sun. What I am concerned about > is how the real cause of this accident is being glossed over and, on > the part of Airbus Industries, actually lied about. > > There are stories circulating now about how the flight > computers helped "save" the aircraft by insuring the ditching was done > properly. The stories themselves are absolute nonsense and the > contention that the flight computers ensured the proper attitude was > maintained for ditching is pure fabrication. > > So what's wrong with Airbus wanting to steal a little glory > for their computerized drones? There is a good chance it was the > computers that put the aircraft into the water! > > I readily admit I heartily dislike Airbus because of their > design philosophy, I will never set foot in an A-380 (the superjumbo) > as I consider it a really bad accident looking for a place to happen. > I am not much happier with the rest of them but especially the A-320 > which has killed several folks, while the engineers try to perfect > software that can replace a human brain that has a talent for > flying... something that I, rather naturally, don't believe possible. > > It is well known that I love Boeings. I love to fly them. > Beyond the sheer joy of just flying the Boeing, I also believe in > their design philosophy that the last word has to be with the pilot, > not the machine. > > No pilot, no matter how hard he tries, can turn an A-320 > upside down. It just won't do it. Airbus believes it has designed a > computer that is smarter than a pilot (the evidence of dead bodies > scattered around Mulhouse , France to the contrary) and gives the last > word to the computer. If a pilot moves the controls so as to turn the > airplane upside down, the computer will refuse. > > I can turn the B777 upside down. Once I get it upside down, > if I let go of the controls, it will turn itself right-side up (smart > airplane). I don't believe I will ever be in a situation where I will > need to turn the airplane upside down, but I feel good knowing I have > the control to do it. That's why I'm not really kidding when I say: > "if it ain't a Boeing; I ain't going". > > What follows is an e-mail from a retired US Air Pilot who > has flown the Airbus A320 just like the one that ended up in the > Hudson . It was written in response to a friend asking him if he knew > the pilot who did the ditching. It is most illuminating and worth the > read... > > Dear Chuck, > > I don't know him. I've seen him in the crew room and around > the system but never met him. He was former PSA and I was former > Piedmont and we never had the occasion to fly together. > > The dumb shit press just won't leave this alone. Most > airliner ditchings aren't very successful since they take place on the > open ocean with wind, rough seas, swells and rescue boats are hours or > days away. This one happened in fresh smooth water, landing with the > current and the rescue boats were there picking people up while they > were still climbing out of the airplane. It also happened on a cold > winter day when all the pleasure boats were parked. Had this > happened in July it would be pretty hard not to whack a couple of > little boats. Sully did a nice job but so would 95% of the other > pilots in the industry. You would have done a nice job. > > Don't be surprised if the Airbus fly by wire computers > didn't put a perfectly good airplane in the water. In an older > generation airplane like the 727 or 737-300/400, the throttles are > hooked to the fuel controllers on the engine by a steel throttle cable > just like a TBM or a Comanche. > > On the Airbus nothing in the cockpit is real. Everything is > electronic. The throttles, rudder and brake pedals and the side stick > are hooked to rheostats who talk to a computer who talks to a electric > hydraulic servo valve which in turn hopefully moves something. > > In a older generation airplane when you hit birds the > engines keep screaming or they blow up but they don't both roll back > to idle simultaneously like happened to Flt. 1549. All it would take > is for bird guts to plug a pressure sensor or knock the pitot probe > off or plug it and the computers would roll the engines back to idle > thinking they were over boosting because the computers were getting > bad data. > > The Airbus is a real pile of shit. I don't like riding on > them. Google the Airbus A320 Crash at the Paris Airshow in 1998. > Watch the video of an airbus A320 crash into a forest because the > computers wouldn't allow a power increase following a low pass. The > computers wouldn't allow a power increase because they determined that > the airspeed was too low for the increase requested so the computers > didn't give them any. Pushing the throttles forward in a Airbus does > nothing more than request a power increase from the computer. If the > computer doesn't like all the airplane and engine parameters you don't > get a power increase. Airbus blamed the dead crew since they couldn't > defend themselves. > > A Boeing would still be flying. > From ekroposki at charter.net Thu Jun 18 18:48:46 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 18:48:46 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] 4th of July Present? Message-ID: Look at what Washington, D.C. is thinking: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1193941/North-Korea-plan-missile-launch-Hawaii-Independence-Day.html Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090618/d5762a58/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Fri Jun 19 12:34:01 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:34:01 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] What's Going On?: No. 08A407 for Rik... Message-ID: http://www.fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate http://countusout.wordpress.com/2008/11/19/what-congress-and-the-media-wont-tell-you-about-barry-soetoro-barack-hussein-and-the-lawsuits/ www.blogtext.org/naturalborncitizen/ For what it is worth if he was born in Hawaii and never renounced his citizenship it will most likely be declared he is a U. S. Citizen. However, there are questions about those children of foreign parents who clain citizenship other than U. S. and declare child to be citizen of that country. It is generally assumed that the child is then a citizen of that country and not USA. However, I do not believe the supreme court has ever ruled on this. The above is only other court's opinions. That is the point in question of Donofrio's case. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090619/6129cf90/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Sat Jun 20 07:04:33 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 07:04:33 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Illegal U.S. immigration, look at legal immigration Message-ID: <61C2CECD07634B3ABC461910CDBD367E@YOURB88038198E> The announcer is in Swedish, but the report is in English: http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=FR&hl=fr&v=y6Y1pyy8ESM Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090620/a374f216/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Sat Jun 20 07:09:50 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 07:09:50 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Happy Ending Message-ID: Subject: An old prospector An old prospector shuffled into town leading an old tired mule. The old man headed straight for the only saloon in town to clear his parched throat. He walked up to the saloon and tied his old mule to the hitch rail. As he stood there brushing some of the dust from his face and clothes, a young gunslinger stepped out of the saloon with a gun in one hand and a bottle of whiskey in the other. The young gunslinger looked at the old man and laughed, saying, "Hey old man, have you ever danced?" The old man looked up at the gunslinger and said, "No, I never did dance-and just never wanted to." A crowd had gathered quickly and the gunslinger grinned and said, "Well, you old fool, you're gonna' dance now," and started shooting at the old man's feet. The old prospector in order to not get a toe blown off or his boots perforated was soon hopping around like a flea on a hot skillet and everybody was laughing fit to be tied. When the last bullet had been fired the young gunslinger, still laughing, holstered his gun and turned around to go back into the saloon. The old man turned to his pack mule, pulled out a double barreled shotgun, and cocked both hammers back. The loud, audible double clicks carried clearly through the desert air. The crowd stopped laughing immediately. The young gunslinger heard the sounds, too, and he turned around very slowly. The quiet was almost deafening. The crowd watched as the young gunman stared at the old timer and the large gaping holes of those twin barrels. He found it hard to swallow. The barrels of the shotgun never wavered in the old man's hands. The old man said, "Son, did you ever kiss a mule's ass?" The young bully swallowed hard and said, "No, but I've always wanted to." There are two lessons for us all here: 1. Don't waste ammunition. 2. Don't mess with old people. I just love a story with a happy ending.... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090620/b78e9e88/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Jun 21 08:19:42 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2009 07:19:42 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] The inmates have escaped again ..... Message-ID: <6634e19e0906210519h1299a105oca1e15c97be182d9@mail.gmail.com> Good Morning All, Where do we find these people??? Haven't we had enough of the damage that their artificial pricing causes already??? How many times do their little schemes have to blow up in their faces before they start to get a clue??? I can see it now. We'll sell off a bunch of our strategic reserve and automagically forget to replace it. About that time either the brown, or maybe the yellow horde will decide it's time to take the place over and we'll be standing here with our friggin' pants down around our knees. You can bet there's some group somewhere that's hoping that we'll do something this stupid. Rik __________________ http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/nitwits-in-congress-propose-tapping-oil.html Nitwits In Congress Propose Tapping Oil Reserves To Halt Price Increases Inquiring minds are investigating legislation that would sell US oil reserves in an attempt to bring down the price of gasoline. Can such a scheme possibly work? Please consider US Reps File Bill To Tap SPR To Counter Oil Price Rise . Several influential U.S. House Democrats have filed a bill that would require the government to tap the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve to counter rising oil prices. Reps. Ed Markey, D-Mass., Chris Van Hollen, D-Md. and Peter Welch, D-Vt., said their legislation would direct the Department of Energy to sell 70 million barrels of more expensive light, sweet crude and replace it with cheaper heavy crude. By mandating a release of oil into the market, legislators want to try and shake some speculators out of the market. Many lawmakers blame what they term " excessive" speculation in the market for skyrocketing crude prices, despite many economists citing the fundamentals of supply and demand as being the primary drivers. The revenues brought in from the price differential in the swap would then go back into the SPR account to fill the reserve back up to its 727-million barrel capacity. Constant Price Theories Hello guys, assuming you were selling reserves in enough quantity to matter (a mighty assumption indeed, as we shall see in a moment) the very act of demanding more sour crude while selling sweet crude would artificially suppress the price of sweet while artificially raising the price for the sour. Did this simple economic fact escape you? Moreover, if and when the strategic reserves became all sour crude, what would you do then? Oil Production and Consumption Let's now address the issue of whether selling 70 million barrels of light crude would do anything at all and if so for how long. Production figures from the Department of Energyin thousands of barrels. The above table is from the EIA - Energy Information Administration as of June 9, 2009. The chart shows the entire world's production was about 85 million barrels per day in 2008 and is roughly 84 million barrels per day now. A Look at the Consumption Side The CIA World Factbook shows the following consumption figures. OECD Oil Consumption Inquiring minds are taking a look at a chart Rune Likvern posted on the Oil Drum addressing the question Has OECD oil consumption peaked? The first thing to note is how the price of oil does not necessarily move in conjunction with consumption. More importantly, the chart also shows total world consumption is about 85 million barrels a day (no surprise as consumption plus reserves should match production). The proposal to sell 70 million barrels is not even a single day's worth of global consumption! Even if Congress authorized a swap for the entire reserves, it would amount to a mere 9 days worth of global consumption. Sweet vs. Sour By the way, the price differential between sweet and sour crude which the fine Congressmen proposed would finance the scheme, averaged less than $1 in the first quarter of 2009 according to Alon USA . The WTI/WTS crude oil differentials for the first quarter of 2009 decreased to $0.94 per barrel compared to $4.67 per barrel for the first quarter of 2008. Yahoo Finance has the current WTS to WTI spreadat -$2.34 (a premium of $2.34 for light crude). Excuse me for asking, but exactly how much per barrel would it cost to deplete the reserves of 70 million barrels of light crude and replace them with 70 million barrels of sour? Is the handling free of charge by magic genies? Meaning of Strategic Finally, the whole reason we have SPR is for national emergencies. The "S" in "SPR" stands for "Strategic". $70 oil is not even a hardship, let alone a strategic need. Representatives Ed Markey of Massachusetts, Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, and Peter Welch of Vermont have proven they do not know a thing about oil consumption, the meaning of the word strategic, the price points of crude, or even general economic theory about pricing. Their proposal to tap oil reserves is what happens when political hacks start writing bills on things they know nothing about, which in general is everything. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090621/553a12a6/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Sun Jun 21 17:04:46 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2009 17:04:46 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Tom Hanson - Message-ID: <684B58F823E04942945C09BE29F15504@YOURB88038198E> President Teddy Roosevelt on immigration (1907) In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language.. and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people. >From Tom Hanson, tom.hanson at southcarolinaconservative.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090621/c58f4c2a/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Jun 22 07:30:54 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 06:30:54 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] The inmates have escaped again ..... In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0906210519h1299a105oca1e15c97be182d9@mail.gmail.com> References: <6634e19e0906210519h1299a105oca1e15c97be182d9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906220430o3ee4f48fo37ecb220281658a6@mail.gmail.com> Rik, The stupidity of these "congress critters" no longer has any shock value. The strategic petroleum reserve (SPR) is slightly over a months supply of fuel. What, if any, positive impact releasing it to the market would have is doubtful. If I were hell bent on attacking the US, I'd manipulate the oil market (several countries have the capacity to do that as well as some individuals - Soros comes to mind), convince the US to piss away their SPR, then go for the jugular. What's really amazing is that they can make such a proposal in the same week they passed the "Cash for Clunkers" bill. Did it ever occur to anyone in Congress that the falling dollar is what is driving the increase in oil prices? There's a reason China is investing their surplus into gold and oil. Last week, some California legislators proposed a $9 per barrel tax on California produced crude oil. If I were a California producer sitting on reserves, I'd immediately dial back the speed of the wellheads (which can be done via cellphone for about $2K in technology), scale back the water-flood and steam injection units, and wait for prices to rise. Where do we find these people? Brad On 6/21/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Good Morning All, > > Where do we find these people??? Haven't we had enough of the damage that > their artificial pricing causes already??? How many times do their little > schemes have to blow up in their faces before they start to get a clue??? > > I can see it now. We'll sell off a bunch of our strategic reserve and > automagically forget to replace it. About that time either the brown, or > maybe the yellow horde will decide it's time to take the place over and > we'll be standing here with our friggin' pants down around our knees. You > can bet there's some group somewhere that's hoping that we'll do something > this stupid. > > Rik > __________________ > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/nitwits-in-congress-propose-tapping-oil.html > Nitwits In Congress Propose Tapping Oil Reserves To Halt Price > Increases > > Inquiring minds are investigating legislation that would sell US oil > reserves in an attempt to bring down the price of gasoline. Can such a > scheme possibly work? > > Please consider US Reps File Bill To Tap SPR To Counter Oil Price > Rise > . > > Several influential U.S. House Democrats have filed a bill that would > require the government to tap the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve to > counter rising oil prices. > > Reps. Ed Markey, D-Mass., Chris Van Hollen, D-Md. and Peter Welch, D-Vt., > said their legislation would direct the Department of Energy to sell 70 > million barrels of more expensive light, sweet crude and replace it with > cheaper heavy crude. > > By mandating a release of oil into the market, legislators want to try and > shake some speculators out of the market. Many lawmakers blame what they > term " excessive" speculation in the market for skyrocketing crude prices, > despite many economists citing the fundamentals of supply and demand as > being the primary drivers. > > The revenues brought in from the price differential in the swap would then > go back into the SPR account to fill the reserve back up to its 727-million > barrel capacity. > > Constant Price Theories > > Hello guys, assuming you were selling reserves in enough quantity to matter > (a mighty assumption indeed, as we shall see in a moment) the very act of > demanding more sour crude while selling sweet crude would artificially > suppress the price of sweet while artificially raising the price for the > sour. Did this simple economic fact escape you? > > Moreover, if and when the strategic reserves became all sour crude, what > would you do then? > > Oil Production and Consumption > > Let's now address the issue of whether selling 70 million barrels of light > crude would do anything at all and if so for how long. > > Production figures from the Department of > Energyin > thousands of barrels. > > > > The above table is from the EIA - Energy Information Administration as of > June 9, 2009. The chart shows the entire world's production was about 85 > million barrels per day in 2008 and is roughly 84 million barrels per day > now. > > A Look at the Consumption Side > > The CIA World Factbook > shows > the following consumption figures. > > > > OECD Oil Consumption > > Inquiring minds are taking a look at a chart Rune Likvern posted on the Oil > Drum addressing the question Has OECD oil consumption > peaked? > > > > The first thing to note is how the price of oil does not necessarily move in > conjunction with consumption. > > More importantly, the chart also shows total world consumption is about 85 > million barrels a day (no surprise as consumption plus reserves should match > production). The proposal to sell 70 million barrels is not even a single > day's worth of global consumption! Even if Congress authorized a swap for > the entire reserves, it would amount to a mere 9 days worth of global > consumption. > > Sweet vs. Sour > > By the way, the price differential between sweet and sour crude which the > fine Congressmen proposed would finance the scheme, averaged less than $1 in > the first quarter of 2009 according to Alon USA > > . > > The WTI/WTS crude oil differentials for the first quarter of 2009 decreased > to $0.94 per barrel compared to $4.67 per barrel for the first quarter of > 2008. > > Yahoo Finance has the current WTS to WTI > spreadat -$2.34 (a premium > of $2.34 for light crude). Excuse me for asking, but > exactly how much per barrel would it cost to deplete the reserves of 70 > million barrels of light crude and replace them with 70 million barrels of > sour? Is the handling free of charge by magic genies? > > Meaning of Strategic > > Finally, the whole reason we have SPR is for national emergencies. The "S" > in "SPR" stands for > "Strategic". > $70 oil is not even a hardship, let alone a strategic need. > > Representatives Ed Markey of Massachusetts, Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, > and Peter Welch of Vermont have proven they do not know a thing about oil > consumption, the meaning of the word strategic, the price points of crude, > or even general economic theory about pricing. > > Their proposal to tap oil reserves is what happens when political hacks > start writing bills on things they know nothing about, which in general is > everything. > > Mike "Mish" Shedlock > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com > > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Jun 22 08:36:27 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 07:36:27 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] The inmates have escaped again ..... In-Reply-To: <400985d70906220430o3ee4f48fo37ecb220281658a6@mail.gmail.com> References: <6634e19e0906210519h1299a105oca1e15c97be182d9@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70906220430o3ee4f48fo37ecb220281658a6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0906220536t2010f7afn1440b089ce56d4ab@mail.gmail.com> Brad, I guess the lesson that should be learned here is: The smart money can move around faster than a dim witted legislature can figure out new ways to steal it. It looks like a commodities bubble may be the next problem with all that loose cash floating around in China looking for something to do. Rik http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/speculation-in-china-does-not-mean.html ______________________ Speculation In China Does Not Mean Inflation In The US Inflationists and even hyperinflationist are coming out of the woodwork. Even some people I highly respect have jumped on the hyperinflation bandwagon. Given that the Flow of Funds Report Offers Hard Evidence of Deflation, I am not changing my tune. Some of the inflation fears stem from a falling US dollar that seems to me to be range bound. In addition, there has been a strong rebound in commodity prices. OK oil prices more than doubled from the December low to over $70. However that is a far cry from $140. Even many deflationists (at least me) thought oil prices bottomed and Treasury yields may have. Yet, suddenly a snapback rally in commodity prices is supposed to mean a powerful surge in inflation, perhaps even hyperinflation? WTIC - Light Sweet Crude Weekly click on chart for sharper image On a log chart the oil rebound looks impressive. On a retrace perspective, the story is different. The first Fibonacci retrace level at 38.2% has not even been reached. This is hyperinflation? Fear the Dark Side of China's Lending Surge The easy scapegoat for rising commodity prices is a collapsing US dollar, strong inflation or even hyperinflation in the us. Sadly, few seem to have noticed (except when it is convenient to their theories) that this is a global economy, peak oil is a factor, and so are happenings in China. I had a bookmark of an interesting post by Andy Xie lined up for today to talk about. It's called "Fear the Dark Side of China's Lending Surge". Unfortunately the post is no longer available or the site is now restricted. However, Yves Smith at Naked Capitalism posted it earlier this weekend. Please consider Xie: Chinese Banks Funding Commodities Speculation, Casting Doubt on Recovery The current surge in commodity prices, for example, is being fueled by China's demand for speculative inventory. Commodity prices have skyrocketed since March. The weak global economy can't support high commodity prices. Instead, low interest rates and inflation fears are driving money into commodity buying. Exchange-traded funds (ETFs) alone account for half of the activity on the oil futures market. ETFs allow retail investors to act like hedge funds. This product has serious implications for monetary policymaking. One consequence is that inflation fears could lead to inflation through massive deployment of money into inflation-hedging assets such as commodities. Financial demand alone can't support commodity prices. Financial investors can't take physical delivery and must sell maturing futures contracts. This force can lead to a steep price curve over time. There's little doubt that China's bank lending since last December has driven speculative inventory demand for commodities. Chinese banks lend for commodity purchases, allowing the underlying commodities to be used as collateral. These loans are structured like mortgages. The international media has been following reports of record commodity imports by China. The surge is being portrayed as reflecting China's recovering economy. Indeed, the international financial market is portraying China's perceived recovery as a harbinger for global recovery. It is a major factor pushing up stock prices around the world. What is happening in the commodity market is glaring proof that China's lending surge is hurting the country. Even more serious is that it is leading Chinese companies away from real business and further toward asset speculation ? virtual business... This lending surge proves China's economic problems can't be resolved with liquidity. China's growth model is based on government-led investment and foreign enterprise-led export. As exports grew in the past, the government channeled income into investment to support more export growth. Now that the global economy and China's exports have collapsed, there will be no income growth to support investment growth. The government's current investment stimulus is tapping a money pool accumulated from past exports. Eventually, the pool will dry up. If exports remain weak for several years, China's only chance for returning to high growth will be to shift demand to the domestic household sector. This would require significant rebalancing of wealth and income. A new growth cycle could start by distributing shares of listed SOEs to Chinese households, creating a virtuous cycle that lasts a decade. Putting money into speculative investments isn't totally irrational. It's better than expanding capacity which, without export customers, would surely lead to losses. Businesses currently lack incentive to invest. But many boom forecasters wrongly assume that recent asset appreciation, fueled by speculation, signaled an end to economic problems. That's an illusion. The lending surge may have created more problems than it resolved. One Must Not Confuse - One must not confuse speculation in China for "green shoots" - One must not confuse speculation in China for hyperinflation in the US - One must not confuse increasing commodity prices for inflation while ignoring a massive collapse in credit and an even bigger collapse in credit marked to market. Given there has never been a hyperinflation in history where home prices have crashed, I have one question: Where are the hyperinflationist's recommendations to buy houses? Where? Please don't be a wimp about it. Is any hyperinflationist recommending houses? OK so inflationists like gold. So do I, as a deflationist. However, in housing, and only housing can one put down 10% and control and asset for decades. Housing is (or should be) a hyperinflationist's dream come true. Falling home prices remain the nut that hyperinflationsts just cannot escape. Yes, home prices will bottom, perhaps years from now, perhaps even next year. Then what? If you truly believe hyperinflation is coming, then housing is a sure thing. Go for it. Addendum: The link Fear the Dark Side of China's Lending Surgeis again working for me. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 6:30 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > The stupidity of these "congress critters" no longer has any shock > value. The strategic petroleum reserve (SPR) is slightly over a > months supply of fuel. What, if any, positive impact releasing it to > the market would have is doubtful. If I were hell bent on attacking > the US, I'd manipulate the oil market (several countries have the > capacity to do that as well as some individuals - Soros comes to > mind), convince the US to piss away their SPR, then go for the > jugular. What's really amazing is that they can make such a proposal > in the same week they passed the "Cash for Clunkers" bill. Did it > ever occur to anyone in Congress that the falling dollar is what is > driving the increase in oil prices? There's a reason China is > investing their surplus into gold and oil. Last week, some California > legislators proposed a $9 per barrel tax on California produced crude > oil. If I were a California producer sitting on reserves, I'd > immediately dial back the speed of the wellheads (which can be done > via cellphone for about $2K in technology), scale back the water-flood > and steam injection units, and wait for prices to rise. Where do we > find these people? > > Brad > > On 6/21/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > > Good Morning All, > > > > Where do we find these people??? Haven't we had enough of the damage that > > their artificial pricing causes already??? How many times do their little > > schemes have to blow up in their faces before they start to get a clue??? > > > > I can see it now. We'll sell off a bunch of our strategic reserve and > > automagically forget to replace it. About that time either the brown, or > > maybe the yellow horde will decide it's time to take the place over and > > we'll be standing here with our friggin' pants down around our knees. You > > can bet there's some group somewhere that's hoping that we'll do > something > > this stupid. > > > > Rik > > __________________ > > > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/nitwits-in-congress-propose-tapping-oil.html > > Nitwits In Congress Propose Tapping Oil Reserves To Halt Price > > Increases< > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/nitwits-in-congress-propose-tapping-oil.html > > > > > > Inquiring minds are investigating legislation that would sell US oil > > reserves in an attempt to bring down the price of gasoline. Can such a > > scheme possibly work? > > > > Please consider US Reps File Bill To Tap SPR To Counter Oil Price > > Rise< > http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=200906171404dowjonesdjonline000772&title=us-reps-file-bill-to-tap-spr-to-counter-oil-price-rise > > > > . > > > > Several influential U.S. House Democrats have filed a bill that would > > require the government to tap the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve to > > counter rising oil prices. > > > > Reps. Ed Markey, D-Mass., Chris Van Hollen, D-Md. and Peter Welch, D-Vt., > > said their legislation would direct the Department of Energy to sell 70 > > million barrels of more expensive light, sweet crude and replace it with > > cheaper heavy crude. > > > > By mandating a release of oil into the market, legislators want to try > and > > shake some speculators out of the market. Many lawmakers blame what they > > term " excessive" speculation in the market for skyrocketing crude > prices, > > despite many economists citing the fundamentals of supply and demand as > > being the primary drivers. > > > > The revenues brought in from the price differential in the swap would > then > > go back into the SPR account to fill the reserve back up to its > 727-million > > barrel capacity. > > > > Constant Price Theories > > > > Hello guys, assuming you were selling reserves in enough quantity to > matter > > (a mighty assumption indeed, as we shall see in a moment) the very act of > > demanding more sour crude while selling sweet crude would artificially > > suppress the price of sweet while artificially raising the price for the > > sour. Did this simple economic fact escape you? > > > > Moreover, if and when the strategic reserves became all sour crude, what > > would you do then? > > > > Oil Production and Consumption > > > > Let's now address the issue of whether selling 70 million barrels of > light > > crude would do anything at all and if so for how long. > > > > Production figures from the Department of > > Energyin > > thousands of barrels. > > > > < > http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_nSTO-vZpSgc/Sjm4rckk8rI/AAAAAAAAGTQ/ApT2wombHxM/s1600-h/oil+production.png > > > > > > The above table is from the EIA - Energy Information Administration as of > > June 9, 2009. The chart shows the entire world's production was about 85 > > million barrels per day in 2008 and is roughly 84 million barrels per day > > now. > > > > A Look at the Consumption Side > > > > The CIA World Factbook > > < > https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2174rank.html > >shows > > the following consumption figures. > > > > < > http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_nSTO-vZpSgc/Sjlve-9qfHI/AAAAAAAAGTA/C1y_XlaqLng/s1600-h/oil+consumption.png > > > > > > OECD Oil Consumption > > > > Inquiring minds are taking a look at a chart Rune Likvern posted on the > Oil > > Drum addressing the question Has OECD oil consumption > > peaked? > > > > < > http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_nSTO-vZpSgc/SjlxbFE5JkI/AAAAAAAAGTI/NYebK5rHhpY/s1600-h/oil+consumption+oildrum.png > > > > > > The first thing to note is how the price of oil does not necessarily move > in > > conjunction with consumption. > > > > More importantly, the chart also shows total world consumption is about > 85 > > million barrels a day (no surprise as consumption plus reserves should > match > > production). The proposal to sell 70 million barrels is not even a single > > day's worth of global consumption! Even if Congress authorized a swap for > > the entire reserves, it would amount to a mere 9 days worth of global > > consumption. > > > > Sweet vs. Sour > > > > By the way, the price differential between sweet and sour crude which the > > fine Congressmen proposed would finance the scheme, averaged less than $1 > in > > the first quarter of 2009 according to Alon USA > > < > http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS224641+06-May-2009+PRN20090506 > > > > . > > > > The WTI/WTS crude oil differentials for the first quarter of 2009 > decreased > > to $0.94 per barrel compared to $4.67 per barrel for the first quarter of > > 2008. > > > > Yahoo Finance has the current WTS to WTI > > spreadat -$2.34 (a premium > > of $2.34 for light crude). Excuse me for asking, but > > exactly how much per barrel would it cost to deplete the reserves of 70 > > million barrels of light crude and replace them with 70 million barrels > of > > sour? Is the handling free of charge by magic genies? > > > > Meaning of Strategic > > > > Finally, the whole reason we have SPR is for national emergencies. The > "S" > > in "SPR" stands for > > "Strategic". > > $70 oil is not even a hardship, let alone a strategic need. > > > > Representatives Ed Markey of Massachusetts, Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, > > and Peter Welch of Vermont have proven they do not know a thing about oil > > consumption, the meaning of the word strategic, the price points of > crude, > > or even general economic theory about pricing. > > > > Their proposal to tap oil reserves is what happens when political hacks > > start writing bills on things they know nothing about, which in general > is > > everything. > > > > Mike "Mish" Shedlock > > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090622/24cc570c/attachment-0001.html From ekroposki at charter.net Mon Jun 22 09:27:06 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 09:27:06 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] The inmates have escaped again ..... Message-ID: Rik, And if you follow Mish's comment to: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/06/xie-chinese-banks-funding-commodities.html Here is another bubble developing. Brad might want to warn his relatives. Also, I may have posted this once already, if so disregard, roadtrip, sent to me by a member of the Rhodes List who will not join here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5yxFtTwDcc Also, just for Rik's interest here is an web site from a different Rhodes List member who will not join here: www.tinyurl.com/bits-001 Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090622/4a1d700a/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Jun 22 09:59:51 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 08:59:51 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] The inmates have escaped again ..... In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0906220536t2010f7afn1440b089ce56d4ab@mail.gmail.com> References: <6634e19e0906210519h1299a105oca1e15c97be182d9@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70906220430o3ee4f48fo37ecb220281658a6@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906220536t2010f7afn1440b089ce56d4ab@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906220659y5aaea792mb9a1e98c2b589704@mail.gmail.com> Rik, China isn't just "speculating" on futures contracts for commodities, they are taking physical possession for future consumption (including filling their own strategic petroleum reserve). China has purchased large tracts of drilling rights 90 miles from the coast of Florida - areas that are off limits to US companies. Go to the deepest, darkest, most remote places on the planet and you'll find Chinese engineers working with local mineral owners. I'm leaving for Shanghai next Monday and will spend the first week with one of Fan's geophysicist buddies who got into mining and has become quite wealthy. I'll give a full report after picking her brain. Brad On 6/22/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > I guess the lesson that should be learned here is: The smart money can move > around faster than a dim witted legislature can figure out new ways to steal > it. > > It looks like a commodities bubble may be the next problem with all that > loose cash floating around in China looking for something to do. > > Rik > > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/speculation-in-china-does-not-mean.html > > ______________________ > > Speculation In China Does Not Mean Inflation In The > US > > Inflationists and even hyperinflationist are coming out of the woodwork. > Even some people I highly respect have jumped on the hyperinflation > bandwagon. Given that the Flow of Funds Report Offers Hard Evidence of > Deflation, > I am not changing my tune. > > Some of the inflation fears stem from a falling US dollar that seems to me > to be range bound. In addition, there has been a strong rebound in commodity > prices. OK oil prices more than doubled from the December low to over $70. > However that is a far cry from $140. > > Even many deflationists (at least me) thought oil prices bottomed and > Treasury yields may have. Yet, suddenly a snapback rally in commodity prices > is supposed to mean a powerful surge in inflation, perhaps even > hyperinflation? > > WTIC - Light Sweet Crude Weekly > > > > click on chart for sharper image > > On a log chart the oil rebound looks impressive. On a retrace perspective, > the story is different. The first Fibonacci retrace level at 38.2% has not > even been reached. This is hyperinflation? > > Fear the Dark Side of China's Lending Surge > > The easy scapegoat for rising commodity prices is a collapsing US dollar, > strong inflation or even hyperinflation in the us. Sadly, few seem to have > noticed (except when it is convenient to their theories) that this is a > global economy, peak oil is a factor, and so are happenings in China. > > I had a bookmark of an interesting post by Andy Xie lined up for today to > talk about. It's called "Fear the Dark Side of China's Lending Surge". > Unfortunately the post is no longer available or the site is now restricted. > > However, Yves Smith at Naked Capitalism posted it earlier this weekend. > Please consider Xie: Chinese Banks Funding Commodities Speculation, Casting > Doubt on Recovery > > > The current surge in commodity prices, for example, is being fueled by > China's demand for speculative inventory. > > Commodity prices have skyrocketed since March. The weak global economy can't > support high commodity prices. Instead, low interest rates and inflation > fears are driving money into commodity buying. > > Exchange-traded funds (ETFs) alone account for half of the activity on the > oil futures market. ETFs allow retail investors to act like hedge funds. > This product has serious implications for monetary policymaking. One > consequence is that inflation fears could lead to inflation through massive > deployment of money into inflation-hedging assets such as commodities. > > Financial demand alone can't support commodity prices. Financial investors > can't take physical delivery and must sell maturing futures contracts. This > force can lead to a steep price curve over time. > > There's little doubt that China's bank lending since last December has > driven speculative inventory demand for commodities. Chinese banks lend for > commodity purchases, allowing the underlying commodities to be used as > collateral. These loans are structured like mortgages. > > The international media has been following reports of record commodity > imports by China. The surge is being portrayed as reflecting China's > recovering economy. Indeed, the international financial market is portraying > China's perceived recovery as a harbinger for global recovery. It is a major > factor pushing up stock prices around the world. > > What is happening in the commodity market is glaring proof that China's > lending surge is hurting the country. Even more serious is that it is > leading Chinese companies away from real business and further toward asset > speculation ? virtual business... > > This lending surge proves China's economic problems can't be resolved with > liquidity. China's growth model is based on government-led investment and > foreign enterprise-led export. As exports grew in the past, the government > channeled income into investment to support more export growth. Now that the > global economy and China's exports have collapsed, there will be no income > growth to support investment growth. The government's current investment > stimulus is tapping a money pool accumulated from past exports. Eventually, > the pool will dry up. > > If exports remain weak for several years, China's only chance for returning > to high growth will be to shift demand to the domestic household sector. > This would require significant rebalancing of wealth and income. A new > growth cycle could start by distributing shares of listed SOEs to Chinese > households, creating a virtuous cycle that lasts a decade. > > Putting money into speculative investments isn't totally irrational. It's > better than expanding capacity which, without export customers, would surely > lead to losses. Businesses currently lack incentive to invest. But many boom > forecasters wrongly assume that recent asset appreciation, fueled by > speculation, signaled an end to economic problems. That's an illusion. The > lending surge may have created more problems than it resolved. > > One Must Not Confuse > > > - One must not confuse speculation in China for "green shoots" > - One must not confuse speculation in China for hyperinflation in the US > - One must not confuse increasing commodity prices for inflation while > ignoring a massive collapse in credit and an even bigger collapse in > credit > marked to market. > > > Given there has never been a hyperinflation in history where home prices > have crashed, I have one question: Where are the hyperinflationist's > recommendations to buy houses? Where? Please don't be a wimp about it. Is > any hyperinflationist recommending houses? > > OK so inflationists like gold. So do I, as a deflationist. However, in > housing, and only housing can one put down 10% and control and asset for > decades. Housing is (or should be) a hyperinflationist's dream come true. > > Falling home prices remain the nut that hyperinflationsts just cannot > escape. Yes, home prices will bottom, perhaps years from now, perhaps even > next year. Then what? If you truly believe hyperinflation is coming, then > housing is a sure thing. Go for it. > > Addendum: > > The link Fear the Dark Side of China's Lending > Surgeis again > working for me. > > Mike "Mish" Shedlock > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com > > > On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 6:30 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> The stupidity of these "congress critters" no longer has any shock >> value. The strategic petroleum reserve (SPR) is slightly over a >> months supply of fuel. What, if any, positive impact releasing it to >> the market would have is doubtful. If I were hell bent on attacking >> the US, I'd manipulate the oil market (several countries have the >> capacity to do that as well as some individuals - Soros comes to >> mind), convince the US to piss away their SPR, then go for the >> jugular. What's really amazing is that they can make such a proposal >> in the same week they passed the "Cash for Clunkers" bill. Did it >> ever occur to anyone in Congress that the falling dollar is what is >> driving the increase in oil prices? There's a reason China is >> investing their surplus into gold and oil. Last week, some California >> legislators proposed a $9 per barrel tax on California produced crude >> oil. If I were a California producer sitting on reserves, I'd >> immediately dial back the speed of the wellheads (which can be done >> via cellphone for about $2K in technology), scale back the water-flood >> and steam injection units, and wait for prices to rise. Where do we >> find these people? >> >> Brad >> >> On 6/21/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: >> > Good Morning All, >> > >> > Where do we find these people??? Haven't we had enough of the damage >> > that >> > their artificial pricing causes already??? How many times do their >> > little >> > schemes have to blow up in their faces before they start to get a >> > clue??? >> > >> > I can see it now. We'll sell off a bunch of our strategic reserve and >> > automagically forget to replace it. About that time either the brown, or >> > maybe the yellow horde will decide it's time to take the place over and >> > we'll be standing here with our friggin' pants down around our knees. >> > You >> > can bet there's some group somewhere that's hoping that we'll do >> something >> > this stupid. >> > >> > Rik >> > __________________ >> > >> http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/nitwits-in-congress-propose-tapping-oil.html >> > Nitwits In Congress Propose Tapping Oil Reserves To Halt Price >> > Increases< >> http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/06/nitwits-in-congress-propose-tapping-oil.html >> > >> > >> > Inquiring minds are investigating legislation that would sell US oil >> > reserves in an attempt to bring down the price of gasoline. Can such a >> > scheme possibly work? >> > >> > Please consider US Reps File Bill To Tap SPR To Counter Oil Price >> > Rise< >> http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/stock-market-news-story.aspx?storyid=200906171404dowjonesdjonline000772&title=us-reps-file-bill-to-tap-spr-to-counter-oil-price-rise >> > >> > . >> > >> > Several influential U.S. House Democrats have filed a bill that would >> > require the government to tap the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve >> > to >> > counter rising oil prices. >> > >> > Reps. Ed Markey, D-Mass., Chris Van Hollen, D-Md. and Peter Welch, >> > D-Vt., >> > said their legislation would direct the Department of Energy to sell 70 >> > million barrels of more expensive light, sweet crude and replace it with >> > cheaper heavy crude. >> > >> > By mandating a release of oil into the market, legislators want to try >> and >> > shake some speculators out of the market. Many lawmakers blame what they >> > term " excessive" speculation in the market for skyrocketing crude >> prices, >> > despite many economists citing the fundamentals of supply and demand as >> > being the primary drivers. >> > >> > The revenues brought in from the price differential in the swap would >> then >> > go back into the SPR account to fill the reserve back up to its >> 727-million >> > barrel capacity. >> > >> > Constant Price Theories >> > >> > Hello guys, assuming you were selling reserves in enough quantity to >> matter >> > (a mighty assumption indeed, as we shall see in a moment) the very act >> > of >> > demanding more sour crude while selling sweet crude would artificially >> > suppress the price of sweet while artificially raising the price for the >> > sour. Did this simple economic fact escape you? >> > >> > Moreover, if and when the strategic reserves became all sour crude, what >> > would you do then? >> > >> > Oil Production and Consumption >> > >> > Let's now address the issue of whether selling 70 million barrels of >> light >> > crude would do anything at all and if so for how long. >> > >> > Production figures from the Department of >> > Energyin >> > thousands of barrels. >> > >> > < >> http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_nSTO-vZpSgc/Sjm4rckk8rI/AAAAAAAAGTQ/ApT2wombHxM/s1600-h/oil+production.png >> > >> > >> > The above table is from the EIA - Energy Information Administration as >> > of >> > June 9, 2009. The chart shows the entire world's production was about 85 >> > million barrels per day in 2008 and is roughly 84 million barrels per >> > day >> > now. >> > >> > A Look at the Consumption Side >> > >> > The CIA World Factbook >> > < >> https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2174rank.html >> >shows >> > the following consumption figures. >> > >> > < >> http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_nSTO-vZpSgc/Sjlve-9qfHI/AAAAAAAAGTA/C1y_XlaqLng/s1600-h/oil+consumption.png >> > >> > >> > OECD Oil Consumption >> > >> > Inquiring minds are taking a look at a chart Rune Likvern posted on the >> Oil >> > Drum addressing the question Has OECD oil consumption >> > peaked? >> > >> > < >> http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_nSTO-vZpSgc/SjlxbFE5JkI/AAAAAAAAGTI/NYebK5rHhpY/s1600-h/oil+consumption+oildrum.png >> > >> > >> > The first thing to note is how the price of oil does not necessarily >> > move >> in >> > conjunction with consumption. >> > >> > More importantly, the chart also shows total world consumption is about >> 85 >> > million barrels a day (no surprise as consumption plus reserves should >> match >> > production). The proposal to sell 70 million barrels is not even a >> > single >> > day's worth of global consumption! Even if Congress authorized a swap >> > for >> > the entire reserves, it would amount to a mere 9 days worth of global >> > consumption. >> > >> > Sweet vs. Sour >> > >> > By the way, the price differential between sweet and sour crude which >> > the >> > fine Congressmen proposed would finance the scheme, averaged less than >> > $1 >> in >> > the first quarter of 2009 according to Alon USA >> > < >> http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS224641+06-May-2009+PRN20090506 >> > >> > . >> > >> > The WTI/WTS crude oil differentials for the first quarter of 2009 >> decreased >> > to $0.94 per barrel compared to $4.67 per barrel for the first quarter >> > of >> > 2008. >> > >> > Yahoo Finance has the current WTS to WTI >> > spreadat -$2.34 (a premium >> > of $2.34 for light crude). Excuse me for asking, but >> > exactly how much per barrel would it cost to deplete the reserves of 70 >> > million barrels of light crude and replace them with 70 million barrels >> of >> > sour? Is the handling free of charge by magic genies? >> > >> > Meaning of Strategic >> > >> > Finally, the whole reason we have SPR is for national emergencies. The >> "S" >> > in "SPR" stands for >> > "Strategic". >> > $70 oil is not even a hardship, let alone a strategic need. >> > >> > Representatives Ed Markey of Massachusetts, Chris Van Hollen of >> > Maryland, >> > and Peter Welch of Vermont have proven they do not know a thing about >> > oil >> > consumption, the meaning of the word strategic, the price points of >> crude, >> > or even general economic theory about pricing. >> > >> > Their proposal to tap oil reserves is what happens when political hacks >> > start writing bills on things they know nothing about, which in general >> is >> > everything. >> > >> > Mike "Mish" Shedlock >> > http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From ekroposki at charter.net Tue Jun 23 06:09:39 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 06:09:39 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Political Satire Message-ID: See attachment... EK -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090623/2c7a143e/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Did I.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 56224 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090623/2c7a143e/attachment-0001.jpg From flybrad at gmail.com Tue Jun 23 07:07:03 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 06:07:03 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Political Satire In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <400985d70906230407q617f3a48m46433264be2cc89f@mail.gmail.com> Ed, Here's a sobering chart - http://www.flickr.com/photos/98131992 at N00/3650482224/ Even the most optimistic scenario doesn't look good. Brad On 6/23/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > See attachment... > > EK From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Jun 24 07:40:27 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 06:40:27 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] He Thinks You Are Stupid! Message-ID: <400985d70906240440t3f611112qc6fdce34b21548fa@mail.gmail.com> Obama thinks you are stupid, and sadly enough, too many Americans are. In yesterdays news conference he said, "under "Cap and Trade" the costs of the bill would be born by the worst polluters". Yeah right, in his fantasy world utilities won't pass on the costs to consumers. Here's a looks at the costs - http://www.nma.org/pdf/061909_2454_map.pdf If we we're serious about energy we'd start building nukes. They're good enough for Iran, why not for us? On another "whopper" note, he keeps talking about how his "health" plan will save money and cut costs. Again I say, "Mr. President, why don't you share your expertise that you apparently learned from your wife on how to cut medical expenses. Why must we wait for you to nationalize 17% of the economy? Couldn't we benefit from your wisdom sooner, rather than later? Oh please do tell us the details". I won't even get into his statement to the effect that citizens took to the streets of Tehran because of his Cairo speech. The hubris of this man/boy never ceases to amaze me, nor does the stupidity of many Americans. Brad From sanderico1 at gmail.com Wed Jun 24 08:09:15 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 07:09:15 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] He Thinks You Are Stupid! In-Reply-To: <400985d70906240440t3f611112qc6fdce34b21548fa@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906240440t3f611112qc6fdce34b21548fa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0906240509p658bd63cy1d3c5c378f246cf3@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Yep, Cap and Trade would be a BIG tax that would be passed right down the line to the consumer, Mostly to that 95% who voted for and were supposed to be enjoying a TAX CUT. However, many of us would have a tough time knowing just how much of the final price is tax. I see the VAT they are considering in the same light. Very complicated and the end result is simply higher prices for the end user and a great degree of difficulty understanding just what exactly the amount of taxation is. Why, if they want to do a value added tax, can't they just put on a simple sales tax so the American consumer would have half a chance of figuring out just how much tax they are actually paying?? This would be simple and inexpensive to implement since almost everybody already does sales taxes for the states anyway. Do you suppose it is because they are afraid that if Americans could actually figure out what they were really paying, they'd get up on their hind legs and say NO MORE??? THIS IS FRIGGIN' RIDICULOUS!!! I have a hard time coming up with any other reason that makes any sense. I am, as much as I hate all the deception, really enjoying all the creative excuse making all the O one's kool-aid drinker's are coming up with since it has become obvious that he is pretty much simply GWB on steroids. Rik On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 6:40 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Obama thinks you are stupid, and sadly enough, too many Americans are. > In yesterdays news conference he said, "under "Cap and Trade" the > costs of the bill would be born by the worst polluters". Yeah right, > in his fantasy world utilities won't pass on the costs to consumers. > Here's a looks at the costs - > > http://www.nma.org/pdf/061909_2454_map.pdf > > If we we're serious about energy we'd start building nukes. They're > good enough for Iran, why not for us? > > On another "whopper" note, he keeps talking about how his "health" > plan will save money and cut costs. Again I say, "Mr. President, why > don't you share your expertise that you apparently learned from your > wife on how to cut medical expenses. Why must we wait for you to > nationalize 17% of the economy? Couldn't we benefit from your wisdom > sooner, rather than later? Oh please do tell us the details". > > I won't even get into his statement to the effect that citizens took > to the streets of Tehran because of his Cairo speech. The hubris of > this man/boy never ceases to amaze me, nor does the stupidity of many > Americans. > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090624/ba57dd33/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Wed Jun 24 08:48:21 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 07:48:21 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] He Thinks You Are Stupid! In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0906240509p658bd63cy1d3c5c378f246cf3@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906240440t3f611112qc6fdce34b21548fa@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906240509p658bd63cy1d3c5c378f246cf3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0906240548k7cb498b4w883e0c206f5dc3cd@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Looking at that cap and trade chart and giving it a little thought. I see the big blue states (hope I got my colors right) would benefit most from this tax. BUT, I am wondering, CA looks to have the most benefit, but do they really?? Since they haven't built a power plant in CA for many years, are they not going to have to buy their power from some other state that is probably going to see a price increase?? Would they actually see a benefit or just pay effectively, taxes in another state?? Rik On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 7:09 AM, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Yep, Cap and Trade would be a BIG tax that would be passed right down the > line to the consumer, Mostly to that 95% who voted for and were supposed to > be enjoying a TAX CUT. However, many of us would have a tough time knowing > just how much of the final price is tax. I see the VAT they are considering > in the same light. Very complicated and the end result is simply higher > prices for the end user and a great degree of difficulty understanding just > what exactly the amount of taxation is. > > Why, if they want to do a value added tax, can't they just put on a simple > sales tax so the American consumer would have half a chance of figuring out > just how much tax they are actually paying?? This would be simple and > inexpensive to implement since almost everybody already does sales taxes for > the states anyway. > > Do you suppose it is because they are afraid that if Americans could > actually figure out what they were really paying, they'd get up on their > hind legs and say NO MORE??? THIS IS FRIGGIN' RIDICULOUS!!! I have a hard > time coming up with any other reason that makes any sense. > > I am, as much as I hate all the deception, really enjoying all the creative > excuse making all the O one's kool-aid drinker's are coming up with since it > has become obvious that he is pretty much simply GWB on steroids. > > Rik > > > > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 6:40 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Obama thinks you are stupid, and sadly enough, too many Americans are. >> In yesterdays news conference he said, "under "Cap and Trade" the >> costs of the bill would be born by the worst polluters". Yeah right, >> in his fantasy world utilities won't pass on the costs to consumers. >> Here's a looks at the costs - >> >> http://www.nma.org/pdf/061909_2454_map.pdf >> >> If we we're serious about energy we'd start building nukes. They're >> good enough for Iran, why not for us? >> >> On another "whopper" note, he keeps talking about how his "health" >> plan will save money and cut costs. Again I say, "Mr. President, why >> don't you share your expertise that you apparently learned from your >> wife on how to cut medical expenses. Why must we wait for you to >> nationalize 17% of the economy? Couldn't we benefit from your wisdom >> sooner, rather than later? Oh please do tell us the details". >> >> I won't even get into his statement to the effect that citizens took >> to the streets of Tehran because of his Cairo speech. The hubris of >> this man/boy never ceases to amaze me, nor does the stupidity of many >> Americans. >> >> Brad >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090624/0d17cf16/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Jun 24 12:11:03 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 11:11:03 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] He Thinks You Are Stupid! In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0906240548k7cb498b4w883e0c206f5dc3cd@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906240440t3f611112qc6fdce34b21548fa@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906240509p658bd63cy1d3c5c378f246cf3@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906240548k7cb498b4w883e0c206f5dc3cd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906240911n52a2b3f6k97df12d6533efac2@mail.gmail.com> Rik, California is the "canary in the coal mine". They are broke. They are beyond broke - they are bankrupt. A few years ago during the time-frame that California was enduring 'brownouts' sponsored by Enron (California legislative attempts to "control costs" created the opportunity for Enron) I was driving out to the redwood forest outside Sacramento with a friend. She was bitching about the heat, the lack of air-conditioning at certain times of the day, blah, blah, blah. It just so happened we were in eye-sight of the never finished nuclear plant during the conversation. "Look over there 'sweetheart', there's your problem". For that comment, I got a lecture about being a "sexist" asshole. So much for intelligent, open discussion! (A few years later Obama referred to a female news reporter as "sweetheart" so I assume it is OK to use as a term or endearment now). None of the legislation we see coming down the pike makes any sense at all unless you look at it through the lenses of "command and control". I'm waiting for the first five-year-plan to come out any day now. I keep asking proponents the same question; "how are we going to pay for this?" They think the "rich" will. All I can say based on my experience in life is this;" it's pretty damned easy to get rich". Last night we had our minister friend (I've never stepped foot in his church) over for dinner (he came home early from vacation with his wife in China). My wife told a story about being in the second grade and wanting to join a Mao worshiping dance troupe. Fan was allowed to participate in practice but when the ceremony arrived where everyone got the "red scarf" she was kicked out. It seems her grandparents were "exploiters". To my mother-in-law's credit, she marched to the school and explained that Fan was born in 1959, her grandparents "lost" all their money in 1956, (confiscated by the 'gubmint') so what did a 7-year-old do to exploit anyone? Fan got her red scarf but hasn't forgotten the experience. We are at the tipping point! Forgive me if I don't worship at the feet of "Chocolate Baby Jesus". Brad On 6/24/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Looking at that cap and trade chart and giving it a little thought. I see > the big blue states (hope I got my colors right) would benefit most from > this tax. BUT, I am wondering, CA looks to have the most benefit, but do > they really?? Since they haven't built a power plant in CA for many years, > are they not going to have to buy their power from some other state that is > probably going to see a price increase?? Would they actually see a benefit > or just pay effectively, taxes in another state?? > > Rik > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 7:09 AM, Eric Sandberg wrote: > >> Brad, >> >> Yep, Cap and Trade would be a BIG tax that would be passed right down the >> line to the consumer, Mostly to that 95% who voted for and were supposed >> to >> be enjoying a TAX CUT. However, many of us would have a tough time knowing >> just how much of the final price is tax. I see the VAT they are >> considering >> in the same light. Very complicated and the end result is simply higher >> prices for the end user and a great degree of difficulty understanding >> just >> what exactly the amount of taxation is. >> >> Why, if they want to do a value added tax, can't they just put on a simple >> sales tax so the American consumer would have half a chance of figuring >> out >> just how much tax they are actually paying?? This would be simple and >> inexpensive to implement since almost everybody already does sales taxes >> for >> the states anyway. >> >> Do you suppose it is because they are afraid that if Americans could >> actually figure out what they were really paying, they'd get up on their >> hind legs and say NO MORE??? THIS IS FRIGGIN' RIDICULOUS!!! I have a hard >> time coming up with any other reason that makes any sense. >> >> I am, as much as I hate all the deception, really enjoying all the >> creative >> excuse making all the O one's kool-aid drinker's are coming up with since >> it >> has become obvious that he is pretty much simply GWB on steroids. >> >> Rik >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 6:40 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> >>> Obama thinks you are stupid, and sadly enough, too many Americans are. >>> In yesterdays news conference he said, "under "Cap and Trade" the >>> costs of the bill would be born by the worst polluters". Yeah right, >>> in his fantasy world utilities won't pass on the costs to consumers. >>> Here's a looks at the costs - >>> >>> http://www.nma.org/pdf/061909_2454_map.pdf >>> >>> If we we're serious about energy we'd start building nukes. They're >>> good enough for Iran, why not for us? >>> >>> On another "whopper" note, he keeps talking about how his "health" >>> plan will save money and cut costs. Again I say, "Mr. President, why >>> don't you share your expertise that you apparently learned from your >>> wife on how to cut medical expenses. Why must we wait for you to >>> nationalize 17% of the economy? Couldn't we benefit from your wisdom >>> sooner, rather than later? Oh please do tell us the details". >>> >>> I won't even get into his statement to the effect that citizens took >>> to the streets of Tehran because of his Cairo speech. The hubris of >>> this man/boy never ceases to amaze me, nor does the stupidity of many >>> Americans. >>> >>> Brad >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >> >> > From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Jun 24 12:45:01 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 11:45:01 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Neda Message-ID: <400985d70906240945l3c758e77oa37bc4b5f129aa64@mail.gmail.com> No comment. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzUDyL1RTk8 From ekroposki at charter.net Wed Jun 24 13:09:01 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 13:09:01 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] economic forecast for 2011 Message-ID: <7t7c1c0074eoq0j05t7dLz@charter.net> Now if you believe the fed, "The Fed forecast calls for the jobless rate to dip to between 8 and 8.3 percent next year, and to between 7.5 and 6.7 percent in 2011. All those projections are worse than the Fed's previous estimates and would put unemployment higher than the normal range around 5 percent." Actually the reason for this post is that an unatibuted economists has stated there will be no upturn in the economy thru 2011. That comment was in a local news report and they never went back to say again who said it. Brad posted a chart showing what growth rates were need to reduce unemployment. Here is a site that analyzes data and makes economic projections. The project 2011 U.S. growth rate at 3.14 %. That is not enough to sufficiently reduce unemployment according to the numbers Brad posted. http://www.economywatch.com/ An now you have Barney Frank wanting to let Fanie and Fredie make suspect loans. http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/22/barney-frank-encourag...%20www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/22/barney-frank-encourages-fannie-freddie-to-relax-lending-standar/ And why isn't this making main stream media front pages? Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090624/45c2b4f1/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Jun 24 13:25:33 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 12:25:33 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] economic forecast for 2011 In-Reply-To: <7t7c1c0074eoq0j05t7dLz@charter.net> References: <7t7c1c0074eoq0j05t7dLz@charter.net> Message-ID: <400985d70906241025kb3ce583v8c90dceba4a85de8@mail.gmail.com> Ed, The chief economist for my employer (a Chinese guy who lives in my neighborhood) predicts an 'uptick' in the economy in early 2010. That's a reasonable prediction given the history of business cycles. There's two big problems with these "recovery" predictions; 1 - new jobs will substantially lag, and 2 - inflation will erode future "profits". It is easy for those who didn't live through Jimmy Carter's 14% inflation and 21% interest rates to forget how decimating those two factors are to wealth creation. It is one thing to study it, another to experience it - not unlike our parent's having lived through the Great Depression. No one would be happier to be wrong about all this than me, but, no can give a rational explanation on how we're going to pay off the debt we're taking on. Well actually, Warren Buffet did. He said we'll inflate our way out of debt. There I go again - repeating myself. Brad On 6/24/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > Now if you believe the fed, "The Fed forecast calls for the jobless rate to > dip to between 8 and 8.3 percent next year, and to between 7.5 and 6.7 > percent in 2011. All those projections are worse than the Fed's previous > estimates and would put unemployment higher than the normal range around 5 > percent." > > Actually the reason for this post is that an unatibuted economists has > stated there will be no upturn in the economy thru 2011. That comment was in > a local news report and they never went back to say again who said it. > > Brad posted a chart showing what growth rates were need to reduce > unemployment. Here is a site that analyzes data and makes economic > projections. The project 2011 U.S. growth rate at 3.14 %. That is not > enough to sufficiently reduce unemployment according to the numbers Brad > posted. > http://www.economywatch.com/ > > An now you have Barney Frank wanting to let Fanie and Fredie make suspect > loans. > http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/22/barney-frank-encourag...%20www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/22/barney-frank-encourages-fannie-freddie-to-relax-lending-standar/ > > And why isn't this making main stream media front pages? > > Ed K > > > > > From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Jun 24 18:00:56 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:00:56 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Attn. Ed - About Your Guv Message-ID: <400985d70906241500k43657f6eo4996fd57e3dec55d@mail.gmail.com> Ed, This is disappointing - Sanford had a good message and was a hopeful for 2012. Now, he's beyond toast, he's charcoal. He needs to go. I could care less about his personal life beyond sympathy for his wife and kids. We don't need this distraction. Chairman Obama is trying to ruin us with cap-and-trade, nationalize another 17% of the economy, and cuddle-up with a corrupt regime in Iran. The MSM will take the focus off the Communist-in-Chief and concentrate on Sanford. He needs to go. Call whoever you know in SC and put the pressure on - we've got bigger issues to deal with. The earlier the news cycle ends on this the better. I have nothing against Sanford (trust me, I've been to Argentina, I know the challenges) but he's in the way of progress now. Brad From ekroposki at charter.net Wed Jun 24 18:18:50 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:18:50 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Attn. Ed - About Your Guv Message-ID: Brad, I have been told this is a good example of a type A person: Hiking on the Appalachian trail. Going to Argentina. Having an Affair. Who does he think he is, Eliot Spitzer? Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090624/4c3621a4/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Wed Jun 24 18:37:50 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:37:50 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Attn. Ed - About Your Guv Message-ID: Brad, I am going out of town Friday, and will not see Jim DeMint for a minimum of two weeks. I will have to ask him if he plans to be next. I was asking him last week if his new title is "Uber" as the Miami Herald called him. Jim used to sail an O'Day 27 but his wife does not like sailing and he spends too much time in D.C. He is traveling around the country fund raising for his re election campaign. He says he is very uncomfortable trying to raise money especially in the millions. However, he is committed to run again and fully expects to win. Expects Democrat opposition because of stands on spending. Stanford is a Charleston guy. Actually, except for this incident he is o.k. He is a strong fiscal conservative and may have fallen into this getting depressed in fighting the spend happy legislature. In South Carolina the governor is really a figure head. The state legislature has always been in control of everything. In recent years, since Dick Riley, the governors office has gained some political power, but not much. The governor in South Carolina is probably the weakest in the nation. Bobby Harrell, speaker of the House may be the most powerful. However, his job is like herding cats. The Senate is based on seniority and have veto power over both the house and the governor. Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090624/d790888e/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Jun 24 19:12:20 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:12:20 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Attn. Ed - About Your Guv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <400985d70906241612g20d8f450v4c3884ac4557ebcd@mail.gmail.com> Ed, Based on how quickly his personal e-mails were released, he either has a mole in his administration or one pissed-off wife. It really doesn't matter. I'd like to see him resign just so everyone can focus on the "big picture". This has gotta help Palin for 2012. Whoever is best at keeping their penis under control may win the nomination by default. Brad On 6/24/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > > > Brad, > > I am going out of town Friday, and will not see Jim DeMint for a minimum of > two weeks. I will have to ask him if he plans to be next. > > I was asking him last week if his new title is "Uber" as the Miami Herald > called him. Jim used to sail an O'Day 27 but his wife does not like sailing > and he spends too much time in D.C. > > He is traveling around the country fund raising for his re election > campaign. He says he is very uncomfortable trying to raise money especially > in the millions. However, he is committed to run again and fully expects to > win. Expects Democrat opposition because of stands on spending. > > Stanford is a Charleston guy. Actually, except for this incident he is o.k. > He is a strong fiscal conservative and may have fallen into this getting > depressed in fighting the spend happy legislature. > > In South Carolina the governor is really a figure head. The state > legislature has always been in control of everything. In recent years, > since Dick Riley, the governors office has gained some political power, but > not much. The governor in South Carolina is probably the weakest in the > nation. > > Bobby Harrell, speaker of the House may be the most powerful. However, his > job is like herding cats. The Senate is based on seniority and have veto > power over both the house and the governor. > > Ed K From ekroposki at charter.net Wed Jun 24 19:38:36 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 19:38:36 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] one pissed-off wife Message-ID: <8182DCCC5E214A488838B23E5D05B41B@YOURB88038198E> Brad: Apparently his wife threw him out a couple of weeks ago. That is why she did not know his whereabouts for the press. And I would think that there is a mole too. He pissed off too many powerful people. I think that the pressure just got too much and he broke. I have not heard anything about him resigning, to the contrary he has said he plans to stay in office. I heard prior to today that there might be a marital problem. Next time I see that source I will ask him what next. Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090624/b29698fd/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Jun 24 20:02:31 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 19:02:31 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] one pissed-off wife In-Reply-To: <8182DCCC5E214A488838B23E5D05B41B@YOURB88038198E> References: <8182DCCC5E214A488838B23E5D05B41B@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <400985d70906241702l70974952ge039d5b7ff9f3db9@mail.gmail.com> Ed, There's a new sexual innuendo phrase that's already entered the slang lexicon - "hiking the Appalachian Trail". And now for the next scandal - http://tinyurl.com/dncbbs Brad On 6/24/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > Brad: > > Apparently his wife threw him out a couple of weeks ago. That is why she > did not know his whereabouts for the press. > > And I would think that there is a mole too. He pissed off too many powerful > people. > > I think that the pressure just got too much and he broke. > > I have not heard anything about him resigning, to the contrary he has said > he plans to stay in office. > > I heard prior to today that there might be a marital problem. Next time I > see that source I will ask him what next. > > Ed K From bill at effros.com Thu Jun 25 10:29:14 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 10:29:14 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Attn. Ed - About Your Guv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4A4389BA.6080009@effros.com> Seems to me this is payback for Spitzer. Obviously, lots of people know what's going on in the private lives of public figures, and there are certain rules we all live and play by. Republicans outed Spitzer. I'm sure some Democrat, who already knew the answer, started asking the question "Where's Sanford?" Once that happens you just watch the spin -- it's "game-over". B. Ed Kroposki wrote: > Brad, > > I have been told this is a good example of a type A person: > > Hiking on the* A*ppalachian trail. > Going to *A*rgentina. > Having an *A*ffair. > > Who does he think he is, Eliot Spitzer? > > Ed K > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090625/44799aa5/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Thu Jun 25 10:40:06 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 09:40:06 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Attn. Ed - About Your Guv In-Reply-To: <4A4389BA.6080009@effros.com> References: <4A4389BA.6080009@effros.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906250740n27bc421bge42ebe40da090d53@mail.gmail.com> Bill, Couldn't help but notice that the "house organ" of the Democratic Party, otherwise known as the New York Times, had no less than five front page articles on Sanford. It must be a slow news day. Sanford's press conference didn't follow the usual script. He's one confused puppy and shared more information than any sane and rational person wants to know. That said, I hope he does the right thing and resigns without a nasty fight. He's done in politics at the national level with the GOP anyway. I really liked the guy but he did this to himself. I wish he and his family (one or both of them) the best of luck. Let's look at the bright side of things - at least he didn't drown anyone! Brad On 6/25/09, Bill Effros wrote: > Seems to me this is payback for Spitzer. > > Obviously, lots of people know what's going on in the private lives of > public figures, and there are certain rules we all live and play by. > > Republicans outed Spitzer. > > I'm sure some Democrat, who already knew the answer, started asking the > question "Where's Sanford?" > > Once that happens you just watch the spin -- it's "game-over". > > B. > > > > Ed Kroposki wrote: >> Brad, >> >> I have been told this is a good example of a type A person: >> >> Hiking on the* A*ppalachian trail. >> Going to *A*rgentina. >> Having an *A*ffair. >> >> Who does he think he is, Eliot Spitzer? >> >> Ed K >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From bill at effros.com Thu Jun 25 11:20:59 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 11:20:59 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Attn. Ed - About Your Guv In-Reply-To: <400985d70906250740n27bc421bge42ebe40da090d53@mail.gmail.com> References: <4A4389BA.6080009@effros.com> <400985d70906250740n27bc421bge42ebe40da090d53@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A4395DB.1050305@effros.com> Brad, The Republicans seriously considered for President Rudy Guiliani, the Mayor of the City of New York, (with roughly twice the population of South Carolina) who was living in his girl friend's apartment, with the knowledge of the public, while his wife and family continued their residence at Gracie Mansion, the Mayor's official house. Please. You've been a guy for a long time. You know how things are. Especially how things are for guys who frequently have business reasons for sleeping in distant cities away from their wives and children... Now, say what you will about the current President, you've got to admit he's at least as good looking a guy as ... (fill in the blank -- so many funny choices come to mind). Is it possible, in your guy mind, that this guy never strayed from his marital vows? In all those years of organizing communities? Please, again. Half of Chicago probably knows who he was sleeping with, and how recently. It shouldn't take that long for some Republican to find out and whisper into a Fox News reporter's ear. B. Brad Haslett wrote: > Bill, > > Couldn't help but notice that the "house organ" of the Democratic > Party, otherwise known as the New York Times, had no less than five > front page articles on Sanford. It must be a slow news day. > Sanford's press conference didn't follow the usual script. He's one > confused puppy and shared more information than any sane and rational > person wants to know. That said, I hope he does the right thing and > resigns without a nasty fight. He's done in politics at the national > level with the GOP anyway. I really liked the guy but he did this to > himself. I wish he and his family (one or both of them) the best of > luck. > > Let's look at the bright side of things - at least he didn't drown anyone! > > Brad > > > On 6/25/09, Bill Effros wrote: > >> Seems to me this is payback for Spitzer. >> >> Obviously, lots of people know what's going on in the private lives of >> public figures, and there are certain rules we all live and play by. >> >> Republicans outed Spitzer. >> >> I'm sure some Democrat, who already knew the answer, started asking the >> question "Where's Sanford?" >> >> Once that happens you just watch the spin -- it's "game-over". >> >> B. >> >> >> >> Ed Kroposki wrote: >> >>> Brad, >>> >>> I have been told this is a good example of a type A person: >>> >>> Hiking on the* A*ppalachian trail. >>> Going to *A*rgentina. >>> Having an *A*ffair. >>> >>> Who does he think he is, Eliot Spitzer? >>> >>> Ed K >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >>> > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090625/91edc22f/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Thu Jun 25 11:56:34 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 10:56:34 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Attn. Ed - About Your Guv In-Reply-To: <4A4395DB.1050305@effros.com> References: <4A4389BA.6080009@effros.com> <400985d70906250740n27bc421bge42ebe40da090d53@mail.gmail.com> <4A4395DB.1050305@effros.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906250856x46abf39el924bd708e6fad5fb@mail.gmail.com> Bill, I never considered Rudy as Presidential timber for those precise reasons (not that I personally give-a-shit) nor do I consider Newt Gingrich a viable candidate for the same reasons. The press still gives cover to some (John Edwards comes to mind) as they did FDR, JFK, and LBJ, but not Gary Hart because he rubbed their noses in it - Sanford was just as stupid! Obviously, the local press had "the goods" on this guy for a long time and he didn't step into a trap, he shouted "watch this!" and stomped it! He should resign for stupidity alone. Obama could be banging crack whores on the White House lawn (oops, that might be perceived as racial, make it meth whores, his father would approve) and the MSM would provide cover. I don't care who he f*%$ as long as he doesn't wave that thing at me. And that, Sir, is the problem. Between cap-n-trade, so called "health care reform", and tax the "rich" (and we haven't even gotten to decimating everything I've worked my ass off for the last 35 years via inflation) the guy is after a piece of me. Sorry, I've got nothing against gays - got many gay friends. It's just this - homie don't play that game - nothing personal against other's personal savior. Every serious GOP challenger for office should be aware of the rules. If you lose your head (or find it in the wrong place) don't expect "fair" treatment. They're dumb asses if they don't look at every come-on as a possible plant. Sanford is a small bit player (but who blew lot's of potential). Ensign will get a pass because the Senate is so close. Like Edwards from Louisiana said once, "unless they find me with a dead girl or a live boy, I'll be re-elected". This Sanford thing couldn't have come at a worse time. Kids (70% of the population of Iran) are dying in the streets and we're worried about some "looker" from Argentina. A long time ago when I used to vacation in Germany, I'd walk around Bad Weissee and think about "little points of history" like the "Night of the Long Knives" and how history sometimes evolves around minor events. This Sanford thing means nothing in the long run. Distracting us during a crucial period when Iran, Healthcare, and Climate Change is up for grabs is what is important. Brad On 6/25/09, Bill Effros wrote: > Brad, > > The Republicans seriously considered for President Rudy Guiliani, the > Mayor of the City of New York, (with roughly twice the population of > South Carolina) who was living in his girl friend's apartment, with the > knowledge of the public, while his wife and family continued their > residence at Gracie Mansion, the Mayor's official house. > > Please. > > You've been a guy for a long time. You know how things are. Especially > how things are for guys who frequently have business reasons for > sleeping in distant cities away from their wives and children... > > Now, say what you will about the current President, you've got to admit > he's at least as good looking a guy as ... (fill in the blank -- so many > funny choices come to mind). Is it possible, in your guy mind, that > this guy never strayed from his marital vows? In all those years of > organizing communities? > > Please, again. > > Half of Chicago probably knows who he was sleeping with, and how > recently. It shouldn't take that long for some Republican to find out > and whisper into a Fox News reporter's ear. > > B. > > > > > > Brad Haslett wrote: >> Bill, >> >> Couldn't help but notice that the "house organ" of the Democratic >> Party, otherwise known as the New York Times, had no less than five >> front page articles on Sanford. It must be a slow news day. >> Sanford's press conference didn't follow the usual script. He's one >> confused puppy and shared more information than any sane and rational >> person wants to know. That said, I hope he does the right thing and >> resigns without a nasty fight. He's done in politics at the national >> level with the GOP anyway. I really liked the guy but he did this to >> himself. I wish he and his family (one or both of them) the best of >> luck. >> >> Let's look at the bright side of things - at least he didn't drown anyone! >> >> Brad >> >> >> On 6/25/09, Bill Effros wrote: >> >>> Seems to me this is payback for Spitzer. >>> >>> Obviously, lots of people know what's going on in the private lives of >>> public figures, and there are certain rules we all live and play by. >>> >>> Republicans outed Spitzer. >>> >>> I'm sure some Democrat, who already knew the answer, started asking the >>> question "Where's Sanford?" >>> >>> Once that happens you just watch the spin -- it's "game-over". >>> >>> B. >>> >>> >>> >>> Ed Kroposki wrote: >>> >>>> Brad, >>>> >>>> I have been told this is a good example of a type A person: >>>> >>>> Hiking on the* A*ppalachian trail. >>>> Going to *A*rgentina. >>>> Having an *A*ffair. >>>> >>>> Who does he think he is, Eliot Spitzer? >>>> >>>> Ed K >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>>> >>>> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> > From flybrad at gmail.com Thu Jun 25 12:28:23 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 11:28:23 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Hey Look! The SC GUV Is Banging Some Chick! Message-ID: <400985d70906250928y608a977amee1245b99981f27f@mail.gmail.com> Something else that got lost in the spin of this weeks news (see below). Brad ------------------------ Obama Plays Hardball With Watchdogs By Robert Stacy McCain on 6.25.09 @ 6:07AM Gerald Walpin has quickly become the most famous of the three inspector generals who've left their jobs in recent weeks, exposing what appears to be a pattern of pressure from the Obama administration. In radio and television interviews, the silver-haired 77-year-old former AmeriCorps IG has certainly contradicted insinuations of senility that administration officials made in defending the quit-or-be-fired ultimatum that Walpin said he received on June 11. On Tuesday, Walpin released a letter signed by more than 140 allies -- including a former White House counsel to President Clinton -- attesting that they have never seen him "confused" or "disoriented," as the administration claims he appeared to be at a May 20 meeting. Yet the investigations into President Obama's evident crackdown on IGs -- designated watchdogs who guard against waste, fraud and abuse in federal agencies -- are not about Walpin. Those familiar with the investigations (and yes, that noun is plural) caution against personalizing or politicizing the situation. These sources are especially concerned that inquiries by Republican members of Congress should not be portrayed as a partisan "gotcha" game against the popular new president. Similar words of caution are expressed by some members of the IG community, who note that Walpin had only been watchdogging the Corporation for National and Community Service for two years. An able attorney and certainly not the doddering incompetent that Obama officials portrayed him to be, Walpin hasn't been an IG long enough to have acquired "veteran" status, and some say he had a reputation as "arrogant" or "holier-than-thou." Whatever Walpin's reputation, however, sources familiar with his dismissal believe it was no accident that he was shown the door immediately after getting into a dispute with Eric Holder's Justice Department over a program affiliated with Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, an enthusiastic political ally of Obama. And perhaps the most important fact of the case so far is that the FBI is now investigating an accusation that e-mails relevant to Walpin's work were deleted by Johnson or others. Destroying evidence in a federal investigation is a serious crime, no matter what the other circumstances of the case may be. While Walpin's case has pushed the IG story into the headlines, the cases of two other ex-IGs are now the subject of congressional inquiries: ? Judith Gwynn, inspector general for the International Trade Commission, was notified last week that her contract would not be renewed. She received that notice shortly after Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley sent a letter to ITC Chairwoman Shara Aranof inquiring about an incident in which Gwynn said procurement documents "were removed forcibly from [her] possession" by a commission staffer. ? Fred Wiederhold Jr., inspector general for Amtrak, retired without notice or explanation June 18. Grassley says the unexpected resignation came after Wiederhold was asked to provide "specific examples of agency interference with OIG audits and/or investigations." An interesting angle to emerge in the Wiederhold case, according to sources, is that many of the IG's problems involved Amtrak vice president and general counsel Eleanor Acheson. A former Clinton administration Justice Department official under Attorney General Janet Reno, Acheson is not only the grandaughter of former Secretary of State Dean Acheson, but also happens to have been Hillary Rodham Clinton's roommate at Wellesley College. That famous connection may be merely coincidental, but shortly after The American Spectator's blog first mentioned Acheson's name in regard to the IG probe Tuesday, Michelle Malkin noted another connection that is almost certainly less of a coincidence. After joining Amtrak in January 2006, Acheson brought in as her deputy Jonathan Meyer, who spent six years as a top Senate aide to Joe Biden, who for years has proudly proclaimed himself Amtrak's No. 1 advocate in Washington. It was Biden who in March announced that the money-losing passenger rail service would get $1.3 billion from the massive $787 billion "stimulus" bill Obama signed in February. As Malkin also noted, the vice president's son, Hunter Biden, serves on the Amtrak board of directors. Clearly, the Amtrak IG situation will get close scrutiny on Capitol Hill -- as of Tuesday, Wiederhold had made no public comment about his sudden retirement -- but perhaps the most interesting part of the developing inspectors general story involves an IG who is still on the job. Neil Barofsky is "SIGTARP," the special investigator general whose job is to keep an eye on disbursement from the Troubled Assets Relief Program, the $3 trillion financial bailout that was rushed through Congress in October. Last week, Grassley sent a stern letter to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, asking about "a dispute over certain Treasury documents that were being withheld from SIGTARP auditors on a specious claim of attorney-client privilege." At stake in the TARP case -- as in the cases of the IGs at Amtrak, AmeriCorps and the ITC -- is whether the inspectors generals will remain vigilant watchdogs on behalf of taxpayers or become compliant lapdogs, allowing Obama's political appointees to do as they wish without fear of independent scrutiny. Given the controversial nature of the TARP -- including the public outcry over bonuses paid to top employees of insurance giant AIG, a bailout beneficiary -- Grassley is by no means the only member of Congress interested in preserving Barofsky's independence. In April, Geithner was grilled by Texas Republican Rep. Jeb Hensarling and other members of Congress at a hearing after Barofsky reported a "staggering" amount of fraud in the bailout program. Hensarling is one of the staunchest critics of TARP and, as ABC News reported last week, the Texan sent a letter to Elizabeth Warren, chairwoman of the congressional panel charged with overseeing the bailout, warning that Treasury's actions were a "threat to [Barofksy's] independence." Several observers see the administration's push against the IGs as emblematic of the notorious Chicago style of political hardball that Obama learned to play early in his career. As investigators move forward in their effort to safeguard the independence of the inspectors general, it will be an important test of whether "the Chicago way" will prevail on the shores of the Potomac. Robert Stacy McCain is co-author (with Lynn Vincent) of Donkey Cons: Sex, Crime, and Corruption in the Democratic Party (Nelson Current). He blogs at The Other McCain. From ekroposki at charter.net Thu Jun 25 18:40:13 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 18:40:13 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] African Colonial Message-ID: <7983C52BE1504766ACFFE4B19469D6B1@YOURB88038198E> >From American Thinker ref at bottom: June 25, 2009 Obama, the African Colonial By L.E. Ikenga Had Americans been able to stop obsessing over the color of Barack Obama's skin and instead paid more attention to his cultural identity, maybe he would not be in the White House today. The key to understanding him lies with his identification with his father, and his adoption of a cultural and political mindset rooted in postcolonial Africa. Like many educated intellectuals in postcolonial Africa, Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. was enraged at the transformation of his native land by its colonial conqueror. But instead of embracing the traditional values of his own tribal cultural past, he embraced an imported Western ideology, Marxism. I call such frustrated and angry modern Africans who embrace various foreign "isms", instead of looking homeward for repair of societies that are broken, African Colonials. They are Africans who serve foreign ideas. The tropes of America's racial history as a way of understanding all things black are useless in understanding the man who got his dreams from his father, a Kenyan exemplar of the African Colonial. Before I continue, I need to say this: I am a first generation born West African-American woman whose parents emigrated to the U.S. in the 1970's from the country now called Nigeria. I travel to Nigeria frequently. I see myself as both a proud American and as a proud Igbo (the tribe that we come from -- also sometimes spelled Ibo). Politically, I have always been conservative (though it took this past election for me to commit to this once and for all!); my conservative values come from my Igbo heritage and my place of birth. Of course, none of this qualifies me to say what I am about to -- but at the same time it does. My friends, despite what CNN and the rest are telling you, Barack Obama is nothing more than an old school African Colonial who is on his way to turning this country into one of the developing nations that you learn about on the National Geographic Channel. Many conservative (East, West, South, North) African-Americans like myself -- those of us who know our history -- have seen this movie before. Here are two main reasons why many Americans allowed Obama to slip through the cracks despite all of his glaring inconsistencies: First, Obama has been living on American soil for most of his adult life. Therefore, he has been able to masquerade as one who understands and believes in American democratic ideals. But he does not. Barack Obama is intrinsically undemocratic and as his presidency plays out, this will become more obvious. Second, and most importantly, too many Americans know very little about Africa. The one-size-fits-all understanding that many Americans (both black and white) continue to have of Africa might end up bringing dire consequences for this country. Contrary to the way it continues to be portrayed in mainstream Western culture, Africa is not a continent that can be solely defined by AIDS, ethnic rivalries, poverty and safaris. Africa, like any other continent, has an immense history defined by much diversity and complexity. Africa's long-standing relationship with Europe speaks especially to some of these complexities -- particularly the relationship that has existed between the two continents over the past two centuries. Europe's complete colonization of Africa during the nineteenth century, also known as the Scramble for Africa, produced many unfortunate consequences, the African colonial being one of them. The African colonial (AC) is a person who by means of their birth or lineage has a direct connection with Africa. However, unlike Africans like me, their worldviews have been largely shaped not by the indigenous beliefs of a specific African tribe but by the ideals of the European imperialism that overwhelmed and dominated Africa during the colonial period. AC's have no real regard for their specific African traditions or histories. AC's use aspects of their African culture as one would use pieces of costume jewelry: things of little or no value that can be thoughtlessly discarded when they become a negative distraction, or used on a whim to decorate oneself in order to seem exotic. (Hint: Obama's Muslim heritage). On the other hand, AC's strive to be the best at the culture that they inherited from Europe. Throughout the West, they are tops in their professions as lawyers, doctors, engineers, Ivy League professors and business moguls; this is all well and good. It's when they decide to engage us as politicians that things become messy and convoluted. The African colonial politician (ACP) feigns repulsion towards the hegemonic paradigms of Western civilization. But at the same time, he is completely enamored of the trappings of its aristocracy or elite culture. The ACP blames and caricatures whitey to no end for all that has gone wrong in the world. He convinces the masses that various forms of African socialism are the best way for redressing the problems that European colonialism motivated in Africa. However, as opposed to really being a hard-core African Leftist who actually believes in something, the ACP uses socialist themes as a way to disguise his true ambitions: a complete power grab whereby the "will of the people" becomes completely irrelevant. Barack Obama is all of the above. The only difference is that he is here playing (colonial) African politics as usual. In his 1995 memoir, Dreams From My Father -- an eloquent piece of political propaganda -- Obama styles himself as a misunderstood intellectual who is deeply affected by the sufferings of black people, especially in America and Africa. In the book, Obama clearly sees himself as an African, not as a black American. And to prove this, he goes on a quest to understand his Kenyan roots. He is extremely thoughtful of his deceased father's legacy; this provides the main clue for understanding Barack Obama. Barack Obama Sr. was an African colonial to the core; in his case, the apple did not fall far from the tree. All of the telltale signs of Obama's African colonialist attitudes are on full display in the book -- from his feigned antipathy towards Europeans to his view of African tribal associations as distracting elements that get in the way of "progress". (On p. 308 of Dreams From My Father, Obama says that African tribes should be viewed as an "ancient loyalties".) Like imperialists of Old World Europe, the ACP sees their constituents not as free thinking individuals who best know how to go about achieving and creating their own means for success. Instead, the ACP sees his constituents as a flock of ignorant sheep that need to be led -- oftentimes to their own slaughter. Like the European imperialist who spawned him, the ACP is a destroyer of all forms of democracy. Here are a few examples of what the British did in order to create (in 1914) what is now called Nigeria and what Obama is doing to you: Convince the people that "clinging" to any aspect of their cultural (tribal) identity or history is bad and regresses the process of "unity". British Imperialists deeply feared people who were loyal to anything other than the state. "Tribalism" made the imperialists have to work harder to get people to just fall in line. Imperialists pitted tribes against each other in order to create chaos that they then blamed on ethnic rivalry. Today many "educated" Nigerians, having believed that their traditions were irrelevant, remain completely ignorant of their ancestry and the history of their own tribes. Confiscate the wealth and resources of the area that you govern by any means necessary in order to redistribute wealth. The British used this tactic to present themselves as empathetic and benevolent leaders who wanted everyone to have a "fair shake". Imperialists are not interested in equality for all. They are interested in controlling all. Convince the masses that your upper-crust university education naturally puts you on an intellectual plane from which to understand everything even when you understand nothing. Imperialists were able to convince the people that their elite university educations allowed them to understand what Africa needed. Many of today's Nigerians-having followed that lead-hold all sorts of degrees and certificates-but what good are they if you can't find a job? Lie to the people and tell them that progress is being made even though things are clearly becoming worse. One thing that the British forgot to mention to their Nigerian constituents was that one day, the resources that were being used to engineer "progress" (which the British had confiscated from the Africans to begin with!) would eventually run out. After WWII, Western Europe could no longer afford to hold on to their African colonies. So all of the counterfeit countries that the Europeans created were then left high-and-dry to fend for themselves. This was the main reason behind the African independence movements of the1950 and 60's. What will a post-Obama America look like? Use every available media outlet to perpetuate the belief that you and your followers are the enlightened ones-and that those who refuse to support you are just barbaric, uncivilized, ignorant curmudgeons. This speaks for itself. America, don't be fooled. The Igbos were once made up of a confederacy of clans that ascribed to various forms of democratic government. They took their eyes off the ball and before they knew it, the British were upon them. Also, understand this: the African colonial who is given too much political power can only become one thing: a despot. L.E. Ikenga can be reached at leikenga at gmail.com. Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/06/obama_the_african_colonial.html at June 25, 2009 - 06:26:35 PM EDT -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090625/72e3a640/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Thu Jun 25 19:43:11 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 18:43:11 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] African Colonial In-Reply-To: <7983C52BE1504766ACFFE4B19469D6B1@YOURB88038198E> References: <7983C52BE1504766ACFFE4B19469D6B1@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <400985d70906251643g446b5febr530538a3df76d55c@mail.gmail.com> Ed, Excellent article. Baldilocks (Julie Akinyi) said much of the same on her blogspot during the campaign and she was constantly attacked by the paid trolls of the Obama campaign. Julie's father was from the Luo tribe, same as Obama's father, and he immigrated to the US on the same flight as Obama, Sr. http://www.luoamerican.com/baldilocks/ Her blog has pretty much dropped off my radar but I may re-visit some postings from last summer. The information was out there for all too see, but, a cult is a cult. Brad On 6/25/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > >From American Thinker ref at bottom: > > > > June 25, 2009 > > Obama, the African Colonial > > By L.E. Ikenga > > > > Had Americans been able to stop obsessing over the color of Barack Obama's > skin and instead paid more attention to his cultural identity, maybe he > would not be in the White House today. The key to understanding him lies > with his identification with his father, and his adoption of a cultural and > political mindset rooted in postcolonial Africa. > > > > Like many educated intellectuals in postcolonial Africa, Barack Hussein > Obama, Sr. was enraged at the transformation of his native land by its > colonial conqueror. But instead of embracing the traditional values of his > own tribal cultural past, he embraced an imported Western ideology, Marxism. > I call such frustrated and angry modern Africans who embrace various foreign > "isms", instead of looking homeward for repair of societies that are broken, > African Colonials. They are Africans who serve foreign ideas. > > > > The tropes of America's racial history as a way of understanding all things > black are useless in understanding the man who got his dreams from his > father, a Kenyan exemplar of the African Colonial. > > > > Before I continue, I need to say this: I am a first generation born West > African-American woman whose parents emigrated to the U.S. in the 1970's > from the country now called Nigeria. I travel to Nigeria frequently. I see > myself as both a proud American and as a proud Igbo (the tribe that we come > from -- also sometimes spelled Ibo). Politically, I have always been > conservative (though it took this past election for me to commit to this > once and for all!); my conservative values come from my Igbo heritage and my > place of birth. Of course, none of this qualifies me to say what I am about > to -- but at the same time it does. > > > > My friends, despite what CNN and the rest are telling you, Barack Obama is > nothing more than an old school African Colonial who is on his way to > turning this country into one of the developing nations that you learn about > on the National Geographic Channel. Many conservative (East, West, South, > North) African-Americans like myself -- those of us who know our history -- > have seen this movie before. Here are two main reasons why many Americans > allowed Obama to slip through the cracks despite all of his glaring > inconsistencies: > > > > First, Obama has been living on American soil for most of his adult life. > Therefore, he has been able to masquerade as one who understands and > believes in American democratic ideals. But he does not. Barack Obama is > intrinsically undemocratic and as his presidency plays out, this will become > more obvious. Second, and most importantly, too many Americans know very > little about Africa. The one-size-fits-all understanding that many Americans > (both black and white) continue to have of Africa might end up bringing dire > consequences for this country. > > > > Contrary to the way it continues to be portrayed in mainstream Western > culture, Africa is not a continent that can be solely defined by AIDS, > ethnic rivalries, poverty and safaris. Africa, like any other continent, has > an immense history defined by much diversity and complexity. Africa's > long-standing relationship with Europe speaks especially to some of these > complexities -- particularly the relationship that has existed between the > two continents over the past two centuries. Europe's complete colonization > of Africa during the nineteenth century, also known as the Scramble for > Africa, produced many unfortunate consequences, the African colonial being > one of them. > > > > The African colonial (AC) is a person who by means of their birth or lineage > has a direct connection with Africa. However, unlike Africans like me, their > worldviews have been largely shaped not by the indigenous beliefs of a > specific African tribe but by the ideals of the European imperialism that > overwhelmed and dominated Africa during the colonial period. AC's have no > real regard for their specific African traditions or histories. AC's use > aspects of their African culture as one would use pieces of costume jewelry: > things of little or no value that can be thoughtlessly discarded when they > become a negative distraction, or used on a whim to decorate oneself in > order to seem exotic. (Hint: Obama's Muslim heritage). > > > > On the other hand, AC's strive to be the best at the culture that they > inherited from Europe. Throughout the West, they are tops in their > professions as lawyers, doctors, engineers, Ivy League professors and > business moguls; this is all well and good. It's when they decide to engage > us as politicians that things become messy and convoluted. > > > > The African colonial politician (ACP) feigns repulsion towards the hegemonic > paradigms of Western civilization. But at the same time, he is completely > enamored of the trappings of its aristocracy or elite culture. The ACP > blames and caricatures whitey to no end for all that has gone wrong in the > world. He convinces the masses that various forms of African socialism are > the best way for redressing the problems that European colonialism motivated > in Africa. However, as opposed to really being a hard-core African Leftist > who actually believes in something, the ACP uses socialist themes as a way > to disguise his true ambitions: a complete power grab whereby the "will of > the people" becomes completely irrelevant. > > > > Barack Obama is all of the above. The only difference is that he is here > playing (colonial) African politics as usual. > > > > In his 1995 memoir, Dreams From My Father -- an eloquent piece of political > propaganda -- Obama styles himself as a misunderstood intellectual who is > deeply affected by the sufferings of black people, especially in America and > Africa. In the book, Obama clearly sees himself as an African, not as a > black American. And to prove this, he goes on a quest to understand his > Kenyan roots. He is extremely thoughtful of his deceased father's legacy; > this provides the main clue for understanding Barack Obama. > > > > Barack Obama Sr. was an African colonial to the core; in his case, the apple > did not fall far from the tree. All of the telltale signs of Obama's African > colonialist attitudes are on full display in the book -- from his feigned > antipathy towards Europeans to his view of African tribal associations as > distracting elements that get in the way of "progress". (On p. 308 of > Dreams From My Father, Obama says that African tribes should be viewed as an > "ancient loyalties".) > > > > Like imperialists of Old World Europe, the ACP sees their constituents not > as free thinking individuals who best know how to go about achieving and > creating their own means for success. Instead, the ACP sees his constituents > as a flock of ignorant sheep that need to be led -- oftentimes to their own > slaughter. > > > > Like the European imperialist who spawned him, the ACP is a destroyer of all > forms of democracy. > > > > Here are a few examples of what the British did in order to create (in 1914) > what is now called Nigeria and what Obama is doing to you: > > > > Convince the people that "clinging" to any aspect of their cultural (tribal) > identity or history is bad and regresses the process of "unity". British > Imperialists deeply feared people who were loyal to anything other than the > state. "Tribalism" made the imperialists have to work harder to get people > to just fall in line. Imperialists pitted tribes against each other in order > to create chaos that they then blamed on ethnic rivalry. Today many > "educated" Nigerians, having believed that their traditions were irrelevant, > remain completely ignorant of their ancestry and the history of their own > tribes. > > > > Confiscate the wealth and resources of the area that you govern by any means > necessary in order to redistribute wealth. The British used this tactic to > present themselves as empathetic and benevolent leaders who wanted everyone > to have a "fair shake". Imperialists are not interested in equality for all. > They are interested in controlling all. > > > > Convince the masses that your upper-crust university education naturally > puts you on an intellectual plane from which to understand everything even > when you understand nothing. Imperialists were able to convince the people > that their elite university educations allowed them to understand what > Africa needed. Many of today's Nigerians-having followed that lead-hold all > sorts of degrees and certificates-but what good are they if you can't find a > job? > > Lie to the people and tell them that progress is being made even though > things are clearly becoming worse. One thing that the British forgot to > mention to their Nigerian constituents was that one day, the resources that > were being used to engineer "progress" (which the British had confiscated > from the Africans to begin with!) would eventually run out. After WWII, > Western Europe could no longer afford to hold on to their African colonies. > So all of the counterfeit countries that the Europeans created were then > left high-and-dry to fend for themselves. This was the main reason behind > the African independence movements of the1950 and 60's. What will a > post-Obama America look like? > > > > Use every available media outlet to perpetuate the belief that you and your > followers are the enlightened ones-and that those who refuse to support you > are just barbaric, uncivilized, ignorant curmudgeons. This speaks for > itself. > > > > America, don't be fooled. The Igbos were once made up of a confederacy of > clans that ascribed to various forms of democratic government. They took > their eyes off the ball and before they knew it, the British were upon them. > Also, understand this: the African colonial who is given too much political > power can only become one thing: a despot. > > > > L.E. Ikenga can be reached at leikenga at gmail.com. > > > > Page Printed from: > http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/06/obama_the_african_colonial.html at > June 25, 2009 - 06:26:35 PM EDT > From flybrad at gmail.com Thu Jun 25 20:50:31 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:50:31 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] News Flash - Michael Jackson Stable Message-ID: <400985d70906251750t3691528fw93022263b3174503@mail.gmail.com> That's right folks, his condition has stabilized - HE'S STILL DEAD! Every single news program on cable TV has preempted their programming with Michael Jackson. Is he still dead? Yes? What the hell else is there to report? It's no wonder this country is so screwed. Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Thu Jun 25 22:36:09 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 21:36:09 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] New Laws Message-ID: <400985d70906251936m3ded70dbkc7cdd0ec1389bef9@mail.gmail.com> So here we are on the eve of the vote for the biggest tax increase in the history of the nation (cap-n-trade) and the whole country is focused on a dead child molester. Nancy thinks she has the votes to get this US industry crippling bill (I'll let you know next week just how hard the Chinese are laughing) passed in the House because of some last minute compromises on, wait for it, ....................................... that's right........drumroll please..........ETHANOL! The article below nicely sums up our dilemma. Brad --------------------- Jun 25 2009, 10:02AM Spring Cleaning in Washington Just a few months ago, members of Congress took turns wagging their fingers at CEOs of the automakers for not making tough choices--not shedding "legacy costs," not making products consumers wanted, not cutting bloated bureaucracies. Detroit had become self-referential, unable to compete because it was unwilling to deal with its internal constituents. Now Washington faces a series of domestic crises that will shape the health of our society for decades--unaffordable healthcare, balkanized financial regulation, and a mind-boggling deficit, to name three. But Washington will likely fail--indeed, may even make the problems worse--unless it deals with its own "legacy costs" and bloated bureaucracies, which currently make it impossible to achieve new focus and efficiencies. Detroit is Google compared to Washington. Year after year, Congress makes laws but almost never repeals them. Washington is like a huge monument to legacy costs. Laws from the Depression will send tens of billions in unnecessary subsidies this year to farmers, organized labor and other groups thought to be in need--80 years ago. Bloat is also notorious--it's nearly impossible to fire anyone under civil service laws, so layers of middle management have grown exponentially. Professor Paul Light found 32 levels in some agencies (compared to 5 levels in most well-run enterprises). All this accumulated law--about 300,000 pages of federal statutes and regulations--operates as a form of central planning. It bogs people down in bureaucracy. In healthcare, the labyrinthian requirements of Medicare, Medicaid, HIPAA, plus the equally dense, and often conflicting requirements of 50 states, plus the insurance company red tape, make it impossible for people to deliver care efficiently. Add to that bureaucratic nightmare the ever-present fear of being hauled into court whenever a sick person gets sicker, and you have a system that looks like it was designed for frustration and waste. (See here for principles needed to climb out of this rut.) The inertial forces that make it hard to achieve change in Washington, in the best of circumstances, become a kind of invincible fortress when reinforced by thousands upon thousands of pages of binding law. Each of those provisions is zealously guarded by special interest groups, and changing any word of a statute requires the votes of 218 members of the House and (generally) 60 senators. Faced with legions of special interests, Congress is trying to fix healthcare by piling new requirements on top of the old ones. But this won't address the underlying problems of efficiency, any more than it could in Detroit. To restore focus and efficiency, Congress must first clean out what's there--not to eliminate the goals of existing regulation but to put them in a coherent framework that real people can understand and internalize. Dealing with the sclerosis of accumulated regulation, however, is not something our leaders have any experience with. Most of the historic legal reforms of the past century were written on a new slate. The Progressives at the turn of the 19th century imposed worker safety and food safety laws to fill the regulatory void of laissez-faire. Roosevelt's New Deal provided social safety nets where there were none, and job programs in agencies that didn't exist before. The civil rights movement led to laws against discrimination where there were none. We don't have the luxury of a clean slate--healthcare, schools, and the financial sector are all mired in a bureaucratic jungle. Al Gore had the right idea with his Reinventing Government initiative, but he was trying to simplify what was there. The imperative now is much more radical, and urgent--to solve society-wide crises of affordability in healthcare, accountability in the financial markets, and disarray in schools. Making sense of the current problems requires not just new laws--but a willingness to undo old laws in order to build coherent new structures. The litmus test is not whether some expert can draw a complicated chart showing how law requires this or that, but whether real people (including doctors, teachers, and financial regulators officials) feel liberated to focus on doing their jobs properly. The closest analog in history are recodifications that occur periodically--almost always releasing enormous improvements in productivity. In ancient Rome, the emperor Justinian is best known for taking "the vast mass of juristic writings which served only to obscure the law," and rewriting them into a coherent code. Napoleon considered his "Napoleonic Code" to be his finest achievement, and the simplified set of principles that his experts created is still the legal foundation for most European countries. America's Uniform Commercial Code, developed in the 1950s and adopted by all states, brought consistency and efficiency to a tangled web of state laws that impeded free flow of commerce. The current debate is missing its most important element of effective reform--the need to phase out many existing laws and regulations so that our leaders can build structures from the ground up that focus on human responsibility and accountability. This is what observers such as Ezekiel Emanuel have called for in healthcare (see here), and what Richard Posner seems to be suggesting for financial reform (see here). Two areas I have worked on--healthcare justice and authority of teachers--both require abandoning existing legal conventions in order to meet our public goals. To restore trust needed in healthcare interactions, patients and doctors need health courts that are reliable to sort out good care from bad care. To restore a school culture of order and respect, teachers need to be released from bureaucracy and the threat of a legal proceeding for ordinary daily disciplinary decisions. Getting anything done in Washington is notoriously difficult, and the instinct is always to do whatever can be agreed upon in the sausage factory, and then to collapse from exhaustion. But that's not good enough this time around. We can't get there from here. The failures of our public institutions are built into the current structures and can't be fixed without rebuilding those structures. Future historians will look on this time as one that was critical to the growth of America in this century. Meeting the challenge requires building a new foundation of law and regulation that aspires to address our current goals, not to mollify interest groups clinging to past entitlements. Like Detroit, Washington has to face up to the need to clean out its clogged bureaucracies and start anew. http://correspondents.theatlantic.com/mt-42/mt-tb.cgi/10652 From flybrad at gmail.com Fri Jun 26 07:22:45 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 06:22:45 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] BOHICA - Call Your Congress Critter Today! Message-ID: <400985d70906260422l63c529a6r9ebe5a2b81a8b813@mail.gmail.com> Boys and Girls, today is a watershed moment. The House is voting on another bill no one has read. In fact, it isn't even finished yet. They'll be penciling in last minute "compromises" right up to the point of the vote. Is it too much to ask that we put some thought into the biggest tax increase in history? If you really think that global warming is real and carbon is bad, tax carbon. It is simple to collect and cuts out 99% of the opportunity for fraud. This cap-n-trade is one massive "command and control" takeover of private industry. Here's the bigger threat - if this passes, healthcare "reform" is next. There's probably a dozen workable solutions to providing affordable health insurance to the uninsured. But that is not Obama's goal - it is another "command and control" issue for he and his minions. He was caught off guard the other night in a revealing moment when he said he'd want the best possible care for his family. Notice, he doesn't use the public school system for his children. The Obama plan for a single-payer health care system will not have the option for private care. He's on record along with his supporters for destroying private health insurance. Otherwise, things would develop like the education system - you are forced to pay taxes for a public system but have the option to use a private system. You won't have that option for medical care, it will be the public route or nothing. It will be illegal to not accept public patients just as it is in Canada under the guise that private clinics and hospitals are using "scarce" resources. Otherwise, employers like mine would pay for health care at better facilities and others would get access to the nationwide rationing system (large employers like mine are self-insured - the "insurance" company simply handles the administration). Their goal is not to provide the best healthcare, it is to provide equal access to equally shitty health care - command and control. Cap and Trade can be reversed once people figure out how much it affects their disposable income and their livelihood (China and India don't give a shit about global warming so jobs will head east at an even faster pace). If a single-payer health care system passes, we'll most likely be stuck with it forever (the 40% who don't pay taxes sure as hell won't pressure for a change). These decisions are being made by a handful of people. Most of the Democrats don't have a say in what is being proposed and won't have a chance to read the bill until after they've voted. The Republicans are completely in the dark and powerless. What a joke this Republic as become! Think bananas. Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Fri Jun 26 08:44:58 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 07:44:58 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] BOHICA - Call Your Congress Critter Today! In-Reply-To: <400985d70906260422l63c529a6r9ebe5a2b81a8b813@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906260422l63c529a6r9ebe5a2b81a8b813@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906260544s19502eclfa168008451dbe3d@mail.gmail.com> Here's the list of Dems who needs calling (GOP below). I've got Gene Taylor of Mississippi covered. Bright AL-02 334-277-9113 Griffith AL-05 256-551-0190 Berry AR-01 870-972-4600 Ross AR-04 501-520-5892 Mitchell AZ-05 480-946-2411 Giffords AZ-08 520-881-3588 Cardoza CA-18 209-527-1914 Costa CA-20 559-495-1620 Schiff CA-29 626-304-2727 Harman CA-36 310-643 3636 Baca CA-43 909-888-2222 Sanchez CA-47 714-621-0102 Salazar CO-03 970-245-7107 Boyd FL-02 850-561-3979 Bishop GA-02 229-439-8067 Marshall GA-08 478-464-0255 Barrow GA-12 706-722-4494 Scott GA-13 770-210-5073 Boswell IA-03 515-282-1909 Minnick ID-01 208-667-0127 Donnelly IN-02 574.288.2780 Ellsworth IN-08 812-465-6484 Hill IN-09 812-288-3999 Moore KS-03 785-842-9313 Chandler KY-06 859-219-1366 Melancon LA-03 225.621.8490 Kravotil MD-01 202-225-5311 Michaud ME-02 207-942-6935 Childers MS-01 662-841-8808 Taylor MS-04 228.864.7670 Shuler NC-11 828-252-1651 Pomeroy ND 01-224-0355 Arcuri NY-24 315-252-2777 Wilson OH?06 740-633-5705 Space OH-18 330-364-4300 Altmire PA-04 724-378-0928 Thompson PA-05 814-353-0215 Murphy PA-08 215-826-1963 Carney PA-10 570-585-9988 Holden PA-17 717-234-5904 Herseth-Sandlin SD 605-367-8371 Davis TN-04 202.225.6831 Cooper TN-05 615-736-5292 Gordon TN-06 615-896-1986 Tanner TN-08 731-885-7070 Cuellar TX-28 210-271-2851 Matheson UT-02 801-486-1236 Nye VA-02 757-326-6201 Perriello VA-05 434-293-9631 GOP Vern Buchanan (FL-13): 202-225-5015 Joseph Cao (LA-02): 202-225-6636 Vern Ehlers (MI-03): 202-225-3831 Rodney Frelinghuysen (NJ-11): 202-225-5034 Jim Gerlach (PA-06): 202-225-4315 Tim Johnson (IL-15): 202-225-2371 Mark Kirk (IL-10): 202-225-4835 Chris Smith (NJ-04): 202-225-3765 On 6/26/09, Brad Haslett wrote: > Boys and Girls, today is a watershed moment. The House is voting on > another bill no one has read. In fact, it isn't even finished yet. > They'll be penciling in last minute "compromises" right up to the > point of the vote. Is it too much to ask that we put some thought > into the biggest tax increase in history? If you really think that > global warming is real and carbon is bad, tax carbon. It is simple to > collect and cuts out 99% of the opportunity for fraud. This > cap-n-trade is one massive "command and control" takeover of private > industry. > > Here's the bigger threat - if this passes, healthcare "reform" is > next. There's probably a dozen workable solutions to providing > affordable health insurance to the uninsured. But that is not Obama's > goal - it is another "command and control" issue for he and his > minions. He was caught off guard the other night in a revealing > moment when he said he'd want the best possible care for his family. > Notice, he doesn't use the public school system for his children. The > Obama plan for a single-payer health care system will not have the > option for private care. He's on record along with his supporters for > destroying private health insurance. Otherwise, things would develop > like the education system - you are forced to pay taxes for a public > system but have the option to use a private system. You won't have > that option for medical care, it will be the public route or nothing. > It will be illegal to not accept public patients just as it is in > Canada under the guise that private clinics and hospitals are using > "scarce" resources. Otherwise, employers like mine would pay for > health care at better facilities and others would get access to the > nationwide rationing system (large employers like mine are > self-insured - the "insurance" company simply handles the > administration). Their goal is not to provide the best healthcare, it > is to provide equal access to equally shitty health care - command and > control. > > Cap and Trade can be reversed once people figure out how much it > affects their disposable income and their livelihood (China and India > don't give a shit about global warming so jobs will head east at an > even faster pace). If a single-payer health care system passes, we'll > most likely be stuck with it forever (the 40% who don't pay taxes sure > as hell won't pressure for a change). These decisions are being made > by a handful of people. Most of the Democrats don't have a say in > what is being proposed and won't have a chance to read the bill until > after they've voted. The Republicans are completely in the dark and > powerless. > > What a joke this Republic as become! Think bananas. > > Brad > From flybrad at gmail.com Fri Jun 26 09:07:05 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:07:05 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Sailing Video Message-ID: <400985d70906260607ib88e1d2x55c905e3d8ceb60c@mail.gmail.com> Well, a very short sailing video near the end. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPC6CqAFA4E&feature=player_embedded Ok, so I lied. Sue me! It's not like a ran off to Argentina for the weekend or drowned someone. Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Fri Jun 26 14:03:45 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:03:45 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Michael Jackson Is Alive! Message-ID: <400985d70906261103h7f2ed997wf2f7f6b655071c0a@mail.gmail.com> Here's the proof! http://tinyurl.com/kotc98 The cry for help went out yesterday from Iranian students (I'll send you the link if you ask) to Israel for technology to defeat the block on television, radio, and internet. I hope the Israeli's do what they can. These kids are not stupid, they see the freedom in Israel and Iraq, and they want it for themselves. Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Fri Jun 26 23:14:23 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 22:14:23 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] DC-10 Message-ID: <400985d70906262014q7c9e8c96rec30ee6760082195@mail.gmail.com> Not really. More lies. Well, there is a DC-10 in the opening shot. Gawd, what a wonderful airplane! http://www.thewaywegetbymovie.com/ Brad From bcittadino at dcs-law.com Thu Jun 25 12:25:08 2009 From: bcittadino at dcs-law.com (Benjamin Cittadino) Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 12:25:08 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Sanford Message-ID: <43B1E98C24F2D241A25C39B8721778D4DD87AC@dcs-srv1.dcslaw.com> Men of the Swift (as in "boat"?) water (as in "white"?) list, (really quite clever Bill, and congratulations on the new list, by the way); Woody Allen said it best I think. "The heart wants what it wants". A few things are clear from his emails. This is his first affair. This is probably the first time the poor guy has actually been in love. And if he's half as smart as he seems to be he ought to get on the next plane to Buenos Aires and never look back. The boys will come around eventually. BenCittadino -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090625/2b6c06d3/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sat Jun 27 14:28:03 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 13:28:03 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Sanford In-Reply-To: <43B1E98C24F2D241A25C39B8721778D4DD87AC@dcs-srv1.dcslaw.com> References: <43B1E98C24F2D241A25C39B8721778D4DD87AC@dcs-srv1.dcslaw.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906271128x2fe8be24p839f8cdb51999cd3@mail.gmail.com> Ben, Welcome, Welcome! Thank God, now we have a voice from the "dark side". Welcome again! What's been interesting about the Sanford 'thing' is the leniency granted from the left and the daggers thrown from the right. I say "off with his head" for reasons that have nothing to do with Maria, or whatever her name is. Did you see the photo? I'd put her in the "I can't wait to see you again" not the "let me go home and abdicate the throne'" category Brad . On 6/25/09, Benjamin Cittadino wrote: > Men of the Swift (as in "boat"?) water (as in "white"?) list, (really > quite clever Bill, and congratulations on the new list, by the way); > > Woody Allen said it best I think. "The heart wants what it wants". > > A few things are clear from his emails. This is his first affair. This > is probably the first time the poor guy has actually been in love. And > if he's half as smart as he seems to be he ought to get on the next > plane to Buenos Aires and never look back. The boys will come around > eventually. > > BenCittadino > > > > From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Jun 28 10:32:19 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 09:32:19 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Crap and Trade (TAX) Message-ID: <400985d70906280732nb21f2c9td318e84712827dee@mail.gmail.com> As you all know, the single largest tax increase in the history of our nation passed the House on Friday (with the help of 8 RINO votes). An important story that's being lost in the of course more important Michael Jackson story, is that this, the Obama administration via the EPA has been stifling dissent on Global Warming from within the EPA - http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=330911757213432 You can read the internal e-mails here - http://cei.org/cei_files/fm/active/0/Endangerment%20Comments%206-23-09.pdf As you can see for yourself on page 6, the author of the dissenting report is clearly told that the discussion period is over and policy is trumping science. You can read the full report here - http://cei.org/cei_files/fm/active/0/DOC062509-004.pdf No one, Democrat or Republican, read this bill before it was voted on - it was impossible. The 1200 page bill had 300 pages of amendments released at 3 AM the day of the vote. There was five hours of debate. Ethanol survived (surprise, surprise)! You don't have to be an economist to see where this program will lead. Obama said during the campaign that his cap and trade plan would cause electricity rates to "skyrocket". He meant it! Off to China early in the morning. This is just one more thing to be subjected to as the butt of jokes. Brad From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Jun 28 12:58:17 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:58:17 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] American Community Survey - Anybody else had the pleasure??? Message-ID: <6634e19e0906280958r7f017648j9e89c871a03e39a8@mail.gmail.com> Good morning All, I have been blessed to receive this week, the American Community Survey from our beloved gov't bean counters. These folks claim to be from the census bureau. The questions they are asking would indicate that there is much more going on here than just head counting and apportionment of congressional representation. Has anyone else seen this thing?? Did you fill it out and send it in?? Many of the questions are VERY personal and in my mind quite intrusive and unnecessary for the purpose of conducting a census. Many of the answers to these questions I would not pass on to my closest friends, let alone someone I don't know or more importantly ..... trust,... our gov't. They tell me right on the form that I am obligated by law to answer all of these questions like: How much I make, how I buy my insurance, how much my property taxes are, how many rooms in my home, do I have running water (???) What time I leave for work and return (!!!) or I will be liable for a fine. I am having a hard time imagining that such a survey is possible in the United States of America, let alone legal. Anyone else have any insight or experience into this .... travesty??? Rik -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090628/268a5312/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Jun 28 13:06:37 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 12:06:37 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Crap and Trade (TAX) In-Reply-To: <400985d70906280732nb21f2c9td318e84712827dee@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906280732nb21f2c9td318e84712827dee@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0906281006h45241c2en15e81e6efd476da2@mail.gmail.com> Brad, I knew there was a reason why I needed to keep that 30 acres of mostly woods that people have been trying to convince me to sell for the last many years. It's becoming obvious now, I'm probably gonna need those woods to keep warm in the near future. I suppose I'll have to set out a guard now to keep everyone else from stealing my resource. Rik On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > As you all know, the single largest tax increase in the history of our > nation passed the House on Friday (with the help of 8 RINO votes). An > important story that's being lost in the of course more important > Michael Jackson story, is that this, the Obama administration via the > EPA has been stifling dissent on Global Warming from within the EPA - > > http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=330911757213432 > > You can read the internal e-mails here - > > http://cei.org/cei_files/fm/active/0/Endangerment%20Comments%206-23-09.pdf > > As you can see for yourself on page 6, the author of the dissenting > report is clearly told that the discussion period is over and policy > is trumping science. You can read the full report here - > > http://cei.org/cei_files/fm/active/0/DOC062509-004.pdf > > No one, Democrat or Republican, read this bill before it was voted on > - it was impossible. The 1200 page bill had 300 pages of amendments > released at 3 AM the day of the vote. There was five hours of debate. > Ethanol survived (surprise, surprise)! You don't have to be an > economist to see where this program will lead. Obama said during the > campaign that his cap and trade plan would cause electricity rates to > "skyrocket". He meant it! > > Off to China early in the morning. This is just one more thing to be > subjected to as the butt of jokes. > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090628/3bd62857/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Jun 28 15:29:20 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 14:29:20 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Crap and Trade (TAX) In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0906281006h45241c2en15e81e6efd476da2@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906280732nb21f2c9td318e84712827dee@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906281006h45241c2en15e81e6efd476da2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70906281229g324e1c0cu8900fafff0e760c2@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Here's another bit of coverage on the issue from an unconventional news source - http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10274412-38.html And it seems this is not the only report being repressed - http://tinyurl.com/m3ygzq I seriously doubt you see any MSM sources such as the All Barak Channel or any of the other alphabet networks cover this - too much inconvenient truth. Another point of fact - when you read the comments to any report that questions the GW theories, it is always pointed out that so-and-so has this-and-that degree while the other guy isn't qualified. This is coming from a cult who's spiritual leader, Al Gore, has only a BS degree in political science. By all means, keep the woods! Brad On 6/28/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > I knew there was a reason why I needed to keep that 30 acres of mostly woods > that people have been trying to convince me to sell for the last many years. > It's becoming obvious now, I'm probably gonna need those woods to keep warm > in the near future. > > I suppose I'll have to set out a guard now to keep everyone else from > stealing my resource. > > Rik > > On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> As you all know, the single largest tax increase in the history of our >> nation passed the House on Friday (with the help of 8 RINO votes). An >> important story that's being lost in the of course more important >> Michael Jackson story, is that this, the Obama administration via the >> EPA has been stifling dissent on Global Warming from within the EPA - >> >> http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=330911757213432 >> >> You can read the internal e-mails here - >> >> http://cei.org/cei_files/fm/active/0/Endangerment%20Comments%206-23-09.pdf >> >> As you can see for yourself on page 6, the author of the dissenting >> report is clearly told that the discussion period is over and policy >> is trumping science. You can read the full report here - >> >> http://cei.org/cei_files/fm/active/0/DOC062509-004.pdf >> >> No one, Democrat or Republican, read this bill before it was voted on >> - it was impossible. The 1200 page bill had 300 pages of amendments >> released at 3 AM the day of the vote. There was five hours of debate. >> Ethanol survived (surprise, surprise)! You don't have to be an >> economist to see where this program will lead. Obama said during the >> campaign that his cap and trade plan would cause electricity rates to >> "skyrocket". He meant it! >> >> Off to China early in the morning. This is just one more thing to be >> subjected to as the butt of jokes. >> >> Brad >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Jun 28 23:08:15 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Eric Sandberg) Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 22:08:15 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Crap and Trade (TAX) In-Reply-To: <400985d70906281229g324e1c0cu8900fafff0e760c2@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70906280732nb21f2c9td318e84712827dee@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0906281006h45241c2en15e81e6efd476da2@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70906281229g324e1c0cu8900fafff0e760c2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0906282008y6a235104idbbdd98c6bf28ad3@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Boy, it'd sure be a shame to see the funding cut off for all those GW scientists. Those boys have been cutting a fat hog in the ass for quite a while now. Looks like they're not taking kindly to the end of the gravy train, eh. Who'd a thunk it, global warming as a profit center..... Rik On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 2:29 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > Here's another bit of coverage on the issue from an unconventional news > source - > > http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10274412-38.html > > And it seems this is not the only report being repressed - > > http://tinyurl.com/m3ygzq > > I seriously doubt you see any MSM sources such as the All Barak > Channel or any of the other alphabet networks cover this - too much > inconvenient truth. Another point of fact - when you read the > comments to any report that questions the GW theories, it is always > pointed out that so-and-so has this-and-that degree while the other > guy isn't qualified. This is coming from a cult who's spiritual > leader, Al Gore, has only a BS degree in political science. > > By all means, keep the woods! > > Brad > > On 6/28/09, Eric Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > I knew there was a reason why I needed to keep that 30 acres of mostly > woods > > that people have been trying to convince me to sell for the last many > years. > > It's becoming obvious now, I'm probably gonna need those woods to keep > warm > > in the near future. > > > > I suppose I'll have to set out a guard now to keep everyone else from > > stealing my resource. > > > > Rik > > > > On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> As you all know, the single largest tax increase in the history of our > >> nation passed the House on Friday (with the help of 8 RINO votes). An > >> important story that's being lost in the of course more important > >> Michael Jackson story, is that this, the Obama administration via the > >> EPA has been stifling dissent on Global Warming from within the EPA - > >> > >> http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=330911757213432 > >> > >> You can read the internal e-mails here - > >> > >> > http://cei.org/cei_files/fm/active/0/Endangerment%20Comments%206-23-09.pdf > >> > >> As you can see for yourself on page 6, the author of the dissenting > >> report is clearly told that the discussion period is over and policy > >> is trumping science. You can read the full report here - > >> > >> http://cei.org/cei_files/fm/active/0/DOC062509-004.pdf > >> > >> No one, Democrat or Republican, read this bill before it was voted on > >> - it was impossible. The 1200 page bill had 300 pages of amendments > >> released at 3 AM the day of the vote. There was five hours of debate. > >> Ethanol survived (surprise, surprise)! You don't have to be an > >> economist to see where this program will lead. Obama said during the > >> campaign that his cap and trade plan would cause electricity rates to > >> "skyrocket". He meant it! > >> > >> Off to China early in the morning. This is just one more thing to be > >> subjected to as the butt of jokes. > >> > >> Brad > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090628/a52702d3/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Jun 29 03:50:39 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 02:50:39 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Debt Message-ID: <400985d70906290050h7c7f3494tfafc1b3b55bcc92c@mail.gmail.com> Last post before heading out the door. The Washington Post is starting to worry, that's your sign! (article below). Here's some quick links I don't have time to comment on. The "handwriting is on the wall". It will be interesting to hear what the Chinese have to say. Or not. Brad ------------------ http://www.ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=330912782903148 http://www.cnbc.com/id/31535428 http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Foreign-demand-for-US-apf-15524501.html?sec=topStories&pos=2&asset=&ccode http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aLpv3.MFL1Oc -------- The Debt Tsunami The CBO's latest warning on the long-term deficit is scarier than ever. Sunday, June 28, 2009 THE CONGRESSIONAL Budget Office has a tough job: to provide America's lawmakers with a reality check on their tax and spending plans. Not surprisingly, the CBO's projections are not always received cheerfully. Both President Obama and leading congressional Democrats were less than thrilled when the CBO estimated that the costs of universal health coverage would be much higher than advertised. To be sure, projecting the cost of legislation involves making assumptions and constructing models that may or may not prove accurate 10 years down the road. Nonetheless, the CBO, with its tradition of scholarly independence, is the best available arbiter, and Congress must heed its numbers -- like them or not. Now comes the CBO with yet more news of the sort that neither Capitol Hill nor the White House is likely to welcome: its freshly released report on the federal government's long-term financial situation. To put it bluntly, the fiscal policy of the United States is unsustainable. Debt is growing faster than gross domestic product. Under the CBO's most realistic scenario, the publicly held debt of the U.S. government will reach 82 percent of GDP by 2019 -- roughly double what it was in 2008. By 2026, spiraling interest payments would push the debt above its all-time peak (set just after World War II) of 113 percent of GDP. It would reach 200 percent of GDP in 2038. This huge mass of debt, which would stifle economic growth and reduce the American standard of living, can be avoided only through spending cuts, tax increases or some combination of the two. And the longer government waits to get its financial house in order, the more it will cost to do so, the CBO says. The CBO's new long-term forecast is considerably more pessimistic than the one it issued 18 months ago, mostly because of the recession, which has driven the budget deficit above 12 percent of GDP. But the report makes clear that the recent economic downturn did not cause the government's predicament and that the situation will not necessarily improve once the economy does. The principal cause of long-term fiscal distress is the aging of the U.S. population, coupled with rising health-care costs -- which, together, will drive spending on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security to new heights. Unchecked, federal spending on Medicare and Medicaid combined will grow from almost 5 percent of GDP today to almost 10 percent by 2035 -- and to more than 17 percent of GDP by 2080. Like his predecessors, Mr. Obama is aware of this issue. Like them, he has promised a plan to deal with it. And like them, he has not come up with anything credible yet. It's time for that to change. From bencittadino at gmail.com Thu Jun 25 13:06:25 2009 From: bencittadino at gmail.com (Benjamin Cittadino) Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:06:25 -0400 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Sanford Message-ID: <9c1805870906251006q51307ba0rec9a673fded91d13@mail.gmail.com> Men of the Swift (as in "Boat"?) water (as in "white"?) list, (really quite clever Bill, and congratulations on the new list by the way); Woody Allen said it best I think. "The heart wants what it wants". A few things are clear from his emails. This is his first affair. This is probably the first time the poor guy has ever been in love. And if he's half a smart as he seems to be he ought to get on the next paln to Buenos Aires and never look back. The boys will come around eventually. -- BenCittadino -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20090625/f50e5038/attachment.html