From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 1 08:30:56 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 07:30:56 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Aliens From Outer Space Message-ID: <400985d70911010530y184d0e2fh4b3ecb9ae7fad87@mail.gmail.com> People aren't that stupid! http://tinyurl.com/ya6p86c From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 1 09:19:30 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 08:19:30 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Of Course I'll Respect You In The Morning! Message-ID: <400985d70911010619o22f3eaabva759348b600307bf@mail.gmail.com> Good grief! Has it ever occurred to anyone in California that they have a spending problem, not a revenue problem? Watch how this goes because the entire nation is heading down the same path. Brad ----------- latimes.com California to withhold a bigger chunk of paychecks The amount goes up 10% on Sunday as Sacramento borrows from taxpayers. Technically, it's not an income tax increase: You'll get the money back eventually. By Shane Goldmacher and W.J. Hennigan October 31, 2009 Reporting from Los Angeles and Sacramento Starting Sunday, cash-strapped California will dig deeper into the pocketbooks of wage earners -- holding back 10% more than it already does in state income taxes just as the biggest shopping season of the year kicks into gear. Technically, it's not a tax increase, even though it may feel like one when your next paycheck arrives. As part of a bundle of budget patches adopted in the summer, the state is taking more money now in withholding, even though workers' annual tax bills won't change. Think of it as a forced, interest-free loan: You'll be repaid any extra withholding in April. Those who would receive a refund anyway will receive a larger one, and those who owe taxes will owe less. But with rising gas costs, depressed home prices and double-digit unemployment, the state's added reach into residents' regular paycheck isn't sitting well with many. "The state's suddenly slapping people upside the head," said Mack Reed, 50, of Silver Lake. "It's appalling how brash that is." Brittney McKaig, 23, of Santa Ana said she expects the additional withholding to affect her holiday spending. "Coming into the holidays, we're getting squeezed anyway," she said. "We're not getting Christmas bonuses and other perks we used to get. So it all falls back on spending. The $40 gift will become a $20 gift." The extra withholding may seem like a small amount siphoned from each paycheck, but it adds up to a $1.7-billion fix for California's deficit-riddled books. >From a single taxpayer earning $51,000 a year with no dependents, the state will be grabbing an extra $17.59 each month, according to state tax officials. A married person earning $90,000 with two dependents would receive $24.87 less in monthly pay. California will probably continue to collect the tax at a higher rate for many years -- or find an additional $1.7 billion to slice from a future budget, an unlikely occurrence. All workers who have state taxes withheld will see their paychecks shrink. "Many families are sitting at their kitchen table wondering how they're going to make ends meet," said state Sen. Tony Strickland (R-Thousand Oaks). "At the same time, the state of California is taking a no-interest loan." The provision is one of numerous maneuvers state lawmakers and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger approved in the summer to paper over the state's deficit. Many of the changes, including the extra withholding, were little noticed outside of Sacramento. Savvy taxpayers can get around the state's maneuver by increasing the number of personal withholding allowances they claim on their employer tax forms, said Brenda Voet, a spokeswoman for the state's Franchise Tax Board. "People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people would have to change their allowances through their employers. California's budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't. The increase is coming at a bad time for store owners, many of whom depend on the holiday shopping season to keep their businesses alive. "I don't think there's any question it's going to impact consumers' spending," said Bill Dombrowski, president of the California Retailers Assn. "Any time you reduce people's disposable income, there's going to be a negative effect on the retail sector." But Stephen Levy, director of the Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy, wasn't so sure. "It's having a relatively small impact on people's income," Levy said, pointing out that many families will receive only $12 to $40 less each month. Yet Erika Wendt, 28, of San Diego said she already lived on a tight budget: She rides her bike to work, for instance, to save on gasoline and parking costs. "I am frustrated as this directly impacts my weekly budget -- what groceries I buy, how much I drive and can spend on gas," she said. "Now money will just be tighter, and I'm not sure where else I can cut back." The extra withholding comes in addition to tax hikes the state enacted this year. In February, state income tax rates were bumped up 0.25 of a percentage point for every tax bracket. The dependent credit was slashed by two-thirds. The state sales tax rate rose 1 percentage point. The vehicle license fee nearly doubled to 1.15% of a car's value. Lawmakers and the governor also approved deep cuts to schools, social services and prisons to fend off one of the steepest revenue losses in California history. Temporary budget bandages, such as the increase in withholding, were included at several points this year to avoid higher taxes and deeper cuts, said H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the state Department of Finance. Sacramento, meanwhile, is awash in red ink again. The state controller recently said revenue in the budget year already had fallen more than $1 billion short of assumptions. Outsize deficits are projected for years to come. Such temporary measures as the withholding tax increase don't really fix the budget gap, "they just more or less hid it," said Christopher Thornberg, a principal with Beacon Economics in Los Angeles. "I call it a fraud." shane.goldmacher@ latimes.com From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Nov 1 09:26:05 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 08:26:05 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Aliens From Outer Space In-Reply-To: <400985d70911010530y184d0e2fh4b3ecb9ae7fad87@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911010530y184d0e2fh4b3ecb9ae7fad87@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911010626y65e58303t92d98c3f009f3120@mail.gmail.com> Brad, "Trust us, we know what's best for you" from the congress sure a hell isn't cutting it for me anymore. (not that it ever did, but now it REALLY pisses me off) I fit well in the strongly opposed group, willing to actively work against the re-election of anyone who votes for this legislation. In fact, I might even be a bit more strongly opposed than that. As far as I am concerned, no change at all is a huge improvement over what is being proposed. No amount of word salad is going to change that. Rik On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 7:30 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > People aren't that stupid! > > http://tinyurl.com/ya6p86c > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091101/67e35302/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Nov 1 09:49:51 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 08:49:51 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Of Course I'll Respect You In The Morning! In-Reply-To: <400985d70911010619o22f3eaabva759348b600307bf@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911010619o22f3eaabva759348b600307bf@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911010649o6158a76esf6a4adaef51c291b@mail.gmail.com> Ha ha .... Will the last one leaving California, please turn out the lights?? _______ "People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people would have to change their allowances through their employers. California's budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't." _______ Good grief, I sure hope nobody takes that advice without doing the math first. I really HATE when people have to get a loan to pay their taxes on April 15th and that's exactly what it'll come to if they take this woman's advice. First (and maybe the biggest) problem they're going to run into is finding someone that will even make them a loan. Oh wait, I forgot, they can just put this bill on their 30% interest credit card and make minimum payments :-) Dumb and dumber. Rik On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Good grief! Has it ever occurred to anyone in California that they > have a spending problem, not a revenue problem? Watch how this goes > because the entire nation is heading down the same path. > > Brad > > ----------- > > latimes.com > California to withhold a bigger chunk of paychecks > The amount goes up 10% on Sunday as Sacramento borrows from taxpayers. > Technically, it's not an income tax increase: You'll get the money > back eventually. > > By Shane Goldmacher and W.J. Hennigan > > October 31, 2009 > > Reporting from Los Angeles and Sacramento > > Starting Sunday, cash-strapped California will dig deeper into the > pocketbooks of wage earners -- holding back 10% more than it already > does in state income taxes just as the biggest shopping season of the > year kicks into gear. > > Technically, it's not a tax increase, even though it may feel like one > when your next paycheck arrives. As part of a bundle of budget patches > adopted in the summer, the state is taking more money now in > withholding, even though workers' annual tax bills won't change. > > Think of it as a forced, interest-free loan: You'll be repaid any > extra withholding in April. Those who would receive a refund anyway > will receive a larger one, and those who owe taxes will owe less. > > But with rising gas costs, depressed home prices and double-digit > unemployment, the state's added reach into residents' regular paycheck > isn't sitting well with many. > > "The state's suddenly slapping people upside the head," said Mack > Reed, 50, of Silver Lake. "It's appalling how brash that is." > > Brittney McKaig, 23, of Santa Ana said she expects the additional > withholding to affect her holiday spending. > > "Coming into the holidays, we're getting squeezed anyway," she said. > "We're not getting Christmas bonuses and other perks we used to get. > So it all falls back on spending. The $40 gift will become a $20 > gift." > > The extra withholding may seem like a small amount siphoned from each > paycheck, but it adds up to a $1.7-billion fix for California's > deficit-riddled books. > > >From a single taxpayer earning $51,000 a year with no dependents, the > state will be grabbing an extra $17.59 each month, according to state > tax officials. A married person earning $90,000 with two dependents > would receive $24.87 less in monthly pay. > > California will probably continue to collect the tax at a higher rate > for many years -- or find an additional $1.7 billion to slice from a > future budget, an unlikely occurrence. All workers who have state > taxes withheld will see their paychecks shrink. > > "Many families are sitting at their kitchen table wondering how > they're going to make ends meet," said state Sen. Tony Strickland > (R-Thousand Oaks). "At the same time, the state of California is > taking a no-interest loan." > > The provision is one of numerous maneuvers state lawmakers and Gov. > Arnold Schwarzenegger approved in the summer to paper over the state's > deficit. Many of the changes, including the extra withholding, were > little noticed outside of Sacramento. > > Savvy taxpayers can get around the state's maneuver by increasing the > number of personal withholding allowances they claim on their employer > tax forms, said Brenda Voet, a spokeswoman for the state's Franchise > Tax Board. > > "People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people would > have to change their allowances through their employers. California's > budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't. > > The increase is coming at a bad time for store owners, many of whom > depend on the holiday shopping season to keep their businesses alive. > > "I don't think there's any question it's going to impact consumers' > spending," said Bill Dombrowski, president of the California Retailers > Assn. "Any time you reduce people's disposable income, there's going > to be a negative effect on the retail sector." > > But Stephen Levy, director of the Center for Continuing Study of the > California Economy, wasn't so sure. > > "It's having a relatively small impact on people's income," Levy said, > pointing out that many families will receive only $12 to $40 less each > month. > > Yet Erika Wendt, 28, of San Diego said she already lived on a tight > budget: She rides her bike to work, for instance, to save on gasoline > and parking costs. > > "I am frustrated as this directly impacts my weekly budget -- what > groceries I buy, how much I drive and can spend on gas," she said. > "Now money will just be tighter, and I'm not sure where else I can cut > back." > > The extra withholding comes in addition to tax hikes the state enacted > this year. > > In February, state income tax rates were bumped up 0.25 of a > percentage point for every tax bracket. The dependent credit was > slashed by two-thirds. The state sales tax rate rose 1 percentage > point. The vehicle license fee nearly doubled to 1.15% of a car's > value. > > Lawmakers and the governor also approved deep cuts to schools, social > services and prisons to fend off one of the steepest revenue losses in > California history. > > Temporary budget bandages, such as the increase in withholding, were > included at several points this year to avoid higher taxes and deeper > cuts, said H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the state Department of > Finance. > > Sacramento, meanwhile, is awash in red ink again. The state controller > recently said revenue in the budget year already had fallen more than > $1 billion short of assumptions. Outsize deficits are projected for > years to come. > > Such temporary measures as the withholding tax increase don't really > fix the budget gap, "they just more or less hid it," said Christopher > Thornberg, a principal with Beacon Economics in Los Angeles. "I call > it a fraud." > > shane.goldmacher@ latimes.com > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091101/fcff4cab/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 1 09:58:04 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 08:58:04 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Of Course I'll Respect You In The Morning! In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911010649o6158a76esf6a4adaef51c291b@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911010619o22f3eaabva759348b600307bf@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911010649o6158a76esf6a4adaef51c291b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911010658w44390489u46c70bdc4d3ad468@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Can't remember if I posted this or not - http://tinyurl.com/yhh3ad7 What great advice! DO NOTHING! GO HOME! JUST STOP! Brad On 11/1/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Ha ha .... Will the last one leaving California, please turn out the > lights?? > > _______ > "People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people would > have to change their allowances through their employers. California's > budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't." > _______ > > Good grief, I sure hope nobody takes that advice without doing the math > first. I really HATE when people have to get a loan to pay their taxes on > April 15th and that's exactly what it'll come to if they take this woman's > advice. First (and maybe the biggest) problem they're going to run into is > finding someone that will even make them a loan. Oh wait, I forgot, they can > just put this bill on their 30% interest credit card and make minimum > payments :-) > > Dumb and dumber. > > Rik > > On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Good grief! Has it ever occurred to anyone in California that they >> have a spending problem, not a revenue problem? Watch how this goes >> because the entire nation is heading down the same path. >> >> Brad >> >> ----------- >> >> latimes.com >> California to withhold a bigger chunk of paychecks >> The amount goes up 10% on Sunday as Sacramento borrows from taxpayers. >> Technically, it's not an income tax increase: You'll get the money >> back eventually. >> >> By Shane Goldmacher and W.J. Hennigan >> >> October 31, 2009 >> >> Reporting from Los Angeles and Sacramento >> >> Starting Sunday, cash-strapped California will dig deeper into the >> pocketbooks of wage earners -- holding back 10% more than it already >> does in state income taxes just as the biggest shopping season of the >> year kicks into gear. >> >> Technically, it's not a tax increase, even though it may feel like one >> when your next paycheck arrives. As part of a bundle of budget patches >> adopted in the summer, the state is taking more money now in >> withholding, even though workers' annual tax bills won't change. >> >> Think of it as a forced, interest-free loan: You'll be repaid any >> extra withholding in April. Those who would receive a refund anyway >> will receive a larger one, and those who owe taxes will owe less. >> >> But with rising gas costs, depressed home prices and double-digit >> unemployment, the state's added reach into residents' regular paycheck >> isn't sitting well with many. >> >> "The state's suddenly slapping people upside the head," said Mack >> Reed, 50, of Silver Lake. "It's appalling how brash that is." >> >> Brittney McKaig, 23, of Santa Ana said she expects the additional >> withholding to affect her holiday spending. >> >> "Coming into the holidays, we're getting squeezed anyway," she said. >> "We're not getting Christmas bonuses and other perks we used to get. >> So it all falls back on spending. The $40 gift will become a $20 >> gift." >> >> The extra withholding may seem like a small amount siphoned from each >> paycheck, but it adds up to a $1.7-billion fix for California's >> deficit-riddled books. >> >> >From a single taxpayer earning $51,000 a year with no dependents, the >> state will be grabbing an extra $17.59 each month, according to state >> tax officials. A married person earning $90,000 with two dependents >> would receive $24.87 less in monthly pay. >> >> California will probably continue to collect the tax at a higher rate >> for many years -- or find an additional $1.7 billion to slice from a >> future budget, an unlikely occurrence. All workers who have state >> taxes withheld will see their paychecks shrink. >> >> "Many families are sitting at their kitchen table wondering how >> they're going to make ends meet," said state Sen. Tony Strickland >> (R-Thousand Oaks). "At the same time, the state of California is >> taking a no-interest loan." >> >> The provision is one of numerous maneuvers state lawmakers and Gov. >> Arnold Schwarzenegger approved in the summer to paper over the state's >> deficit. Many of the changes, including the extra withholding, were >> little noticed outside of Sacramento. >> >> Savvy taxpayers can get around the state's maneuver by increasing the >> number of personal withholding allowances they claim on their employer >> tax forms, said Brenda Voet, a spokeswoman for the state's Franchise >> Tax Board. >> >> "People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people would >> have to change their allowances through their employers. California's >> budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't. >> >> The increase is coming at a bad time for store owners, many of whom >> depend on the holiday shopping season to keep their businesses alive. >> >> "I don't think there's any question it's going to impact consumers' >> spending," said Bill Dombrowski, president of the California Retailers >> Assn. "Any time you reduce people's disposable income, there's going >> to be a negative effect on the retail sector." >> >> But Stephen Levy, director of the Center for Continuing Study of the >> California Economy, wasn't so sure. >> >> "It's having a relatively small impact on people's income," Levy said, >> pointing out that many families will receive only $12 to $40 less each >> month. >> >> Yet Erika Wendt, 28, of San Diego said she already lived on a tight >> budget: She rides her bike to work, for instance, to save on gasoline >> and parking costs. >> >> "I am frustrated as this directly impacts my weekly budget -- what >> groceries I buy, how much I drive and can spend on gas," she said. >> "Now money will just be tighter, and I'm not sure where else I can cut >> back." >> >> The extra withholding comes in addition to tax hikes the state enacted >> this year. >> >> In February, state income tax rates were bumped up 0.25 of a >> percentage point for every tax bracket. The dependent credit was >> slashed by two-thirds. The state sales tax rate rose 1 percentage >> point. The vehicle license fee nearly doubled to 1.15% of a car's >> value. >> >> Lawmakers and the governor also approved deep cuts to schools, social >> services and prisons to fend off one of the steepest revenue losses in >> California history. >> >> Temporary budget bandages, such as the increase in withholding, were >> included at several points this year to avoid higher taxes and deeper >> cuts, said H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the state Department of >> Finance. >> >> Sacramento, meanwhile, is awash in red ink again. The state controller >> recently said revenue in the budget year already had fallen more than >> $1 billion short of assumptions. Outsize deficits are projected for >> years to come. >> >> Such temporary measures as the withholding tax increase don't really >> fix the budget gap, "they just more or less hid it," said Christopher >> Thornberg, a principal with Beacon Economics in Los Angeles. "I call >> it a fraud." >> >> shane.goldmacher@ latimes.com >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 1 10:16:52 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 09:16:52 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] This Ain't Pretty Message-ID: <400985d70911010716g636d8b6uf07cfdbe22cddd1d@mail.gmail.com> Forgive me if I'm not too excited about the annualized GDP rising 3.5% last quarter. With Cash-4-Clunkers and the $8000 home buyer's tax credit, we need to rename GDP "Government Domestic Production". As a friend of mine in the commercial real estate industry pointed out, we've yet to see the "other shoe fall" (commercial real estate defaults). Here's what it looks like in home mortgages - http://www.zerohedge.com/print/27067 What are we going to do? Print mo' money! Brad From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Nov 1 10:34:26 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 09:34:26 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] This Ain't Pretty In-Reply-To: <400985d70911010716g636d8b6uf07cfdbe22cddd1d@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911010716g636d8b6uf07cfdbe22cddd1d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911010734k3fbaaf03o4f9ecf3e4851b60b@mail.gmail.com> "Bernanke & Co., LLC" What a fitting description .... limited (meaning NO) liability Rik On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 9:16 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Forgive me if I'm not too excited about the annualized GDP rising 3.5% > last quarter. With Cash-4-Clunkers and the $8000 home buyer's tax > credit, we need to rename GDP "Government Domestic Production". As a > friend of mine in the commercial real estate industry pointed out, > we've yet to see the "other shoe fall" (commercial real estate > defaults). Here's what it looks like in home mortgages - > > http://www.zerohedge.com/print/27067 > > What are we going to do? Print mo' money! > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091101/c169d78a/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Nov 1 10:40:23 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 09:40:23 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Of Course I'll Respect You In The Morning! In-Reply-To: <400985d70911010658w44390489u46c70bdc4d3ad468@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911010619o22f3eaabva759348b600307bf@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911010649o6158a76esf6a4adaef51c291b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911010658w44390489u46c70bdc4d3ad468@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911010740p33b5dcc1sb6bb6d03a5f71181@mail.gmail.com> Yabut .... do ya think anybody listened? How many of the legislators do you think actually got it. I can hear that giant sucking sound and it's coming from California. Rik On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > Can't remember if I posted this or not - > > http://tinyurl.com/yhh3ad7 > > What great advice! DO NOTHING! GO HOME! JUST STOP! > > Brad > > > On 11/1/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > > Ha ha .... Will the last one leaving California, please turn out the > > lights?? > > > > _______ > > "People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people would > > have to change their allowances through their employers. California's > > budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't." > > _______ > > > > Good grief, I sure hope nobody takes that advice without doing the math > > first. I really HATE when people have to get a loan to pay their taxes on > > April 15th and that's exactly what it'll come to if they take this > woman's > > advice. First (and maybe the biggest) problem they're going to run into > is > > finding someone that will even make them a loan. Oh wait, I forgot, they > can > > just put this bill on their 30% interest credit card and make minimum > > payments :-) > > > > Dumb and dumber. > > > > Rik > > > > On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> Good grief! Has it ever occurred to anyone in California that they > >> have a spending problem, not a revenue problem? Watch how this goes > >> because the entire nation is heading down the same path. > >> > >> Brad > >> > >> ----------- > >> > >> latimes.com > >> California to withhold a bigger chunk of paychecks > >> The amount goes up 10% on Sunday as Sacramento borrows from taxpayers. > >> Technically, it's not an income tax increase: You'll get the money > >> back eventually. > >> > >> By Shane Goldmacher and W.J. Hennigan > >> > >> October 31, 2009 > >> > >> Reporting from Los Angeles and Sacramento > >> > >> Starting Sunday, cash-strapped California will dig deeper into the > >> pocketbooks of wage earners -- holding back 10% more than it already > >> does in state income taxes just as the biggest shopping season of the > >> year kicks into gear. > >> > >> Technically, it's not a tax increase, even though it may feel like one > >> when your next paycheck arrives. As part of a bundle of budget patches > >> adopted in the summer, the state is taking more money now in > >> withholding, even though workers' annual tax bills won't change. > >> > >> Think of it as a forced, interest-free loan: You'll be repaid any > >> extra withholding in April. Those who would receive a refund anyway > >> will receive a larger one, and those who owe taxes will owe less. > >> > >> But with rising gas costs, depressed home prices and double-digit > >> unemployment, the state's added reach into residents' regular paycheck > >> isn't sitting well with many. > >> > >> "The state's suddenly slapping people upside the head," said Mack > >> Reed, 50, of Silver Lake. "It's appalling how brash that is." > >> > >> Brittney McKaig, 23, of Santa Ana said she expects the additional > >> withholding to affect her holiday spending. > >> > >> "Coming into the holidays, we're getting squeezed anyway," she said. > >> "We're not getting Christmas bonuses and other perks we used to get. > >> So it all falls back on spending. The $40 gift will become a $20 > >> gift." > >> > >> The extra withholding may seem like a small amount siphoned from each > >> paycheck, but it adds up to a $1.7-billion fix for California's > >> deficit-riddled books. > >> > >> >From a single taxpayer earning $51,000 a year with no dependents, the > >> state will be grabbing an extra $17.59 each month, according to state > >> tax officials. A married person earning $90,000 with two dependents > >> would receive $24.87 less in monthly pay. > >> > >> California will probably continue to collect the tax at a higher rate > >> for many years -- or find an additional $1.7 billion to slice from a > >> future budget, an unlikely occurrence. All workers who have state > >> taxes withheld will see their paychecks shrink. > >> > >> "Many families are sitting at their kitchen table wondering how > >> they're going to make ends meet," said state Sen. Tony Strickland > >> (R-Thousand Oaks). "At the same time, the state of California is > >> taking a no-interest loan." > >> > >> The provision is one of numerous maneuvers state lawmakers and Gov. > >> Arnold Schwarzenegger approved in the summer to paper over the state's > >> deficit. Many of the changes, including the extra withholding, were > >> little noticed outside of Sacramento. > >> > >> Savvy taxpayers can get around the state's maneuver by increasing the > >> number of personal withholding allowances they claim on their employer > >> tax forms, said Brenda Voet, a spokeswoman for the state's Franchise > >> Tax Board. > >> > >> "People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people would > >> have to change their allowances through their employers. California's > >> budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't. > >> > >> The increase is coming at a bad time for store owners, many of whom > >> depend on the holiday shopping season to keep their businesses alive. > >> > >> "I don't think there's any question it's going to impact consumers' > >> spending," said Bill Dombrowski, president of the California Retailers > >> Assn. "Any time you reduce people's disposable income, there's going > >> to be a negative effect on the retail sector." > >> > >> But Stephen Levy, director of the Center for Continuing Study of the > >> California Economy, wasn't so sure. > >> > >> "It's having a relatively small impact on people's income," Levy said, > >> pointing out that many families will receive only $12 to $40 less each > >> month. > >> > >> Yet Erika Wendt, 28, of San Diego said she already lived on a tight > >> budget: She rides her bike to work, for instance, to save on gasoline > >> and parking costs. > >> > >> "I am frustrated as this directly impacts my weekly budget -- what > >> groceries I buy, how much I drive and can spend on gas," she said. > >> "Now money will just be tighter, and I'm not sure where else I can cut > >> back." > >> > >> The extra withholding comes in addition to tax hikes the state enacted > >> this year. > >> > >> In February, state income tax rates were bumped up 0.25 of a > >> percentage point for every tax bracket. The dependent credit was > >> slashed by two-thirds. The state sales tax rate rose 1 percentage > >> point. The vehicle license fee nearly doubled to 1.15% of a car's > >> value. > >> > >> Lawmakers and the governor also approved deep cuts to schools, social > >> services and prisons to fend off one of the steepest revenue losses in > >> California history. > >> > >> Temporary budget bandages, such as the increase in withholding, were > >> included at several points this year to avoid higher taxes and deeper > >> cuts, said H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the state Department of > >> Finance. > >> > >> Sacramento, meanwhile, is awash in red ink again. The state controller > >> recently said revenue in the budget year already had fallen more than > >> $1 billion short of assumptions. Outsize deficits are projected for > >> years to come. > >> > >> Such temporary measures as the withholding tax increase don't really > >> fix the budget gap, "they just more or less hid it," said Christopher > >> Thornberg, a principal with Beacon Economics in Los Angeles. "I call > >> it a fraud." > >> > >> shane.goldmacher@ latimes.com > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > > you with experience. > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091101/a9dd35e1/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 1 11:53:21 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 10:53:21 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Of Course I'll Respect You In The Morning! In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911010740p33b5dcc1sb6bb6d03a5f71181@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911010619o22f3eaabva759348b600307bf@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911010649o6158a76esf6a4adaef51c291b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911010658w44390489u46c70bdc4d3ad468@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911010740p33b5dcc1sb6bb6d03a5f71181@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911010853j5e67cad9t674b320ae692a331@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Like Peggy Noonan insinuated in her article, we've got a whole crop of 'utes' that have a poor understanding of where "stuff" comes from - Mommy and Daddy or the government, right? Some of these 'utes' are in their 60's now. We've witnessed trillions of dollars of "wealth" disappear into thin air, never to return anytime soon. States like California are going to have to fess-up sooner or later, ie, "look folks, we're flat-ass broke", and cut spending accordingly. If the US government would do the same, we'd suffer a lot less and for a much shorter period of time. Don't hold your breath on that happening. What makes people think that sharing misery and poverty equally is better than income inequality? I think back to reading "Titan" about John Rockefeller a few years ago. We've got cell phones, computers, electric lights, refrigerators, air-conditioners, cars, access to airplanes, fresh fruit year round, meals from every continent within 15 minutes, we're far wealthier than Rockefeller was at his prime. And still we bitch. Ask any Chinese over the age of 50 how that suffering equally works out. Brad On 11/1/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Yabut .... do ya think anybody listened? How many of the legislators do you > think actually got it. > > I can hear that giant sucking sound and it's coming from California. > > Rik > > On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> Can't remember if I posted this or not - >> >> http://tinyurl.com/yhh3ad7 >> >> What great advice! DO NOTHING! GO HOME! JUST STOP! >> >> Brad >> >> >> On 11/1/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> > Ha ha .... Will the last one leaving California, please turn out the >> > lights?? >> > >> > _______ >> > "People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people would >> > have to change their allowances through their employers. California's >> > budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't." >> > _______ >> > >> > Good grief, I sure hope nobody takes that advice without doing the math >> > first. I really HATE when people have to get a loan to pay their taxes >> > on >> > April 15th and that's exactly what it'll come to if they take this >> woman's >> > advice. First (and maybe the biggest) problem they're going to run into >> is >> > finding someone that will even make them a loan. Oh wait, I forgot, they >> can >> > just put this bill on their 30% interest credit card and make minimum >> > payments :-) >> > >> > Dumb and dumber. >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> Good grief! Has it ever occurred to anyone in California that they >> >> have a spending problem, not a revenue problem? Watch how this goes >> >> because the entire nation is heading down the same path. >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> ----------- >> >> >> >> latimes.com >> >> California to withhold a bigger chunk of paychecks >> >> The amount goes up 10% on Sunday as Sacramento borrows from taxpayers. >> >> Technically, it's not an income tax increase: You'll get the money >> >> back eventually. >> >> >> >> By Shane Goldmacher and W.J. Hennigan >> >> >> >> October 31, 2009 >> >> >> >> Reporting from Los Angeles and Sacramento >> >> >> >> Starting Sunday, cash-strapped California will dig deeper into the >> >> pocketbooks of wage earners -- holding back 10% more than it already >> >> does in state income taxes just as the biggest shopping season of the >> >> year kicks into gear. >> >> >> >> Technically, it's not a tax increase, even though it may feel like one >> >> when your next paycheck arrives. As part of a bundle of budget patches >> >> adopted in the summer, the state is taking more money now in >> >> withholding, even though workers' annual tax bills won't change. >> >> >> >> Think of it as a forced, interest-free loan: You'll be repaid any >> >> extra withholding in April. Those who would receive a refund anyway >> >> will receive a larger one, and those who owe taxes will owe less. >> >> >> >> But with rising gas costs, depressed home prices and double-digit >> >> unemployment, the state's added reach into residents' regular paycheck >> >> isn't sitting well with many. >> >> >> >> "The state's suddenly slapping people upside the head," said Mack >> >> Reed, 50, of Silver Lake. "It's appalling how brash that is." >> >> >> >> Brittney McKaig, 23, of Santa Ana said she expects the additional >> >> withholding to affect her holiday spending. >> >> >> >> "Coming into the holidays, we're getting squeezed anyway," she said. >> >> "We're not getting Christmas bonuses and other perks we used to get. >> >> So it all falls back on spending. The $40 gift will become a $20 >> >> gift." >> >> >> >> The extra withholding may seem like a small amount siphoned from each >> >> paycheck, but it adds up to a $1.7-billion fix for California's >> >> deficit-riddled books. >> >> >> >> >From a single taxpayer earning $51,000 a year with no dependents, the >> >> state will be grabbing an extra $17.59 each month, according to state >> >> tax officials. A married person earning $90,000 with two dependents >> >> would receive $24.87 less in monthly pay. >> >> >> >> California will probably continue to collect the tax at a higher rate >> >> for many years -- or find an additional $1.7 billion to slice from a >> >> future budget, an unlikely occurrence. All workers who have state >> >> taxes withheld will see their paychecks shrink. >> >> >> >> "Many families are sitting at their kitchen table wondering how >> >> they're going to make ends meet," said state Sen. Tony Strickland >> >> (R-Thousand Oaks). "At the same time, the state of California is >> >> taking a no-interest loan." >> >> >> >> The provision is one of numerous maneuvers state lawmakers and Gov. >> >> Arnold Schwarzenegger approved in the summer to paper over the state's >> >> deficit. Many of the changes, including the extra withholding, were >> >> little noticed outside of Sacramento. >> >> >> >> Savvy taxpayers can get around the state's maneuver by increasing the >> >> number of personal withholding allowances they claim on their employer >> >> tax forms, said Brenda Voet, a spokeswoman for the state's Franchise >> >> Tax Board. >> >> >> >> "People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people would >> >> have to change their allowances through their employers. California's >> >> budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't. >> >> >> >> The increase is coming at a bad time for store owners, many of whom >> >> depend on the holiday shopping season to keep their businesses alive. >> >> >> >> "I don't think there's any question it's going to impact consumers' >> >> spending," said Bill Dombrowski, president of the California Retailers >> >> Assn. "Any time you reduce people's disposable income, there's going >> >> to be a negative effect on the retail sector." >> >> >> >> But Stephen Levy, director of the Center for Continuing Study of the >> >> California Economy, wasn't so sure. >> >> >> >> "It's having a relatively small impact on people's income," Levy said, >> >> pointing out that many families will receive only $12 to $40 less each >> >> month. >> >> >> >> Yet Erika Wendt, 28, of San Diego said she already lived on a tight >> >> budget: She rides her bike to work, for instance, to save on gasoline >> >> and parking costs. >> >> >> >> "I am frustrated as this directly impacts my weekly budget -- what >> >> groceries I buy, how much I drive and can spend on gas," she said. >> >> "Now money will just be tighter, and I'm not sure where else I can cut >> >> back." >> >> >> >> The extra withholding comes in addition to tax hikes the state enacted >> >> this year. >> >> >> >> In February, state income tax rates were bumped up 0.25 of a >> >> percentage point for every tax bracket. The dependent credit was >> >> slashed by two-thirds. The state sales tax rate rose 1 percentage >> >> point. The vehicle license fee nearly doubled to 1.15% of a car's >> >> value. >> >> >> >> Lawmakers and the governor also approved deep cuts to schools, social >> >> services and prisons to fend off one of the steepest revenue losses in >> >> California history. >> >> >> >> Temporary budget bandages, such as the increase in withholding, were >> >> included at several points this year to avoid higher taxes and deeper >> >> cuts, said H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the state Department of >> >> Finance. >> >> >> >> Sacramento, meanwhile, is awash in red ink again. The state controller >> >> recently said revenue in the budget year already had fallen more than >> >> $1 billion short of assumptions. Outsize deficits are projected for >> >> years to come. >> >> >> >> Such temporary measures as the withholding tax increase don't really >> >> fix the budget gap, "they just more or less hid it," said Christopher >> >> Thornberg, a principal with Beacon Economics in Los Angeles. "I call >> >> it a fraud." >> >> >> >> shane.goldmacher@ latimes.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> > beat >> > you with experience. >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 1 12:08:47 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 11:08:47 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Of Course I'll Respect You In The Morning! In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911010740p33b5dcc1sb6bb6d03a5f71181@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911010619o22f3eaabva759348b600307bf@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911010649o6158a76esf6a4adaef51c291b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911010658w44390489u46c70bdc4d3ad468@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911010740p33b5dcc1sb6bb6d03a5f71181@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911010908u5c20ba78i53f7d47f65171259@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Right after that last post, I stumbled across this (see below). Sums it up pretty well. Brad ----------- Orphans of the Storm Posted By edgelings On October 30, 2009 @ 9:48 am In Business, Government, ORPHANS OF THE STORM by Michael S. Malone I?m constantly amazed, and appalled, by what little actual wisdom I?ve actually gained in my more than half-century in this world. But if there are three things I have learned, they are: 1. Never trust luck to get you through. 2. Don?t assume the best-case scenario. 3. The laws of economics, like the laws of chance, always triumph. The economic news this week, like most recent weeks, is mixed but mostly bad. The good news is that the economy appears to have grown in the most recent quarter ? at least in comparison to the miserable first half of this year. The growth in unemployment seems to be slowing. And, of course, the stock market has enjoyed one of its fastest run-ups in recent memory. The bad news is that much of this third quarter growth was already predicted from the artificial juicing of the economy from the Stimulus, Cash for Clunkers, and inventory replacement by manufacturers. Take those away, and you?re down to about a 1 percent improvement over the disastrous second quarter ? positive, at least, but hardly grounds for cheering. Meanwhile, the stock market rally may have peaked, and the indexes have begun sliding ? with little indication whether this is the beginning of a second downturn or just a temporary hiccup. As for unemployment, its growth may be slowing because we?ve already reached historically high levels (especially if you measure real unemployment) and we?re running out of people to lay-off ? and those who are laid-off are giving up looking for work. Perhaps most dispiriting are the studies that suggest that other than paying off some campaign debts to unions, the Stimulus generated few jobs ? meaning that hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money were spent on . . . nothing. In other words, about the only conclusions that you can draw from all of this is that, the Administration?s cheerleading aside ? and that, of course, is their job ? there is still no clear indication whether the U.S. economy is actually recovering, sinking into a double-dip recession (or worse), or sliding into the malaise of a ?70s style stagflation. What does seem obvious is that the economy wants to recover. I can see it everywhere around me here in Silicon Valley ? companies (notably the PC makers) putting out great new products, entrepreneurs writing business plans, talented people anxious to get back in harness. And I sense that?s true almost everywhere else in this country. Even the stock market rally seemed like a bull banging against a gate waiting to be unleashed. But while we all may be ready to get back into the race, Washington ? in whose hands our collective fate now sadly rests ? may not be ready to let us. And it?s all because they seem to have forgotten, or never learned, those three hard-earned pearls of wisdom with which I began this column. For example, inside the Beltway they seem to be pixilated (the old definition) these days with Magical Thinking. Both the White House and Congress somehow believe ? despite all evidence that big, top-down and bureaucratic initiatives no longer work in our Web 2.0 world ? that they can grab entire sectors of our economy and impose on them a whole new regime that will magically work without any unexpected and catastrophic side-effects. No business in America, from the corner dry cleaners to a Fortune 500 company would ever contemplate something this crazy, at least not without preparing the most detailed road map imaginable and getting every employee on-board ? not passing massive and sweeping laws that nobody has read, whose consequences are unclear, and the majority of the citizenry is against. By the same token, the lesson I?ve learned from thirty years working in a volatile place like Silicon Valley is to pray for the best-case scenario, but prepare for the worst. The smart companies around here scale up fast during the good times, but are always worriedly looking ahead for the next downturn. That?s why, Cisco?s John Chambers told me a few months ago, he hoarded cash during the last boom ? just so Cisco would be able to navigate through this current crash, keep its employees and outrun its weakened competition. The best-case scenario for this economy right now is that the Stimulus (or the proposed second one) actually works, the U.S. economy rights itself, and grows sufficiently fast over the next five years to absorb all of this new debt and produce enough new jobs to bring unemployment down to reasonable levels. And it is upon this best-case scenario that we are now preparing to embark on one of the most sweeping eras in government-run social engineering in our nation?s history. Leaving aside any doubts you and I may have about this War on the Status Quo, what happens if the best-case scenario for this economy doesn?t come true? What happens if the economy stagnates or falls off a cliff again right when we?re saddling it with trillions of dollars of more debt, we?re dismantling the insurance industry, driving thousands of doctors and other professionals (except lawyers, of course) out of their careers, and real unemployment is hovering at about 17 percent? I?ll tell you what happens ? and that?s life lesson #3. Back during the dot.com bubble I was running a magazine (Forbes ASAP) that was riding right on the crest of the boom. Everyone in the Valley was getting rich, at the magazine we couldn?t write enough copy to keep with all of the advertising pages, and I was paying my junior staffers extravagant salaries. I remember that we older folks on the masthead became increasingly (and properly) nervous that what we were seeing was a Bubble on the brink of bursting. I also vividly remember one of my junior editors laughing at my concern and saying, ?You?re just old-fashioned, Mike, you need to understand that the old business rules ? you know, ?profits? and all of that ? are obsolete.? As we soon learned, no they weren?t. And they aren?t now. And no amount of magical thinking or betting on luck or assuming the best-case scenario is going to keep those laws from re-asserting themselves. You can?t print and spend mountains of money without creating massive inflation. You can?t keep raising taxes and assume that people will continue to work just as hard or that they won?t find a way to hide their earnings ? or they won?t move away. You can?t dictate pay rates and not have the best and brightest jump to somewhere else where they are properly rewarded. You can?t force companies to compete against government-run competitors who get to write the rules of engagement and expect the private competitors to stay in the game. And you can?t expect private industry to save you after you?ve wrapped it in chains of regulation, crippled it with taxes and excoriated it as criminal. I stopped gambling when I realized that no matter how long a win streak you enjoy that eventually the laws of chance reassert themselves. The same is true with the U.S. economy today: we?re stretching it now and a nasty snap back lies in our future. Another storm, I fear, is heading our way ? and we risk being orphans caught within it. But I?ve learned one more lesson, this one from David Packard and Bill Hewlett (and Thomas Jefferson): 1. Trust in the ingenuity of everyday folks. The American people will get us out of this mess. Through the election process, of course, but I?ll leave all of that political stuff to the pundits. What I mean is that people like you and me are already figuring out ways on their own to get through these hard times. Much of it has to do with technology. Why pay to rent an office when you can run your business off a laptop and a Blackberry? Why pay for cable and phone in the age of Skype and Hulu? How many people out there are building small enterprises off Facebook, eBay and Craigslist? Or marketing with Twitter? Or designing apps for the iPhone or Android? Meanwhile, the tools are in place to form small (150 people or less) sub-markets in which you buy and sell ? or barter ? from each other, or team up to buy common items at discount. Or to team up and sell your services around the world virtually. Or move somewhere else where the taxes aren?t so onerous, and still keep your current clients. And why keep working past the point when the government takes it all away? Why not use the remaining time ? and a good network on some place like LinkedIn ? to try your hand at entrepreneurship and build a virtual start-up company? And when inflation hits, you may find you make more money sitting at home at your computer arbitraging and investing the wealth you have than actually working for an ever-less valuable paycheck. In other words, even if Washington no longer believes you can make intelligent decisions for yourself, it doesn?t mean you can make them anyway. And even if our leaders have chosen to be foolish, it doesn?t mean that you can?t choose to be wise. [For a decade of Michael S. Malone?s columns about business and high technology, please visit www.abcnews.com] On 11/1/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Yabut .... do ya think anybody listened? How many of the legislators do you > think actually got it. > > I can hear that giant sucking sound and it's coming from California. > > Rik > > On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> Can't remember if I posted this or not - >> >> http://tinyurl.com/yhh3ad7 >> >> What great advice! DO NOTHING! GO HOME! JUST STOP! >> >> Brad >> >> >> On 11/1/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> > Ha ha .... Will the last one leaving California, please turn out the >> > lights?? >> > >> > _______ >> > "People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people would >> > have to change their allowances through their employers. California's >> > budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't." >> > _______ >> > >> > Good grief, I sure hope nobody takes that advice without doing the math >> > first. I really HATE when people have to get a loan to pay their taxes >> > on >> > April 15th and that's exactly what it'll come to if they take this >> woman's >> > advice. First (and maybe the biggest) problem they're going to run into >> is >> > finding someone that will even make them a loan. Oh wait, I forgot, they >> can >> > just put this bill on their 30% interest credit card and make minimum >> > payments :-) >> > >> > Dumb and dumber. >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> Good grief! Has it ever occurred to anyone in California that they >> >> have a spending problem, not a revenue problem? Watch how this goes >> >> because the entire nation is heading down the same path. >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> ----------- >> >> >> >> latimes.com >> >> California to withhold a bigger chunk of paychecks >> >> The amount goes up 10% on Sunday as Sacramento borrows from taxpayers. >> >> Technically, it's not an income tax increase: You'll get the money >> >> back eventually. >> >> >> >> By Shane Goldmacher and W.J. Hennigan >> >> >> >> October 31, 2009 >> >> >> >> Reporting from Los Angeles and Sacramento >> >> >> >> Starting Sunday, cash-strapped California will dig deeper into the >> >> pocketbooks of wage earners -- holding back 10% more than it already >> >> does in state income taxes just as the biggest shopping season of the >> >> year kicks into gear. >> >> >> >> Technically, it's not a tax increase, even though it may feel like one >> >> when your next paycheck arrives. As part of a bundle of budget patches >> >> adopted in the summer, the state is taking more money now in >> >> withholding, even though workers' annual tax bills won't change. >> >> >> >> Think of it as a forced, interest-free loan: You'll be repaid any >> >> extra withholding in April. Those who would receive a refund anyway >> >> will receive a larger one, and those who owe taxes will owe less. >> >> >> >> But with rising gas costs, depressed home prices and double-digit >> >> unemployment, the state's added reach into residents' regular paycheck >> >> isn't sitting well with many. >> >> >> >> "The state's suddenly slapping people upside the head," said Mack >> >> Reed, 50, of Silver Lake. "It's appalling how brash that is." >> >> >> >> Brittney McKaig, 23, of Santa Ana said she expects the additional >> >> withholding to affect her holiday spending. >> >> >> >> "Coming into the holidays, we're getting squeezed anyway," she said. >> >> "We're not getting Christmas bonuses and other perks we used to get. >> >> So it all falls back on spending. The $40 gift will become a $20 >> >> gift." >> >> >> >> The extra withholding may seem like a small amount siphoned from each >> >> paycheck, but it adds up to a $1.7-billion fix for California's >> >> deficit-riddled books. >> >> >> >> >From a single taxpayer earning $51,000 a year with no dependents, the >> >> state will be grabbing an extra $17.59 each month, according to state >> >> tax officials. A married person earning $90,000 with two dependents >> >> would receive $24.87 less in monthly pay. >> >> >> >> California will probably continue to collect the tax at a higher rate >> >> for many years -- or find an additional $1.7 billion to slice from a >> >> future budget, an unlikely occurrence. All workers who have state >> >> taxes withheld will see their paychecks shrink. >> >> >> >> "Many families are sitting at their kitchen table wondering how >> >> they're going to make ends meet," said state Sen. Tony Strickland >> >> (R-Thousand Oaks). "At the same time, the state of California is >> >> taking a no-interest loan." >> >> >> >> The provision is one of numerous maneuvers state lawmakers and Gov. >> >> Arnold Schwarzenegger approved in the summer to paper over the state's >> >> deficit. Many of the changes, including the extra withholding, were >> >> little noticed outside of Sacramento. >> >> >> >> Savvy taxpayers can get around the state's maneuver by increasing the >> >> number of personal withholding allowances they claim on their employer >> >> tax forms, said Brenda Voet, a spokeswoman for the state's Franchise >> >> Tax Board. >> >> >> >> "People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people would >> >> have to change their allowances through their employers. California's >> >> budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't. >> >> >> >> The increase is coming at a bad time for store owners, many of whom >> >> depend on the holiday shopping season to keep their businesses alive. >> >> >> >> "I don't think there's any question it's going to impact consumers' >> >> spending," said Bill Dombrowski, president of the California Retailers >> >> Assn. "Any time you reduce people's disposable income, there's going >> >> to be a negative effect on the retail sector." >> >> >> >> But Stephen Levy, director of the Center for Continuing Study of the >> >> California Economy, wasn't so sure. >> >> >> >> "It's having a relatively small impact on people's income," Levy said, >> >> pointing out that many families will receive only $12 to $40 less each >> >> month. >> >> >> >> Yet Erika Wendt, 28, of San Diego said she already lived on a tight >> >> budget: She rides her bike to work, for instance, to save on gasoline >> >> and parking costs. >> >> >> >> "I am frustrated as this directly impacts my weekly budget -- what >> >> groceries I buy, how much I drive and can spend on gas," she said. >> >> "Now money will just be tighter, and I'm not sure where else I can cut >> >> back." >> >> >> >> The extra withholding comes in addition to tax hikes the state enacted >> >> this year. >> >> >> >> In February, state income tax rates were bumped up 0.25 of a >> >> percentage point for every tax bracket. The dependent credit was >> >> slashed by two-thirds. The state sales tax rate rose 1 percentage >> >> point. The vehicle license fee nearly doubled to 1.15% of a car's >> >> value. >> >> >> >> Lawmakers and the governor also approved deep cuts to schools, social >> >> services and prisons to fend off one of the steepest revenue losses in >> >> California history. >> >> >> >> Temporary budget bandages, such as the increase in withholding, were >> >> included at several points this year to avoid higher taxes and deeper >> >> cuts, said H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the state Department of >> >> Finance. >> >> >> >> Sacramento, meanwhile, is awash in red ink again. The state controller >> >> recently said revenue in the budget year already had fallen more than >> >> $1 billion short of assumptions. Outsize deficits are projected for >> >> years to come. >> >> >> >> Such temporary measures as the withholding tax increase don't really >> >> fix the budget gap, "they just more or less hid it," said Christopher >> >> Thornberg, a principal with Beacon Economics in Los Angeles. "I call >> >> it a fraud." >> >> >> >> shane.goldmacher@ latimes.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> > beat >> > you with experience. >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Sun Nov 1 12:27:51 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 09:27:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Mobile Homes In-Reply-To: <400985d70910282112r3b8c1841x58a8e78973be76ef@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <451719.71857.qm@web111212.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> A telling comment on our society that over 400K views of the mobile home salesman but only 11K views of the 'single payer' distortion ?video. elle --- On Thu, 10/29/09, Brad Haslett wrote: From: Brad Haslett Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Mobile Homes To: "Letters to the Editor" Date: Thursday, October 29, 2009, 12:12 AM If I every buy a mobile home, I'm buying it from this guy - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-RLqLx1iYI&feature=player_embedded _______________________________________________ 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/20091101/00a39ead/attachment.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Sun Nov 1 13:04:15 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 10:04:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Headed for DC! In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0910301932x69cbb775t80adba2109caea1b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <841685.63150.qm@web111204.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Leave her here with me on the No Neck...I'm 2.5 hrs away via car.. elle --- On Fri, 10/30/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: From: Rik Sandberg Subject: Re: [Swiftwater Gazette] Headed for DC! To: SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com Date: Friday, October 30, 2009, 10:32 PM Brad, Don't think I can make this happen. Looks like it'd cost 1700 give or take. Damned expensive lunch. Hell for that kind of money I'd drive, but I doubt I can find someplace for my wife to stay for that long. Don't think this is gonna work. Rik On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: Rik, I'm flying into Dulles. ?I'll either ride with the crew to Tysons Corner and catch the subway from there or maybe just take the bus. ?I can meet you near the Capital if you choose to fly into Reagan. Baltimore might be an option as well. ?If you decide to come the night before, I can swap my jumpseat, fly in early and we can split a room. Brad On 10/30/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > What airport in DC > > Rik > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Congressman Michelle Bauchman just put out the call to show at her >> press conference at noon on Thursday, November 5th. ?The more that >> show the better. ?I just booked the jumpseat to DC, arriving 7am with >> a return flight leaving 8pm. ?Who wants to join me for lunch in >> Washington DC? >> >> Brad >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > _______________________________________________ SwiftwaterGazette mailing list SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ 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/20091101/d945f0d9/attachment-0001.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Nov 1 13:16:56 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 12:16:56 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Headed for DC! In-Reply-To: <841685.63150.qm@web111204.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <6634e19e0910301932x69cbb775t80adba2109caea1b@mail.gmail.com> <841685.63150.qm@web111204.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911011016w59698526q66637db3bf7b97fa@mail.gmail.com> That's a tempting idea. But, I don't exactly know where the No. Neck is. And: Don't you have a day job?? Rik On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 12:04 PM, elle wrote: > Leave her here with me on the No Neck...I'm 2.5 hrs away via car.. > > elle > > --- On *Fri, 10/30/09, Rik Sandberg * wrote: > > > From: Rik Sandberg > Subject: Re: [Swiftwater Gazette] Headed for DC! > To: SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > Date: Friday, October 30, 2009, 10:32 PM > > > Brad, > > Don't think I can make this happen. Looks like it'd cost 1700 give or take. > > Damned expensive lunch. > > Hell for that kind of money I'd drive, but I doubt I can find someplace for > my wife to stay for that long. > > Don't think this is gonna work. > > Rik > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Brad Haslett > > wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> I'm flying into Dulles. I'll either ride with the crew to Tysons >> Corner and catch the subway from there or maybe just take the bus. I >> can meet you near the Capital if you choose to fly into Reagan. >> Baltimore might be an option as well. If you decide to come the night >> before, I can swap my jumpseat, fly in early and we can split a room. >> >> Brad >> >> On 10/30/09, Rik Sandberg > >> wrote: >> > Brad, >> > >> > What airport in DC >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Brad Haslett > >> wrote: >> > >> >> Congressman Michelle Bauchman just put out the call to show at her >> >> press conference at noon on Thursday, November 5th. The more that >> >> show the better. I just booked the jumpseat to DC, arriving 7am with >> >> a return flight leaving 8pm. Who wants to join me for lunch in >> >> Washington DC? >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> beat >> > you with experience. >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > > -----Inline Attachment Follows----- > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091101/b8897608/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Nov 1 13:56:52 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 12:56:52 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Of Course I'll Respect You In The Morning! In-Reply-To: <400985d70911010908u5c20ba78i53f7d47f65171259@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911010619o22f3eaabva759348b600307bf@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911010649o6158a76esf6a4adaef51c291b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911010658w44390489u46c70bdc4d3ad468@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911010740p33b5dcc1sb6bb6d03a5f71181@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911010908u5c20ba78i53f7d47f65171259@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911011056w2f0e8338h5a4d077060567e14@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Seems like there's more and more writers who are starting to "get it". How long do you suppose it'll take before the epidemic spreads to our congressional liberals?? The idea popped into my head a bit ago that if there was a couple states that would get together and become a Galt's Gulch of sorts, they could make a pretty serious killing right now. Rik On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > Right after that last post, I stumbled across this (see below). Sums > it up pretty well. > > Brad > > ----------- > > Orphans of the Storm > > Posted By edgelings On October 30, 2009 @ 9:48 am In Business, Government, > > ORPHANS OF THE STORM by Michael S. Malone > > I?m constantly amazed, and appalled, by what little actual wisdom > I?ve actually gained in my more than half-century in this world. But > if there are three things I have learned, they are: > > > > 1. Never trust luck to get you through. > 2. Don?t assume the best-case scenario. > 3. The laws of economics, like the laws of chance, always triumph. > > > > The economic news this week, like most recent weeks, is mixed but > mostly bad. The good news is that the economy appears to have grown > in the most recent quarter ? at least in comparison to the miserable > first half of this year. The growth in unemployment seems to be > slowing. And, of course, the stock market has enjoyed one of its > fastest run-ups in recent memory. > > The bad news is that much of this third quarter growth was already > predicted from the artificial juicing of the economy from the > Stimulus, Cash for Clunkers, and inventory replacement by > manufacturers. Take those away, and you?re down to about a 1 percent > improvement over the disastrous second quarter ? positive, at least, > but hardly grounds for cheering. > > Meanwhile, the stock market rally may have peaked, and the indexes > have begun sliding ? with little indication whether this is the > beginning of a second downturn or just a temporary hiccup. As for > unemployment, its growth may be slowing because we?ve already reached > historically high levels (especially if you measure real unemployment) > and we?re running out of people to lay-off ? and those who are > laid-off are giving up looking for work. Perhaps most dispiriting are > the studies that suggest that other than paying off some campaign > debts to unions, the Stimulus generated few jobs ? meaning that > hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money were spent on . . . > nothing. > > In other words, about the only conclusions that you can draw from all > of this is that, the Administration?s cheerleading aside ? and that, > of course, is their job ? there is still no clear indication whether > the U.S. economy is actually recovering, sinking into a double-dip > recession (or worse), or sliding into the malaise of a ?70s style > stagflation. > > What does seem obvious is that the economy wants to recover. I can > see it everywhere around me here in Silicon Valley ? companies > (notably the PC makers) putting out great new products, entrepreneurs > writing business plans, talented people anxious to get back in > harness. And I sense that?s true almost everywhere else in this > country. Even the stock market rally seemed like a bull banging > against a gate waiting to be unleashed. > > But while we all may be ready to get back into the race, Washington ? > in whose hands our collective fate now sadly rests ? may not be ready > to let us. And it?s all because they seem to have forgotten, or never > learned, those three hard-earned pearls of wisdom with which I began > this column. > > For example, inside the Beltway they seem to be pixilated (the old > definition) these days with Magical Thinking. Both the White House > and Congress somehow believe ? despite all evidence that big, top-down > and bureaucratic initiatives no longer work in our Web 2.0 world ? > that they can grab entire sectors of our economy and impose on them a > whole new regime that will magically work without any unexpected and > catastrophic side-effects. No business in America, from the corner > dry cleaners to a Fortune 500 company would ever contemplate something > this crazy, at least not without preparing the most detailed road map > imaginable and getting every employee on-board ? not passing massive > and sweeping laws that nobody has read, whose consequences are > unclear, and the majority of the citizenry is against. > > By the same token, the lesson I?ve learned from thirty years working > in a volatile place like Silicon Valley is to pray for the best-case > scenario, but prepare for the worst. The smart companies around here > scale up fast during the good times, but are always worriedly looking > ahead for the next downturn. That?s why, Cisco?s John Chambers told > me a few months ago, he hoarded cash during the last boom ? just so > Cisco would be able to navigate through this current crash, keep its > employees and outrun its weakened competition. > > The best-case scenario for this economy right now is that the Stimulus > (or the proposed second one) actually works, the U.S. economy rights > itself, and grows sufficiently fast over the next five years to absorb > all of this new debt and produce enough new jobs to bring unemployment > down to reasonable levels. And it is upon this best-case scenario > that we are now preparing to embark on one of the most sweeping eras > in government-run social engineering in our nation?s history. > > Leaving aside any doubts you and I may have about this War on the > Status Quo, what happens if the best-case scenario for this economy > doesn?t come true? What happens if the economy stagnates or falls off > a cliff again right when we?re saddling it with trillions of dollars > of more debt, we?re dismantling the insurance industry, driving > thousands of doctors and other professionals (except lawyers, of > course) out of their careers, and real unemployment is hovering at > about 17 percent? > > I?ll tell you what happens ? and that?s life lesson #3. Back during > the dot.com bubble I was running a magazine (Forbes ASAP) that was > riding right on the crest of the boom. Everyone in the Valley was > getting rich, at the magazine we couldn?t write enough copy to keep > with all of the advertising pages, and I was paying my junior staffers > extravagant salaries. I remember that we older folks on the masthead > became increasingly (and properly) nervous that what we were seeing > was a Bubble on the brink of bursting. I also vividly remember one of > my junior editors laughing at my concern and saying, ?You?re just > old-fashioned, Mike, you need to understand that the old business > rules ? you know, ?profits? and all of that ? are obsolete.? > > As we soon learned, no they weren?t. And they aren?t now. And no > amount of magical thinking or betting on luck or assuming the > best-case scenario is going to keep those laws from re-asserting > themselves. You can?t print and spend mountains of money without > creating massive inflation. You can?t keep raising taxes and assume > that people will continue to work just as hard or that they won?t find > a way to hide their earnings ? or they won?t move away. You can?t > dictate pay rates and not have the best and brightest jump to > somewhere else where they are properly rewarded. You can?t force > companies to compete against government-run competitors who get to > write the rules of engagement and expect the private competitors to > stay in the game. And you can?t expect private industry to save you > after you?ve wrapped it in chains of regulation, crippled it with > taxes and excoriated it as criminal. > > I stopped gambling when I realized that no matter how long a win > streak you enjoy that eventually the laws of chance reassert > themselves. The same is true with the U.S. economy today: we?re > stretching it now and a nasty snap back lies in our future. > > Another storm, I fear, is heading our way ? and we risk being orphans > caught within it. But I?ve learned one more lesson, this one from > David Packard and Bill Hewlett (and Thomas Jefferson): > > > > 1. Trust in the ingenuity of everyday folks. > > > > The American people will get us out of this mess. Through the > election process, of course, but I?ll leave all of that political > stuff to the pundits. What I mean is that people like you and me are > already figuring out ways on their own to get through these hard > times. Much of it has to do with technology. Why pay to rent an > office when you can run your business off a laptop and a Blackberry? > Why pay for cable and phone in the age of Skype and Hulu? > > How many people out there are building small enterprises off Facebook, > eBay and Craigslist? Or marketing with Twitter? Or designing apps > for the iPhone or Android? > > Meanwhile, the tools are in place to form small (150 people or less) > sub-markets in which you buy and sell ? or barter ? from each other, > or team up to buy common items at discount. Or to team up and sell > your services around the world virtually. Or move somewhere else > where the taxes aren?t so onerous, and still keep your current > clients. > > And why keep working past the point when the government takes it all > away? Why not use the remaining time ? and a good network on some > place like LinkedIn ? to try your hand at entrepreneurship and build a > virtual start-up company? And when inflation hits, you may find you > make more money sitting at home at your computer arbitraging and > investing the wealth you have than actually working for an ever-less > valuable paycheck. > > In other words, even if Washington no longer believes you can make > intelligent decisions for yourself, it doesn?t mean you can make them > anyway. And even if our leaders have chosen to be foolish, it doesn?t > mean that you can?t choose to be wise. > > > > [For a decade of Michael S. Malone?s columns about business and high > technology, please visit www.abcnews.com] > > On 11/1/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > > Yabut .... do ya think anybody listened? How many of the legislators do > you > > think actually got it. > > > > I can hear that giant sucking sound and it's coming from California. > > > > Rik > > > > On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> Rik, > >> > >> Can't remember if I posted this or not - > >> > >> http://tinyurl.com/yhh3ad7 > >> > >> What great advice! DO NOTHING! GO HOME! JUST STOP! > >> > >> Brad > >> > >> > >> On 11/1/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > >> > Ha ha .... Will the last one leaving California, please turn out the > >> > lights?? > >> > > >> > _______ > >> > "People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people would > >> > have to change their allowances through their employers. California's > >> > budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't." > >> > _______ > >> > > >> > Good grief, I sure hope nobody takes that advice without doing the > math > >> > first. I really HATE when people have to get a loan to pay their taxes > >> > on > >> > April 15th and that's exactly what it'll come to if they take this > >> woman's > >> > advice. First (and maybe the biggest) problem they're going to run > into > >> is > >> > finding someone that will even make them a loan. Oh wait, I forgot, > they > >> can > >> > just put this bill on their 30% interest credit card and make minimum > >> > payments :-) > >> > > >> > Dumb and dumber. > >> > > >> > Rik > >> > > >> > On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Brad Haslett > wrote: > >> > > >> >> Good grief! Has it ever occurred to anyone in California that they > >> >> have a spending problem, not a revenue problem? Watch how this goes > >> >> because the entire nation is heading down the same path. > >> >> > >> >> Brad > >> >> > >> >> ----------- > >> >> > >> >> latimes.com > >> >> California to withhold a bigger chunk of paychecks > >> >> The amount goes up 10% on Sunday as Sacramento borrows from > taxpayers. > >> >> Technically, it's not an income tax increase: You'll get the money > >> >> back eventually. > >> >> > >> >> By Shane Goldmacher and W.J. Hennigan > >> >> > >> >> October 31, 2009 > >> >> > >> >> Reporting from Los Angeles and Sacramento > >> >> > >> >> Starting Sunday, cash-strapped California will dig deeper into the > >> >> pocketbooks of wage earners -- holding back 10% more than it already > >> >> does in state income taxes just as the biggest shopping season of the > >> >> year kicks into gear. > >> >> > >> >> Technically, it's not a tax increase, even though it may feel like > one > >> >> when your next paycheck arrives. As part of a bundle of budget > patches > >> >> adopted in the summer, the state is taking more money now in > >> >> withholding, even though workers' annual tax bills won't change. > >> >> > >> >> Think of it as a forced, interest-free loan: You'll be repaid any > >> >> extra withholding in April. Those who would receive a refund anyway > >> >> will receive a larger one, and those who owe taxes will owe less. > >> >> > >> >> But with rising gas costs, depressed home prices and double-digit > >> >> unemployment, the state's added reach into residents' regular > paycheck > >> >> isn't sitting well with many. > >> >> > >> >> "The state's suddenly slapping people upside the head," said Mack > >> >> Reed, 50, of Silver Lake. "It's appalling how brash that is." > >> >> > >> >> Brittney McKaig, 23, of Santa Ana said she expects the additional > >> >> withholding to affect her holiday spending. > >> >> > >> >> "Coming into the holidays, we're getting squeezed anyway," she said. > >> >> "We're not getting Christmas bonuses and other perks we used to get. > >> >> So it all falls back on spending. The $40 gift will become a $20 > >> >> gift." > >> >> > >> >> The extra withholding may seem like a small amount siphoned from each > >> >> paycheck, but it adds up to a $1.7-billion fix for California's > >> >> deficit-riddled books. > >> >> > >> >> >From a single taxpayer earning $51,000 a year with no dependents, > the > >> >> state will be grabbing an extra $17.59 each month, according to state > >> >> tax officials. A married person earning $90,000 with two dependents > >> >> would receive $24.87 less in monthly pay. > >> >> > >> >> California will probably continue to collect the tax at a higher rate > >> >> for many years -- or find an additional $1.7 billion to slice from a > >> >> future budget, an unlikely occurrence. All workers who have state > >> >> taxes withheld will see their paychecks shrink. > >> >> > >> >> "Many families are sitting at their kitchen table wondering how > >> >> they're going to make ends meet," said state Sen. Tony Strickland > >> >> (R-Thousand Oaks). "At the same time, the state of California is > >> >> taking a no-interest loan." > >> >> > >> >> The provision is one of numerous maneuvers state lawmakers and Gov. > >> >> Arnold Schwarzenegger approved in the summer to paper over the > state's > >> >> deficit. Many of the changes, including the extra withholding, were > >> >> little noticed outside of Sacramento. > >> >> > >> >> Savvy taxpayers can get around the state's maneuver by increasing the > >> >> number of personal withholding allowances they claim on their > employer > >> >> tax forms, said Brenda Voet, a spokeswoman for the state's Franchise > >> >> Tax Board. > >> >> > >> >> "People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people would > >> >> have to change their allowances through their employers. California's > >> >> budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't. > >> >> > >> >> The increase is coming at a bad time for store owners, many of whom > >> >> depend on the holiday shopping season to keep their businesses alive. > >> >> > >> >> "I don't think there's any question it's going to impact consumers' > >> >> spending," said Bill Dombrowski, president of the California > Retailers > >> >> Assn. "Any time you reduce people's disposable income, there's going > >> >> to be a negative effect on the retail sector." > >> >> > >> >> But Stephen Levy, director of the Center for Continuing Study of the > >> >> California Economy, wasn't so sure. > >> >> > >> >> "It's having a relatively small impact on people's income," Levy > said, > >> >> pointing out that many families will receive only $12 to $40 less > each > >> >> month. > >> >> > >> >> Yet Erika Wendt, 28, of San Diego said she already lived on a tight > >> >> budget: She rides her bike to work, for instance, to save on gasoline > >> >> and parking costs. > >> >> > >> >> "I am frustrated as this directly impacts my weekly budget -- what > >> >> groceries I buy, how much I drive and can spend on gas," she said. > >> >> "Now money will just be tighter, and I'm not sure where else I can > cut > >> >> back." > >> >> > >> >> The extra withholding comes in addition to tax hikes the state > enacted > >> >> this year. > >> >> > >> >> In February, state income tax rates were bumped up 0.25 of a > >> >> percentage point for every tax bracket. The dependent credit was > >> >> slashed by two-thirds. The state sales tax rate rose 1 percentage > >> >> point. The vehicle license fee nearly doubled to 1.15% of a car's > >> >> value. > >> >> > >> >> Lawmakers and the governor also approved deep cuts to schools, social > >> >> services and prisons to fend off one of the steepest revenue losses > in > >> >> California history. > >> >> > >> >> Temporary budget bandages, such as the increase in withholding, were > >> >> included at several points this year to avoid higher taxes and deeper > >> >> cuts, said H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the state Department of > >> >> Finance. > >> >> > >> >> Sacramento, meanwhile, is awash in red ink again. The state > controller > >> >> recently said revenue in the budget year already had fallen more than > >> >> $1 billion short of assumptions. Outsize deficits are projected for > >> >> years to come. > >> >> > >> >> Such temporary measures as the withholding tax increase don't really > >> >> fix the budget gap, "they just more or less hid it," said Christopher > >> >> Thornberg, a principal with Beacon Economics in Los Angeles. "I call > >> >> it a fraud." > >> >> > >> >> shane.goldmacher@ latimes.com > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then > >> > beat > >> > you with experience. > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > > you with experience. > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091101/437eb5b1/attachment-0001.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Sun Nov 1 17:40:26 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 14:40:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Headed for DC! In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911011016w59698526q66637db3bf7b97fa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <733396.27179.qm@web111214.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Rick, I am about an hour NE of Richmond, VA...I-95 is @ an hour from here....You are both welcome to crash here one or both ways & Sandy is welcome to stay here while you go to DC. No, I do not have a day job other than annoying my two daughters...turn about is fair play;^) I'm retired. elle --- On Sun, 11/1/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: From: Rik Sandberg Subject: Re: [Swiftwater Gazette] Headed for DC! To: SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com Date: Sunday, November 1, 2009, 1:16 PM That's a tempting idea. But, I don't exactly know where the No. Neck is. And: Don't you have a day job?? Rik On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 12:04 PM, elle wrote: Leave her here with me on the No Neck...I'm 2.5 hrs away via car.. elle --- On Fri, 10/30/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: From: Rik Sandberg Subject: Re: [Swiftwater Gazette] Headed for DC! To: SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com Date: Friday, October 30, 2009, 10:32 PM Brad, Don't think I can make this happen. Looks like it'd cost 1700 give or take. Damned expensive lunch. Hell for that kind of money I'd drive, but I doubt I can find someplace for my wife to stay for that long. Don't think this is gonna work. Rik On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: Rik, I'm flying into Dulles. ?I'll either ride with the crew to Tysons Corner and catch the subway from there or maybe just take the bus. ?I can meet you near the Capital if you choose to fly into Reagan. Baltimore might be an option as well. ?If you decide to come the night before, I can swap my jumpseat, fly in early and we can split a room. Brad On 10/30/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > What airport in DC > > Rik > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Congressman Michelle Bauchman just put out the call to show at her >> press conference at noon on Thursday, November 5th. ?The more that >> show the better. ?I just booked the jumpseat to DC, arriving 7am with >> a return flight leaving 8pm. ?Who wants to join me for lunch in >> Washington DC? >> >> Brad >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > _______________________________________________ SwiftwaterGazette mailing list SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ 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 -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ 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/20091101/e5359455/attachment.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Sun Nov 1 17:42:57 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 14:42:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Of Course I'll Respect You In The Morning! In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911011056w2f0e8338h5a4d077060567e14@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <437501.92321.qm@web111213.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> >?not passing massive?and sweeping laws that nobody has read, whose consequences are >unclear, and the majority of the citizenry is against. Here is what still amazes me...We are America. Land of the FREE.....When are we going to hear the word CONSTITUTION in all of this??? elle --- On Sun, 11/1/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: From: Rik Sandberg Subject: Re: [Swiftwater Gazette] Of Course I'll Respect You In The Morning! To: SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com Date: Sunday, November 1, 2009, 1:56 PM Brad, Seems like there's more and more writers who are starting to "get it". How long do you suppose it'll take before the epidemic spreads to our congressional liberals?? The idea popped into my head a bit ago that if there was a couple states that would get together and become a Galt's Gulch of sorts, they could make a pretty serious killing right now. Rik On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: Rik, Right after that last post, I stumbled across this (see below). Sums it up pretty well. Brad ----------- Orphans of the Storm Posted By edgelings On October 30, 2009 @ 9:48 am In Business, Government, ORPHANS OF THE STORM by Michael S. Malone ?I?m constantly amazed, and appalled, by what little actual wisdom I?ve actually gained in my more than half-century in this world. ?But if there are three things I have learned, they are: ? 1. Never trust luck to get you through. ? 2. Don?t assume the best-case scenario. ? 3. The laws of economics, like the laws of chance, always triumph. The economic news this week, like most recent weeks, is mixed but mostly bad. ?The good news is that the economy appears to have grown in the most recent quarter ? at least in comparison to the miserable first half of this year. ?The growth in unemployment seems to be slowing. ?And, of course, the stock market has enjoyed one of its fastest run-ups in recent memory. The bad news is that much of this third quarter growth was already predicted from the artificial juicing of the economy from the Stimulus, Cash for Clunkers, and inventory replacement by manufacturers. ?Take those away, and you?re down to about a 1 percent improvement over the disastrous second quarter ? positive, at least, but hardly grounds for cheering. Meanwhile, the stock market rally may have peaked, and the indexes have begun sliding ? with little indication whether this is the beginning of a second downturn or just a temporary hiccup. ?As for unemployment, its growth may be slowing because we?ve already reached historically high levels (especially if you measure real unemployment) and we?re running out of people to lay-off ? and those who are laid-off are giving up looking for work. ?Perhaps most dispiriting are the studies that suggest that other than paying off some campaign debts to unions, the Stimulus generated few jobs ? meaning that hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money were spent on . . . nothing. In other words, about the only conclusions that you can draw from all of this is that, the Administration?s cheerleading aside ? and that, of course, is their job ? there is still no clear indication whether the U.S. economy is actually recovering, sinking into a double-dip recession (or worse), or sliding into the malaise of a ?70s style stagflation. What does seem obvious is that the economy wants to recover. ?I can see it everywhere around me here in Silicon Valley ? companies (notably the PC makers) putting out great new products, entrepreneurs writing business plans, talented people anxious to get back in harness. ?And I sense that?s true almost everywhere else in this country. ?Even the stock market rally seemed like a bull banging against a gate waiting to be unleashed. But while we all may be ready to get back into the race, Washington ? in whose hands our collective fate now sadly rests ? may not be ready to let us. ?And it?s all because they seem to have forgotten, or never learned, those three hard-earned pearls of wisdom with which I began this column. For example, inside the Beltway they seem to be pixilated (the old definition) these days with Magical Thinking. ?Both the White House and Congress somehow believe ? despite all evidence that big, top-down and bureaucratic initiatives no longer work in our Web 2.0 world ? that they can grab entire sectors of our economy and impose on them a whole new regime that will magically work without any unexpected and catastrophic side-effects. ?No business in America, from the corner dry cleaners to a Fortune 500 company would ever contemplate something this crazy, at least not without preparing the most detailed road map imaginable and getting every employee on-board ? not passing massive and sweeping laws that nobody has read, whose consequences are unclear, and the majority of the citizenry is against. By the same token, the lesson I?ve learned from thirty years working in a volatile place like Silicon Valley is to pray for the best-case scenario, but prepare for the worst. ?The smart companies around here scale up fast during the good times, but are always worriedly looking ahead for the next downturn. ?That?s why, Cisco?s John Chambers told me a few months ago, he hoarded cash during the last boom ? just so Cisco would be able to navigate through this current crash, keep its employees and outrun its weakened competition. The best-case scenario for this economy right now is that the Stimulus (or the proposed second one) actually works, the U.S. economy rights itself, and grows sufficiently fast over the next five years to absorb all of this new debt and produce enough new jobs to bring unemployment down to reasonable levels. ?And it is upon this best-case scenario that we are now preparing to embark on one of the most sweeping eras in government-run social engineering in our nation?s history. Leaving aside any doubts you and I may have about this War on the Status Quo, what happens if the best-case scenario for this economy doesn?t come true? ?What happens if the economy stagnates or falls off a cliff again right when we?re saddling it with trillions of dollars of more debt, we?re dismantling the insurance industry, driving thousands of doctors and other professionals (except lawyers, of course) out of their careers, and real unemployment is hovering at about 17 percent? I?ll tell you what happens ? and that?s life lesson #3. ?Back during the dot.com bubble I was running a magazine (Forbes ASAP) that was riding right on the crest of the boom. ?Everyone in the Valley was getting rich, at the magazine we couldn?t write enough copy to keep with all of the advertising pages, and I was paying my junior staffers extravagant salaries. ?I remember that we older folks on the masthead became increasingly (and properly) nervous that what we were seeing was a Bubble on the brink of bursting. ?I also vividly remember one of my junior editors laughing at my concern and saying, ?You?re just old-fashioned, Mike, you need to understand that the old business rules ? you know, ?profits? and all of that ? are obsolete.? As we soon learned, no they weren?t. ?And they aren?t now. ?And no amount of magical thinking or betting on luck or assuming the best-case scenario is going to keep those laws from re-asserting themselves. ?You can?t print and spend mountains of money without creating massive inflation. ?You can?t keep raising taxes and assume that people will continue to work just as hard or that they won?t find a way to hide their earnings ? or they won?t move away. ?You can?t dictate pay rates and not have the best and brightest jump to somewhere else where they are properly rewarded. ?You can?t force companies to compete against government-run competitors who get to write the rules of engagement and expect the private competitors to stay in the game. ?And you can?t expect private industry to save you after you?ve wrapped it in chains of regulation, crippled it with taxes and excoriated it as criminal. I stopped gambling when I realized that no matter how long a win streak you enjoy that eventually the laws of chance reassert themselves. ?The same is true with the U.S. economy today: ?we?re stretching it now and a nasty snap back lies in our future. Another storm, I fear, is heading our way ? and we risk being orphans caught within it. ?But I?ve learned one more lesson, this one from David Packard and Bill Hewlett (and Thomas Jefferson): ? 1. Trust in the ingenuity of everyday folks. The American people will get us out of this mess. ?Through the election process, of course, but I?ll leave all of that political stuff to the pundits. ?What I mean is that people like you and me are already figuring out ways on their own to get through these hard times. ?Much of it has to do with technology. ?Why pay to rent an office when you can run your business off a laptop and a Blackberry? Why pay for cable and phone in the age of Skype and Hulu? How many people out there are building small enterprises off Facebook, eBay and Craigslist? ?Or marketing with Twitter? ?Or designing apps for the iPhone or Android? Meanwhile, the tools are in place to form small (150 people or less) sub-markets in which you buy and sell ? or barter ? from each other, or team up to buy common items at discount. ?Or to team up and sell your services around the world virtually. ?Or move somewhere else where the taxes aren?t so onerous, and still keep your current clients. And why keep working past the point when the government takes it all away? ? Why not use the remaining time ? and a good network on some place like LinkedIn ? to try your hand at entrepreneurship and build a virtual start-up company? ? ?And when inflation hits, you may find you make more money sitting at home at your computer arbitraging and investing the wealth you have than actually working for an ever-less valuable paycheck. In other words, even if Washington no longer believes you can make intelligent decisions for yourself, it doesn?t mean you can make them anyway. ?And even if our leaders have chosen to be foolish, it doesn?t mean that you can?t choose to be wise. [For a decade of Michael S. Malone?s columns about business and high technology, please visit www.abcnews.com] On 11/1/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Yabut .... do ya think anybody listened? How many of the legislators do you > think actually got it. > > I can hear that giant sucking sound and it's coming from California. > > Rik > > On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> Can't remember if I posted this or not - >> >> http://tinyurl.com/yhh3ad7 >> >> What great advice! ?DO NOTHING! ?GO HOME! ?JUST STOP! >> >> Brad >> >> >> On 11/1/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> > Ha ha .... Will the last one leaving California, please turn out the >> > lights?? >> > >> > _______ >> > "People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people would >> > have to change their allowances through their employers. California's >> > budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't." >> > _______ >> > >> > Good grief, I sure hope nobody takes that advice without doing the math >> > first. I really HATE when people have to get a loan to pay their taxes >> > on >> > April 15th and that's exactly what it'll come to if they take this >> woman's >> > advice. First (and maybe the biggest) problem they're going to run into >> is >> > finding someone that will even make them a loan. Oh wait, I forgot, they >> can >> > just put this bill on their 30% interest credit card and make minimum >> > payments :-) >> > >> > Dumb and dumber. >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> Good grief! ?Has it ever occurred to anyone in California that they >> >> have a spending problem, not a revenue problem? Watch how this goes >> >> because the entire nation is heading down the same path. >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> ----------- >> >> >> >> latimes.com >> >> California to withhold a bigger chunk of paychecks >> >> The amount goes up 10% on Sunday as Sacramento borrows from taxpayers. >> >> Technically, it's not an income tax increase: You'll get the money >> >> back eventually. >> >> >> >> By Shane Goldmacher and W.J. Hennigan >> >> >> >> October 31, 2009 >> >> >> >> Reporting from Los Angeles and Sacramento >> >> >> >> Starting Sunday, cash-strapped California will dig deeper into the >> >> pocketbooks of wage earners -- holding back 10% more than it already >> >> does in state income taxes just as the biggest shopping season of the >> >> year kicks into gear. >> >> >> >> Technically, it's not a tax increase, even though it may feel like one >> >> when your next paycheck arrives. As part of a bundle of budget patches >> >> adopted in the summer, the state is taking more money now in >> >> withholding, even though workers' annual tax bills won't change. >> >> >> >> Think of it as a forced, interest-free loan: You'll be repaid any >> >> extra withholding in April. Those who would receive a refund anyway >> >> will receive a larger one, and those who owe taxes will owe less. >> >> >> >> But with rising gas costs, depressed home prices and double-digit >> >> unemployment, the state's added reach into residents' regular paycheck >> >> isn't sitting well with many. >> >> >> >> "The state's suddenly slapping people upside the head," said Mack >> >> Reed, 50, of Silver Lake. "It's appalling how brash that is." >> >> >> >> Brittney McKaig, 23, of Santa Ana said she expects the additional >> >> withholding to affect her holiday spending. >> >> >> >> "Coming into the holidays, we're getting squeezed anyway," she said. >> >> "We're not getting Christmas bonuses and other perks we used to get. >> >> So it all falls back on spending. The $40 gift will become a $20 >> >> gift." >> >> >> >> The extra withholding may seem like a small amount siphoned from each >> >> paycheck, but it adds up to a $1.7-billion fix for California's >> >> deficit-riddled books. >> >> >> >> >From a single taxpayer earning $51,000 a year with no dependents, the >> >> state will be grabbing an extra $17.59 each month, according to state >> >> tax officials. A married person earning $90,000 with two dependents >> >> would receive $24.87 less in monthly pay. >> >> >> >> California will probably continue to collect the tax at a higher rate >> >> for many years -- or find an additional $1.7 billion to slice from a >> >> future budget, an unlikely occurrence. All workers who have state >> >> taxes withheld will see their paychecks shrink. >> >> >> >> "Many families are sitting at their kitchen table wondering how >> >> they're going to make ends meet," said state Sen. Tony Strickland >> >> (R-Thousand Oaks). "At the same time, the state of California is >> >> taking a no-interest loan." >> >> >> >> The provision is one of numerous maneuvers state lawmakers and Gov. >> >> Arnold Schwarzenegger approved in the summer to paper over the state's >> >> deficit. Many of the changes, including the extra withholding, were >> >> little noticed outside of Sacramento. >> >> >> >> Savvy taxpayers can get around the state's maneuver by increasing the >> >> number of personal withholding allowances they claim on their employer >> >> tax forms, said Brenda Voet, a spokeswoman for the state's Franchise >> >> Tax Board. >> >> >> >> "People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people would >> >> have to change their allowances through their employers. California's >> >> budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't. >> >> >> >> The increase is coming at a bad time for store owners, many of whom >> >> depend on the holiday shopping season to keep their businesses alive. >> >> >> >> "I don't think there's any question it's going to impact consumers' >> >> spending," said Bill Dombrowski, president of the California Retailers >> >> Assn. "Any time you reduce people's disposable income, there's going >> >> to be a negative effect on the retail sector." >> >> >> >> But Stephen Levy, director of the Center for Continuing Study of the >> >> California Economy, wasn't so sure. >> >> >> >> "It's having a relatively small impact on people's income," Levy said, >> >> pointing out that many families will receive only $12 to $40 less each >> >> month. >> >> >> >> Yet Erika Wendt, 28, of San Diego said she already lived on a tight >> >> budget: She rides her bike to work, for instance, to save on gasoline >> >> and parking costs. >> >> >> >> "I am frustrated as this directly impacts my weekly budget -- what >> >> groceries I buy, how much I drive and can spend on gas," she said. >> >> "Now money will just be tighter, and I'm not sure where else I can cut >> >> back." >> >> >> >> The extra withholding comes in addition to tax hikes the state enacted >> >> this year. >> >> >> >> In February, state income tax rates were bumped up 0.25 of a >> >> percentage point for every tax bracket. The dependent credit was >> >> slashed by two-thirds. The state sales tax rate rose 1 percentage >> >> point. The vehicle license fee nearly doubled to 1.15% of a car's >> >> value. >> >> >> >> Lawmakers and the governor also approved deep cuts to schools, social >> >> services and prisons to fend off one of the steepest revenue losses in >> >> California history. >> >> >> >> Temporary budget bandages, such as the increase in withholding, were >> >> included at several points this year to avoid higher taxes and deeper >> >> cuts, said H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the state Department of >> >> Finance. >> >> >> >> Sacramento, meanwhile, is awash in red ink again. The state controller >> >> recently said revenue in the budget year already had fallen more than >> >> $1 billion short of assumptions. Outsize deficits are projected for >> >> years to come. >> >> >> >> Such temporary measures as the withholding tax increase don't really >> >> fix the budget gap, "they just more or less hid it," said Christopher >> >> Thornberg, a principal with Beacon Economics in Los Angeles. "I call >> >> it a fraud." >> >> >> >> shane.goldmacher@ latimes.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> > beat >> > you with experience. >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > _______________________________________________ SwiftwaterGazette mailing list SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ 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/20091101/5869bd65/attachment-0001.html From mweisner at ebsmed.com Sun Nov 1 18:24:55 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 18:24:55 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Of Course I'll Respect You In The Morning! References: <400985d70911010619o22f3eaabva759348b600307bf@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Brad, This has been my favorite theme/phrase for years. When my kids found that they didn't have enough money for something they always blamed their employer or job for not paying them what they were worth. I always challenged that they needed to evaluate their purchases in terms of need (or worse, ROI) before going into debt for something. Does every kid really need to carry a cell phone or Blackberry with all of the bells and whistles? Do we really need 500+ cable channels of drivel in HD? This has been the way of the world in the recent past and we are about to be given the bill for it all. What spending problem, we just don't have enough revenue! Mike From: "Brad Haslett" Sunday, November 01, 2009 9:19 AM > Good grief! Has it ever occurred to anyone in California that they > have a spending problem, not a revenue problem? Watch how this goes > because the entire nation is heading down the same path. > > Brad -- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter. We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam. SPAMfighter has removed 762 of my spam emails to date. Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len The Professional version does not have this message From ekroposki at charter.net Sun Nov 1 18:27:02 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 18:27:02 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Elle's question Message-ID: <3697C943664344899B9CE432B2581AD0@YOURB88038198E> Elle asked, "When are we going to hear the word CONSTITUTION in all of this???" Obama does not believe in the U. S. Constitution. Furthermore, they believe they can say what they want to under 'Free Speech'. They claim they have a right to 'Treasonous' speech. Just ask that Rockefeller Republican who is willing to kiss Obama. If you claim that their speech and acts are treasonous, then you are that evil Joe McCarthy. Meanwhile the value of your retirement has been transferred to Obama's stash. You recall that lady who said it was Obama's stash. Obama promised to change, to change the rules that made America. A true analysis of Marxism is the antithesis of what America is, what made America. Under feudalism, people were slaves to king or what ever the chief noble was. They were called serfs. What Obama wants is for us to be all serfs to the Federal Government. Read Brad's and Rik's posts. Read other writings of the authors of their posts. Here is a good start: http://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2009&month=09 Bye the way, Walter Williams has put on some age, but he used to regularly substitute for Rush Limbaugh when Rush took days off. Here was a Ph.D. in economics answering questions on the radio in American blue collar English. Walter is a few years younger than Thomas Sowell, oft quoted on this forum. What is interesting is that both these guys speak ordinary American English. That is you can easily read and understand their writings or spoken word. No high brow mumbo jumbo or disingenuous speech. They both are teachers. The publication of the speeches for Imprimis is a freebee. About once a month you get scholarly lecture. Worth subscribing to. Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091101/dfd9fe98/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Nov 1 21:53:43 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 20:53:43 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Of Course I'll Respect You In The Morning! In-Reply-To: <437501.92321.qm@web111213.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <6634e19e0911011056w2f0e8338h5a4d077060567e14@mail.gmail.com> <437501.92321.qm@web111213.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911011853u650b551j734ed7a82f7df07a@mail.gmail.com> Elle, Michele Bachmann did mention that she believed the liberal gov't medical takeover bill was unconstitutional. If you watch, IIRC it's at about the 8 minute mark. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfpcUDY_AUk God only knows if it passed if it would actually get to be considered by the court. Truth be known, they've been kinda funny lately too. After all, they believe CO2 is a pollutant and should be regulated by the EPA. There's pretty much the height of foolishness. Rik On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 4:42 PM, elle wrote: > > not passing massive and sweeping laws that nobody has read, whose > consequences are > >unclear, and the majority of the citizenry is against. > > Here is what still amazes me...We are America. Land of the FREE.....When > are we going to hear the word CONSTITUTION in all of this??? > > elle > > --- On *Sun, 11/1/09, Rik Sandberg * wrote: > > > From: Rik Sandberg > Subject: Re: [Swiftwater Gazette] Of Course I'll Respect You In The > Morning! > To: SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > Date: Sunday, November 1, 2009, 1:56 PM > > > Brad, > > Seems like there's more and more writers who are starting to "get it". How > long do you suppose it'll take before the epidemic spreads to our > congressional liberals?? > > The idea popped into my head a bit ago that if there was a couple states > that would get together and become a Galt's Gulch of sorts, they could make > a pretty serious killing right now. > > Rik > > On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 11:08 AM, Brad Haslett > > wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> Right after that last post, I stumbled across this (see below). Sums >> it up pretty well. >> >> Brad >> >> ----------- >> >> Orphans of the Storm >> >> Posted By edgelings On October 30, 2009 @ 9:48 am In Business, Government, >> >> ORPHANS OF THE STORM by Michael S. Malone >> >> I?m constantly amazed, and appalled, by what little actual wisdom >> I?ve actually gained in my more than half-century in this world. But >> if there are three things I have learned, they are: >> >> >> >> 1. Never trust luck to get you through. >> 2. Don?t assume the best-case scenario. >> 3. The laws of economics, like the laws of chance, always triumph. >> >> >> >> The economic news this week, like most recent weeks, is mixed but >> mostly bad. The good news is that the economy appears to have grown >> in the most recent quarter ? at least in comparison to the miserable >> first half of this year. The growth in unemployment seems to be >> slowing. And, of course, the stock market has enjoyed one of its >> fastest run-ups in recent memory. >> >> The bad news is that much of this third quarter growth was already >> predicted from the artificial juicing of the economy from the >> Stimulus, Cash for Clunkers, and inventory replacement by >> manufacturers. Take those away, and you?re down to about a 1 percent >> improvement over the disastrous second quarter ? positive, at least, >> but hardly grounds for cheering. >> >> Meanwhile, the stock market rally may have peaked, and the indexes >> have begun sliding ? with little indication whether this is the >> beginning of a second downturn or just a temporary hiccup. As for >> unemployment, its growth may be slowing because we?ve already reached >> historically high levels (especially if you measure real unemployment) >> and we?re running out of people to lay-off ? and those who are >> laid-off are giving up looking for work. Perhaps most dispiriting are >> the studies that suggest that other than paying off some campaign >> debts to unions, the Stimulus generated few jobs ? meaning that >> hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money were spent on . . . >> nothing. >> >> In other words, about the only conclusions that you can draw from all >> of this is that, the Administration?s cheerleading aside ? and that, >> of course, is their job ? there is still no clear indication whether >> the U.S. economy is actually recovering, sinking into a double-dip >> recession (or worse), or sliding into the malaise of a ?70s style >> stagflation. >> >> What does seem obvious is that the economy wants to recover. I can >> see it everywhere around me here in Silicon Valley ? companies >> (notably the PC makers) putting out great new products, entrepreneurs >> writing business plans, talented people anxious to get back in >> harness. And I sense that?s true almost everywhere else in this >> country. Even the stock market rally seemed like a bull banging >> against a gate waiting to be unleashed. >> >> But while we all may be ready to get back into the race, Washington ? >> in whose hands our collective fate now sadly rests ? may not be ready >> to let us. And it?s all because they seem to have forgotten, or never >> learned, those three hard-earned pearls of wisdom with which I began >> this column. >> >> For example, inside the Beltway they seem to be pixilated (the old >> definition) these days with Magical Thinking. Both the White House >> and Congress somehow believe ? despite all evidence that big, top-down >> and bureaucratic initiatives no longer work in our Web 2.0 world ? >> that they can grab entire sectors of our economy and impose on them a >> whole new regime that will magically work without any unexpected and >> catastrophic side-effects. No business in America, from the corner >> dry cleaners to a Fortune 500 company would ever contemplate something >> this crazy, at least not without preparing the most detailed road map >> imaginable and getting every employee on-board ? not passing massive >> and sweeping laws that nobody has read, whose consequences are >> unclear, and the majority of the citizenry is against. >> >> By the same token, the lesson I?ve learned from thirty years working >> in a volatile place like Silicon Valley is to pray for the best-case >> scenario, but prepare for the worst. The smart companies around here >> scale up fast during the good times, but are always worriedly looking >> ahead for the next downturn. That?s why, Cisco?s John Chambers told >> me a few months ago, he hoarded cash during the last boom ? just so >> Cisco would be able to navigate through this current crash, keep its >> employees and outrun its weakened competition. >> >> The best-case scenario for this economy right now is that the Stimulus >> (or the proposed second one) actually works, the U.S. economy rights >> itself, and grows sufficiently fast over the next five years to absorb >> all of this new debt and produce enough new jobs to bring unemployment >> down to reasonable levels. And it is upon this best-case scenario >> that we are now preparing to embark on one of the most sweeping eras >> in government-run social engineering in our nation?s history. >> >> Leaving aside any doubts you and I may have about this War on the >> Status Quo, what happens if the best-case scenario for this economy >> doesn?t come true? What happens if the economy stagnates or falls off >> a cliff again right when we?re saddling it with trillions of dollars >> of more debt, we?re dismantling the insurance industry, driving >> thousands of doctors and other professionals (except lawyers, of >> course) out of their careers, and real unemployment is hovering at >> about 17 percent? >> >> I?ll tell you what happens ? and that?s life lesson #3. Back during >> the dot.com bubble I was running a magazine (Forbes ASAP) that was >> riding right on the crest of the boom. Everyone in the Valley was >> getting rich, at the magazine we couldn?t write enough copy to keep >> with all of the advertising pages, and I was paying my junior staffers >> extravagant salaries. I remember that we older folks on the masthead >> became increasingly (and properly) nervous that what we were seeing >> was a Bubble on the brink of bursting. I also vividly remember one of >> my junior editors laughing at my concern and saying, ?You?re just >> old-fashioned, Mike, you need to understand that the old business >> rules ? you know, ?profits? and all of that ? are obsolete.? >> >> As we soon learned, no they weren?t. And they aren?t now. And no >> amount of magical thinking or betting on luck or assuming the >> best-case scenario is going to keep those laws from re-asserting >> themselves. You can?t print and spend mountains of money without >> creating massive inflation. You can?t keep raising taxes and assume >> that people will continue to work just as hard or that they won?t find >> a way to hide their earnings ? or they won?t move away. You can?t >> dictate pay rates and not have the best and brightest jump to >> somewhere else where they are properly rewarded. You can?t force >> companies to compete against government-run competitors who get to >> write the rules of engagement and expect the private competitors to >> stay in the game. And you can?t expect private industry to save you >> after you?ve wrapped it in chains of regulation, crippled it with >> taxes and excoriated it as criminal. >> >> I stopped gambling when I realized that no matter how long a win >> streak you enjoy that eventually the laws of chance reassert >> themselves. The same is true with the U.S. economy today: we?re >> stretching it now and a nasty snap back lies in our future. >> >> Another storm, I fear, is heading our way ? and we risk being orphans >> caught within it. But I?ve learned one more lesson, this one from >> David Packard and Bill Hewlett (and Thomas Jefferson): >> >> >> >> 1. Trust in the ingenuity of everyday folks. >> >> >> >> The American people will get us out of this mess. Through the >> election process, of course, but I?ll leave all of that political >> stuff to the pundits. What I mean is that people like you and me are >> already figuring out ways on their own to get through these hard >> times. Much of it has to do with technology. Why pay to rent an >> office when you can run your business off a laptop and a Blackberry? >> Why pay for cable and phone in the age of Skype and Hulu? >> >> How many people out there are building small enterprises off Facebook, >> eBay and Craigslist? Or marketing with Twitter? Or designing apps >> for the iPhone or Android? >> >> Meanwhile, the tools are in place to form small (150 people or less) >> sub-markets in which you buy and sell ? or barter ? from each other, >> or team up to buy common items at discount. Or to team up and sell >> your services around the world virtually. Or move somewhere else >> where the taxes aren?t so onerous, and still keep your current >> clients. >> >> And why keep working past the point when the government takes it all >> away? Why not use the remaining time ? and a good network on some >> place like LinkedIn ? to try your hand at entrepreneurship and build a >> virtual start-up company? And when inflation hits, you may find you >> make more money sitting at home at your computer arbitraging and >> investing the wealth you have than actually working for an ever-less >> valuable paycheck. >> >> In other words, even if Washington no longer believes you can make >> intelligent decisions for yourself, it doesn?t mean you can make them >> anyway. And even if our leaders have chosen to be foolish, it doesn?t >> mean that you can?t choose to be wise. >> >> >> >> [For a decade of Michael S. Malone?s columns about business and high >> technology, please visit www.abcnews.com] >> >> On 11/1/09, Rik Sandberg > >> wrote: >> > Yabut .... do ya think anybody listened? How many of the legislators do >> you >> > think actually got it. >> > >> > I can hear that giant sucking sound and it's coming from California. >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Brad Haslett > >> wrote: >> > >> >> Rik, >> >> >> >> Can't remember if I posted this or not - >> >> >> >> http://tinyurl.com/yhh3ad7 >> >> >> >> What great advice! DO NOTHING! GO HOME! JUST STOP! >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> >> >> On 11/1/09, Rik Sandberg > >> wrote: >> >> > Ha ha .... Will the last one leaving California, please turn out the >> >> > lights?? >> >> > >> >> > _______ >> >> > "People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people would >> >> > have to change their allowances through their employers. California's >> >> > budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't." >> >> > _______ >> >> > >> >> > Good grief, I sure hope nobody takes that advice without doing the >> math >> >> > first. I really HATE when people have to get a loan to pay their >> taxes >> >> > on >> >> > April 15th and that's exactly what it'll come to if they take this >> >> woman's >> >> > advice. First (and maybe the biggest) problem they're going to run >> into >> >> is >> >> > finding someone that will even make them a loan. Oh wait, I forgot, >> they >> >> can >> >> > just put this bill on their 30% interest credit card and make minimum >> >> > payments :-) >> >> > >> >> > Dumb and dumber. >> >> > >> >> > Rik >> >> > >> >> > On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Brad Haslett > >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Good grief! Has it ever occurred to anyone in California that they >> >> >> have a spending problem, not a revenue problem? Watch how this goes >> >> >> because the entire nation is heading down the same path. >> >> >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> >> >> ----------- >> >> >> >> >> >> latimes.com >> >> >> California to withhold a bigger chunk of paychecks >> >> >> The amount goes up 10% on Sunday as Sacramento borrows from >> taxpayers. >> >> >> Technically, it's not an income tax increase: You'll get the money >> >> >> back eventually. >> >> >> >> >> >> By Shane Goldmacher and W.J. Hennigan >> >> >> >> >> >> October 31, 2009 >> >> >> >> >> >> Reporting from Los Angeles and Sacramento >> >> >> >> >> >> Starting Sunday, cash-strapped California will dig deeper into the >> >> >> pocketbooks of wage earners -- holding back 10% more than it already >> >> >> does in state income taxes just as the biggest shopping season of >> the >> >> >> year kicks into gear. >> >> >> >> >> >> Technically, it's not a tax increase, even though it may feel like >> one >> >> >> when your next paycheck arrives. As part of a bundle of budget >> patches >> >> >> adopted in the summer, the state is taking more money now in >> >> >> withholding, even though workers' annual tax bills won't change. >> >> >> >> >> >> Think of it as a forced, interest-free loan: You'll be repaid any >> >> >> extra withholding in April. Those who would receive a refund anyway >> >> >> will receive a larger one, and those who owe taxes will owe less. >> >> >> >> >> >> But with rising gas costs, depressed home prices and double-digit >> >> >> unemployment, the state's added reach into residents' regular >> paycheck >> >> >> isn't sitting well with many. >> >> >> >> >> >> "The state's suddenly slapping people upside the head," said Mack >> >> >> Reed, 50, of Silver Lake. "It's appalling how brash that is." >> >> >> >> >> >> Brittney McKaig, 23, of Santa Ana said she expects the additional >> >> >> withholding to affect her holiday spending. >> >> >> >> >> >> "Coming into the holidays, we're getting squeezed anyway," she said. >> >> >> "We're not getting Christmas bonuses and other perks we used to get. >> >> >> So it all falls back on spending. The $40 gift will become a $20 >> >> >> gift." >> >> >> >> >> >> The extra withholding may seem like a small amount siphoned from >> each >> >> >> paycheck, but it adds up to a $1.7-billion fix for California's >> >> >> deficit-riddled books. >> >> >> >> >> >> >From a single taxpayer earning $51,000 a year with no dependents, >> the >> >> >> state will be grabbing an extra $17.59 each month, according to >> state >> >> >> tax officials. A married person earning $90,000 with two dependents >> >> >> would receive $24.87 less in monthly pay. >> >> >> >> >> >> California will probably continue to collect the tax at a higher >> rate >> >> >> for many years -- or find an additional $1.7 billion to slice from a >> >> >> future budget, an unlikely occurrence. All workers who have state >> >> >> taxes withheld will see their paychecks shrink. >> >> >> >> >> >> "Many families are sitting at their kitchen table wondering how >> >> >> they're going to make ends meet," said state Sen. Tony Strickland >> >> >> (R-Thousand Oaks). "At the same time, the state of California is >> >> >> taking a no-interest loan." >> >> >> >> >> >> The provision is one of numerous maneuvers state lawmakers and Gov. >> >> >> Arnold Schwarzenegger approved in the summer to paper over the >> state's >> >> >> deficit. Many of the changes, including the extra withholding, were >> >> >> little noticed outside of Sacramento. >> >> >> >> >> >> Savvy taxpayers can get around the state's maneuver by increasing >> the >> >> >> number of personal withholding allowances they claim on their >> employer >> >> >> tax forms, said Brenda Voet, a spokeswoman for the state's Franchise >> >> >> Tax Board. >> >> >> >> >> >> "People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people >> would >> >> >> have to change their allowances through their employers. >> California's >> >> >> budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't. >> >> >> >> >> >> The increase is coming at a bad time for store owners, many of whom >> >> >> depend on the holiday shopping season to keep their businesses >> alive. >> >> >> >> >> >> "I don't think there's any question it's going to impact consumers' >> >> >> spending," said Bill Dombrowski, president of the California >> Retailers >> >> >> Assn. "Any time you reduce people's disposable income, there's going >> >> >> to be a negative effect on the retail sector." >> >> >> >> >> >> But Stephen Levy, director of the Center for Continuing Study of the >> >> >> California Economy, wasn't so sure. >> >> >> >> >> >> "It's having a relatively small impact on people's income," Levy >> said, >> >> >> pointing out that many families will receive only $12 to $40 less >> each >> >> >> month. >> >> >> >> >> >> Yet Erika Wendt, 28, of San Diego said she already lived on a tight >> >> >> budget: She rides her bike to work, for instance, to save on >> gasoline >> >> >> and parking costs. >> >> >> >> >> >> "I am frustrated as this directly impacts my weekly budget -- what >> >> >> groceries I buy, how much I drive and can spend on gas," she said. >> >> >> "Now money will just be tighter, and I'm not sure where else I can >> cut >> >> >> back." >> >> >> >> >> >> The extra withholding comes in addition to tax hikes the state >> enacted >> >> >> this year. >> >> >> >> >> >> In February, state income tax rates were bumped up 0.25 of a >> >> >> percentage point for every tax bracket. The dependent credit was >> >> >> slashed by two-thirds. The state sales tax rate rose 1 percentage >> >> >> point. The vehicle license fee nearly doubled to 1.15% of a car's >> >> >> value. >> >> >> >> >> >> Lawmakers and the governor also approved deep cuts to schools, >> social >> >> >> services and prisons to fend off one of the steepest revenue losses >> in >> >> >> California history. >> >> >> >> >> >> Temporary budget bandages, such as the increase in withholding, were >> >> >> included at several points this year to avoid higher taxes and >> deeper >> >> >> cuts, said H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the state Department of >> >> >> Finance. >> >> >> >> >> >> Sacramento, meanwhile, is awash in red ink again. The state >> controller >> >> >> recently said revenue in the budget year already had fallen more >> than >> >> >> $1 billion short of assumptions. Outsize deficits are projected for >> >> >> years to come. >> >> >> >> >> >> Such temporary measures as the withholding tax increase don't really >> >> >> fix the budget gap, "they just more or less hid it," said >> Christopher >> >> >> Thornberg, a principal with Beacon Economics in Los Angeles. "I call >> >> >> it a fraud." >> >> >> >> >> >> shane.goldmacher@ latimes.com >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> >> > beat >> >> > you with experience. >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> beat >> > you with experience. >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > > -----Inline Attachment Follows----- > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091101/600cf034/attachment-0001.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Nov 1 22:32:44 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 21:32:44 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Headed for DC! In-Reply-To: <733396.27179.qm@web111214.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <6634e19e0911011016w59698526q66637db3bf7b97fa@mail.gmail.com> <733396.27179.qm@web111214.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911011932m45d5ecdel59fba1fcd5d02d5e@mail.gmail.com> Elle, I'll get back to you tomorrow about the trip. Rik On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 4:40 PM, elle wrote: > Rick, > > I am about an hour NE of Richmond, VA...I-95 is @ an hour from here....You > are both welcome to crash here one or both ways & Sandy is welcome to stay > here while you go to DC. > > > No, I do not have a day job other than annoying my two daughters...turn > about is fair play;^) > > I'm retired. > > elle > > > --- On *Sun, 11/1/09, Rik Sandberg * wrote: > > > From: Rik Sandberg > Subject: Re: [Swiftwater Gazette] Headed for DC! > To: SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > Date: Sunday, November 1, 2009, 1:16 PM > > > That's a tempting idea. > > But, I don't exactly know where the No. Neck is. > > And: > > Don't you have a day job?? > > Rik > > On Sun, Nov 1, 2009 at 12:04 PM, elle > > wrote: > >> Leave her here with me on the No Neck...I'm 2.5 hrs away via car.. >> >> elle >> >> --- On *Fri, 10/30/09, Rik Sandberg >> >* wrote: >> >> >> From: Rik Sandberg >> > >> Subject: Re: [Swiftwater Gazette] Headed for DC! >> To: SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> Date: Friday, October 30, 2009, 10:32 PM >> >> >> Brad, >> >> Don't think I can make this happen. Looks like it'd cost 1700 give or >> take. >> >> Damned expensive lunch. >> >> Hell for that kind of money I'd drive, but I doubt I can find someplace >> for my wife to stay for that long. >> >> Don't think this is gonna work. >> >> Rik >> >> On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Brad Haslett >> > wrote: >> >>> Rik, >>> >>> I'm flying into Dulles. I'll either ride with the crew to Tysons >>> Corner and catch the subway from there or maybe just take the bus. I >>> can meet you near the Capital if you choose to fly into Reagan. >>> Baltimore might be an option as well. If you decide to come the night >>> before, I can swap my jumpseat, fly in early and we can split a room. >>> >>> Brad >>> >>> On 10/30/09, Rik Sandberg > >>> wrote: >>> > Brad, >>> > >>> > What airport in DC >>> > >>> > Rik >>> > >>> > On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Brad Haslett > >>> wrote: >>> > >>> >> Congressman Michelle Bauchman just put out the call to show at her >>> >> press conference at noon on Thursday, November 5th. The more that >>> >> show the better. I just booked the jumpseat to DC, arriving 7am with >>> >> a return flight leaving 8pm. Who wants to join me for lunch in >>> >> Washington DC? >>> >> >>> >> Brad >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> >> >>> >> >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >>> beat >>> > you with experience. >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat >> you with experience. >> >> -----Inline Attachment Follows----- >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > > -----Inline Attachment Follows----- > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091101/ce59cea5/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 04:39:14 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 03:39:14 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Of Course I'll Respect You In The Morning! In-Reply-To: <400985d70911010619o22f3eaabva759348b600307bf@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911010619o22f3eaabva759348b600307bf@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911020139s32f2492dpc8962a437e8955e2@mail.gmail.com> More from the LA Times - latimes.com THE CALIFORNIA FIX The Golden State isn't worth it Our high-benefit/high-tax model no longer works, especially compared with low-tax states like Texas. By William Voegeli November 1, 2009 In America's federal system, some states, such as California, offer residents a "package deal" that bundles numerous and ambitious public benefits with the high taxes needed to pay for them. Other states, such as Texas, offer packages combining modest benefits and low taxes. These alternatives, of course, define the basic argument between liberals and conservatives over what it means to get the size and scope of government right. It's not surprising, then, that there's an intense debate over which model is more admirable and sustainable. What is surprising is the growing evidence that the low-benefit/low-tax package not only succeeds on its own terms but also according to the criteria used to defend its opposite. In other words, the superior public goods that supposedly justify the high taxes just aren't being delivered. California and Texas are not perfect representatives of the alternative deals, but they come close. Overall, the Census Bureau's latest data show that state and local government expenditures for all purposes in 2005-06 were 46.8% higher in California than in Texas: $10,070 per person compared with $6,858. Only three states and the District of Columbia saw higher per capita government outlays than California, while those expenditures in Texas were lower than in all but seven states. California ranked 10th in overall taxes levied by state and local governments, on a per capita basis, while Texas, one of only seven states with no individual income tax, was 38th. One way to assess how Americans feel about the different tax and benefit packages the states offer is by examining internal U.S. migration patterns. Between April 1, 2000, and June 30, 2007, an average of 3,247 more people moved out of California than into it every week, according to the Census Bureau. Over the same period, Texas had a net weekly population increase of 1,544 as a result of people moving in from other states. During these years, more generally, 16 of the 17 states with the lowest tax levels had positive "net internal migration," in the Census Bureau's language, while 14 of the 17 states with the highest taxes had negative net internal migration. These folks pulling up stakes and driving U-Haul trucks across state lines understand a reality the defenders of the high-benefit/high-tax model must confront: All things being equal, everyone would rather pay low taxes than high ones. The high-benefit/high-tax model can work only if things are demonstrably not equal -- if the public goods purchased by the high taxes far surpass the quality, quantity and impact of those available to people who live in states with low taxes. Today's public benefits fail that test, as urban scholar Joel Kotkin of NewGeography.com and Chapman University told the Los Angeles Times in March: "Twenty years ago, you could go to Texas, where they had very low taxes, and you would see the difference between there and California. Today, you go to Texas, the roads are no worse, the public schools are not great but are better than or equal to ours, and their universities are good. The bargain between California's government and the middle class is constantly being renegotiated to the disadvantage of the middle class." These judgments are not based on drive-by sociology. According to a report issued earlier this year by the consulting firm McKinsey & Co., Texas students "are, on average, one to two years of learning ahead of California students of the same age," even though per-pupil expenditures on public school students are 12% higher in California. The details of the Census Bureau data show that Texas not only spends its citizens' dollars more effectively than California but emphasizes priorities that are more broadly beneficial. Per capita spending on transportation was 5.9% lower in California, and highway expenditures in particular were 9.5% lower, a discovery both plausible and infuriating to any Los Angeles commuter losing the will to live while sitting in yet another freeway traffic jam. In what respects, then, does California "excel"? California's state and local government employees were the best compensated in America, according to the Census Bureau data for 2006. And the latest posting on the website of the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility shows 9,223 former civil servants and educators receiving pensions worth more than $100,000 a year from California's public retirement funds. The "dues" paid by taxpayers in order to belong to Club California purchase benefits that, increasingly, are enjoyed by the staff instead of the members. None of this happens by accident. California's interlocking directorate of government employee unions, issue activists, careerists and campaign contributors has become increasingly aggressive and adept at using rhetoric extolling public benefits for all to deliver targeted advantages to itself. As a result, the political reality of the high-benefit/high-tax model is that its public goods are, increasingly, neither public nor good. Instead, the beneficiaries are the providers of the public services, and certain favored or connected constituencies, rather than the general population. The recession will eventually end, and California's finances will get better. Given its powerful systemic bias against efficient and effective public services, however, the question is whether the state will ever get well. California's public sector has pinned its hopes for avoiding fundamental reform on increased federal aid to replace dollars the state's fed-up taxpayers refuse to surrender. In other words, residents in the other 49 states -- the new 49ers? -- would enjoy the privilege of paying California's taxes. Their one consolation will be not having to endure its lousy public services. If, on the other hand, America's taxpayers (and China's bond buyers) succumb to bailout fatigue, California may reach the point at which, after every alternative has been exhausted, it is forced to try governing itself competently. You wouldn't know it from putting up with California's transportation and educational systems, but there actually is a principled, plausible argument to be made for the high-benefit/high-tax model. For the sake of both California and their own political ideals, its advocates ought to be leading the charge against every excess and inefficiency that deprives taxpayers of good value for their dollars. That won't happen until they stand up to their coalition partners by breaking their Faustian political bargain with California's self-serving governmental-industrial complex. William Voegeli is a contributing editor of the Claremont Review of Books. This article is adapted from the autumn 2009 issue of City Journal. On 11/1/09, Brad Haslett wrote: > Good grief! Has it ever occurred to anyone in California that they > have a spending problem, not a revenue problem? Watch how this goes > because the entire nation is heading down the same path. > > Brad > > ----------- > > latimes.com > California to withhold a bigger chunk of paychecks > The amount goes up 10% on Sunday as Sacramento borrows from taxpayers. > Technically, it's not an income tax increase: You'll get the money > back eventually. > > By Shane Goldmacher and W.J. Hennigan > > October 31, 2009 > > Reporting from Los Angeles and Sacramento > > Starting Sunday, cash-strapped California will dig deeper into the > pocketbooks of wage earners -- holding back 10% more than it already > does in state income taxes just as the biggest shopping season of the > year kicks into gear. > > Technically, it's not a tax increase, even though it may feel like one > when your next paycheck arrives. As part of a bundle of budget patches > adopted in the summer, the state is taking more money now in > withholding, even though workers' annual tax bills won't change. > > Think of it as a forced, interest-free loan: You'll be repaid any > extra withholding in April. Those who would receive a refund anyway > will receive a larger one, and those who owe taxes will owe less. > > But with rising gas costs, depressed home prices and double-digit > unemployment, the state's added reach into residents' regular paycheck > isn't sitting well with many. > > "The state's suddenly slapping people upside the head," said Mack > Reed, 50, of Silver Lake. "It's appalling how brash that is." > > Brittney McKaig, 23, of Santa Ana said she expects the additional > withholding to affect her holiday spending. > > "Coming into the holidays, we're getting squeezed anyway," she said. > "We're not getting Christmas bonuses and other perks we used to get. > So it all falls back on spending. The $40 gift will become a $20 > gift." > > The extra withholding may seem like a small amount siphoned from each > paycheck, but it adds up to a $1.7-billion fix for California's > deficit-riddled books. > > From a single taxpayer earning $51,000 a year with no dependents, the > state will be grabbing an extra $17.59 each month, according to state > tax officials. A married person earning $90,000 with two dependents > would receive $24.87 less in monthly pay. > > California will probably continue to collect the tax at a higher rate > for many years -- or find an additional $1.7 billion to slice from a > future budget, an unlikely occurrence. All workers who have state > taxes withheld will see their paychecks shrink. > > "Many families are sitting at their kitchen table wondering how > they're going to make ends meet," said state Sen. Tony Strickland > (R-Thousand Oaks). "At the same time, the state of California is > taking a no-interest loan." > > The provision is one of numerous maneuvers state lawmakers and Gov. > Arnold Schwarzenegger approved in the summer to paper over the state's > deficit. Many of the changes, including the extra withholding, were > little noticed outside of Sacramento. > > Savvy taxpayers can get around the state's maneuver by increasing the > number of personal withholding allowances they claim on their employer > tax forms, said Brenda Voet, a spokeswoman for the state's Franchise > Tax Board. > > "People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people would > have to change their allowances through their employers. California's > budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't. > > The increase is coming at a bad time for store owners, many of whom > depend on the holiday shopping season to keep their businesses alive. > > "I don't think there's any question it's going to impact consumers' > spending," said Bill Dombrowski, president of the California Retailers > Assn. "Any time you reduce people's disposable income, there's going > to be a negative effect on the retail sector." > > But Stephen Levy, director of the Center for Continuing Study of the > California Economy, wasn't so sure. > > "It's having a relatively small impact on people's income," Levy said, > pointing out that many families will receive only $12 to $40 less each > month. > > Yet Erika Wendt, 28, of San Diego said she already lived on a tight > budget: She rides her bike to work, for instance, to save on gasoline > and parking costs. > > "I am frustrated as this directly impacts my weekly budget -- what > groceries I buy, how much I drive and can spend on gas," she said. > "Now money will just be tighter, and I'm not sure where else I can cut > back." > > The extra withholding comes in addition to tax hikes the state enacted > this year. > > In February, state income tax rates were bumped up 0.25 of a > percentage point for every tax bracket. The dependent credit was > slashed by two-thirds. The state sales tax rate rose 1 percentage > point. The vehicle license fee nearly doubled to 1.15% of a car's > value. > > Lawmakers and the governor also approved deep cuts to schools, social > services and prisons to fend off one of the steepest revenue losses in > California history. > > Temporary budget bandages, such as the increase in withholding, were > included at several points this year to avoid higher taxes and deeper > cuts, said H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the state Department of > Finance. > > Sacramento, meanwhile, is awash in red ink again. The state controller > recently said revenue in the budget year already had fallen more than > $1 billion short of assumptions. Outsize deficits are projected for > years to come. > > Such temporary measures as the withholding tax increase don't really > fix the budget gap, "they just more or less hid it," said Christopher > Thornberg, a principal with Beacon Economics in Los Angeles. "I call > it a fraud." > > shane.goldmacher@ latimes.com > From ekroposki at charter.net Mon Nov 2 08:12:40 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 08:12:40 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] alternatives define the basic argument between Message-ID: <93EB859725F6435293F1B519444A8DB4@YOURB88038198E> Brad, Great article. The first paragraph says it best, "alternatives, of course, define the basic argument between liberals and conservatives over what it means to get the size and scope of government right." Unfortunately, the article does not bring in lust for power and control of others, as being illustrated in Washington, D.C. Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091102/c55ec047/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 08:54:54 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 07:54:54 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Of Course I'll Respect You In The Morning! In-Reply-To: <400985d70911020139s32f2492dpc8962a437e8955e2@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911010619o22f3eaabva759348b600307bf@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911020139s32f2492dpc8962a437e8955e2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911020554y4734c135u4348c2c76534124c@mail.gmail.com> Brad, California has been in trouble for quite a while. Recent population shrinkage sure isn't gonna' help. But, being in (as any Texan will tell you) "The Great State of Texas" appears to be no guarantee of fiscal success either. It doesn't seem to matter where you look, overly generous government wages, benefits and especially pensions and retiree healthcare have gov't agencies and many private ones too (GM for example) from the largest to the smallest in trouble almost everywhere. And yet, the government's store of bureaucrats and shovel leaners keeps growing every day. One has to wonder, what will happen when there are more gov't workers than private sector workers to pay them. It appears we're awful close to the tipping point on this as we speak. Rik ______________________ http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/10/city-of-houston-is-bankrupt-so-are.html Houston, we have a problem. We are bankrupt. That is the finding of Bob Lemer, CPA, Retired Partner at Ernst & Young; Aubrey M. Farb, CPA, Retired Partner at Grant Thornton; and Tom Roberts, CPA, Retired Partner at Fitts Roberts. Cover Letter October 22, 2009 Name, Title and Address [see list below] Subject: Finances of the City of Houston Dear : [see list below] Enclosed is our partial analysis of the very serious financial situation at the City of Houston. We would be derelict if we failed to share this financial analysis with you. This financial heads up will assist you in meeting your fiduciary responsibilities to Houston voters, taxpayers, readers, viewers or investors---as the case may be. We feel a public discussion of the City?s financial situation is necessary and firmly believe that addressing the City?s financial condition is in the best interest of the Houston economy and Houston taxpayers. We believe the sooner the City of Houston addresses the financial shortfall the better. Please bear in mind that the Houston City elections are on November 3, 2009, with early voting having commenced on October 19, 2009. Recent history has shown a large portion of voting occurs during early voting. We trust that the attached article is of significant assistance to you. We may be reached at boblemer at sbcglobal.net. The above was sent to: City of Houston---Incumbent Mayor, City Controller, and City Council Members City of Houston?Non-Incumbent City Candidates Greater Houston Partnership---Board Members Houston Chronicle---Editorial Board Members Houston TV Stations---CEOs Houston Business Journal---Editor Houston Community Newspapers-Editor Houston Press-Editor Municipal Bond Rating Agencies---CEOs Wall Street Journal---Editor Barron?s-Editor Investor?s Business Daily-Editor USA Today-Editor Texas Monthly---Executive Editor Deloitte & Touche LLP---Houston and New York Executive Summary City of Houston Disturbing Financial Facts---October 2009 By: Bob Lemer, Aubrey M. Farb and Tom Roberts The City of Houston is financially broke and it appears that the mayor who takes office in January 2010 may have to captain the City through bankruptcy procedures. The City?s unrestricted assets were $1.2 billion short of the already recorded corresponding liabilities these assets were needed to pay as of fiscal year end June 30, 2008,according to the City?s latest publicly available audited Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). The $1.2 billion shortfall was a result of operating losses totaling $1.5 billion for fiscal years 2004-2008, applying the full accrual basis of accounting used in the private sector. Apparently the City has no idea as to what has transpired financially since June 30, 2008 or will transpire this fiscal year ending June 30, 2010, on the full accrual basis of accounting. But even on the modified accrual basis of accounting (essentially cash basis) followed by the City and all other municipalities, the $236.8 million fund balance in the City?s general fund as of July 1, 2009 (the beginning of this current fiscal year) would not exist except for the City having deposited the proceeds of pension obligation bonds into the City?s general fund instead of depositing them in their legally required immediate destination, the pension plans? bank accounts. The City is in this dangerous financial position because its total spending since fiscal year 2003 has greatly outstripped its total revenues in that period. And the rate of growth in the City?s total revenues since 2003 has, in turn, greatly outstripped the City?s rate of growth in population plus inflation. Thus the City?s problems are a result of greatly overspending and not a result of insufficient revenues. All of this occurred before the current severe recession. Now the City has the added burden of the recession. The City is in a real financial dilemma, because now its two principal sources of general fund revenues are in trouble---sales taxes and property taxes. Sales tax revenues already are dropping significantly and property tax revenues will commence dropping at an even more rapid rate after the next annual appraisal and assessment process. And the City will have to go to the voters for any contemplated rate increases in either the sales tax rate or the portion of the property tax rate allocable to operations. It appears to us that there may be no viable alternative to bankruptcy proceedings and thereby positioning the City to regain control over its overspending, through addressing structural spending problems such as overstaffing and overly generous employee benefits. Pension Plans and Government Salaries To Blame According to the report, pension plans and government salaries are at the heart of the matter. Here are a few select details. Detailed Findings and Observations 1. The City incurred operating losses (?Change In Net Assets?) totaling approximately $1.5 billion for the five fiscal years ended 6/30/08--- per the latest (fiscal year 2008) publicly available audited Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), page 199: In Thousands a. (312,790) b. (531,465) c. (131,893) d. (221,452) e. (281,556) TOTAL (1,479,156) ---or--- $1.5 BILLION 2. The City?s deficiency in unrestricted assets [?Unrestricted (deficit)?] was $1.2 BILLION ($1,174,429 thousands) at June 30, 2008--- per 2008 CAFR, page 15. In other words, the City?s unrestricted assets were approximately $1.2 billion less than the already recorded liabilities that they will be required to satisfy. 3. The $1.2 billion deficiency in unrestricted assets as of June 30, 2008 (which was created essentially during fiscal years 2004-2008-see item 1) was basically financed, per page 15 of the 2008 CAFR, by: (a) the $347,728,000 collateralized note payable to the municipal employees? pension trust; (b) the $643,413,000 combined accrued liabilities to the employees? pension trusts (municipal-$285,462,000, police officers?-$318,567,000, and firefighters?-$39,384,000); (c) the $219,755,000 pension obligation bonds payable; (d) the $272,941,000 accrued liability for other post employment benefits-----less, per pages 17 and 74 of the 2003 CAFR, (d) the $54,395,000 net accrued liabilities to the employees? pension trusts at June 30, 2003 (municipal-$92,386,000, police officers?-$19,221,000, and firefighters?-asset of $57,212,000). 4. Thus, as of June 30, 2008, the City?s elected officials essentially had transferred financial ownership of the City from the taxpayers to the City?s employees, about 43.7% of who do not live in the City, according to documentation we have received from the City?s human resources department. Very troubling, 63.3% of first responders (police officers and firefighters) do not live in the City, versus just 30.0% of civilian employees, according to the City?s human resources department. 5. The City?s deficiency in unrestricted assets is so severe that in their yet to be completed audit for fiscal year 2009 the City?s independent auditors apparently will have to address the audit reporting issue as to whether the City was a ?going concern? as of June 30, 2009. 6. Apparently the City has no idea yet as to what its operating loss (?change in net assets?) was for the fiscal year just ended June 30, 2009 or what its deficiency in unrestricted assets was at June 30, 2009, and has no idea as to what is in store fiscally for fiscal year 2010. That is because the City does not keep its books on the full accrual basis of accounting (fully accruing its assets and liabilities) but once a year, via the audited Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). And the CAFR cannot be completed until the (nearly always very substantial) annual audit adjustments are booked. .... 17. For example, Exhibit B demonstrates how it was possible for the City to actually show an audited surplus of $19,891,000 from operations in the general fund (which is the focus of the annual budget and the MFOR) for fiscal year 2008 when, in reality, the City had an audited Citywide operations deficit of $281,556,000 for fiscal year 2008. 18. Exhibit B is difficult to comprehend for a person not trained in governmental accounting, even for a CPA. But the two most significant reasons for the difference between the $19,891,000 general fund surplus from 2008 operations and the $281,556,000 deficit from 2008 Citywide operations are: (a) the ever-growing accrued liabilities to employees for pension plans and other post retirement benefits; and (b) the commenced practice of financing current pension plan expenses with backend loaded pension obligation long-term bonds. 19. Once one understands Exhibit B, or at least items 18(a) and 18(b), it becomes obvious that the City?s fiscal 2010 general fund budget is an illusion, for two reasons. First, it is calculated on the modified accrual basis of accounting (essentially cash basis) and therefore ignores the ever-growing and enormous accrued liabilities for employee pensions and other post retirement benefits. Secondly, it is dependent upon continued payment of some of the pension expenses with issuance of long-term backend loaded pension obligation bonds. 23. At June 30, 2008 (date of the City?s last audited financial statements), the City?s total Citywide debt per capita of $5,338 was over twice the $2,528 debt per capita of the now bankrupt State of California. Inquiring minds may wish to download the entire Lemer/Farb/Roberts assessment of City of Houston Finances documentfrom Scribd. I agree with the findings of Bob Lemer, Aubrey M. Farb, and Tom Roberts. Any attempts to balance this on the backs of taxpayers is not viable. Houston should declare bankruptcy and seek to null and void the contracts of city workers including police and fireman. California Is Bankrupt Too Interesting, I note in point 23 that the authors of this report have concluded California is bankrupt. Of course I agree with that assessment as well. Unfortunately there is no provisions for states to declare bankruptcy. What About Oregon? Inquiring minds are reading Climbing PERS expenses face Oregon pension board, agency budget writers . The cost of Oregon's Public Employees Retirement System is about to skyrocket to budget-busting levels. As a result of PERS' $17 billion investment loss in 2008, every state agency, municipality and school district that participates in the system is staring at an average 50 percent increase in the base rates PERS charges to fund their employees' retirement benefits in 2011 and 2012. That's not a doomsday scenario. Unless the pension fund's board changes its rate-setting rules, or its investment portfolio generates a 26 percent return in 2009, these rate increases are guaranteed. What does that mean to you? Fewer teachers, cops and firefighters. Less of every service that government provides. Higher fees and taxes. Perhaps all of the above. The base rate that public agencies pay to support employees' retirement benefits could double in the next five years, according to the PERS actuary, Mercer Inc. If rates reach that level, the retirement system will gobble one quarter of every tax dollar that goes into a public agency to support payrolls. Oregon isn't alone. Public pensions nationwide are in crisis mode, and state Treasurer Ben Westlund points out that Oregon's pension system is still better funded than most. PERS officials also note that a major recovery in the stock market could alleviate, or even eliminate, the pain. Indeed, the system's investment portfolio has already bounced back 14 percent this year. But here's the rub: Even if the pension system's investments return an average 10.5 percent annually for the next three years - their historical average - PERS rates will still increase to 21 percent of payroll in July 2013, according to Mercer's modeling. If, in a slower growth scenario, investment returns are closer to their 10-year average of 4.5 percent, all bets are off. PERS' executive director, Paul Cleary, recently told the citizens board that oversees investment of the $50 billion pension fund that if 4.5 percent is the new normal, "our business model doesn't work." Pension System Busted Country Wide It is highly likely that nearly every pension plan in the country is busted. The solution is for every city and municipality in a predicament to "pull a Vallejo" and declare bankruptcy. Please see Judge Rules Vallejo Can Void Union Contractsfor details. Deficiencies cannot be met on the backs of taxpayers. Enough is enough. It's time to end every massively underfunded public defined benefit plan in the country, by force if necessary (bankruptcy), unless unions agree to major concessions that would make the plans viable without raising taxes one cent. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 3:39 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > More from the LA Times - > > latimes.com > > THE CALIFORNIA FIX > The Golden State isn't worth it > Our high-benefit/high-tax model no longer works, especially compared > with low-tax states like Texas. > > By William Voegeli > > November 1, 2009 > > In America's federal system, some states, such as California, offer > residents a "package deal" that bundles numerous and ambitious public > benefits with the high taxes needed to pay for them. Other states, > such as Texas, offer packages combining modest benefits and low taxes. > These alternatives, of course, define the basic argument between > liberals and conservatives over what it means to get the size and > scope of government right. > > It's not surprising, then, that there's an intense debate over which > model is more admirable and sustainable. What is surprising is the > growing evidence that the low-benefit/low-tax package not only > succeeds on its own terms but also according to the criteria used to > defend its opposite. In other words, the superior public goods that > supposedly justify the high taxes just aren't being delivered. > > California and Texas are not perfect representatives of the > alternative deals, but they come close. Overall, the Census Bureau's > latest data show that state and local government expenditures for all > purposes in 2005-06 were 46.8% higher in California than in Texas: > $10,070 per person compared with $6,858. Only three states and the > District of Columbia saw higher per capita government outlays than > California, while those expenditures in Texas were lower than in all > but seven states. California ranked 10th in overall taxes levied by > state and local governments, on a per capita basis, while Texas, one > of only seven states with no individual income tax, was 38th. > > One way to assess how Americans feel about the different tax and > benefit packages the states offer is by examining internal U.S. > migration patterns. Between April 1, 2000, and June 30, 2007, an > average of 3,247 more people moved out of California than into it > every week, according to the Census Bureau. Over the same period, > Texas had a net weekly population increase of 1,544 as a result of > people moving in from other states. During these years, more > generally, 16 of the 17 states with the lowest tax levels had positive > "net internal migration," in the Census Bureau's language, while 14 of > the 17 states with the highest taxes had negative net internal > migration. > > These folks pulling up stakes and driving U-Haul trucks across state > lines understand a reality the defenders of the high-benefit/high-tax > model must confront: All things being equal, everyone would rather pay > low taxes than high ones. The high-benefit/high-tax model can work > only if things are demonstrably not equal -- if the public goods > purchased by the high taxes far surpass the quality, quantity and > impact of those available to people who live in states with low taxes. > > Today's public benefits fail that test, as urban scholar Joel Kotkin > of NewGeography.com and Chapman University told the Los Angeles Times > in March: "Twenty years ago, you could go to Texas, where they had > very low taxes, and you would see the difference between there and > California. Today, you go to Texas, the roads are no worse, the public > schools are not great but are better than or equal to ours, and their > universities are good. The bargain between California's government and > the middle class is constantly being renegotiated to the disadvantage > of the middle class." > > These judgments are not based on drive-by sociology. According to a > report issued earlier this year by the consulting firm McKinsey & Co., > Texas students "are, on average, one to two years of learning ahead of > California students of the same age," even though per-pupil > expenditures on public school students are 12% higher in California. > The details of the Census Bureau data show that Texas not only spends > its citizens' dollars more effectively than California but emphasizes > priorities that are more broadly beneficial. Per capita spending on > transportation was 5.9% lower in California, and highway expenditures > in particular were 9.5% lower, a discovery both plausible and > infuriating to any Los Angeles commuter losing the will to live while > sitting in yet another freeway traffic jam. > > In what respects, then, does California "excel"? California's state > and local government employees were the best compensated in America, > according to the Census Bureau data for 2006. And the latest posting > on the website of the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility > shows 9,223 former civil servants and educators receiving pensions > worth more than $100,000 a year from California's public retirement > funds. The "dues" paid by taxpayers in order to belong to Club > California purchase benefits that, increasingly, are enjoyed by the > staff instead of the members. > > None of this happens by accident. California's interlocking > directorate of government employee unions, issue activists, careerists > and campaign contributors has become increasingly aggressive and adept > at using rhetoric extolling public benefits for all to deliver > targeted advantages to itself. As a result, the political reality of > the high-benefit/high-tax model is that its public goods are, > increasingly, neither public nor good. Instead, the beneficiaries are > the providers of the public services, and certain favored or connected > constituencies, rather than the general population. > > The recession will eventually end, and California's finances will get > better. Given its powerful systemic bias against efficient and > effective public services, however, the question is whether the state > will ever get well. California's public sector has pinned its hopes > for avoiding fundamental reform on increased federal aid to replace > dollars the state's fed-up taxpayers refuse to surrender. In other > words, residents in the other 49 states -- the new 49ers? -- would > enjoy the privilege of paying California's taxes. Their one > consolation will be not having to endure its lousy public services. > > If, on the other hand, America's taxpayers (and China's bond buyers) > succumb to bailout fatigue, California may reach the point at which, > after every alternative has been exhausted, it is forced to try > governing itself competently. You wouldn't know it from putting up > with California's transportation and educational systems, but there > actually is a principled, plausible argument to be made for the > high-benefit/high-tax model. For the sake of both California and their > own political ideals, its advocates ought to be leading the charge > against every excess and inefficiency that deprives taxpayers of good > value for their dollars. That won't happen until they stand up to > their coalition partners by breaking their Faustian political bargain > with California's self-serving governmental-industrial complex. > > > > William Voegeli is a contributing editor of the Claremont Review of > Books. This article is adapted from the autumn 2009 issue of City > Journal. > > On 11/1/09, Brad Haslett wrote: > > Good grief! Has it ever occurred to anyone in California that they > > have a spending problem, not a revenue problem? Watch how this goes > > because the entire nation is heading down the same path. > > > > Brad > > > > ----------- > > > > latimes.com > > California to withhold a bigger chunk of paychecks > > The amount goes up 10% on Sunday as Sacramento borrows from taxpayers. > > Technically, it's not an income tax increase: You'll get the money > > back eventually. > > > > By Shane Goldmacher and W.J. Hennigan > > > > October 31, 2009 > > > > Reporting from Los Angeles and Sacramento > > > > Starting Sunday, cash-strapped California will dig deeper into the > > pocketbooks of wage earners -- holding back 10% more than it already > > does in state income taxes just as the biggest shopping season of the > > year kicks into gear. > > > > Technically, it's not a tax increase, even though it may feel like one > > when your next paycheck arrives. As part of a bundle of budget patches > > adopted in the summer, the state is taking more money now in > > withholding, even though workers' annual tax bills won't change. > > > > Think of it as a forced, interest-free loan: You'll be repaid any > > extra withholding in April. Those who would receive a refund anyway > > will receive a larger one, and those who owe taxes will owe less. > > > > But with rising gas costs, depressed home prices and double-digit > > unemployment, the state's added reach into residents' regular paycheck > > isn't sitting well with many. > > > > "The state's suddenly slapping people upside the head," said Mack > > Reed, 50, of Silver Lake. "It's appalling how brash that is." > > > > Brittney McKaig, 23, of Santa Ana said she expects the additional > > withholding to affect her holiday spending. > > > > "Coming into the holidays, we're getting squeezed anyway," she said. > > "We're not getting Christmas bonuses and other perks we used to get. > > So it all falls back on spending. The $40 gift will become a $20 > > gift." > > > > The extra withholding may seem like a small amount siphoned from each > > paycheck, but it adds up to a $1.7-billion fix for California's > > deficit-riddled books. > > > > From a single taxpayer earning $51,000 a year with no dependents, the > > state will be grabbing an extra $17.59 each month, according to state > > tax officials. A married person earning $90,000 with two dependents > > would receive $24.87 less in monthly pay. > > > > California will probably continue to collect the tax at a higher rate > > for many years -- or find an additional $1.7 billion to slice from a > > future budget, an unlikely occurrence. All workers who have state > > taxes withheld will see their paychecks shrink. > > > > "Many families are sitting at their kitchen table wondering how > > they're going to make ends meet," said state Sen. Tony Strickland > > (R-Thousand Oaks). "At the same time, the state of California is > > taking a no-interest loan." > > > > The provision is one of numerous maneuvers state lawmakers and Gov. > > Arnold Schwarzenegger approved in the summer to paper over the state's > > deficit. Many of the changes, including the extra withholding, were > > little noticed outside of Sacramento. > > > > Savvy taxpayers can get around the state's maneuver by increasing the > > number of personal withholding allowances they claim on their employer > > tax forms, said Brenda Voet, a spokeswoman for the state's Franchise > > Tax Board. > > > > "People can get out of this," she said, noting that most people would > > have to change their allowances through their employers. California's > > budget leaders are banking on the hope that most won't. > > > > The increase is coming at a bad time for store owners, many of whom > > depend on the holiday shopping season to keep their businesses alive. > > > > "I don't think there's any question it's going to impact consumers' > > spending," said Bill Dombrowski, president of the California Retailers > > Assn. "Any time you reduce people's disposable income, there's going > > to be a negative effect on the retail sector." > > > > But Stephen Levy, director of the Center for Continuing Study of the > > California Economy, wasn't so sure. > > > > "It's having a relatively small impact on people's income," Levy said, > > pointing out that many families will receive only $12 to $40 less each > > month. > > > > Yet Erika Wendt, 28, of San Diego said she already lived on a tight > > budget: She rides her bike to work, for instance, to save on gasoline > > and parking costs. > > > > "I am frustrated as this directly impacts my weekly budget -- what > > groceries I buy, how much I drive and can spend on gas," she said. > > "Now money will just be tighter, and I'm not sure where else I can cut > > back." > > > > The extra withholding comes in addition to tax hikes the state enacted > > this year. > > > > In February, state income tax rates were bumped up 0.25 of a > > percentage point for every tax bracket. The dependent credit was > > slashed by two-thirds. The state sales tax rate rose 1 percentage > > point. The vehicle license fee nearly doubled to 1.15% of a car's > > value. > > > > Lawmakers and the governor also approved deep cuts to schools, social > > services and prisons to fend off one of the steepest revenue losses in > > California history. > > > > Temporary budget bandages, such as the increase in withholding, were > > included at several points this year to avoid higher taxes and deeper > > cuts, said H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the state Department of > > Finance. > > > > Sacramento, meanwhile, is awash in red ink again. The state controller > > recently said revenue in the budget year already had fallen more than > > $1 billion short of assumptions. Outsize deficits are projected for > > years to come. > > > > Such temporary measures as the withholding tax increase don't really > > fix the budget gap, "they just more or less hid it," said Christopher > > Thornberg, a principal with Beacon Economics in Los Angeles. "I call > > it a fraud." > > > > shane.goldmacher@ latimes.com > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091102/06861680/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 10:09:01 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 09:09:01 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Worst Bill Ever Message-ID: <400985d70911020709k75318c87k70fd4a660d9cda9b@mail.gmail.com> From the WSJ - * NOVEMBER 1, 2009, 11:23 P.M. ET The Worst Bill Ever Epic new spending and taxes, pricier insurance, rationed care, dishonest accounting: The Pelosi health bill has it all. Speaker Nancy Pelosi has reportedly told fellow Democrats that she's prepared to lose seats in 2010 if that's what it takes to pass ObamaCare, and little wonder. The health bill she unwrapped last Thursday, which President Obama hailed as a "critical milestone," may well be the worst piece of post-New Deal legislation ever introduced. In a rational political world, this 1,990-page runaway train would have been derailed months ago. With spending and debt already at record peacetime levels, the bill creates a new and probably unrepealable middle-class entitlement that is designed to expand over time. Taxes will need to rise precipitously, even as ObamaCare so dramatically expands government control of health care that eventually all medicine will be rationed via politics. Yet at this point, Democrats have dumped any pretense of genuine bipartisan "reform" and moved into the realm of pure power politics as they race against the unpopularity of their own agenda. The goal is to ram through whatever income-redistribution scheme they can claim to be "universal coverage." The result will be destructive on every level?for the health-care system, for the country's fiscal condition, and ultimately for American freedom and prosperity. ?The spending surge. The Congressional Budget Office figures the House program will cost $1.055 trillion over a decade, which while far above the $829 billion net cost that Mrs. Pelosi fed to credulous reporters is still a low-ball estimate. Most of the money goes into government-run "exchanges" where people earning between 150% and 400% of the poverty level?that is, up to about $96,000 for a family of four in 2016?could buy coverage at heavily subsidized rates, tied to income. The government would pay for 93% of insurance costs for a family making $42,000, 72% for another making $78,000, and so forth. At least at first, these benefits would be offered only to those whose employers don't provide insurance or work for small businesses with 100 or fewer workers. The taxpayer costs would be far higher if not for this "firewall"?which is sure to cave in when people see the deal their neighbors are getting on "free" health care. Mrs. Pelosi knows this, like everyone else in Washington. Even so, the House disguises hundreds of billions of dollars in additional costs with budget gimmicks. It "pays for" about six years of program with a decade of revenue, with the heaviest costs concentrated in the second five years. The House also pretends Medicare payments to doctors will be cut by 21.5% next year and deeper after that, "saving" about $250 billion. ObamaCare will be lucky to cost under $2 trillion over 10 years; it will grow more after that. ? Expanding Medicaid, gutting private Medicare. All this is particularly reckless given the unfunded liabilities of Medicare?now north of $37 trillion over 75 years. Mrs. Pelosi wants to steal $426 billion from future Medicare spending to "pay for" universal coverage. While Medicare's price controls on doctors and hospitals are certain to be tightened, the only cut that is a sure thing in practice is gutting Medicare Advantage to the tune of $170 billion. Democrats loathe this program because it gives one of out five seniors private insurance options. As for Medicaid, the House will expand eligibility to everyone below 150% of the poverty level, meaning that some 15 million new people will be added to the rolls as private insurance gets crowded out at a cost of $425 billion. A decade from now more than a quarter of the population will be on a program originally intended for poor women, children and the disabled. Even though the House will assume 91% of the "matching rate" for this joint state-federal program?up from today's 57%?governors would still be forced to take on $34 billion in new burdens when budgets from Albany to Sacramento are in fiscal collapse. Washington's budget will collapse too, if anything like the House bill passes. ? European levels of taxation. All told, the House favors $572 billion in new taxes, mostly by imposing a 5.4-percentage-point "surcharge" on joint filers earning over $1 million, $500,000 for singles. This tax will raise the top marginal rate to 45% in 2011 from 39.6% when the Bush tax cuts expire?not counting state income taxes and the phase-out of certain deductions and exemptions. The burden will mostly fall on the small businesses that have organized as Subchapter S or limited liability corporations, since the truly wealthy won't have any difficulty sheltering their incomes. This surtax could hit ever more earners because, like the alternative minimum tax, it isn't indexed for inflation. Yet it still won't be nearly enough. Even if Congress had confiscated 100% of the taxable income of people earning over $500,000 in the boom year of 2006, it would have only raised $1.3 trillion. When Democrats end up soaking the middle class, perhaps via the European-style value-added tax that Mrs. Pelosi has endorsed, they'll claim the deficits that they created made them do it. Under another new tax, businesses would have to surrender 8% of their payroll to government if they don't offer insurance or pay at least 72.5% of their workers' premiums, which eat into wages. Such "play or pay" taxes always become "pay or pay" and will rise over time, with severe consequences for hiring, job creation and ultimately growth. While the U.S. already has one of the highest corporate income tax rates in the world, Democrats are on the way to creating a high structural unemployment rate, much as Europe has done by expanding its welfare states. Meanwhile, a tax equal to 2.5% of adjusted gross income will also be imposed on some 18 million people who CBO expects still won't buy insurance in 2019. Democrats could make this penalty even higher, but that is politically unacceptable, or they could make the subsidies even higher, but that would expose the (already ludicrous) illusion that ObamaCare will reduce the deficit. ? The insurance takeover. A new "health choices commissioner" will decide what counts as "essential benefits," which all insurers will have to offer as first-dollar coverage. Private insurers will also be told how much they are allowed to charge even as they will have to offer coverage at virtually the same price to anyone who applies, regardless of health status or medical history. The cost of insurance, naturally, will skyrocket. The insurer WellPoint estimates based on its own market data that some premiums in the individual market will triple under these new burdens. The same is likely to prove true for the employer-sponsored plans that provide private coverage to about 177 million people today. Over time, the new mandates will apply to all contracts, including for the large businesses currently given a safe harbor from bureaucratic tampering under a 1974 law called Erisa. The political incentive will always be for government to expand benefits and reduce cost-sharing, trampling any chance of giving individuals financial incentives to economize on care. Essentially, all insurers will become government contractors, in the business of fulfilling political demands: There will be no such thing as "private" health insurance. *** All of this is intentional, even if it isn't explicitly acknowledged. The overriding liberal ambition is to finish the work began decades ago as the Great Society of converting health care into a government responsibility. Mr. Obama's own Medicare actuaries estimate that the federal share of U.S. health dollars will quickly climb beyond 60% from 46% today. One reason Mrs. Pelosi has fought so ferociously against her own Blue Dog colleagues to include at least a scaled-back "public option" entitlement program is so that the architecture is in place for future Congresses to expand this share even further. As Congress's balance sheet drowns in trillions of dollars in new obligations, the political system will have no choice but to start making cost-minded decisions about which treatments patients are allowed to receive. Democrats can't regulate their way out of the reality that we live in a world of finite resources and infinite wants. Once health care is nationalized, or mostly nationalized, medical rationing is inevitable?especially for the innovative high-cost technologies and drugs that are the future of medicine. Mr. Obama rode into office on a wave of "change," but we doubt most voters realized that the change Democrats had in mind was making health care even more expensive and rigid than the status quo. Critics will say we are exaggerating, but we believe it is no stretch to say that Mrs. Pelosi's handiwork ranks with the Smoot-Hawley tariff and FDR's National Industrial Recovery Act as among the worst bills Congress has ever seriously contemplated. From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 10:45:33 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 09:45:33 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] It Is This Serious! Message-ID: <400985d70911020745g6da0e631v55be84acabb57d83@mail.gmail.com> This is a depressing way to start the week - http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/ff197.pdf As has been pointed out by many others, if we confiscated ALL the income of the "wealthy" it wouldn't pay for health-care, much less for all the other shit. When something can't continue, it won't. That isn't the point or the objective of our current leadership. Our nation is under attack, and the POTUS is leading the charge. Forget the War on Terror for the time being. The new Cold Civil War is what we need to be focused on. We won the first Cold War. Pray that we win the second. Brad From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 10:48:22 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 09:48:22 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Worst Bill Ever In-Reply-To: <400985d70911020709k75318c87k70fd4a660d9cda9b@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911020709k75318c87k70fd4a660d9cda9b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911020748x41b830d8v7bf4e027b76b85ed@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Once again, if you had told me this would happen a year or two ago, I would have said, in America something like this is just not possible. Silly Me. Rik On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > From the WSJ - > > * NOVEMBER 1, 2009, 11:23 P.M. ET > > The Worst Bill Ever > Epic new spending and taxes, pricier insurance, rationed care, > dishonest accounting: The Pelosi health bill has it all. > > > Speaker Nancy Pelosi has reportedly told fellow Democrats that she's > prepared to lose seats in 2010 if that's what it takes to pass > ObamaCare, and little wonder. The health bill she unwrapped last > Thursday, which President Obama hailed as a "critical milestone," may > well be the worst piece of post-New Deal legislation ever introduced. > > In a rational political world, this 1,990-page runaway train would > have been derailed months ago. With spending and debt already at > record peacetime levels, the bill creates a new and probably > unrepealable middle-class entitlement that is designed to expand over > time. Taxes will need to rise precipitously, even as ObamaCare so > dramatically expands government control of health care that eventually > all medicine will be rationed via politics. > > Yet at this point, Democrats have dumped any pretense of genuine > bipartisan "reform" and moved into the realm of pure power politics as > they race against the unpopularity of their own agenda. The goal is to > ram through whatever income-redistribution scheme they can claim to be > "universal coverage." The result will be destructive on every > level?for the health-care system, for the country's fiscal condition, > and ultimately for American freedom and prosperity. > > > ?The spending surge. The Congressional Budget Office figures the House > program will cost $1.055 trillion over a decade, which while far above > the $829 billion net cost that Mrs. Pelosi fed to credulous reporters > is still a low-ball estimate. Most of the money goes into > government-run "exchanges" where people earning between 150% and 400% > of the poverty level?that is, up to about $96,000 for a family of four > in 2016?could buy coverage at heavily subsidized rates, tied to > income. The government would pay for 93% of insurance costs for a > family making $42,000, 72% for another making $78,000, and so forth. > > At least at first, these benefits would be offered only to those whose > employers don't provide insurance or work for small businesses with > 100 or fewer workers. The taxpayer costs would be far higher if not > for this "firewall"?which is sure to cave in when people see the deal > their neighbors are getting on "free" health care. Mrs. Pelosi knows > this, like everyone else in Washington. > > Even so, the House disguises hundreds of billions of dollars in > additional costs with budget gimmicks. It "pays for" about six years > of program with a decade of revenue, with the heaviest costs > concentrated in the second five years. The House also pretends > Medicare payments to doctors will be cut by 21.5% next year and deeper > after that, "saving" about $250 billion. ObamaCare will be lucky to > cost under $2 trillion over 10 years; it will grow more after that. > > ? Expanding Medicaid, gutting private Medicare. All this is > particularly reckless given the unfunded liabilities of Medicare?now > north of $37 trillion over 75 years. Mrs. Pelosi wants to steal $426 > billion from future Medicare spending to "pay for" universal coverage. > While Medicare's price controls on doctors and hospitals are certain > to be tightened, the only cut that is a sure thing in practice is > gutting Medicare Advantage to the tune of $170 billion. Democrats > loathe this program because it gives one of out five seniors private > insurance options. > > As for Medicaid, the House will expand eligibility to everyone below > 150% of the poverty level, meaning that some 15 million new people > will be added to the rolls as private insurance gets crowded out at a > cost of $425 billion. A decade from now more than a quarter of the > population will be on a program originally intended for poor women, > children and the disabled. > > Even though the House will assume 91% of the "matching rate" for this > joint state-federal program?up from today's 57%?governors would still > be forced to take on $34 billion in new burdens when budgets from > Albany to Sacramento are in fiscal collapse. Washington's budget will > collapse too, if anything like the House bill passes. > > ? European levels of taxation. All told, the House favors $572 billion > in new taxes, mostly by imposing a 5.4-percentage-point "surcharge" on > joint filers earning over $1 million, $500,000 for singles. This tax > will raise the top marginal rate to 45% in 2011 from 39.6% when the > Bush tax cuts expire?not counting state income taxes and the phase-out > of certain deductions and exemptions. The burden will mostly fall on > the small businesses that have organized as Subchapter S or limited > liability corporations, since the truly wealthy won't have any > difficulty sheltering their incomes. > > This surtax could hit ever more earners because, like the alternative > minimum tax, it isn't indexed for inflation. Yet it still won't be > nearly enough. Even if Congress had confiscated 100% of the taxable > income of people earning over $500,000 in the boom year of 2006, it > would have only raised $1.3 trillion. When Democrats end up soaking > the middle class, perhaps via the European-style value-added tax that > Mrs. Pelosi has endorsed, they'll claim the deficits that they created > made them do it. > > Under another new tax, businesses would have to surrender 8% of their > payroll to government if they don't offer insurance or pay at least > 72.5% of their workers' premiums, which eat into wages. Such "play or > pay" taxes always become "pay or pay" and will rise over time, with > severe consequences for hiring, job creation and ultimately growth. > While the U.S. already has one of the highest corporate income tax > rates in the world, Democrats are on the way to creating a high > structural unemployment rate, much as Europe has done by expanding its > welfare states. > > Meanwhile, a tax equal to 2.5% of adjusted gross income will also be > imposed on some 18 million people who CBO expects still won't buy > insurance in 2019. Democrats could make this penalty even higher, but > that is politically unacceptable, or they could make the subsidies > even higher, but that would expose the (already ludicrous) illusion > that ObamaCare will reduce the deficit. > > ? The insurance takeover. A new "health choices commissioner" will > decide what counts as "essential benefits," which all insurers will > have to offer as first-dollar coverage. Private insurers will also be > told how much they are allowed to charge even as they will have to > offer coverage at virtually the same price to anyone who applies, > regardless of health status or medical history. > > The cost of insurance, naturally, will skyrocket. The insurer > WellPoint estimates based on its own market data that some premiums in > the individual market will triple under these new burdens. The same is > likely to prove true for the employer-sponsored plans that provide > private coverage to about 177 million people today. Over time, the new > mandates will apply to all contracts, including for the large > businesses currently given a safe harbor from bureaucratic tampering > under a 1974 law called Erisa. > > The political incentive will always be for government to expand > benefits and reduce cost-sharing, trampling any chance of giving > individuals financial incentives to economize on care. Essentially, > all insurers will become government contractors, in the business of > fulfilling political demands: There will be no such thing as "private" > health insurance. > *** > > All of this is intentional, even if it isn't explicitly acknowledged. > The overriding liberal ambition is to finish the work began decades > ago as the Great Society of converting health care into a government > responsibility. Mr. Obama's own Medicare actuaries estimate that the > federal share of U.S. health dollars will quickly climb beyond 60% > from 46% today. One reason Mrs. Pelosi has fought so ferociously > against her own Blue Dog colleagues to include at least a scaled-back > "public option" entitlement program is so that the architecture is in > place for future Congresses to expand this share even further. > > As Congress's balance sheet drowns in trillions of dollars in new > obligations, the political system will have no choice but to start > making cost-minded decisions about which treatments patients are > allowed to receive. Democrats can't regulate their way out of the > reality that we live in a world of finite resources and infinite > wants. Once health care is nationalized, or mostly nationalized, > medical rationing is inevitable?especially for the innovative > high-cost technologies and drugs that are the future of medicine. > > Mr. Obama rode into office on a wave of "change," but we doubt most > voters realized that the change Democrats had in mind was making > health care even more expensive and rigid than the status quo. Critics > will say we are exaggerating, but we believe it is no stretch to say > that Mrs. Pelosi's handiwork ranks with the Smoot-Hawley tariff and > FDR's National Industrial Recovery Act as among the worst bills > Congress has ever seriously contemplated. > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091102/5d94df91/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 11:06:59 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 10:06:59 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Worst Bill Ever In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911020748x41b830d8v7bf4e027b76b85ed@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911020709k75318c87k70fd4a660d9cda9b@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911020748x41b830d8v7bf4e027b76b85ed@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911020806k77449394m5e44d5c810c2fe68@mail.gmail.com> Rik, We'll see. The polls look good for sending a strong message tomorrow. Hopefully, the GOP has already gotten the message in the NY-23rd. Those bastards wasted $900,000 million on Dede and I can't wait for the phone to ring asking me for more money! If I can get in, I hope to visit Gene Taylor's office on Thursday. He's the Blue Dog Dem from Southern Mississippi. I can't vote against him but I want him to know I own a business in Gulfport and I sure-as-hell know a lot of people who can. Here's the latest poll numbers on health care - http://tinyurl.com/kwqzrs So 42% favor it. Damn if that isn't close to the number of people who don't pay federal income tax. Nah, no relationship there! Yeah, it can happen. All you need is the right Marxist at the helm. Brad On 11/2/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Once again, if you had told me this would happen a year or two ago, I would > have said, in America something like this is just not possible. > > Silly Me. > > Rik > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> From the WSJ - >> >> * NOVEMBER 1, 2009, 11:23 P.M. ET >> >> The Worst Bill Ever >> Epic new spending and taxes, pricier insurance, rationed care, >> dishonest accounting: The Pelosi health bill has it all. >> >> >> Speaker Nancy Pelosi has reportedly told fellow Democrats that she's >> prepared to lose seats in 2010 if that's what it takes to pass >> ObamaCare, and little wonder. The health bill she unwrapped last >> Thursday, which President Obama hailed as a "critical milestone," may >> well be the worst piece of post-New Deal legislation ever introduced. >> >> In a rational political world, this 1,990-page runaway train would >> have been derailed months ago. With spending and debt already at >> record peacetime levels, the bill creates a new and probably >> unrepealable middle-class entitlement that is designed to expand over >> time. Taxes will need to rise precipitously, even as ObamaCare so >> dramatically expands government control of health care that eventually >> all medicine will be rationed via politics. >> >> Yet at this point, Democrats have dumped any pretense of genuine >> bipartisan "reform" and moved into the realm of pure power politics as >> they race against the unpopularity of their own agenda. The goal is to >> ram through whatever income-redistribution scheme they can claim to be >> "universal coverage." The result will be destructive on every >> level?for the health-care system, for the country's fiscal condition, >> and ultimately for American freedom and prosperity. >> >> >> ?The spending surge. The Congressional Budget Office figures the House >> program will cost $1.055 trillion over a decade, which while far above >> the $829 billion net cost that Mrs. Pelosi fed to credulous reporters >> is still a low-ball estimate. Most of the money goes into >> government-run "exchanges" where people earning between 150% and 400% >> of the poverty level?that is, up to about $96,000 for a family of four >> in 2016?could buy coverage at heavily subsidized rates, tied to >> income. The government would pay for 93% of insurance costs for a >> family making $42,000, 72% for another making $78,000, and so forth. >> >> At least at first, these benefits would be offered only to those whose >> employers don't provide insurance or work for small businesses with >> 100 or fewer workers. The taxpayer costs would be far higher if not >> for this "firewall"?which is sure to cave in when people see the deal >> their neighbors are getting on "free" health care. Mrs. Pelosi knows >> this, like everyone else in Washington. >> >> Even so, the House disguises hundreds of billions of dollars in >> additional costs with budget gimmicks. It "pays for" about six years >> of program with a decade of revenue, with the heaviest costs >> concentrated in the second five years. The House also pretends >> Medicare payments to doctors will be cut by 21.5% next year and deeper >> after that, "saving" about $250 billion. ObamaCare will be lucky to >> cost under $2 trillion over 10 years; it will grow more after that. >> >> ? Expanding Medicaid, gutting private Medicare. All this is >> particularly reckless given the unfunded liabilities of Medicare?now >> north of $37 trillion over 75 years. Mrs. Pelosi wants to steal $426 >> billion from future Medicare spending to "pay for" universal coverage. >> While Medicare's price controls on doctors and hospitals are certain >> to be tightened, the only cut that is a sure thing in practice is >> gutting Medicare Advantage to the tune of $170 billion. Democrats >> loathe this program because it gives one of out five seniors private >> insurance options. >> >> As for Medicaid, the House will expand eligibility to everyone below >> 150% of the poverty level, meaning that some 15 million new people >> will be added to the rolls as private insurance gets crowded out at a >> cost of $425 billion. A decade from now more than a quarter of the >> population will be on a program originally intended for poor women, >> children and the disabled. >> >> Even though the House will assume 91% of the "matching rate" for this >> joint state-federal program?up from today's 57%?governors would still >> be forced to take on $34 billion in new burdens when budgets from >> Albany to Sacramento are in fiscal collapse. Washington's budget will >> collapse too, if anything like the House bill passes. >> >> ? European levels of taxation. All told, the House favors $572 billion >> in new taxes, mostly by imposing a 5.4-percentage-point "surcharge" on >> joint filers earning over $1 million, $500,000 for singles. This tax >> will raise the top marginal rate to 45% in 2011 from 39.6% when the >> Bush tax cuts expire?not counting state income taxes and the phase-out >> of certain deductions and exemptions. The burden will mostly fall on >> the small businesses that have organized as Subchapter S or limited >> liability corporations, since the truly wealthy won't have any >> difficulty sheltering their incomes. >> >> This surtax could hit ever more earners because, like the alternative >> minimum tax, it isn't indexed for inflation. Yet it still won't be >> nearly enough. Even if Congress had confiscated 100% of the taxable >> income of people earning over $500,000 in the boom year of 2006, it >> would have only raised $1.3 trillion. When Democrats end up soaking >> the middle class, perhaps via the European-style value-added tax that >> Mrs. Pelosi has endorsed, they'll claim the deficits that they created >> made them do it. >> >> Under another new tax, businesses would have to surrender 8% of their >> payroll to government if they don't offer insurance or pay at least >> 72.5% of their workers' premiums, which eat into wages. Such "play or >> pay" taxes always become "pay or pay" and will rise over time, with >> severe consequences for hiring, job creation and ultimately growth. >> While the U.S. already has one of the highest corporate income tax >> rates in the world, Democrats are on the way to creating a high >> structural unemployment rate, much as Europe has done by expanding its >> welfare states. >> >> Meanwhile, a tax equal to 2.5% of adjusted gross income will also be >> imposed on some 18 million people who CBO expects still won't buy >> insurance in 2019. Democrats could make this penalty even higher, but >> that is politically unacceptable, or they could make the subsidies >> even higher, but that would expose the (already ludicrous) illusion >> that ObamaCare will reduce the deficit. >> >> ? The insurance takeover. A new "health choices commissioner" will >> decide what counts as "essential benefits," which all insurers will >> have to offer as first-dollar coverage. Private insurers will also be >> told how much they are allowed to charge even as they will have to >> offer coverage at virtually the same price to anyone who applies, >> regardless of health status or medical history. >> >> The cost of insurance, naturally, will skyrocket. The insurer >> WellPoint estimates based on its own market data that some premiums in >> the individual market will triple under these new burdens. The same is >> likely to prove true for the employer-sponsored plans that provide >> private coverage to about 177 million people today. Over time, the new >> mandates will apply to all contracts, including for the large >> businesses currently given a safe harbor from bureaucratic tampering >> under a 1974 law called Erisa. >> >> The political incentive will always be for government to expand >> benefits and reduce cost-sharing, trampling any chance of giving >> individuals financial incentives to economize on care. Essentially, >> all insurers will become government contractors, in the business of >> fulfilling political demands: There will be no such thing as "private" >> health insurance. >> *** >> >> All of this is intentional, even if it isn't explicitly acknowledged. >> The overriding liberal ambition is to finish the work began decades >> ago as the Great Society of converting health care into a government >> responsibility. Mr. Obama's own Medicare actuaries estimate that the >> federal share of U.S. health dollars will quickly climb beyond 60% >> from 46% today. One reason Mrs. Pelosi has fought so ferociously >> against her own Blue Dog colleagues to include at least a scaled-back >> "public option" entitlement program is so that the architecture is in >> place for future Congresses to expand this share even further. >> >> As Congress's balance sheet drowns in trillions of dollars in new >> obligations, the political system will have no choice but to start >> making cost-minded decisions about which treatments patients are >> allowed to receive. Democrats can't regulate their way out of the >> reality that we live in a world of finite resources and infinite >> wants. Once health care is nationalized, or mostly nationalized, >> medical rationing is inevitable?especially for the innovative >> high-cost technologies and drugs that are the future of medicine. >> >> Mr. Obama rode into office on a wave of "change," but we doubt most >> voters realized that the change Democrats had in mind was making >> health care even more expensive and rigid than the status quo. Critics >> will say we are exaggerating, but we believe it is no stretch to say >> that Mrs. Pelosi's handiwork ranks with the Smoot-Hawley tariff and >> FDR's National Industrial Recovery Act as among the worst bills >> Congress has ever seriously contemplated. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 11:09:10 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 10:09:10 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] It Is This Serious! In-Reply-To: <400985d70911020745g6da0e631v55be84acabb57d83@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911020745g6da0e631v55be84acabb57d83@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911020809y5973d7cetcd05be2c9abc4fc1@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Depressing Indeed!! Hell, we're not even talking about paying down debt, merely getting back to break even!!! This is not only stupid, it is shameful!! If I were a congress person now, I believe the threat of real physical violence would have to be crossing my mind. Rik On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > This is a depressing way to start the week - > > http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/ff197.pdf > > As has been pointed out by many others, if we confiscated ALL the > income of the "wealthy" it wouldn't pay for health-care, much less for > all the other shit. When something can't continue, it won't. That > isn't the point or the objective of our current leadership. Our > nation is under attack, and the POTUS is leading the charge. > > Forget the War on Terror for the time being. The new Cold Civil War > is what we need to be focused on. We won the first Cold War. Pray > that we win the second. > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091102/39150ff4/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 11:19:35 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 10:19:35 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Worst Bill Ever In-Reply-To: <400985d70911020806k77449394m5e44d5c810c2fe68@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911020709k75318c87k70fd4a660d9cda9b@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911020748x41b830d8v7bf4e027b76b85ed@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911020806k77449394m5e44d5c810c2fe68@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911020819o672b9f7btaeca62f7b407f48f@mail.gmail.com> Correction - $900,000 On 11/2/09, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > We'll see. The polls look good for sending a strong message tomorrow. > Hopefully, the GOP has already gotten the message in the NY-23rd. > Those bastards wasted $900,000 million on Dede and I can't wait for > the phone to ring asking me for more money! If I can get in, I hope to > visit Gene Taylor's office on Thursday. He's the Blue Dog Dem from > Southern Mississippi. I can't vote against him but I want him to know > I own a business in Gulfport and I sure-as-hell know a lot of people > who can. > > Here's the latest poll numbers on health care - > > http://tinyurl.com/kwqzrs > > So 42% favor it. Damn if that isn't close to the number of people who > don't pay federal income tax. Nah, no relationship there! > > Yeah, it can happen. All you need is the right Marxist at the helm. > > Brad > > On 11/2/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> Brad, >> >> Once again, if you had told me this would happen a year or two ago, I >> would >> have said, in America something like this is just not possible. >> >> Silly Me. >> >> Rik >> >> On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> >>> From the WSJ - >>> >>> * NOVEMBER 1, 2009, 11:23 P.M. ET >>> >>> The Worst Bill Ever >>> Epic new spending and taxes, pricier insurance, rationed care, >>> dishonest accounting: The Pelosi health bill has it all. >>> >>> >>> Speaker Nancy Pelosi has reportedly told fellow Democrats that she's >>> prepared to lose seats in 2010 if that's what it takes to pass >>> ObamaCare, and little wonder. The health bill she unwrapped last >>> Thursday, which President Obama hailed as a "critical milestone," may >>> well be the worst piece of post-New Deal legislation ever introduced. >>> >>> In a rational political world, this 1,990-page runaway train would >>> have been derailed months ago. With spending and debt already at >>> record peacetime levels, the bill creates a new and probably >>> unrepealable middle-class entitlement that is designed to expand over >>> time. Taxes will need to rise precipitously, even as ObamaCare so >>> dramatically expands government control of health care that eventually >>> all medicine will be rationed via politics. >>> >>> Yet at this point, Democrats have dumped any pretense of genuine >>> bipartisan "reform" and moved into the realm of pure power politics as >>> they race against the unpopularity of their own agenda. The goal is to >>> ram through whatever income-redistribution scheme they can claim to be >>> "universal coverage." The result will be destructive on every >>> level?for the health-care system, for the country's fiscal condition, >>> and ultimately for American freedom and prosperity. >>> >>> >>> ?The spending surge. The Congressional Budget Office figures the House >>> program will cost $1.055 trillion over a decade, which while far above >>> the $829 billion net cost that Mrs. Pelosi fed to credulous reporters >>> is still a low-ball estimate. Most of the money goes into >>> government-run "exchanges" where people earning between 150% and 400% >>> of the poverty level?that is, up to about $96,000 for a family of four >>> in 2016?could buy coverage at heavily subsidized rates, tied to >>> income. The government would pay for 93% of insurance costs for a >>> family making $42,000, 72% for another making $78,000, and so forth. >>> >>> At least at first, these benefits would be offered only to those whose >>> employers don't provide insurance or work for small businesses with >>> 100 or fewer workers. The taxpayer costs would be far higher if not >>> for this "firewall"?which is sure to cave in when people see the deal >>> their neighbors are getting on "free" health care. Mrs. Pelosi knows >>> this, like everyone else in Washington. >>> >>> Even so, the House disguises hundreds of billions of dollars in >>> additional costs with budget gimmicks. It "pays for" about six years >>> of program with a decade of revenue, with the heaviest costs >>> concentrated in the second five years. The House also pretends >>> Medicare payments to doctors will be cut by 21.5% next year and deeper >>> after that, "saving" about $250 billion. ObamaCare will be lucky to >>> cost under $2 trillion over 10 years; it will grow more after that. >>> >>> ? Expanding Medicaid, gutting private Medicare. All this is >>> particularly reckless given the unfunded liabilities of Medicare?now >>> north of $37 trillion over 75 years. Mrs. Pelosi wants to steal $426 >>> billion from future Medicare spending to "pay for" universal coverage. >>> While Medicare's price controls on doctors and hospitals are certain >>> to be tightened, the only cut that is a sure thing in practice is >>> gutting Medicare Advantage to the tune of $170 billion. Democrats >>> loathe this program because it gives one of out five seniors private >>> insurance options. >>> >>> As for Medicaid, the House will expand eligibility to everyone below >>> 150% of the poverty level, meaning that some 15 million new people >>> will be added to the rolls as private insurance gets crowded out at a >>> cost of $425 billion. A decade from now more than a quarter of the >>> population will be on a program originally intended for poor women, >>> children and the disabled. >>> >>> Even though the House will assume 91% of the "matching rate" for this >>> joint state-federal program?up from today's 57%?governors would still >>> be forced to take on $34 billion in new burdens when budgets from >>> Albany to Sacramento are in fiscal collapse. Washington's budget will >>> collapse too, if anything like the House bill passes. >>> >>> ? European levels of taxation. All told, the House favors $572 billion >>> in new taxes, mostly by imposing a 5.4-percentage-point "surcharge" on >>> joint filers earning over $1 million, $500,000 for singles. This tax >>> will raise the top marginal rate to 45% in 2011 from 39.6% when the >>> Bush tax cuts expire?not counting state income taxes and the phase-out >>> of certain deductions and exemptions. The burden will mostly fall on >>> the small businesses that have organized as Subchapter S or limited >>> liability corporations, since the truly wealthy won't have any >>> difficulty sheltering their incomes. >>> >>> This surtax could hit ever more earners because, like the alternative >>> minimum tax, it isn't indexed for inflation. Yet it still won't be >>> nearly enough. Even if Congress had confiscated 100% of the taxable >>> income of people earning over $500,000 in the boom year of 2006, it >>> would have only raised $1.3 trillion. When Democrats end up soaking >>> the middle class, perhaps via the European-style value-added tax that >>> Mrs. Pelosi has endorsed, they'll claim the deficits that they created >>> made them do it. >>> >>> Under another new tax, businesses would have to surrender 8% of their >>> payroll to government if they don't offer insurance or pay at least >>> 72.5% of their workers' premiums, which eat into wages. Such "play or >>> pay" taxes always become "pay or pay" and will rise over time, with >>> severe consequences for hiring, job creation and ultimately growth. >>> While the U.S. already has one of the highest corporate income tax >>> rates in the world, Democrats are on the way to creating a high >>> structural unemployment rate, much as Europe has done by expanding its >>> welfare states. >>> >>> Meanwhile, a tax equal to 2.5% of adjusted gross income will also be >>> imposed on some 18 million people who CBO expects still won't buy >>> insurance in 2019. Democrats could make this penalty even higher, but >>> that is politically unacceptable, or they could make the subsidies >>> even higher, but that would expose the (already ludicrous) illusion >>> that ObamaCare will reduce the deficit. >>> >>> ? The insurance takeover. A new "health choices commissioner" will >>> decide what counts as "essential benefits," which all insurers will >>> have to offer as first-dollar coverage. Private insurers will also be >>> told how much they are allowed to charge even as they will have to >>> offer coverage at virtually the same price to anyone who applies, >>> regardless of health status or medical history. >>> >>> The cost of insurance, naturally, will skyrocket. The insurer >>> WellPoint estimates based on its own market data that some premiums in >>> the individual market will triple under these new burdens. The same is >>> likely to prove true for the employer-sponsored plans that provide >>> private coverage to about 177 million people today. Over time, the new >>> mandates will apply to all contracts, including for the large >>> businesses currently given a safe harbor from bureaucratic tampering >>> under a 1974 law called Erisa. >>> >>> The political incentive will always be for government to expand >>> benefits and reduce cost-sharing, trampling any chance of giving >>> individuals financial incentives to economize on care. Essentially, >>> all insurers will become government contractors, in the business of >>> fulfilling political demands: There will be no such thing as "private" >>> health insurance. >>> *** >>> >>> All of this is intentional, even if it isn't explicitly acknowledged. >>> The overriding liberal ambition is to finish the work began decades >>> ago as the Great Society of converting health care into a government >>> responsibility. Mr. Obama's own Medicare actuaries estimate that the >>> federal share of U.S. health dollars will quickly climb beyond 60% >>> from 46% today. One reason Mrs. Pelosi has fought so ferociously >>> against her own Blue Dog colleagues to include at least a scaled-back >>> "public option" entitlement program is so that the architecture is in >>> place for future Congresses to expand this share even further. >>> >>> As Congress's balance sheet drowns in trillions of dollars in new >>> obligations, the political system will have no choice but to start >>> making cost-minded decisions about which treatments patients are >>> allowed to receive. Democrats can't regulate their way out of the >>> reality that we live in a world of finite resources and infinite >>> wants. Once health care is nationalized, or mostly nationalized, >>> medical rationing is inevitable?especially for the innovative >>> high-cost technologies and drugs that are the future of medicine. >>> >>> Mr. Obama rode into office on a wave of "change," but we doubt most >>> voters realized that the change Democrats had in mind was making >>> health care even more expensive and rigid than the status quo. Critics >>> will say we are exaggerating, but we believe it is no stretch to say >>> that Mrs. Pelosi's handiwork ranks with the Smoot-Hawley tariff and >>> FDR's National Industrial Recovery Act as among the worst bills >>> Congress has ever seriously contemplated. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat >> you with experience. >> > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 11:21:15 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 10:21:15 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Worst Bill Ever In-Reply-To: <400985d70911020806k77449394m5e44d5c810c2fe68@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911020709k75318c87k70fd4a660d9cda9b@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911020748x41b830d8v7bf4e027b76b85ed@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911020806k77449394m5e44d5c810c2fe68@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911020821s5d3fa19cif97e0830acda24c@mail.gmail.com> Brad, It has never occurred to me that I might someday be forced to leave my country. If this health care bill passes, let alone Cap and Trade, I may not be left with a choice. They may have to send their friggin' tax bill to me in Argentina..... As for the GOP: They've been begging with no offect, since the presidential election last fall. Show me a candidate!.!.! If the best they can do is scoozapalooza, they may get a letter from me demanding a refund of my last donation. Rik On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 10:06 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > We'll see. The polls look good for sending a strong message tomorrow. > Hopefully, the GOP has already gotten the message in the NY-23rd. > Those bastards wasted $900,000 million on Dede and I can't wait for > the phone to ring asking me for more money! If I can get in, I hope to > visit Gene Taylor's office on Thursday. He's the Blue Dog Dem from > Southern Mississippi. I can't vote against him but I want him to know > I own a business in Gulfport and I sure-as-hell know a lot of people > who can. > > Here's the latest poll numbers on health care - > > http://tinyurl.com/kwqzrs > > So 42% favor it. Damn if that isn't close to the number of people who > don't pay federal income tax. Nah, no relationship there! > > Yeah, it can happen. All you need is the right Marxist at the helm. > > Brad > > On 11/2/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > Once again, if you had told me this would happen a year or two ago, I > would > > have said, in America something like this is just not possible. > > > > Silly Me. > > > > Rik > > > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> From the WSJ - > >> > >> * NOVEMBER 1, 2009, 11:23 P.M. ET > >> > >> The Worst Bill Ever > >> Epic new spending and taxes, pricier insurance, rationed care, > >> dishonest accounting: The Pelosi health bill has it all. > >> > >> > >> Speaker Nancy Pelosi has reportedly told fellow Democrats that she's > >> prepared to lose seats in 2010 if that's what it takes to pass > >> ObamaCare, and little wonder. The health bill she unwrapped last > >> Thursday, which President Obama hailed as a "critical milestone," may > >> well be the worst piece of post-New Deal legislation ever introduced. > >> > >> In a rational political world, this 1,990-page runaway train would > >> have been derailed months ago. With spending and debt already at > >> record peacetime levels, the bill creates a new and probably > >> unrepealable middle-class entitlement that is designed to expand over > >> time. Taxes will need to rise precipitously, even as ObamaCare so > >> dramatically expands government control of health care that eventually > >> all medicine will be rationed via politics. > >> > >> Yet at this point, Democrats have dumped any pretense of genuine > >> bipartisan "reform" and moved into the realm of pure power politics as > >> they race against the unpopularity of their own agenda. The goal is to > >> ram through whatever income-redistribution scheme they can claim to be > >> "universal coverage." The result will be destructive on every > >> level?for the health-care system, for the country's fiscal condition, > >> and ultimately for American freedom and prosperity. > >> > >> > >> ?The spending surge. The Congressional Budget Office figures the House > >> program will cost $1.055 trillion over a decade, which while far above > >> the $829 billion net cost that Mrs. Pelosi fed to credulous reporters > >> is still a low-ball estimate. Most of the money goes into > >> government-run "exchanges" where people earning between 150% and 400% > >> of the poverty level?that is, up to about $96,000 for a family of four > >> in 2016?could buy coverage at heavily subsidized rates, tied to > >> income. The government would pay for 93% of insurance costs for a > >> family making $42,000, 72% for another making $78,000, and so forth. > >> > >> At least at first, these benefits would be offered only to those whose > >> employers don't provide insurance or work for small businesses with > >> 100 or fewer workers. The taxpayer costs would be far higher if not > >> for this "firewall"?which is sure to cave in when people see the deal > >> their neighbors are getting on "free" health care. Mrs. Pelosi knows > >> this, like everyone else in Washington. > >> > >> Even so, the House disguises hundreds of billions of dollars in > >> additional costs with budget gimmicks. It "pays for" about six years > >> of program with a decade of revenue, with the heaviest costs > >> concentrated in the second five years. The House also pretends > >> Medicare payments to doctors will be cut by 21.5% next year and deeper > >> after that, "saving" about $250 billion. ObamaCare will be lucky to > >> cost under $2 trillion over 10 years; it will grow more after that. > >> > >> ? Expanding Medicaid, gutting private Medicare. All this is > >> particularly reckless given the unfunded liabilities of Medicare?now > >> north of $37 trillion over 75 years. Mrs. Pelosi wants to steal $426 > >> billion from future Medicare spending to "pay for" universal coverage. > >> While Medicare's price controls on doctors and hospitals are certain > >> to be tightened, the only cut that is a sure thing in practice is > >> gutting Medicare Advantage to the tune of $170 billion. Democrats > >> loathe this program because it gives one of out five seniors private > >> insurance options. > >> > >> As for Medicaid, the House will expand eligibility to everyone below > >> 150% of the poverty level, meaning that some 15 million new people > >> will be added to the rolls as private insurance gets crowded out at a > >> cost of $425 billion. A decade from now more than a quarter of the > >> population will be on a program originally intended for poor women, > >> children and the disabled. > >> > >> Even though the House will assume 91% of the "matching rate" for this > >> joint state-federal program?up from today's 57%?governors would still > >> be forced to take on $34 billion in new burdens when budgets from > >> Albany to Sacramento are in fiscal collapse. Washington's budget will > >> collapse too, if anything like the House bill passes. > >> > >> ? European levels of taxation. All told, the House favors $572 billion > >> in new taxes, mostly by imposing a 5.4-percentage-point "surcharge" on > >> joint filers earning over $1 million, $500,000 for singles. This tax > >> will raise the top marginal rate to 45% in 2011 from 39.6% when the > >> Bush tax cuts expire?not counting state income taxes and the phase-out > >> of certain deductions and exemptions. The burden will mostly fall on > >> the small businesses that have organized as Subchapter S or limited > >> liability corporations, since the truly wealthy won't have any > >> difficulty sheltering their incomes. > >> > >> This surtax could hit ever more earners because, like the alternative > >> minimum tax, it isn't indexed for inflation. Yet it still won't be > >> nearly enough. Even if Congress had confiscated 100% of the taxable > >> income of people earning over $500,000 in the boom year of 2006, it > >> would have only raised $1.3 trillion. When Democrats end up soaking > >> the middle class, perhaps via the European-style value-added tax that > >> Mrs. Pelosi has endorsed, they'll claim the deficits that they created > >> made them do it. > >> > >> Under another new tax, businesses would have to surrender 8% of their > >> payroll to government if they don't offer insurance or pay at least > >> 72.5% of their workers' premiums, which eat into wages. Such "play or > >> pay" taxes always become "pay or pay" and will rise over time, with > >> severe consequences for hiring, job creation and ultimately growth. > >> While the U.S. already has one of the highest corporate income tax > >> rates in the world, Democrats are on the way to creating a high > >> structural unemployment rate, much as Europe has done by expanding its > >> welfare states. > >> > >> Meanwhile, a tax equal to 2.5% of adjusted gross income will also be > >> imposed on some 18 million people who CBO expects still won't buy > >> insurance in 2019. Democrats could make this penalty even higher, but > >> that is politically unacceptable, or they could make the subsidies > >> even higher, but that would expose the (already ludicrous) illusion > >> that ObamaCare will reduce the deficit. > >> > >> ? The insurance takeover. A new "health choices commissioner" will > >> decide what counts as "essential benefits," which all insurers will > >> have to offer as first-dollar coverage. Private insurers will also be > >> told how much they are allowed to charge even as they will have to > >> offer coverage at virtually the same price to anyone who applies, > >> regardless of health status or medical history. > >> > >> The cost of insurance, naturally, will skyrocket. The insurer > >> WellPoint estimates based on its own market data that some premiums in > >> the individual market will triple under these new burdens. The same is > >> likely to prove true for the employer-sponsored plans that provide > >> private coverage to about 177 million people today. Over time, the new > >> mandates will apply to all contracts, including for the large > >> businesses currently given a safe harbor from bureaucratic tampering > >> under a 1974 law called Erisa. > >> > >> The political incentive will always be for government to expand > >> benefits and reduce cost-sharing, trampling any chance of giving > >> individuals financial incentives to economize on care. Essentially, > >> all insurers will become government contractors, in the business of > >> fulfilling political demands: There will be no such thing as "private" > >> health insurance. > >> *** > >> > >> All of this is intentional, even if it isn't explicitly acknowledged. > >> The overriding liberal ambition is to finish the work began decades > >> ago as the Great Society of converting health care into a government > >> responsibility. Mr. Obama's own Medicare actuaries estimate that the > >> federal share of U.S. health dollars will quickly climb beyond 60% > >> from 46% today. One reason Mrs. Pelosi has fought so ferociously > >> against her own Blue Dog colleagues to include at least a scaled-back > >> "public option" entitlement program is so that the architecture is in > >> place for future Congresses to expand this share even further. > >> > >> As Congress's balance sheet drowns in trillions of dollars in new > >> obligations, the political system will have no choice but to start > >> making cost-minded decisions about which treatments patients are > >> allowed to receive. Democrats can't regulate their way out of the > >> reality that we live in a world of finite resources and infinite > >> wants. Once health care is nationalized, or mostly nationalized, > >> medical rationing is inevitable?especially for the innovative > >> high-cost technologies and drugs that are the future of medicine. > >> > >> Mr. Obama rode into office on a wave of "change," but we doubt most > >> voters realized that the change Democrats had in mind was making > >> health care even more expensive and rigid than the status quo. Critics > >> will say we are exaggerating, but we believe it is no stretch to say > >> that Mrs. Pelosi's handiwork ranks with the Smoot-Hawley tariff and > >> FDR's National Industrial Recovery Act as among the worst bills > >> Congress has ever seriously contemplated. > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > > you with experience. > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091102/ee5e2626/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 11:37:09 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 10:37:09 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] It Is This Serious! In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911020809y5973d7cetcd05be2c9abc4fc1@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911020745g6da0e631v55be84acabb57d83@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911020809y5973d7cetcd05be2c9abc4fc1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911020837j6c13e8e4t31b4388b3779e17a@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Most people don't have a clue. In medieval times, serfs owed 1/3 of what they earned to the King. After the Civil War, share croppers owed 1/3 of their produce to the landowner. The average citizen in this nation works until May to meet their obligations to the government. That was yesterday. Our renter for our second apartment in Beijing decided to break the lease but Fan's sister found a buyer and we've decided to sell. We're going to buy a smaller apartment unit nearer the center of town. The "hot ticket" these days in Beijing is to renovate old hutongs (there's only 3000 left in the city). These are the old walled family complexes. Her grandfather owned one that several generations lived in with aunts and uncles. First, they took one unit and forced the family to consolidate. By the time it was all over, her grandfather was down to one room in a unit he shared with strangers. It took some time but they got it done. People think it can't happen here. If a culture that has been around for 6000 years can have their world turned upside-down in a few years time, it sure as hell can happen with a country that is only 233 years old. Do we have a Statue of Liberty or a Statue of Necessities? Brad On 11/2/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Depressing Indeed!! Hell, we're not even talking about paying down debt, > merely getting back to break even!!! > > This is not only stupid, it is shameful!! > > If I were a congress person now, I believe the threat of real physical > violence would have to be crossing my mind. > > Rik > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> This is a depressing way to start the week - >> >> http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/ff197.pdf >> >> As has been pointed out by many others, if we confiscated ALL the >> income of the "wealthy" it wouldn't pay for health-care, much less for >> all the other shit. When something can't continue, it won't. That >> isn't the point or the objective of our current leadership. Our >> nation is under attack, and the POTUS is leading the charge. >> >> Forget the War on Terror for the time being. The new Cold Civil War >> is what we need to be focused on. We won the first Cold War. Pray >> that we win the second. >> >> Brad >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 12:24:27 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 11:24:27 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Worst Bill Ever In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911020821s5d3fa19cif97e0830acda24c@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911020709k75318c87k70fd4a660d9cda9b@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911020748x41b830d8v7bf4e027b76b85ed@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911020806k77449394m5e44d5c810c2fe68@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911020821s5d3fa19cif97e0830acda24c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911020924v35ef2f9blb822218421a92689@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Speaking of Scoozapalooza .... WHAT AN ASSHOLE.!.!.! This from Malkin's blog ______________ http://michellemalkin.com/2009/11/01/how-scozzafava-repays-nrcc-and-rnc/ She repaid the GOP by endorsing Democrat candidate Bill Owens. Some gratitude,eh? ?Since beginning my campaign, I have told you that this election is not about me; it?s about the people of this District,? Scozzafava wrote in an e-mail sent to supporters this afternoon. ?It is in this spirit that I am writing to let you know I am supporting Bill Owens for Congress and urge you to do the same.? ______________ I hope the GOP sues her, into the poor house. Rik On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > It has never occurred to me that I might someday be forced to leave my > country. If this health care bill passes, let alone Cap and Trade, I may not > be left with a choice. They may have to send their friggin' tax bill to me > in Argentina..... > > As for the GOP: They've been begging with no offect, since the presidential > election last fall. Show me a candidate!.!.! If the best they can do is > scoozapalooza, they may get a letter from me demanding a refund of my last > donation. > > Rik > > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 10:06 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> We'll see. The polls look good for sending a strong message tomorrow. >> Hopefully, the GOP has already gotten the message in the NY-23rd. >> Those bastards wasted $900,000 million on Dede and I can't wait for >> the phone to ring asking me for more money! If I can get in, I hope to >> visit Gene Taylor's office on Thursday. He's the Blue Dog Dem from >> Southern Mississippi. I can't vote against him but I want him to know >> I own a business in Gulfport and I sure-as-hell know a lot of people >> who can. >> >> Here's the latest poll numbers on health care - >> >> http://tinyurl.com/kwqzrs >> >> So 42% favor it. Damn if that isn't close to the number of people who >> don't pay federal income tax. Nah, no relationship there! >> >> Yeah, it can happen. All you need is the right Marxist at the helm. >> >> Brad >> >> On 11/2/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> > Brad, >> > >> > Once again, if you had told me this would happen a year or two ago, I >> would >> > have said, in America something like this is just not possible. >> > >> > Silly Me. >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> From the WSJ - >> >> >> >> * NOVEMBER 1, 2009, 11:23 P.M. ET >> >> >> >> The Worst Bill Ever >> >> Epic new spending and taxes, pricier insurance, rationed care, >> >> dishonest accounting: The Pelosi health bill has it all. >> >> >> >> >> >> Speaker Nancy Pelosi has reportedly told fellow Democrats that she's >> >> prepared to lose seats in 2010 if that's what it takes to pass >> >> ObamaCare, and little wonder. The health bill she unwrapped last >> >> Thursday, which President Obama hailed as a "critical milestone," may >> >> well be the worst piece of post-New Deal legislation ever introduced. >> >> >> >> In a rational political world, this 1,990-page runaway train would >> >> have been derailed months ago. With spending and debt already at >> >> record peacetime levels, the bill creates a new and probably >> >> unrepealable middle-class entitlement that is designed to expand over >> >> time. Taxes will need to rise precipitously, even as ObamaCare so >> >> dramatically expands government control of health care that eventually >> >> all medicine will be rationed via politics. >> >> >> >> Yet at this point, Democrats have dumped any pretense of genuine >> >> bipartisan "reform" and moved into the realm of pure power politics as >> >> they race against the unpopularity of their own agenda. The goal is to >> >> ram through whatever income-redistribution scheme they can claim to be >> >> "universal coverage." The result will be destructive on every >> >> level?for the health-care system, for the country's fiscal condition, >> >> and ultimately for American freedom and prosperity. >> >> >> >> >> >> ?The spending surge. The Congressional Budget Office figures the House >> >> program will cost $1.055 trillion over a decade, which while far above >> >> the $829 billion net cost that Mrs. Pelosi fed to credulous reporters >> >> is still a low-ball estimate. Most of the money goes into >> >> government-run "exchanges" where people earning between 150% and 400% >> >> of the poverty level?that is, up to about $96,000 for a family of four >> >> in 2016?could buy coverage at heavily subsidized rates, tied to >> >> income. The government would pay for 93% of insurance costs for a >> >> family making $42,000, 72% for another making $78,000, and so forth. >> >> >> >> At least at first, these benefits would be offered only to those whose >> >> employers don't provide insurance or work for small businesses with >> >> 100 or fewer workers. The taxpayer costs would be far higher if not >> >> for this "firewall"?which is sure to cave in when people see the deal >> >> their neighbors are getting on "free" health care. Mrs. Pelosi knows >> >> this, like everyone else in Washington. >> >> >> >> Even so, the House disguises hundreds of billions of dollars in >> >> additional costs with budget gimmicks. It "pays for" about six years >> >> of program with a decade of revenue, with the heaviest costs >> >> concentrated in the second five years. The House also pretends >> >> Medicare payments to doctors will be cut by 21.5% next year and deeper >> >> after that, "saving" about $250 billion. ObamaCare will be lucky to >> >> cost under $2 trillion over 10 years; it will grow more after that. >> >> >> >> ? Expanding Medicaid, gutting private Medicare. All this is >> >> particularly reckless given the unfunded liabilities of Medicare?now >> >> north of $37 trillion over 75 years. Mrs. Pelosi wants to steal $426 >> >> billion from future Medicare spending to "pay for" universal coverage. >> >> While Medicare's price controls on doctors and hospitals are certain >> >> to be tightened, the only cut that is a sure thing in practice is >> >> gutting Medicare Advantage to the tune of $170 billion. Democrats >> >> loathe this program because it gives one of out five seniors private >> >> insurance options. >> >> >> >> As for Medicaid, the House will expand eligibility to everyone below >> >> 150% of the poverty level, meaning that some 15 million new people >> >> will be added to the rolls as private insurance gets crowded out at a >> >> cost of $425 billion. A decade from now more than a quarter of the >> >> population will be on a program originally intended for poor women, >> >> children and the disabled. >> >> >> >> Even though the House will assume 91% of the "matching rate" for this >> >> joint state-federal program?up from today's 57%?governors would still >> >> be forced to take on $34 billion in new burdens when budgets from >> >> Albany to Sacramento are in fiscal collapse. Washington's budget will >> >> collapse too, if anything like the House bill passes. >> >> >> >> ? European levels of taxation. All told, the House favors $572 billion >> >> in new taxes, mostly by imposing a 5.4-percentage-point "surcharge" on >> >> joint filers earning over $1 million, $500,000 for singles. This tax >> >> will raise the top marginal rate to 45% in 2011 from 39.6% when the >> >> Bush tax cuts expire?not counting state income taxes and the phase-out >> >> of certain deductions and exemptions. The burden will mostly fall on >> >> the small businesses that have organized as Subchapter S or limited >> >> liability corporations, since the truly wealthy won't have any >> >> difficulty sheltering their incomes. >> >> >> >> This surtax could hit ever more earners because, like the alternative >> >> minimum tax, it isn't indexed for inflation. Yet it still won't be >> >> nearly enough. Even if Congress had confiscated 100% of the taxable >> >> income of people earning over $500,000 in the boom year of 2006, it >> >> would have only raised $1.3 trillion. When Democrats end up soaking >> >> the middle class, perhaps via the European-style value-added tax that >> >> Mrs. Pelosi has endorsed, they'll claim the deficits that they created >> >> made them do it. >> >> >> >> Under another new tax, businesses would have to surrender 8% of their >> >> payroll to government if they don't offer insurance or pay at least >> >> 72.5% of their workers' premiums, which eat into wages. Such "play or >> >> pay" taxes always become "pay or pay" and will rise over time, with >> >> severe consequences for hiring, job creation and ultimately growth. >> >> While the U.S. already has one of the highest corporate income tax >> >> rates in the world, Democrats are on the way to creating a high >> >> structural unemployment rate, much as Europe has done by expanding its >> >> welfare states. >> >> >> >> Meanwhile, a tax equal to 2.5% of adjusted gross income will also be >> >> imposed on some 18 million people who CBO expects still won't buy >> >> insurance in 2019. Democrats could make this penalty even higher, but >> >> that is politically unacceptable, or they could make the subsidies >> >> even higher, but that would expose the (already ludicrous) illusion >> >> that ObamaCare will reduce the deficit. >> >> >> >> ? The insurance takeover. A new "health choices commissioner" will >> >> decide what counts as "essential benefits," which all insurers will >> >> have to offer as first-dollar coverage. Private insurers will also be >> >> told how much they are allowed to charge even as they will have to >> >> offer coverage at virtually the same price to anyone who applies, >> >> regardless of health status or medical history. >> >> >> >> The cost of insurance, naturally, will skyrocket. The insurer >> >> WellPoint estimates based on its own market data that some premiums in >> >> the individual market will triple under these new burdens. The same is >> >> likely to prove true for the employer-sponsored plans that provide >> >> private coverage to about 177 million people today. Over time, the new >> >> mandates will apply to all contracts, including for the large >> >> businesses currently given a safe harbor from bureaucratic tampering >> >> under a 1974 law called Erisa. >> >> >> >> The political incentive will always be for government to expand >> >> benefits and reduce cost-sharing, trampling any chance of giving >> >> individuals financial incentives to economize on care. Essentially, >> >> all insurers will become government contractors, in the business of >> >> fulfilling political demands: There will be no such thing as "private" >> >> health insurance. >> >> *** >> >> >> >> All of this is intentional, even if it isn't explicitly acknowledged. >> >> The overriding liberal ambition is to finish the work began decades >> >> ago as the Great Society of converting health care into a government >> >> responsibility. Mr. Obama's own Medicare actuaries estimate that the >> >> federal share of U.S. health dollars will quickly climb beyond 60% >> >> from 46% today. One reason Mrs. Pelosi has fought so ferociously >> >> against her own Blue Dog colleagues to include at least a scaled-back >> >> "public option" entitlement program is so that the architecture is in >> >> place for future Congresses to expand this share even further. >> >> >> >> As Congress's balance sheet drowns in trillions of dollars in new >> >> obligations, the political system will have no choice but to start >> >> making cost-minded decisions about which treatments patients are >> >> allowed to receive. Democrats can't regulate their way out of the >> >> reality that we live in a world of finite resources and infinite >> >> wants. Once health care is nationalized, or mostly nationalized, >> >> medical rationing is inevitable?especially for the innovative >> >> high-cost technologies and drugs that are the future of medicine. >> >> >> >> Mr. Obama rode into office on a wave of "change," but we doubt most >> >> voters realized that the change Democrats had in mind was making >> >> health care even more expensive and rigid than the status quo. Critics >> >> will say we are exaggerating, but we believe it is no stretch to say >> >> that Mrs. Pelosi's handiwork ranks with the Smoot-Hawley tariff and >> >> FDR's National Industrial Recovery Act as among the worst bills >> >> Congress has ever seriously contemplated. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> beat >> > you with experience. >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091102/7d14724f/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 12:38:29 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 11:38:29 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Worst Bill Ever In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911020924v35ef2f9blb822218421a92689@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911020709k75318c87k70fd4a660d9cda9b@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911020748x41b830d8v7bf4e027b76b85ed@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911020806k77449394m5e44d5c810c2fe68@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911020821s5d3fa19cif97e0830acda24c@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911020924v35ef2f9blb822218421a92689@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911020938v48e6158fm59d36c1fe3c825c0@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Micheal Steele "screwed the pooch" on this one, big time. Ed was right. There was a better candidate to lead the GOP. Lesson learned. Brad On 11/2/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Speaking of Scoozapalooza .... WHAT AN ASSHOLE.!.!.! > > This from Malkin's blog > > ______________ > http://michellemalkin.com/2009/11/01/how-scozzafava-repays-nrcc-and-rnc/ > > She repaid the GOP by endorsing Democrat candidate Bill Owens. Some > gratitude,eh? > > ?Since beginning my campaign, I have told you that this election is not > about me; it?s about the people of this District,? Scozzafava wrote in an > e-mail sent to supporters this afternoon. > > ?It is in this spirit that I am writing to let you know I am supporting Bill > Owens for Congress and urge you to do the same.? > > ______________ > > I hope the GOP sues her, into the poor house. > > Rik > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Rik Sandberg wrote: > >> Brad, >> >> It has never occurred to me that I might someday be forced to leave my >> country. If this health care bill passes, let alone Cap and Trade, I may >> not >> be left with a choice. They may have to send their friggin' tax bill to me >> in Argentina..... >> >> As for the GOP: They've been begging with no offect, since the >> presidential >> election last fall. Show me a candidate!.!.! If the best they can do is >> scoozapalooza, they may get a letter from me demanding a refund of my last >> donation. >> >> Rik >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 10:06 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> >>> Rik, >>> >>> We'll see. The polls look good for sending a strong message tomorrow. >>> Hopefully, the GOP has already gotten the message in the NY-23rd. >>> Those bastards wasted $900,000 million on Dede and I can't wait for >>> the phone to ring asking me for more money! If I can get in, I hope to >>> visit Gene Taylor's office on Thursday. He's the Blue Dog Dem from >>> Southern Mississippi. I can't vote against him but I want him to know >>> I own a business in Gulfport and I sure-as-hell know a lot of people >>> who can. >>> >>> Here's the latest poll numbers on health care - >>> >>> http://tinyurl.com/kwqzrs >>> >>> So 42% favor it. Damn if that isn't close to the number of people who >>> don't pay federal income tax. Nah, no relationship there! >>> >>> Yeah, it can happen. All you need is the right Marxist at the helm. >>> >>> Brad >>> >>> On 11/2/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >>> > Brad, >>> > >>> > Once again, if you had told me this would happen a year or two ago, I >>> would >>> > have said, in America something like this is just not possible. >>> > >>> > Silly Me. >>> > >>> > Rik >>> > >>> > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >>> > >>> >> From the WSJ - >>> >> >>> >> * NOVEMBER 1, 2009, 11:23 P.M. ET >>> >> >>> >> The Worst Bill Ever >>> >> Epic new spending and taxes, pricier insurance, rationed care, >>> >> dishonest accounting: The Pelosi health bill has it all. >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> Speaker Nancy Pelosi has reportedly told fellow Democrats that she's >>> >> prepared to lose seats in 2010 if that's what it takes to pass >>> >> ObamaCare, and little wonder. The health bill she unwrapped last >>> >> Thursday, which President Obama hailed as a "critical milestone," may >>> >> well be the worst piece of post-New Deal legislation ever introduced. >>> >> >>> >> In a rational political world, this 1,990-page runaway train would >>> >> have been derailed months ago. With spending and debt already at >>> >> record peacetime levels, the bill creates a new and probably >>> >> unrepealable middle-class entitlement that is designed to expand over >>> >> time. Taxes will need to rise precipitously, even as ObamaCare so >>> >> dramatically expands government control of health care that eventually >>> >> all medicine will be rationed via politics. >>> >> >>> >> Yet at this point, Democrats have dumped any pretense of genuine >>> >> bipartisan "reform" and moved into the realm of pure power politics as >>> >> they race against the unpopularity of their own agenda. The goal is to >>> >> ram through whatever income-redistribution scheme they can claim to be >>> >> "universal coverage." The result will be destructive on every >>> >> level?for the health-care system, for the country's fiscal condition, >>> >> and ultimately for American freedom and prosperity. >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> ?The spending surge. The Congressional Budget Office figures the House >>> >> program will cost $1.055 trillion over a decade, which while far above >>> >> the $829 billion net cost that Mrs. Pelosi fed to credulous reporters >>> >> is still a low-ball estimate. Most of the money goes into >>> >> government-run "exchanges" where people earning between 150% and 400% >>> >> of the poverty level?that is, up to about $96,000 for a family of four >>> >> in 2016?could buy coverage at heavily subsidized rates, tied to >>> >> income. The government would pay for 93% of insurance costs for a >>> >> family making $42,000, 72% for another making $78,000, and so forth. >>> >> >>> >> At least at first, these benefits would be offered only to those whose >>> >> employers don't provide insurance or work for small businesses with >>> >> 100 or fewer workers. The taxpayer costs would be far higher if not >>> >> for this "firewall"?which is sure to cave in when people see the deal >>> >> their neighbors are getting on "free" health care. Mrs. Pelosi knows >>> >> this, like everyone else in Washington. >>> >> >>> >> Even so, the House disguises hundreds of billions of dollars in >>> >> additional costs with budget gimmicks. It "pays for" about six years >>> >> of program with a decade of revenue, with the heaviest costs >>> >> concentrated in the second five years. The House also pretends >>> >> Medicare payments to doctors will be cut by 21.5% next year and deeper >>> >> after that, "saving" about $250 billion. ObamaCare will be lucky to >>> >> cost under $2 trillion over 10 years; it will grow more after that. >>> >> >>> >> ? Expanding Medicaid, gutting private Medicare. All this is >>> >> particularly reckless given the unfunded liabilities of Medicare?now >>> >> north of $37 trillion over 75 years. Mrs. Pelosi wants to steal $426 >>> >> billion from future Medicare spending to "pay for" universal coverage. >>> >> While Medicare's price controls on doctors and hospitals are certain >>> >> to be tightened, the only cut that is a sure thing in practice is >>> >> gutting Medicare Advantage to the tune of $170 billion. Democrats >>> >> loathe this program because it gives one of out five seniors private >>> >> insurance options. >>> >> >>> >> As for Medicaid, the House will expand eligibility to everyone below >>> >> 150% of the poverty level, meaning that some 15 million new people >>> >> will be added to the rolls as private insurance gets crowded out at a >>> >> cost of $425 billion. A decade from now more than a quarter of the >>> >> population will be on a program originally intended for poor women, >>> >> children and the disabled. >>> >> >>> >> Even though the House will assume 91% of the "matching rate" for this >>> >> joint state-federal program?up from today's 57%?governors would still >>> >> be forced to take on $34 billion in new burdens when budgets from >>> >> Albany to Sacramento are in fiscal collapse. Washington's budget will >>> >> collapse too, if anything like the House bill passes. >>> >> >>> >> ? European levels of taxation. All told, the House favors $572 billion >>> >> in new taxes, mostly by imposing a 5.4-percentage-point "surcharge" on >>> >> joint filers earning over $1 million, $500,000 for singles. This tax >>> >> will raise the top marginal rate to 45% in 2011 from 39.6% when the >>> >> Bush tax cuts expire?not counting state income taxes and the phase-out >>> >> of certain deductions and exemptions. The burden will mostly fall on >>> >> the small businesses that have organized as Subchapter S or limited >>> >> liability corporations, since the truly wealthy won't have any >>> >> difficulty sheltering their incomes. >>> >> >>> >> This surtax could hit ever more earners because, like the alternative >>> >> minimum tax, it isn't indexed for inflation. Yet it still won't be >>> >> nearly enough. Even if Congress had confiscated 100% of the taxable >>> >> income of people earning over $500,000 in the boom year of 2006, it >>> >> would have only raised $1.3 trillion. When Democrats end up soaking >>> >> the middle class, perhaps via the European-style value-added tax that >>> >> Mrs. Pelosi has endorsed, they'll claim the deficits that they created >>> >> made them do it. >>> >> >>> >> Under another new tax, businesses would have to surrender 8% of their >>> >> payroll to government if they don't offer insurance or pay at least >>> >> 72.5% of their workers' premiums, which eat into wages. Such "play or >>> >> pay" taxes always become "pay or pay" and will rise over time, with >>> >> severe consequences for hiring, job creation and ultimately growth. >>> >> While the U.S. already has one of the highest corporate income tax >>> >> rates in the world, Democrats are on the way to creating a high >>> >> structural unemployment rate, much as Europe has done by expanding its >>> >> welfare states. >>> >> >>> >> Meanwhile, a tax equal to 2.5% of adjusted gross income will also be >>> >> imposed on some 18 million people who CBO expects still won't buy >>> >> insurance in 2019. Democrats could make this penalty even higher, but >>> >> that is politically unacceptable, or they could make the subsidies >>> >> even higher, but that would expose the (already ludicrous) illusion >>> >> that ObamaCare will reduce the deficit. >>> >> >>> >> ? The insurance takeover. A new "health choices commissioner" will >>> >> decide what counts as "essential benefits," which all insurers will >>> >> have to offer as first-dollar coverage. Private insurers will also be >>> >> told how much they are allowed to charge even as they will have to >>> >> offer coverage at virtually the same price to anyone who applies, >>> >> regardless of health status or medical history. >>> >> >>> >> The cost of insurance, naturally, will skyrocket. The insurer >>> >> WellPoint estimates based on its own market data that some premiums in >>> >> the individual market will triple under these new burdens. The same is >>> >> likely to prove true for the employer-sponsored plans that provide >>> >> private coverage to about 177 million people today. Over time, the new >>> >> mandates will apply to all contracts, including for the large >>> >> businesses currently given a safe harbor from bureaucratic tampering >>> >> under a 1974 law called Erisa. >>> >> >>> >> The political incentive will always be for government to expand >>> >> benefits and reduce cost-sharing, trampling any chance of giving >>> >> individuals financial incentives to economize on care. Essentially, >>> >> all insurers will become government contractors, in the business of >>> >> fulfilling political demands: There will be no such thing as "private" >>> >> health insurance. >>> >> *** >>> >> >>> >> All of this is intentional, even if it isn't explicitly acknowledged. >>> >> The overriding liberal ambition is to finish the work began decades >>> >> ago as the Great Society of converting health care into a government >>> >> responsibility. Mr. Obama's own Medicare actuaries estimate that the >>> >> federal share of U.S. health dollars will quickly climb beyond 60% >>> >> from 46% today. One reason Mrs. Pelosi has fought so ferociously >>> >> against her own Blue Dog colleagues to include at least a scaled-back >>> >> "public option" entitlement program is so that the architecture is in >>> >> place for future Congresses to expand this share even further. >>> >> >>> >> As Congress's balance sheet drowns in trillions of dollars in new >>> >> obligations, the political system will have no choice but to start >>> >> making cost-minded decisions about which treatments patients are >>> >> allowed to receive. Democrats can't regulate their way out of the >>> >> reality that we live in a world of finite resources and infinite >>> >> wants. Once health care is nationalized, or mostly nationalized, >>> >> medical rationing is inevitable?especially for the innovative >>> >> high-cost technologies and drugs that are the future of medicine. >>> >> >>> >> Mr. Obama rode into office on a wave of "change," but we doubt most >>> >> voters realized that the change Democrats had in mind was making >>> >> health care even more expensive and rigid than the status quo. Critics >>> >> will say we are exaggerating, but we believe it is no stretch to say >>> >> that Mrs. Pelosi's handiwork ranks with the Smoot-Hawley tariff and >>> >> FDR's National Industrial Recovery Act as among the worst bills >>> >> Congress has ever seriously contemplated. >>> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> >> >>> >> >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >>> beat >>> > you with experience. >>> > >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat >> you with experience. >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 15:07:43 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 14:07:43 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Katrina Message-ID: <400985d70911021207s52edcb5byb5de393c17e72659@mail.gmail.com> What a long strange trip it's been! One of our earlier clients (after the Vietnamese) was Bob B*^n. He was an ex SeaBee and tough as nails. We destroyed his house (for a price). Old Bob made the mistake of getting in my brothers face. My best friend of 30+ years made the same mistake of abusing my oldest son in front of Old Bob. Isn't it strange how alliances are formed? Old Bob is leaving us this week. I'm trying my best to be sad but the old bastard is so positive about everything! Bob, I love you and your ilk! You were willing to throw a punch after the strength to raise a glass was expired. You will not be forgotten. Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 20:49:50 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 19:49:50 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Twenty Years! Message-ID: <400985d70911021749i55c564faye79e34b3ad775e2a@mail.gmail.com> "I sat in that church for twenty years and never heard him say those things" - Barack Obama http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxfumgUTm5I&feature=player_embedded From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 20:59:14 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 19:59:14 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Twenty Years! In-Reply-To: <400985d70911021749i55c564faye79e34b3ad775e2a@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911021749i55c564faye79e34b3ad775e2a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911021759va6e09fak8a1774a365a85e28@mail.gmail.com> He was a dik then .... it's plain, nothing's changed Rik On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 7:49 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > "I sat in that church for twenty years and never heard him say those > things" - Barack Obama > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxfumgUTm5I&feature=player_embedded > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091102/9b8c27ed/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 21:00:35 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 20:00:35 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Which Way to Washington? Message-ID: <400985d70911021800y6d8b67ddv6f9ce665e48e138@mail.gmail.com> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CT7xfoSiH5Q&feature=player_embedded Let's Roll! Brad From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 21:17:37 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 20:17:37 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Elle Message-ID: <6634e19e0911021817k2560df7did69ed6cda56a13dc@mail.gmail.com> Elle, Tried to email you earlier. Are you there?? Rik -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091102/4370625b/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 22:41:47 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 21:41:47 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Hmmmmmmmm Message-ID: <400985d70911021941v62afc721h23cd0d1a1363dc7b@mail.gmail.com> Marsha Blackburn is the congressman from my district. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html?_r=1 From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 23:38:46 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 22:38:46 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Hmmmmmmmm In-Reply-To: <400985d70911021941v62afc721h23cd0d1a1363dc7b@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911021941v62afc721h23cd0d1a1363dc7b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911022038w1b69bb34sf2bbf791b70dc187@mail.gmail.com> Brad, It's simple. Make up a few lies and scare the hell out of all the gullible lemming/sheeple types. then sit back and let them make you a hundred million or so. Brilliant!!! I just happened to be reading this when your email showed up: http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/goreerrors.html Here's more. The science is settled, MY ASS http://www.middlebury.net/op-ed/global-warming-01.html Rik On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 9:41 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Marsha Blackburn is the congressman from my district. > > > http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html?_r=1 > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091102/6bb6c35b/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Tue Nov 3 07:47:40 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 06:47:40 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] It Is This Serious! In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911020809y5973d7cetcd05be2c9abc4fc1@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911020745g6da0e631v55be84acabb57d83@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911020809y5973d7cetcd05be2c9abc4fc1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911030447j292b13f4kc803ed3421c453fc@mail.gmail.com> Rik, We're obviously not the only ones looking at this situation and scratching our heads. You and I have both been leveraged up to our ass in business before, but we had a plan. What plan does the US have. Wait till interest rates start rising - and they will! What then? (article below from the Washington Post - they're supposed to be Obama cheerleeders - oops) Brad ---------- Could America go broke? By Robert J. Samuelson Monday, November 2, 2009 The idea that the government of a major advanced country would default on its debt -- that is, tell lenders that it won't repay them all they're owed -- was, until recently, a preposterous proposition. Argentina and Russia have stiffed their creditors, but surely the likes of the United States, Japan or Britain wouldn't. Well, it's still a very, very long shot, but it's no longer entirely unimaginable. Governments of rich countries are borrowing so much that it's conceivable that one day the twin assumptions underlying their burgeoning debt (that lenders will continue to lend and that governments will continue to pay) might collapse. What happens then? The question is so unfamiliar that the past provides few clues to the future. Psychology is crucial. To take a parallel example: the dollar. The fear is that foreigners (and Americans, too) will lose confidence in its value and dump it for yen, euros, gold or oil. If too many investors do that, a self-fulfilling stampede could trigger sell-offs in U.S. stocks and bonds. People have predicted such a crisis for decades. It hasn't happened yet. The currency's decline has been orderly, because the dollar retains a bedrock confidence based on America's political stability, openness, wealth and low inflation. But something could shatter that confidence -- tomorrow or 10 years from tomorrow. The same logic applies to exploding government debt. We have moved into uncharted territory and are prisoners of psychology. Consider Japan. In 2009, its budget deficit -- the gap between spending and taxes -- amounts to 10 percent or more of gross domestic product (GDP). The total government debt -- the borrowing to cover all its deficits -- is approaching 200 percent of GDP. That's twice the size of its economy. The mountainous debt reflects years of slow economic growth, many "stimulus" plans, an aging society and the impact of the global recession. By 2019, the debt-to-GDP ratio could hit 300 percent, says a report from JPMorgan Chase. No one knows how to interpret these numbers. If someone had predicted 20 years ago that Japan's debt would rise so spectacularly, the forecast would doubtlessly have inspired this alarm: Japan will pay crushing interest rates as fearful lenders demand high returns to compensate for the risk that government might default or inflate away its debt. Instead, the opposite has happened. Japanese investors -- households, banks, insurers -- have absorbed 94 percent of the debt, reports JPMorgan. Interest rates on 10-year Japanese government bonds have dropped from 7.1 percent in 1990 to 1.4 percent now. Superficially, it's possible to explain this. Japan has ample private savings to buy bonds; modest deflation -- falling prices -- makes low interest rates acceptable; and investors remain confident that new and maturing debt will be financed. The American situation is similar. Despite huge deficits, interest rates on 10-year Treasury bonds have hovered around 3.5 percent. In time of financial crisis, investors have sought the apparent sanctuary of government bonds. But the correct conclusion to draw is not that major governments (such as Japan and the United States) can easily borrow as much as they want. It is that they can easily borrow as much as they want until confidence that they can do so evaporates -- and we don't know when, how or whether that may happen. Wealthy societies everywhere face a similar dilemma. Debt is ballooning from already high levels. The Congressional Budget Office reckons the Obama administration's planned budgets would increase the debt-to-GDP ratio from 41 percent in 2008 to 82 percent in 2019. Higher interest rates would aggravate the debt burden. Anticipating higher rates, the CBO estimates annual interest payments on the federal debt at $799 billion in 2019, up from $170 billion in 2009. Even the size of exposed debt is unclear; adding Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's debts (effectively guaranteed by the government) to Treasury debt would raise the total sharply. But containing debt by spending cuts or tax increases would involve wrenching and unpopular measures that might, perversely, weaken the economy and worsen deficits. In Japan, the existing value-added tax (national sales tax) of 5 percent would have to go to 12 percent, says JPMorgan, along with deep spending cuts. Against choices like that, some advanced country might decide that a partial or complete default, though dire, would be less damaging economically and politically than the alternatives. Deprived of international or domestic credit, defaulting countries in the past have suffered deep economic downturns, hyperinflation, or both. The odds may be against a wealthy society tempting that fate, but even the remote possibility underlines the precariousness and the novelty of the present situation. The arguments over whether we need more "stimulus" (and debt) obscure the larger reality that past debt increasingly constricts governments' economic maneuvering room. On 11/2/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Depressing Indeed!! Hell, we're not even talking about paying down debt, > merely getting back to break even!!! > > This is not only stupid, it is shameful!! > > If I were a congress person now, I believe the threat of real physical > violence would have to be crossing my mind. > > Rik > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> This is a depressing way to start the week - >> >> http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/ff197.pdf >> >> As has been pointed out by many others, if we confiscated ALL the >> income of the "wealthy" it wouldn't pay for health-care, much less for >> all the other shit. When something can't continue, it won't. That >> isn't the point or the objective of our current leadership. Our >> nation is under attack, and the POTUS is leading the charge. >> >> Forget the War on Terror for the time being. The new Cold Civil War >> is what we need to be focused on. We won the first Cold War. Pray >> that we win the second. >> >> Brad >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From flybrad at gmail.com Tue Nov 3 09:01:40 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 08:01:40 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Twenty Years! In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911021759va6e09fak8a1774a365a85e28@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911021749i55c564faye79e34b3ad775e2a@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911021759va6e09fak8a1774a365a85e28@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911030601q24b220d4r6a0726be5a962671@mail.gmail.com> Rik, And here is the most frequent visitor to the White House - http://www.breitbart.tv/meet-president-obamas-most-frequent-white-house-visitor/ Move along folks, nothing to see here. Brad On 11/2/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > He was a dik then .... it's plain, nothing's changed > > Rik > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 7:49 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> "I sat in that church for twenty years and never heard him say those >> things" - Barack Obama >> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxfumgUTm5I&feature=player_embedded >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Tue Nov 3 09:12:28 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 08:12:28 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] It Is This Serious! In-Reply-To: <400985d70911030447j292b13f4kc803ed3421c453fc@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911020745g6da0e631v55be84acabb57d83@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911020809y5973d7cetcd05be2c9abc4fc1@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911030447j292b13f4kc803ed3421c453fc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911030612p1c957ccdt8936fcb903a54cac@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Around here, back in the '80s, there was a huge rash of farmer bankruptcies. These guys were going out and buying big equipment, on borrowed money, to avoid paying taxes. The interest ate them alive. Today, you never hear anyone ask what the carrying cost is on all of this. As an illustration, My wife once bought and sold a fixer-upper house to some people. They're nice enough and honest enough, but in the financial sense they aren't too sharp. Things went along fine for a few years until one of their kids went off to college. Tuition apparently was more than they could manage and the result was they only made about half their house payments for several years. My wife is too kindhearted to foreclose so the amortization schedule just kept on adding that unpaid interest to the principal of the note. Then something happened and these folks got a big settlement for some accident or something. They wanted to pay off the contract for deed they owed us, thinking that they only owed us about 30,000 dollars or so. The reality is, after not making meaningful payment for almost five years, their mortgage was actually just a few dollars shy of 70,000 .... up from 48,000. Needless to say Their jaws dropped some when they got that news. Compounding interest is probably the most powerful financial force known to man. You want it working for you, not against you. Myself, I wonder how many people you could feed with that projected 799 BN dollars in interest. An expense that actually brings you nothing in return. This congress lately is beginning to remind me of those farmers back in the '80s. Rik On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 6:47 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > We're obviously not the only ones looking at this situation and > scratching our heads. You and I have both been leveraged up to our ass > in business before, but we had a plan. What plan does the US have. > Wait till interest rates start rising - and they will! What then? > (article below from the Washington Post - they're supposed to be Obama > cheerleeders - oops) > > Brad > > ---------- > > Could America go broke? > > By Robert J. Samuelson > Monday, November 2, 2009 > > The idea that the government of a major advanced country would default > on its debt -- that is, tell lenders that it won't repay them all > they're owed -- was, until recently, a preposterous proposition. > Argentina and Russia have stiffed their creditors, but surely the > likes of the United States, Japan or Britain wouldn't. Well, it's > still a very, very long shot, but it's no longer entirely > unimaginable. Governments of rich countries are borrowing so much that > it's conceivable that one day the twin assumptions underlying their > burgeoning debt (that lenders will continue to lend and that > governments will continue to pay) might collapse. What happens then? > > The question is so unfamiliar that the past provides few clues to the > future. Psychology is crucial. To take a parallel example: the dollar. > The fear is that foreigners (and Americans, too) will lose confidence > in its value and dump it for yen, euros, gold or oil. If too many > investors do that, a self-fulfilling stampede could trigger sell-offs > in U.S. stocks and bonds. People have predicted such a crisis for > decades. It hasn't happened yet. The currency's decline has been > orderly, because the dollar retains a bedrock confidence based on > America's political stability, openness, wealth and low inflation. But > something could shatter that confidence -- tomorrow or 10 years from > tomorrow. > > The same logic applies to exploding government debt. We have moved > into uncharted territory and are prisoners of psychology. Consider > Japan. In 2009, its budget deficit -- the gap between spending and > taxes -- amounts to 10 percent or more of gross domestic product > (GDP). The total government debt -- the borrowing to cover all its > deficits -- is approaching 200 percent of GDP. That's twice the size > of its economy. The mountainous debt reflects years of slow economic > growth, many "stimulus" plans, an aging society and the impact of the > global recession. By 2019, the debt-to-GDP ratio could hit 300 > percent, says a report from JPMorgan Chase. > > No one knows how to interpret these numbers. If someone had predicted > 20 years ago that Japan's debt would rise so spectacularly, the > forecast would doubtlessly have inspired this alarm: Japan will pay > crushing interest rates as fearful lenders demand high returns to > compensate for the risk that government might default or inflate away > its debt. Instead, the opposite has happened. Japanese investors -- > households, banks, insurers -- have absorbed 94 percent of the debt, > reports JPMorgan. Interest rates on 10-year Japanese government bonds > have dropped from 7.1 percent in 1990 to 1.4 percent now. > > Superficially, it's possible to explain this. Japan has ample private > savings to buy bonds; modest deflation -- falling prices -- makes low > interest rates acceptable; and investors remain confident that new and > maturing debt will be financed. > > The American situation is similar. Despite huge deficits, interest > rates on 10-year Treasury bonds have hovered around 3.5 percent. In > time of financial crisis, investors have sought the apparent sanctuary > of government bonds. But the correct conclusion to draw is not that > major governments (such as Japan and the United States) can easily > borrow as much as they want. It is that they can easily borrow as much > as they want until confidence that they can do so evaporates -- and we > don't know when, how or whether that may happen. > > Wealthy societies everywhere face a similar dilemma. Debt is > ballooning from already high levels. The Congressional Budget Office > reckons the Obama administration's planned budgets would increase the > debt-to-GDP ratio from 41 percent in 2008 to 82 percent in 2019. > Higher interest rates would aggravate the debt burden. Anticipating > higher rates, the CBO estimates annual interest payments on the > federal debt at $799 billion in 2019, up from $170 billion in 2009. > Even the size of exposed debt is unclear; adding Fannie Mae's and > Freddie Mac's debts (effectively guaranteed by the government) to > Treasury debt would raise the total sharply. > > But containing debt by spending cuts or tax increases would involve > wrenching and unpopular measures that might, perversely, weaken the > economy and worsen deficits. In Japan, the existing value-added tax > (national sales tax) of 5 percent would have to go to 12 percent, says > JPMorgan, along with deep spending cuts. Against choices like that, > some advanced country might decide that a partial or complete default, > though dire, would be less damaging economically and politically than > the alternatives. > > Deprived of international or domestic credit, defaulting countries in > the past have suffered deep economic downturns, hyperinflation, or > both. The odds may be against a wealthy society tempting that fate, > but even the remote possibility underlines the precariousness and the > novelty of the present situation. The arguments over whether we need > more "stimulus" (and debt) obscure the larger reality that past debt > increasingly constricts governments' economic maneuvering room. > > On 11/2/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > Depressing Indeed!! Hell, we're not even talking about paying down debt, > > merely getting back to break even!!! > > > > This is not only stupid, it is shameful!! > > > > If I were a congress person now, I believe the threat of real physical > > violence would have to be crossing my mind. > > > > Rik > > > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> This is a depressing way to start the week - > >> > >> http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/ff197.pdf > >> > >> As has been pointed out by many others, if we confiscated ALL the > >> income of the "wealthy" it wouldn't pay for health-care, much less for > >> all the other shit. When something can't continue, it won't. That > >> isn't the point or the objective of our current leadership. Our > >> nation is under attack, and the POTUS is leading the charge. > >> > >> Forget the War on Terror for the time being. The new Cold Civil War > >> is what we need to be focused on. We won the first Cold War. Pray > >> that we win the second. > >> > >> Brad > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > > you with experience. > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091103/5c130dc9/attachment-0001.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Tue Nov 3 09:31:58 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 08:31:58 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Twenty Years! In-Reply-To: <400985d70911030601q24b220d4r6a0726be5a962671@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911021749i55c564faye79e34b3ad775e2a@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911021759va6e09fak8a1774a365a85e28@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911030601q24b220d4r6a0726be5a962671@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911030631t5b8eb898h62b19c8bbddcd7e3@mail.gmail.com> Certainly a true communist if ever there was one. I got some tar and feathers out in the shed for him. If he don't like that, I got a hunk of rope too. How's that for persuasion of power .... mister extortionist Rik On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 8:01 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > And here is the most frequent visitor to the White House - > > > http://www.breitbart.tv/meet-president-obamas-most-frequent-white-house-visitor/ > > Move along folks, nothing to see here. > > Brad > > On 11/2/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > > He was a dik then .... it's plain, nothing's changed > > > > Rik > > > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 7:49 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> "I sat in that church for twenty years and never heard him say those > >> things" - Barack Obama > >> > >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxfumgUTm5I&feature=player_embedded > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > > you with experience. > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091103/48293802/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Tue Nov 3 09:51:01 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 08:51:01 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] It Is This Serious! In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911030612p1c957ccdt8936fcb903a54cac@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911020745g6da0e631v55be84acabb57d83@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911020809y5973d7cetcd05be2c9abc4fc1@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911030447j292b13f4kc803ed3421c453fc@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911030612p1c957ccdt8936fcb903a54cac@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911030651s7a51e9b1h88aa86e01d0b9eca@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Yeah, a lot of kids I grew up with got caught-up in the "farm crisis" of the 80's. Most went out of business. Banks were throwing money at them based on the increased value of the land, not bothering to notice one small detail. The underlying value of the crops produced off that land were not rising in proportion. I was a little nervous about buying the second apartment in Beijing (thought the market was getting saturated) until my sister-in-law explained, "there's 900 million peasants in China and they all want an apartment and a job in the city". OK, that makes sense. There was nothing that made sense about the recent boom and bust in US real estate other than cheap & easy money combined with greed. Sandy's experience was very similar to one I had. I sold a house in Little Rock in the early 90's to a young couple and financed their minimal down payment for the FHA loan (around $5K). They paid the first few months and then quit. It wasn't worth getting an attorney so I just let it go and waited. Sure enough, about five years later I got a call from a bank asking for a letter releasing the lien I had on the property. I politely explained that I couldn't do that since the 2nd mortgage had never been paid. The buyers wife calls me says they paid it off. "Umm, somehow I think that's something I'd remember". So she asks how much I they owe, "oh I don't know, probably around 8 Grand". She wanted to know where that number came from and I said, "I pulled it out of my ass, and it's probably low, if you don't like it I can dig around for another one that's even bigger" I got paid! I think it was Albert Einstein that called compound interest the "eighth wonder of the world". Rates aren't going to stay this low forever. And when they start moving, the nation is in really big trouble - not that the average community organizer understands any of that issue. Brad On 11/3/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Around here, back in the '80s, there was a huge rash of farmer bankruptcies. > These guys were going out and buying big equipment, on borrowed money, to > avoid paying taxes. The interest ate them alive. > > Today, you never hear anyone ask what the carrying cost is on all of this. > As an illustration, My wife once bought and sold a fixer-upper house to some > people. They're nice enough and honest enough, but in the financial sense > they aren't too sharp. Things went along fine for a few years until one of > their kids went off to college. Tuition apparently was more than they could > manage and the result was they only made about half their house payments for > several years. My wife is too kindhearted to foreclose so the amortization > schedule just kept on adding that unpaid interest to the principal of the > note. Then something happened and these folks got a big settlement for some > accident or something. They wanted to pay off the contract for deed they > owed us, thinking that they only owed us about 30,000 dollars or so. The > reality is, after not making meaningful payment for almost five years, their > mortgage was actually just a few dollars shy of 70,000 .... up from 48,000. > Needless to say Their jaws dropped some when they got that news. > > Compounding interest is probably the most powerful financial force known to > man. You want it working for you, not against you. > > Myself, I wonder how many people you could feed with that projected 799 BN > dollars in interest. An expense that actually brings you nothing in return. > This congress lately is beginning to remind me of those farmers back in the > '80s. > > Rik > > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 6:47 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> We're obviously not the only ones looking at this situation and >> scratching our heads. You and I have both been leveraged up to our ass >> in business before, but we had a plan. What plan does the US have. >> Wait till interest rates start rising - and they will! What then? >> (article below from the Washington Post - they're supposed to be Obama >> cheerleeders - oops) >> >> Brad >> >> ---------- >> >> Could America go broke? >> >> By Robert J. Samuelson >> Monday, November 2, 2009 >> >> The idea that the government of a major advanced country would default >> on its debt -- that is, tell lenders that it won't repay them all >> they're owed -- was, until recently, a preposterous proposition. >> Argentina and Russia have stiffed their creditors, but surely the >> likes of the United States, Japan or Britain wouldn't. Well, it's >> still a very, very long shot, but it's no longer entirely >> unimaginable. Governments of rich countries are borrowing so much that >> it's conceivable that one day the twin assumptions underlying their >> burgeoning debt (that lenders will continue to lend and that >> governments will continue to pay) might collapse. What happens then? >> >> The question is so unfamiliar that the past provides few clues to the >> future. Psychology is crucial. To take a parallel example: the dollar. >> The fear is that foreigners (and Americans, too) will lose confidence >> in its value and dump it for yen, euros, gold or oil. If too many >> investors do that, a self-fulfilling stampede could trigger sell-offs >> in U.S. stocks and bonds. People have predicted such a crisis for >> decades. It hasn't happened yet. The currency's decline has been >> orderly, because the dollar retains a bedrock confidence based on >> America's political stability, openness, wealth and low inflation. But >> something could shatter that confidence -- tomorrow or 10 years from >> tomorrow. >> >> The same logic applies to exploding government debt. We have moved >> into uncharted territory and are prisoners of psychology. Consider >> Japan. In 2009, its budget deficit -- the gap between spending and >> taxes -- amounts to 10 percent or more of gross domestic product >> (GDP). The total government debt -- the borrowing to cover all its >> deficits -- is approaching 200 percent of GDP. That's twice the size >> of its economy. The mountainous debt reflects years of slow economic >> growth, many "stimulus" plans, an aging society and the impact of the >> global recession. By 2019, the debt-to-GDP ratio could hit 300 >> percent, says a report from JPMorgan Chase. >> >> No one knows how to interpret these numbers. If someone had predicted >> 20 years ago that Japan's debt would rise so spectacularly, the >> forecast would doubtlessly have inspired this alarm: Japan will pay >> crushing interest rates as fearful lenders demand high returns to >> compensate for the risk that government might default or inflate away >> its debt. Instead, the opposite has happened. Japanese investors -- >> households, banks, insurers -- have absorbed 94 percent of the debt, >> reports JPMorgan. Interest rates on 10-year Japanese government bonds >> have dropped from 7.1 percent in 1990 to 1.4 percent now. >> >> Superficially, it's possible to explain this. Japan has ample private >> savings to buy bonds; modest deflation -- falling prices -- makes low >> interest rates acceptable; and investors remain confident that new and >> maturing debt will be financed. >> >> The American situation is similar. Despite huge deficits, interest >> rates on 10-year Treasury bonds have hovered around 3.5 percent. In >> time of financial crisis, investors have sought the apparent sanctuary >> of government bonds. But the correct conclusion to draw is not that >> major governments (such as Japan and the United States) can easily >> borrow as much as they want. It is that they can easily borrow as much >> as they want until confidence that they can do so evaporates -- and we >> don't know when, how or whether that may happen. >> >> Wealthy societies everywhere face a similar dilemma. Debt is >> ballooning from already high levels. The Congressional Budget Office >> reckons the Obama administration's planned budgets would increase the >> debt-to-GDP ratio from 41 percent in 2008 to 82 percent in 2019. >> Higher interest rates would aggravate the debt burden. Anticipating >> higher rates, the CBO estimates annual interest payments on the >> federal debt at $799 billion in 2019, up from $170 billion in 2009. >> Even the size of exposed debt is unclear; adding Fannie Mae's and >> Freddie Mac's debts (effectively guaranteed by the government) to >> Treasury debt would raise the total sharply. >> >> But containing debt by spending cuts or tax increases would involve >> wrenching and unpopular measures that might, perversely, weaken the >> economy and worsen deficits. In Japan, the existing value-added tax >> (national sales tax) of 5 percent would have to go to 12 percent, says >> JPMorgan, along with deep spending cuts. Against choices like that, >> some advanced country might decide that a partial or complete default, >> though dire, would be less damaging economically and politically than >> the alternatives. >> >> Deprived of international or domestic credit, defaulting countries in >> the past have suffered deep economic downturns, hyperinflation, or >> both. The odds may be against a wealthy society tempting that fate, >> but even the remote possibility underlines the precariousness and the >> novelty of the present situation. The arguments over whether we need >> more "stimulus" (and debt) obscure the larger reality that past debt >> increasingly constricts governments' economic maneuvering room. >> >> On 11/2/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> > Brad, >> > >> > Depressing Indeed!! Hell, we're not even talking about paying down debt, >> > merely getting back to break even!!! >> > >> > This is not only stupid, it is shameful!! >> > >> > If I were a congress person now, I believe the threat of real physical >> > violence would have to be crossing my mind. >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> This is a depressing way to start the week - >> >> >> >> http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/ff197.pdf >> >> >> >> As has been pointed out by many others, if we confiscated ALL the >> >> income of the "wealthy" it wouldn't pay for health-care, much less for >> >> all the other shit. When something can't continue, it won't. That >> >> isn't the point or the objective of our current leadership. Our >> >> nation is under attack, and the POTUS is leading the charge. >> >> >> >> Forget the War on Terror for the time being. The new Cold Civil War >> >> is what we need to be focused on. We won the first Cold War. Pray >> >> that we win the second. >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> > beat >> > you with experience. >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From mweisner at ebsmed.com Tue Nov 3 13:43:19 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 13:43:19 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] It Is This Serious! References: <400985d70911020745g6da0e631v55be84acabb57d83@mail.gmail.com><6634e19e0911020809y5973d7cetcd05be2c9abc4fc1@mail.gmail.com><400985d70911030447j292b13f4kc803ed3421c453fc@mail.gmail.com><6634e19e0911030612p1c957ccdt8936fcb903a54cac@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911030651s7a51e9b1h88aa86e01d0b9eca@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Brad, Pay careful attention to the credit card banks. Many have realized that compound interest (even based on "average daily balance"), at 14% just isn't lucrative enough! With the upcoming change in credit cards abuse legislation, courtesy of the new administration, a good number of banks have notified customers that they have 30 days to pay off their current balances or be subject to 33.98% interest! Most who were used to making their minimum payments or slightly more each month have no way to pay off a $10-20K credit card balance ($12.5K is the reported average balance for people who carry a balance) in a month! Look for major consumer credit defaults soon. Mike From: "Brad Haslett" Tuesday, November 03, 2009 9:51 AM > Rik, > > Yeah, a lot of kids I grew up with got caught-up in the "farm crisis" > of the 80's. Most went out of business. Banks were throwing money at > them based on the increased value of the land, not bothering to notice > one small detail. The underlying value of the crops produced off that > land were not rising in proportion. I was a little nervous about > buying the second apartment in Beijing (thought the market was getting > saturated) until my sister-in-law explained, "there's 900 million > peasants in China and they all want an apartment and a job in the > city". OK, that makes sense. There was nothing that made sense about > the recent boom and bust in US real estate other than cheap & easy > money combined with greed. > > Sandy's experience was very similar to one I had. I sold a house in > Little Rock in the early 90's to a young couple and financed their > minimal down payment for the FHA loan (around $5K). They paid the > first few months and then quit. It wasn't worth getting an attorney > so I just let it go and waited. Sure enough, about five years later I > got a call from a bank asking for a letter releasing the lien I had on > the property. I politely explained that I couldn't do that since the > 2nd mortgage had never been paid. The buyers wife calls me says they > paid it off. "Umm, somehow I think that's something I'd remember". > So she asks how much I they owe, "oh I don't know, probably around 8 > Grand". She wanted to know where that number came from and I said, "I > pulled it out of my ass, and it's probably low, if you don't like it I > can dig around for another one that's even bigger" I got paid! > > I think it was Albert Einstein that called compound interest the > "eighth wonder of the world". Rates aren't going to stay this low > forever. And when they start moving, the nation is in really big > trouble - not that the average community organizer understands any of > that issue. > > Brad > > > > > > On 11/3/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> Brad, >> >> Around here, back in the '80s, there was a huge rash of farmer >> bankruptcies. >> These guys were going out and buying big equipment, on borrowed money, to >> avoid paying taxes. The interest ate them alive. >> >> Today, you never hear anyone ask what the carrying cost is on all of >> this. >> As an illustration, My wife once bought and sold a fixer-upper house to >> some >> people. They're nice enough and honest enough, but in the financial sense >> they aren't too sharp. Things went along fine for a few years until one >> of >> their kids went off to college. Tuition apparently was more than they >> could >> manage and the result was they only made about half their house payments >> for >> several years. My wife is too kindhearted to foreclose so the >> amortization >> schedule just kept on adding that unpaid interest to the principal of the >> note. Then something happened and these folks got a big settlement for >> some >> accident or something. They wanted to pay off the contract for deed they >> owed us, thinking that they only owed us about 30,000 dollars or so. The >> reality is, after not making meaningful payment for almost five years, >> their >> mortgage was actually just a few dollars shy of 70,000 .... up from >> 48,000. >> Needless to say Their jaws dropped some when they got that news. >> >> Compounding interest is probably the most powerful financial force known >> to >> man. You want it working for you, not against you. >> >> Myself, I wonder how many people you could feed with that projected 799 >> BN >> dollars in interest. An expense that actually brings you nothing in >> return. >> This congress lately is beginning to remind me of those farmers back in >> the >> '80s. >> >> Rik >> >> On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 6:47 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> >>> Rik, >>> >>> We're obviously not the only ones looking at this situation and >>> scratching our heads. You and I have both been leveraged up to our ass >>> in business before, but we had a plan. What plan does the US have. >>> Wait till interest rates start rising - and they will! What then? >>> (article below from the Washington Post - they're supposed to be Obama >>> cheerleeders - oops) >>> >>> Brad >>> >>> ---------- >>> >>> Could America go broke? >>> >>> By Robert J. Samuelson >>> Monday, November 2, 2009 >>> >>> The idea that the government of a major advanced country would default >>> on its debt -- that is, tell lenders that it won't repay them all >>> they're owed -- was, until recently, a preposterous proposition. >>> Argentina and Russia have stiffed their creditors, but surely the >>> likes of the United States, Japan or Britain wouldn't. Well, it's >>> still a very, very long shot, but it's no longer entirely >>> unimaginable. Governments of rich countries are borrowing so much that >>> it's conceivable that one day the twin assumptions underlying their >>> burgeoning debt (that lenders will continue to lend and that >>> governments will continue to pay) might collapse. What happens then? >>> >>> The question is so unfamiliar that the past provides few clues to the >>> future. Psychology is crucial. To take a parallel example: the dollar. >>> The fear is that foreigners (and Americans, too) will lose confidence >>> in its value and dump it for yen, euros, gold or oil. If too many >>> investors do that, a self-fulfilling stampede could trigger sell-offs >>> in U.S. stocks and bonds. People have predicted such a crisis for >>> decades. It hasn't happened yet. The currency's decline has been >>> orderly, because the dollar retains a bedrock confidence based on >>> America's political stability, openness, wealth and low inflation. But >>> something could shatter that confidence -- tomorrow or 10 years from >>> tomorrow. >>> >>> The same logic applies to exploding government debt. We have moved >>> into uncharted territory and are prisoners of psychology. Consider >>> Japan. In 2009, its budget deficit -- the gap between spending and >>> taxes -- amounts to 10 percent or more of gross domestic product >>> (GDP). The total government debt -- the borrowing to cover all its >>> deficits -- is approaching 200 percent of GDP. That's twice the size >>> of its economy. The mountainous debt reflects years of slow economic >>> growth, many "stimulus" plans, an aging society and the impact of the >>> global recession. By 2019, the debt-to-GDP ratio could hit 300 >>> percent, says a report from JPMorgan Chase. >>> >>> No one knows how to interpret these numbers. If someone had predicted >>> 20 years ago that Japan's debt would rise so spectacularly, the >>> forecast would doubtlessly have inspired this alarm: Japan will pay >>> crushing interest rates as fearful lenders demand high returns to >>> compensate for the risk that government might default or inflate away >>> its debt. Instead, the opposite has happened. Japanese investors -- >>> households, banks, insurers -- have absorbed 94 percent of the debt, >>> reports JPMorgan. Interest rates on 10-year Japanese government bonds >>> have dropped from 7.1 percent in 1990 to 1.4 percent now. >>> >>> Superficially, it's possible to explain this. Japan has ample private >>> savings to buy bonds; modest deflation -- falling prices -- makes low >>> interest rates acceptable; and investors remain confident that new and >>> maturing debt will be financed. >>> >>> The American situation is similar. Despite huge deficits, interest >>> rates on 10-year Treasury bonds have hovered around 3.5 percent. In >>> time of financial crisis, investors have sought the apparent sanctuary >>> of government bonds. But the correct conclusion to draw is not that >>> major governments (such as Japan and the United States) can easily >>> borrow as much as they want. It is that they can easily borrow as much >>> as they want until confidence that they can do so evaporates -- and we >>> don't know when, how or whether that may happen. >>> >>> Wealthy societies everywhere face a similar dilemma. Debt is >>> ballooning from already high levels. The Congressional Budget Office >>> reckons the Obama administration's planned budgets would increase the >>> debt-to-GDP ratio from 41 percent in 2008 to 82 percent in 2019. >>> Higher interest rates would aggravate the debt burden. Anticipating >>> higher rates, the CBO estimates annual interest payments on the >>> federal debt at $799 billion in 2019, up from $170 billion in 2009. >>> Even the size of exposed debt is unclear; adding Fannie Mae's and >>> Freddie Mac's debts (effectively guaranteed by the government) to >>> Treasury debt would raise the total sharply. >>> >>> But containing debt by spending cuts or tax increases would involve >>> wrenching and unpopular measures that might, perversely, weaken the >>> economy and worsen deficits. In Japan, the existing value-added tax >>> (national sales tax) of 5 percent would have to go to 12 percent, says >>> JPMorgan, along with deep spending cuts. Against choices like that, >>> some advanced country might decide that a partial or complete default, >>> though dire, would be less damaging economically and politically than >>> the alternatives. >>> >>> Deprived of international or domestic credit, defaulting countries in >>> the past have suffered deep economic downturns, hyperinflation, or >>> both. The odds may be against a wealthy society tempting that fate, >>> but even the remote possibility underlines the precariousness and the >>> novelty of the present situation. The arguments over whether we need >>> more "stimulus" (and debt) obscure the larger reality that past debt >>> increasingly constricts governments' economic maneuvering room. >>> >>> On 11/2/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >>> > Brad, >>> > >>> > Depressing Indeed!! Hell, we're not even talking about paying down >>> > debt, >>> > merely getting back to break even!!! >>> > >>> > This is not only stupid, it is shameful!! >>> > >>> > If I were a congress person now, I believe the threat of real physical >>> > violence would have to be crossing my mind. >>> > >>> > Rik >>> > >>> > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Brad Haslett >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> >> This is a depressing way to start the week - >>> >> >>> >> http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/ff197.pdf >>> >> >>> >> As has been pointed out by many others, if we confiscated ALL the >>> >> income of the "wealthy" it wouldn't pay for health-care, much less >>> >> for >>> >> all the other shit. When something can't continue, it won't. That >>> >> isn't the point or the objective of our current leadership. Our >>> >> nation is under attack, and the POTUS is leading the charge. >>> >> >>> >> Forget the War on Terror for the time being. The new Cold Civil War >>> >> is what we need to be focused on. We won the first Cold War. Pray >>> >> that we win the second. >>> >> >>> >> Brad >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> >> >>> >> >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >>> > beat >>> > you with experience. >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat >> you with experience. >> > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter. We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam. SPAMfighter has removed 7380 of my spam emails to date. Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len The Professional version does not have this message From flybrad at gmail.com Tue Nov 3 16:08:26 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 15:08:26 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Free Speech Message-ID: <400985d70911031308i3092f04fsb9708b7fa2a55bf5@mail.gmail.com> Don't forget Micheal Yon. ----------- http://outsidethewire.com/blog/war/free-speech-on-the-cheap.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Tue Nov 3 20:33:07 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 17:33:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Elle In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911021817k2560df7did69ed6cda56a13dc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <475661.25628.qm@web111207.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Rik, My sweetest dog died suddenly Mon.....had to take care of burying her, etc and other errands that got put off when she became critical so sudenly Mon AM.I am also in chg of getting the Museum calendar refined at the printer's & so have been living with them lately....Just got back in about an hour ago & just finished getting dinner ready. elle --- On Mon, 11/2/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: From: Rik Sandberg Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Elle To: "Swiftwater Gazette List" Date: Monday, November 2, 2009, 9:17 PM Elle, Tried to email you earlier. Are you there?? Rik -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ 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/20091103/4c936baa/attachment.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Tue Nov 3 21:33:48 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 18:33:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] How 'bout that VA Rout! Message-ID: <919229.53632.qm@web111207.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> How bout this! elle -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091103/7b5712b0/attachment.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Wed Nov 4 11:15:20 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 08:15:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Here's one for Rik Message-ID: <404524.29519.qm@web111203.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> http://www.gizmag.com/opera-luxury-camper-trailer/13241/?utm_source=Gizmag+Subscribers&utm_campaign=f9a68132df-UA-2235360-4&utm_medium=email elle -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091104/3dd0b6cf/attachment.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Wed Nov 4 11:24:46 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 08:24:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Question on election Message-ID: <901678.90000.qm@web111206.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Does anyone know how many State Congressional seats changed parties last night (from Dem to Repub or to Indep)? thanks..elle -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091104/97b57b58/attachment-0001.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 11:53:13 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 10:53:13 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Here's one for Rik In-Reply-To: <404524.29519.qm@web111203.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <404524.29519.qm@web111203.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911040853i439a6af6i54f198db200e0802@mail.gmail.com> My dear Elle, Nice .... way too nice I hope you don't hold your breath while you wait for me to announce that purchase .... :-) I see they don't mention a price range. I imagine, when they do finally get around to bringing that little unimportant bit of information up, it will set off my conspicuous consumption alarm bells and my head will explode. Believe me, it stretched my sensibilities sorely to pay what I did to get that little gem I've got. In fact, had Sandy not had her troubles, we'd probably still be hiking/backpacking/tenting just like we always had. Truth is, the night of Sandy's stroke, we were just getting ready to go to bed in our tent. A tent that weighs about 3 pounds. Rik On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 10:15 AM, elle wrote: > > > http://www.gizmag.com/opera-luxury-camper-trailer/13241/?utm_source=Gizmag+Subscribers&utm_campaign=f9a68132df-UA-2235360-4&utm_medium=email > > elle > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091104/a0a1a7c5/attachment.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Wed Nov 4 12:13:03 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 09:13:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Here's one for Rik In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911040853i439a6af6i54f198db200e0802@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <959700.98627.qm@web111212.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Yes, I noticed that....spoils the dreaming when we have to be jerked back to reality. But that doesn't stop many folks who get themselves into financial troub...OH! Yea...that's where we are now! elle --- On Wed, 11/4/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: From: Rik Sandberg Subject: Re: [Swiftwater Gazette] Here's one for Rik To: SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com Date: Wednesday, November 4, 2009, 11:53 AM My dear Elle, Nice .... way too nice I hope you don't hold your breath while you wait for me to announce that purchase .... :-) I see they don't mention a price range. I imagine, when they do finally get around to bringing that little unimportant bit of information up, it will set off my conspicuous consumption alarm bells and my head will explode. Believe me, it stretched my sensibilities sorely to pay what I did to get that little gem I've got. In fact, had Sandy not had her troubles, we'd probably still be hiking/backpacking/tenting just like we always had. Truth is, the night of Sandy's stroke, we were just getting ready to go to bed in our tent. A tent that weighs about 3 pounds. Rik On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 10:15 AM, elle wrote: http://www.gizmag.com/opera-luxury-camper-trailer/13241/?utm_source=Gizmag+Subscribers&utm_campaign=f9a68132df-UA-2235360-4&utm_medium=email elle _______________________________________________ SwiftwaterGazette mailing list SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette ? -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ 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/20091104/d5433d85/attachment.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Wed Nov 4 12:26:53 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 09:26:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chime in Message-ID: <167325.12255.qm@web111202.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> OK, Pundits....what's your take on the NJ & VA & NY results???? The Dems are spinning like mad that it isn't a referundum on O'Boy's policies..(he's so narcissistic that he supposedly watched a TV special on his Pres campaign...or are they just trying to imply that he didn't think these races were important so they were not worth his time.. .what a jerk...? The Repub challenger to the many-term Dem in the 99th Congressional Dist (where I live) in VA came close to winning...she entered the race late with almost no name recognition....the Repub Party in VA removed the 99th from their official website because she would not play footsie with them...they'd rather a Dem won then support her....the guy she challenged was running unopposed until she entered the race about two months ago.....vote was 10,892 for the Dem & 10,171 for her (Catherine Crabill.) She took two of the 5 districts by a wide margin...lost two (one was his home district where his family has lived forever ...he won it by only 460 votes) and in my county, with 52.5 % turnout, she lost by ONE vote (2384 to 2383.) I think that speaks VOLUMES! I hope the Dems don't strain their necks as they keep looking nervously behind them..... No referendum on O"Baby's policies, my foot.? elle -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091104/c5ef2f63/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 13:04:22 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 12:04:22 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chime in In-Reply-To: <167325.12255.qm@web111202.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <167325.12255.qm@web111202.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911041004k7371aa4aq25377a208aad58b4@mail.gmail.com> Elle, I didn't pay to much attention to anything except the VJ, NJ Gov. races and the 23 district race in NY. Truthfully, I am appalled at the tactics used to win the seat in NY23. That Scoosapaloosa woman should be hounded and stalked for the rest of her days for what she did there. Repaying the $900,000 in campaign monies she got from the GOP should be just the beginning of her restitution. I am pleased to see the changes that have come about, because it shows for sure that people are FINALLY starting to wake up and see the Obi messiah for what he is. Right now I'm trying to figure out how much trouble he can get us into at the climate summit in Copenhagen next month (I think). It's conceivable that this could be a worse disaster than anything he has previously screwed up, if he starts signing treaties. Rik On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 11:26 AM, elle wrote: > OK, Pundits....what's your take on the NJ & VA & NY results??? > > The Dems are spinning like mad that it isn't a referundum on O'Boy's > policies..(he's so narcissistic that he supposedly watched a TV special on > his Pres campaign...or are they just trying to imply that he didn't think > these races were important so they were not worth his time.. > > .what a jerk... > > The Repub challenger to the many-term Dem in the 99th Congressional Dist > (where I live) in VA came close to winning...she entered the race late with > almost no name recognition....the Repub Party in VA removed the 99th from > their official website because she would not play footsie with them...they'd > rather a Dem won then support her....the guy she challenged was running > unopposed until she entered the race about two months ago.....vote was > 10,892 for the Dem & 10,171 for her (Catherine Crabill.) She took two of the > 5 districts by a wide margin...lost two (one was his home district where his > family has lived forever ...he won it by only 460 votes) and in my county, > with 52.5 % turnout, she lost by ONE vote (2384 to 2383.) > > I think that speaks VOLUMES! > > I hope the Dems don't strain their necks as they keep looking nervously > behind them..... > > No referendum on O"Baby's policies, my foot. > > elle > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091104/8830c192/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 13:30:26 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 12:30:26 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chime in In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911041004k7371aa4aq25377a208aad58b4@mail.gmail.com> References: <167325.12255.qm@web111202.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <6634e19e0911041004k7371aa4aq25377a208aad58b4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911041030x74d45cbejfc2b2c7f3811887b@mail.gmail.com> Elle, Here's one article that speaks to the Copenhagen treaty I mentioned. Rik ________________ http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=734422 Of climate control and one-world gov't Pete Chagnon - OneNewsNow - 10/23/2009 6:00:00 AM[image: Bookmark and Share] Will the upcoming Copenhagen climate talks usher in a one-world government? Lord Christopher Monckton, the former advisor for science policy to Lady Margaret Thatcher, believes that if the U.S. signs any climate treaty coming out of the Copenhagen climate change conference in December, it could subject the United States to a global dictatorship. Monckton explains his concerns. [image: Christopher Monckton]"[T]his treaty of Copenhagen, which is going to be negotiated by the states' parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in December, is going to...establish for the first time in human history a global government," he warns.* (Please see poll at bottom of page)* Monckton contends that the word "government" appears twice in paragraph 38 of the draft, and that paragraphs 36 through 38 explain that the purpose of the treaty is to establish a world government. "Whose job," he explains, "will be to transfer wealth from the wealthy countries, such as the United States most of all, to Third World countries -- and the excuse for this transfer of wealth is so-called 'reparation.'" Reparation for so-called "climate debt," he adds. Monckton notes that the U.N. believes the U.S. owes the world this debt because of its use of fossil fuels, which he says are mistakenly blamed for causing "manmade global warming." He adds that this world government will have the ability to make the U.S. pay. Monckton is hopeful that the U.S. will lack the willingness to ratify such a dangerous treaty. "It must be passed by a two-thirds majority in the Senate, which is 67 out of your 100 senators," says Monckton. "Now I don't think that Obama will find it at all easy to get a two-thirds majority...but during his election campaign one of his advisors said that he [Obama] regarded the U.S. Constitution as merely a piece of paper...and he saw it as a barrier to the things that the Left around the world want to do -- and therefore they were going to find ways of circumventing it." [image: global warming question]One way of doing that, says Monckton, is to amend the Copenhagen Treaty to the current cap-and-trade bill in the U.S. House and Senate and get it passed by a simple majority. Monckton notes that if Obama takes this route, then the treaty merely becomes domestic law and can be overturned later on. Provided the Senate stands firm against such a move, Monckton says the U.S. will remain "unsullied" by this new "dictatorship" being established by the Copenhagen Treaty. "We sleep-walked into a dictatorship in Europe," he laments. "Alright, it appears to be a benevolent dictatorship for now, though it's a very expensive one -- but you still don't want [America] to go there. Democracy is valuable. "In this country [the U.S.], which is the cradle of freedom, I hope you will cling to your democracy, [that] you will all fight this sinister treaty, you will say no to it very, very firmly -- and [that] you will remain the beacon of freedom for the world." *Listen to the full interview with Lord Monckton* On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Elle, > > I didn't pay to much attention to anything except the VJ, NJ Gov. races and > the 23 district race in NY. Truthfully, I am appalled at the tactics used to > win the seat in NY23. That Scoosapaloosa woman should be hounded and stalked > for the rest of her days for what she did there. Repaying the $900,000 in > campaign monies she got from the GOP should be just the beginning of her > restitution. > > I am pleased to see the changes that have come about, because it shows for > sure that people are FINALLY starting to wake up and see the Obi messiah for > what he is. > > Right now I'm trying to figure out how much trouble he can get us into at > the climate summit in Copenhagen next month (I think). It's conceivable that > this could be a worse disaster than anything he has previously screwed up, > if he starts signing treaties. > > Rik > > On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 11:26 AM, elle wrote: > >> OK, Pundits....what's your take on the NJ & VA & NY results??? >> >> The Dems are spinning like mad that it isn't a referundum on O'Boy's >> policies..(he's so narcissistic that he supposedly watched a TV special on >> his Pres campaign...or are they just trying to imply that he didn't think >> these races were important so they were not worth his time.. >> >> .what a jerk... >> >> The Repub challenger to the many-term Dem in the 99th Congressional Dist >> (where I live) in VA came close to winning...she entered the race late with >> almost no name recognition....the Repub Party in VA removed the 99th from >> their official website because she would not play footsie with them...they'd >> rather a Dem won then support her....the guy she challenged was running >> unopposed until she entered the race about two months ago.....vote was >> 10,892 for the Dem & 10,171 for her (Catherine Crabill.) She took two of the >> 5 districts by a wide margin...lost two (one was his home district where his >> family has lived forever ...he won it by only 460 votes) and in my county, >> with 52.5 % turnout, she lost by ONE vote (2384 to 2383.) >> >> I think that speaks VOLUMES! >> >> I hope the Dems don't strain their necks as they keep looking nervously >> behind them..... >> >> No referendum on O"Baby's policies, my foot. >> >> elle >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091104/d7ab437a/attachment-0001.html From ekroposki at charter.net Wed Nov 4 14:32:18 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 14:32:18 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Elle's magazine Message-ID: Elle: Your magazine has other interesting information. For your scientific inquiry - Nano Drug Delivery System http://www.gizmag.com/nanotech-drug-delivery-system/13262/ and related article: http://www.gizmag.com/new-drug-delivery-system/12641/ Professional abstract: http://www.nature.com/nmat/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/nmat2564.html For your further study: http://www.nature.com/biotech/index.html EK -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091104/737fc5a1/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Wed Nov 4 14:40:24 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 14:40:24 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Elle's question Message-ID: <923289912130468CB81F5642A2773138@YOURB88038198E> Elle, I do not know real #'s, but one changed from R to D and another D stayed D. I do not think there was any R gain. Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091104/ae7c5e61/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Wed Nov 4 14:42:57 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 14:42:57 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Sing a song? Message-ID: <0C0D4A625DF847BC85787BB38C5B8127@YOURB88038198E> Elle, Page down to Elementary Epidemic. Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091104/98db0f43/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 15:11:15 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 14:11:15 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chime in In-Reply-To: <167325.12255.qm@web111202.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <167325.12255.qm@web111202.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911041211k19efe253w49407e5fa11f7e6e@mail.gmail.com> Elle, Overall, it was a good night for fiscal conservatives - a mixed bag for the GOP. I don't know the answer to your questions about the downstate races other than Virginia (guv, lt. guv, and AG). The really sweet one was NJ. Obamao had his fingerprints all over that one and his minions can't explain it away. It was a rejection of Dear Leader. The NY-23rd was one whacky race. The local GOP shot themselves in the foot by choosing Skuzzi-efyu instead of Hoffman in the first place, and then the GOP national blew $900K on her. Yeah, you could say the base is a little pissed off! Hoffman is a good guy but he's a nerdy CPA that came out of no where - still a good show for his efforts. Owens will have to start campaigning again for the primaries in 150 days and maybe this time Hoffman will be the GOP pick and get the seat back. Either way, the world is a better place with Skuzzi-efyu as a private citizen. The experience of your candidate in the VA 99th speaks volumes. People are still ready for Hope & Change, just not the Marxist variety. Now the question is; did the Blue Dogs get the message? I'm betting they did. Brad On 11/4/09, elle wrote: > OK, Pundits....what's your take on the NJ & VA & NY results??? > The Dems are spinning like mad that it isn't a referundum on O'Boy's > policies..(he's so narcissistic that he supposedly watched a TV special on > his Pres campaign...or are they just trying to imply that he didn't think > these races were important so they were not worth his time.. > .what a jerk... > The Repub challenger to the many-term Dem in the 99th Congressional Dist > (where I live) in VA came close to winning...she entered the race late with > almost no name recognition....the Repub Party in VA removed the 99th from > their official website because she would not play footsie with them...they'd > rather a Dem won then support her....the guy she challenged was running > unopposed until she entered the race about two months ago.....vote was > 10,892 for the Dem & 10,171 for her (Catherine Crabill.) She took two of the > 5 districts by a wide margin...lost two (one was his home district where his > family has lived forever ...he won it by only 460 votes) and in my county, > with 52.5 % turnout, she lost by ONE vote (2384 to 2383.) > I think that speaks VOLUMES! > I hope the Dems don't strain their necks as they keep looking nervously > behind them..... > No referendum on O"Baby's policies, my foot. > elle > > > From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Wed Nov 4 20:18:23 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 17:18:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chime in In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911041030x74d45cbejfc2b2c7f3811887b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <98329.82391.qm@web111203.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Rik, I hope someone is listening to this man. elle --- On Wed, 11/4/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: From: Rik Sandberg Subject: Re: [Swiftwater Gazette] Chime in To: SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com Date: Wednesday, November 4, 2009, 1:30 PM Elle, Here's one article that speaks to the Copenhagen treaty I mentioned. Rik ________________ http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=734422 Of climate control and one-world gov'tPete Chagnon - OneNewsNow - 10/23/2009 6:00:00 AM Will the upcoming Copenhagen climate talks usher in a one-world government??Lord Christopher Monckton, the former advisor for science policy to Lady Margaret Thatcher, believes that if the U.S. signs any climate treaty coming out of the Copenhagen climate change conference in December, it could subject the United States to a global dictatorship. Monckton explains his concerns. ? "[T]his treaty of Copenhagen, which is going to be negotiated by the states' parties to the?United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change?in December, is going to...establish for the first time in human history a global government," he warns. (Please see poll at bottom of page) ?? Monckton contends that the word "government" appears twice in paragraph 38 of the draft, and that paragraphs 36 through 38 explain that the purpose of the treaty is to establish a world government. "Whose job," he explains, "will be to transfer wealth from the wealthy countries, such as the United States most of all, to Third World countries -- and the excuse for this transfer of wealth is so-called 'reparation.'" ? Reparation for so-called "climate debt," he adds. Monckton notes that the U.N. believes the U.S. owes the world this debt because of its use of fossil fuels, which he says are mistakenly blamed for causing "manmade global warming." He adds that this world government will have the ability to make the U.S. pay. Monckton is hopeful that the U.S. will lack the willingness to ratify such a dangerous treaty. ? "It must be passed by a two-thirds majority in the Senate, which is 67 out of your 100 senators," says Monckton. "Now I don't think that Obama will find it at all easy to get a two-thirds majority...but during his election campaign one of his advisors said that he [Obama] regarded the U.S. Constitution as merely a piece of paper...and he saw it as a barrier to the things that the Left around the world want to do -- and therefore they were going to find ways of circumventing it." ? One way of doing that, says Monckton, is to amend the Copenhagen Treaty to the current cap-and-trade bill in the U.S. House and Senate and get it passed by a simple majority. Monckton notes that if Obama takes this route, then the treaty merely becomes domestic law and can be overturned later on. ? Provided the Senate stands firm against such a move, Monckton says the U.S. will remain "unsullied" by this new "dictatorship" being established by the Copenhagen Treaty. ? "We sleep-walked into a dictatorship in Europe," he laments. "Alright, it appears to be a benevolent dictatorship for now, though it's a very expensive one -- but you still don't want [America] to go there. Democracy is valuable. ? "In this country [the U.S.], which is the cradle of freedom, I hope you will cling to your democracy, [that] you will all fight this sinister treaty, you will say no to it very, very firmly -- and [that] you will remain the beacon of freedom for the world."?Listen to the full interview with Lord Monckton On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 12:04 PM, Rik Sandberg wrote: Elle, I didn't pay to much attention to anything except the VJ, NJ Gov. races and the 23 district race in NY. Truthfully, I am appalled at the tactics used to win the seat in NY23. That Scoosapaloosa woman should be hounded and stalked for the rest of her days for what she did there. Repaying the $900,000 in campaign monies she got from the GOP should be just the beginning of her restitution. I am pleased to see the changes that have come about, because it shows for sure that people are FINALLY starting to wake up and see the Obi messiah for what he is. Right now I'm trying to figure out how much trouble he can get us into at the climate summit in Copenhagen next month (I think). It's conceivable that this could be a worse disaster than anything he has previously screwed up, if he starts signing treaties. Rik On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 11:26 AM, elle wrote: OK, Pundits....what's your take on the NJ & VA & NY results???? The Dems are spinning like mad that it isn't a referundum on O'Boy's policies..(he's so narcissistic that he supposedly watched a TV special on his Pres campaign...or are they just trying to imply that he didn't think these races were important so they were not worth his time.. .what a jerk...? The Repub challenger to the many-term Dem in the 99th Congressional Dist (where I live) in VA came close to winning...she entered the race late with almost no name recognition....the Repub Party in VA removed the 99th from their official website because she would not play footsie with them...they'd rather a Dem won then support her....the guy she challenged was running unopposed until she entered the race about two months ago.....vote was 10,892 for the Dem & 10,171 for her (Catherine Crabill.) She took two of the 5 districts by a wide margin...lost two (one was his home district where his family has lived forever ...he won it by only 460 votes) and in my county, with 52.5 % turnout, she lost by ONE vote (2384 to 2383.) I think that speaks VOLUMES! I hope the Dems don't strain their necks as they keep looking nervously behind them..... No referendum on O"Baby's policies, my foot.? elle _______________________________________________ SwiftwaterGazette mailing list SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ 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/20091104/9412e6a1/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 21:56:01 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 20:56:01 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] New China Tea Message-ID: <400985d70911041856v4ac44898x3477066192b12515@mail.gmail.com> Leaving for the Capitol Tea Party in 6 hours. Ya gotta watch this - http://www.breitbart.tv/obamas-half-brother-writes-about-abusive-father/ You can't make shit like this up, can you? Brad From sanderico1 at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 23:47:06 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 22:47:06 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] New China Tea In-Reply-To: <400985d70911041856v4ac44898x3477066192b12515@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911041856v4ac44898x3477066192b12515@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911042047n284cb87dp193abdcfd5ea668f@mail.gmail.com> Brad, What a convenient boost for him, eh??? If your brother gets elected, quick, throw together a book before his ratings start dropping. ..... sigh ...... Rik On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 8:56 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Leaving for the Capitol Tea Party in 6 hours. > > Ya gotta watch this - > > http://www.breitbart.tv/obamas-half-brother-writes-about-abusive-father/ > > You can't make shit like this up, can you? > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091104/a02221d9/attachment.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Thu Nov 5 12:10:06 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 09:10:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] DC TEA & Rik Message-ID: <930957.33234.qm@web111207.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> 12:00 noon....Fox is carrying video & sound of the crowd assembling outside the Capitol. Let's hope that many make it into the halls of congress to bring 'up close & personal' to their attention. I remember ?the tractor Rebellion years ago in DC...I was living in the area then & it certainly garnered attention. We need something of the sort again........but the Dems would find a way to dismiss it.... Rik...I'm sorry it did not work out for you to go to DC.. If there is another gathering, the offer still stands.? elle -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091105/8fea9096/attachment.html From bill at effros.com Thu Nov 5 13:00:34 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:00:34 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Fall Classes for Adult Women Message-ID: <4AF312C2.8040009@effros.com> *Fall classes for Women at :* *THE ADULT LEARNING CENTER* * * *REGISTRATION MUST BE COMPLETED* * By Friday November 13,** **2009* * * * NOTE: DUE TO THE COMPLEXITY AND DIFFICULTY LEVEL* *OF THEIR CONTENTS, CLASS SIZES WILL BE LIMITED TO 8 PARTICIPANTS MAXIMUM*. * * * * * Class 1* Up in Winter, Down in Summer - How to Adjust a Thermostat* Step by Step, with Slide Presentation.* *Meets 4 wks, Monday and Wednesday for 2 hrs beginning at 7:00 PM.* *Class 2* *Which Takes More Energy - Putting the Toilet Seat Down, or Bitching About It for 3 Hours?* *Round Table Discussion.* *Meets 2 weeks, Saturday 12:00 for 2 hours.* *Class 3* *Is It Possible To Drive Past a Wal-Mart Without Stopping?- Group Debate.* *Meets 4 weeks, Saturday 10:00 PM for 2 hours.* *Class 4* *Fundamental Differences Between a Purse and a Suitcase - Pictures and Explanatory Graphics.* *Meets Saturdays at 2:00 PM for 3 weeks.* *Class 5* *Curling Irons - Can They Levitate and Fly Into The Bathroom Cabinet?* *Examples on Video* *Meets 4 weeks, Tuesday and Thursday for 2 hours beginning* *At 7:00 PM* *Class 6* *How to Ask Questions During Commercials and Be Quiet During the Program* *Help Line Support and Support Groups* *Meets 4 Weeks, Friday and Sunday 7:00 PM* *Class 7* *Can a Bath Be Taken Without 14 Different Kinds of Soaps and Shampoos?* *Open Forum* *Monday at 8:00 PM, 2 hours.* *Class 8* *Health Watch - They Make Medicine for PMS - USE IT!* *Three nights; Monday, Wednesday, Friday at 7:00 PM for 2 hours.* *Class 9* *I Was Wrong and He Was Right! - Real Life Testimonials.* *Tuesdays at 6:00 PM Location to be determined.* *Class 10* *How to Parallel Park In Less Than 20 Minutes Without an Insurance Claim.* *Driving Simulations.* *4 weeks, Saturday noon, 2 hours.* *Class 11* *Learning to Live - How to Apply Brakes Without Throwing Passengers Through the Windshield**.* *Tuesdays at 7:00 PM, location to be determined* *Class 12* *How to Shop by Yourself.* *Meets 4 wks, Tuesday and Thursday for 2 hours beginning at 7:00 PM.* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091105/712017b5/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 08:34:11 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 07:34:11 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Hey Brad, did you survive Message-ID: <6634e19e0911060534o2cc5e3dfof6a5b0814ebc936e@mail.gmail.com> I kept an eye on the news yesterday and saw they had a pretty good turn out. You didn't call ..... hey you weren't the guy that got arrested in Pelosi's office ......??? :-) Rik -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091106/ad9d4372/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 08:56:35 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 07:56:35 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Hey Brad, did you survive In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911060534o2cc5e3dfof6a5b0814ebc936e@mail.gmail.com> References: <6634e19e0911060534o2cc5e3dfof6a5b0814ebc936e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911060556i7d3ef73bha1f75a939bd87216@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Beautiful day in DC! I got to the Capitol about 7AM (none of the museums were open) and found a deli nearby in Georgetown for some coffee and a bagel. I then walked the entire distance from the Capitol bldg. to the Lincoln Memorial, stopping at the WW2 and Vietnam memorials on the way, and the Korea and WW1 memorials on the return. By the time I got back to the Capitol it was about 11:15 and the grounds were already about 1/3 full. By the time it started, the entire area from the steps to the street were packed and the crowd had to spill over the sides. The estimates I've seen were 10,000 but it sure looked and felt bigger from my vantage point. Levin was great but after about the 50th Congressman saying yada, yada, yada, the crowd was getting tired and restless. One great moment at the end was when they started throwing pages of the bill in the air and encouraging the crowd to grab pieces, walk over to their Congressman's office and ask that he/she explain what it meant. My page was pure gibberish - something about the definition of "part time" for minority doctors educated on the gubmint nickel. As was the case after the 9/12 gathering, the grounds were spotless after the crowd dispersed (noisy but well behaved bunch). I didn't make the trip to Pelosi's office and wasn't surprised that she had people arrested. It was a great experience and I'm glad I went. I got home a little after midnight and am a little sore and sunburned today, but happy. Let's hope the bastards listened. Brad On 11/6/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > I kept an eye on the news yesterday and saw they had a pretty good turn out. > > You didn't call ..... hey you weren't the guy that got arrested in Pelosi's > office ......??? :-) > > Rik > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From flybrad at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 09:15:58 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 08:15:58 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Hey Brad, did you survive In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911060534o2cc5e3dfof6a5b0814ebc936e@mail.gmail.com> References: <6634e19e0911060534o2cc5e3dfof6a5b0814ebc936e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911060615o2015b1dfq5a05169c0d38ba53@mail.gmail.com> Found this website with some great photos - http://whatbubbaknows.net/blog1.php/2009/11/05/answering-the-conservative-call On 11/6/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > I kept an eye on the news yesterday and saw they had a pretty good turn out. > > You didn't call ..... hey you weren't the guy that got arrested in Pelosi's > office ......??? :-) > > Rik > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 09:39:42 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 08:39:42 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Hey Brad, did you survive In-Reply-To: <400985d70911060556i7d3ef73bha1f75a939bd87216@mail.gmail.com> References: <6634e19e0911060534o2cc5e3dfof6a5b0814ebc936e@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911060556i7d3ef73bha1f75a939bd87216@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911060639j3bc24e81n4fd4ed5bd68404cf@mail.gmail.com> Apparently some of the liberal congresspeople weren't too happy to have to explain themselves to their constituents. I heard that I think it was a guy named McConnell (?) from VA (?) actually left his office and went into hiding after trying to have a woman arrested for assault for touching his arm. What a guy ..... Indeed, I hope we put enough of the fear of God in them to put this H/C boondoggle to bed for good. I spent the afternoon (well, some of it) writing a letter to our local blue dog explaining how this bill should be shredded or burnt. I explained to him that he had had our support in the past, but if he voted for this, I would be out actively campaigning against him should he consider running for re-election in the future. It is amazing, the difference in respect shown between liberals and conservatives. I saw pictures of the mall after inauguration day .... what a friggin' mess. Rik On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 7:56 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > Beautiful day in DC! I got to the Capitol about 7AM (none of the > museums were open) and found a deli nearby in Georgetown for some > coffee and a bagel. I then walked the entire distance from the > Capitol bldg. to the Lincoln Memorial, stopping at the WW2 and Vietnam > memorials on the way, and the Korea and WW1 memorials on the return. > By the time I got back to the Capitol it was about 11:15 and the > grounds were already about 1/3 full. By the time it started, the > entire area from the steps to the street were packed and the crowd had > to spill over the sides. The estimates I've seen were 10,000 but it > sure looked and felt bigger from my vantage point. Levin was great but > after about the 50th Congressman saying yada, yada, yada, the crowd > was getting tired and restless. One great moment at the end was when > they started throwing pages of the bill in the air and encouraging the > crowd to grab pieces, walk over to their Congressman's office and ask > that he/she explain what it meant. My page was pure gibberish - > something about the definition of "part time" for minority doctors > educated on the gubmint nickel. As was the case after the 9/12 > gathering, the grounds were spotless after the crowd dispersed (noisy > but well behaved bunch). I didn't make the trip to Pelosi's office > and wasn't surprised that she had people arrested. It was a great > experience and I'm glad I went. I got home a little after midnight > and am a little sore and sunburned today, but happy. > > Let's hope the bastards listened. > > Brad > > On 11/6/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > > I kept an eye on the news yesterday and saw they had a pretty good turn > out. > > > > You didn't call ..... hey you weren't the guy that got arrested in > Pelosi's > > office ......??? :-) > > > > Rik > > > > -- > > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > > you with experience. > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091106/ca490adf/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 11:16:03 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 10:16:03 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Health Issues Message-ID: <400985d70911060816k6edd8a84mfec804a4ea7bae4d@mail.gmail.com> To prepare for the trip to DC, on Wednesday I had the second colonoscopy in as many months. The previous one had to be repeated because the "flush" wasn't complete (a polite way of saying I was still full of *it). What a great way to prepare for a trip to Washington. We also got Cora a H1N1 vaccination (nasal) on Wednesday - $25 at Walgreens with no waiting. FedEx has the contract to deliver the vaccine so transportation isn't the issue. Interesting ad here - http://tinyurl.com/y897cpm The clinic that did my procedure on Wednesday does nothing but specialize in that one procedure. It runs like a well oiled machine (no pun intended). I'm paying for a visit for my older brother as his Christmas present this year - I'm sure that's something he wants! We really do have the best health care available anywhere on the planet. It is expensive because it is so far advanced. This current debate is NOT about reducing costs or making improvements in care. It is nothing short of an ultimate power grab. Brad From sanderico1 at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 12:00:47 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 11:00:47 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Health Issues In-Reply-To: <400985d70911060816k6edd8a84mfec804a4ea7bae4d@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911060816k6edd8a84mfec804a4ea7bae4d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911060900p34748f00yb547b09ebbc8c9a2@mail.gmail.com> Ha ha .... I brought that exact question as this ad up to some liberals a couple weeks ago. At the time, the gov't had only delivered about 10% (11 M doses) of the promised vaccine. The excuses flowed like water, oh it just wasn't the governments fault .... what did I expect .... I'm just not realistic .... yada yada yada. I told them it was simple. All I expect is for the gov't to do what the hell it says it is going to do. If they can only deliver 11 million doses, great, then do it. NOBODY believes it is acceptable to constantly blow your estimates by, in this case 90%. Actually, this was closer than they get on much of the time. Rik On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > To prepare for the trip to DC, on Wednesday I had the second > colonoscopy in as many months. The previous one had to be repeated > because the "flush" wasn't complete (a polite way of saying I was > still full of *it). What a great way to prepare for a trip to > Washington. > > We also got Cora a H1N1 vaccination (nasal) on Wednesday - $25 at > Walgreens with no waiting. FedEx has the contract to deliver the > vaccine so transportation isn't the issue. Interesting ad here - > > http://tinyurl.com/y897cpm > > The clinic that did my procedure on Wednesday does nothing but > specialize in that one procedure. It runs like a well oiled machine > (no pun intended). I'm paying for a visit for my older brother as his > Christmas present this year - I'm sure that's something he wants! > > We really do have the best health care available anywhere on the > planet. It is expensive because it is so far advanced. This current > debate is NOT about reducing costs or making improvements in care. It > is nothing short of an ultimate power grab. > > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091106/a5ba2b69/attachment.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Fri Nov 6 16:58:30 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 13:58:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Rik: BBC E-mail: Climate deal 'unlikely' this year Message-ID: <131046.83399.qm@web111201.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> rik, ?Saw this on Slate this AM & thought you might be interested. elle ** Climate deal 'unlikely' this year ** The UK government has admitted that a new legally binding global treaty on climate change is highly unlikely to be agreed this year. < http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/8345501.stm > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091106/51e027fe/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 18:20:34 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 17:20:34 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Rik: BBC E-mail: Climate deal 'unlikely' this year In-Reply-To: <131046.83399.qm@web111201.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <131046.83399.qm@web111201.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911061520j26c76544h36ff9d221d15bf98@mail.gmail.com> Elle, Good, It shouldn't be too long before all those "developing" nations realize that they need to worry more about freezing to death than about Al Gore's & Co's. attempt at world domination. It isn't about the climate that they worry anyway. It's about not being able to make virtual slaves of the American's that is such a great disappointment to them. For my part, the UN could fold up their tent and take it else where. Hopefully, wherever that might be, they won't tell us. Rik On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 3:58 PM, elle wrote: > rik, Saw this on Slate this AM & thought you might be interested. > > > elle > > > > > > ** Climate deal 'unlikely' this year ** > The UK government has admitted that a new legally binding global treaty on > climate change is highly unlikely to be agreed this year. > < http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/em/fr/-/2/hi/science/nature/8345501.stm > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091106/4cd1391b/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Fri Nov 6 18:21:38 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 18:21:38 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Rik, enjoy democracy Message-ID: Rik, Enjoy this example of our congress at work: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywgUCdefSW8 Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091106/4f18d94e/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 19:24:24 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 18:24:24 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Health Issues In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911060900p34748f00yb547b09ebbc8c9a2@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911060816k6edd8a84mfec804a4ea7bae4d@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911060900p34748f00yb547b09ebbc8c9a2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911061624r13cf6e0ew7790c0ffc26aaaaa@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Whatever reason that's given, it is sure to be someone else s fault. http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/006690.html Brad On 11/6/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Ha ha .... I brought that exact question as this ad up to some liberals a > couple weeks ago. At the time, the gov't had only delivered about 10% (11 M > doses) of the promised vaccine. The excuses flowed like water, oh it just > wasn't the governments fault .... what did I expect .... I'm just not > realistic .... yada yada yada. I told them it was simple. All I expect is > for the gov't to do what the hell it says it is going to do. If they can > only deliver 11 million doses, great, then do it. NOBODY believes it is > acceptable to constantly blow your estimates by, in this case 90%. Actually, > this was closer than they get on much of the time. > > Rik > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> To prepare for the trip to DC, on Wednesday I had the second >> colonoscopy in as many months. The previous one had to be repeated >> because the "flush" wasn't complete (a polite way of saying I was >> still full of *it). What a great way to prepare for a trip to >> Washington. >> >> We also got Cora a H1N1 vaccination (nasal) on Wednesday - $25 at >> Walgreens with no waiting. FedEx has the contract to deliver the >> vaccine so transportation isn't the issue. Interesting ad here - >> >> http://tinyurl.com/y897cpm >> >> The clinic that did my procedure on Wednesday does nothing but >> specialize in that one procedure. It runs like a well oiled machine >> (no pun intended). I'm paying for a visit for my older brother as his >> Christmas present this year - I'm sure that's something he wants! >> >> We really do have the best health care available anywhere on the >> planet. It is expensive because it is so far advanced. This current >> debate is NOT about reducing costs or making improvements in care. It >> is nothing short of an ultimate power grab. >> >> >> Brad >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From flybrad at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 19:26:49 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 18:26:49 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Jobs Saved or Created Message-ID: <400985d70911061626w2bf3e109x8f7d0462a524bdab@mail.gmail.com> Check out the attached file. I wonder if the artists employed by the stimulus money to the NEA were responsible. Brad -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: unemployment.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 17541 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091106/7016880d/attachment-0001.jpg From sanderico1 at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 20:14:49 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 19:14:49 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Rik, enjoy democracy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6634e19e0911061714h706cab64ra87c92add69b736b@mail.gmail.com> What a DIK I don't generally like to wish ill on people, but we'd be better off if Mr. Murtha hadn't returned from Vietnam. Rik On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 5:21 PM, Ed Kroposki wrote: > Rik, > > Enjoy this example of our congress at work: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ywgUCdefSW8 > > Ed K > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091106/fc4bb332/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 20:24:12 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 19:24:12 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Health Issues In-Reply-To: <400985d70911061624r13cf6e0ew7790c0ffc26aaaaa@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911060816k6edd8a84mfec804a4ea7bae4d@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911060900p34748f00yb547b09ebbc8c9a2@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911061624r13cf6e0ew7790c0ffc26aaaaa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911061724n5000baa1u216bb7975b522948@mail.gmail.com> Well yeah, that's why the gov't (president) had to declare an emergency, so they could get around and/or stop stumbling over their own rules. It's just ludicrous. Honestly, who in their right mind would ask these people to manage their entire health care system? I think Joe Wilson is right, If I have to take this plan, good, bad, or indifferent, then every citizen, including members of congress, EVERY citizen should have to be enrolled in it too. Rik On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 6:24 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > Whatever reason that's given, it is sure to be someone else s fault. > > http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/006690.html > > Brad > > On 11/6/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > > Ha ha .... I brought that exact question as this ad up to some liberals a > > couple weeks ago. At the time, the gov't had only delivered about 10% (11 > M > > doses) of the promised vaccine. The excuses flowed like water, oh it just > > wasn't the governments fault .... what did I expect .... I'm just not > > realistic .... yada yada yada. I told them it was simple. All I expect > is > > for the gov't to do what the hell it says it is going to do. If they can > > only deliver 11 million doses, great, then do it. NOBODY believes it is > > acceptable to constantly blow your estimates by, in this case 90%. > Actually, > > this was closer than they get on much of the time. > > > > Rik > > > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> To prepare for the trip to DC, on Wednesday I had the second > >> colonoscopy in as many months. The previous one had to be repeated > >> because the "flush" wasn't complete (a polite way of saying I was > >> still full of *it). What a great way to prepare for a trip to > >> Washington. > >> > >> We also got Cora a H1N1 vaccination (nasal) on Wednesday - $25 at > >> Walgreens with no waiting. FedEx has the contract to deliver the > >> vaccine so transportation isn't the issue. Interesting ad here - > >> > >> http://tinyurl.com/y897cpm > >> > >> The clinic that did my procedure on Wednesday does nothing but > >> specialize in that one procedure. It runs like a well oiled machine > >> (no pun intended). I'm paying for a visit for my older brother as his > >> Christmas present this year - I'm sure that's something he wants! > >> > >> We really do have the best health care available anywhere on the > >> planet. It is expensive because it is so far advanced. This current > >> debate is NOT about reducing costs or making improvements in care. It > >> is nothing short of an ultimate power grab. > >> > >> > >> Brad > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > > you with experience. > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091106/0fac4625/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 20:41:56 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 19:41:56 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Health Issues In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911061724n5000baa1u216bb7975b522948@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911060816k6edd8a84mfec804a4ea7bae4d@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911060900p34748f00yb547b09ebbc8c9a2@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911061624r13cf6e0ew7790c0ffc26aaaaa@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911061724n5000baa1u216bb7975b522948@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911061741t12b67c60wf51a2a307dae3d1b@mail.gmail.com> BTW, Joe Wilson spoke briefly yesterday and got the loudest and longest applause. On 11/6/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Well yeah, that's why the gov't (president) had to declare an emergency, so > they could get around and/or stop stumbling over their own rules. > > It's just ludicrous. > > Honestly, who in their right mind would ask these people to manage their > entire health care system? > > I think Joe Wilson is right, If I have to take this plan, good, bad, or > indifferent, then every citizen, including members of congress, EVERY > citizen should have to be enrolled in it too. > > Rik > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 6:24 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> Whatever reason that's given, it is sure to be someone else s fault. >> >> http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/006690.html >> >> Brad >> >> On 11/6/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> > Ha ha .... I brought that exact question as this ad up to some liberals >> > a >> > couple weeks ago. At the time, the gov't had only delivered about 10% >> > (11 >> M >> > doses) of the promised vaccine. The excuses flowed like water, oh it >> > just >> > wasn't the governments fault .... what did I expect .... I'm just not >> > realistic .... yada yada yada. I told them it was simple. All I expect >> is >> > for the gov't to do what the hell it says it is going to do. If they can >> > only deliver 11 million doses, great, then do it. NOBODY believes it is >> > acceptable to constantly blow your estimates by, in this case 90%. >> Actually, >> > this was closer than they get on much of the time. >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> To prepare for the trip to DC, on Wednesday I had the second >> >> colonoscopy in as many months. The previous one had to be repeated >> >> because the "flush" wasn't complete (a polite way of saying I was >> >> still full of *it). What a great way to prepare for a trip to >> >> Washington. >> >> >> >> We also got Cora a H1N1 vaccination (nasal) on Wednesday - $25 at >> >> Walgreens with no waiting. FedEx has the contract to deliver the >> >> vaccine so transportation isn't the issue. Interesting ad here - >> >> >> >> http://tinyurl.com/y897cpm >> >> >> >> The clinic that did my procedure on Wednesday does nothing but >> >> specialize in that one procedure. It runs like a well oiled machine >> >> (no pun intended). I'm paying for a visit for my older brother as his >> >> Christmas present this year - I'm sure that's something he wants! >> >> >> >> We really do have the best health care available anywhere on the >> >> planet. It is expensive because it is so far advanced. This current >> >> debate is NOT about reducing costs or making improvements in care. It >> >> is nothing short of an ultimate power grab. >> >> >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> > beat >> > you with experience. >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From flybrad at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 21:43:27 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 20:43:27 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Hitler Message-ID: <400985d70911061843h344e1ee4n6dee2c2bc86fff5c@mail.gmail.com> If there were any "Hitler" posters at the rally yesterday, I didn't see them. That doesn't mean there weren't some there, I just didn't spot any in the 1/4 to 1/3 of the (very well behaved) crowd I could see from my vantage point. Here's the POTUS mouthpiece responding to a "softball" question about the rally - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o71Sw5xwAI4&feature=player_embedded Gibby, here's a few images from the recent past you may have forgotten about - http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=612 These people really do think we're that stupid! Brad From sanderico1 at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 23:21:14 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 22:21:14 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Hitler In-Reply-To: <400985d70911061843h344e1ee4n6dee2c2bc86fff5c@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911061843h344e1ee4n6dee2c2bc86fff5c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911062021o3b298049yb3e3e9d7b4fc4bbb@mail.gmail.com> I'm listening to Levin ripping the libs up over this exact thing right now. But see, the libs know that no or at least few libs are likely to listen to someone like Levin, so they can pretty much say what they want and all their lapdogs will just continue slobbering on after them. I listen on the computer so I hear him after normal showtime. Rik On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 8:43 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > If there were any "Hitler" posters at the rally yesterday, I didn't > see them. That doesn't mean there weren't some there, I just didn't > spot any in the 1/4 to 1/3 of the (very well behaved) crowd I could > see from my vantage point. Here's the POTUS mouthpiece responding to > a "softball" question about the rally - > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o71Sw5xwAI4&feature=player_embedded > > Gibby, here's a few images from the recent past you may have forgotten > about - > > http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=612 > > These people really do think we're that stupid! > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091106/1e7c0aa7/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sat Nov 7 00:57:34 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 23:57:34 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Hitler In-Reply-To: <400985d70911061843h344e1ee4n6dee2c2bc86fff5c@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911061843h344e1ee4n6dee2c2bc86fff5c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911062157r174813adr89e2b89eadf17a5a@mail.gmail.com> When I hear people like Pelosi and her ilk running off at the mouth about astro-turfing and nazis and swastikas and how we should be trusting them, I'd like to sit them down and make them listen to this, over and over .... 'til they get it. Might take a while!! But, I'm patient, I'll wait http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVh75ylAUXY&feature=player_embedded Rik On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 8:43 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > If there were any "Hitler" posters at the rally yesterday, I didn't > see them. That doesn't mean there weren't some there, I just didn't > spot any in the 1/4 to 1/3 of the (very well behaved) crowd I could > see from my vantage point. Here's the POTUS mouthpiece responding to > a "softball" question about the rally - > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o71Sw5xwAI4&feature=player_embedded > > Gibby, here's a few images from the recent past you may have forgotten > about - > > http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=612 > > These people really do think we're that stupid! > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091106/2c7aaea5/attachment-0001.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sat Nov 7 01:08:54 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 00:08:54 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Hitler In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911062157r174813adr89e2b89eadf17a5a@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911061843h344e1ee4n6dee2c2bc86fff5c@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911062157r174813adr89e2b89eadf17a5a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911062208i611d976rc784863f81687cd0@mail.gmail.com> Speaking of gov't dumbasses, Here's a little slam on Geithner I read in the "Free Advice" blog tonight. ______________ "Over at MarginalRevolution Mr. Cowen goes to the Treasury. In his post-game showTyler said, *"Tim Geithner is very smart and he was conceptually stronger than one might have expected."* In the comments Joseph Lawler said, *"I assume that by "conceptually stronger than one might have expected" you mean "didn't literally hand bags of cash to his friends right in front of us."*" _____________ Got to laughing so hard I damned near choked on my apple :-) Rik On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 11:57 PM, Rik Sandberg wrote: > When I hear people like Pelosi and her ilk running off at the mouth about > astro-turfing and nazis and swastikas and how we should be trusting them, > I'd like to sit them down and make them listen to this, over and over .... > 'til they get it. Might take a while!! But, I'm patient, I'll wait > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVh75ylAUXY&feature=player_embedded > > Rik > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 8:43 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> If there were any "Hitler" posters at the rally yesterday, I didn't >> see them. That doesn't mean there weren't some there, I just didn't >> spot any in the 1/4 to 1/3 of the (very well behaved) crowd I could >> see from my vantage point. Here's the POTUS mouthpiece responding to >> a "softball" question about the rally - >> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o71Sw5xwAI4&feature=player_embedded >> >> Gibby, here's a few images from the recent past you may have forgotten >> about - >> >> http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=612 >> >> These people really do think we're that stupid! >> >> Brad >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091107/21f6df43/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sat Nov 7 08:09:12 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 07:09:12 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Lament For A Nation Message-ID: <400985d70911070509j7f2bafeeof27b1f44637b6e96@mail.gmail.com> This was published last month but just showed-up on my radar. Too bad our own lame-stream media can't be objective and see what is happening. Brad ---------------- Lament for a nation By David Warren, The Ottawa CitizenOctober 2, 2009 There is nothing new under the sun: and I mean, nothing. It is a point brought home to us with increasing force by the expansion of the Internet. Conceive of an "original idea." Now, select two or more keywords suggested by it. Use them as search terms, and you will soon find that, say, 438,000 other people have entertained said "original idea," and a dozen are currently blogging on it. Before beginning today's column, my search terms were "Gorbachev" and "Obama." Yes: a lot of people have entertained the idea, that Mikhail Gorbachev was to the late great Soviet Union, what Barack Obama is to the surviving United States -- the leader who reforms so many things so quickly that his country suddenly disappears. One recalls the speed with which the first Soviet head of state to be born after the October Revolution became its last head of state. It took him about three years: just less than the time of one U.S. presidential term. (Though he had already taken three years to warm up, as General Secretary of the Communist Party.) It is, today, a little-known fact that Gorbachev did not bring about the collapse of the Soviet Union, on purpose. Those who still detect a glint in his eye would do well to respect his persistent denials. He was sincerely trying to reform the place. He was walking a dog with powerful jaws, but rather loose teeth; he tried to adapt it to a vegetarian diet; it died. The poor dictator inherited not only an economy going bankrupt by even socialist standards; but a war in Afghanistan that was being lost, against an utterly disorganized enemy from another century; to say nothing of half-a-dozen other imperial missions, in exotic third-world locations, that were not going well. By merely liberating the little West Indian island of Grenada, President Reagan was able to send a hollow sound through the hearts of aspiring Communist revolutionaries all over the world. The comparison between Gorbachev and Obama is apt on few levels. The chief difference is between the U.S. of 2009, and the USSR of 1985; between a huge, decentralized, open economy, and the society it serves; and a much smaller, very centralized, command economy, and the society serving it. These circumstances are not even remotely comparable, and one must be a fool indeed to play with a moral, economic, or ideological "equivalence" between the two old superpowers. Which is not to say such fools aren't numerous. Nor are the two men, themselves, remotely comparable in their backgrounds, or political outlook. Gorbachev, for instance, had come up from tractor driver, not through elite schools including Harvard Law; he lacked the narcissism that constantly seeks self-reflection through microphones and cameras, or the sense that everything is about him. On the other hand, some interesting comparisons could be made between the thuggish party machine of Chicago, which raised Obama as its golden boy; and the thuggish party machine of Moscow, which presented Gorbachev as it's most attractive face. Both men have been praised for their wonderful temperaments, and their ability to remain unperturbed by approaching catastrophe. But again, the substance is different, for Gorbachev's temperament was that of a survivor of many previous catastrophes. Yet they do have one major thing in common, and that is the belief that, regardless of what the ruler does, the polity he rules must necessarily continue. This is perhaps the most essential, if seldom acknowledged, insight of the post-modern "liberal" mind: that if you take the pillars away, the roof will continue to hover in the air. Gorbachev seemed to assume, right up to the fall of the Berlin Wall and then beyond it, that his Communist Party would recover from any temporary setbacks, and that the long-term effects of his glasnost and perestroika could only be to make it bigger and stronger. There is a corollary of this largely unspoken assumption: that no matter what you do to one part of a machine, the rest of the machine will continue to function normally. A variant of this is the frequently expressed denial of the law of unintended consequences: the belief that, if the effect you intend is good, the actual effect must be similarly happy. Very small children, the mad, and certain extinct primitive tribes, have shared in this belief system, but only the fully college-educated liberal has the vocabulary to make it sound plausible. With an incredible rapidity, America's status as the world's pre-eminent superpower is now passing away. This is a function both of the nearly systematic abandonment of U.S. interests and allies overseas, with metastasizing debt and bureaucracy on the home front. And while I think the U.S. has the structural fortitude to survive the Obama presidency, it will be a much-diminished country that emerges from the "new physics" of hope and change. David Warren's column appears Sunday, Wednesday and Saturday. From flybrad at gmail.com Sat Nov 7 08:22:09 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 07:22:09 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Hitler In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911062021o3b298049yb3e3e9d7b4fc4bbb@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911061843h344e1ee4n6dee2c2bc86fff5c@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911062021o3b298049yb3e3e9d7b4fc4bbb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911070522y55099288ncaf8b263b186e836@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Here's another memory jogger for Gibby - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8b4dqne6y4&feature=player_embedded Who took Baghdad Bob's job after Saddam was removed from power? Maybe there's a job opening for Gibby when he gets thrown under the bus. Brad On 11/6/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > I'm listening to Levin ripping the libs up over this exact thing right now. > But see, the libs know that no or at least few libs are likely to listen to > someone like Levin, so they can pretty much say what they want and all their > lapdogs will just continue slobbering on after them. > > I listen on the computer so I hear him after normal showtime. > > Rik > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 8:43 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> If there were any "Hitler" posters at the rally yesterday, I didn't >> see them. That doesn't mean there weren't some there, I just didn't >> spot any in the 1/4 to 1/3 of the (very well behaved) crowd I could >> see from my vantage point. Here's the POTUS mouthpiece responding to >> a "softball" question about the rally - >> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o71Sw5xwAI4&feature=player_embedded >> >> Gibby, here's a few images from the recent past you may have forgotten >> about - >> >> http://www.zombietime.com/zomblog/?p=612 >> >> These people really do think we're that stupid! >> >> Brad >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From flybrad at gmail.com Sat Nov 7 09:12:30 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 08:12:30 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Jobs Saved or Created In-Reply-To: <400985d70911061626w2bf3e109x8f7d0462a524bdab@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911061626w2bf3e109x8f7d0462a524bdab@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911070612s753a1c1bs3d65573f0ca776bc@mail.gmail.com> Rot Roh! The Kool Aid is starting to taste bitter at the New York Times. Brad --------------- November 7, 2009 Broader Measure of U.S. Unemployment Stands at 17.5% By DAVID LEONHARDT For all the pain caused by the Great Recession, the job market still was not in as bad shape as it had been during the depths of the early 1980s recession ? until now. With the release of the jobs report on Friday, the broadest measure of unemployment and underemployment tracked by the Labor Department has reached its highest level in decades. If statistics went back so far, the measure would almost certainly be at its highest level since the Great Depression. In all, more than one out of every six workers ? 17.5 percent ? were unemployed or underemployed in October. The previous recorded high was 17.1 percent, in December 1982. This includes the officially unemployed, who have looked for work in the last four weeks. It also includes discouraged workers, who have looked in the past year, as well as millions of part-time workers who want to be working full time. The official jobless rate ? 10.2 percent in October, up from 9.8 percent in September ? remains lower than the early 1980s peak of 10.8 percent. The rate is highest today, sometimes 20 percent, in states that had big housing bubbles, like California and Arizona, or that have large manufacturing sectors, like Michigan, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island and South Carolina. The new benchmark is a sign of just how much damage financial crises tend to inflict. A recent book by Carmen M. Reinhart and Kenneth S. Rogoff, two economists, found that over the last century the typical crisis had caused the jobless rate in the country where it occurred to rise for almost five years. By that standard, the jobless rate here would continue rising for two more years, through the end of 2011. Most economists predict that the rate will in fact begin to fall next year, largely because of the federal government?s aggressive response ? fiscal stimulus, interest-rate cuts and a variety of creative steps by the Federal Reserve and Treasury Department. Friday?s report showed that monthly job losses continued to slow recently, though the improvement has been gradual. At the White House Friday, President Obama signed a bill to extend unemployment benefits and a tax credit for home buyers, and said that he was looking at ways to enact more stimulus. On Wednesday, the Fed announced that it expected to leave its benchmark interest at zero for ?an extended period.? Nearly 16 million people are now unemployed and more than seven million jobs have been lost since late 2007. Officially, the Labor Department?s broad measure of unemployment goes back only to 1994. But early this year, with the help of economists at the department, The New York Times created a version that estimates it going back to 1970. If such a measure were available for the Depression, it probably would have exceeded 30 percent. Compared with the early 1980s, a smaller share of workers today are officially unemployed and a smaller share are considered discouraged workers. But there are many more people who would like to be working full time and have been able to find only part-time work, according to the government?s monthly survey of workers. The rapid increase in their ranks and in the officially unemployed has caused the rate to rise much faster in this recession than in the early 1980s. Two years ago, it was only 8.2 percent. One of the more striking aspects of the Great Recession is that most of its impact has fallen on a relatively narrow group of workers. This is evident primarily in two ways. First, the number of people who have experienced any unemployment is surprisingly low, given the severity of the recession. The pace of layoffs has increased, but the peak layoff rate this year was the same as it was during the 2001 recession, which was a fairly mild downturn. The main reason that the unemployment rate has soared is the hiring rate has plummeted. So fewer workers than might be expected have lost their jobs. But those without work are paying a steep price, because finding a new job is extremely difficult. Second, wages have continued to rise for most people who still have jobs. The average hourly wage for rank-and-file workers, who make up about four-fifths of the work force, actually accelerated in October, according to the new report. Even though some companies have cut the pay of workers, the average hourly wage has still risen 1.5 to 2.5 percent over the last year, depending on which government survey is examined. Average weekly pay has risen less ? zero to 1 percent ? because hours have been cut. But average prices have fallen. Altogether, the typical worker has received a 1 to 2 percent inflation-adjusted raise over the last year. In the other two severe recessions in recent decades, workers with jobs fared considerably worse. At the same point in the mid-1970s downturn, real weekly pay had fallen 7 percent; in the early 1980s recession, it had fallen 4 percent. It is a strange combination: workers who still have a job are doing better than in other deep recessions, but the unemployment and underemployment have risen to their highest level since the Depression. On 11/6/09, Brad Haslett wrote: > Check out the attached file. I wonder if the artists employed by the > stimulus money to the NEA were responsible. > > Brad > From bill at effros.com Sat Nov 7 09:33:14 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2009 09:33:14 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] I Did NOT Make This Up Message-ID: <4AF5852A.7030007@effros.com> *Big bang goes phut as bird drops baguette into Cern machinery* *. Hadron collider halted again by power cut . Scientists stop testing for relaunch after fowl play* Adam Gabbatt guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk), Friday 6 November 2009 19.27 GMT Cern: View from the central axis of the LHC (Large Hadron Collider) tunnel of the ATLAS underground facility with the eight toroids surrounding the calorimeter It is the machine that scientists hope will recreate the conditions present at the beginning of time. But scientists at the ?3.6bn Large Hadron Collider (LHC) found their plans to emulate the big bang postponed this week when a passing bird dropped a "bit of baguette" into the machine, causing it to overheat. Cern (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/cern), the European particle physics (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/physics) laboratory, launched the LHC (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2008/sep/10/cern.large.hadron.collider) with much fanfare on 10 September last year. Physicists hope to use the collider to prove the existence of the Higgs boson, or God particle, which gives matter in the universe its mass. But the collider, which when running will collide protons travelling at 99.9% of the speed of light, has been out of action for over a year after a helium leak caused it to be shut down (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/sep/24/cern.nuclear) on 19 September 2008, nine days after its start-up. The particle accelerator, which is buried 100m underground near Geneva, is currently undergoing tests ahead of its proposed restart date (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/blog/2009/aug/12/lhc-shutdown-higgs-boson-cern) later this month, but the testing process was stopped on Monday after the power supply to the collider was cut. A Cern spokeswoman, Christine Sutton, said scientists had headed above ground to investigate when they made their discovery. "The problem related to the high voltage supply," Sutton said. "We get mains voltage from the grid, and there was an interruption in the power supply, just like you might have a power cut at home. The person who went to investigate discovered bread and a bird eating the bread." Sutton said the bird and its bread were discovered at a compensating capacitor -- one of the points where the mains electricity supply enters the collider from above ground. The incident cut power to one of the collider's cooling plants, causing temperatures to rise by more than 3C in part of the tunnel. Superconducting magnets within the LHC require a temperature of 1.9C above absolute zero (-273.15C) to steer, and ultimately collide, particles around the 16.8 mile (27km) circuit. This latest incident, although far less severe, appears to bear some similarities to the fault (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/nov/01/cern-large-hadron-collider) that caused the LHC to shut for more than a year after its launch. On that occasion faulty wiring led to an electrical failure, causing a rise in temperature which led to helium, cooled to minus 271C, being released into the machine. The 2008 fault damaged a 400 metre stretch of the collider and cost Cern ?23m. Scientists had to redesign safety systems to prevent a repeat, a process which has taken over a year. However in this latest incident the magnets were only stopped for three days, while the LHC could be recooled, and Sutton said the power cut did not pose a risk to either life or the future of the project. "The beams [of protons] would have been dumped, we have very safe mechanisms that come instantly into play," she said. "They deposit beams into a huge block of graphite which is cooled to take up the energy of the beam. This is something Cern has a lot of experience of, perhaps power cuts will usually be caused by a more obvious kind of interruption than a bird eating a baguette -- particularly by lightning, for example, but these incidents will happen." guardian.co.uk ? Guardian News and Media Limited 2009 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091107/d6013d9c/attachment-0001.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sat Nov 7 10:25:58 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 09:25:58 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Lament For A Nation In-Reply-To: <400985d70911070509j7f2bafeeof27b1f44637b6e96@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911070509j7f2bafeeof27b1f44637b6e96@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911070725o571d3d7at1a91a5216a3a7007@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Wow, this guy gets it. I especially liked this part: ________________ "A variant of this is the frequently expressed denial of the law of unintended consequences: the belief that, if the effect you intend is good, the actual effect must be similarly happy. Very small children, the mad, and certain extinct primitive tribes, have shared in this belief system, but only the fully college-educated liberal has the vocabulary to make it sound plausible." _________________ Shall we all hold hands now and join in singing Kum bay yah?? Our president and his chosen disciples want this from us, we should not be questioning their infinite wisdom. Trying to maintain the role of benevolent superpower to the world is going to break us. It is not possible to remain in good favor with all the rest of the world because, the more you freely give, the more is expected. This is a never ending downward spiral that cannot be escaped until in the end, we are virtual slaves to all who are jealous of our success. The result is, we are brought down to the level of the takers, rather than them being raised to our's, as is their hope. This holds true as well for those within our country who expect to be carried on the shoulders of the ambitious and successful. Things like the climate treaty (Copenhagen) being contemplated by the UN right now should be obvious evidence that all the benevolence we have shared over the last fifty or sixty years is not only unappreciated, it has made us despised by the people who have accepted it. Is it not time for us to get back to the basic idea conveyed in the bible (and I believe is a basic natural law) where it says, the good lord helps those that are willing to help themselves. {End of rant] Rik On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 7:09 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > This was published last month but just showed-up on my radar. Too bad > our own lame-stream media can't be objective and see what is > happening. > > Brad > > ---------------- > > Lament for a nation > > > By David Warren, The Ottawa CitizenOctober 2, 2009 > > > > There is nothing new under the sun: and I mean, nothing. It is a point > brought home to us with increasing force by the expansion of the > Internet. Conceive of an "original idea." Now, select two or more > keywords suggested by it. Use them as search terms, and you will soon > find that, say, 438,000 other people have entertained said "original > idea," and a dozen are currently blogging on it. > > Before beginning today's column, my search terms were "Gorbachev" and > "Obama." > > Yes: a lot of people have entertained the idea, that Mikhail Gorbachev > was to the late great Soviet Union, what Barack Obama is to the > surviving United States -- the leader who reforms so many things so > quickly that his country suddenly disappears. One recalls the speed > with which the first Soviet head of state to be born after the October > Revolution became its last head of state. It took him about three > years: just less than the time of one U.S. presidential term. (Though > he had already taken three years to warm up, as General Secretary of > the Communist Party.) > > It is, today, a little-known fact that Gorbachev did not bring about > the collapse of the Soviet Union, on purpose. Those who still detect a > glint in his eye would do well to respect his persistent denials. He > was sincerely trying to reform the place. He was walking a dog with > powerful jaws, but rather loose teeth; he tried to adapt it to a > vegetarian diet; it died. > > The poor dictator inherited not only an economy going bankrupt by even > socialist standards; but a war in Afghanistan that was being lost, > against an utterly disorganized enemy from another century; to say > nothing of half-a-dozen other imperial missions, in exotic third-world > locations, that were not going well. By merely liberating the little > West Indian island of Grenada, President Reagan was able to send a > hollow sound through the hearts of aspiring Communist revolutionaries > all over the world. > > The comparison between Gorbachev and Obama is apt on few levels. The > chief difference is between the U.S. of 2009, and the USSR of 1985; > between a huge, decentralized, open economy, and the society it > serves; and a much smaller, very centralized, command economy, and the > society serving it. These circumstances are not even remotely > comparable, and one must be a fool indeed to play with a moral, > economic, or ideological "equivalence" between the two old > superpowers. Which is not to say such fools aren't numerous. > > Nor are the two men, themselves, remotely comparable in their > backgrounds, or political outlook. Gorbachev, for instance, had come > up from tractor driver, not through elite schools including Harvard > Law; he lacked the narcissism that constantly seeks self-reflection > through microphones and cameras, or the sense that everything is about > him. > > On the other hand, some interesting comparisons could be made between > the thuggish party machine of Chicago, which raised Obama as its > golden boy; and the thuggish party machine of Moscow, which presented > Gorbachev as it's most attractive face. > > Both men have been praised for their wonderful temperaments, and their > ability to remain unperturbed by approaching catastrophe. But again, > the substance is different, for Gorbachev's temperament was that of a > survivor of many previous catastrophes. > > Yet they do have one major thing in common, and that is the belief > that, regardless of what the ruler does, the polity he rules must > necessarily continue. This is perhaps the most essential, if seldom > acknowledged, insight of the post-modern "liberal" mind: that if you > take the pillars away, the roof will continue to hover in the air. > > Gorbachev seemed to assume, right up to the fall of the Berlin Wall > and then beyond it, that his Communist Party would recover from any > temporary setbacks, and that the long-term effects of his glasnost and > perestroika could only be to make it bigger and stronger. > > There is a corollary of this largely unspoken assumption: that no > matter what you do to one part of a machine, the rest of the machine > will continue to function normally. > > A variant of this is the frequently expressed denial of the law of > unintended consequences: the belief that, if the effect you intend is > good, the actual effect must be similarly happy. > > Very small children, the mad, and certain extinct primitive tribes, > have shared in this belief system, but only the fully college-educated > liberal has the vocabulary to make it sound plausible. > > With an incredible rapidity, America's status as the world's > pre-eminent superpower is now passing away. This is a function both of > the nearly systematic abandonment of U.S. interests and allies > overseas, with metastasizing debt and bureaucracy on the home front. > > And while I think the U.S. has the structural fortitude to survive the > Obama presidency, it will be a much-diminished country that emerges > from the "new physics" of hope and change. > > David Warren's column appears Sunday, Wednesday and Saturday. > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091107/4bd318d8/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sat Nov 7 11:13:28 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 10:13:28 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Lament For A Nation In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911070725o571d3d7at1a91a5216a3a7007@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911070509j7f2bafeeof27b1f44637b6e96@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911070725o571d3d7at1a91a5216a3a7007@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911070813hff9be11y2ae0b52714acd68a@mail.gmail.com> Rik, We may know by the end of the day, it looks like they're going to vote tonight. I'm convinced that Nancy Pelosi is nothing short of bat-shit crazy. It wouldn't be the first time that history turned on a single person without fully functioning faculties. Brad On 11/7/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Wow, this guy gets it. > > I especially liked this part: > > ________________ > "A variant of this is the frequently expressed denial of the law of > unintended consequences: the belief that, if the effect you intend is > good, the actual effect must be similarly happy. > > Very small children, the mad, and certain extinct primitive tribes, > have shared in this belief system, but only the fully college-educated > liberal has the vocabulary to make it sound plausible." > _________________ > > Shall we all hold hands now and join in singing Kum bay yah?? Our president > and his chosen disciples want this from us, we should not be questioning > their infinite wisdom. > > Trying to maintain the role of benevolent superpower to the world is going > to break us. It is not possible to remain in good favor with all the rest of > the world because, the more you freely give, the more is expected. This is a > never ending downward spiral that cannot be escaped until in the end, we are > virtual slaves to all who are jealous of our success. The result is, we are > brought down to the level of the takers, rather than them being raised to > our's, as is their hope. This holds true as well for those within our > country who expect to be carried on the shoulders of the ambitious and > successful. > > Things like the climate treaty (Copenhagen) being contemplated by the UN > right now should be obvious evidence that all the benevolence we have shared > over the last fifty or sixty years is not only unappreciated, it has made us > despised by the people who have accepted it. > > Is it not time for us to get back to the basic idea conveyed in the bible > (and I believe is a basic natural law) where it says, the good lord helps > those that are willing to help themselves. > > {End of rant] > > Rik > > > > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 7:09 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> This was published last month but just showed-up on my radar. Too bad >> our own lame-stream media can't be objective and see what is >> happening. >> >> Brad >> >> ---------------- >> >> Lament for a nation >> >> >> By David Warren, The Ottawa CitizenOctober 2, 2009 >> >> >> >> There is nothing new under the sun: and I mean, nothing. It is a point >> brought home to us with increasing force by the expansion of the >> Internet. Conceive of an "original idea." Now, select two or more >> keywords suggested by it. Use them as search terms, and you will soon >> find that, say, 438,000 other people have entertained said "original >> idea," and a dozen are currently blogging on it. >> >> Before beginning today's column, my search terms were "Gorbachev" and >> "Obama." >> >> Yes: a lot of people have entertained the idea, that Mikhail Gorbachev >> was to the late great Soviet Union, what Barack Obama is to the >> surviving United States -- the leader who reforms so many things so >> quickly that his country suddenly disappears. One recalls the speed >> with which the first Soviet head of state to be born after the October >> Revolution became its last head of state. It took him about three >> years: just less than the time of one U.S. presidential term. (Though >> he had already taken three years to warm up, as General Secretary of >> the Communist Party.) >> >> It is, today, a little-known fact that Gorbachev did not bring about >> the collapse of the Soviet Union, on purpose. Those who still detect a >> glint in his eye would do well to respect his persistent denials. He >> was sincerely trying to reform the place. He was walking a dog with >> powerful jaws, but rather loose teeth; he tried to adapt it to a >> vegetarian diet; it died. >> >> The poor dictator inherited not only an economy going bankrupt by even >> socialist standards; but a war in Afghanistan that was being lost, >> against an utterly disorganized enemy from another century; to say >> nothing of half-a-dozen other imperial missions, in exotic third-world >> locations, that were not going well. By merely liberating the little >> West Indian island of Grenada, President Reagan was able to send a >> hollow sound through the hearts of aspiring Communist revolutionaries >> all over the world. >> >> The comparison between Gorbachev and Obama is apt on few levels. The >> chief difference is between the U.S. of 2009, and the USSR of 1985; >> between a huge, decentralized, open economy, and the society it >> serves; and a much smaller, very centralized, command economy, and the >> society serving it. These circumstances are not even remotely >> comparable, and one must be a fool indeed to play with a moral, >> economic, or ideological "equivalence" between the two old >> superpowers. Which is not to say such fools aren't numerous. >> >> Nor are the two men, themselves, remotely comparable in their >> backgrounds, or political outlook. Gorbachev, for instance, had come >> up from tractor driver, not through elite schools including Harvard >> Law; he lacked the narcissism that constantly seeks self-reflection >> through microphones and cameras, or the sense that everything is about >> him. >> >> On the other hand, some interesting comparisons could be made between >> the thuggish party machine of Chicago, which raised Obama as its >> golden boy; and the thuggish party machine of Moscow, which presented >> Gorbachev as it's most attractive face. >> >> Both men have been praised for their wonderful temperaments, and their >> ability to remain unperturbed by approaching catastrophe. But again, >> the substance is different, for Gorbachev's temperament was that of a >> survivor of many previous catastrophes. >> >> Yet they do have one major thing in common, and that is the belief >> that, regardless of what the ruler does, the polity he rules must >> necessarily continue. This is perhaps the most essential, if seldom >> acknowledged, insight of the post-modern "liberal" mind: that if you >> take the pillars away, the roof will continue to hover in the air. >> >> Gorbachev seemed to assume, right up to the fall of the Berlin Wall >> and then beyond it, that his Communist Party would recover from any >> temporary setbacks, and that the long-term effects of his glasnost and >> perestroika could only be to make it bigger and stronger. >> >> There is a corollary of this largely unspoken assumption: that no >> matter what you do to one part of a machine, the rest of the machine >> will continue to function normally. >> >> A variant of this is the frequently expressed denial of the law of >> unintended consequences: the belief that, if the effect you intend is >> good, the actual effect must be similarly happy. >> >> Very small children, the mad, and certain extinct primitive tribes, >> have shared in this belief system, but only the fully college-educated >> liberal has the vocabulary to make it sound plausible. >> >> With an incredible rapidity, America's status as the world's >> pre-eminent superpower is now passing away. This is a function both of >> the nearly systematic abandonment of U.S. interests and allies >> overseas, with metastasizing debt and bureaucracy on the home front. >> >> And while I think the U.S. has the structural fortitude to survive the >> Obama presidency, it will be a much-diminished country that emerges >> from the "new physics" of hope and change. >> >> David Warren's column appears Sunday, Wednesday and Saturday. >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From flybrad at gmail.com Sat Nov 7 11:22:49 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 10:22:49 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Lament For A Nation In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911070725o571d3d7at1a91a5216a3a7007@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911070509j7f2bafeeof27b1f44637b6e96@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911070725o571d3d7at1a91a5216a3a7007@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911070822o7f3deb21k8886df232cf97f5a@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Like you didn't already know this, read article below. Brad -------- Shutting off the miracle-drug spigot By JEFF STIER & HENRY I. MILLER Last Updated: 4:40 AM, November 7, 2009 Posted: 12:29 AM, November 7, 2009 House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was right last week when she called her latest health-care-reform proposal a "his toric moment": After decades of life-saving and cost-cutting scientific innovations from drug and medical-device companies, the government is about to step in and stifle the R&D that is our best hope for improving health outcomes. Pelosi's bill may cost pharmaceutical companies $150 billion over a decade -- nearly double the amount they conceded when they cut a White House-approved deal with Sen. Max Baucus this summer. The Pelosi bill is a prescription for fewer new life-saving drugs. By stifling innovation, it would hurt not only industry, but also all of us who'd benefit from new-drug development. Democrats in Washington are out to cut health-care costs at the expense of the research-intensive (as opposed to generic) pharmaceutical industry. Yet drugs often improve the span and quality of life in a remarkably cost-effective way. Innovative new drugs have helped many patients avoid costly hospitalization, for example. From 1980 to 2000, the number of days in the hospital per 100 people fell from 129.7 to 56.6, a drop of 56 percent -- so that Americans avoided 206 million days of hospital care in 2000 alone, according to Medtap International, which provides health economics and outcomes-research services. And a study in 2000 sponsored by the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research concluded that increased use of a blood-thinning drug would prevent 40,000 strokes a year, saving $600 million annually. A 1997 study by the National Bureau of Economic Research found the costs of treatment per episode of major depression fell by 25 percent from 1991 to 1995, largely as a result of new medicines. New drugs are also generally better than older ones at reducing mortality. In a study of patients who took drugs between January and June 2000, those who took newer medications were less likely to die by the end of 2002. Yet Washington has grown increasingly hostile to the industry. R&D investments per new-drug introduction nearly doubled between the early '80s and early '90s -- but government approvals have been dropping. Even after drugs are approved for marketing, only about three in 10 now recoup their development costs. And now Congress is out to make the climate for new-drug development significantly worse. The president has bragged that he intends to eke out huge cost savings at drug companies' expense: "The pharmaceutical industry has already said they're willing to put $80 billion on the table," adding, "We might be able to get $100 billion out or more." The industry was willing to "give" back its profits because it was told it wouldn't have a seat at the negotiating table if it didn't go along. But now Pelosi has set up her own "negotiating table" -- nearly doubling the amount Washington would confiscate from the industry and planning vast cuts in what Medicare would pay for drugs -- a provision that the industry was assured was off the other table. Give 'em a hand, they'll take an arm. Nor are the drug companies the only target. The Pelosi bill has $20 billion in "user fees" (read: taxes) on medical-device manufacturers. New devices such as artificial joints, pacemakers and insulin pumps are often developed by small startup companies -- those least capable of paying these punitive up-front regulatory expenses. And the working Senate bill aims at $40 billion from the industry. The tactics employed by the administration and Congress add up to sheer bullying -- and while they're battering the drug industry, patients are the ones ultimately getting beaten up. Jeff Stier is an associate director of the American Council on Science and Health. Henry Miller, a physician and Hoover Insti tution fellow, was an FDA official from 1979 to 1994. NEW YORK POST On 11/7/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Wow, this guy gets it. > > I especially liked this part: > > ________________ > "A variant of this is the frequently expressed denial of the law of > unintended consequences: the belief that, if the effect you intend is > good, the actual effect must be similarly happy. > > Very small children, the mad, and certain extinct primitive tribes, > have shared in this belief system, but only the fully college-educated > liberal has the vocabulary to make it sound plausible." > _________________ > > Shall we all hold hands now and join in singing Kum bay yah?? Our president > and his chosen disciples want this from us, we should not be questioning > their infinite wisdom. > > Trying to maintain the role of benevolent superpower to the world is going > to break us. It is not possible to remain in good favor with all the rest of > the world because, the more you freely give, the more is expected. This is a > never ending downward spiral that cannot be escaped until in the end, we are > virtual slaves to all who are jealous of our success. The result is, we are > brought down to the level of the takers, rather than them being raised to > our's, as is their hope. This holds true as well for those within our > country who expect to be carried on the shoulders of the ambitious and > successful. > > Things like the climate treaty (Copenhagen) being contemplated by the UN > right now should be obvious evidence that all the benevolence we have shared > over the last fifty or sixty years is not only unappreciated, it has made us > despised by the people who have accepted it. > > Is it not time for us to get back to the basic idea conveyed in the bible > (and I believe is a basic natural law) where it says, the good lord helps > those that are willing to help themselves. > > {End of rant] > > Rik > > > > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 7:09 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> This was published last month but just showed-up on my radar. Too bad >> our own lame-stream media can't be objective and see what is >> happening. >> >> Brad >> >> ---------------- >> >> Lament for a nation >> >> >> By David Warren, The Ottawa CitizenOctober 2, 2009 >> >> >> >> There is nothing new under the sun: and I mean, nothing. It is a point >> brought home to us with increasing force by the expansion of the >> Internet. Conceive of an "original idea." Now, select two or more >> keywords suggested by it. Use them as search terms, and you will soon >> find that, say, 438,000 other people have entertained said "original >> idea," and a dozen are currently blogging on it. >> >> Before beginning today's column, my search terms were "Gorbachev" and >> "Obama." >> >> Yes: a lot of people have entertained the idea, that Mikhail Gorbachev >> was to the late great Soviet Union, what Barack Obama is to the >> surviving United States -- the leader who reforms so many things so >> quickly that his country suddenly disappears. One recalls the speed >> with which the first Soviet head of state to be born after the October >> Revolution became its last head of state. It took him about three >> years: just less than the time of one U.S. presidential term. (Though >> he had already taken three years to warm up, as General Secretary of >> the Communist Party.) >> >> It is, today, a little-known fact that Gorbachev did not bring about >> the collapse of the Soviet Union, on purpose. Those who still detect a >> glint in his eye would do well to respect his persistent denials. He >> was sincerely trying to reform the place. He was walking a dog with >> powerful jaws, but rather loose teeth; he tried to adapt it to a >> vegetarian diet; it died. >> >> The poor dictator inherited not only an economy going bankrupt by even >> socialist standards; but a war in Afghanistan that was being lost, >> against an utterly disorganized enemy from another century; to say >> nothing of half-a-dozen other imperial missions, in exotic third-world >> locations, that were not going well. By merely liberating the little >> West Indian island of Grenada, President Reagan was able to send a >> hollow sound through the hearts of aspiring Communist revolutionaries >> all over the world. >> >> The comparison between Gorbachev and Obama is apt on few levels. The >> chief difference is between the U.S. of 2009, and the USSR of 1985; >> between a huge, decentralized, open economy, and the society it >> serves; and a much smaller, very centralized, command economy, and the >> society serving it. These circumstances are not even remotely >> comparable, and one must be a fool indeed to play with a moral, >> economic, or ideological "equivalence" between the two old >> superpowers. Which is not to say such fools aren't numerous. >> >> Nor are the two men, themselves, remotely comparable in their >> backgrounds, or political outlook. Gorbachev, for instance, had come >> up from tractor driver, not through elite schools including Harvard >> Law; he lacked the narcissism that constantly seeks self-reflection >> through microphones and cameras, or the sense that everything is about >> him. >> >> On the other hand, some interesting comparisons could be made between >> the thuggish party machine of Chicago, which raised Obama as its >> golden boy; and the thuggish party machine of Moscow, which presented >> Gorbachev as it's most attractive face. >> >> Both men have been praised for their wonderful temperaments, and their >> ability to remain unperturbed by approaching catastrophe. But again, >> the substance is different, for Gorbachev's temperament was that of a >> survivor of many previous catastrophes. >> >> Yet they do have one major thing in common, and that is the belief >> that, regardless of what the ruler does, the polity he rules must >> necessarily continue. This is perhaps the most essential, if seldom >> acknowledged, insight of the post-modern "liberal" mind: that if you >> take the pillars away, the roof will continue to hover in the air. >> >> Gorbachev seemed to assume, right up to the fall of the Berlin Wall >> and then beyond it, that his Communist Party would recover from any >> temporary setbacks, and that the long-term effects of his glasnost and >> perestroika could only be to make it bigger and stronger. >> >> There is a corollary of this largely unspoken assumption: that no >> matter what you do to one part of a machine, the rest of the machine >> will continue to function normally. >> >> A variant of this is the frequently expressed denial of the law of >> unintended consequences: the belief that, if the effect you intend is >> good, the actual effect must be similarly happy. >> >> Very small children, the mad, and certain extinct primitive tribes, >> have shared in this belief system, but only the fully college-educated >> liberal has the vocabulary to make it sound plausible. >> >> With an incredible rapidity, America's status as the world's >> pre-eminent superpower is now passing away. This is a function both of >> the nearly systematic abandonment of U.S. interests and allies >> overseas, with metastasizing debt and bureaucracy on the home front. >> >> And while I think the U.S. has the structural fortitude to survive the >> Obama presidency, it will be a much-diminished country that emerges >> from the "new physics" of hope and change. >> >> David Warren's column appears Sunday, Wednesday and Saturday. >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sat Nov 7 11:31:29 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 10:31:29 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Lament For A Nation In-Reply-To: <400985d70911070822o7f3deb21k8886df232cf97f5a@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911070509j7f2bafeeof27b1f44637b6e96@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911070725o571d3d7at1a91a5216a3a7007@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911070822o7f3deb21k8886df232cf97f5a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911070831q7073dd88q763242b054891643@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Yet more evidence .... This woman needs to be exposed for what she is and removed ..... like a cancer. And I for one don't care how. Rik On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > Like you didn't already know this, read article below. > > Brad > > -------- > > > Shutting off the miracle-drug spigot > > By JEFF STIER & HENRY I. MILLER > > Last Updated: 4:40 AM, November 7, 2009 > > Posted: 12:29 AM, November 7, 2009 > > House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was right last week when she called her > latest health-care-reform proposal a "his toric moment": After decades > of life-saving and cost-cutting scientific innovations from drug and > medical-device companies, the government is about to step in and > stifle the R&D that is our best hope for improving health outcomes. > > Pelosi's bill may cost pharmaceutical companies $150 billion over a > decade -- nearly double the amount they conceded when they cut a White > House-approved deal with Sen. Max Baucus this summer. > > The Pelosi bill is a prescription for fewer new life-saving drugs. By > stifling innovation, it would hurt not only industry, but also all of > us who'd benefit from new-drug development. > > Democrats in Washington are out to cut health-care costs at the > expense of the research-intensive (as opposed to generic) > pharmaceutical industry. Yet drugs often improve the span and quality > of life in a remarkably cost-effective way. > > Innovative new drugs have helped many patients avoid costly > hospitalization, for example. From 1980 to 2000, the number of days in > the hospital per 100 people fell from 129.7 to 56.6, a drop of 56 > percent -- so that Americans avoided 206 million days of hospital care > in 2000 alone, according to Medtap International, which provides > health economics and outcomes-research services. > > And a study in 2000 sponsored by the Agency for Health Care Policy and > Research concluded that increased use of a blood-thinning drug would > prevent 40,000 strokes a year, saving $600 million annually. A 1997 > study by the National Bureau of Economic Research found the costs of > treatment per episode of major depression fell by 25 percent from 1991 > to 1995, largely as a result of new medicines. > > New drugs are also generally better than older ones at reducing > mortality. In a study of patients who took drugs between January and > June 2000, those who took newer medications were less likely to die by > the end of 2002. > > Yet Washington has grown increasingly hostile to the industry. R&D > investments per new-drug introduction nearly doubled between the early > '80s and early '90s -- but government approvals have been dropping. > Even after drugs are approved for marketing, only about three in 10 > now recoup their development costs. > > And now Congress is out to make the climate for new-drug development > significantly worse. The president has bragged that he intends to eke > out huge cost savings at drug companies' expense: "The pharmaceutical > industry has already said they're willing to put $80 billion on the > table," adding, "We might be able to get $100 billion out or more." > The industry was willing to "give" back its profits because it was > told it wouldn't have a seat at the negotiating table if it didn't go > along. > > But now Pelosi has set up her own "negotiating table" -- nearly > doubling the amount Washington would confiscate from the industry and > planning vast cuts in what Medicare would pay for drugs -- a provision > that the industry was assured was off the other table. Give 'em a > hand, they'll take an arm. > > Nor are the drug companies the only target. The Pelosi bill has $20 > billion in "user fees" (read: taxes) on medical-device manufacturers. > New devices such as artificial joints, pacemakers and insulin pumps > are often developed by small startup companies -- those least capable > of paying these punitive up-front regulatory expenses. And the working > Senate bill aims at $40 billion from the industry. > > The tactics employed by the administration and Congress add up to > sheer bullying -- and while they're battering the drug industry, > patients are the ones ultimately getting beaten up. > > Jeff Stier is an associate director of the American Council on Science > and Health. Henry Miller, a physician and Hoover Insti tution fellow, > was an FDA official from 1979 to 1994. > > NEW YORK POST > > On 11/7/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > Wow, this guy gets it. > > > > I especially liked this part: > > > > ________________ > > "A variant of this is the frequently expressed denial of the law of > > unintended consequences: the belief that, if the effect you intend is > > good, the actual effect must be similarly happy. > > > > Very small children, the mad, and certain extinct primitive tribes, > > have shared in this belief system, but only the fully college-educated > > liberal has the vocabulary to make it sound plausible." > > _________________ > > > > Shall we all hold hands now and join in singing Kum bay yah?? Our > president > > and his chosen disciples want this from us, we should not be questioning > > their infinite wisdom. > > > > Trying to maintain the role of benevolent superpower to the world is > going > > to break us. It is not possible to remain in good favor with all the rest > of > > the world because, the more you freely give, the more is expected. This > is a > > never ending downward spiral that cannot be escaped until in the end, we > are > > virtual slaves to all who are jealous of our success. The result is, we > are > > brought down to the level of the takers, rather than them being raised to > > our's, as is their hope. This holds true as well for those within our > > country who expect to be carried on the shoulders of the ambitious and > > successful. > > > > Things like the climate treaty (Copenhagen) being contemplated by the UN > > right now should be obvious evidence that all the benevolence we have > shared > > over the last fifty or sixty years is not only unappreciated, it has made > us > > despised by the people who have accepted it. > > > > Is it not time for us to get back to the basic idea conveyed in the bible > > (and I believe is a basic natural law) where it says, the good lord helps > > those that are willing to help themselves. > > > > {End of rant] > > > > Rik > > > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 7:09 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> This was published last month but just showed-up on my radar. Too bad > >> our own lame-stream media can't be objective and see what is > >> happening. > >> > >> Brad > >> > >> ---------------- > >> > >> Lament for a nation > >> > >> > >> By David Warren, The Ottawa CitizenOctober 2, 2009 > >> > >> > >> > >> There is nothing new under the sun: and I mean, nothing. It is a point > >> brought home to us with increasing force by the expansion of the > >> Internet. Conceive of an "original idea." Now, select two or more > >> keywords suggested by it. Use them as search terms, and you will soon > >> find that, say, 438,000 other people have entertained said "original > >> idea," and a dozen are currently blogging on it. > >> > >> Before beginning today's column, my search terms were "Gorbachev" and > >> "Obama." > >> > >> Yes: a lot of people have entertained the idea, that Mikhail Gorbachev > >> was to the late great Soviet Union, what Barack Obama is to the > >> surviving United States -- the leader who reforms so many things so > >> quickly that his country suddenly disappears. One recalls the speed > >> with which the first Soviet head of state to be born after the October > >> Revolution became its last head of state. It took him about three > >> years: just less than the time of one U.S. presidential term. (Though > >> he had already taken three years to warm up, as General Secretary of > >> the Communist Party.) > >> > >> It is, today, a little-known fact that Gorbachev did not bring about > >> the collapse of the Soviet Union, on purpose. Those who still detect a > >> glint in his eye would do well to respect his persistent denials. He > >> was sincerely trying to reform the place. He was walking a dog with > >> powerful jaws, but rather loose teeth; he tried to adapt it to a > >> vegetarian diet; it died. > >> > >> The poor dictator inherited not only an economy going bankrupt by even > >> socialist standards; but a war in Afghanistan that was being lost, > >> against an utterly disorganized enemy from another century; to say > >> nothing of half-a-dozen other imperial missions, in exotic third-world > >> locations, that were not going well. By merely liberating the little > >> West Indian island of Grenada, President Reagan was able to send a > >> hollow sound through the hearts of aspiring Communist revolutionaries > >> all over the world. > >> > >> The comparison between Gorbachev and Obama is apt on few levels. The > >> chief difference is between the U.S. of 2009, and the USSR of 1985; > >> between a huge, decentralized, open economy, and the society it > >> serves; and a much smaller, very centralized, command economy, and the > >> society serving it. These circumstances are not even remotely > >> comparable, and one must be a fool indeed to play with a moral, > >> economic, or ideological "equivalence" between the two old > >> superpowers. Which is not to say such fools aren't numerous. > >> > >> Nor are the two men, themselves, remotely comparable in their > >> backgrounds, or political outlook. Gorbachev, for instance, had come > >> up from tractor driver, not through elite schools including Harvard > >> Law; he lacked the narcissism that constantly seeks self-reflection > >> through microphones and cameras, or the sense that everything is about > >> him. > >> > >> On the other hand, some interesting comparisons could be made between > >> the thuggish party machine of Chicago, which raised Obama as its > >> golden boy; and the thuggish party machine of Moscow, which presented > >> Gorbachev as it's most attractive face. > >> > >> Both men have been praised for their wonderful temperaments, and their > >> ability to remain unperturbed by approaching catastrophe. But again, > >> the substance is different, for Gorbachev's temperament was that of a > >> survivor of many previous catastrophes. > >> > >> Yet they do have one major thing in common, and that is the belief > >> that, regardless of what the ruler does, the polity he rules must > >> necessarily continue. This is perhaps the most essential, if seldom > >> acknowledged, insight of the post-modern "liberal" mind: that if you > >> take the pillars away, the roof will continue to hover in the air. > >> > >> Gorbachev seemed to assume, right up to the fall of the Berlin Wall > >> and then beyond it, that his Communist Party would recover from any > >> temporary setbacks, and that the long-term effects of his glasnost and > >> perestroika could only be to make it bigger and stronger. > >> > >> There is a corollary of this largely unspoken assumption: that no > >> matter what you do to one part of a machine, the rest of the machine > >> will continue to function normally. > >> > >> A variant of this is the frequently expressed denial of the law of > >> unintended consequences: the belief that, if the effect you intend is > >> good, the actual effect must be similarly happy. > >> > >> Very small children, the mad, and certain extinct primitive tribes, > >> have shared in this belief system, but only the fully college-educated > >> liberal has the vocabulary to make it sound plausible. > >> > >> With an incredible rapidity, America's status as the world's > >> pre-eminent superpower is now passing away. This is a function both of > >> the nearly systematic abandonment of U.S. interests and allies > >> overseas, with metastasizing debt and bureaucracy on the home front. > >> > >> And while I think the U.S. has the structural fortitude to survive the > >> Obama presidency, it will be a much-diminished country that emerges > >> from the "new physics" of hope and change. > >> > >> David Warren's column appears Sunday, Wednesday and Saturday. > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > > you with experience. > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091107/cf0b93da/attachment-0001.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sat Nov 7 11:35:32 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 10:35:32 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Lament For A Nation In-Reply-To: <400985d70911070813hff9be11y2ae0b52714acd68a@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911070509j7f2bafeeof27b1f44637b6e96@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911070725o571d3d7at1a91a5216a3a7007@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911070813hff9be11y2ae0b52714acd68a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911070835m1758499frb7a380c8ccb5a41e@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Let's hope ..... not much else we can do at this point. Unfortunately, what you say about Pelosi and other past wannabe tin horn dictators is true. Not sure how they manage to create such leverage, but again and again we see it happen and seem to learn nothing from it. Rik On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > We may know by the end of the day, it looks like they're going to vote > tonight. I'm convinced that Nancy Pelosi is nothing short of bat-shit > crazy. It wouldn't be the first time that history turned on a single > person without fully functioning faculties. > > Brad > > On 11/7/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > Wow, this guy gets it. > > > > I especially liked this part: > > > > ________________ > > "A variant of this is the frequently expressed denial of the law of > > unintended consequences: the belief that, if the effect you intend is > > good, the actual effect must be similarly happy. > > > > Very small children, the mad, and certain extinct primitive tribes, > > have shared in this belief system, but only the fully college-educated > > liberal has the vocabulary to make it sound plausible." > > _________________ > > > > Shall we all hold hands now and join in singing Kum bay yah?? Our > president > > and his chosen disciples want this from us, we should not be questioning > > their infinite wisdom. > > > > Trying to maintain the role of benevolent superpower to the world is > going > > to break us. It is not possible to remain in good favor with all the rest > of > > the world because, the more you freely give, the more is expected. This > is a > > never ending downward spiral that cannot be escaped until in the end, we > are > > virtual slaves to all who are jealous of our success. The result is, we > are > > brought down to the level of the takers, rather than them being raised to > > our's, as is their hope. This holds true as well for those within our > > country who expect to be carried on the shoulders of the ambitious and > > successful. > > > > Things like the climate treaty (Copenhagen) being contemplated by the UN > > right now should be obvious evidence that all the benevolence we have > shared > > over the last fifty or sixty years is not only unappreciated, it has made > us > > despised by the people who have accepted it. > > > > Is it not time for us to get back to the basic idea conveyed in the bible > > (and I believe is a basic natural law) where it says, the good lord helps > > those that are willing to help themselves. > > > > {End of rant] > > > > Rik > > > > > > > > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 7:09 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> This was published last month but just showed-up on my radar. Too bad > >> our own lame-stream media can't be objective and see what is > >> happening. > >> > >> Brad > >> > >> ---------------- > >> > >> Lament for a nation > >> > >> > >> By David Warren, The Ottawa CitizenOctober 2, 2009 > >> > >> > >> > >> There is nothing new under the sun: and I mean, nothing. It is a point > >> brought home to us with increasing force by the expansion of the > >> Internet. Conceive of an "original idea." Now, select two or more > >> keywords suggested by it. Use them as search terms, and you will soon > >> find that, say, 438,000 other people have entertained said "original > >> idea," and a dozen are currently blogging on it. > >> > >> Before beginning today's column, my search terms were "Gorbachev" and > >> "Obama." > >> > >> Yes: a lot of people have entertained the idea, that Mikhail Gorbachev > >> was to the late great Soviet Union, what Barack Obama is to the > >> surviving United States -- the leader who reforms so many things so > >> quickly that his country suddenly disappears. One recalls the speed > >> with which the first Soviet head of state to be born after the October > >> Revolution became its last head of state. It took him about three > >> years: just less than the time of one U.S. presidential term. (Though > >> he had already taken three years to warm up, as General Secretary of > >> the Communist Party.) > >> > >> It is, today, a little-known fact that Gorbachev did not bring about > >> the collapse of the Soviet Union, on purpose. Those who still detect a > >> glint in his eye would do well to respect his persistent denials. He > >> was sincerely trying to reform the place. He was walking a dog with > >> powerful jaws, but rather loose teeth; he tried to adapt it to a > >> vegetarian diet; it died. > >> > >> The poor dictator inherited not only an economy going bankrupt by even > >> socialist standards; but a war in Afghanistan that was being lost, > >> against an utterly disorganized enemy from another century; to say > >> nothing of half-a-dozen other imperial missions, in exotic third-world > >> locations, that were not going well. By merely liberating the little > >> West Indian island of Grenada, President Reagan was able to send a > >> hollow sound through the hearts of aspiring Communist revolutionaries > >> all over the world. > >> > >> The comparison between Gorbachev and Obama is apt on few levels. The > >> chief difference is between the U.S. of 2009, and the USSR of 1985; > >> between a huge, decentralized, open economy, and the society it > >> serves; and a much smaller, very centralized, command economy, and the > >> society serving it. These circumstances are not even remotely > >> comparable, and one must be a fool indeed to play with a moral, > >> economic, or ideological "equivalence" between the two old > >> superpowers. Which is not to say such fools aren't numerous. > >> > >> Nor are the two men, themselves, remotely comparable in their > >> backgrounds, or political outlook. Gorbachev, for instance, had come > >> up from tractor driver, not through elite schools including Harvard > >> Law; he lacked the narcissism that constantly seeks self-reflection > >> through microphones and cameras, or the sense that everything is about > >> him. > >> > >> On the other hand, some interesting comparisons could be made between > >> the thuggish party machine of Chicago, which raised Obama as its > >> golden boy; and the thuggish party machine of Moscow, which presented > >> Gorbachev as it's most attractive face. > >> > >> Both men have been praised for their wonderful temperaments, and their > >> ability to remain unperturbed by approaching catastrophe. But again, > >> the substance is different, for Gorbachev's temperament was that of a > >> survivor of many previous catastrophes. > >> > >> Yet they do have one major thing in common, and that is the belief > >> that, regardless of what the ruler does, the polity he rules must > >> necessarily continue. This is perhaps the most essential, if seldom > >> acknowledged, insight of the post-modern "liberal" mind: that if you > >> take the pillars away, the roof will continue to hover in the air. > >> > >> Gorbachev seemed to assume, right up to the fall of the Berlin Wall > >> and then beyond it, that his Communist Party would recover from any > >> temporary setbacks, and that the long-term effects of his glasnost and > >> perestroika could only be to make it bigger and stronger. > >> > >> There is a corollary of this largely unspoken assumption: that no > >> matter what you do to one part of a machine, the rest of the machine > >> will continue to function normally. > >> > >> A variant of this is the frequently expressed denial of the law of > >> unintended consequences: the belief that, if the effect you intend is > >> good, the actual effect must be similarly happy. > >> > >> Very small children, the mad, and certain extinct primitive tribes, > >> have shared in this belief system, but only the fully college-educated > >> liberal has the vocabulary to make it sound plausible. > >> > >> With an incredible rapidity, America's status as the world's > >> pre-eminent superpower is now passing away. This is a function both of > >> the nearly systematic abandonment of U.S. interests and allies > >> overseas, with metastasizing debt and bureaucracy on the home front. > >> > >> And while I think the U.S. has the structural fortitude to survive the > >> Obama presidency, it will be a much-diminished country that emerges > >> from the "new physics" of hope and change. > >> > >> David Warren's column appears Sunday, Wednesday and Saturday. > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > > you with experience. > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091107/fa8252d8/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Sat Nov 7 13:34:55 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 13:34:55 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Lament For A Nation Message-ID: <7BEC58E077644418845E922505FB7080@YOURB88038198E> Brad and Rik, It is interesting and depressing to read what people in other parts of world say. Rik, While many share your thoughts on the situation, remember that the internet is monitored. And just think, we have 3 1/2 years to go. EK -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091107/77e053b2/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sat Nov 7 14:10:31 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 13:10:31 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Lament For A Nation In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911070835m1758499frb7a380c8ccb5a41e@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911070509j7f2bafeeof27b1f44637b6e96@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911070725o571d3d7at1a91a5216a3a7007@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911070813hff9be11y2ae0b52714acd68a@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911070835m1758499frb7a380c8ccb5a41e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911071110oc0cdc7ev934e9f11501659ca@mail.gmail.com> this from Michele Malkin today _____________________ The death of deliberative democracy by Michelle Malkin Creators Syndicate Copyright 2009 In 2006, the minority party in Congress issued a dire report on the ?unprecedented erosion of the Democratic process.? Democrat Rep. Louise Slaughter, then the ranking member of the House Rules Committee, authored the scathing document. She blasted the majority Republicans? violations of ?procedural fairness,? short-circuiting of debate, and late-night meetings ?to discourage Members and the press from participating? in legislative deliberations. My, how history repeats itself. Fast-forward to 2009. The Imperial Congress has returned. The oppressed have become the oppressors. Democrats have met the enemies of deliberative democracy and it is them. Three years ago, the Democrats complained of House Republicans rushing through conference reports ?before Members could read them.? Sound vaguely familiar? They urged their colleagues in power to ?spend more time on major, substantive legislation? instead of ramming things through. D?j? vu, anyone? The Slaughter report pleaded for more transparency and public access: ?Regular order should be the rule, not the exception.? Instead of meeting late at night or early in the morning, the Dems called on the majority to operate ?during regular ?business? hours so that Members and the press can attend and participate.? Three years later, Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is jamming a 1,900-page health care takeover bill through Congress for a hasty Saturday vote while members of her own party revolt against strong-arm tactics. Upwards of 40 pro-life Democrats have objected to the plan?s government abortion subsidies. Majority leaders evaded sunlight by keeping a compromise amendment on the matter out of the version of the bill made available to the public. As of Thursday afternoon (less than two days before the scheduled vote), Pelosi had yet to decide whether to permit an abortion ban amendment to her health care bill. Pelosi?s ?most ethical,? open, and transparent House ever ordered Capitol police to block a GOP staffer from attending the public unveiling of the health care reform plan last week. A week before that, Democrat Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.) locked Republicans out of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee room to prevent them from meeting when Democrats weren?t present. In June, Pelosi?s Imperial Congress severely curtailed debate on the House cap-and-tax bill and rammed a 309-page manager?s amendment through the legislative grinder at 3 a.m., which no one read before the vote just hours later. As GOP Rep. Mike Pence pointed out on the House floor, the ?debate? was a ?travesty.? So much for procedural fairness: 224 GOP amendments were denied by the majority. In April, the House passed a $3.6 trillion federal budget in the middle of the night with phony fiscal restraint amendments that leaders all admitted would be thrown out during conference behind closed doors. In February, House and Senate conferees larded up the stimulus bill with pork galore behind closed doors while President Obama denied the existence of earmarks with a straight face. South Carolina Rep. and House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn snuck in a provision intended to punish governors who chose to turn down federal stimulus funds. The Democrats broke their high-minded pledge to give Americans 48 hours to read the bill before passage. ?Urgency? demanded it. On the Senate side, Majority Leader Harry Reid is playing Harry Houdini with his health care package. After announcing a deal last week and telling the public that he was sending his proposal to the Congressional Budget Office for scoring, there is still no actual bill to review. When 40 Republican senators demanded to see the bill, he played ?you show me yours? and then admitted that, indeed, ?there is no bill to release publicly ? it does not exist.? Emitting more vapor than an industrial humidifier, Reid still holds out the possibility of abusing the budget reconciliation process to force the government health care takeover through with a simple majority and limited debate. Meanwhile, Sen. Barbara Boxer performed an end-runaround debate over her massive global warming bill on Thursday by using a ?nuclear option? maneuver on the Senate Environment and Public Works. She and 10 Democrats rammed through the legislation without considering amendments and in defiance of GOP protests. The 2006 minority Democrats? report on the death of deliberative democracy condemned the then-GOP leadership for becoming ?the arrogant and corrupt majority they despised and condemned in their minority days.? And now? Et tu, majority Democrats? Same as it ever was. On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Let's hope ..... not much else we can do at this point. > > Unfortunately, what you say about Pelosi and other past wannabe tin horn > dictators is true. Not sure how they manage to create such leverage, but > again and again we see it happen and seem to learn nothing from it. > > Rik > > > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> We may know by the end of the day, it looks like they're going to vote >> tonight. I'm convinced that Nancy Pelosi is nothing short of bat-shit >> crazy. It wouldn't be the first time that history turned on a single >> person without fully functioning faculties. >> >> Brad >> >> On 11/7/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> > Brad, >> > >> > Wow, this guy gets it. >> > >> > I especially liked this part: >> > >> > ________________ >> > "A variant of this is the frequently expressed denial of the law of >> > unintended consequences: the belief that, if the effect you intend is >> > good, the actual effect must be similarly happy. >> > >> > Very small children, the mad, and certain extinct primitive tribes, >> > have shared in this belief system, but only the fully college-educated >> > liberal has the vocabulary to make it sound plausible." >> > _________________ >> > >> > Shall we all hold hands now and join in singing Kum bay yah?? Our >> president >> > and his chosen disciples want this from us, we should not be questioning >> > their infinite wisdom. >> > >> > Trying to maintain the role of benevolent superpower to the world is >> going >> > to break us. It is not possible to remain in good favor with all the >> rest of >> > the world because, the more you freely give, the more is expected. This >> is a >> > never ending downward spiral that cannot be escaped until in the end, we >> are >> > virtual slaves to all who are jealous of our success. The result is, we >> are >> > brought down to the level of the takers, rather than them being raised >> to >> > our's, as is their hope. This holds true as well for those within our >> > country who expect to be carried on the shoulders of the ambitious and >> > successful. >> > >> > Things like the climate treaty (Copenhagen) being contemplated by the UN >> > right now should be obvious evidence that all the benevolence we have >> shared >> > over the last fifty or sixty years is not only unappreciated, it has >> made us >> > despised by the people who have accepted it. >> > >> > Is it not time for us to get back to the basic idea conveyed in the >> bible >> > (and I believe is a basic natural law) where it says, the good lord >> helps >> > those that are willing to help themselves. >> > >> > {End of rant] >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > >> > >> > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 7:09 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> This was published last month but just showed-up on my radar. Too bad >> >> our own lame-stream media can't be objective and see what is >> >> happening. >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> ---------------- >> >> >> >> Lament for a nation >> >> >> >> >> >> By David Warren, The Ottawa CitizenOctober 2, 2009 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> There is nothing new under the sun: and I mean, nothing. It is a point >> >> brought home to us with increasing force by the expansion of the >> >> Internet. Conceive of an "original idea." Now, select two or more >> >> keywords suggested by it. Use them as search terms, and you will soon >> >> find that, say, 438,000 other people have entertained said "original >> >> idea," and a dozen are currently blogging on it. >> >> >> >> Before beginning today's column, my search terms were "Gorbachev" and >> >> "Obama." >> >> >> >> Yes: a lot of people have entertained the idea, that Mikhail Gorbachev >> >> was to the late great Soviet Union, what Barack Obama is to the >> >> surviving United States -- the leader who reforms so many things so >> >> quickly that his country suddenly disappears. One recalls the speed >> >> with which the first Soviet head of state to be born after the October >> >> Revolution became its last head of state. It took him about three >> >> years: just less than the time of one U.S. presidential term. (Though >> >> he had already taken three years to warm up, as General Secretary of >> >> the Communist Party.) >> >> >> >> It is, today, a little-known fact that Gorbachev did not bring about >> >> the collapse of the Soviet Union, on purpose. Those who still detect a >> >> glint in his eye would do well to respect his persistent denials. He >> >> was sincerely trying to reform the place. He was walking a dog with >> >> powerful jaws, but rather loose teeth; he tried to adapt it to a >> >> vegetarian diet; it died. >> >> >> >> The poor dictator inherited not only an economy going bankrupt by even >> >> socialist standards; but a war in Afghanistan that was being lost, >> >> against an utterly disorganized enemy from another century; to say >> >> nothing of half-a-dozen other imperial missions, in exotic third-world >> >> locations, that were not going well. By merely liberating the little >> >> West Indian island of Grenada, President Reagan was able to send a >> >> hollow sound through the hearts of aspiring Communist revolutionaries >> >> all over the world. >> >> >> >> The comparison between Gorbachev and Obama is apt on few levels. The >> >> chief difference is between the U.S. of 2009, and the USSR of 1985; >> >> between a huge, decentralized, open economy, and the society it >> >> serves; and a much smaller, very centralized, command economy, and the >> >> society serving it. These circumstances are not even remotely >> >> comparable, and one must be a fool indeed to play with a moral, >> >> economic, or ideological "equivalence" between the two old >> >> superpowers. Which is not to say such fools aren't numerous. >> >> >> >> Nor are the two men, themselves, remotely comparable in their >> >> backgrounds, or political outlook. Gorbachev, for instance, had come >> >> up from tractor driver, not through elite schools including Harvard >> >> Law; he lacked the narcissism that constantly seeks self-reflection >> >> through microphones and cameras, or the sense that everything is about >> >> him. >> >> >> >> On the other hand, some interesting comparisons could be made between >> >> the thuggish party machine of Chicago, which raised Obama as its >> >> golden boy; and the thuggish party machine of Moscow, which presented >> >> Gorbachev as it's most attractive face. >> >> >> >> Both men have been praised for their wonderful temperaments, and their >> >> ability to remain unperturbed by approaching catastrophe. But again, >> >> the substance is different, for Gorbachev's temperament was that of a >> >> survivor of many previous catastrophes. >> >> >> >> Yet they do have one major thing in common, and that is the belief >> >> that, regardless of what the ruler does, the polity he rules must >> >> necessarily continue. This is perhaps the most essential, if seldom >> >> acknowledged, insight of the post-modern "liberal" mind: that if you >> >> take the pillars away, the roof will continue to hover in the air. >> >> >> >> Gorbachev seemed to assume, right up to the fall of the Berlin Wall >> >> and then beyond it, that his Communist Party would recover from any >> >> temporary setbacks, and that the long-term effects of his glasnost and >> >> perestroika could only be to make it bigger and stronger. >> >> >> >> There is a corollary of this largely unspoken assumption: that no >> >> matter what you do to one part of a machine, the rest of the machine >> >> will continue to function normally. >> >> >> >> A variant of this is the frequently expressed denial of the law of >> >> unintended consequences: the belief that, if the effect you intend is >> >> good, the actual effect must be similarly happy. >> >> >> >> Very small children, the mad, and certain extinct primitive tribes, >> >> have shared in this belief system, but only the fully college-educated >> >> liberal has the vocabulary to make it sound plausible. >> >> >> >> With an incredible rapidity, America's status as the world's >> >> pre-eminent superpower is now passing away. This is a function both of >> >> the nearly systematic abandonment of U.S. interests and allies >> >> overseas, with metastasizing debt and bureaucracy on the home front. >> >> >> >> And while I think the U.S. has the structural fortitude to survive the >> >> Obama presidency, it will be a much-diminished country that emerges >> >> from the "new physics" of hope and change. >> >> >> >> David Warren's column appears Sunday, Wednesday and Saturday. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> beat >> > you with experience. >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091107/9fd1e9c5/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sat Nov 7 23:38:50 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 22:38:50 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] kubelwagens Message-ID: <400985d70911072038m4ffc326bhd33bbcb034834a3f@mail.gmail.com> Most people don't know the history of Volkswagen - the "Peoples Car". Germans were forced to buy stamps for the eventual purchase of a VW (deducted from their paychecks). Most couldn't afford the car or insurance or fuel, but they bought stamps for one anyway because the government forced them to. Eventually, WW2 sucked-up all the production facilities of VW and they produced Kubelwagens, an amphibious vehicle. I owned one once, it was called "The Thing" when it was introduced into the US in the 70's. So now we have a health care bill that has passed the House that will force people to buy something, whether they want or can afford it, or they will face up to five years of imprisonment. Some progress! Of course it will still have to pass the Senate and there will be multiple Supreme Court challenges if it passes the Senate. Who knows what the final product will look like if it goes undefeated. The kubelwagen sure didn't look anything like Dr. Porsche's Bug. The VW turned out to be a fine car eventually. I've owned several including the one I drive every day. They are popular in Mexico, South America, China, and Europe. A lot can change in 75 years. So how good a war machine was the kubelwagen? It was a piece of shit compared to the Willys Jeep. How things change. Willys is now Chrysler/Jeep (gubmint owned) and VW is a private company. Funny thing, history. Brad PS - Cao, I've got your number! From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sat Nov 7 23:49:29 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 22:49:29 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] kubelwagens In-Reply-To: <400985d70911072038m4ffc326bhd33bbcb034834a3f@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911072038m4ffc326bhd33bbcb034834a3f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911072049y26288264w708bc873d8989f6b@mail.gmail.com> Like you often say, Brad .... you just can't make this shit up :-) Rik On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Most people don't know the history of Volkswagen - the "Peoples Car". > Germans were forced to buy stamps for the eventual purchase of a VW > (deducted from their paychecks). Most couldn't afford the car or > insurance or fuel, but they bought stamps for one anyway because the > government forced them to. Eventually, WW2 sucked-up all the > production facilities of VW and they produced Kubelwagens, an > amphibious vehicle. I owned one once, it was called "The Thing" when > it was introduced into the US in the 70's. > > So now we have a health care bill that has passed the House that will > force people to buy something, whether they want or can afford it, or > they will face up to five years of imprisonment. Some progress! Of > course it will still have to pass the Senate and there will be > multiple Supreme Court challenges if it passes the Senate. Who knows > what the final product will look like if it goes undefeated. The > kubelwagen sure didn't look anything like Dr. Porsche's Bug. > > The VW turned out to be a fine car eventually. I've owned several > including the one I drive every day. They are popular in Mexico, > South America, China, and Europe. A lot can change in 75 years. > > So how good a war machine was the kubelwagen? It was a piece of shit > compared to the Willys Jeep. How things change. Willys is now > Chrysler/Jeep (gubmint owned) and VW is a private company. > > Funny thing, history. > > Brad > > PS - Cao, I've got your number! > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091107/2438a3a9/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 00:56:29 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 23:56:29 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] kubelwagens In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911072049y26288264w708bc873d8989f6b@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911072038m4ffc326bhd33bbcb034834a3f@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911072049y26288264w708bc873d8989f6b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911072156pace7290wbb2b34759cf080c8@mail.gmail.com> Rik, "In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people. Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war, in peace friends." We have yet begun the fight! Brad On 11/7/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Like you often say, Brad .... you just can't make this shit up :-) > > Rik > > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Most people don't know the history of Volkswagen - the "Peoples Car". >> Germans were forced to buy stamps for the eventual purchase of a VW >> (deducted from their paychecks). Most couldn't afford the car or >> insurance or fuel, but they bought stamps for one anyway because the >> government forced them to. Eventually, WW2 sucked-up all the >> production facilities of VW and they produced Kubelwagens, an >> amphibious vehicle. I owned one once, it was called "The Thing" when >> it was introduced into the US in the 70's. >> >> So now we have a health care bill that has passed the House that will >> force people to buy something, whether they want or can afford it, or >> they will face up to five years of imprisonment. Some progress! Of >> course it will still have to pass the Senate and there will be >> multiple Supreme Court challenges if it passes the Senate. Who knows >> what the final product will look like if it goes undefeated. The >> kubelwagen sure didn't look anything like Dr. Porsche's Bug. >> >> The VW turned out to be a fine car eventually. I've owned several >> including the one I drive every day. They are popular in Mexico, >> South America, China, and Europe. A lot can change in 75 years. >> >> So how good a war machine was the kubelwagen? It was a piece of shit >> compared to the Willys Jeep. How things change. Willys is now >> Chrysler/Jeep (gubmint owned) and VW is a private company. >> >> Funny thing, history. >> >> Brad >> >> PS - Cao, I've got your number! >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 07:38:35 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 06:38:35 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] kubelwagens In-Reply-To: <400985d70911072156pace7290wbb2b34759cf080c8@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911072038m4ffc326bhd33bbcb034834a3f@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911072049y26288264w708bc873d8989f6b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911072156pace7290wbb2b34759cf080c8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911080438o47b28571wc674e7f38651444b@mail.gmail.com> Brad, Hear, Hear..... I was over at my brothers last night having a discussion about this issue. We all know this is bad business. The stock market appears to be looking for an excuse to reverse. We wondered if this might be enough to catalyze that, considering also the BS Reid and Boxer pulled this week in the senate with cap and trade. I think it would be a very fitting payback for congressional arrogance. 'Course, I'm not long the market .... hope you're not too Rik On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > "In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in > the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only > by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every > act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free > people. > > Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have > warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to > extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of > the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have > appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured > them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, > which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. > They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. > We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our > separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in > war, in peace friends." > > We have yet begun the fight! > > Brad > > On 11/7/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > > Like you often say, Brad .... you just can't make this shit up :-) > > > > Rik > > > > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> Most people don't know the history of Volkswagen - the "Peoples Car". > >> Germans were forced to buy stamps for the eventual purchase of a VW > >> (deducted from their paychecks). Most couldn't afford the car or > >> insurance or fuel, but they bought stamps for one anyway because the > >> government forced them to. Eventually, WW2 sucked-up all the > >> production facilities of VW and they produced Kubelwagens, an > >> amphibious vehicle. I owned one once, it was called "The Thing" when > >> it was introduced into the US in the 70's. > >> > >> So now we have a health care bill that has passed the House that will > >> force people to buy something, whether they want or can afford it, or > >> they will face up to five years of imprisonment. Some progress! Of > >> course it will still have to pass the Senate and there will be > >> multiple Supreme Court challenges if it passes the Senate. Who knows > >> what the final product will look like if it goes undefeated. The > >> kubelwagen sure didn't look anything like Dr. Porsche's Bug. > >> > >> The VW turned out to be a fine car eventually. I've owned several > >> including the one I drive every day. They are popular in Mexico, > >> South America, China, and Europe. A lot can change in 75 years. > >> > >> So how good a war machine was the kubelwagen? It was a piece of shit > >> compared to the Willys Jeep. How things change. Willys is now > >> Chrysler/Jeep (gubmint owned) and VW is a private company. > >> > >> Funny thing, history. > >> > >> Brad > >> > >> PS - Cao, I've got your number! > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > > you with experience. > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091108/89afb860/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 09:56:43 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 08:56:43 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] kubelwagens In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911080438o47b28571wc674e7f38651444b@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911072038m4ffc326bhd33bbcb034834a3f@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911072049y26288264w708bc873d8989f6b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911072156pace7290wbb2b34759cf080c8@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080438o47b28571wc674e7f38651444b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911080656r63c4a151gc6b4dcd8f273ed63@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Thanks for bringing up a sore subject. As you know, I rode the market down and have recouped about 75% of the losses. That puts me about where I would be had I invested in the Bank of Sealy Posturepedic in 2004. Over the course of the last several weeks I've moved the bulk of my investments to international funds, especially one fund weighted heavily to Asian companies. Here's a bitter lesson that you've escaped; I fell hook-line-and-sinker for the government sponsored 401K scam and have limited options. Before the market meltdown there was already talk of targeting 401Ks. Trust me, there's still some congress-critters that have their eyes on them. I got a call from one of our friends that moved here from Minneapolis a couple of years ago. She lost her job in Minnie but had a PhD in Chemistry and landed on her feet here in Memphis with a drug company. She wanted some reassurance. Knowing her background as a conscripted farmer during the Cultural Revolution and her personal struggle, starting college at age 28, immigrating to the US, and eventually earning a doctorate, I really wanted to tell her not to worry. But frankly, I'm worried. Brad On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > Hear, Hear..... > > I was over at my brothers last night having a discussion about this issue. > We all know this is bad business. The stock market appears to be looking for > an excuse to reverse. We wondered if this might be enough to catalyze that, > considering also the BS Reid and Boxer pulled this week in the senate with > cap and trade. > > I think it would be a very fitting payback for congressional arrogance. > > 'Course, I'm not long the market .... hope you're not too > > Rik > > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> "In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in >> the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only >> by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every >> act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free >> people. >> >> Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have >> warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to >> extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of >> the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have >> appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured >> them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, >> which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. >> They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. >> We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our >> separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in >> war, in peace friends." >> >> We have yet begun the fight! >> >> Brad >> >> On 11/7/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> > Like you often say, Brad .... you just can't make this shit up :-) >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> Most people don't know the history of Volkswagen - the "Peoples Car". >> >> Germans were forced to buy stamps for the eventual purchase of a VW >> >> (deducted from their paychecks). Most couldn't afford the car or >> >> insurance or fuel, but they bought stamps for one anyway because the >> >> government forced them to. Eventually, WW2 sucked-up all the >> >> production facilities of VW and they produced Kubelwagens, an >> >> amphibious vehicle. I owned one once, it was called "The Thing" when >> >> it was introduced into the US in the 70's. >> >> >> >> So now we have a health care bill that has passed the House that will >> >> force people to buy something, whether they want or can afford it, or >> >> they will face up to five years of imprisonment. Some progress! Of >> >> course it will still have to pass the Senate and there will be >> >> multiple Supreme Court challenges if it passes the Senate. Who knows >> >> what the final product will look like if it goes undefeated. The >> >> kubelwagen sure didn't look anything like Dr. Porsche's Bug. >> >> >> >> The VW turned out to be a fine car eventually. I've owned several >> >> including the one I drive every day. They are popular in Mexico, >> >> South America, China, and Europe. A lot can change in 75 years. >> >> >> >> So how good a war machine was the kubelwagen? It was a piece of shit >> >> compared to the Willys Jeep. How things change. Willys is now >> >> Chrysler/Jeep (gubmint owned) and VW is a private company. >> >> >> >> Funny thing, history. >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> PS - Cao, I've got your number! >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> > beat >> > you with experience. >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From ekroposki at charter.net Sat Nov 7 10:27:46 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 10:27:46 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Brad forgot to post his picture Message-ID: See attached: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091107/20dee4d7/attachment-0001.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Brad in Washington.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 353097 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091107/20dee4d7/attachment-0001.jpg From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 10:29:58 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 09:29:58 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Cartoons In-Reply-To: <465687.59652.qm@web34301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <465687.59652.qm@web34301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911080729w525ee663h845cf2dbc219cf65@mail.gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: brad haslett Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 07:10:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cartoons To: flybrad at gmail.com [] [] [] [] [] [] < Think about this: If you don't want to forward this for fear of offending someone YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM! It is Time for America to Speak up! Visit www.abundantlifetourandtravel.com for all your travel and entertainment needs. Order tickets to concerts, sporting events, Broadway shows and attractions. Book flights, cruises, hotels, car rentals, vacation packages and tee times. Order flowers, gift baskets and gifts. Do on line shopping and much, much more. From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Sun Nov 8 10:57:36 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 07:57:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Cartoons In-Reply-To: <400985d70911080729w525ee663h845cf2dbc219cf65@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <987298.7379.qm@web111209.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> DOODOODEEDOO....DOODOODEEDOO ? none of the pix came through ? (can they hear us now???) ? elle --- On Sun, 11/8/09, Brad Haslett wrote: From: Brad Haslett Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Cartoons To: "Letters to the Editor" Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 10:29 AM ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: brad haslett Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 07:10:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cartoons To: flybrad at gmail.com ? ? ? ? ? ? [] ? ? ? ? ? ? [] ? ? ? ? ? ? [] ? ? ? ? ? ? [] ? ? ? ? ? ? [] ? ? ? ? ? ? [] ? ? ? ? ? ? < ? ? ? ? ? ? Think ? ? ? ? ? ? about this: ? ? ? ? ? ? If ? ? ? ? ? ? you don't want to forward this ? ? ? ? ? ? for ? ? ? ? ? ? fear of offending someone ? ? ? ? ? ? YOU ? ? ? ? ? ? ARE PART OF THE? PROBLEM! It ? ? ? ? ? ? is Time for America to Speak? up! Visit www.abundantlifetourandtravel.com for all your travel and entertainment needs. Order tickets to concerts, sporting events, Broadway shows and attractions. Book flights, cruises, hotels, car rentals, vacation packages and tee times. Order flowers, gift baskets and gifts. Do on line shopping and much, much more. _______________________________________________ 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/20091108/72fdff90/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 11:00:40 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 10:00:40 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Cartoons In-Reply-To: <987298.7379.qm@web111209.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <400985d70911080729w525ee663h845cf2dbc219cf65@mail.gmail.com> <987298.7379.qm@web111209.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911080800g5e386923k45545dc478797e60@mail.gmail.com> Elle, Been down this road before and can't remember how to fix the problem. I forwarded them from my Yahoo account to the Gmail account and they came through, hmmm, maybe as an attachment? Brad On 11/8/09, elle wrote: > DOODOODEEDOO....DOODOODEEDOO > > none of the pix came through > > (can they hear us now???) > > elle > > --- On Sun, 11/8/09, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > From: Brad Haslett > Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Cartoons > To: "Letters to the Editor" > > Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 10:29 AM > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: brad haslett > Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 07:10:10 -0800 (PST) > Subject: Cartoons > To: flybrad at gmail.com > > > > > > > [] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [] > > > > > > > > > [] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [] > > > > > > > > > > > > [] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [] > < > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think > about this: > If > you don't want to forward this > for > fear of offending someone > YOU > ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM! > It > is Time for America to Speak up! > > > Visit > www.abundantlifetourandtravel.com > for all your travel and entertainment > needs. > Order > tickets to concerts, sporting events, Broadway shows and attractions. > Book > flights, cruises, hotels, car rentals, vacation packages and tee times. > > Order flowers, gift baskets and gifts. Do on line shopping and much, much > more. > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > > > From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 11:18:50 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 10:18:50 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Keep Fighting! Message-ID: <400985d70911080818l47cb2390mc16ffb142f932ff3@mail.gmail.com> Let us hope this is the case - Is this the high-water mark for ObamaCare? posted at 9:00 am on November 8, 2009 by Ed Morrissey The Democrats wheedled, cajoled, begged, and finally abandoned its defense of abortion ? truly a watershed moment ? in order to get their version of ObamaCare passed ? in the House of Representatives, where they enjoy a 75-seat majority. In the end, they could only muster a five-vote win on Nancy Pelosi?s bill out of that strong majority. Until this week, most had assumed that any ObamaCare bill would pass the House easily, but that the fight would be in the Senate. So what does this 220-215 vote tell us? Capitol Hill Democrats know that this bill is an albatross. It?s true that Pelosi was able at the end to negotiate votes to allow a few at-risk Democrats that supported the bill to oppose it in the final vote, but even that tells a tale of fear and consciousness of unpopularity. The razor-thin vote, as well as a number of earlier, more sincere defections, show that this bill was a radical and expensive approach to fix a 13% problem ? and even most of the Democrats know it. Now the focus swings to the Senate, where Harry Reid will have to gain supermajorities at least twice to allow the bill to proceed to a final vote. That seems unlikely, although not impossible. The process will slow down considerably from the jam-down Pelosi conducted in the lower chamber, perhaps even to a crawl if Tom Coburn makes good on his threat to have the bill read in its entirety on the Senate floor. That will leave plenty of time for ObamaCare opponents to find all of the taxes, mandates, and government intrusions that will make it even less popular as it sits in the Senate. Even before Coburn?s threat, Democrats had pushed expectations for the bill out to late January ? which makes the politics of the bill even more fraught for Democrats, at the start of an election year. Democrats have another problem, even in the House. The Senate is not considering the Pelosi plan, but one they wrote themselves. Unless Reid pulls his own bill out of consideration and substitutes Pelosi?s ? which is a possibility ? that sets up a conference committee and second vote in each chamber, assuming that the Senate passes anything at all. If that happens, a conference committee will have to meet to produce another bill that would then go for a full floor vote in each chamber. If abortion funding makes its way back into the bill, or if mandates or taxes increase, or if conscience protections get stripped, then all of the hurdles that Pelosi barely cleared the first time return, and without the ability to amend the bill (conference reports get straight up-or-down votes without amendments in order to have both chambers pass identical legislation for the President to sign.) That means another shot at a filibuster and a lengthy bill reading in the Senate, and at least a chance to hold Bart Stupak?s pro-life coalition in the House under the spotlight to find out whether they will vote their conscience or bow to Pelosi. We always thought the fight was in the Senate, so the only real surprise yesterday was how weak Pelosi actually was on ObamaCare. Our focus now has to shift to those red-state Senators who will have to explain to voters their potential support of a bill that imposes unconstitutional mandates and trillions of dollars in new costs on a government that can?t pay its bills now. And in this case, we?ll only need two of them to stop the runaway tyranny of the Democratic agenda. From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 11:22:47 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 10:22:47 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] kubelwagens In-Reply-To: <400985d70911080656r63c4a151gc6b4dcd8f273ed63@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911072038m4ffc326bhd33bbcb034834a3f@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911072049y26288264w708bc873d8989f6b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911072156pace7290wbb2b34759cf080c8@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080438o47b28571wc674e7f38651444b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911080656r63c4a151gc6b4dcd8f273ed63@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911080822r4dd49ca7rbbd3ac864de0c4e8@mail.gmail.com> Brad, I've never had a 401K or frankly any other gov't connected retirement account. Never had enough faith in our handlers to go for that. That being said, You know I'm no expert on the workings of gov't retirement accts. So I ask, is it not possible to at least get an account like that into a cash position rather than being invested in equities?? I truly expect that "the people" will reward congress for their arrogance, one way or the other. Since they wouldn't listen to our voices, people will speak with their wallets. Congress is likely to get a hard lesson that it just might have been easier to listen to the voices. The fundamentals don't support this market to begin with. I am quite sure that we're getting close to that last straw that busts the camel's back and here comes congress to load on more with a scoop shovel. The market won't put up with much of this anti-business legislation for long. Right now, the best advice I think you could give your friend is, "all my best friends call me cash". Worst case, if I'm wrong you won't make a little money. If I'm right, you won't lose ... a ton of money. Rik On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 8:56 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > Thanks for bringing up a sore subject. As you know, I rode the market > down and have recouped about 75% of the losses. That puts me about > where I would be had I invested in the Bank of Sealy Posturepedic in > 2004. Over the course of the last several weeks I've moved the bulk of > my investments to international funds, especially one fund weighted > heavily to Asian companies. Here's a bitter lesson that you've > escaped; I fell hook-line-and-sinker for the government sponsored 401K > scam and have limited options. Before the market meltdown there was > already talk of targeting 401Ks. Trust me, there's still some > congress-critters that have their eyes on them. > > I got a call from one of our friends that moved here from Minneapolis > a couple of years ago. She lost her job in Minnie but had a PhD in > Chemistry and landed on her feet here in Memphis with a drug company. > She wanted some reassurance. Knowing her background as a conscripted > farmer during the Cultural Revolution and her personal struggle, > starting college at age 28, immigrating to the US, and eventually > earning a doctorate, I really wanted to tell her not to worry. But > frankly, I'm worried. > > Brad > > On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > Hear, Hear..... > > > > I was over at my brothers last night having a discussion about this > issue. > > We all know this is bad business. The stock market appears to be looking > for > > an excuse to reverse. We wondered if this might be enough to catalyze > that, > > considering also the BS Reid and Boxer pulled this week in the senate > with > > cap and trade. > > > > I think it would be a very fitting payback for congressional arrogance. > > > > 'Course, I'm not long the market .... hope you're not too > > > > Rik > > > > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> Rik, > >> > >> "In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in > >> the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only > >> by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every > >> act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free > >> people. > >> > >> Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have > >> warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to > >> extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of > >> the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have > >> appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured > >> them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, > >> which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. > >> They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. > >> We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our > >> separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in > >> war, in peace friends." > >> > >> We have yet begun the fight! > >> > >> Brad > >> > >> On 11/7/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > >> > Like you often say, Brad .... you just can't make this shit up :-) > >> > > >> > Rik > >> > > >> > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Brad Haslett > wrote: > >> > > >> >> Most people don't know the history of Volkswagen - the "Peoples Car". > >> >> Germans were forced to buy stamps for the eventual purchase of a VW > >> >> (deducted from their paychecks). Most couldn't afford the car or > >> >> insurance or fuel, but they bought stamps for one anyway because the > >> >> government forced them to. Eventually, WW2 sucked-up all the > >> >> production facilities of VW and they produced Kubelwagens, an > >> >> amphibious vehicle. I owned one once, it was called "The Thing" when > >> >> it was introduced into the US in the 70's. > >> >> > >> >> So now we have a health care bill that has passed the House that will > >> >> force people to buy something, whether they want or can afford it, or > >> >> they will face up to five years of imprisonment. Some progress! Of > >> >> course it will still have to pass the Senate and there will be > >> >> multiple Supreme Court challenges if it passes the Senate. Who knows > >> >> what the final product will look like if it goes undefeated. The > >> >> kubelwagen sure didn't look anything like Dr. Porsche's Bug. > >> >> > >> >> The VW turned out to be a fine car eventually. I've owned several > >> >> including the one I drive every day. They are popular in Mexico, > >> >> South America, China, and Europe. A lot can change in 75 years. > >> >> > >> >> So how good a war machine was the kubelwagen? It was a piece of shit > >> >> compared to the Willys Jeep. How things change. Willys is now > >> >> Chrysler/Jeep (gubmint owned) and VW is a private company. > >> >> > >> >> Funny thing, history. > >> >> > >> >> Brad > >> >> > >> >> PS - Cao, I've got your number! > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then > >> > beat > >> > you with experience. > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > > you with experience. > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091108/aeac5f15/attachment-0001.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 11:27:25 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 10:27:25 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Cartoons In-Reply-To: <400985d70911080800g5e386923k45545dc478797e60@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911080729w525ee663h845cf2dbc219cf65@mail.gmail.com> <987298.7379.qm@web111209.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <400985d70911080800g5e386923k45545dc478797e60@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911080827u45125c3ai4bb96e31a140f20f@mail.gmail.com> Nope, don't see any attachment either. Rik On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Elle, > > Been down this road before and can't remember how to fix the problem. > I forwarded them from my Yahoo account to the Gmail account and they > came through, hmmm, maybe as an attachment? > > Brad > > > On 11/8/09, elle wrote: > > DOODOODEEDOO....DOODOODEEDOO > > > > none of the pix came through > > > > (can they hear us now???) > > > > elle > > > > --- On Sun, 11/8/09, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > > > > From: Brad Haslett > > Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Cartoons > > To: "Letters to the Editor" > > > > Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 10:29 AM > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: brad haslett > > Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 07:10:10 -0800 (PST) > > Subject: Cartoons > > To: flybrad at gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [] > > < > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Think > > about this: > > If > > you don't want to forward this > > for > > fear of offending someone > > YOU > > ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM! > > It > > is Time for America to Speak up! > > > > > > Visit > > www.abundantlifetourandtravel.com > > for all your travel and entertainment > > needs. > > Order > > tickets to concerts, sporting events, Broadway shows and attractions. > > Book > > flights, cruises, hotels, car rentals, vacation packages and tee times. > > > > Order flowers, gift baskets and gifts. Do on line shopping and much, much > > more. > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091108/e9e8bb7f/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 11:39:29 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 10:39:29 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Keep Fighting! In-Reply-To: <400985d70911080818l47cb2390mc16ffb142f932ff3@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911080818l47cb2390mc16ffb142f932ff3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911080839n5d81c93ei43940ae35a07b57c@mail.gmail.com> Boy Howdy ...What a great victory. 5 votes out of 435 You go Nancy, You da man!!! Not...... Rik (gag me with a spoon) On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 10:18 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Let us hope this is the case - > > Is this the high-water mark for ObamaCare? > posted at 9:00 am on November 8, 2009 by Ed Morrissey > > > The Democrats wheedled, cajoled, begged, and finally abandoned its > defense of abortion ? truly a watershed moment ? in order to get their > version of ObamaCare passed ? in the House of Representatives, where > they enjoy a 75-seat majority. In the end, they could only muster a > five-vote win on Nancy Pelosi?s bill out of that strong majority. > Until this week, most had assumed that any ObamaCare bill would pass > the House easily, but that the fight would be in the Senate. > > So what does this 220-215 vote tell us? Capitol Hill Democrats know > that this bill is an albatross. It?s true that Pelosi was able at the > end to negotiate votes to allow a few at-risk Democrats that supported > the bill to oppose it in the final vote, but even that tells a tale of > fear and consciousness of unpopularity. The razor-thin vote, as well > as a number of earlier, more sincere defections, show that this bill > was a radical and expensive approach to fix a 13% problem ? and even > most of the Democrats know it. > > Now the focus swings to the Senate, where Harry Reid will have to gain > supermajorities at least twice to allow the bill to proceed to a final > vote. That seems unlikely, although not impossible. The process will > slow down considerably from the jam-down Pelosi conducted in the lower > chamber, perhaps even to a crawl if Tom Coburn makes good on his > threat to have the bill read in its entirety on the Senate floor. > That will leave plenty of time for ObamaCare opponents to find all of > the taxes, mandates, and government intrusions that will make it even > less popular as it sits in the Senate. Even before Coburn?s threat, > Democrats had pushed expectations for the bill out to late January ? > which makes the politics of the bill even more fraught for Democrats, > at the start of an election year. > > Democrats have another problem, even in the House. The Senate is not > considering the Pelosi plan, but one they wrote themselves. Unless > Reid pulls his own bill out of consideration and substitutes Pelosi?s > ? which is a possibility ? that sets up a conference committee and > second vote in each chamber, assuming that the Senate passes anything > at all. If that happens, a conference committee will have to meet to > produce another bill that would then go for a full floor vote in each > chamber. If abortion funding makes its way back into the bill, or if > mandates or taxes increase, or if conscience protections get stripped, > then all of the hurdles that Pelosi barely cleared the first time > return, and without the ability to amend the bill (conference reports > get straight up-or-down votes without amendments in order to have both > chambers pass identical legislation for the President to sign.) That > means another shot at a filibuster and a lengthy bill reading in the > Senate, and at least a chance to hold Bart Stupak?s pro-life coalition > in the House under the spotlight to find out whether they will vote > their conscience or bow to Pelosi. > > We always thought the fight was in the Senate, so the only real > surprise yesterday was how weak Pelosi actually was on ObamaCare. Our > focus now has to shift to those red-state Senators who will have to > explain to voters their potential support of a bill that imposes > unconstitutional mandates and trillions of dollars in new costs on a > government that can?t pay its bills now. And in this case, we?ll only > need two of them to stop the runaway tyranny of the Democratic agenda. > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091108/46c1a4d4/attachment.html From bill at effros.com Sun Nov 8 11:48:14 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 11:48:14 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Cartoons In-Reply-To: <400985d70911080800g5e386923k45545dc478797e60@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911080729w525ee663h845cf2dbc219cf65@mail.gmail.com> <987298.7379.qm@web111209.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <400985d70911080800g5e386923k45545dc478797e60@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4AF6F64E.8010302@effros.com> The email program is stripping them out. Some year I'll get around to adjusting the program, but I've got way too many balls in the air right now. B. Brad Haslett wrote: > Elle, > > Been down this road before and can't remember how to fix the problem. > I forwarded them from my Yahoo account to the Gmail account and they > came through, hmmm, maybe as an attachment? > > Brad > > > On 11/8/09, elle wrote: > >> DOODOODEEDOO....DOODOODEEDOO >> >> none of the pix came through >> >> (can they hear us now???) >> >> elle >> >> --- On Sun, 11/8/09, Brad Haslett wrote: >> >> >> From: Brad Haslett >> Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Cartoons >> To: "Letters to the Editor" >> >> Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 10:29 AM >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: brad haslett >> Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 07:10:10 -0800 (PST) >> Subject: Cartoons >> To: flybrad at gmail.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> [] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> [] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> [] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> [] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> [] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> [] >> < >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Think >> about this: >> If >> you don't want to forward this >> for >> fear of offending someone >> YOU >> ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM! >> It >> is Time for America to Speak up! >> >> >> Visit >> www.abundantlifetourandtravel.com >> for all your travel and entertainment >> needs. >> Order >> tickets to concerts, sporting events, Broadway shows and attractions. >> Book >> flights, cruises, hotels, car rentals, vacation packages and tee times. >> >> Order flowers, gift baskets and gifts. Do on line shopping and much, much >> more. >> _______________________________________________ >> 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/20091108/800990b4/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 11:58:02 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 10:58:02 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] kubelwagens In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911080822r4dd49ca7rbbd3ac864de0c4e8@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911072038m4ffc326bhd33bbcb034834a3f@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911072049y26288264w708bc873d8989f6b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911072156pace7290wbb2b34759cf080c8@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080438o47b28571wc674e7f38651444b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911080656r63c4a151gc6b4dcd8f273ed63@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080822r4dd49ca7rbbd3ac864de0c4e8@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911080858t40f3e312yc721634056535d41@mail.gmail.com> Rik, The problem with 401Ks are that you are limited by your employer's choice of management, in my case Vanguard. Vanguard closed down their Treasury bill fund because it had a negative rate of return. China is facing the same issue with US treasuries and the inflation hasn't even started yet. Bond funds will take a huge hit when inflation kicks in after deflation. Make sense? What I'm suggesting is that until the real estate market clears (something that won't happen for some time) and the business cycle reverses (something that is already happening) prices will remain flat. But, BUT!, the Chinese will either demand a better return on their investment or they'll quietly start dumping dollars (they already are). The US goobermint will have to speed-up the printing presses beyond what they already have and hellooooooo Mr. Inflation! What the rest of the US economy is doing at that point is immaterial. Yeah, I envy your position - cash. We've moved most of our non 401K investments into cash. We're trading one of the properties in Beijing (closer to where we want to be) and are still waiting on the condo in Destin to close. I'm trying to decide whether to fund those properties with more cash or borrow to the max and pay back with inflated dollars (lots of variables there). We don't have or plan to have a lot of debt that we couldn't retire quickly if need be. You are right about the fundamentals not supporting the current market, the earnings just aren't there. Fannie Mae "only" needs 5 more billion. The banks aren't lending because they're hunkered down in the "turtle mode" trying to make reserve requirements, and that's BEFORE they come clean with their accounting. Most well run companies have load-shedded as many employees as possible and they are not anxious to hire any new ones anytime soon. Here's what most people don't get. The market has a huge psychological aspect to it in both directions. The "I feel good" moment in the stock market right now won't last forever. That is true for business management as well, and most CEOs are watching the current climate on Capitol Hill and thinking, "screw it, I'm not sticking my neck out there". There are exceptions, ie, GE thinks they have the system gamed on the cap-n-tax scam. Watch the cheerleading on any given night on MSNBC. Remember the old adage from Herb Stein, "when something can't go on forever, it won't". There is a reason you and I can't make sense of what is going on. It doesn't make sense. Brad On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > I've never had a 401K or frankly any other gov't connected retirement > account. Never had enough faith in our handlers to go for that. > > That being said, You know I'm no expert on the workings of gov't retirement > accts. So I ask, is it not possible to at least get an account like that > into a cash position rather than being invested in equities?? > > I truly expect that "the people" will reward congress for their arrogance, > one way or the other. Since they wouldn't listen to our voices, people will > speak with their wallets. Congress is likely to get a hard lesson that it > just might have been easier to listen to the voices. The fundamentals don't > support this market to begin with. I am quite sure that we're getting close > to that last straw that busts the camel's back and here comes congress to > load on more with a scoop shovel. > > The market won't put up with much of this anti-business legislation for > long. > > Right now, the best advice I think you could give your friend is, "all my > best friends call me cash". > > Worst case, if I'm wrong you won't make a little money. If I'm right, you > won't lose ... a ton of money. > > Rik > > On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 8:56 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> Thanks for bringing up a sore subject. As you know, I rode the market >> down and have recouped about 75% of the losses. That puts me about >> where I would be had I invested in the Bank of Sealy Posturepedic in >> 2004. Over the course of the last several weeks I've moved the bulk of >> my investments to international funds, especially one fund weighted >> heavily to Asian companies. Here's a bitter lesson that you've >> escaped; I fell hook-line-and-sinker for the government sponsored 401K >> scam and have limited options. Before the market meltdown there was >> already talk of targeting 401Ks. Trust me, there's still some >> congress-critters that have their eyes on them. >> >> I got a call from one of our friends that moved here from Minneapolis >> a couple of years ago. She lost her job in Minnie but had a PhD in >> Chemistry and landed on her feet here in Memphis with a drug company. >> She wanted some reassurance. Knowing her background as a conscripted >> farmer during the Cultural Revolution and her personal struggle, >> starting college at age 28, immigrating to the US, and eventually >> earning a doctorate, I really wanted to tell her not to worry. But >> frankly, I'm worried. >> >> Brad >> >> On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> > Brad, >> > >> > Hear, Hear..... >> > >> > I was over at my brothers last night having a discussion about this >> issue. >> > We all know this is bad business. The stock market appears to be looking >> for >> > an excuse to reverse. We wondered if this might be enough to catalyze >> that, >> > considering also the BS Reid and Boxer pulled this week in the senate >> with >> > cap and trade. >> > >> > I think it would be a very fitting payback for congressional arrogance. >> > >> > 'Course, I'm not long the market .... hope you're not too >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> Rik, >> >> >> >> "In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in >> >> the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only >> >> by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every >> >> act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free >> >> people. >> >> >> >> Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have >> >> warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to >> >> extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of >> >> the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have >> >> appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured >> >> them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, >> >> which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. >> >> They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. >> >> We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our >> >> separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in >> >> war, in peace friends." >> >> >> >> We have yet begun the fight! >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> On 11/7/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> >> > Like you often say, Brad .... you just can't make this shit up :-) >> >> > >> >> > Rik >> >> > >> >> > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Brad Haslett >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Most people don't know the history of Volkswagen - the "Peoples >> >> >> Car". >> >> >> Germans were forced to buy stamps for the eventual purchase of a VW >> >> >> (deducted from their paychecks). Most couldn't afford the car or >> >> >> insurance or fuel, but they bought stamps for one anyway because the >> >> >> government forced them to. Eventually, WW2 sucked-up all the >> >> >> production facilities of VW and they produced Kubelwagens, an >> >> >> amphibious vehicle. I owned one once, it was called "The Thing" >> >> >> when >> >> >> it was introduced into the US in the 70's. >> >> >> >> >> >> So now we have a health care bill that has passed the House that >> >> >> will >> >> >> force people to buy something, whether they want or can afford it, >> >> >> or >> >> >> they will face up to five years of imprisonment. Some progress! Of >> >> >> course it will still have to pass the Senate and there will be >> >> >> multiple Supreme Court challenges if it passes the Senate. Who >> >> >> knows >> >> >> what the final product will look like if it goes undefeated. The >> >> >> kubelwagen sure didn't look anything like Dr. Porsche's Bug. >> >> >> >> >> >> The VW turned out to be a fine car eventually. I've owned several >> >> >> including the one I drive every day. They are popular in Mexico, >> >> >> South America, China, and Europe. A lot can change in 75 years. >> >> >> >> >> >> So how good a war machine was the kubelwagen? It was a piece of >> >> >> shit >> >> >> compared to the Willys Jeep. How things change. Willys is now >> >> >> Chrysler/Jeep (gubmint owned) and VW is a private company. >> >> >> >> >> >> Funny thing, history. >> >> >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> >> >> PS - Cao, I've got your number! >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> >> > beat >> >> > you with experience. >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> > beat >> > you with experience. >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 12:38:09 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 11:38:09 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Sarah Speaks! Message-ID: <400985d70911080938y3d1c4e7bs88c574100f9c57b6@mail.gmail.com> The Pelosi Bill Was Rammed Through on Saturday, But Sunday?s Coming Yesterday at 10:34pm We?ve got to hold on to hope, and we?ve got to fight hard because Congressional action tonight just put America on a path toward an unrecognizable country. The same government leaders that got us into the mortgage business and the car business are now getting us into the health care business. Despite Americans? decisive message last Tuesday that they reject the troubling path this country has been taking, Speaker Pelosi has broken her own promises of transparency to ram a health ?care? bill through the House of Representatives just before midnight. Why did she push the 2,000 page bill this weekend? Was she perhaps afraid to give her peers and the constituents for whom she works the chance to actually read this monstrous bill carefully, if at all? Was she concerned that Americans might really digest the details of a bill that the Wall Street Journal has called ?the worst piece of post-New Deal legislation ever introduced?? This out-of-control bureaucratic mess will be disastrous for our economy, our small businesses, and our personal liberty. It will slam businesses at a time when we are at double-digit unemployment rates ? the highest we?ve seen in a quarter of a century. This massive new bureaucracy will cost us and our children money we don?t have. It will rob Americans of more of our freedom and further hamper the free market. Make no mistake: we?re on course to have government commandeer one-sixth of our economy. The people who gave us Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac now want to run our health care. Think about that. All of us who value the sanctity of life are grateful for the success of the pro-life majority in the House this evening in its battle against federal funding of abortion in this bill, but it?s ironic because we were promised that abortion wasn?t covered in the bill to begin with. Our healthy distrust of these government leaders made us look deeper into the bill because unfortunately we knew better than to trust what they were saying. The victory tonight to amend the bill and eliminate that federal funding for abortion was great ? because abortion is not health care. Now we can only hope that Rep. Stupak?s amendment will hold in the final bill, though the Democratic leadership has already refused to promise that it won?t be scrapped later. We had been told there were no ?death panels? in the bill either. But look closely at the provision mandating bureaucratic panels that will be calling the shots regarding who will receive government health care. Look closely at provisions addressing illegal aliens? health care coverage too. Those of us who love freedom and believe in open and transparent government can only be dismayed by midnight action on a Saturday. Speaker Pelosi?s promise that Americans would have 72 hours to read the final bill before the vote was just another one of the D.C. establishment?s too-common political ploys. It?s broken promises like this that turn people off to politics and leave them disillusioned about the future of their country. But despite this late-night maneuvering, many of us were paying close attention tonight. We?ll keep paying close attention. We need to let our legislators in Washington know that they still represent us, and that the majority of Americans are not in favor of the ?reform? they are pushing. After all, this is still a country ?of the people, by the people, and for the people.? We will make our voices heard. It?s on to the Senate now. Our legislators can listen now, or they can hear us in 2010. It?s their choice. - Sarah Palin From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 12:45:27 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 11:45:27 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] kubelwagens In-Reply-To: <400985d70911080858t40f3e312yc721634056535d41@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911072038m4ffc326bhd33bbcb034834a3f@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911072049y26288264w708bc873d8989f6b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911072156pace7290wbb2b34759cf080c8@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080438o47b28571wc674e7f38651444b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911080656r63c4a151gc6b4dcd8f273ed63@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080822r4dd49ca7rbbd3ac864de0c4e8@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911080858t40f3e312yc721634056535d41@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911080945m66e0451ena5b44e73fb193ad7@mail.gmail.com> Brad, So, you're telling me there is no "ordinary savings account" kind of thing available?? Bummer. To be honest, I just stopped using brokers altogether, quite a while back. It seemed that I was the one getting "broker" so what did I need them for? Hell, I could do that by myself. Yes, I see quite a tight rope act coming for Mr. Bernanke. It'll be tricky as heck. Hope he's up to it. Rik On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 10:58 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > The problem with 401Ks are that you are limited by your employer's > choice of management, in my case Vanguard. Vanguard closed down their > Treasury bill fund because it had a negative rate of return. China is > facing the same issue with US treasuries and the inflation hasn't even > started yet. Bond funds will take a huge hit when inflation kicks in > after deflation. Make sense? What I'm suggesting is that until the > real estate market clears (something that won't happen for some time) > and the business cycle reverses (something that is already happening) > prices will remain flat. But, BUT!, the Chinese will either demand a > better return on their investment or they'll quietly start dumping > dollars (they already are). The US goobermint will have to speed-up > the printing presses beyond what they already have and hellooooooo Mr. > Inflation! What the rest of the US economy is doing at that point is > immaterial. Yeah, I envy your position - cash. We've moved most of > our non 401K investments into cash. We're trading one of the > properties in Beijing (closer to where we want to be) and are still > waiting on the condo in Destin to close. I'm trying to decide whether > to fund those properties with more cash or borrow to the max and pay > back with inflated dollars (lots of variables there). We don't have or > plan to have a lot of debt that we couldn't retire quickly if need be. > > You are right about the fundamentals not supporting the current > market, the earnings just aren't there. Fannie Mae "only" needs 5 more > billion. The banks aren't lending because they're hunkered down in > the "turtle mode" trying to make reserve requirements, and that's > BEFORE they come clean with their accounting. Most well run companies > have load-shedded as many employees as possible and they are not > anxious to hire any new ones anytime soon. Here's what most people > don't get. The market has a huge psychological aspect to it in both > directions. The "I feel good" moment in the stock market right now > won't last forever. That is true for business management as well, and > most CEOs are watching the current climate on Capitol Hill and > thinking, "screw it, I'm not sticking my neck out there". There are > exceptions, ie, GE thinks they have the system gamed on the cap-n-tax > scam. Watch the cheerleading on any given night on MSNBC. > > Remember the old adage from Herb Stein, "when something can't go on > forever, it won't". There is a reason you and I can't make sense of > what is going on. It doesn't make sense. > > Brad > > On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > I've never had a 401K or frankly any other gov't connected retirement > > account. Never had enough faith in our handlers to go for that. > > > > That being said, You know I'm no expert on the workings of gov't > retirement > > accts. So I ask, is it not possible to at least get an account like that > > into a cash position rather than being invested in equities?? > > > > I truly expect that "the people" will reward congress for their > arrogance, > > one way or the other. Since they wouldn't listen to our voices, people > will > > speak with their wallets. Congress is likely to get a hard lesson that it > > just might have been easier to listen to the voices. The fundamentals > don't > > support this market to begin with. I am quite sure that we're getting > close > > to that last straw that busts the camel's back and here comes congress to > > load on more with a scoop shovel. > > > > The market won't put up with much of this anti-business legislation for > > long. > > > > Right now, the best advice I think you could give your friend is, "all my > > best friends call me cash". > > > > Worst case, if I'm wrong you won't make a little money. If I'm right, you > > won't lose ... a ton of money. > > > > Rik > > > > On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 8:56 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> Rik, > >> > >> Thanks for bringing up a sore subject. As you know, I rode the market > >> down and have recouped about 75% of the losses. That puts me about > >> where I would be had I invested in the Bank of Sealy Posturepedic in > >> 2004. Over the course of the last several weeks I've moved the bulk of > >> my investments to international funds, especially one fund weighted > >> heavily to Asian companies. Here's a bitter lesson that you've > >> escaped; I fell hook-line-and-sinker for the government sponsored 401K > >> scam and have limited options. Before the market meltdown there was > >> already talk of targeting 401Ks. Trust me, there's still some > >> congress-critters that have their eyes on them. > >> > >> I got a call from one of our friends that moved here from Minneapolis > >> a couple of years ago. She lost her job in Minnie but had a PhD in > >> Chemistry and landed on her feet here in Memphis with a drug company. > >> She wanted some reassurance. Knowing her background as a conscripted > >> farmer during the Cultural Revolution and her personal struggle, > >> starting college at age 28, immigrating to the US, and eventually > >> earning a doctorate, I really wanted to tell her not to worry. But > >> frankly, I'm worried. > >> > >> Brad > >> > >> On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > >> > Brad, > >> > > >> > Hear, Hear..... > >> > > >> > I was over at my brothers last night having a discussion about this > >> issue. > >> > We all know this is bad business. The stock market appears to be > looking > >> for > >> > an excuse to reverse. We wondered if this might be enough to catalyze > >> that, > >> > considering also the BS Reid and Boxer pulled this week in the senate > >> with > >> > cap and trade. > >> > > >> > I think it would be a very fitting payback for congressional > arrogance. > >> > > >> > 'Course, I'm not long the market .... hope you're not too > >> > > >> > Rik > >> > > >> > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Brad Haslett > wrote: > >> > > >> >> Rik, > >> >> > >> >> "In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress > in > >> >> the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only > >> >> by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every > >> >> act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free > >> >> people. > >> >> > >> >> Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We > have > >> >> warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to > >> >> extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them > of > >> >> the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have > >> >> appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have > conjured > >> >> them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, > >> >> which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. > >> >> They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. > >> >> We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our > >> >> separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in > >> >> war, in peace friends." > >> >> > >> >> We have yet begun the fight! > >> >> > >> >> Brad > >> >> > >> >> On 11/7/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > >> >> > Like you often say, Brad .... you just can't make this shit up :-) > >> >> > > >> >> > Rik > >> >> > > >> >> > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Brad Haslett > >> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> Most people don't know the history of Volkswagen - the "Peoples > >> >> >> Car". > >> >> >> Germans were forced to buy stamps for the eventual purchase of a > VW > >> >> >> (deducted from their paychecks). Most couldn't afford the car or > >> >> >> insurance or fuel, but they bought stamps for one anyway because > the > >> >> >> government forced them to. Eventually, WW2 sucked-up all the > >> >> >> production facilities of VW and they produced Kubelwagens, an > >> >> >> amphibious vehicle. I owned one once, it was called "The Thing" > >> >> >> when > >> >> >> it was introduced into the US in the 70's. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> So now we have a health care bill that has passed the House that > >> >> >> will > >> >> >> force people to buy something, whether they want or can afford it, > >> >> >> or > >> >> >> they will face up to five years of imprisonment. Some progress! Of > >> >> >> course it will still have to pass the Senate and there will be > >> >> >> multiple Supreme Court challenges if it passes the Senate. Who > >> >> >> knows > >> >> >> what the final product will look like if it goes undefeated. The > >> >> >> kubelwagen sure didn't look anything like Dr. Porsche's Bug. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> The VW turned out to be a fine car eventually. I've owned several > >> >> >> including the one I drive every day. They are popular in Mexico, > >> >> >> South America, China, and Europe. A lot can change in 75 years. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> So how good a war machine was the kubelwagen? It was a piece of > >> >> >> shit > >> >> >> compared to the Willys Jeep. How things change. Willys is now > >> >> >> Chrysler/Jeep (gubmint owned) and VW is a private company. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Funny thing, history. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Brad > >> >> >> > >> >> >> PS - Cao, I've got your number! > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > -- > >> >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level > then > >> >> > beat > >> >> > you with experience. > >> >> > > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then > >> > beat > >> > you with experience. > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > > you with experience. > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091108/a7c16304/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 12:53:14 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 11:53:14 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] kubelwagens In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911080945m66e0451ena5b44e73fb193ad7@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911072038m4ffc326bhd33bbcb034834a3f@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911072049y26288264w708bc873d8989f6b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911072156pace7290wbb2b34759cf080c8@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080438o47b28571wc674e7f38651444b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911080656r63c4a151gc6b4dcd8f273ed63@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080822r4dd49ca7rbbd3ac864de0c4e8@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911080858t40f3e312yc721634056535d41@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080945m66e0451ena5b44e73fb193ad7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911080953m73eef95fvcf09f72126714266@mail.gmail.com> Rik, This is it - http://www.forbes.com/funds/Tearsheet.jhtml?tkr=VMRXX Brad On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > So, you're telling me there is no "ordinary savings account" kind of thing > available?? > > Bummer. > > To be honest, I just stopped using brokers altogether, quite a while back. > It seemed that I was the one getting "broker" so what did I need them for? > Hell, I could do that by myself. > > Yes, I see quite a tight rope act coming for Mr. Bernanke. It'll be tricky > as heck. Hope he's up to it. > > Rik > > On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 10:58 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> The problem with 401Ks are that you are limited by your employer's >> choice of management, in my case Vanguard. Vanguard closed down their >> Treasury bill fund because it had a negative rate of return. China is >> facing the same issue with US treasuries and the inflation hasn't even >> started yet. Bond funds will take a huge hit when inflation kicks in >> after deflation. Make sense? What I'm suggesting is that until the >> real estate market clears (something that won't happen for some time) >> and the business cycle reverses (something that is already happening) >> prices will remain flat. But, BUT!, the Chinese will either demand a >> better return on their investment or they'll quietly start dumping >> dollars (they already are). The US goobermint will have to speed-up >> the printing presses beyond what they already have and hellooooooo Mr. >> Inflation! What the rest of the US economy is doing at that point is >> immaterial. Yeah, I envy your position - cash. We've moved most of >> our non 401K investments into cash. We're trading one of the >> properties in Beijing (closer to where we want to be) and are still >> waiting on the condo in Destin to close. I'm trying to decide whether >> to fund those properties with more cash or borrow to the max and pay >> back with inflated dollars (lots of variables there). We don't have or >> plan to have a lot of debt that we couldn't retire quickly if need be. >> >> You are right about the fundamentals not supporting the current >> market, the earnings just aren't there. Fannie Mae "only" needs 5 more >> billion. The banks aren't lending because they're hunkered down in >> the "turtle mode" trying to make reserve requirements, and that's >> BEFORE they come clean with their accounting. Most well run companies >> have load-shedded as many employees as possible and they are not >> anxious to hire any new ones anytime soon. Here's what most people >> don't get. The market has a huge psychological aspect to it in both >> directions. The "I feel good" moment in the stock market right now >> won't last forever. That is true for business management as well, and >> most CEOs are watching the current climate on Capitol Hill and >> thinking, "screw it, I'm not sticking my neck out there". There are >> exceptions, ie, GE thinks they have the system gamed on the cap-n-tax >> scam. Watch the cheerleading on any given night on MSNBC. >> >> Remember the old adage from Herb Stein, "when something can't go on >> forever, it won't". There is a reason you and I can't make sense of >> what is going on. It doesn't make sense. >> >> Brad >> >> On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> > Brad, >> > >> > I've never had a 401K or frankly any other gov't connected retirement >> > account. Never had enough faith in our handlers to go for that. >> > >> > That being said, You know I'm no expert on the workings of gov't >> retirement >> > accts. So I ask, is it not possible to at least get an account like that >> > into a cash position rather than being invested in equities?? >> > >> > I truly expect that "the people" will reward congress for their >> arrogance, >> > one way or the other. Since they wouldn't listen to our voices, people >> will >> > speak with their wallets. Congress is likely to get a hard lesson that >> > it >> > just might have been easier to listen to the voices. The fundamentals >> don't >> > support this market to begin with. I am quite sure that we're getting >> close >> > to that last straw that busts the camel's back and here comes congress >> > to >> > load on more with a scoop shovel. >> > >> > The market won't put up with much of this anti-business legislation for >> > long. >> > >> > Right now, the best advice I think you could give your friend is, "all >> > my >> > best friends call me cash". >> > >> > Worst case, if I'm wrong you won't make a little money. If I'm right, >> > you >> > won't lose ... a ton of money. >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 8:56 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> Rik, >> >> >> >> Thanks for bringing up a sore subject. As you know, I rode the market >> >> down and have recouped about 75% of the losses. That puts me about >> >> where I would be had I invested in the Bank of Sealy Posturepedic in >> >> 2004. Over the course of the last several weeks I've moved the bulk of >> >> my investments to international funds, especially one fund weighted >> >> heavily to Asian companies. Here's a bitter lesson that you've >> >> escaped; I fell hook-line-and-sinker for the government sponsored 401K >> >> scam and have limited options. Before the market meltdown there was >> >> already talk of targeting 401Ks. Trust me, there's still some >> >> congress-critters that have their eyes on them. >> >> >> >> I got a call from one of our friends that moved here from Minneapolis >> >> a couple of years ago. She lost her job in Minnie but had a PhD in >> >> Chemistry and landed on her feet here in Memphis with a drug company. >> >> She wanted some reassurance. Knowing her background as a conscripted >> >> farmer during the Cultural Revolution and her personal struggle, >> >> starting college at age 28, immigrating to the US, and eventually >> >> earning a doctorate, I really wanted to tell her not to worry. But >> >> frankly, I'm worried. >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> >> > Brad, >> >> > >> >> > Hear, Hear..... >> >> > >> >> > I was over at my brothers last night having a discussion about this >> >> issue. >> >> > We all know this is bad business. The stock market appears to be >> looking >> >> for >> >> > an excuse to reverse. We wondered if this might be enough to catalyze >> >> that, >> >> > considering also the BS Reid and Boxer pulled this week in the senate >> >> with >> >> > cap and trade. >> >> > >> >> > I think it would be a very fitting payback for congressional >> arrogance. >> >> > >> >> > 'Course, I'm not long the market .... hope you're not too >> >> > >> >> > Rik >> >> > >> >> > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Brad Haslett >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Rik, >> >> >> >> >> >> "In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress >> in >> >> >> the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered >> >> >> only >> >> >> by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by >> >> >> every >> >> >> act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free >> >> >> people. >> >> >> >> >> >> Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We >> have >> >> >> warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to >> >> >> extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them >> of >> >> >> the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have >> >> >> appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have >> conjured >> >> >> them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, >> >> >> which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and >> >> >> correspondence. >> >> >> They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of >> >> >> consanguinity. >> >> >> We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our >> >> >> separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies >> >> >> in >> >> >> war, in peace friends." >> >> >> >> >> >> We have yet begun the fight! >> >> >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> >> >> On 11/7/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> >> >> > Like you often say, Brad .... you just can't make this shit up :-) >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Rik >> >> >> > >> >> >> > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Brad Haslett >> >> wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Most people don't know the history of Volkswagen - the "Peoples >> >> >> >> Car". >> >> >> >> Germans were forced to buy stamps for the eventual purchase of a >> VW >> >> >> >> (deducted from their paychecks). Most couldn't afford the car or >> >> >> >> insurance or fuel, but they bought stamps for one anyway because >> the >> >> >> >> government forced them to. Eventually, WW2 sucked-up all the >> >> >> >> production facilities of VW and they produced Kubelwagens, an >> >> >> >> amphibious vehicle. I owned one once, it was called "The Thing" >> >> >> >> when >> >> >> >> it was introduced into the US in the 70's. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> So now we have a health care bill that has passed the House that >> >> >> >> will >> >> >> >> force people to buy something, whether they want or can afford >> >> >> >> it, >> >> >> >> or >> >> >> >> they will face up to five years of imprisonment. Some progress! >> >> >> >> Of >> >> >> >> course it will still have to pass the Senate and there will be >> >> >> >> multiple Supreme Court challenges if it passes the Senate. Who >> >> >> >> knows >> >> >> >> what the final product will look like if it goes undefeated. The >> >> >> >> kubelwagen sure didn't look anything like Dr. Porsche's Bug. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> The VW turned out to be a fine car eventually. I've owned >> >> >> >> several >> >> >> >> including the one I drive every day. They are popular in Mexico, >> >> >> >> South America, China, and Europe. A lot can change in 75 years. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> So how good a war machine was the kubelwagen? It was a piece of >> >> >> >> shit >> >> >> >> compared to the Willys Jeep. How things change. Willys is now >> >> >> >> Chrysler/Jeep (gubmint owned) and VW is a private company. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Funny thing, history. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> PS - Cao, I've got your number! >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > -- >> >> >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level >> then >> >> >> > beat >> >> >> > you with experience. >> >> >> > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> >> > beat >> >> > you with experience. >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> > beat >> > you with experience. >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 13:36:03 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 12:36:03 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] kubelwagens In-Reply-To: <400985d70911080953m73eef95fvcf09f72126714266@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911072038m4ffc326bhd33bbcb034834a3f@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911072049y26288264w708bc873d8989f6b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911072156pace7290wbb2b34759cf080c8@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080438o47b28571wc674e7f38651444b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911080656r63c4a151gc6b4dcd8f273ed63@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080822r4dd49ca7rbbd3ac864de0c4e8@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911080858t40f3e312yc721634056535d41@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080945m66e0451ena5b44e73fb193ad7@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911080953m73eef95fvcf09f72126714266@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911081036o3f18a3fdwea2fde6b376a64fb@mail.gmail.com> Yikes .... and I was bitchin' about the credit union the other day.... What was that parable about the guy complaining about having no shoes, 'til he met the guy with no feet?? Yeah you sure couldn't pay somebody to administer that. Rik On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > This is it - > > http://www.forbes.com/funds/Tearsheet.jhtml?tkr=VMRXX > > Brad > > On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > > > So, you're telling me there is no "ordinary savings account" kind of > thing > > available?? > > > > Bummer. > > > > To be honest, I just stopped using brokers altogether, quite a while > back. > > It seemed that I was the one getting "broker" so what did I need them > for? > > Hell, I could do that by myself. > > > > Yes, I see quite a tight rope act coming for Mr. Bernanke. It'll be > tricky > > as heck. Hope he's up to it. > > > > Rik > > > > On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 10:58 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> Rik, > >> > >> The problem with 401Ks are that you are limited by your employer's > >> choice of management, in my case Vanguard. Vanguard closed down their > >> Treasury bill fund because it had a negative rate of return. China is > >> facing the same issue with US treasuries and the inflation hasn't even > >> started yet. Bond funds will take a huge hit when inflation kicks in > >> after deflation. Make sense? What I'm suggesting is that until the > >> real estate market clears (something that won't happen for some time) > >> and the business cycle reverses (something that is already happening) > >> prices will remain flat. But, BUT!, the Chinese will either demand a > >> better return on their investment or they'll quietly start dumping > >> dollars (they already are). The US goobermint will have to speed-up > >> the printing presses beyond what they already have and hellooooooo Mr. > >> Inflation! What the rest of the US economy is doing at that point is > >> immaterial. Yeah, I envy your position - cash. We've moved most of > >> our non 401K investments into cash. We're trading one of the > >> properties in Beijing (closer to where we want to be) and are still > >> waiting on the condo in Destin to close. I'm trying to decide whether > >> to fund those properties with more cash or borrow to the max and pay > >> back with inflated dollars (lots of variables there). We don't have or > >> plan to have a lot of debt that we couldn't retire quickly if need be. > >> > >> You are right about the fundamentals not supporting the current > >> market, the earnings just aren't there. Fannie Mae "only" needs 5 more > >> billion. The banks aren't lending because they're hunkered down in > >> the "turtle mode" trying to make reserve requirements, and that's > >> BEFORE they come clean with their accounting. Most well run companies > >> have load-shedded as many employees as possible and they are not > >> anxious to hire any new ones anytime soon. Here's what most people > >> don't get. The market has a huge psychological aspect to it in both > >> directions. The "I feel good" moment in the stock market right now > >> won't last forever. That is true for business management as well, and > >> most CEOs are watching the current climate on Capitol Hill and > >> thinking, "screw it, I'm not sticking my neck out there". There are > >> exceptions, ie, GE thinks they have the system gamed on the cap-n-tax > >> scam. Watch the cheerleading on any given night on MSNBC. > >> > >> Remember the old adage from Herb Stein, "when something can't go on > >> forever, it won't". There is a reason you and I can't make sense of > >> what is going on. It doesn't make sense. > >> > >> Brad > >> > >> On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > >> > Brad, > >> > > >> > I've never had a 401K or frankly any other gov't connected retirement > >> > account. Never had enough faith in our handlers to go for that. > >> > > >> > That being said, You know I'm no expert on the workings of gov't > >> retirement > >> > accts. So I ask, is it not possible to at least get an account like > that > >> > into a cash position rather than being invested in equities?? > >> > > >> > I truly expect that "the people" will reward congress for their > >> arrogance, > >> > one way or the other. Since they wouldn't listen to our voices, people > >> will > >> > speak with their wallets. Congress is likely to get a hard lesson that > >> > it > >> > just might have been easier to listen to the voices. The fundamentals > >> don't > >> > support this market to begin with. I am quite sure that we're getting > >> close > >> > to that last straw that busts the camel's back and here comes congress > >> > to > >> > load on more with a scoop shovel. > >> > > >> > The market won't put up with much of this anti-business legislation > for > >> > long. > >> > > >> > Right now, the best advice I think you could give your friend is, "all > >> > my > >> > best friends call me cash". > >> > > >> > Worst case, if I'm wrong you won't make a little money. If I'm right, > >> > you > >> > won't lose ... a ton of money. > >> > > >> > Rik > >> > > >> > On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 8:56 AM, Brad Haslett > wrote: > >> > > >> >> Rik, > >> >> > >> >> Thanks for bringing up a sore subject. As you know, I rode the > market > >> >> down and have recouped about 75% of the losses. That puts me about > >> >> where I would be had I invested in the Bank of Sealy Posturepedic in > >> >> 2004. Over the course of the last several weeks I've moved the bulk > of > >> >> my investments to international funds, especially one fund weighted > >> >> heavily to Asian companies. Here's a bitter lesson that you've > >> >> escaped; I fell hook-line-and-sinker for the government sponsored > 401K > >> >> scam and have limited options. Before the market meltdown there was > >> >> already talk of targeting 401Ks. Trust me, there's still some > >> >> congress-critters that have their eyes on them. > >> >> > >> >> I got a call from one of our friends that moved here from Minneapolis > >> >> a couple of years ago. She lost her job in Minnie but had a PhD in > >> >> Chemistry and landed on her feet here in Memphis with a drug company. > >> >> She wanted some reassurance. Knowing her background as a conscripted > >> >> farmer during the Cultural Revolution and her personal struggle, > >> >> starting college at age 28, immigrating to the US, and eventually > >> >> earning a doctorate, I really wanted to tell her not to worry. But > >> >> frankly, I'm worried. > >> >> > >> >> Brad > >> >> > >> >> On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > >> >> > Brad, > >> >> > > >> >> > Hear, Hear..... > >> >> > > >> >> > I was over at my brothers last night having a discussion about this > >> >> issue. > >> >> > We all know this is bad business. The stock market appears to be > >> looking > >> >> for > >> >> > an excuse to reverse. We wondered if this might be enough to > catalyze > >> >> that, > >> >> > considering also the BS Reid and Boxer pulled this week in the > senate > >> >> with > >> >> > cap and trade. > >> >> > > >> >> > I think it would be a very fitting payback for congressional > >> arrogance. > >> >> > > >> >> > 'Course, I'm not long the market .... hope you're not too > >> >> > > >> >> > Rik > >> >> > > >> >> > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Brad Haslett > >> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >> Rik, > >> >> >> > >> >> >> "In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for > redress > >> in > >> >> >> the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered > >> >> >> only > >> >> >> by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by > >> >> >> every > >> >> >> act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free > >> >> >> people. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We > >> have > >> >> >> warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to > >> >> >> extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded > them > >> of > >> >> >> the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have > >> >> >> appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have > >> conjured > >> >> >> them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these > usurpations, > >> >> >> which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and > >> >> >> correspondence. > >> >> >> They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of > >> >> >> consanguinity. > >> >> >> We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces > our > >> >> >> separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies > >> >> >> in > >> >> >> war, in peace friends." > >> >> >> > >> >> >> We have yet begun the fight! > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Brad > >> >> >> > >> >> >> On 11/7/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > >> >> >> > Like you often say, Brad .... you just can't make this shit up > :-) > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > Rik > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Brad Haslett < > flybrad at gmail.com> > >> >> wrote: > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> >> Most people don't know the history of Volkswagen - the "Peoples > >> >> >> >> Car". > >> >> >> >> Germans were forced to buy stamps for the eventual purchase of > a > >> VW > >> >> >> >> (deducted from their paychecks). Most couldn't afford the car > or > >> >> >> >> insurance or fuel, but they bought stamps for one anyway > because > >> the > >> >> >> >> government forced them to. Eventually, WW2 sucked-up all the > >> >> >> >> production facilities of VW and they produced Kubelwagens, an > >> >> >> >> amphibious vehicle. I owned one once, it was called "The > Thing" > >> >> >> >> when > >> >> >> >> it was introduced into the US in the 70's. > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> So now we have a health care bill that has passed the House > that > >> >> >> >> will > >> >> >> >> force people to buy something, whether they want or can afford > >> >> >> >> it, > >> >> >> >> or > >> >> >> >> they will face up to five years of imprisonment. Some progress! > >> >> >> >> Of > >> >> >> >> course it will still have to pass the Senate and there will be > >> >> >> >> multiple Supreme Court challenges if it passes the Senate. Who > >> >> >> >> knows > >> >> >> >> what the final product will look like if it goes undefeated. > The > >> >> >> >> kubelwagen sure didn't look anything like Dr. Porsche's Bug. > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> The VW turned out to be a fine car eventually. I've owned > >> >> >> >> several > >> >> >> >> including the one I drive every day. They are popular in > Mexico, > >> >> >> >> South America, China, and Europe. A lot can change in 75 > years. > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> So how good a war machine was the kubelwagen? It was a piece > of > >> >> >> >> shit > >> >> >> >> compared to the Willys Jeep. How things change. Willys is now > >> >> >> >> Chrysler/Jeep (gubmint owned) and VW is a private company. > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Funny thing, history. > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> Brad > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> PS - Cao, I've got your number! > >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > -- > >> >> >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level > >> then > >> >> >> > beat > >> >> >> > you with experience. > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > -- > >> >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level > then > >> >> > beat > >> >> > you with experience. > >> >> > > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then > >> > beat > >> > you with experience. > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > > you with experience. > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091108/e05e61f4/attachment-0001.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Sun Nov 8 14:02:31 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 11:02:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Cartoons In-Reply-To: <400985d70911080800g5e386923k45545dc478797e60@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <811985.13719.qm@web111201.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> ? Brad, I copied & pasted the screen as it appears...I'm on the PC at work so it can't be a platform problem...each cartoon was represented by a pair of brackets.... ? that's OK.. ? elle ? ? [Swiftwater Gazette] Cartoons Sunday, November 8, 2009 10:29 AM From: "Brad Haslett" View contact details To: "Letters to the Editor" ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: brad haslett Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 07:10:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cartoons To: flybrad at gmail.com ? ? ? ? ? ? [] --- On Sun, 11/8/09, Brad Haslett wrote: From: Brad Haslett Subject: Re: [Swiftwater Gazette] Cartoons To: SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 11:00 AM Elle, Been down this road before and can't remember how to fix the problem. I forwarded them from my Yahoo account to the Gmail account and they came through, hmmm, maybe as an attachment? Brad On 11/8/09, elle wrote: > DOODOODEEDOO....DOODOODEEDOO > > none of the pix came through > > (can they hear us now???) > > elle > > --- On Sun, 11/8/09, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > From: Brad Haslett > Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Cartoons > To: "Letters to the Editor" > > Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 10:29 AM > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: brad haslett > Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 07:10:10 -0800 (PST) > Subject: Cartoons > To: flybrad at gmail.com > > > > > > >? ? ? ? ? ???[] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >? ? ? ? ? ???[] > > > > > > > > >? ? ? ? ? ???[] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >? ? ? ? ? ???[] > > > > > > > > > > > >? ? ? ? ? ???[] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >? ? ? ? ? ???[] >? ? ? ? ? ???< > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >? ? ? ? ? ???Think >? ? ? ? ? ???about this: >? ? ? ? ? ???If >? ? ? ? ? ???you don't want to forward this >? ? ? ? ? ???for >? ? ? ? ? ???fear of offending someone >? ? ? ? ? ???YOU >? ? ? ? ? ???ARE PART OF THE? PROBLEM! > It >? ? ? ? ? ???is Time for America to Speak? up! > > > Visit > www.abundantlifetourandtravel.com > for all your travel and entertainment > needs. > Order > tickets to concerts, sporting events, Broadway shows and attractions. > Book > flights, cruises, hotels, car rentals, vacation packages and tee times. > > Order flowers, gift baskets and gifts. Do on line shopping and much, much > more. > _______________________________________________ > 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/20091108/c3672ab9/attachment.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Sun Nov 8 14:05:53 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 11:05:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Keep Fighting! In-Reply-To: <400985d70911080818l47cb2390mc16ffb142f932ff3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <383050.43526.qm@web111211.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Why are we not hearing about unconstitutionality of the bill? ? Is it because they can say it fits under the provisions of 'promote the general welfare"??? ? elle ? sorry to ask such mundane questions.... --- On Sun, 11/8/09, Brad Haslett wrote: From: Brad Haslett Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Keep Fighting! To: "Letters to the Editor" Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 11:18 AM Let us hope this is the case - Is this the high-water mark for ObamaCare? posted at 9:00 am on November 8, 2009 by Ed Morrissey The Democrats wheedled, cajoled, begged, and finally abandoned its defense of abortion ? truly a watershed moment ? in order to get their version of ObamaCare passed ? in the House of Representatives, where they enjoy a 75-seat majority.? In the end, they could only muster a five-vote win on Nancy Pelosi?s bill out of that strong majority. Until this week, most had assumed that any ObamaCare bill would pass the House easily, but that the fight would be in the Senate. So what does this 220-215 vote tell us?? Capitol Hill Democrats know that this bill is an albatross.? It?s true that Pelosi was able at the end to negotiate votes to allow a few at-risk Democrats that supported the bill to oppose it in the final vote, but even that tells a tale of fear and consciousness of unpopularity.? The razor-thin vote, as well as a number of earlier, more sincere defections, show that this bill was a radical and expensive approach to fix a 13% problem ? and even most of the Democrats know it. Now the focus swings to the Senate, where Harry Reid will have to gain supermajorities at least twice to allow the bill to proceed to a final vote.? That seems unlikely, although not impossible.? The process will slow down considerably from the jam-down Pelosi conducted in the lower chamber, perhaps even to a crawl if Tom Coburn makes good on his threat to have the bill read in its entirety on the Senate floor. That will leave plenty of time for ObamaCare opponents to find all of the taxes, mandates, and government intrusions that will make it even less popular as it sits in the Senate.? Even before Coburn?s threat, Democrats had pushed expectations for the bill out to late January ? which makes the politics of the bill even more fraught for Democrats, at the start of an election year. Democrats have another problem, even in the House.? The Senate is not considering the Pelosi plan, but one they wrote themselves.? Unless Reid pulls his own bill out of consideration and substitutes Pelosi?s ? which is a possibility ? that sets up a conference committee and second vote in each chamber, assuming that the Senate passes anything at all.? If that happens, a conference committee will have to meet to produce another bill that would then go for a full floor vote in each chamber.? If abortion funding makes its way back into the bill, or if mandates or taxes increase, or if conscience protections get stripped, then all of the hurdles that Pelosi barely cleared the first time return, and without the ability to amend the bill (conference reports get straight up-or-down votes without amendments in order to have both chambers pass identical legislation for the President to sign.)? That means another shot at a filibuster and a lengthy bill reading in the Senate, and at least a chance to hold Bart Stupak?s pro-life coalition in the House under the spotlight to find out whether they will vote their conscience or bow to Pelosi. We always thought the fight was in the Senate, so the only real surprise yesterday was how weak Pelosi actually was on ObamaCare.? Our focus now has to shift to those red-state Senators who will have to explain to voters their potential support of a bill that imposes unconstitutional mandates and trillions of dollars in new costs on a government that can?t pay its bills now.? And in this case, we?ll only need two of them to stop the runaway tyranny of the Democratic agenda. _______________________________________________ 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/20091108/15acc012/attachment.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Sun Nov 8 14:10:42 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 11:10:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Sarah Speaks! In-Reply-To: <400985d70911080938y3d1c4e7bs88c574100f9c57b6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <822249.41950.qm@web111202.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Wow..if that's not a call to action.... ? elle --- On Sun, 11/8/09, Brad Haslett wrote: From: Brad Haslett Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Sarah Speaks! To: "Letters to the Editor" Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 12:38 PM The Pelosi Bill Was Rammed Through on Saturday, But Sunday?s Coming Yesterday at 10:34pm We?ve got to hold on to hope, and we?ve got to fight hard because Congressional action tonight just put America on a path toward an unrecognizable country. The same government leaders that got us into the mortgage business and the car business are now getting us into the health care business. Despite Americans? decisive message last Tuesday that they reject the troubling path this country has been taking, Speaker Pelosi has broken her own promises of transparency to ram a health ?care? bill through the House of Representatives just before midnight. Why did she push the 2,000 page bill this weekend? Was she perhaps afraid to give her peers and the constituents for whom she works the chance to actually read this monstrous bill carefully, if at all? Was she concerned that Americans might really digest the details of a bill that the Wall Street Journal has called ?the worst piece of post-New Deal legislation ever introduced?? This out-of-control bureaucratic mess will be disastrous for our economy, our small businesses, and our personal liberty. It will slam businesses at a time when we are at double-digit unemployment rates ? the highest we?ve seen in a quarter of a century. This massive new bureaucracy will cost us and our children money we don?t have. It will rob Americans of more of our freedom and further hamper the free market. Make no mistake: we?re on course to have government commandeer one-sixth of our economy. The people who gave us Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac now want to run our health care. Think about that. All of us who value the sanctity of life are grateful for the success of the pro-life majority in the House this evening in its battle against federal funding of abortion in this bill, but it?s ironic because we were promised that abortion wasn?t covered in the bill to begin with. Our healthy distrust of these government leaders made us look deeper into the bill because unfortunately we knew better than to trust what they were saying. The victory tonight to amend the bill and eliminate that federal funding for abortion was great ? because abortion is not health care. Now we can only hope that Rep. Stupak?s amendment will hold in the final bill, though the Democratic leadership has already refused to promise that it won?t be scrapped later. We had been told there were no ?death panels? in the bill either. But look closely at the provision mandating bureaucratic panels that will be calling the shots regarding who will receive government health care. Look closely at provisions addressing illegal aliens? health care coverage too. Those of us who love freedom and believe in open and transparent government can only be dismayed by midnight action on a Saturday. Speaker Pelosi?s promise that Americans would have 72 hours to read the final bill before the vote was just another one of the D.C. establishment?s too-common political ploys. It?s broken promises like this that turn people off to politics and leave them disillusioned about the future of their country. But despite this late-night maneuvering, many of us were paying close attention tonight. We?ll keep paying close attention. We need to let our legislators in Washington know that they still represent us, and that the majority of Americans are not in favor of the ?reform? they are pushing. After all, this is still a country ?of the people, by the people, and for the people.? We will make our voices heard. It?s on to the Senate now. Our legislators can listen now, or they can hear us in 2010. It?s their choice. - Sarah Palin _______________________________________________ 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/20091108/77da91c2/attachment-0001.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 14:32:57 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 13:32:57 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Sarah Speaks! In-Reply-To: <400985d70911080938y3d1c4e7bs88c574100f9c57b6@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911080938y3d1c4e7bs88c574100f9c57b6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911081132h6034e367we413c49629659a89@mail.gmail.com> Like somebody said a while back ..... Uh, is it too late to vote for the white guy???? Seriously, It will be interesting, if not out-right fun to see what the consequences of these shenanigans are. It's just amazing to me that these people couldn't find any way to help 15 percent of the people find some insurance without screwing up the other 85% ....Duh Rik On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 11:38 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > The Pelosi Bill Was Rammed Through on Saturday, But Sunday?s Coming > Yesterday at 10:34pm > > We?ve got to hold on to hope, and we?ve got to fight hard because > Congressional action tonight just put America on a path toward an > unrecognizable country. > > The same government leaders that got us into the mortgage business and > the car business are now getting us into the health care business. > > Despite Americans? decisive message last Tuesday that they reject the > troubling path this country has been taking, Speaker Pelosi has broken > her own promises of transparency to ram a health ?care? bill through > the House of Representatives just before midnight. Why did she push > the 2,000 page bill this weekend? Was she perhaps afraid to give her > peers and the constituents for whom she works the chance to actually > read this monstrous bill carefully, if at all? Was she concerned that > Americans might really digest the details of a bill that the Wall > Street Journal has called ?the worst piece of post-New Deal > legislation ever introduced?? > > This out-of-control bureaucratic mess will be disastrous for our > economy, our small businesses, and our personal liberty. It will slam > businesses at a time when we are at double-digit unemployment rates ? > the highest we?ve seen in a quarter of a century. This massive new > bureaucracy will cost us and our children money we don?t have. It will > rob Americans of more of our freedom and further hamper the free > market. > > Make no mistake: we?re on course to have government commandeer > one-sixth of our economy. The people who gave us Fannie Mae and > Freddie Mac now want to run our health care. Think about that. > > All of us who value the sanctity of life are grateful for the success > of the pro-life majority in the House this evening in its battle > against federal funding of abortion in this bill, but it?s ironic > because we were promised that abortion wasn?t covered in the bill to > begin with. Our healthy distrust of these government leaders made us > look deeper into the bill because unfortunately we knew better than to > trust what they were saying. The victory tonight to amend the bill and > eliminate that federal funding for abortion was great ? because > abortion is not health care. Now we can only hope that Rep. Stupak?s > amendment will hold in the final bill, though the Democratic > leadership has already refused to promise that it won?t be scrapped > later. > > We had been told there were no ?death panels? in the bill either. But > look closely at the provision mandating bureaucratic panels that will > be calling the shots regarding who will receive government health > care. > > Look closely at provisions addressing illegal aliens? health care coverage > too. > > Those of us who love freedom and believe in open and transparent > government can only be dismayed by midnight action on a Saturday. > Speaker Pelosi?s promise that Americans would have 72 hours to read > the final bill before the vote was just another one of the D.C. > establishment?s too-common political ploys. It?s broken promises like > this that turn people off to politics and leave them disillusioned > about the future of their country. > > But despite this late-night maneuvering, many of us were paying close > attention tonight. We?ll keep paying close attention. We need to let > our legislators in Washington know that they still represent us, and > that the majority of Americans are not in favor of the ?reform? they > are pushing. After all, this is still a country ?of the people, by the > people, and for the people.? We will make our voices heard. It?s on to > the Senate now. Our legislators can listen now, or they can hear us in > 2010. It?s their choice. > > - Sarah Palin > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091108/80854c31/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 14:42:00 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 13:42:00 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Keep Fighting! In-Reply-To: <383050.43526.qm@web111211.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <400985d70911080818l47cb2390mc16ffb142f932ff3@mail.gmail.com> <383050.43526.qm@web111211.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911081142n488db105g80fa762e7b55fb32@mail.gmail.com> Elle, I was listening to some debate in a committee (c-span) and one representative was trying to say it was constitutional because people with illnesses or pre-existing conditions deserved "equal treatment under the law". Apparently, that's getting a pretty broad interpretation these days. It left me going ...... say what??? Rik On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 1:05 PM, elle wrote: > Why are we not hearing about unconstitutionality of the bill? > > Is it because they can say it fits under the provisions of 'promote the > general welfare"??? > > elle > > sorry to ask such mundane questions.... > > --- On *Sun, 11/8/09, Brad Haslett * wrote: > > > From: Brad Haslett > Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Keep Fighting! > To: "Letters to the Editor" < > swiftwatergazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com> > Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 11:18 AM > > > Let us hope this is the case - > > Is this the high-water mark for ObamaCare? > posted at 9:00 am on November 8, 2009 by Ed Morrissey > > > The Democrats wheedled, cajoled, begged, and finally abandoned its > defense of abortion ? truly a watershed moment ? in order to get their > version of ObamaCare passed ? in the House of Representatives, where > they enjoy a 75-seat majority. In the end, they could only muster a > five-vote win on Nancy Pelosi?s bill out of that strong majority. > Until this week, most had assumed that any ObamaCare bill would pass > the House easily, but that the fight would be in the Senate. > > So what does this 220-215 vote tell us? Capitol Hill Democrats know > that this bill is an albatross. It?s true that Pelosi was able at the > end to negotiate votes to allow a few at-risk Democrats that supported > the bill to oppose it in the final vote, but even that tells a tale of > fear and consciousness of unpopularity. The razor-thin vote, as well > as a number of earlier, more sincere defections, show that this bill > was a radical and expensive approach to fix a 13% problem ? and even > most of the Democrats know it. > > Now the focus swings to the Senate, where Harry Reid will have to gain > supermajorities at least twice to allow the bill to proceed to a final > vote. That seems unlikely, although not impossible. The process will > slow down considerably from the jam-down Pelosi conducted in the lower > chamber, perhaps even to a crawl if Tom Coburn makes good on his > threat to have the bill read in its entirety on the Senate floor. > That will leave plenty of time for ObamaCare opponents to find all of > the taxes, mandates, and government intrusions that will make it even > less popular as it sits in the Senate. Even before Coburn?s threat, > Democrats had pushed expectations for the bill out to late January ? > which makes the politics of the bill even more fraught for Democrats, > at the start of an election year. > > Democrats have another problem, even in the House. The Senate is not > considering the Pelosi plan, but one they wrote themselves. Unless > Reid pulls his own bill out of consideration and substitutes Pelosi?s > ? which is a possibility ? that sets up a conference committee and > second vote in each chamber, assuming that the Senate passes anything > at all. If that happens, a conference committee will have to meet to > produce another bill that would then go for a full floor vote in each > chamber. If abortion funding makes its way back into the bill, or if > mandates or taxes increase, or if conscience protections get stripped, > then all of the hurdles that Pelosi barely cleared the first time > return, and without the ability to amend the bill (conference reports > get straight up-or-down votes without amendments in order to have both > chambers pass identical legislation for the President to sign.) That > means another shot at a filibuster and a lengthy bill reading in the > Senate, and at least a chance to hold Bart Stupak?s pro-life coalition > in the House under the spotlight to find out whether they will vote > their conscience or bow to Pelosi. > > We always thought the fight was in the Senate, so the only real > surprise yesterday was how weak Pelosi actually was on ObamaCare. Our > focus now has to shift to those red-state Senators who will have to > explain to voters their potential support of a bill that imposes > unconstitutional mandates and trillions of dollars in new costs on a > government that can?t pay its bills now. And in this case, we?ll only > need two of them to stop the runaway tyranny of the Democratic agenda. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091108/8fa590ec/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 14:55:43 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 13:55:43 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Keep Fighting! In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911081142n488db105g80fa762e7b55fb32@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911080818l47cb2390mc16ffb142f932ff3@mail.gmail.com> <383050.43526.qm@web111211.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <6634e19e0911081142n488db105g80fa762e7b55fb32@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911081155h7d8541d7i21fc34536eed7e78@mail.gmail.com> Excuse me, that should have been "equal protection under the law". Either way, I don't get it either. Rik On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Elle, > > I was listening to some debate in a committee (c-span) and one > representative was trying to say it was constitutional because people with > illnesses or pre-existing conditions deserved "equal treatment under the > law". Apparently, that's getting a pretty broad interpretation these days. > > It left me going ...... say what??? > > Rik > > > On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 1:05 PM, elle wrote: > >> Why are we not hearing about unconstitutionality of the bill? >> >> Is it because they can say it fits under the provisions of 'promote the >> general welfare"??? >> >> elle >> >> sorry to ask such mundane questions.... >> >> --- On *Sun, 11/8/09, Brad Haslett * wrote: >> >> >> From: Brad Haslett >> Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Keep Fighting! >> To: "Letters to the Editor" < >> swiftwatergazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com> >> Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 11:18 AM >> >> >> Let us hope this is the case - >> >> Is this the high-water mark for ObamaCare? >> posted at 9:00 am on November 8, 2009 by Ed Morrissey >> >> >> The Democrats wheedled, cajoled, begged, and finally abandoned its >> defense of abortion ? truly a watershed moment ? in order to get their >> version of ObamaCare passed ? in the House of Representatives, where >> they enjoy a 75-seat majority. In the end, they could only muster a >> five-vote win on Nancy Pelosi?s bill out of that strong majority. >> Until this week, most had assumed that any ObamaCare bill would pass >> the House easily, but that the fight would be in the Senate. >> >> So what does this 220-215 vote tell us? Capitol Hill Democrats know >> that this bill is an albatross. It?s true that Pelosi was able at the >> end to negotiate votes to allow a few at-risk Democrats that supported >> the bill to oppose it in the final vote, but even that tells a tale of >> fear and consciousness of unpopularity. The razor-thin vote, as well >> as a number of earlier, more sincere defections, show that this bill >> was a radical and expensive approach to fix a 13% problem ? and even >> most of the Democrats know it. >> >> Now the focus swings to the Senate, where Harry Reid will have to gain >> supermajorities at least twice to allow the bill to proceed to a final >> vote. That seems unlikely, although not impossible. The process will >> slow down considerably from the jam-down Pelosi conducted in the lower >> chamber, perhaps even to a crawl if Tom Coburn makes good on his >> threat to have the bill read in its entirety on the Senate floor. >> That will leave plenty of time for ObamaCare opponents to find all of >> the taxes, mandates, and government intrusions that will make it even >> less popular as it sits in the Senate. Even before Coburn?s threat, >> Democrats had pushed expectations for the bill out to late January ? >> which makes the politics of the bill even more fraught for Democrats, >> at the start of an election year. >> >> Democrats have another problem, even in the House. The Senate is not >> considering the Pelosi plan, but one they wrote themselves. Unless >> Reid pulls his own bill out of consideration and substitutes Pelosi?s >> ? which is a possibility ? that sets up a conference committee and >> second vote in each chamber, assuming that the Senate passes anything >> at all. If that happens, a conference committee will have to meet to >> produce another bill that would then go for a full floor vote in each >> chamber. If abortion funding makes its way back into the bill, or if >> mandates or taxes increase, or if conscience protections get stripped, >> then all of the hurdles that Pelosi barely cleared the first time >> return, and without the ability to amend the bill (conference reports >> get straight up-or-down votes without amendments in order to have both >> chambers pass identical legislation for the President to sign.) That >> means another shot at a filibuster and a lengthy bill reading in the >> Senate, and at least a chance to hold Bart Stupak?s pro-life coalition >> in the House under the spotlight to find out whether they will vote >> their conscience or bow to Pelosi. >> >> We always thought the fight was in the Senate, so the only real >> surprise yesterday was how weak Pelosi actually was on ObamaCare. Our >> focus now has to shift to those red-state Senators who will have to >> explain to voters their potential support of a bill that imposes >> unconstitutional mandates and trillions of dollars in new costs on a >> government that can?t pay its bills now. And in this case, we?ll only >> need two of them to stop the runaway tyranny of the Democratic agenda. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091108/03b6ef7d/attachment-0001.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Sun Nov 8 15:33:40 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 12:33:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Keep Fighting! In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911081155h7d8541d7i21fc34536eed7e78@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <524643.97661.qm@web111216.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Well, they have it now...under a law which is UNconstitutional... ? elle --- On Sun, 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: From: Rik Sandberg Subject: Re: [Swiftwater Gazette] Keep Fighting! To: SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 2:55 PM Excuse me, that should have been "equal protection under the law". Either way, I don't get it either. Rik On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Rik Sandberg wrote: Elle, I was listening to some debate in a committee (c-span) and one representative was trying to say it was constitutional because people with illnesses or pre-existing conditions deserved "equal treatment under the law". Apparently, that's getting a pretty broad interpretation these days. It left me going ...... say what??? Rik On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 1:05 PM, elle wrote: Why are we not hearing about unconstitutionality of the bill? ? Is it because they can say it fits under the provisions of 'promote the general welfare"??? ? elle ? sorry to ask such mundane questions.... --- On Sun, 11/8/09, Brad Haslett wrote: From: Brad Haslett Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Keep Fighting! To: "Letters to the Editor" Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 11:18 AM Let us hope this is the case - Is this the high-water mark for ObamaCare? posted at 9:00 am on November 8, 2009 by Ed Morrissey The Democrats wheedled, cajoled, begged, and finally abandoned its defense of abortion ? truly a watershed moment ? in order to get their version of ObamaCare passed ? in the House of Representatives, where they enjoy a 75-seat majority.? In the end, they could only muster a five-vote win on Nancy Pelosi?s bill out of that strong majority. Until this week, most had assumed that any ObamaCare bill would pass the House easily, but that the fight would be in the Senate. So what does this 220-215 vote tell us?? Capitol Hill Democrats know that this bill is an albatross.? It?s true that Pelosi was able at the end to negotiate votes to allow a few at-risk Democrats that supported the bill to oppose it in the final vote, but even that tells a tale of fear and consciousness of unpopularity.? The razor-thin vote, as well as a number of earlier, more sincere defections, show that this bill was a radical and expensive approach to fix a 13% problem ? and even most of the Democrats know it. Now the focus swings to the Senate, where Harry Reid will have to gain supermajorities at least twice to allow the bill to proceed to a final vote.? That seems unlikely, although not impossible.? The process will slow down considerably from the jam-down Pelosi conducted in the lower chamber, perhaps even to a crawl if Tom Coburn makes good on his threat to have the bill read in its entirety on the Senate floor. That will leave plenty of time for ObamaCare opponents to find all of the taxes, mandates, and government intrusions that will make it even less popular as it sits in the Senate.? Even before Coburn?s threat, Democrats had pushed expectations for the bill out to late January ? which makes the politics of the bill even more fraught for Democrats, at the start of an election year. Democrats have another problem, even in the House.? The Senate is not considering the Pelosi plan, but one they wrote themselves.? Unless Reid pulls his own bill out of consideration and substitutes Pelosi?s ? which is a possibility ? that sets up a conference committee and second vote in each chamber, assuming that the Senate passes anything at all.? If that happens, a conference committee will have to meet to produce another bill that would then go for a full floor vote in each chamber.? If abortion funding makes its way back into the bill, or if mandates or taxes increase, or if conscience protections get stripped, then all of the hurdles that Pelosi barely cleared the first time return, and without the ability to amend the bill (conference reports get straight up-or-down votes without amendments in order to have both chambers pass identical legislation for the President to sign.)? That means another shot at a filibuster and a lengthy bill reading in the Senate, and at least a chance to hold Bart Stupak?s pro-life coalition in the House under the spotlight to find out whether they will vote their conscience or bow to Pelosi. We always thought the fight was in the Senate, so the only real surprise yesterday was how weak Pelosi actually was on ObamaCare.? Our focus now has to shift to those red-state Senators who will have to explain to voters their potential support of a bill that imposes unconstitutional mandates and trillions of dollars in new costs on a government that can?t pay its bills now.? And in this case, we?ll only need two of them to stop the runaway tyranny of the Democratic agenda. _______________________________________________ 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 -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ 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/20091108/95c112fc/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Sun Nov 8 16:48:44 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 16:48:44 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Some abnormality... Message-ID: Bill said, "I've got way too many balls..." Some abnormality ... Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091108/ea34a74b/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Sun Nov 8 16:56:37 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 16:56:37 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Brad, what is source? Message-ID: Brad, What is your source for the Palin info? Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091108/5fc38123/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 17:25:13 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 16:25:13 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Brad, what is source? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6634e19e0911081425w26a4933erab9171e3e083b36f@mail.gmail.com> Ed, That comes from Sarah Palin's Facebook page. All the articles she has written lately are in there. Just keep scrolling down Go here: http://www.facebook.com/sarahpalin Then click on "notes" Rik On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Ed Kroposki wrote: > Brad, > > What is your source for the Palin info? > > Ed K > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091108/af96f040/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 17:56:35 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 16:56:35 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] DC Rally Report Message-ID: <400985d70911081456h585fbc4q58eaffdccbdaf90a@mail.gmail.com> This is the report from a gal I met at the DC rally to her friends and family. I've scrubbed out the names out of respect for her privacy. Brad -------------- Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 5:22 AM Dear friend/family member, Below are some observations taken from my trip to DC this week. When I logged in moments ago to send this information, I noticed that as of 10:20 p.m., the House was successful in passing HR 3200. Please read on (and forward as appropriate) as I think the information is still relevant. Photos to follow. November 6, 2009 On Monday November 2, Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann, and her colleagues in the House of Representatives called for support in their efforts to defeat HR 3200 ? ?America?s Affordable Healthcare Choices Act of 2009?. She issued a request to those in opposition of the bill to demonstrate their resolve by attending a rally to be held on the lawn of the nation?s Capitol, Thursday November 5th. Her hope was that a significant showing might encourage her ?undecided? colleagues across the aisle to vote against the bill. Thus hearing her message, I was inclined to give due consideration to my plans for the remainder of the week. In addition to my normal work schedule, I had planned a day off on Thursday to attend xxxx'x final Field Hockey game of her high school senior year in xxxx, Texas. As much as I hated to miss this event, arguably her last field hockey match ever, I weighed the pros and cons. In the end I could not, in good conscience, sit on the sidelines (in more ways than one) and pass an opportunity to further to express my growing concern about the bill - in person. I had previously written letters and emails of concern to both my own representatives and various ?blue dog? democrats, but all evidence was pointing to the bill?s likely passage. So, after circumspect reflection, a brief discussion with xxx and xxx, and in utter disbelief that I would actually consider protesting my government, I purchased an airline ticket and made arrangements to leave on Wednesday evening. To be frank, once the arrangements were made, I had many second thoughts about going?Would I be the only one to show up? Does it really make a difference anyway? Is the Pelosi train too far down the tracks? Am I a NUT JOB?? And so on. In spite of the second-guessing, I took a deep breath, better known as ?sucking it up?, and with a great sense of loneliness boarded the plane without looking back. Fortunately, I had the benefit of staying with my mother-in-law on Wednesday night, who lives just outside DC. This I thought would make the trip more palatable, albeit not in a political sense as she is very left leaning. None of our political discussions have gone well. In spite of this, she was warm and receptive to the visit, which goes to show that we can disagree and yet be respectful. On Thursday morning I made my way back downtown, and arrived at the Capitol around 11:00 a.m., still in disbelief that I would soon be standing among protesters! People had already begun to gather quietly and the west-side lawn was about 1/3 full. Many people carried signs expressing their frustration with the bill, and those who would support it. Generally the crowd was very orderly and non-confrontational (see attached photos). The people in attendance generally appeared to be a clean-cut, working class group. To my great disappointment I did not encounter many of our brothers and sisters of color, although one gentleman whose acquaintance I made, relayed to me that he was there to represent his wife who is Chinese-American. She apparently came to America in 1989 only months after the gatherings in Tiananmen Square. You may recall that these gatherings were designed to mourn the death of a pro-democracy Chinese official named Hu Yaobang. On June 4th the gathering eventually turned to a protest against the communist government, and the crowd was then dispersed by military force, ending in an estimated 400-800 deaths of innocent Chinese students. In this gentleman?s words??My wife?s head explodes every time she considers this bill and its indirect consequences?. While we waited there patiently, the rally began, and by this time the lawn was completely jammed. Music from The Who rang out over the loud speakers and the lyrics from Won?t Get Fooled Again seemed interestingly applicable: ?I?ll tip my hat to the new constitution Take a bow for the new revolution Smile and grin at the change all around Pick up my guitar and play?.? The energy level was high and I snapped photos of the crowd; one by holding my camera as high as I could and pointing it backward above the heads of those behind me to see if I could get a sense for just how many had arrived. The first Representative after Congresswoman Bachmann to speak, as I recall, was from Georgia. He began by welcoming the participants and thanking them for their support. As all meetings of the House begin with the pledge of allegiance, he declared the opening of the rally would begin similarly. The attendants joined in with a uniform voice. The pledge was followed with a prayer given by a local Episcopal minister. For two hours the crowd was addressed by a large contingent of Republican Congressmen and Congresswomen, many of whom are former practicing physicians. The messages were repetitively thankful and provided encouragement to the people for making their presence known. Some of the representatives sited reasons why the bill is a poor answer to the call for ?change??$500 billion in reductions in Medicare and $700 billion in increased taxes and penalties, not to mention a multitude of new government offices that will be created as a result of the bill. At the end of the day, the burden of the legislation will largely be borne by the elderly and tax paying citizens (read middle to upper class) for generations to come, as one Representative quipped, it ?Leaves no child a dime.? From time to time there was punctuation of the message in the form of commentary related to the notion that the bill, through its provisions, subsidizes abortions with taxpayer money. All of this was interspersed with chants of frustration from the crowd of ?Kill the bill!? and ?Can you hear me now?? For my part, I had read portions of the bill, and all of the Congressional Budget Office?s report on it, so I was somewhat versed in its contents. Having said that, my purpose for being on the Capitol lawn was not so much to protest the bill itself, but rather to protest 1) the way in which it?s being shoved through the legislative process, and 2) the creeping government influence which I believe it represents. The bill is now 1,990+ pages, many of which are incomprehensible, even to people such as myself, who are well versed in contractual language. As best I understand it, the House has provided Congressmen/women roughly 72 hours to review this latest version of the monstrosity prior to the expected vote. To draw an analogy, my team and I are responsible for making investments with shareholder money. If any of us were to suggest to the investment committee that we make an investment (however large or small) in an asset for which we had 1) not thoroughly articulated the risks, 2) not generated a plan to mitigate those risks; and 3) that we were willing to sign a contract acquiring an asset without reading every last word of it, we would be summarily dismissed!!! In the greatest form of irony I can imagine, the government officials who sit in judgment of, and condemn our country?s CEOs for having not properly stewarded shareholder?s money, are the very ones who dare to propose dispensing with egregious sums of taxpayer money through the passage of this bill! At the end of the rally, Congresswoman Bachmann was happy to provide the rally participants with a party favor. She held two copies of the behemoth bill high and encouraged the participants to come forward, take a page of the bill; go across the way to the offices of the House of Representatives; find a Congressman or Congresswoman; and ask them politely to explain the provisions of the page. She then entreated the crowd to be orderly, respectful and articulate when addressing the representatives. Now a day later, as I write, it occurs to me that the vote will happen this weekend, as the momentum of the Obama machine is strong. Worse, its tentacles are creeping further and further into personal matters, and matters of business over and above normal regulatory boundaries (a subject of a later email). Many arguments can be made about a person?s intention, but when Obama himself has clearly articulated his message of ?redistribution?, there can be no debate. Perhaps redistribution of wealth has some merit, but I suggest that when the point of redistribution is reached, we will undoubtedly find that there is no longer a middle and/or upper-class from which to feed his redistribution machine and that we will have blithely stumbled from socialism into communism. But I digress! There was one notable quote and one inspiring Biblical sighting provided by the speakers at the rally. The first was a quote from Ronald Reagan who said: ?Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.? I?ve heard that quote for many years. However, I never dreamed it possible that we would be so perilously close in only one generation to failing in the task of handing down our 233 year legacy of freedom (and liberty, and the pursuit of happiness). Where did we go so blindingly wrong that our representatives would presume to change the word ?pursuit? to ?right?? Our founding fathers did not call for the guarantee of happiness or the right to happiness, or any other form of comfort including healthcare. They simply intended to provide every generation of Americans the opportunity to pursue their form of happiness without being threatened, so long as it falls within the four corners of the law. I still believe it is our responsibility to pass this notion to the next generation as President Reagan so clearly stated. The other notable takeaway from the rally was the Biblical recollection of the Philistine?s call to the Israelites to send a warrior to fight their champion. For forty days the call went unanswered until finally David, the youngest son of Jesse answered the call. At this point, the story was slightly modified. The rational of the other Israelites was that Goliath was simply too big. David?s observation however was quite different?Goliath was simply too big to miss! This story is a good analogy for as you know, healthcare issues cut across all socio-boundaries. No matter what your ethnicity, age, religion, or gender, healthcare is an issue of great importance and in this way, the healthcare bill is too big to miss. I believe people who have previously disagreed politically will join together when they perceive their personal choices are being threatened. In joining together, we will not only deliver the stone to the temple that will ultimately fell the giant of HR 3200, but in the process we are likely to find other common ground. I?m happy to report that I made the right decision. Going to Washington and standing not only for myself, but also for countless other family members and friends, simply buttressed my adoration of our country. While we seem to be in the midst of an enormous cultural challenge, where the word entertainment is synonymous with death and destruction; the only hero we can identify lives on a sports field/court; and a large portion of the populous takes its advice from those whose pictures fill the pages of People Magazine, there is still no place on earth like America. More importantly there is no place in recent history where people have respected the rule of law and the construct of our government, as laid out by our forefathers with such enthusiasm, and for such a lengthy period of time. It is my sincere hope that if this bill passes well intentioned Americans everywhere will 1) at a minimum, do everything lawfully available to them to help reverse its biggest offences, and at best to repeal it altogether, and 2) get engaged on the issues and provide positive suggestions for a financially responsible enhancement of the system that provides the most sought after medical care in the world! Your friend/family member xxxxxx From bill at effros.com Sun Nov 8 18:25:27 2009 From: bill at effros.com (Bill Effros) Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 18:25:27 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] kubelwagens In-Reply-To: <400985d70911080858t40f3e312yc721634056535d41@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911072038m4ffc326bhd33bbcb034834a3f@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911072049y26288264w708bc873d8989f6b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911072156pace7290wbb2b34759cf080c8@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080438o47b28571wc674e7f38651444b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911080656r63c4a151gc6b4dcd8f273ed63@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080822r4dd49ca7rbbd3ac864de0c4e8@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911080858t40f3e312yc721634056535d41@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4AF75367.8020403@effros.com> Brad, Like Rik I completely opted out of government controlled retirement plans. None of them ever made any sense to me, and I don't like assets that are less than 100% under my control. The 2 reasons the stock market appears to be doing well is 1. It's a phony index useful only to sell stock. -- Worthless stock is dropped from the index. If you actually bought and held all the stock on the original Dow Jones, you wouldn't have a cent today. Never mind an "inflation adjusted" cent. Every single one of those companies is no more, and almost all the successor companies went belly-up, too. 2. Owing to retirement plan restrictions, it is impossible for everyone in the system to get out of the stock market. It's like discovering you are in a Ponzi scheme, and knowing that everyone can't get their money out, but a few can. Maybe. Until then, everyone understands it's dumb to point out that the emperor has no clothes on. Pretend you don't notice, and that things are getting better. Maybe you can figure a way out before everyone else stops pretending. With regard to the world money supply, it appears to me that China has figured out how to do something that was considered impossible--they seem to be totally controlling the money market. Nobody can compete with them, and there doesn't seem to be much anyone can do about it. Europeans can't compete with them because they have made Euros so expensive, nobody can afford to buy European goods. We can't compete with them because we don't make anything anymore. The Chinese can buy natural resources using Euros, and sell to us for dollars. We can't even buy the raw materials for what they will sell finished goods. This isn't an Obama problem or a Bush problem. We all got ourselves into this mess. But what both Obama and Bush did will make things worse. It is remarkable how quickly the Chinese figured out the flaws in the Capitalist system, and how easily they exploited them. B. Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > The problem with 401Ks are that you are limited by your employer's > choice of management, in my case Vanguard. Vanguard closed down their > Treasury bill fund because it had a negative rate of return. China is > facing the same issue with US treasuries and the inflation hasn't even > started yet. Bond funds will take a huge hit when inflation kicks in > after deflation. Make sense? What I'm suggesting is that until the > real estate market clears (something that won't happen for some time) > and the business cycle reverses (something that is already happening) > prices will remain flat. But, BUT!, the Chinese will either demand a > better return on their investment or they'll quietly start dumping > dollars (they already are). The US goobermint will have to speed-up > the printing presses beyond what they already have and hellooooooo Mr. > Inflation! What the rest of the US economy is doing at that point is > immaterial. Yeah, I envy your position - cash. We've moved most of > our non 401K investments into cash. We're trading one of the > properties in Beijing (closer to where we want to be) and are still > waiting on the condo in Destin to close. I'm trying to decide whether > to fund those properties with more cash or borrow to the max and pay > back with inflated dollars (lots of variables there). We don't have or > plan to have a lot of debt that we couldn't retire quickly if need be. > > You are right about the fundamentals not supporting the current > market, the earnings just aren't there. Fannie Mae "only" needs 5 more > billion. The banks aren't lending because they're hunkered down in > the "turtle mode" trying to make reserve requirements, and that's > BEFORE they come clean with their accounting. Most well run companies > have load-shedded as many employees as possible and they are not > anxious to hire any new ones anytime soon. Here's what most people > don't get. The market has a huge psychological aspect to it in both > directions. The "I feel good" moment in the stock market right now > won't last forever. That is true for business management as well, and > most CEOs are watching the current climate on Capitol Hill and > thinking, "screw it, I'm not sticking my neck out there". There are > exceptions, ie, GE thinks they have the system gamed on the cap-n-tax > scam. Watch the cheerleading on any given night on MSNBC. > > Remember the old adage from Herb Stein, "when something can't go on > forever, it won't". There is a reason you and I can't make sense of > what is going on. It doesn't make sense. > > Brad > > On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > >> Brad, >> >> I've never had a 401K or frankly any other gov't connected retirement >> account. Never had enough faith in our handlers to go for that. >> >> That being said, You know I'm no expert on the workings of gov't retirement >> accts. So I ask, is it not possible to at least get an account like that >> into a cash position rather than being invested in equities?? >> >> I truly expect that "the people" will reward congress for their arrogance, >> one way or the other. Since they wouldn't listen to our voices, people will >> speak with their wallets. Congress is likely to get a hard lesson that it >> just might have been easier to listen to the voices. The fundamentals don't >> support this market to begin with. I am quite sure that we're getting close >> to that last straw that busts the camel's back and here comes congress to >> load on more with a scoop shovel. >> >> The market won't put up with much of this anti-business legislation for >> long. >> >> Right now, the best advice I think you could give your friend is, "all my >> best friends call me cash". >> >> Worst case, if I'm wrong you won't make a little money. If I'm right, you >> won't lose ... a ton of money. >> >> Rik >> >> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 8:56 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> >> >>> Rik, >>> >>> Thanks for bringing up a sore subject. As you know, I rode the market >>> down and have recouped about 75% of the losses. That puts me about >>> where I would be had I invested in the Bank of Sealy Posturepedic in >>> 2004. Over the course of the last several weeks I've moved the bulk of >>> my investments to international funds, especially one fund weighted >>> heavily to Asian companies. Here's a bitter lesson that you've >>> escaped; I fell hook-line-and-sinker for the government sponsored 401K >>> scam and have limited options. Before the market meltdown there was >>> already talk of targeting 401Ks. Trust me, there's still some >>> congress-critters that have their eyes on them. >>> >>> I got a call from one of our friends that moved here from Minneapolis >>> a couple of years ago. She lost her job in Minnie but had a PhD in >>> Chemistry and landed on her feet here in Memphis with a drug company. >>> She wanted some reassurance. Knowing her background as a conscripted >>> farmer during the Cultural Revolution and her personal struggle, >>> starting college at age 28, immigrating to the US, and eventually >>> earning a doctorate, I really wanted to tell her not to worry. But >>> frankly, I'm worried. >>> >>> Brad >>> >>> On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >>> >>>> Brad, >>>> >>>> Hear, Hear..... >>>> >>>> I was over at my brothers last night having a discussion about this >>>> >>> issue. >>> >>>> We all know this is bad business. The stock market appears to be looking >>>> >>> for >>> >>>> an excuse to reverse. We wondered if this might be enough to catalyze >>>> >>> that, >>> >>>> considering also the BS Reid and Boxer pulled this week in the senate >>>> >>> with >>> >>>> cap and trade. >>>> >>>> I think it would be a very fitting payback for congressional arrogance. >>>> >>>> 'Course, I'm not long the market .... hope you're not too >>>> >>>> Rik >>>> >>>> On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Rik, >>>>> >>>>> "In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in >>>>> the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only >>>>> by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every >>>>> act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free >>>>> people. >>>>> >>>>> Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have >>>>> warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to >>>>> extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of >>>>> the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have >>>>> appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured >>>>> them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, >>>>> which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. >>>>> They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. >>>>> We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our >>>>> separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in >>>>> war, in peace friends." >>>>> >>>>> We have yet begun the fight! >>>>> >>>>> Brad >>>>> >>>>> On 11/7/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Like you often say, Brad .... you just can't make this shit up :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> Rik >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Brad Haslett >>>>>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>>>>> Most people don't know the history of Volkswagen - the "Peoples >>>>>>> Car". >>>>>>> Germans were forced to buy stamps for the eventual purchase of a VW >>>>>>> (deducted from their paychecks). Most couldn't afford the car or >>>>>>> insurance or fuel, but they bought stamps for one anyway because the >>>>>>> government forced them to. Eventually, WW2 sucked-up all the >>>>>>> production facilities of VW and they produced Kubelwagens, an >>>>>>> amphibious vehicle. I owned one once, it was called "The Thing" >>>>>>> when >>>>>>> it was introduced into the US in the 70's. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So now we have a health care bill that has passed the House that >>>>>>> will >>>>>>> force people to buy something, whether they want or can afford it, >>>>>>> or >>>>>>> they will face up to five years of imprisonment. Some progress! Of >>>>>>> course it will still have to pass the Senate and there will be >>>>>>> multiple Supreme Court challenges if it passes the Senate. Who >>>>>>> knows >>>>>>> what the final product will look like if it goes undefeated. The >>>>>>> kubelwagen sure didn't look anything like Dr. Porsche's Bug. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The VW turned out to be a fine car eventually. I've owned several >>>>>>> including the one I drive every day. They are popular in Mexico, >>>>>>> South America, China, and Europe. A lot can change in 75 years. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So how good a war machine was the kubelwagen? It was a piece of >>>>>>> shit >>>>>>> compared to the Willys Jeep. How things change. Willys is now >>>>>>> Chrysler/Jeep (gubmint owned) and VW is a private company. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Funny thing, history. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Brad >>>>>>> >>>>>>> PS - Cao, I've got your number! >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>>>>>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >>>>>> beat >>>>>> you with experience. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>>>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >>>> beat >>>> you with experience. >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat >> you with experience. >> >> > _______________________________________________ > 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/20091108/d2c70b7d/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 19:09:28 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 18:09:28 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] kubelwagens In-Reply-To: <4AF75367.8020403@effros.com> References: <400985d70911072038m4ffc326bhd33bbcb034834a3f@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911072049y26288264w708bc873d8989f6b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911072156pace7290wbb2b34759cf080c8@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080438o47b28571wc674e7f38651444b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911080656r63c4a151gc6b4dcd8f273ed63@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080822r4dd49ca7rbbd3ac864de0c4e8@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911080858t40f3e312yc721634056535d41@mail.gmail.com> <4AF75367.8020403@effros.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911081609gd5f5997m9afc8948a43073a0@mail.gmail.com> Bill, You have no idea how much it hurts to say this, but, you are mostly correct. I'm not giving the US government credit for being smart enough to design a 401K system that was "rigged" on the front-end, but they sure have figured it out since. I stayed "ahead" of the game from 1985 to 2008, and am now at 2004. Lesson learned! One thing I learned about doing some research for someone I met in Beijing who wanted an "investment visa" as a path to citizenship is this; you FOREVER render your world-wide income to US income tax laws. Frankly, I wouldn't advise anyone to do that in this environment. China is buying STUFF - coal, minerals, oil, anything that will hold value. They continue to fund our silliness only because they want to keep us as a customer. We in the United States tend to think they need us more than we need them. Look at their trading partners. The US is fading fast as their primary concern. When they put a limit on our credit card (and they will) there will be hell to pay. The bright spot is that China has at least a 4000 year history of being happy with their own territory and not being that aggressive about building a world empire. Some would argue Tibet and Taiwan, but they will politely explain that both were "theirs" before, and a few hundred years of independence doesn't matter in the long run. That reminds me once again of Deng Xiaoping's response to a question while he was a student in Paris. "How successful was the French Revolution?" "It is too early to tell". Brad On 11/8/09, Bill Effros wrote: > Brad, > > Like Rik I completely opted out of government controlled retirement > plans. None of them ever made any sense to me, and I don't like assets > that are less than 100% under my control. > > The 2 reasons the stock market appears to be doing well is > > 1. It's a phony index useful only to sell stock. -- Worthless stock > is dropped from the index. If you actually bought and held all the > stock on the original Dow Jones, you wouldn't have a cent today. Never > mind an "inflation adjusted" cent. Every single one of those companies > is no more, and almost all the successor companies went belly-up, too. > > 2. Owing to retirement plan restrictions, it is impossible for > everyone in the system to get out of the stock market. It's like > discovering you are in a Ponzi scheme, and knowing that everyone can't > get their money out, but a few can. Maybe. Until then, everyone > understands it's dumb to point out that the emperor has no clothes on. > Pretend you don't notice, and that things are getting better. Maybe you > can figure a way out before everyone else stops pretending. > > With regard to the world money supply, it appears to me that China has > figured out how to do something that was considered impossible--they > seem to be totally controlling the money market. Nobody can compete > with them, and there doesn't seem to be much anyone can do about it. > Europeans can't compete with them because they have made Euros so > expensive, nobody can afford to buy European goods. We can't compete > with them because we don't make anything anymore. The Chinese can buy > natural resources using Euros, and sell to us for dollars. We can't > even buy the raw materials for what they will sell finished goods. > > This isn't an Obama problem or a Bush problem. We all got ourselves > into this mess. But what both Obama and Bush did will make things > worse. It is remarkable how quickly the Chinese figured out the flaws > in the Capitalist system, and how easily they exploited them. > > B. > > > > Brad Haslett wrote: >> Rik, >> >> The problem with 401Ks are that you are limited by your employer's >> choice of management, in my case Vanguard. Vanguard closed down their >> Treasury bill fund because it had a negative rate of return. China is >> facing the same issue with US treasuries and the inflation hasn't even >> started yet. Bond funds will take a huge hit when inflation kicks in >> after deflation. Make sense? What I'm suggesting is that until the >> real estate market clears (something that won't happen for some time) >> and the business cycle reverses (something that is already happening) >> prices will remain flat. But, BUT!, the Chinese will either demand a >> better return on their investment or they'll quietly start dumping >> dollars (they already are). The US goobermint will have to speed-up >> the printing presses beyond what they already have and hellooooooo Mr. >> Inflation! What the rest of the US economy is doing at that point is >> immaterial. Yeah, I envy your position - cash. We've moved most of >> our non 401K investments into cash. We're trading one of the >> properties in Beijing (closer to where we want to be) and are still >> waiting on the condo in Destin to close. I'm trying to decide whether >> to fund those properties with more cash or borrow to the max and pay >> back with inflated dollars (lots of variables there). We don't have or >> plan to have a lot of debt that we couldn't retire quickly if need be. >> >> You are right about the fundamentals not supporting the current >> market, the earnings just aren't there. Fannie Mae "only" needs 5 more >> billion. The banks aren't lending because they're hunkered down in >> the "turtle mode" trying to make reserve requirements, and that's >> BEFORE they come clean with their accounting. Most well run companies >> have load-shedded as many employees as possible and they are not >> anxious to hire any new ones anytime soon. Here's what most people >> don't get. The market has a huge psychological aspect to it in both >> directions. The "I feel good" moment in the stock market right now >> won't last forever. That is true for business management as well, and >> most CEOs are watching the current climate on Capitol Hill and >> thinking, "screw it, I'm not sticking my neck out there". There are >> exceptions, ie, GE thinks they have the system gamed on the cap-n-tax >> scam. Watch the cheerleading on any given night on MSNBC. >> >> Remember the old adage from Herb Stein, "when something can't go on >> forever, it won't". There is a reason you and I can't make sense of >> what is going on. It doesn't make sense. >> >> Brad >> >> On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> >>> Brad, >>> >>> I've never had a 401K or frankly any other gov't connected retirement >>> account. Never had enough faith in our handlers to go for that. >>> >>> That being said, You know I'm no expert on the workings of gov't >>> retirement >>> accts. So I ask, is it not possible to at least get an account like that >>> into a cash position rather than being invested in equities?? >>> >>> I truly expect that "the people" will reward congress for their >>> arrogance, >>> one way or the other. Since they wouldn't listen to our voices, people >>> will >>> speak with their wallets. Congress is likely to get a hard lesson that it >>> just might have been easier to listen to the voices. The fundamentals >>> don't >>> support this market to begin with. I am quite sure that we're getting >>> close >>> to that last straw that busts the camel's back and here comes congress to >>> load on more with a scoop shovel. >>> >>> The market won't put up with much of this anti-business legislation for >>> long. >>> >>> Right now, the best advice I think you could give your friend is, "all my >>> best friends call me cash". >>> >>> Worst case, if I'm wrong you won't make a little money. If I'm right, you >>> won't lose ... a ton of money. >>> >>> Rik >>> >>> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 8:56 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Rik, >>>> >>>> Thanks for bringing up a sore subject. As you know, I rode the market >>>> down and have recouped about 75% of the losses. That puts me about >>>> where I would be had I invested in the Bank of Sealy Posturepedic in >>>> 2004. Over the course of the last several weeks I've moved the bulk of >>>> my investments to international funds, especially one fund weighted >>>> heavily to Asian companies. Here's a bitter lesson that you've >>>> escaped; I fell hook-line-and-sinker for the government sponsored 401K >>>> scam and have limited options. Before the market meltdown there was >>>> already talk of targeting 401Ks. Trust me, there's still some >>>> congress-critters that have their eyes on them. >>>> >>>> I got a call from one of our friends that moved here from Minneapolis >>>> a couple of years ago. She lost her job in Minnie but had a PhD in >>>> Chemistry and landed on her feet here in Memphis with a drug company. >>>> She wanted some reassurance. Knowing her background as a conscripted >>>> farmer during the Cultural Revolution and her personal struggle, >>>> starting college at age 28, immigrating to the US, and eventually >>>> earning a doctorate, I really wanted to tell her not to worry. But >>>> frankly, I'm worried. >>>> >>>> Brad >>>> >>>> On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >>>> >>>>> Brad, >>>>> >>>>> Hear, Hear..... >>>>> >>>>> I was over at my brothers last night having a discussion about this >>>>> >>>> issue. >>>> >>>>> We all know this is bad business. The stock market appears to be >>>>> looking >>>>> >>>> for >>>> >>>>> an excuse to reverse. We wondered if this might be enough to catalyze >>>>> >>>> that, >>>> >>>>> considering also the BS Reid and Boxer pulled this week in the senate >>>>> >>>> with >>>> >>>>> cap and trade. >>>>> >>>>> I think it would be a very fitting payback for congressional arrogance. >>>>> >>>>> 'Course, I'm not long the market .... hope you're not too >>>>> >>>>> Rik >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Brad Haslett >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Rik, >>>>>> >>>>>> "In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in >>>>>> the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered only >>>>>> by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every >>>>>> act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free >>>>>> people. >>>>>> >>>>>> Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We have >>>>>> warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to >>>>>> extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of >>>>>> the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have >>>>>> appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured >>>>>> them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, >>>>>> which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. >>>>>> They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. >>>>>> We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our >>>>>> separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in >>>>>> war, in peace friends." >>>>>> >>>>>> We have yet begun the fight! >>>>>> >>>>>> Brad >>>>>> >>>>>> On 11/7/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Like you often say, Brad .... you just can't make this shit up :-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Rik >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Brad Haslett >>>>>>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>>>>> Most people don't know the history of Volkswagen - the "Peoples >>>>>>>> Car". >>>>>>>> Germans were forced to buy stamps for the eventual purchase of a VW >>>>>>>> (deducted from their paychecks). Most couldn't afford the car or >>>>>>>> insurance or fuel, but they bought stamps for one anyway because the >>>>>>>> government forced them to. Eventually, WW2 sucked-up all the >>>>>>>> production facilities of VW and they produced Kubelwagens, an >>>>>>>> amphibious vehicle. I owned one once, it was called "The Thing" >>>>>>>> when >>>>>>>> it was introduced into the US in the 70's. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So now we have a health care bill that has passed the House that >>>>>>>> will >>>>>>>> force people to buy something, whether they want or can afford it, >>>>>>>> or >>>>>>>> they will face up to five years of imprisonment. Some progress! Of >>>>>>>> course it will still have to pass the Senate and there will be >>>>>>>> multiple Supreme Court challenges if it passes the Senate. Who >>>>>>>> knows >>>>>>>> what the final product will look like if it goes undefeated. The >>>>>>>> kubelwagen sure didn't look anything like Dr. Porsche's Bug. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The VW turned out to be a fine car eventually. I've owned several >>>>>>>> including the one I drive every day. They are popular in Mexico, >>>>>>>> South America, China, and Europe. A lot can change in 75 years. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So how good a war machine was the kubelwagen? It was a piece of >>>>>>>> shit >>>>>>>> compared to the Willys Jeep. How things change. Willys is now >>>>>>>> Chrysler/Jeep (gubmint owned) and VW is a private company. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Funny thing, history. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Brad >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> PS - Cao, I've got your number! >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>>>>>>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >>>>>>> beat >>>>>>> you with experience. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>>>>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >>>>> beat >>>>> you with experience. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>>> >>>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat >>> you with experience. >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> > From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 20:36:34 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 19:36:34 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] The Road From Serfdom Message-ID: <400985d70911081736s4d0d3a88p8804588894617abb@mail.gmail.com> Another day, another Disney event. Who knew having a daughter could be so much fun! This article just crossed the radar screen (below). Every week I hear of a new story from the Cultural Revolution. Until today, I didn't know that the parents of one of Fan's best friends were both doctors. They were considered "rightists" and the father was given the choice of moving to one of the Western provinces of China (the hinterlands) or prison. He moved west. So many stories, so little time. Brad ------------------ The Road From Serfdom By Marian L. Tupy Saturday, November 7, 2009 Filed under: Big Ideas, Culture, Economic Policy, Lifestyle, Public Square, World Watch Given the renewed interest in alternatives to capitalism, it is perhaps appropriate to recall the last time that socialism was tried with real gusto. Twenty years ago, the Berlin Wall came down and with it communist rule in Central Europe. Within little more than two years, the Soviet Union ceased to exist and the transition from communist dictatorship to free market democracy began in much of the former socialist commonwealth. Democracy and capitalism, Francis Fukuyama concluded in The End of History, have won. Communism, to use (with an appropriate sense of irony) Leon Trotsky?s words, ended up in ?the dustbin of history.? In spite of its monumental failure to bring social peace and material abundance, socialism is enjoying something of a renaissance. From Venezuela to Bolivia to South Africa, government ministers espouse the supposed virtues of socialism. Even in the West, some policies are taking government intervention in the economy to levels unseen in decades. Given the renewed interest in alternatives to capitalism, it is perhaps appropriate to recall the last time that socialism was tried with real gusto. Some 100 million people have died in the pursuit of a communist utopia. Few recall communist rule in Eastern Europe in the 1950s?the height of its glory. The fog of time shrouds painful memories of firing squads and forced labor camps. However, I am old enough to remember communism on its last leg?communism that no longer had the confidence to pull the trigger, but still had the strength to lock the door of a prison cell. For, by the late 1980s, not even the communists believed in communism. What was once humanity?s greatest threat became a pathetic joke?except that the people in ex-communist countries were not a happy, giggling lot. Shortages, some Americans will recall from the 1984 Robin Williams movie ?Moscow on the Hudson,? were an everyday reality in the Soviet bloc. As a kid, I remember being taken by my aunt (a hardcore communist) to a shop where the only sign of life was a fat fly buzzing atop a lonely gray sausage?the sole indicator that the shop was, in fact, a butchery. Born after the communist take-over of Czechoslovakia in 1948, she did not know any better. Like Williams?s character Vladimir Ivanoff, she saw endless lines for one or two rolls of low-grade toilet paper as perfectly normal. Paradoxically, it was her trip to the workers? paradise (a reward of sorts for true believers) that made her doubt communism. ?Russia,? she said upon her return, ?is a very poor country.? As there can be no agreement on a single plan in a free society, the centralization of economic decision-making has to be accompanied by centralization of political power in the hands of a small elite. Of course, shops can be filled with goods, roads can be rebuilt, and houses renovated. The psychological scars of communism take much longer to heal. As one traveler to Russia wrote in 1982: If it is hard to describe the economic wasteland of Russia to someone who hasn?t been there, it is even harder to describe what their totalitarian system has done to the human spirit ? It isn?t just the drabness and grayness one sees everywhere. Or the rudeness and surliness one encounters so often. It?s that you virtually never see people laughing, smiling, or just seeming to enjoy themselves. People seem to walk slightly bent over, their eyes always averting a stranger. There is an overwhelming sense of oppression and depression. As the Austrian philosopher Friedrich von Hayek explained in his 1944 classic, The Road to Serfdom, central planning leads to massive inefficiencies and long queues outside empty shops. A state of perpetual economic crisis then leads to calls for more planning. But economic planning is inimical to freedom. As there can be no agreement on a single plan in a free society, the centralization of economic decision-making has to be accompanied by centralization of political power in the hands of a small elite. When, in the end, the failure of central planning becomes undeniable, totalitarian regimes tend to silence the dissenters?sometimes through mass murder. I am old enough to remember communism on its last leg?communism that no longer had the confidence to pull the trigger, but still had the strength to lock the door of a prison cell. Some 100 million people have died in the pursuit of a communist utopia. Eliminating profit and private property was meant to end social ills, such as inequality, racism, and sexism. But the closer a society got to Marxism?whether it was half-hearted attempt as in Hungary or a whole-hearted attempt as in Cambodia?the bloodier the result. Survival in a communist society necessitated lies, theft, and betrayal. Thus, as the former Czech President Vaclav Havel wrote, most people in the former Soviet bloc grew up without a moral compass. These morally compromised survivors of communism find it difficult to reflect on the past and to come to terms with it. Unlike the Germans after the World War II, the people in ex-communist countries were never forced to face their demons. As a consequence, communist rule has not acquired the moral opprobrium of Nazism. As long as that remains the case, socialist economics will continue to enjoy an aura of plausibility. Marian Tupy is a policy analyst at the Cato Institute?s Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity and author of the study ?The Rise of Populist Parties in Central Europe: Big Government, Corruption and the Threat to Liberalism.? FURTHER READING: Tupy last wrote ?Botswana and Zimbabwe: A Tale of Two Countries? for THE AMERICAN, on why, since gaining independence, one country has become a success while the other has become a dismal failure. From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 22:42:52 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 21:42:52 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Ouch! Message-ID: <400985d70911081942l5738b91by7d54b68933147121@mail.gmail.com> Haven't read anything from this gal in quite awhile. Glad to see she hasn't lost her bite. http://www.villainouscompany.com/vcblog/archives/2009/11/why_obama_doesn.html Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 23:35:00 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 22:35:00 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Random Stuff Message-ID: <400985d70911082035x32e65f0ch826779fdc58204f2@mail.gmail.com> First, this is scary - http://www.usdebtclock.org/# But to take your mind off that, watch this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvEobeNfGcc&feature=player_embedded Did I ever tell you the story about my short marriage to a soccer coach? Never mind. Brad From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 00:02:13 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 23:02:13 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Ouch! In-Reply-To: <400985d70911081942l5738b91by7d54b68933147121@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911081942l5738b91by7d54b68933147121@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911082102h157a7b50h81d6ab7d5e389664@mail.gmail.com> Jesus .... what do we have to do to get things like this out where someone actually sees them. This should be televised nationally. Did you read the comments?? I think, if the O one pushes too hard and things get tough here at home, our hero may have trouble depending on "his" military. It's pretty obvious they can feel the love. Can you believe it .... George and Laura Bush went to visit the victims at Ft. Hood and Obie won didn't bother??? Do you suppose he actually asked them to do that? My guess is they would have anyway, but do you suppose they were asked? Rik ____________________ Miss Cassandra, Once again, I stand in awe at your ability to use words as a rapier, filleting the current seatwarmer in chief and his significant other. Their care for those of us who defend the nation is non existant; we are merely props to be used when a point needs to be emphasised (witness Dover). Little does he (and she) realize, as is the case with Pelosi and Reid, that we are sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution against ALL enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC. We take the oath seriously; many have given all they had to uphold their oath. Barack dare not make that claim. He has given nothing, only taken from us. As he dithers, not fufilling the request of his hand picked General for more troops, he and his myrmidoms infer he is being cautious, deliberate and measured. Let's face it. He is as full of crap as a Christmas goose and has no idea how to do anything but campaign. At some point, people will realize what he has done. I only hope it is not too late. As a case in point, my civilian MD was telling me what a great person Pelosi was, and how her plan was so good. I asked her if she was ready for a big pay cut, and she said that was just a scare tactic used by the republicans. Now I have to find a new doctor, because this one is seriously challenged in the thought process department. And one final thought. George Bush and Laura Bush are great Americans. I was honored to serve him, and I am honored that he chose to reside in Texas. They are the kind of Americans who do what needs to be done and don't need the fanfare or glory. They are good, kind and decent people. Hang tough. pbo's time is coming. The poop is about to hit the scoop....and he won't have a clue - as usual. KP On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 9:42 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Haven't read anything from this gal in quite awhile. Glad to see she > hasn't lost her bite. > > > http://www.villainouscompany.com/vcblog/archives/2009/11/why_obama_doesn.html > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091108/6ee33d65/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 00:59:37 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 23:59:37 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Random Stuff In-Reply-To: <400985d70911082035x32e65f0ch826779fdc58204f2@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911082035x32e65f0ch826779fdc58204f2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911082159g5daace23g94bb2d1e5c97ec1f@mail.gmail.com> I am imagining the New Mexico player doing that pony tail trick to Nancy Pelosi Gives me a shiver up my leg ..... :-) Rik On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 10:35 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > First, this is scary - > > http://www.usdebtclock.org/# > > But to take your mind off that, watch this - > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvEobeNfGcc&feature=player_embedded > > Did I ever tell you the story about my short marriage to a soccer > coach? Never mind. > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091108/63fd72d8/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Mon Nov 9 07:38:10 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 07:38:10 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Road from Serfdom Message-ID: Brad, the Lion of Memphis, excellent article. Ought to be sent to everyone on Rhodes list, ostriches who do not understand history and economics. Ought to be sent to everyone with email. That begs the question, if you know someone has email, but pretends not to, is there a way to get their email address? Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091109/13c3b0f1/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 08:07:50 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 07:07:50 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Road from Serfdom In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <400985d70911090507l1e5e78cevaf37635220a0eae1@mail.gmail.com> Some analysis of Obama's snub of the Berlin Wall anniversary - November 9, 2009 Posted by Scott at 5:39 AM Hillsdale College Professor Paul Rahe writes on the celebration of the anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall today from which President Obama has chosen to be absent: Today marks the twentieth anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. To those in my generation, this seemed an almost miraculous event. Berlin had long been the flashpoint in East-West relations. It was with regard to Berlin that Josef Stalin first tested our resolve, breaking the Four-Power agreements with regard to that city, which was located deep in the Soviet Zone of occupied Germany, and cutting off access from the West by road and rail. Our response, under Harry Truman, was the Berlin Airlift, which delivered food and other supplies by air to those isolated within the American, British, and French Zones in that city. This was the first clear, undoubted sign that we would not stand idly by while the Soviet Union took over western Europe. Its historic importance cannot be overstated. The second Berlin Crisis took place in August, 1961 when Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev and his Easter German counterpart Erick Honecker took up a suggestion publicly floated by Senator J. William Fulbright, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (and privately supported by John F. Kennedy) and built the Berlin Wall. This, too, was a breach of the Four-Power agreement, which specified that Berlin be an open city. Khrushchev and Honecker built the wall because it had become the practice for young people in East Germany, especially those with marketable skills, to travel to East Berlin, cross over to the West, and fly on to West Germany to start a new life. One consequence was that, prior to August, 1961, East Germany was not economically viable. J. William Fulbright and some in the Kennedy administration entertained hopes not unlike those entertained by the Obama administration with regard to Iran. If the Russians found themselves unthreatened in Eastern Europe, they reasoned, they would relax and be more amenable to working out a modus vivendi with the West. They soon learned that they had blundered -- for our failure to send in the bulldozers to knock down the wall, which Harry Truman urged that we do, led to a crisis of confidence within the western alliance, and it was this crisis that occasioned John Kennedy's dramatic flight to Berlin and the speech in which he said, "Ich bin ein Berliner." It did not matter that this meant, in German, "I am a jelly donut." No one expected linguistic competence from an American. Everyone understood that he meant to say, "Ich bin Berliner: I am a Berliner." It would be a while, however, before the Kennedy administration would recognize the full consequences of its display of weakness. As a consequence of such foolishness, the United States would soon be faced with the Cuban Missile Crisis. The Obama administration can expect to be rewarded in a similar fashion by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. In the aftermath of the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Soviet Union, chastened, gave up its policy of brinksmanship and sought by indirect means to bring about the collapse of the West. The event that took place twenty years ago signaled the fact that we had outlasted the Soviets. We have much to be proud of. Never in human history has there been a sustained conflict over four decades between two great power blocs in which no great war took place and one of the two won a decisive victory resulting in the dismantlement of the rival alliance and even the dismantlement of the country that led it. We made mistakes in the course of the Cold War, but -- despite partisan divisions -- we managed to maintain a more or less consistent policy of containment and, after a time, strategic engagement. We -- and the world -- owe a great debt to the Cold War presidents: especially, to Harry Truman and Ronald Reagan, who were the most stalwart. This was arguably America's finest hour. It is, I think, significant that Barack Obama chose not to join the other heads of state and heads of government who have gathered in Berlin today to celebrate what was a remarkable and blessed event. Back in June, in two separate posts on Power Line - here and here -- I drew attention to our current president's propensity for communicating different messages to different audiences by means of gestures of one kind or another. Here is what I then wrote: Barack Obama has a history of belittling his adversaries [by indirection]. In April, 2008, he was caught on tape during a debate with Hillary Clinton, rubbing his hand across the right side of his face and extending his middle finger in an obscene gesture that many in the audience could see it but she could not, and when this provoked laughter on the part of his supporters he responded with a knowing smile. Later, after accepting his party's nomination, he did precisely the same thing during a debate with John McCain; and, after Sarah Palin remarked at the Republican National Convention that the only difference between a pit bull and a soccer mom was lipstick, he observed at a rally that a pig with lipstick is still a pig. Again, many in the audience caught the dig and they, too, were rewarded with a knowing smile. Obama is, in fact, a master of the insulting gesture. There is no other construction that one can put on his conduct towards Gordon Brown when the British prime minister paid him a visit shortly after his inauguration. First, in an ostentatious manner, he returned to the British embassy a bust of Winston Churchill that had been loaned to his predecessor. Then, when Brown presented him with a pen made from timber used in a British ship once involved in putting down the slave trade, he gave him in return a stack of movies on DVD which could not be played on machines sold in Europe. Were Obama a yokel, one might be able to explain this away. But a yokel he is not, and there are State Department protocol officers who are highly sensitive to the proprieties. It is no accident that, at about the same time, the White House press secretary intimated in the presence of members of the British press that there was no special relationship between the United States and Great Britain. Obama's gesture was a calculated insult--meant to be understood only by those to whom it was directed. If we are to comprehend what is going on, we must pay close attention not only to what Obama says but to what he conveys in other ways. His tone is nearly always moderate but what he hints at and what he intimates by way of body language often convey the opposite Witness his warm embrace of Hugo Chavez. Behind the thin veneer of politeness, there is, I suspect, something ugly lurking. In the first of the autobiographies that he claims to have written, Barack Obama frequently speaks of himself as being in the grips of rage. We would do well to take him at his word. If we are to stop him from doing great damage to this country and to our friends and allies, we must take every opportunity that comes our way to unmask the man. In a later post, which can be found here, I added: We now know - thanks to events in the Honduras - the meaning of Obama's gesture with respect to the Venezuelan dictator, and I would suggest that we must regard in a similar light the timing of Obama's announcement of his administration's shift in policy regarding missile-defence in Europe. For it can hardly be an accident that he chose the seventieth anniversary of the Soviet Union's invasion of Poland as the occasion. We must keep in mind the fact that Obama is not a yokel and that the State Department is there to prevent an ill-informed president from unnecessarily stepping on toes. What happened last Thursday was a deliberate gesture. It was aimed at our allies in eastern Europe and at Russia, and it was recognized as such in Poland, the Czech republic, and Russia. Vladimir Putin spoke of Obama's decision as a courageous act. Our friends in eastern Europe would not have used that adjective. A signal has been given, and they know the meaning. We are living in a dangerous time. It seems highly unlikely that Barack Obama will get his way in domestic affairs. The Democrats may control Congress, but they now fear a rout in 2010, and they are likely to tred with caution from now on. In foreign affairs, however, presidents have a relatively free hand, and this president has ample time to do damage to a country that, there is reason to suspect, he deeply hates. President Obama chose not to go to Berlin for a reason. Once again, he is signaling that his administration is in the process of turning its back on our erstwhile allies in Europe. He has thus far persistently made it his practice to embrace our enemies and to stiff our friends. We should not for a moment underestimate the significance of this. It means that he believes our policy in the Cold War wrong-headed, and it means that he intends to line us up now with the likes of Hugo Chavez, Vladimir Putin, Fidel Castro, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. It is by no means an accident that the man in the State Department now in charge of our policy towards Iran is on the board of Iran's main front-organization in the United States. Ed Lasky's report regarding this matter is well worth reading. Paul A. Rahe holds the Charles O. Lee and Louise K. Lee Chair in the Western Heritage at Hillsdale College. He is the author, most recently, of Montesquieu and the Logic of Liberty: War, Religion, Commerce, Climate, Terrain, Technology, Uneasiness of Mind, the Spirit of Political Vigilance, and the Foundations of the Modern Republic and of Soft Despotism, Democracy's Drift: Montesquieu, Rousseau, Tocqueville, and the Modern Prospect. * Authors: John Hinderaker, Scott Johnson, Paul Mirengoff On 11/9/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > Brad, the Lion of Memphis, excellent article. Ought to be sent to everyone > on Rhodes list, ostriches who do not understand history and economics. > Ought to be sent to everyone with email. > > That begs the question, if you know someone has email, but pretends not to, > is there a way to get their email address? > > Ed K From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 10:36:40 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 09:36:40 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Sarah Speaks! In-Reply-To: <822249.41950.qm@web111202.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <400985d70911080938y3d1c4e7bs88c574100f9c57b6@mail.gmail.com> <822249.41950.qm@web111202.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911090736o620639efu83599e45c16ba5a7@mail.gmail.com> Elle, As everyone knows by now, I'm hardly objective about "all things Sarah" - you can count me in as a die-hard Palinista. That attitude predates her pick as the 2008 GOP VP candidate. She has created a cottage industry amongst the political punditry, bloggers, and gossip columnists predicting her eventual demise. My favorite label is that of "quitter". Those who continue with the quitter meme either aren't aware, or choose to forget, that indeed she is a quitter. She quit the Alaska Oil & Gas Commission (a 6-figure job her family depended on) out of protest to ethics violations and the firing of seven Oil & Gas employees. When this so-called quitter returned to power as the Governor of Alaska, she reinstated the seven employees, as well as blew-up her own party. The other stream of constant criticism we hear about Palin is her hardcore right wing social views. Again, few are aware of a couple of telling incidents during her term as Guv. The Alaska Legislature chooses a panel of potential AK Supreme Court Judge candidates for the Governor to choose from. In an attempt to box Palin into a dilemma, they gave her only two candidates to choose from; one, a stellar jurist that was pro-choice, and a second that was a mediocre legal talent but strongly pro-life. We all know Sarah's personal beliefs on the issue. Palin spent a weekend reviewing the professional work of both candidates and chose the better talent. A second revealing action she took was this; the AK Legislature passed a bill that would deny domestic partners of gay state employees benefits. Palin openly stated her opposition to gay marriage, then vetoed the bill because she said it was unconstitutional. Unconstitutional? You mean there's politicians that pay attention to those documents? I took a copy of "Sarah Takes On Big Oil" with me to read on the airplane to DC. It is a great book for anyone who enjoys "David v Goliath" stories and I recommend it as a primer on Mrs. Palin. I can't wait for her book to come in the mail and the series of interviews that follow, starting with Oprah! There is just something wickedly funny about a housewife and mother posting opinions on a Facebook page whilst wearing pajamas and slippers, and everytime she does, veins start popping out all over leftist world. Brad ----------------------------------- Sarah Palin and the Dysfunctional Political Class Posted By James V. DeLong On November 8, 2009 @ 12:10 am In . Column2 06, Elections 2008, Media, Opinion, Politics, US News | The frenetic hostility to Sarah Palin, even by many on the Republican side, is unnerving, because her qualifications to be president are objectively better than those of almost anyone who has been on the national ticket over the past decade. A reasonable conclusion is that these qualifications are precisely the cause of the hostility. To admit to the reality that the dominant political class, including the MSM and the punditocracy of both parties, has been giving us abysmal presidential candidates, to accept that a hockey mom plucked from small-town Alaska is better than the best that the political class can come up with, would require recognition of the terrible truth that the system has become deeply dysfunctional. Doing this would force our political elites to look into an abyss of serious questions about the functioning of our democracy. Palin creates a cognitive dissonance so intense that it simply cannot be accepted. To start, compare her experience as a person, mayor, and state leader with George W. Bush?s pre-presidential career as an alcoholic, baseball executive, and ornamental governor. Whatever one thinks of his performance as president ? and like most conservatives my views are complex ? he was not promising material as of 2000. Al Gore would be disqualified by knowledge of his academic career and by a reading of Earth in the Balance [1], an exercise in messianic ignorance. His subsequent career getting rich from climate change subsidies would reinforce this opinion. John Kerry had a Senate career of unbroken mediocrity, compounded by his unapologized-for Winter Soldier exercise [2] and the still-unanswered Swift Boat questions [3]. John Edwards had no shadow of a qualification, and again the judgment is confirmed by subsequent events. Obama?s qualifications were will-o-the-wisp. His supporters cited his ?potential,? as they had to, because his only actual feat was his first book ? and the claims that this was ghosted have been met by non-denial. The Asia Times characterizes these rumors [4] as ?well-established,? which tells one something about current foreign assessments of Obama. The president?s long-standing ties to the radical left should have tipped the balance to the negative. Vice President Joe Biden has a long history of blurring the line between fantasy and reality to a degree that one wonders if he sees any distinction, but 36 years of this is enough to make him ?qualified.? This, too, tells a lot about the mental processes of the dominant political class. One can deeply respect John McCain?s courage and service. But he is an erratic senator, with a tendency to reach decisions on a whim and then excoriate anyone who disagrees. As demonstrated by McCain-Feingold [5] ? which hamstrings the middle-class base of the Republicans while leaving intact the power of unions and public employees, the media, the rich, and Native American tribes ? McCain does not, or cannot, think even two moves ahead. This leaves Joe Lieberman and Dick Cheney as the only candidates with any weight, and Palin?s executive experience gives her an edge over Lieberman. The list may not be impressive, but being number two is not bad. The biases of the political class also explain why Palin got sandbagged at the outset. Anyone familiar with the world of Washington private schools knows that they are experts at resume building ? creating scads of extracurricular activities and awards so that every student can shine for the college of his or her choice. Well, the kids learned it from their parents, who are also experts at blowing air into the CV. Palin was called inexperienced because she had never gone on a five-photo-ops-with-foreign-leaders-in-four-days tour, held show hearings on the topic du jour, introduced meaningless legislation, or had her staff give her a list of the publications she should say she was currently reading. In fact ? and of course ? negotiating with Exxon is better preparation for negotiating with Putin than is a foreign photo op. And running a town is a miles-better education than warming a Senate seat. But again, it is not in the interests of the political class to acknowledge this. So her handlers tried to cram her into a D.C. frame of reference by stuffing her with facts on national and international issues that could withstand grilling from a gotcha! press, something that was neither possible nor the right game. Palin should instead have conceded that of course she would not be ready to be president on day one, but that: 1. What she had turned her hand to, she had quickly learned to do successfully ? and this ability, based on her solid grounding in the realities of American life, was and is the real test. 2. If she were called upon on day one, she would be the head of a government, not a lone individual, and she had the experience in handling people that would be necessary to tap into the collective intelligence of the nation. Those are called real qualifications! Since the election, Palin has learned her lesson about the political handlers and she has followed Mao?s advice, as channeled through Anita Dunn ? ?you fight your war and I?ll fight mine.? Her resignation from the governorship, which was mostly condemned by the pundits, was dead-on shrewd. Why let herself be tied down defending perjured ethics charges from people with infinite money, whose only desire is to shut her up or bankrupt her? Her willingness to be herself and pursue her own ideas without regard to whether or not they could lead to future office is a source of great political strength. Her public pronouncements, such as the Hong Kong speech [6], are serious and adult, unlike most of the vapidity produced by politicians, especially Obama. And Palin is mastering the art of short, sharp statements. None of this is winning over the political class. Indeed, Palin?s refusal to fulfill their desires that she be a clown or take a proper role in the kabuki theater of Washington is making them angrier than ever and more determined to marginalize her. But the disillusionment with government among the tea-partying middle class is so great that every attack on her builds her stature on Main Street. Is Palin going to be nominated? Hard to tell, even assuming she wants it. The unrelenting hostility of the media does have an insidious effect. She also needs to achieve the discipline in speaking that she displays with her written pronouncements ? more brevity and less nattering ? but this is doable. The cultural issues are more important. There is a middle ground of people who are against the increasing bipartisan kleptocracy but not conservative on cultural matters ? personally, I am pro-choice (but with reasonable caveats about the exercise of that choice), utterly indifferent to gay marriage, pro-gun, pro-decriminalization of marijuana, in favor of a forward strategy towards the terrorist wing of Islam and with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and sympathetic to China?s extraordinary effort to remake itself economically and politically. Ultimately, this may or may not make me into a Palin supporter. But either way, our most fundamental current crisis is the inability of the political class to produce plausible leaders, and its hostility to anyone, such as Palin, who threatens the system. The election of Obama was a symptom of our current dysfunctional politics, not a cause. We need more Palins, not fewer. James V. DeLong is a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School, and a former Book Review Editor of the Harvard Law Review. --------------------------------------- On 11/8/09, elle wrote: > Wow..if that's not a call to action.... > > elle > > --- On Sun, 11/8/09, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > From: Brad Haslett > Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Sarah Speaks! > To: "Letters to the Editor" > > Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 12:38 PM > > > The Pelosi Bill Was Rammed Through on Saturday, But Sunday?s Coming > Yesterday at 10:34pm > > We?ve got to hold on to hope, and we?ve got to fight hard because > Congressional action tonight just put America on a path toward an > unrecognizable country. > > The same government leaders that got us into the mortgage business and > the car business are now getting us into the health care business. > > Despite Americans? decisive message last Tuesday that they reject the > troubling path this country has been taking, Speaker Pelosi has broken > her own promises of transparency to ram a health ?care? bill through > the House of Representatives just before midnight. Why did she push > the 2,000 page bill this weekend? Was she perhaps afraid to give her > peers and the constituents for whom she works the chance to actually > read this monstrous bill carefully, if at all? Was she concerned that > Americans might really digest the details of a bill that the Wall > Street Journal has called ?the worst piece of post-New Deal > legislation ever introduced?? > > This out-of-control bureaucratic mess will be disastrous for our > economy, our small businesses, and our personal liberty. It will slam > businesses at a time when we are at double-digit unemployment rates ? > the highest we?ve seen in a quarter of a century. This massive new > bureaucracy will cost us and our children money we don?t have. It will > rob Americans of more of our freedom and further hamper the free > market. > > Make no mistake: we?re on course to have government commandeer > one-sixth of our economy. The people who gave us Fannie Mae and > Freddie Mac now want to run our health care. Think about that. > > All of us who value the sanctity of life are grateful for the success > of the pro-life majority in the House this evening in its battle > against federal funding of abortion in this bill, but it?s ironic > because we were promised that abortion wasn?t covered in the bill to > begin with. Our healthy distrust of these government leaders made us > look deeper into the bill because unfortunately we knew better than to > trust what they were saying. The victory tonight to amend the bill and > eliminate that federal funding for abortion was great ? because > abortion is not health care. Now we can only hope that Rep. Stupak?s > amendment will hold in the final bill, though the Democratic > leadership has already refused to promise that it won?t be scrapped > later. > > We had been told there were no ?death panels? in the bill either. But > look closely at the provision mandating bureaucratic panels that will > be calling the shots regarding who will receive government health > care. > > Look closely at provisions addressing illegal aliens? health care coverage > too. > > Those of us who love freedom and believe in open and transparent > government can only be dismayed by midnight action on a Saturday. > Speaker Pelosi?s promise that Americans would have 72 hours to read > the final bill before the vote was just another one of the D.C. > establishment?s too-common political ploys. It?s broken promises like > this that turn people off to politics and leave them disillusioned > about the future of their country. > > But despite this late-night maneuvering, many of us were paying close > attention tonight. We?ll keep paying close attention. We need to let > our legislators in Washington know that they still represent us, and > that the majority of Americans are not in favor of the ?reform? they > are pushing. After all, this is still a country ?of the people, by the > people, and for the people.? We will make our voices heard. It?s on to > the Senate now. Our legislators can listen now, or they can hear us in > 2010. It?s their choice. > > - Sarah Palin > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > > > From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 11:11:37 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 10:11:37 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] November 9th Message-ID: <400985d70911090811p63e2fa77s86ed47b49d74f5d7@mail.gmail.com> This day in history - http://tinyurl.com/yzuz4wd The role of a lifetime - http://tinyurl.com/yk88wkr Brad From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 11:42:47 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 10:42:47 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Sarah Speaks! In-Reply-To: <400985d70911090736o620639efu83599e45c16ba5a7@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911080938y3d1c4e7bs88c574100f9c57b6@mail.gmail.com> <822249.41950.qm@web111202.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <400985d70911090736o620639efu83599e45c16ba5a7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911090842v4267ddeesf477e10c89b5ef9a@mail.gmail.com> Mr Haslett and Mr De long, Very eloquently put!! I'm not so long on eloquence ..... but GO SARAH I cannot begin to tell what a delight it would be to once again have a person in the White House with more or less traditional American values. Watching the current crop of liars and hypocrites trying to rip the guts out of my country is so very depressing. Hint to Obie won: Ever wonder about the reason ammunition sales are at record highs?? Ever wonder why ordinary, middle class people who rarely get too excited about anything are suddenly in the streets and on the capitol steps protesting? (albeit politely) You're it, Step down my friend, while you still can and make room for someone who has the best interests of this country at heart. And please, take your phony cronies with you. Rik On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 9:36 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Elle, > > As everyone knows by now, I'm hardly objective about "all things > Sarah" - you can count me in as a die-hard Palinista. That attitude > predates her pick as the 2008 GOP VP candidate. She has created a > cottage industry amongst the political punditry, bloggers, and gossip > columnists predicting her eventual demise. My favorite label is that > of "quitter". Those who continue with the quitter meme either aren't > aware, or choose to forget, that indeed she is a quitter. She quit > the Alaska Oil & Gas Commission (a 6-figure job her family depended > on) out of protest to ethics violations and the firing of seven Oil & > Gas employees. When this so-called quitter returned to power as the > Governor of Alaska, she reinstated the seven employees, as well as > blew-up her own party. The other stream of constant criticism we hear > about Palin is her hardcore right wing social views. Again, few are > aware of a couple of telling incidents during her term as Guv. The > Alaska Legislature chooses a panel of potential AK Supreme Court Judge > candidates for the Governor to choose from. In an attempt to box > Palin into a dilemma, they gave her only two candidates to choose > from; one, a stellar jurist that was pro-choice, and a second that was > a mediocre legal talent but strongly pro-life. We all know Sarah's > personal beliefs on the issue. Palin spent a weekend reviewing the > professional work of both candidates and chose the better talent. A > second revealing action she took was this; the AK Legislature passed a > bill that would deny domestic partners of gay state employees > benefits. Palin openly stated her opposition to gay marriage, then > vetoed the bill because she said it was unconstitutional. > Unconstitutional? You mean there's politicians that pay attention to > those documents? I took a copy of "Sarah Takes On Big Oil" with me to > read on the airplane to DC. It is a great book for anyone who enjoys > "David v Goliath" stories and I recommend it as a primer on Mrs. > Palin. I can't wait for her book to come in the mail and the series of > interviews that follow, starting with Oprah! There is just something > wickedly funny about a housewife and mother posting opinions on a > Facebook page whilst wearing pajamas and slippers, and everytime she > does, veins start popping out all over leftist world. > > Brad > ----------------------------------- > Sarah Palin and the Dysfunctional Political Class > > Posted By James V. DeLong On November 8, 2009 @ 12:10 am In . Column2 > 06, Elections 2008, Media, Opinion, Politics, US News | > > The frenetic hostility to Sarah Palin, even by many on the Republican > side, is unnerving, because her qualifications to be president are > objectively better than those of almost anyone who has been on the > national ticket over the past decade. > > A reasonable conclusion is that these qualifications are precisely the > cause of the hostility. To admit to the reality that the dominant > political class, including the MSM and the punditocracy of both > parties, has been giving us abysmal presidential candidates, to accept > that a hockey mom plucked from small-town Alaska is better than the > best that the political class can come up with, would require > recognition of the terrible truth that the system has become deeply > dysfunctional. Doing this would force our political elites to look > into an abyss of serious questions about the functioning of our > democracy. Palin creates a cognitive dissonance so intense that it > simply cannot be accepted. > > To start, compare her experience as a person, mayor, and state leader > with George W. Bush?s pre-presidential career as an alcoholic, > baseball executive, and ornamental governor. Whatever one thinks of > his performance as president ? and like most conservatives my views > are complex ? he was not promising material as of 2000. > > Al Gore would be disqualified by knowledge of his academic career and > by a reading of Earth in the Balance [1], an exercise in messianic > ignorance. His subsequent career getting rich from climate change > subsidies would reinforce this opinion. John Kerry had a Senate career > of unbroken mediocrity, compounded by his unapologized-for Winter > Soldier exercise [2] and the still-unanswered Swift Boat questions > [3]. > > John Edwards had no shadow of a qualification, and again the judgment > is confirmed by subsequent events. > > Obama?s qualifications were will-o-the-wisp. His supporters cited his > ?potential,? as they had to, because his only actual feat was his > first book ? and the claims that this was ghosted have been met by > non-denial. The Asia Times characterizes these rumors [4] as > ?well-established,? which tells one something about current foreign > assessments of Obama. The president?s long-standing ties to the > radical left should have tipped the balance to the negative. > > Vice President Joe Biden has a long history of blurring the line > between fantasy and reality to a degree that one wonders if he sees > any distinction, but 36 years of this is enough to make him > ?qualified.? This, too, tells a lot about the mental processes of the > dominant political class. > > One can deeply respect John McCain?s courage and service. But he is an > erratic senator, with a tendency to reach decisions on a whim and then > excoriate anyone who disagrees. As demonstrated by McCain-Feingold [5] > ? which hamstrings the middle-class base of the Republicans while > leaving intact the power of unions and public employees, the media, > the rich, and Native American tribes ? McCain does not, or cannot, > think even two moves ahead. > > This leaves Joe Lieberman and Dick Cheney as the only candidates with > any weight, and Palin?s executive experience gives her an edge over > Lieberman. > > The list may not be impressive, but being number two is not bad. > > The biases of the political class also explain why Palin got > sandbagged at the outset. Anyone familiar with the world of Washington > private schools knows that they are experts at resume building ? > creating scads of extracurricular activities and awards so that every > student can shine for the college of his or her choice. Well, the kids > learned it from their parents, who are also experts at blowing air > into the CV. > > Palin was called inexperienced because she had never gone on a > five-photo-ops-with-foreign-leaders-in-four-days tour, held show > hearings on the topic du jour, introduced meaningless legislation, or > had her staff give her a list of the publications she should say she > was currently reading. > > In fact ? and of course ? negotiating with Exxon is better preparation > for negotiating with Putin than is a foreign photo op. And running a > town is a miles-better education than warming a Senate seat. But > again, it is not in the interests of the political class to > acknowledge this. > > So her handlers tried to cram her into a D.C. frame of reference by > stuffing her with facts on national and international issues that > could withstand grilling from a gotcha! press, something that was > neither possible nor the right game. > > Palin should instead have conceded that of course she would not be > ready to be president on day one, but that: > > 1. What she had turned her hand to, she had quickly learned to do > successfully ? and this ability, based on her solid grounding in the > realities of American life, was and is the real test. > > 2. If she were called upon on day one, she would be the head of a > government, not a lone individual, and she had the experience in > handling people that would be necessary to tap into the collective > intelligence of the nation. > > Those are called real qualifications! > > Since the election, Palin has learned her lesson about the political > handlers and she has followed Mao?s advice, as channeled through Anita > Dunn ? ?you fight your war and I?ll fight mine.? > > Her resignation from the governorship, which was mostly condemned by > the pundits, was dead-on shrewd. Why let herself be tied down > defending perjured ethics charges from people with infinite money, > whose only desire is to shut her up or bankrupt her? Her willingness > to be herself and pursue her own ideas without regard to whether or > not they could lead to future office is a source of great political > strength. Her public pronouncements, such as the Hong Kong speech [6], > are serious and adult, unlike most of the vapidity produced by > politicians, especially Obama. And Palin is mastering the art of > short, sharp statements. > > None of this is winning over the political class. Indeed, Palin?s > refusal to fulfill their desires that she be a clown or take a proper > role in the kabuki theater of Washington is making them angrier than > ever and more determined to marginalize her. But the disillusionment > with government among the tea-partying middle class is so great that > every attack on her builds her stature on Main Street. > > Is Palin going to be nominated? Hard to tell, even assuming she wants > it. The unrelenting hostility of the media does have an insidious > effect. She also needs to achieve the discipline in speaking that she > displays with her written pronouncements ? more brevity and less > nattering ? but this is doable. > > The cultural issues are more important. There is a middle ground of > people who are against the increasing bipartisan kleptocracy but not > conservative on cultural matters ? personally, I am pro-choice (but > with reasonable caveats about the exercise of that choice), utterly > indifferent to gay marriage, pro-gun, pro-decriminalization of > marijuana, in favor of a forward strategy towards the terrorist wing > of Islam and with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and sympathetic to > China?s extraordinary effort to remake itself economically and > politically. > > Ultimately, this may or may not make me into a Palin supporter. But > either way, our most fundamental current crisis is the inability of > the political class to produce plausible leaders, and its hostility to > anyone, such as Palin, who threatens the system. The election of Obama > was a symptom of our current dysfunctional politics, not a cause. > > We need more Palins, not fewer. > > James V. DeLong is a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law > School, and a former Book Review Editor of the Harvard Law Review. > > --------------------------------------- > > On 11/8/09, elle wrote: > > Wow..if that's not a call to action.... > > > > elle > > > > --- On Sun, 11/8/09, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > > > > From: Brad Haslett > > Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Sarah Speaks! > > To: "Letters to the Editor" > > > > Date: Sunday, November 8, 2009, 12:38 PM > > > > > > The Pelosi Bill Was Rammed Through on Saturday, But Sunday?s Coming > > Yesterday at 10:34pm > > > > We?ve got to hold on to hope, and we?ve got to fight hard because > > Congressional action tonight just put America on a path toward an > > unrecognizable country. > > > > The same government leaders that got us into the mortgage business and > > the car business are now getting us into the health care business. > > > > Despite Americans? decisive message last Tuesday that they reject the > > troubling path this country has been taking, Speaker Pelosi has broken > > her own promises of transparency to ram a health ?care? bill through > > the House of Representatives just before midnight. Why did she push > > the 2,000 page bill this weekend? Was she perhaps afraid to give her > > peers and the constituents for whom she works the chance to actually > > read this monstrous bill carefully, if at all? Was she concerned that > > Americans might really digest the details of a bill that the Wall > > Street Journal has called ?the worst piece of post-New Deal > > legislation ever introduced?? > > > > This out-of-control bureaucratic mess will be disastrous for our > > economy, our small businesses, and our personal liberty. It will slam > > businesses at a time when we are at double-digit unemployment rates ? > > the highest we?ve seen in a quarter of a century. This massive new > > bureaucracy will cost us and our children money we don?t have. It will > > rob Americans of more of our freedom and further hamper the free > > market. > > > > Make no mistake: we?re on course to have government commandeer > > one-sixth of our economy. The people who gave us Fannie Mae and > > Freddie Mac now want to run our health care. Think about that. > > > > All of us who value the sanctity of life are grateful for the success > > of the pro-life majority in the House this evening in its battle > > against federal funding of abortion in this bill, but it?s ironic > > because we were promised that abortion wasn?t covered in the bill to > > begin with. Our healthy distrust of these government leaders made us > > look deeper into the bill because unfortunately we knew better than to > > trust what they were saying. The victory tonight to amend the bill and > > eliminate that federal funding for abortion was great ? because > > abortion is not health care. Now we can only hope that Rep. Stupak?s > > amendment will hold in the final bill, though the Democratic > > leadership has already refused to promise that it won?t be scrapped > > later. > > > > We had been told there were no ?death panels? in the bill either. But > > look closely at the provision mandating bureaucratic panels that will > > be calling the shots regarding who will receive government health > > care. > > > > Look closely at provisions addressing illegal aliens? health care > coverage > > too. > > > > Those of us who love freedom and believe in open and transparent > > government can only be dismayed by midnight action on a Saturday. > > Speaker Pelosi?s promise that Americans would have 72 hours to read > > the final bill before the vote was just another one of the D.C. > > establishment?s too-common political ploys. It?s broken promises like > > this that turn people off to politics and leave them disillusioned > > about the future of their country. > > > > But despite this late-night maneuvering, many of us were paying close > > attention tonight. We?ll keep paying close attention. We need to let > > our legislators in Washington know that they still represent us, and > > that the majority of Americans are not in favor of the ?reform? they > > are pushing. After all, this is still a country ?of the people, by the > > people, and for the people.? We will make our voices heard. It?s on to > > the Senate now. Our legislators can listen now, or they can hear us in > > 2010. It?s their choice. > > > > - Sarah Palin > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091109/5cfc03a2/attachment-0001.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 12:06:40 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 11:06:40 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] November 9th In-Reply-To: <400985d70911090811p63e2fa77s86ed47b49d74f5d7@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911090811p63e2fa77s86ed47b49d74f5d7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911090906r4ef5324xa390b156aef86721@mail.gmail.com> And to commemorate this historic occasion we,... pass a bill though the house promising 5 years in jail to anyone who refuses to buy the gov't mandated insurance. Is this not the ultimate irony?? Oh to have a man (or woman, hint, hint) like Reagan at the helm once again. Excuse me, I have to wipe a tear. Rik On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > This day in history - > > http://tinyurl.com/yzuz4wd > > The role of a lifetime - > > http://tinyurl.com/yk88wkr > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091109/9cce91fc/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 12:30:58 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 11:30:58 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] November 9th In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911090906r4ef5324xa390b156aef86721@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911090811p63e2fa77s86ed47b49d74f5d7@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911090906r4ef5324xa390b156aef86721@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911090930r3aa48addn7a46cc82852afa5e@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Four powerful words. And today? Our enemy (as defined by the current POTUS) has been reduced to two words. Fox News. Brad On 11/9/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > And to commemorate this historic occasion we,... pass a bill though the > house promising 5 years in jail to anyone who refuses to buy the gov't > mandated insurance. Is this not the ultimate irony?? > > Oh to have a man (or woman, hint, hint) like Reagan at the helm once again. > > Excuse me, I have to wipe a tear. > > Rik > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> This day in history - >> >> http://tinyurl.com/yzuz4wd >> >> The role of a lifetime - >> >> http://tinyurl.com/yk88wkr >> >> Brad >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 17:31:34 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 16:31:34 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] kubelwagens In-Reply-To: <400985d70911081609gd5f5997m9afc8948a43073a0@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911072038m4ffc326bhd33bbcb034834a3f@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911072049y26288264w708bc873d8989f6b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911072156pace7290wbb2b34759cf080c8@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080438o47b28571wc674e7f38651444b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911080656r63c4a151gc6b4dcd8f273ed63@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080822r4dd49ca7rbbd3ac864de0c4e8@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911080858t40f3e312yc721634056535d41@mail.gmail.com> <4AF75367.8020403@effros.com> <400985d70911081609gd5f5997m9afc8948a43073a0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911091431h743c2035hce69918a8aa90215@mail.gmail.com> Hmmmm, it was early morning in Beijing when I wrote this - wonder if they read the Swiftwater Gazette list? http://tinyurl.com/yfb5erb On 11/8/09, Brad Haslett wrote: > Bill, > > You have no idea how much it hurts to say this, but, you are mostly > correct. I'm not giving the US government credit for being smart > enough to design a 401K system that was "rigged" on the front-end, but > they sure have figured it out since. I stayed "ahead" of the game from > 1985 to 2008, and am now at 2004. Lesson learned! One thing I learned > about doing some research for someone I met in Beijing who wanted an > "investment visa" as a path to citizenship is this; you FOREVER render > your world-wide income to US income tax laws. Frankly, I wouldn't > advise anyone to do that in this environment. > > China is buying STUFF - coal, minerals, oil, anything that will hold > value. They continue to fund our silliness only because they want to > keep us as a customer. We in the United States tend to think they > need us more than we need them. Look at their trading partners. The > US is fading fast as their primary concern. When they put a limit on > our credit card (and they will) there will be hell to pay. The bright > spot is that China has at least a 4000 year history of being happy > with their own territory and not being that aggressive about building > a world empire. Some would argue Tibet and Taiwan, but they will > politely explain that both were "theirs" before, and a few hundred > years of independence doesn't matter in the long run. > > That reminds me once again of Deng Xiaoping's response to a question > while he was a student in Paris. "How successful was the French > Revolution?" "It is too early to tell". > > Brad > > On 11/8/09, Bill Effros wrote: >> Brad, >> >> Like Rik I completely opted out of government controlled retirement >> plans. None of them ever made any sense to me, and I don't like assets >> that are less than 100% under my control. >> >> The 2 reasons the stock market appears to be doing well is >> >> 1. It's a phony index useful only to sell stock. -- Worthless stock >> is dropped from the index. If you actually bought and held all the >> stock on the original Dow Jones, you wouldn't have a cent today. Never >> mind an "inflation adjusted" cent. Every single one of those companies >> is no more, and almost all the successor companies went belly-up, too. >> >> 2. Owing to retirement plan restrictions, it is impossible for >> everyone in the system to get out of the stock market. It's like >> discovering you are in a Ponzi scheme, and knowing that everyone can't >> get their money out, but a few can. Maybe. Until then, everyone >> understands it's dumb to point out that the emperor has no clothes on. >> Pretend you don't notice, and that things are getting better. Maybe you >> can figure a way out before everyone else stops pretending. >> >> With regard to the world money supply, it appears to me that China has >> figured out how to do something that was considered impossible--they >> seem to be totally controlling the money market. Nobody can compete >> with them, and there doesn't seem to be much anyone can do about it. >> Europeans can't compete with them because they have made Euros so >> expensive, nobody can afford to buy European goods. We can't compete >> with them because we don't make anything anymore. The Chinese can buy >> natural resources using Euros, and sell to us for dollars. We can't >> even buy the raw materials for what they will sell finished goods. >> >> This isn't an Obama problem or a Bush problem. We all got ourselves >> into this mess. But what both Obama and Bush did will make things >> worse. It is remarkable how quickly the Chinese figured out the flaws >> in the Capitalist system, and how easily they exploited them. >> >> B. >> >> >> >> Brad Haslett wrote: >>> Rik, >>> >>> The problem with 401Ks are that you are limited by your employer's >>> choice of management, in my case Vanguard. Vanguard closed down their >>> Treasury bill fund because it had a negative rate of return. China is >>> facing the same issue with US treasuries and the inflation hasn't even >>> started yet. Bond funds will take a huge hit when inflation kicks in >>> after deflation. Make sense? What I'm suggesting is that until the >>> real estate market clears (something that won't happen for some time) >>> and the business cycle reverses (something that is already happening) >>> prices will remain flat. But, BUT!, the Chinese will either demand a >>> better return on their investment or they'll quietly start dumping >>> dollars (they already are). The US goobermint will have to speed-up >>> the printing presses beyond what they already have and hellooooooo Mr. >>> Inflation! What the rest of the US economy is doing at that point is >>> immaterial. Yeah, I envy your position - cash. We've moved most of >>> our non 401K investments into cash. We're trading one of the >>> properties in Beijing (closer to where we want to be) and are still >>> waiting on the condo in Destin to close. I'm trying to decide whether >>> to fund those properties with more cash or borrow to the max and pay >>> back with inflated dollars (lots of variables there). We don't have or >>> plan to have a lot of debt that we couldn't retire quickly if need be. >>> >>> You are right about the fundamentals not supporting the current >>> market, the earnings just aren't there. Fannie Mae "only" needs 5 more >>> billion. The banks aren't lending because they're hunkered down in >>> the "turtle mode" trying to make reserve requirements, and that's >>> BEFORE they come clean with their accounting. Most well run companies >>> have load-shedded as many employees as possible and they are not >>> anxious to hire any new ones anytime soon. Here's what most people >>> don't get. The market has a huge psychological aspect to it in both >>> directions. The "I feel good" moment in the stock market right now >>> won't last forever. That is true for business management as well, and >>> most CEOs are watching the current climate on Capitol Hill and >>> thinking, "screw it, I'm not sticking my neck out there". There are >>> exceptions, ie, GE thinks they have the system gamed on the cap-n-tax >>> scam. Watch the cheerleading on any given night on MSNBC. >>> >>> Remember the old adage from Herb Stein, "when something can't go on >>> forever, it won't". There is a reason you and I can't make sense of >>> what is going on. It doesn't make sense. >>> >>> Brad >>> >>> On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >>> >>>> Brad, >>>> >>>> I've never had a 401K or frankly any other gov't connected retirement >>>> account. Never had enough faith in our handlers to go for that. >>>> >>>> That being said, You know I'm no expert on the workings of gov't >>>> retirement >>>> accts. So I ask, is it not possible to at least get an account like >>>> that >>>> into a cash position rather than being invested in equities?? >>>> >>>> I truly expect that "the people" will reward congress for their >>>> arrogance, >>>> one way or the other. Since they wouldn't listen to our voices, people >>>> will >>>> speak with their wallets. Congress is likely to get a hard lesson that >>>> it >>>> just might have been easier to listen to the voices. The fundamentals >>>> don't >>>> support this market to begin with. I am quite sure that we're getting >>>> close >>>> to that last straw that busts the camel's back and here comes congress >>>> to >>>> load on more with a scoop shovel. >>>> >>>> The market won't put up with much of this anti-business legislation for >>>> long. >>>> >>>> Right now, the best advice I think you could give your friend is, "all >>>> my >>>> best friends call me cash". >>>> >>>> Worst case, if I'm wrong you won't make a little money. If I'm right, >>>> you >>>> won't lose ... a ton of money. >>>> >>>> Rik >>>> >>>> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 8:56 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Rik, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for bringing up a sore subject. As you know, I rode the market >>>>> down and have recouped about 75% of the losses. That puts me about >>>>> where I would be had I invested in the Bank of Sealy Posturepedic in >>>>> 2004. Over the course of the last several weeks I've moved the bulk of >>>>> my investments to international funds, especially one fund weighted >>>>> heavily to Asian companies. Here's a bitter lesson that you've >>>>> escaped; I fell hook-line-and-sinker for the government sponsored 401K >>>>> scam and have limited options. Before the market meltdown there was >>>>> already talk of targeting 401Ks. Trust me, there's still some >>>>> congress-critters that have their eyes on them. >>>>> >>>>> I got a call from one of our friends that moved here from Minneapolis >>>>> a couple of years ago. She lost her job in Minnie but had a PhD in >>>>> Chemistry and landed on her feet here in Memphis with a drug company. >>>>> She wanted some reassurance. Knowing her background as a conscripted >>>>> farmer during the Cultural Revolution and her personal struggle, >>>>> starting college at age 28, immigrating to the US, and eventually >>>>> earning a doctorate, I really wanted to tell her not to worry. But >>>>> frankly, I'm worried. >>>>> >>>>> Brad >>>>> >>>>> On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Brad, >>>>>> >>>>>> Hear, Hear..... >>>>>> >>>>>> I was over at my brothers last night having a discussion about this >>>>>> >>>>> issue. >>>>> >>>>>> We all know this is bad business. The stock market appears to be >>>>>> looking >>>>>> >>>>> for >>>>> >>>>>> an excuse to reverse. We wondered if this might be enough to catalyze >>>>>> >>>>> that, >>>>> >>>>>> considering also the BS Reid and Boxer pulled this week in the senate >>>>>> >>>>> with >>>>> >>>>>> cap and trade. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think it would be a very fitting payback for congressional >>>>>> arrogance. >>>>>> >>>>>> 'Course, I'm not long the market .... hope you're not too >>>>>> >>>>>> Rik >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Brad Haslett >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Rik, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress >>>>>>> in >>>>>>> the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered >>>>>>> only >>>>>>> by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by >>>>>>> every >>>>>>> act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free >>>>>>> people. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We >>>>>>> have >>>>>>> warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to >>>>>>> extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have >>>>>>> appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have >>>>>>> conjured >>>>>>> them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, >>>>>>> which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and >>>>>>> correspondence. >>>>>>> They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of >>>>>>> consanguinity. >>>>>>> We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our >>>>>>> separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies >>>>>>> in >>>>>>> war, in peace friends." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We have yet begun the fight! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Brad >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 11/7/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Like you often say, Brad .... you just can't make this shit up :-) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Rik >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Brad Haslett >>>>>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>>> Most people don't know the history of Volkswagen - the "Peoples >>>>>>>>> Car". >>>>>>>>> Germans were forced to buy stamps for the eventual purchase of a >>>>>>>>> VW >>>>>>>>> (deducted from their paychecks). Most couldn't afford the car or >>>>>>>>> insurance or fuel, but they bought stamps for one anyway because >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> government forced them to. Eventually, WW2 sucked-up all the >>>>>>>>> production facilities of VW and they produced Kubelwagens, an >>>>>>>>> amphibious vehicle. I owned one once, it was called "The Thing" >>>>>>>>> when >>>>>>>>> it was introduced into the US in the 70's. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So now we have a health care bill that has passed the House that >>>>>>>>> will >>>>>>>>> force people to buy something, whether they want or can afford it, >>>>>>>>> or >>>>>>>>> they will face up to five years of imprisonment. Some progress! Of >>>>>>>>> course it will still have to pass the Senate and there will be >>>>>>>>> multiple Supreme Court challenges if it passes the Senate. Who >>>>>>>>> knows >>>>>>>>> what the final product will look like if it goes undefeated. The >>>>>>>>> kubelwagen sure didn't look anything like Dr. Porsche's Bug. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The VW turned out to be a fine car eventually. I've owned several >>>>>>>>> including the one I drive every day. They are popular in Mexico, >>>>>>>>> South America, China, and Europe. A lot can change in 75 years. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So how good a war machine was the kubelwagen? It was a piece of >>>>>>>>> shit >>>>>>>>> compared to the Willys Jeep. How things change. Willys is now >>>>>>>>> Chrysler/Jeep (gubmint owned) and VW is a private company. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Funny thing, history. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Brad >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> PS - Cao, I've got your number! >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>>>>>>>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level >>>>>>>> then >>>>>>>> beat >>>>>>>> you with experience. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>>>>>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >>>>>> beat >>>>>> you with experience. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>>>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>>>> >>>>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >>>> beat >>>> you with experience. >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >>> >> > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 18:15:49 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 17:15:49 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] kubelwagens In-Reply-To: <400985d70911091431h743c2035hce69918a8aa90215@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911072038m4ffc326bhd33bbcb034834a3f@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911072049y26288264w708bc873d8989f6b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911072156pace7290wbb2b34759cf080c8@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080438o47b28571wc674e7f38651444b@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911080656r63c4a151gc6b4dcd8f273ed63@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911080822r4dd49ca7rbbd3ac864de0c4e8@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911080858t40f3e312yc721634056535d41@mail.gmail.com> <4AF75367.8020403@effros.com> <400985d70911081609gd5f5997m9afc8948a43073a0@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911091431h743c2035hce69918a8aa90215@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911091515s72be1108hd29f405db50c5ddc@mail.gmail.com> Somebody's gonna take it in the shorts here. There ain't no way running up a couple trillion dollars a year in deficit spending can have a happy ending. Rik On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 4:31 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Hmmmm, it was early morning in Beijing when I wrote this - wonder if > they read the Swiftwater Gazette list? > > http://tinyurl.com/yfb5erb > > > > On 11/8/09, Brad Haslett wrote: > > Bill, > > > > You have no idea how much it hurts to say this, but, you are mostly > > correct. I'm not giving the US government credit for being smart > > enough to design a 401K system that was "rigged" on the front-end, but > > they sure have figured it out since. I stayed "ahead" of the game from > > 1985 to 2008, and am now at 2004. Lesson learned! One thing I learned > > about doing some research for someone I met in Beijing who wanted an > > "investment visa" as a path to citizenship is this; you FOREVER render > > your world-wide income to US income tax laws. Frankly, I wouldn't > > advise anyone to do that in this environment. > > > > China is buying STUFF - coal, minerals, oil, anything that will hold > > value. They continue to fund our silliness only because they want to > > keep us as a customer. We in the United States tend to think they > > need us more than we need them. Look at their trading partners. The > > US is fading fast as their primary concern. When they put a limit on > > our credit card (and they will) there will be hell to pay. The bright > > spot is that China has at least a 4000 year history of being happy > > with their own territory and not being that aggressive about building > > a world empire. Some would argue Tibet and Taiwan, but they will > > politely explain that both were "theirs" before, and a few hundred > > years of independence doesn't matter in the long run. > > > > That reminds me once again of Deng Xiaoping's response to a question > > while he was a student in Paris. "How successful was the French > > Revolution?" "It is too early to tell". > > > > Brad > > > > On 11/8/09, Bill Effros wrote: > >> Brad, > >> > >> Like Rik I completely opted out of government controlled retirement > >> plans. None of them ever made any sense to me, and I don't like assets > >> that are less than 100% under my control. > >> > >> The 2 reasons the stock market appears to be doing well is > >> > >> 1. It's a phony index useful only to sell stock. -- Worthless stock > >> is dropped from the index. If you actually bought and held all the > >> stock on the original Dow Jones, you wouldn't have a cent today. Never > >> mind an "inflation adjusted" cent. Every single one of those companies > >> is no more, and almost all the successor companies went belly-up, too. > >> > >> 2. Owing to retirement plan restrictions, it is impossible for > >> everyone in the system to get out of the stock market. It's like > >> discovering you are in a Ponzi scheme, and knowing that everyone can't > >> get their money out, but a few can. Maybe. Until then, everyone > >> understands it's dumb to point out that the emperor has no clothes on. > >> Pretend you don't notice, and that things are getting better. Maybe you > >> can figure a way out before everyone else stops pretending. > >> > >> With regard to the world money supply, it appears to me that China has > >> figured out how to do something that was considered impossible--they > >> seem to be totally controlling the money market. Nobody can compete > >> with them, and there doesn't seem to be much anyone can do about it. > >> Europeans can't compete with them because they have made Euros so > >> expensive, nobody can afford to buy European goods. We can't compete > >> with them because we don't make anything anymore. The Chinese can buy > >> natural resources using Euros, and sell to us for dollars. We can't > >> even buy the raw materials for what they will sell finished goods. > >> > >> This isn't an Obama problem or a Bush problem. We all got ourselves > >> into this mess. But what both Obama and Bush did will make things > >> worse. It is remarkable how quickly the Chinese figured out the flaws > >> in the Capitalist system, and how easily they exploited them. > >> > >> B. > >> > >> > >> > >> Brad Haslett wrote: > >>> Rik, > >>> > >>> The problem with 401Ks are that you are limited by your employer's > >>> choice of management, in my case Vanguard. Vanguard closed down their > >>> Treasury bill fund because it had a negative rate of return. China is > >>> facing the same issue with US treasuries and the inflation hasn't even > >>> started yet. Bond funds will take a huge hit when inflation kicks in > >>> after deflation. Make sense? What I'm suggesting is that until the > >>> real estate market clears (something that won't happen for some time) > >>> and the business cycle reverses (something that is already happening) > >>> prices will remain flat. But, BUT!, the Chinese will either demand a > >>> better return on their investment or they'll quietly start dumping > >>> dollars (they already are). The US goobermint will have to speed-up > >>> the printing presses beyond what they already have and hellooooooo Mr. > >>> Inflation! What the rest of the US economy is doing at that point is > >>> immaterial. Yeah, I envy your position - cash. We've moved most of > >>> our non 401K investments into cash. We're trading one of the > >>> properties in Beijing (closer to where we want to be) and are still > >>> waiting on the condo in Destin to close. I'm trying to decide whether > >>> to fund those properties with more cash or borrow to the max and pay > >>> back with inflated dollars (lots of variables there). We don't have or > >>> plan to have a lot of debt that we couldn't retire quickly if need be. > >>> > >>> You are right about the fundamentals not supporting the current > >>> market, the earnings just aren't there. Fannie Mae "only" needs 5 more > >>> billion. The banks aren't lending because they're hunkered down in > >>> the "turtle mode" trying to make reserve requirements, and that's > >>> BEFORE they come clean with their accounting. Most well run companies > >>> have load-shedded as many employees as possible and they are not > >>> anxious to hire any new ones anytime soon. Here's what most people > >>> don't get. The market has a huge psychological aspect to it in both > >>> directions. The "I feel good" moment in the stock market right now > >>> won't last forever. That is true for business management as well, and > >>> most CEOs are watching the current climate on Capitol Hill and > >>> thinking, "screw it, I'm not sticking my neck out there". There are > >>> exceptions, ie, GE thinks they have the system gamed on the cap-n-tax > >>> scam. Watch the cheerleading on any given night on MSNBC. > >>> > >>> Remember the old adage from Herb Stein, "when something can't go on > >>> forever, it won't". There is a reason you and I can't make sense of > >>> what is going on. It doesn't make sense. > >>> > >>> Brad > >>> > >>> On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > >>> > >>>> Brad, > >>>> > >>>> I've never had a 401K or frankly any other gov't connected retirement > >>>> account. Never had enough faith in our handlers to go for that. > >>>> > >>>> That being said, You know I'm no expert on the workings of gov't > >>>> retirement > >>>> accts. So I ask, is it not possible to at least get an account like > >>>> that > >>>> into a cash position rather than being invested in equities?? > >>>> > >>>> I truly expect that "the people" will reward congress for their > >>>> arrogance, > >>>> one way or the other. Since they wouldn't listen to our voices, people > >>>> will > >>>> speak with their wallets. Congress is likely to get a hard lesson that > >>>> it > >>>> just might have been easier to listen to the voices. The fundamentals > >>>> don't > >>>> support this market to begin with. I am quite sure that we're getting > >>>> close > >>>> to that last straw that busts the camel's back and here comes congress > >>>> to > >>>> load on more with a scoop shovel. > >>>> > >>>> The market won't put up with much of this anti-business legislation > for > >>>> long. > >>>> > >>>> Right now, the best advice I think you could give your friend is, "all > >>>> my > >>>> best friends call me cash". > >>>> > >>>> Worst case, if I'm wrong you won't make a little money. If I'm right, > >>>> you > >>>> won't lose ... a ton of money. > >>>> > >>>> Rik > >>>> > >>>> On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 8:56 AM, Brad Haslett > wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Rik, > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks for bringing up a sore subject. As you know, I rode the > market > >>>>> down and have recouped about 75% of the losses. That puts me about > >>>>> where I would be had I invested in the Bank of Sealy Posturepedic in > >>>>> 2004. Over the course of the last several weeks I've moved the bulk > of > >>>>> my investments to international funds, especially one fund weighted > >>>>> heavily to Asian companies. Here's a bitter lesson that you've > >>>>> escaped; I fell hook-line-and-sinker for the government sponsored > 401K > >>>>> scam and have limited options. Before the market meltdown there was > >>>>> already talk of targeting 401Ks. Trust me, there's still some > >>>>> congress-critters that have their eyes on them. > >>>>> > >>>>> I got a call from one of our friends that moved here from Minneapolis > >>>>> a couple of years ago. She lost her job in Minnie but had a PhD in > >>>>> Chemistry and landed on her feet here in Memphis with a drug company. > >>>>> She wanted some reassurance. Knowing her background as a conscripted > >>>>> farmer during the Cultural Revolution and her personal struggle, > >>>>> starting college at age 28, immigrating to the US, and eventually > >>>>> earning a doctorate, I really wanted to tell her not to worry. But > >>>>> frankly, I'm worried. > >>>>> > >>>>> Brad > >>>>> > >>>>> On 11/8/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Brad, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hear, Hear..... > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I was over at my brothers last night having a discussion about this > >>>>>> > >>>>> issue. > >>>>> > >>>>>> We all know this is bad business. The stock market appears to be > >>>>>> looking > >>>>>> > >>>>> for > >>>>> > >>>>>> an excuse to reverse. We wondered if this might be enough to > catalyze > >>>>>> > >>>>> that, > >>>>> > >>>>>> considering also the BS Reid and Boxer pulled this week in the > senate > >>>>>> > >>>>> with > >>>>> > >>>>>> cap and trade. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I think it would be a very fitting payback for congressional > >>>>>> arrogance. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 'Course, I'm not long the market .... hope you're not too > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Rik > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 11:56 PM, Brad Haslett > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Rik, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> "In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress > >>>>>>> in > >>>>>>> the most humble terms: our repeated petitions have been answered > >>>>>>> only > >>>>>>> by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by > >>>>>>> every > >>>>>>> act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free > >>>>>>> people. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Nor have we been wanting in attention to our British brethren. We > >>>>>>> have > >>>>>>> warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to > >>>>>>> extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them > >>>>>>> of > >>>>>>> the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have > >>>>>>> appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have > >>>>>>> conjured > >>>>>>> them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these > usurpations, > >>>>>>> which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and > >>>>>>> correspondence. > >>>>>>> They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of > >>>>>>> consanguinity. > >>>>>>> We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our > >>>>>>> separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies > >>>>>>> in > >>>>>>> war, in peace friends." > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> We have yet begun the fight! > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Brad > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 11/7/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Like you often say, Brad .... you just can't make this shit up :-) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Rik > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Brad Haslett > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Most people don't know the history of Volkswagen - the "Peoples > >>>>>>>>> Car". > >>>>>>>>> Germans were forced to buy stamps for the eventual purchase of a > >>>>>>>>> VW > >>>>>>>>> (deducted from their paychecks). Most couldn't afford the car or > >>>>>>>>> insurance or fuel, but they bought stamps for one anyway because > >>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>> government forced them to. Eventually, WW2 sucked-up all the > >>>>>>>>> production facilities of VW and they produced Kubelwagens, an > >>>>>>>>> amphibious vehicle. I owned one once, it was called "The Thing" > >>>>>>>>> when > >>>>>>>>> it was introduced into the US in the 70's. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> So now we have a health care bill that has passed the House that > >>>>>>>>> will > >>>>>>>>> force people to buy something, whether they want or can afford > it, > >>>>>>>>> or > >>>>>>>>> they will face up to five years of imprisonment. Some progress! > Of > >>>>>>>>> course it will still have to pass the Senate and there will be > >>>>>>>>> multiple Supreme Court challenges if it passes the Senate. Who > >>>>>>>>> knows > >>>>>>>>> what the final product will look like if it goes undefeated. The > >>>>>>>>> kubelwagen sure didn't look anything like Dr. Porsche's Bug. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> The VW turned out to be a fine car eventually. I've owned > several > >>>>>>>>> including the one I drive every day. They are popular in Mexico, > >>>>>>>>> South America, China, and Europe. A lot can change in 75 years. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> So how good a war machine was the kubelwagen? It was a piece of > >>>>>>>>> shit > >>>>>>>>> compared to the Willys Jeep. How things change. Willys is now > >>>>>>>>> Chrysler/Jeep (gubmint owned) and VW is a private company. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Funny thing, history. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Brad > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> PS - Cao, I've got your number! > >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>>>>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >>>>>>>>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>> Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level > >>>>>>>> then > >>>>>>>> beat > >>>>>>>> you with experience. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >>>>>>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -- > >>>>>> Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then > >>>>>> beat > >>>>>> you with experience. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >>>>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >>>>> > >>>>> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then > >>>> beat > >>>> you with experience. > >>>> > >>>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> 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 > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091109/9c5dcb33/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 18:42:35 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 17:42:35 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Allah's Business Card Message-ID: <400985d70911091542q6fdf52aaka21ee0d5509fcec2@mail.gmail.com> Is it too early to suggest that this WAS an act of terrorism, or should we wait for the PC clock to run out and the lame-stream media to finish its investigation? The "alphabet" networks are (ABC, CBS, NBC) are still asking the tough questions, like "what did we do as a society to drive this poor man to drive him to do this?" http://tinyurl.com/yl42t8j From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 19:08:46 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 18:08:46 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Salty Language Message-ID: <400985d70911091608r381f4511s8b12711fff054cf6@mail.gmail.com> ?Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit? Democratic voters ?and it will encourage the extremists.? B. Obama Lord knows, I know my way around the world of salty language, but is it too much to ask that the POTUS not use a sexual slur to describe his opponents? Are people who oppose his policies really "extremists" and "anti-government"? Is it too prudish to ask that the Lyin' King save the trash talk for the basketball court? Brad -------------- >From the NYT's November 7, 2009, 9:45 pm Lawmakers Detail Obama?s Pitch By Jackie Calmes In an odd coincidence, the House debate on Saturday to overhaul health care took place on the third anniversary of the 2006 election that gave Democrats majority control after 12 years of Republican dominance. It fell to President Obama and to Congressional leaders to persuade those Democrats still sweating the final vote that it would not prove the party?s undoing in next November?s midterm elections. The House Debate Prescriptions will be following the floor debate over health care legislation in the House of Representatives throughout Saturday. Previous posts: Both Mr. Obama and the House leaders showcased Democrats? newest colleague, Representative Bill Owens, who last Tuesday won a special election in an upstate New York district that Republicans had held since 1872. In the campaign, Mr. Owens gave unabashed support to the pending House health care bill, despite the opposition of national conservative groups, including the new Tea Party Patriots, who backed Mr. Owens?s conservative rival. Mr. Obama, during his private pep talk to Democrats, recognized Mr. Owens?s election and then posed a question to the other lawmakers. According to Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, who supports the health care bill, the president asked, ?Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit? Democratic voters ?and it will encourage the extremists.? Another freshman Democrat from New Mexico, Representative Martin Heinrich, said the president?s comments overall were reassuring. ?If you want to see a recipe for failure,? Mr. Heinrich said, ?don?t do the things you talked about in your campaigns and turn your back on your base. All the independent voters in the world don?t matter if the Democrats don?t turn out.? ?This is an opportunity to do something as big as Social Security,? he added. ?And me, personally, I don?t want to be on the wrong side of history.? From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 19:57:58 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 18:57:58 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Allah's Business Card In-Reply-To: <400985d70911091542q6fdf52aaka21ee0d5509fcec2@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911091542q6fdf52aaka21ee0d5509fcec2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911091657h680055b5x840352fe8c3cd449@mail.gmail.com> Why are we so afraid to offend people who are not only ready and able to kill us, but delighted to have the opportunity. Ha ha 72 raisins .... I like that. So many agendas .... so little time. There was another writer who tried to turn this into a gun control thing by reporting the pistol the shooter used was some special "cop killer" pistol. Turns out the pistol, a FN Herstal five-seven, packs all the mouse killing firepower of a 22 magnum. A 9MM makes it look like a pea shooter by comparison. The .357 Mag revolver, which he also had with him, but apparently didn't use, is a cannon by comparison. Here's the anti-gunner's article: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cop-killer-gun-thought-ft-hood-shooting/story?id=9019521 Here's the real scoop on that gun and the 5.7x28 ammo used in the shootings. http://www.chuckhawks.com/5-7x28_cop_killer.htm I just love it when some reporter who couldn't tell a 450 Win Mag from a pool cue starts trying to dictate to the rest of us what kinds of guns we should be allowed to own. Rik On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Is it too early to suggest that this WAS an act of terrorism, or > should we wait for the PC clock to run out and the lame-stream media > to finish its investigation? The "alphabet" networks are (ABC, CBS, > NBC) are still asking the tough questions, like "what did we do as a > society to drive this poor man to drive him to do this?" > > http://tinyurl.com/yl42t8j > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091109/3baecd04/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 21:35:08 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 20:35:08 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Salty Language In-Reply-To: <400985d70911091608r381f4511s8b12711fff054cf6@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911091608r381f4511s8b12711fff054cf6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911091835p1a56ed9cq5e51771fc4a026fa@mail.gmail.com> Brad, ____________________ "This is an opportunity to do something as big as Social Security,? he added. ?And me, personally, I don?t want to be on the wrong side of history." ____________________ Darn, I guess he forgot, we can't pay for social security either. What a dumbass. Sure wouldn't want to be on the right side of honesty and integrity. Psst ... when they make up nasty names like that, it means you're scaring the hell out of 'em. Rik On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 6:08 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > ?Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going > to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is > confuse and dispirit? Democratic voters ?and it will encourage the > extremists.? > B. Obama > > > > Lord knows, I know my way around the world of salty language, but is > it too much to ask that the POTUS not use a sexual slur to describe > his opponents? Are people who oppose his policies really "extremists" > and "anti-government"? Is it too prudish to ask that the Lyin' King > save the trash talk for the basketball court? > > Brad > > -------------- > > >From the NYT's > > November 7, 2009, 9:45 pm > Lawmakers Detail Obama?s Pitch > By Jackie Calmes > > In an odd coincidence, the House debate on Saturday to overhaul health > care took place on the third anniversary of the 2006 election that > gave Democrats majority control after 12 years of Republican > dominance. It fell to President Obama and to Congressional leaders to > persuade those Democrats still sweating the final vote that it would > not prove the party?s undoing in next November?s midterm elections. > > The House Debate > > Prescriptions will be following the floor debate over health care > legislation in the House of Representatives throughout Saturday. > Previous posts: > > > Both Mr. Obama and the House leaders showcased Democrats? newest > colleague, Representative Bill Owens, who last Tuesday won a special > election in an upstate New York district that Republicans had held > since 1872. In the campaign, Mr. Owens gave unabashed support to the > pending House health care bill, despite the opposition of national > conservative groups, including the new Tea Party Patriots, who backed > Mr. Owens?s conservative rival. > > Mr. Obama, during his private pep talk to Democrats, recognized Mr. > Owens?s election and then posed a question to the other lawmakers. > According to Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, who supports > the health care bill, the president asked, ?Does anybody think that > the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they > bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit? > Democratic voters ?and it will encourage the extremists.? > > Another freshman Democrat from New Mexico, Representative Martin > Heinrich, said the president?s comments overall were reassuring. ?If > you want to see a recipe for failure,? Mr. Heinrich said, ?don?t do > the things you talked about in your campaigns and turn your back on > your base. All the independent voters in the world don?t matter if the > Democrats don?t turn out.? > > ?This is an opportunity to do something as big as Social Security,? he > added. ?And me, personally, I don?t want to be on the wrong side of > history.? > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091109/4e650b00/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 22:34:10 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 21:34:10 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Salty Language In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911091835p1a56ed9cq5e51771fc4a026fa@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911091608r381f4511s8b12711fff054cf6@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911091835p1a56ed9cq5e51771fc4a026fa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911091934r431f0ab6s7cf6ee03b697af86@mail.gmail.com> Rik, We've destroyed our education system to the point that people are too indoctrinated to ask how we will pay for anything. Like the video posted a few weeks about thousands lining-up for "Obama money" in Detroit. "Where did Obama get the money?" "I don't know, he gets it from his stash." This will not end well when China says no, and China is getting louder and clearer about saying NO. Here's a great article about the anniversary of the Berlin Wall falling - http://tinyurl.com/yld9msm It explains a great deal about how we can pass bills that we obviously can't fund. We need some adults in the room. November 2010 won't be here soon enough! Brad On 11/9/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > ____________________ > "This is an opportunity to do something as big as Social Security,? he > added. ?And me, personally, I don?t want to be on the wrong side of > history." > ____________________ > > Darn, I guess he forgot, we can't pay for social security either. What a > dumbass. Sure wouldn't want to be on the right side of honesty and > integrity. > > Psst ... when they make up nasty names like that, it means you're scaring > the hell out of 'em. > > Rik > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 6:08 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> ?Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going >> to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is >> confuse and dispirit? Democratic voters ?and it will encourage the >> extremists.? >> B. Obama >> >> >> >> Lord knows, I know my way around the world of salty language, but is >> it too much to ask that the POTUS not use a sexual slur to describe >> his opponents? Are people who oppose his policies really "extremists" >> and "anti-government"? Is it too prudish to ask that the Lyin' King >> save the trash talk for the basketball court? >> >> Brad >> >> -------------- >> >> >From the NYT's >> >> November 7, 2009, 9:45 pm >> Lawmakers Detail Obama?s Pitch >> By Jackie Calmes >> >> In an odd coincidence, the House debate on Saturday to overhaul health >> care took place on the third anniversary of the 2006 election that >> gave Democrats majority control after 12 years of Republican >> dominance. It fell to President Obama and to Congressional leaders to >> persuade those Democrats still sweating the final vote that it would >> not prove the party?s undoing in next November?s midterm elections. >> >> The House Debate >> >> Prescriptions will be following the floor debate over health care >> legislation in the House of Representatives throughout Saturday. >> Previous posts: >> >> >> Both Mr. Obama and the House leaders showcased Democrats? newest >> colleague, Representative Bill Owens, who last Tuesday won a special >> election in an upstate New York district that Republicans had held >> since 1872. In the campaign, Mr. Owens gave unabashed support to the >> pending House health care bill, despite the opposition of national >> conservative groups, including the new Tea Party Patriots, who backed >> Mr. Owens?s conservative rival. >> >> Mr. Obama, during his private pep talk to Democrats, recognized Mr. >> Owens?s election and then posed a question to the other lawmakers. >> According to Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, who supports >> the health care bill, the president asked, ?Does anybody think that >> the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they >> bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit? >> Democratic voters ?and it will encourage the extremists.? >> >> Another freshman Democrat from New Mexico, Representative Martin >> Heinrich, said the president?s comments overall were reassuring. ?If >> you want to see a recipe for failure,? Mr. Heinrich said, ?don?t do >> the things you talked about in your campaigns and turn your back on >> your base. All the independent voters in the world don?t matter if the >> Democrats don?t turn out.? >> >> ?This is an opportunity to do something as big as Social Security,? he >> added. ?And me, personally, I don?t want to be on the wrong side of >> history.? >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From flybrad at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 23:08:09 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 22:08:09 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Allah's Business Card In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911091657h680055b5x840352fe8c3cd449@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911091542q6fdf52aaka21ee0d5509fcec2@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911091657h680055b5x840352fe8c3cd449@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911092008l5e87da57l303e5dc296f9b8e3@mail.gmail.com> How big a friggin' clue does the Army need? Talk about PC run amok! >From the WaPo - Fort Hood suspect Hasan warned of threats within the ranks Urged release of Muslim troops in 2007 lecture at Walter Reed By Dana Priest Monday, November 9, 2009 9:47 PM The Army psychiatrist believed to have killed 13 people at Fort Hood warned a roomful of senior Army physicians a year and a half ago that to avoid "adverse events," the military should allow Muslim soldiers to be released as conscientious objectors instead of fighting in wars against other Muslims. As a senior-year psychiatric resident at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Maj. Nidal M. Hasan was supposed to make a presentation on a medical topic of his choosing as a culminating exercise of the residency program. Instead, in late June 2007, he stood before his supervisors and about 25 other mental health staff members and lectured on Islam, suicide bombers and threats the military could encounter from Muslims conflicted about fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, both Muslim countries, according to a copy of the presentation obtained by The Washington Post. "It's getting harder and harder for Muslims in the service to morally justify being in a military that seems constantly engaged against fellow Muslims," he said in the presentation. "It was really strange," said one staff member who attended the presentation and requested anonymity because of the investigation of Hasan. "The senior doctors looked really upset" at the end. These medical presentations occurred each Wednesday afternoon, and other students had lectured on new medications and treatment of specific mental illnesses. An Army spokesman said Monday night he was unaware of the presentation, and a Walter Reed spokesman declined comment. It is unclear whether anyone in attendance reported the briefing to counterintelligence or law enforcement authorities whose job it is to identify threats from within the military ranks. Hasan spent six years at Walter Reed as an intern, resident and fellow beginning in 2003. He had been transferred to Fort Hood as a practicing psychiatrist in July and was set to leave soon for Afghanistan. According to a relative, he had asked not to be deployed. It is not known whether he ever sought conscientious-objector status. Maj. Gen. Gina S. Farrisee, the Army's personnel chief, said in an interview Monday that due to the ongoing investigation, she and other Army officials could not discuss whether Hasan had officially asked to quit the service or to not be deployed. However, Farrisee and another Army official said that it would be highly unusual for officers with Hasan's rank and medical training to be allowed to resign, given their ongoing service obligation. Investigators looking into Hasan's background are examining his religious beliefs, whether he harbored extremist views, and whether he was in contact with others who may have encouraged violence against U.S. soldiers. The title of Hasan's power-point presentation was "The Koranic World View As It Relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military." It consisted of 50 slides. In one slide, Hasan described the presentation's objectives as identifying "what the Koran inculcates in the minds of Muslims and the potential implications this may have for the U.S. military." He also sought to "Describe the nature of the religious conflicts that Muslims may have" who serve in the U.S. military and to convince the Army that it should identify these individuals. Other slides delved into the history of Islam, its tenets, statistics about the number of Muslims in the military, and explanations of "offensive jihad," or holy war. Another slide suggested ways to draw out Muslim soldiers: "It must be hard for you to balance Islamic beliefs that might be conflicting with current war; feelings of guilt; Is it what you expected." Hasan's presentation lasted about an hour. It is unclear whether he read out loud every point on each slide. If typical procedures were followed, his adviser would have supervised the development of his project, said people familiar with the practice. The final three slides of the presentation indicate that Hasan referred to Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, suicide bombers and Iran. Under a slide titled "Comments," he wrote: "If Muslim groups can convince Muslims that they are fighting for God against injustices of the 'infidels'; ie: enemies of Islam, then Muslims can become a potent adversary ie: suicide bombing, etc." [sic] The last bullet point on that page reads simply: "We love death more then (sic) you love life!" Under the "Conclusions" page, Hasan wrote that "Fighting to establish an Islamic State to please God, even by force, is condoned by the Islam," and that "Muslim Soldiers should not serve in any capacity that renders them at risk to hurting/killing believers unjustly -- will vary!" The final page, labeled "Recommendation," contained only one suggestion: "Department of Defense should allow Muslims (sic) Soldiers the option of being released as 'Conscientious objectors' to increase troop morale and decrease adverse events." Staff writer Ann Scott Tyson contributed to this report. On 11/9/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Why are we so afraid to offend people who are not only ready and able to > kill us, but delighted to have the opportunity. > > Ha ha 72 raisins .... I like that. > > So many agendas .... so little time. > > There was another writer who tried to turn this into a gun control thing by > reporting the pistol the shooter used was some special "cop killer" pistol. > Turns out the pistol, a FN Herstal five-seven, packs all the mouse killing > firepower of a 22 magnum. A 9MM makes it look like a pea shooter by > comparison. The .357 Mag revolver, which he also had with him, but > apparently didn't use, is a cannon by comparison. > > Here's the anti-gunner's article: > > http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cop-killer-gun-thought-ft-hood-shooting/story?id=9019521 > > Here's the real scoop on that gun and the 5.7x28 ammo used in the shootings. > > http://www.chuckhawks.com/5-7x28_cop_killer.htm > > I just love it when some reporter who couldn't tell a 450 Win Mag from a > pool cue starts trying to dictate to the rest of us what kinds of guns we > should be allowed to own. > > Rik > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Is it too early to suggest that this WAS an act of terrorism, or >> should we wait for the PC clock to run out and the lame-stream media >> to finish its investigation? The "alphabet" networks are (ABC, CBS, >> NBC) are still asking the tough questions, like "what did we do as a >> society to drive this poor man to drive him to do this?" >> >> http://tinyurl.com/yl42t8j >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 23:16:10 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 22:16:10 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Salty Language In-Reply-To: <400985d70911091934r431f0ab6s7cf6ee03b697af86@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911091608r381f4511s8b12711fff054cf6@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911091835p1a56ed9cq5e51771fc4a026fa@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911091934r431f0ab6s7cf6ee03b697af86@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911092016x7575dfd1s614f43739817f706@mail.gmail.com> Adults in the room .... Indeed. >From the sound of things there, I'm a bit surprised that she doesn't get in trouble for even writing an article like that. I'd say the Brits are a couple steps ahead of in the socialism dept., but it would appear we've started to run to catch up. Rik On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > We've destroyed our education system to the point that people are too > indoctrinated to ask how we will pay for anything. Like the video > posted a few weeks about thousands lining-up for "Obama money" in > Detroit. "Where did Obama get the money?" "I don't know, he gets it > from his stash." > > This will not end well when China says no, and China is getting louder > and clearer about saying NO. > > Here's a great article about the anniversary of the Berlin Wall falling - > > http://tinyurl.com/yld9msm > > It explains a great deal about how we can pass bills that we obviously > can't fund. We need some adults in the room. November 2010 won't be > here soon enough! > > Brad > > On 11/9/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > > Brad, > > ____________________ > > "This is an opportunity to do something as big as Social Security,? he > > added. ?And me, personally, I don?t want to be on the wrong side of > > history." > > ____________________ > > > > Darn, I guess he forgot, we can't pay for social security either. What a > > dumbass. Sure wouldn't want to be on the right side of honesty and > > integrity. > > > > Psst ... when they make up nasty names like that, it means you're scaring > > the hell out of 'em. > > > > Rik > > > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 6:08 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> ?Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going > >> to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is > >> confuse and dispirit? Democratic voters ?and it will encourage the > >> extremists.? > >> B. Obama > >> > >> > >> > >> Lord knows, I know my way around the world of salty language, but is > >> it too much to ask that the POTUS not use a sexual slur to describe > >> his opponents? Are people who oppose his policies really "extremists" > >> and "anti-government"? Is it too prudish to ask that the Lyin' King > >> save the trash talk for the basketball court? > >> > >> Brad > >> > >> -------------- > >> > >> >From the NYT's > >> > >> November 7, 2009, 9:45 pm > >> Lawmakers Detail Obama?s Pitch > >> By Jackie Calmes > >> > >> In an odd coincidence, the House debate on Saturday to overhaul health > >> care took place on the third anniversary of the 2006 election that > >> gave Democrats majority control after 12 years of Republican > >> dominance. It fell to President Obama and to Congressional leaders to > >> persuade those Democrats still sweating the final vote that it would > >> not prove the party?s undoing in next November?s midterm elections. > >> > >> The House Debate > >> > >> Prescriptions will be following the floor debate over health care > >> legislation in the House of Representatives throughout Saturday. > >> Previous posts: > >> > >> > >> Both Mr. Obama and the House leaders showcased Democrats? newest > >> colleague, Representative Bill Owens, who last Tuesday won a special > >> election in an upstate New York district that Republicans had held > >> since 1872. In the campaign, Mr. Owens gave unabashed support to the > >> pending House health care bill, despite the opposition of national > >> conservative groups, including the new Tea Party Patriots, who backed > >> Mr. Owens?s conservative rival. > >> > >> Mr. Obama, during his private pep talk to Democrats, recognized Mr. > >> Owens?s election and then posed a question to the other lawmakers. > >> According to Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, who supports > >> the health care bill, the president asked, ?Does anybody think that > >> the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they > >> bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit? > >> Democratic voters ?and it will encourage the extremists.? > >> > >> Another freshman Democrat from New Mexico, Representative Martin > >> Heinrich, said the president?s comments overall were reassuring. ?If > >> you want to see a recipe for failure,? Mr. Heinrich said, ?don?t do > >> the things you talked about in your campaigns and turn your back on > >> your base. All the independent voters in the world don?t matter if the > >> Democrats don?t turn out.? > >> > >> ?This is an opportunity to do something as big as Social Security,? he > >> added. ?And me, personally, I don?t want to be on the wrong side of > >> history.? > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > > you with experience. > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091109/6e681f39/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Tue Nov 10 01:28:21 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 00:28:21 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Allah's Business Card In-Reply-To: <400985d70911092008l5e87da57l303e5dc296f9b8e3@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911091542q6fdf52aaka21ee0d5509fcec2@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911091657h680055b5x840352fe8c3cd449@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911092008l5e87da57l303e5dc296f9b8e3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911092228y7882b034nabedce8b3d7c8fbe@mail.gmail.com> Back in the day, I used to call myself a Lutheran. I've since gotten away from organized religion, but that's neither here nor there. If it had happened then, that they put on a war with another country that happened to have a bunch of Lutherans in it, and invited me, I would care less if the enemy were Lutheran or any other religion. The damned point is they are trying to take away your way of life and impose theirs. Some Muslims come to this country and want to have all the freedoms and the standard of living, but when it comes to defending that against another Muslim suddenly they have a memory lapse as to how their bread has gotten buttered. People like these should return to their Muslim roots and we should encourage them (at gun point if need be) to go to wherever that might be, as long as it isn't here. Maybe the butter is much better there. Rik On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 10:08 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > How big a friggin' clue does the Army need? Talk about PC run amok! > > >From the WaPo - > > Fort Hood suspect Hasan warned of threats within the ranks > Urged release of Muslim troops in 2007 lecture at Walter Reed > > By Dana Priest > Monday, November 9, 2009 9:47 PM > > The Army psychiatrist believed to have killed 13 people at Fort Hood > warned a roomful of senior Army physicians a year and a half ago that > to avoid "adverse events," the military should allow Muslim soldiers > to be released as conscientious objectors instead of fighting in wars > against other Muslims. > > As a senior-year psychiatric resident at Walter Reed Army Medical > Center, Maj. Nidal M. Hasan was supposed to make a presentation on a > medical topic of his choosing as a culminating exercise of the > residency program. > > Instead, in late June 2007, he stood before his supervisors and about > 25 other mental health staff members and lectured on Islam, suicide > bombers and threats the military could encounter from Muslims > conflicted about fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, both Muslim > countries, according to a copy of the presentation obtained by The > Washington Post. > > "It's getting harder and harder for Muslims in the service to morally > justify being in a military that seems constantly engaged against > fellow Muslims," he said in the presentation. > > "It was really strange," said one staff member who attended the > presentation and requested anonymity because of the investigation of > Hasan. "The senior doctors looked really upset" at the end. These > medical presentations occurred each Wednesday afternoon, and other > students had lectured on new medications and treatment of specific > mental illnesses. > > An Army spokesman said Monday night he was unaware of the > presentation, and a Walter Reed spokesman declined comment. It is > unclear whether anyone in attendance reported the briefing to > counterintelligence or law enforcement authorities whose job it is to > identify threats from within the military ranks. > > Hasan spent six years at Walter Reed as an intern, resident and fellow > beginning in 2003. He had been transferred to Fort Hood as a > practicing psychiatrist in July and was set to leave soon for > Afghanistan. According to a relative, he had asked not to be deployed. > It is not known whether he ever sought conscientious-objector status. > > Maj. Gen. Gina S. Farrisee, the Army's personnel chief, said in an > interview Monday that due to the ongoing investigation, she and other > Army officials could not discuss whether Hasan had officially asked to > quit the service or to not be deployed. However, Farrisee and another > Army official said that it would be highly unusual for officers with > Hasan's rank and medical training to be allowed to resign, given their > ongoing service obligation. > > Investigators looking into Hasan's background are examining his > religious beliefs, whether he harbored extremist views, and whether he > was in contact with others who may have encouraged violence against > U.S. soldiers. > > The title of Hasan's power-point presentation was "The Koranic World > View As It Relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military." It consisted of > 50 slides. In one slide, Hasan described the presentation's objectives > as identifying "what the Koran inculcates in the minds of Muslims and > the potential implications this may have for the U.S. military." > > He also sought to "Describe the nature of the religious conflicts that > Muslims may have" who serve in the U.S. military and to convince the > Army that it should identify these individuals. > > Other slides delved into the history of Islam, its tenets, statistics > about the number of Muslims in the military, and explanations of > "offensive jihad," or holy war. > > Another slide suggested ways to draw out Muslim soldiers: "It must be > hard for you to balance Islamic beliefs that might be conflicting with > current war; feelings of guilt; Is it what you expected." > > Hasan's presentation lasted about an hour. It is unclear whether he > read out loud every point on each slide. If typical procedures were > followed, his adviser would have supervised the development of his > project, said people familiar with the practice. > > The final three slides of the presentation indicate that Hasan > referred to Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, suicide bombers and Iran. > > Under a slide titled "Comments," he wrote: "If Muslim groups can > convince Muslims that they are fighting for God against injustices of > the 'infidels'; ie: enemies of Islam, then Muslims can become a potent > adversary ie: suicide bombing, etc." [sic] > > The last bullet point on that page reads simply: "We love death more > then (sic) you love life!" > > Under the "Conclusions" page, Hasan wrote that "Fighting to establish > an Islamic State to please God, even by force, is condoned by the > Islam," and that "Muslim Soldiers should not serve in any capacity > that renders them at risk to hurting/killing believers unjustly -- > will vary!" > > The final page, labeled "Recommendation," contained only one suggestion: > > "Department of Defense should allow Muslims (sic) Soldiers the option > of being released as 'Conscientious objectors' to increase troop > morale and decrease adverse events." > > Staff writer Ann Scott Tyson contributed to this report. > > On 11/9/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > > Why are we so afraid to offend people who are not only ready and able to > > kill us, but delighted to have the opportunity. > > > > Ha ha 72 raisins .... I like that. > > > > So many agendas .... so little time. > > > > There was another writer who tried to turn this into a gun control thing > by > > reporting the pistol the shooter used was some special "cop killer" > pistol. > > Turns out the pistol, a FN Herstal five-seven, packs all the mouse > killing > > firepower of a 22 magnum. A 9MM makes it look like a pea shooter by > > comparison. The .357 Mag revolver, which he also had with him, but > > apparently didn't use, is a cannon by comparison. > > > > Here's the anti-gunner's article: > > > > > http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cop-killer-gun-thought-ft-hood-shooting/story?id=9019521 > > > > Here's the real scoop on that gun and the 5.7x28 ammo used in the > shootings. > > > > http://www.chuckhawks.com/5-7x28_cop_killer.htm > > > > I just love it when some reporter who couldn't tell a 450 Win Mag from a > > pool cue starts trying to dictate to the rest of us what kinds of guns we > > should be allowed to own. > > > > Rik > > > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> Is it too early to suggest that this WAS an act of terrorism, or > >> should we wait for the PC clock to run out and the lame-stream media > >> to finish its investigation? The "alphabet" networks are (ABC, CBS, > >> NBC) are still asking the tough questions, like "what did we do as a > >> society to drive this poor man to drive him to do this?" > >> > >> http://tinyurl.com/yl42t8j > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > > you with experience. > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091110/dfc4130f/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Tue Nov 10 07:00:55 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 06:00:55 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Allah's Business Card In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911092228y7882b034nabedce8b3d7c8fbe@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911091542q6fdf52aaka21ee0d5509fcec2@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911091657h680055b5x840352fe8c3cd449@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911092008l5e87da57l303e5dc296f9b8e3@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911092228y7882b034nabedce8b3d7c8fbe@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911100400k57650a2cgaf32e9faa936ad45@mail.gmail.com> Rik, When something like this happens, given what we know about the individual's behavior, you can't help but ask, "what the hell were his superiors thinking?" I know exactly what they were thinking. " This isn't worth it, I'll just get walked down the PC gangplank and suffer for bringing up the subject." This mindset is pervasive in the military, education, and the corporate world. The enemy has learned to use our free society and tolerance as a weapon. Ironically, just a few days ago a Federal court case ended in your neck-of-the-woods (posted below). The aviation industry continues to be probed for security weakness, and this court case was a major step backwards. Look what happened to Mark Steyn in Canada for writing an article. This is crazy. This PC pendulum is about due for a swing in the opposite direction - lives are at stake. Brad ------------- The Flying Imams Win And the rest of us lose. by Scott W. ?Johnson 11/09/2009, Volume 015, Issue 08 The case of the flying imams who were removed in November 2006 from a USAirways flight in Minneapolis for questioning by law enforcement authorities concluded in the Minnesota federal district court before Judge Ann Montgomery. The parties arrived at a settlement of the case on October 20 in a court-supervised conference. The amounts paid by the defendants remain confidential. The case drew national attention--including that of Congress, which passed a law protecting private citizens who report suspicious activity and law enforcement authorities who act in good faith on the information. The imams had named USAirways passengers who raised concerns about their behavior as John Doe defendants in their original complaint, but later dropped the passengers. Represented by an attorney from the New York chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the imams went forward with federal civil rights and state law claims against USAirways and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) police officers and FBI special agents involved in their removal from the flight and their questioning. This past July, Judge Montgomery denied the motions of the law enforcement defendants for dismissal on the ground of qualified immunity. When these defendants appealed the ruling to the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, she scheduled the conference that resulted in the termination of the lawsuit. As a result of the recent settlement, Montgomery's 47-page decision of last July stands as the last word on the law applicable to the case. Without going into all the legal issues it discusses, some aspects of it deserve serious scrutiny. Montgomery emphasized the distinction between the suspicion necessary for lawful investigatory stops (a relatively low standard) and the probable cause necessary for arrests (a higher standard), and her comments addressing the issue raise lingering concerns. The six imams were detained as they were returning home from a convention of the North American Imams Federation in a suburb of Minneapolis. Three of the six had prayed before the passengers at the airport as they awaited the departure of the flight. A passenger had passed a note to the pilot pointing out suspicious activity: 6 suspicious Arabic men on plane, spaced out in their seats. All were together saying "??.??.??.??Allah??.??.??.??Allah" cursing U.S. involvement w/Saddam before flight--1 in front exit row, another in first row 1st class, another in 8D, another in 22D, two in 25 E&F. Onboard USAirways personnel called MAC dispatch to advise that the six passengers would be removed and ask for officers to come to the gate. The first MAC officer on the scene was advised by a USAirways manager of the passenger's note. He was also advised that some of the six passengers had checked no luggage, some had asked for seatbelt extensions, some had one-way tickets, and all six were of Middle Eastern descent. A USAirways flight attendant told one of the MAC officers that, in her opinion, the two seatbelt extensions requested by the imams were unnecessary given their sizes. A MAC officer and a federal air marshal boarded the plane and interviewed the passenger who had written the note. In her decision the judge stated that after leaving the plane, the officers conferred and decided that the request for seatbelt extensions, the praying and utterances prior to boarding the plane, and the seating configuration amounted to suspicious behavior. They alerted the FBI and were requested to detain the imams for questioning. The imams were removed from the plane and searched. They were taken into custody and transported in handcuffs to the airport's police command center. There they were interrogated by the FBI and Secret Service for several hours, then released five to six hours after leaving the aircraft. The principal issue addressed by Montgomery's decision is whether the law enforcement defendants were entitled to qualified immunity for their actions. This immunity protects government officials from monetary claims under circumstances where a reasonable officer would not know his conduct was illegal. Montgomery held that the flying imams were the subject of an unlawful arrest and that no reasonable law enforcement officer could have believed otherwise. Quoting case law, Montgomery stated that the relevant question in determining qualified immunity is whether it would be clear to a reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful in the situation he confronted. She held that no reasonably competent law enforcement officer could have believed that his conduct was legal in the imams' case. One of the striking elements of the facts in the case is the number of law enforcement officers who participated in the detention or questioning of the imams: Montgomery mentioned six MAC officers, one federal air marshal, three FBI special agents, at least one Secret Service officer, and four other law enforcement officers. At the time of the arrest, Montgomery observed, law enforcement officers outnumbered the imams fifteen to six. So far as one can determine from the judge's opinion, not a single one of these officers questioned the legality of the imams' detention and interrogation. Given the variety of officers and agencies involved, one might almost posit the imams' detention as a case study in whether a reasonable law enforcement officer would think the conduct in question was legal. All of these apparently thought it was. Montgomery was highly critical of the law enforcement officers' failure to ascertain facts that would have exonerated the imams when they were removed from the aircraft. She cited the fact that USAirways had assigned the seats taken by the imams and that they had not in fact purchased one-way tickets. She called the imams' reported cursing of the United States constitutionally protected speech. And regarding the requested seatbelt extensions (one of which, she notes, was requested by a blind imam), she said: The MAC Defendants have produced no evidence of a documented instance in which seatbelt extensions were used as a weapon or that law enforcement ever expressed concern about their use as a weapon. It is difficult to understand what danger a seatbelt extension poses that is not also posed by a sturdy belt with a large buckle. Even assuming the extensions could be employed as a weapon, the MAC Defendants have failed to offer a reasoned explanation of how Saleddin, who is completely blind, could pose such a threat. These observations are odd. Prior to 9/11, there was no documented instance of box cutters having been used by hijackers. Prior to Richard Reid's attempted bombing of American Airline Flight 63 in December 2001, there was no documented instance of shoes having been used as bombs. When taken together with other circumstances, the imams' request for unneeded (according to the flight attendant) seatbelt extensions certainly raised reasonable suspicion if not probable cause. As for some of the other circumstances, Montgomery stated: "Praying in public, commenting on current events, and even criticizing government policy is protected speech under the First Amendment." This is true. She failed to note, however, that lawful speech such as cursing the United States might reasonably bear on the interpretation of other behavior brought to the attention of law enforcement. Neither does the decision state what the interrogation of the imams turned up about their backgrounds. It wouldn't have taken much digging to discover that one of them, Omar Shahin, was a former representative of and fundraiser for the Muslim charity KindHearts, shuttered by the Treasury Department as a Hamas front in February 2006. (Shahin claims he "had no clue what they were doing.") In the concluding paragraph of this key part of her decision, Montgomery stated: Unquestionably the events of 9/11 changed the calculus in the balance American society chooses to make, especially in airport settings, between liberty and security. Ultimately, the proper balance will be achieved, in large part, because we have the most capable and diligent law enforcement and intelligence communities in the world. But when a law enforcement officer exercises the power of the Sovereign over its citizens, she or he has a responsibility to operate within the bounds of the Constitution and cannot raise the specter of 9/11 as an absolute exception to that responsibility. Reading the opinion elicits a question: Can we reasonably rely on law enforcement authorities to be so capable and diligent that they will arrive at appropriate determinations within a matter of a few minutes--when fifteen out of fifteen law enforcement professionals handled the case of the flying imams as they did? The decision raises perhaps an even more basic question: What was law enforcement to do? Judge Montgomery believes the authorities were required to release the imams after a brief investigatory stop to go on their way and catch their flight or board another. The next time around, it will be the imams who fly and the other passengers who stay behind. Scott W. Johnson is a Minneapolis attorney and contributor to the Power Line blog (powerlineblog.com). On 11/10/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Back in the day, I used to call myself a Lutheran. I've since gotten away > from organized religion, but that's neither here nor there. If it had > happened then, that they put on a war with another country that happened to > have a bunch of Lutherans in it, and invited me, I would care less if the > enemy were Lutheran or any other religion. The damned point is they are > trying to take away your way of life and impose theirs. Some Muslims come to > this country and want to have all the freedoms and the standard of living, > but when it comes to defending that against another Muslim suddenly they > have a memory lapse as to how their bread has gotten buttered. People like > these should return to their Muslim roots and we should encourage them (at > gun point if need be) to go to wherever that might be, as long as it isn't > here. Maybe the butter is much better there. > > Rik > > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 10:08 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> How big a friggin' clue does the Army need? Talk about PC run amok! >> >> >From the WaPo - >> >> Fort Hood suspect Hasan warned of threats within the ranks >> Urged release of Muslim troops in 2007 lecture at Walter Reed >> >> By Dana Priest >> Monday, November 9, 2009 9:47 PM >> >> The Army psychiatrist believed to have killed 13 people at Fort Hood >> warned a roomful of senior Army physicians a year and a half ago that >> to avoid "adverse events," the military should allow Muslim soldiers >> to be released as conscientious objectors instead of fighting in wars >> against other Muslims. >> >> As a senior-year psychiatric resident at Walter Reed Army Medical >> Center, Maj. Nidal M. Hasan was supposed to make a presentation on a >> medical topic of his choosing as a culminating exercise of the >> residency program. >> >> Instead, in late June 2007, he stood before his supervisors and about >> 25 other mental health staff members and lectured on Islam, suicide >> bombers and threats the military could encounter from Muslims >> conflicted about fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, both Muslim >> countries, according to a copy of the presentation obtained by The >> Washington Post. >> >> "It's getting harder and harder for Muslims in the service to morally >> justify being in a military that seems constantly engaged against >> fellow Muslims," he said in the presentation. >> >> "It was really strange," said one staff member who attended the >> presentation and requested anonymity because of the investigation of >> Hasan. "The senior doctors looked really upset" at the end. These >> medical presentations occurred each Wednesday afternoon, and other >> students had lectured on new medications and treatment of specific >> mental illnesses. >> >> An Army spokesman said Monday night he was unaware of the >> presentation, and a Walter Reed spokesman declined comment. It is >> unclear whether anyone in attendance reported the briefing to >> counterintelligence or law enforcement authorities whose job it is to >> identify threats from within the military ranks. >> >> Hasan spent six years at Walter Reed as an intern, resident and fellow >> beginning in 2003. He had been transferred to Fort Hood as a >> practicing psychiatrist in July and was set to leave soon for >> Afghanistan. According to a relative, he had asked not to be deployed. >> It is not known whether he ever sought conscientious-objector status. >> >> Maj. Gen. Gina S. Farrisee, the Army's personnel chief, said in an >> interview Monday that due to the ongoing investigation, she and other >> Army officials could not discuss whether Hasan had officially asked to >> quit the service or to not be deployed. However, Farrisee and another >> Army official said that it would be highly unusual for officers with >> Hasan's rank and medical training to be allowed to resign, given their >> ongoing service obligation. >> >> Investigators looking into Hasan's background are examining his >> religious beliefs, whether he harbored extremist views, and whether he >> was in contact with others who may have encouraged violence against >> U.S. soldiers. >> >> The title of Hasan's power-point presentation was "The Koranic World >> View As It Relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military." It consisted of >> 50 slides. In one slide, Hasan described the presentation's objectives >> as identifying "what the Koran inculcates in the minds of Muslims and >> the potential implications this may have for the U.S. military." >> >> He also sought to "Describe the nature of the religious conflicts that >> Muslims may have" who serve in the U.S. military and to convince the >> Army that it should identify these individuals. >> >> Other slides delved into the history of Islam, its tenets, statistics >> about the number of Muslims in the military, and explanations of >> "offensive jihad," or holy war. >> >> Another slide suggested ways to draw out Muslim soldiers: "It must be >> hard for you to balance Islamic beliefs that might be conflicting with >> current war; feelings of guilt; Is it what you expected." >> >> Hasan's presentation lasted about an hour. It is unclear whether he >> read out loud every point on each slide. If typical procedures were >> followed, his adviser would have supervised the development of his >> project, said people familiar with the practice. >> >> The final three slides of the presentation indicate that Hasan >> referred to Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, suicide bombers and Iran. >> >> Under a slide titled "Comments," he wrote: "If Muslim groups can >> convince Muslims that they are fighting for God against injustices of >> the 'infidels'; ie: enemies of Islam, then Muslims can become a potent >> adversary ie: suicide bombing, etc." [sic] >> >> The last bullet point on that page reads simply: "We love death more >> then (sic) you love life!" >> >> Under the "Conclusions" page, Hasan wrote that "Fighting to establish >> an Islamic State to please God, even by force, is condoned by the >> Islam," and that "Muslim Soldiers should not serve in any capacity >> that renders them at risk to hurting/killing believers unjustly -- >> will vary!" >> >> The final page, labeled "Recommendation," contained only one suggestion: >> >> "Department of Defense should allow Muslims (sic) Soldiers the option >> of being released as 'Conscientious objectors' to increase troop >> morale and decrease adverse events." >> >> Staff writer Ann Scott Tyson contributed to this report. >> >> On 11/9/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> > Why are we so afraid to offend people who are not only ready and able to >> > kill us, but delighted to have the opportunity. >> > >> > Ha ha 72 raisins .... I like that. >> > >> > So many agendas .... so little time. >> > >> > There was another writer who tried to turn this into a gun control thing >> by >> > reporting the pistol the shooter used was some special "cop killer" >> pistol. >> > Turns out the pistol, a FN Herstal five-seven, packs all the mouse >> killing >> > firepower of a 22 magnum. A 9MM makes it look like a pea shooter by >> > comparison. The .357 Mag revolver, which he also had with him, but >> > apparently didn't use, is a cannon by comparison. >> > >> > Here's the anti-gunner's article: >> > >> > >> http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cop-killer-gun-thought-ft-hood-shooting/story?id=9019521 >> > >> > Here's the real scoop on that gun and the 5.7x28 ammo used in the >> shootings. >> > >> > http://www.chuckhawks.com/5-7x28_cop_killer.htm >> > >> > I just love it when some reporter who couldn't tell a 450 Win Mag from a >> > pool cue starts trying to dictate to the rest of us what kinds of guns >> > we >> > should be allowed to own. >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> Is it too early to suggest that this WAS an act of terrorism, or >> >> should we wait for the PC clock to run out and the lame-stream media >> >> to finish its investigation? The "alphabet" networks are (ABC, CBS, >> >> NBC) are still asking the tough questions, like "what did we do as a >> >> society to drive this poor man to drive him to do this?" >> >> >> >> http://tinyurl.com/yl42t8j >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> > beat >> > you with experience. >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From ekroposki at charter.net Tue Nov 10 07:07:05 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 07:07:05 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Rik, ut oh Message-ID: Rik, Rik said, "People like these should return to their Muslim roots and we should encourage them (at gun point if need be) to go to wherever that might be, as long as it isn't here. Maybe the butter is much better there." Now Rik, recall the angst I generated when I suggested that those supporting national health care should go live in one of the socialist countries? Unfortunately, we are very much in the minority. The feel gooders and do gooders are in control. It matters not that it destroys America. EK "Adjust your end to your means. In determining your object, clear sight and cool calculation should prevail. It is folly "to bite off more than you can chew." The beginning of military wisdom is a sense of what is possible." Lidell Hart -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091110/a161ad41/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Tue Nov 10 08:29:39 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 07:29:39 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Allah's Business Card In-Reply-To: <400985d70911100400k57650a2cgaf32e9faa936ad45@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911091542q6fdf52aaka21ee0d5509fcec2@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911091657h680055b5x840352fe8c3cd449@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911092008l5e87da57l303e5dc296f9b8e3@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911092228y7882b034nabedce8b3d7c8fbe@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911100400k57650a2cgaf32e9faa936ad45@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911100529jf49844dg2ebd0880cae34602@mail.gmail.com> Apparently, imams aren't the brightest bulbs on the tree. It certainly isn't rocket science to understand that since 9-11 people are a little skittish about getting on an airplane, defenseless as a newborn babe, with a bunch of Muslim people, let alone Allah chanting, US cursing ones. One might think that good sense would tell these gentlemen to keep their damned pie hole shut for an hour or two. Had they, they would have gotten where they were going, probably none the worse for wear. A judge with any sense at all would have looked them in the eye and said as much, right before he (she) said case dismissed. Free speech doesn't extend to yelling fire in a crowded theater and to a reasonable person, this is effectively exactly what these imams were doing. Shame on your sorry hide judge Montgomery. Rik On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 6:00 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > When something like this happens, given what we know about the > individual's behavior, you can't help but ask, "what the hell were his > superiors thinking?" I know exactly what they were thinking. " This > isn't worth it, I'll just get walked down the PC gangplank and suffer > for bringing up the subject." This mindset is pervasive in the > military, education, and the corporate world. The enemy has learned > to use our free society and tolerance as a weapon. > > Ironically, just a few days ago a Federal court case ended in your > neck-of-the-woods (posted below). The aviation industry continues to > be probed for security weakness, and this court case was a major step > backwards. Look what happened to Mark Steyn in Canada for writing an > article. This is crazy. > > This PC pendulum is about due for a swing in the opposite direction - > lives are at stake. > > Brad > > ------------- > > The Flying Imams Win > And the rest of us lose. > by Scott W. Johnson > 11/09/2009, Volume 015, Issue 08 > > > The case of the flying imams who were removed in November 2006 from a > USAirways flight in Minneapolis for questioning by law enforcement > authorities concluded in the Minnesota federal district court before > Judge Ann Montgomery. The parties arrived at a settlement of the case > on October 20 in a court-supervised conference. The amounts paid by > the defendants remain confidential. > > The case drew national attention--including that of Congress, which > passed a law protecting private citizens who report suspicious > activity and law enforcement authorities who act in good faith on the > information. The imams had named USAirways passengers who raised > concerns about their behavior as John Doe defendants in their original > complaint, but later dropped the passengers. > > Represented by an attorney from the New York chapter of the Council on > American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the imams went forward with federal > civil rights and state law claims against USAirways and the > Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) police officers and FBI special > agents involved in their removal from the flight and their > questioning. This past July, Judge Montgomery denied the motions of > the law enforcement defendants for dismissal on the ground of > qualified immunity. > > When these defendants appealed the ruling to the Eighth U.S. Circuit > Court of Appeals, she scheduled the conference that resulted in the > termination of the lawsuit. As a result of the recent settlement, > Montgomery's 47-page decision of last July stands as the last word on > the law applicable to the case. Without going into all the legal > issues it discusses, some aspects of it deserve serious scrutiny. > Montgomery emphasized the distinction between the suspicion necessary > for lawful investigatory stops (a relatively low standard) and the > probable cause necessary for arrests (a higher standard), and her > comments addressing the issue raise lingering concerns. > > The six imams were detained as they were returning home from a > convention of the North American Imams Federation in a suburb of > Minneapolis. Three of the six had prayed before the passengers at the > airport as they awaited the departure of the flight. A passenger had > passed a note to the pilot pointing out suspicious activity: > > 6 suspicious Arabic men on plane, spaced out in their seats. All > were together saying "??.??.??.??Allah??.??.??.??Allah" cursing U.S. > involvement w/Saddam before flight--1 in front exit row, another in > first row 1st class, another in 8D, another in 22D, two in 25 E&F. > > Onboard USAirways personnel called MAC dispatch to advise that the six > passengers would be removed and ask for officers to come to the gate. > The first MAC officer on the scene was advised by a USAirways manager > of the passenger's note. He was also advised that some of the six > passengers had checked no luggage, some had asked for seatbelt > extensions, some had one-way tickets, and all six were of Middle > Eastern descent. A USAirways flight attendant told one of the MAC > officers that, in her opinion, the two seatbelt extensions requested > by the imams were unnecessary given their sizes. > > A MAC officer and a federal air marshal boarded the plane and > interviewed the passenger who had written the note. In her decision > the judge stated that after leaving the plane, the officers conferred > and decided that the request for seatbelt extensions, the praying and > utterances prior to boarding the plane, and the seating configuration > amounted to suspicious behavior. They alerted the FBI and were > requested to detain the imams for questioning. > > The imams were removed from the plane and searched. They were taken > into custody and transported in handcuffs to the airport's police > command center. There they were interrogated by the FBI and Secret > Service for several hours, then released five to six hours after > leaving the aircraft. > > The principal issue addressed by Montgomery's decision is whether the > law enforcement defendants were entitled to qualified immunity for > their actions. This immunity protects government officials from > monetary claims under circumstances where a reasonable officer would > not know his conduct was illegal. Montgomery held that the flying > imams were the subject of an unlawful arrest and that no reasonable > law enforcement officer could have believed otherwise. > > Quoting case law, Montgomery stated that the relevant question in > determining qualified immunity is whether it would be clear to a > reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful in the situation he > confronted. She held that no reasonably competent law enforcement > officer could have believed that his conduct was legal in the imams' > case. > > One of the striking elements of the facts in the case is the number of > law enforcement officers who participated in the detention or > questioning of the imams: Montgomery mentioned six MAC officers, one > federal air marshal, three FBI special agents, at least one Secret > Service officer, and four other law enforcement officers. At the time > of the arrest, Montgomery observed, law enforcement officers > outnumbered the imams fifteen to six. > > So far as one can determine from the judge's opinion, not a single one > of these officers questioned the legality of the imams' detention and > interrogation. Given the variety of officers and agencies involved, > one might almost posit the imams' detention as a case study in whether > a reasonable law enforcement officer would think the conduct in > question was legal. All of these apparently thought it was. > > Montgomery was highly critical of the law enforcement officers' > failure to ascertain facts that would have exonerated the imams when > they were removed from the aircraft. She cited the fact that USAirways > had assigned the seats taken by the imams and that they had not in > fact purchased one-way tickets. She called the imams' reported cursing > of the United States constitutionally protected speech. And regarding > the requested seatbelt extensions (one of which, she notes, was > requested by a blind imam), she said: > > The MAC Defendants have produced no evidence of a documented > instance in which seatbelt extensions were used as a weapon or that > law enforcement ever expressed concern about their use as a weapon. It > is difficult to understand what danger a seatbelt extension poses that > is not also posed by a sturdy belt with a large buckle. Even assuming > the extensions could be employed as a weapon, the MAC Defendants have > failed to offer a reasoned explanation of how Saleddin, who is > completely blind, could pose such a threat. > > These observations are odd. Prior to 9/11, there was no documented > instance of box cutters having been used by hijackers. Prior to > Richard Reid's attempted bombing of American Airline Flight 63 in > December 2001, there was no documented instance of shoes having been > used as bombs. When taken together with other circumstances, the > imams' request for unneeded (according to the flight attendant) > seatbelt extensions certainly raised reasonable suspicion if not > probable cause. > > As for some of the other circumstances, Montgomery stated: "Praying in > public, commenting on current events, and even criticizing government > policy is protected speech under the First Amendment." This is true. > She failed to note, however, that lawful speech such as cursing the > United States might reasonably bear on the interpretation of other > behavior brought to the attention of law enforcement. > > Neither does the decision state what the interrogation of the imams > turned up about their backgrounds. It wouldn't have taken much digging > to discover that one of them, Omar Shahin, was a former representative > of and fundraiser for the Muslim charity KindHearts, shuttered by the > Treasury Department as a Hamas front in February 2006. (Shahin claims > he "had no clue what they were doing.") > > In the concluding paragraph of this key part of her decision, Montgomery > stated: > > Unquestionably the events of 9/11 changed the calculus in the > balance American society chooses to make, especially in airport > settings, between liberty and security. Ultimately, the proper balance > will be achieved, in large part, because we have the most capable and > diligent law enforcement and intelligence communities in the world. > But when a law enforcement officer exercises the power of the > Sovereign over its citizens, she or he has a responsibility to operate > within the bounds of the Constitution and cannot raise the specter of > 9/11 as an absolute exception to that responsibility. > > Reading the opinion elicits a question: Can we reasonably rely on law > enforcement authorities to be so capable and diligent that they will > arrive at appropriate determinations within a matter of a few > minutes--when fifteen out of fifteen law enforcement professionals > handled the case of the flying imams as they did? > > The decision raises perhaps an even more basic question: What was law > enforcement to do? Judge Montgomery believes the authorities were > required to release the imams after a brief investigatory stop to go > on their way and catch their flight or board another. The next time > around, it will be the imams who fly and the other passengers who stay > behind. > > Scott W. Johnson is a Minneapolis attorney and contributor to the > Power Line blog (powerlineblog.com). > > On 11/10/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > > Back in the day, I used to call myself a Lutheran. I've since gotten away > > from organized religion, but that's neither here nor there. If it had > > happened then, that they put on a war with another country that happened > to > > have a bunch of Lutherans in it, and invited me, I would care less if the > > enemy were Lutheran or any other religion. The damned point is they are > > trying to take away your way of life and impose theirs. Some Muslims come > to > > this country and want to have all the freedoms and the standard of > living, > > but when it comes to defending that against another Muslim suddenly they > > have a memory lapse as to how their bread has gotten buttered. People > like > > these should return to their Muslim roots and we should encourage them > (at > > gun point if need be) to go to wherever that might be, as long as it > isn't > > here. Maybe the butter is much better there. > > > > Rik > > > > > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 10:08 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> How big a friggin' clue does the Army need? Talk about PC run amok! > >> > >> >From the WaPo - > >> > >> Fort Hood suspect Hasan warned of threats within the ranks > >> Urged release of Muslim troops in 2007 lecture at Walter Reed > >> > >> By Dana Priest > >> Monday, November 9, 2009 9:47 PM > >> > >> The Army psychiatrist believed to have killed 13 people at Fort Hood > >> warned a roomful of senior Army physicians a year and a half ago that > >> to avoid "adverse events," the military should allow Muslim soldiers > >> to be released as conscientious objectors instead of fighting in wars > >> against other Muslims. > >> > >> As a senior-year psychiatric resident at Walter Reed Army Medical > >> Center, Maj. Nidal M. Hasan was supposed to make a presentation on a > >> medical topic of his choosing as a culminating exercise of the > >> residency program. > >> > >> Instead, in late June 2007, he stood before his supervisors and about > >> 25 other mental health staff members and lectured on Islam, suicide > >> bombers and threats the military could encounter from Muslims > >> conflicted about fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, both Muslim > >> countries, according to a copy of the presentation obtained by The > >> Washington Post. > >> > >> "It's getting harder and harder for Muslims in the service to morally > >> justify being in a military that seems constantly engaged against > >> fellow Muslims," he said in the presentation. > >> > >> "It was really strange," said one staff member who attended the > >> presentation and requested anonymity because of the investigation of > >> Hasan. "The senior doctors looked really upset" at the end. These > >> medical presentations occurred each Wednesday afternoon, and other > >> students had lectured on new medications and treatment of specific > >> mental illnesses. > >> > >> An Army spokesman said Monday night he was unaware of the > >> presentation, and a Walter Reed spokesman declined comment. It is > >> unclear whether anyone in attendance reported the briefing to > >> counterintelligence or law enforcement authorities whose job it is to > >> identify threats from within the military ranks. > >> > >> Hasan spent six years at Walter Reed as an intern, resident and fellow > >> beginning in 2003. He had been transferred to Fort Hood as a > >> practicing psychiatrist in July and was set to leave soon for > >> Afghanistan. According to a relative, he had asked not to be deployed. > >> It is not known whether he ever sought conscientious-objector status. > >> > >> Maj. Gen. Gina S. Farrisee, the Army's personnel chief, said in an > >> interview Monday that due to the ongoing investigation, she and other > >> Army officials could not discuss whether Hasan had officially asked to > >> quit the service or to not be deployed. However, Farrisee and another > >> Army official said that it would be highly unusual for officers with > >> Hasan's rank and medical training to be allowed to resign, given their > >> ongoing service obligation. > >> > >> Investigators looking into Hasan's background are examining his > >> religious beliefs, whether he harbored extremist views, and whether he > >> was in contact with others who may have encouraged violence against > >> U.S. soldiers. > >> > >> The title of Hasan's power-point presentation was "The Koranic World > >> View As It Relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military." It consisted of > >> 50 slides. In one slide, Hasan described the presentation's objectives > >> as identifying "what the Koran inculcates in the minds of Muslims and > >> the potential implications this may have for the U.S. military." > >> > >> He also sought to "Describe the nature of the religious conflicts that > >> Muslims may have" who serve in the U.S. military and to convince the > >> Army that it should identify these individuals. > >> > >> Other slides delved into the history of Islam, its tenets, statistics > >> about the number of Muslims in the military, and explanations of > >> "offensive jihad," or holy war. > >> > >> Another slide suggested ways to draw out Muslim soldiers: "It must be > >> hard for you to balance Islamic beliefs that might be conflicting with > >> current war; feelings of guilt; Is it what you expected." > >> > >> Hasan's presentation lasted about an hour. It is unclear whether he > >> read out loud every point on each slide. If typical procedures were > >> followed, his adviser would have supervised the development of his > >> project, said people familiar with the practice. > >> > >> The final three slides of the presentation indicate that Hasan > >> referred to Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, suicide bombers and Iran. > >> > >> Under a slide titled "Comments," he wrote: "If Muslim groups can > >> convince Muslims that they are fighting for God against injustices of > >> the 'infidels'; ie: enemies of Islam, then Muslims can become a potent > >> adversary ie: suicide bombing, etc." [sic] > >> > >> The last bullet point on that page reads simply: "We love death more > >> then (sic) you love life!" > >> > >> Under the "Conclusions" page, Hasan wrote that "Fighting to establish > >> an Islamic State to please God, even by force, is condoned by the > >> Islam," and that "Muslim Soldiers should not serve in any capacity > >> that renders them at risk to hurting/killing believers unjustly -- > >> will vary!" > >> > >> The final page, labeled "Recommendation," contained only one suggestion: > >> > >> "Department of Defense should allow Muslims (sic) Soldiers the option > >> of being released as 'Conscientious objectors' to increase troop > >> morale and decrease adverse events." > >> > >> Staff writer Ann Scott Tyson contributed to this report. > >> > >> On 11/9/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > >> > Why are we so afraid to offend people who are not only ready and able > to > >> > kill us, but delighted to have the opportunity. > >> > > >> > Ha ha 72 raisins .... I like that. > >> > > >> > So many agendas .... so little time. > >> > > >> > There was another writer who tried to turn this into a gun control > thing > >> by > >> > reporting the pistol the shooter used was some special "cop killer" > >> pistol. > >> > Turns out the pistol, a FN Herstal five-seven, packs all the mouse > >> killing > >> > firepower of a 22 magnum. A 9MM makes it look like a pea shooter by > >> > comparison. The .357 Mag revolver, which he also had with him, but > >> > apparently didn't use, is a cannon by comparison. > >> > > >> > Here's the anti-gunner's article: > >> > > >> > > >> > http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cop-killer-gun-thought-ft-hood-shooting/story?id=9019521 > >> > > >> > Here's the real scoop on that gun and the 5.7x28 ammo used in the > >> shootings. > >> > > >> > http://www.chuckhawks.com/5-7x28_cop_killer.htm > >> > > >> > I just love it when some reporter who couldn't tell a 450 Win Mag from > a > >> > pool cue starts trying to dictate to the rest of us what kinds of guns > >> > we > >> > should be allowed to own. > >> > > >> > Rik > >> > > >> > On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Brad Haslett > wrote: > >> > > >> >> Is it too early to suggest that this WAS an act of terrorism, or > >> >> should we wait for the PC clock to run out and the lame-stream media > >> >> to finish its investigation? The "alphabet" networks are (ABC, CBS, > >> >> NBC) are still asking the tough questions, like "what did we do as a > >> >> society to drive this poor man to drive him to do this?" > >> >> > >> >> http://tinyurl.com/yl42t8j > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> >> > >> >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then > >> > beat > >> > you with experience. > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > > you with experience. > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091110/e3b19301/attachment-0001.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Tue Nov 10 08:53:30 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 07:53:30 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Rik, ut oh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6634e19e0911100553o2a3ff8e2x2ae559f879e209f3@mail.gmail.com> Ed, "It matters not that it destroys America." Unfortunately, for the wimps and pussies, It does matter to me. If this inability to kill another Muslim is prevalent among Muslims, then they can certainly be of no use for our military and should not be allowed in. We pay these people good money and depend on them to defend against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic. If one can't do that, why would we hire him?? When that man indicated that he couldn't kill another Muslim, he should have been gone, do not pass go, do not collect $200. It would be different if he said, he could not kill another person, but apparently, killing Lutherans, or Catholics since he didn't mention them, doesn't weigh on his conscience. Our soldiers must be equal opportunity killers, or not at all. Not ranting at you ,Ed, just in general Rik On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 6:07 AM, Ed Kroposki wrote: > Rik, > > Rik said, "People like these should return to their > Muslim roots and we should encourage them (at > gun point if need be) to go to wherever that > might be, as long as it isn't here. Maybe the butter > is much better there." > > Now Rik, recall the angst I generated when I > suggested that those supporting national health > care should go live in one of the socialist countries? > > Unfortunately, we are very much in the minority. The > feel gooders and do gooders are in control. It matters > not that it destroys America. > > EK > > > "Adjust your end to your means. In determining your object, clear sight > and cool calculation should prevail. It is folly "to bite off more than > you can chew." The beginning of military wisdom is a sense of what is > possible." Lidell Hart > > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091110/4fc27f99/attachment.html From mweisner at ebsmed.com Tue Nov 10 09:14:59 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:14:59 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Allah's Business Card References: <400985d70911091542q6fdf52aaka21ee0d5509fcec2@mail.gmail.com><6634e19e0911091657h680055b5x840352fe8c3cd449@mail.gmail.com><400985d70911092008l5e87da57l303e5dc296f9b8e3@mail.gmail.com><6634e19e0911092228y7882b034nabedce8b3d7c8fbe@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911100400k57650a2cgaf32e9faa936ad45@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <251B3465DE7B448E8C1B7915D9B96E2C@acer7e8cb8aec8> Brad, "What the hell were his superiors thinking?" I find it interesting that the military was unable to do anything except promote him to major and deploy him to an active region. Maybe they had planned a "PC solution" for the problem overseas. If he acted as a terrorist (I refuse to try him in the court of public opinion, although the case appears made) then one must look at the fact that his actions must have been hastilly planned, since he failed on so many fronts as a terrorist, most importantly, his own death. He may have been shouting all kinds of stuff and he may have been nuttier than a fruitcake. Since he is still alive, we will have to permit the system to deal with him, a fate that surely will be worse than death. As far as Judge Monty goes, the entire airline security system is reactive, improperly trained and definitely uses profiling as a method of identifying "possible" threats. The problem was not with the police officers or even necessarily with the imams. The issue is whether it is prudent to deny passenger civil rights in an effort to protect the public using an ineffective approach. In this country, people have always been able to speak freely, even at the airports, until 9-11. TSA officials are trained to detain any individuals who may pose a threat (as documented by actions, words or demeanor.) You can been detained and interrogated (for hours) just for talking about the quality and operation of the screening system, as a friend of mine was. He works for a major competitor of the system that was in use and posed no threat to security. IMHO, these actions do not make air travel any safer. The decision handed down by Montgomery demonstrates how difficult it is to use such procedures which have not been shown to truly prevent any terrorist actions in the air. Mike From: "Brad Haslett" Tuesday, November 10, 2009 7:00 AM > Rik, > > When something like this happens, given what we know about the > individual's behavior, you can't help but ask, "what the hell were his > superiors thinking?" I know exactly what they were thinking. " This > isn't worth it, I'll just get walked down the PC gangplank and suffer > for bringing up the subject." This mindset is pervasive in the > military, education, and the corporate world. The enemy has learned > to use our free society and tolerance as a weapon. > > Ironically, just a few days ago a Federal court case ended in your > neck-of-the-woods (posted below). The aviation industry continues to > be probed for security weakness, and this court case was a major step > backwards. Look what happened to Mark Steyn in Canada for writing an > article. This is crazy. > > This PC pendulum is about due for a swing in the opposite direction - > lives are at stake. > > Brad > > ------------- > > The Flying Imams Win > And the rest of us lose. > by Scott W. ?Johnson > 11/09/2009, Volume 015, Issue 08 > > > The case of the flying imams who were removed in November 2006 from a > USAirways flight in Minneapolis for questioning by law enforcement > authorities concluded in the Minnesota federal district court before > Judge Ann Montgomery. The parties arrived at a settlement of the case > on October 20 in a court-supervised conference. The amounts paid by > the defendants remain confidential. > > The case drew national attention--including that of Congress, which > passed a law protecting private citizens who report suspicious > activity and law enforcement authorities who act in good faith on the > information. The imams had named USAirways passengers who raised > concerns about their behavior as John Doe defendants in their original > complaint, but later dropped the passengers. > > Represented by an attorney from the New York chapter of the Council on > American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the imams went forward with federal > civil rights and state law claims against USAirways and the > Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) police officers and FBI special > agents involved in their removal from the flight and their > questioning. This past July, Judge Montgomery denied the motions of > the law enforcement defendants for dismissal on the ground of > qualified immunity. > > When these defendants appealed the ruling to the Eighth U.S. Circuit > Court of Appeals, she scheduled the conference that resulted in the > termination of the lawsuit. As a result of the recent settlement, > Montgomery's 47-page decision of last July stands as the last word on > the law applicable to the case. Without going into all the legal > issues it discusses, some aspects of it deserve serious scrutiny. > Montgomery emphasized the distinction between the suspicion necessary > for lawful investigatory stops (a relatively low standard) and the > probable cause necessary for arrests (a higher standard), and her > comments addressing the issue raise lingering concerns. > > The six imams were detained as they were returning home from a > convention of the North American Imams Federation in a suburb of > Minneapolis. Three of the six had prayed before the passengers at the > airport as they awaited the departure of the flight. A passenger had > passed a note to the pilot pointing out suspicious activity: > > 6 suspicious Arabic men on plane, spaced out in their seats. All > were together saying "??.??.??.??Allah??.??.??.??Allah" cursing U.S. > involvement w/Saddam before flight--1 in front exit row, another in > first row 1st class, another in 8D, another in 22D, two in 25 E&F. > > Onboard USAirways personnel called MAC dispatch to advise that the six > passengers would be removed and ask for officers to come to the gate. > The first MAC officer on the scene was advised by a USAirways manager > of the passenger's note. He was also advised that some of the six > passengers had checked no luggage, some had asked for seatbelt > extensions, some had one-way tickets, and all six were of Middle > Eastern descent. A USAirways flight attendant told one of the MAC > officers that, in her opinion, the two seatbelt extensions requested > by the imams were unnecessary given their sizes. > > A MAC officer and a federal air marshal boarded the plane and > interviewed the passenger who had written the note. In her decision > the judge stated that after leaving the plane, the officers conferred > and decided that the request for seatbelt extensions, the praying and > utterances prior to boarding the plane, and the seating configuration > amounted to suspicious behavior. They alerted the FBI and were > requested to detain the imams for questioning. > > The imams were removed from the plane and searched. They were taken > into custody and transported in handcuffs to the airport's police > command center. There they were interrogated by the FBI and Secret > Service for several hours, then released five to six hours after > leaving the aircraft. > > The principal issue addressed by Montgomery's decision is whether the > law enforcement defendants were entitled to qualified immunity for > their actions. This immunity protects government officials from > monetary claims under circumstances where a reasonable officer would > not know his conduct was illegal. Montgomery held that the flying > imams were the subject of an unlawful arrest and that no reasonable > law enforcement officer could have believed otherwise. > > Quoting case law, Montgomery stated that the relevant question in > determining qualified immunity is whether it would be clear to a > reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful in the situation he > confronted. She held that no reasonably competent law enforcement > officer could have believed that his conduct was legal in the imams' > case. > > One of the striking elements of the facts in the case is the number of > law enforcement officers who participated in the detention or > questioning of the imams: Montgomery mentioned six MAC officers, one > federal air marshal, three FBI special agents, at least one Secret > Service officer, and four other law enforcement officers. At the time > of the arrest, Montgomery observed, law enforcement officers > outnumbered the imams fifteen to six. > > So far as one can determine from the judge's opinion, not a single one > of these officers questioned the legality of the imams' detention and > interrogation. Given the variety of officers and agencies involved, > one might almost posit the imams' detention as a case study in whether > a reasonable law enforcement officer would think the conduct in > question was legal. All of these apparently thought it was. > > Montgomery was highly critical of the law enforcement officers' > failure to ascertain facts that would have exonerated the imams when > they were removed from the aircraft. She cited the fact that USAirways > had assigned the seats taken by the imams and that they had not in > fact purchased one-way tickets. She called the imams' reported cursing > of the United States constitutionally protected speech. And regarding > the requested seatbelt extensions (one of which, she notes, was > requested by a blind imam), she said: > > The MAC Defendants have produced no evidence of a documented > instance in which seatbelt extensions were used as a weapon or that > law enforcement ever expressed concern about their use as a weapon. It > is difficult to understand what danger a seatbelt extension poses that > is not also posed by a sturdy belt with a large buckle. Even assuming > the extensions could be employed as a weapon, the MAC Defendants have > failed to offer a reasoned explanation of how Saleddin, who is > completely blind, could pose such a threat. > > These observations are odd. Prior to 9/11, there was no documented > instance of box cutters having been used by hijackers. Prior to > Richard Reid's attempted bombing of American Airline Flight 63 in > December 2001, there was no documented instance of shoes having been > used as bombs. When taken together with other circumstances, the > imams' request for unneeded (according to the flight attendant) > seatbelt extensions certainly raised reasonable suspicion if not > probable cause. > > As for some of the other circumstances, Montgomery stated: "Praying in > public, commenting on current events, and even criticizing government > policy is protected speech under the First Amendment." This is true. > She failed to note, however, that lawful speech such as cursing the > United States might reasonably bear on the interpretation of other > behavior brought to the attention of law enforcement. > > Neither does the decision state what the interrogation of the imams > turned up about their backgrounds. It wouldn't have taken much digging > to discover that one of them, Omar Shahin, was a former representative > of and fundraiser for the Muslim charity KindHearts, shuttered by the > Treasury Department as a Hamas front in February 2006. (Shahin claims > he "had no clue what they were doing.") > > In the concluding paragraph of this key part of her decision, Montgomery > stated: > > Unquestionably the events of 9/11 changed the calculus in the > balance American society chooses to make, especially in airport > settings, between liberty and security. Ultimately, the proper balance > will be achieved, in large part, because we have the most capable and > diligent law enforcement and intelligence communities in the world. > But when a law enforcement officer exercises the power of the > Sovereign over its citizens, she or he has a responsibility to operate > within the bounds of the Constitution and cannot raise the specter of > 9/11 as an absolute exception to that responsibility. > > Reading the opinion elicits a question: Can we reasonably rely on law > enforcement authorities to be so capable and diligent that they will > arrive at appropriate determinations within a matter of a few > minutes--when fifteen out of fifteen law enforcement professionals > handled the case of the flying imams as they did? > > The decision raises perhaps an even more basic question: What was law > enforcement to do? Judge Montgomery believes the authorities were > required to release the imams after a brief investigatory stop to go > on their way and catch their flight or board another. The next time > around, it will be the imams who fly and the other passengers who stay > behind. > > Scott W. Johnson is a Minneapolis attorney and contributor to the > Power Line blog (powerlineblog.com). > > On 11/10/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> Back in the day, I used to call myself a Lutheran. I've since gotten away >> from organized religion, but that's neither here nor there. If it had >> happened then, that they put on a war with another country that happened >> to >> have a bunch of Lutherans in it, and invited me, I would care less if the >> enemy were Lutheran or any other religion. The damned point is they are >> trying to take away your way of life and impose theirs. Some Muslims come >> to >> this country and want to have all the freedoms and the standard of >> living, >> but when it comes to defending that against another Muslim suddenly they >> have a memory lapse as to how their bread has gotten buttered. People >> like >> these should return to their Muslim roots and we should encourage them >> (at >> gun point if need be) to go to wherever that might be, as long as it >> isn't >> here. Maybe the butter is much better there. >> >> Rik >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 10:08 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> >>> How big a friggin' clue does the Army need? Talk about PC run amok! >>> >>> >From the WaPo - >>> >>> Fort Hood suspect Hasan warned of threats within the ranks >>> Urged release of Muslim troops in 2007 lecture at Walter Reed >>> >>> By Dana Priest >>> Monday, November 9, 2009 9:47 PM >>> >>> The Army psychiatrist believed to have killed 13 people at Fort Hood >>> warned a roomful of senior Army physicians a year and a half ago that >>> to avoid "adverse events," the military should allow Muslim soldiers >>> to be released as conscientious objectors instead of fighting in wars >>> against other Muslims. >>> >>> As a senior-year psychiatric resident at Walter Reed Army Medical >>> Center, Maj. Nidal M. Hasan was supposed to make a presentation on a >>> medical topic of his choosing as a culminating exercise of the >>> residency program. >>> >>> Instead, in late June 2007, he stood before his supervisors and about >>> 25 other mental health staff members and lectured on Islam, suicide >>> bombers and threats the military could encounter from Muslims >>> conflicted about fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, both Muslim >>> countries, according to a copy of the presentation obtained by The >>> Washington Post. >>> >>> "It's getting harder and harder for Muslims in the service to morally >>> justify being in a military that seems constantly engaged against >>> fellow Muslims," he said in the presentation. >>> >>> "It was really strange," said one staff member who attended the >>> presentation and requested anonymity because of the investigation of >>> Hasan. "The senior doctors looked really upset" at the end. These >>> medical presentations occurred each Wednesday afternoon, and other >>> students had lectured on new medications and treatment of specific >>> mental illnesses. >>> >>> An Army spokesman said Monday night he was unaware of the >>> presentation, and a Walter Reed spokesman declined comment. It is >>> unclear whether anyone in attendance reported the briefing to >>> counterintelligence or law enforcement authorities whose job it is to >>> identify threats from within the military ranks. >>> >>> Hasan spent six years at Walter Reed as an intern, resident and fellow >>> beginning in 2003. He had been transferred to Fort Hood as a >>> practicing psychiatrist in July and was set to leave soon for >>> Afghanistan. According to a relative, he had asked not to be deployed. >>> It is not known whether he ever sought conscientious-objector status. >>> >>> Maj. Gen. Gina S. Farrisee, the Army's personnel chief, said in an >>> interview Monday that due to the ongoing investigation, she and other >>> Army officials could not discuss whether Hasan had officially asked to >>> quit the service or to not be deployed. However, Farrisee and another >>> Army official said that it would be highly unusual for officers with >>> Hasan's rank and medical training to be allowed to resign, given their >>> ongoing service obligation. >>> >>> Investigators looking into Hasan's background are examining his >>> religious beliefs, whether he harbored extremist views, and whether he >>> was in contact with others who may have encouraged violence against >>> U.S. soldiers. >>> >>> The title of Hasan's power-point presentation was "The Koranic World >>> View As It Relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military." It consisted of >>> 50 slides. In one slide, Hasan described the presentation's objectives >>> as identifying "what the Koran inculcates in the minds of Muslims and >>> the potential implications this may have for the U.S. military." >>> >>> He also sought to "Describe the nature of the religious conflicts that >>> Muslims may have" who serve in the U.S. military and to convince the >>> Army that it should identify these individuals. >>> >>> Other slides delved into the history of Islam, its tenets, statistics >>> about the number of Muslims in the military, and explanations of >>> "offensive jihad," or holy war. >>> >>> Another slide suggested ways to draw out Muslim soldiers: "It must be >>> hard for you to balance Islamic beliefs that might be conflicting with >>> current war; feelings of guilt; Is it what you expected." >>> >>> Hasan's presentation lasted about an hour. It is unclear whether he >>> read out loud every point on each slide. If typical procedures were >>> followed, his adviser would have supervised the development of his >>> project, said people familiar with the practice. >>> >>> The final three slides of the presentation indicate that Hasan >>> referred to Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, suicide bombers and Iran. >>> >>> Under a slide titled "Comments," he wrote: "If Muslim groups can >>> convince Muslims that they are fighting for God against injustices of >>> the 'infidels'; ie: enemies of Islam, then Muslims can become a potent >>> adversary ie: suicide bombing, etc." [sic] >>> >>> The last bullet point on that page reads simply: "We love death more >>> then (sic) you love life!" >>> >>> Under the "Conclusions" page, Hasan wrote that "Fighting to establish >>> an Islamic State to please God, even by force, is condoned by the >>> Islam," and that "Muslim Soldiers should not serve in any capacity >>> that renders them at risk to hurting/killing believers unjustly -- >>> will vary!" >>> >>> The final page, labeled "Recommendation," contained only one suggestion: >>> >>> "Department of Defense should allow Muslims (sic) Soldiers the option >>> of being released as 'Conscientious objectors' to increase troop >>> morale and decrease adverse events." >>> >>> Staff writer Ann Scott Tyson contributed to this report. >>> >>> On 11/9/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >>> > Why are we so afraid to offend people who are not only ready and able >>> > to >>> > kill us, but delighted to have the opportunity. >>> > >>> > Ha ha 72 raisins .... I like that. >>> > >>> > So many agendas .... so little time. >>> > >>> > There was another writer who tried to turn this into a gun control >>> > thing >>> by >>> > reporting the pistol the shooter used was some special "cop killer" >>> pistol. >>> > Turns out the pistol, a FN Herstal five-seven, packs all the mouse >>> killing >>> > firepower of a 22 magnum. A 9MM makes it look like a pea shooter by >>> > comparison. The .357 Mag revolver, which he also had with him, but >>> > apparently didn't use, is a cannon by comparison. >>> > >>> > Here's the anti-gunner's article: >>> > >>> > >>> http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cop-killer-gun-thought-ft-hood-shooting/story?id=9019521 >>> > >>> > Here's the real scoop on that gun and the 5.7x28 ammo used in the >>> shootings. >>> > >>> > http://www.chuckhawks.com/5-7x28_cop_killer.htm >>> > >>> > I just love it when some reporter who couldn't tell a 450 Win Mag from >>> > a >>> > pool cue starts trying to dictate to the rest of us what kinds of guns >>> > we >>> > should be allowed to own. >>> > >>> > Rik >>> > >>> > On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Brad Haslett >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> >> Is it too early to suggest that this WAS an act of terrorism, or >>> >> should we wait for the PC clock to run out and the lame-stream media >>> >> to finish its investigation? The "alphabet" networks are (ABC, CBS, >>> >> NBC) are still asking the tough questions, like "what did we do as a >>> >> society to drive this poor man to drive him to do this?" >>> >> >>> >> http://tinyurl.com/yl42t8j >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> >> >>> >> >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >>> > beat >>> > you with experience. >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat >> you with experience. >> > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter. We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam. SPAMfighter has removed 1879 of my spam emails to date. Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len The Professional version does not have this message From flybrad at gmail.com Tue Nov 10 10:38:21 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:38:21 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Allah's Business Card In-Reply-To: <251B3465DE7B448E8C1B7915D9B96E2C@acer7e8cb8aec8> References: <400985d70911091542q6fdf52aaka21ee0d5509fcec2@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911091657h680055b5x840352fe8c3cd449@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911092008l5e87da57l303e5dc296f9b8e3@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911092228y7882b034nabedce8b3d7c8fbe@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911100400k57650a2cgaf32e9faa936ad45@mail.gmail.com> <251B3465DE7B448E8C1B7915D9B96E2C@acer7e8cb8aec8> Message-ID: <400985d70911100738m7e3bb8adw7acf27d9093957c@mail.gmail.com> Mike, The theory behind the "Flying Imams" case is that they wanted to get arrested, and they did. Originally, there were several "John and Jane Does" facing civil litigation for voicing their concerns to the flight attendant. What Judge Monty did is create a "chilling" affect against concerned citizens. There is still an ongoing battle regarding FAR 91.3 and the authority of the PIC (pilot in command) as it relates to who gets to board and who doesn't. The FFDO program (pilots packing firearms) mitigates that issue to some degree, but participation in the program isn't universal, nor is it easy. Profiling is with us to stay because it does indeed work. Richard Reid, the "shoe bomber", was denied boarding on his first attempt because the American Airlines gate agent had previous experience working for El Al. El Al profiles everyone and was doing so long before 9/11. The agent profiled him again the next day but the French authorities allowed him to board anyway. An alert flight attendant, a burly passenger, and the fact that Reid's tennis shoes were wet from the Paris weather averted a disaster. Like most people, I find a lot of the security apparatus downright silly on the surface. But then over time, often discover the real reason behind a procedure in a security briefing (the 4 oz limitation on liquids comes to mind) . As big a PITA as it may be, sometimes it just pays to "cooperate and graduate". Unfortunately, commercial aviation remains a fascination with the "evil doers" and the system is constantly being probed for weak areas. In the case of Ft. Hood - had a red-haired, blue-eyed "bubba" been spouting off remarks such as the shooter did over a period of years, he would have been scheduled for a "come to Jesus" meeting rather quickly. I can certainly empathize with law abiding Muslims in the US, especially in the military. However, I've seen the PC card abused too many times by minorities and the female gender in professional environments to not recognize it as a problem. When we fail to hold people accountable for their behavior and performance out of fear of the PC Police, we open the door to failure. Brad On 11/10/09, Michael D. Weisner wrote: > Brad, > > "What the hell were his superiors thinking?" > > I find it interesting that the military was unable to do anything except > promote him to major and deploy him to an active region. Maybe they had > planned a "PC solution" for the problem overseas. If he acted as a > terrorist (I refuse to try him in the court of public opinion, although the > case appears made) then one must look at the fact that his actions must have > been hastilly planned, since he failed on so many fronts as a terrorist, > most importantly, his own death. He may have been shouting all kinds of > stuff and he may have been nuttier than a fruitcake. Since he is still > alive, we will have to permit the system to deal with him, a fate that > surely will be worse than death. > > As far as Judge Monty goes, the entire airline security system is reactive, > improperly trained and definitely uses profiling as a method of identifying > "possible" threats. The problem was not with the police officers or even > necessarily with the imams. The issue is whether it is prudent to deny > passenger civil rights in an effort to protect the public using an > ineffective approach. In this country, people have always been able to > speak freely, even at the airports, until 9-11. TSA officials are trained > to detain any individuals who may pose a threat (as documented by actions, > words or demeanor.) You can been detained and interrogated (for hours) just > for talking about the quality and operation of the screening system, as a > friend of mine was. He works for a major competitor of the system that was > in use and posed no threat to security. IMHO, these actions do not make air > travel any safer. The decision handed down by Montgomery demonstrates how > difficult it is to use such procedures which have not been shown to truly > prevent any terrorist actions in the air. > > Mike > > From: "Brad Haslett" Tuesday, November 10, 2009 7:00 AM >> Rik, >> >> When something like this happens, given what we know about the >> individual's behavior, you can't help but ask, "what the hell were his >> superiors thinking?" I know exactly what they were thinking. " This >> isn't worth it, I'll just get walked down the PC gangplank and suffer >> for bringing up the subject." This mindset is pervasive in the >> military, education, and the corporate world. The enemy has learned >> to use our free society and tolerance as a weapon. >> >> Ironically, just a few days ago a Federal court case ended in your >> neck-of-the-woods (posted below). The aviation industry continues to >> be probed for security weakness, and this court case was a major step >> backwards. Look what happened to Mark Steyn in Canada for writing an >> article. This is crazy. >> >> This PC pendulum is about due for a swing in the opposite direction - >> lives are at stake. >> >> Brad >> >> ------------- >> >> The Flying Imams Win >> And the rest of us lose. >> by Scott W. ?Johnson >> 11/09/2009, Volume 015, Issue 08 >> >> >> The case of the flying imams who were removed in November 2006 from a >> USAirways flight in Minneapolis for questioning by law enforcement >> authorities concluded in the Minnesota federal district court before >> Judge Ann Montgomery. The parties arrived at a settlement of the case >> on October 20 in a court-supervised conference. The amounts paid by >> the defendants remain confidential. >> >> The case drew national attention--including that of Congress, which >> passed a law protecting private citizens who report suspicious >> activity and law enforcement authorities who act in good faith on the >> information. The imams had named USAirways passengers who raised >> concerns about their behavior as John Doe defendants in their original >> complaint, but later dropped the passengers. >> >> Represented by an attorney from the New York chapter of the Council on >> American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the imams went forward with federal >> civil rights and state law claims against USAirways and the >> Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) police officers and FBI special >> agents involved in their removal from the flight and their >> questioning. This past July, Judge Montgomery denied the motions of >> the law enforcement defendants for dismissal on the ground of >> qualified immunity. >> >> When these defendants appealed the ruling to the Eighth U.S. Circuit >> Court of Appeals, she scheduled the conference that resulted in the >> termination of the lawsuit. As a result of the recent settlement, >> Montgomery's 47-page decision of last July stands as the last word on >> the law applicable to the case. Without going into all the legal >> issues it discusses, some aspects of it deserve serious scrutiny. >> Montgomery emphasized the distinction between the suspicion necessary >> for lawful investigatory stops (a relatively low standard) and the >> probable cause necessary for arrests (a higher standard), and her >> comments addressing the issue raise lingering concerns. >> >> The six imams were detained as they were returning home from a >> convention of the North American Imams Federation in a suburb of >> Minneapolis. Three of the six had prayed before the passengers at the >> airport as they awaited the departure of the flight. A passenger had >> passed a note to the pilot pointing out suspicious activity: >> >> 6 suspicious Arabic men on plane, spaced out in their seats. All >> were together saying "??.??.??.??Allah??.??.??.??Allah" cursing U.S. >> involvement w/Saddam before flight--1 in front exit row, another in >> first row 1st class, another in 8D, another in 22D, two in 25 E&F. >> >> Onboard USAirways personnel called MAC dispatch to advise that the six >> passengers would be removed and ask for officers to come to the gate. >> The first MAC officer on the scene was advised by a USAirways manager >> of the passenger's note. He was also advised that some of the six >> passengers had checked no luggage, some had asked for seatbelt >> extensions, some had one-way tickets, and all six were of Middle >> Eastern descent. A USAirways flight attendant told one of the MAC >> officers that, in her opinion, the two seatbelt extensions requested >> by the imams were unnecessary given their sizes. >> >> A MAC officer and a federal air marshal boarded the plane and >> interviewed the passenger who had written the note. In her decision >> the judge stated that after leaving the plane, the officers conferred >> and decided that the request for seatbelt extensions, the praying and >> utterances prior to boarding the plane, and the seating configuration >> amounted to suspicious behavior. They alerted the FBI and were >> requested to detain the imams for questioning. >> >> The imams were removed from the plane and searched. They were taken >> into custody and transported in handcuffs to the airport's police >> command center. There they were interrogated by the FBI and Secret >> Service for several hours, then released five to six hours after >> leaving the aircraft. >> >> The principal issue addressed by Montgomery's decision is whether the >> law enforcement defendants were entitled to qualified immunity for >> their actions. This immunity protects government officials from >> monetary claims under circumstances where a reasonable officer would >> not know his conduct was illegal. Montgomery held that the flying >> imams were the subject of an unlawful arrest and that no reasonable >> law enforcement officer could have believed otherwise. >> >> Quoting case law, Montgomery stated that the relevant question in >> determining qualified immunity is whether it would be clear to a >> reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful in the situation he >> confronted. She held that no reasonably competent law enforcement >> officer could have believed that his conduct was legal in the imams' >> case. >> >> One of the striking elements of the facts in the case is the number of >> law enforcement officers who participated in the detention or >> questioning of the imams: Montgomery mentioned six MAC officers, one >> federal air marshal, three FBI special agents, at least one Secret >> Service officer, and four other law enforcement officers. At the time >> of the arrest, Montgomery observed, law enforcement officers >> outnumbered the imams fifteen to six. >> >> So far as one can determine from the judge's opinion, not a single one >> of these officers questioned the legality of the imams' detention and >> interrogation. Given the variety of officers and agencies involved, >> one might almost posit the imams' detention as a case study in whether >> a reasonable law enforcement officer would think the conduct in >> question was legal. All of these apparently thought it was. >> >> Montgomery was highly critical of the law enforcement officers' >> failure to ascertain facts that would have exonerated the imams when >> they were removed from the aircraft. She cited the fact that USAirways >> had assigned the seats taken by the imams and that they had not in >> fact purchased one-way tickets. She called the imams' reported cursing >> of the United States constitutionally protected speech. And regarding >> the requested seatbelt extensions (one of which, she notes, was >> requested by a blind imam), she said: >> >> The MAC Defendants have produced no evidence of a documented >> instance in which seatbelt extensions were used as a weapon or that >> law enforcement ever expressed concern about their use as a weapon. It >> is difficult to understand what danger a seatbelt extension poses that >> is not also posed by a sturdy belt with a large buckle. Even assuming >> the extensions could be employed as a weapon, the MAC Defendants have >> failed to offer a reasoned explanation of how Saleddin, who is >> completely blind, could pose such a threat. >> >> These observations are odd. Prior to 9/11, there was no documented >> instance of box cutters having been used by hijackers. Prior to >> Richard Reid's attempted bombing of American Airline Flight 63 in >> December 2001, there was no documented instance of shoes having been >> used as bombs. When taken together with other circumstances, the >> imams' request for unneeded (according to the flight attendant) >> seatbelt extensions certainly raised reasonable suspicion if not >> probable cause. >> >> As for some of the other circumstances, Montgomery stated: "Praying in >> public, commenting on current events, and even criticizing government >> policy is protected speech under the First Amendment." This is true. >> She failed to note, however, that lawful speech such as cursing the >> United States might reasonably bear on the interpretation of other >> behavior brought to the attention of law enforcement. >> >> Neither does the decision state what the interrogation of the imams >> turned up about their backgrounds. It wouldn't have taken much digging >> to discover that one of them, Omar Shahin, was a former representative >> of and fundraiser for the Muslim charity KindHearts, shuttered by the >> Treasury Department as a Hamas front in February 2006. (Shahin claims >> he "had no clue what they were doing.") >> >> In the concluding paragraph of this key part of her decision, Montgomery >> stated: >> >> Unquestionably the events of 9/11 changed the calculus in the >> balance American society chooses to make, especially in airport >> settings, between liberty and security. Ultimately, the proper balance >> will be achieved, in large part, because we have the most capable and >> diligent law enforcement and intelligence communities in the world. >> But when a law enforcement officer exercises the power of the >> Sovereign over its citizens, she or he has a responsibility to operate >> within the bounds of the Constitution and cannot raise the specter of >> 9/11 as an absolute exception to that responsibility. >> >> Reading the opinion elicits a question: Can we reasonably rely on law >> enforcement authorities to be so capable and diligent that they will >> arrive at appropriate determinations within a matter of a few >> minutes--when fifteen out of fifteen law enforcement professionals >> handled the case of the flying imams as they did? >> >> The decision raises perhaps an even more basic question: What was law >> enforcement to do? Judge Montgomery believes the authorities were >> required to release the imams after a brief investigatory stop to go >> on their way and catch their flight or board another. The next time >> around, it will be the imams who fly and the other passengers who stay >> behind. >> >> Scott W. Johnson is a Minneapolis attorney and contributor to the >> Power Line blog (powerlineblog.com). >> >> On 11/10/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >>> Back in the day, I used to call myself a Lutheran. I've since gotten away >>> from organized religion, but that's neither here nor there. If it had >>> happened then, that they put on a war with another country that happened >>> to >>> have a bunch of Lutherans in it, and invited me, I would care less if the >>> enemy were Lutheran or any other religion. The damned point is they are >>> trying to take away your way of life and impose theirs. Some Muslims come >>> >>> to >>> this country and want to have all the freedoms and the standard of >>> living, >>> but when it comes to defending that against another Muslim suddenly they >>> have a memory lapse as to how their bread has gotten buttered. People >>> like >>> these should return to their Muslim roots and we should encourage them >>> (at >>> gun point if need be) to go to wherever that might be, as long as it >>> isn't >>> here. Maybe the butter is much better there. >>> >>> Rik >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 10:08 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: >>> >>>> How big a friggin' clue does the Army need? Talk about PC run amok! >>>> >>>> >From the WaPo - >>>> >>>> Fort Hood suspect Hasan warned of threats within the ranks >>>> Urged release of Muslim troops in 2007 lecture at Walter Reed >>>> >>>> By Dana Priest >>>> Monday, November 9, 2009 9:47 PM >>>> >>>> The Army psychiatrist believed to have killed 13 people at Fort Hood >>>> warned a roomful of senior Army physicians a year and a half ago that >>>> to avoid "adverse events," the military should allow Muslim soldiers >>>> to be released as conscientious objectors instead of fighting in wars >>>> against other Muslims. >>>> >>>> As a senior-year psychiatric resident at Walter Reed Army Medical >>>> Center, Maj. Nidal M. Hasan was supposed to make a presentation on a >>>> medical topic of his choosing as a culminating exercise of the >>>> residency program. >>>> >>>> Instead, in late June 2007, he stood before his supervisors and about >>>> 25 other mental health staff members and lectured on Islam, suicide >>>> bombers and threats the military could encounter from Muslims >>>> conflicted about fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, both Muslim >>>> countries, according to a copy of the presentation obtained by The >>>> Washington Post. >>>> >>>> "It's getting harder and harder for Muslims in the service to morally >>>> justify being in a military that seems constantly engaged against >>>> fellow Muslims," he said in the presentation. >>>> >>>> "It was really strange," said one staff member who attended the >>>> presentation and requested anonymity because of the investigation of >>>> Hasan. "The senior doctors looked really upset" at the end. These >>>> medical presentations occurred each Wednesday afternoon, and other >>>> students had lectured on new medications and treatment of specific >>>> mental illnesses. >>>> >>>> An Army spokesman said Monday night he was unaware of the >>>> presentation, and a Walter Reed spokesman declined comment. It is >>>> unclear whether anyone in attendance reported the briefing to >>>> counterintelligence or law enforcement authorities whose job it is to >>>> identify threats from within the military ranks. >>>> >>>> Hasan spent six years at Walter Reed as an intern, resident and fellow >>>> beginning in 2003. He had been transferred to Fort Hood as a >>>> practicing psychiatrist in July and was set to leave soon for >>>> Afghanistan. According to a relative, he had asked not to be deployed. >>>> It is not known whether he ever sought conscientious-objector status. >>>> >>>> Maj. Gen. Gina S. Farrisee, the Army's personnel chief, said in an >>>> interview Monday that due to the ongoing investigation, she and other >>>> Army officials could not discuss whether Hasan had officially asked to >>>> quit the service or to not be deployed. However, Farrisee and another >>>> Army official said that it would be highly unusual for officers with >>>> Hasan's rank and medical training to be allowed to resign, given their >>>> ongoing service obligation. >>>> >>>> Investigators looking into Hasan's background are examining his >>>> religious beliefs, whether he harbored extremist views, and whether he >>>> was in contact with others who may have encouraged violence against >>>> U.S. soldiers. >>>> >>>> The title of Hasan's power-point presentation was "The Koranic World >>>> View As It Relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military." It consisted of >>>> 50 slides. In one slide, Hasan described the presentation's objectives >>>> as identifying "what the Koran inculcates in the minds of Muslims and >>>> the potential implications this may have for the U.S. military." >>>> >>>> He also sought to "Describe the nature of the religious conflicts that >>>> Muslims may have" who serve in the U.S. military and to convince the >>>> Army that it should identify these individuals. >>>> >>>> Other slides delved into the history of Islam, its tenets, statistics >>>> about the number of Muslims in the military, and explanations of >>>> "offensive jihad," or holy war. >>>> >>>> Another slide suggested ways to draw out Muslim soldiers: "It must be >>>> hard for you to balance Islamic beliefs that might be conflicting with >>>> current war; feelings of guilt; Is it what you expected." >>>> >>>> Hasan's presentation lasted about an hour. It is unclear whether he >>>> read out loud every point on each slide. If typical procedures were >>>> followed, his adviser would have supervised the development of his >>>> project, said people familiar with the practice. >>>> >>>> The final three slides of the presentation indicate that Hasan >>>> referred to Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, suicide bombers and Iran. >>>> >>>> Under a slide titled "Comments," he wrote: "If Muslim groups can >>>> convince Muslims that they are fighting for God against injustices of >>>> the 'infidels'; ie: enemies of Islam, then Muslims can become a potent >>>> adversary ie: suicide bombing, etc." [sic] >>>> >>>> The last bullet point on that page reads simply: "We love death more >>>> then (sic) you love life!" >>>> >>>> Under the "Conclusions" page, Hasan wrote that "Fighting to establish >>>> an Islamic State to please God, even by force, is condoned by the >>>> Islam," and that "Muslim Soldiers should not serve in any capacity >>>> that renders them at risk to hurting/killing believers unjustly -- >>>> will vary!" >>>> >>>> The final page, labeled "Recommendation," contained only one suggestion: >>>> >>>> "Department of Defense should allow Muslims (sic) Soldiers the option >>>> of being released as 'Conscientious objectors' to increase troop >>>> morale and decrease adverse events." >>>> >>>> Staff writer Ann Scott Tyson contributed to this report. >>>> >>>> On 11/9/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >>>> > Why are we so afraid to offend people who are not only ready and able >>>> > to >>>> > kill us, but delighted to have the opportunity. >>>> > >>>> > Ha ha 72 raisins .... I like that. >>>> > >>>> > So many agendas .... so little time. >>>> > >>>> > There was another writer who tried to turn this into a gun control >>>> > thing >>>> by >>>> > reporting the pistol the shooter used was some special "cop killer" >>>> pistol. >>>> > Turns out the pistol, a FN Herstal five-seven, packs all the mouse >>>> killing >>>> > firepower of a 22 magnum. A 9MM makes it look like a pea shooter by >>>> > comparison. The .357 Mag revolver, which he also had with him, but >>>> > apparently didn't use, is a cannon by comparison. >>>> > >>>> > Here's the anti-gunner's article: >>>> > >>>> > >>>> http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cop-killer-gun-thought-ft-hood-shooting/story?id=9019521 >>>> > >>>> > Here's the real scoop on that gun and the 5.7x28 ammo used in the >>>> shootings. >>>> > >>>> > http://www.chuckhawks.com/5-7x28_cop_killer.htm >>>> > >>>> > I just love it when some reporter who couldn't tell a 450 Win Mag from >>>> > >>>> > a >>>> > pool cue starts trying to dictate to the rest of us what kinds of guns >>>> > we >>>> > should be allowed to own. >>>> > >>>> > Rik >>>> > >>>> > On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Brad Haslett >>>> > wrote: >>>> > >>>> >> Is it too early to suggest that this WAS an act of terrorism, or >>>> >> should we wait for the PC clock to run out and the lame-stream media >>>> >> to finish its investigation? The "alphabet" networks are (ABC, CBS, >>>> >> NBC) are still asking the tough questions, like "what did we do as a >>>> >> society to drive this poor man to drive him to do this?" >>>> >> >>>> >> http://tinyurl.com/yl42t8j >>>> >> _______________________________________________ >>>> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>>> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>>> >> >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >>>> > beat >>>> > you with experience. >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>>> >>>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat >>> you with experience. >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > -- > I am using the free version of SPAMfighter. > We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam. > SPAMfighter has removed 1879 of my spam emails to date. > Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len > > The Professional version does not have this message > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Tue Nov 10 10:38:37 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:38:37 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Allah's Business Card In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911092228y7882b034nabedce8b3d7c8fbe@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911091542q6fdf52aaka21ee0d5509fcec2@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911091657h680055b5x840352fe8c3cd449@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911092008l5e87da57l303e5dc296f9b8e3@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911092228y7882b034nabedce8b3d7c8fbe@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911100738s1f768a92jbad3e5a16bbfd6e1@mail.gmail.com> This, from M/M's site today, kinda makes my point. They're getting ready to execute that Mohammed from the DC killings in '02 also. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy as far as I am concerned Rik __________________ The NEFA Foundation has obtained a statement issued by Anwar al Awlaki, an Al-Qaida-linked U.S. citizen, titled ?Nidal Hassan Did the Right Thing? in which al Awlaki profusely praised the Fort Hood shooter: ?Nidal Hassan is a hero. He is a man of conscience who could not bear living the contradiction of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own people?The US is leading the war against terrorism which in reality is a war against Islam. Its army is directly invading two Muslim countries and indirectly occupying the rest through its stooges.? Al Awlaki continued, ?Nidal opened fire on soldiers who were on their way to be deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. How can there be any dispute about the virtue of what he has done? In fact the only way a Muslim could Islamically justify serving as a soldier in the US army is if his intention is to follow the footsteps of men like Nidal.? Further, ?The heroic act of brother Nidal also shows the dilemma of the Muslim American community. Increasingly they are being cornered into taking stances that would either make them betray Islam or betray their nation. Many amongst them are choosing the former. The Muslim organizations in America came out in a pitiful chorus condemning Nidal?s operation.? On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:28 AM, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Back in the day, I used to call myself a Lutheran. I've since gotten away > from organized religion, but that's neither here nor there. If it had > happened then, that they put on a war with another country that happened to > have a bunch of Lutherans in it, and invited me, I would care less if the > enemy were Lutheran or any other religion. The damned point is they are > trying to take away your way of life and impose theirs. Some Muslims come to > this country and want to have all the freedoms and the standard of living, > but when it comes to defending that against another Muslim suddenly they > have a memory lapse as to how their bread has gotten buttered. People like > these should return to their Muslim roots and we should encourage them (at > gun point if need be) to go to wherever that might be, as long as it isn't > here. Maybe the butter is much better there. > > Rik > > > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 10:08 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> How big a friggin' clue does the Army need? Talk about PC run amok! >> >> >From the WaPo - >> >> Fort Hood suspect Hasan warned of threats within the ranks >> Urged release of Muslim troops in 2007 lecture at Walter Reed >> >> By Dana Priest >> Monday, November 9, 2009 9:47 PM >> >> The Army psychiatrist believed to have killed 13 people at Fort Hood >> warned a roomful of senior Army physicians a year and a half ago that >> to avoid "adverse events," the military should allow Muslim soldiers >> to be released as conscientious objectors instead of fighting in wars >> against other Muslims. >> >> As a senior-year psychiatric resident at Walter Reed Army Medical >> Center, Maj. Nidal M. Hasan was supposed to make a presentation on a >> medical topic of his choosing as a culminating exercise of the >> residency program. >> >> Instead, in late June 2007, he stood before his supervisors and about >> 25 other mental health staff members and lectured on Islam, suicide >> bombers and threats the military could encounter from Muslims >> conflicted about fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, both Muslim >> countries, according to a copy of the presentation obtained by The >> Washington Post. >> >> "It's getting harder and harder for Muslims in the service to morally >> justify being in a military that seems constantly engaged against >> fellow Muslims," he said in the presentation. >> >> "It was really strange," said one staff member who attended the >> presentation and requested anonymity because of the investigation of >> Hasan. "The senior doctors looked really upset" at the end. These >> medical presentations occurred each Wednesday afternoon, and other >> students had lectured on new medications and treatment of specific >> mental illnesses. >> >> An Army spokesman said Monday night he was unaware of the >> presentation, and a Walter Reed spokesman declined comment. It is >> unclear whether anyone in attendance reported the briefing to >> counterintelligence or law enforcement authorities whose job it is to >> identify threats from within the military ranks. >> >> Hasan spent six years at Walter Reed as an intern, resident and fellow >> beginning in 2003. He had been transferred to Fort Hood as a >> practicing psychiatrist in July and was set to leave soon for >> Afghanistan. According to a relative, he had asked not to be deployed. >> It is not known whether he ever sought conscientious-objector status. >> >> Maj. Gen. Gina S. Farrisee, the Army's personnel chief, said in an >> interview Monday that due to the ongoing investigation, she and other >> Army officials could not discuss whether Hasan had officially asked to >> quit the service or to not be deployed. However, Farrisee and another >> Army official said that it would be highly unusual for officers with >> Hasan's rank and medical training to be allowed to resign, given their >> ongoing service obligation. >> >> Investigators looking into Hasan's background are examining his >> religious beliefs, whether he harbored extremist views, and whether he >> was in contact with others who may have encouraged violence against >> U.S. soldiers. >> >> The title of Hasan's power-point presentation was "The Koranic World >> View As It Relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military." It consisted of >> 50 slides. In one slide, Hasan described the presentation's objectives >> as identifying "what the Koran inculcates in the minds of Muslims and >> the potential implications this may have for the U.S. military." >> >> He also sought to "Describe the nature of the religious conflicts that >> Muslims may have" who serve in the U.S. military and to convince the >> Army that it should identify these individuals. >> >> Other slides delved into the history of Islam, its tenets, statistics >> about the number of Muslims in the military, and explanations of >> "offensive jihad," or holy war. >> >> Another slide suggested ways to draw out Muslim soldiers: "It must be >> hard for you to balance Islamic beliefs that might be conflicting with >> current war; feelings of guilt; Is it what you expected." >> >> Hasan's presentation lasted about an hour. It is unclear whether he >> read out loud every point on each slide. If typical procedures were >> followed, his adviser would have supervised the development of his >> project, said people familiar with the practice. >> >> The final three slides of the presentation indicate that Hasan >> referred to Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, suicide bombers and Iran. >> >> Under a slide titled "Comments," he wrote: "If Muslim groups can >> convince Muslims that they are fighting for God against injustices of >> the 'infidels'; ie: enemies of Islam, then Muslims can become a potent >> adversary ie: suicide bombing, etc." [sic] >> >> The last bullet point on that page reads simply: "We love death more >> then (sic) you love life!" >> >> Under the "Conclusions" page, Hasan wrote that "Fighting to establish >> an Islamic State to please God, even by force, is condoned by the >> Islam," and that "Muslim Soldiers should not serve in any capacity >> that renders them at risk to hurting/killing believers unjustly -- >> will vary!" >> >> The final page, labeled "Recommendation," contained only one suggestion: >> >> "Department of Defense should allow Muslims (sic) Soldiers the option >> of being released as 'Conscientious objectors' to increase troop >> morale and decrease adverse events." >> >> Staff writer Ann Scott Tyson contributed to this report. >> >> On 11/9/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> > Why are we so afraid to offend people who are not only ready and able to >> > kill us, but delighted to have the opportunity. >> > >> > Ha ha 72 raisins .... I like that. >> > >> > So many agendas .... so little time. >> > >> > There was another writer who tried to turn this into a gun control thing >> by >> > reporting the pistol the shooter used was some special "cop killer" >> pistol. >> > Turns out the pistol, a FN Herstal five-seven, packs all the mouse >> killing >> > firepower of a 22 magnum. A 9MM makes it look like a pea shooter by >> > comparison. The .357 Mag revolver, which he also had with him, but >> > apparently didn't use, is a cannon by comparison. >> > >> > Here's the anti-gunner's article: >> > >> > >> http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cop-killer-gun-thought-ft-hood-shooting/story?id=9019521 >> > >> > Here's the real scoop on that gun and the 5.7x28 ammo used in the >> shootings. >> > >> > http://www.chuckhawks.com/5-7x28_cop_killer.htm >> > >> > I just love it when some reporter who couldn't tell a 450 Win Mag from a >> > pool cue starts trying to dictate to the rest of us what kinds of guns >> we >> > should be allowed to own. >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> Is it too early to suggest that this WAS an act of terrorism, or >> >> should we wait for the PC clock to run out and the lame-stream media >> >> to finish its investigation? The "alphabet" networks are (ABC, CBS, >> >> NBC) are still asking the tough questions, like "what did we do as a >> >> society to drive this poor man to drive him to do this?" >> >> >> >> http://tinyurl.com/yl42t8j >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> beat >> > you with experience. >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091110/fe1aeb32/attachment-0001.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Tue Nov 10 16:01:00 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:01:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] November 9th In-Reply-To: <400985d70911090811p63e2fa77s86ed47b49d74f5d7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <635155.96200.qm@web111211.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Can you even IMAGINE Obie having the courage! elle --- On Mon, 11/9/09, Brad Haslett wrote: From: Brad Haslett Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] November 9th To: "Letters to the Editor" Date: Monday, November 9, 2009, 11:11 AM This day in history - http://tinyurl.com/yzuz4wd The role of a lifetime - http://tinyurl.com/yk88wkr 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/20091110/6f62dfdc/attachment.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Tue Nov 10 16:06:18 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:06:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] November 9th In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911090906r4ef5324xa390b156aef86721@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <445370.85354.qm@web111206.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Ummmm...Land of the FREE??? they gonna put us ALL in jail?? Methinks O'B and his boys don't know what party the good ole boys of this country belong to. Do they forget that the decendants of those who fought and died (on both sides) in the Revolution and Civil War still populate the mountains..... And they ain't just sittin' around swilling shine..... O'Bie and his friends think that the Military will protect him??? After he's dissed 'em over & over?? elle --- On Mon, 11/9/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: From: Rik Sandberg Subject: Re: [Swiftwater Gazette] November 9th To: SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com Date: Monday, November 9, 2009, 12:06 PM And to commemorate this historic occasion we,... pass a bill though the house promising 5 years in jail to anyone who refuses to buy the gov't mandated insurance.? Is this not the ultimate irony?? Oh to have a man (or woman, hint, hint) like Reagan at the helm once again. Excuse me, I have to wipe a tear. Rik On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: This day in history - http://tinyurl.com/yzuz4wd The role of a lifetime - http://tinyurl.com/yk88wkr Brad _______________________________________________ SwiftwaterGazette mailing list SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ 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/20091110/eb501ea4/attachment.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Tue Nov 10 16:09:03 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:09:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Salty Language In-Reply-To: <400985d70911091608r381f4511s8b12711fff054cf6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <387050.36759.qm@web111214.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> OK..I may be going where a lady should fear to tread...but the 'teabag' slur....I am so totally out of the loop here.... Can anyone euphemize it for me?? Oh, hell..what does it mean? elle (Already blushing) --- On Mon, 11/9/09, Brad Haslett wrote: From: Brad Haslett Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Salty Language To: "Letters to the Editor" Date: Monday, November 9, 2009, 7:08 PM ?Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit? Democratic voters ?and it will encourage the extremists.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? B. Obama Lord knows, I know my way around the world of salty language, but is it too much to ask that the POTUS not use a sexual slur to describe his opponents? Are people who oppose his policies really "extremists" and "anti-government"?? Is it too prudish to ask that the Lyin' King save the trash talk for the basketball court? Brad -------------- >From the NYT's November 7, 2009, 9:45 pm Lawmakers Detail Obama?s Pitch By Jackie Calmes In an odd coincidence, the House debate on Saturday to overhaul health care took place on the third anniversary of the 2006 election that gave Democrats majority control after 12 years of Republican dominance. It fell to President Obama and to Congressional leaders to persuade those Democrats still sweating the final vote that it would not prove the party?s undoing in next November?s midterm elections. The House Debate Prescriptions will be following the floor debate over health care legislation in the House of Representatives throughout Saturday. Previous posts: Both Mr. Obama and the House leaders showcased Democrats? newest colleague, Representative Bill Owens, who last Tuesday won a special election in an upstate New York district that Republicans had held since 1872. In the campaign, Mr. Owens gave unabashed support to the pending House health care bill, despite the opposition of national conservative groups, including the new Tea Party Patriots, who backed Mr. Owens?s conservative rival. Mr. Obama, during his private pep talk to Democrats, recognized Mr. Owens?s election and then posed a question to the other lawmakers. According to Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, who supports the health care bill, the president asked, ?Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit? Democratic voters ?and it will encourage the extremists.? Another freshman Democrat from New Mexico, Representative Martin Heinrich, said the president?s comments overall were reassuring. ?If you want to see a recipe for failure,? Mr. Heinrich said, ?don?t do the things you talked about in your campaigns and turn your back on your base. All the independent voters in the world don?t matter if the Democrats don?t turn out.? ?This is an opportunity to do something as big as Social Security,? he added. ?And me, personally, I don?t want to be on the wrong side of history.? _______________________________________________ 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/20091110/d8bbd4fd/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Tue Nov 10 16:43:31 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 15:43:31 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Salty Language In-Reply-To: <387050.36759.qm@web111214.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <400985d70911091608r381f4511s8b12711fff054cf6@mail.gmail.com> <387050.36759.qm@web111214.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911101343m21329cbnbe78302bc41edf7@mail.gmail.com> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teabagging On 11/10/09, elle wrote: > OK..I may be going where a lady should fear to tread...but the 'teabag' > slur....I am so totally out of the loop here.... > Can anyone euphemize it for me?? > Oh, hell..what does it mean? > elle > (Already blushing) > > --- On Mon, 11/9/09, Brad Haslett wrote: > > From: Brad Haslett > Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Salty Language > To: "Letters to the Editor" > > Date: Monday, November 9, 2009, 7:08 PM > > ?Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going > to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is > confuse and dispirit? Democratic voters ?and it will encourage the > extremists.? > B. Obama > > > > Lord knows, I know my way around the world of salty language, but is > it too much to ask that the POTUS not use a sexual slur to describe > his opponents? Are people who oppose his policies really "extremists" > and "anti-government"? Is it too prudish to ask that the Lyin' King > save the trash talk for the basketball court? > > Brad > > -------------- > > >From the NYT's > > November 7, 2009, 9:45 pm > Lawmakers Detail Obama?s Pitch > By Jackie Calmes > > In an odd coincidence, the House debate on Saturday to overhaul health > care took place on the third anniversary of the 2006 election that > gave Democrats majority control after 12 years of Republican > dominance. It fell to President Obama and to Congressional leaders to > persuade those Democrats still sweating the final vote that it would > not prove the party?s undoing in next November?s midterm elections. > > The House Debate > > Prescriptions will be following the floor debate over health care > legislation in the House of Representatives throughout Saturday. > Previous posts: > > > Both Mr. Obama and the House leaders showcased Democrats? newest > colleague, Representative Bill Owens, who last Tuesday won a special > election in an upstate New York district that Republicans had held > since 1872. In the campaign, Mr. Owens gave unabashed support to the > pending House health care bill, despite the opposition of national > conservative groups, including the new Tea Party Patriots, who backed > Mr. Owens?s conservative rival. > > Mr. Obama, during his private pep talk to Democrats, recognized Mr. > Owens?s election and then posed a question to the other lawmakers. > According to Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, who supports > the health care bill, the president asked, ?Does anybody think that > the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they > bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit? > Democratic voters ?and it will encourage the extremists.? > > Another freshman Democrat from New Mexico, Representative Martin > Heinrich, said the president?s comments overall were reassuring. ?If > you want to see a recipe for failure,? Mr. Heinrich said, ?don?t do > the things you talked about in your campaigns and turn your back on > your base. All the independent voters in the world don?t matter if the > Democrats don?t turn out.? > > ?This is an opportunity to do something as big as Social Security,? he > added. ?And me, personally, I don?t want to be on the wrong side of > history.? > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > > > > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Tue Nov 10 16:46:50 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 15:46:50 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Salty Language In-Reply-To: <387050.36759.qm@web111214.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <400985d70911091608r381f4511s8b12711fff054cf6@mail.gmail.com> <387050.36759.qm@web111214.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911101346g69488e71uf4dd4b40f9ec7f5a@mail.gmail.com> "already blushing" As would I be if I tried to explain. Wikipedia has some answers if you care to see. Rik On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 3:09 PM, elle wrote: > OK..I may be going where a lady should fear to tread...but the 'teabag' > slur....I am so totally out of the loop here.... > > Can anyone euphemize it for me?? > > Oh, hell..what does it mean? > > elle > > (Already blushing) > > --- On *Mon, 11/9/09, Brad Haslett * wrote: > > > From: Brad Haslett > Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Salty Language > To: "Letters to the Editor" < > swiftwatergazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com> > Date: Monday, November 9, 2009, 7:08 PM > > > ?Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going > to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is > confuse and dispirit? Democratic voters ?and it will encourage the > extremists.? > B. Obama > > > > Lord knows, I know my way around the world of salty language, but is > it too much to ask that the POTUS not use a sexual slur to describe > his opponents? Are people who oppose his policies really "extremists" > and "anti-government"? Is it too prudish to ask that the Lyin' King > save the trash talk for the basketball court? > > Brad > > -------------- > > >>From the NYT's > > November 7, 2009, 9:45 pm > Lawmakers Detail Obama?s Pitch > By Jackie Calmes > > In an odd coincidence, the House debate on Saturday to overhaul health > care took place on the third anniversary of the 2006 election that > gave Democrats majority control after 12 years of Republican > dominance. It fell to President Obama and to Congressional leaders to > persuade those Democrats still sweating the final vote that it would > not prove the party?s undoing in next November?s midterm elections. > > The House Debate > > Prescriptions will be following the floor debate over health care > legislation in the House of Representatives throughout Saturday. > Previous posts: > > > Both Mr. Obama and the House leaders showcased Democrats? newest > colleague, Representative Bill Owens, who last Tuesday won a special > election in an upstate New York district that Republicans had held > since 1872. In the campaign, Mr. Owens gave unabashed support to the > pending House health care bill, despite the opposition of national > conservative groups, including the new Tea Party Patriots, who backed > Mr. Owens?s conservative rival. > > Mr. Obama, during his private pep talk to Democrats, recognized Mr. > Owens?s election and then posed a question to the other lawmakers. > According to Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, who supports > the health care bill, the president asked, ?Does anybody think that > the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they > bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit? > Democratic voters ?and it will encourage the extremists.? > > Another freshman Democrat from New Mexico, Representative Martin > Heinrich, said the president?s comments overall were reassuring. ?If > you want to see a recipe for failure,? Mr. Heinrich said, ?don?t do > the things you talked about in your campaigns and turn your back on > your base. All the independent voters in the world don?t matter if the > Democrats don?t turn out.? > > ?This is an opportunity to do something as big as Social Security,? he > added. ?And me, personally, I don?t want to be on the wrong side of > history.? > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091110/f700e448/attachment-0001.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Tue Nov 10 17:20:09 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:20:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Salty Language In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911101346g69488e71uf4dd4b40f9ec7f5a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <649034.44735.qm@web111215.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Oh. ?(!) (Ole schoolmarm me never even thought it would be in an encyclopedia....silly me.) And our nation's leaders use this crude reference. Certainly reveals their character. Thanks guys . elle --- On Tue, 11/10/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: From: Rik Sandberg Subject: Re: [Swiftwater Gazette] Salty Language To: SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2009, 4:46 PM "already blushing" As would I be if I tried to explain. Wikipedia has some answers if you care to see. Rik On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 3:09 PM, elle wrote: OK..I may be going where a lady should fear to tread...but the 'teabag' slur....I am so totally out of the loop here.... Can anyone euphemize it for me?? Oh, hell..what does it mean? elle (Already blushing) --- On Mon, 11/9/09, Brad Haslett wrote: From: Brad Haslett Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Salty Language To: "Letters to the Editor" Date: Monday, November 9, 2009, 7:08 PM ?Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit? Democratic voters ?and it will encourage the extremists.? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? B. Obama Lord knows, I know my way around the world of salty language, but is it too much to ask that the POTUS not use a sexual slur to describe his opponents? Are people who oppose his policies really "extremists" and "anti-government"?? Is it too prudish to ask that the Lyin' King save the trash talk for the basketball court? Brad -------------- >>From the NYT's November 7, 2009, 9:45 pm Lawmakers Detail Obama?s Pitch By Jackie Calmes In an odd coincidence, the House debate on Saturday to overhaul health care took place on the third anniversary of the 2006 election that gave Democrats majority control after 12 years of Republican dominance. It fell to President Obama and to Congressional leaders to persuade those Democrats still sweating the final vote that it would not prove the party?s undoing in next November?s midterm elections. The House Debate Prescriptions will be following the floor debate over health care legislation in the House of Representatives throughout Saturday. Previous posts: Both Mr. Obama and the House leaders showcased Democrats? newest colleague, Representative Bill Owens, who last Tuesday won a special election in an upstate New York district that Republicans had held since 1872. In the campaign, Mr. Owens gave unabashed support to the pending House health care bill, despite the opposition of national conservative groups, including the new Tea Party Patriots, who backed Mr. Owens?s conservative rival. Mr. Obama, during his private pep talk to Democrats, recognized Mr. Owens?s election and then posed a question to the other lawmakers. According to Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon, who supports the health care bill, the president asked, ?Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit? Democratic voters ?and it will encourage the extremists.? Another freshman Democrat from New Mexico, Representative Martin Heinrich, said the president?s comments overall were reassuring. ?If you want to see a recipe for failure,? Mr. Heinrich said, ?don?t do the things you talked about in your campaigns and turn your back on your base. All the independent voters in the world don?t matter if the Democrats don?t turn out.? ?This is an opportunity to do something as big as Social Security,? he added. ?And me, personally, I don?t want to be on the wrong side of history.? _______________________________________________ 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 -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ 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/20091110/16c87c9a/attachment.html From ekroposki at charter.net Tue Nov 10 18:33:51 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 18:33:51 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Elle, you style? Message-ID: A lesson that should be taught in all schools . . And colleges Back in September, on the first day of school, Martha Cothren, a social studies school teacher at Robinson High School, did something not to be forgotten. On the first day of school, with the permission of the school superintendent, the principal and the building supervisor, she removed all of the desks out of her classroom. When the first period kids entered the room they discovered that there were no desks. 'Ms.. Cothren, where're our desks?' She replied, 'You can't have a desk until you tell me how you earn the right to sit at a desk.' They thought, 'Well, maybe it's our grades.' 'No,' she said. 'Maybe it's our behavior.' She told them, 'No, it's not even your behavior.' And so, they came and went, the first period, second period, third period. Still no desks in the classroom. By early afternoon television news crews had started gathering in Ms.Cothren's classroom to report about this crazy teacher who had taken all the desks out of her room. The final period of the day came and as the puzzled students found seats on the floor of the deskless classroom, Martha Cothren said, 'Throughout the day no one has been able to tell me just what he/she has done to earn the right to sit at the desks that are ordinarily found in this classroom. Now I am going to tell you.' At this point, Martha Cothren went over to the door of her classroom and opened it. Twenty-seven (27) War Veterans, all in uniforms, walked into that classroom, each one carrying a school desk. The Vets began placing the school desks in rows, and then they would walk over and stand alongside the wall... By the time the last soldier had set the final desk in place those kids started to understand, perhaps for the first time in their lives, just how the right to sit at those desks had been earned.. Martha said, 'You didn't earn the right to sit at these desks. These heroes did it for you. They placed the desks here for you. Now, it's up to you to sit in them. It is your responsibility to learn, to be good students, to be good citizens. They paid the price so that you could have the freedom to get an education. Don't ever forget it.' By the way, this is a true story. http://www.snopes.com/glurge/nodesks.asp Please consider passing this along so others won't forget that the freedoms we have in this great country were earned by War Veterans. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091110/98c72394/attachment.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Tue Nov 10 21:12:00 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 18:12:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Elle, you style? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <806369.36386.qm@web111210.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Thank you, Ed. How about sending it to Obama. elle --- On Tue, 11/10/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: From: Ed Kroposki Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Elle, you style? To: "Swift Water" Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2009, 6:33 PM A lesson that should be taught in all schools . . And colleges Back in September, on the first day of school, Martha Cothren, a social studies school teacher at Robinson High School , did something not to be forgotten. On the first day of school, with the permission of the school superintendent, the principal and the building supervisor, she removed all of the desks out of her classroom. When the first period kids entered the room they discovered that there were no desks. 'Ms.. Cothren, where're our desks?' She replied, 'You can't have a desk until you tell me how you earn the right to sit at a desk.' They thought, 'Well, maybe it's our grades.' 'No,' she said. 'Maybe it's our behavior.' She told them, 'No, it's not even your behavior.' And so, they came and went, the first period, second period, third period. Still no desks in the classroom. By early afternoon television news crews had started gathering in Ms.Cothren's classroom to report about this crazy teacher who had taken all the desks out of her room. The final period of the day came and as the puzzled students found seats on the floor of the deskless classroom, Martha Cothren said, 'Throughout the day no one has been able to tell me just what he/she has done to earn the right to sit at the desks that are ordinarily found in this classroom. Now I am going to tell you.' At this point, Martha Cothren went over to the door of her classroom and opened it. Twenty-seven (27) War Veterans, all in uniforms, walked into that classroom, each one carrying a school desk. The Vets began placing the school desks in rows, and then they would walk over and stand alongside the wall... By the time the last soldier had set the final desk in place those kids started to understand, perhaps for the first time in their lives, just how the right to sit at those desks had been earned.. Martha said, 'You didn't earn the right to sit at these desks. These heroes did it for you. They placed the desks here for you. Now, it's up to you to sit in them. It is your responsibility to learn, to be good students, to be good citizens. They paid the price so that you could have the freedom to get an education. Don't ever forget it.' By the way, this is a true story. http://www.snopes.com/glurge/nodesks.asp Please consider passing this along so others won't forget that the freedoms we have in this great country were earned by War Veterans. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ 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/20091110/e2751a87/attachment-0001.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Tue Nov 10 21:16:57 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 20:16:57 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Elle, you style? In-Reply-To: <806369.36386.qm@web111210.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <806369.36386.qm@web111210.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911101816l7fd5f6f7u4488ff2249d91d60@mail.gmail.com> Ha ha, Good luck with that. the Messiah would probably have you arrested for radical teabagger activity. Rik On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 8:12 PM, elle wrote: > Thank you, Ed. > > How about sending it to Obama. > > elle > > --- On *Tue, 11/10/09, Ed Kroposki * wrote: > > > From: Ed Kroposki > Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Elle, you style? > To: "Swift Water" > Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2009, 6:33 PM > > > *A lesson that should be taught in all schools . . And colleges > > Back in September, on the first day of school, Martha Cothren, a social > studies school teacher at Robinson High School , did something not to be > forgotten. On the first day of school, with the permission of the school > superintendent, the principal and the building supervisor, she removed all > of the desks out of her classroom. > > When the first period kids entered the room they discovered that there were > no desks. > > 'Ms.. Cothren, where're our desks?' > > She replied, 'You can't have a desk until you tell me how you earn the > right to sit at a desk.' > > They thought, 'Well, maybe it's our grades.' > > 'No,' she said. > > 'Maybe it's our behavior.' > > She told them, 'No, it's not even your behavior.' > > And so, they came and went, the first period, second period, third period. > Still no desks in the classroom. > > By early afternoon television news crews had started gathering in > Ms.Cothren's classroom to report about this crazy teacher who had taken all > the desks out of her room. > > The final period of the day came and as the puzzled students found seats on > the floor of the deskless classroom, Martha Cothren said, 'Throughout the > day no one has been able to tell me just what he/she has done to earn the > right to sit at the desks that are ordinarily found in this classroom. Now I > am going to tell you.' > > At this point, Martha Cothren went over to the door of her classroom and > opened it. > > Twenty-seven (27) War Veterans, all in uniforms, walked into that > classroom, each one carrying a school desk. The Vets began placing the > school desks in rows, and then they would walk over and stand alongside the > wall... By the time the last soldier had set the final desk in place those > kids started to understand, perhaps for the first time in their lives, just > how the right to sit at those desks had been earned.. > > Martha said, 'You didn't earn the right to sit at these desks. These heroes > did it for you. They placed the desks here for you. Now, it's up to you to > sit in them. It is your responsibility to learn, to be good students, to be > good citizens. They paid the price so that you could have the freedom to get > an education. Don't ever forget it.' > > By the way, this is a true story. ** > **http://www.snopes.com/glurge/nodesks.asp** > Please consider passing this along so others won't forget that the freedoms > we have in this great country were earned by War Veterans. * > > > -----Inline Attachment Follows----- > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091110/bd0bd1de/attachment.html From ragdollelle at yahoo.com Tue Nov 10 21:23:36 2009 From: ragdollelle at yahoo.com (elle) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 18:23:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Elle, you style? In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911101816l7fd5f6f7u4488ff2249d91d60@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <248181.30568.qm@web111202.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> I'd like to figure out how he can believe the females of the species can accomplish that..... (oops...;^) elle --- On Tue, 11/10/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: From: Rik Sandberg Subject: Re: [Swiftwater Gazette] Elle, you style? To: SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2009, 9:16 PM Ha ha, Good luck with that. the Messiah would probably have you arrested for radical teabagger activity. Rik On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 8:12 PM, elle wrote: Thank you, Ed. How about sending it to Obama. elle --- On Tue, 11/10/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: From: Ed Kroposki Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Elle, you style? To: "Swift Water" Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2009, 6:33 PM A lesson that should be taught in all schools . . And colleges Back in September, on the first day of school, Martha Cothren, a social studies school teacher at Robinson High School , did something not to be forgotten. On the first day of school, with the permission of the school superintendent, the principal and the building supervisor, she removed all of the desks out of her classroom. When the first period kids entered the room they discovered that there were no desks. 'Ms.. Cothren, where're our desks?' She replied, 'You can't have a desk until you tell me how you earn the right to sit at a desk.' They thought, 'Well, maybe it's our grades.' 'No,' she said. 'Maybe it's our behavior.' She told them, 'No, it's not even your behavior.' And so, they came and went, the first period, second period, third period. Still no desks in the classroom. By early afternoon television news crews had started gathering in Ms.Cothren's classroom to report about this crazy teacher who had taken all the desks out of her room. The final period of the day came and as the puzzled students found seats on the floor of the deskless classroom, Martha Cothren said, 'Throughout the day no one has been able to tell me just what he/she has done to earn the right to sit at the desks that are ordinarily found in this classroom. Now I am going to tell you.' At this point, Martha Cothren went over to the door of her classroom and opened it. Twenty-seven (27) War Veterans, all in uniforms, walked into that classroom, each one carrying a school desk. The Vets began placing the school desks in rows, and then they would walk over and stand alongside the wall... By the time the last soldier had set the final desk in place those kids started to understand, perhaps for the first time in their lives, just how the right to sit at those desks had been earned.. Martha said, 'You didn't earn the right to sit at these desks. These heroes did it for you. They placed the desks here for you. Now, it's up to you to sit in them. It is your responsibility to learn, to be good students, to be good citizens. They paid the price so that you could have the freedom to get an education. Don't ever forget it.' By the way, this is a true story. http://www.snopes.com/glurge/nodesks.asp Please consider passing this along so others won't forget that the freedoms we have in this great country were earned by War Veterans. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ 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 -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -----Inline Attachment Follows----- _______________________________________________ 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/20091110/cffebe81/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Tue Nov 10 22:54:20 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 21:54:20 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Allah's Business Card In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911100738s1f768a92jbad3e5a16bbfd6e1@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911091542q6fdf52aaka21ee0d5509fcec2@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911091657h680055b5x840352fe8c3cd449@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911092008l5e87da57l303e5dc296f9b8e3@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911092228y7882b034nabedce8b3d7c8fbe@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911100738s1f768a92jbad3e5a16bbfd6e1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911101954o406768fct15de104505b96d9@mail.gmail.com> What he said - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUCOoatudP4&feature=player_embedded On 11/10/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > This, from M/M's site today, kinda makes my point. > > They're getting ready to execute that Mohammed from the DC killings in '02 > also. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy as far as I am concerned > > Rik > __________________ > > The NEFA Foundation has obtained a statement issued by Anwar al Awlaki, an > Al-Qaida-linked U.S. citizen, titled ?Nidal Hassan Did the Right Thing? in > which al Awlaki profusely praised the Fort Hood shooter: ?Nidal Hassan is a > hero. He is a man of conscience who could not bear living the contradiction > of being a Muslim and serving in an army that is fighting against his own > people?The US is leading the war against terrorism which in reality is a war > against Islam. Its army is directly invading two Muslim countries and > indirectly occupying the rest through its stooges.? Al Awlaki continued, > ?Nidal opened fire on soldiers who were on their way to be deployed to Iraq > and Afghanistan. How can there be any dispute about the virtue of what he > has done? In fact the only way a Muslim could Islamically justify serving as > a soldier in the US army is if his intention is to follow the footsteps of > men like Nidal.? Further, ?The heroic act of brother Nidal also shows the > dilemma of the Muslim American community. Increasingly they are being > cornered into taking stances that would either make them betray Islam or > betray their nation. Many amongst them are choosing the former. The Muslim > organizations in America came out in a pitiful chorus condemning Nidal?s > operation.? > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:28 AM, Rik Sandberg wrote: > >> Back in the day, I used to call myself a Lutheran. I've since gotten away >> from organized religion, but that's neither here nor there. If it had >> happened then, that they put on a war with another country that happened >> to >> have a bunch of Lutherans in it, and invited me, I would care less if the >> enemy were Lutheran or any other religion. The damned point is they are >> trying to take away your way of life and impose theirs. Some Muslims come >> to >> this country and want to have all the freedoms and the standard of living, >> but when it comes to defending that against another Muslim suddenly they >> have a memory lapse as to how their bread has gotten buttered. People like >> these should return to their Muslim roots and we should encourage them (at >> gun point if need be) to go to wherever that might be, as long as it isn't >> here. Maybe the butter is much better there. >> >> Rik >> >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 10:08 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> >>> How big a friggin' clue does the Army need? Talk about PC run amok! >>> >>> >From the WaPo - >>> >>> Fort Hood suspect Hasan warned of threats within the ranks >>> Urged release of Muslim troops in 2007 lecture at Walter Reed >>> >>> By Dana Priest >>> Monday, November 9, 2009 9:47 PM >>> >>> The Army psychiatrist believed to have killed 13 people at Fort Hood >>> warned a roomful of senior Army physicians a year and a half ago that >>> to avoid "adverse events," the military should allow Muslim soldiers >>> to be released as conscientious objectors instead of fighting in wars >>> against other Muslims. >>> >>> As a senior-year psychiatric resident at Walter Reed Army Medical >>> Center, Maj. Nidal M. Hasan was supposed to make a presentation on a >>> medical topic of his choosing as a culminating exercise of the >>> residency program. >>> >>> Instead, in late June 2007, he stood before his supervisors and about >>> 25 other mental health staff members and lectured on Islam, suicide >>> bombers and threats the military could encounter from Muslims >>> conflicted about fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, both Muslim >>> countries, according to a copy of the presentation obtained by The >>> Washington Post. >>> >>> "It's getting harder and harder for Muslims in the service to morally >>> justify being in a military that seems constantly engaged against >>> fellow Muslims," he said in the presentation. >>> >>> "It was really strange," said one staff member who attended the >>> presentation and requested anonymity because of the investigation of >>> Hasan. "The senior doctors looked really upset" at the end. These >>> medical presentations occurred each Wednesday afternoon, and other >>> students had lectured on new medications and treatment of specific >>> mental illnesses. >>> >>> An Army spokesman said Monday night he was unaware of the >>> presentation, and a Walter Reed spokesman declined comment. It is >>> unclear whether anyone in attendance reported the briefing to >>> counterintelligence or law enforcement authorities whose job it is to >>> identify threats from within the military ranks. >>> >>> Hasan spent six years at Walter Reed as an intern, resident and fellow >>> beginning in 2003. He had been transferred to Fort Hood as a >>> practicing psychiatrist in July and was set to leave soon for >>> Afghanistan. According to a relative, he had asked not to be deployed. >>> It is not known whether he ever sought conscientious-objector status. >>> >>> Maj. Gen. Gina S. Farrisee, the Army's personnel chief, said in an >>> interview Monday that due to the ongoing investigation, she and other >>> Army officials could not discuss whether Hasan had officially asked to >>> quit the service or to not be deployed. However, Farrisee and another >>> Army official said that it would be highly unusual for officers with >>> Hasan's rank and medical training to be allowed to resign, given their >>> ongoing service obligation. >>> >>> Investigators looking into Hasan's background are examining his >>> religious beliefs, whether he harbored extremist views, and whether he >>> was in contact with others who may have encouraged violence against >>> U.S. soldiers. >>> >>> The title of Hasan's power-point presentation was "The Koranic World >>> View As It Relates to Muslims in the U.S. Military." It consisted of >>> 50 slides. In one slide, Hasan described the presentation's objectives >>> as identifying "what the Koran inculcates in the minds of Muslims and >>> the potential implications this may have for the U.S. military." >>> >>> He also sought to "Describe the nature of the religious conflicts that >>> Muslims may have" who serve in the U.S. military and to convince the >>> Army that it should identify these individuals. >>> >>> Other slides delved into the history of Islam, its tenets, statistics >>> about the number of Muslims in the military, and explanations of >>> "offensive jihad," or holy war. >>> >>> Another slide suggested ways to draw out Muslim soldiers: "It must be >>> hard for you to balance Islamic beliefs that might be conflicting with >>> current war; feelings of guilt; Is it what you expected." >>> >>> Hasan's presentation lasted about an hour. It is unclear whether he >>> read out loud every point on each slide. If typical procedures were >>> followed, his adviser would have supervised the development of his >>> project, said people familiar with the practice. >>> >>> The final three slides of the presentation indicate that Hasan >>> referred to Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, suicide bombers and Iran. >>> >>> Under a slide titled "Comments," he wrote: "If Muslim groups can >>> convince Muslims that they are fighting for God against injustices of >>> the 'infidels'; ie: enemies of Islam, then Muslims can become a potent >>> adversary ie: suicide bombing, etc." [sic] >>> >>> The last bullet point on that page reads simply: "We love death more >>> then (sic) you love life!" >>> >>> Under the "Conclusions" page, Hasan wrote that "Fighting to establish >>> an Islamic State to please God, even by force, is condoned by the >>> Islam," and that "Muslim Soldiers should not serve in any capacity >>> that renders them at risk to hurting/killing believers unjustly -- >>> will vary!" >>> >>> The final page, labeled "Recommendation," contained only one suggestion: >>> >>> "Department of Defense should allow Muslims (sic) Soldiers the option >>> of being released as 'Conscientious objectors' to increase troop >>> morale and decrease adverse events." >>> >>> Staff writer Ann Scott Tyson contributed to this report. >>> >>> On 11/9/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >>> > Why are we so afraid to offend people who are not only ready and able >>> > to >>> > kill us, but delighted to have the opportunity. >>> > >>> > Ha ha 72 raisins .... I like that. >>> > >>> > So many agendas .... so little time. >>> > >>> > There was another writer who tried to turn this into a gun control >>> > thing >>> by >>> > reporting the pistol the shooter used was some special "cop killer" >>> pistol. >>> > Turns out the pistol, a FN Herstal five-seven, packs all the mouse >>> killing >>> > firepower of a 22 magnum. A 9MM makes it look like a pea shooter by >>> > comparison. The .357 Mag revolver, which he also had with him, but >>> > apparently didn't use, is a cannon by comparison. >>> > >>> > Here's the anti-gunner's article: >>> > >>> > >>> http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/cop-killer-gun-thought-ft-hood-shooting/story?id=9019521 >>> > >>> > Here's the real scoop on that gun and the 5.7x28 ammo used in the >>> shootings. >>> > >>> > http://www.chuckhawks.com/5-7x28_cop_killer.htm >>> > >>> > I just love it when some reporter who couldn't tell a 450 Win Mag from >>> > a >>> > pool cue starts trying to dictate to the rest of us what kinds of guns >>> we >>> > should be allowed to own. >>> > >>> > Rik >>> > >>> > On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: >>> > >>> >> Is it too early to suggest that this WAS an act of terrorism, or >>> >> should we wait for the PC clock to run out and the lame-stream media >>> >> to finish its investigation? The "alphabet" networks are (ABC, CBS, >>> >> NBC) are still asking the tough questions, like "what did we do as a >>> >> society to drive this poor man to drive him to do this?" >>> >> >>> >> http://tinyurl.com/yl42t8j >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> >> >>> >> >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >>> beat >>> > you with experience. >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat >> you with experience. >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 09:12:05 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 08:12:05 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Disincentives to Work Message-ID: <400985d70911110612g5d628d40y3ae47e4998fe40f4@mail.gmail.com> My employer, as well as our major competitor, uses primarily part-time workers that are paid roughly twice the minimum wage, but more importantly, receive health-care insurance and education benefits. UPS has even established a branch campus of U. of Louisville next door to their main hub and schedules classes at times convenient to their worker's schedule. After Katrina, contractors relied heavily on illegal immigrant workers, not because they were cheaper, but rather they were available, period. Potential workers living in utility paid FEMA trailers and receiving living stipends had neither the desire or incentive to seek employment. When the FEMA trailer program finally ended some three years later, there was the all too predictable outcry of "they're taking away my home!" Where the "safety net" ends and the cycle of dependency begins is beyond me, but we see evidence of it every day. See article below - http://mises.org/daily/3822 to Work I can personally relate to the issues regarding the phase out of college assistance plans and the disincentives against saving for retirement. Just as we've created an almost insurmountable hurdle at the low income level, we've enacted huge punishments at the other end of the income scale. One of the reasons job creation will be slow in this business cycle recovery is that we've scared the 'bejesus' out of small business owners, the very people who can create new jobs the fastest. Frankly, I don't see how universal health coverage will do anything but add to the problem. That sure was the experience in Tennessee. Brad From ekroposki at charter.net Wed Nov 11 09:16:45 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 09:16:45 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Informational Broadcast on Internet Message-ID: <540F71BAA7F249F28AD264C35D245DDB@YOURB88038198E> Read about Goldman Sachs: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6907681.ece Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091111/a1d74ce0/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 11:19:45 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 10:19:45 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Informational Broadcast on Internet In-Reply-To: <540F71BAA7F249F28AD264C35D245DDB@YOURB88038198E> References: <540F71BAA7F249F28AD264C35D245DDB@YOURB88038198E> Message-ID: <400985d70911110819h72cffbedq9d2ed234d1d20ee4@mail.gmail.com> Ed, "Doing God's work?" The investment banking industry has never been short on ego. I don't begrudge these people the money they make, but companies like Goldman-Sachs were built on capitalizing the gains and socializing the losses. Follow the money. Who contributes the most money to politics and which party do they predominantly contribute to? The most recent bubble to burst, real estate, was based on two broad assumptions (1) real estate values always rise, and (2) the underlying debt is backed by the full faith and credit of the US Government. Companies like Goldman-Sachs don't achieve their status by "fooling some of the people all the time" or even "all the people some of the time" They achieve success by buying the "gang of 535" most of the time (doesn't matter which party is in power). Per the article I posted earlier, when Hank Paulson went running into Bush 43's office screaming "the sky is falling", it was in his world. Hell, I bought into the hysteria for awhile. The world is too interconnected and capital too free to move where it is treated the kindest to think that we can somehow regulate the finance industry down to the last detail. What we can do is get the federal government out of the risk mitigation industry. You want to risk your own or your investors money? Have at it! There will always be the Enrons and the World Coms, and the Bernie Madoffs. But, when things look too good to be true, they probably are. Generally speaking, when something as big as the derivatives market fails, it has the fingerprints of a government policy all over it. The market works because it rewards success and punishes failure. When the government intervenes by subsidizing failure and discouraging success, we get what we have now. During the prosperous decades in the United States following WW2, finance was dull and manufacturing was exciting - a bit like China is now. The choice is this; do you want the "invisible hand" or the centralized planning fist? Brad On 11/11/09, Ed Kroposki wrote: > Read about Goldman Sachs: > > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6907681.ece > > Ed K From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 12:35:56 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 11:35:56 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Do Not Pass Go, Do Not Collect $200, Go Directly To Jail! Message-ID: <400985d70911110935g1c1c87b9n3ea5ad085bc15cb5@mail.gmail.com> >From Dear Madame Speaker - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUkzV8h3Wp0&feature=player_embedded So who pays for health care in prison? Brad From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 12:55:16 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 11:55:16 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Veterans Day Message-ID: <400985d70911110955x5e09bcffxf7c7c89db651c861@mail.gmail.com> >From the late, great Mike Royko (circa 1993) - *** I just phoned six friends and asked them what they will be doing on Monday. They all said the same thing: working. Me, too. There is something else we share. We are all military veterans. And there is a third thing we have in common. We are not employees of the federal government, state government, county government, municipal government, the Postal Service, the courts, banks, or S & Ls, and we don?t teach school. If we did, we would be among the many millions of people who will spend Monday goofing off. Which is why it is about time Congress revised the ridiculous terms of Veterans Day as a national holiday. The purpose of Veterans Day is to honor all veterans. So how does this country honor them? By letting the veterans, the majority of whom work in the private sector, spend the day at their jobs so they can pay taxes that permit millions of non-veterans to get paid for doing nothing. As my friend Harry put it: "First I went through basic training. Then infantry school. Then I got on a crowded, stinking troop ship that took 23 days to get from San Francisco to Japan. We went through a storm that had 90 percent of the guys on the ship throwing up for a week. "Then I rode a beat-up transport plane from Japan to Korea, and it almost went down in the drink. I think the pilot was drunk. "When I got to Korea, I was lucky. The war ended seven months after I got there, and I didn?t kill anybody and nobody killed me. "But it was still a miserable experience. Then when my tour was over, I got on another troop ship and it took 21 stinking days to cross the Pacific. "When I got home on leave, one of the older guys at the neighborhood bar ? he was a World War II vet ? told me I was a ----head because we didn?t win, we only got a tie. "So now on Veterans Day I get up in the morning and go down to the office and work. "You know what my nephew does? He sleeps in. That?s because he works for the state. "And do you know what he did during the Vietnam War? He ducked the draft by getting a job teaching at an inner-city school. "Now, is that a raw deal or what?" Of course that?s a raw deal. So I propose that the members of Congress revise Veterans Day to provide the following: - All veterans ? and only veterans ? should have the day off from work. It doesn?t matter if they were combat heroes or stateside clerk-typists. Anybody who went through basic training and was awakened before dawn by a red-neck drill sergeant who bellowed: "Drop your whatsis and grab your socks and fall out on the road," is entitled. - Those veterans who wish to march in parades, make speeches or listen to speeches can do so. But for those who don?t, all local gambling laws should be suspended for the day to permit vets to gather in taverns, pull a couple of tables together and spend the day playing poker, blackjack, craps, drinking and telling lewd lies about lewd experiences with lewd women. All bar prices should be rolled back to enlisted men?s club prices, Officers can pay the going rate, the stiffs. - All anti-smoking laws will be suspended for Veterans Day. The same hold for all misdemeanor laws pertaining to disorderly conduct, non-felonious brawling, leering, gawking and any other gross and disgusting public behavior that does not harm another individual. - It will be a treasonable offense for any spouse or live-in girlfriend (or boyfriend, if it applies) to utter the dreaded words: "What time will you be home tonight?" - Anyone caught posing as a veteran will be required to eat a triple portion of chipped beef on toast, with Spam on the side, and spend the day watching a chaplain present a color-slide presentation on the horrors of VD. - Regardless of how high his office, no politician who had the opportunity to serve in the military, but didn?t, will be allowed to make a patriotic speech, appear on TV, or poke his nose out of his office for the entire day. Any politician who defies this ban will be required to spend 12 hours wearing headphones and listening to tapes of President Clinton explaining his deferments. Now, deal the cards and pass the tequila. - Mike Royko From sanderico1 at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 13:02:34 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:02:34 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Do Not Pass Go, Do Not Collect $200, Go Directly To Jail! In-Reply-To: <400985d70911110935g1c1c87b9n3ea5ad085bc15cb5@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911110935g1c1c87b9n3ea5ad085bc15cb5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911111002l77263e92la2a9c5ff32c70944@mail.gmail.com> Brad, It's gotta' make you wonder ... did they have all this in mind when they built all those mysterious FEMA camps that no one seems to have an explanation for??? I'm beginning to think, next time everybody goes to Washington, they should bring a bigger hammer. Rik On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >From Dear Madame Speaker - > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUkzV8h3Wp0&feature=player_embedded > > So who pays for health care in prison? > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091111/a46023db/attachment.html From sanderico1 at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 13:45:53 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:45:53 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Disincentives to Work In-Reply-To: <400985d70911110612g5d628d40y3ae47e4998fe40f4@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911110612g5d628d40y3ae47e4998fe40f4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911111045h6b765eb2ge0bf821355edbfa0@mail.gmail.com> Brad, I'm curious: Have you always been an Austrian (economically speaking), or did the foolishness of the last few years cause you to convert? I never realized it, but I was always an Austrian. Between 1977 and 2007 we were so damned busy working, I never had much time to think about economic philosophies. All I knew was, the harder I worked, the luckier I got. It's only been since my unplanned retirement in '07 (after Sandy's stroke in '06) that I have even had time to consider such things. Rik On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:12 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > My employer, as well as our major competitor, uses primarily part-time > workers that are paid roughly twice the minimum wage, but more > importantly, receive health-care insurance and education benefits. UPS > has even established a branch campus of U. of Louisville next door to > their main hub and schedules classes at times convenient to their > worker's schedule. > > After Katrina, contractors relied heavily on illegal immigrant > workers, not because they were cheaper, but rather they were > available, period. Potential workers living in utility paid FEMA > trailers and receiving living stipends had neither the desire or > incentive to seek employment. When the FEMA trailer program finally > ended some three years later, there was the all too predictable outcry > of "they're taking away my home!" > > Where the "safety net" ends and the cycle of dependency begins is > beyond me, but we see evidence of it every day. See article below - > > http://mises.org/daily/3822 to Work > > I can personally relate to the issues regarding the phase out of > college assistance plans and the disincentives against saving for > retirement. Just as we've created an almost insurmountable hurdle at > the low income level, we've enacted huge punishments at the other end > of the income scale. One of the reasons job creation will be slow in > this business cycle recovery is that we've scared the 'bejesus' out of > small business owners, the very people who can create new jobs the > fastest. > > Frankly, I don't see how universal health coverage will do anything > but add to the problem. That sure was the experience in Tennessee. > > Brad > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091111/438d8f53/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 13:57:18 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:57:18 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Do Not Pass Go, Do Not Collect $200, Go Directly To Jail! In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911111002l77263e92la2a9c5ff32c70944@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911110935g1c1c87b9n3ea5ad085bc15cb5@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911111002l77263e92la2a9c5ff32c70944@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911111057oadc953agc2df603cf23694b8@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Speaking of FEMA camps, we dodged a bullet earlier this week. I chose to self-insure our property on the coast because insurance is so expensive since Katrina. We're 14 miles inland so we don't worry about flooding, but hurricane and tropical storm induced tornadoes could rip about $25K worth of new roofing off our buildings. So far, so good. In the infinite wisdom of FEMA, they spent millions on a trailer park right on the beach where the previous inhabitants had been washed to sea. They got lucky. Even a 3 foot storm surge would have washed the FEMA trailers away. That problem solved itself anyway. Thousands of lawsuits have been filed against FEMA for the formaldehyde content of the trailers (never mind that retired people pay good money for the smell of fresh formaldehyde) and FEMA will never again buy travel-trailers as temporary housing. It is far cheaper to put everyone displaced by a hurricane on a cruise ship. Once again I have to say this, "you can't make shit like this up". The first cruise ship I ever sailed on was the Carnival Sensation. It was put into service after Katrina at a cost per day per person at roughly what I paid to eat and drink my way from New Orleans to Cozumel and back for a week. I got to get me one of them gubmint calculators. As I've told the story before, the MS Housing Authority bought the 7 acres and single-family dwelling next door to our commercial property. They either knew we (and they) might be wiped out by the footprint of the new highway proposed or that was the whole point of the exercise. Either way, a contractor was walking through our buildings one day until my brother confronted him. The contractor said he had the winning bid to demo the buildings on the site. Gary politely explained that our property was privately owned and perhaps he needed to review the bid proposal. Then Gary contacted the Housing Authority to look at the bid proposal himself since he seemed to have missed it being published in the paper (it wasn't). Short version of a long story - almost a year has gone by and nothing has been demo'd. We could do it in about 20 minutes for about $2K - the equipment needed is less than 100 yds away. Why do I get the impression that the "most bang for the buck" isn't the highest priority? Yeah, I can't wait for the gubmint to run health care. Brad On 11/11/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > It's gotta' make you wonder ... did they have all this in mind when they > built all those mysterious FEMA camps that no one seems to have an > explanation for??? > > I'm beginning to think, next time everybody goes to Washington, they should > bring a bigger hammer. > > Rik > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 11:35 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> >From Dear Madame Speaker - >> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUkzV8h3Wp0&feature=player_embedded >> >> So who pays for health care in prison? >> >> Brad >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 14:37:35 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:37:35 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Disincentives to Work In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911111045h6b765eb2ge0bf821355edbfa0@mail.gmail.com> References: <400985d70911110612g5d628d40y3ae47e4998fe40f4@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911111045h6b765eb2ge0bf821355edbfa0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911111137w12e54101yd3221b1d6a7aa35d@mail.gmail.com> Rik, This is a statement I got just this morning in an e-mail from an energy investment banker I met on the grounds of the Capitol building - " ..... it's more profitable for me to push back against the ever more invasive, tax and spend government than it is to go to the office and invest shareholder money! Sound familiar? " ... Yeah, real familiar. As a child, I used to ask my dad the same two questions time and time again; "what did you do in the war" and "what was it like growing-up during the Great Depression?" The answers were always the same; "I did what I needed to do", and, "we were poor when it started and we were poor when it ended." During the early 70's I worked for $2 an hour as an apprentice airplane mechanic (the minimum wage at the time was around $3.25) but I wasn't paid in cash, only airplane and instructor time. The cheapest airplane was $11 per hour and the instructor cost $6 per hour. Most workdays during the summer was at least 12 hours long, so between work and the weather, I had more "money in the bank" than I could fly off. I bagged groceries and stocked shelves at Kroger during the winter to provide the real cash flow to support the airport "frolics" during the summer. It probably sounds as corny now as it did when I explained it to my kids when they were young, but, "you can't make shit like this up". My "peers" in HS were equally divided between farm kids versus little town doctors, lawyers, and small businessmen. I wouldn't trade that experience for anything! The "eye opener" for me was the period of 1977 to 1982. I started out studying finance during the run-up to the S&L failures at EIU (Eastern Illinois U) under a professor who made us read the Wall Street Journal everyday and then explain in class what happened the day before. We couldn't, neither could he - and that was the point. I eventually switched majors to accounting - "if you can't predict it, perhaps you can at least measure the damn thing". After reading Ed's contribution this morning on Goldman-Sachs, it reminded me of the Chinese gal I met who was jumpseating on my airplane a few years ago. She was in the process of leaving the company to start the MBA program at Harvard and was making one last free trip. I walked on the airplane and she was sleeping in the passenger compartment between the cockpit and the cargo area. I woke her up rather abruptly and asked, "who are you and why are you sleeping on my airplane" (this was pre 9/11). She turned out to be a nice gal and she and Fan are friends to this day. But, and this is a big BUT, she's smart but she ain't THAT smart. She's now a big Kahuna for Kahuna, Inc. in London. Her shit still stinks! So some a-hole from Goldmans thinks he's doing "God's Work". Yeah right! If something doesn't make sense and isn't easily understood, it probably doesn't make sense. You saved yourself a lot of grief by not going to college and listening to nonsense for four years. Brad On 11/11/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Brad, > > I'm curious: Have you always been an Austrian (economically speaking), or > did the foolishness of the last few years cause you to convert? > > I never realized it, but I was always an Austrian. Between 1977 and 2007 we > were so damned busy working, I never had much time to think about economic > philosophies. All I knew was, the harder I worked, the luckier I got. It's > only been since my unplanned retirement in '07 (after Sandy's stroke in '06) > that I have even had time to consider such things. > > Rik > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:12 AM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> My employer, as well as our major competitor, uses primarily part-time >> workers that are paid roughly twice the minimum wage, but more >> importantly, receive health-care insurance and education benefits. UPS >> has even established a branch campus of U. of Louisville next door to >> their main hub and schedules classes at times convenient to their >> worker's schedule. >> >> After Katrina, contractors relied heavily on illegal immigrant >> workers, not because they were cheaper, but rather they were >> available, period. Potential workers living in utility paid FEMA >> trailers and receiving living stipends had neither the desire or >> incentive to seek employment. When the FEMA trailer program finally >> ended some three years later, there was the all too predictable outcry >> of "they're taking away my home!" >> >> Where the "safety net" ends and the cycle of dependency begins is >> beyond me, but we see evidence of it every day. See article below - >> >> http://mises.org/daily/3822 to Work >> >> I can personally relate to the issues regarding the phase out of >> college assistance plans and the disincentives against saving for >> retirement. Just as we've created an almost insurmountable hurdle at >> the low income level, we've enacted huge punishments at the other end >> of the income scale. One of the reasons job creation will be slow in >> this business cycle recovery is that we've scared the 'bejesus' out of >> small business owners, the very people who can create new jobs the >> fastest. >> >> Frankly, I don't see how universal health coverage will do anything >> but add to the problem. That sure was the experience in Tennessee. >> >> Brad >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From mweisner at ebsmed.com Wed Nov 11 16:33:05 2009 From: mweisner at ebsmed.com (Michael D. Weisner) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 16:33:05 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Fw: [Rhodes22-list] Veterans Day 2009 Message-ID: <46344684B9A246BEB4E5353DBAB67A7B@ebsoffice> Brad, Thanks, from all your old friends ... Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "BenCittadino" To: Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 4:26 PM Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Veterans Day 2009 > > Thanks Mike; > > Tell the "old friend" thanks too. > > It's never inappropriate to thank our veterans, even on a "sailing" list. > > We had some active duty marines at our local Veterans Day ceremony in > Princeton today. Gosh they look so young.... > > Thanks again, > > BenCittadino > > > Leland wrote: >> >> Mike, >> >> Excellent post, especially since I'm at work. >> >> Obviously I'm not working too hard. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Lee >> 1986 Rhodes22 At Ease >> Kent Island, MD >> >> >> >> R22MikeW wrote: >>> >>> I am forwarding this to the Rhodes 22 list as a service to all veterans >>> on >>> their day from an old friend (on another old friend's list-Sweetwater >>> Gazette). >>> >>> Note to Big Al ... nevermind >>> >>> Mike >>> s/v Shanghai'd Summer ('81) >>> Nissequogue River, NY >>> >>> From: "Brad Haslett" Wednesday, November 11, 2009 12:55 PM >>> Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Veterans Day >>> >>> >>>>From the late, great Mike Royko (circa 1993) - >>> >>> *** >>> >>> I just phoned six friends and asked them what they will be doing on >>> Monday. >>> >>> They all said the same thing: working. >>> >>> Me, too. >>> >>> There is something else we share. We are all military veterans. >>> >>> And there is a third thing we have in common. We are not employees of >>> the federal government, state government, county government, municipal >>> government, the Postal Service, the courts, banks, or S & Ls, and we >>> don?t teach school. >>> >>> If we did, we would be among the many millions of people who will >>> spend Monday goofing off. >>> >>> Which is why it is about time Congress revised the ridiculous terms of >>> Veterans Day as a national holiday. >>> >>> The purpose of Veterans Day is to honor all veterans. >>> >>> So how does this country honor them? >>> >>> By letting the veterans, the majority of whom work in the private >>> sector, spend the day at their jobs so they can pay taxes that permit >>> millions of non-veterans to get paid for doing nothing. >>> >>> As my friend Harry put it: >>> >>> "First I went through basic training. Then infantry school. Then I got >>> on a crowded, stinking troop ship that took 23 days to get from San >>> Francisco to Japan. We went through a storm that had 90 percent of the >>> guys on the ship throwing up for a week. >>> >>> "Then I rode a beat-up transport plane from Japan to Korea, and it >>> almost went down in the drink. I think the pilot was drunk. >>> >>> "When I got to Korea, I was lucky. The war ended seven months after I >>> got there, and I didn?t kill anybody and nobody killed me. >>> >>> "But it was still a miserable experience. Then when my tour was over, >>> I got on another troop ship and it took 21 stinking days to cross the >>> Pacific. >>> >>> "When I got home on leave, one of the older guys at the neighborhood >>> bar ? he was a World War II vet ? told me I was a ----head because we >>> didn?t win, we only got a tie. >>> >>> "So now on Veterans Day I get up in the morning and go down to the >>> office and work. >>> >>> "You know what my nephew does? He sleeps in. That?s because he works >>> for the state. >>> >>> "And do you know what he did during the Vietnam War? He ducked the >>> draft by getting a job teaching at an inner-city school. >>> >>> "Now, is that a raw deal or what?" >>> >>> Of course that?s a raw deal. So I propose that the members of Congress >>> revise Veterans Day to provide the following: >>> >>> - All veterans ? and only veterans ? should have the day off from >>> work. It doesn?t matter if they were combat heroes or stateside >>> clerk-typists. >>> >>> Anybody who went through basic training and was awakened before dawn >>> by a red-neck drill sergeant who bellowed: "Drop your whatsis and grab >>> your socks and fall out on the road," is entitled. >>> >>> - Those veterans who wish to march in parades, make speeches or listen >>> to speeches can do so. But for those who don?t, all local gambling >>> laws should be suspended for the day to permit vets to gather in >>> taverns, pull a couple of tables together and spend the day playing >>> poker, blackjack, craps, drinking and telling lewd lies about lewd >>> experiences with lewd women. All bar prices should be rolled back to >>> enlisted men?s club prices, Officers can pay the going rate, the >>> stiffs. >>> >>> - All anti-smoking laws will be suspended for Veterans Day. The same >>> hold for all misdemeanor laws pertaining to disorderly conduct, >>> non-felonious brawling, leering, gawking and any other gross and >>> disgusting public behavior that does not harm another individual. >>> >>> - It will be a treasonable offense for any spouse or live-in >>> girlfriend (or boyfriend, if it applies) to utter the dreaded words: >>> "What time will you be home tonight?" >>> >>> - Anyone caught posing as a veteran will be required to eat a triple >>> portion of chipped beef on toast, with Spam on the side, and spend the >>> day watching a chaplain present a color-slide presentation on the >>> horrors of VD. >>> >>> - Regardless of how high his office, no politician who had the >>> opportunity to serve in the military, but didn?t, will be allowed to >>> make a patriotic speech, appear on TV, or poke his nose out of his >>> office for the entire day. >>> >>> Any politician who defies this ban will be required to spend 12 hours >>> wearing headphones and listening to tapes of President Clinton >>> explaining his deferments. >>> >>> Now, deal the cards and pass the tequila. >>> >>> - Mike Royko >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >>> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >>> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >>> >>> >>> -- >>> I am using the free version of SPAMfighter. >>> We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam. >>> SPAMfighter has removed 7862 of my spam emails to date. >>> Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len >>> >>> The Professional version does not have this message >>> >>> >>> __________________________________________________ >>> To subscribe/unsubscribe go to >>> http://www.rhodes22.org/mailman/listinfo/rhodes22-list >>> >>> For the list Charter and help with using the mailing list and archives >>> go >>> to http://www.rhodes22.org/list >>> __________________________________________________ >>> >>> >> >> > > -- > View this message in context: > http://old.nabble.com/Veterans-Day-2009-tp26306091p26308937.html > Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > __________________________________________________ > To subscribe/unsubscribe go to > http://www.rhodes22.org/mailman/listinfo/rhodes22-list > > For the list Charter and help with using the mailing list and archives go > to http://www.rhodes22.org/list > __________________________________________________ > -- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter. We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam. SPAMfighter has removed 7873 of my spam emails to date. Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len The Professional version does not have this message From sanderico1 at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 18:26:33 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 17:26:33 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] How to ram home Marxist ideology Message-ID: <6634e19e0911111526gfc5427pb519c2b808813911@mail.gmail.com> It makes you wonder: Could those that elected the O one understand what they were voting for??? If they understood the implications of their vote, do they have any place in a free society?? What's next from the merry band of Marxists ..... mandatory community re-education?? Rik __________________ http://www.nrapublications.org/sg/index.asp *STANDING GUARD** By Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice President* *Silencing The First Amendment* [image: Wayne LaPierre] One of the radical ideological appointees embedded in the Obama political machine is a man with a dream for the First Amendment. His name is Mark Lloyd, and as Obama's "Diversity Czar" at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), he plans to wield immense power over the way Americans can communicate. In his vision, a day would come when talk radio would be replaced with government-approved "progressive" local radio and by a smothering National People's Radio. In his vision ... Rush Limbaugh would be gone. Glenn Beck, gone. Lou Dobbs, off the air. Sean Hannity, silenced. Laura Ingraham, history. The networks and satellite broadcasters that now carry those broadcasts would be broken up, and their affiliate stations "delicensed," replaced by "local" licensees?all in the name of diversity. Free choice would be dead, as would the free flow of ideas. At the same time, government radio would be bloated with funds taken as punitive license fees from remaining commercial broadcasters. In the Orwellian name of "diversity," censorship will reign. It is Katrina for the First Amendment. Well before President Obama began packing the federal bureaucracies with his personal "czars," I warned of the influence of the George Soros-bankrolled Center for American Progress (CAP). The man who heads that far-left think tank, John Podesta, ran Obama's post-election transition team and was key to filling positions in the Obama Chicago-style federal machine. As White House chief of staff, he was one of Bill Clinton's hatchet men on federal gun control. Among the most critical targets for Podesta's transition was the Federal Communications Commission. His most important appointee to the FCC was Mark Lloyd, who as a CAP fellow, authored a George Soros-financed war plan to kill talk radio. In his powerful FCC post, Lloyd is shaping the critical components of the Obama administration's backdoor censorship of electronic and digital communications. He is doing it through the "regulatory" process?outside any specific congressional authority. FCC has the power to determine who gets broadcast licenses and who is barred. Political misuse of that power is the key. In terms of the sanctity of the Constitutional right of free speech as we know it today, Lloyd's views are scary. In his 2006 book, "Prologue to a Farce: Communication and Democracy in America," he wrote: "It should be clear ... that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the press. This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction from the critical examination of other communications policies." In Lloyd's worldview and from his prism of intolerance, "[T]he purpose of free speech is warped to protect global corporations and block rules that would promote democratic governance." Lloyd's 2007 declaration of war against broadcast free speech, "The Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio," came under scathing criticism from many true free speech advocates, including the NRA. But keep in mind that with this administration, criticism is always treated as nothing more than a "distraction" from the relentless agenda. Lloyd's attack on commercial talk-radio calls for a redistribution of broadcast licenses?taking them from commercial broadcasters carrying hugely successful commentators and giving those licenses to local "progressives," who otherwise would have no audience at all. Lloyd whined about the fact that left-wing Air America Radio drew audiences in "progressive" metropolitan areas that were so small as to be unmeasurable. Talkers like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity in those same cities garnered huge audiences. For Lloyd, market share is a myth. With that as evidence, Lloyd declared, "... that conservative talk radio dominates the airwaves of our country to the detriment of informed public discourse and the First Amendment." Got that? The free market of ideas?where individual Americans choose with their radio dials?exists "to the detriment of the First Amendment." Condemning what he calls the "power of right-wing talk radio and their echo chambers in the conservative blogosphere," Lloyd has demanded that commercial broadcasters "... should pay to support public broadcasters who will operate on behalf of the local community... We want either clear rules that promote these First Amendment values or a reasonable payment to the public for the use of its property." According to CNSNews.com, "reasonable payment" amounts to "... a sum equal to their (commercial broad-casters) total operating costs." With Lloyd empowered as "Diversity Czar" at the FCC?and Soros ultimately pulling the strings?this effort in the coming months to turn radical anti-First Amendment theory into public policy will move at a rapid pace. It will be merely one part of a flood of "Change" aimed at silencing any political opposition at any cost, especially my voice and your voice. As freedom-loving Americans, we, the people, must put our members of Congress on notice. Stop the FCC's backdoor attempt to choke off talk radio. And protect the Internet. As Benjamin Franklin put it: "Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech." We must not let that happen?not today?not ever. -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091111/27551ed4/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 21:12:58 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:12:58 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] How to ram home Marxist ideology In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911111526gfc5427pb519c2b808813911@mail.gmail.com> References: <6634e19e0911111526gfc5427pb519c2b808813911@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911111812g35635c82xed0c0416dd21a169@mail.gmail.com> Rik, Why did Lou Dobbs quit CNN today after 30 years with the network? Was it because someone shot at his house recently while his wife was home? Was it something he said? http://tinyurl.com/yeer2vr Brad On 11/11/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > It makes you wonder: > > Could those that elected the O one understand what they were voting for??? > If they understood the implications of their vote, do they have any place in > a free society?? > > What's next from the merry band of Marxists ..... mandatory community > re-education?? > > Rik > > __________________ > http://www.nrapublications.org/sg/index.asp > > *STANDING GUARD** > By Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice President* > > *Silencing The First Amendment* > [image: Wayne LaPierre] > > One of the radical ideological appointees embedded in the Obama political > machine is a man with a dream for the First Amendment. His name is Mark > Lloyd, and as Obama's "Diversity Czar" at the Federal Communications > Commission (FCC), he plans to wield immense power over the way Americans can > communicate. > > In his vision, a day would come when talk radio would be replaced with > government-approved "progressive" local radio and by a smothering National > People's Radio. > > In his vision ... Rush Limbaugh would be gone. Glenn Beck, gone. Lou Dobbs, > off the air. Sean Hannity, silenced. Laura Ingraham, history. The networks > and satellite broadcasters that now carry those broadcasts would be broken > up, and their affiliate stations "delicensed," replaced by "local" > licensees?all in the name of diversity. > > Free choice would be dead, as would the free flow of ideas. At the same > time, government radio would be bloated with funds taken as punitive license > fees from remaining commercial broadcasters. In the Orwellian name of > "diversity," censorship will reign. > > It is Katrina for the First Amendment. > > Well before President Obama began packing the federal bureaucracies with his > personal "czars," I warned of the influence of the George Soros-bankrolled > Center for American Progress (CAP). > > The man who heads that far-left think tank, John Podesta, ran Obama's > post-election transition team and was key to filling positions in the Obama > Chicago-style federal machine. As White House chief of staff, he was one of > Bill Clinton's hatchet men on federal gun control. > > Among the most critical targets for Podesta's transition was the Federal > Communications Commission. His most important appointee to the FCC was Mark > Lloyd, who as a CAP fellow, authored a George Soros-financed war plan to > kill talk radio. > > In his powerful FCC post, Lloyd is shaping the critical components of the > Obama administration's backdoor censorship of electronic and digital > communications. He is doing it through the "regulatory" process?outside any > specific congressional authority. FCC has the power to determine who gets > broadcast licenses and who is barred. Political misuse of that power is the > key. > > In terms of the sanctity of the Constitutional right of free speech as we > know it today, Lloyd's views are scary. In his 2006 book, "Prologue to a > Farce: Communication and Democracy in America," he wrote: > > "It should be clear ... that my focus here is not freedom of speech or the > press. This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, > blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction > from the critical examination of other communications policies." > > In Lloyd's worldview and from his prism of intolerance, "[T]he purpose of > free speech is warped to protect global corporations and block rules that > would promote democratic governance." > > Lloyd's 2007 declaration of war against broadcast free speech, "The > Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio," came under scathing criticism > from many true free speech advocates, including the NRA. But keep in mind > that with this administration, criticism is always treated as nothing more > than a "distraction" from the relentless agenda. > > Lloyd's attack on commercial talk-radio calls for a redistribution of > broadcast licenses?taking them from commercial broadcasters carrying hugely > successful commentators and giving those licenses to local "progressives," > who otherwise would have no audience at all. Lloyd whined about the fact > that left-wing Air America Radio drew audiences in "progressive" > metropolitan areas that were so small as to be unmeasurable. Talkers like > Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity in those same cities garnered huge audiences. > For Lloyd, market share is a myth. > > With that as evidence, Lloyd declared, "... that conservative talk radio > dominates the airwaves of our country to the detriment of informed public > discourse and the First Amendment." > > Got that? The free market of ideas?where individual Americans choose with > their radio dials?exists "to the detriment of the First Amendment." > > Condemning what he calls the "power of right-wing talk radio and their echo > chambers in the conservative blogosphere," Lloyd has demanded that > commercial broadcasters "... should pay to support public broadcasters who > will operate on behalf of the local community... We want either clear rules > that promote these First Amendment values or a reasonable payment to the > public for the use of its property." According to CNSNews.com, "reasonable > payment" amounts to "... a sum equal to their (commercial broad-casters) > total operating costs." > > With Lloyd empowered as "Diversity Czar" at the FCC?and Soros ultimately > pulling the strings?this effort in the coming months to turn radical > anti-First Amendment theory into public policy will move at a rapid pace. It > will be merely one part of a flood of "Change" aimed at silencing any > political opposition at any cost, especially my voice and your voice. > > As freedom-loving Americans, we, the people, must put our members of > Congress on notice. Stop the FCC's backdoor attempt to choke off talk radio. > And protect the Internet. As Benjamin Franklin put it: "Whoever would > overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of > speech." We must not let that happen?not today?not ever. > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 23:14:50 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 22:14:50 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] How to ram home Marxist ideology In-Reply-To: <400985d70911111812g35635c82xed0c0416dd21a169@mail.gmail.com> References: <6634e19e0911111526gfc5427pb519c2b808813911@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911111812g35635c82xed0c0416dd21a169@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911112014n4fe30c4aw27489bc75acdb8de@mail.gmail.com> Lot's of reports out there on this, but no one I've seen has said why yet. I've heard both quit and fired. But hey c'mon, a liberal shooting a gun??? A liberal using physical violence to advance their political agenda?? That couldn't possibly happen ...could it?? Rik On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:12 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Rik, > > Why did Lou Dobbs quit CNN today after 30 years with the network? Was > it because someone shot at his house recently while his wife was home? > Was it something he said? > > http://tinyurl.com/yeer2vr > > Brad > > On 11/11/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > > It makes you wonder: > > > > Could those that elected the O one understand what they were voting > for??? > > If they understood the implications of their vote, do they have any place > in > > a free society?? > > > > What's next from the merry band of Marxists ..... mandatory community > > re-education?? > > > > Rik > > > > __________________ > > http://www.nrapublications.org/sg/index.asp > > > > *STANDING GUARD** > > By Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice President* > > > > *Silencing The First Amendment* > > [image: Wayne LaPierre] > > > > One of the radical ideological appointees embedded in the Obama political > > machine is a man with a dream for the First Amendment. His name is Mark > > Lloyd, and as Obama's "Diversity Czar" at the Federal Communications > > Commission (FCC), he plans to wield immense power over the way Americans > can > > communicate. > > > > In his vision, a day would come when talk radio would be replaced with > > government-approved "progressive" local radio and by a smothering > National > > People's Radio. > > > > In his vision ... Rush Limbaugh would be gone. Glenn Beck, gone. Lou > Dobbs, > > off the air. Sean Hannity, silenced. Laura Ingraham, history. The > networks > > and satellite broadcasters that now carry those broadcasts would be > broken > > up, and their affiliate stations "delicensed," replaced by "local" > > licensees?all in the name of diversity. > > > > Free choice would be dead, as would the free flow of ideas. At the same > > time, government radio would be bloated with funds taken as punitive > license > > fees from remaining commercial broadcasters. In the Orwellian name of > > "diversity," censorship will reign. > > > > It is Katrina for the First Amendment. > > > > Well before President Obama began packing the federal bureaucracies with > his > > personal "czars," I warned of the influence of the George > Soros-bankrolled > > Center for American Progress (CAP). > > > > The man who heads that far-left think tank, John Podesta, ran Obama's > > post-election transition team and was key to filling positions in the > Obama > > Chicago-style federal machine. As White House chief of staff, he was one > of > > Bill Clinton's hatchet men on federal gun control. > > > > Among the most critical targets for Podesta's transition was the Federal > > Communications Commission. His most important appointee to the FCC was > Mark > > Lloyd, who as a CAP fellow, authored a George Soros-financed war plan to > > kill talk radio. > > > > In his powerful FCC post, Lloyd is shaping the critical components of the > > Obama administration's backdoor censorship of electronic and digital > > communications. He is doing it through the "regulatory" process?outside > any > > specific congressional authority. FCC has the power to determine who gets > > broadcast licenses and who is barred. Political misuse of that power is > the > > key. > > > > In terms of the sanctity of the Constitutional right of free speech as we > > know it today, Lloyd's views are scary. In his 2006 book, "Prologue to a > > Farce: Communication and Democracy in America," he wrote: > > > > "It should be clear ... that my focus here is not freedom of speech or > the > > press. This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, > > blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a distraction > > from the critical examination of other communications policies." > > > > In Lloyd's worldview and from his prism of intolerance, "[T]he purpose of > > free speech is warped to protect global corporations and block rules that > > would promote democratic governance." > > > > Lloyd's 2007 declaration of war against broadcast free speech, "The > > Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio," came under scathing > criticism > > from many true free speech advocates, including the NRA. But keep in mind > > that with this administration, criticism is always treated as nothing > more > > than a "distraction" from the relentless agenda. > > > > Lloyd's attack on commercial talk-radio calls for a redistribution of > > broadcast licenses?taking them from commercial broadcasters carrying > hugely > > successful commentators and giving those licenses to local > "progressives," > > who otherwise would have no audience at all. Lloyd whined about the fact > > that left-wing Air America Radio drew audiences in "progressive" > > metropolitan areas that were so small as to be unmeasurable. Talkers like > > Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity in those same cities garnered huge > audiences. > > For Lloyd, market share is a myth. > > > > With that as evidence, Lloyd declared, "... that conservative talk radio > > dominates the airwaves of our country to the detriment of informed public > > discourse and the First Amendment." > > > > Got that? The free market of ideas?where individual Americans choose with > > their radio dials?exists "to the detriment of the First Amendment." > > > > Condemning what he calls the "power of right-wing talk radio and their > echo > > chambers in the conservative blogosphere," Lloyd has demanded that > > commercial broadcasters "... should pay to support public broadcasters > who > > will operate on behalf of the local community... We want either clear > rules > > that promote these First Amendment values or a reasonable payment to the > > public for the use of its property." According to CNSNews.com, > "reasonable > > payment" amounts to "... a sum equal to their (commercial broad-casters) > > total operating costs." > > > > With Lloyd empowered as "Diversity Czar" at the FCC?and Soros ultimately > > pulling the strings?this effort in the coming months to turn radical > > anti-First Amendment theory into public policy will move at a rapid pace. > It > > will be merely one part of a flood of "Change" aimed at silencing any > > political opposition at any cost, especially my voice and your voice. > > > > As freedom-loving Americans, we, the people, must put our members of > > Congress on notice. Stop the FCC's backdoor attempt to choke off talk > radio. > > And protect the Internet. As Benjamin Franklin put it: "Whoever would > > overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of > > speech." We must not let that happen?not today?not ever. > > > > > > -- > > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > > you with experience. > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091111/a55b6956/attachment.html From flybrad at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 23:35:50 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 22:35:50 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] How to ram home Marxist ideology In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911112014n4fe30c4aw27489bc75acdb8de@mail.gmail.com> References: <6634e19e0911111526gfc5427pb519c2b808813911@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911111812g35635c82xed0c0416dd21a169@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911112014n4fe30c4aw27489bc75acdb8de@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911112035p255c59b4q9a529672aa54aab1@mail.gmail.com> Silly me, never! http://cbs13.com/local/hamidi.seiu.beating.2.1297874.html http://tinyurl.com/yjyhwqk http://tinyurl.com/ygbux2o On 11/11/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Lot's of reports out there on this, but no one I've seen has said why yet. > > I've heard both quit and fired. > > But hey c'mon, a liberal shooting a gun??? A liberal using physical violence > to advance their political agenda?? That couldn't possibly happen ...could > it?? > > Rik > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:12 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Rik, >> >> Why did Lou Dobbs quit CNN today after 30 years with the network? Was >> it because someone shot at his house recently while his wife was home? >> Was it something he said? >> >> http://tinyurl.com/yeer2vr >> >> Brad >> >> On 11/11/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> > It makes you wonder: >> > >> > Could those that elected the O one understand what they were voting >> for??? >> > If they understood the implications of their vote, do they have any >> > place >> in >> > a free society?? >> > >> > What's next from the merry band of Marxists ..... mandatory community >> > re-education?? >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > __________________ >> > http://www.nrapublications.org/sg/index.asp >> > >> > *STANDING GUARD** >> > By Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice President* >> > >> > *Silencing The First Amendment* >> > [image: Wayne LaPierre] >> > >> > One of the radical ideological appointees embedded in the Obama >> > political >> > machine is a man with a dream for the First Amendment. His name is Mark >> > Lloyd, and as Obama's "Diversity Czar" at the Federal Communications >> > Commission (FCC), he plans to wield immense power over the way Americans >> can >> > communicate. >> > >> > In his vision, a day would come when talk radio would be replaced with >> > government-approved "progressive" local radio and by a smothering >> National >> > People's Radio. >> > >> > In his vision ... Rush Limbaugh would be gone. Glenn Beck, gone. Lou >> Dobbs, >> > off the air. Sean Hannity, silenced. Laura Ingraham, history. The >> networks >> > and satellite broadcasters that now carry those broadcasts would be >> broken >> > up, and their affiliate stations "delicensed," replaced by "local" >> > licensees?all in the name of diversity. >> > >> > Free choice would be dead, as would the free flow of ideas. At the same >> > time, government radio would be bloated with funds taken as punitive >> license >> > fees from remaining commercial broadcasters. In the Orwellian name of >> > "diversity," censorship will reign. >> > >> > It is Katrina for the First Amendment. >> > >> > Well before President Obama began packing the federal bureaucracies with >> his >> > personal "czars," I warned of the influence of the George >> Soros-bankrolled >> > Center for American Progress (CAP). >> > >> > The man who heads that far-left think tank, John Podesta, ran Obama's >> > post-election transition team and was key to filling positions in the >> Obama >> > Chicago-style federal machine. As White House chief of staff, he was one >> of >> > Bill Clinton's hatchet men on federal gun control. >> > >> > Among the most critical targets for Podesta's transition was the Federal >> > Communications Commission. His most important appointee to the FCC was >> Mark >> > Lloyd, who as a CAP fellow, authored a George Soros-financed war plan to >> > kill talk radio. >> > >> > In his powerful FCC post, Lloyd is shaping the critical components of >> > the >> > Obama administration's backdoor censorship of electronic and digital >> > communications. He is doing it through the "regulatory" process?outside >> any >> > specific congressional authority. FCC has the power to determine who >> > gets >> > broadcast licenses and who is barred. Political misuse of that power is >> the >> > key. >> > >> > In terms of the sanctity of the Constitutional right of free speech as >> > we >> > know it today, Lloyd's views are scary. In his 2006 book, "Prologue to a >> > Farce: Communication and Democracy in America," he wrote: >> > >> > "It should be clear ... that my focus here is not freedom of speech or >> the >> > press. This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very least, >> > blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a >> > distraction >> > from the critical examination of other communications policies." >> > >> > In Lloyd's worldview and from his prism of intolerance, "[T]he purpose >> > of >> > free speech is warped to protect global corporations and block rules >> > that >> > would promote democratic governance." >> > >> > Lloyd's 2007 declaration of war against broadcast free speech, "The >> > Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio," came under scathing >> criticism >> > from many true free speech advocates, including the NRA. But keep in >> > mind >> > that with this administration, criticism is always treated as nothing >> more >> > than a "distraction" from the relentless agenda. >> > >> > Lloyd's attack on commercial talk-radio calls for a redistribution of >> > broadcast licenses?taking them from commercial broadcasters carrying >> hugely >> > successful commentators and giving those licenses to local >> "progressives," >> > who otherwise would have no audience at all. Lloyd whined about the fact >> > that left-wing Air America Radio drew audiences in "progressive" >> > metropolitan areas that were so small as to be unmeasurable. Talkers >> > like >> > Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity in those same cities garnered huge >> audiences. >> > For Lloyd, market share is a myth. >> > >> > With that as evidence, Lloyd declared, "... that conservative talk radio >> > dominates the airwaves of our country to the detriment of informed >> > public >> > discourse and the First Amendment." >> > >> > Got that? The free market of ideas?where individual Americans choose >> > with >> > their radio dials?exists "to the detriment of the First Amendment." >> > >> > Condemning what he calls the "power of right-wing talk radio and their >> echo >> > chambers in the conservative blogosphere," Lloyd has demanded that >> > commercial broadcasters "... should pay to support public broadcasters >> who >> > will operate on behalf of the local community... We want either clear >> rules >> > that promote these First Amendment values or a reasonable payment to the >> > public for the use of its property." According to CNSNews.com, >> "reasonable >> > payment" amounts to "... a sum equal to their (commercial broad-casters) >> > total operating costs." >> > >> > With Lloyd empowered as "Diversity Czar" at the FCC?and Soros ultimately >> > pulling the strings?this effort in the coming months to turn radical >> > anti-First Amendment theory into public policy will move at a rapid >> > pace. >> It >> > will be merely one part of a flood of "Change" aimed at silencing any >> > political opposition at any cost, especially my voice and your voice. >> > >> > As freedom-loving Americans, we, the people, must put our members of >> > Congress on notice. Stop the FCC's backdoor attempt to choke off talk >> radio. >> > And protect the Internet. As Benjamin Franklin put it: "Whoever would >> > overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of >> > speech." We must not let that happen?not today?not ever. >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> > beat >> > you with experience. >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From sanderico1 at gmail.com Thu Nov 12 00:06:13 2009 From: sanderico1 at gmail.com (Rik Sandberg) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 23:06:13 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] How to ram home Marxist ideology In-Reply-To: <400985d70911112035p255c59b4q9a529672aa54aab1@mail.gmail.com> References: <6634e19e0911111526gfc5427pb519c2b808813911@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911111812g35635c82xed0c0416dd21a169@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911112014n4fe30c4aw27489bc75acdb8de@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911112035p255c59b4q9a529672aa54aab1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6634e19e0911112106t298d54bao88780d9ed0688a8d@mail.gmail.com> Yep, but you really gotta' watch those radical conservative types. I've seen them come onto the capital steps .... with signs for God's sake .... I feared for my life ... those nazi, radical, teabagger wing-nuts .... Honestly, who is so stupid that they can't see what is going on here?? Swear to God, I can't imagine how this can go on much longer without violence in the streets. Rik On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:35 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > Silly me, never! > > http://cbs13.com/local/hamidi.seiu.beating.2.1297874.html > > http://tinyurl.com/yjyhwqk > > http://tinyurl.com/ygbux2o > > > > On 11/11/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > > Lot's of reports out there on this, but no one I've seen has said why > yet. > > > > I've heard both quit and fired. > > > > But hey c'mon, a liberal shooting a gun??? A liberal using physical > violence > > to advance their political agenda?? That couldn't possibly happen > ...could > > it?? > > > > Rik > > > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:12 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > > > >> Rik, > >> > >> Why did Lou Dobbs quit CNN today after 30 years with the network? Was > >> it because someone shot at his house recently while his wife was home? > >> Was it something he said? > >> > >> http://tinyurl.com/yeer2vr > >> > >> Brad > >> > >> On 11/11/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > >> > It makes you wonder: > >> > > >> > Could those that elected the O one understand what they were voting > >> for??? > >> > If they understood the implications of their vote, do they have any > >> > place > >> in > >> > a free society?? > >> > > >> > What's next from the merry band of Marxists ..... mandatory community > >> > re-education?? > >> > > >> > Rik > >> > > >> > __________________ > >> > http://www.nrapublications.org/sg/index.asp > >> > > >> > *STANDING GUARD** > >> > By Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice President* > >> > > >> > *Silencing The First Amendment* > >> > [image: Wayne LaPierre] > >> > > >> > One of the radical ideological appointees embedded in the Obama > >> > political > >> > machine is a man with a dream for the First Amendment. His name is > Mark > >> > Lloyd, and as Obama's "Diversity Czar" at the Federal Communications > >> > Commission (FCC), he plans to wield immense power over the way > Americans > >> can > >> > communicate. > >> > > >> > In his vision, a day would come when talk radio would be replaced with > >> > government-approved "progressive" local radio and by a smothering > >> National > >> > People's Radio. > >> > > >> > In his vision ... Rush Limbaugh would be gone. Glenn Beck, gone. Lou > >> Dobbs, > >> > off the air. Sean Hannity, silenced. Laura Ingraham, history. The > >> networks > >> > and satellite broadcasters that now carry those broadcasts would be > >> broken > >> > up, and their affiliate stations "delicensed," replaced by "local" > >> > licensees?all in the name of diversity. > >> > > >> > Free choice would be dead, as would the free flow of ideas. At the > same > >> > time, government radio would be bloated with funds taken as punitive > >> license > >> > fees from remaining commercial broadcasters. In the Orwellian name of > >> > "diversity," censorship will reign. > >> > > >> > It is Katrina for the First Amendment. > >> > > >> > Well before President Obama began packing the federal bureaucracies > with > >> his > >> > personal "czars," I warned of the influence of the George > >> Soros-bankrolled > >> > Center for American Progress (CAP). > >> > > >> > The man who heads that far-left think tank, John Podesta, ran Obama's > >> > post-election transition team and was key to filling positions in the > >> Obama > >> > Chicago-style federal machine. As White House chief of staff, he was > one > >> of > >> > Bill Clinton's hatchet men on federal gun control. > >> > > >> > Among the most critical targets for Podesta's transition was the > Federal > >> > Communications Commission. His most important appointee to the FCC was > >> Mark > >> > Lloyd, who as a CAP fellow, authored a George Soros-financed war plan > to > >> > kill talk radio. > >> > > >> > In his powerful FCC post, Lloyd is shaping the critical components of > >> > the > >> > Obama administration's backdoor censorship of electronic and digital > >> > communications. He is doing it through the "regulatory" > process?outside > >> any > >> > specific congressional authority. FCC has the power to determine who > >> > gets > >> > broadcast licenses and who is barred. Political misuse of that power > is > >> the > >> > key. > >> > > >> > In terms of the sanctity of the Constitutional right of free speech as > >> > we > >> > know it today, Lloyd's views are scary. In his 2006 book, "Prologue to > a > >> > Farce: Communication and Democracy in America," he wrote: > >> > > >> > "It should be clear ... that my focus here is not freedom of speech or > >> the > >> > press. This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very > least, > >> > blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a > >> > distraction > >> > from the critical examination of other communications policies." > >> > > >> > In Lloyd's worldview and from his prism of intolerance, "[T]he purpose > >> > of > >> > free speech is warped to protect global corporations and block rules > >> > that > >> > would promote democratic governance." > >> > > >> > Lloyd's 2007 declaration of war against broadcast free speech, "The > >> > Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio," came under scathing > >> criticism > >> > from many true free speech advocates, including the NRA. But keep in > >> > mind > >> > that with this administration, criticism is always treated as nothing > >> more > >> > than a "distraction" from the relentless agenda. > >> > > >> > Lloyd's attack on commercial talk-radio calls for a redistribution of > >> > broadcast licenses?taking them from commercial broadcasters carrying > >> hugely > >> > successful commentators and giving those licenses to local > >> "progressives," > >> > who otherwise would have no audience at all. Lloyd whined about the > fact > >> > that left-wing Air America Radio drew audiences in "progressive" > >> > metropolitan areas that were so small as to be unmeasurable. Talkers > >> > like > >> > Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity in those same cities garnered huge > >> audiences. > >> > For Lloyd, market share is a myth. > >> > > >> > With that as evidence, Lloyd declared, "... that conservative talk > radio > >> > dominates the airwaves of our country to the detriment of informed > >> > public > >> > discourse and the First Amendment." > >> > > >> > Got that? The free market of ideas?where individual Americans choose > >> > with > >> > their radio dials?exists "to the detriment of the First Amendment." > >> > > >> > Condemning what he calls the "power of right-wing talk radio and their > >> echo > >> > chambers in the conservative blogosphere," Lloyd has demanded that > >> > commercial broadcasters "... should pay to support public broadcasters > >> who > >> > will operate on behalf of the local community... We want either clear > >> rules > >> > that promote these First Amendment values or a reasonable payment to > the > >> > public for the use of its property." According to CNSNews.com, > >> "reasonable > >> > payment" amounts to "... a sum equal to their (commercial > broad-casters) > >> > total operating costs." > >> > > >> > With Lloyd empowered as "Diversity Czar" at the FCC?and Soros > ultimately > >> > pulling the strings?this effort in the coming months to turn radical > >> > anti-First Amendment theory into public policy will move at a rapid > >> > pace. > >> It > >> > will be merely one part of a flood of "Change" aimed at silencing any > >> > political opposition at any cost, especially my voice and your voice. > >> > > >> > As freedom-loving Americans, we, the people, must put our members of > >> > Congress on notice. Stop the FCC's backdoor attempt to choke off talk > >> radio. > >> > And protect the Internet. As Benjamin Franklin put it: "Whoever would > >> > overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness > of > >> > speech." We must not let that happen?not today?not ever. > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then > >> > beat > >> > you with experience. > >> > > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > >> > >> > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > > you with experience. > > > > _______________________________________________ > SwiftwaterGazette mailing list > SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com > > http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette > -- Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat you with experience. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/pipermail/swiftwatergazette/attachments/20091111/eba003cd/attachment-0001.html From flybrad at gmail.com Thu Nov 12 00:23:59 2009 From: flybrad at gmail.com (Brad Haslett) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2009 23:23:59 -0600 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] How to ram home Marxist ideology In-Reply-To: <6634e19e0911112106t298d54bao88780d9ed0688a8d@mail.gmail.com> References: <6634e19e0911111526gfc5427pb519c2b808813911@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911111812g35635c82xed0c0416dd21a169@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911112014n4fe30c4aw27489bc75acdb8de@mail.gmail.com> <400985d70911112035p255c59b4q9a529672aa54aab1@mail.gmail.com> <6634e19e0911112106t298d54bao88780d9ed0688a8d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <400985d70911112123k291ec26dxdcd64f90d0562d2b@mail.gmail.com> Rik, I wouldn't believe it if I hadn't been there as a spy and heard it with my own ears. Those anti-government types were yelling "you work for us" and "that's our house". Can you believe the nerve! Brad On 11/11/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: > Yep, but you really gotta' watch those radical conservative types. I've seen > them come onto the capital steps .... with signs for God's sake .... I > feared for my life ... those nazi, radical, teabagger wing-nuts .... > > Honestly, who is so stupid that they can't see what is going on here?? > > Swear to God, I can't imagine how this can go on much longer without > violence in the streets. > > Rik > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:35 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: > >> Silly me, never! >> >> http://cbs13.com/local/hamidi.seiu.beating.2.1297874.html >> >> http://tinyurl.com/yjyhwqk >> >> http://tinyurl.com/ygbux2o >> >> >> >> On 11/11/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> > Lot's of reports out there on this, but no one I've seen has said why >> yet. >> > >> > I've heard both quit and fired. >> > >> > But hey c'mon, a liberal shooting a gun??? A liberal using physical >> violence >> > to advance their political agenda?? That couldn't possibly happen >> ...could >> > it?? >> > >> > Rik >> > >> > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:12 PM, Brad Haslett wrote: >> > >> >> Rik, >> >> >> >> Why did Lou Dobbs quit CNN today after 30 years with the network? Was >> >> it because someone shot at his house recently while his wife was home? >> >> Was it something he said? >> >> >> >> http://tinyurl.com/yeer2vr >> >> >> >> Brad >> >> >> >> On 11/11/09, Rik Sandberg wrote: >> >> > It makes you wonder: >> >> > >> >> > Could those that elected the O one understand what they were voting >> >> for??? >> >> > If they understood the implications of their vote, do they have any >> >> > place >> >> in >> >> > a free society?? >> >> > >> >> > What's next from the merry band of Marxists ..... mandatory >> >> > community >> >> > re-education?? >> >> > >> >> > Rik >> >> > >> >> > __________________ >> >> > http://www.nrapublications.org/sg/index.asp >> >> > >> >> > *STANDING GUARD** >> >> > By Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice President* >> >> > >> >> > *Silencing The First Amendment* >> >> > [image: Wayne LaPierre] >> >> > >> >> > One of the radical ideological appointees embedded in the Obama >> >> > political >> >> > machine is a man with a dream for the First Amendment. His name is >> Mark >> >> > Lloyd, and as Obama's "Diversity Czar" at the Federal Communications >> >> > Commission (FCC), he plans to wield immense power over the way >> Americans >> >> can >> >> > communicate. >> >> > >> >> > In his vision, a day would come when talk radio would be replaced >> >> > with >> >> > government-approved "progressive" local radio and by a smothering >> >> National >> >> > People's Radio. >> >> > >> >> > In his vision ... Rush Limbaugh would be gone. Glenn Beck, gone. Lou >> >> Dobbs, >> >> > off the air. Sean Hannity, silenced. Laura Ingraham, history. The >> >> networks >> >> > and satellite broadcasters that now carry those broadcasts would be >> >> broken >> >> > up, and their affiliate stations "delicensed," replaced by "local" >> >> > licensees?all in the name of diversity. >> >> > >> >> > Free choice would be dead, as would the free flow of ideas. At the >> same >> >> > time, government radio would be bloated with funds taken as punitive >> >> license >> >> > fees from remaining commercial broadcasters. In the Orwellian name of >> >> > "diversity," censorship will reign. >> >> > >> >> > It is Katrina for the First Amendment. >> >> > >> >> > Well before President Obama began packing the federal bureaucracies >> with >> >> his >> >> > personal "czars," I warned of the influence of the George >> >> Soros-bankrolled >> >> > Center for American Progress (CAP). >> >> > >> >> > The man who heads that far-left think tank, John Podesta, ran Obama's >> >> > post-election transition team and was key to filling positions in the >> >> Obama >> >> > Chicago-style federal machine. As White House chief of staff, he was >> one >> >> of >> >> > Bill Clinton's hatchet men on federal gun control. >> >> > >> >> > Among the most critical targets for Podesta's transition was the >> Federal >> >> > Communications Commission. His most important appointee to the FCC >> >> > was >> >> Mark >> >> > Lloyd, who as a CAP fellow, authored a George Soros-financed war plan >> to >> >> > kill talk radio. >> >> > >> >> > In his powerful FCC post, Lloyd is shaping the critical components of >> >> > the >> >> > Obama administration's backdoor censorship of electronic and digital >> >> > communications. He is doing it through the "regulatory" >> process?outside >> >> any >> >> > specific congressional authority. FCC has the power to determine who >> >> > gets >> >> > broadcast licenses and who is barred. Political misuse of that power >> is >> >> the >> >> > key. >> >> > >> >> > In terms of the sanctity of the Constitutional right of free speech >> >> > as >> >> > we >> >> > know it today, Lloyd's views are scary. In his 2006 book, "Prologue >> >> > to >> a >> >> > Farce: Communication and Democracy in America," he wrote: >> >> > >> >> > "It should be clear ... that my focus here is not freedom of speech >> >> > or >> >> the >> >> > press. This freedom is all too often an exaggeration. At the very >> least, >> >> > blind references to freedom of speech or the press serve as a >> >> > distraction >> >> > from the critical examination of other communications policies." >> >> > >> >> > In Lloyd's worldview and from his prism of intolerance, "[T]he >> >> > purpose >> >> > of >> >> > free speech is warped to protect global corporations and block rules >> >> > that >> >> > would promote democratic governance." >> >> > >> >> > Lloyd's 2007 declaration of war against broadcast free speech, "The >> >> > Structural Imbalance of Political Talk Radio," came under scathing >> >> criticism >> >> > from many true free speech advocates, including the NRA. But keep in >> >> > mind >> >> > that with this administration, criticism is always treated as nothing >> >> more >> >> > than a "distraction" from the relentless agenda. >> >> > >> >> > Lloyd's attack on commercial talk-radio calls for a redistribution of >> >> > broadcast licenses?taking them from commercial broadcasters carrying >> >> hugely >> >> > successful commentators and giving those licenses to local >> >> "progressives," >> >> > who otherwise would have no audience at all. Lloyd whined about the >> fact >> >> > that left-wing Air America Radio drew audiences in "progressive" >> >> > metropolitan areas that were so small as to be unmeasurable. Talkers >> >> > like >> >> > Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity in those same cities garnered huge >> >> audiences. >> >> > For Lloyd, market share is a myth. >> >> > >> >> > With that as evidence, Lloyd declared, "... that conservative talk >> radio >> >> > dominates the airwaves of our country to the detriment of informed >> >> > public >> >> > discourse and the First Amendment." >> >> > >> >> > Got that? The free market of ideas?where individual Americans choose >> >> > with >> >> > their radio dials?exists "to the detriment of the First Amendment." >> >> > >> >> > Condemning what he calls the "power of right-wing talk radio and >> >> > their >> >> echo >> >> > chambers in the conservative blogosphere," Lloyd has demanded that >> >> > commercial broadcasters "... should pay to support public >> >> > broadcasters >> >> who >> >> > will operate on behalf of the local community... We want either clear >> >> rules >> >> > that promote these First Amendment values or a reasonable payment to >> the >> >> > public for the use of its property." According to CNSNews.com, >> >> "reasonable >> >> > payment" amounts to "... a sum equal to their (commercial >> broad-casters) >> >> > total operating costs." >> >> > >> >> > With Lloyd empowered as "Diversity Czar" at the FCC?and Soros >> ultimately >> >> > pulling the strings?this effort in the coming months to turn radical >> >> > anti-First Amendment theory into public policy will move at a rapid >> >> > pace. >> >> It >> >> > will be merely one part of a flood of "Change" aimed at silencing any >> >> > political opposition at any cost, especially my voice and your voice. >> >> > >> >> > As freedom-loving Americans, we, the people, must put our members of >> >> > Congress on notice. Stop the FCC's backdoor attempt to choke off talk >> >> radio. >> >> > And protect the Internet. As Benjamin Franklin put it: "Whoever would >> >> > overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness >> of >> >> > speech." We must not let that happen?not today?not ever. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> >> > beat >> >> > you with experience. >> >> > >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> >> >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then >> > beat >> > you with experience. >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SwiftwaterGazette mailing list >> SwiftwaterGazette at mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com >> >> http://mailman.theswiftwatergazette.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/swiftwatergazette >> > > > > -- > Never argue with idiots, they just drag you down to their level then beat > you with experience. > From ekroposki at charter.net Thu Nov 12 07:16:43 2009 From: ekroposki at charter.net (Ed Kroposki) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 07:16:43 -0500 Subject: [Swiftwater Gazette] Unions prod Obama to fix ailing airline industry Message-ID: <01F26A11708C49018903A1951584EC18@YOURB88038198E> Will this include freight airlines? Since most airlines carry freight also. Here goes another one... Can he include foreign airlines? http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_FIXING_AIRLINES?SITE=CAANR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT Ed K -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.t