Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Michigan will lose big time if no bailout

Posted By: OldMT on 2008-11-16
In Reply to: Well, looks like the automakers aren't - Backwards typist

Here in Michigan 7 out of 10 jobs are related to the auto industry.  I don't know if the bailout is the right thing to do or not, but if the auto industry fails, Michigan will be in big trouble.  We already have the highest unemployment rates in the country and I believe the highest foreclosure rate.  I do believe most of the high executives need to go, their salaries and "benefits" are unbelievable with the bonuses, stock options, etc.


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

I do agree. It was a lose/lose situation for him either way.
Very sad.
Michigan
I live here in Michigan and we have the highest unemployment in the US. My husband got laid off right after Christmas and I have had no work since the beginning of January working for the Q, so I also am on unemployment. We are really struggling and worried about putting food on the table and paying the bills. Too much stress! We don't eat out at all or go shopping for anything that is not a necessity. Things are horrible here, everyone is hurting. I actually saw a lawyer this morning and am considering filing bankruptcy which I don't want to do but I really don't have a choice. We just keep praying that things get better which is about all we can do.
What are your opinions on Fla and Michigan

I keep hearing about HC wanting to push on getting Florida and Michigan votes to count, delegates to be seated, etc.  While I understand about every vote should count and they should, I also understand that Fla & Mich agreed on this so that they could vote early (i.e. they broke the rules and were punished) and both sides (Obama & Clinton) agreed to it.  I guess at that time she thought that the whole US was just going to vote for her and nobody would vote for Obama and now that she is seeing otherwise she wants to change the rules/laws.


Now I don't even understand why there is a meeting going on.  Doesn't anyone just tell them...No!  You agreed to this.  You were told of the consequences and you agreed and now that your losing you want to change the laws to be put in your favor.  Every time they don't win they want to change the rules, and I dont understand why they are not just being told "No".  If they are so concerned about all the votes counting why didn't they just wait until when they were supposed to vote and not push it earlier.  I can tell you - because they thought they would be winning more states and they didn't care enough about Fla or Mich to wait.


Now I understand that she is going to go to the meeting and push that even with FL and MI she doesn't have enough votes, but she's now going to push for them to just dismiss Obama (even though he has more delagates and votes, and states won), that they should just dump him and make her the nominee because she believes she can win over McCain. She really needs to wake up.  She's just like her husband - a legend in their own minds.  If she steals this from Obama and becomes the nominee (which I doubt very very much) but if she was to be able to finagle that so much dirt would come out going all the way back to Whitewater, Rose Law Firm, etc, etc,


Maybe what they should be doing is taking responsibility and telling the citizens of FL & MI the real reason why their votes are not being counted - because of her and her decisions she made and if they blame anyone they should blame her for not following the laws.


And on another side cannot anyone tell me why in the world Obama's name was not on the ticket in MI.  I have not for the life of me figured out that one.  Only her name was on the ticket?  Helloooo....the last time I looked there were two candidates.  Now they are trying to say Obama removed his name from the ticket.  Yeah, right, tell me another one.  I hear that and I think, what country do we live in where the person who wants to be president has only their name on the ballot.  That's what I hear happens in Cuba, Russia and all those other communist countries.


When wil the insanity end?


 


 


Michigan is in a depression.
I was born and raised in Michigan.  Your state has been hit hard.  I live in the Northwest and in my neighborhood, I have 8 new families who have moved in and guess where they are from?  Michigan.  A lot of my family members in Michigan believe that the Oil companies should bail out the 3 car companies, not from taxpayers money.  Family members do not seem to care if the car companies fold because they are already in worse shape.  My cousin, last family relative working for the GM, took an early retirement package given to him 2-3 weeks BEFORE the financial crisis hit US.  He was very lucky.  I have family members considering moving to the Northwest and 1 family already is here and just love it. 
am originally from Michigan sm
Oakland County and alot of my reltives still live there.  Some are retired from GM.  It is really bad up there.  Lots of folks on my sister's street with no jobs and more losing jobs every day.  I was up there in September and the houses for sale are unreal!
Being that I live in Michigan and s/m

have a father that retired from General Motors and have a lot of friends that have either retired from there or currently work there, it is a big combination of blame.  I blame the union, General Motors and the employees for letting a lot of this happen.  GM paid the "fat cats" (that is what they are called around here) big money for skilled trades for them to sit around and do nothing, literally nothing.  It is a big joke around here that some go and clock in and turn around and go straight to a bar and then go back to clock out.  If they are needed, someone will call their cell and let them know they are needed. 


It has been common for years to allow employees to work 70/80 hour weeks, massive overtime and my father was one of them.  He was making over $130k a year, if not more when he retired.  I know it was hard physically on him to do it, but he said that he mostly read on the job and exercised.  A friend's husband goes to work to sleep.


I am not saying that everyone does this, but a majority of them do and it is a real shame.  I know the ones on the lines cannot do it, but the skilled trades can and do.  If the salaried employees complain, then the union gets involved and they still get to keep their jobs no matter how many times they are written up.  It takes a lot to get an employee fired. 


Just think, something breaks on the line, so they call in the skilled trades guy who has been at the bar drinking, he comes and fixes whatever is wrong, creating a quality problem and then GM has to charge so much money to cover the expenses.  And we wonder why they are over priced? And they want to be bailed out?  No thank you!


The GM execs have been getting millions of dollars in bonuses for years as well and the employees get a nice check before Xmas as well for a bonus.  They should have been like any other company and budgeted their money.  Shame on them.  If they had quality vehicles at a reasonable price, people wouldn't be buying foreign cars.  I personally do drive a GM vehicle because of the discount that I get from my dad.  Otherwise, I would probably be buying foreign as well, you get what you pay for. 


Sorry to rant, but living in a GM town and not working there, you can get a different perspective on things than what is shown in the news/media.  Forgive me if I have offended anyone.


What?? Where's Michigan? Oh, yeah...
We have the Big 3 and Detroit. 'Nuf said.
Michigan is in a one state recession. sm
The big 3 are tanking, our unemployment numbers are higher than the nation as a whole, jobs are leaving like the spring thaw, and who does Obama pick as part of his "Financial Advisory Committee"....none other than our wonderful governor, Jennifer Granholm. She can't advise her own state let alone the country. She now says that we have to cut the budget even more than last time. There isn't a whole lot left to cut. Our education system is absolutely the pits, Detroit is bankrupting us all, and she gets picked for part of the financial advisory committee. Makes me wonder what's going in Obama's head.

Oh well, at least I have a trade I can take with me where ever I go. The ultimate in healthcare portability.
Michigan is a right to work state a well s/m
But if you have a union behind (once upon a time the union had much pull), it took a lot to get you fired. 
The last sentence is particularly worrisome for Michigan.....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/18/AR2009061804053.html?wpisrc=newsletter

Senate's Health-Care Draft Calls for Most to Buy Insurance, Nixes Obama's 'Public Option'

By Lori Montgomery and Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, June 19, 2009

A draft proposal in the Senate to overhaul the nation's health-care system would require most people to buy health insurance, authorize an expansion of Medicaid coverage and create consumer-owned cooperative plans instead of the government coverage that President Obama is seeking.

The document, distributed among members of the Senate Finance Committee yesterday afternoon, addressed none of the funding questions that have consumed House and Senate negotiators in recent days. But it included an array of coverage provisions that were drastically scaled back from earlier versions, as lawmakers seek to shrink the bill's overall cost. The proposal, for instance, would reduce the pool of middle-class beneficiaries eligible for a new tax credit meant to make insurance more affordable.

The absence of a "public option" marks perhaps the most significant omission. Obama and many Democrats had sought a public option to ensure affordable, universal coverage, but as many as 10 Senate Democrats have protested the idea as unfair to private insurers. In its place, the draft circulated yesterday outlines a co-op approach modeled after rural electricity and telecom providers, subject to government oversight and funded with federal seed money.

Yesterday, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) met with four Republicans, including Sen. Charles Grassley (Iowa), the ranking GOP member on the panel, along with two Democratic colleagues in an attempt to find bipartisan consensus. Baucus dubbed the group "the coalition of the willing."

Meanwhile, in the House, Democrats are exploring a range of funding options, including a surtax on the rich and an increase in the payroll tax imposed on all U.S. workers. The list also includes new taxes on sugary drinks and alcohol, along with broader levies, such as a national value-added tax of up to 3 percent.

The Senate's preferred option -- taxing the health benefits that millions of Americans receive through their employers -- is also on the House list. So is Obama's favorite idea: limiting the value of itemized deductions for the nation's wealthiest 3 million taxpayers.

Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.), chairman of the Ways and Means subcommittee charged with developing a financing plan, said lawmakers have not "embraced any particular source of revenue." But he confirmed that big, broad-based taxes like the payroll tax and a value-added tax are under discussion, mainly because they have the potential to raise "a lot of money" for an expansion of health coverage expected to cost more than $1 trillion over the next decade.

The House will not unveil a financing plan until after the July 4 recess, Neal said, though House leaders were expected to release an outline of the rest of their plan today, with a goal of putting a bill to vote later this summer. The Senate is aiming to debate its legislation in July as well, and is seeking a bill that would cost less than $1 trillion.

Maintaining that tight schedule could prove difficult, though, because daunting issues remain in both chambers. One area of contention is the extent to which private employers must subsidize public coverage for their workers if the companies don't offer their own plan or if the premiums are unaffordable. The Congressional Budget Office has warned that if lawmakers don't find the right formula, employees may flee their company plans for federal coverage, sending government costs soaring.

The draft in the Senate committee spells out one possible solution: It would require employers to pay 50 percent of Medicaid costs for workers enrolled in the low-income program and 100 percent of the cost of health-insurance tax credits for eligible employees. Workers could forfeit employer coverage only if the cost exceeds 12.5 percent of their income.

The draft, earlier reported on by washingtonpost.com blogger Ezra Klein, spells out four options for requiring employers to provide coverage, with exemptions for firms with up to 200 employees. It would fine individuals who do not purchase coverage, though certain groups, including Native Americans and undocumented workers, would be exempted.

It also would loosen eligibility requirements for Medicaid, a proposal certain to alarm many governors who are grappling with budget crises.





No boyfriend sleepovers for parents in Michigan...sm
Dad Pans Girlfriend Sleepover Ban

DETROIT, Dec. 22, 2005










 (AP / CBS)


Quote


This antiquated law allows the state to unconstitutionally interfere with a parent's relationship with his or her children.




Kary Moss, executive director, ACLU of Michigan



(AP) A divorced father will fight a ruling that keeps his girlfriend away from their Michigan home when his children visit overnight, the state chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union said Wednesday.

The ACLU said it would appeal to the state Supreme Court on behalf of Christian Muller, whose ex-wife sought the court order based on an 1838 state law that makes lewd and lascivious cohabitation a crime. Michigan is one of only seven states with such a law on the books, the ACLU said.

This antiquated law allows the state to unconstitutionally interfere with a parent's relationship with his or her children, said Kary Moss, executive director of the ACLU of Michigan.

Muller shares legal custody of his two daughters, ages 5 and 7, with his former wife, Nicolette Muller.

Oakland County Judge Daniel Patrick O'Brien ordered that both parents be prohibited from having overnight visitation with their children when they have unrelated overnight guests of the opposite sex.

The latest appeal argues that the Court of Appeals decision conflicts with its prior rulings and with the Child Custody Act of 1970, and relies on an unconstitutional statute — the 1838 state law.

Elizabeth Silverman, an attorney who had represented Nicolette Muller, said Wednesday her services had not been retained for the latest appeal.

A home telephone number could not be found for Nicolette Muller, who lives in southeastern Michigan.

Michigan Police Officer's Take on Obama...
This was forwarded to me by a boyhood friend who is a retired cop.

Please pass this along to everyone that you have on your e-mail list because this is just the beginning if this arrogant, egotistical, super liberal, president wannabe gets into office....

To all,

I have read all of the emails from not only some of the MTOA board members, but from other Law Enforcement & Military personnel about Barack Obama's rudeness and what seems to be disgust for basically anyone in uniform. Well, it's my turn to add to the list of emailers and here it is:

So members of the Calhoun County Sheriff's Department, Michigan State Police, (me included) and other local agencies inside Calhoun County are working with Secret Service in the security of Mr. Obama. Mr. Obama's bus arrives in Battle Creek and pulls into the stadium area. Before Mr. Obama exits the bus, he has the Secret Service get off and tell all Law Enforcement personnel in uniform that they now have to stand behind the bus so Mr. Obama is not seen with anyone in a Law Enforcement uniform before he gets off or while in the public view. So, everyone from Michigan State Police, Sheriff's Departments and other agencies look at each other for a brief second, go and stand behind the bus out of sight so Mr. Obama does not have to see, or been seen with, what to him is 'undesirables' since he refuses to been seen or even acknowledge Military or Law Enforcement personnel in uniform. And he wants to be our commander-in-chief!


At a time of war and terrorism in our world, this presidential candidate who is being protected by various branches of the military & law enforcement at the tax payers expense, refuses to acknowledge, be seen with, have in his photographed background, any type of Military or Law Enforcement in uniform.

But this is not in the headlines or in the news or on TV. The TV news doesn't show us marching around behind the bus. In the future, look and see if you can see a single soldier or police officer in uniform when you see Obama. Why? I wonder what the story or media frenzy would be if it was Muslims, blacks, whites, Jews, or any other race, gender, religion, and/or occupation, that Mr. Obama refused to be seen with or have around him.

Why would I make this up? Everyone in Law Enforcement knows we have traditionally had more funding under Democrats.

Just food for thought leading up to November 4th.

Jason Kern
Michigan Tactical Officer's Association
Michigan State Police

Executive Board Member

Stand in line behind Michigan. Our roads are probably almost as bad. sm
And we have the highest gas tax in the country that is supposed to take care of that. However, with Michigan being a 1 state recession and/or depression, roads might be the least of our worries.
I heard this today.....and I live in Michigan....
Some governors are not going to take the stimulus money because there are too many strings attached to it. Well never fear......our wonderfully liberal Jennifer Granholm, who takes from the west side to give to the east side, has so nicely volunteered to take all the money that other governors have turned down and put it to good use. Not that we couldn't use it, but.....


DH and I live in Michigan. We called Hoekstra, Levin, and Stabenow....
We told them that they no longer had our vote as they voted FOR the "porkulus" bill, they voted for the first bailout, and had not accomplished anything for their constituents in ages. We also told them that we were going to get all our friends and friends of friends to vote for whoever runs against them. Levin has been in politics since Hector was a pup and the state of Michigan has nothing to show for it. Our unemployment rate is higher than the national average, our jobs have been leaving left and right, the Big 3 are tanking, our economy is tanking, and yet Levin and his cronies still keep sticking it to the little people.

And people ask if there is a recession? Michigan is in it's own one-state recession.
The whole country would crash and burn. Do you know how many jobs in Michigan alone are auto related
Michigan might as well hang a sign on the door saying last one out, turn out the lights. But then if Obama has his way, we won't have any electricity either because the coal companies will be bankrupted too. Domino effect in my opinion.
I am not willing to lose what

I've earned through my hard work to give to some lazy bum who would rather mooch than work for a living.  I'm not willing to lose my freedom.  To me....it seems like government wants to take control over more things and when will it end. 


I do not support our president because I do not believe his goals and agenda will help anyone who really needs the help.  It will continue to enable moochers to keep on mooching.  It will hurt charities by taxing the rich.....who, BTW, are the biggest donators to charities.  It will hurt businesses by taxing them more and in turn they will cut back and lay off workers, not hire more employees.  Cap and trade will hurt everyone as gas prices will sore, utility costs will sky rocket, and the price for all goods and services will go up.  That doesn't help people who have to decide which is more imporant....gas to get to work or food to put on the table. 


To stand by and let these things happen because we support our country and just have to see how things come together......to me that is just ignorant.  That is how we ended up in this situation in the first place.  We supported our country and put our trust in government (dems and pubs alike) and we ended up getting it stuck to us. 


The U.S. didn't lose.
We weren't allowed to win. 
How many did you lose on Sept 11?
Probably none. I did. I still can hardly believe that they country I live in, have ALWAYS felt safe in and never, EVER thought anything like that would happen in...did. Don't you get it? It did. I for one do not ever, EVER want it to happen again. I'd give every dime I have and every dime I'll ever make to have those back that I lost.
Yes, investors have a lot to lose....
and investors are not just "the rich." Many companies' 401Ks for their employees are in the stock market. People should be VERY careful about what they think they want...the effects could be disastrous for an already weak economy.
here are a few if my candidates lose -
1. Get up Wed. AM, after election, turn on TV. See my faves didn't win. My reaction: 'Oh, cr@p!'

2. my actions: Eat cereal and drink coffee.

3. Where to go from thERE?
BACK TO BED!

4. What will I flee? My low-paying MT job, which most likely will never get any better.
Don't lose sleep over it
Win or lose, we'll be rebuilding the Republican party.  That means purging the RINOs, too.  That's more than can be said for the Dems. 
I believe they lose a portion of their
social security. I agree that it is unfortunate and absurd that senior citizens are treated as they are. As far as her obit, that was the family. Could be they did not agree with the situation or had a problem with him. At least he was mentioned although it must have hurt him deeply. Long-time same sex partners are usually not mentioned at all.
they did not lose one person
They lost an entire generation and their children too probably. Can you say 529 no more?
novelty VP choices always lose

Geraldine Ferraro.  Gore and Lieberman, etc.


 


I agree with you. He/she should lose license. nm
.
Dang! 208 to 228 didn't lose by much (sm)

Both Suzy Orman and Jim Cramer were on the Today show and they thought it was a good deal which, I might add, surprised me.


I wonder what will happen now.


There goes my 401K!


Lose the "denial" accusation will ya.
x
Thinking that the democrats would lose is exactly, well....
Thanks for proving my point for me.
win or lose......it's not our place to intervene
we continually give Israel the very tools they use to give to terrorists groups who when the terrorists groups no longer do Israel's bidding, then Israel wants to turn on them. They may have good reason down the road but Israel needs to stop playing the terrorists like pieces on a chess board if they don't want them turning around decades down the road and turning on them.....
Let's lose the "teabagger" thing, okay?
X
IRS to Church: Support Iraq War or Lose Your

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-allsaints7nov07,0,592419,full.story?coll=la-home-headlines


Antiwar Sermon Brings IRS Warning


All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena risks losing its tax-exempt status because of a former rector's remarks in 2004.


By Patricia Ward Biederman and Jason Felch
Times Staff Writers

November 7, 2005

The Internal Revenue Service has warned one of Southern California's largest and most liberal churches that it is at risk of losing its tax-exempt status because of an antiwar sermon two days before the 2004 presidential election.

Rector J. Edwin Bacon of All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena told many congregants during morning services Sunday that a guest sermon by the church's former rector, the Rev. George F. Regas, on Oct. 31, 2004, had prompted a letter from the IRS.

In his sermon, Regas, who from the pulpit opposed both the Vietnam War and 1991's Gulf War, imagined Jesus participating in a political debate with then-candidates George W. Bush and John Kerry. Regas said that good people of profound faith could vote for either man, and did not tell parishioners whom to support.

But he criticized the war in Iraq, saying that Jesus would have told Bush, Mr. President, your doctrine of preemptive war is a failed doctrine. Forcibly changing the regime of an enemy that posed no imminent threat has led to disaster.

On June 9, the church received a letter from the IRS stating that a reasonable belief exists that you may not be tax-exempt as a church … The federal tax code prohibits tax-exempt organizations, including churches, from intervening in political campaigns and elections.

The letter went on to say that our concerns are based on a Nov. 1, 2004, newspaper article in the Los Angeles Times and a sermon presented at the All Saints Church discussed in the article.

The IRS cited The Times story's description of the sermon as a searing indictment of the Bush administration's policies in Iraq and noted that the sermon described tax cuts as inimical to the values of Jesus.

As Bacon spoke, 1984 Nobel Peace Prize winner Archbishop Desmond Tutu, a co-celebrant of Sunday's Requiem Eucharist, looked on.

We are so careful at our church never to endorse a candidate, Bacon said in a later interview.

One of the strongest sermons I've ever given was against President Clinton's fraying of the social safety net.

Telephone calls to IRS officials in Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles were not returned.

On a day when churches throughout California took stands on both sides of Proposition 73, which would bar abortions for minors unless parents are notified, some at All Saints feared the politically active church had been singled out.

I think obviously we were a bit shocked and dismayed, said Bob Long, senior warden for the church's oversight board. We felt somewhat targeted.

Bacon said the church had retained the services of a Washington law firm with expertise in tax-exempt organizations.

And he told the congregation: It's important for everyone to understand that the IRS concerns are not supported by the facts.

After the initial inquiry, the church provided the IRS with a copy of all literature given out before the election and copies of its policies, Bacon said.

But the IRS recently informed the church that it was not satisfied by those materials, and would proceed with a formal examination. Soon after that, church officials decided to inform the congregation about the dispute.

In an October letter to the IRS, Marcus Owens, the church's tax attorney and a former head of the IRS tax-exempt section, said, It seems ludicrous to suggest that a pastor cannot preach about the value of promoting peace simply because the nation happens to be at war during an election season.

Owens said that an IRS audit team had recently offered the church a settlement during a face-to-face meeting.

They said if there was a confession of wrongdoing, they would not proceed to the exam stage. They would be willing not to revoke tax-exempt status if the church admitted intervening in an election.

The church declined the offer.

Long said Bacon is fond of saying it's a sin not to vote, but has never told anyone how to vote. We don't do that. We preach to people how to vote their values, the biblical principles.

Regas, who was rector of All Saints from 1967 to 1995, said in an interview that he was surprised by the IRS action and then I became suspicious, suspicious that they were going after a progressive church person.

Regas helped the current church leadership collect information for the IRS on his sermon and the church's policies on involvement in political campaigns.

Some congregants were upset that a sermon citing Jesus Christ's championing of peace and the poor was the occasion for an IRS probe.

I'm appalled, said 70-year-old Anne Thompson of Altadena, a professional singer who also makes vestments for the church.

In a government that leans so heavily on religious values, that they would pull a stunt like this, it makes me heartsick.

Joe Mirando, an engineer from Burbank, questioned whether the 3,500-member church would be under scrutiny if it were not known for its activism and its liberal stands on social issues.

The question is, is it politically motivated? he said. That's the underlying feeling of everyone here. I don't have enough information to make a decision, but there's a suspicion.

Bacon revealed the IRS investigation at both morning services. Until his announcement, the mood of the congregation had been solemn because the services remembered, by name, those associated with the church who had died since last All Saints Day.

Regas' 2004 sermon imagined how Jesus would admonish Bush and Kerry if he debated them. Regas never urged parishioners to vote for one candidate over the other, but he did say that he believes Jesus would oppose the war in Iraq, and that Jesus would be saddened by Bush's positions on the use and testing of nuclear weapons.

In the sermon, Regas said, President Bush has led us into war with Iraq as a response to terrorism. Yet I believe Jesus would say to Bush and Kerry: 'War is itself the most extreme form of terrorism. President Bush, you have not made dramatically clear what have been the human consequences of the war in Iraq.'

Later, he had Jesus confront both Kerry and Bush: I will tell you what I think of your war: The sin at the heart of this war against Iraq is your belief that an American life is of more value than an Iraqi life. That an American child is more precious than an Iraqi baby. God loathes war.

If Jesus debated Bush and Kerry, Regas said, he would say to them, Why is so little mentioned about the poor?''

In his own voice, Regas said: ''The religious right has drowned out everyone else. Now the faith of Jesus has come to be known as pro-rich, pro-war and pro-American…. I'm not pro-abortion, but pro-choice. There is something vicious and violent about coercing a woman to carry to term an unwanted child.

When you go into the voting booth, Regas told the congregation, take with you all that you know about Jesus, the peacemaker. Take all that Jesus means to you. Then vote your deepest values.

Owens, the tax attorney, said he was surprised that the IRS is pursuing the case despite explicit statements by Regas that he was not trying to influence the congregation's vote.

I doubt it's politically motivated, Owens said. I think it is more a case of senior management at IRS not paying attention to what the rules are.

According to Owens, six years ago the IRS used to send about 20 such letters to churches a year. That number has increased sharply because of the agency's recent delegation of audit authority to agents on the front lines, he said.

He knew of two other churches, both critical of government policies, that had received similar letters, Owens said.

It's unclear how often the IRS raises questions about the tax-exempt status of churches.

While such action is rare, the IRS has at least once revoked the charitable designation of a church.

Shortly before the 1992 presidential election, a church in Binghamton, N.Y., ran advertisements against Bill Clinton's candidacy, and the tax agency ruled that the congregation could not retain its tax-exempt status because it had intervened in an election.

Bacon said he thought the IRS would eventually drop its case against All Saints.

It is a social action church, but not a politically partisan church, he said.


Just learned how Hillary is going to get Barack to lose

Hillary's supporters like General Wesley Clark and others are starting to come out now in full force making statements that are not favorable towards Barack.  Even though Clark's statements are true (just cos you are shot down in an aircraft doesn't mean your qualified to be President) but it doesn't help in getting your party elected to the white house.  I knew she was going to do it so that McCain would win and because he's so weak he'll only be in four years then she and Bill will run again in 4 years.  I just didn't know how she was planning it until I watched the news this a.m.  She is such a skum bag in my opinion.  The worry of having to listen to her again in 4 years is enough to put me through the roof again.


The Mind is a terrible thing to lose

thus spats out another great repub VP choice, Dan Potatoe Quayle.


 


Bottom line: Either way, WE lose. At least, if the bill
doesn't pass until it strips the wall street & banking criminals of their ill-gotten gains, then EVERYONE will have to pay. But as the bill is currently written, WE have to pay. We're screwed, either say. Once this dies down a bit, I'm pulling every cent out of the stock market forever. I don't want my hard-earned savings, what little there is, going to making shysters rich.
GAME OVER!
It's hard to have your precious McCain lose

McCain did himself in by choosing Palin.  It is exhibit A of his bad judgement.


they lose a lot of their income and also their Medicare if they marry - nm
x
Hey, don't lose heart....look what he has done in 3 short weeks with...
the power you folks gave him. He has a LONG time left to do his O magic. When we are all lining up for the checks (well, that is if you lose your job and don't have to pay taxes as those are the folks who are going to get the biggest handout), just remember who put the great benefactor in Washington there and gave him carte blanche. Uh...that would be you. :)
There are a lot of angry folks in the US with nothing left to lose.
.
If you lose your ability to work, you're gonna need it

Obama could win popular but still lose election - see message

It is possible.  It has happened before.  I think now especially in these final two days, when people are hearing Obama saying in a radio interview that he will bankrupt coal companies and skyrocket electricity bills, a lot of people are really wondering.  Especially the states where coal is their major industry.  They are starting to realize that a vote for the O means they'll be out of work.  Along with the birth certificate issue not being resolved, and other the other numerous questions about the O people are really wondering about him. 


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081103/ap_on_el_pr/split_decision_4


 


You probably lose more bets than GOP lost offices in this last election.
The red radical finge is a dying breed, destined for extinction.
Wow, such sour grapes!!! I know it's hard to lose but try to be classy nm
nm

"She" made it easy for "you" to lose control of yourself? sm
and end up writing that trash you wrote?

Only you are responsible for how low you sink. Anyone can see that.
hang on a minute? WE'LL get paid less or lose jobs.
nm
Heads dems win, tails pubs lose. I'm just sayin'........

x


Army order soldiers to get rid of better body armor or lose death benefits
Army Orders Soldiers to Shed Dragon Skin or Lose SGLI Death Benefits

By Nathaniel R. Helms

Two deploying soldiers and a concerned mother reported Friday afternoon that the U.S. Army appears to be singling out soldiers who have purchased Pinnacle's Dragon Skin Body Armor for special treatment. The soldiers, who are currently staging for combat operations from a secret location, reported that their commander told them if they were wearing Pinnacle Dragon Skin and were killed their beneficiaries might not receive the death benefits from their $400,000 SGLI life insurance policies. The soldiers were ordered to leave their privately purchased body armor at home or face the possibility of both losing their life insurance benefit and facing disciplinary action.

The soldiers asked for anonymity because they are concerned they will face retaliation for going public with the Army's apparently new directive. At the sources' requests DefenseWatch has also agreed not to reveal the unit at which the incident occured for operational security reasons.

On Saturday morning a soldier affected by the order reported to DefenseWatch that the directive specified that all commercially available body armor was prohibited. The soldier said the order came down Friday morning from Headquarters, United States Special Operations Command (HQ, USSOCOM), located at MacDill Air Force Base, Florida. It arrived unexpectedly while his unit was preparing to deploy on combat operations. The soldier said the order was deeply disturbiing to many of the men who had used their own money to purchase Dragon Skin because it will affect both their mobility and ballistic protection.

We have to be able to move. It (Dragon Skin) is heavy, but it is made so we have mobility and the best ballistic protection out there. This is crazy. And they are threatening us with our benefits if we don't comply. he said.

The soldier reiterated Friday's reports that any soldier who refused to comply with the order and was subsequently killed in action could be denied the $400,000 death benefit provided by their SGLI life insurance policy as well as face disciplinary action.

As of this report Saturday morning the Army has not yet responded to a DefenseWatch inquiry.

Recently Dragon Skin became an item of contention between proponents of the Interceptor OTV body armor generally issued to all service members deploying in combat theaters and its growing legion of critics. Critics of the Interceptor OTV system say it is ineffective and inferior to Dragon Skin, as well as several other commercially available body armor systems on the market. Last week DefenseWatch released a secret Marine Corps report that determined that 80% of the 401 Marines killed in Iraq between April 2004 and June 2005 might have been saved if the Interceptor OTV body armor they were wearing was more effective. The Army has declined to comment on the report because doing so could aid the enemy, an Army spokesman has repeatedly said.

A U.S. Army spokesman was not available for comment at the time DW's original report (Friday - 1700 CST) was published. DefenseWatch continues to seek a response from the Army and will post one as soon as it becomes available. Yesterday the DoD released a news story through the Armed Forces News Service that quoted Maj. Gen. Steven Speaks, the Army's director of force development, who countered critical media reports by denying that the U.S. military is behind the curve in providing appropriate force protection gear for troops deployed to Iraq and elsewhere in the global war against terrorism. The New York Tiimes and Washington Post led the bandwagon of mainstream media that capitalized on DefenseWatch's release of the Marine Corps study. Both newspapers released the forensic information the Army and Marines are unwilling to discuss.

Those headlines entirely miss the point, Speaks said.

The effort to improve body armor has been a programmatic effort in the case of the Army that has gone on with great intensity for the last five months, he noted.

Speaks' assessment contradicts earlier Army, Marine and DoD statements that indicated as late as last week that the Army was certain there was nothing wrong with Interceptor OTV body armor and that it was and remains the best body armor in the world.

One of the soldiers who lost his coveted Dragon Skin is a veteran operator. He reported that his commander expressed deep regret upon issuing his orders directing him to leave his Dragon Skin body armor behind. The commander reportedly told his subordinates that he had no choice because the orders came from very high up and had to be enforced, the soldier said. Another soldier's story was corroborated by his mother, who helped defray the $6,000 cost of buying the Dragon Skin, she said.

The mother of the soldier, who hails from the Providence, Rhode Island area, said she helped pay for the Dragon Skin as a Christmas present because her son told her it was so much better than the Interceptor OTV they expected to be issued when arriving in country for a combat tour.

He didn't want to use that other stuff, she said. He told me that if anything happened to him I am supposed to raise hell.

At the time the orders were issued the two soldiers had already loaded their Dragon Skin body armor onto the pallets being used to air freight their gear into the operational theater, the soldiers said. They subsequently removed it pursuant to their orders.

Currently nine U.S. generals stationed in Afghanistan are reportedly wearing Pinnacle Dragon Skin body armor, according to company spokesman Paul Chopra. Chopra, a retired Army chief warrant officer and 20+-year pilot in the famed 160th Nightstalkers Special Operations Aviation Regiment (Airborne), said his company was merely told the generals wanted to evaluate the body armor in a combat environment. Chopra said he did not know the names of the general officers wearing the Dragon Skin.

Pinnacle claims more than 3,000 soldiers and civilians stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan are wearing Dragon Skin body armor, Chopra said. Several months ago DefenseWatch began receiving anecdotal reports from individual soldiers that they were being forced to remove all non-issue gear while in theater, including Dragon Skin body armor, boots, and various kinds of non-issue ancillary equipment.

Last year the DoD, under severe pressure from Congress, authorized a one-time $1,000 reimbursement to soldiers who had purchased civilian equipment to supplement either inadequate or unavailable equipment they needed for combat operations. At the time there was no restriction on what the soldiers could buy as long as it was specifically intended to offer personal protection or further their mission capabilities while in theater.

Bailout

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of our money, frist by inflation and then by deflation; the banks and corporations that will grow up around them (around the banks) will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered"


-President Thomas Jefferson


here's your bailout
I think that all the CEOs of the big three along with all their members of the board and whatnot, all the big wigs, that have made millions screwing people over for years and years should dip into their OWN pockets and sell a few houses, cancel a few vacations, cash in a few money markets and get their own companies out of debt.  Then, when the books are balanced, the people who have been making 80,000 a year to push a button should take a pay cut and NOT go on strike and live like the rest of real America.  Then they should be fine.
Bailout
if they fail, do you realize it would affect everyone. Millions of jobs in the auto industry alone. If people don't have jobs, they can't spend money anywhere. Stores will start to close, etc. It will affect everyone.
Bailout
I totally agree 1000% with your analysis - the only time these greedy CEO's give a hoot about us is when they see their profits increase.  You can bet your last five cents that if one of us went to them asking for money - they would call the police!!  It would be interesting to see  the salaries of CEO's in Europe as opposed to what these guys continually fleece us for...