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

No objective person can state with 100% certainty what happened 9-11-2001.

Posted By: Democrat on 2006-07-12
In Reply to: Conservative Bruce Willis has switched political paradigm. - LVMT

Some believe what they were told via news, some believe the new presentation of facts, theories, evidence, and logic. I believe that al-Quaeda terrorist attacked the US on 9-11. I take to the conspiracy theories with a grain of salt, until different is proven to be true. Out of all of the theories and logic presented, the one unanswered question is why was the bin Laden family allowed to flee America the day after the attacks??? It's at least one piece of the puzzle that doesn't fit and to me the American public has not gotten a satisfactory answer. Heck, most don't even know or care.

On a lighter note, have you seen The Seige starring Denzel Washington and Bruce Willis? Released in 1998 and eerily similar to post 9-11.


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

Something else happened in 09/2001........ sm
My 17YO stepson was killed in a motorcycle accident in which a car pulled out in front of him. He had been taught to safely ride a motorcycle, had a helmet on, and was traveling at a safe rate of speed. Was it his fault he was killed? Was it his parents' fault he was killed? Was it the City of Mesquite's fault he was killed?

No.

It was a tragedy, but there is nothing that could have been done to keep that accident from happening from our standpoint. The only person who could have prevented it was the driver of the car who pulled out in front of him.

Sometimes things happen that are beyond our control. Bush could not have stopped the 911 disaster. He was not the pilot of any of the planes. He could not personally marshall each plane and verify each passenger on the manifest. He could not keep those planes from crashing into the Towers or the Pentagon or in the field in Pennsylvania.

I'm so sick and tired of hearing the Dems bash Bush from everything from 911 to their own bad hair days. If you are going to blame anyone in the US for 911, blame the airlines who did not have proper security in place in the event that terrorists might try something like this. Blame Clinton for not taking out Bin Laden when he had 3, count 'me, THREE chances to do so. Or better yet, blame AL Quaida for sending their terrorists off in search of their 70 virgins. I'm not the biggest Bush fan in the world, but the man does not deserve to be blamed for things he had no control over. Oh, sure, he may have known that terroist activitis were brewing, but as I said, he could not have done anything to stop what happened.
McCain did state to everyone that Obama is a good person and not someone to be feared (sm)
Maybe he didn't mention race specifically because he did not want to further add to this being a race-based election? At least he stood up and said something to defend Obama in that respect. But if people were saying McCain was the Messiah, we would expect him to be man enough to stand up and say that he is not. That is the point here.
They have to stay objective. It's their job.
One of our family members is a well-known political analyst on t.v. At family functions, we all hear the full-on opinions. Believe me, reporters are human, and they certainly do have their opinions! But their job isn't to discuss their own point of view. It is amazing, though, isn't it? I don't think I could control myself if I had to interview some of these people!
Objective?? ROFL.....
that being said....wow. I invite everyone to read this speech and replace Republican, Redneck, religious right-winger with Jew. Hitler could have made this speech. What nasty, vitrolic hate speech. This is what the democratic party has become.

Whew.

From an objective observer.
nothing further to add to te nothingness of this post
Being an objective observer, the repugnants appear to be the most evil.
Defend the republican party all you want with your self-righteousness, but in the end the republican party will always be a party that represents big business and the rich.

You religious right wingers, rednecks who were undereducated and/or raised by a long line of redneckers will never get it so I won't even address you as your perception of reality is hopelessly distorted.

However, I will say that, anyone who makes under 250 grand a year and who votes for the republican tick is a fool.

This next presidential term will all be about taxes now that Georgie has sold out the country to foreign lands to pay for his war and cover his tax cuts to the wealthy, and someone's taxes are going to be raised and if you vote republican and earn less than 250 grand, it will be YOURS.

Funding under republicans will also be cut to social services and that means more crime, and if your town is like mine, police and fire departments are laying off due to budget cuts - hey, what an oxymoron, cutting police forces while fighting terrorism.

Republicans are not for the people whatever you say. They pander to the religious right and those high school drop out rednecks for the votes. Abortion is and always will happen as it has since the beginning of time and I don't think you will ever stop it from happening. You can try to romanticize reproduction all you want but in this world, as we watch babies starving, dying from curable disease and, even raped, it just doesn't hold water.

Republicans are as evil as greed is evil.

Your arguments are weak as always.
gourdpainter objective,fair, straightforward and
There is absolutely nothing offensive about what she said or how she said it. She is right. I don't know her age, but I suspect she is (like I am) old enough to recall the devastating losses via political assassinations of our past civil leaders.
1. Medgar Evers, NAACP field secretary, June 12, 1963 by KKK member.
2. JFK November 22, 1963.
3. Malcolm X, February 21, 1965.
4. MLK April 4, 1968.
5. RFK June 5, 1968.
6. Fred Hampton, December 1969.

Regardless of whether or not you agree with any of their political views, the fact remains that these Americans gave their lives fighting for the beliefs they held most dear and in their own ways, were all striving to make our country...your country...a better place.

Four out of six were black leaders, one a president, the other a presidential candidate. In hindsight, it is plain to see that there were common threads shared by each and all in terms of their circumstances and their times. That common tie was hate speech and bigotry. We would like to tell ourselves, "that was then and this is now," but for those of us who lived through it, I can tell you it is never really very far behind us.

The scenes I see at these rallies and the words I read on this forum are chilling reminders that we must never forget those days, that time and the losses we suffered. To some of you who think you are being smart or cute or somehow take pride and pleasure in your thoughtless, juvenile, petty one-ups-manship, I tell you now, along with the gourdpainter, you do not realize what it is you are doing. This is not about a candidate, a platform, a party or an election. This is about the preservation of human dignity and human life. She is absolutely right to say that should anything happen to Obama of this nature, his blood will be on your hands and all the denial in the universe will not change that fact.
Good Source for (more) objective news
http://www.democracynow.org/
who woulda guessed you wouldn't be objective...nm
nm
From 2001
EXTREMISM ON THE LEFT AND RIGHT
Many believe that leftist extremism in the United States was at its peak during the 1960s and 1970s and that right-wing extremism then became the major threat. While the
bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City and a number of other incidents attributed to right-wing extremists indicate that the major threat is from the right, leftist extremism remains a concern within the United States.
Two Border State Governors Declare Illegal Immigration State of Emergency

Two Border State Governors Declare Illegal Immigration State of Emergency



SIGN THE PETITION!
CLICK
HERE!

THANK YOU!


I wonder if that settled down since 2001. nm
.
Uh...the DATE was 9/11/2001
I do believe that was Dumb-ya's administration. Why don't you read a book? You need some education.
Who was Pres on 09/11/2001?
Why would anyone give him credit for PROTECTING us?
You can have our federal money along with a new state motto: "Michigan - The Slave State". n
NM
Yes, my income grew after 2001...nm
Moved home, and I took my primary account home with me as an IC, and then promptly found two other accounts. I've always worked more than one job, and being at home is no different. And it's always been just me doing the work, no one else.

However, in the last two years, since dems have had control of Congress, my income has plummeted by 20,000. The most I ever made was close to $80,000 a year, and that was working 12 hours a day, every day, seven days a week.

Now, I have to work more day, get paid less, and make somewhere around $55 or 60,000.

I'm an IC MT/editor/QA type person, who does all three, for different clients, depending on who I work for.

Not an MTSO, but took advantage of all the tax breaks for small businesses, as well as HSA account for health purposes, just for my husband and myself.

Soooo...to answer your question to sam....Yes, I did well in the first four years after 9/11. I work my butt off, to be able to live where I do. We're middle class America....but dropping fast.

I cannot afford to have more taxes. I cannot afford to pay for more social programs for those who do not work.

As someone said recently on this board. Why should I work my butt off to make $60,000 a year, to be told I am in an upper middle class bracket, and have to dole out thousands more in taxes to the people who refuse to work? (And if they can't work, there are progrmas for them) I'd do just as well working only 40 hours a week, instead of the 80 to 100 I do work.


Do not believe for a moment, that Obama knows what he's doing for the economy. It's all a subterfuge to raise taxes anything that isn't tied down, and then some. A one time tax rebate to lower and middle America, to buy their votes. Then tax, tax, tax.

No thanks.


If we had NUKED the Afghan SOB's on 9/12/2001,
.
Obama talking about redistribution of wealth in 2001...

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/26/obama-in-2001-how-to-bring-about-redistributive-change/


Before discounting this because it is on a conservative site....the You Tube tape is there...you can hear "O" in his own words.


Pot meets kettle. You mean like Tom Delay's 2000-2001
We are still dealing with the aftermath. But hey, he was just trying to help out the shrub and the rest of the GOP good ole boys.
Between May and July 2001, the National Security Agency reported
at least 33 different intercepts indicating a possible imminent al Qaeda attack. The FBI issued 216 secret, internal threat warnings between January 1 and September 10, 2001, of which 6 mentioned possible attacks against airports or airlines. The Federal Aviation Administration issued 15 notices of possible terrorist threats against American airlines. The State Department issued 9 separate warnings during the same period to embassies and citizens abroad, including 5 that highlighted a general threat to Americans all over the world.

Yeah, that Bill Clinton wasn't doing his job alright.

Oh, wait.
Laws vary state-to-state

Many people were confined against their will just because someone wanted them "out of the way." These were normal people with no mental illness - that is why it is so difficult - don't blame the liberals. Blame your state.


CONFINING THE MENTALLY ILL


In the legal space between what a society should and should not do, taking action to restrict the liberty of people who are mentally ill sits in the grayest of gray areas.

Our notions about civil and constitutional rights flow from an assumption of "normalcy." Step beyond the boundaries and arrest and prison may legally follow. Short of that, government's ability to hold people against their will is severely and properly limited. Unusual behavior on the part of someone who is mentally ill is not illegal behavior. Freedom can't be snatched away on a whim, or on the thought that a person is hard to look at, hard to hear, hard to smell.

It was only a few decades ago that the promise of new medications and a change in attitude opened the doors of the mental hospitals and sent many patients into society. There, they would somehow "normalize" and join everyone else, supported by networks of out-patient facilities, job training, special living arrangements and regular, appropriate medication. But the transition has been imperfect, long and difficult.

In some parts of urban America there is little professional support for those with mental health problems. A new generation of drug and alcohol-fueled mental illness has come on the scene. People frequently end up on the street, un-medicated and exhibiting a full range of behaviors that are discomforting at the very least and threatening at their worst.


yes, the first person did....the person replying to that post...
was talking about the founding fathers...who came along a long time after the witch trials. You replied to the second post, not the first one. I was replying to you based on that. Purtianism came first...Christianity was the religion practiced by the founding fathers. It is evident in their writings and in most of our original documents.

I think we can stop whipping this dead horse now.
Red state, blue state?

Written last Thanksgiving:  "Some would argue that two different nations actually celebrated: upright, moral, traditional red America and the dissolute, liberal blue states clustered on the periphery of the heartland. The truth, however, is much more complicated and interesting than that.

Take two iconic states: Texas and Massachusetts. In some ways, they were the two states competing in the last election. In the world's imagination, you couldn't have two starker opposites. One is the homeplace of Harvard, gay marriage, high taxes, and social permissiveness. The other is Bush country, solidly Republican, traditional, and gun-toting. Massachusetts voted for Kerry over Bush 62 to 37 percent; Texas voted for Bush over Kerry 61 to 38 percent.

So ask yourself a simple question: which state has the highest divorce rate? Marriage was a key issue in the last election, with Massachusetts' gay marriages becoming a symbol of alleged blue state decadence and moral decay. But in actual fact, Massachusetts has the lowest divorce rate in the country at 2.4 divorces per 1,000 inhabitants. Texas - which until recently made private gay sex a criminal offence - has a divorce rate of 4.1. A fluke? Not at all. The states with the highest divorce rates in the U.S. are Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas. And the states with the lowest divorce rates are: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont. Every single one of the high divorce rate states went for Bush. Every single one of the low divorce rate states went for Kerry. The Bible Belt divorce rate, in fact, is roughly 50 percent higher than the national average.

Some of this discrepancy can be accounted for by the fact that couples tend to marry younger in the Bible Belt - and many clearly don't have the maturity to know what they're getting into. There's some correlation too between rates of college education and stable marriages, with the Bible Belt lagging a highly educated state like Massachusetts. But the irony still holds. Those parts of America that most fiercely uphold what they believe are traditional values are not those parts where traditional values are healthiest. Hypocrisy? Perhaps. A more insightful explanation is that these socially troubled communities cling onto absolutes in the abstract because they cannot live up to them in practice.

But doesn't being born again help bring down divorce rates? Jesus, after all, was mum on the subject of homosexuality, but was very clear about divorce, declaring it a sin unless adultery was involved. A recent study, however, found no measurable difference in divorce rates between those who are "born again" and those who are not. 29 percent of Baptists have been divorced, compared to 21 percent of Catholics. Moreover, a staggering 23 percent of married born-agains have been divorced twice or more. Teen births? Again, the contrast is striking. In a state like Texas, where the religious right is extremely strong and the rhetoric against teenage sex is gale-force strong, the teen births as a percentage of all births is 16.1 percent. In liberal, secular, gay-friendly Massachusetts, it's 7.4, almost half. Marriage itself is less popular in Texas than in Massachusetts. In Texas, the percent of people unmarried is 32.4 percent; in Massachusetts, it's 26.8 percent. So even with a higher marriage rate, Massachusetts manages a divorce rate almost half of its "conservative" rival.

Or take abortion. America is one of the few Western countries where the legality of abortion is still ferociously disputed. It's a country where the religious right is arguably the strongest single voting bloc, and in which abortion is a constant feature of cultural politics. Compare it to a country like Holland, perhaps the epitome of socially liberal, relativist liberalism. So which country has the highest rate of abortion? It's not even close. America has an abortion rate of 21 abortions per 1,000 women aged between 15 and 44. Holland has a rate of 6.8. Americans, in other words, have three times as many abortions as the Dutch. Remind me again: which country is the most socially conservative?

Even a cursory look at the leading members of the forces of social conservatism in America reveals the same pattern. The top conservative talk-radio host, Rush Limbaugh, has had three divorces and an addiction to pain-killers. The most popular conservative television personality, Bill O'Reilly, just settled a sex harassment suit that indicated a highly active adulterous sex life. Bill Bennett, the guru of the social right, was for many years a gambling addict. Karl Rove's chief outreach manager to conservative Catholics for the last four years, Deal Hudson, also turned out to be a man with a history of sexual harassment. Bob Barr, the conservative Georgian congressman who wrote the "Defense of Marriage Act," has had three wives so far. The states which register the highest ratings for the hot new television show, "Desperate Housewives," are all Bush-states.

The complicated truth is that America truly is a divided and conflicted country. But it's a grotesque exaggeration to say that the split is geographical, or correlated with blue and red states. Many of America's biggest "sinners" are those most intent on upholding virtue. In fact, it may be partly because they know sin so close-up that they want to prevent its occurrence among others. And some of those states which have the most liberal legal climate - the Northeast and parts of the upper MidWest - are also, in practice, among the most socially conservative. To ascribe all this to "hypocrisy" seems to me too crude an explanation. America is simply a far more complicated and diverse place than crude red and blue divisions can explain.


I don't know what state you live in but in my state

they are adding police and only in the big cities do they have paid firemen. The rest are volunteers.


I look at it this way: If a state can't stay in the black, then they have to cut spending some place that wouldn't jeopardize the safety of the citizens. Threats of cutting essential services like Barney Fife stated today are unjustified. Cut the non-essential services first.


Our governor talks about cutting back on services, laying off government workers, which I think is a good idea because government is too big anyway, but then he turns around and spends more money on non-essential items. Doesn't make sense.  


 


 


Whoops....A person....not I person.
.
What happened?
Oh geez..what happened?  Where are all the attack posts??  They are gone!!  Or maybe Im just hallucinating this morning, LOL. OMG!!  Now we can have soulful, fruitful, progressive and caring debates and ideas and maybe even possibly make a difference, without being attacked on everything we post.  Halleluiah!!
What I think happened
I believe the other short, nasty post was deleted and in doing so it automatically deleted the other posts below it, which unfortunately included yours. 
Yes, let's. What happened to all that
You used the "little people" reference to illustrate how elitist my concerns are. Those were not Obama's words, they were yours. You are not as good at spin as you think you are. Your choice to skip over the points about what KIND of executive experiences is another casual dismissal of issues far to vital to ignore, as you evidently would have us do. Those concerns will not be repeated here since you are trying to side-step them, as republicans inevitably do when faced with intellectual challenge, except to say that CEOs are executives, but keep themselves far out of touch with the "little people" beneath them. Sarah what's-her-name has also demonstrated a tendency to be a bit out of touch when it comes to using her office to elevate herself from ethics maid to VP.

Be impressed by that December 4, 2006 to now executive title. You obviously cannot cite any substance behind the title and neither can she. Most of us will not be voting for a title or a label, despite your party's best efforts.

Side-stepped everything about the token selection and Stepford Wife delegation, I see. So much for celebrating women's progress in the political arena.

First chair? Hopefully not (God help us if she ever is). Fact: That possibility is considerably more real under McCain (especially over an 8-year term) because of his age. Again, you have side-stepped the difference between the experience of Biden and the absence of same in what's-her-name. So much for being ready to lead the country. No problem. Says all it need to. 80% approval rating unheard of? You got that right. Nobody beyond Alaska has heard about it and it does not mean anything in view of the issue I raised that you are ignoring.

If you want to continue to make an utter fool of yourself by insisting her experience matches Obama's, go for it. I won't need to answer that lunacy again anytime soon. I'll let the media take care of that one for me and besides, rational minds will prevail over this lame claim.

What ever happened to
all those scathing protests over "redistribution of wealth?"  How do all these bail-outs factor into that line of thinking? 
I don't know how this happened!!! =)
ms - here's my political profile from the test you posted. Yes, I was very surprised! The liberal part must be hold-overs from my college days! =)

Overall: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal

Social Issues: 50% Conservative, 50% Liberal

Personal Responsibility: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal

Fiscal Issues: 75% Conservative, 25% Liberal

Ethics: 50% Conservative, 50% Liberal

Defense and Crime: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal
and what happened?
did someone put a stop to it???
What happened to sam?

I'm just curious.  I can barely stomach the politics board, so I almost never read the political posts due to the O-Love-A-Thon and the pure vitreol, which does nobody any good. 


I noticed that sam took off.  I don't blame him/her, either.  I simply wondered.


As for Ann Coulter, her brilliance and success literally drives the libs nuts.  I have her books, too, just short of her latest one, "Guilty."


I'm not here to start a bunch of %(#$*, but I just wondered where sam went.  My guess is that he/she got sick of the crap and left.  I couldn't figure why he/she continued the fightl  I know I won't go there.


I know what happened...LOL..(sm)

You responded to a post that said "what makes you think we don't" when you probably should have, or meant to respond to the comment above that.  It went south after that.  Been there and done that.  I hate it when that happens....LOL.


What happened to us.

You always hear about people in the old days who worked from run rise to run set to make enough money, etc. to support themselves and their kids.  They wouldn't take charity or handouts.  They took pride in working and earning what they got whether it was enough or not.  Now there are just too many people with their hands out asking for a free ride. 


As far as I am concerned.....if you are receiving welfare and you refuse to work even if it isn't a great job......you lose your welfare.  I have no problem contributing to someone who is at least trying to work.  However, I do have a problem with giving money to lazy bums who would rather mooch off other people than to do a days honest work.


This is what happened
Someone posted that the Capt had been freed. Someone replied to that "Thank you President Obama. Job well done". We're all thinking what????? I didn't know that the O was part of the Navy Seal team that went in and rescued the Captain. Why would you be thanking the O but not the Navy Seals, not saying they are hero's that laid down their lives to rescue the Captain. No they attribute it all to the O. And yet on the other side of the coin they wouldn't give GW the same "congrats" when he gave the orders to have the girl from West Virginia rescued, or when he have the orders to have the hostages in Iran rescued, or any of the other orders he gave the okay on for the Navy Seals to rescue the people. But even then, as I don't congratulate the O because he wasn't part of the Navy Seals that risked their life to save the Captain, I would also not congratulate Bush on his orders to rescue other hostages.

The congrats goes to the Navy Seals. The ones who lay their lives down to rescue people they don't even know. When you give your life and are prepared to die to save another human being, they are the real hero's. But the poster that congratulated the O for "a job well done", didn't even mention anything about the ones who actually did the saving.

I don't get you guys...what is it you want. We all know you think he is the messiah, the anointed one, the one who can do no wrong. You will always be the first to praise "oh looky the stock market went up 8.5 points - way to go O, you're just the best president ever", but when the stock market drops something like 150 points you stay silent, and then be the ones to point out that the stock market goes up and down and it's not his fault. I sit and think...uh hellloooooo...you just congratuated him for the stock market going up but it's not his fault it goes down?????? (which by the way I don't believe whether it goes up or down he has anything to do with, but evidently you people do - that is of course only when it goes up).

All you want to see on this board is praises for him and rejoicing and singing hallelujah's to his name. You will never ever say anything when something bad is happening. Just praises.

Yes, I know he will make mistakes, and I know he will do some good. But not admitting when something bad is going on (like tripling our deficit within 90 days - and no, not a fault of Bush's, the O did this all by himself with his pen and paper, and with the help of a crat congress. You won't admit he is breaking his campaign promises. You won't say anything when we hear he is telling other countries that they can have our jobs because we don't want them anyways. You won't say anything when he bows to another countries leader (the American president is suppose to bow to nobody - but on top of that if he is suppose to bow to anyone, certainly not the country like that - I mean for pete's sake, he didn't even bow to the Queen of England). You may say you don't think he's perfect, but you certainly don't speak up when something he has done is wrong.

The "I know he will make mistakes - what man has never made mistakes?", etc, etc. sounds like your trying to get people to feel sorry for him and maybe you think it aids in your cause of the "oh poor O, everyone is picking on him". Well you know what, when people stand up and say "I'm mad as he!! and I'm not going to take it anymore". When you finally will speak up and say "hey, wait a minute, I voted for him but this is not what he said he was going to do" (which is what has happened to me. Yeah, you bet I get pretty ticked off when I have been lied to and I voted for him believing one thing and then realized he suckered us a good one. That's what's the really upsetting thing. Fooled me once shame on you, fool me twice - well there just won't be a twice.

"Why can't ya'll just give him a chance"??????? He has had his chance and he is blowing it.
It disappeared? I wonder how that happened.
nm
More importantly, what ever happened to the USA?

A Chinese bank is opening up in the USA.  Bush at one time had wanted to sell "security" of our ports to an Arab country.  We have two citizen heroes rotting away in jail because they did their job of protecting our border with Mexico and were forced to kill a criminal in the process of doing that job. 


If you open this link, you will see the staggering number of "American" companies that are no longer owned by Americans.  http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/10/american-icons-owned-abroad-falling-dollar-cheaper-u-s-assets/


As far as the redistribution of wealth, below I have copied and pasted what I feel is, by far, the most interesting article I've read on that topic.  In my opinion, a "trickle up" policy needs to be implemented as soon as possible because the "trickle down" theory has not worked.



Closing Time


Jim Kirwan
12-10-8


 








Since Reagan we've been trying to make "Trickle-Down economics" work: For those to whom promises were made, Trickle- Down has been, not just a failure but it has been the major vehicle responsible for the most massive redistribution of wealth, from the population that has worked toward something, to those that wanted everything. Never has there been such a near total transfer of wealth in the history of the planet. This criminal-conspiracy has done what it was created to do ­ and it must be terminated with extreme prejudice, immediately, if we are to survive.
 
When 'Trickle-Down' was the political-priority of the day, the high-point in prosperity was to become a 'Millionaire.' Forbes magazine tracked those lucky few very carefully. Today Forbes 500 no longer bothers with 'millionaires' because there are just far too many of them-they have become inconsequential. Thanks to "Trickle-Down economics today the heavy-hitters financially are 'Billionaires' and above: which is all you need to know about how well this hostile-takeover of the American economy has worked.
 
The problem that this transfer of wealth has created has resulted in the Federalization-of-Privatization: As a result we are all facing another huge round of trickle-down economics, but this time it's being cloaked in a series of stealth-protected measures. These new tactics are commonly called BAILOUT or RESCUE packages, and nothing about their origins or their purposes has been made clear to those of us that will be forced to pay tens of trillions for our own destruction.
 
What's happening is this: First they used compromised laws to squash diversity and opinion within the entire field of communications, under Clinton and Powell's kid that ran the FCC. Together, competition was eliminated and monstrous empires were created that absorbed their competition outright. Once this happened, the entire edifice for total information management was in-place, using household names to lie to the public every minute of every day, whether on television or in print-with very few exceptions. With that completed effort it was easy to move directly onto the openly fascist path to WAR on a variety of fronts, supported and applauded by the very organs that were supposed to question whatever government does, on behalf of the people, as part of their constitutionally protected-jobs as so-called journalists. With the constitution gone, and the only allegiance worthy of that name having become the private for-profit motives that greed and arrogance breeds; in the sewers of those ruined lives where these so-called leaders "live," the current outcome is all that we should have ever expected from these new-age barbarians. (1)
 
We're still in the Twilight Zone; where Obama is just another man waiting to start a job, except that he seemingly can't wait to begin so he formulates their plans and then rushes to the nearest podium to expound upon the glories of what these programs (or pogroms) are pointedly designed to do; for them and 'to' us. And the sheep wait patiently to board the trains that will take them to the slaughterhouse.
 
The larger picture has or course remained hidden from the general public. What continues to go unnoticed is the number of profligate cities and towns, not to mention states that will have to be bailed out by the feds. Once this begins to happen, 'the rights' of states will disappear completely along with any independence from the federal-government. Remember the formula upon which bailouts are based: The crucial money provided is conditioned upon a federal "ownership stake" in everything that needs the money, and when this is applied to the states then all they have left to trade with is their broken-economies and their people who shall both become the property of the federal government that is today a private-corporation that serves only the privately-owned central banks and by extension the multi-national corporations. This is about to happen now to several states, including California; the sixth largest economy in the world. (2)
 
'BTW the "corporation" mentioned above has been bankrupt since 1933, and the result of that bankruptcy is that the USA went into receivership to the privately-owned Federal Reserve. The Dictator was correct when he said: "The constitution is just a goddamned piece of paper," he was actually telling the truth. It was probably the only truthful statement he ever made in nearly eight years.
The owners have simply allowed us to believe we have a constitution. Every law, code and statute world wide is based on the Uniform Commercial Code and has been in place since 1950. Of course no one in a position of power ever bothered to mention this to us did they? One must understand the UCC to understand how and why so many have gotten away with so much: And now they are upping the ante, to take it all.'
 
This explains why every courtroom and every government building has flags hanging that really are not American flags even though they appear to be. Each of them has gold/yellow fringe around them. They give us smoke and mirrors that mask what they created, which allows them to continue to say 'we have a constitution and a democracy.' Of course America was created to be a constitutional republic, not a democracy. There is a huge difference between a democracy and a constitutional republic. The rights of the few and the many, can only be protected under a Republic, while under a democracy, the majority rules-absolutely.
 
There are however a few places that are still holding out against the one-world-order and the New Barbarians. Among these are Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, parts of Pakistan, possibly Iran and certainly Greece.
"Socialist leader George Papandreou called for early elections, saying the conservative government could no longer defend the public from rioters.
 
The government has a single-seat majority in the 300-member Parliament and opposition parties blame hands-off policing for encouraging the worst rioting the country has seen in decades.
 
'The government cannot handle this crisis and has lost the trust of the Greek people,' Papandreou said. 'The best thing it can do is resign and let the people find a solution ... we will protect the public.'" (3)
 
If America is to survive then we must stop this wholesale giveaway of everything that was once part of this society. The relationship between profits and earnings must be freed from the stranglehold that management has created in order to siphon off all the profits and wreck the companies they work for. In addition, the idea that government can function in any capacity as a major stakeholder in any form of private enterprise beggars the imagination far beyond any real possibility for saving anything; except the criminals and their enterprises that created this "crisis" in the first place. The 'economy' must be based on a bottom-up profit motive, based on the real wages of those that create the wealth for those at the top - and not upon the insanity that it is now! People must come first, and the corporations must be controlled at every level by the public!
 
There is no longer anything like responsibility anywhere in government or the private sector to anything except what can continue to be stolen, either by flawed and fraudulent bailouts, or through the strong-arm tactics that are currently acting "under- cover of law" and that are neither legal nor functional. Obama in this venue is neither a savior, nor a friend to the people that supposedly 'elected' him-he is just the instrument of the new global-government engine designed to finish the job and to close down this nation, once and for all! Americans need to watch what happens in Greece and follow their example, if there is to be an America to fight over in the future.
 
In the meanwhile, here is some of what's happened here already.
 
"With the focus on privatization, public-private partnerships, (dismantling local control); anyone with any common sense about them can see that; incrementally the power of the people is being given over to corporate control through various venues. Once upon a time we were subjects, then citizens, and now consumers. Everything is for sale. TV 'programming' is set up to entice "consumers" through the 3000 daily ads to buy, buy, buy! Utilities-waste- nursing homes, and even the people's water (once in local control) is open to the highest bidder or those with the most influence. In "public private partnerships or privatization" (despite the lofty high pitch sales rhetoric) means only one thing, a plundering of the people's money. Profits take precedence over any and all health or environmental concerns. It's pigs at the trough time, locally- state wise and nationally. This is not just happening in one or two isolated places but across the nation. Because we are narrowly focused (many times only one newspaper) parochially; we have little to no idea of the larger picture and what is being set in place.
 
As I read of various happenings across the nation; I am struck with the usage of terms and language being introduced into the public arena; with no explanation as to their meaning (if any). I asked a state politician a few years back what this terminology we're hearing lately of, "regional or regionalization" meant? He brushed the whole thing aside as inconsequential and told me that is was of no importance. Obviously, for me, that was an unsatisfactory answer. Most especially, since on the local level, I could see that it meant a great deal. It appeared to me, that ever so insidiously, local control was gradually being usurped by "regional" control of unelected officials. Consultants (strangers) were replacing local people in places of city government (at lucrative salaries). The sense of community (calling city hall etc.) was being replaced by various business entities, having little to no attachment to the heartbeat of the people. How could they, being strangers, with no sense of native pride or concern? Words like "regional, stake holder, empowerment zones, enterprise committees, visioning councils, smart growth, sustainable development etc;" had replaced understandable language! I didn't imagine that the usage of these terms across the nation (if you look) meant "nothing"." (4)
 
It's 'Closing Time' America, because unless you begin to do more than just watch, this place won't even be a footnote to the ruin that is planned for these people and this place that once held so much promise for everyone.
 
kirwanstudios@sbcglobal.net

More importantly, what ever happened to the USA?

A Chinese bank is opening up in the USA.  Bush at one time had wanted to sell "security" of our ports to an Arab country.  We have two citizen heroes rotting away in jail because they did their job of protecting our border with Mexico and were forced to kill a criminal in the process of doing that job. 


If you open this link, you will see the staggering number of "American" companies that are no longer owned by Americans.  http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/10/american-icons-owned-abroad-falling-dollar-cheaper-u-s-assets/


As far as the redistribution of wealth, below I have copied and pasted what I feel is, by far, the most interesting article I've read on that topic.  In my opinion, a "trickle up" policy needs to be implemented as soon as possible because the "trickle down" theory has not worked.



Closing Time


Jim Kirwan
12-10-8


 








Since Reagan we've been trying to make "Trickle-Down economics" work: For those to whom promises were made, Trickle- Down has been, not just a failure but it has been the major vehicle responsible for the most massive redistribution of wealth, from the population that has worked toward something, to those that wanted everything. Never has there been such a near total transfer of wealth in the history of the planet. This criminal-conspiracy has done what it was created to do ­ and it must be terminated with extreme prejudice, immediately, if we are to survive.
 
When 'Trickle-Down' was the political-priority of the day, the high-point in prosperity was to become a 'Millionaire.' Forbes magazine tracked those lucky few very carefully. Today Forbes 500 no longer bothers with 'millionaires' because there are just far too many of them-they have become inconsequential. Thanks to "Trickle-Down economics today the heavy-hitters financially are 'Billionaires' and above: which is all you need to know about how well this hostile-takeover of the American economy has worked.
 
The problem that this transfer of wealth has created has resulted in the Federalization-of-Privatization: As a result we are all facing another huge round of trickle-down economics, but this time it's being cloaked in a series of stealth-protected measures. These new tactics are commonly called BAILOUT or RESCUE packages, and nothing about their origins or their purposes has been made clear to those of us that will be forced to pay tens of trillions for our own destruction.
 
What's happening is this: First they used compromised laws to squash diversity and opinion within the entire field of communications, under Clinton and Powell's kid that ran the FCC. Together, competition was eliminated and monstrous empires were created that absorbed their competition outright. Once this happened, the entire edifice for total information management was in-place, using household names to lie to the public every minute of every day, whether on television or in print-with very few exceptions. With that completed effort it was easy to move directly onto the openly fascist path to WAR on a variety of fronts, supported and applauded by the very organs that were supposed to question whatever government does, on behalf of the people, as part of their constitutionally protected-jobs as so-called journalists. With the constitution gone, and the only allegiance worthy of that name having become the private for-profit motives that greed and arrogance breeds; in the sewers of those ruined lives where these so-called leaders "live," the current outcome is all that we should have ever expected from these new-age barbarians. (1)
 
We're still in the Twilight Zone; where Obama is just another man waiting to start a job, except that he seemingly can't wait to begin so he formulates their plans and then rushes to the nearest podium to expound upon the glories of what these programs (or pogroms) are pointedly designed to do; for them and 'to' us. And the sheep wait patiently to board the trains that will take them to the slaughterhouse.
 
The larger picture has or course remained hidden from the general public. What continues to go unnoticed is the number of profligate cities and towns, not to mention states that will have to be bailed out by the feds. Once this begins to happen, 'the rights' of states will disappear completely along with any independence from the federal-government. Remember the formula upon which bailouts are based: The crucial money provided is conditioned upon a federal "ownership stake" in everything that needs the money, and when this is applied to the states then all they have left to trade with is their broken-economies and their people who shall both become the property of the federal government that is today a private-corporation that serves only the privately-owned central banks and by extension the multi-national corporations. This is about to happen now to several states, including California; the sixth largest economy in the world. (2)
 
'BTW the "corporation" mentioned above has been bankrupt since 1933, and the result of that bankruptcy is that the USA went into receivership to the privately-owned Federal Reserve. The Dictator was correct when he said: "The constitution is just a goddamned piece of paper," he was actually telling the truth. It was probably the only truthful statement he ever made in nearly eight years.
The owners have simply allowed us to believe we have a constitution. Every law, code and statute world wide is based on the Uniform Commercial Code and has been in place since 1950. Of course no one in a position of power ever bothered to mention this to us did they? One must understand the UCC to understand how and why so many have gotten away with so much: And now they are upping the ante, to take it all.'
 
This explains why every courtroom and every government building has flags hanging that really are not American flags even though they appear to be. Each of them has gold/yellow fringe around them. They give us smoke and mirrors that mask what they created, which allows them to continue to say 'we have a constitution and a democracy.' Of course America was created to be a constitutional republic, not a democracy. There is a huge difference between a democracy and a constitutional republic. The rights of the few and the many, can only be protected under a Republic, while under a democracy, the majority rules-absolutely.
 
There are however a few places that are still holding out against the one-world-order and the New Barbarians. Among these are Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, parts of Pakistan, possibly Iran and certainly Greece.
"Socialist leader George Papandreou called for early elections, saying the conservative government could no longer defend the public from rioters.
 
The government has a single-seat majority in the 300-member Parliament and opposition parties blame hands-off policing for encouraging the worst rioting the country has seen in decades.
 
'The government cannot handle this crisis and has lost the trust of the Greek people,' Papandreou said. 'The best thing it can do is resign and let the people find a solution ... we will protect the public.'" (3)
 
If America is to survive then we must stop this wholesale giveaway of everything that was once part of this society. The relationship between profits and earnings must be freed from the stranglehold that management has created in order to siphon off all the profits and wreck the companies they work for. In addition, the idea that government can function in any capacity as a major stakeholder in any form of private enterprise beggars the imagination far beyond any real possibility for saving anything; except the criminals and their enterprises that created this "crisis" in the first place. The 'economy' must be based on a bottom-up profit motive, based on the real wages of those that create the wealth for those at the top - and not upon the insanity that it is now! People must come first, and the corporations must be controlled at every level by the public!
 
There is no longer anything like responsibility anywhere in government or the private sector to anything except what can continue to be stolen, either by flawed and fraudulent bailouts, or through the strong-arm tactics that are currently acting "under- cover of law" and that are neither legal nor functional. Obama in this venue is neither a savior, nor a friend to the people that supposedly 'elected' him-he is just the instrument of the new global-government engine designed to finish the job and to close down this nation, once and for all! Americans need to watch what happens in Greece and follow their example, if there is to be an America to fight over in the future.
 
In the meanwhile, here is some of what's happened here already.
 
"With the focus on privatization, public-private partnerships, (dismantling local control); anyone with any common sense about them can see that; incrementally the power of the people is being given over to corporate control through various venues. Once upon a time we were subjects, then citizens, and now consumers. Everything is for sale. TV 'programming' is set up to entice "consumers" through the 3000 daily ads to buy, buy, buy! Utilities-waste- nursing homes, and even the people's water (once in local control) is open to the highest bidder or those with the most influence. In "public private partnerships or privatization" (despite the lofty high pitch sales rhetoric) means only one thing, a plundering of the people's money. Profits take precedence over any and all health or environmental concerns. It's pigs at the trough time, locally- state wise and nationally. This is not just happening in one or two isolated places but across the nation. Because we are narrowly focused (many times only one newspaper) parochially; we have little to no idea of the larger picture and what is being set in place.
 
As I read of various happenings across the nation; I am struck with the usage of terms and language being introduced into the public arena; with no explanation as to their meaning (if any). I asked a state politician a few years back what this terminology we're hearing lately of, "regional or regionalization" meant? He brushed the whole thing aside as inconsequential and told me that is was of no importance. Obviously, for me, that was an unsatisfactory answer. Most especially, since on the local level, I could see that it meant a great deal. It appeared to me, that ever so insidiously, local control was gradually being usurped by "regional" control of unelected officials. Consultants (strangers) were replacing local people in places of city government (at lucrative salaries). The sense of community (calling city hall etc.) was being replaced by various business entities, having little to no attachment to the heartbeat of the people. How could they, being strangers, with no sense of native pride or concern? Words like "regional, stake holder, empowerment zones, enterprise committees, visioning councils, smart growth, sustainable development etc;" had replaced understandable language! I didn't imagine that the usage of these terms across the nation (if you look) meant "nothing"." (4)
 
It's 'Closing Time' America, because unless you begin to do more than just watch, this place won't even be a footnote to the ruin that is planned for these people and this place that once held so much promise for everyone.
 
kirwanstudios@sbcglobal.net

Well, whatever happened, I am sure glad
nm
and we all know what happened to Rome don't we? sm
The Roman empire rotted from within. They kept absorbing and absorbing immigrants until they were no long able to sustain both them and their own citizens at the same time. The infrastructure finally gave out.

Sounds familiar to me.
I believe, if this happened...and don't know where you read it...
that these were paid McCain staffers, but some misguided McCain supporters. Obama has them too...many of them came out with the nastiness about Palin. They were Obama supporters, but not Obama staffers. Big difference. Obama can't control supporters, neither can McCain.
That happened to me the last recession we had...
and it took a good 6 years to right itself after the economy straightened out. And when it did...money went right into a CD. I don't mind a little in the market but I am not young enough to wait several years for rebounding again. Sigh.
Speak of Sam, what happened to her? nm
x
I wonder what happened to Kaydie?n/m
xx
That happened to me in the last 4 elections but

why, I don't know. It could be that the post office changed our street address 4 times yet lived here since ྈ.  I wasn't on the list even though I've been registered since 1988 and voted every election. All of a sudden, I had to fill out a special form to vote. Last local primary, they wouldn't let me vote and I had to re-register. Stupid!


This year I called to make sure I was registered and they said yes. Got a new registration card with the old address on it, but no trouble this year. I was #235 at 7:30 a.m.


So, so true. This is what has happened in many

Phoenix, Arizona is one of them.  Greed from Wall Street and greed from Main Street.  After all, Phoenix was in a major housing bubble.  I sold my home in 2005 by a California investor who not wanted my house and 6 others.  My house was in a biding war.  I pockted 280,000.  Now that house in Phoenix is worth 160,000 less than what I sold it for.  In 2005, homes were selling like crazy in Phoenix.  Everyone wanted to jump on the band wagon.  California investor thought, along with so many others, they could sell in a year or two and make a profit.  Some profit, foreclosure.  Many other homeowners took out equity to buy their boats and second homes.  Now their second homes and their own home are in foreclosure.  Not so many took out equity for cars because most lease their cars in Phoenix/Scottsdale.  You rarely see a car on the road that is 5 years or older.  Country has turned to greed, me-me-me, and gotta have it NOW. 


No, this just happened in the last 2 months.
It was WALL STREET, FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC that did it, not Bush. He had nothing to do with this.
What happened to Bin Laden? sm
Watch this Clinton interview by Mike Wallace.  Clinton lets him have it with both barrels and defends why he did not get Bin Laden. 

http://crooksandliars.com/2006/09/24/fox-clinton-interview-part-1-osama-bin-laden/
You would "CARE" if it happened to YOU!
nm
Nope. I just happened to have a day
off for a change and decided to check the board out. I see now, it was a mistake.
What ever happened to hiring someone...sm
because they were qualified - why should anything else matter, i.e. race, gender, religion, etc.?  I would think a job would be done more proficiently if you hired the person best qualified for that job!