Not in time for Chrysler, its employees, downstream businesses
Posted By: nm on 2008-12-17
In Reply to: Totally unfair. Bush is the only one trying - to HELP them at this point.nm
x
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
As of yesterday, Chrysler and GM were still
Today's news about cash flow evidently took that off the table pronto.
Chrysler's Thank You America ads sm
After getting bailout money, Chrysler spends a fortune on Thank You America ads. What gall they have. Take a look at the comments about it before someone removes them. Glad to see people do realize how much the government is screwing us over with these bailouts.
http://blog.chryslerllc.com/blog.do?id=564&p=entry
4 Fords & 2 GMs. Never even bothered with Chrysler!
in the case of the Fords, when I could even FIND parts. Planned obsolescence, you know. Tried to get a replacement seat belt for a broken one in my 4-yr-old Ford. 'No longer have any', they told me. So what am I supposed to do then? Junk the car? Illegal to drive without the belt, can't buy a new one, and still paying off the loan. Maybe just tie a good strong rope around myself to hold me in the seat?
Now I've got a sturdy, reliable Toyota. 5 years old when I bought it, and now it's 13 years old. Only thing I've ever replaced is a water pump. That's IT.
Unlike my Fords, when you drive it down the street, you can actually steer it in a straight line without drifting. And unlike my GM, things don't fall off of it every time you slam the door shut or turn on the engine.
Chrysler closing all 30 plants for 1 month.
x
what happens to car prices if Chrysler files bankruptcy?
If Chrysler ends up filing bankruptcy and has to liquidate, will the prices of the new cars go down or will everything just continue on, business as usual as far as we are concerned?
I am in the process of looking at a convertible Sebring and am now wondering if maybe I should wait an extra month and see what kind of deal I can get... 
what happens to car prices if Chrysler files bankruptcy?
If Chrysler ends up filing bankruptcy and has to liquidate, will the prices of the new cars go down or will everything just continue on, business as usual as far as we are concerned?
I am in the process of looking at a convertible Sebring and am now wondering if maybe I should wait an extra month and see what kind of deal I can get...
GM employees
I will agree that I it is really hard to conceive the government bailing out the big 3 needing billions of dollars, ok so what happened to all the money the big 3 made in the past? They need a plan. Everywhere I look I see foreclosed houses in my area, it is very sad. For the person with the pharmacist dad in Flushing...Let me guess, Cherry Street Pharmacy?
Well the GM salaried retirees, which includes my father-in-law, are losing their health benefits come the first of the year. He is a colorectal survivor with a permanent colostomy and self catherization for the past 13 years, those are a lot of mandatory daily supplies, so I hope that Medicare kicks in on coverage. I don’t think that “working in the shop” was at all glamorous, my dad busted his butt for GM for 38 years plus worked on the farm with my grandparents and my brother went of to the fire pits of h3ll (100+ degrees every day) at Saginaw Grey Iron (which is a foundry) for the last ten years of his GM “career”. Back in the day, GM provided a good income to people, like my dad, who was a hard worker, but had no means of gaining an education. He married my mother, who was a widow with four children before they had me, without being a GM employee, he could have never provided for an instant family on the wages he made as a farmer. I think there are a lot of people in Michigan who forget how thankful they should be to GM. Another way to look at it is, every GM employee coming to your dad’s pharmacy had insurance to pay for their medicine, so he knew that he was going to get paid as well. Just another perspective. Thanks.
Citigroup to cut another 53,000 employees
Citigroup Inc. is shedding approximately 53,000 more employees in the coming quarters as the banking giant struggles to steady itself after suffering massive losses from deteriorating debt.
The New York-based bank, which has already reduced its assets by about 20 percent since the first quarter of the year, also plans to trim expenses by 19 percent in 2009 from third-quarter levels, to $50 billion.
The plans, posted on the company’s Web site, were discussed by CEO Vikram Pandit at the company’s town hall meeting in New York Monday with employees.
The company said it is shrinking its work force by 20 percent from its 2007 peak of 375,000. The company had already announced in October that it was eliminating about 22,000 jobs from that level.
About half of the expected work force reductions will come from business sales; Citigroup already announced that it was selling Citi Global Services and its German retail banking business, accounting for about 18,000 jobs. Citi is planning to sell other businesses, too, but has not announced them yet, a spokesman said.
The other half of the work force reductions will come from layoffs and attrition, the spokesman said.
The New York-based bank has posted four straight quarterly losses, including a loss of $2.8 billion during the third quarter.
In an effort to instill confidence in the company, Citigroup emphasized in its presentation Monday that its Tier 1 capital ratio, a measure of financial strength, is 10.4 percent after a $25 billion investment from the government — part of the $700 billion financial rescue package passed by Congress last month. That ratio is higher than peers Bank of America Corp. and Wells Fargo & Co., after their purchases of Merrill Lynch and Wachovia Corp., respectively.
Citigroup also stressed that it has doubled reserves in a year to $24 billion; that its revenues are stable; and that Citigroup has lower exposure to U.S. consumer mortgages than JPMorgan Chase & Co., Bank of America and Wells Fargo.
But the announcements were not met with enthusiasm from investors. Citi shares fell 46 cents, or 4.8 percent, to $9.06 in morning trading. The company’s shares have been trading at 13-year lows.
Shortly before the town hall meeting in New York, Citigroup Chairman Win Bischoff said at a business forum in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, that it would be irresponsible for Citi and other companies not to look at staffing in the event of a prolonged economic downturn.
“What all of us have done — and perhaps injudiciously — we’ve added a lot of people over ... this very benign period,” Bischoff said.
“If there is a reversion to the mean ... those job losses will obviously fall particularly heavily on the financial sector,” he added. “Certainly they will fall particularly heavily on London and New York.”
A Citigroup spokesman said that while certain regions and businesses might have higher concentrations of job cuts, they would generally be across the entire company and around the world.
In his comments to The Associated Press, Bischoff did not rule out the likelihood that Citi’s leaders would go without bonuses this year — a move that would effectively amount to a substantial pay cut for the company’s executives.
“Watch this space,” he said when asked about lost bonuses.
On Sunday, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. said seven top executives, including Chief Executive Lloyd Blankfein, opted out of receiving cash or stock bonuses for 2008 amid the ongoing credit crisis.
Letter to my employees...
Not sure who wrote this letter, but its quite a good read..
To All My Valued Employees,
There have been some rumblings around the office about the future of this company, and more specifically, your job. As you know, the economy has changed for the worse and presents many challenges. However, the good news is this: The economy doesn't pose a threat to your job. What does threaten your job however, is the changing political landscape in this country.
However, let me tell you some little tidbits of fact which might help you decide what is in your best interests.
First, while it is easy to spew rhetoric that casts employers against employees, you have to understand that for every business owner there is a back story. This back story is often neglected and overshadowed by what you see and hear. Sure, you see me park my Mercedes outside. You've seen my big home at last years Christmas party. I'm sure; all these flashy icons of luxury conjure up some idealized thoughts about my life.
However, what you don't see is the back story.
I started this company 28 years ago. At that time, I lived in a 300 square foot studio apartment for 3 years. My entire living apartment was converted into an office so I could put forth 100% effort into building a company, which by the way, would eventually employ you.
My diet consisted of Ramen Pride noodles because every dollar I spent went back into this company. I drove a rusty Toyota Corolla with a defective transmission. I didn't have time to date. Often times, I stayed home on weekends, while my friends went out drinking and partying. In fact, I was married to my business -- hard work, discipline, and sacrifice.
Meanwhile, my friends got jobs. They worked 40 hours a week and made a modest $50K a year and spent every dime they earned. They drove flashy cars and lived in expensive homes and wore fancy designer clothes. Instead of hitting the Nordstrom's for the latest hot fashion item, I was trolling through the Goodwill store extracting any clothing item that didn't look like it was birthed in the 70's. My friends refinanced their mortgages and lived a life of luxury. I, however, did not. I put my time, my money, and my life into a business with a vision that eventually, some day, I too, will be able to afford these luxuries my friends supposedly had.
So, while you physically arrive at the office at 9am, mentally check in at about noon, and then leave at 5pm, I don't. There is no "off" button for me. When you leave the office, you are done and you have a weekend all to yourself. I unfortunately do not have the freedom. I eat, and breathe this company every minute of the day. There is no rest. There is no weekend. There is no happy hour. Every day this business is attached to my hip like a 1 year old special-needs child. You, of course, only see the fruits of that garden -- the nice house, the Mercedes, the vacations... You never realize the back story and the sacrifices I've made.
Now, the economy is falling apart and I, the guy that made all the right decisions and saved his money, have to bail-out all the people who didn't. The people that overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed a decade of my life for.
Yes, business ownership has is benefits but the price I've paid is steep and not without wounds.
Unfortunately, the cost of running this business, and employing you, is starting to eclipse the threshold of marginal benefit and let me tell you why:
I am being taxed to death and the government thinks I don't pay enough. I have state taxes. Federal taxes. Property taxes. Sales and use taxes. Payroll taxes. Workers compensation taxes. Unemployment taxes. Taxes on taxes. I have to hire a tax man to manage all these taxes and then guess what? I have to pay taxes for employing him. Government mandates and regulations and all the accounting that goes with it, now occupy most of my time. On Oct 15th, I wrote a check to the US Treasury for $288,000 for quarterly taxes. You know what my "stimulus" check was? Zero. Nada. Zilch.
The question I have is this: Who is stimulating the economy? Me, the guy who has provided 14 people good paying jobs and serves over 2,200,000 people per year with a flourishing business? Or, the single mother sitting at home pregnant with her fourth child waiting for her next welfare check? Obviously, government feels the latter is the economic stimulus of this country.
The fact is, if I deducted (Read: Stole) 50% of your paycheck you'd quit and you wouldn't work here. I mean, why should you? That's nuts. Who wants to get rewarded only 50% of their hard work? Well, I agree which is why your job is in jeopardy.
Here is what many of you don't understand ... to stimulate the economy you need to stimulate what runs the economy. Had suddenly government mandated to me that I didn't need to pay taxes, guess what? Instead of depositing that $288,000 into the Washington black-hole, I would have spent it, hired more employees, and generated substantial economic growth. My employees would have enjoyed the wealth of that tax cut in the form of promotions and better salaries. But you can forget it now.
When you have a comatose man on the verge of death, you don't defibrillate and shock his thumb thinking that will bring him back to life, do you? Or, do you defibrillate his heart? Business is at the heart of America and always has been. To restart it, you must stimulate it, not kill it. Suddenly, the power brokers in Washington believe the poor of America are the essential drivers of the American economic engine. Nothing could be further from the truth and this is the type of change you can keep.
So where am I going with all this?
It's quite simple.
If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company, my reaction will be swift and simple. I fire you. I fire your co-workers. You can then plead with the government to pay for your mortgage, your SUV, and your child's future. Frankly, it isn't my problem any more.
Then, I will close this company down, move to another country, and retire. You see, I'm done. I'm done with a country that penalizes the productive and gives to the unproductive. My motivation to work and to provide jobs will be destroyed, and with it, will be my citizenship.
If you lose your job, it won't be at the hands of the economy; it will be at the hands of a political hurricane that swept through this country, steamrolled the constitution, and will have changed its landscape forever. If that happens, you can find me sitting on a beach, retired, and with no employees to worry about....
Signed,
Your boss
The money from employees and their families...
is called "bundling." Lobbyists use "bundling" to get around finance limits.
The donkey in the room here, that you seem content to ignore, is that the Democrats, including Barack Obama, created this mess. They had a chance to stop it in 2005-2006 and did not. That is a fact. McCain tried to get legislation passed, they balked. If they did not do it for mnoney, I don't know why they did it...but the fact is, they did it, and WE are left holding the bag. And now, when Obama has a chance to help fix it, he is refusing again. Said "call me if you need me." Well I want a President I don't have to call. I expect when he is "multitasking" that he prioritizes, and the looming economic failure and the $700 billion it is going to take to get us out of it, is more important than a debate. What difference does 3 days make in the face of that?
Would you like the employees to work for free?
The union already made major concessions in their contract whereas new hires make 50% of what longer term employees make plus they do not receive the same benefits. I don't know it to be fact but I expect they have already got rid of a lot of the higher paid workers and replaced them with lower cost new hires. Sorta like what has been going on in the MT industry!!!! They'll probably end up filing bankruptcy, using that to void the union contracts and workers will probably be paid $10 an hour with no benefits...if they're lucky. Of course they'll likely get rid of all union workers as they won't want any union organizers around to rock their corporate boat.
It makes me angry to hear supposedly American worker brothers and sisters trying to lay the blame at the feet of the workers. Complaining about workers pay while not mentioning a word about the corporate jets that flew these A-hole CEOs to Washington to beg for money is sort of like, as one person said, "going to a soup kitchen in a tuxedo." Makes me furious.
Who do you think hires employees? It AINT the
nm
10 federal employees and 1 w/ criminal charges
over improper relationships between interior dept officials who oversee offshore drilling and oil executives...............Big oil? Offshore drilling? Run afoul of the law?Nahhhhh
Alaska AG: State employees won't honor
By STEVE QUINN
JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) - Alaska's investigation into whether Gov. Sarah Palin abused her power, a potentially damaging distraction for John McCain's presidential campaign, ran into intensified resistance Tuesday when the attorney general said state employees would refuse to honor subpoenas in the case.
In a letter to state Sen. Hollis French, the Democrat overseeing the investigation, Republican Attorney General Talis Colberg asked that the subpoenas be withdrawn. He also said the employees would refuse to appear unless either the full state Senate or the entire Legislature votes to compel their testimony.
Colberg, who was appointed by Palin, said the employees are caught between their respect for the Legislature and their loyalty to the governor, who initially agreed to cooperate with the inquiry but has increasingly opposed it since McCain chose her as his running mate.
"This is an untenable position for our clients because the governor has so strongly stated that the subpoenas issued by your committee are of questionable validity," Colberg wrote.
Last week, French's Senate Judiciary Committee subpoenaed 13 people. They include 10 employees of Palin's administration and three who are not: her husband, Todd Palin; John Bitney, Palin's former legislative liaison who now is chief of staff for Republican House Speaker John Harris; and Murlene Wilkes, a state contractor.
French did not immediately return a telephone call Tuesday for comment.
Earlier in the day, Harris, who two months ago supported the "Troopergate" investigation, openly questioned its impartiality and raised the possibility of delaying the findings.
Like Colberg's letter, the surprise maneuver by Harris reflected deepening resolve by Republicans to spare Palin embarrassment or worse in the final weeks of the presidential campaign.
And it marked a further fraying of a bipartisan consensus, formed by a unanimous panel before Palin became McCain's running mate, that her firing of the state's public safety commissioner justified the ethical investigation.
In a letter, Harris wrote that what "started as a bipartisan and impartial effort is becoming overshadowed by public comments from individuals at both ends of the political spectrum," and he urged lawmakers to meet quickly to decide on a course.
"What I may be in favor of is having the report delayed, but only if it becomes a blatant partisan issue," he told The Associated Press, while indicating he already believes it has become politically tainted.
Democratic state Sen. Kim Elton, chairman of the Legislative Council, the 14-member panel that authorized the probe, had no immediate comment on Harris' request. Under an unusual power-sharing agreement, the council is made up of 10 Republicans and 4 Democrats.
At issue is whether Palin abused her power by pressing the commissioner to remove her former brother-in-law as an Alaska state trooper, then firing the commissioner when he didn't.
The matter risks casting a shadow on Palin's reputation, central to her appeal in the campaign, that she is a clean-government advocate who takes on entrenched interests - not a governor who tried to use her authority behind the scenes to settle a personal score.
Palin has defended her behavior and said she welcomed the investigation. "Hold me accountable," she said. But she and the McCain campaign have taken actions that could slow the probe, possibly past Election Day.
Also Tuesday, five Republican state lawmakers filed a lawsuit against an investigation they called "unlawful, biased, partial and partisan." None serves on the bipartisan Legislative Council that unanimously approved the inquiry. They want it pushed past the election or top Democrats removed from the probe.
Making clear the dispute has ramifications beyond Alaska, Liberty Legal Institute, a Texas-based legal advocacy group, was working on the lawsuit. The institute has taken on a variety of cases in defense of conservative Christian positions.
Elton called the lawsuit "a distraction."
"The silver lining in this action initiated by the five lawmakers is that some of that debate now has been kicked to the judicial branch which, unlike the Legislature and the governor's office, is more insulated from the red-hot passion of presidential politics," he said.
Palin fired public safety commissioner Walt Monegan in July.
Weeks later, it emerged that Palin, her husband, Todd, and several high-level staffers had contacted Monegan about state trooper Mike Wooten, who had gone through a nasty divorce from Palin's sister before Palin became governor. While Monegan says no one from the administration ever told him directly to fire Wooten, he says their repeated contacts made it clear they wanted Wooten gone.
Palin maintains she fired Monegan over budget disagreements, not because he wouldn't dismiss her ex-brother-in-law. She has sought through her lawyer to have the matter investigated in a more favorable forum, the state personnel board.
AIG Employees Starting to Give Back Bonuses
WASHINGTON -- The chief executive officer of failed insurance conglomerate AIG told lawmakers Wednesday that he has asked executives to give back at least half of their bonuses.
Edward Libby, chairman and CEO of the American International Group, said that some workers there already have volunteered to return the money.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/18/aig-chairman-faces-congressional-grilling-bonuses/
Those "small" businesses are the mom and pop...
type who don't have many employees. The small businesses who will be hurt by Obama's plan employ 25-100 people. More taxes on them, more capital gains taxes, they will downsize or close and stop investing because they can't afford it. There are thousands of those kinds of businesses across this country and they employ a significant number of people. It is not just the business owners who suffer....it is the people they employ.
We are not a nation of businesses.
nm
Obama will CAUSE more businesses to go
nm
Big businesses........well they wouldn't have to
if we'd stop taxing the crap out of them. This country taxes the crap out of businesses at an alarming rate, when they can go to places like Ireland and have an 11% tax rate. They go to other countries where they don't have to pay those ridiculous taxes. That's the entire problem here. MORE TAXES! Those companies that do stay here, in order to cover their HIGH TAXES, charge you more to cover it for them. That's the point some of us have been trying to make. Obama wants to raise their taxes and I can guarantee you those that are still here will be gone in a flash. YOu get stuck on this big business hiring cheap labor. Well, they would be hiring you if your government would stop taxing the crap out of them.
That's what McCain has said during this entire campaign. STOP TAXING THE CRAP OUT OF THEM and stop running them off and we'll have more jobs brought back here. OBama says TAX TAX TAX them some more and they'll help pay for all of us. BULL!!! Those corporations won't pay him taxes. They up the cost of products and we pay it for them. Obama knows that. This man is a crook through and through....believe what you want. You darn right businesses want huge tax breaks? Wouldn't you? Oh well, maybe not. After all, O lovers love more taxes.
If you're so worried about the little guy who pays too much for his goods, then why not ask Obama why he wants to raise taxes on those very businesses who will turn right around and put them off on you, making everything you buy even higher!
And since you're so down on the big businesses, though I'm not sure what you call big business, who do you think hires everyone else? Poor people? You won't have to worry about the unemployment rate if O gets in there. He'll have taxed and mandated them right out of business and out of this country. The businesses that WILL be hurt are the very businesses you count on day to day and you don't even know who they are. I do. My husband works for one of them. They don't have a big name but they are the very reason you have your grocery store shelves with food on them and many other products. People that think like you don't have a clue all the businesses you use every day that are NOT rich, but they help sustain the very community you live in. They can employ anywhere from 10-200 people and believe me, that is NOT a RICH business but Obama will tax the businesses right out of business. They cannot afford all those mandates and garbage policies he wants to throw in there.
The florist in your town. Well, they're gonna close. They would fall into that MEAN RICH BUNCH all of you hate so much, as well as so many other companies you depend on every day. You've just got your mind so focused on the hugely large corporations, you can't see past that.
Well, when your town starts laying off hundreds at a time from all those businesses you thought you detested but then realize too late those aren't the ones you were thinking about, maybe you'll see it differently then.
Everyone is so focused on all the Wall Street crowd, they have failed to realize that crowd won't be hurting at all. You will and all those businesses that keep you and your community alive and well.
This is the fault of dems and republicans alike, not just one side.
You want to talk shafted, just wait till your local A/C guy can't even run his business because Obama has deemed him "RICH".
Right, Sam! If businesses are taxed more, they are
nm
Dont you get it?! Businesses WILL go overseas
nm
Oh, and BTW, $250K is not wealthy businesses
They're middle of the road, just making it businesses. They don't employ 3000 people like big business and they will be hurt the most. Big business will pass the tax increase onto the taxpayers. They'll be able to find loopholes with their 30+ laywers (exageration) who are paid to do that.
Wake up and take the blinders off!
Maybe if small businesses like MT companies
receive a tax credit as a reward/incentive to keep jobs INSIDE the USA, that policy will help American MTs.
That's Obama's policy.
The big green businesses are already overseas.......
xx
American businesses and individuals should all
nm
No, mine doesn't, but many small businesses...
including mid range transcription business who operate as S corporations, the entire income from their business is in that bracket and taxed as personal income. It is going to hit small businesses extremely hard. And I don't think it is fair that they have to pick up the tab to pay for tax CUTS for people who are already in the lowest bracket. I don't think that's right, I don't think that is fair, and it will result in businesses closing or laying off workers. So tell me what pray tell does that accomplish?
A government that taxes businesses into the ground...
is a main cause of offshoring. It costs more in taxes to do business in America than any other country in the world save one. And Obama wants to tax them even more, even the small business owners of the S corporation type. In order to fund a cut in tax for the people already in the lowest bracket who pay the lowest amount anyway. Thereby causing more small businesses to fail or cut back on staffing...causing more job loss instead of job creation. Sorry...that makes no sense to me.
Capitalism is when private owners run businesses
xx
Obama wants to grow small businesses
I can stick my head in the sand and pretend I don't know what this garbage is all about but anyone with half a brain would know you can't grow a business when you continue to pay pay pay through the nose AND give it to someone who has no motivation to do crap with their life.
blame it on businesses who won't clean up their trash..................NM
x
Obama wants to give small businesses tax relief not...sm
raise their taxes. He wants taxes raised on large corporations who are making record profits, paying their executives millions in salaries and perks per year. Also you will find that most companies offshore to countries where they pay pennies on the dollar to workers rather than pay Americans a living wage. These countries are happy not to charge them high taxes because those few pennies feed their people.
So businesses can use foreign labor for their products and services? nm
x
With the stimulus package there are built in tax credits for small businesses and SBA...sm
I have worked in retail as an assistant buyer and see their profit margins...and I know there are many legit, honest, mom and pop stores, but they usually make up for it by hiring school kids for slave wages and also family members. I am talking about across the board, in factories, retail, hospitalitiy, techno, every sector, these workers would all be paying more EACH WEEK into the the tax stucture in this country, strengtheing our reserves, becomeing consumers themselves because they can finally afford something....I feel like I dropped from another planet here, or industry in MT is not the norm by far.
What dribble and so uninformed, he isn't taking money from small businesses, geez.
Common sense should tell you he is not saying he is taking the money from small business to give to the the middle class.
he is saying he wants to tax fairly the wealthy (businesses over 250,000) and probably take some of the loop holes away. Lower the middle class taxes (if there is one anymore) so we can breathe. Former statesmen have said it is dangerous to put all the money in so few hands, it develops corruption. Don't just read the headlines, read between, on top, in depth, etc. McCain jumped on that statement to win votes. He is wealthy, what makes you think he understands you? The reason our jobs are going overseas is the present adminstration has given all these corporations tax breaks to do so - saying it builds global democracy - it didn't work, it just made the corporations richer). i don't care who you vote for but Ms. Piggy would be better than McCain and dum, DE dum dum.
Yet we get on this board and moan and whine about not getting paid enough and companies are spening millions buying other transcription companies over our backs you think taxing them fairly is socialism.
I am through with this board, it is sad so many want 4 more years of the same. Keep working for pennies while benefits are taken from you, lines per are decreased. Do you think getting less for voice is fair when it takes almost the same amount of time to do it and make half? Do you think the company is taking that much of a hit? Yet they are forcing it so it most be a benefit to them. They are laughing all the way to the bank while you eat the feathers.
Yep, but it was straight time. No time and a half
DHL is GERMAN OWNED. And, company was located on Snotsdale, I mean Scottsdale, AZ which means. Labor laws in Arizona suck. Right to work state. Basically a company can do whatever they want to do with you and if you do not like it, then quit and find another job.
same time?
Well, if these posts are showing up at the same time, how could it be me? I cant post everywhere at the same time, LOL. You are idiots if you think that. For you to even try to connect me with other posts..what for? Dont you have better things to do with your time? It makes me laugh that you actually have taken the time. It would not even occur to me to try to link up your posts and initials with other posts and initials. Gosh, guess I could take it as a compliment that you are spending so much time obsessing about me. I have a better suggestion for your time. Spend it researching this murderous lying administration.
Goes on all the time.
Does not surprise me at all, all politicians are crooks, that is why they had the wearwithall to get into it, smart, but all crooks. Bill Clinton was a sex addict, no doubt, but he did more to help me than any other president. I am a swing vote, I vote for the man not the party. I don't like the current President, I can see he has no soul in his eyes, but yet, they claim they won "two elections", he only won one, and I still doubt that considering that his brother was the gov of one of the highest electoral votes. But I do believe he won the last election, and his supreme court nomination has to be respected. I am not happy with Dudley Do Right, but Dubya did win one election, (we think), and he as president has the right to appoint whomever he wants.
It's about time this was done
While I don't agree that this is all the president's fault, and while I think some of what these governors are doing is political positioning it's about time somebody does something about this. A lot of the immigration could be handled at the state level other than the border patrol which is solely in the federal government's hand. This is where we as citizens must demand our leaders both dem. and rep. to stand up and do their jobs, and this does include the president. While I am a great fan of Bush this is one of the areas I think he's lacking in along with the majority of our leaders at the federal, state, and local levels. I hope these states go one step further and call in the National Guard. This is going to be the issue that I think will determine elections in 2006 and 2008 along with the issue of soaring gas prices and oil demand.
One time only
Where did she ever state she hated Bush? Could you please post that article or lead me to it. She wants to ask some tough questions which, obviously, he does not have the answers to. I would like to know what our **mission** is too. It changes so often. Talk about flip flops. I think we have had about four different reasons for pre-emptively invading Iraq and, of course, they still try to link Iraq to 9/11. Didnt know it was written in stone that you can only meet with your servant, the president, one time. However, it is working out okay, as most of America backs Cindy and quite a few Europeans too. I think it is great that finally most of America is finding its voice once again and screaming to the warmonger in the WH, bring our troops home. To stay the course is ridiculous but then, again, having invaded Iraq was monsterous and wrong, based on nothing but lies..That to me is RIDICULOUS BIG TIME. I also find it quite sad that Bush is taking a five week vacation, bicycling around his property, clearing brush, yet he cant spare 10 minutes or more to speak with Cindy and answer the questions she has, which many of us have..shows where his priorities are. Last time I took a vacation was in 2000 and it was only a weekend. This person in the WH is so out of touch with reality and the hopes, needs and worries of most Americans. He is pathetic.
Once upon a time. sm
You and the rest of the nameless posters here hounded two posters from the conservative board. And what you said and did to them was far far worse than this. And then when they were gone, you rejoiced and sang songs, ding dong the witch is dead. Remember? ON THE CONSERVATIVE BOARD YOU SANG. Hypocrits.
LOL! Nor did I (either time).
 Too bad they're just not bright enough to see how pathetic and desperate they've become. I've gotta admit, though, their idiocy does provide a LOT of laughs for me. (I don't want to emphasize that because if they think they're doing ANYTHING to make my life more pleasant, they'll stop!)
Its about time!
The 2005 International Commission of Inquiry
on Crimes Against Humanity Committed by
the Bush Administration of the United States
The Bush Crimes Commission
Friday 14 October 2005
When the possibility of far-reaching war crimes and crimes against humanity exists, people of conscience have a solemn responsibility to inquire into the nature and scope of these acts and to determine if they do in fact rise to the level of war crimes and crimes against humanity. That is the mission of the International Commission of Inquiry on Crimes Against Humanity. The first session will be held October 21-22 in New York City. This tribunal will, with care and rigor, present evidence and assess whether George W. Bush and his administration have committed crimes against humanity. Well-established international law will be referenced where applicable, but the tribunal will not be limited by the scope of existing international law.
The tribunal will deliberate on four categories of indictable crimes: 1) Wars of Aggression, with particular reference to the invasions and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan. 2) Torture and Indefinite Detention, with particular reference to the abandonment of international standards concerning the treatment of prisoners of war and the use of torture. 3) Destruction of the Global Environment, with particular reference to systematic policies contributing to the catastrophic effects of global warming. 4) Attacks on Global Public Health and Reproductive Rights, with particular reference to the genocidal effects of forcing international agencies to promote abstinence only in the midst of a global AIDS epidemic.
The Commission's jury of conscience will be composed of internationally respected jurists and legal scholars, prominent voices of conscience, and experts and monitors in relevant fields. The tribunal's legitimacy is derived from its integrity, its rigor in the presentation of evidence, and the stature of its participants. Representatives of the Bush administration will be invited to present a defense.
Prior to the meeting of the Commission, teams with sufficient expertise will prepare preliminary indictments in each of the four areas, setting forth the scope of the Bush administration's actions and how they contravene legal and moral norms for international behavior. At the meeting of the Commission, there will be four prosecution teams that organize the presentation of the evidence. This evidence will be documents as well as eyewitness testimony by victims and observers of the crimes alleged. The formal proceedings will be held in a public venue and all attempts will be made to publicize and broadcast its deliberations internationally. The Commission's jury of conscience will come to verdicts and its findings will be published.
The holding of this tribunal will frame and fuel a discussion that is urgently needed in the United States: Is the administration of George W. Bush guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity? The Commission will conduct its work with a deep sense of responsibility to the people of the world.
The Commission is sponsored by the Not In Our Name statement of conscience, joined by the following individuals and organizations:
- James Abourezk, former United States Senator
- As'ad AbuKhalil, professor of politics & public administration, California State University-Stanislaus
- Dirk Adriaensens, Brussells Tribunal executive committee and coordinator SOS Iraq
- Dr. Nadje al-Ali, social anthropologist at the University of Exeter, founding member of Act Together: Women's Action on Iraq and member Women in Black UK
- Anthony Alessandrini, organizer with the World Tribunal on Iraq and New York University Students for Justice in Palestine
- Edward Asner
- Russell Banks, novelist
- The Rev. Luis Barrios, Ph.D., associate professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice & Anglican Priest
- Amy Bartholomew, professor of law at Carleton University
- Greg Bates, Common Courage Press
- Phyllis Bennis, Institute for Policy Studies
- Michael S. Berg, grieving father of Nick Berg killed in Iraq May 7, 2004, and one man for Peace
- Ayse Berktay, from the organizing team of the World Tribunal on Iraq
- William Blum, author of Killing Hope: US Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II and Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower
- Francis Boyle, author of Destroying World Order and professor at the University of Illinois College of Law
- Jean Bricmont, Brussells Tribunal executive committee
- Marjorie Cohn, professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and executive vice president of National Lawyers Guild
- Lieven De Cauter, Brussells Tribunal executive committee
- Patrick Deboosere, Brussells Tribunal executive committee
- Michael Eric Dyson
- Peter Erlinder, William Mitchell College of Law and lead defense counsel, United Nations Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Arusha, Tanzania
- Larry Everest, author of Oil, Power & Empire: Iraq and the U.S. Global Agenda and Behind the Poison Cloud: Union Carbide's Bhopal Massacre
- Richard Falk, professor emeritus of International Law, Princeton, and Visiting Professor in Global and International Studies, UC-Santa Barbara
- Thomas M. Fasy, MD, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York City
- Lawrence Ferlinghetti, member, American Academy of Arts & Letters and founder & editor in chief, City Lights Books, San Francisco
- Ted Glick, former coordinator, Independent Progressive Politics Network
- Dr. Elaine C. Hagopian, former president of Association of Arab-American University Graduates (AAUG) and primary founder of the Trans-Arab Research Institute (TARI)
- Sam Hamill, director, Poets Against War
- International Movement for a Just World (JUST), Malaysia
- Abdeen Jabara, past president, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee
- Dahr Jamail, U.S. independent journalist who has reported extensively from Iraq since the invasion
- C. Clark Kissinger, contributing writer for Revolution and initiator of the Not In Our Name statement of conscience
- The Reverend Doctor Earl Kooperkamp, Rector, St. Mary's Episcopal Church, West Harlem, New York City
- Joel Kovel, editor-in-chief, Capitalism Nature Socialism: A Quarterly Journal of Socialist Ecology, and author of The Enemy of Nature
- Jesse Lemisch, professor of history emeritus, John Jay College of Criminal Justice
- Rabbi Michael Lerner, editor of Tikkun magazine and author of The Left Hand of God: Taking Back America from the Religious Right
- New Jersey Civil Rights Defense Committee
- New Jersey Workers Democracy Network
- National Lawyers Guild
- National Lawyers Guild, San Francisco Bay Area Chapter
- Rev. Davidson Loehr, Ph.D., First Unitarian Universalist Church of Austin, Texas
- Robert Meeropol, Executive Director, Rosenberg Fund for Children
- Barbara Olshansky, deputy legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights and author of Secret Trials and Executions
- James Petras, professor emeritus of sociology at Binghamton University, New York
- Jeremy Pikser, screenwriter
- Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights and author with Ellen Ray of Guantanamo: What the World Should Know
- Stephen F. Rohde, civil liberties lawyer and co-founder of Interfaith Communities United for Justice and Peace
- Marc Sapir MD, MPH, co-convener of the UC Berkeley Teach In on Torture and executive director of Retro Poll
- Sister Annette M. Sinagra, OP
- State of Nature on-line magazine
- Inge Van de Merlen, Brussells Tribunal executive committee
- Gore Vidal
- Anne Weills, civil rights attorney in Oakland, National Lawyers Guild
- Leonard Weinglass, criminal defense attorney
- Naomi Weisstein, professor emeritus of Neuroscience, State University of NY at Buffalo
- Howard Zinn, historian
--------
The 2005 International Commission of Inquiry on War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity Committed by the Bush Administration of the United States: Sessions take place Friday, October 21, 4-10pm, and Saturday, October 22, Noon-6pm, at the Grand Ballroom of the Manhattan Center, 311 W. 34th Street, New York City, NY.
Only time will tell. nm
x
I never take time off.
My pursuit of literacy is as endless as my pursuit of honesty and integrity. 
One mo time..... 1 example
This board will return to a dead state too
[Post a Reply] [View Follow Ups] [Politics] --> [Liberals]
Posted By: huh? on 2006-03-10,
In Reply to: Oh, she revealed it on the Conservative Board - ??
The stupid rules have made these boards a place where only crickets chirp. Its sad that people are so childish and cannot discuss things like mature adults. This is why these boards will remain a snoozeville, because some people are not capable of mature conversation and get insulted by anyone who does not believe exactly like they do, but if you like it dead here...by all means enjoy the silence.
Well this time it is ..
someone else. Thanks for the holiday greeting. Merry Christmas to you too, and a happy, healthy, joyful new year.
One last time....
I watched a TV broadcast; it evoked thoughts in my mind. The thoughts irritated me. I FELT uneasy and I THOUGHT I could print the same on this board and why. This is, after all, still America despite the speech police and this is, after all still the liberal board.
I'm sorry you feel the need to throw the little personal zingers in.
In this day and time you really can't have it all...sm
There is always going to be something or someone out of sorts, so I say just do you (Mrs. Obama). No one else can do it for her. If I were in her shoes, I would do the same thing.
yes, but she has done it time and time again and yet. sm
She is castigating Obama for MAYBE changing his mind. So what's with that?
I will try this one more time...
There IS money for childrens' health care, if we prioritize. Anyone with half a brain knows there is waste galore in the social programs we have now. They are not administered properly, rules are not followed, people get on who should not thereby taking the funds for people who really need them. All I suggested is that they go ahead and do the cigarette tax, and then prioritize how to spend the rest of the social funding and make sure childrens' health care goes first. As to agreeing or disagreeing to the war...won't go there as childrens' health insurance seems to be the issue. If they would clean up the SCHIP program now and get all the illegals off it, there would be that much more funding for insuring American children. Then if the illegals want to get legal, seek citizenship and pay taxes into the system like the rest of us, then yes, I think their children should be covered too. I really don't see why Democrats seem to have a problem with prioritizing spending. We do it on a personal basis every day; why can't the government do it with OUR tax money? We all know we can't do everything we would like to do. Therefore we should do the most important things first. That is just common sense. Just like parents are not made of money where their own families are concerned, the government (that being your tax dollars and mine) is not made of money either...and prioritization as far as social programs needs to be done. I really don't see why everyone seems to have a problem with that.
Sorry...it would not have been the first time...
a poster used the same moniker and posted as liberal and conservative...guess they like to start a fight and then watch it develop...kinda like people who flock to wrecks. lol. Could not be sure that was not the case and still cannot be sure...but I will take your word for it. lol.
|
