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

With the flat tax, people who make under 40,000 per year will not have to

Posted By: Democrat on 2005-08-10
In Reply to: Hi, there, Democrat!!! Nice to see you again! - American Woman

pay taxes the way it reads now. They estimate that people making over 40,000 will be able to produce more tax income than the current income tax w/o including people who make under 40,000.

Q and A about the Flat Tax.
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/7146/flattax.html


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

    Some people also believe the world is flat.

    Saying it is so or isn't so doesn't make it the truth.


    Yes, Saddam was a face of terror, one of many in the world...and not just in the middle east.  Try Africa. 


    The posting you don't believe has facts as stated by multiple investigations sponsored by the U.S. as well as countless Middle East and terror experts.  They appear to be the truth.  That Saddam was able to keep the lid on violence in his country is backed up by the history of Iraq under his reign.  Very easy to check on.


    YOU MAKE OVER $250,000 a year
    and can't afford to go out to dinner more than once or twice a year, live in a plain house that is almost paid off and have no debt? That is ASTOUNDING! Taxes are being raised on those making over $250,000 a year. My husband and I made around $80,000 last year and now we can't afford a pot to p**s in or a window to throw it out. Cancer has defined my life for the past year, meds are astronomical, medical bills drove us to bankruptcy and, right now, I'm too sick to work. We are barely surviving on hubbies income - I sold all of my jewelry to pay bills and put food on the table. I've been saving aluminum and scrapping it for gas money. I've been fighting insurance companies for treatment and compensation that I PAID for. My 30-year-old son is handicapped and works in a sheltered workshop. He broke his glasses. He's darn near blind. He had to wait 2 years before his medical card would pay for a new pair. So, I don't want to hear how WONDERFUL those on the "dole" have it. We live in a 600 sq. ft. "cottage" and my husband is a professional with a 5-year engineering degree. We are middle class and have been stabbed in the back over the last year. I can't take 4 more years. If McCain gets elected, I hope I sucumb to this disease so I don't have to see my children and grandchildren suffer.
    I do not make over 250,000 a year, sorry
    and like I am going to take someone like Donald Trump's opinions to heart. not a chance. he has a lot more to lose than I do if he has to pay taxes. I will get 1000 stimulus and end up paying less in taxes, it is just they will be distributed differently, in other words, not so much given to lobbyists and oil people that is my understanding...

    my cash gets taken out of my wallet NOW, more than ever, and my say where it goes is all but diminished - now THAT is scary...
    If you make under 75K a year

    you will get an extra 13 bucks a week.  Woo hoo!  Now let me ask you this......he is giving tax cuts to 95% of the people and yet these cuts only go to people making under 75K a year.....surely not 95% of Americans are making under 75K a year? 


    Do you make over $250,000 a year? With Obama I'm
    .
    I don't care how much the parents make per year...

    Their kids still deserve affordable healthcare.  You keep talking about people making $80,000 per year, and yes that is a lot of money, and more than double what I make, but those people can still get into trouble with medical bills of $100,000 to $200,000, and is it fair for that hard-working upper-middle-class family to have to sell their house simply to pay medical bills for a sick child?  Not in my personal opinion.


    Some people don't prioritize their spending well - I agree with you there, but should their kids suffer health-wise because of their parents horrible spending habits? Is it fair that many parents have to take a 2nd job simply to pay for their health insurance premiums?  Is it fair that they cannot afford to take simple family vacations because ALL of their money goes to bills and health insurance?  Is it right that many parents don't spend quality time with their children at night and aren't there to help their kids with their homework because they have had to take a 2nd job to cover health care for the family?  For most families it is not a choice between cable TV and healthcare.  Cable TV costs about $60 to $100 per month.  Health insurance premiums can be upwards of $1000 per month plus additional costs.  $12,000 per year on cable TV?  I don't think so.


    I personally don't go out and buy extravagant things, and that is fine with me.  I can barely afford to take the kids on a weekend trip to the museum in the next town, but I know if I keep working hard someday I might be able to take my kids on more trips and broaden their herizons a bit more.  In the meantime, we have a lot of love to go around, and I know that is what kids needs most, but I long for the freedom to show them a little more of the beautiful state we live in without having to worry about a $1000 per month health insurance premium.


    Holycrap! You make more than 250K a year!
    How did you do that with MT jobs? 
    How much did you make on your "earned income credit" this year? Welfare momma......
    x
    People who earn $40,000 a year don't pay any taxes.

    According to the Republican Speaker of the House.


    http://thinkprogress.org/2006/05/18/hastert-no-taxes/


    Iraq starts new year with 12 car bombings. US is in trouble, people!
    God Help Us All.
    People who make more
    pay more taxes to begin with.  So why up it for them?  I have no problem with people receiving money from the government if they paid too much from their earnings.  However, when there are people out there who aren't working and so no money is going to the government....I don't think they should get a check back from the government.  You should have to contribute before you get anything back.  That is taking money from hard working individuals and giving it to people including the ones who don't work.  That isn't fair and that is nothing but welfare.
    I think what he really does is make people think.
    What he says may sound outrageous, but once you think about what he's really saying, some of it makes sense.

    There should have been an investigation about 9/11, yes, but did we need those families on the TV every single night repeating that? No. I can't say I hate them for doing it because it was really the fault of the journalists that kept shoving cameras in thier faces. That's not to say at all that they don't deserve compassion, but they also should have been left alone to grieve.

    And yes, the Katrina victims certainly deserve compassion, but I know for a fact that if a hurricane was coming my way, I'd get as far away as I could by any means that I could find. I don't hate the people that stayed behind, but what about the people who did get out and still lost everything - do they deserve any less compassion? And you didn't hear thier stories every night.

    Yes, Beck is a radical right-winger and that's why us right-wingers like him so much. I may not always agree with what he says (much like Rush), but what he says definitely makes you think.

    If you want to think he's an idiot, that's fine, but him and a lot of other right-wingers on "Fixed Noise" have been and are still right about a lot of things going on in our country. The left doesn't have the market cornered on what's right just because thier man is in the White House - no one knows that better than those of us who voted for Bush and have been regretting it for several years.


    All these people make up a minority

    I never said that Jefferson was alone in his views just that he was in a minority.  Again, from the evidence I've read on both sides liberal philosophers and professors have chosen to re-write history.  I think the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights speak for themselves and literally scream about a country with it's foundations in God.  You can choose to ignore the words Almighty God, Divine providence etc., but it does not make them any less there in  A deist belives in a deity to answer the question posted above either by the writer of the post or the writer of  the excerpted text (I could not figure out who was posing the question). 


    We could throw quotes back and forth all day and never see eye to eye about it, but I choose to err on the side of God and Jesus Christ.  I choose to live by faith that Jesus Christ is the only way, but let's look at it in a common sense way.  Say I am wrong, and there are many *paths* to God then I'm still eternally okay, because I have embraced this path of which there are many, but say there are not many paths to God and Jesus Christ is truly the only way....then that's going to leave the people on the *other paths* in sad condition when they leave this world.


     


    How about we tax the PRODUCTS that make people fat, sm
    rather than "fatness"? Modified food starch, high fructose corn syrup, soy oils hidden in products? Imagine how much $$ we could make for so-called children's health programs if we actually taxed the items (like SODA POP and crappy snacks) that are MAKING THEM FAT in the first place!
    People like you make me ashamed to call myself
    su
    your mixing people up to try and make a point but not doing it well
    First you compare Obama to her, but then on an issue you compare Obama to McCain because you know you don't have anything bad to compare to Gov Palin with. Then when you talk about Obama you praise him and when you talk above Gov Palin you demean her. Where is the fairness in that?

    First, nobody is taking anything away from Obama. He is intelligent, articulated, has a beautiful family, has done quite well for himself both career and family wise.

    Nobody is saying he is exotic and comparing it to her saying she is a quantessential American Story. People are very impressed with Obama's life history. Hawaii is a very exotic sounding state (I've never heard him described as exotic). Ahh Hawaii, beautiful oceans, white sandy beaches - everyone's dream vacation. You make it sound like people are tearing him down because he was born in Hawaii. Alaska is quite different. You have to admit that hunting moose is not your everyday experience but nowhere in any news source or anywhere have I heard people compare where they grew up in to put one down and bring the other up.

    Nobody has said that because his name is Barack he's a radical unpatriotic Muslim. He's a Muslim turned Christian period, but not because of his name, and nobody has said she's a Maverick because of what she named her kids.

    Nobody has said he is unstable because he graduated Harvard. On the contrary. People have said he is one of the most intelligent persons to have graduated and become the first black president of the Harvard Law Review. That's not an accomplishment many people can say they have and that is what I am hearing everywhere. And who cares how many colleges she went to (this is your first demeaning statement of her by saying they were "small" colleges instead of just saying "5 colleges"). My DH has attended about 7 colleges all because of where he was living at the time and he is far from "well grounded" and I have never heard people say that about her.

    Second part of belittling her and raising him up is by saying he is a "brilliant" community organizer. Brilliant may be your view of him, but I would just say he was a community organizer. No need to say he is brilliant and all other words of praise while belittling her. Yes, she was on TV but she was not a "local weather girl" (another cheap shot at trying to put her down). She was a TV News anchor and covered sports. And your description of her time served as councilwoman, mayor, and governor is a little more than insulting. It goes to verify that you just hate her and what she has accomplished. You need to research all the good things she has done and whether you like it or not, she has done a lot of good things for the people and made their lives better. And to try attack the population of Alaska as though it's some kind of negative for her, and make her sound any less by saying they were small towns and state. Governer is governer. Responsibilites are the same wether your a governor of Alaska, Hawaii, California or any other state (give or take a few of the state programs). BTW Alaska is more than twice the size of Texas. And funny how Dean was the frontrunner for the dems when the population of Vermont is smaller than Alaska (yes, I'm sure you all don't want to remember that little tid bit).

    Gov. Sarah Palin was on the city council for 2 years, Chaired the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Committee for 1 year, was mayor of Wasilla for 6 years. She defeated a 3-term mayor. She created positions and even reduced her salary. She cut property taxes by 75% and eliminated personal property and business inventory taxes. She made improvements to the roads and sewers and increased funding to the police department. She also procured funding for storm-water treatment to protect freshwater resources. She ran a second term and won by 74%. She's promoted oil and natural gas resource development. She sold a jet, got rid of a personal chef and drives herself to work from her home (50 miles) even though she is allowed a per diem and hotel. She got rid of the bridge to nowhere and she signed into law the AGIA. So your portrayal of what Gov. Palin has done is quite inaccurate while boosting up Obama. Gov. Palin's past qualifications will most definitely contribute and help her to be a good VP.

    Obama was a state legislature from 1997-2004, in the US Senate in 2004, and became a junior senator in 2005. You can't even seriously compare the two.

    Yes Obama has been married to Michelle for 19 years and their two daughters are beautiful. Sarah has been married to Todd for 20 years and they have five beautiful children. (your comparing Barack to Sarah in all your answers - so why did you jump to John McCain on this one?)

    Whatever kind of safe sex education you want to give pre-schoolers (who should be
    more concerned with learning how to read and write is just wrong). Gov. Palin did not advocate teaching only abstinence. And she had nothing to do with her daughter getting pregnant. The best of children come up pregnant both in democratic and republican party.

    Funny how you were all for Bill Clinton getting ready to be called "First Dude", but now you have a problem with Todd Palin being called "First Dude", and don't even try to justify that one with Bill Clintons background. Are you saying the the VP's spouse is suppose to have a college education? How egotistical of you. Especially since he is a commercial fisherman, for 18 years worked in the oil fields, member of the United Steelworkers, among other things. That's a pretty stable background.

    Kudo's to Michelle for graduating from Harvard, but not everyone wants to go to college to be a lawyer (and in my opinion we need less lawyers in DC, not more), but to take away from Todd Palin because he doesn't have a college degree????

    And to mention such an insignificant note that he didn't vote until 25? Who cares? And I'm not sure that is even true, but just plain trivial.

    This post is just another liberal post trying to trash and demean decent people, not giving credit where credit due, while propping up your candidate, with inflated statements.

    Ok, much clearer now to you?
    I just knew some people would make this into an argument

    I just thought it was pretty cool and on the lighter side. But...as usual, some people just want to argue.


    To make it easier for some people, I tallied the votes (sm)

    O did not vote  on the issues 289 times. He voted yea 220 times and voted nay 128 times.


    I haven't had the time to really check out the yea's or nay's but I will in the next couple of days.


     


    Perhaps if you would try to make sense people could answer your questions. nm
    x
    is it our government's job to make the world's people happy?
    nm
    why do we vote for people to make things complicated?
    People who make their bills 900 pages should be rejected on the spot.  There should be a page max to make sure that the people representing us fully understands what they are getting US into.  JERKS!!!!  thanks for showing me that!
    Why does the Government have to create Laws to make people Volunteer?...

     


    http://therealbarackobama.wordpress.com/2009/03/15/meet-the-compulsive-service-orwellian-give-act-to-be-voted-on-this-week/


    Next up on the agenda this week is the GIVE Act, short for the “Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act”.


    The ABC News headline ‘GIVE’ Act Would Give Back. Volunteer Programs Would Provide Jobs to Unemployed, Assist Those in Need says it all.


      In his address to Congress last month, President Barack Obama called on lawmakers to expand federally funded national service opportunities.


      “To encourage a renewed spirit of national service for this and future generations, I ask this Congress to send me the bipartisan legislation that bears the name of Sen. Orrin Hatch as well as an American who has never stopped asking what he can do for his country — Sen. Edward Kennedy,” the president said.


      Democrats say they may be able to respond to that call by the end of this month.


      The Senate is working on the Kennedy/Hatch Serve America Act of 2008, and the House is working on a similar bill, called the Generations Invigorating Volunteering and Education (GIVE) Act.


    Flat Tax

    AW  -"I think 10% represents different things to different people and that 10% to someone earning $10,000 a year might be more of an encumbrance than it would to someone earning $10,000,000 a year."


    I personally think the flat tax is a good idea because if a person makes 10,000 dollars a year they pay 1000 dollars, but if a person makes 10,000,000 dollars they pay 1 million. That's fair game to me.  If you were able to benefit 10,000,000 dollars from American entrepreneurship then I think you should pay your 10% in taxes, give back.  9,000,000 after taxes is not too shabby and a lot more than what they would have under the current system.  The more you make the more you should pay anyway.


    I couldn't really grip the fair tax concept.  Maybe you can explain it to me more???? (to American Woman).


    And that would be a flat out lie....(sm)

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#31094044


    Care to try again?


     


    Here's a real nice conservative statement. How to make friends and influence people.

    "Religious broadcaster Pat Robertson suggested on-air Monday, Aug. 22, 2005, that American operatives assassinate Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez to stop his country from becoming "a launching pad for communist infiltration and Muslim extremism."


     


    thanks for the link...yep, she flat out lied
    Lying seems to be the whole premise of the McCain campaign and she jumped right on board!!!
    We would gladly pay a 10% flat tax, which is quite fair to everyone
    and should be instituted. Still see no one has an answer as to why we should be penalized, and not the standard answer of just stop whining and pay your fair share. We do, and more. The taxes that O wants to raise will hurt small business owners also. Are you willing to have your taxes raised?
    Like I posted above, this is flat out false
    He knows there is no way in heck he can do this. Like I said above, a state representative told me they don't even get those plans like the Senators do and other high officials in the white house and you won't be getting the choice of one either. He said the cost to us would be trillions of dollars to pay for it, those with insurance they are now paying for won't even be allowed to get on board, which he said Obama knows means those on the welfare roll will be the ones he will be trying to get the better healthcare plan for. Well, Obama must be in lah lah land because how are they going to pay for this plan on welfare? They won't.....you and I will but WE won't be getting that plan.


    Attack story a flat-out lie. sm

    http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/news/17789356/detail.html


     


     


    Oh, before you call me a liar. I did respond to the flat tax,
    but I brought my responses back here.
    NEWS FLASH - Michelle wears flat shoes a lot!!
    What in the world can we read into this?
    Iraq reconstruction plans in 2003: A flat tax and a no smoking campaign. ((( s/m

    Correction to This Article
    A Sept. 17 article incorrectly said that one person who helped manage Iraq's budget had no background in accounting. The woman, described as the daughter of a prominent neoconservative commentator, has a background in accounting but lacked experience managing the finances of a large organization.
    Ties to GOP Trumped Know-How Among Staff Sent to Rebuild Iraq
    Early U.S. Missteps in the Green Zone

    By Rajiv Chandrasekaran
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Sunday, September 17, 2006; A01


    Adapted from "Imperial Life in the Emerald City," by Rajiv Chandrasekaran, copyright Knopf 2006


    After the fall of Saddam Hussein's government in April 2003, the opportunity to participate in the U.S.-led effort to reconstruct Iraq attracted all manner of Americans -- restless professionals, Arabic-speaking academics, development specialists and war-zone adventurers. But before they could go to Baghdad, they had to get past Jim O'Beirne's office in the Pentagon.


    To pass muster with O'Beirne, a political appointee who screens prospective political appointees for Defense Department posts, applicants didn't need to be experts in the Middle East or in post-conflict reconstruction. What seemed most important was loyalty to the Bush administration.


    O'Beirne's staff posed blunt questions to some candidates about domestic politics: Did you vote for George W. Bush in 2000? Do you support the way the president is fighting the war on terror? Two people who sought jobs with the U.S. occupation authority said they were even asked their views on Roe v. Wade .


    Many of those chosen by O'Beirne's office to work for the Coalition Provisional Authority, which ran Iraq's government from April 2003 to June 2004, lacked vital skills and experience. A 24-year-old who had never worked in finance -- but had applied for a White House job -- was sent to reopen Baghdad's stock exchange. The daughter of a prominent neoconservative commentator and a recent graduate from an evangelical university for home-schooled children were tapped to manage Iraq's $13 billion budget, even though they didn't have a background in accounting.


    The decision to send the loyal and the willing instead of the best and the brightest is now regarded by many people involved in the 3 1/2 -year effort to stabilize and rebuild Iraq as one of the Bush administration's gravest errors. Many of those selected because of their political fidelity spent their time trying to impose a conservative agenda on the postwar occupation, which sidetracked more important reconstruction efforts and squandered goodwill among the Iraqi people, according to many people who participated in the reconstruction effort.


    The CPA had the power to enact laws, print currency, collect taxes, deploy police and spend Iraq's oil revenue. It had more than 1,500 employees in Baghdad at its height, working under America's viceroy in Iraq, L. Paul Bremer, but never released a public roster of its entire staff.


    Interviews with scores of former CPA personnel over the past two years depict an organization that was dominated -- and ultimately hobbled -- by administration ideologues.


    "We didn't tap -- and it should have started from the White House on down -- just didn't tap the right people to do this job," said Frederick Smith, who served as the deputy director of the CPA's Washington office. "It was a tough, tough job. Instead we got people who went out there because of their political leanings."


    Endowed with $18 billion in U.S. reconstruction funds and a comparatively quiescent environment in the immediate aftermath of the U.S. invasion, the CPA was the U.S. government's first and best hope to resuscitate Iraq -- to establish order, promote rebuilding and assemble a viable government, all of which, experts believe, would have constricted the insurgency and mitigated the chances of civil war. Many of the basic tasks Americans struggle to accomplish today in Iraq -- training the army, vetting the police, increasing electricity generation -- could have been performed far more effectively in 2003 by the CPA.


    But many CPA staff members were more interested in other things: in instituting a flat tax, in selling off government assets, in ending food rations and otherwise fashioning a new nation that looked a lot like the United States. Many of them spent their days cloistered in the Green Zone, a walled-off enclave in central Baghdad with towering palms, posh villas, well-stocked bars and resort-size swimming pools.


    By the time Bremer departed in June 2004, Iraq was in a precarious state. The Iraqi army, which had been dissolved and refashioned by the CPA, was one-third the size he had pledged it would be. Seventy percent of police officers had not been screened or trained. Electricity generation was far below what Bremer had promised to achieve. And Iraq's interim government had been selected not by elections but by Americans. Divisive issues were to be resolved later on, increasing the chances that tension over those matters would fuel civil strife.


    To recruit the people he wanted, O'Beirne sought résumés from the offices of Republican congressmen, conservative think tanks and GOP activists. He discarded applications from those his staff deemed ideologically suspect, even if the applicants possessed Arabic language skills or postwar rebuilding experience.


    Smith said O'Beirne once pointed to a young man's résumé and pronounced him "an ideal candidate." His chief qualification was that he had worked for the Republican Party in Florida during the presidential election recount in 2000.


    O'Beirne, a former Army officer who is married to prominent conservative commentator Kate O'Beirne, did not respond to requests for comment.


    He and his staff used an obscure provision in federal law to hire many CPA staffers as temporary political appointees, which exempted the interviewers from employment regulations that prohibit questions about personal political beliefs.


    There were a few Democrats who wound up getting jobs with the CPA, but almost all of them were active-duty soldiers or State Department Foreign Service officers. Because they were career government employees, not temporary hires, O'Beirne's office could not query them directly about their political leanings.


    One former CPA employee who had an office near O'Beirne's wrote an e-mail to a friend describing the recruitment process: "I watched résumés of immensely talented individuals who had sought out CPA to help the country thrown in the trash because their adherence to 'the President's vision for Iraq' (a frequently heard phrase at CPA) was 'uncertain.' I saw senior civil servants from agencies like Treasury, Energy . . . and Commerce denied advisory positions in Baghdad that were instead handed to prominent RNC (Republican National Committee) contributors."


    As more and more of O'Beirne's hires arrived in the Green Zone, the CPA's headquarters in Hussein's marble-walled former Republican Palace felt like a campaign war room. Bumper stickers and mouse pads praising President Bush were standard desk decorations. In addition to military uniforms and "Operation Iraqi Freedom" garb, "Bush-Cheney 2004" T-shirts were among the most common pieces of clothing.


    "I'm not here for the Iraqis," one staffer noted to a reporter over lunch. "I'm here for George Bush."


    When Gordon Robison, who worked in the Strategic Communications office, opened a care package from his mother to find a book by Paul Krugman, a liberal New York Times columnist, people around him stared. "It was like I had just unwrapped a radioactive brick," he recalled.

    Finance Background Not Required

    Twenty-four-year-old Jay Hallen was restless. He had graduated from Yale two years earlier, and he didn't much like his job at a commercial real-estate firm. His passion was the Middle East, and although he had never been there, he was intrigued enough to take Arabic classes and read histories of the region in his spare time.


    He had mixed feelings about the war in Iraq, but he viewed the American occupation as a ripe opportunity. In the summer of 2003, he sent an e-mail to Reuben Jeffrey III, whom he had met when applying for a White House job a year earlier. Hallen had a simple query for Jeffrey, who was working as an adviser to Bremer: Might there be any job openings in Baghdad?


    "Be careful what you wish for," Jeffrey wrote in response. Then he forwarded Hallen's resume to O'Beirne's office.


    Three weeks later, Hallen got a call from the Pentagon. The CPA wanted him in Baghdad. Pronto. Could he be ready in three to four weeks?


    The day he arrived in Baghdad, he met with Thomas C. Foley, the CPA official in charge of privatizing state-owned enterprises. (Foley, a major Republican Party donor, went to Harvard Business School with President Bush.) Hallen was shocked to learn that Foley wanted him to take charge of reopening the stock exchange.


    "Are you sure?" Hallen said to Foley. "I don't have a finance background."


    It's fine, Foley replied. He told Hallen that he was to be the project manager. He would rely on other people to get things done. He would be "the main point of contact."


    Before the war, Baghdad's stock exchange looked nothing like its counterparts elsewhere in the world. There were no computers, electronic displays or men in colorful coats scurrying around on the trading floor. Trades were scrawled on pieces of paper and noted on large blackboards. If you wanted to buy or sell, you came to the exchange yourself and shouted your order to one of the traders. There was no air-conditioning. It was loud and boisterous. But it worked. Private firms raised hundreds of thousands of dollars by selling stock, and ordinary people learned about free enterprise.


    The exchange was gutted by looters after the war. The first wave of American economic reconstruction specialists from the Treasury Department ignored it. They had bigger issues to worry about: paying salaries, reopening the banks, stabilizing the currency. But the brokers wanted to get back to work and investors wanted their money, so the CPA made the reopening a priority.


    Quickly absorbing the CPA's ambition during the optimistic days before the insurgency flared, Hallen decided that he didn't just want to reopen the exchange, he wanted to make it the best, most modern stock market in the Arab world. He wanted to promulgate a new securities law that would make the exchange independent of the Finance Ministry, with its own bylaws and board of directors. He wanted to set up a securities and exchange commission to oversee the market. He wanted brokers to be licensed and listed companies to provide financial disclosures. He wanted to install a computerized trading and settlement system.


    Iraqis cringed at Hallen's plan. Their top priority was reopening the exchange, not setting up computers or enacting a new securities law. "People are broke and bewildered," broker Talib Tabatabai told Hallen. "Why do you want to create enemies? Let us open the way we were."


    Tabatabai, who held a doctorate in political science from Florida State University, believed Hallen's plan was unrealistic. "It was something so fancy, so great, that it couldn't be accomplished," he said.


    But Hallen was convinced that major changes had to be enacted. "Their laws and regulations were completely out of step with the modern world," he said. "There was just no transparency in anything. It was more of a place for Saddam and his friends to buy up private companies that they otherwise didn't have a stake in."


    Opening the stock exchange without legal and structural changes, Hallen maintained, "would have been irresponsible and short-sighted."


    To help rewrite the securities law, train brokers and purchase the necessary computers, Hallen recruited a team of American volunteers. In the spring of 2004, Bremer approved the new law and simultaneously appointed the nine Iraqis selected by Hallen to become the exchange's board of governors.


    The exchange's board selected Tabatabai as its chairman. The new securities law that Hallen had nursed into life gave the board control over the exchange's operations, but it didn't say a thing about the role of the CPA adviser. Hallen assumed that he'd have a part in decision-making until the handover of sovereignty. Tabatabai and the board, however, saw themselves in charge.


    Tabatabai and the other governors decided to open the market as soon as possible. They didn't want to wait several more months for the computerized trading system to be up and running. They ordered dozens of dry-erase boards to be installed on the trading floor. They used such boards to keep track of buying and selling prices before the war, and that's how they'd do it again.


    The exchange opened two days after Hallen's tour in Iraq ended. Brokers barked orders to floor traders, who used their trusty white boards. Transactions were recorded not with computers but with small chits written in ink. CPA staffers stayed away, afraid that their presence would make the stock market a target for insurgents.


    When Tabatabai was asked what would have happened if Hallen hadn't been assigned to reopen the exchange, he smiled. "We would have opened months earlier. He had grand ideas, but those ideas did not materialize," Tabatabai said of Hallen. "Those CPA people reminded me of Lawrence of Arabia."

    'Loyalist' Replaces Public Health Expert

    The hiring of Bremer's most senior advisers was settled upon at the highest levels of the White House and the Pentagon. Some, like Foley, were personally recruited by Bush. Others got their jobs because an influential Republican made a call on behalf of a friend or trusted colleague.


    That's what happened with James K. Haveman Jr., who was selected to oversee the rehabilitation of Iraq's health care system.


    Haveman, a 60-year-old social worker, was largely unknown among international health experts, but he had connections. He had been the community health director for the former Republican governor of Michigan, John Engler, who recommended him to Paul D. Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of defense.


    Haveman was well-traveled, but most of his overseas trips were in his capacity as a director of International Aid, a faith-based relief organization that provided health care while promoting Christianity in the developing world. Before his stint in government, Haveman ran a large Christian adoption agency in Michigan that urged pregnant women not to have abortions.


    Haveman replaced Frederick M. Burkle Jr., a physician with a master's degree in public health and postgraduate degrees from Harvard, Yale, Dartmouth and the University of California at Berkeley. Burkle taught at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, where he specialized in disaster-response issues, and he was a deputy assistant administrator at the U.S. Agency for International Development, which sent him to Baghdad immediately after the war.


    He had worked in Kosovo and Somalia and in northern Iraq after the 1991 Persian Gulf War. A USAID colleague called him the "single most talented and experienced post-conflict health specialist working for the United States government."


    But a week after Baghdad's liberation, Burkle was informed he was being replaced. A senior official at USAID sent Burkle an e-mail saying the White House wanted a "loyalist" in the job. Burkle had a wall of degrees, but he didn't have a picture with the president.


    Haveman arrived in Iraq with his own priorities. He liked to talk about the number of hospitals that had reopened since the war and the pay raises that had been given to doctors instead of the still-decrepit conditions inside the hospitals or the fact that many physicians were leaving for safer, better paying jobs outside Iraq. He approached problems the way a health care administrator in America would: He focused on preventive measures to reduce the need for hospital treatment.


    He urged the Health Ministry to mount an anti-smoking campaign, and he assigned an American from the CPA team -- who turned out to be a closet smoker himself -- to lead the public education effort. Several members of Haveman's staff noted wryly that Iraqis faced far greater dangers in their daily lives than tobacco. The CPA's limited resources, they argued, would be better used raising awareness about how to prevent childhood diarrhea and other fatal maladies.


    Haveman didn't like the idea that medical care in Iraq was free. He figured Iraqis should pay a small fee every time they saw a doctor. He also decided to allocate almost all of the Health Ministry's $793 million share of U.S. reconstruction funds to renovating maternity hospitals and building new community medical clinics. His intention, he said, was "to shift the mind-set of the Iraqis that you don't get health care unless you go to a hospital."


    But his decision meant there were no reconstruction funds set aside to rehabilitate the emergency rooms and operating theaters at Iraqi hospitals, even though injuries from insurgent attacks were the country's single largest public health challenge.


    Haveman also wanted to apply American medicine to other parts of the Health Ministry. Instead of trying to restructure the dysfunctional state-owned firm that imported and distributed drugs and medical supplies to hospitals, he decided to try to sell it to a private company.


    To prepare it for a sale, he wanted to attempt something he had done in Michigan. When he was the state's director of community health, he sought to slash the huge amount of money Michigan spent on prescription drugs for the poor by limiting the medications doctors could prescribe for Medicaid patients. Unless they received an exemption, physicians could only prescribe drugs that were on an approved list, known as a formulary.


    Haveman figured the same strategy could bring down the cost of medicine in Iraq. The country had 4,500 items on its drug formulary. Haveman deemed it too large. If private firms were going to bid for the job of supplying drugs to government hospitals, they needed a smaller, more manageable list. A new formulary would also outline new requirements about where approved drugs could be manufactured, forcing Iraq to stop buying medicines from Syria, Iran and Russia, and start buying from the United States.


    He asked the people who had drawn up the formulary in Michigan whether they wanted to come to Baghdad. They declined. So he beseeched the Pentagon for help. His request made its way to the Defense Department's Pharmacoeconomic Center in San Antonio.


    A few weeks later, three formulary experts were on their way to Iraq.


    The group was led by Theodore Briski, a balding, middle-aged pharmacist who held the rank of lieutenant commander in the U.S. Navy. Haveman's order, as Briski remembered it, was: "Build us a formulary in two weeks and then go home." By his second day in Iraq, Briski came to three conclusions. First, the existing formulary "really wasn't that bad." Second, his mission was really about "redesigning the entire Iraqi pharmaceutical procurement and delivery system, and that was a complete change of scope -- on a grand scale." Third, Haveman and his advisers "really didn't know what they were doing."


    Haveman "viewed Iraq as Michigan after a huge attack," said George Guszcza, an Army captain who worked on the CPA's health team. "Somehow if you went into the ghettos and projects of Michigan and just extended it out for the entire state -- that's what he was coming to save."


    Haveman's critics, including more than a dozen people who worked for him in Baghdad, contend that rewriting the formulary was a distraction. Instead, they said, the CPA should have focused on restructuring, but not privatizing, the drug-delivery system and on ordering more emergency shipments of medicine to address shortages of essential medicines. The first emergency procurement did not occur until early 2004, after the Americans had been in Iraq for more than eight months.


    Haveman insisted that revising the formulary was a crucial first step in improving the distribution of medicines. "It was unwieldy to order 4,500 different drugs, and to test and distribute them," he said.


    When Haveman left Iraq, Baghdad's hospitals were as decrepit as the day the Americans arrived. At Yarmouk Hospital, the city's largest, rooms lacked the most basic equipment to monitor a patient's blood pressure and heart rate, operating theaters were without modern surgical tools and sterile implements, and the pharmacy's shelves were bare.


    Nationwide, the Health Ministry reported that 40 percent of the 900 drugs it deemed essential were out of stock in hospitals. Of the 32 medicines used in public clinics for the management of chronic diseases, 26 were unavailable.


    The new health minister, Aladin Alwan, beseeched the United Nations for help, and he asked neighboring nations to share what they could. He sought to increase production at a state-run manufacturing plant in the city of Samarra. And he put the creation of a new formulary on hold. To him, it was a fool's errand.


    "We didn't need a new formulary. We needed drugs," he said. "But the Americans did not understand that."

    A 9/11 Hero's Public Relations Blitz

    In May 2003, a team of law enforcement experts from the Justice Department concluded that more than 6,600 foreign advisers were needed to help rehabilitate Iraq's police forces.


    The White House dispatched just one: Bernie Kerik.


    Bernard Kerik had more star power than Bremer and everyone else in the CPA combined. Soldiers stopped him in the halls of the Republican Palace to ask for his autograph or, if they had a camera, a picture. Reporters were more interested in interviewing him than they were the viceroy.


    Kerik had been New York City's police commissioner when terrorists attacked the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001. His courage (he shouted evacuation orders from a block away as the south tower collapsed), his stamina (he worked around the clock and catnapped in his office for weeks), and his charisma (he was a master of the television interview) turned him into a national hero. When White House officials were casting about for a prominent individual to take charge of Iraq's Interior Ministry and assume the challenge of rebuilding the Iraqi police, Kerik's name came up. Bush pronounced it an excellent idea.


    Kerik had worked in the Middle East before, as the security director for a government hospital in Saudi Arabia, but he was expelled from the country amid a government investigation into his surveillance of the medical staff. He lacked postwar policing experience, but the White House viewed that as an asset.


    Veteran Middle East hands were regarded as insufficiently committed to the goal of democratizing the region. Post-conflict experts, many of whom worked for the State Department, the United Nations or nongovernmental organizations, were deemed too liberal. Men such as Kerik -- committed Republicans with an accomplished career in business or government -- were ideal. They were loyal, and they shared the Bush administration's goal of rebuilding Iraq in an American image. With Kerik, there were bonuses: The media loved him, and the American public trusted him.


    Robert Gifford, a State Department expert in international law enforcement, was one of the first CPA staff members to meet Kerik when he arrived in Baghdad. Gifford was the senior adviser to the Interior Ministry, which oversaw the police. Kerik was to take over Gifford's job.


    "I understand you are going to be the man, and we are here to support you," Gifford told Kerik.


    "I'm here to bring more media attention to the good work on police because the situation is probably not as bad as people think it is," Kerik replied.


    As they entered the Interior Ministry office in the palace, Gifford offered to brief Kerik. "It was during that period I realized he wasn't with me," Gifford recalled. "He didn't listen to anything. He hadn't read anything except his e-mails. I don't think he read a single one of our proposals."


    Kerik wasn't a details guy. He was content to let Gifford figure out how to train Iraqi officers to work in a democratic society. Kerik would take care of briefing the viceroy and the media. And he'd be going out for a few missions himself.


    Kerik's first order of business, less than a week after he arrived, was to give a slew of interviews saying the situation was improving. He told the Associated Press that security in Baghdad "is not as bad as I thought. Are bad things going on? Yes. But is it out of control? No. Is it getting better? Yes." He went on NBC's "Today" show to pronounce the situation "better than I expected." To Time magazine, he said that "people are starting to feel more confident. They're coming back out. Markets and shops that I saw closed one week ago have opened."


    When it came to his own safety, Kerik took no chances. He hired a team of South African bodyguards, and he packed a 9mm handgun under his safari vest.


    The first months after liberation were a critical period for Iraq's police. Officers needed to be called back to work and screened for Baath Party connections. They'd have to learn about due process, how to interrogate without torture, how to walk the beat. They required new weapons. New chiefs had to be selected. Tens of thousands more officers would have to be hired to put the genie of anarchy back in the bottle.


    Kerik held only two staff meetings while in Iraq, one when he arrived and the other when he was being shadowed by a New York Times reporter, according to Gerald Burke, a former Massachusetts State Police commander who participated in the initial Justice Department assessment mission. Despite his White House connections, Kerik did not secure funding for the desperately needed police advisers. With no help on the way, the task of organizing and training Iraqi officers fell to U.S. military police soldiers, many of whom had no experience in civilian law enforcement.


    "He was the wrong guy at the wrong time," Burke said later. "Bernie didn't have the skills. What we needed was a chief executive-level person. . . . Bernie came in with a street-cop mentality."


    Kerik authorized the formation of a hundred-man Iraqi police paramilitary unit to pursue criminal syndicates that had formed since the war, and he often joined the group on nighttime raids, departing the Green Zone at midnight and returning at dawn, in time to attend Bremer's senior staff meeting, where he would crack a few jokes, describe the night's adventures and read off the latest crime statistics prepared by an aide. The unit did bust a few kidnapping gangs and car-theft rings, generating a stream of positive news stories that Kerik basked in and Bremer applauded. But the all-nighters meant Kerik wasn't around to supervise the Interior Ministry during the day. He was sleeping.


    Several members of the CPA's Interior Ministry team wanted to blow the whistle on Kerik, but they concluded any complaints would be brushed off. "Bremer's staff thought he was the silver bullet," a member of the Justice Department assessment mission said. "Nobody wanted to question the [man who was] police chief during 9/11."


    Kerik contended that he did his best in what was, ultimately, an untenable situation. He said he wasn't given sufficient funding to hire foreign police advisers or establish large-scale training programs.


    Three months after he arrived, Kerik attended a meeting of local police chiefs in Baghdad's Convention Center. When it was his turn to address the group, he stood and bid everyone farewell. Although he had informed Bremer of his decision a few days earlier, Kerik hadn't told most of the people who worked for him. He flew out of Iraq a few hours later.


    "I was in my own world," he said later. "I did my own thing."


    © 2006 The Washington Post Company




    NOBODY can make Saddam look good. But Bush seems to be the ONLY one who can make him look less

    If you can't make abortion illegal, just make it impossible (sm)

    That's right, Bush is still alive and well.  Check this out.


    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#28024676


    Yeah, I know it's MSNBC, but how many other people are doing a lame duck watch?


    Just because you make a statement does not make it true...
    .
    I think we need a 4-year....
    moratorium on presidents.  Let's try 4 years without one.  See how that goes. 
    I'm one year from my MA.
    It seems like half of the posts on this MB are yours. Maybe you should look for other hobbies. Like clubbing baby seals or smashing the dreams of little children.

    You spew on and on about how unbiased you are, yet 90% of your posts bash republicans.

    I think you just like to see your name on the MB. Maybe in your 'real' life nobody cares about you. So you come here to feel like at least someone will read your message and know you are still alive.

    How sad for you.
    Well, in a year you can say


    I just went there last year
    I was welcomed there and not treated as an ugly american.

    My brother and his wife have lived there for years and they and their friends are not treated like "ugly americans", and they've been all over germany, belgium, france, austria, lictenfelds, and switzerland. They travel every weekend and they are always welcome whereever they go. The europeans love Americans. They (not all) may not like our president but they know that americans are not like him.

    This kind of comment is just a lie! Another Bush hater. We get it, we all get it. God I can't want til tomorrow cos I can't wait for the Bush bashers/haters to just shut their mouths. But wait, they keep it up about McCain/Palin, so don't expect it to stop with Bush.
    You tell me how an 8-year-old knows

    anything about being "gay."  I'll tell you where, in the indoctrination centers known as public education. 


    Excuse me, being homosexual does not make one happy and well adjusted.  I've never ever seen when blatant sin ever lead to being happy and well adjusted.


    Probably same as this year
    Get back over 4,000 in tax refunds.
    Yes, he did. This was for LAST YEAR'S

    Seven down, one year to go for America
    Article from yesterday's Times Herald documenting in a nutshell Bush's dynamic and equally distrastrous first year for America.  It packs a wallop.  In hindsight and in black and white, it certainly portends to everything that follows.  I wonder if we shall ever recover from the damage that has been done to this country and abroad.

     

    Seven down, one year to go for America

     

    January 14, 2008

    As I watched Americans caucus in Iowa and enter voting booths in New Hampshire these past two weeks, I felt the first stirrings of hope for my country that I've felt in a very long time.


    It is as though we are peeking out of our caves of fear and despair, still wearing our winter coats and galoshes but preparing to shed them as we step into the promise of springtime.


    For seven years, this country has been held in the grip of men who have used us for their own ends. On Sunday, it will be exactly one year until we see the last of the Bush administration.


    That is reason for celebration. But it is not reason for turning our attention away from the criminals in the White House. There are times when I barely recognize the carcass of America that they continue to strip as they prepare to discard us.


    Only one more year. But we know from experience the kind of damage George Bush and his crowd can do in the space of 12 months. Lest we forget, let's look at just a single year — 2001 — under this, the worst regime in America's history.


    Jan. 20, 2001: On the day of Bush's inauguration, his chief of staff issued a moratorium halting all new health, safety and environmental regulations issued in the final days of the Clinton administration.


    Jan. 23: Bush reinstates the global gag rule barring U.S. funding for abortion counseling abroad.


    Feb. 5: Bush suspends the "roadless rule," which protected 60 million acres of forests from logging and road-building.


    Feb. 17: Bush signs four


    See Beth Quinn page 18


    anti-union executive orders, including measures to prohibit project labor agreements at federal construction sites.


    March 7: At Bush's urging, Congress repeals ergomonic regulations designed to protect workers from repetitive-stress injuries.


    March 15: Bush abandons his campaign pledge to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.


    March 20: The Bush administration moves to overturn a regulation reducing the allowable levels of arsenic in drinking water.


    March 28: Bush backs out of the Kyoto treaty on global warming.


    March 29: Bush shuts down the White House Office for Women's Initiatives and Outreach.


    April 4: Bush's Department of Agriculture proposes lifting a requirment that all beef used in federal school lunch programs must be tested for salmonella.


    April 9: Bush's Department of Interior proposes a limit on lawsuits seeking protection of endangered species.


    May 11: Bush abandons the nation's international effort to crack down on offshore tax havens for the rich.


    May 16: Vice President Dick Cheney's task force releases its National Energy Policy report, calling for weaker environmental regulations and massive subsidies for the oil and gas, coal, and nuclear power industries.


    May 26: At Bush's urging, Congress passes a $1.35 trillion tax cut.


    June 19: Cheny refuses to release records of his energy task force meetings to the General Accounting Office.


    June 28: Attorney General John Ashcroft announces a policy that would require gun records be destroyed one day after a background check rather than 90 days later.


    July 9: Bush opposes a UN treaty to curb international trafficking in small arms and light weapons.


    July 26: Bush rejects an international treaty on germ warfare and biological weapons.


    Aug. 6: During the presidential daily briefing, Bush is warned that Osama bin Laden is determined to strike in the United States.


    Aug. 9: Bush limits stem cell research to existing lines.


    Sept. 11: Terrorists organized by bin Laden crash hijacked airliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, killing thousands.


    Sept. 22: Bush signs a $15 billion airline bailout.


    Oct. 26: Bush signs the USA Patriot Act.


    Oct. 29: Bush's Justice Department acknowledges but won't identify more than 1,000 individuals detained since the Sept. 11 attacks.


    Oc.t 31: Ashcroft authorizes monitoring of attorney-client conversations in terrorism investigations.


    Nov. 1: Bush issues an executive order blocking the release of presidential records.


    Nov. 13: Bush orders that "enemy combatants" be tried in military tribunals.


    Nov. 14: Bush's Justice Department issues regulations allowing illegal immigrants to be detained indefinitely.


    Dec. 11: The Bush White House recommends privatizing Social Security.


    Dec. 12: Bush announces that he intends to pull out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty unilaterally.


    Dec. 27: Bush repeals the "responsible contractor rule" that had required scrutiny of safety and environmental law violations in the awarding of federal contracts.


    There are 372 days left 'til Jan. 20, 2009. Let us hang onto hope for the future.


    Happy New Year to you too....
    As I said, I think it was probably a multitude of things, sick and fed up just pegged on the antiwar always bleak diatribe, it was the holidays and I am sure she was missing her son acutely, and the post, in my view and I don't have a son in Iraq, was very cold and matter of fact on an issue that is not matter of fact and calls in many human emotions...in short, she just had to vent. She did not expect war support. She was just tired of sitting there quiet. She may never post here again. All I was saying is that maybe that should have been taken into consideration and give her a pass that one time instead of coming back and slamming her. Just a little empathy would have been nice. That is all I was saying. I have defended liberals for going on once in awhile as well. And oddly, I have been criticized for that as well. LOL. Politics. Gotta love it.
    Yes, it has been the deadliest year...
    because the insurgency has been the strongest this year and their attacks on civilians have been horrendous. So, it makes sense for this to be the worst year. There were actually fewer deaths during the actual invasion than in the months after, both with soldiers and civilians. The insurgents and militias were not operating in the first months. And I agree mistakes were made, big ones. However, now, even the Iraqi government says attacks in Baghdad (car bombs, suicide bombers, rocket attacks, etc.) are down 70%. People are getting out and about again in major areas of Baghdad and there is some semblance of a normal life. That is a monumental achievement in comparsion to what it was. Are things perfect...no. Are things completely stable? No. But the article I posted by the independent journalist embedded witht he 82nd Airborne in Baghdad (who came in for the original surge in February and have been there since January གྷ)...the battalion he was with has suffered no deaths, not even any injuries since then. That is amazing. I guess, DW, I just get excited for the Iraqi people (and by that I mean the common folk like you and me) even with the "little" strides. I would like to be out of there too, trust me, I would. But I would rather we do everything we can to keep from having a blood bath like Viet Nam happen when we do leave. We are there, for whatever reason we got there, and you can't unscramble eggs. I still have hope that we can help stabilize it to the point that it is not so dangerous and I still have hope that the Iraqi people can find a way to pull together to help it happen faster. We may still have to pull out and bad things happen; there may be no way to avoid that. I just believe enough good is happening to keep that hope alive. Have a good weekend!
    I have a soon to be 9-year-old daughter and
    pregnancy and the allowance of it most certainly does concern me especially when McCain is in his 70s and not in the best of health already.  Yes, I was raised with family values and yes this absolutely does concern not only me but my husband as well.  Yes, this is a big focus right now on Governor Palin and her family values.  I'm only one voice, but one voice that is concerned about this teenage girl and it being "allowed" and "accepted."  This goes against any core family values I've learned my entire life.  Does this mean it's okay for her daughter?  Does this mean that this candidate will just "ignore" issues if she had to step in as President blaming us the country and not herself for her own misjudgements or her own "oversites?" 
    I was just 1 year shy of being able to vote at 21 then...sm
    but was very involved in the election. I couldn't wait to be able to vote for him after I was of age but we all know what happened with that. Then MLK and Bobby. I think that Obama has the same intellect and vision that Jack and Bobby had, as well as being very charismatic. I am glad to have a second chance to vote for someone with my vision for America.
    We both just graduated this year
    Him with a four year degree and me with my MT certificate. I am back in school finishing my psych degree I had originally started. Since he is a history major and the job market is pretty much frozen right now, he is having trouble finding a job. Therefore he works with his dad building houses for $300 a week like I previously stated. At the rate we are going I make $400 a week MTing (remember, I'm P/T because of school) So at $700 a week x 4 weeks a month =$2800 a month x 12 months = $33,600 dollars. Almost $10,000 more than last year, but still not a lot compared to most.

    Make sense?

    Now I'm sure when my husband does find a career position we will be substantially better, but for now, this is what we have, so this is what we work with. But I'm not going to come digging in your pockets so I can buy all the newest toys and gadgets!
    From a 13-year-old girl
    My daughter is in 8th grade. For the election, the students are to go to each candidate's web site and research the candidates, and then the students will vote (using a real voting booth - cool mom!)

    She told me that she started her research today, and she found that when she looked at Obama's web site it talked about his family and such, and then his proposals for change. When she went to McCain's web site, all she found initially, were negative things about Obama, and that was the main point of his web site, but on the sides, she could dig out a little more on the issues.

    She was wondering why people have to be so negative. She said, "Doesn't Gram (my mother) always say that when people spend all their time talking badly about other people, it is because they have nothing good to say about themselves?"

    She hasn't decided who she will vote for (but she is a tree-hugger of her own accord), and I think she will probably lean left.

    Anyway, I am now off to take a better look at the 2 web sites to see what I see.

    Peace,

    CB
    I bet within a year, you will be wondering WHY you
    nm
    when we got laid off last year, I
    moved the 401K to AARP who put it in all conservative bonds and I have lost about 2% of it this quarter.