In article >,
Sqwertz > wrote:

> Omelet > wrote:
>
> > In article >, Andy <q> wrote:
> >
> >> Wayne,
> >>
> >> Are we having a bad day?
> >>
> >> Andy
> >> "Living in the free world"
> >> --Neil Young
> >
> > No, you are a loser.
> >
> > And have been for quite some time.
>
> Ouch. At least there's a sentiment that you and Goomba can both
> agree on ;-)
>
> -sw

;-)
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

"Paul M. Cook" > wrote in news:g9v3uf$pee$1
@registered.motzarella.org:

> Saerah is right, when you lower income taxes, the net effect is to see
> increases in other taxes such as state and local because the federal
> revenues they receive are lowered so they have to raise taxes to sustain
> things like schools and infrastructure.

It's called downloading. A lot of that went on in Canada in the 90's with
or without tax cuts.

The "conservatives" feel that tax cuts are a good thing, putting money into
the hands of the individual, which would be fine if the individual was a
rational creature as most economic theories suppose. But experience
demonstrates that is not the case. Voting for tax reduction is voting
AGAINST your best interest. What governments used to fund from taxes, and
spread it out over the entire treasury, they will now come and get from
those involved directly. Want sewage repairs, you have to pay for them for
a number of years, a portion of your water bill... Want more police? Your
municipal taxes will rise accordingly. Schools? Same.

Only an idiot, or a consie, would suggest that pooling money for common
need is a bad thing.

In article >,
"cybercat" > wrote:

> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Omelet > wrote:
> >
> >> In article >, Andy <q> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Wayne,
> >>>
> >>> Are we having a bad day?
> >>>
> >>> Andy
> >>> "Living in the free world"
> >>> --Neil Young
> >>
> >> No, you are a loser.
> >>
> >> And have been for quite some time.
> >
> > Ouch. At least there's a sentiment that you and Goomba can both
> > agree on ;-)
> >
>
> And are probably somewhat expert on, from the point of view of the "it takes
> one to know one" crowd.

Pot calling the kettle black again sweetheart?

When did you turn into such an ass hole anyway?
You used to be entertaining.
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

Omelet > fnord
news
> In article >,
> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
>
>> > Are you really sure you want to vote for someone that REFUSES to
>> > salute the American Flag and has the above credentials ?
>>
>> Symbolism is not important as you might think.
>>
>> Paul
>
> Symbolism is more important than you think.
> It shows a treasonous attitude.
>
> My main beef with Obama is that he SUPPORTS the formation of a North
> American Union under the rule of the UN which would totally abolish
> the American Constitution.
>
> I don't need to provide sites. There are plenty of them on Google for
> this subject.
>
> He's a commie.

Um, actually, to quote Obama:

"I see no evidence of this actually taking place," he said. "I think
this is something that has been ginned up on certain blogs on the
internet".

Oh, and it's "cites", not "sites"

--
Saerah

"Welcome to Usenet, Biatch! Adapt or haul ass!"
- some hillbilly from FL

blake murphy wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 04:50:37 -0700, Bob Terwilliger wrote:
>
>> Paul wrote:
>>
>>> They have proposed releasing oil from the Strategtic Reserve, shot down by
>>> the republicans.
>> Much as I despise GWB and think he's an idiot and a tool, I have to agree
>> with him on this one. The Strategic Reserve exists to deal with a critical
>> shortage of oil, not as a mechanism for lowering oil prices.
>>
>> Bob
>
> i think you're right about this. the oil should be left there for
> something *really* catastrophic, not political diddling.
>
> blake


Do you think it's possible that we'll still have our "strategic oil"
supply when the rest of the world has run out of oil and has invented a
new energy source (which we WON'T have because we've got those huge oil
tanks full--what, a month's supply?--so we don't need no stinkin'
alternative.) We'll have the last oil in the world when no one else is
using oil because they're onto something better.

Oil is a finite resource and NOT finding something to replace it is
what's catastrophic.

gloria p

Omelet > fnord
news
> In article >, George Cebulka >
> wrote:
>
>> Omelet wrote:
>> > In article >,
>> > "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
>> >
>> >>> Are you really sure you want to vote for someone that REFUSES to
>> >>> salute the American Flag and has the above credentials ?
>> >> Symbolism is not important as you might think.
>> >>
>> >> Paul
>> >
>> > Symbolism is more important than you think.
>> > It shows a treasonous attitude.
>> >
>> > My main beef with Obama is that he SUPPORTS the formation of a
>> > North American Union under the rule of the UN which would totally
>> > abolish the American Constitution.
>> >
>> > I don't need to provide sites. There are plenty of them on Google
>> > for this subject.
>> >
>> > He's a commie.
>>
>> Where in the hell are you getting this from? Please provide some
>> references to back it up.
>
> Here. Take your pick, and ignore the bloggers:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/6majjz

Well, quotation marks might help. The conspiracy theory you speak of has
never been endorsed by Obama; all he's said is that the North American
countries need to have a different strategy to "advance the common
prosperity and security of all of the people of the Americas."

You really should read articles past the headlines, you might learn
something.

--
Saerah

"Welcome to Usenet, Biatch! Adapt or haul ass!"
- some hillbilly from FL

ChattyCathy > fnord news:ga0fke$nn3$1
@registered.motzarella.org:

> Paul M. Cook wrote:
>
>> Vogue magazine wrote about the dress Cindy McCain wore at the
>> RNC opening night party. A very private affair and she wore a
>> $300,000.00 dress. That is 6 years worth of before tax income for
>> the average American. And this is supposed to be the "common man."
I
>> don't think so.
>
> Good grief! She paid *HOW MUCH* for a dress? I could buy a nice house
> for that price 'round here. I thought wealthy movie stars didn't even
> spend that much for a single dress... Guess I'm, waaay behind the
> times. Sigh.

In all fairness, that total included her jewelry.

--
Saerah

"Welcome to Usenet, Biatch! Adapt or haul ass!"
- some hillbilly from FL

Omelet > fnord
news
> In article >,
> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
>
>> >> > Good grief! She paid *HOW MUCH* for a dress? I could buy a nice
>> >> > house for that price 'round here. I thought wealthy movie stars
>> >> > didn't even spend that much for a single dress... Guess I'm,
>> >> > waaay behind the times. Sigh.
>> >> > --
>> >>
>> >> An you know she is not going to ever wear it again.
>> >>
>> >> Paul
>> >
>> > And men put up with this from women... why? So they can wear
>> > Rolexes? <g>
>> >
>> > Seriously, if she spent HER money on it and not tax payers money,
>> > I'm ok with it. It's her money after all...
>> > and that makes jobs. :-)
>>
>>
>> With 300K of investment capital I could, in a good economy, start a
>> business that could employ 10 people in the first year and generate 2
>> million in revenue. And grow from there.
>>
>> This is the world of the rich. They do not spend it on things like
>> new businesses, they either horde it or blow it on trinkets. That is
>> their option I suppose but it dispels the myth that trickle don is a
>> viable economic practice.
>>
>> Paul
>
> It can work... but it depends on the individual.
> The trick is teaching them social consciousness.

why be socially conscious when you can buy a yacht?

--
Saerah

"Welcome to Usenet, Biatch! Adapt or haul ass!"
- some hillbilly from FL

"cybercat" > fnord
:

>
> "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Ed wrote:
>>
>>>> We already spend more on out military than thenext 60 countries
>>>> combined.
>>>
>>> Places like Luxemburg, Andorra, San Martino are hard pressed to keep
>>> up with us.
>>
>>
>> "How many tanks does the Pope have?" --Stalin
>>
>>
>> Bob, who's *been* to San Marino, and knows how it's spelled
>
> Leave it to a vacuous, puffed up piece of shit like you to employ a
> typo lame when he can't counter the argument. Yes, I know, I'm a crack
> whore who's just jealous of an ugly, ugly mother****er. Ugly inside,
> ugly outside, and one foot in the grave from what I hear.
>
>

Uh, this part of the thread wasn't about *you*.

--
Saerah

"Welcome to Usenet, Biatch! Adapt or haul ass!"
- some hillbilly from FL

Omelet > wrote in
news
> Ignorant ass hole... I can't even afford Physical therapy,
> or the Cardiologist my internal med doctor wants me to see.

i have a really good PT, & she's only $65/hour... sorry i
don't know any cardiologists, but if you need an oncologist or
an oncology surgeon, i can give you some names.
lee
--
Last night while sitting in my chair
I pinged a host that wasn't there
It wasn't there again today
The host resolved to NSA.

sf fnord :

> On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 13:27:02 -0700, Pan > wrote:
>
>>And what was the unemployment percentage until the last year.
>>And what is the historical comparison. And also consider if we got rid
>>of the 5% of the workforce that is illegal aliens ( which is up
>>tremendously since 2000) , what our unemployment rate would be?
>
> Our native unemployed will not do what they do. If they did, there
> would be no jobs for immigrants to fill and there's the logical end of
> the illegal immigration problem.
>
>

But, but... you make too much sense!

--
Saerah

"Welcome to Usenet, Biatch! Adapt or haul ass!"
- some hillbilly from FL

Omelet > wrote in
news
> We don't have reliable public transportation where I live.
> I wish we did.

yes, we can drive 30 miles to get public transportation...

> Except for taxis, and that costs more than gas does.

we don't even have taxis. i suppose they'd come if you called,
but you'd have to pay for the drive out from the city.

lee
--
Last night while sitting in my chair
I pinged a host that wasn't there
It wasn't there again today
The host resolved to NSA.

Omelet > wrote:

> And the guy hitting on you was kinda cute. <eg>

He was? I didn't even notice that part. I just remember his
haircut reminded me of Gary Oldman's in the The Fifth Element.

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z...rgSmokes-1.jpg

ObFood: I've got some of that no-knead bread in the oven baking.
I've had mixed results as far as the taste factor goes. Otherwise,
they're beautiful looking loaves.

-sw

"Saerah Gray" > wrote in message
. 102...
> "cybercat" > fnord
> :
>
>>
>> "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Ed wrote:
>>>
>>>>> We already spend more on out military than thenext 60 countries
>>>>> combined.
>>>>
>>>> Places like Luxemburg, Andorra, San Martino are hard pressed to keep
>>>> up with us.
>>>
>>>
>>> "How many tanks does the Pope have?" --Stalin
>>>
>>>
>>> Bob, who's *been* to San Marino, and knows how it's spelled
>>
>> Leave it to a vacuous, puffed up piece of shit like you to employ a
>> typo lame when he can't counter the argument. Yes, I know, I'm a crack
>> whore who's just jealous of an ugly, ugly mother****er. Ugly inside,
>> ugly outside, and one foot in the grave from what I hear.
>>
>>
>
> Uh, this part of the thread wasn't about *you*.
>
I was simply giving Bob's stock flame. Please try to keep up.

In article >,
blake murphy > wrote:

> On Sun, 07 Sep 2008 09:16:34 -0500, Omelet wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
> >
> >> Did you know McCain begged to be Kerry's running mate? Did you know in 01
> >> he was poised to switch to the democrat party but then Jim Jeffords went
> >> Independent and McCain got ****ed and pulled out of the deal? He's not
> >> what
> >> he would like you to think he is.
> >
> > Many of us already know McCain is a RINO.
> >
> > I don't hold it against him...
>
> how 'centrist' of you.
>
> blake

Thank you.

Frankly, I'm sick of partisanship.
Let's work for AMERICANS, not the f-ing "parties".

I never have been a partisan voter.
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

In article >,
Goomba > wrote:

> Michael "Dog3" wrote:
>
> > I suppose her expenditures support a few, select jobs. How many minimum
> > wage employees did it take to make the jewelry or the gown?
> >
> > Michael
>
> So you do begrudge her spending her own money....?

I don't.
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

In article >,
Gloria P > wrote:

> blake murphy wrote:
> > On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 04:50:37 -0700, Bob Terwilliger wrote:
> >
> >> Paul wrote:
> >>
> >>> They have proposed releasing oil from the Strategtic Reserve, shot down
> >>> by
> >>> the republicans.
> >> Much as I despise GWB and think he's an idiot and a tool, I have to agree
> >> with him on this one. The Strategic Reserve exists to deal with a critical
> >> shortage of oil, not as a mechanism for lowering oil prices.
> >>
> >> Bob
> >
> > i think you're right about this. the oil should be left there for
> > something *really* catastrophic, not political diddling.
> >
> > blake
>
>
> Do you think it's possible that we'll still have our "strategic oil"
> supply when the rest of the world has run out of oil and has invented a
> new energy source (which we WON'T have because we've got those huge oil
> tanks full--what, a month's supply?--so we don't need no stinkin'
> alternative.) We'll have the last oil in the world when no one else is
> using oil because they're onto something better.
>
> Oil is a finite resource and NOT finding something to replace it is
> what's catastrophic.
>
> gloria p

I don't think anyone will argue with that.
The problem is, we need relief now. It will take time to develop other
resources.
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

Omelet > fnord
news
> In article >,
> "Giusi" > wrote:
>
>> --
>> http://www.judithgreenwood.com
>> > "Omelet" > ha scritto nel messaggio
>> > newsmpomelet-
>> >
>> >> I have thyroid issues. I need to keep my thermostat at 72. ;-)
>> >
>> > I do not even have a thyroid and I have never heard this suggested
>> > as the mildest of help. In thirty years of treatment in three
>> > countries, no one has told me to override my body's thermostatic
>> > abilities. My two sisters, both medical professionals, also are
>> > being treated for thyroid problems and they also never heard of
>> > this.
>
> Huh?
>
> I keep it at 72 for personal comfort. It's has nothing to do with
> treatment! My medication tends to make me feel hot, and I don't like
> that.
>
> Period.

You said you *need* to keep it at 72. You don't. You made it sound as if
your condition required you to keep the air on.

--
Saerah

"Welcome to Usenet, Biatch! Adapt or haul ass!"
- some hillbilly from FL

In article > ,
Saerah Gray > wrote:

> >> This is the world of the rich. They do not spend it on things like
> >> new businesses, they either horde it or blow it on trinkets. That is
> >> their option I suppose but it dispels the myth that trickle don is a
> >> viable economic practice.
> >>
> >> Paul
> >
> > It can work... but it depends on the individual.
> > The trick is teaching them social consciousness.
>
> why be socially conscious when you can buy a yacht?
>
> --
> Saerah

Why not?
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

In article >,
enigma > wrote:

> Omelet > wrote in
> news >
> > Ignorant ass hole... I can't even afford Physical therapy,
> > or the Cardiologist my internal med doctor wants me to see.
>
> i have a really good PT, & she's only $65/hour... sorry i
> don't know any cardiologists, but if you need an oncologist or
> an oncology surgeon, i can give you some names.
> lee

I can't afford $65.00 per hour, but thanks anyway.
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

In article > ,
Saerah Gray > wrote:

> "cybercat" > fnord
> :
>
> >
> > "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> Ed wrote:
> >>
> >>>> We already spend more on out military than thenext 60 countries
> >>>> combined.
> >>>
> >>> Places like Luxemburg, Andorra, San Martino are hard pressed to keep
> >>> up with us.
> >>
> >>
> >> "How many tanks does the Pope have?" --Stalin
> >>
> >>
> >> Bob, who's *been* to San Marino, and knows how it's spelled
> >
> > Leave it to a vacuous, puffed up piece of shit like you to employ a
> > typo lame when he can't counter the argument. Yes, I know, I'm a crack
> > whore who's just jealous of an ugly, ugly mother****er. Ugly inside,
> > ugly outside, and one foot in the grave from what I hear.
> >
> >
>
> Uh, this part of the thread wasn't about *you*.

She thinks everything is about her.
When the hell did she become so conceited?
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

In article >,
enigma > wrote:

> Omelet > wrote in
> news >
> > We don't have reliable public transportation where I live.
> > I wish we did.
>
> yes, we can drive 30 miles to get public transportation...

My job is only 16 miles.

>
> > Except for taxis, and that costs more than gas does.
>
> we don't even have taxis. i suppose they'd come if you called,
> but you'd have to pay for the drive out from the city.
>
> lee

Yes.
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

Omelet > wrote in
news
> The problem is, we need relief now. It will take time to
> develop other resources.

what we need is someone with an alternate energy vision akin
to JFK's space race vision. developing technology doesn't
occur in a vacuum, it needs funding. and yes, funding means
taxes.
look at all the things that came out of the space race
though... it was money well spent.

lee
--
Last night while sitting in my chair
I pinged a host that wasn't there
It wasn't there again today
The host resolved to NSA.

In article >,
Sqwertz > wrote:

> Omelet > wrote:
>
> > And the guy hitting on you was kinda cute. <eg>
>
> He was? I didn't even notice that part. I just remember his
> haircut reminded me of Gary Oldman's in the The Fifth Element.
>
> http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z...rgSmokes-1.jpg

<giggles> Needs bigger earrings tho'.

>
> ObFood: I've got some of that no-knead bread in the oven baking.
> I've had mixed results as far as the taste factor goes. Otherwise,
> they're beautiful looking loaves.
>
> -sw

You will post pics on a.b.f.?

I have a backlog. Just been too beat lately to set them up. :-P

I'd have taken you shopping yesterday, but seriously, it really does
hurt to try to drive long distance right now, and I'm always broke at
the beginning of the month when morgage and utilities are due...
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

In article > ,
Saerah Gray > wrote:

> Omelet > fnord
> news >
> > In article >,
> > "Giusi" > wrote:
> >
> >> --
> >> http://www.judithgreenwood.com
> >> > "Omelet" > ha scritto nel messaggio
> >> > newsmpomelet-
> >> >
> >> >> I have thyroid issues. I need to keep my thermostat at 72. ;-)
> >> >
> >> > I do not even have a thyroid and I have never heard this suggested
> >> > as the mildest of help. In thirty years of treatment in three
> >> > countries, no one has told me to override my body's thermostatic
> >> > abilities. My two sisters, both medical professionals, also are
> >> > being treated for thyroid problems and they also never heard of
> >> > this.
> >
> > Huh?
> >
> > I keep it at 72 for personal comfort. It's has nothing to do with
> > treatment! My medication tends to make me feel hot, and I don't like
> > that.
> >
> > Period.
>
> You said you *need* to keep it at 72. You don't. You made it sound as if
> your condition required you to keep the air on.

It's for personal comfort...
I hate being HOT.
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

In article >,
enigma > wrote:

> Omelet > wrote in
> news >
> > The problem is, we need relief now. It will take time to
> > develop other resources.
>
> what we need is someone with an alternate energy vision akin
> to JFK's space race vision. developing technology doesn't
> occur in a vacuum, it needs funding. and yes, funding means
> taxes.
> look at all the things that came out of the space race
> though... it was money well spent.
>
> lee

25% of my income already goes to taxes.

Any more and I'll be homeless.
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

Omelet > fnord
news
> In article > ,
> Saerah Gray > wrote:
>
>> Omelet > fnord
>> news >>
>> > In article >,
>> > "Giusi" > wrote:
>> >
>> >> --
>> >> http://www.judithgreenwood.com
>> >> > "Omelet" > ha scritto nel messaggio
>> >> > newsmpomelet-
>> >> >
>> >> >> I have thyroid issues. I need to keep my thermostat at 72. ;-)
>> >> >
>> >> > I do not even have a thyroid and I have never heard this
>> >> > suggested as the mildest of help. In thirty years of treatment
>> >> > in three countries, no one has told me to override my body's
>> >> > thermostatic abilities. My two sisters, both medical
>> >> > professionals, also are being treated for thyroid problems and
>> >> > they also never heard of this.
>> >
>> > Huh?
>> >
>> > I keep it at 72 for personal comfort. It's has nothing to do with
>> > treatment! My medication tends to make me feel hot, and I don't
>> > like that.
>> >
>> > Period.
>>
>> You said you *need* to keep it at 72. You don't. You made it sound as
>> if your condition required you to keep the air on.
>
> It's for personal comfort...
> I hate being HOT.

I'm with you on that. I wear short sleeves in the winter.

--
Saerah

"Welcome to Usenet, Biatch! Adapt or haul ass!"
- some hillbilly from FL

"Pan" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 06:57:42 -0700, "Paul M. Cook" >
> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>And McCain voted with him 90 percent of the time. That is very important,
>>Om. McSame is Bush. There is no difference.
>>
>>Paul
>>
> Paul that is Dem rhetoric. With out unanimous votes, ect, he agrees
> with Bush about 45% of the time. Or the same amount of time as Obama
> if you count the number of time he voted within the unanimous vote.

No it was in one of his own commercials. It is not rhetoric at all it is his
voting record. You're quoting a falsehood, not me.

Paul
> :-)

Saerah Gray wrote:
> Omelet > fnord
> news >
>
>>In article > ,
>> Saerah Gray > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Omelet > fnord
>>>news >>>
>>>
>>>>In article >,
>>>> "Giusi" > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>--
>>>>>http://www.judithgreenwood.com
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Omelet" > ha scritto nel messaggio
>>>>>>newsmpomelet-
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I have thyroid issues. I need to keep my thermostat at 72. ;-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I do not even have a thyroid and I have never heard this
>>>>>>suggested as the mildest of help. In thirty years of treatment
>>>>>>in three countries, no one has told me to override my body's
>>>>>>thermostatic abilities. My two sisters, both medical
>>>>>>professionals, also are being treated for thyroid problems and
>>>>>>they also never heard of this.
>>>>
>>>>Huh?
>>>>
>>>>I keep it at 72 for personal comfort. It's has nothing to do with
>>>>treatment! My medication tends to make me feel hot, and I don't
>>>>like that.
>>>>
>>>>Period.
>>>
>>>You said you *need* to keep it at 72. You don't. You made it sound as
>>>if your condition required you to keep the air on.
>>
>>It's for personal comfort...
>>I hate being HOT.
>
>
> I'm with you on that. I wear short sleeves in the winter.

I'm miserable all summer long, wear shorts and sandals with a sweatshirt
or fleece tunic until outdoor temps drop below 35. My husband runs
around bumping the thermostat up in the name of ecomomy, even though I'm
sweating buckets, but in the winter I won't let him get away with that.

"Oh, no, Mr. Economy. I think not. Take your fingers off the dial and
go put a freakin' sweater on."

Fortunately two of his sisters are currently dealing with the same suite
of symptoms and they have backed me up so he knows damned good and well
that I'm not just being difficult.

"Pan" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 06:15:46 -0700, "Paul M. Cook" >
> wrote:
>
>
>>>> We get most of our oil from Venezuela. Way more than the ME. In a
>>>> crisis
>>>> we can temporarily nationalize oil companies and redirect 100% of
>>>> production
>>>> for domestic use. It has been done before.
>>>>
>>>> Paul
>>>
>>> So lets do it now and give the American people a break!
>>> --
>>
>>McCain would not agree. You may convince Obama though.
>>
>>Paul
>>
> I have no doubt that you could convince Obama to nationalize oil
> companies, that is the socialist way.

It's only been done ver briefly and only during WWII I believe. It doesn;t
matter if Obama were Karl Marc he could never do anything like that. The
president, much as Bush would disagree, is not a dictator.

Paul

"Pan" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 23:44:30 -0700, "Paul M. Cook" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Omelet" > wrote in message
>>news
>>> In article >,
>>> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote:
>>>
>>>> A better question is just how are we going to pay for 9 trillion
>>>> dollars
>>>> in
>>>> republican debt?
>>>
>>> Drill for oil in Alaska.
>>> --
>>
>>They already do. Lots of it. Millions of barrels per year. They sell it
>>all to Japan. If we want to use it, we have to buy it back from Japan or
>>the commodities market. They being those oil companies who have
>>extraction
>>rights that include no strings attached as to who gets it. Alaska
>>gasoline
>>is very expensive easily double what we pay now. Why do you suppose that
>>is? More drilling makes Exxon richer but does nothing to lower our
>>national
>>debt. You seem to think we have nationalized oil companies when in fact
>>they are multi-national corporations. They are not even American
>>companies,
>>they just incorporate here.
>>
>>Paul
>>
> So Paul if we sell it to Japan do we get a lower price per gallon then
> we pay for it?
> Or do we buy it at the world price, and sell it at the world price?
> I think that a wash.

"We" get nothing for it. The oil belongs to the lease holders of the
fields. This is something very few people can comprehend. "We" do not own
the oil, "they" do.

Paul

In article >,
Kathleen > wrote:

> Saerah Gray wrote:
> > Omelet > fnord
> > news > >
> >
> >>In article > ,
> >> Saerah Gray > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Omelet > fnord
> >>>news > >>>
> >>>
> >>>>In article >,
> >>>> "Giusi" > wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>--
> >>>>>http://www.judithgreenwood.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>"Omelet" > ha scritto nel messaggio
> >>>>>>newsmpomelet-
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>I have thyroid issues. I need to keep my thermostat at 72. ;-)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I do not even have a thyroid and I have never heard this
> >>>>>>suggested as the mildest of help. In thirty years of treatment
> >>>>>>in three countries, no one has told me to override my body's
> >>>>>>thermostatic abilities. My two sisters, both medical
> >>>>>>professionals, also are being treated for thyroid problems and
> >>>>>>they also never heard of this.
> >>>>
> >>>>Huh?
> >>>>
> >>>>I keep it at 72 for personal comfort. It's has nothing to do with
> >>>>treatment! My medication tends to make me feel hot, and I don't
> >>>>like that.
> >>>>
> >>>>Period.
> >>>
> >>>You said you *need* to keep it at 72. You don't. You made it sound as
> >>>if your condition required you to keep the air on.
> >>
> >>It's for personal comfort...
> >>I hate being HOT.
> >
> >
> > I'm with you on that. I wear short sleeves in the winter.
>
> I'm miserable all summer long, wear shorts and sandals with a sweatshirt
> or fleece tunic until outdoor temps drop below 35. My husband runs
> around bumping the thermostat up in the name of ecomomy, even though I'm
> sweating buckets, but in the winter I won't let him get away with that.
>
> "Oh, no, Mr. Economy. I think not. Take your fingers off the dial and
> go put a freakin' sweater on."
>
> Fortunately two of his sisters are currently dealing with the same suite
> of symptoms and they have backed me up so he knows damned good and well
> that I'm not just being difficult.

My thermostat wars during the summer are legion with my 76 year old dad.
;-) I'll come home from work in the morning in the middle of summer and
find the damned heat on.
--
Peace! Om

"If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed." --Mark Twain

"Michel Boucher" > wrote in message
...
> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in news:g9v3uf$pee$1
> @registered.motzarella.org:
>
>> Saerah is right, when you lower income taxes, the net effect is to see
>> increases in other taxes such as state and local because the federal
>> revenues they receive are lowered so they have to raise taxes to sustain
>> things like schools and infrastructure.
>
> It's called downloading. A lot of that went on in Canada in the 90's with
> or without tax cuts.
>
> The "conservatives" feel that tax cuts are a good thing, putting money
> into
> the hands of the individual, which would be fine if the individual was a
> rational creature as most economic theories suppose. But experience
> demonstrates that is not the case. Voting for tax reduction is voting
> AGAINST your best interest. What governments used to fund from taxes, and
> spread it out over the entire treasury, they will now come and get from
> those involved directly. Want sewage repairs, you have to pay for them
> for
> a number of years, a portion of your water bill... Want more police?
> Your
> municipal taxes will rise accordingly. Schools? Same.
>
> Only an idiot, or a consie, would suggest that pooling money for common
> need is a bad thing.


Yet the republicans win elections that way over and over again. How about
cash strapped states selling infrastructure like roads and highways to
foreign companies who then make them toll roads. Your tax money built it
and now you have to pay even more to use it so the private company makes a
profit running it whereas before your 18 cents a gallon gas tax paid that.
Which you still pay.

Paul

Omelet wrote:

> In article >,
> Kathleen > wrote:
>
>
>>Saerah Gray wrote:
>>
>>>Omelet > fnord
>>>news >>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>In article > ,
>>>>Saerah Gray > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Omelet > fnord
>>>>>news >>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>In article >,
>>>>>>"Giusi" > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>--
>>>>>>>http://www.judithgreenwood.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"Omelet" > ha scritto nel messaggio
>>>>>>>>newsmpomelet-
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I have thyroid issues. I need to keep my thermostat at 72. ;-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I do not even have a thyroid and I have never heard this
>>>>>>>>suggested as the mildest of help. In thirty years of treatment
>>>>>>>>in three countries, no one has told me to override my body's
>>>>>>>>thermostatic abilities. My two sisters, both medical
>>>>>>>>professionals, also are being treated for thyroid problems and
>>>>>>>>they also never heard of this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Huh?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I keep it at 72 for personal comfort. It's has nothing to do with
>>>>>>treatment! My medication tends to make me feel hot, and I don't
>>>>>>like that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Period.
>>>>>
>>>>>You said you *need* to keep it at 72. You don't. You made it sound as
>>>>>if your condition required you to keep the air on.
>>>>
>>>>It's for personal comfort...
>>>>I hate being HOT.
>>>
>>>
>>>I'm with you on that. I wear short sleeves in the winter.
>>
>>I'm miserable all summer long, wear shorts and sandals with a sweatshirt
>>or fleece tunic until outdoor temps drop below 35. My husband runs
>>around bumping the thermostat up in the name of ecomomy, even though I'm
>>sweating buckets, but in the winter I won't let him get away with that.
>>
>>"Oh, no, Mr. Economy. I think not. Take your fingers off the dial and
>>go put a freakin' sweater on."
>>
>>Fortunately two of his sisters are currently dealing with the same suite
>>of symptoms and they have backed me up so he knows damned good and well
>>that I'm not just being difficult.
>
>
> My thermostat wars during the summer are legion with my 76 year old dad.
> ;-) I'll come home from work in the morning in the middle of summer and
> find the damned heat on.

Can you say "justifiable homicide"?

"Pan" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 6 Sep 2008 16:32:29 -0700, "Paul M. Cook" >
> wrote:
>>
>>A better question is just how are we going to pay for 9 trillion dollars
>>in
>>republican debt?
> What percentage of the GNP is the debt? And how that compare to the
> past?
>
>> Bush's tax cuts were supposed to generate 1.5
>>million jobs. We lost 3 million instead.
>
> And what was the unemployment percentage until the last year.
> And what is the historical comparison. And also consider if we got rid
> of the 5% of the workforce that is illegal aliens ( which is up
> tremendously since 2000) , what our unemployment rate would be?

Well one way I know they fudge the figure is to now include anyone with any
W2 wages. Before you had to be part time or better. Now just 2 hours a
week sweeping floors and you are counted in the empolyed column.

And you can ask that last question of the apple growers in Washington. They
can't hire people to pick their apples and they are rotting on trees.
Nobody seems to want to do that kind of tedious manual labor. Few Americans
are willing to pick tomatoes in 100 degree weather all day. They don't,
contrary to misperception, flock into those jobs when the illegals are
pulled out.

Paul

Paul M. Cook wrote:

>
>> So Paul if we sell it to Japan do we get a lower price per gallon then
>> we pay for it?
>> Or do we buy it at the world price, and sell it at the world price?
>> I think that a wash.
>
> "We" get nothing for it. The oil belongs to the lease holders of the
> fields. This is something very few people can comprehend. "We" do not own
> the oil, "they" do.

So.... by paying a few dollars for mineral rights on property that other
people may own, and that other people drill and extract, they may get
millions of dollars????

Michel Boucher wrote:

> The "conservatives" feel that tax cuts are a good thing, putting money into
> the hands of the individual, which would be fine if the individual was a
> rational creature as most economic theories suppose.

It's a scam, and it is designed to suit the political agenda of the
right. I worked for a government ministry (transportation) that
downsized and outsourced. It appeals to those who assume that whatever
civil servants do can be done cheaper and more efficiently by the public
sector. It doesn't really matter than they they never reveal the figures
to show what a farce it is.

First of all, the province downloaded a lot of provincial highways to
municipalities, either cities, towns or regional municipalities.
Thousands of miles of provincial highways became cit. town or regional
roads. The province then had that many thousands of miles less to take
care of, and that automatically led to a drastic cut in the amount of
money they needed to look after their roads.

While the province looked good on paper for cutting their operating
expenses, they could then deflect blame to the regions and towns for
their increased costs. Of course their cost soared. They had so many
more miles of roads to look after. Meanwhile, the province is
subsidizing the municipalities for their roads. downloading didn't save
the province any money at all. It just shifted the blame for rising
costs to the municipalities which were given <?> the roads that the
province dumped.

Then there was the privatization of the work. Because private
enterprise is supposedly so much more efficient, they got rid of the
government workers and contracted the work to private companies. The
political agenda dictates that idea that private companies are efficient
and competitive. The truth of the matter is that there are a limited
number of companies that have the resources to bid on those jobs, and
there is a lot of confusion. They rig their bids.

To give you an example of the money saved <?>, the winter maintenance
contract at one of our highway maintenance yards was $650,000 to provide
the sanders and two snow plows to supplement the ministry;s 4 plow trucks.

When it comes to plowing and sanding, the sanders are out a lot more
than the plows. They are sent out to sand in light snows when plows are
never needed. They are sent out before, during and after plowing
operations, so they perform close to 80% of all winter maintenance
operations. When the ministry got rid of their last plows, accounting
for less than 20% of winter maintenance operations and all sanding,
salting and plowing operations, the contract price doubled. The
contractors took on less than 20% extra work and the cost increased by
100%. And if that weren't bad enough, the contractors do a horrible job.
When I worked on a plow crew, we used to be able to keep the highways
open even in the worst weather. Now we find highways closed in bad
weather.

"Michael "Dog3"" > wrote in message
. ..
> Goomba > : in
> rec.food.cooking
>
>> She didn't pay that much for a dress. Lots of sour grapes being
>> reported, IMO.
>> Her entire outfit (including family jewelry) was priced out. The dress
>> was an Oscar de Lorenta and did cost a couple notes but it was the
>> family jewels were what jacked up the price of the "outfit". Some seem
>> to hold it against her that she inherited oodles of money from her
>> father and dares to ....spend it!
>> I consider her spending money a good thing. It provides jobs for people,
>> right?
>
> I suppose her expenditures support a few, select jobs. How many minimum
> wage employees did it take to make the jewelry or the gown?
>

None, she had it outsourced to China.

Paul

"Goomba" > wrote in message
...
> Michael "Dog3" wrote:
>
>> I suppose her expenditures support a few, select jobs. How many minimum
>> wage employees did it take to make the jewelry or the gown?
>>
>> Michael
>
> So you do begrudge her spending her own money....?
>

Nobody does. But as Peggy Noonan called it, "a bullshit narrative" doesn't
play will with them because that is not what they are. They cannot claim
any connection to the people they want to vote for them. You cannot claim
to know the fears of losing your home when you do not even know how many you
own yourself. They are out of touch. They are members of a class that like
it or not looks down on the rest of us. Any community organizer will tell
you that these people will gladly contribute money for an exclusive art
museum but they will not spend a dime on after school programs to keep kids
off the streets. That is the way they are with few exceptions. So to try
to make yourself out to be just another guy, that is a bullshit narrative.
And they time and time again get into office just that way and then from day
1 actively push legislation that has quite the opposite effect as what they
promised everyone.

Paul

"cybercat" > wrote in message
...
>
> "George Cebulka" > wrote
>>>
>>> George, if McSame gets in those guys aren't going anywhere. I wager
>>> Cheney will be retained as a "consultant."
>>>
>>> Paul
>>
>> Now that is a scary thought....

They've already prepared the life body suit and the respirator mask.

Paul
>
> Hopefully he won't last that long.
>