World's Biggest PAC-Man |

http://www.worldstart.com/worlds-biggest-pac-man/

 

 

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

US Stability Police Force on the Way

http://moonbattery.com/?p=47

 

 

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Fwd: Judge Napolitano: An Open Letter to Boehner

                                  http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=210274

 

Judge Napolitano: An Open Letter to Boehner

An Open Letter to Boehner Judge Napolitano: An Open Letter to Boehner .Judge Napolitano: An Open Letter to Boehner Judge Andrew Napolitano extends his thoughts to Speaker of the House, John Boehner, in an open letter concerning the looming debt ceiling deadline and the struggle for sanity on Capitol Hill. Dear Mr. Speaker, When the Founders at the Constitution Conventional in 1787 created the House of Representatives, it was fashioned to act as the voice of the people within the institutional checks and balances of the Federal Government. That's why the entire House faces reelection every 2 years. That's why Constitutionally, you don't have to even be a member of Congress to serve as speaker. And that's why the Constitution allows for thousands of members of the House for our current population. It is the people's house, and the people spoke last November. They cried out against a government completely out of control. After President Bush grew the U.S. debt by $7 trillion dollars in 8 years in office, and President Obama added $4 Trillion in just 2 years in office, the people cried out against big-government policies that are sabotaging the economy and taking over our lives. And because they cried out, you are no longer just John Boehner from Ohio. You are now the second in line to succeed to the presidency. You are the Speaker of the House of Representatives. Mr. Speaker, the House of Representatives has just 8 working days left before the August 2nd debt ceiling deadline, and by wide margins in whatever way the question is asked, Americans do not want to see the debt ceiling raised. They're sick and tired of paying interest on borrowed money; money borrowed in their name. The Federal Government borrows so much money from so many sources, Mr. Speaker, that no-one knows for sure just how much it owes to its lenders. It already appears that it has exceeded the legal limit set by the congress at $14.294 trillion, and they actually at this moment in time are closer to $14.5 trillion. The White House is putting intense pressure on you and on Congress to raise that limit. The President's apologists have even suggested invoking the 14th amendment to bypass the will of Congress and borrow money without legal authority. Given the way the White House has run roughshod over your House in the matter of the "not-war" in Libya that our military is still "not" engaged in, the word of the President's lawyers that there is no presidential power in the 14th amendment to borrow money on his own can hardly be trusted. This is a president who does not regard the Constitution as a limit on the exercise of governmental power. But the President can only get away with violating the Constitution, Mr. Speaker, if you let him do so. If you stand up for the will of the people, you will restrain him. This is the moment of truth for the Congress, Mr. Speaker. The scare-mongers and the chicken-littles in DC will tell you that the sky will come tumbling down if the debt ceiling isn't raised, even though your colleagues, Senator Pat Toomey and Rep. Tom McClintock, have introduced legislation that would prevent the United States from defaulting on its debt obligations. I have two words for you, Mr. Speaker. Stop it. That's right, just stop it. For too long our government has spent beyond its means and in our names, sinking us and generations as yet unborn into deeper and deeper debt. And you, Mr. Speaker, can stop it. The President stands with the big-business, big-banks, big-government complex, and against the American people. He's even prepared to defy the laws of economics. But the American people are not ignorant as he thinks they are, and you know that. Mr. Speaker, you have the opportunity to do something that no standard bearer of small government has ever been able to do in our modern era; get the government to live within its means. You can do it by standing firm with your colleagues in the Congress who are leading the call for change. You can stop it. You can force the Federal Government to make the difficult decisions to bring itself within its means and begin to loosen the chains of debt that have been foisted on our country by a centuries worth of progressive big-government architects. End it this summer, Mr. Speaker. Stop it. Tell the President, "not a penny more." Stand up for the American people, bring government within its means, and begin the restoration of our republic. If you do this Mr. Speaker, if you restrain the federal beast, you will become one of history's great champions and heroes of freedom. If you don't, we'll all go through this again the next time a president wants to spend beyond the government's means and chain us all down to more debt. Mr. Speaker, don't let us down. -Judge Andrew P. Napolitano

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Rupert Empire going to hell!

Thanks for that enlightening update Steve! 

 

Do you take credit cards?

 

For the crack rock you sell?

 

 

 

 

On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 12:06 AM, Stephen Stink <not4udude@yahoo.com> wrote:

Yep....Have you watch Fox news lately? Hee! Hee! Talk about denial?
Whaoooo! They act like nothing is going on! Stupid fools! Meshell
Bachmann husband is queer as a 3 dollar bill! Obama has power! KOCH
BROTHERS ARE LOSING MONEY!!!! Tea Fags are angry honkeys and sad too.
republicans have no power!!!! Don'tcha just love it?
Wheeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Rupert Empire going to hell!

Yep....Have you watch Fox news lately? Hee! Hee! Talk about denial?
Whaoooo! They act like nothing is going on! Stupid fools! Meshell
Bachmann husband is queer as a 3 dollar bill! Obama has power! KOCH
BROTHERS ARE LOSING MONEY!!!! Tea Fags are angry honkeys and sad too.
republicans have no power!!!! Don'tcha just love it?
Wheeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: questions remaining after your 100th townhall

Hey Dan,

 

Three bucks,  Gold Fringed Flags in Court rooms; terms like "[f]ederation of [S]tates, and the distinciton between the "U.S." and the "U.S.A." will get you, the "Patriot/Militiamen/Tax Protest Crew" a cup of coffee at Starbucks.  Moreover,  when you start studying some of the concepts that you are obviously studying,  (and I salute you for doing so!)  you are gonna find a bunch of holes.   Many of them are bullet holes from the U.S.D.O.J.

 

Be careful!

 

Keith

On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:17 PM, Daniel Seigler <danielseigler@hotmail.com> wrote:

Sir,
    At your townhall meeting on Sunday 17July, i asked you a few questions and your answers, though honest (i hope) were not sufficient in content.  So i ask them again, giving you the opportunity to research your answers.
 
    Let's start with something easy.  Is the federation of states referred to as the United States of America still working under the contract ratified in 1787?  A simple question, requiring a simple answer.  Yes or no.  No other comments are needed at the moment.
 
    We can all pretty much agree that the federation governing body is spending way too much money.  We can also pretty much agree that one should be compensated for work performed.  With the need for the federation governing body to cut it's spending, will you be taking a voluntary pay/perk cut?
 
    Assuming we ARE still working under the contract mentioned earlier, "All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives;"{ARticle I, section 7, paragraph 1} so how does the Senate Constitutionally justify deficit spending?  Granted, spending is not revenue, but the separation was placed to insure that no one branch would make law that cost the citizen more than his Representative agreed to.  Therefore, by deficit spending, the Senate has determined that the House will raise revenue whether it is a good idea or not. 
 
    Does your Office of Senator for Oregon  view the USC (United States Code) as the code of law for the United States or for the United States of America?  If it is for the United States, which the Congress has exclusive Legislative power over {Article I, Section 8, paragraph 17}, then isn't compelling the states to abide by such law against said contract?
 
    Speaking of the USC, why does it include WashingtonDC, Peurto Rico, Northern Marianas, or any territory or possession as a state, in direct conflict with the Constitution for these United States of America?  And what does your office intend to do to correct this unlawful event?
 
    And finally, for the moment, if Congress did NOT declare war against Lybia, and the initial NATO attack was NOT in DIRECT response to an attack on one of these United States of America, and the attack of Pearl Harbor was an act of war on the part of the Nipponese, WHY is Mr. Obama not being impeached and tried for treason?




sign me
daniel karl seigler, born in Fort Benning, Cussetta County, Georgia, son of
Clarance Roland O'Neil Seigler, born in Ozark, Dale County, Alabama, son of
Thomas Malcolm Seigler, born somewhere in Alabama

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

questions remaining after your 100th townhall

Sir,
    At your townhall meeting on Sunday 17July, i asked you a few questions and your answers, though honest (i hope) were not sufficient in content.  So i ask them again, giving you the opportunity to research your answers.
 
    Let's start with something easy.  Is the federation of states referred to as the United States of America still working under the contract ratified in 1787?  A simple question, requiring a simple answer.  Yes or no.  No other comments are needed at the moment.
 
    We can all pretty much agree that the federation governing body is spending way too much money.  We can also pretty much agree that one should be compensated for work performed.  With the need for the federation governing body to cut it's spending, will you be taking a voluntary pay/perk cut?
 
    Assuming we ARE still working under the contract mentioned earlier, "All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives;"{ARticle I, section 7, paragraph 1} so how does the Senate Constitutionally justify deficit spending?  Granted, spending is not revenue, but the separation was placed to insure that no one branch would make law that cost the citizen more than his Representative agreed to.  Therefore, by deficit spending, the Senate has determined that the House will raise revenue whether it is a good idea or not. 
 
    Does your Office of Senator for Oregon  view the USC (United States Code) as the code of law for the United States or for the United States of America?  If it is for the United States, which the Congress has exclusive Legislative power over {Article I, Section 8, paragraph 17}, then isn't compelling the states to abide by such law against said contract?
 
    Speaking of the USC, why does it include WashingtonDC, Peurto Rico, Northern Marianas, or any territory or possession as a state, in direct conflict with the Constitution for these United States of America?  And what does your office intend to do to correct this unlawful event?
 
    And finally, for the moment, if Congress did NOT declare war against Lybia, and the initial NATO attack was NOT in DIRECT response to an attack on one of these United States of America, and the attack of Pearl Harbor was an act of war on the part of the Nipponese, WHY is Mr. Obama not being impeached and tried for treason?




sign me
daniel karl seigler, born in Fort Benning, Cussetta County, Georgia, son of
Clarance Roland O'Neil Seigler, born in Ozark, Dale County, Alabama, son of
Thomas Malcolm Seigler, born somewhere in Alabama

Re: German reaction to our debt disput - strange who they blame

Pretty much sums it up Dick.  The media is still not focused on this aspect....And there are "Liberal Spin"  terms, which I forget now, but Reid, as well as all of the minority leadership in the House, ("Nanc")  are talking about "future" cuts, and  tax increases NOW!

 

I am totally opposed to any tax increases, period.  If these assholes want a tax increase, then the only way should be a flat tax,  or the "Fair Tax Amendment";  period!

 

I am actually with Bachman and Cain on this.  Vote no on any increase to the ceiling debt.  It will surely throw our Nation into a tailspin, but I think that is what we need!  We have got to get back to folks no longer dependent on Nanny State horse hockey,  and getting off of the government dole!

 

 

 

 

On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:56 PM, dick thompson <rhomp2002@earthlink.net> wrote:

He did present some plans in Feb and got zero votes.  Not even the Dems would support his plan.  Part of the problem is that the taxes would take effect immediately and the spending cuts are all years away.  By the time they would take effect he would try to get them scotched.  That is the problem.  The Republicans are all about doing the cuts now, taking effect now and then discuss the tax increases.  That makes sense.  Obama's way is nothing but the old Dem MO writ large, get the taxes in place and then forget about the spending cuts.  We cannot afford that any more.  The sooner this POS administration and its supporters are gone, the better.

brough, civilization-overview dot com wrote:

On Jul 17, 3:48 pm, dick thompson <rhomp2...@earthlink.net> wrote:
 Not one of the selections that /Der Spiegel/ published mentioned
President Obama's
 

failure to /even present a plan/ to solve our long-term fiscal problems.
But it is the Republicans these news organizations blame, mostly.
   

He has presented a plan. He would make drastic cuts provided the
Republicans also accept tax reform-caused increases in tax revenue.
The Republicans reject this plan, so there is no point in detailing
his proposed, drastic cuts until the Republican are willing to go
along with tax revenue increases.

 

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: German reaction to our debt disput - strange who they blame

He did present some plans in Feb and got zero votes. Not even the Dems
would support his plan. Part of the problem is that the taxes would
take effect immediately and the spending cuts are all years away. By
the time they would take effect he would try to get them scotched. That
is the problem. The Republicans are all about doing the cuts now,
taking effect now and then discuss the tax increases. That makes
sense. Obama's way is nothing but the old Dem MO writ large, get the
taxes in place and then forget about the spending cuts. We cannot
afford that any more. The sooner this POS administration and its
supporters are gone, the better.

brough, civilization-overview dot com wrote:
> On Jul 17, 3:48 pm, dick thompson <rhomp2...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Not one of the selections that /Der Spiegel/ published mentioned
> President Obama's
>
>> failure to /even present a plan/ to solve our long-term fiscal problems.
>> But it is the Republicans these news organizations blame, mostly.
>>
>
> He has presented a plan. He would make drastic cuts provided the
> Republicans also accept tax reform-caused increases in tax revenue.
> The Republicans reject this plan, so there is no point in detailing
> his proposed, drastic cuts until the Republican are willing to go
> along with tax revenue increases.
>
>

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Country music to brain wash stupid white guys!

Geesh PlainOl'!!  You're asking a Moonbat to support his hate, vile and spin?   Come on!  Be reasonable!!

 

<Grin>!

 

 

On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:39 PM, plainolamerican <plainolamerican@gmail.com> wrote:

 Toby Keith
will tell you who to hate
---
site example

On Jul 17, 2:43 pm, Stephen Stink <not4ud...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Yep...The Koch brothers listen to classical music while the WASP
> flunkies listen to C&W that tell's how to live. Yeah..sure. Toby Keith
> will tell you who to hate.Yesssss! That is just great! Really great.
> I'll stick to the devils music! Yes please! May I have more sir!
> Wheeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Country music to brain wash stupid white guys!

Toby Keith
will tell you who to hate
---
site example

On Jul 17, 2:43 pm, Stephen Stink <not4ud...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Yep...The Koch brothers listen to classical music while the WASP
> flunkies listen to C&W that tell's how to live. Yeah..sure. Toby Keith
> will tell you who to hate.Yesssss! That is just great! Really great.
> I'll stick to the devils music! Yes please! May I have more sir!
> Wheeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: German reaction to our debt disput - strange who they blame

On Jul 17, 3:48 pm, dick thompson <rhomp2...@earthlink.net> wrote:
 Not one of the selections that /Der Spiegel/ published mentioned
President Obama's
> failure to /even present a plan/ to solve our long-term fiscal problems.
> But it is the Republicans these news organizations blame, mostly.

He has presented a plan. He would make drastic cuts provided the
Republicans also accept tax reform-caused increases in tax revenue.
The Republicans reject this plan, so there is no point in detailing
his proposed, drastic cuts until the Republican are willing to go
along with tax revenue increases.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Bring back any memories?

http://www.bizzyblog.com/2011/07/16/13-minutes-understanding-capitalism/

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

And the MSM tellus more and more of the good things about this admin - good things??????????? Where and when

http://pajamasmedia.com/vodkapundit/2011/07/17/david-ignatius-ignoring-the-tough-questions/

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

'Balancing' the Budget?

'Balancing' the Budget?
Posted by Karen Kwiatkowski on July 18, 2011 07:42 AM

The House's Cut, Cap and Balance bill expands the debt limit, suggests cuts without actually committing to them, and increases our already bloated military accounts while seeking to get the money from the social welfare accounts (already and always empty). Specifically, the House Bill plans to happily pay for a growing military budget ad infinitum, predicting and praying that the already lopsided and obscene "Pentagon appropriations ...[will continue to] grow..." The establishment Republican from the 6th District of Virginia (Goodlatte) is proud of his "conservatism," as are so many of the Republicrats. The bill should be entitled "Lie, Lay Low, and Rock the Status Quo." Or maybe "Con, Crap and Bull." What's so hard to understand about the message Americans (especially the younger generations) have for Washington DC ­ which is stop borrowing, stop spending, and just go away?

Fwd: "Regulatory Reform at the FCC: Why Not Now?" - FSF Seminar Transcript Released

THE FREE STATE FOUNDATION's  Luncheon Seminar   "Regulatory Reform at the FCC: Why Not Now?"   On April 12, 2011, the Free State Foundation held a lunch seminar entitled "Regulatory Reform at the FCC: Why Not Now?" The seminar's purpose was to explore issues relating to regulatory reform and institutional change at the Federal Communications Commission.   FSF is now releasing a transcript of the panel discussion. The panel followed a very substantive opening keynote by Congressman Cliff Stearns, Chairman of the House Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.   The panel discussion was moderated by RANDOLPH MAY, President of The Free State Foundation. The panel consisted of the following key FCC, think tank, and industry experts offering their views on FCC reform:   JAMES ASSEY, Executive Vice President, National Cable & Telecommunications Association STEVE LARGENT, President & CEO, CTIA-The Wireless Association EDWARD LAZARUS, Chief of Staff, FCC WALTER MCCORMICK, President and CEO, USTelecom MICHAEL WEINBERG, Staff Attorney, Public Knowledge   In light of the current heightened interest in Congress, the Executive Branch, and elsewhere concerning the topic of regulatory reform at the FCC, the panel's discussion, which covered a variety of topics, is particularly timely and instructive. Of course, the transcript should be read in its entirety for an appreciation of all of the views of each panelist. Nevertheless, immediately below are selected representative excerpts in the order of the panelists' presentations at the April 12 program. These excerpts provide an indication of the various perspectives presented at the seminar:    JAMES ASSEY:   "[I]t's important that we from the outside recognize that regulatory reform is really not a criticism of this agency, any previous agency, or any non-communications agency. But it really stands as an opportunity to recognize that the world that we live in is very different from the world that was created when various regulations, or in many cases the statutes themselves were enacted...And in many ways, regulatory reform is a celebration of the fact that we no longer have to rely on the government to set norms, because the marketplace and social norms have graduated to the point in which they are able to guide the marketplace in a way that maximizes consumers' benefits."   "Particularly important in the [National Broadband] Plan was the emphasis on how critical private capital was going to be to achieving our goals, and a recognition that we were at a time where command-and-control regulation really needs to recede from the foreground into the background, so that we could unleash and continue unleashing the dynamic investment that has made such a difference already, and will continue to do so in the future."   "[I]t's important to have a strong regulatory screen that counsels against regulatory intervention.  Particularly where we see areas of rapid development in the marketplace, we need to be very careful before we decide to jump in because of the costs that are imposed by false positives and the fact that the marketplace often will sort stuff out.  And in the lumpiness and bumpiness of progress and innovation, there are tremendous consumer benefits that we don't want to stall."   "For some reason I think we have focused a lot on outdated regulations or statutory provisions in Title II.  And I think that that is fair...But to the extent that we have a tool, something that is a little bit more incremental in the ability to remove statutory obligations or regulations, it makes little sense to me that it be restricted to one particular type of service or another...We have a number of provisions in Title VI of the Act, whether it's leased access or PEG obligations, that date back well before the Internet was just a science project...So we have a chance, should Congress either want to address that directly, or through insuring that the tools that are available through the forbearance process, to clarify that we really shouldn't pick and choose between services when we're talking about regulations."     STEVE LARGENT   "Specifically, the Executive Order in relevant part requires each agency to -- and I quote -- 'propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned determination that its benefits justify its costs, recognizing that some benefits and costs are difficult to quantify' and 'tailor its regulations to impose the least burden on society, consistent with obtaining regulatory objectives, taking into account, among other things, and to the extent practicable, the cost of cumulative regulations.' This is exactly the right approach. It is one that will allow private companies, like those in the competitive wireless industry, to focus on innovating and developing new products and services for consumers. We also strongly support Chairman Genachowski's directive to the Commission to follow the executive order.  We applaud this choice."   "[W]e believe the Commission has initiated several proceedings, including the bill shock proceeding, the transparency requirements of the net neutrality item, and a few other areas, that could cause harm.  And we're working with the Commission to address these potential harms."   "[C]urrent rules limit the use of spectrum in the broadcast television bands to provide over-the-air broadcast television services.  This despite the overwhelming demand for additional spectrum for mobile broadband services, and dwindling consumer demand for broadcast television services...That is why the FCC's effort to create a more flexible framework that could ultimately accommodate a reallocation of portions of the underutilized TV bands is so important...Government has a key role in coordinating spectrum rights.  But the wireless industry also has a tremendous record of investing, innovating, and meeting consumer demand...It has delivered unparalleled benefits to consumers and businesses across the country, with consistently lower prices and new and improved services."   "The Sunshine Act is something that the FCC needs to look at.  It goes to the kind of Commissioner that you would see nominated to those positions, if you were able to meet with your fellow Commissioners, even Commissioners that were appointed under a Republican or Democratic presidency...And if it doesn't work, then they don't have to meet.  But if it does work, they had the opportunity to meet.  Commissioner Copps' idea of having a bipartisan group that's meeting is a good thing.  You'd find Commissioners that were more in tune with policy that the FCC has responsibility for, as opposed to politics."     MICHAEL WEINBERG   "One of the greatest challenges that the FCC faces, especially since the '96 Act was passed, is the way that the Information Age and the Internet has changed what happens at the FCC. There are many more small companies that are not used to dealing with the FCC or 'playing' in Washington. They often do not have a Washington presence, and don't really spend a lot of time thinking about what happens in Washington and how they can be significantly impacted by the decisions made by the FCC...So when we think about reforming the regulatory process, one of the primary goals and one of the primary questions that needs to be asked is not 'Does this work for the people we know?' but 'Does it work for those companies, those people as individuals, those communities that we don't know, that aren't used to coming in and filing comments and filing reply comments and monitoring dockets and doing ex parte meetings?'"   "When people are outside of Washington, they think of the revolving door in this incredibly pejorative way...But inside Washington, many people have a much more nuanced understanding.  Agency capture is not something where there are people with cigars in back rooms, with boxes of money being passed around, plotting the demise of the public interest. I mean it simply is not that....Instead, it is a natural result of the fact that the FCC, or any agency, isn't that big of an agency.  The communications bar is not that big of a bar.  The larger communications policy world is not that big of a world...And so over time, you will develop personal relationships with the people that you meet over and over.  One of the things that you need to be aware of, though, is that that can influence decision-making in a way that is not necessarily directly connected to policy."   "When we get to the point where we have pages and pages of conditions, especially those conditions that by and large expire after a couple of years, it may be time to look at that underlying merger and say, 'In fact, this merger is not in the public interest.'...As a corollary to that, sometimes merger conditions are used to impose policy that is not specific to the merging entities.  Many people in this room will agree that that really distorts the regulatory universe, it distorts the market...If a policy is really important enough that we think it should be used in a specific merger and we hope that it will influence the other actors in that field, that's a time when we say: 'No, this is not a merger condition; this is something that is important enough that it is going to be an industry-wide practice.'"     WALTER MCCORMICK   "We believe that there is nothing more important right now than reform of universal service and intercarrier compensation.  These are the financial fundamentals of the industry, they are critical to broadband deployment in rural areas.  We commend the Commission for recognizing this and for taking it on."   "The Commission's goal is to advance broadband; but the statute under which it derives its authority is a narrowband statute...And the Commission's internal structure largely mirrors the statute, a policy-making structure that is built upon distinct analog, narrow-band technologies rather than the converged digital platforms of today."   "[B]oth the statute and the Commission's structure are built upon a framework that treats incumbent LECs from the standpoint of being dominant providers of voice service...Our bureau is the Wireline Competition Bureau, as distinct from the Wireless Bureau, as distinct from the Media Bureau...And as a result, we have a host of archaic requirements that apply only to us, as voice service providers."   "[W]hen Congress enacted the law with the forbearance provision, it was meant to take advantage of streamlining.  There was an understanding that there was going to be a lot of regulatory reform in the '96 Act, and a lot of proceedings were going to be implemented...It was intended to give the Commissioner an option to either grab onto forbearance petitions filed and make a decision on the issue...Or, if it didn't really rise to the level of having them make a decision, just let it go...It was also intended to impose some discipline on the Commission, so the things wouldn't lay there for a long time...The problem is that in recent years, it was viewed as a way of trying to get around having the Commission make a decision.  So as a result, that has tended to emasculate the purpose of the original forbearance section... This is another area where it really is important for Congress to redefine the mission."   "The communications industry and the railroad industry are probably the only two industries that are left, where the merger review inquiry isn't focused on competitive harm.  The inquiry is something else, where we find no competitive harm, but ask, "Is it otherwise in the public interest?"...The inquiry should be narrow.  It should relate directly to competitive harms.  It should only relate to competitive harms...I frankly don't think that there should be duplicative merger reviews...This is an area where I hope that the FCC would exercise restraint."     EDWARD LAZARUS   "[T]he Chairman has been focused on what I think loosely we call regulatory reform from the very first day that he got to the agency...From that day, it was a philosophical matter.  And based on his experience in the private sector, he has been focused on having open, fair, data-driven processes, and whenever we're considering imposing any new obligations on the industry, we have to be clear of why we're doing it, and what the relative costs and benefits for doing it are...That's how we've approached everything we do.  Now that said, there are going to be disagreements between the agency and the Chairman and industry about how that calculus comes out...That's the nature of what we do.  Those are debates that are really important to have.  But we are focused on doing that in a thorough and fact-based and open and fair way."   "When it comes to regulatory reform, we're open for business.  We want to get this right.  It's not perfect.  I won't pretend that it is...But I also think we shouldn't kid ourselves that when we talk about regulatory reform, sometimes it's code for disagreement over issues of policy and law; disagreements over whether a particular segment of the industry really is as competitive as some of the industry players would like us to think; whether regardless of a market's competitiveness, consumers are getting the protection they need; whether the statute under which we operate provides the authority that we think it does.  And I agree with Walter that this is one where Congress could well be looking to update the statute...These are good-faith disagreements.  They're important disagreements.  But they're not the same as regulatory reform.  We shouldn't mistake the two."   "We are engaged in a retrospective review of our regulations to look at the ones that may be outmoded.  It turns out there are some easy pickings when it comes to that. I think we've discovered that we still have some regulations related to telegraph services, which I don't think actually exist anymore. But we're really actively working on this.  We welcome the ideas, and we've been over to USTelecom to talk about this.  We do have this initiative that is very high on the Chairman's priority list for reducing the barriers to broadband deployment and build-outs."   "It seems to me that forbearance petitions ought to be decided on the evidence.  It ought to be a jump ball...But I'd also say, based on my years as a litigator, that evidentiary presumptions are pretty easy to get around, if that's the result you want to reach...What really matters is having fair and impartial decision-makers more than it is setting up a particular set of evidentiary presumptions...If people are calling it on the facts, you're going to, generally speaking, get good decisions."        A PDF of the full transcript of the panel presentation, "Regulatory Reform at the FCC: Why Not Now?" is here.                 Sign Up for FSF EMails The Free State Foundation P. O. Box 60680 Potomac, MD 20859 Tel: 301-984-8253 Fax: 301-299-5007 www.freestatefoundation.org Email FSF  The FSF Blog Make a Tax-Deductible Donation!   A Free Market Think Tank for Maryland......Because Ideas Matters and FSF are registered trademarks of the Free State Foundation. All trademark and copyright rights are reserved.

Forward to a friend This email was sent to majors.bruce@gmail.com by info@freestatefoundation.org |   Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy. The Free State Foundation | P. O. Box 60680 | Potomac | MD | 20859

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Michele Bachmann's hubby is so gay!!!!!!!!!!!!

The ever so compassionate, faux pro-gay rights, lefty dooshbag, drops
his hand again.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Why Casey Anthony Got Away With It…

Because you can't prove MURDER without a CAUSE OF DEATH!

A gimme

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Joel Salatin on Twinkies vs Raw Milk

Joel Salatin on Twinkies vs Raw Milk
Posted by Karen De Coster on July 17, 2011 07:57 PM

Here's Joel Salatin at the 2:50 mark of the video, stating that he thinks it is pretty amazing that we have a government that decides it is perfectly safe to feed your kids ho-ho cakes, Twinkies, and mountain dew, but its unsafe to feed them raw milk.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6YCuloesNc&feature=player_embedded

If you are the kind of person who delights in sniggering at boorish government propaganda, you might enjoy the FDA's Big Lie on raw milk vs pasteurized milk over at its corner on the web: " The Dangers of Raw Milk: Unpasteurized Milk Can Pose a Serious Health Risk." Remember that the FDA, a criminal organization that masquerades as a government agency, received its largest budget increase ever in 2009 (for fiscal year 2010), and this increase was dished out in order to fund that criminal organization's food "safety" initiatives, such as the monstrous HR 2749, the Food Safety Modernization Act. Those initiatives fell under the FDA's "Protecting America's Food Supply" umbrella (I do not make this up; see here), which is a large-scale jihad against consumer food choice and farmers and food producers who are not a part of the industrialized, subsidized, favored food machine.

I blogged last week about my attendance at Salatin's Field Day at Polyface Farms in Virginia. I thought it was incredible that whenever Salatin opened up to the crowd for questions, he made the very clear point that no questions were out of bounds - sustainable farming, government intervention, gay marriage, politics, religion, whatever. He's willing to put his mind and vision to any and all topics in a manner that is thoughtful yet wholly uncompromising.

Following my blog post on LewRockwell.com reviewing the Field Day, I received emails from other libertarians who were there, or who had family members who were there at the Field Day. In fact, LewRockwell.com's Karen Kwiatowski was also in attendance, and she's a big Salatin fan. I also received an email from a fella (I will not reveal his identity) who read my review and I paid a visit to his farm - in the same area - where there are more pasteured chickens and grass-fed cattle being raised on techniques and principles learned from Salatin. I brought home a gallon of the good stuff from that Virginia farm, a state where you also need to sell herd shares in order to produce and sell raw milk. Drinking this stuff is, as a friend of mine noted, like drinking ice cream. It is real and untainted milk as nature intended, and the "other stuff" you buy in the store is the result of government's tyranny sold under the facade of "safety." My car was loaded with all kinds of contraband moving across state lines back to Michigan: Raw milk, great Virginia wines, and guns/ammo, so it's a good thing I was able to speed along for 600+ miles undetected.

A few days after the event on my last night in town, I had the good fortune of being seated at a local restaurant (that uses Polyface Farms meat) at a table right next to Mr. Salatin, who was having a meal with friends and family. In talking with him, I discovered he was gracious and and passionate and never about being politically correct or trying to covey a "digestible" message. He is very aware of the Mises Institute, and after hearing him talking about economics and the entrepreneur in his many interviews and YouTubes, I was not surprised. We talked about social media and his potential for using that platform, as well as a few other colorful items. And there were no Twinkies or mountain dew at his table.

Re: Hey Travis! The Republitards want to cut your SS check off!

Dodge?

>On Jul 15, 7:54 am, Neil <rrrailwa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 7:35 PM, GregfromBoston <greg.vinc...@yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hmmm, why is Bernie Saunders gathering up democrats and threatening
> > filibuster and reelection support if POTUS fucks with SS?
>
> > On Jul 12, 11:33 pm, studio <tl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > Well, SS doesn't need to finance your time on the Internet anyway.
> > > ---
> > > Consequences of defaulting on the federal debt
>
> > > Congress has the duty to honor the debts of the United States by
> > > raising the federal debt ceiling under the "full faith and credit
> > > clause," Article IV, Section 1, of the U.S. Constitution, and Section
> > > 4 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Not raising the
> > > federal debt ceiling will cause a default on the U.S. debt in
> > > violation of the U.S. Constitution.
>
> > > Has the U.S. ever defaulted on its debt? Well, in a technical sense
> > > yes, briefly and unintentionally when Congress waited to the last
> > > minute to act to raise the federal debt ceiling in 1979. Our present
> > > situation differs where Tea-Publicans are threatening not to raise the
> > > federal debt ceiling intentionally to put the nation's debt into
> > > default. That will shake the confidence of the international markets
> > > in the ability of the U.S. government to govern itself and to honor
> > > its debts.
>
> > > All lending agreements, whether between central banks of countries, or
> > > your mortgage or credit card agreement, have a "default" provision
> > > that automatically escalates the rate of interest to a default rate in
> > > the event of default. For many, this will affect your credit
> > > worthiness and make credit unavailable. The banks will "adjust" the
> > > interest on all credit agreements. Default will cost Americans
> > > hundreds of billions of dollars in additional interest and tax dollars
> > > to finance the interest on the federal debt over time.
>
> > > So when you hear the darlings of the Tea Party like Sen. Jim DeMint (R-
> > > SC) and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) say they are going to vote
> > > against raising the federal debt ceiling because they "don't believe"
> > > anything bad is going to occur, just keep in mind that they are
> > > ignorant of history, ignorant of economic principles, ignorant of how
> > > the international monetary system works, and ignorant of how
> > > international markets work in the real world.
>
> > > Why would any sane person listen to what an ignorant fool has to say
> > > when all the experts in the field who do this for a living say it will
> > > result in a debt crisis and another recession?
>
> > >http://www.blogforarizona.com/blog/2011/07/consequences-of-defaulting...
> > > ---
> > > Not even mentioning all the checks government writes out to people
> > > like Travis, military personnel, pensioners, etc. etc. etcetera.
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> fuck
> --
> ok- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: German reaction to our debt disput - strange who they blame

I linked to the entire article in Der Spiegel.

Moe wrote:
> You really have to present the entire article and not just the part
> that justifies your opinion.
>
> The conservative Die Welt writes:
>
> "In this period of competing debt crises, America and Europe are
> looking at each other in amazement, with each side understanding less
> and less about what is happening on the other side of the Atlantic.
> While Europe's chaos is obvious to the Europeans and the rest of the
> world, there are few signs of self-doubt or self-awareness in the US.
> In the middle of the poker game between the two political parties to
> prevent a national default on Aug. 2, polls show that 77 percent of
> Americans believe that they live in the world's greatest system of
> government. Just as many are convinced that life is only worth living
> as an American."
>
> "Democrats and Republicans are so hopelessly embroiled in a religious
> war that compromise and pragmatism are just dreams from a far-off era
> of reason. … The influence of the Tea Party movement … can not be
> overestimated. … The movement sees traditional politics as corrupt and
> regards Washington as a den of iniquity. … They see the other side as
> their enemy. Negotiations with the Democrats, whether it's about
> appointing a judge or the insolvency of the United States, are only
> successful if the enemy is defeated. Compromise, they feel, is a sign
> of weakness and cowardice."
>
> When you sit in Europe and watch the Americans (The favorit past time
> of many Europeans.) you can not help but think that they tick in
> another way. For us, USA is the wild man in the desert with the bible
> in one hand and a six gun in the other hand. Americans are for
> overkill. You do not use a newspaper to kill the fly. You kill the fly
> with a 357 Magnum. It does not matter if the wall is no longer there
> as long as the fly is dead. Look at the Casey Anthony case. You want
> her dead and not just hanging from a tree. You want a stain on the
> wall as a sign of justice. When it comes to the debt situation in the
> United States you see this as a chance to chrush Obama. When he is
> chrushed, the Chinese loose 75 percent of their reserves, meaning that
> they can no longer sustain their economy. This means that artificial
> societies like the oil countries dependant on Americas momentum are
> also unstable. You can take this to any place in the world where the
> dollar controls the economy. This crisis started with Bush and Obama
> has got to clean it up. Here in Europe you really have to question
> the state of mind of a lot of your politicians. This is not like I am
> saying that we have it better here. The difference seems to be that
> you can take a nut case like Palin and make her president. In France
> we would accept that a Strauss Kahn rapes the hotel maid in New York,
> writes a book on social conditions of working class in France and then
> elect him. What is the difference? Strauss Kahn does not have an army
> that can march into Iraq to take over the oil fields, find no threat
> or reason for being there, and end up having to pay to get the Iraq
> back on it feet at the cost of the French taxpayer. In Germany, the
> American Boy Scouts are stronger than the German Army, but we have
> medical care for everyone who can drag himself to a hospital.
> The one thing that is hard is that America is 110 percent when it
> comes to doing something. I mean this in saving the lives of people in
> an area devistated by a natural disaster. The Americans are first
> there with a bang. You look up in the sky and see the Americans with
> 30 planes carrying food. Behind them are two German planes carrying
> food and one of the planes has motor problems. We can only hope that
> America is not 110 percent when it comes to destroying it own
> existance.
>
>
> On Jul 17, 3:48 pm, dick thompson <rhomp2...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> *n That Case, The World Had Better Pay Up: *That was my first (and
>> admittedly ill-tempered) reaction to this story
>> <http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,774666,00.html> from
>> Germany.
>>
>> The mass-circulation Bild writes:
>>
>> "Playing poker is part of politics, as is theatrical posturing.
>> That's fair enough. But what America is currently exhibiting is
>> the worst kind of absurd theatrics. And the whole world is being
>> held hostage."
>>
>> "Irrespective of what the correct fiscal and economic policy should
>> be for the most powerful country on earth, it's simply not possible
>> to stop taking on new debt overnight. Most importantly, the
>> Republicans have turned a dispute over a technicality into a
>> religious war, which no longer has any relation to a reasonable
>> dispute between the elected government and the opposition."
>>
>> Because there isn't a nation in the world that is capable of mounting a
>> hostage rescue mission against the US.
>>
>> I might not have reacted so sharply to that collection of German
>> reactions to our crisis, if it were not for this fact: Not one of the
>> selections that /Der Spiegel/ published mentioned President Obama's
>> failure to /even present a plan/ to solve our long-term fiscal problems.
>> But it is the Republicans these news organizations blame, mostly.
>>
>> (Here's a description of /Bild/ <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild>, if
>> you are wondering what kind of newspaper it is.)
>> - 12:10 PM, 17 July 2011 [link]
>> <http://www.seanet.com/%7Ejimxc/Politics/July2011_3.html#jrm10082>
>>
>
>

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Stuff

All of these are quite astute.

 

 

On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 1:11 PM, ray <jr3901@aol.com> wrote:

Ø      Tea Partiers follow the saying: Government can only do certain
things.

Ø      Liberals follow the saying: Only government can do certain
things

Ø      Revenue enhancement is the number one reason for traffic
management. Safety is somewhere down the list.

Ø      Lawyers receive compensation whether they win or lose

Ø      It is a felony for a citizen to lie to the government.

Ø      It is perfectly acceptable for a politician to lie to their
constituents.

Ø      Any law that includes a derivative of the word "Intent" should
be illegal.

Ø      Every government needs additional revenue

Ø      Government spending will never decrease.

Ø      The Congressional budget office has never been correct

Ø      Beware of any politician who claims their job is to create
jobs.

Ø      The only thing protected by FINRA is FINRA

Ø      When you pass a highway construction site ninety percent of the
workers will be doing something other than work.

Ø      Information is not as important as using the correct form

Ø      HOV lanes cause additional pollution and waste gas.

Ø      Never vote for a politician who has yet to hold a job in the
private sector

Ø      Politicians always leave office with more wealth than upon
entering.

Ø      If the government had never gotten involved in health insurance
regulation there would be no need for health insurance regulation
reform.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: German reaction to our debt disput - strange who they blame

Thanks for sharing this article Dick and Moe.  It's an interesting perspective, especially considering the Germans position on Greece, Spain, Portugal, and all of the other "Have Not's"  in the EU.   Germany is truly the dealer in the economic card game in Europe, and they are taking a very hard conservative stance with regard to debt ceilings.....

 

 

On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Moe <coatesmoe@gmail.com> wrote:

You really have to present the entire article and not just the part
that justifies your opinion.

The conservative Die Welt writes:

"In this period of competing debt crises, America and Europe are
looking at each other in amazement, with each side understanding less
and less about what is happening on the other side of the Atlantic.
While Europe's chaos is obvious to the Europeans and the rest of the
world, there are few signs of self-doubt or self-awareness in the US.
In the middle of the poker game between the two political parties to
prevent a national default on Aug. 2, polls show that 77 percent of
Americans believe that they live in the world's greatest system of
government. Just as many are convinced that life is only worth living
as an American."

"Democrats and Republicans are so hopelessly embroiled in a religious
war that compromise and pragmatism are just dreams from a far-off era
of reason. … The influence of the Tea Party movement … can not be
overestimated. … The movement sees traditional politics as corrupt and
regards Washington as a den of iniquity. … They see the other side as
their enemy. Negotiations with the Democrats, whether it's about
appointing a judge or the insolvency of the United States, are only
successful if the enemy is defeated. Compromise, they feel, is a sign
of weakness and cowardice."

When you sit in Europe and watch the Americans (The favorit past time
of many Europeans.) you can not help but think that they tick in
another way. For us, USA is the wild man in the desert with the bible
in one hand and a six gun in the other hand. Americans are for
overkill. You do not use a newspaper to kill the fly. You kill the fly
with a 357 Magnum. It does not matter if the wall is no longer there
as long as the fly is dead. Look at the Casey Anthony case. You want
her dead and not just hanging from a tree. You want a stain on the
wall as a sign of justice. When it comes to the debt situation in the
United States you see this as a chance to chrush Obama. When he is
chrushed, the Chinese loose 75 percent of their reserves, meaning that
they can no longer sustain their economy. This means that artificial
societies like the oil countries dependant on Americas momentum are
also unstable. You can take this to any place in the world where the
dollar controls the economy. This crisis started with Bush and Obama
has got to clean it up.  Here in Europe you really have to question
the state of mind of a lot of your politicians. This is not like I am
saying that we have it better here. The difference seems to be that
you can take a nut case like Palin and make her president. In France
we would accept that a Strauss Kahn rapes the hotel maid in New York,
writes a book on social conditions of working class in France and then
elect him. What is the difference? Strauss Kahn does not have an army
that can march into Iraq to take over the oil fields, find no threat
or reason for being there, and end up having to pay to get the Iraq
back on it feet at the cost of the French taxpayer. In Germany, the
American Boy Scouts are stronger than the German Army, but we have
medical care for everyone who can drag himself to a hospital.
The one thing that is hard is that America is 110 percent when it
comes to doing something. I mean this in saving the lives of people in
an area devistated by a natural disaster. The Americans are first
there with a bang. You look up in the sky and see the Americans with
30 planes carrying food. Behind them are two German planes carrying
food and one of the planes has motor problems. We can only hope that
America is not 110 percent when it comes to destroying it own
existance.

On Jul 17, 3:48 pm, dick thompson <rhomp2...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> *n That Case, The World Had Better Pay Up:  *That was my first (and
> admittedly ill-tempered) reaction to this story
> <http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,774666,00.html> from
> Germany.
>
>     The mass-circulation Bild writes:
>
>     "Playing poker is part of politics, as is theatrical posturing.
>      That's fair enough.  But what America is currently exhibiting is
>     the worst kind of absurd theatrics.  And the whole world is being
>     held hostage."
>
>     "Irrespective of what the correct fiscal and economic policy should
>     be for the most powerful country on earth, it's simply not possible
>     to stop taking on new debt overnight.  Most importantly, the
>     Republicans have turned a dispute over a technicality into a
>     religious war, which no longer has any relation to a reasonable
>     dispute between the elected government and the opposition."
>
> Because there isn't a nation in the world that is capable of mounting a
> hostage rescue mission against the US.
>
> I might not have reacted so sharply to that collection of German
> reactions to our crisis, if it were not for this fact:  Not one of the
> selections that /Der Spiegel/ published mentioned President Obama's
> failure to /even present a plan/ to solve our long-term fiscal problems.
> But it is the Republicans these news organizations blame, mostly.
>
> (Here's a description of /Bild/ <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild>, if
> you are wondering what kind of newspaper it is.)
> - 12:10 PM, 17 July 2011   [link]
> <http://www.seanet.com/%7Ejimxc/Politics/July2011_3.html#jrm10082>

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.