The Swamp
-
Text size:  A A A A A

« Obama pals mad about mail -- from their own union | Main | Media bias against Clinton? »

Greenspan, Summers: Economy needs handouts, tax cuts

Email Print Link
Election 2008
[What is this?]
Posted December 19, 2007 12:07 PM
The Swamp

by William Neikirk

The housing-induced credit crunch continues to fan worries about a recession and give birth to new proposals to keep the economy afloat.

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan raised eyebrows when he said that troubled mortgage borrowers should get straight cash from the federal government.

Former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers raised eyebrows even higher when he called for a $50 billion to $75 billion tax cut, plus better unemployment benefits and an increase in food stamps.

Many people in the stock market have expressed a lack of confidence over the Federal Reserve's, and the Bush administration's, steps to tackle the credit crisis and head off an actual downturn.

But when economic VIPs like Greenspan and Summers say that the government should give out handouts or cut taxes to handle the problem that began in the "subprime" mortgage market for marginally qualified borrowers, these concerns are all the more disquieting.

After Greenspan first made his remarks on a Sunday talk show, he later modified them to say that the money from the federal treasury should only go a limited group of people who are current with their mortgage payments but can't afford them when their interest rates are "reset" to a higher level.

Summers, who gave an interview to the Wall Street Journal and also appeared at a Brookings Institution conference today, was Treasury chief in the Clinton administration. He told the Journal there is a "distinct possibility of a more serious recession that will lead to the worst economic performance since the late 1970s and 1980s."

During part of that era, unemployment rose above 12 percent. Such a recession now would make the 2001 downturn look like a tea party by comparison.

Summers is not alone in fearing a steep recession. There are bears on Wall Street who have expressed the same sentiment. Many believe the central bank and the Bush administration are behind the curve in dealing with the economy. The best Bush could say is that there are "storm clouds" on the horizon. To some, it looks like a Hurricane Katrina is approaching.

The credit crunch has tentacles that reach worldwide. That's because these mortgages were bundled together in large packages and sold as securities to investors here and around the world. Everyone wanted them in the giddy days of the housing boom. Now, having this mortgage-backed paper in your portfolio is a major concern. No one wants it, and there is no way to put a price on it.

Furthermore, it has caused banks to be even more skittish about lending, so that there is fear that even qualified borrowers (such as companies, for example, that hire people) are having a harder time getting loans for legitimate purposes.

No one knows how this will come out over the next year. Most analysts don't predict a recession, relying on hope that the good old central bank will come to the rescue and slash interest rates as needed. But it's hard to stop an accumulating downturn once it starts--it truly is like a juggernaut. That is why some old hands would like to see dramatic action now.

Digg Delicious Facebook Fark Google Newsvine Reddit Yahoo

Comments

Isn't it amazing how little we know about our economy?
Think now, if you had invested your Social Security money in the stock market, like Pres. Bush suggest we do, and you were planning on retiring in say one or two years. How would you be feeling right now?


The best Bush could say is that there are "storm clouds" on the horizon. To some, it looks like a Hurricane Katrina is approaching.

We know how well he handled that crisis.

I do agree that O'Really,Rush and Hanniscum could use some tax relief and food stamps.

I don't think Bush has done enough for their ILK.


"GREENSPAN SPEAKS"

I'M NO LONGER UNDER GEORGE BUSH AND DICK CHENEY LAW OF ECONOMICS.

I DIDN'T KNOW THEY WANTED THE AMERICAN DREAM TO BE FILLED JUST TO TREAT IT LIKE A PIECE OF STOCK.

DUMP IT, DUMP IT ALL. SO WHAT IF THE RICH GETS KICKED TO THE CURB.

WE HAVE PRIVATE EQUITY FIRMS TO STEP IN WITH 5 BILLION DOLLARS FROM CHINA.

SO GREENSPAN GOT USED, THE FEDERAL RESERVE GOT USED BY THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION AND THE TREASURY SECRETARY IN THE LAST TWO CONGRESS'

SHAKE THE AMERICAN HOMEOWNERS DREAM WITH ECONOMIC PROPAGANDA -

THE POOR MAN IS COMING, THE POOR MAN IS COMING, HE OWNS A HOUSE, HE HAS EQUITY, HE HAS THE POWER OF THE VOTE.

CHANGE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF EVERYONE, AND LETS GO TAKE IT BACK.

WE WILL AUCTION OFF THE AMERICAN DREAM TO HALLIBURTON EMPLOYEES COMING BACK FROM IRAQ.

SO WHAT IF IT'S A MILITARY MEMBER OVERSEAS. BLACK TOO, OH FORGET THAT, AND HE DOESN'T HAVE A VOTE IT'S CAGED UP IN ALBERTO GONZALES EMAILS.


Know if only the Federal Reserve, and the Bush administration would listen.


Would not expect the democrat liberal to say anything else.


It's not surprising thsat William "Santa, please give us a recession for Christmas" Neikirk, sees "raised" eyebrows over tax cuts. William, tax cuts spur economic growth, and after an initial dip in government revenues, actually increases government revenues in the long run Also, Neikirk, countries that have lowered their tax rates for individuals AND corporations see their economies GROW. But Neikirk is a socialist, perhaps even communist, at heart and believes higher taxes is the solution to everything.


John D;
Every act has a point of diminishing returns.
So it is with tax cuts.
If we totally eliminate taxes, would that make us a rich nation? Or would we just be a country without infrastructure?
Raising taxes also has a point of diminishing returns.
Question is, how do we know where those points are?
One thing seems pretty certain, whatever we spend, we have to collect taxes to pay for it, someday.
I still wonder how you would feel if you had been allowed to put all of your Social Security taxes into the stock market and were planning on retiring in the next year or two.


"tax cuts spur economic growth, and after an initial dip in government revenues, actually increases government revenues in the long run."

This assertion is verifiably false and Rudy Giuliani continues to get skewered by all but the blindest blind (we know where you stand, Dyslin) for continuing to trumpet it. Even the Bush Administration admits that at best the tax cuts have recovered 10-15% of their cost, which, here on planet Earth, is nowhere close to generating the revenue lost.

Nice try.


But Neikirk is a socialist, perhaps even communist, at heart and believes higher taxes is the solution to everything.

Oh wells you should know. You "Sanat please bring me WWIII for Christmas" got both covered on the abroad front. Expansive military is the solution for everything.


Also, Neikirk, countries that have lowered their tax rates for individuals AND corporations see their economies GROW.

Posted by: John D | December 19, 2007 2:32 PM

Actually Johnny D if that were true the continent of Africa would be booming. Why has China had double digit growth each quarter for years? Have they lowered taxes on individuals and corporations?


The banks created too much credit while Greenspan was chairman. They didn't adequately "insure" themselves. There are international concerns that shouldn't be protect from their folly by us. At most we should buy their assets at its reduced value and let the chips fall where they may.


Well, St. Michael, I did some analysis of your question. If Social Security had had as good a return as my 401(k) has had over my career, instead of the paltry 2% per annum that we hear that it gets, the "trust fund" would be rolling in dough right now. My 401(k) is allocated among a variety of investments, primarily domestic and foreign equities. It went through the crash of 1987 and the free-fall after the 9/11 attacks, and today has approximately seven times the cash value of the money that I've put into it. Yes, the stock market has its ups and downs, but if you allocate your money, don't try to beat the market, and stay in for the long term, you'll do well, certainly better than those who have been charged with investing the Social Security money have done.


Isn't it amazing how little we know about our economy?
Think now, if you had invested your Social Security money in the stock market, like Pres. Bush suggest we do, and you were planning on retiring in say one or two years. How would you be feeling right now?

Posted by: San Miguel | December 19, 2007 12:31 PM

That really depends on the stocks in which you invest. If I had all my social sercurity money invested in just one of the companies in which I currently own stock, I would be feeling very good right now.


If I had all my social sercurity money invested in just one of the companies in which I currently own stock, I would be feeling very good right now.

Posted by: John W. | December 19, 2007 4:30 PM

And if you had it all in Enron, you'd be begging on a street corner when you retired.

Every retirement portfolio needs a base of lower growth, minimal risk investments to protect the individual if their other investments fail, which they very well may.


But Neikirk is a socialist, perhaps even communist, at heart and believes higher taxes is the solution to everything.
_____________________________
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaahah
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaahah
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaahah
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaahah
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaahah
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaahah
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaahah
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaahah

Whew, let me grow dry my eyes. Man that was good. I needed some comedy after my day.


Even Al has figured out that a whole segment of our 'society' was screwed by predatory lenders.
"I would be feeling very good right now.
John W,"

Yeah, right now, but, in a year? Who knows. The stock market is the worlds largest pyramid scheme. It's even bigger than Social Security.

Fact is, SS is a perfect diversification and confidence building investment by society as a whole. With SS as a floor it gives us little people the nerve to put some of our 'wealth' (ha ha) in the 'slot' market.

My advice to young workes; Never invest heavily in the stock of the company you work for.


Now that I think about it, let's follow juannieed's "logic". Let's cut all taxes. It would end the illegal occupation of Iraq! No tax revenue means no disbursements for the military. But then, of course, according to juannieed, bruthiee, pillow and tearriee, with no American troops in Iraq to die for the cause, the terrorists would win.

Why does juannieed hate America?


Even Al has figured out that a whole segment of our 'society' was screwed by predatory lenders.
"I would be feeling very good right now.
John W,"

Yeah, right now, but, in a year? Who knows. The stock market is the worlds largest pyramid scheme. It's even bigger than Social Security.

Fact is, SS is a perfect diversification and confidence building investment by society as a whole. With SS as a floor it gives us little people the nerve to put some of our 'wealth' (ha ha) in the 'slot' market.

My advice to young workers; Never invest heavily in the stock of the company you work for.


Hopeless John D., still drinking the voodoo economics kool-aid even after several quotes by Bush's own economist have been posted dispelling the myth.

John D., Trickle-down Terry, take note:

To a question about tax disparities, Buffett said he surveyed 13 workers in his office and found that they paid an average tax rate of 32.9 percent, compared with the 17.7 percent that he pays.

"My cleaning lady pays a higher tax on her earnings than I do on my dividends and investments," he said. "It's better to earn in the boardroom than in the bathroom."

Buffett also touted one of his pet causes: He opposes a repeal of the estate tax, which now brings in $24 billion a year.

"Leona Helmsley left $12 million to her dog," he said. "If there were no estate tax, the dog would have gotten $22 million."

Alluding to Bush administration policies, Buffett said: "In the last seven-eight years, the super-rich have gotten a huge break... It has been a marvelous, marvelous time to be super-rich." The catch: "Nothing trickles down."

He has faith in "the ability of the American economy to generate more and more prosperity," Buffett said. "The real test of this country will be how widely is that prosperity shared."

Buffett also said he feels strongly that the United States is making a serious mistake by importing $2 billion a day more than it exports.

"If you force-feed $2 billion a day to the rest of the world, they get somewhat less enthusiastic over time - and the dollar is worth less," he said.

"We're like a very rich family; we own a farm the size of Texas but want to consume more" than the farm generates, he said. "Every day, we sell off or mortgage a piece of the farm."

If the policy continues, over time, the rest of the world "will own more of our farm" and future generations will resent that they spend part of their workweek paying off those costs of consumption, he said.


SAn Miguel,

"I still wonder how you would feel if you had been allowed to put all of your Social Security taxes into the stock market and were planning on retiring in the next year or two."

First, if I was retiring in a year or two, I would have been gradually pulling by money from the stock market anyway, since I would be wanting to reduce my risk.

Second, I could only wish I could have invested the 12.4% that the gov't has confiscated from me over the decades and had invested it the stokc market. I have run the numbers and by the time my wife and I retire, we would have well into a seven-digit (all left of the decimal) lump-sum.

Karl Marx' brother,

China has strong growth because it is a new economy. Africa is run buy a bunch of thieves.

For a better example, look at the eastern European democracies and see what their tax rates are. Lokk at Ireland and its tax rate and look at their GDP.

Even Charlie Rangle has propsed to lower the US Corporate Tax Rate in order to help keep capital in America.

If you don't think lower taxes doesn't increase economic activity - go to any store that borders Chicago or Cook County. You will seee more activity at the stores on the other side of these borders. Capital seeks lower costs, including taxes.

CMorris,

At least you admit Social Security is a pyramid scheme. Keep stuffing your allowance in your mattress.

To the "young workers":

The only thing CM speaks is well is not putting all your eggs in one basket (your company). Other than that, what his qualifications for financial advice produces the crap he spewed. Get some professional advice from someone who is certified to provide it.


Neikirk,

John D called you a commie!!

You are in terrific company! What more evidence do you need?


C. Morris, excellent advice. The financial advisers that I've talked to say never to have more than 5-10% of your money in the stock of ANY one company. Unfortunately, many company savings plans automatically invest at least a portion of their employees' savings, and the corporate match, in company stock, so it's easy to accumulate a lot of it. The employee has to review the plan regularly and spread that money around.

The mistake made by Enron employees was the one of having all of their money in Enron stock, so when Enron tanked, so did they. One of the stories circulated was that Enron required it; if that was so, it would have been a strong signal to go look for work somewhere else.

It's important to remember that this is the money you're going to live on in retirement, so the saver has to be actively involved in it. Social Security is a good "floor" for passive savers, but if you rely on it, you're not going to live very well in your old age.


Dave,

You seem to have your head screwed on right, unlike Terry.
Anyway, I agree with your posting.

Terry,
What experience do I have in these matters? Just 43 years in the workforce, including a couple long gigs in Fortune 500 companies that tanked. They all promoted their own stock. One, peaked at $40 per share in the late seventies. It ended up penny stocks before the final death knell.

All,
And what's Terry's sage advice? Get rich, stay rich.


Here is what Social Security, Medicare and other entitlements have gotten our children and grandchildren.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22299587/

This is what would be reported if the gov't had to use the same accounting principles as private industry.


This is what would be reported if the gov't had to use the same accounting principles as private industry.

Posted by: Terry | December 19, 2007 11:08 PM

Yo Terry,
You can't be serious.
Does the firm of Arthur Andersen Accounting ring a bell? You know, one of the worlds largest private industry accounting firms (now dissolved) who's private industry accounting principles brought down Enron and destroyed the jobs and life savings of thousands?

Take a minute and read-up, Terry:

Congress and the Accounting Wars--

During the boom years of the 1990s, the accounting industry flexed its lobbying muscle on Capitol Hill as never before. Here's a look at the three major political battles of the decade's accounting wars: the fight over stock options, the fight over tort reform, and the all-out war over the SEC's attempt to separate auditing and consulting.

The whole sordid tale of how PRIVATE INDUSTRY ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES were used to screw investors and stockholders can be found here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/regulation/congress/

And here's more kudo's for private industry accounting practices, Terry:

Interview with Arthur Levitt,
chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission from 1993 to 2001, he launched an unsuccessful effort to reform the accounting industry.

What's the significance of the Enron scandal and collapse for the markets as a whole? Is this symptomatic of something larger?

I think the Enron scandal is symptomatic of something much broader than Enron. I think it's symptomatic of a breakdown of the ethical values of business over a period of perhaps 20 years, a gradual erosion of business ethics that brought us to an Enron, but might very well bring us to a whole host of Enrons as we move down the road. ...

[In 1998] you made a speech up in New York in which you used the terms "abuses," "trickery," and "accounting hocus-pocus." Are things that bad?

I think they are. I think that the seduction of the boards of companies that are intended to protect investors ... the nexus between the accounting firms and the corporations, and the aggressive attitudes of CFOs and CEOs, has created a pattern of deception; that has created a situation which has eroded public confidence in the sanctity of the numbers which is the basis of our markets today. ...

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/regulation/lessons/

And just in case you thought any lessons were learned, think again:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/3/story.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10481770&pnum=0


But Neikirk is a socialist, perhaps even communist, at heart and believes higher taxes is the solution to everything.

Posted by: John D | December 19, 2007 2:32 PM

No, Dyslin. We now know that tax cuts for the rich are the solution to everything.

Trillion Dollar War?, more tax cuts for the rich. $9
trillion national debt?, more tax cuts for the rich. Stagnant wages for the lower and middle class?, more tax-cuts for the rich. Inflation?, recession?, stagflation?, all can be cured by giving more tax cuts to the rich (NOT!)

How about a real world example why your world-view of tax-cuts is bogus, Johnny D.?:

Growth, prosperity not tied to tax cuts

By KEN NEAL World Senior Editor
5/6/2007

Contrary to the constant preachments of the politicians and what most of us would like to believe, tax cuts do not assure economic growth and prosperity.

Economists have generally debunked the supply-side economics popularized during the Reagan administration. But the politicians continue to claim that tax cuts will spur economic growth so much that government will get more revenue than if taxes had not been cut.

It's reminiscent of the alchemy theory of the Middle Ages when men tried to make gold from base metal.


Neal goes on to examine the effects of Oklahoma's tax cuts to make his point. Those interested read on. Dyslin, close your eyes, plug your ears and go nanananananan...

http://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/article.aspx?articleID=070505_7_G6_Contr70410&breadcrumb=editorials


CM,

I see the common thread with the companies you worked at - they failed. Do you have any financial background? Are you certified?

The Reamer,

Before you spout off, get a clue on what you are talking about.

You point to one instance AA/Enron. I am talking about GAAP - better google that since I know you don't know what that means.

As far as EnRon, it was bad that the employees had their retirement in one stock, but did you hear them complain in the 90's when the shady accounting was going on (under Mr Levitt's SEC)and the stock was going up?

AA did not perform the accounting, they audited the accounting. Private industry must reflect the present value of its future liabilities on its balance sheets unlike the gov't.


Terry and John D,
Why do you keep pretending that Social Security is a retirment savings program? It's pooled risk insurance to prevent workers from retiring in POVERTY and provide income to the PERMANANTLY DISABLED.


jethro, exactly right. The point is though, I believe, that if the money put into Social Security had been invested at market rates, instead of being used to shore up the Federal budget and increase the national debt, Social Security would be a lot better off than it is now, and those goals that you mention would be better served.


Terry,

Oh, I see; it's the workers faults that companies fail, not managements fault.

You are not stupid, in fact, you seem smart, but that was a stupid implication.

It was due to the efforts of the 'little people' like me that Old Bessie and that funny little railroad lasted as long as they did.


C. Morris, frequently, when a company fails, there is enough blame to share with everyone.

True, it's management's responsibility to steer the company, and ensure its long-term viability. Often, though, like a ship on a lee shore, management is faced with a very difficult or impossible situation. If the (particularly unionized) workforce cannot face the reality that their continued demands make the company uncompetitive, then management is faced with the real possibility of going out of business. I believe that such is what is occurring in the US auto industry right now, and has already occurred in the British auto industry. In the US, the UAW has the former Big Three by the throat, and there is no mechanism in the union for it to stopm squeezing until all of the life is gone. I'm not very optimistic.


Terry,
So you're saying we should accept that the GAAP which companies like WorldCom, Enron, and Adelphia were essentially bound to but still managed to "massage" so as to screw investors out of billions, and that were validated by "watchdogs" like Arthur Anderson, are going to save us from faulty gov't accounting practices?

I'm not defending gov't accounting practices per se, just pointing out that GAAP haven't prevented the Enrons of the world from "gaming" the system.

I think you also missed that "Levitt's SEC" tried, unsuccessfully, to eliminate the shared dependence among finance, auditing and legal providers and their corporate clients. It's these kind of conflicts that lead to the demise of Enron and AA.


C. Mo.,

You should be comforted by the fact that Terry, with his financial background, has your best interest at heart. Never mind that the accountants he mentions at Enron were most certainly certified, or that the auditors at Arthur Anderson that signed off on their work were equally qualified.

Terry wants us to believe that Corporations represent "the force" and that government is synonymous with the "dark side". Your experience may tell you different, but hey, Trickle-Down Terry knows what's best (for him).


Jethro,

SS in name only is it a "risk insurance to prevent workers from retiring in POVERTY"... I'll give you the disablility portion.

The reason it isn't "risk insurance" is that most people will collect their pension or 401K. Insurance pays out when monetary damage is done to the asset - think your car, house, medical, ...

CM,

I guess you weren't part of mgmt at those Fortune 500 companies and I am hoping you weren't part of the Finance disvions either - based upon your investment advice.

Let me get it straight, it was due to the workers that your companies lasted as long as they did, but it was mgmts fault when they went belly-up?


Terry,

Glad you finally figger'd it out.

I was a salaried system and statistical programmer. I was 'Dilbert', ha ha.

BTW, what the h are you??


Reamed,

GAAP is Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. They are the "rules" of accounting. It has nothing to do with the internal accountants that apply them nor the auditors that certify the financials. Enron/AA was pure blatent fraud. Having your external auditor also performing your internal auditor work was not appropriate. SARBOX has taken care of a lot of this.

Back to the original point, the gov't does not have to recognize future liabilities, such as pensions unlike the private corpoartions.


dts,

I missed your Warren Buffet point. First, Mr. Buffet is giving about $30 billion to the gates foundation, not leaving it for the estate tax.

Second, either Mr. Buffet is ignorant of how his money is being made or he is being disingenous. I'm guessing the latter. Since Mr. Buffet derives most of his income thru capital gains and dividends, most people think he is only paying 15% tax on his dividends and capital gains. However, since Mr. Buffet is a shareholder, a major one at that, his income is really being taxed twice - once at the corporate level at 35% - plus state and then add the dividend and/or capital gains tax on top of that. Therefore, his effective rate is much higher than his cleaning lady.

The top 1% are paying a higher percentage of the nations federal income tax than they ever have.

Some of those imports that Mr. Buffet is talking about is all the oil we import. Anytime you wwant to open up ANWAR, more off-shore drilling, and some other federal lands, I'll back your play.

Enron was fraud accounting. the AA partners that certified the accounting were frauds and therefore criminal action should have been taken. However, the entire AA organization did not deserve to be disbanded. There was a lot of fraud in the last half of the 90's.

CM,

I work in accounting and finance. therefore, on this topic, I know what I speak. If I need an if-then stmt, I'll call.


TD Terry.

I know what GAAP stands for: It's shorthand for rules were meant to be broken in today's corporate culture. The effectiveness of SOX in stemming corporate fraud is debatable. This article is a year old from the WLJ, but I doubt much has changed in a year:

http://www.wislawjournal.com/archive/2006/1225/coenen-122506.htm

BTW, accountants and finance officers are a dime a dozen. You blow off the world's most respected scientist because their conclusions on global warming don't fit your vested interest, yet we're supposed to believe you have all the answers on matters of finance because you cook the books for Exxon or some other energy-related entity.

Even Greenspan said that the sub-prime mess was a temporary "froth in the market". I imagine his credentials trump yours many times over.

Like your idiot-in-chief idol, GWB, you're big on one thing...Hubris.


Terry,

Are you sure you didn't used to work for Arthur Anderson?

The top 1% are paying a higher percentage of the nations federal income tax than they ever have.

Noticed you didn't say they are paying AT a higher TAX RATE. Of course they're paying a higher percentage of the nations fed. income tax...because they're the ones receiving all the benefits (increased revenue) of Bush's tax cuts. Meanwhile middle-class wages are stagnant:

Half of America's Gain in Income Goes to Richest 0.25%
(David Kay--NYT)

[Earners of over $1 million/year,] who constitute less than a quarter of 1 percent of all taxpayers, reaped almost 47 percent of the total income gains in 2005, compared with 2000.
People with incomes of more than a million dollars also received 62 percent of the savings from the reduced tax rates on long-term capital gains and dividends that President Bush signed into law in 2003...
So less than one-quarter of one percent of all taxpayers took in almost 50 percent of the nation's revenues revenue gain. And what about the little guy? Screwed, as you would suspect.

Americans earned a smaller average income in 2005 than in 2000, the fifth consecutive year that they had to make ends meet with less money...
Total income listed on tax returns grew every year after World War II, with a single one-year exception, until 2001, making the five-year period of lower average incomes and four years of lower total incomes a new experience for the majority of Americans born since 1945.

So who's being disingenuous, Terry?

As for your recommendation to trash one of the worlds most pristine wildlife habitations (ANWAR) for a few months supply of oil, or despoil the areas around our national parks with oil derricks--no thanks, T.D.

"On this topic, I know [of] what I speak." Why don't you put all that financial training of yours to good use and whip up a cost-benefit analysis of the Iraq War, you arrogant jerk.


dt

Here's a funny bit about some of Terry's financial heros.

Krugman, of course, is no Terry, but it's worth a look...

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/21/opinion/21krugman.html?ref=opinion


dts,

Riddle me this - If the highest tyax rate was 100% how much tax would the rich pay? Would that you make you happy?

Tax rates were cut across the board.

As far as a cost analysis of the war:

In March, 2003 most politicians of both parties thought that Sadaam had WMDs. How much danmagae to our economy would have occurred if a second 9-11 or a chemical attack on our country occurred. Just think how much money would be saved if Bill Clinton took out Osama when he had the chance.

As far as ANWAR

http://www.doi.gov/news/030312.htm

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/analysis_publications/arctic_national_wildlife_refuge/html/execsummary.html

As far as arrogance, Dizzy Dean once said " It ain't braggin', if you can back it up"


Ter,

That's the best you've got, it was Clinton's fault? What was the frat boy-in-chief doing for 9-months before 9/11 while his own intelligence people were warning him of an impending attack?

Chemical attacks? Russia has more nasty biological weapons and chemical weapons than anybody, shall we invade them next?

That would still leave those pesky domestic terrorists like Timothy Mcveigh. Fertilizer, the next WMD.

Yeah, Bush's excellent adventure into Iraq has been a real bargain, TD. Hundreds of thousands of casualties, a trillion dollar war, $12 billion a month and no end in sight. It must be nice being part of the M.I.C., that is, if you have no conscience.

Dizzy Dean--One colorful character, and I love baseball. But I'm a Giants fan, and besides, those "bring 'em on" type boast can backfire, just ask Dubya. I prefer more reasoned council, like the words of Kerry Livgre (Kansas)..."If I claim to be a wise man, it surely means that I don't know."
Of course, humility isn't part of the Cowboy-Bush-crowd lexicon and look where all their hubris has gotten us.

Anyway, TD, I'm fairly confident that the American people have had enough of the neocon experiment. Next November we're putting all you flat-earthers on waivers. Enjoy the plunder while you can. Happy Hanukkah, friend.


"Riddle me this - If the highest tyax rate was 100% how much tax would the rich pay? Would that you make you happy?"

Terry,

The tax rate is not important; it's how much income can be sheltered through loopholes.

EG; A man makes $10,000,000 per year, but shelters 100% of it. If the Tax rate is %100 he pays nothing.


dts,

First, it was less than 8 moths if you do the math. JOhn E can help you with that.

As far as I know, Russia had nothing to do w/ Islamic terrorist like Saddam did - rewarding the families of suicide bombers.

Please show me the math on the trillion dollar war.

As far as the "neocon experiment" (part of the great right-wing conspiracy), let's go back to the days where Americans around the world are the targets of terrorist - USS Cole, Kohbar twoers, African embassies.

Piece of financial advice - invest in prayer rugs.

ISn't Hanukkah over?

AAroo - please show me the specific shelter you are talking about. Anyway, either way the gov't gets no money wheteher your alleged tax shelter exists or not. If the tax shelter does not exist, then the $10 million would never have been earned since there was no incentive.


TheReamer,

The bottom line for me, (in the aftermath) After my property taxes went through the roof in August. Statistics that measure the relative state of the housing industry confirmed that the local market was now, belatedly, feeling the effects of the national mortgage crisis. We could expect the value of homes in our zip code to depreciate by 30%, we were told.

I already suspected as much. Where homes in my neighborhood had been selling in days, now they were sitting and sitting and sitting. A house around the corner from me that listed for $575,000 has been reduced to $450,000 and still no takers. I never celebrated the irrational rise in home prices, anyway. If you don't plan on selling anytime soon, all it means is higher taxes. Now, with the timing of things, my taxes are considerably higher, the value of my home, not so much. I live in the reddest of states, a one-party state, can't blame it on the democrats, there aren't any, to speak of.

That won't stop Tricke-down from trying to lay the sub-prime mess on Clinton or the ignorant masses. Yeah, it's all buyer beware with Terry (until the fall-out affects his own investments).

That's the way it is with all these unfettered capitalism worshipers, the market can do no wrong... till things go to sh#t and then they want a government bail-out.

Here's some of Terry's flippant remarks about a topic of which "I know what I speak":

Dodd backs lending reforms
by David Lightman

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher J. Dodd today proposed a sweeping set of changes aimed at helping high-risk borrowers deal with predatory lenders.


Here's some reform - Consumers get educated, know what you sign!

Posted by: Terry | September 5, 2007 6:27 PM


Here's some reform - Consumers get educated, know what you sign!

Posted by: Terry | September 5, 2007 6:27 PM

So if sub-prime loans were crack you'd say dangerous drugs are o.k., educate yourself about their dangers and avoid them. Legalize drugs, don't regulate or penalize the dealers, is that it? Fine, as long as the lenders and investors don't get bailed out either.

Posted by: dt | September 5, 2007 9:32 PM


dt,

I haven't seen anybody die yet from a sub-prime loan have you?

So dt wants crack legalized?

Posted by: Terry | September 5, 2007 10:30 PM

In answer to the dying part, Terry, it usually manifest itself when financial advisers like yourself, put a gun to their mouth or take that leap from the 13th floor. In Terry's world, greed is good...until it isn't. Keep smokin' the crack, friendo.



Terry!
Everyone knows the rich control Amerika and get any tax shelter they wish, numb nts!


Aaroo,

I must say I agree with Terry on this one, my good man. The rich need protection from the rabble out there. They, the rich, righteous Christian men stand naked before the power of the low classes.

Given any actual power at the polls, they will vote in Stalinism!

My father was in a so called 'Teachers Union' so I know of what I speak! To this day I mourn my childhood and upbringing. It was strictly 'liberool', with all the good table manners, etc, to match. It's a G-- given miracle I survived.


dt,
I believe the likes of Terry and his ilk should be repressed via some governmental agency, the likes of which has never been seen!!


dt,
I believe the likes of John D, and his ilk should be repressed via some governmental agency, the likes of which has never been seen!!


Terry,

Didn't frat boy-in-chief get intelligence briefings in December to prepare him for, you know, the threat of bin Laden? (Where is Mr. Wanted dead or alive, anyway?). Didn't Dubya have access to intelligence on Al Qaeda as President- appointed by the Supreme Court? And there was always Daddy Bush, former Pres. and CIA main man to bring Jr. up to speed. But then, his priorities were elsewhere:

Simply put, terrorism was not a priority for the Bush administration during the first nine months of 2001. As former Bush administration counter-terrorism czar Richard Clarke told the 9/11 Commission investigating the attacks in 2004: "To the loved ones of the victims of 9/11, to them who are here in the room, to those who are watching on television, your government failed you."

Clarke served as a White House counter-terrorism official in three presidential administrations.

The truth is that the administration received warnings about al-Qaeda's intentions to use jetliners as bombs in August 2001, but it was too busy obsessing about a war with Iraq to take action. Although President Bush has maintained over the years that terrorism was his number one priority before 9/11, evidence suggests otherwise.

A little known article in the January 11, 2001, edition of the New York Times titled "Iraq Is Focal Point as Bush Meets with Joint Chiefs" confirms that the administration was more interested in toppling Saddam Hussein than dealing with the growing threat of domestic terrorism.

"As far as I know, Russia had nothing to do w/ Islamic terrorist like Saddam did - rewarding the families of suicide bombers."

Oh, so that's the neocons' latest iteration of why we were justified in invading Iraq.

I wonder who armed and trained the Mujahideen to fight the Russians in Afghanistan? You know, the Jhihaddist that evolved into al-Qeada?

Prime suspect in the New York and Washington terrorists attacks, branded by the FBI as an "international terrorist" for his role in the African US embassy bombings, Saudi born Osama bin Laden was recruited during the Soviet-Afghan war "ironically under the auspices of the CIA, to fight Soviet invaders". 1

In 1979 "the largest covert operation in the history of the CIA" was launched in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in support of the pro-Communist government of Babrak Kamal.2:

With the active encouragement of the CIA and Pakistan's ISI [Inter Services Intelligence], who wanted to turn the Afghan jihad into a global war waged by all Muslim states against the Soviet Union, some 35,000 Muslim radicals from 40 Islamic countries joined Afghanistan's fight between 1982 and 1992. Tens of thousands more came to study in Pakistani madrasahs. Eventually more than 100,000 foreign Muslim radicals were directly influenced by the Afghan jihad.3
The Islamic "jihad" was supported by the United States and Saudi Arabia with a significant part of the funding generated from the Golden Crescent drug trade:

In March 1985, President Reagan signed National Security Decision Directive 166,...[which] authorize[d] stepped-up covert military aid to the mujahideen, and it made clear that the secret Afghan war had a new goal: to defeat Soviet troops in Afghanistan through covert action and encourage a Soviet withdrawal. The new covert U.S. assistance began with a dramatic increase in arms supplies -- a steady rise to 65,000 tons annually by 1987, ... as well as a "ceaseless stream" of CIA and Pentagon specialists who traveled to the secret headquarters of Pakistan's ISI on the main road near Rawalpindi, Pakistan. There the CIA specialists met with Pakistani intelligence officers to help plan operations for the Afghan rebels.4

The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) using Pakistan's military Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) played a key role in training the Mujahideen. In turn, the CIA sponsored guerrilla training was integrated with the teachings of Islam:

Predominant themes were that Islam was a complete socio-political ideology, that holy Islam was being violated by the atheistic Soviet troops, and that the Islamic people of Afghanistan should reassert their independence by overthrowing the leftist Afghan regime propped up by Moscow.5

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO109C.html

Terry--you wan't the math on the Trillion dollar war? I apologize, I was a little conservative, it's the TWO Trillion Dollar War and the source Joseph Stiglitz, winner of the Nobel Prize in economics and professor of economics at Columbia University. Admittingly, his creditials pale in comparison to "I know what I speak" Trickle-down Terry, but just the same...

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/12855294/national_affairs_the_2_trillion_dollar_war

And Terry's little tax riddle suggest Exxon et. al. won't have enough incentive to produce with their tremendous tax burden. Exxon Mobil only earned $39.5 billion in 2006, can't wait to see their haul this year. Let's all cry a tear for Terry's employer.


LoudTalker,

That is not the way to intervene! Please, some manners.

Terry,
You are, however, intractable, and somewhat passive aggressive. I think you need, minimally, some kind of therapy to gain some insights into the human condition.

My experience on a communal farm in Canada in the late sixties and my year in that free clinic in Santa Fe taught me something about the human spirit, and your spirit, sir, needs healed.

Please, go in peace, harmony, and well being.


LoudTalker,

That is not the way to intervene! Please, some manners.

Terry,
You are, however, intractable, and somewhat passive aggressive. I think you need, minimally, some kind of therapy to gain some insights into the human condition.

My experience on a communal farm in Canada in the late sixties and my year in that free clinic in Santa Fe taught me something about the human spirit, and your spirit, sir, needs healed.

Please, go in peace, harmony, and well being.


"If the tax shelter does not exist, then the $10 million would never have been earned since there was no incentive.
Posted by: Terry | December 22, 2007 5:41 PM"

At least, Terry, you admit the tax laws are biased in favor of the millionaires!


Swampers, pay no attention to TrickleDown Boy

Terry is a Wall Street whore whose only goal is to keep the criminal Repubs in power so that he and the other fat rich white guys can continue to get big tax cuts while the middle class and the poor continue to suffer?.


I see the Karl Marx support group met in here this evening.

dts,

As far as the sub-prime mess. Who signed the contract? The home buyer and the mortgage company - let them deal with the mess they made.

My guess is bin Laden is holed up in some cave at about 20,000 feet.

Richard Clarke - you mean Bill Clinton's chief counter-terrorism adviser.

Was terrorism a priority for the Clinton Administartion? I don't think so, or all those attacks on American tagerts would not have happened.

And you suggesstion in 2001 would have been do what???

Wasn't Iraq Bill Clinton's obsession - at least for a few days. Why did he bomb Iraq in Dec, 1998?

As far as who trained the Mujahideen? Wasn't it Tom Hanks, I mean Charlie Wilson?

As far as the spending on the Iraq war, I believe the answer is $400 billion according to your article. The future spending as propsed by your "leading economist" is conjecture. If you use that logic then we are still paying for WW2 since we still haves bases in Germany and Japan. Was that worth the cost, considering Germany never invaded us? How about the cost of the Korean War and the cost of the 30,000 troops we have had there for decades?

Finally, Exxon-Mobil and their $40 billions in earnings. Why don't you look and see how much they made in taxes and then tell me who earned more from Exxon-Mobil - the gov't or their shareholders - the ones who took the risk. Secons, who had the better ROI - Exxon-Mobil or Starbucks?

How do you figure Exxon-Mobil is my employer? By what means of your superior intellgence did you deduce that?

dts ,my observation is that you are back on the sauce.

Lennon Sisters - Another liberal for personal freedom.

Flower Power - Pass the doobie.

Flower Power - Pass the doobie.

Aaroo - tax laws are written for those that pay taxes.



Terry,
Have you no criticism for Prof. Stiglitz? He used GAAP and everything to arrive at the "true" cost of the Iraq war. What was it you said:

"Back to the original point, the gov't does not have to recognize future liabilities, such as pensions unlike the private corpoartions" [corporations].

So there you go, TD. Dr. Stiglitz figured in future liabilities, such as the government's est. future cost to care for soldiers minus limbs and/or with scrambled eggs for brains.

BTW- Hanukkah started on Dec. 4th. this year. Last year it was Dec. 15, next year Dec. 21. You might want to "Google" that exemplary bunch of Democrats over at Google and double-check, though.


Terry - Why do you approve of raping America for your personal profit (tax cuts for the rich)?...I hope you fall face first on your pocket protecter you little, halliburton, blackwater, big oil loving piece of anti-American crap.

"Terry's Heroes"
http://photobucket.com/mediadetail/?media=http%3A%2F%2Fi86.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fk88%2FDuke_S%2Fgop.jpg&searchTerm=gop&pageOffset=11


"As far as the sub-prime mess. Who signed the contract? The home buyer and the mortgage company - let them deal with the mess they made."

That's what I heard during the Savings and Loan disaster, if only...

http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoon/display.cfm/46155/

"My guess is bin Laden is holed up in some cave at about 20,000 feet."

Whether he is or not, he's the one responsible for 9/11 and he's still flipping us the bird at every opportunity thanks to the botched effort at Tora Bora and the distraction of Iraq. Al Qeada influence is growing in Pakistan as well.

From the article above: Clarke served as a White House counter-terrorism official in three presidential administrations.
(including Dubya's)

"Wasn't Iraq Bill Clinton's obsession -at least for a few days. Why did he bomb Iraq in Dec, 1998"?

According to Thomas Ricks (Fiasco), and captured Iraqi scientist and workers, Clinton's little cruise missile party was successful in largely persuading Iraq to abandon its WMD programs. Plus Bubba didn't invade Iraq and we aren't still paying for it.

"And you suggesstion in 2001 would have been do what???"

Focus all our energies on bin Laden and Afghanistan. Iraq made no sense, the sanctions were working. Should have kept our eye on the ball, Dizzy.

"Was terrorism a priority for the Clinton Administration? I don't think so, or all those attacks on American targets would not have happened."

Terrorist attacks have occurred against U.S. targets through the last several administrations, Marines in Beirut, Oklahoma City, WTC I. If you want to blame the intelligence community, go ahead. They did after all miss the impending fall of the Soviet Union. But you can't in fairness single out Clinton. And 9/11 happened on Dubya's watch no matter how you try to spin it.

The cost of the Iraq War-- spare me the bogus WWII analogies. Japan (part of the Axis) invaded a U.S. possession and we were forced into that war. Did Iraq have a navy, air force, missiles that were a credible threat to us? No. There are a half dozen countries that are a greater potential threat to the U.S., including Pakistan. And you have my blessing to eliminate bases and bring home troops from Japan, Korea, and Germany at any time.

As for conjecture on the future cost of the Iraq War...first, the current cost of Bush's excellent adventure (about $480 billion)

http://nationalpriorities.org/cms/costofwar

This part of the "conjecture" is likely to increase:

"It also includes losses the economy will suffer from injured vets ($355 billion) and higher oil prices ($450 billion).
Gotta like BushCo's est. though, that the war will practically pay for itself in oil revenue.

"Finally, Exxon-Mobil and their $40 billions in earnings. Why don't you look and see how much they made in taxes and then tell me who earned more from Exxon-Mobil - the gov't or their shareholders - the ones who took the risk. Secons, who had the better ROI - Exxon-Mobil or Starbucks?

I'd say the CEO's:

Exxon Mobil CEO Lee R. Raymond’s retirement in January 2006 coincided with record profits for Exxon Mobil. On retirement, Raymond was entitled to receive an estimated annual retirement benefit of over $8 million.[1] He choose instead to take a lump sum payment of $98 million.[2] Raymond will also get an administrative assistant, company-provided life insurance, a car, driver, and airplane use for two years.[3]

Starbucks sucks, Peets rules, I'll be off the sauce as soon as this nightmare administration goes back to the ranch.

P.S.--More good news for the market, bubble-boy:

Bear Stearns Cos. said Thursday a bigger-than-expected writedown in its mortgage portfolio caused the nation's fifth-largest U.S. investment bank to post the first loss in its 84-year history.


"As far as the sub-prime mess. Who signed the contract? The home buyer and the mortgage company - let them deal with the mess they made."

But who caused the harm, Grasshopper?



dts,

He used "GAAP" based upon his assumptions. Before I'll critize the prof, I'll want to see his assumptions first. Ask the prof what the true cost of WW2 was - put that in today's dollars for comparison sake. If you want the true cost of WW2 - don't forget the GI Bill. Also, don't forget the cost to corporations that started offering fringe benefits to its employees , since they couldn't give them wage raises.

You wished me Happy Hanukkah this year, not in 2005 & 2006.

S & L fiasco - the only bailout that should have taken place was for the depositers that had their money in the S & L's, not the S & L execs.

Clarke was promoted to CHEIF counter-terrorism expert under Bill. He was a gov't employee for 30 years.

If MR. Ricks stmt was true, why were democratic leaders still saying that Saddam had WMD's during 1999 & 2000?

What does the CEO's salary have to do with anything? Do I think its excessive? Probably. However, its not my problem. That's between the shareholders, board and the CEO.

That lump-sum payment is a discounted settlement of the future payments the corpoartion would owe him.

Bear-Stearns is just applying LCM acctng principles. You buy high and the value drops, you have to take write-downs. I'm glad to see bad economic news makes you so happy.

Gil Thorpe - stick with coaching. How do you make these leaps of illogic?

FLower-Power - Who caused the harm? They both did, they both should pay, not the innocent taxpayers like you and me.


"FLower-Power - Who caused the harm? They both did, they both should pay, not the innocent taxpayers like you and me.

Posted by: Terry | December 23, 2007 12:12 PM"

Oh, but innocent one, we all pay as we write....

Have a serene solstice my friend. I worry for your well being and personal karma halo.


Terry,
Re. B.S.--bad economic news doesn't make me happy, shrinking 401's don't make me happy. Just making the point that not everyone who suffers the fallout from sub-prime mess were made aware that parts of their investment portfolios were being vested in risky sub primes. You expect the folks at B.S. to know better.

If all the foreign investors that got burned by the Sub-prime mess (like China) pulled out their investments as a result, we all suffer the credit crunch, not just the banks and individual investors. What makes you think you're insulated?

I know what LSP is, he isn't worth it, no CEO is. It may not be your problem, but it is to workers like Delta Employees who are told they have to take three pay cuts and lose benefits while the management walks off with their golden parachutes. Your a real compassionate guy, Ter.

Ricks and WMD's-They weren't, and neither were Dubya's people like I explained to you earlier:

Terry...about those WMD's and who was quoting what:

(eriposte)

On the June 15 [2003] Meet the Press, Wesley Clark offered an intriguing thought about those AWOL WMD:

RUSSERT: Was there an intelligence failure? Was the intelligence hyped, as Senator Joe Biden said? Was the president misled, or did he mislead the American people?

CLARK: Well, several things. First of all, all of us in the community who read intelligence believe that Saddam wanted these capabilities and he had some. We struck very hard in December of ’98, did everything we knew, all of his facilities. I think it was an effective set of strikes. Tony Zinni commanded that, called Operation Desert Fox, and I think that set them back a long ways.

George Tenet in a report to Congress in Feb. 2001 (from raw story):

We do not have any direct evidence that Iraq has used the period since Desert Fox to reconstitute its WMD programs...

Tenet also continued that sentence with "...although given its past behavior, this type of activity must be regarded as likely." But the basic point is that even if Saddam Hussein possessed WMDs or WMD programs in 1998, Clinton's 1998 bombings of Iraq's WMD facilities destroyed them at that time (which would require the need to "reconstitute"). So, using the "same" intelligence from 1998 to go to war in 2003 would be the most blatant form of fraud.

George Bush, 10/11/00:

We don't know whether he's developing weapons of mass destruction. He better not be or there's going to be a consequence should I be the president.

Colin Powell, 2/24/01:

...the fact that the sanctions exist -- not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein's ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they [the U.N. sanctions] have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq...


And what about Scott Ritter's version of events? Ritter, who Bush's people tried to discredit, is an ex- Marine who fought in the Gulf War. He went on to become an intelligence specialist and U.N. inspector. By his account, over the seven years of the program, he and other inspectors were able to confirm that Iraq's chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons programs were effectively destroyed.


Posted by: dt | November 28, 2007 11:59 PM

S&L-Tell Neil Bush we taxpayers want our billion back.

The cost of war, yeah Terry, the costs of all wars go on and on and on. That's why intelligent people don't rush in to unnecessary wars like Bush did in Iraq. And it's even more insulting when people like you try to compare the two, as if the situation or the threat of the Axis powers in WWII were in any way similar.

And you wonder why we don't trust republican chickenhawks to govern our country?

But I am impressed my your "I've got mine so F.U." mentality, TD. You make a fine Republican, all we've come to expect.


Flower-Power,

If such a thing as karma exist, I fear there are black clouds forming around TD's head.

In some ways Terry resembles the character of Scrooge..."a cold-hearted, tight fisted, selfish man." Yeah, that's our Terry, the maestro of misanthropy. Bah, humbug!, TD.


Flower Power,

Don't waste your time or compassion on Trickle-down. I visited him already, he told me to Cheney! Cheney? Anyway he'll be a room mate of mine soon.


FP,

I worry that I have to pay your welfare check.


FLower-Power - Who caused the harm? They both did, they both should pay, not the innocent taxpayers like you and me.

Posted by: Terry | December 23, 2007 12:12 PM

In a perfect world, maybe. But there's such a thing as collateral damage, Terry. It happens in finance and in war. But you keep those blinders on, Terry, that's what "compassionate conservatives" do.


Exibit A as to why Republicans can't govern, TD Terry.

"For I have sworn thee fair and thought thee bright, who art as black as hell, and dark as night."--Shakespeare


dts,

I would expect the folks at BS to know better. They took a risk and they paid a price. Folks, that's capitalism.

I don't think I'm insulated from this mess. The next time I need a loan in the near future, I ill probably pay a higher rate because of this, even though I have perfect credit. That's life. The choice I'll make at that time is the additional cost going to stop me from making the purchase or downgrade my purchase.

The pay of a CEO is the business of the shareholders, not the general public; i.e., the gov't.

WMD quotes:

http://www.davidstuff.com/political/wmdquotes.htm

BTW, if those weapons had been destroyed in Dec 1998, all Saddam had to do was show the proof they had been destroyed (UN REsolution 1441) and all of this would have been avoided.

I agree Neil Bush shouldn't have gotten his bailout.

The cost of war does go on; however, that cost pales incomparison to teh cost of entitlements such as social security, medicare, perscription drugs, universal healthcare, etc...

But I am impressed my your "I can't get mine, so I'll take yours" mentality. You make a fine democrat, all we've come to expect.


Duck,

If we bail out the lendwers and the lendees, will that stop future risky behavior?


The Anonymous post above are from Terry.


"The cost of war does go on; however, that cost pales incomparison to teh cost of entitlements such as social security, medicare, perscription drugs, universal healthcare, etc...

Terry,
But those items are for the greater good, unlike the Iraq war.


Aaaroo,

Those costs (social security, medicare, perscription drugs, universal healthcare) are for the greater good of making the American populace more dependant on the gov't.

Is the war on terror in Afghanistan for the greater good?

How about the first Gulf War? VietNam? Korean War? were these wars for the "greater good"?


Terry,

I'm not anti-capitalist, markets can work well as long as there's an even playing field. When there isn't, as is often the case, they need oversight. The kind of oversight the SEC didn't provide when Harken tubed and Dubya used his insider knowledge to bail, rather than go down with the sinking ship.

I can't just shrug off the injustice and say, "that's life". Some of those investors propped up Harken to get access to Bush, they just blew off their losses as the price of buying Bush. They don't need our pity, just our contempt, but what about the rest?

http://books.google.com/books?id=LFgl1_k2iawC&pg=PA151&lpg=PA151&dq=who+financed+harken&source=web&ots=K7gZ27XOE1&sig=8GDCEvyP5J8SOYNe11pAnCwoJRA#PPP2,M1

"But I am impressed my your "I can't get mine, so I'll take yours" mentality. You make a fine democrat, all we've come to expect."

You guys kill me. You think that because we have a social conscience we're all stupid, lazy and out of work. You also think we live for government handouts.

I paid income taxes, mostly in the higher brackets, and payroll taxes for over 40 years. I've never been unemployed, even when I was in school full-time. I was able to retire in comfort, not a third home in Aspen comfort, but we have everything we need.

But I'm not oblivious to what goes on around me. I see good people, hard-working people suffer misfortune that is not of their doing. Some people get help from their family, some people from church organizations, but many fall through the cracks. I don't believe in social Darwinism, I don't believe the market can cure all ills, like you do.

I have a neighbor up the street who has cancer and is being treated with Hospice care through Medicare. He worked as a gardener till he was 75, then fell too ill to do what he loved. He lived a modest life, saved what he could, but now has trouble making ends meet. Do you feel "cheated" that your tax dollars are helping him live the rest of his remaining days in comfort"? Do you feel cheated that his wife is getting Social Security to help ease the burden of caring for her invalid husband? I don't?


Wars are sometimes necessary, many are not. Vietnam and Iraq fall in the later territory. WWII and Afghanistan in the former.

Just because Saddam was recalcitrant, we never came close to exhausting our options there. Bush was looking for an excuse to invade, that's why he cherry-picked and cooked the intel. Bush could have invaded Iran and N.Korea for the same reasons he used to invade Iraq. I'd rather our tax dollars go to constructive domestic programs than "shock and awe".

"Those costs (social security, medicare, perscription drugs, universal healthcare) are for the greater good of making the American populace more dependant on the gov't."

The PD program was pushed through by Bush to get the senior vote and to repay the Pharmaceutical Industry for their support (no negotiated price breaks). And BushCo lied about the projected cost, they knew they would be much higher (a $100 billion higher) and witheld the cost est. in order to secure the votes of 13 convervative Republicans who balked at any figure about $400 billion. You still voted for him after that, right?

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0312-01.htm

Gotta go now Ter. We have Christmas eve plans with our neighbors. One's a retired professional basketball player and current P.T. Another is an attorney who manages a large law firm. One is an air-traffic controller, another a social worker. The common thread, all of them are democrats, none of them "can't get mine, so I'll take yours", all of them give a crap about the less fortunate in this country. All of them think that this country, under Bush, has lost it's soul. That's why we will do our best to keep blood-suckers like you from controlling the country.

Merry Christmas, Terry and welcome to the new China:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/gate/a/2007/12/19/notes121907.DTL

P.S. A recalcitrant Santa is rumoured to be sending bin Laden a few crates of RPG's for Christmas, but won't give up the location of his cache. Recommend "shock and awe" for the North Pole. Elves and reindeer are expendable. Oil liberated beneath the ice by our bunker-busters will pay for everything--Dick Cheney.


Trickle Down,

You don't believe in man-made Global Warming despite the obvious and overwhelming scientific proof that supports it, therefore you are not worhty of a present this year.

You compare the recessionary period of the early 90's(second largest in US history next to the Great Depression) to the tiny recessionary period post- Clinton as one in the same, therefore you are not only partisan and pathetic, you will be lucky to get a lump of coal. Then again, I guess apples and oranges are both fruit.

You attribute the greatest economic expansion in the history of this country during the Clinton Administration to nothing more than Venture Capitalists and Dot Com voodoo magic, therefore I take it back, you get no coal.

I just wish Bryan and Tony would come back and start smacking you around like a couple of alley cats with a brained mouse. Then again, you can't even handle someone called Flower Power.

Merry Christmas.

ps, There was never a war on Christmas.


Terry,
Possibly GWI and maybe Korea, but that is iffy. Most war are a mistake. GHWB agent passed an ambiguous statement on to Saddam's people giving a false green light.
These people are incompetent, most of them. Criky, you could do a better job.

VN, definitely not. More lies, from all of them, Truman thru Nixon.


Terry,
Possibly GWI and maybe Korea, but that is iffy. Most war are a mistake. GHWB agent passed an ambiguous statement on to Saddam's people giving a false green light.
These people are incompetent, most of them. Criky, you could do a better job.

VN, definitely not. More lies, from all of them, Truman thru Nixon.


Terry,
Possibly GWI and maybe Korea, but that is iffy. Most war are a mistake. GHWB agent passed an ambiguous statement on to Saddam's people giving a false green light.
These people are incompetent, most of them. Criky, you could do a better job.

Of course, the Afg. War, apparently necessary, has been neglected and mishandled.

VN, definitely not. More lies, from all of them, Truman thru Nixon.


"Aaaroo,

Those costs (social security, medicare, perscription drugs, universal healthcare) are for the greater good of making the American populace more dependant on the gov't. Terry"

Aaroo,

You are treating 'Terry' way too seriously. Here's what you say to 'Terry';

Terry,

Actually, I plan on spending my first Social Security check on liquor, pot, and the rest on lap dances down at the strip joint.
Have a nice day.

TheReamer


Do I feel cheated that you neighbors are collecting social security and medicare? No, I assume they worked hard and paid into it (technically they paid for someone older and the current workers are paying for them - but none the less, the promise was made).

You answered on four of the wars(WW2, Afghanistan, Iraq, and VietNam), but you did not answer Korea, Gulf War One and while we are at, how about the Balkans?

The problem with you libs, is think the only compassion can come thru the gov't. The gov't has been fighting the war on poverty for how many years? and by the amount of complaining you libs do, the gov't obviously has not won the battle.

Hope you enjoyed time with you fellow limo libs, I'm sure I was worth a chuckle or two.


Duck,

If we bail out the lendwers and the lendees, will that stop future risky behavior?


Posted by: Anonymous | December 24, 2007 10:12 AM

No, and I'm not proposing they do a bailout (unless it becomes apparent that inaction would cause a major meltdown of the economy). Greenspan should have reigned in these risky loans long ago. Krugman was saying back in 2003 that they would lead to disaster. Feds should regulate those pay-day loan businesses out of existence too (some states are already doing this). They're nothing but legalized loan sharking outfits.


The problem with you libs, is think the only compassion can come thru the gov't. The gov't has been fighting the war on poverty for how many years? and by the amount of complaining you libs do, the gov't obviously has not won the battle.
Hope you enjoyed time with you fellow limo libs, I'm sure I was worth a chuckle or two.

Posted by: Terry | December 24, 2007 10:13 PM


Merry Xmas everyone, even to the crooks of the Repuplican ilk (Terry).

May Santa bring Terry, Bill-O, Rush, and Seany larger tax cuts than the last ones.

"When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross...and Terry will be carrying both of them and serving Wingnut kool-aide at the same time.


Peace on earth...unless you're one of those scary brown people - GW Bush


"The gov't has been fighting the war on poverty for how many years?"

How many years, how many dollars on the failed war on drugs? I'll tell ya:

How America Lost the War on Drugs
After Thirty-Five Years and $500 Billion, Drugs Are as Cheap and Plentiful as Ever: An Anatomy of a Failure.
Ben Wallace-WellsPosted Nov 27, 2007 12:56 PM

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/17438347/how_america_lost_the_war_on_drugs


What did we get for our billions in Pakistan?

U.S. Officials See Waste in Billions Sent to Pakistan:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/24/world/asia/24military.html

What do we have to show for our $500 billion (so far) in Iraq? So we took out a few bad guys, they're a dime a dozen. An American-style democracy was a pie in the sky fantasy. This thing will go on forever, and the best we can hope for now, is a Shia theocracy friendly to Iran. Gee, that was worth it.

Meanwhile, Afghanistan has gone to sh#t, we're too busy screwin' the pooch in Iraq.

As for "Charly's War", that you mentioned earlier--you missed the movie's primary message: The blame for the Islamic ascendancy is not placed on the support for the Afghani warlords, but on the United States’ failure to maintain its aid to Afghanistan after the Soviet retreat.

The trouble with you cons is you think you can solve all the world's problems by locking up, blowing up, or fencing out all the "undesirable" elements. How well has that worked out? All Bush has done is create a whole new generation of terrorist bent on our destruction.

And Terry, don't you know, we libs travel in Prius', not limos?


Reamed,

I hope you enjoy you ss check. Use your perscription drug for viagra, might make the lap dances better.


Venom, when you have no argument, thro out the facist term.

dts,

The war on drugs - another gov't success story.

I'm not thrilled with Pakistan either, but unlike Obama, I don't think it is as simple as invading considering they have Nukes and an unstable militant Islamic population.

I see you're still ducking the question of the Korean War, First Gulf War, and the Balkans?

Also, I guess thosoe quotes from the democratic leadership quashed the WMDs were destroyed in 1998 theory?

The trouble with you libs is that dismantle intellgence and military operations in order to feed domestic dependency.

The Prius - a feel good car to solve a non-existant problem. That's for another day.


dt,

Here's a good look at "Terry's America"
http://www.bushflash.com/14.html


I really must that I feel in all honesty that the liberals won this one.

Terry, you have been bested!


Venom has gone for the absolute when he makes a comparison to Hitler/Nazis.

Rejoin this conversation when you graduate 12th grade.


Terry,

I agree with you on Pakistan (complicated), but we must see better monitoring of the Paki slush fund. It's akin to the $9 billion unaccounted for in Iraq, and the billion dollars worth of weapons in the wrong hands. What the hell are these people doing?

Also I don't think Obama said he would invade Pakistan in the sense you are implying (to overthrow the government), but only to pursue bin Laden if we knew with certainty of his whereabouts there.

I don't know of anyone who wants to dismantle the military or the intelligence agencies, but we should stop the M.I.C. from sucking at the public teat. Did you see the post I made of the $5 billion pentagon flush to Boeing on a failed spy satellite upgrade? Ike was right.

The Korean War, a real U.N. war in which N.Korea was never defeated. I'll give you my final answer on that after I read Halberstam's The Coldest Winter (American and the Korean War). It was a gift for Christmas.

Gulf War I, we never should have deserted those who rose up in the south to oppose Saddam. We didn't enforce southern no-fly-zone while thousands were massacred by Iraqi gunships. And in the aftermath of it all, Kuwaiti's still hate our guts.

Balkans yes, and I'll elaborate later, but we have plans this evening.

Prius--Later.


Terry,

A special message for you from your friends at the Democratic Party:
http://www.amishrakefight.org/gfy/


I'm going to laugh when you wingnuts get your arse handed to you in this election, you greedy sob.


dts,

I wasn't implying that Boy Wonder would overthrow the Pakistani gov't, but U.S. trooops on their soil would give the the Islamonuts just another reason to revolt.

Dismantlting of the militray and intellgence - see the reduction of troop levels that took place during the 90's.

I await you answes on Korea and Balkans.


Venom,

I'll bet your 5th grade teacher is glad she has two weeks away from you.


Re. Islamonuts on Paki soil, true enough, although I suspect it would be in the form of a quick and dirty 2000 lb. bomb like the one al-Zarkawi was introduced to.

But didn't bin Laden sight our continued presence in Saudi Arabia as motive for 9/11? Your boy, Ron Paul, is a fan of that theory too.

Very tragic development with Bhutto's assassination, really Pakistan's best hope for the near future. Katy bar the door, things are going to get ugly.

Reduction of troop levels in the 90's-- We were supposed to get a "peace benefit" from the end of the cold war. Smaller forces were intended to respond to regional crisis, not nation-building. I know a naval intelligence officer, quite well, who taught a class on military geography in the 90's which I attended. I was always friends with him outside of school. This guy was formerly in a position like the Alec Baldwin character in Hunt For Red October. He also taught an MBA program for DCE, a very bright fellow.

I could tell you what he told me privately, outside the classroom, but then I'd have to kill you. Bottom line, the neocon theorist have hijacked the military.

They are many things not to like about the Korean and the Balkans Wars, and I am still learning about them. One theme that sets these wars apart from the Iraq War, (The Republican War) is expressed well in the following article:

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/kevin_mattson/2007/11/the_republican_way_of_war.html

Prius--Was designed with the idea that it would pollute significantly less and guzzle significantly less. If it is addressing a problem that doesn't exist, we must have infinite sources of oil and no pollution in the world. Hadn't heard that before.

And, BTW, TD, I know you don't believe in Global Warming, but get real, buddy. From USA Today's Life section yesterday:

Global warming

It led the pack as the main science story of 2007. This was a year in which the topic moved from being theory to fact in the scientific world and, perhaps more important, in the minds of many Americans.

It also was the year in which the gold-standard scientific body on the topic, the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, won the Nobel Peace Prize. It shared the award with former vice president Al Gore.

In its long-awaited report in February, the U.N. panel said that global warming was unequivocal and that humankind's reliance on fossil fuels — coal, fuel oil and natural gas — was to blame. Discussion has shifted in scientific and political circles to "What effects will it have?" and "What can we do about it?"

And about the Earth being 6,000 years old, get serious. More of the "devils handiwork" from the same issue:

Feathered, flightless dinosaur

Archaeologists in China discovered the remains of a feathered, 16-foot-tall, 3,000-pound flightless dinosaur that stunned scientists. The 70-million-year-old Gigantoraptor erlianensis was found in Mongolia and could stand eye-to-eye with a tyrannosaur. Previously, the largest bird dinosaur, or oviraptor, found was the size of a horse

So how is it that a flat-earther like you is telling we libs that we're nuts, T.D? I mean, get with the program. The evidence is all around you, bubble-boy.

If you want further insights as to where Dubya dropped the ball in his foreign policy, TD, read the following article from this republican website:

http://www.republicansforhumility.com/rhetoric.html

I know humility is a concept foreign to you, but you should try it some time.


A 2000 lb bunker-buster would do the trick. Can you identify the cave?

Ron Paul's not my boy - he has some good domestic spending (lack of spending) ideas, but forigen policy is where we part.

Article still doesn't explain your stand on Korea and the Balkans. Was our inviolvement in those two conflicts more justified than our invasion of Iraq?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,318656,00.html

I also believe our presence in Sauid Arabia is sighted for his involvment with Khobar Towers, African Embassy bombings, and the USS Cole. This was while he was walking freely throughout the MIddle East smiling at our satillites.

We did get the troop reduction during the 90's from the peace dividend. That is why we have the military size we do now.

Today's events, another thing Al Qeada has taken credit for - shouldv'e been nipped in the bud a decade ago.

Speaking of MMGW.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,318656,00.html

I don't know where you get the idea that the earth is only 6,000 years. As a matter of fact, if it was, I might believe in MMGW. But since the earth is at least 300 million years old - at least that's the estimated age of the cockroach. I don't think a 30 year trend is statistically significant. IN addition Dr. James Hansen, the big MMGW NASA cliementologist, was first on the global cooling bandwagon of the 70's

http://canadiancoalition.com/forum/messages/25455.shtml


dt,
That's an eye-opening article on the Neocon grand plan (repulicansforhumility) The bastards dragged us all into the rabbit hole. Reamer was right about BushCheney Inc. and Trickle-down--"Black as hell and dark as night." How did you get to be this way, Terry, were you home-schooled?


Balkans III

Here's my two-bits. The Balkans and Bushie's excellent adventure both sucked. At least Clinton, with bipartisan support, knew how to prosecute a war. Charges of wag-the-dog were bogus. Bush would have managed to screw-up Grenada.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/04/20/kosovo.congress/

Terry. Are you really a creationist and global warming denier? What a loser! And you think bin Laden is living in a cave.

Sorry for butting in, dts.


JM, I wasn't gov't schooled, that's for damn sure.

Dust - your two bits ain't worth a quarter. Where do you think bin Laden's living, squatting in a foreclosed condo in SoCal?


Trickle-Down,

My Canadian two-bits are worth more than your sorry-ass currency.

Bin Laden in on the Pak/Afghan border somewhere ( CIA is doubtful that he's in a cave). BL is surrounded by loyal tribesman that won't reveal his whereabouts for the $25 million bounty. A greedy sod like yourself would sell-out his own mother for that amount.


dt,

Lot of unanswered questions on your part.

So you are a socilaist from the north? Probably Quebec or Ontario.

Ok - he is sitting on a rock outside of the cave. Do you have an insider at Langley?

$25 million - how many camels does one need.


Yeah Terry,

Bin Laden is living in a cave, a cave that has a state of the art electonics/video system, hair stylist studio for beard dying, and a wide sceen TV giving him constant updates on what your Republican Prez Dip*hit is screwing up on every single day.

Mission Accomplished, Wall Street whore...


Something weird going on. I'm halfway through my comments and the post goes through, didn't hit enter, that I'm aware of, and didn't submit anti-spam letter.

Oh well. I'll proceed as if it went through. Here's the link I was about to submit:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/09/26/parties_trading_blame_on_bin_laden/

Re. Peace dividend. We never got it (at least monetarily) and the MIC will make sure we never do.

On Korea and Kosovo. I've always believed the last truly necessary war was WWII. Korea and Kosovo I felt were at least justified on some level. I'm reevaluating that opinion after reading a slew of stuff on the matter. I've just scratched the surface of the the Halberstam book on Korea and yesterday, I ordered Just and Unjust Wars by Michael Walzer from Amazon. So thanks for the inspiration, Terry. In the interim, I came across this article which you might find interesting:

http://www.sussex.ac.uk/sei/documents/wp76.pdf

Re. Ron Paul--I'm just the opposite. I agree with much of his foreign philosophy, don't think his domestic agenda is realistic, or even desirable in many cases.

Not buying the James Hansen is a political hack, MMGW is a fraud line, TD. Too much scientific, peer-reviewed evidence out there from too many credible sources with no motive to "create" a crisis. I remember when Limpbag was saying the hole in the ozone was a fraud concocted by communist to thwart capitalism. I call b.s. on that and b.s. on the current effort to discredit MMGW, which BTW, is the latest iteration of the GW denial crowd.

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/12554.html

Sorry I confused you with the creationist crowd, buddy. I could have sworn you listed this link awhile back, must have been another Terry.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/drjonboyg/sets/72157600301874014/

Speaking of which, in case the first part of this post didn't go through:

Canadian dt is not me and I think he/she (dusty?) is being a little harsh on you Ter. Then again, you probably deserve it for being so arrogant and hard-headed (maybe even greedy).

As for OBL, we know were he is, and so will you just before the 2008 election (ha, ha).

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/images/blosamacomma.htm

dusty, if you're there, it's dt, not dts. The clever (not) acronym Terry throes out there would require me to get off the sauce first. That won't happen till Bush goes back to Crawford.


Jim Short in the Shortz,

Wall Street Whore vs Lazy ass welfare recipient. I know what I'll take anyday. I make my money work for me. Why is it you libs have an issue with individual financial success.

dts,

My point on Kosovo/Bosnia is that there was never a clear danger to America nor its interest. There was much more of a clear and present danger coming from Iraq than there ever was from Kosovo - even w/o the intellgence failure that went on for a decade.

As far as my arrogance, I base my opinions on facts and will call things as I see them. Will I bash President Bush, you bet. He help spend the Republicans into the minority and he has done foolish things such as tarriffs on imported steel. If he screws up, I will call him on it. The one thing I will not do, as so many loons in here do, is criticize him for decisions where he did not have accurate information - Iraq. The intellgence was horrible as I have shown is that no one knows what happened to the WMDs.
Why is it people interpret keeeping what one earns as being greedy. Greeedy would be if I think I should be getting money from what someone else earns.

If you want an opinion on creationism, I don't think the earth is 6,000 years old; but I really don't know how it started. If it started with a big bang, then my question is what caused the big bang? I think to be honest, no one will claim that they know with certainity how the earth was created.

I do have a problem with MMGW, since the phenom is only 30 years old and climate cycles run in the 100's of years. Yes, Dr. Hansen has held both sides of this issue - cooling and warming. Let's see if the doom and gloom warnings that Al Gore says will be true.


Terrance,

It's Hogtown, you deranged, nut-root cookie. And you're living in a cave if you don't accept that mmgw is real (get it?) Where are you from, Pocatello?

dt-sorry. If it's any consolation
http://www.gmcanada.com/gm/english/vehicles/cadillac/dts/overview

Harper and Bush--You're not the only one seein' the governor.


Dusty,

If you are going to use my proper name, spell it correctly.

I'm from Chitown. Do you have a problem with Idaho?

If you want to buy in to the crock called MMGW, go for it. The only thing these climatolgists have going for them are their self-fullfilling models that predict what they want.


Terry,

Our spectacular intelligence failures span more than a decade:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/international/jan-june04/intel_2-3.html

The thing about the Balkans, right or wrong, it was always sold as a humanitarian exercise. Iraq II was sold as the need to eliminate WMD's, then morphed into a dozen other justifications, none of which would have flown with the public, initially. Bush cherry-picked intelligence and was dishonest about the threat from the get-go. Neither was a legitimate threat to our national security. Pakistan is and was more of a threat, for that matter. They sold nuclear technology to several rogue nations, Musharraf is more concerned with India then Muslim extremist in his own country. So called Kashmiri freedom fighters are trained by Paki military and known to aid al Qaeda. Mush looks the other way while he pockets our bribes.

When you say you base your opinions on facts, you also seem willing to ignore a lot of facts. There are many, many more facts supporting MMGW then ones that dispute it. You seem to want to cherry pick your facts like the emperor Bush.

Even Bush's own people accept it:
In an interview with the BBC, Professor John Marburger, Bush’s chief science adviser, said it was an “unequivocal” fact that climate change is man-made and that greenhouse gases emitted by human activity are to blame.

Marburger said he “strongly agrees” with the IPCC reports and “supports its conclusions.” He added:

I think there is widespread agreement on certain basics, and one of the most important is that we are producing far more CO2 from fossil fuels than we ought to be. And it’s going to lead to trouble unless we can begin to reduce the amount of fossil fuels we are burning and using in our economies. […]

The CO2 accumulates in the atmosphere and there’s no end point, it just gets hotter and hotter, and so at some point it becomes unlivable.

Yet you go blindly along with your "crock" theory. Anyway, it doesn't matter what you flat-earthers think. After Bush is out of office the adults will be back in charge and, I promise you, this critical issue will no longer be ignored. Just hope we're not past the tipping point, Terry.

On the issue of greed. Corporations have too much influence on legislation in this country. That legislation has been skewed to benefit the corporations themselves at the expense of the public. The Prescription Drug plan is a prime example. What large body wouldn't use it's buying clout to negotiate price breaks?, yet congress pushes through a plan that negates that option. Who cleans up on that?...the pharmaceutical companies.

Then there's those shameful unrestricted royalty waivers and tax subsidies to big oil (like they need it):

http://www.earthportal.org/news/?p=761

Even the Oil Man himself said this back in 2005:

"I will tell you. With $55 oil we don't need any incentives to oil and gas companies to explore. There's plenty of incentive".---George W. Bush

Yet the Oil lobby still had enough clout to retract the change in the new Energy Bill that would have corrected the 2005 omission. That's called greed Terry, and the middle class ends up picking up the slack in lost revenue.


Wall Street Whore - killin' in the name of the middle class and poor.

What's wrong Terry? seems like you're gettin' a little touchy now that your heroes (Bu$hCo) and your party ($Rep$ubli$can) are in a free fall down the sh*tter.

I guess being the greedy SOB that you are, you probably see no problem with the "Conservatives,my arses" nearly tripling our national debt in seven years.


dt,
Terry is so f-ing self absorbed that he doesn't care that his kids and grandkids will have to pay off all of the debt that his heroes have run up.

Trust me dt, you're wasting you're time on him, this guy doesn't like himself or anyone else and I doubt that anyone can stand being around him for very long.


dts,

Intellgence failures have been going on for decades, a great case in point in the missles in Cuba in the early 60's. On the ground intellgence had no clue until the satillite photos showed them.

MMGW is based upon future models, not scientific fact. The MMGW believers are always quoting "consensus". Science is not "consensus" . Science is fact, not a popularity contest. If President Bush's people, believe; how can you believe it? I thought you leftists believed he was a dumb as dumb gets.

Are we producing more CO2 - yes. What is the leading cause of CO2? Water Vapor.

http://mysite.verizon.net/mhieb/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html

As far as oil royalities and tax breaks for the greedy oil companies.

Two things, Clinton administration was giving generous incenetive on oil and gas royalities to furthur development whne oil was in the $20's. Second, as far greedy oil comapnies, go look at "Big Oils" income statements and see that gov't tax bodies benefit over threefold as compared to shareholders for the companies' oil and gas revenues. Unlike the shareholders, the gov't takes no risks. Also, those taxes do NOT include the gas taxes we pay at the pump or on our utility bills.


http://www.indianz.com/News/2007/017478.asp

Finally, assume those gov't breaks for oil and gas companies are revoked. Who do you think pays? Do you think the companies eat those costs or do you think the companies pass those costs onto the consumer. Some economists say the employees are also harmed.

Short in the Shortz,

As I mentioned above - I'm not a fan of all the growth in domestic spending that has occurred in past seven years. However, as fast as it has grown the past seven years, it will pale in comaprison as to what will happen with a democratic president AND congress.

As far as my personal life, my wife of 25 yrs might disagree with you.

As for my kids and grandkids (when they come), the largst part of the national debt they will be paying off is the pozi scheme called Social Security.

Finally, I hope for society's sake that it when it comes to reproduction, you take the Joceyln Elders' approach.


Not sure why the Swamp gurus lost my first post of the day, but here we go again.

dts,

The balkans was exactly that, a humanitarian cause. That's well and good, but why not Rhowanda? or the Sudan?

You say Bush cherry-picked, I'll say he was given bad intellgent. I want to know what happened to those WMDs between Dec 1998 and March 2003.

As far as MMGW, do you knw what the number one source of greenhouse gas is?

http://mysite.verizon.net/mhieb/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html

In the 1970's, when global cooling was all the rage, the theory was that the greenhouse gases would block out the sunlight and thus cool the earth.

The last time I checked, science is based on facts, not the poularity contest. Yes there are theories in science, and yes MMGW is one of them and it has a majority following, but that does not make it scientific fact. Just as 500 years ago, the minority questioned the scientific "fact" that the earth was flat and the sun rotated around the earth, so to, does the minority question the validity of MMGW. Whne folks like Al Gore will persecute someone that questions his "settled science", then that is when you real need to question it.

Also, if President Bush says MMGW is true, then shouldn't all you libs be saying it can't be true, since in your minds President Bush is the dumbest thing since dirt?

As far as greedy oil companies, please go look at the 10Ks of Big Oil. You will see they pay 3 times in taxes than they make in net income. In other words, while the sharteholders take all the risk, the gov't reaps the benfits. In addition, lets say the gov't takes away the favorable incentives, who will pay for that? Do you thhink the oil companies will pass that cost (loss subsidy) onto the consumer.

Also, favorable oil royality treatment has been going on for years, even when oil was in the $30's.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/17/washington/17royalty.html

Short in the Shortz,

I do have a wife of 25+ tears, so at least on person can stand to be around me.

I know my kids and grandkids will be paying off debt - its called the soical security ponzi scheme. Go back to the beginning of this thread, specifically Dec 19 at 11:08 p.m.

Since we are talking about offspring, for society's sake, I hope you use the Jocelyn Elders' method of sexual gratification.


Terry,

Re. MMGW and water vapor:

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=if-carbon-dioxide-makes-u

While Bush's chief science advisor agrees with IPCC report, Dubya and Dick are still floating "the jury is still out" line, as good oilmen would do. I think the tobacco people still say there is no proven link to smoking and cancer, too.

Wasn't aware Gore was persecuting any one, just trying to get the ball rolling since, if the science is correct, we may be nearing a tipping point.

Our understanding of the earth's ecosystems is growing, not diminishing. We know considerably more now then we did even ten years ago, let alone a few hundred years ago. The consequences of believing the world is flat--you don't fall off the edge. If the global warming scientist are correct, we have a bit more to lose, don't you agree?

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/12/071214-tipping-points.html

Yeah, it's that guy. Now before you run out the but, but... he once predicted global cooling, read this:

http://magazine.audubon.org/global.html

The bound and scope of the 2005 Energy Bill was unprecedented in its corporate giveaways:

http://www.citizen.org/cmep/energy_enviro_nuclear/electricity/energybill/2005/articles.cfm?ID=13980

Bush's "faulty intelligence". Read Fiasco, Assassins Gate, and the End of Iraq and learn how the CIA, the State Dept. and other agencies were kept out of the loop so Bush could get the intelligence he wanted to hear, there's a ton of documentation. You'll also learn from General Petraeus and others how Bush's people, mainly Rumsfeld, blew the prosecution of the war. Here's a brief summary of the former:

http://www.altpr.org/print.php?sid=736

Genocide- I already wrote my congressmen. The ball is in Bush's court to sign SADA into law. I didn't read today's paper, did he sign it?

http://www.genocideintervention.net/index.php


dts,

Up a bit early today?

"if the science is correct, we may be nearing a tipping point."

You make the best stmt - IF and MAY.

"If the global warming scientist are correct, we have a bit more to lose, don't you agree?"

Use that same logic on WMDs in 2003:

"If the PRES BUSH is correct, we have a bit more to lose, don't you agree?"

It sounds like you believe that MMGW is a high possibility, but not certainity. In other words, the science isn't quite settled. Here is a subject that the science is quite settled on, but those on the left just poo-poo it away: Life does begin at conception so why allow abortion (murder)?

As far as the intellgence on WMDs, I know there are a lot of people out there writing about cherry-picking and false intellgence and this is just another. You can tell that the writer has a pre-disposed bias when he keeps using the phrase "neo-con" and has to get in a bash at Fox News.

Still doesn't answer the question: what happened to the WMDs? We know he had them since he had used them.

If I understand you correctly, you are all in favor of using our troops for humanitarian causes such as Sudan, even though Sudan poses no threat to the American people. Do you cherry-pick which humanitarian cause like Bill Clinton did we he chose Kosovo over Rhowanda or Sudan? You don't think that was a racial thing do you?


TD,
The degree of certainty is very high on MMGW. Nothing is absolutely certain. People are urged not to smoke because it's known to cause cancer, doesn't mean everyone will. If I see a disaster up ahead I like to slow down, not cruise along till it's too late to stop. Thing about MMGW, it affects everyone, whether you practice green or not.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/06/science/earth/06clim.html

You can't invade every country that you think might be a threat. Get real. That article I gave you was to highlight bush's efforts to make intelligence self-fulfilling. The books I mentioned are not politically charged, like that article, read them and tell me if you still feel the same.


SADA calls for economic sanctions, not direct U.S. intervention.
Kosovo did not call for U.S. ground troops so it seemed more palatable to the public.

Republicans in Congress ripped Clinton for intervening in Somalia, strongly urged him to get out, warned him of intervening in Rwanda and Sudan, called wag-the-dog on Kosovo and now they're suddenly the party for humanitarian causes? Bush senior barely made a fuss when Saddam used chemical weapons on Iran and the Kurds in the 80's, the 2003 invasion by Jr. wasn't a humanitarian gesture, it was about avenging daddy and securing oil.

The WMD issue:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/12/04/EDGQIF5U1L1.DTL




dts,

"Nothing is absolutly certain" I will disagree. For example, the law of gravity states that if an object is dropped, it will drop at a rate of 32 feet per second squared. Just one of many absolutes in science.

Yes, I understand the climate effects everyone, not just the "non-believers".

Here is a good coincidence, at least I don't think its a casue and effect. In the 1970's is when the country really started to become aware of poluution and littering. The EPA was formed in the 70's - right at the end of global cooling. Then cars started getting more fuel efficient and less polluting, and all of a sudden we have MMGW. What I wonder, is if all those things hadn't been done, what would the shape of the earth be in today?

Also, why is the MMGW crowd is so anti-nuclear power? That is basically non CO2 producing. Why the hostility?

The use of air power was OK as opposed to ground troops. Is one way of killing more palatible than the other?

If I recall, the democrats held the majority in Congress and Clinton was Commander-in-Chief during the Somalia battle. Isn't a commander-in-chief supposed to lead? Also, it has been widely quoted that the US w/d from Somalia was what gave bin Laden the courage to keep attacking the US on foriegn soil and eventually our on soil since he felt we did not have the stomach for battle.

Avenging daddy? I would expect that from John E.

Securing oil? Like in colonization?

Where do you see the Republican party wanting to use the armed forces as a world-wide "meals-on-wheels"?


Securing oil? Like in colonization?

Where do you see the Republican party wanting to use the armed forces as a world-wide "meals-on-wheels"?

Posted by: Terry | December 31, 2007 3:43 PM

Terry,

Wow, you are dumb with a capitol D and it's obvious that you've been drunk on the GOP kool-aide for years now.

Republican meals-on-wheels, anyone?:
http://photobucket.com/mediadetail/?media=http%3A%2F%2Fi97.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fl201%2FRRR_018%2Fhalliburton_profits.jpg&searchTerm=halliburton&pageOffset=6


Here's a picture of one of your heroes, Terry.
Feel free to copy it and frame it?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/67916529@N00/341890910/



Venom,

Only 5 more days of Christmas vacation.

You haven't got to the 20th century yet in your 5th grade US history class have you?


Happy 08 New Year, Terry!

Now bend over and kiss yourself and your party goodbye.


Venom,

I'm looking forward to my copy of Das Kapital next year.

What, no childish links this time?

Only four more days of vacation.


The use of air power was OK as opposed to ground troops. Is one way of killing more palatible than the other?

To Americans, apparently yes, as long as someone else is doing the dieing (i.e. Hiroshima, Dresden).

When I say nothing is certain, I mean some event (nuclear holocaust) could make the whole thing a moot point, or to true believers, the second coming.

Rachel Carson's Silent Spring helped raise our awareness to the danger of pesticides, saved the bald eagles and dozens of other species. Now the Rush crowd is claiming that was a crock, that DDT is being used in 3rd world countries to control malaria with no problem. They forget to mention it is being used selectively, indoors, to control malaria. Damage to the environment from widespread outdoor application has not been disproved, as they would have you believe.

Avenging daddy? I would expect that from John E.

Securing oil? Like in colonization?

Al Qaeda plotted to assassinate George Sr., Dubya starts planning Iraq invasion before 9/11. Maybe a coincidence?

Greenspan said Iraq was all about oil, doesn't sound so crazy to me.

This sounds like a little more than "meals on wheels" to me:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/30/world/middleeast/30reconstruct.html

Nuclear Power--If they figure out a solution to disposing the waste, I'm all for it. Italy wants to send some of its nuclear waste out to Utah.

Happy New Year, Terry.


dts,

happy New Year.

The Rush crowd is saying DDT should be used in the third world. If it had been used, millions would have been saved.

There are a lot of military plans that are performed and 99% of them are never used.

Your NYT artcile is not what I was considering "meals-on-wheels". Your article on the rebuilding of Iraq is no different than America did after WW2 in Europe and Japan and no different than it did in Korea. The meals-on-wheels, I was considering was more the using the military for humanitarian acts only, not after the battle.

You are in the miority of the libs when it comes to Nuclear Power.

Here is an article showing the earth's tempature has not risen since 2001. I wonder if President Bush get credit for this?

http://www.newstatesman.com/200712190004

The author of the above is one of your true believers.

Have you ever considered sunspots for global warming? or are there SUV's on Pluto?

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-on-mars.htm



TD,

"There are a lot of military plans that are performed and 99% of them are never used."

Make that 100% for Bush. He blew-off all the Iraq invasion plans that called for a force big enough to secure the peace, instead opting for Rummy's flowers and candy pipe-dream.

This should answer your pseudo-science theories:

http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/GlobWarm.HTM

http://portal.campaigncc.org/node/1843

Another thing you need to take into account on Nuclear Energy besides safety and disposal of radioactive material---it requires massive amounts of water, a requirement not easily met. Also the Uranium Mining itself is dangerous, the incidence of cancer and birth defects in Moab, Ut. is off the charts. Until they can address all these problems, N.E. shouldn't fly:

http://www.nirs.org/nukerelapse/background/toptenreasons.htm

DDT and the ban myth:

http://info-pollution.com/ddtban.htm

Iraq reconstruction is different in this sense; tribal warfare, civil war, terrorist activity, large scale corruption (like that unaccounted for $9 billion and shoddy construction everywhere).

And as my friend Rick Dement says:

In both Germany and Japan, we were dealing with nations in arms. Those nations declared war on us. When we reached Berlin we were a conquering nation. When we went into France, we were liberators of that nation, if you want to compare apples to apples then ask how many of the Vichy government supporters were killing American troops in France after the liberation.


Terry, you're still on here spreading propaganda?

Conservatives have shitty ideas, they suck at governing, the American people have begun to see through them, yet conservatives won't admit that they're wrong on the issues (insert Terry's name), wrong in how they govern, and wrong for America and the world.

The conservative movement has been held together by concealing the theocratic element, offering the tax-cutting element as a panacea for everything, and preying on American insularity to trumpet a neoconservative foreign policy that doesn't work but has now been shown to be a fraud, anti-democratic, anti-American, and too unilateralist for the rest of the world to accept or the American electorate to embrace.

They're thinking it's a problem of the candidates or factions other than their own. No, instead this is just the ultimate conflict when you have incompatible elements fully exposed to the American public, and the American public--or two thirds of it, anyway--rejects it. The result, if you're a delusional conservative? You blame it on your politicians, instead of facing up to the fact that the blame goes to the heart of the republican coalition, that wanted something for nothing, to be secretive about their religious and anti-modernist goals, and to try to control the world and instead threatens to weaken us for decades to come


Only a 'Terri' could consider Canada the enemy.


Let's take care of the two children first:

Short in the Shortz and reamed, since you have absolutely nothing to offer I will suggest that the two of you get together. You can flip for who brings the vaseline.

dts,

Actually President Bush blew off all but one plan if he used Rummy's. Obviously in hindsight, it wasn't the correct plan.

Global Cooloing lasted 30 - 40 years according to your article and GW has been going on for 28 years (really the last seven years have been flat), so is it possible that the trend could reverse?

It doesn't rebuke sun-spot activity nor does it rebuke measurement errors.

Is it possible, sure, is it a possible overreaction, sure.

Most sources of energy do have risk to life: oil and gas is a dangerous occupation, as is coal mining, and even farming (making ethanol).

Your DDT article was informative: I liker Sri Lanka facts: before DDT 2.8 million malaryia deaths and after DDT use, there were 17 deaths. Yes there is resistance strains, but assume DDT was not banded, do you think research would not have been done on this?

There is not a large amount of the Iraqi population that hates the US. That % that does dislike is being provoked by al Qaeda. Did post-war France or Germany have anything resembling al Qaeda with funding coming in from foriegn countries?

Your friend Rick, is this the same Rick Dement that is quoted as saying "I'm confident that a half built nuke will be discovered whether Saddam built it or not. There is no way the government can oust Saddam and take the chance that there was never really anything to find."?


Short in the Shortz and reamed, since you have absolutely nothing to offer I will suggest that the two of you get together. You can flip for who brings the vaseline.

Posted by: Terry | January 2, 2008 11:31 PM


I guess this is Terry's way of saying that he can't come up with a BS GOP spinned answer.

Terrence, this case is closed.

YOU LOSE!


Actually President Bush blew off all but one plan if he used Rummy's. Obviously in hindsight, it wasn't the correct plan.

It's not only that it was the wrong plan, it was the arrogance of Mr. "stuff happens". There were voices on the ground warning of the impending crisis, they we fired or reassigned. Bush thought it was a virtue that he stuck by this guy, it wasn't. You speak of this blunder as if it was some little misstep. How about one of the worst foreign policy disasters in America's history?

Keep the blinders on about MMGW, Ter. Your type only responds to crisis when it hits them in the pocket book. Fortunately, once we get the oil men out of office, the country and the world will address the issue. (Guess you missed the 60 Minutes special on the Age of Megafires)

http://www.nationalparkstraveler.com/2007/10/60-minutes-age-megafires

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=3389657n

Re. N.E.--Most sources of energy can't cause a Chernobyl. Guess you're not familiar with the "China Syndrome".

Iraq Sept. assessment:

War-weary Iraqis are similarly ambivalent about the American occupation. According to the latest BBC/ABC poll, approximately 47 percent of Iraqis want the America military to withdrawal immediately and approximately 85 percent are not confident in the American military. Approximately two-of-three Iraqis believe that the “surge” has failed.

Opinions among Iraqis are often influenced by their ethnicity and area of residence. Only Kurdish Iraqis support a long term American occupation. The Kurds are concentrated in northern Iraq, a relatively peaceful and stable area. Much of the “surge” was deployed in Baghdad and that city has consequently become more secure. Baghdad residents are more inclined to endorse the "surge" than other Iraqis.

In general, Sunni Iraqis particularly dislike the American military. Approximately 93 percent of Sunni Iraqis consider attacks on American and British troops acceptable. In Anbar provence (in western Iraq), the Sunni insurgency calmed considerably in concurrence with the “surge.” But the “surge” has done little to dissuade Shia militias, who continue to clash with one another and with Iraqi and American military personnel.

There can be no military solution in Iraq, get used to $12 billion a month and continued casualties.

There is not a large amount of the Iraqi population that hates the US. That % that does dislike is being provoked by al Qaeda. Did post-war France or Germany have anything resembling al Qaeda with funding coming in from foreign countries?

Your the one that said that said the situation was no different. OH, and there was no al Qaeda in Iraq prior to our invasion.

What about the DDT issue didn't you get?:

The WHO recommendations are right on target. Indoor use for countries where it’s needed to stop Malaria, use other chemicals with shorter half-lives outside. Cycle through the drugs, so that resistance is limited. Do more research on treatments for the disease.

You mentioned Sri Lanka, resistance was the issue there:

Sri Lanka had started large scale spray operation in 1947 and achieved tremendous success too. The spectacular successes of the early years of the malaria eradication programme were nullified by the country-wide epidemic in 1967/1968, when over half a million cases were detected. The epidemic pressure relented in subsequent years, and by 1972, the incidence was brought down to 132 605 detected cases. The situation thereafter reversed once- again and the number of cases detected increased progressively to 400 777 in 1975 with a Slide Positivity Rate of 26.7%. The most alarming fact in the malaria situation was the increase in the proportion of P. falciparum infections which, from less than 0.5% in 1968, reached 8.3% in 1974, and almost doubled to 15.9% in 1975. The number of deaths due to P.falciparum has also increased. With widespread resistance of A. culicifacies to DDT, malathion spraying was introduced in 1975 in areas of P.falciparum transmission affording protection to nearly one million people. Towards the end of 1976 DDT spraying was completely discontinued and during 1977 exclusively malathion was used as an adulticide

More on your misplaced blame for malaria deaths (you're cherry picking again, Terry):

http://kenethmiles.blogspot.com/2004_02_01_kenethmiles_archive.html#107570569615970184


Terrence,

I now see what happens when one gets addicted to hate-radio. Reading your comments is like re-playing a segment of Sean Insanity or Rush Limpdong. TD--here's your cue brain-washed boy: "Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening".


Terry's brain has not only been washed, as they say... It has been dry cleaned


Nothing from the children, onto DTs,

You don't know if a military plan is any good until it is used. Just as in Dec, 1941, the thought of having all the ships docked at Pearl seemed like an all right idea.

China Syndrome - bad movie with good timing. Yes those are the risk of energy. Wherever you live (sounds like California), go run on windmills, solar and discount all other "risky" forms of energy and see what happens to your economy.

Speaking of other forms of energy, why is it green Senator Kennedy won't allow windmills off the shores of his home?

What do you think happens to Iraq if we withdrawl now? Or should we care?

The casulaties are at an all-time low for the war in Iraq over the last three months.


T,

Please read Fiasco, there were lots of top military people, and policy experts saying that the tough part wasn't defeating Saddam's forces, that was a foregone conclusion. The success of the
Iraq War, if it could be had, depended entirely on securing the peace. Army chief of staff, Gen. Eric Shinseki, was just one of many voices that warned the occupation would require several hundred thousand troops. They were all shot down by Rummy, Wolfy and others within the Bush administration. Colin Powell was also among those voices calling for more troops:

(CBS/AP) Former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell advised President George W. Bush before the Iraq war to send more troops to the country, but the administration did not follow his recommendation, Powell said in an interview broadcast Sunday...

Powell, who served as chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff during the 1991 Gulf War, is known for his belief in deploying decisive force with a clear exit strategy in any conflict.

This wasn't about monday-morning quarterbacking, rather it speaks of arrogance and incompetence trumping experience and proven strategies

Nothing about the "surge", reduced violence not withstanding, has convinced me that we should stay in Iraq beyond next year. Part of the reason violence in Iraq has subsided is that formerly mixed neighborhoods of Shiite and Sunni inhabitants, are now fully segregated. Also the Sunni allegiance has been bought (for the time being) with dollars and arms, and Shia militias are laying low.

Meanwhile conditions in the south have deteriorated and the Brits are pulling out. The main objective (a political solution) is no closer and there's no reason to believe these people (Shia, Sunni and Kurds) will ever agree on anything.

I see no good solution in Iraq, but no one knows with any certainty what will happen if we pull out. I remember hearing that all of S.E. Asia would go communist if we left Vietnam--the domino theory. That never happened.

Anyway, Iraqi's want us out, our continued presence there is breaking our military and bankrupting the country. We can't afford to stay there indefinitely and surge is meaningless if we can't reach the political benchmarks. I wished we could apply the pottery barn rule, like Colin Powell said, but I think we're beyond the point we can fix anything now. Reconstruction efforts have been abysmal despite tens of billions spent. Iraqi's still go without clean water, and electricity (after nearly five years of the occupation).

Re. Nantucket Wind Farm, to be honest I don't know much about it, only that Romney when he was governor, and Kennedy have long opposed it. Reasons sited were regulatory, and aesthetic (possible negative affects on tourism). I know it's tempting to make the Kennedys, ob Jr. and uncle Ted, out to be hypocrites, but I'm not sure the issue is so cut and dried. It's a lot easier to get people to embrace a wind farm in the desolate Mojave:

http://ludb.clui.org/ex/i/CA4977/

than it is in Nantucket Sound or even in more sensitive desert locations like:

http://digital-desert.com/needles-ca/

I'm not defending the Kennedy's here, I just think that hyperbole should be left out of the equation. I don't want a wind farm outside of Zions National Park (nor do I care for the aircraft hanger-sized Barfmart distribution center that ruins the incredible vista overlooking Zions). Doesn't mean I'm against green energy. Oh, and a note on the proposed Nantucket wind farm, I believe it would be six miles from the Hyanis Port compound rather than on it's shores. It still could be a case of "not in my back yard", I'm not saying that, I just don't know enough about it. I'm having a hard enough time keeping up with events on The Swamp and happenings in my own back yard.

Speaking of which, what did you think of the Iowa Cuacases, did anything surprise you? Biden and Dodd have now bowed out, haven't heard if any Repubs have been culled. The "experts are saying Edwards is toast and Romney is in trouble. We'll see.


Terry,

Before you start parsing things on Kennedy, you did say offshore, not on the shores, like my response implied. But it isn't just- off shore, to be sure...ha ha.

BTW, Terry, had you been on top of it, you could have purchased the Matt Kennedy Est. last year for a cool $6 Million. You could have rubbed shoulders with the Kennedy clan and gotten a bird's-eye-view of the (future?) Nantucket wind farm:

Kennedy cousin and author Matthew Maxwell Kennedy, and his wife, Vicki, last month sold their Cape Cod, Mass., summer home for nearly $6 million -- just under its asking price.

The 1929 Shingle-style house is in Hyannis Port, around the corner from the main Kennedy compound; the family has summered in the town since the 1920s. The couple bought the six-bedroom, 3,354-square-foot house for about $1.5 million in 1998, according to public records, and renovated it extensively. The 1.43-acre lot overlooks Hyannis Harbor and Nantucket Sound and has a pool, pier and 290 feet of beach.

I was back there in '64 (off the shore in a boat)
It's a spectacular area, even more picturesque than the shores of Lake Michigan, IMO, although I'm very fond of Chicago.


When we pulled out of VietNam, wasn't there som slaughter by Pol Pot inthe mid-late 70's in neighboring Cambodia?

I haven't heard anything about the elected gov't of Iraq wanting US troops out of Iraq right now, have you?

Plans for the Nantucket wind farm were shut down due to the fact the Kennedy's would see it from their estate.

The problem with putting a wind farm in the desert is the electricity is needed where popualtion is located. There is a cost to transmission lines and also the further electricty is transmitted, the less electricty there is to use.

It sound like you wouldn't want a wind farm in your line of sight either.

Last thing I would want is to live next door to that dysfunctional family. Knowing my luck, Teddy would offer to drive me across a bridge:)

I wonder how greenhouse gas is genererated heating and cooling that compound?

From Russia on Global Cooling:

http://www.carboncreditwarehouse.com/global-warming/moscow-says-global-cooling-by-2012/

As far as the primaries. What surprised me on the dem size was the margin of victory which was caused by turnout. It will be curious to see what happens as all these primaries just start coming day-after-day.

I think the Breck Girl is toast, but the longer he stays in, the more he helps Hillary and hurts Obama. I don't think the Breck Girl can win.

On the repubs, Huckabee won due to all the soc conservs. I don't see him higher than 3rd in NH. I see McCain with Romney again as the brides maid.


Just when I think we can have a reasonable discussion, you go all Limbaugh on me:

The Killing Fields in Cambodia were not a result of America’s pullout from Vietnam. The Khmer Rouge came to power in reaction to an American-backed rightwing coup and US incursions into the country. The Killing Fields genocide was stopped by the Vietcong, the hated enemy of the Khmer Rouge.

The Iraqi people want us out of Iraq, Malicki said he's indifferent. The majority of Americans want us out, Bush doesn't.

Show me where Kennedy says he doesn't want wind farm because it would ruin his view. If I want opinions from freepers, I'll go to their site. Where did I say I would object to a wind farm in my view. I said their are places they shouldn't be located, like outside an incredible natural view like Zions National Park. That goes for coal-fired power plants too.

"The problem with putting a wind farm in the desert is the electricity is needed where popualtion is located. There is a cost to transmission lines and also the further electricty is transmitted, the less electricty there is to use."

Las Vegas has a 3.1 megawatt solar powered grid consisting of 6 locations, one as close as L.V. Springs Reserve, one as far away outside the western reaches of the Grand Canyon. What they didn't do is locate them in front of Red-Rock State park or in the Valley of Fire. Just because you want green, doesn't mean you have to be stupid about it's location.

Robert Kennedy said, if you read the article, that the Nantucket wind farm would amount to barely discernible white dots from their vantage point at Hyannis Port, ruining their view was not the basis of their objections, or so they claim. Mitt didn't want them either when he was governor. Personally, I think it could be done with little negative impact, from what I know.

I've read the abstract of the Sorokhtin piece (not the book which is $160). I've read the W. Aeschbach-Hertig rebuttal. I've read the response to the rebuttal (Chilingar and Khilyuk). My conclusion? I'll go with the 80% who say mmgw is real. And you site me articles that say their is no global warming, their global warming but it's not caused by human activity, and now it's global cooling we need to worry about. You don't even know your own position, except as a denialist in general. They can't all be right Terry, so which is it? There is no GW? There GW but it's not man-made?, we're on the cusp of GC?, or the FreeRepublic take--that all science or opinion that encourages me to be environmentally conscious is bogus? I'm guessing it's the latter.

BTW, Terry, something tells me that the Russian Gov't doesn't buy the global cooling theory. Could it be this?:

Race to Secure Arctic Riches Heats Up Posted: 09.10.07

Northern countries are racing to claim areas of the potentially oil-rich Arctic seabed, which could become more accessible as global warming melts the polar ice caps.


Russia claims that nearly 500,000 square miles of the seabed, including the north pole, are connected to the country through underwater mountain ridges.

It is pushing to become the first of the five countries bordering the Arctic to have a claim approved by the United Nations, but the United States, Canada and Denmark are hot on its trail.

On the primaries, "Huckabee won due to all the social conservatives? You mean it wasn't the Evangelinut factor? I thought Romney and McCain claimed to be social conservatives too. Th Breck girl?, what, am I talking to John D.? Anyway Terry, I believe s thread has outlived it's usefulness, if there ever were any. I've got better things to do then respond to your topic list right out of the FR and Newsbusters. For crying out loud, Freepers are still obsessed with Chappaquiddick. Hell, why don't we just discuss Prescott Bush's financial dealings with Nazi Germany?
Well talk again when you're ready to leave the propaganda machine home?


We'll pick this up on another day. It has been fun - you do have mor intellgence than John E even though you come to his ssame conclusions :)


We'll pick this up on another day. It has been fun - you do have mor intellgence than John E even though you come to his ssame conclusions :)

Posted by: Terry | January 5, 2008 8:26 AM

Trickle Boy,

Do they shut off the oxygen where you live or are you always this damn stupid?

~Your President is failing

~Your Party is failing

~You are failing to grasp reality.

Case closed, you lose.

See yeah!


Hate to say I told you so, dt, but trickle-down is hopelessly deluded and criminally insane. In other words, a perfect candidate for the Republican noise-machine.


Post a comment

(Anonymous comments will not be posted. Comments aren't posted immediately. They're screened for relevance to the topic, obscenity, spam and over-the-top personal attacks. We can't always get them up as soon as we'd like so please be patient. Thanks for visiting The Swamp.)

Please enter the letter "j" in the field below:

-

News, but funnier

Cartoon

Those were the days
More Handelsman
Editorial cartoons

Galleries

Iraq

Iraq War 5th anniversary

Dog

Campaign trail

Quiz

Obama

Your Obama IQ