| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
www.freedomtofascism.com
Guest
|
 Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 8:02 am Post subject: Federal Reserve Banking System Doesn>t Provide Wealth Re: |
 |
|
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 07:17:27 -0700, "DB" <DeeBee@netscape.net> wrote:
[quote]Only spending real money and making real profits is the answer.
[/quote]
As you>ve seen this past 10 days, the Federal Reserve money is obviously not
real or it would be worth something. The Federal Reserve system is
definitely NOT making a profit for anyone. The Fed wasn>t designed to
be profitable, it was designed around indentured servitude, al la the feudal
system, wherein people were born owing to the feudal royalty. The Federal
Reserve money can>t buy people food, shelter, clothing or an education for
their children. The latter is precisely why the Federal Reserve banking
system is worthless and why it is bankrupt and imploding in on itself.
The Federal Reserve system simply can not buy people what they need to live
and prosper because it was designed to create slaves, not free people.
Of course the Federal Reserve doesn>t have any priority in mind by putting
forth their worthless money other than to temporarily buy off people and
politicians to help them allegedly enslave mankind. To a large extent this
is true as the Federal Reserve banking system has most definitely dumbed
down its constituency, promoted illiteracy, stifled scientific achievement
and misdirected the course of human potential. |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:53 am Post subject: Re: 74% of CEOs Believe Obama Would Be Disastrous for the Na |
|
|
On Oct 10, 4:43 pm, Mepps#3 <l...@re.nothing> wrote:
[quote]h...@nospam.org wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 23:59:41 +0200 (CEST), "Non scrivetemi"
nonscrivet...@pboxmix.winstonsmith.info> wrote:
In article <c4bddd58-36df-4138-b2fe-
6793c0f25...@h60g2000hsg.googlegroups.com
tkc <stromh...@gmail.com> wrote:
http://newsbusters.org/node/25081/print
74% of CEOs Believe Obama Would Be Disastrous for the Nation
By Noel Sheppard
Created 2008-10-09 10:29
With the nation in the middle of what is being regularly reported as
the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, a new poll
found that 74 percent of America>s top business leaders fear "an Obama
presidency would be disastrous for the country."
"[Obama>s] programs would bankrupt the country within three
years" (emphasis added, h/t Jazz from Hell [2], photo courtesy
Time.com):
Chief Executive magazine’s most recent polling of 751 CEOs shows that
GOP presidential candidate John McCain is the preferred choice for
CEOs.
And job creating CEOs repeatedly tell us that McCain’s policies are
far more conducive to a more positive employment environment than
Obama’s.” [...]
In expressing their rejection of Senator Obama, some CEOs who
responded to the survey went as far as to say that “some of his
programs would bankrupt the country within three years, if
implemented.”
you mean he could do a better job bankrupting the country than George
Bush did?
Ask his contributors...
http://politicallydrunk.blogspot.com/2008/09/obamas-sub-prime-buddies...
Among Obama>s campaign contributors are many Lehman Brothers Executives,
such as CEO Richard Fuld ($2,300), President Joseph Gregory ($4,600) and
dozens of other top Lehman Executives. On June 19th, Lehman shareholders
filed suit against Fuld and Gregory for the company’s exposure in the
subprime market. In addition to dozens of Lehman executives are Obama>s
bundlers from Lehman Borthers who have raised top dollar for the
campaign. Direct contributions from Lehman Brothers have exceeded
$395,000 for Senator Obama.
John Rhea - (over $500,000) Co-Head of Lehman Bros. Global Investment
Banking
Mark Gilbert - (over $500,000) Lehman Brothers Senior Executive
Christine Forester - (over $500,000) Lehman Brothers Senior Executive
Theodore Janulis – Bundler (over $100,000) & Lehman Brothers Head of
Global Mortgages
Nadja Fidelia – Bundler (over $50,000) & Managing Director of Lehman
Brothers
In San Antonia this past February Obama stated in a campaign speech, “To
give you a sense of what that kind of lobbying gets you… the CEO of the
largest subprime lender was promised a hundred-million-dollar severance
package at a time when more than 2 million Americans were facing
foreclosure, including nearly 14,000 right here in San Antonio..." Obama
was most likely referring to an Angelo R. Mozillo, one of three CEO’s
that were scheduled to appear to testify in front of a senate committee
concerning their compensation and firms roles in the ongoing mortgage
crisis. Stanley O’Neal, who received more than $161 million when he was
ousted as the Chairman of Merrill Lynch, was one of the three CEO’s
coming under scrutiny. In 2003, O’Neil donated to Senator Obama’s
Senatorial campaign, followed up by a maximum $4,600 campaign
contribution by he and his wife, Nancy Garvey, to the Obama Campaign.
Ironically, the O’Neals tried to originally contribute $6,900 to the
campaign only to have $2,300 returned. For those attuned to the
financial sector, Stanley O>Neil will forever be remembered as the man
at the helm while Merrill Lynch exposed themselves to tens of billions
in subprime exposure.
The real problem for Obama extends well beyond his campaign bundlers
that include several prominent lobby–representing attorney’s and
executives such as Frank Clark, the CEO of Commonwealth Edison.
Executives across the financial and investment industry have accounted
for millions in campaign contributions.
Contributing to Obama’s cause is the more controversial Brad Morrice,
the former CEO and President of the imploded subprime lender, New
Century Financial. Morrice and his wife contributed the maximum $4,600
to Obama’s campaign last August.
Among other subprime contributors to Obama’s campaign are Steve Boland,
a managing director at Countrywide, who donated the maximum last June.
Andrew Beer the president of Wachovia’s troubled subprime lender
Evergreen Investment Partners also maxed out his contribution to the
Obama campaign; and Joseph Azrack, the president of Citigroup Property
Investments along with dozens of Citi Executives have heavily contributed..
In 2007 Eric Schwartz, the co-head of Goldman-Sachs Global Asset
Management abruptly stepped down from is position, fueling rumors that
his resignation was tied to a crumbling Global Alpha Hedge Fund. The
Fund’s mounting losses led to a -39% performance last year as the fund
assets shrunk by 60%. Shwartz, an Obama bundler and contributor, has
helped to raise over $100,000 for the Senator’s Campaign.
In 2007 Robert Wolf, the CEO of UBS Americas, helped the Obama campaign
raise more than $500,000. That amount was equaled by Louis Susman, the
Chairman of a Citibank Subsidiary.
Additional High Profile Financial Executives Include:
John W. Roberts - (over $500,000) Ariel Capital Management
Richard Leweke – Vice Chairman of Washington Mutual Card Services
Seth Waugh – CEO of Deutsche Bank
Charles Lewis – Vice Chairman of Merrill Lynch
Francisco Borges – Over $50,000 Chairman of Landmark Partners a private
equity real estate firm.
Michael Froman – Over $200,000 Managing Director of Citigroup
David Heller – Over $200,000 Managing Director of Goldman Sachs
Bruce Heyman - Over $200,000 - Managing Director Goldman Sachs
J. Michael Schell – Over $200,000 Managing Director at Citigroup
Jim Torrey – Over $500,000 Founder of the Torrey Funds – Hedge Funds
Todd Williams – Over $50,000 Managing Director Goldman Sachs & The Real
Estate Council
Louis Susman - Over $200,000 Citi Investment Banking
The listing of contributions flowing in from Financial Institutions
through Senator Obama’s career is short of amazing. There are currently
dozens upon dozens of Senior Vice Presidents, Managing Directors, and
other top level executives from firms such as Lehman Brothers, Wachovia,
Washington Mutual, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, UBS, Deutsche Bank, Merrill
Lynch, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley
and other high profile Wall Street banks and funds mired in the mortgage
meltdown.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
Sick fucking society. Bring down the walls! Schmucks gobbling up
"rescue" money delivered by Paulson and stupid feds. America
needs a total rebuild.
Walter
http://www.wvwnews.net/ Western Voices World News |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Jerry Kraus
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 2:36 pm Post subject: Re: Dollar dies, or Markets die, or both |
|
|
On Oct 10, 12:05 pm, Les Cargill <lcarg...@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
[quote]Jerry Kraus wrote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/quote]
[quote]Where did you get this obsession with the
perfection of the "Market", Fred? It>s nutty as all Hell.
It>s not an "obsession", it>s an observation.... although "perfect"
isn>t a very descriptive term....
[/quote]
It>s not an observation, it>s a pseudo-religious projection. Just as
Christians see all existence as proof that Jesus is real, Capitalists
see all existence as proof of the perfection of the Markets. It>s
mildly Schizophrenic. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Jerry Kraus
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 2:40 pm Post subject: Re: Dollar dies, or Markets die, or both |
|
|
On Oct 11, 8:48 am, "Mark M." <m...@ztech.com> wrote:
[quote]Les Cargill wrote:
DB wrote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/quote]
[quote]Funny. When government is weakened and corrupted by the rich and made into
their class tool, your solution is to blame government for being too
powerful and to let the rich have even more freedom to screw the people.
[/quote]
Ah, you>ve noticed the rules! Anything that doesn>t work is
Socialism, by defintion. Anything that does work is Capitalism, by
definition. The solution to all problems is to give the wealthy and
powerful even more wealth and power.
Thus, when banks lend money to people who can>t pay it back, this is
"Socialism"!!!!????
Hate to tell you guys, Capitalism is about money. You know,
"Capital"? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 2:45 pm Post subject: Re: TELL CONGRESS: "If you Vote for a BAILOUT, We>ll Vote *Y |
|
|
On 10 Oct 2008 18:15:44 GMT, Michael Coburn <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote:
[quote]On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 09:09:07 -0400, * US * wrote:
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 05:55:14 -0700 (PDT), V <vfr44@aol.com> wrote:
On Oct 10, 7:57?am, * US * wrote:
On Wed, 1 Oct 2008 20:46:12 -0700, "Phlip" <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
Responding to the subject line:
What if - for whatever reason - you were _already_ going to vote them
out??
The blackbox will vote them back in for you.
To have a meaningful effect on the DC knuckleheads the citizens would
have form a national union.
You already have that. It is called "The House of Representatives". The
Constitutional limit on the number of representatives is currently ten
thousand members and each member is accountable to a small constituency
of thirty thousand informed and concerned citizens. That>s right. You
need to go out into the neighbor hood and make sure that Fox News or
MSNBC are not getting away with lying about the economy and the rest.
That _IS_ the citizen>s union. And you can have it if you are willing to
insist on it.
[/quote]
You>ll have to insist on a real ballot and real count instead of the blackbox. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 2:45 pm Post subject: Re: TELL CONGRESS: "If you Vote for a BAILOUT, We>ll Vote *Y |
|
|
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 08:20:59 -0700, retrogrouch@comcast.net wrote:
[quote]On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 09:09:07 -0400, * US * wrote:
The strike idea worked pretty well in Poland, back in the day.
What would "we" be striking for?
You need demands.
[/quote]
"But how would it work? A curious question to ask given that not working is most of what
it would entail. Not working until the president and the shadow president resigned or were
impeached. Never mind what happens next. Rather, let our mandarins ask how this came to
happen in the first place. Let them ask in shock and awe."
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2007/10/0081720 |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Peace Crusader
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:28 pm Post subject: Re: Will we see a repeat of the Great Depression of 1929 & s |
|
|
My Dear Fellowmen,
I mentioned that the stock market would not crash on a Sunday because
it is closed. But extrapolating the trend Black Tuesday, October 29,
1929 and Black Monday, October 19, 1987, we could have a crash on
October 9. But it did not. Somebody said yesterday, October 10, was
Black Friday when many markets fell 8-10%. It may be correct if we
follow the trading days, hence, Black Tuesday, Black Monday, and Black
Friday, and October 10 is just a day after October 9. The nervous
public, however, has not seen the bottom yet. The jittery market
might still continue its downward spiral. We will see what happens in
the coming days.
October seems to be a spooky month for the stock market. The market
crashed on October 29, 1929 sending the economy to the Great
Depression. On October 19, 1987, the largest one day stock market
crash in history, then, occurred. We still have about three weeks to
go this October before November comes and anything could happen. The
injection of $700 billion by the US government to bail out Bear
Stearns, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG did not calm down the
market. Even the coordinated effort of several governments in
reducing the interest rate was ignored. We will see if the solutions
of the ministers of the G-7 nations representing the United States,
Great Britain, Canada, Germany, France, Italy, and Japan together with
the leaders of the G-20 emerging industrialized nations would solve
this deepening global financial crisis.
If they don’t and the world falls into recession, if not depression,
would a war end it like what happened when the Great Depression ended
in the United States at the onset of the war economy of World War II
around 1939? I hope not for we are civilized enough to find solution
to our problems instead of settling our differences with a war.
Regards,
Aristeo Canlas Fernando, Peace Crusader and Echo
Motto: pro aris et focis
http://www.geocities.com/peacecrusader888/
“The Internet is mightier than the sword.” |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
alohacyberian
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:35 pm Post subject: Re: Dollar dies, or Markets die, or both Options |
|
|
On Sep 28, 11:52 am, "(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯) -- NO FACTS Support
the RRR Cult>s Loathsome Agendas!" <xanadu2...@mchsi.com> wrote:
[quote]On Sun, 28 Sep 2008 14:14:28 +1000,
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
Jerry Kraus <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com> wrote
Rod, do you "support" the "bailout"?
Yep.
<< sigh >> MORE stupidity from Rod. He certainly doesn>t
seem to have much in the way of a working brain -- and just
keeps right on PROVING that. (And one has to wonder WHY
he>s so *desperate* to see America SCAMMED by the BIG
SWINDLE (???) )
snip
With enough pressure from the PEOPLE, this moronic
BAILOUT SWINDLE **can** be STOPPED.
All we need to do is make it very clear to Congress
that we WILL throw all of those who vote for it out on their
ear on November 4th. In no uncertain terms. As a PROMISE!
-- (¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯)
xanadu...@mchsi.com -- To E-Mail me.
http://www.roadrat.com -- Learn how to get PAID to TRAVEL.
http://apifar.blogspot.com-- Great TACTICS to Fight Bigotry.
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com-- Christianity *vs.* Bigotry.
[/quote]
Well, chitlon, let>s start with those from alaska. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Jerry Kraus
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 4:27 pm Post subject: Re: Dollar dies, or Markets die, or both |
|
|
On Oct 11, 11:19 am, Les Cargill <lcarg...@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
[quote]Jerry Kraus wrote:
On Oct 11, 8:48 am, "Mark M." <m...@ztech.com> wrote:
Les Cargill wrote:
DB wrote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny. When government is weakened and corrupted by the rich and made into
their class tool, your solution is to blame government for being too
powerful and to let the rich have even more freedom to screw the people.
Ah, you>ve noticed the rules! Anything that doesn>t work is
Socialism, by defintion. Anything that does work is Capitalism, by
definition.
Gad, no. That>s not it at all. At least with me, a socialism that
works is still a socialism.
The solution to all problems is to give the wealthy and
powerful even more wealth and power.
Absolutely not. Those who desire wealth will just seek power, and
then use that power to gain wealth.
Thus, when banks lend money to people who can>t pay it back, this is
"Socialism"!!!!????
More like "social engineering".
--
Les Cargill
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/quote]
[quote]Hate to tell you guys, Capitalism is about money. You know,
"Capital"?
It>s not everything about money. It is specific to private ownership
of the means of production.
[/quote]
No. That definition is propaganda. Just like saying Communism is
"justice for the people". Capitalism is a socio-economic system in
which the pursuit of Capital is the fundamental means of structuring
society. Socialism is a system in which the government controls
society for the purpose of socially defined, long-term goals such as
increasing life-expectancy, average per capita income etc. Socialism
does not exclude private ownership of the means of production, if that
is deemed to be effective in terms of the society>s long term goals.
Communism is an authoritarian variant of Socialism, as distinct from
Swedish style social democracy. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
BuffetHater
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 4:28 pm Post subject: Re: 74% of CEOs Believe Obama Would Be Disastrous for the Na |
|
|
| And 100% of em thought bush was the leadership we needed. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Jerry Kraus
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:14 pm Post subject: Re: Dollar dies, or Markets die, or both |
|
|
On Oct 11, 11:59 am, Les Cargill <lcarg...@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
[quote]Jerry Kraus wrote:
On Oct 11, 11:19 am, Les Cargill <lcarg...@cfl.rr.com> wrote:
Jerry Kraus wrote:
On Oct 11, 8:48 am, "Mark M." <m...@ztech.com> wrote:
Les Cargill wrote:
DB wrote:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny. When government is weakened and corrupted by the rich and made into
their class tool, your solution is to blame government for being too
powerful and to let the rich have even more freedom to screw the people.
Ah, you>ve noticed the rules! Anything that doesn>t work is
Socialism, by defintion. Anything that does work is Capitalism, by
definition.
Gad, no. That>s not it at all. At least with me, a socialism that
works is still a socialism.
The solution to all problems is to give the wealthy and
powerful even more wealth and power.
Absolutely not. Those who desire wealth will just seek power, and
then use that power to gain wealth.
Thus, when banks lend money to people who can>t pay it back, this is
"Socialism"!!!!????
More like "social engineering".
--
Les Cargill
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hate to tell you guys, Capitalism is about money. You know,
"Capital"?
It>s not everything about money. It is specific to private ownership
of the means of production.
No. That definition is propaganda. Just like saying Communism is
"justice for the people". Capitalism is a socio-economic system in
which the pursuit of Capital is the fundamental means of structuring
society.
Uhhhh.... no, not really. I got news for you - most people "work
just hard enough to not get fired, and get paid just enough to
not quit."
Society is a much bigger and richer suite than the economy.
Eventually, people get tired of sorting others and being
sorted themselves and just live their lives. The ambitious
find their hubris, us less ambitious buy 'em a beer* when they
do.
*or sufficiently medically-correct beerlike consumption
token when appropriate.
Socialism is a system in which the government controls
society for the purpose of socially defined, long-term goals such as
increasing life-expectancy, average per capita income etc.
Both socialism and capitalism have one thing in common - the
committee. The committee is the basic building block of almost all
formally organized human interaction.
And committees are *stupid*. People lie. People lie the most
in peer groups.
Markets allow people to express preferences very privately.
Those preferences will have only a passing relationship
with what they *say* the preferences are.
The problem with socialism is the same as the problem with
capitalism - groupthink. But when you have "jealous"
socialisms, no private thought is permitted. So the stupidity
amplifies....
> Socialism
does not exclude private ownership of the means of production, if that
is deemed to be effective in terms of the society>s long term goals.
Communism is an authoritarian variant of Socialism, as distinct from
Swedish style social democracy.
The sort of Fabian socialism you describe is completely distinct from
Communism. It>s the application of Colonial principles to the
domestic state.
That>s one reason people don>t like it.
Public altruism is very, very difficult. Self interest has a nasty
way of coming back on you...
--
Les Cargill- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
I agree that public altruism is very, very difficult. It is, also,
the only thing that results in social progress. The Wright Brothers,
for example, were almost exclusively motivated by altruism in
inventing the airplane. Wilbur Wright expressed the view that his
quest would kill him, and he eventually died because of injuries
sustained in a test flight. Stalin incrased the average life
expectancy in Russia from 40 to 60 in just 25 years, despite his
brutality. And, he was justifiably proud of this.
The notion that society progresses spontaneously, as the result of the
pursuit of Capital, is naive in the extreme. What we get is Bush-
style egomania instead -- self-destructiveness in the pursuit of
power. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:44 pm Post subject: Re: 74% of CEOs Believe Obama Would Be Disastrous for the Na |
|
|
On Sat, 11 Oct 2008 02:53:17 -0700 (PDT),
whudson1903@gmail.com wrote:
[quote]tkc <stromh...@gmail.com> wrote:
[/quote]
[quote]http://newsbusters.org/node/25081/print
74% of CEOs Believe Obama Would Be Disastrous for the Nation
By Noel Sheppard
Created 2008-10-09 10:29
[/quote]
Hey! GREAT! *That* helps us sort things out! Let>s just
FIRE all of those klutzes, and KEEP the other 26% who are the
INTELLIGENT ones!
-- (¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯)
xanadu222@mchsi.com -- To E-Mail me.
http://www.roadrat.com -- Learn how to get PAID to TRAVEL.
http://apifar.blogspot.com -- Great TACTICS to Fight Bigotry.
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com -- Christianity *vs.* Bigotry.
And with Election Day looming, THIS site is a MUST:
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
MORE THAN EVER BEFORE...
"It IS The SUPREME COURT, Stupid!"
Earl Weber ("duke") <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote, 10-8-08 --
[quote]I know how the system is supposed to work. But we have
too many judges that decide based not on the Constitution
but on their version of social justice.
[/quote]
There can>t possibly BE too many egalitarian judges, since ALL
of them are constrained to rule *within* the parameters of the
Constitution. NO judge can *contradict* the Constitution. In
any given case, there is only so much potential "gray area" wiggle
room within which one must rule, or contradiction would occur.
The BEST judges are the fair-minded, sensible, and compas-
sionate ones who rule as close as they possibly can to the param-
eter that affords the most personal freedom for individuals. As
an envelope is defined by it>s edges, it>s a case of staying inside
of the envelope so as to still be mailable, with the *content*
always being snugly against the edge called "liberty."
Individual freedom should be PARAMOUNT, and NO President
or Senate should EVER be responsible for appointing/confirming
a Justice that doesn>t make it unequivocally *clear* that he/she
will steadfastly seek to defend and support it to the fullest extent
possible. There is NOTHING good to be gained by installing a
repressive Justice. That is one of the most *harmful* actions that
an President or Senator can do to his/her country.
We MUST **keep** EGALITARIAN judges in the majority in
the U.S. Supreme Court. And to do that, we MUST elect Obama.
For more important information and talking points, go here:
http://apifar.blogspot.com/2007/11/vital-warning-unseen-unheeded-now.html
http://apifar.blogspot.com/2007/12/surreal-alternate-reality-if-democrats.html
The above articles are clear, concise, totally factual, and are
HIGHLY useful and thought-provoking.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
(¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:28 pm Post subject: McDonald>s WIMPS OUT to the Loathsome RRR Cult!! Egalitaria |
|
|
On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 19:01:28 -0400,
"Jon Young"/"IBen Getiner" <Jvisions@live.com> PARROTED more
GARBAGE from the RRR Cult ---
[quote]http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=281548
[/quote]
CRAP-site that spews HATE-SWILL of the WORST and MOST bigoted
of the oligarchical RRR Cult>s organizations. ALWAYS a highly-bigoted
"source." Print their stuff out if you need birdcage liner. That>s all
it>s good for.
[quote]McDonald>s pledges neutrality in culture battle
Allie Martin - OneNewsNow - 10/9/2008 10:40:00 AM
The American Family Association (AFA) is ending its boycott of McDonald>s.
Mississippi-based AFA called for the boycott in May after the fast food
giant joined the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce. McDonald>s
has notified the pro-homosexual organization that McDonald>s vice president
Richard Ellis resigned from the board of directors of NGLCC and his seat on
the board will not be replaced.
In a press release on Thursday morning, AFA reports that in an email from
McDonald>s to its franchise owners the company stated its policy is "to not
be involved in political and social issues."
[/quote]
Well, then, SCREW the bigots at McDonald>s! I will NOT be eating
so much as a dollar burger there from now on until they wise up, tell
the hateful AFA to hang it in their ear, and become FAIR-minded and
egalitarian again.
Worthless COWARDS!!
Spread the word! There are around 15,000,000 gays in the USA,
and at least NINE TIMES that number of their straight ALLIES in their
quest for full access to EQUAL rights in Civil Rights Movement II.
If 150,000,000 Americans flat-out REFUSED to patronize McDonald>s,
I wonder what THAT would do to their bottom line?
Any time the RRR cult (or any of its hate-organizations) tries to
"boycott" some business, we need to remember that EGALITARIANS
have IMMENSELY more clout. WE need to use THAT to **counter**
the RRR Cult>s efforts. EVERY single time!!
If you happen to be a Christian, no problem. RRR Cultists are only
PSEUDO-Christians. At best! REAL Christians are **not** bigots.
There are a whole LOT more of us fair and SENSIBLE people than there
are of the hateful RRR Cultists (who comprise merely 15 million or so. See
analogy below). (However, as long as the RRR Cult INFESTS America, it
is the equivalent of having the TALIBAN within our borders.)
RRR Cult : Society :: 5% Arsenic Solution : Glass of Drinking Water
Please see this, and the articles in the SIG:
http://apifar.blogspot.com/2007/10/have-you-ever-told-lie-key-talking.html
http://
apifar.blogspot.com/
2007/10/have-you-ever-told-lie-key-talking.html
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com/2008/01/coral-ridge-ministries-inadvertently.html
http://
pro-christian.blogspot.com/
2008/01/coral-ridge-ministries-inadvertently.html
-- (¯`·.¸Craig Chilton¸.·´¯)
xanadu222@mchsi.com -- To E-Mail me.
http://www.roadrat.com -- Learn how to get PAID to TRAVEL.
http://apifar.blogspot.com -- Great TACTICS to Fight Bigotry.
http://pro-christian.blogspot.com -- Christianity *vs.* Bigotry.
And with Election Day looming, THIS site is a MUST:
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
MORE THAN EVER BEFORE...
"It IS The SUPREME COURT, Stupid!"
Earl Weber ("duke") <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote, 10-8-08 --
[quote]I know how the system is supposed to work. But we have
too many judges that decide based not on the Constitution
but on their version of social justice.
[/quote]
There can>t possibly BE too many egalitarian judges, since ALL
of them are constrained to rule *within* the parameters of the
Constitution. NO judge can *contradict* the Constitution. In
any given case, there is only so much potential "gray area" wiggle
room within which one must rule, or contradiction would occur.
The BEST judges are the fair-minded, sensible, and compas-
sionate ones who rule as close as they possibly can to the param-
eter that affords the most personal freedom for individuals. As
an envelope is defined by it>s edges, it>s a case of staying inside
of the envelope so as to still be mailable, with the *content*
always being snugly against the edge called "liberty."
Individual freedom should be PARAMOUNT, and NO President
or Senate should EVER be responsible for appointing/confirming
a Justice that doesn>t make it unequivocally *clear* that he/she
will steadfastly seek to defend and support it to the fullest extent
possible. There is NOTHING good to be gained by installing a
repressive Justice. That is one of the most *harmful* actions that
an President or Senator can do to his/her country.
We MUST **keep** EGALITARIAN judges in the majority in
the U.S. Supreme Court. And to do that, we MUST elect Obama.
For more important information and talking points, go here:
http://apifar.blogspot.com/2007/11/vital-warning-unseen-unheeded-now.html
http://apifar.blogspot.com/2007/12/surreal-alternate-reality-if-democrats.html
The above articles are clear, concise, totally factual, and are
HIGHLY useful and thought-provoking.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Mark M.
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:48 pm Post subject: Re: Dollar dies, or Markets die, or both |
|
|
Les Cargill wrote:
[quote]DB wrote:
Fred Weiss wrote:
On Oct 10, 2:57 pm, retrogro...@comcast.net wrote:
... to think anyone understands the economy i sa recipe for
disaster.
That of course is precisely why socialism - or any form of overarching
gov>t planning - cannot work.
It is not - as Les correctly notes - that the market is (or need be)
"perfect". It just needs to more consistently reward those who do
understand the economy vs. those who don>t, those whose investments
tend to succeed vs. those who don>t, those who correctly guage market
opportunities vs. those whose don>t, etc. etc. Gov>t regulation and
manipulation invariably mucks up this process - just as it has very
dramatically (and tragically) in the mortgage (and underlying credit)
market.
And just what did the government do in the 20s
In the teens/20s, they established the Federal Reserve, then
did not use it to create enough money supply in the '30s.
or up till now to create this mess?
They pushed too much liquidity into housing....
[/quote]
Funny. When government is weakened and corrupted by the rich and made into
their class tool, your solution is to blame government for being too
powerful and to let the rich have even more freedom to screw the people.
Mark M.
Mark M. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
DB
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2008 7:22 pm Post subject: Re: Federal Reserve Bankrupt: Fractional Banking To Be Repl |
|
|
"www.freedomtofascism.com" <truth@r.us> wrote in message
news:e39g3ahl68pljtrg5tuq3u4nfgaoqqnkrl@4ax.com...
[quote]On Fri, 10 Oct 2008 19:48:15 -0500, "johnny@." <johnny@.> wrote:
You<snip foul-mouthed crap
I told you several years ago that the Federal Reserve would collapse.
Don>t say I didn>t warn you.
[/quote]
Seems like the Federal Reserve only exists to create credibility for the US
Government by giving the impression that it has access to infinite amounts
of money.
It>s easy to fake that you are rich for a night by renting a luxury car,
seeding your wallet with a few hundred dollars and telling a story that a
rich uncle left you a fortune.
You look good on paper, but your credibility only lasts as long as the value
of real money in your wallet.
The US government has pawned all it>s assets, it>s wealth is fake, and why
anyone would invest in this dead horse is beyond all reason. Perhaps
people want to keep on believing they haven>t been conned and their money is
safe?
Wakeup, the American Dream is over! |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
