So very...
 

....Republican:

The Anatomy of a Deception: How The McCains Changed Their Baby Adoption
Story Just Before 2008 Campaign Began


Posted August 21, 2008 | 12:32 PM (EST)

As was pointed out yesterday by the Christian Science Monitor, the
McCain campaign was called out for lying about the purported urging of
Cindy McCain by Mother Teresa herself to adopt two children at her
orphanage back in 1991. Turns out, McCain never met or even spoke with
Mother Teresa on that trip.

Once confronted by the Monitor about the deception, the campaign quickly
erased such claims from the website, as it did with Cindy's family
recipes, which were proved to be lifted from the Food Network.

But after doing some research, this deception was no careless accident,
but rather another shameless and deliberate attempt by the campaign to
reinvent and embellish the McCain family history in time for his 2008
presidential bid.

Here's how the McCain adoption was described by them prior to the 2008
presidential race:

Newsweek (Nov. 15, 1999, Cindy McCain's Own Story):

On finding a child while running a relief mission to Bangladesh
in 1991:

I was working in Dhaka, and a friend of mine from Arizona had
said to me, Look, while you're there, do me a favor. Mother Teresa has
an orphanage in Dhaka. Would you mind seeing if they need any help? And
I said, Sure. We finally found the orphanage, and we saw 150 newborns on
one floor. And a lot of them were sick. And the nuns said, [This little
girl with a cleft palate]--can't you take her and get her medical help?
And I thought, well, sure I can, I can do that.

CNBC (Feb 12, 2000, Tim Russert Interview with the McCains):

Mrs. McCAIN: She's--our daughter Bridget is eight years old. I
found her in Mother Teresa's orphanage when she was 10 weeks old in
Bangladesh. She has a cleft palate; she had some other problems. And the
nuns persuaded me to bring her home, and I did. I--I could do that. I
was able to do that. And literally on board the flight home from Bangkok
to Los Angeles, not having spoken to my husband, I decided I couldn't
c--I had to--I couldn't let her go. I had--she chose me. So she's ours
now. I came home and presented my husband with a new daughter that he
didn't know he had.

Vanity Fair (November 2004, The Trashing of John McCain):

In 1991, when Cindy McCain was on a relief mission to
Bangladesh, she was asked by one of Mother Teresa's nuns to help a young
orphan with a cleft palate. Flying her to the U.S. for surgery, Cindy
realized she couldn't give her up. At the Phoenix airport, she broke it
to her husband, and they eventually adopted the child. But few people
knew that story. In the words of McCain's national campaign manager,
Rick Davis, a smear doesn't have "to be true to be effective."

Now see how the story changed at the beginning of 2008:

The Sunday Mail (Feb. 3, 2008, Dark past no barrier for Cindy):

``While working at Mother Teresa's orphanage in the early
1990s, I stumbled upon the most beautiful little girl I'd ever seen,''
she said. ``She had a terrible cleft palate. She had problems with her
feet. She had problems with her hands. She had all kinds of problems.

``As only Mother Teresa can, she prevailed upon me to take this
baby and another baby to the United States for medical care.''

The Sunday Telegraph (Feb. 3, 2008, Cindy McCain: pills, ills, beer
and the White House)

It was on a trip to Bangladesh in 1991 that she adopted
Bridget. On Friday she recounted to voters in Missouri and Illinois how
Mother Teresa persuaded her to return home with the child. "I just could
not let her go. The only thing was, I had not told my husband. When I
got back, he asked me 'Where will she go?' and I said: 'I thought she
could come to our house.'

Digital Journal (Jun 15, 2008, Can We Trust Cindy McCain to
Represent American Women?):

Mrs. McCain has been involved in charity work from clearing
landmines, to starting a charity to help children who need facial
reconstruction. She has been inspired by her daughter she adopted from
Bangladesh who needed extreme care after being born with a cleft palate.
The adoption was prompted by Mother Teresa herself who implored Cindy to
adopt the little girl. She did so without first consulting John McCain
because of her compassion for the girl and her respect for Mother Teresa.

But the most damning evidence of a deliberate attempt to concoct this
story comes from cached versions of the McCain campaign website.

Here's how Cindy's campaign bio reads on the website as late as November
9, 2004:

As an advocate for children's health care needs, Cindy H. McCain
founded the American Voluntary Medical Team (AVMT) in 1988. The AVMT
provided emergency medical and surgical care to impoverished children
throughout the world. Cindy led 55 medical missions to third world and
war-torn countries during AVMT's seven years of existence. During one of
those missions, on a visit to Mother Teresa's Orphanage Cindy agreed to
bring two babies in need of medical attention back to the United States.
One of those babies is now a happy and healthy little girl named Bridget
McCain.

Now compare that to the change made on the website on February 3, 2008
-- the same day the stories above by The Sunday Mail and The Sunday
Telegraph were printed:

As an advocate for children's health care needs, Cindy founded and
ran the American Voluntary Medical Team (AVMT) from 1988 to 1995. AVMT
provided emergency medical and surgical care to impoverished children
throughout the world. Cindy led 55 medical missions to third world and
war-torn countries during AVMT's seven years of existence. On one of
those missions, Mother Teresa convinced Cindy to take two babies in need
of medical attention to the United States. One of those babies is now
their adopted daughter, 15 year old Bridget McCain.

Notice the obvious change in the one sentence that depicts the
circumstances of the adoption.

The instances of the dishonest efforts to create a McCain family
portrait are growing. The campaign previously had to scrub its website
of Cindy's family recipes when it was discovered in April that they were
largely cut and paste from the Food Network.

At the time, they blamed an intern for the problem. I wonder who they
will now blame for Cindy McCain's own words?

Are these indicative of the McCain family values?

UPDATE: Seems that Rick Warren told Larry King on Monday night that the
Mother Teresa story was one of three times during Saturday's forum that
McCain teared-up. They're liars and actors.

Mark Nickolas is the Managing Editor of Political Base, and this story
was from his original post, "The Anatomy of a Deception: How The McCains
Changed Their Baby Adoption Story Just Before 2008 Bid"


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-n...tml?view=print

SPAM: Looooong wafa cut and paste
 

...

So very...
 

"hk" wrote in message
...
...Republican:

The Anatomy of a Deception: How The McCains Changed Their Baby Adoption
Story Just Before 2008 Campaign Began


Posted August 21, 2008 | 12:32 PM (EST)

As was pointed out yesterday by the Christian Science Monitor, the McCain
campaign was called out for lying about the purported urging of Cindy
McCain by Mother Teresa herself to adopt two children at her orphanage
back in 1991. Turns out, McCain never met or even spoke with Mother Teresa
on that trip.

Once confronted by the Monitor about the deception, the campaign quickly
erased such claims from the website, as it did with Cindy's family
recipes, which were proved to be lifted from the Food Network.

But after doing some research, this deception was no careless accident,
but rather another shameless and deliberate attempt by the campaign to
reinvent and embellish the McCain family history in time for his 2008
presidential bid.

Here's how the McCain adoption was described by them prior to the 2008
presidential race:

Newsweek (Nov. 15, 1999, Cindy McCain's Own Story):

On finding a child while running a relief mission to Bangladesh in
1991:

I was working in Dhaka, and a friend of mine from Arizona had said
to me, Look, while you're there, do me a favor. Mother Teresa has an
orphanage in Dhaka. Would you mind seeing if they need any help? And I
said, Sure. We finally found the orphanage, and we saw 150 newborns on one
floor. And a lot of them were sick. And the nuns said, [This little girl
with a cleft palate]--can't you take her and get her medical help? And I
thought, well, sure I can, I can do that.

CNBC (Feb 12, 2000, Tim Russert Interview with the McCains):

Mrs. McCAIN: She's--our daughter Bridget is eight years old. I
found her in Mother Teresa's orphanage when she was 10 weeks old in
Bangladesh. She has a cleft palate; she had some other problems. And the
nuns persuaded me to bring her home, and I did. I--I could do that. I was
able to do that. And literally on board the flight home from Bangkok to
Los Angeles, not having spoken to my husband, I decided I couldn't c--I
had to--I couldn't let her go. I had--she chose me. So she's ours now. I
came home and presented my husband with a new daughter that he didn't know
he had.

Vanity Fair (November 2004, The Trashing of John McCain):

In 1991, when Cindy McCain was on a relief mission to Bangladesh,
she was asked by one of Mother Teresa's nuns to help a young orphan with a
cleft palate. Flying her to the U.S. for surgery, Cindy realized she
couldn't give her up. At the Phoenix airport, she broke it to her husband,
and they eventually adopted the child. But few people knew that story. In
the words of McCain's national campaign manager, Rick Davis, a smear
doesn't have "to be true to be effective."

Now see how the story changed at the beginning of 2008:

The Sunday Mail (Feb. 3, 2008, Dark past no barrier for Cindy):

``While working at Mother Teresa's orphanage in the early 1990s, I
stumbled upon the most beautiful little girl I'd ever seen,'' she said.
``She had a terrible cleft palate. She had problems with her feet. She had
problems with her hands. She had all kinds of problems.

``As only Mother Teresa can, she prevailed upon me to take this
baby and another baby to the United States for medical care.''

The Sunday Telegraph (Feb. 3, 2008, Cindy McCain: pills, ills, beer
and the White House)

It was on a trip to Bangladesh in 1991 that she adopted Bridget.
On Friday she recounted to voters in Missouri and Illinois how Mother
Teresa persuaded her to return home with the child. "I just could not let
her go. The only thing was, I had not told my husband. When I got back, he
asked me 'Where will she go?' and I said: 'I thought she could come to our
house.'

Digital Journal (Jun 15, 2008, Can We Trust Cindy McCain to Represent
American Women?):

Mrs. McCain has been involved in charity work from clearing
landmines, to starting a charity to help children who need facial
reconstruction. She has been inspired by her daughter she adopted from
Bangladesh who needed extreme care after being born with a cleft palate.
The adoption was prompted by Mother Teresa herself who implored Cindy to
adopt the little girl. She did so without first consulting John McCain
because of her compassion for the girl and her respect for Mother Teresa.

But the most damning evidence of a deliberate attempt to concoct this
story comes from cached versions of the McCain campaign website.

Here's how Cindy's campaign bio reads on the website as late as November
9, 2004:

As an advocate for children's health care needs, Cindy H. McCain
founded the American Voluntary Medical Team (AVMT) in 1988. The AVMT
provided emergency medical and surgical care to impoverished children
throughout the world. Cindy led 55 medical missions to third world and
war-torn countries during AVMT's seven years of existence. During one of
those missions, on a visit to Mother Teresa's Orphanage Cindy agreed to
bring two babies in need of medical attention back to the United States.
One of those babies is now a happy and healthy little girl named Bridget
McCain.

Now compare that to the change made on the website on February 3, 2008 --
the same day the stories above by The Sunday Mail and The Sunday Telegraph
were printed:

As an advocate for children's health care needs, Cindy founded and ran
the American Voluntary Medical Team (AVMT) from 1988 to 1995. AVMT
provided emergency medical and surgical care to impoverished children
throughout the world. Cindy led 55 medical missions to third world and
war-torn countries during AVMT's seven years of existence. On one of those
missions, Mother Teresa convinced Cindy to take two babies in need of
medical attention to the United States. One of those babies is now their
adopted daughter, 15 year old Bridget McCain.

Notice the obvious change in the one sentence that depicts the
circumstances of the adoption.

The instances of the dishonest efforts to create a McCain family portrait
are growing. The campaign previously had to scrub its website of Cindy's
family recipes when it was discovered in April that they were largely cut
and paste from the Food Network.

At the time, they blamed an intern for the problem. I wonder who they will
now blame for Cindy McCain's own words?

Are these indicative of the McCain family values?

UPDATE: Seems that Rick Warren told Larry King on Monday night that the
Mother Teresa story was one of three times during Saturday's forum that
McCain teared-up. They're liars and actors.

Mark Nickolas is the Managing Editor of Political Base, and this story was
from his original post, "The Anatomy of a Deception: How The McCains
Changed Their Baby Adoption Story Just Before 2008 Bid"


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-n...tml?view=print

I don't think that the changing of how the humanitarian deeds were
accomplished takes away from the apparent good,

Recipes? Come on now.

So very...
 

D.Duck wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
...
...Republican:

The Anatomy of a Deception: How The McCains Changed Their Baby Adoption
Story Just Before 2008 Campaign Began


Posted August 21, 2008 | 12:32 PM (EST)

As was pointed out yesterday by the Christian Science Monitor, the McCain
campaign was called out for lying about the purported urging of Cindy
McCain by Mother Teresa herself to adopt two children at her orphanage
back in 1991. Turns out, McCain never met or even spoke with Mother Teresa
on that trip.

Once confronted by the Monitor about the deception, the campaign quickly
erased such claims from the website, as it did with Cindy's family
recipes, which were proved to be lifted from the Food Network.

But after doing some research, this deception was no careless accident,
but rather another shameless and deliberate attempt by the campaign to
reinvent and embellish the McCain family history in time for his 2008
presidential bid.

Here's how the McCain adoption was described by them prior to the 2008
presidential race:

Newsweek (Nov. 15, 1999, Cindy McCain's Own Story):

On finding a child while running a relief mission to Bangladesh in
1991:

I was working in Dhaka, and a friend of mine from Arizona had said
to me, Look, while you're there, do me a favor. Mother Teresa has an
orphanage in Dhaka. Would you mind seeing if they need any help? And I
said, Sure. We finally found the orphanage, and we saw 150 newborns on one
floor. And a lot of them were sick. And the nuns said, [This little girl
with a cleft palate]--can't you take her and get her medical help? And I
thought, well, sure I can, I can do that.

CNBC (Feb 12, 2000, Tim Russert Interview with the McCains):

Mrs. McCAIN: She's--our daughter Bridget is eight years old. I
found her in Mother Teresa's orphanage when she was 10 weeks old in
Bangladesh. She has a cleft palate; she had some other problems. And the
nuns persuaded me to bring her home, and I did. I--I could do that. I was
able to do that. And literally on board the flight home from Bangkok to
Los Angeles, not having spoken to my husband, I decided I couldn't c--I
had to--I couldn't let her go. I had--she chose me. So she's ours now. I
came home and presented my husband with a new daughter that he didn't know
he had.

Vanity Fair (November 2004, The Trashing of John McCain):

In 1991, when Cindy McCain was on a relief mission to Bangladesh,
she was asked by one of Mother Teresa's nuns to help a young orphan with a
cleft palate. Flying her to the U.S. for surgery, Cindy realized she
couldn't give her up. At the Phoenix airport, she broke it to her husband,
and they eventually adopted the child. But few people knew that story. In
the words of McCain's national campaign manager, Rick Davis, a smear
doesn't have "to be true to be effective."

Now see how the story changed at the beginning of 2008:

The Sunday Mail (Feb. 3, 2008, Dark past no barrier for Cindy):

``While working at Mother Teresa's orphanage in the early 1990s, I
stumbled upon the most beautiful little girl I'd ever seen,'' she said.
``She had a terrible cleft palate. She had problems with her feet. She had
problems with her hands. She had all kinds of problems.

``As only Mother Teresa can, she prevailed upon me to take this
baby and another baby to the United States for medical care.''

The Sunday Telegraph (Feb. 3, 2008, Cindy McCain: pills, ills, beer
and the White House)

It was on a trip to Bangladesh in 1991 that she adopted Bridget.
On Friday she recounted to voters in Missouri and Illinois how Mother
Teresa persuaded her to return home with the child. "I just could not let
her go. The only thing was, I had not told my husband. When I got back, he
asked me 'Where will she go?' and I said: 'I thought she could come to our
house.'

Digital Journal (Jun 15, 2008, Can We Trust Cindy McCain to Represent
American Women?):

Mrs. McCain has been involved in charity work from clearing
landmines, to starting a charity to help children who need facial
reconstruction. She has been inspired by her daughter she adopted from
Bangladesh who needed extreme care after being born with a cleft palate.
The adoption was prompted by Mother Teresa herself who implored Cindy to
adopt the little girl. She did so without first consulting John McCain
because of her compassion for the girl and her respect for Mother Teresa.

But the most damning evidence of a deliberate attempt to concoct this
story comes from cached versions of the McCain campaign website.

Here's how Cindy's campaign bio reads on the website as late as November
9, 2004:

As an advocate for children's health care needs, Cindy H. McCain
founded the American Voluntary Medical Team (AVMT) in 1988. The AVMT
provided emergency medical and surgical care to impoverished children
throughout the world. Cindy led 55 medical missions to third world and
war-torn countries during AVMT's seven years of existence. During one of
those missions, on a visit to Mother Teresa's Orphanage Cindy agreed to
bring two babies in need of medical attention back to the United States.
One of those babies is now a happy and healthy little girl named Bridget
McCain.

Now compare that to the change made on the website on February 3, 2008 --
the same day the stories above by The Sunday Mail and The Sunday Telegraph
were printed:

As an advocate for children's health care needs, Cindy founded and ran
the American Voluntary Medical Team (AVMT) from 1988 to 1995. AVMT
provided emergency medical and surgical care to impoverished children
throughout the world. Cindy led 55 medical missions to third world and
war-torn countries during AVMT's seven years of existence. On one of those
missions, Mother Teresa convinced Cindy to take two babies in need of
medical attention to the United States. One of those babies is now their
adopted daughter, 15 year old Bridget McCain.

Notice the obvious change in the one sentence that depicts the
circumstances of the adoption.

The instances of the dishonest efforts to create a McCain family portrait
are growing. The campaign previously had to scrub its website of Cindy's
family recipes when it was discovered in April that they were largely cut
and paste from the Food Network.

At the time, they blamed an intern for the problem. I wonder who they will
now blame for Cindy McCain's own words?

Are these indicative of the McCain family values?

UPDATE: Seems that Rick Warren told Larry King on Monday night that the
Mother Teresa story was one of three times during Saturday's forum that
McCain teared-up. They're liars and actors.

Mark Nickolas is the Managing Editor of Political Base, and this story was
from his original post, "The Anatomy of a Deception: How The McCains
Changed Their Baby Adoption Story Just Before 2008 Bid"


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-n...tml?view=print

I don't think that the changing of how the humanitarian deeds were
accomplished takes away from the apparent good,

Recipes? Come on now.




You mean, other than the lie about Mother Teresa? :)

SPAM: Looooong wafa cut and paste
 

SPAM: Looooong wafa cut and paste"
 

On Aug 24, 7:20*am, "D.Duck" wrote:

I don't think that the changing of how the humanitarian deeds were
accomplished takes away from the apparent good,

Recipes? *Come on now.


You read it? Did you compare it with the origional to find the edits?

So very...
 

On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 07:20:41 -0400, "D.Duck" wrote:


"hk" wrote in message
...
Unread **** snipped

I don't think that the changing of how the humanitarian deeds were
accomplished takes away from the apparent good,

Recipes? Come on now.


Since recipes were brought up, here's what's on the menu today.

Swiss Steak

2 pounds beef bottom round, trimmed of excess fat
2 teaspoons kosher salt
1 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
3/4 cup all-purpose flour
1/4 cup vegetable oil or bacon drippings
1 large onion, thinly sliced
2 cloves garlic, minced
2 stalks celery, chopped
1 tablespoon tomato paste
1 (14.5-ounce) can diced tomatoes
1 teaspoon smoked paprika
1 teaspoon dried oregano
1 tablespoon Worcestershire sauce
1 1/2 cups beef broth
Preheat the oven to 325 degrees F.
Cut the meat with the grain into 1/2-inch thick slices and season on both
sides with the salt and pepper. Place the flour into a pie pan. Dredge the
pieces of meat on both sides in the flour mixture. Tenderize the meat using
a needling device, until each slice is 1/4-inch thick. Dredge the slices on
both sides once more and set aside.
Add enough of the bacon drippings or vegetable oil to just cover the bottom
of a 4 to 5-quart Dutch oven set over medium-high heat. Once the oil begins
to shimmer, add the steaks to the pan, being careful not to overcrowd. Cook
until golden brown on both sides, approximately 2 minutes per side. Remove
the steaks to a plate and repeat until all of the steaks have been browned.
Remove the last steaks from the pot and add the onions, garlic, and celery.
Saute for 1 to 2 minutes. Add the tomato paste and stir to combine. Next
add the tomatoes, paprika, oregano, Worcestershire sauce and beef broth and
stir to combine. Return the meat to the pot, submerging it in the liquid.
Cover the pot and place it in the oven on the middle rack. Cook for 1 1/2
to 2 hours or until the meat is tender and falling apart.

I start off with cube steak, saves a lot of pounding.

So very...
 

D.Duck wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
...
...Republican:

The Anatomy of a Deception: How The McCains Changed Their Baby Adoption
Story Just Before 2008 Campaign Began


Posted August 21, 2008 | 12:32 PM (EST)

As was pointed out yesterday by the Christian Science Monitor, the McCain
campaign was called out for lying about the purported urging of Cindy
McCain by Mother Teresa herself to adopt two children at her orphanage
back in 1991. Turns out, McCain never met or even spoke with Mother Teresa
on that trip.

Once confronted by the Monitor about the deception, the campaign quickly
erased such claims from the website, as it did with Cindy's family
recipes, which were proved to be lifted from the Food Network.

But after doing some research, this deception was no careless accident,
but rather another shameless and deliberate attempt by the campaign to
reinvent and embellish the McCain family history in time for his 2008
presidential bid.

Here's how the McCain adoption was described by them prior to the 2008
presidential race:

Newsweek (Nov. 15, 1999, Cindy McCain's Own Story):

On finding a child while running a relief mission to Bangladesh in
1991:

I was working in Dhaka, and a friend of mine from Arizona had said
to me, Look, while you're there, do me a favor. Mother Teresa has an
orphanage in Dhaka. Would you mind seeing if they need any help? And I
said, Sure. We finally found the orphanage, and we saw 150 newborns on one
floor. And a lot of them were sick. And the nuns said, [This little girl
with a cleft palate]--can't you take her and get her medical help? And I
thought, well, sure I can, I can do that.

CNBC (Feb 12, 2000, Tim Russert Interview with the McCains):

Mrs. McCAIN: She's--our daughter Bridget is eight years old. I
found her in Mother Teresa's orphanage when she was 10 weeks old in
Bangladesh. She has a cleft palate; she had some other problems. And the
nuns persuaded me to bring her home, and I did. I--I could do that. I was
able to do that. And literally on board the flight home from Bangkok to
Los Angeles, not having spoken to my husband, I decided I couldn't c--I
had to--I couldn't let her go. I had--she chose me. So she's ours now. I
came home and presented my husband with a new daughter that he didn't know
he had.

Vanity Fair (November 2004, The Trashing of John McCain):

In 1991, when Cindy McCain was on a relief mission to Bangladesh,
she was asked by one of Mother Teresa's nuns to help a young orphan with a
cleft palate. Flying her to the U.S. for surgery, Cindy realized she
couldn't give her up. At the Phoenix airport, she broke it to her husband,
and they eventually adopted the child. But few people knew that story. In
the words of McCain's national campaign manager, Rick Davis, a smear
doesn't have "to be true to be effective."

Now see how the story changed at the beginning of 2008:

The Sunday Mail (Feb. 3, 2008, Dark past no barrier for Cindy):

``While working at Mother Teresa's orphanage in the early 1990s, I
stumbled upon the most beautiful little girl I'd ever seen,'' she said.
``She had a terrible cleft palate. She had problems with her feet. She had
problems with her hands. She had all kinds of problems.

``As only Mother Teresa can, she prevailed upon me to take this
baby and another baby to the United States for medical care.''

The Sunday Telegraph (Feb. 3, 2008, Cindy McCain: pills, ills, beer
and the White House)

It was on a trip to Bangladesh in 1991 that she adopted Bridget.
On Friday she recounted to voters in Missouri and Illinois how Mother
Teresa persuaded her to return home with the child. "I just could not let
her go. The only thing was, I had not told my husband. When I got back, he
asked me 'Where will she go?' and I said: 'I thought she could come to our
house.'

Digital Journal (Jun 15, 2008, Can We Trust Cindy McCain to Represent
American Women?):

Mrs. McCain has been involved in charity work from clearing
landmines, to starting a charity to help children who need facial
reconstruction. She has been inspired by her daughter she adopted from
Bangladesh who needed extreme care after being born with a cleft palate.
The adoption was prompted by Mother Teresa herself who implored Cindy to
adopt the little girl. She did so without first consulting John McCain
because of her compassion for the girl and her respect for Mother Teresa.

But the most damning evidence of a deliberate attempt to concoct this
story comes from cached versions of the McCain campaign website.

Here's how Cindy's campaign bio reads on the website as late as November
9, 2004:

As an advocate for children's health care needs, Cindy H. McCain
founded the American Voluntary Medical Team (AVMT) in 1988. The AVMT
provided emergency medical and surgical care to impoverished children
throughout the world. Cindy led 55 medical missions to third world and
war-torn countries during AVMT's seven years of existence. During one of
those missions, on a visit to Mother Teresa's Orphanage Cindy agreed to
bring two babies in need of medical attention back to the United States.
One of those babies is now a happy and healthy little girl named Bridget
McCain.

Now compare that to the change made on the website on February 3, 2008 --
the same day the stories above by The Sunday Mail and The Sunday Telegraph
were printed:

As an advocate for children's health care needs, Cindy founded and ran
the American Voluntary Medical Team (AVMT) from 1988 to 1995. AVMT
provided emergency medical and surgical care to impoverished children
throughout the world. Cindy led 55 medical missions to third world and
war-torn countries during AVMT's seven years of existence. On one of those
missions, Mother Teresa convinced Cindy to take two babies in need of
medical attention to the United States. One of those babies is now their
adopted daughter, 15 year old Bridget McCain.

Notice the obvious change in the one sentence that depicts the
circumstances of the adoption.

The instances of the dishonest efforts to create a McCain family portrait
are growing. The campaign previously had to scrub its website of Cindy's
family recipes when it was discovered in April that they were largely cut
and paste from the Food Network.

At the time, they blamed an intern for the problem. I wonder who they will
now blame for Cindy McCain's own words?

Are these indicative of the McCain family values?

UPDATE: Seems that Rick Warren told Larry King on Monday night that the
Mother Teresa story was one of three times during Saturday's forum that
McCain teared-up. They're liars and actors.

Mark Nickolas is the Managing Editor of Political Base, and this story was
from his original post, "The Anatomy of a Deception: How The McCains
Changed Their Baby Adoption Story Just Before 2008 Bid"


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-n...tml?view=print

I don't think that the changing of how the humanitarian deeds were
accomplished takes away from the apparent good,

Recipes? Come on now.



Over time details of events seem to become fuzzy in folks minds. For
instance; Wasn't Hillery over in Rag Head land on a humanitarian fact
finding mission recently? Seems that she recalled bullets flying all
around her. She had some wild memories of that trip. Lies? Lapse of
memory? Harry never commented on her defective reccolector.

So very...
 

So very...

boring

So very...
 

On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 08:07:19 -0400, Jim wrote:

Over time details of events seem to become fuzzy in folks minds. For
instance; Wasn't Hillery over in Rag Head land on a humanitarian fact
finding mission recently? Seems that she recalled bullets flying all
around her. She had some wild memories of that trip. Lies? Lapse of
memory? Harry never commented on her defective reccolector.

Desperation.

Oh - just read this morning that Pelosi is still on message - she's
going to save the planet.

Uh huh....

So very...
 

On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 08:07:19 -0400, Jim wrote:

BULL**** SNIPPED

Over time details of events seem to become fuzzy in folks minds. For
instance; Wasn't Hillery over in Rag Head land on a humanitarian fact
finding mission recently? Seems that she recalled bullets flying all
around her. She had some wild memories of that trip. Lies? Lapse of
memory? Harry never commented on her defective reccolector.

Must you keep quoting all 12 pages of ****?

So very...
 

On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:32:08 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 08:07:19 -0400, Jim wrote:

Over time details of events seem to become fuzzy in folks minds. For
instance; Wasn't Hillery over in Rag Head land on a humanitarian fact
finding mission recently? Seems that she recalled bullets flying all
around her. She had some wild memories of that trip. Lies? Lapse of
memory? Harry never commented on her defective reccolector.

Desperation.

Oh - just read this morning that Pelosi is still on message - she's
going to save the planet.

Uh huh....

Thank you, for snipping the crap.

You're truly a blessed, great American.

So very...
 

"Tim" wrote in message
...

So very...

boring


You know, I don't think any of us mere mortals can understand the rigors of
running for a political national office, especially for the POTUS. Given
the countless number of speeches, rallies, questions, travel, etc., over
such a long period of time, I can forgive a few gaffes or story
inconsistencies from both sides. (although I *do* think I'd remember being
shot at upon arrival at an airport).

What concerns me more than anything else ... more than the individuals
running and screw ups they may make in the process .... is the slow but
sure progress being made to transform this country from a free, democratic
republic to democratic socialism.
The roots of this movement can be traced back to people like Eugene Debs

http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h801.html

and continues today, growing strength in numbers. The modern day group,
"Democratic Socialists of America" hosts a number of similar organizations
with more sanitized names, like the "Progressive Caucus" with over 60
Congressional Democrats or other major political figures, including notables
such as Nancy Pelosi and Jesse Jackson.

http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/gov_ph...socialists.htm


I believe we should really stop and think before we continue down this path
to be sure it's what we want or need. If we choose to go this way, it will
be forever the end of the nation that our forefathers envisioned.

Eisboch

So very...
 

On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 08:52:06 -0400, Eisboch wrote:


http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h801.html

An antiwar speech gets a 10 year sentence. I don't think that's what our
forefathers intended.


I believe we should really stop and think before we continue down this
path to be sure it's what we want or need. If we choose to go this
way, it will be forever the end of the nation that our forefathers
envisioned.

Eisboch

Nothing for nothing, but I don't see any references to capitalism in the
Constitution. Private property, yes, but free markets and capitalism
weren't invented yet. So, just how do you know what our forefathers
envisioned.

So very...
 

wrote in message
t...
On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 08:52:06 -0400, Eisboch wrote:


http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h801.html

An antiwar speech gets a 10 year sentence. I don't think that's what our
forefathers intended.


I believe we should really stop and think before we continue down this
path to be sure it's what we want or need. If we choose to go this
way, it will be forever the end of the nation that our forefathers
envisioned.

Eisboch

Nothing for nothing, but I don't see any references to capitalism in the
Constitution. Private property, yes, but free markets and capitalism
weren't invented yet. So, just how do you know what our forefathers
envisioned.


Individual freedom.

Not socialism.

Eisboch

So very...
 

On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 08:44:55 -0400, John H.
salmonremovebait@gmaildotcom wrote:

On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 08:07:19 -0400, Jim wrote:

BULL**** SNIPPED

Over time details of events seem to become fuzzy in folks minds. For
instance; Wasn't Hillery over in Rag Head land on a humanitarian fact
finding mission recently? Seems that she recalled bullets flying all
around her. She had some wild memories of that trip. Lies? Lapse of
memory? Harry never commented on her defective reccolector.

Must you keep quoting all 12 pages of ****?

Bout time someone at this NG snipped something.

Casady

So very...
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"Tim" wrote in message
...

So very...

boring


You know, I don't think any of us mere mortals can understand the rigors
of running for a political national office, especially for the POTUS.
Given the countless number of speeches, rallies, questions, travel, etc.,
over such a long period of time, I can forgive a few gaffes or story
inconsistencies from both sides. (although I *do* think I'd remember
being shot at upon arrival at an airport).

What concerns me more than anything else ... more than the individuals
running and screw ups they may make in the process .... is the slow but
sure progress being made to transform this country from a free, democratic
republic to democratic socialism.
The roots of this movement can be traced back to people like Eugene Debs

http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h801.html

and continues today, growing strength in numbers. The modern day group,
"Democratic Socialists of America" hosts a number of similar organizations
with more sanitized names, like the "Progressive Caucus" with over 60
Congressional Democrats or other major political figures, including
notables such as Nancy Pelosi and Jesse Jackson.

http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/gov_ph...socialists.htm


I believe we should really stop and think before we continue down this
path to be sure it's what we want or need. If we choose to go this way,
it will be forever the end of the nation that our forefathers envisioned.

Eisboch








Nancy Pelosi. Where have I heard that name before? Oh yes. She is the
speaker of the house of Pelosi.

So very...
 

"John H." salmonremovebait@gmaildotcom wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 08:07:19 -0400, Jim wrote:

BULL**** SNIPPED

Over time details of events seem to become fuzzy in folks minds. For
instance; Wasn't Hillery over in Rag Head land on a humanitarian fact
finding mission recently? Seems that she recalled bullets flying all
around her. She had some wild memories of that trip. Lies? Lapse of
memory? Harry never commented on her defective reccolector.

Must you keep quoting all 12 pages of ****?

I'm so very sorry. It's hard to focus on the mission, sometimes. I'll try to
do better.

So very...
 

wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 08:52:06 -0400, Eisboch wrote:


http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h801.html

An antiwar speech gets a 10 year sentence. I don't think that's what our
forefathers intended.


I believe we should really stop and think before we continue down this
path to be sure it's what we want or need. If we choose to go this
way, it will be forever the end of the nation that our forefathers
envisioned.

Eisboch

Nothing for nothing, but I don't see any references to capitalism in the
Constitution. Private property, yes, but free markets and capitalism
weren't invented yet. So, just how do you know what our forefathers
envisioned.

While there were not completely free markets in reference to trade
between countries. It was common to have tariffs on certain items, and
to limit who could import and/or sell certain items, free market pricing
on the majority of items and capitalism absolutely did exist well before
the revolution.

So very...
 

On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:47:10 -0400, Earl of Warwich, Duke of Cornwall,
Marquies of Anglesea, Sir Reginald P. Smithers III Esq. LLC, STP. wrote:


While there were not completely free markets in reference to trade
between countries. It was common to have tariffs on certain items, and
to limit who could import and/or sell certain items, free market pricing
on the majority of items and capitalism absolutely did exist well before
the revolution.

It can be argued that "true" capitalism, still doesn't exist. There have
always been government limits in defining the rules of the market. The
only real arguments we have in this country are in defining those
limits. I mean it is the basic left-right, individual-tribal, paradigm.
I was just questioning Eisboch's forefather's vision. After all, the
majority of the leaders of the Revolution were leftists.

So very...
 

Eisboch wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message
...
So very...

boring


You know, I don't think any of us mere mortals can understand the rigors of
running for a political national office, especially for the POTUS. Given
the countless number of speeches, rallies, questions, travel, etc., over
such a long period of time, I can forgive a few gaffes or story
inconsistencies from both sides. (although I *do* think I'd remember being
shot at upon arrival at an airport).

What concerns me more than anything else ... more than the individuals
running and screw ups they may make in the process .... is the slow but
sure progress being made to transform this country from a free, democratic
republic to democratic socialism.
The roots of this movement can be traced back to people like Eugene Debs

http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h801.html

and continues today, growing strength in numbers. The modern day group,
"Democratic Socialists of America" hosts a number of similar organizations
with more sanitized names, like the "Progressive Caucus" with over 60
Congressional Democrats or other major political figures, including notables
such as Nancy Pelosi and Jesse Jackson.

http://www.tysknews.com/Depts/gov_ph...socialists.htm


I believe we should really stop and think before we continue down this path
to be sure it's what we want or need. If we choose to go this way, it will
be forever the end of the nation that our forefathers envisioned.

Eisboch



Debs had nothing to do with this country's slide into the toilet. If you
want to blame anything, blame greed, especially the greed of the 1980s.

There's nothing in the Declaration or Constitution that says we all
exist for "the corporation" or its "shareholders," but that seems to be
the mentality these days.

So very...
 

hk wrote:



Debs had nothing to do with this country's slide into the toilet. If you
want to blame anything, blame greed, especially the greed of the 1980s.

Who is Debs and why is she playing in the toilet?

I also want to know what Clinton was doing when he was president? If I
am not mistaken, wasn't he president for 8 yrs during the 90's?

SPAM: Looooong wafa cut and paste
 

On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 07:30:20 -0400, hk wrote:

photos of how one of your kids, with your encouragement, has taken
up gunfighting with live ammo for a hobby.

There are thousands of kids with that hobby. They call them
gangbangers, and they will be happy to sell you some coke.

Casady

SPAM: Looooong wafa cut and paste
 

Richard Casady wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 07:30:20 -0400, hk wrote:

photos of how one of your kids, with your encouragement, has taken
up gunfighting with live ammo for a hobby.

There are thousands of kids with that hobby. They call them
gangbangers, and they will be happy to sell you some coke.

Casady


That doesn't surprise me...I wonder how many of them got their "start"
as pre-teenies or teenies who made obscene gestures with the
encouragement of their parnets?


Re; coke...I prefer water with a bit of lemon or lime. :)

So very...
 

wrote in message
t...
On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:47:10 -0400, Earl of Warwich, Duke of Cornwall,
Marquies of Anglesea, Sir Reginald P. Smithers III Esq. LLC, STP. wrote:


While there were not completely free markets in reference to trade
between countries. It was common to have tariffs on certain items, and
to limit who could import and/or sell certain items, free market pricing
on the majority of items and capitalism absolutely did exist well before
the revolution.

It can be argued that "true" capitalism, still doesn't exist. There have
always been government limits in defining the rules of the market. The
only real arguments we have in this country are in defining those
limits. I mean it is the basic left-right, individual-tribal, paradigm.
I was just questioning Eisboch's forefather's vision. After all, the
majority of the leaders of the Revolution were leftists.


I wrote that poorly. I was trying to make the point that our forefathers
envisioned life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, not a government
social welfare system.

Eisboch

So very...
 

"hk" wrote in message
. ..


Debs had nothing to do with this country's slide into the toilet. If you
want to blame anything, blame greed, especially the greed of the 1980s.

There's nothing in the Declaration or Constitution that says we all exist
for "the corporation" or its "shareholders," but that seems to be the
mentality these days.



I cited Debs purposely, for your benefit.

Your political and social welfare views expressed over the years are almost
exactly those of his, but with a time frame difference.
He was a Socialist.

Eisboch

So very...
 

On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:24:19 -0400, Eisboch wrote:


I wrote that poorly. I was trying to make the point that our
forefathers envisioned life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, not
a government social welfare system.

Eisboch

That works for me.

So very...
 

Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..

Debs had nothing to do with this country's slide into the toilet. If you
want to blame anything, blame greed, especially the greed of the 1980s.

There's nothing in the Declaration or Constitution that says we all exist
for "the corporation" or its "shareholders," but that seems to be the
mentality these days.



I cited Debs purposely, for your benefit.

Your political and social welfare views expressed over the years are almost
exactly those of his, but with a time frame difference.
He was a Socialist.

Eisboch




Really? Well, good. Debs helped exploited workers of his era. Better to
be likened to a great American like Debs than a slimeball like Dick Cheney.

So very...
 

So very...
 

On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:34:12 -0400, Eisboch wrote:


I cited Debs purposely, for your benefit.

Your political and social welfare views expressed over the years are
almost exactly those of his, but with a time frame difference. He was a
Socialist.

Eisboch

Yeah, but, Debs started out as a Democrat. Perhaps, if he hadn't been
sent to jail for his role in the Pullman Strike, he would have remained
one. It was during that incarceration, that he read the works of Karl
Marx.

http://www.lib.niu.edu/1994/ihy941208.html

So very...
 

"hk" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:
On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 12:24:19 -0400, Eisboch wrote:


I wrote that poorly. I was trying to make the point that our
forefathers envisioned life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, not
a government social welfare system.

Eisboch

That works for me.


What we actually have is a government social welfare system for the rich.

"Nothing" for less fortunate?

So very...
 

On Aug 24, 8:23 am, (Richard Casady)
wrote:


Bout time someone at this NG snipped something.

Casady


I totally wiped it off and started over

So very...
 

"hk" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..

Debs had nothing to do with this country's slide into the toilet. If you
want to blame anything, blame greed, especially the greed of the 1980s.

There's nothing in the Declaration or Constitution that says we all
exist for "the corporation" or its "shareholders," but that seems to be
the mentality these days.



I cited Debs purposely, for your benefit.

Your political and social welfare views expressed over the years are
almost exactly those of his, but with a time frame difference.
He was a Socialist.

Eisboch




Really? Well, good. Debs helped exploited workers of his era. Better to be
likened to a great American like Debs than a slimeball like Dick Cheney.

So, am I then to assume you are for Socialism, rather than a free market,
capitalistic economy?

Eisboch

So very...
 

On Aug 24, 9:43*pm, "Eisboch" wrote:
"hk" wrote in message

. ..





Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
m...

Debs had nothing to do with this country's slide into the toilet. If you
want to blame anything, blame greed, especially the greed of the 1980s.

There's nothing in the Declaration or Constitution that says we all
exist for "the corporation" or its "shareholders," but that seems to be
the mentality these days.

I cited Debs purposely, for your benefit.

Your political and social welfare views expressed over the years are
almost exactly those of his, but with a time frame difference.
He was a Socialist.

Eisboch

Really? Well, good. Debs helped exploited workers of his era. Better to be
likened to a great American like Debs than a slimeball like Dick Cheney..

So, am I then to assume you are for Socialism, rather than a free market,
capitalistic economy?

Eisboch- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I bet he says something like.. "only if it's done right". Which of
course means, by his rules...;)

So very...
 

On Aug 24, 9:47*pm, wrote:
On Aug 24, 9:43*pm, "Eisboch" wrote:





"hk" wrote in message

...

Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
m...

Debs had nothing to do with this country's slide into the toilet. If you
want to blame anything, blame greed, especially the greed of the 1980s.

There's nothing in the Declaration or Constitution that says we all
exist for "the corporation" or its "shareholders," but that seems to be
the mentality these days.

I cited Debs purposely, for your benefit.

Your political and social welfare views expressed over the years are
almost exactly those of his, but with a time frame difference.
He was a Socialist.

Eisboch

Really? Well, good. Debs helped exploited workers of his era. Better to be
likened to a great American like Debs than a slimeball like Dick Cheney.

So, am I then to assume you are for Socialism, rather than a free market,
capitalistic economy?

Eisboch- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I bet he says something like.. "only if it's done right". Which of
course means, by his rules...;)- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You know, rules like:
You can't put your kid on a motorcycle, but he can rape her and sneak
her over state lines for an abortion to hide the evidence. Right down
to the age of 10, that is what they call, progressive...

So very...
 

Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..
Debs had nothing to do with this country's slide into the toilet. If you
want to blame anything, blame greed, especially the greed of the 1980s.

There's nothing in the Declaration or Constitution that says we all
exist for "the corporation" or its "shareholders," but that seems to be
the mentality these days.


I cited Debs purposely, for your benefit.

Your political and social welfare views expressed over the years are
almost exactly those of his, but with a time frame difference.
He was a Socialist.

Eisboch



Really? Well, good. Debs helped exploited workers of his era. Better to be
likened to a great American like Debs than a slimeball like Dick Cheney.

So, am I then to assume you are for Socialism, rather than a free market,
capitalistic economy?

Eisboch



The "free market" these days only "capitalizes" the wealthy. The middle
classes in this country are suffering. Capitalism needs to be closely
regulated, and government should be doing more to promote the middle
class. I agree with Obama that those earning more than $250,000 a year
should have their taxes raised. I also think the cap on "SSI earnings"
that are taxed should be eliminated.

I've made no secret that I find attractive certain aspects of modern
European socialism.


None of this, though, has anything to do with the fact that I find Debs
an attractive historical figure and Cheney a slimeball.

So very...
 

So very...
 

"hk" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..
Debs had nothing to do with this country's slide into the toilet. If
you want to blame anything, blame greed, especially the greed of the
1980s.

There's nothing in the Declaration or Constitution that says we all
exist for "the corporation" or its "shareholders," but that seems to
be the mentality these days.


I cited Debs purposely, for your benefit.

Your political and social welfare views expressed over the years are
almost exactly those of his, but with a time frame difference.
He was a Socialist.

Eisboch



Really? Well, good. Debs helped exploited workers of his era. Better to
be likened to a great American like Debs than a slimeball like Dick
Cheney.

So, am I then to assume you are for Socialism, rather than a free market,
capitalistic economy?

Eisboch

The "free market" these days only "capitalizes" the wealthy. The middle
classes in this country are suffering. Capitalism needs to be closely
regulated, and government should be doing more to promote the middle
class. I agree with Obama that those earning more than $250,000 a year
should have their taxes raised. I also think the cap on "SSI earnings"
that are taxed should be eliminated.

I've made no secret that I find attractive certain aspects of modern
European socialism.


None of this, though, has anything to do with the fact that I find Debs an
attractive historical figure and Cheney a slimeball.



I understand.

I am trying to identify you as either a socialist or a capitalist. I
think you have answered the question, in a round about way.

Eisboch

So very...
 

Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..
Debs had nothing to do with this country's slide into the toilet. If
you want to blame anything, blame greed, especially the greed of the
1980s.

There's nothing in the Declaration or Constitution that says we all
exist for "the corporation" or its "shareholders," but that seems to
be the mentality these days.

I cited Debs purposely, for your benefit.

Your political and social welfare views expressed over the years are
almost exactly those of his, but with a time frame difference.
He was a Socialist.

Eisboch


Really? Well, good. Debs helped exploited workers of his era. Better to
be likened to a great American like Debs than a slimeball like Dick
Cheney.
So, am I then to assume you are for Socialism, rather than a free market,
capitalistic economy?

Eisboch
The "free market" these days only "capitalizes" the wealthy. The middle
classes in this country are suffering. Capitalism needs to be closely
regulated, and government should be doing more to promote the middle
class. I agree with Obama that those earning more than $250,000 a year
should have their taxes raised. I also think the cap on "SSI earnings"
that are taxed should be eliminated.

I've made no secret that I find attractive certain aspects of modern
European socialism.


None of this, though, has anything to do with the fact that I find Debs an
attractive historical figure and Cheney a slimeball.



I understand.

I am trying to identify you as either a socialist or a capitalist. I
think you have answered the question, in a round about way.

Eisboch



Naw, I'm neither. Oh, except for "family farms," I think the
"inheritance tax" should be raised substantially. Doing so would raise
the capital gifts to legitimate charities, and it might imbue in the
sons and daughters of the very rich a little motivation.

So very...
 

"hk" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..
Debs had nothing to do with this country's slide into the toilet. If
you want to blame anything, blame greed, especially the greed of the
1980s.

There's nothing in the Declaration or Constitution that says we all
exist for "the corporation" or its "shareholders," but that seems to
be the mentality these days.

I cited Debs purposely, for your benefit.

Your political and social welfare views expressed over the years are
almost exactly those of his, but with a time frame difference.
He was a Socialist.

Eisboch


Really? Well, good. Debs helped exploited workers of his era. Better
to be likened to a great American like Debs than a slimeball like Dick
Cheney.
So, am I then to assume you are for Socialism, rather than a free
market, capitalistic economy?

Eisboch
The "free market" these days only "capitalizes" the wealthy. The middle
classes in this country are suffering. Capitalism needs to be closely
regulated, and government should be doing more to promote the middle
class. I agree with Obama that those earning more than $250,000 a year
should have their taxes raised. I also think the cap on "SSI earnings"
that are taxed should be eliminated.

I've made no secret that I find attractive certain aspects of modern
European socialism.


None of this, though, has anything to do with the fact that I find Debs
an attractive historical figure and Cheney a slimeball.



I understand.

I am trying to identify you as either a socialist or a capitalist. I
think you have answered the question, in a round about way.

Eisboch

Naw, I'm neither. Oh, except for "family farms," I think the "inheritance
tax" should be raised substantially. Doing so would raise the capital
gifts to legitimate charities, and it might imbue in the sons and
daughters of the very rich a little motivation.


I am sure you have, but just in case, I would invite you to reread Deb's
views of an ideal society.
It reads very much like a collection of your many posts here on the subject.

Debs was a acknowledged socialist. Since he and you are in obvious
agreement, are you?

Eisboch