Dems owe me
 

Jim wrote:
HK wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 13:53:39 -0500, Keith nuttle
wrote:

What is sad that the first black president is going to be remember
in history as the president who created the depression of 2008.

You are quite the moron, and this post from you proves it
conclusively. Obama will not even take office until 2009.


Keith probably showed up to vote on Wednesday so he could avoid the
crowds.

I am taking special delight in the angst of the "conservative"
Republicans. CNN had a bit on Rush Limbaugh yesterday, and the video
being shown made it look as if Rush was abou five blood pressure points
away from a stroke.

Now *that* would be a small step for mankind.

The Republicans who are engaging in "PalinBashing" now are making
revelations that are pretty frightening if true...that she didn't know
"Africa" was a continent, that she refused to be briefed before her
Couric interview, that she spent a lot more than $150,000...they're
frightening because they reveal an amazing amount of shallowness on
the part of the guy who picked her.

What fun Tueday night was...an almost complete repudiation of
"conservative" Republicanism.

Quit dwelling in the past. Start thinking about how the armchair
quarterback is going to perform once he gets in the game and goes to the
line of scrimmage.


Oh, I have no doubts about Obama's ability to lead this country. He's
smart, he's knowledgeable, he ran a brilliant campaign, beating the
Clintons and the Republicans, and he is politically sophisticated.

He's certainly going to have to work hard to try to reverse all the
horrors perpetrated on us by Bush and the Republicans, but he is up to
the task. I *love* the choice of Rahm as chief of staff.


I understand the neocon Repubs and conservatives are meeting in Virginia
to decide what to do next. Mass suicide seems appropriate.

Dems owe me
 

On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 05:57:00 -0500, HK wrote:

wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 13:53:39 -0500, Keith nuttle
wrote:

What is sad that the first black president is going to be remember in
history as the president who created the depression of 2008.

You are quite the moron, and this post from you proves it
conclusively. Obama will not even take office until 2009.


Keith probably showed up to vote on Wednesday so he could avoid the crowds.

I am taking special delight in the angst of the "conservative"
Republicans. CNN had a bit on Rush Limbaugh yesterday, and the video
being shown made it look as if Rush was abou five blood pressure points
away from a stroke.

Now *that* would be a small step for mankind.

The Republicans who are engaging in "PalinBashing" now are making
revelations that are pretty frightening if true...that she didn't know
"Africa" was a continent, that she refused to be briefed before her
Couric interview, that she spent a lot more than $150,000...they're
frightening because they reveal an amazing amount of shallowness on the
part of the guy who picked her.


I seriously doubt McCain picked her. I don't think that is even a
remote possibility. The Republican party was none too thrilled that
McCain was their candidate. That was not exactly the game plan. McCain
was forced to take Palin. Who was at his side more than anybody during
the campaign? Joe Lieberman. Figure it out.

I have another bit of business for your to digest. Joe Lieberman
abandoned his "Lieberman for Connecticut" party right after he was
re-elected, and now it has been taken over by some aspiring candidates
that are opposed to Joe Lieberman. He can't get on the ballot in CT
again unless he either forms a new party to run against the "Lieberman
for CT" party, or else... drumroll... His plan all along was to become
the Republican candidate in the next election cycle. He has remained
in the Democratic party only to do as much sabotage as possible. His
end game is to force the Democrats to force him out, so he can attempt
to use THAT as fodder when he runs as a Repulican.

There may be a few kinks in his plan, however. Not the least of which
is that the Republican party is in complete disarray for the time
being, and running as a Republican may not be a particularly strong
position in onty 2 years from now.

He pretty much has jumped the shark.

Wait until he starts betraying the Republican party to gain something
personally. That's coming, too. They are foolish enough not to realize
that if he cheated on the Dems, he'll eventually cheat on them.

Dems owe me
 

HK wrote:
Jim wrote:
HK wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 13:53:39 -0500, Keith nuttle
wrote:

What is sad that the first black president is going to be remember
in history as the president who created the depression of 2008.

You are quite the moron, and this post from you proves it
conclusively. Obama will not even take office until 2009.


Keith probably showed up to vote on Wednesday so he could avoid the
crowds.

I am taking special delight in the angst of the "conservative"
Republicans. CNN had a bit on Rush Limbaugh yesterday, and the video
being shown made it look as if Rush was abou five blood pressure points
away from a stroke.

Now *that* would be a small step for mankind.

The Republicans who are engaging in "PalinBashing" now are making
revelations that are pretty frightening if true...that she didn't
know "Africa" was a continent, that she refused to be briefed before
her Couric interview, that she spent a lot more than
$150,000...they're frightening because they reveal an amazing amount
of shallowness on the part of the guy who picked her.

What fun Tueday night was...an almost complete repudiation of
"conservative" Republicanism.

Quit dwelling in the past. Start thinking about how the armchair
quarterback is going to perform once he gets in the game and goes to
the line of scrimmage.


Oh, I have no doubts about Obama's ability to lead this country. He's
smart, he's knowledgeable, he ran a brilliant campaign, beating the
Clintons and the Republicans, and he is politically sophisticated.

He's certainly going to have to work hard to try to reverse all the
horrors perpetrated on us by Bush and the Republicans, but he is up to
the task. I *love* the choice of Rahm as chief of staff.


I understand the neocon Repubs and conservatives are meeting in Virginia
to decide what to do next. Mass suicide seems appropriate.




That is an option worth considering.

Dems owe me
 

Calif Bill wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"Jim" wrote in message
...
snip...
Unions, regulation, taxes, un-motivated, expensive, work forces, greed
and corruption. Killed our industrial complex. Granted, there were
republicans and democrats who were involved.

Unions?? Only a small fraction of the US workforce is unionized, yet
clowns like you still blame them for your situation.
Wake up & blame the greedy *******s who run the companies.
The greedy *******s who run the companies write me a check every two
weeks. And, tomorrow is Q3 bonus payouts!

And some of the worst performing industries are unionized. Including
government employees. But it is not all the unions fault in the auto
industry. The management caved all the time, when the US controlled 80% of
the market. One of the reason that GM had thousands getting a salary, but
did not have to come to work. One of the reason Toyota, etc can make a
profit, is they have not been here long enough to build up a huge retirees
retirement pay and medical. Plus they negotiated better contracts. The
Toyota contract does not specify all the job classifications. They can send
the lugnut installer to clean floors tomorrow.

My first real job was working at USDA part while I was still in high
school. I was a GS-1 Computer Assistant and my boss was a GS-13, retired
Army Major, He introduced me to paragraph "E" on the job descriptions.
"E. All other duties as assigned." One of the two best bosses I ever
worked for. He gave me opportunities I never would have had working
anywhere else I just had to remember to put the trash cans out side of
the office area each night before I left.

Dems owe me
 

Dems owe me
 

"BAR" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"Jim" wrote in message
...
snip...
Unions, regulation, taxes, un-motivated, expensive, work forces, greed
and corruption. Killed our industrial complex. Granted, there were
republicans and democrats who were involved.


Unions?? Only a small fraction of the US workforce is unionized, yet
clowns like you still blame them for your situation.
Wake up & blame the greedy *******s who run the companies.

The greedy *******s who run the companies write me a check every two
weeks. And, tomorrow is Q3 bonus payouts!

Thank you...you prove my point!

Dems owe me
 

"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 13:53:39 -0500, Keith nuttle
wrote:

What is sad that the first black president is going to be remember in
history as the president who created the depression of 2008.

You are quite the moron, and this post from you proves it
conclusively. Obama will not even take office until 2009.


Keith probably showed up to vote on Wednesday so he could avoid the
crowds.

I am taking special delight in the angst of the "conservative"
Republicans. CNN had a bit on Rush Limbaugh yesterday, and the video being
shown made it look as if Rush was abou five blood pressure points
away from a stroke.

Now *that* would be a small step for mankind.

The Republicans who are engaging in "PalinBashing" now are making
revelations that are pretty frightening if true...that she didn't know
"Africa" was a continent, that she refused to be briefed before her Couric
interview, that she spent a lot more than $150,000...they're frightening
because they reveal an amazing amount of shallowness on the part of the
guy who picked her.

What fun Tueday night was...an almost complete repudiation of
"conservative" Republicanism.


When you think about it...it's damn scary.
That woman could have been a weak heartbeat away from controlling all our
futures.
I can't believe a country like the US can't come up with better people to
run.

Dems owe me
 

Don White wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote:
"Jim" wrote in message
...
snip...
Unions, regulation, taxes, un-motivated, expensive, work forces, greed
and corruption. Killed our industrial complex. Granted, there were
republicans and democrats who were involved.

Unions?? Only a small fraction of the US workforce is unionized, yet
clowns like you still blame them for your situation.
Wake up & blame the greedy *******s who run the companies.
The greedy *******s who run the companies write me a check every two
weeks. And, tomorrow is Q3 bonus payouts!

Thank you...you prove my point!


I think it was a wee bit too subtle for you, Donnie. Read it again. This
time with a little sarcasm.

Dems owe me
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"Canuck57" wrote in message
...

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
message ...

On Wed, 5 Nov 2008 18:34:01 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

So, my retirement fund loses $80,000 due to Dem Chris Dodd of the
banking comitttee and Barney Frank and the other dems who refused to
take action in 2005 when they were warned their actions were
endangering the economy

No - you lost $85,000 because you were stupid enough to keep your
funds in whatever type of account you had it in.


He hasn't "lost" anything unless he bailed.
Better to sit it out.

Eisboch

Only to a point. Last April I bailed off the US markets but keep to much
in the foreign markets. I had the right idea, but underestimated the
depth of this one. Still, not hurting as bad as many.

I don't see a domestic buying opportunity, I suspect this depression of
stocks is going to be with us for some time to come.


You might want to read this:

http://finance.yahoo.com/expert/arti...einvest/118916

Eisboch

I more or less hold the same view but think for 20% it would be closer to 5
or more years. Not to say you wouldn't buy now for the juicy dividend but I
am second guessing and holding of on more stock purchases at this time.

But the counterpoint, and probably why the markets are getting hammered are
as follows.

Obama's promises are going to cost lots of money. More than the banks!!
The money has to come from somewhere and more printing and debt is still
debt and it means inflation at some point down the road. So why invest in a
stock paying 3% dividend? (Yes, some pay more but hardly would be
diversified). So to anticipate inflation I need a 6-9% yield, a much lower
P/E which means lower stock prices.

Next issue, this isn't over not by a long shot. So far only the symptoms of
debt default are being addressed and debtors are getting away with murder.
This lowers the faith in the currency and it's value.

Next issue is there are more problems coming. GM and Chrysler for example.
They are bankrupt and few buying their products. If they do, it is because
they get it for 1/2 price. Seriously, there are serious signs of prices a
falling like a rock. This is a depression curve, in which case stocks will
depreciate with the costs. This might reverse if the government gets it's
act together. But it could also turn around quick to the next phase below.

Finally, at the tail end of the 70's interest rates went right nuts. His
analysis ignores what happens to a 3% dividend stock in 18% interest rates.
Yes, I said 18%. Real market rates for money need to yield depositors the
follow this equation:

savings interest rates must be greater than inflation + costs + taxes +
risk + profit

The above equation is severely broken in today's economics. While a stock
doesn't have to pay interest rates, it has to be close.

Interest rates and/or inflation will go nuts. You can't print trillions of
dollars and expect these two economic components not to notice.

There is also the fact that over 64 trillion dollars out there no longer
exists in this world. Between property devaluations, 401ks, stock accounts,
failed debt, there is going to be a spending whiplash potentially for
decades. You can't make that kind of debt to keep spending. Even the
government is going to get less taxes as a result.

And 800 billion, just addressed the symptoms, the cause is still out there.
Debts must be honoured or the currency/bank isn't worth crap.

Unlike the '70's though, I think this time the government is trying to cause
inflation as it would numerically increase the homes dollar value, even
though it was less in NPV value. For example, say I have a $300K home, and
inflation hits 50%. But because of the slow down, the house goes to $325K,
lower in NPV but higher in dollar so people don't walk away.

The difference from the 70's though is the government is pulling the
interest leaver so hard down towards 0 it is in fact causing a depression.

There is no liquidity crisis, there is a shortage of people willing to pay
market rates with good credit.

Dems owe me
 

wrote in message
...
On Nov 6, 9:30 am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Canuck57" wrote in message

...





"Eisboch" wrote in message
m...

"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
messagenews:ofj5h41uc5ji8khccpgaa15ti22hkli31t@4ax .com...

On Wed, 5 Nov 2008 18:34:01 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

So, my retirement fund loses $80,000 due to Dem Chris Dodd of the
banking comitttee and Barney Frank and the other dems who refused to
take action in 2005 when they were warned their actions were
endangering the economy

No - you lost $85,000 because you were stupid enough to keep your
funds in whatever type of account you had it in.

He hasn't "lost" anything unless he bailed.
Better to sit it out.

Eisboch

Only to a point. Last April I bailed off the US markets but keep to
much
in the foreign markets. I had the right idea, but underestimated the
depth of this one. Still, not hurting as bad as many.

I don't see a domestic buying opportunity, I suspect this depression of
stocks is going to be with us for some time to come.

You might want to read this:

http://finance.yahoo.com/expert/arti...einvest/118916

Eisboch

I do not expect the real value of the market to significantly increase
in the next 4 years because the crooks who caused the problem are now
firmly entrenched in congress and nobody in their right mind would
invest in mutual funds, etc under that condition. Specific stocks may
go up but funds that are arranged to minimize risk will not.
Furthermore, I have realized that a traditional IRA is not a good deal
for me because I expect to still be working at age 70 and to still be
in a high tax bracket so there is no tax savings at all.

That is unfortunately more realistic than most. One difference. With 64
trillion less dollars out there today, people are going to be more price
sensitive than ever for a long time. While the government might try to
change this, until more people have more money and less debt the economy is
shot.

Dems owe me
 

"Jim" wrote in message
...
Canuck57 wrote:
"Keith nuttle" wrote in message
...
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Wed, 5 Nov 2008 18:34:01 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

So, my retirement fund loses $80,000 due to Dem Chris Dodd of the
banking comitttee and Barney Frank and the other dems who refused to
take action in 2005 when they were warned their actions were
endangering the economy
No - you lost $85,000 because you were stupid enough to keep your
funds in whatever type of account you had it in.

Cash dude - been saying that for years - in fact, since 2004.

Haven't lost a thing because I recognized the bubble and kept my
powder dry.

Another couple of months, I'm ready to get back in.
Except the 2% LOST to inflation every year. or about 100/1000 over the
four years. With the twit going to be in the White House expect that
to double hopefully not the double digit inflation during the Carter
years.

Good point, as I am at about 2005 valuations, at least I got more than 1%
return using Jan 2005 as a base. And in the bank, you might not get your
money. The last place to put it is the bank, find a brokerage account
where the broker does not do loans, mortgages and the like.
Please explain. I think you got it backwards.

Lets see, $100,000 in the bank for 5 years @ 2% is a little over $110,000.
Inflation was 3% or higher for most of the period. So today, to have the
same buying power you need at least $115,000. So, in the bank you lost
$5,000 in buying power.

Which leads into the "liquidity crisis". What a line of bunk. There is no
liquidity crisis, there is a shortage of people who will supply money at
below inflation and lose value. That is, a bankrupt bank wants to borrow at
a rate lower than inflation and might not pay you back. Hardly a good
investment. But I digress.

You would be best to buy gold, platinum or silver even. Banks are bad long
term places for money.

Dems owe me
 

wrote in message
...

Just think what a Democratic Administration might accomplish if it
didn't have to expend all it's time and energy correcting Republican
messes. We might be in a much better position in so many areas that
they can't even get to.

Last time I checked the democratic congress works the Fed, not the
president. So in faact the democrats gave the republican Bush all the money
to start a war that the democrats voted for. That sounds more acccurate.

Dems owe me
 

wrote in message
...

Toyota would being trying to emulate Chrysler, and Michigan would be
swamped with work and not enough workers to fill all the positions.

Toyota isn't trying to emulate Chrysler, Toyota makes better cars.

Dems owe me
 

"Jim" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 15:10:06 GMT, JohnH wrote:

On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 09:16:57 -0500, wrote:


Just think what a Democratic Administration might accomplish if it
didn't have to expend all it's time and energy correcting Republican
messes.
Getting in your excuses early?

Stick with what's on your pedo mind.

You snipped a lot of what I wrote because you know its the truth, and
your position is unsupportable.

Here is my post again in its entirety:


When the last Democratic President took office there was what was
considered an insurmountable deficit. Wghen he left office, eight
years later, he handed over a country that had a surplus, to a
Republican President. What';s the current deficit or surplus after 8
years of Republicans? Don't worry, the Democrats will fix your massive
screw ups AGAIN. Just bear in muind that they cant fix yuoru 8 years
of hard work in the wrong direction, overnight. We may need to
maintain Democratic control for the next 30 years or so to make sure
you don't go stupid on us again.

Just think what a Democratic Administration might accomplish if it
didn't have to expend all it's time and energy correcting Republican
messes. We might be in a much better position in so many areas that
they can't even get to. We'd probably still be the world leader in
manufacturing, and be
admired and respected around the world.

Toyota would being trying to emulate Chrysler, and Michigan would be
swamped with work and not enough workers to fill all the positions.


Your thoughts mimic Krause's. Are you related?

Unions, regulation, taxes, un-motivated, expensive, work forces, greed and
corruption. Killed our industrial complex. Granted, there were republicans
and democrats who were involved.

That was exquisitely stated.

Guess GM is done for. If everyone in GM worked for nothing, GM could sell
what they produce, they would still lose money. Ditto Chrysler. These two
turkeys days of abusing shareholders and customers is coming to a close.
The brands may be resold, but the old GM and old Chrysler be flushing down
the toilet.

Dems owe me
 

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"Jim" wrote in message
...
snip...
Unions, regulation, taxes, un-motivated, expensive, work forces, greed
and corruption. Killed our industrial complex. Granted, there were
republicans and democrats who were involved.


Unions?? Only a small fraction of the US workforce is unionized, yet
clowns like you still blame them for your situation.
Wake up & blame the greedy *******s who run the companies.

I think it was meant not at one particular union, but in general.

For example, union employees are into my utility bill all over. City
workers are even union. So the price doubles. I need to make more to
afford it even if I am non-union. I also get taxed more so the union
government employee gets more and it inflates the prices to the moon. Then
we need to pay for union priced cars.

Then the bubble breaks. GM goes down right after Christmas. At their burn
rate the creditors must be getting ants in their pants.

But I agree, management is the ultimate culprit here. They should have had
their asses kicked a long time ago.

Dems owe me
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...



You snipped a lot of what I wrote because you know its the truth, and
your position is unsupportable.

Here is my post again in its entirety:


When the last Democratic President took office there was what was
considered an insurmountable deficit. Wghen he left office, eight
years later, he handed over a country that had a surplus, to a
Republican President. What';s the current deficit or surplus after 8
years of Republicans? Don't worry, the Democrats will fix your massive
screw ups AGAIN. Just bear in muind that they cant fix yuoru 8 years
of hard work in the wrong direction, overnight. We may need to
maintain Democratic control for the next 30 years or so to make sure
you don't go stupid on us again.

Just think what a Democratic Administration might accomplish if it
didn't have to expend all it's time and energy correcting Republican
messes. We might be in a much better position in so many areas that
they can't even get to.

We'd probably still be the world leader in manufacturing, and be
admired and respected around the world.

Toyota would being trying to emulate Chrysler, and Michigan would be
swamped with work and not enough workers to fill all the positions.




I no longer participate in political discussions. If I did, I would
probably suggest that most financial experts
consider Clinton's "balanced budget" to be nothing more than the result of
some v e rrrrr y creative accounting.

The deficit actually increased. Spending per the budget *was* getting
under better control, but Clinton really can't take the credit, although
he still tries to this day. You can actually thank Ronald Regan and a
Republican controlled Congress, as hard as that may be for some to accept.

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6107

But, it doesn't matter because I don't get involved in political
discussions.

Eisboch

Good point. If the government had to account for money like businesses,
they would panic.

Dems owe me
 

"Canuck57" wrote in message
...

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"Jim" wrote in message
...
snip...
Unions, regulation, taxes, un-motivated, expensive, work forces, greed
and corruption. Killed our industrial complex. Granted, there were
republicans and democrats who were involved.


Unions?? Only a small fraction of the US workforce is unionized, yet
clowns like you still blame them for your situation.
Wake up & blame the greedy *******s who run the companies.

I think it was meant not at one particular union, but in general.

For example, union employees are into my utility bill all over. City
workers are even union. So the price doubles. I need to make more to
afford it even if I am non-union. I also get taxed more so the union
government employee gets more and it inflates the prices to the moon.
Then we need to pay for union priced cars.

Then the bubble breaks. GM goes down right after Christmas. At their
burn rate the creditors must be getting ants in their pants.

But I agree, management is the ultimate culprit here. They should have
had their asses kicked a long time ago.


Instead they and the board of directors just kept rewarding themselves more
& more.
Wonder how much the top people at GM & Ford made in total last year & this
year.

Dems owe me
 

"Canuck57" wrote in message
...


Good point. If the government had to account for money like businesses,
they would panic.



I got a kick out of some local debates that went on here in MA during the
election cycle.
The "official" MA operating budget, as reported by the state accounting
office was approximately $28B last year.
However, that does not include a couple of other categories that do not get
officially reported, yet funding is required for through taxes. The real MA
budget was in excess of $40B for the same time period. One of the
unreported budgets is called, (believe it or not) the "Budget for
non-budgeted items".

We are all nuts. We just keep paying. A referendum question to cut the
state sales tax in half as a means to force state government to re-evaluate
all expenditures and eliminate non-essential, pork barrel programs failed.

Eisboch

Dems owe me
 

Canuck57 wrote:
"Jim" wrote in message
...
Canuck57 wrote:
"Keith nuttle" wrote in message
...
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Wed, 5 Nov 2008 18:34:01 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

So, my retirement fund loses $80,000 due to Dem Chris Dodd of the
banking comitttee and Barney Frank and the other dems who refused to
take action in 2005 when they were warned their actions were
endangering the economy
No - you lost $85,000 because you were stupid enough to keep your
funds in whatever type of account you had it in.

Cash dude - been saying that for years - in fact, since 2004.

Haven't lost a thing because I recognized the bubble and kept my
powder dry.

Another couple of months, I'm ready to get back in.
Except the 2% LOST to inflation every year. or about 100/1000 over the
four years. With the twit going to be in the White House expect that
to double hopefully not the double digit inflation during the Carter
years.
Good point, as I am at about 2005 valuations, at least I got more than 1%
return using Jan 2005 as a base. And in the bank, you might not get your
money. The last place to put it is the bank, find a brokerage account
where the broker does not do loans, mortgages and the like.
Please explain. I think you got it backwards.

Lets see, $100,000 in the bank for 5 years @ 2% is a little over $110,000.
Inflation was 3% or higher for most of the period. So today, to have the
same buying power you need at least $115,000. So, in the bank you lost
$5,000 in buying power.

Which leads into the "liquidity crisis". What a line of bunk. There is no
liquidity crisis, there is a shortage of people who will supply money at
below inflation and lose value. That is, a bankrupt bank wants to borrow at
a rate lower than inflation and might not pay you back. Hardly a good
investment. But I digress.

You would be best to buy gold, platinum or silver even. Banks are bad long
term places for money.


Thanks. Thought you were talking about stocks.

Dems owe me
 

Eisboch wrote:
"Canuck57" wrote in message
...

Good point. If the government had to account for money like businesses,
they would panic.



I got a kick out of some local debates that went on here in MA during the
election cycle.
The "official" MA operating budget, as reported by the state accounting
office was approximately $28B last year.
However, that does not include a couple of other categories that do not get
officially reported, yet funding is required for through taxes. The real MA
budget was in excess of $40B for the same time period. One of the
unreported budgets is called, (believe it or not) the "Budget for
non-budgeted items".

We are all nuts. We just keep paying. A referendum question to cut the
state sales tax in half as a means to force state government to re-evaluate
all expenditures and eliminate non-essential, pork barrel programs failed.

Eisboch




Speaking of Massachusetts, I had a pretty good time there Thursday and
Friday, despite the really crappy rainy weather. Stayed at a hotel right
across from the Commons, got to visit some interesting construction
sites, talk to some construction workers, and even went out to the
Franklin Park area, where my grandfather and I used to go to the zoo.

Boston's always been one of my favorite American cities.

Dems owe me
 

On Sat, 08 Nov 2008 07:02:38 -0500, Boater wrote:


Speaking of Massachusetts, I had a pretty good time there Thursday and
Friday, despite the really crappy rainy weather. Stayed at a hotel right
across from the Commons, got to visit some interesting construction
sites, talk to some construction workers, and even went out to the
Franklin Park area, where my grandfather and I used to go to the zoo.

Boston's always been one of my favorite American cities.

Who gives a schitt about your favorite cities?

Do narcissistic liars need to crosspost?
--
A Harry Krause truism:

"It's not a *baby* kicking, beautiful bride, it's just a fetus!"