Disqus - Latest Comments for ftp

Re: Lawrence cabbie robbed, beaten

ftp — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 23:48:52 -0000

Amable Rojas, told police he picked up two men at the train station. I'm sure they have vidieo cameras in that station. do you think somebody would check those cameras? I hope Mr. Rojas is doing well.Gee do you think DA Coakley would be against "self help" in this case?

Re: Sound Off

ftp — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 01:40:18 -0000

What the Media won't tell you but I will...

Atheists Place Anti-God Sign Next To Nativity In Washington Capitol
December 1, 2008 |

I guess all is fair in love and war, and now is all fair in religion.

The Freedom From Religion Foundation has placed an anti-God sign only a few feet from a nativity scene in the Legislative Building in Olympia, Washington.

The sign says:

There is no god or other supernatural power, and that religion hardens hearts and enslaves minds.

More proof these guys aren’t bent on merely peacefully coexisting. Their purpose is to take over and be just as “intolerant” as us.

Re: Sound Off

ftp — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 14:00:26 -0000

What the media wont tell you......Tom Smith started the day early having set his
alarm clock

(MADE IN JAPAN ) for 6am.

While his coffeepot

(MADE IN CHINA )

was perking, he shaved with his

electric razor

(MADE IN HONG KONG ).

He put on a

dress shirt

(MADE IN SRI LANKA ),

designer jeans

(MADE IN SINGAPORE )

and

tennis shoes

(MADE IN KOREA )

After cooking his breakfast in his new

electric skillet

(MADE IN INDIA )

he sat down with his

calculator

(MADE IN MEXICO )

to see how much he could spend today. After setting his

watch

(MADE IN TAIWAN )

to the radio

(MADE IN INDIA )

he got in his car

(MADE IN GERMANY )

filled it with GAS

(from Saudi Arabia )

and continued his search

for a good paying AMERICAN JOB.

At the end

of yet another discouraging

and fruitless day

checking his

Computer

(Made In Malaysia ),

Joe decided to relax for a while.

He put on his sandals

(MADE IN BRAZIL )

poured himself a glass of

wine

(MADE IN FRANCE )

and turned on his

TV

(MADE IN INDONESI
and then wondered

why he can't find

a good paying job

in AMERICA

Y'all gotta Keep this one circulating, please.!
___________________________________

Re: Our view: Region hit with brunt of toll increases

ftp — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 00:54:47 -0000

Befor you wonder if you have clout on Beacon Hill you better wonder if you have clout in Washington...I report what the media won't so please read this because it's near full swing with Hussein Obama and the Dummycrats....Global Socialists Toast Victory over America
By Cliff Kincaid Monday, November 17, 2008

The American people may be losing their jobs and savings, but on Friday night, on the eve of the international financial summit, they provided President Bush and other G20 leaders a lavish banquet that included $300-a-bottle wine, Vermont Brie, eggplant fondue, and rack of lamb. Details of the “culinary delights” and “sumptuous feast” provided to the politicians who departed their black limousines were included in wire service stories. They were toasting the demise of America as a global economic and military superpower and planning to loot another trillion dollars from U.S. taxpayers.

Stories about the feast can only cause rising anger in the United States. A C-SPAN moderator on Sunday morning, hosting a discussion of the growing financial crisis and taking calls, himself commented that there was a lot of anger out there. One caller mentioned taking up arms against the government over the looting of the taxpayers.

We have seen the people react this way in the past to proposals for Congressional pay raises and illegal alien amnesty. But the growing anger over the endless series of taxpayer bailouts is getting louder and louder. In response to the stories about the lavish G20 banquet and my own columns on the growing financial crisis, I received this email:

“I just finished reading the menu that I and the US Taxpayers just bought these idiots and thieves. $300 bottles of wine? Racks of lamb? (Does the image of Nero fiddling while Rome burns come to mind?) What if Bush had announced that the menu was going to reflect the seriousness of the situation? Maybe a great minestrone soup and some good Carlo Rossi red? Show the world that he (Bush) was serious about caring for our money. I realize it doesn’t make a bean’s worth of difference in the whole budget but when do we, as taxpayers, get any respect? Personally I resent more and more everyone associated with my government. And especially the country club Republicans that Bush (I was fooled) and [Treasury Secretary Henry] Paulson represent. I may have to lay off two good guys this coming week. I’m sure they will understand that the President had to keep up the image to all these ‘important’ people and that the King of Saudi Arabia and the Premier of China and assorted other international flotsam enjoyed their largesse.”

By the way, Carlo Rossi red is a California wine that goes for about $6.99 a bottle. It apparently wasn’t good enough for the global elite.

In a development that attracted the attention of some media, the U.S. agreed at the conference to the establishment of “supervisory colleges” by March 31, 2009, to monitor “all major cross-border financial institutions.” It is the beginning of a new global regulatory body that could eventually impose and collect a currency transactions tax known as the Tobin Tax, named after the late Yale University economist, James Tobin. Such a tax, which could affect stocks, mutual funds, and pensions, could generate hundreds of billions of dollars a year.

But ignored by most of the media was the fact that buried in the “declaration” endorsed by Bush and other leaders meeting on Saturday was (Point number 14) support for the United Nations Millennium Development Goals, “the development assistance commitments we have made,” and a reaffirmation of “the development principles agreed at the 2002 United Nations Conference on Financing for Development in Monterrey, Mexico, which emphasized country ownership and mobilizing all sources of financing for development.”

This language may sound vague or confusing. But to those familiar with the U.N. and its conferences and the Millennium Development Goals, it all makes perfect sense. This is a commitment to devote 0.7 percent of the Gross National Product to official foreign aid, a plan envisaged in President-elect Barack Obama’s Global Poverty Act. It will cost $845 billion, to be recovered in whole or part through a global tax. The phrase “all sources of financing for development” is U.N.-speak for global taxes.

In addition to his Global Poverty Act, which could pass Congress in a lame duck session or after President Obama takes office, the Jubilee Act is also being pushed for the benefit of other nations of the world. It would cancel as much as $75 billion in debt owed by foreign countries. The total of the two measures is $920 billion.

It is no coincidence that one of Obama’s personal representatives to the G20 meeting was former Republican Rep. Jim Leach, a left-winger who not only gave a speech backing Obama at the 2008 Democratic National Convention but is a long-time collaborator of the World Federalist Movement. This is a group that favors global taxes to finance world government.

Leach is clearly hoping for an appointment from Obama as the new U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, where he could help implement the Millennium Development Goals.

To demonstrate how the media view all of this, Washington Post columnist Sebastian Mallaby on Thursday devoted a column headlined “Supersize the IMF” to the idea that the global financial institution known as the International Monetary Fund should get a massive infusion of American taxpayer dollars as well. He argued that the U.S. and other governments should triple their financial commitments to the IMF.

Mallaby, who doubles as director of the Center for Geoeconomic Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, didn’t put a price tag on this. But it was clear that he believes the more money the better. “A bigger IMF should be on its [the Obama Administration’s] agenda, he said.

Meanwhile, now that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has admitted that his $700-billion plan didn’t work out as planned, some in the media are acknowledging that they helped stampede the Congress into passing it.

On his CNN Reliable Sources show, Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post asked his colleague Steven Pearlstein, “Wasn’t there a prevailing drumbeat that this package had to pass?” The reply: “I was, I guess, part of that drumbeat. It did have to pass.” Pearlstein added, “You know, the Congress and the government had to do something to get liquidity moving in the financial system. There’s no playbook for how to do this in a situation like this. People are making it up as they go along. And so we really shouldn’t be surprised that they tried something, it doesn’t work. They try something else, maybe it works. They’re throwing a lot of darts at the wall.”

But since it didn’t work and Paulson changed the plan, Kurtz asked, “Where is the journalistic outrage here?” It’s a good question. The only outrage I can find is coming from the taxpayers.

For his part, Pearlstein’s new column, “Toward a New International Capitalism,” includes no apologies over his central role in what has happened. Instead, he hails the arrival of a new era in which America “can no longer expect to dominate the institutions of international finance and will have to share power and influence with rapidly developing countries…”

In other words, America has been cut down to size and the beneficiaries are those who were always jealous of her wealth and power. The result will not only be less U.S economic power but the diminution of American military power. One will inevitably follow the other, especially if more U.S. manufacturing industries go bankrupt.

This isn’t “international capitalism.” It’s the victory of global socialism. The stage is perfectly set for the U.S. presidency to be occupied by a revolutionary Marxist.

“We are the world” is coming true.

Re: Should government bail out the US auto industry?

ftp — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 22:38:15 -0000

I would rather bail the auto industry rather then fund this. Please read.........De-funded during the Bush Administration, US money for the UN Population Fund that supports China's policy of coercive abortion will flow again during the Obama Administrations, say supporters.

Saturday, November 15, 2008 By CNA

Supporters of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) are confident that President-elect Barack Obama will reverse the Bush administration’s 2002 decision to stop the $40 million it received in U.S. funding. The policy was instated because of UNFPA’s support for China’s one-child policy, which includes coercive abortion practices.

Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D – N.Y.) said the funding will be approved by the Democratic majority Congress. Her comments came while speaking Wednesday at a press conference at the National Press Club where the 2008 U.N. report on world population was released.

“You know the president will have to do nothing,” said Maloney. “He will just have to let the will of Congress go through.
One of the changes is that UNFPA will be funded,” CNSNews. com reports.

The Bush administration in 2002 had stopped funding the organization, citing the Kemp-Kasten Amendment which prohibits funds from being available to organizations or programs determined to be supporting or participating in coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization programs.

In July of 2008, Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte announced that for the sixth year in a row, the government had determined that “UNFPA provides support for and participates in the management of the Chinese government’s program of coercive abortion and involuntary sterilization.
”

Rep. Maloney reported that she discusses UNFPA funding controversies in her book “Rumors of Our Progress are Greatly Exaggerated.” She said the UNFPA was founded “with American leadership” and “was supported strongly by George Bush’s father.
”

The new UN report, “Reaching Common Ground: Culture, Gender and Human Rights,” calls for “cultural sensitivity” to “mitigate and overcome cultural resistance to couples and individuals using modern contraception.” It claims to prepare for the empowerment of women with control over their fertility.

Nevertheless, Rep. Maloney claimed the U.S. will no longer “impose our own ideology” under the UNFPA funding changes.

She said Obama “has already said his administration will change the way we do business in Washington and that improving the role of women around the world is going to be one of his prominent priorities.

“I am thrilled with this report, and I am really thrilled at the new direction of our government,” Maloney said, according to CNSNews. com.

Re: Safe containing $178K left in vacant lot in Lawrence

ftp — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 14:04:51 -0000

When do we get the check. let's spred the wealth

Re: Letter: Taxpayers, wake up before it's too late

ftp — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 19:58:55 -0000

What the Media won't tell you::::::::::Please Read

Minneapolis Plant Must pay $365,000 to Muslims....
Body: IT'S FUNNY, I NEVER DEMANDED MY EMPLOYER GIVE ME ONE DAY TO PRAY DURING EASTER, I. E. GOOD FRIDAY... OR THE JEWISH PEOPLE DEMAND A DAY OFF DURING THEIR HOLIDAY IN OCTOBER...

ALSO, WHY DID THEY TAKE A BREAK FOR PRAYER TIME AND ALSO LUNCH TIME AND THE REGULAR 15 MINUTE BREAK THAT THE COMPANY ALREADY HAD GIVEN....

THE TRUTH STORY IS THAT THESE PEOPLE WANTED A LOT OF EXTRA TIME TO "PRAY" BUT WOULD STAY LONGER AND ALSO THINK ABOUT THOSE EMPLOYEES WHO WERE NOT MUSLIM... IS IT FAIR TO THEM THAT THEY NEED TO WORK MORE TIME? AND BE THE ONLYONES TO HANDLE THE PORK AT THE PLANT BECAUSE THE MUSLIMS CONSIDER PORK UNCLEAN? THIS HAS GOT TO STOP... NOW ALL MUSLIMS WOULD BE SUING ON PRETENSES SUCH AS "I WAS COULDN'T PRAY TWO TIMES DURING THE WORKING HOURS; I HAD TO TAKE MY LUNCH SO THE COMPANY NOW OWES ME MONEY"

____________

Muslims get last laugh at Swift: Plant must pay $365,000 to Muslims fired for walking off job

An update on this story, which played out essentially as predicted although that earlier post referred to the controversy at a different plant. The principles in play are the same.
"Minnesota Plant That Fired Muslims for Taking Prayer Breaks Will Pay $365,000," from AP, November 11 (thanks to Islam In Action):

MINNEAPOLIS — Under a settlement to a federal lawsuit, up to 100 Somali Muslims who are current or former workers at Gold'n Plump Inc.
will receive a total of $365,000

The settlement was filed in Minneapolis on Friday.
It sprang from allegations of religious discrimination at the company's chicken processing plants in Cold Spring and Arcadia, Wis

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission filed lawsuits against St. Cloud-based Gold'n Plump and the Work Connection Inc., an employment agency in St.
Paul, which handled some hiring for the plant

Under the settlement, Gold'n Plump agreed to pay $215,000 to workers who were terminated for taking prayer breaks

The Work Connection will pay $150,000 to workers who were asked to sign a form acknowledging that they might be required to handle pork, which many Muslims consider unclean....

So the proposition that Muslims have special privileges in American society, to which others are not privy, is now enshrined in precedent

http://www. jihadwatch. org/dhimmiwatch/archives/023476. php

Re: Sound off

ftp — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 01:00:40 -0000

This Letter go's to the so called Media

This is just a reminder, so WE WILL NEVER FORGET, of the cruel and CRIMINAL treatment by the media of President George W Bush and the Republicans.

Would the Last Honest Reporter Please Turn On the Lights?

by Orson Scott Card

Greensboro Rhino Times

October 9, 2008

An open letter to the local daily paper -- almost every local daily paper in America:

I remember reading All the President's Men and thinking: That's journalism. You do what it takes to get the truth and you lay it before the public, because the public has a right to know.

This housing crisis didn't come out of nowhere.
It was not a vague emanation of the evil Bush administration.

It was a direct result of the political decision, back in the late 1990s, to loosen the rules of lending so that home loans would be more accessible to poor people.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were authorized to approve risky loans.

What is a risky loan? It's a loan that the recipient is likely not to be able to repay.

The goal of this rule change was to help the poor -- which especially would help members of minority groups. But how does it help these people to give them a loan that they can't repay? They get into a house, yes, but when they can't make the payments, they lose the house -- along with their credit rating.

They end up worse off than before.

This was completely foreseeable and in fact many people did foresee it. One political party, in Congress and in the executive branch, tried repeatedly to tighten up the rules. The other party blocked every such attempt and tried to loosen them.

Furthermore, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were making political contributions to the very members of Congress who were allowing them to make irresponsible loans. (Though why quasi-federal agencies were allowed to do so baffles me. It's as if the Pentagon were allowed to contribute to the political campaigns of congressmen who support increasing their budget.
)

Isn't there a story here? Doesn't journalism require that you who produce our daily paper tell the truth about who brought us to a position where the only way to keep confidence in our economy was a $700 billion bailout? Aren't you supposed to follow the money and see which politicians were benefiting personally from the deregulation of mortgage lending?

I have no doubt that if these facts had pointed to the Republican Party or to John McCain as the guilty parties, you would be treating it as a vast scandal. "Housing-gate," no doubt. Or "Fannie-gate.
"

Instead, it was Sen. Christopher Dodd and Congressman Barney Frank, both Democrats, who denied that there were any problems, who refused Bush administration requests to set up a regulatory agency to watch over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and who were still pushing for these agencies to go even further in promoting subprime mortgage loans almost up to the minute they failed.

As Thomas Sowell points out in a TownHall. com essay entitled "Do Facts Matter?" (http://snipurl. com/457to): "Alan Greenspan warned them four years ago. So did the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to the President.
So did Bush's Secretary of the Treasury.
"

These are facts. This financial crisis was completely preventable. The party that blocked any attempt to prevent it was ... the Democratic Party. The party that tried to prevent it was ... the Republican Party.

Yet when Nancy Pelosi accused the Bush administration and Republican deregulation of causing the crisis, you in the press did not hold her to account for her lie.
Instead, you criticized Republicans who took offense at this lie and refused to vote for the bailout!

What? It's not the liar, but the victims of the lie who are to blame?

Now let's follow the money ... right to the presidential candidate who is the number two recipient of campaign contributions from Fannie Mae.

And after Frank Raines, the CEO of Fannie Mae who made $90 million while running it into the ground, was fired for his incompetence, one presidential candidate's campaign actually consulted him for advice on housing.

If that presidential candidate had been John McCain, you would have called it a major scandal and we would be getting stories in your paper every day about how incompetent and corrupt he was.

But instead, that candidate was Barack Obama, and so you have buried this story, and when the McCain campaign dared to call Raines an "adviser" to the Obama campaign -- because that campaign had sought his advice -- you actually let Obama's people get away with accusing McCain of lying, merely because Raines wasn't listed as an official adviser to the Obama campaign.

You would never tolerate such weasely nit-picking from a Republican.

If you who produce our local daily paper actually had any principles, you would be pounding this story, because the prosperity of all Americans was put at risk by the foolish, short-sighted, politically selfish and possibly corrupt actions of leading Democrats, including Obama.

If you who produce our local daily paper had any personal honor, you would find it unbearable to let the American people believe that somehow Republicans were to blame for this crisis.

There are precedents. Even though President Bush and his administration never said that Iraq sponsored or was linked to 9/11, you could not stand the fact that Americans had that misapprehension -- so you pounded us with the fact that there was no such link. (Along the way, you created the false impression that Bush had lied to them and said that there was a connection.
)

If you had any principles, then surely right now, when the American people are set to blame President Bush and John McCain for a crisis they tried to prevent, and are actually shifting to approve of Barack Obama because of a crisis he helped cause, you would be laboring at least as hard to correct that false impression.

Your job, as journalists, is to tell the truth. That's what you claim you do, when you accept people's money to buy or subscribe to your paper.

But right now, you are consenting to or actively promoting a big fat lie -- that the housing crisis should somehow be blamed on Bush, McCain and the Republicans. You have trained the American people to blame everything bad -- even bad weather -- on Bush, and they are responding as you have taught them to.

If you had any personal honor, each reporter and editor would be insisting on telling the truth -- even if it hurts the election chances of your favorite candidate.

Because that's what honorable people do. Honest people tell the truth even when they don't like the probable consequences. That's what honesty means. That's how trust is earned.

Barack Obama is just another politician, and not a very wise one. He has revealed his ignorance and naivete time after time -- and you have swept it under the rug, treated it as nothing.

Meanwhile, you have participated in the borking of Sarah Palin, reporting savage attacks on her for the pregnancy of her unmarried daughter -- while you ignored the story of John Edwards' own adultery for many months.

So I ask you now: Do you have any standards at all? Do you even know what honesty means?

Is getting people to vote for Barack Obama so important that you will throw away everything that journalism is supposed to stand for?

You might want to remember the way the National Organization of Women (NOW) threw away their integrity by supporting Bill Clinton despite his well-known pattern of sexual exploitation of powerless women. Who listens to NOW anymore? We know they stand for nothing; they have no principles.

That's where you are right now.

It's not too late. You know that if the situation were reversed, and the truth would damage McCain and help Obama, you would be moving heaven and earth to get the true story out there.

If you want to redeem your honor, you will swallow hard and make a list of all the stories you would print if it were McCain who had been getting money from Fannie Mae, McCain whose campaign had consulted with its discredited former CEO, McCain who had voted against tightening its lending practices.

Then you will print them, even though every one of those true stories will point the finger of blame at the reckless Democratic Party, which put our nation's prosperity at risk so they could feel good about helping the poor, and lay a fair share of the blame at Obama's door.

You will also tell the truth about John McCain: that he tried, as a senator, to do what it took to prevent this crisis. You will tell the truth about President Bush: that his administration tried more than once to get Congress to regulate lending in a responsible way.

This was a Congress-caused crisis, beginning during the Clinton administration, with Democrats leading the way into the crisis and blocking every effort to get out of it in a timely fashion.

If you at our local daily newspaper continue to let Americans believe -- and vote as if -- President Bush and the Republicans caused the crisis, then you are joining in that lie.

If you do not tell the truth about the Democrats -- including Barack Obama -- and do so with the same energy you would use if the miscreants were Republicans -- then you are not journalists by any standard.

You're just the public relations machine of the Democratic Party, and it's time you were all fired and real journalists brought in, so that we can actually have a daily newspaper in our city.

http://greensboro. rhinotimes. com/orson. 10. 09. 08. html

- - The Decline of the American Empire

Re: Cash, TV taken in Lawrence break-ins

ftp — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 23:21:44 -0000

It's the President-elect Obama shair the WEALTH Program in effect. only it's in it's early stages. 'Change has come to America'

Re: Sound Off

ftp — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 20:57:55 -0000

WELL HERE IT IS YOUR OWN CHICK LIST .

Few presidential candidates have made more specific promises to American voters than Barack Obama.

They came so fast and furious in the latter part of the campaign, you'd be excused for not keeping up.

So as a public service, we've put together a handy checklist of some of the biggest Obama promises — culled from his "Blueprint for Change,

" his campaign speeches and advertisements.

Clip it. Save it. And see how he did in four years.

Taxes

• Give a tax break to 95% of Americans.

• Restore Clinton-era tax rates on top income earners.

• "If you make under $250,000, you will not see your taxes increase by a single dime. Not your income taxes, not your payroll taxes, not your capital gains taxes. Nothing.
"

• Dramatically simplify tax filings so that millions of Americans will be able to do their taxes in less than five minutes.

• Give American businesses a $3,000 tax credit for every job they create in the U.S.

• Eliminate capital gains taxes for small business and startup companies.

• Eliminate income taxes for seniors making under $50,000.

• Expand the child and dependent care tax credit.

• Expand the earned income tax credit.

• Create a universal mortgage credit.

• Create a small business health tax credit.

• Provide a $500 "make work pay" tax credit to small businesses.

• Provide a $1,000 emergency energy rebate to families.

Energy

• Spend $15 billion a year on renewable sources of energy.

• Eliminate oil imports from the Middle East in 10 years.

• Increase fuel economy standards by 4% a year.

• Weatherize 1 million homes annually.

• Ensure that 10% of our electricity comes from renewable sources by 2012.

Environment

• Create 5 million green jobs.

• Implement a cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

• Get 1 million plug-in hybrids on the road by 2015.

Labor

• Sign a fair pay restoration act, which would overturn the Supreme Court's pay discrimination ruling.

• Sign into law an employee free choice act — aka card check — to make it easier for unions to organize.

• Make employers offer seven paid sick days per year.

• Increase the minimum wage to $9.50 an hour by 2009.

National security

• Remove troops from Iraq by the summer of 2010.

• Cut spending on unproven missile defense systems.

• No more homeless veterans.

• Stop spending $10 billion a month in Iraq.

• Finish the fight against Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaida terrorists.

Social Security

• Work in a "bipartisan way to preserve Social Security for future generations.
"

• Impose a Social Security payroll tax on incomes above $250,000.

• Match 50% of retirement savings up to $1,000 for families earning less than $75,000.

Education

• Demand higher standards and more accountability from our teachers.

Spending

• Go through the budget, line by line, ending programs we don't need and making the ones we do need work better and cost less.

• Slash earmarks.

Health care

• Lower health care costs for the typical family by $2,500 a year.

• Let the uninsured get the same kind of health insurance that members of Congress get.

• Stop insurance companies from discriminating against those who are sick and need care the most.

• Spend $10 billion over five years on health care information technology

Re: President-elect Obama: 'Change has come to America'

ftp — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 16:36:06 -0000

The most eye-opening civics lesson I ever had was while teaching third grade. The presidential election was heating up and some of the children showed an interest. I decided we would have an election for a class president. We would choose our nominees. They would make a campaign speech and the class would vote.

To simplify the process, candidates were nominated by other class members. We discussed what kinds of characteristics these students should have. We got many nominations and from those, Jamie and Olivia were picked to run for the top spot.

The class had done a great job in their selections. Both candidates were good kids. I thought Jamie might have an advantage because he got lots of parental support. I had never seen Olivia’s mother. The day arrived when they were to make their speeches Jamie went first. He had specific ideas about how to make our class a better place. He ended by promising to do his very best. Every one applauded. He sat down and Olivia came to the podium. Her speech was concise. She said, “If you will vote for me, I will give you ice cream.” She sat down. The class went wild. “Yes! Yes! We want ice cream.
”

She surely would say more. She did not have to. A discussion followed. How did she plan to pay for the ice cream? She wasn’t sure. Would her parents buy it or would the class pay for it. She didn’t know. The class really didn’t care. All they were thinking about was ice cream. Jamie was forgotten. Olivia won by a land slide.

Every time Barack Obama opens his mouth he offers ice cream, and fifty percent of America react like nine year olds. They want ice cream. The other fifty percent know they’re going to have to feed the cow.

Re: Valley voters motivated by economy, war

ftp — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 02:15:39 -0000

WHAT THE MEDIA WONT TELL YOU.......Look out... obamas in, this WILL pass.

Powerful House Democrats are eyeing proposals to overhaul the nation’s $3 trillion 401(k) system, including the elimination of most of the $80 billion in annual tax breaks that 401(k) investors receive.

Under Ghilarducci’s plan, all workers would receive a $600 annual inflation-adjusted subsidy from the U.S. government but would be required to invest 5 percent of their pay into a guaranteed retirement account administered by the Social Security Administration. The money in turn would be invested in special government bonds that would pay 3 percent a year, adjusted for inflation.

The current system of providing tax breaks on 401(k) contributions and earnings would be eliminated.

“I want to stop the federal subsidy of 401(k)s,” Ghilarducci said in an interview. “401(k)s can continue to exist, but they won’t have the benefit of the subsidy of the tax break.
”

Link for story, http://www. workforce. com/section/00/article/25/83/58. php

My Cousin sent this to me, here is what she had to say about it...

This is truly scary if this happens. If they think that giving me $600.00 per year and requiring me to invest 5% at a 3% return is great, they are out of their mind. I already make more than that in my employer match which would more than likely be eliminated. My company matches me at 100% of my first 6% invested so I basically double my investment right off the bat from my employer, not to mention that they gave me a 10% bonus each of the last 3 years into my 401k. Currently, though my investment is down from a year ago, with the investments I have made and employer contributions, I am still in the positive from what I have personally invested. Plus, since the stock market is cyclical, by time I retire in 20 years, my investment will be up considerably more than the measly 3% they are offering. 3% is also a ridiculously low number.
On BAnkcd. com which lists CD’s and their rates, most 1 year CD’s are making 4.25% return and 10 year average is 5.5%. I am making more than 3% in the stable income fund that I have. I am making a 4% return on that fund at this point in time and it last year it was over 8%. Let’s hope this doesn’t actually happen because no one would save for retirement. It isn’t worth it. People put money in their 401k in order to get the tax benefits from it.

On top of this, look at the state of our Social Security system as it is. Do you really believe that the government will keep our money for us so that by time we retire it will be there? That’s what all the retirees thought too and look where most of them stand. Most can’t live on their Social Security check alone.

Here are my major questions to George Miller and Jim McDermott:

1.
Who is going to keep track of all of the money that I put in and how is it determined how much I get each month as I retire?
1. I may put in for 20 years, while Joe next door only puts in for 10 years.
Should Joe and I get the same benefits in the end?
2.
What happens if they don’t put in the full 5%? What is their share when they retire?
3.
What if I decide that I need to put in more than the 5% required because I am married and what to make sure that my spouse who doesn’t work is cared for in retirement?
2. Do the people who don’t put in, still get a payment when they retire? Our current system is based a return of how much you have paid in during your lifetime, if you don’t pay in, you don’t get the benefit.
Why should I subsidize people who choose to spend their money now then be responsible and save for retirement?
3. How do they guarantee that people put in 5% to earn their $600.
00?
4.
They are paying me 3% return, but they are likely to make much higher returns on investing my money, how is that money divided, or do they get to keep it and profit from my hard work and money?
5. What happens in the case of divorce? The law now is that any 401k is divided equally between the spouses because many times the wife doesn’t work or takes a lesser job to stay home and care for the children.
Where would this leave her?
6. Who gets what is left of my investment when I die? I work hard for the money that I earned and put in my 401k, I don’t want the government keeping it or taking a share of it, I want it to go to family members or to people of my choice.

Re: Kids endorse Obama in mock Andover election

ftp — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 02:20:53 -0000

Jaidahrose your right we need it for the morons in the state house who like to dubble dip the system and keep the crooks like wilkerson stuffinf her bra and keep the teachers union and police union in tack to steal tax payers money. If the Democrats are for the poor why is it we still have poor people? they have both houses and have any of the poor people seen any of the Democrats Senators in their naberhood? having those kids take a mock election shows teachers have a lot of time on their hands this is a brainwashing at an early age I bet your proud teacher now could you get them ready for the MCAS?

Re: Obama outraises McCain in Merrimack Valley, Southern NH

ftp — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 02:02:11 -0000

A Letter from Ron Paul........I have been a lifetime Libertarian Party activist, for over 25 years. I've served in numerous capacities, including on the Libertarian National Committee, as a Libertarian State Rep. candidate, and as Ron Paul's Personal Travel Aide in his 1988 Libertarian Presidential campaign. I've also served as Ron Paul's Congressional Campaign Coordinator and as his Senior Congressional Aide for 7 years, 1997-2004.This election year, I've been supporting Libertarian Presidential candidate Bob Barr. As a matter of fact, I'm the very guy who recruited his running mate Wayne Root into the race.

Since the Spring, I've been the Party's lead petitioner around the Nation. I've collected tens of thousands of signatures to get Barr/Root on the ballot in Illinois, Ohio, Kentucky, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Maine and Rhode Island. However, I was greatly encouraged by McCain's pick of Sarah Palin for his VP. Palin has a solid libertarian background. In 2005/06 she was the guest speaker at two Libertarian Party meetings in Anchorage. She has been called a "libertarian" by many in Alaska politics and in the Anchorage media. She even received the last minute backing of the Libertarian Party leadership in the State for her successful gubernatorial race, and today, she is the most popular governor in America. Up until now, I've encouraged my fellow Libertarians to follow their conscience and vote for either McCain/Palin or for Barr/Root, if it suits them better.

I now believe, two days before Election Day, that this campaign is just too critical to risk on such a strategy, and if Libertarians won't put the liberty of our country ahead of our party ambitions, who else in this country will? Obama is fundamentally opposed to virtually all libertarian stances on all issues. From taxes, to freedom of speech, to protecting property rights, to putting a halt to the ever-encroaching Nanny-state, and 4 years of an Obama Presidency will have disastrous results for liberty, and supporters of the limited government view. As evidence of this, Obama has taken to lodge a full frontal assault on the libertarian movement within the last couple days. In two separate speeches Obama accused McCain/Palin of supporting tax cuts because they believed in the "Virtue of Selfishness. " ABC News confirmed that the phrase was most likely a direct hit at libertarian icon Philosopher Ayn Rand. By attacking Rand, and her Individualist philosophy, in essence, Obama has declared war on libertarians and the libertarian movement in these closing days of Election '08.

How should libertarians respond?

It is now my strong feeling that libertarians nationwide, and most assuredly my fellow Libertarian Party members, should strongly consider casting their votes for Republicans John McCain and Sarah Palin.

The libertarian movement would be best served with an Obama defeat. Bob Barr has been polling around 1 to 1.5% in recent polls. A Research 2000/Daily Kos poll released just Friday, had Barr at a full 2%. That is more than enough to cause McCain/Palin to go down to defeat. As we all know, a good 90% of Libertarian votes come directly out of the GOP column. For example, it is widely believed that in 2006, incumbent Republican Senator Conrad Burns almost certainly went down to defeat due to the 4% vote of Libertarian Stan Jones, which turned out to be a wider total than Burns's loss.

I urge my Libertarian friends, especially those in "swing states" to shift these final days to McCain/Palin. Those States that are especially critical include: New Hampshire, Virginia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Missouri, Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada. McCain/Palin lead Obama/Biden in the latest poll out of Wyoming with 68% to 32%. A Libertarian vote cast for Barr/Root in Wyoming, or even Utah, Idaho, Alabama, Kansas, and my native Texas, would not cause any harm. But Libertarians in the critical swing states must now weigh their vote very seriously and with great caution.

Do we want a guarantee of tax increases for virtually all taxpayers, more federalization of education, more pork barrel spending, and continuation of affirmative action quotas, a return of the so-called Fairness Doctrine intended to silence the voice of libertarians and conservatives across the nation? Or, do we want a friendly ear in a confirmed Libertarian Party friend and ally in the office of the Vice-Presidency of the United States. For these reasons, I am voting for McCain/Palin on Tuesday and I urge all of my Libertarian friends to do the same.Our party has made great gains and that is important. Nobody in the libertarian movement has worked harder than I have to assure those gains. But at this moment in history, we must stand with our conservative friends, against a massive affront upon liberty and freedom itself.

I call upon all freedom loving libertarians to consider this situation carefully and stand with me!

Libertarian Republicans Fiscally Conservative, Socially Tolerant & Pro-Defense!

Re: Local races, ballot questions at a glance

ftp — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 21:36:33 -0000

Bill Clinton bonded from China, fool now we will have to pay it back. get a clue and stop livin blind.your just a Bush hater.But here a shock Bush is not running anymore. as for the 90's remember Bosnia? watch BlackHawk Down. where was your cry then. Moron

Re: Local races, ballot questions at a glance

ftp — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 21:30:47 -0000

TheBD BD must be for Big Dummy Look fool you need to smell the coffee read this moonbat........Vote "No!" Please keep your income tax dollars flowing to crimmigrants getting welfare benefits and public housing on your dime!

Vote "No!" so that Sal DiMoney has plenty of your cash to spread around!

Vote "No!" so Rep.
Jack Rogers can make the payments on his Cape Cod vacation home!

Vote "No!" and keep Dianne Wilkerson's spirit alive on Beacon Hill!

Vote "No!" and keep the 2,000 new government employees hired since Gov. Patrick was elected on the job.

Vote "No!" because there's a cop sleeping in his squad car at some lonely pot hole out there who's counting on you!

Vote "No!" so Gov.
Patrick can give subsidized college tuition to illegal immigrants!

Vote "No!" and make sure no toll taker loses his cushy $66k job making change on the Turnpike!

Vote "No!" so that you can a Massachusetts government tomorrow that's just as honest, responsive and careful with your money as the one we have today.

Say "No" to change! Say "Yes!" to the status quo!

Vote "No!" on Question 1!

(This message brought to you by every government hack counting on a six-figure tax-funded pension when he retires at 45)

Re: Local races, ballot questions at a glance

ftp — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 21:25:16 -0000

Hi,

You matter to me. What's best for you and your family is important to
me. Will you please do me one small favor - so I can do you a big favor?
Will you please take 3 minutes to read my message below?

Thanks!

+++

On Election Day, you get to vote on Ballot Question 1, the first big tax
cut in 28 years. Ballot Question 1 will cut your state income tax by 50%
this January 1st. It will cut the last 50% of the state income tax next
January 1st.

Elected politicians are against it. So are the Teachers Unions - who
spent over $5 million in ads and mailers to scare you into voting
against Ballot Question 1.

I'm on your side. I want you to decide what's best for you, your family,
your neighbors, and the 3,400,000 Massachusetts workers who are paying
this tax.

Okay?

Why haven't you been told these 9 huge benefits to your family and your
neighbors from voting YES on Ballot Question 1?

1.You get back $3,700 each year from this tax cut - if you're an average
taxpayer. Every year. So do your neighbors, co-workers, and friends. So
do the 3,400,000 Massachusetts workers and taxpayers.

2.The average Massachusetts worker is earning $2,000 less than 8 years
ago, The average homeowner is paying over $2,000 more in property taxes
than 8 years ago. $4,000 taken from your family. This year. Next year.
Every year. Getting back $3,700 with this tax cut gives lets you "erase"
the $4,000 loss - and get back your family budget.

3. This will end the 5.3% additional income tax taken from your family
when you sell your home. If a family bought a home for $200,000 ten
years ago, pays $30,000 in property taxes on it during the 10 years, and
sells it for $300,000 - they pay another $5,300 income tax on the home
when they sell it. That's right $5,300 income tax on the home's increase
in value. Yes on Question 1 will end this.

4. Save families from home foreclosures and bankruptcies. Getting back
$3,700 a year average from this tax cut may well save thousands of
working families who are barely making ends meet.

5. Massachusetts has the 5th heaviest city and state tax burden. Ballot
Question 1 reduces and relieves your total tax burden - and your
neighbors - and makes taxes more affordable. After we end the income
tax, our total tax burden is still higher than New Hampshire's.

6. Keeps our children and grandchildren in Massachusetts. When our
children and grandchildren graduate, tens of thousands of them are
driven out of state by our heavy tax burdens. Yes on 1 keeps our
families together.

7. It will take $12.6 billion out of the hands of wasteful state
government - and puts it back into the hands of the 3,400,000
Massachusetts workers who earned it.

8. Yes on 1 will create over 100,000 new jobs in Massachusetts.

9. Ending the state income tax will force the legislature to reduce and
remove government waste, over-charges, massive overpayment for
government retirement packages, patronage, sweetheart deals, and
giveaways to special interests and lobbyists.

Will you do me a little favor?

Will you please vote YES on Ballot Question 1 on Tuesday?

Will you please vote YES for your family, co-workers, neighbors - and
the 3,400,000 Massachusetts workers and taxpayers who desperately need
this tax relief?

What's my big favor to you? A better Massachusetts for your loved ones.

If you need more reasons to vote YES, please click here:
http://www.smallgovernmentact.org

Re: Local races, ballot questions at a glance

ftp — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 19:23:43 -0000

What the Media wont tell you
Mr. Obama's Wealth Redistribution Agenda

Democrats Target Your 401k Retirement Plan with Taxes

Dear Fellow American:

The public outcry of real Americans like you and Joe the Plumber is finally getting some light shed on Mr. Obama's wealth redistribution agenda supported by Socialist Democrats in Congress. The corrupt media can't hide it any longer. The plan is to bring an end to the America we know and love; to bring an end to freedom and liberty.

They want total control of what you see, hear, think, and do. They will stop at nothing. NOW, they are aiming at your 401k retirement plan and they are going for the kill.

Yes that's right, Liberals in government want to seize these assets for their own. Just look at what James Pethokoukis, the money and politics blogger for U.S. News & World Report has said,

In place of 401(k) plans, she would have workers transfer their dough into government-created "guaranteed retirement accounts" for every worker. The government would deposit $600 (inflation indexed) every year into the GRAs. Each worker would also have to save 5 percent of pay into the accounts, to which the government would pay a measly 3 percent return. Rep. Jim McDermott, a Democrat from Washington and chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee's Subcommittee on Income Security and Family Support, said that since "the savings rate isn't going up for the investment of $80 billion [in 401(k) tax breaks], we have to start to think about whether or not we want to continue to invest that $80 billion for a policy that's not generating what we now say it should."

Straight from the jackasses mouth, the Democratic plan is to SIEZE your 401k and take $80 billion that is currently the property of American citizens. Effectively, this plan will end all of the incentives that the majority of Americans not only enjoy but rely on. I am sure you or someone you know takes advantage of their employer matching their 401k contribution. Under the iron fist of the Democratic empire your employer would no longer receive a tax benefit for matching your contribution, so they won't do it. And you will lose half of your retirement contributions. And don't forget, that you will lose your tax breaks from the 401k plan also, so you'd be paying the government to let you retire. Sounds like fun?

Don't let the tyrannical rule of socialists take hold, put a stop to the unholy trinity of the Democrat controlled Senate and House and potential president Obama. Do not let Barrack Obama bring an end to this great country!

Re: Halloween dance ends in brawl, three arrests

ftp — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 12:36:24 -0000

What a shame even at a church party hitting a Police officer show lack of respect for the police what is it that makes these kids think they can just crash a party anytime they want? must be a girl friend boy friend thing. send them to anger managment for 12 months.

Re: Sound Off

ftp — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 14:04:59 -0000

Why was this not reported in this News Paper? .....updated 1 hour, 8 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - Barack Obama's aunt, a Kenyan woman who has been quietly living in public housing in Boston, is in the United States illegally after an immigration judge rejected her request for asylum four years ago, The Associated Press has learned.

Zeituni Onyango, 56, referred to as "Aunti Zeituni" in Obama's memoir, was instructed to leave the United States by a U.S. immigration judge who denied her asylum request, a person familiar with the matter told the AP late Friday. This person spoke on condition of anonymity because no one was authorized to discuss Onyango's case.

Information about the deportation case was disclosed and confirmed by two separate sources, one of them a federal law enforcement official. The information they made available is known to officials in the federal government, but the AP could not establish whether anyone at a political level in the Bush administration or in the McCain campaign had been involved in its release.

http://www. msnbc. msn. com/id/27481680/

Re: Mayor or city manager: Public opinion sought on Lawrence government

ftp — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 01:49:13 -0000

Open your eyes people Lawrence is doing a lot better then many think. I see construction all over the place and a new High School and the Kids are in better uniforms . Now would be the time to shut down many of the bars around the city.Lawrence has to many.police should walk the streets and talk to the peple of Lawrence Michael you like Kevin are doing a good job even with the moonbats on your back.people need to know Lawrence is no longer the hand out city and the opra watchers should leave to Andover. for to long Lawrence has been a dump sight for the gimmies and perv's it's time Lawrence stand on it own.

Re: Our view: No on Questions 1, 2 and 3

ftp — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 01:29:26 -0000

WHY ARE THE TEACHERS UNIONS IGNORING, DENYING, AND REFUSING TO CUT THESE
BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN MASSACHUSETTS GOVERNMENT WASTE?
By Michael Cloud and Carla Howell
===========================================================

Government Waste Causes Your High Taxes.

Yet the Teachers Unions and their anti-Question 1 allies refuse to
acknowledge or address the billions and billions of dollars in
Massachusetts government waste.

The Teachers Unions are trying to terrorize voters with visions of 40%
to 80% layoffs and shut downs of police, fire fighters, ambulances,
9-1-1 emergency services, and other highly-prized government personnel
and services.

The Teachers Unions know full well that Question 1 will simply cut state
government spending from $47 billion to $35 billion – our 1999 level.

Teachers Unions are praying you’ll never learn that 36% of the combined
$70 billion in city, town and state government spending fully funds all
of these government services at their current level:
· public schools
· road construction, repair and maintenance
· colleges and universities
· police officers
· fire fighters
· 9-1-1 emergency services
· snow plowing
· trash pick-up
· payments on the state government’s debt
· lottery prize winnings
· courts
· prisons
· and all constitutionally-mandated offices

…with a few bucks left over for graft and patronage.

All of these services are funded at 100% of today’s level with only 36%
of Massachusetts government spending.

So why are the Teachers Unions and their allies threatening your family
with firing and shutting down these essential services?

Remember the story of the baby and the dirty bathwater?
(http://tinyurl.com/5jdcyb )

Why are the Teachers Unions campaigning against Ballot Question 1 by
threatening to hurt the baby?

Why are they ferociously opposing our proposal to throw out ONLY the
dirty bathwater?

Again and again, opposition spokespeople – led by the husband of Rosanne
Bacon Meade, former President of the Massachusetts Teachers Association
- claim,

“Carla Howell and the supporters of Ballot Question 1 can’t even show us
$2 billion in waste in state government spending.”

Again and again, we cite billions and billions in government waste.

But they seem to suffer from Government Waste Amnesia – and raise their
discredited challenge at the next debate.

Once again, here’s a partial list of Massachusetts government waste.

Because the Massachusetts state government refuses to "Show You the Tax
Money," refuses to open the books on government finances, this list of
state government waste is only the tip of the garbage heap.

All of the information was exposed by Massachusetts newspapers - who
sometimes get access to income and spending numbers.

Here's a partial list of Massachusetts state government waste we would
cut – while ENDing the state income tax:

* $138.7 million tax subsidy to millionaire movie stars and millionaire
movie directors.

* $1 billion in tax subsidies to multi-billion dollar bio-tech
pharmaceutical corporations – to bring more of them to Massachusetts.
($100 million paid each year for 10 years.)

* $2.55 billion MORE waste added this year to the retirement pay for
retired state government employees. Despite the fact that they get twice
to three times the retirement income of private sector retirees. Despite
the fact that government employees retire 13 years younger than private
sector retirees. Who’s forced to pay the $2.55 billion increase? You and
your co-workers. Private sector taxpayers.

* $3 billion to $6 billion waste per year in retirement pay - excessive
and outrageous over-payment - to retired state government employees,
city and town government employees, and public school teachers and other
school employees. We can and we should engage in good faith
re-negotiations of the terms and money of all government employee
pensions - and give back the outrageous overcharges to taxpayers.

* $330 million waste and overpayment to toll collectors. $70,000 a year
paid to toll collectors – plus plush benefits. Plus full retirement pay
of $50,000 a year at age 54. For unskilled labor – counting and making
change – that require only a 5th grade education. Cut toll booth
collector pay in half – to $35,000 a year. Give back the $15 million a
year excess pay to taxpayers. And give back the $315 million in
excessive retirement pay - caused by the $35,000 in overpayment each
year for toll collectors.

* $200 million high school being built in Newton, Massachusetts. A large
fraction funded out of the state government budget.

* $300 million to $600 million worth of unnecessary, over-built, and
overpriced local public school construction in the just the last few
years – hundreds of millions of dollars out of the taxes we pay to the
state government.

* $80 million to $100 million a year in overpayment, excess, and waste
for road safety flaggers by Massachusetts town, city, and state governments.

This is just the tip of the garbage heap.

We must open the government’s books. Expose all the nitty-gritty
government waste. The sheer embarrassment of it will force the
legislature to announce billions of dollars in immediate cuts.

What's worse than government waste?

Financing government waste.

Paying interest and finance fees on government waste.

Every billion dollars of government waste that gets financed by tax
bonds ends up costing taxpayers an additional billion dollars.

Waste Financed is Waste Doubled. And the tax costs doubled.

Proof? The Big Dig: the over-promised, under-delivered, massively
wasteful government construction project. The Big Dig proves that waste
financed doubles the cost of the waste. The Massachusetts state
government still owes $13.83 billion for the Big Dig. $6.81 billion of
the debt is for the construction – and $7.02 billion is for finance
charges and interest!

Teachers Unions and other government unions directly profit from
protecting and promoting government waste.

Government waste causes high taxes.

Cutting government waste cuts your taxes.

Cutting taxes promotes cutting government waste.

Help us cut Massachusetts government waste.

Please make a donation right now so we can WIN the vote on November 4th,
get rid of billions and billions of dollars in government waste -- and
END the state income tax:

https://www.savyon.com/ms/sga/sga2.php

===========================================================
At-a-Glance Comparison: Government Worker Retirement VS. Private Sector
Worker Retirement
===========================================================

Why haven't you been told these things about Massachusetts government
employee retirement packages?

Click and glance: http://tinyurl.com/6e3hxl

===========================================================
DOCUMENTATION AND SOURCES FOR SOME OF THE GOVERNMENT WASTE
===========================================================

Safety Flagger Waste:

http://tinyurl.com/58e3xv

http://tinyurl.com/5w2k2x

http://tinyurl.com/5dpwg2

Big Dig Waste - Boston Globe Report:

http://tinyurl.com/5sulty

Simplified Graph:

http://tinyurl.com/6j3may

Jeff Jacoby’s column:

http://tinyurl.com/5joxrz

A sampling of government employee retirement packages:
http://www.bostonherald.com/projects/boston_pen...

More info on government employee retirement packages:

http://www.pensiontsunami.com/index.php

http://tinyurl.com/5hh5b6

Re: Letter: Obama is the rational choice for president

ftp — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 01:03:49 -0000

You Fools you have no clue as to what waites you and Israel Hussein Obama is a Muslim and he will not do anything but appease the enemys and let Iran do as they please, as to your Liberal friend they can just go back to tel aviv. why the hell did this liberal Jew come here?Blaming the hard right I surely dout that .I say go free your liberal jews and quit the blame game to appease the Left you hole the truth in your heart and you hide it well. people who vote for Hussein Obama vote to kill Jews and the weak come to America to spred weakness. I am a Jew and proud of my people and it's weak Jews like you who will cause anothe near extintion

Re: Letter: Obama is the rational choice for president

ftp — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 00:43:31 -0000

Hussein Obama is a Fool as well as the Hollywood Pawn he demeans women just read here you will get the true point......

Hillary Clinton supporters and Women for McCain leadership are slamming Barack Obama's new ad, titled "His Choice," as sexist and demeaning to women for its depiction of running mate Sarah Palin.

The ad features a McCain quote about relying on his vice president for economic advice — and then shows an unrelated clip of Palin winking mischievously at the camera.

The implication: She's less than a person to be taken seriously.

"It's a sexist example of reducing a woman to an object — a wink — and denying her a voice. Her lips are actually moving, but she's not allowed to be heard," says Stephanie Bressler, a Hillary Clinton supporter and women and politics professor at the University of Scranton.

Bressler is not alone in her umbrage over the ad.

Christine Toretti, co-chair of Pennsylvania Women for McCain, said, "God forbid a leader is not only competent, but beautiful and wears a skirt!"

And Judy Singleton, co-chair of Indiana Women for McCain, said: "To imply that Governor Palin doesn't understand economics because she's pretty and winks is ridiculous.

"

Such objections are echoing throughout the country, so much so that the McCain-Palin campaign released the following statements Friday from former Clinton supporters and Women for McCain leaders reacting to the ad:

Virginia:

Judy Black, national co-chair of Women for McCain: "Enough is enough! Senator Obama has stooped to a new low in his constant attacks on Governor Palin . . . Barack Obama's choice has been to attack, demean and ridicule women, first Senator Clinton and now Governor Palin.

"American women do not need any more of Obama's sexist choices or attacks. John McCain made the choice to put a strong leader with a proven record forward as his running mate. As a woman, I am outraged by the over-the-top treatment of Governor Palin, and I urge all women to reject the double standard put forward by a man who was just a state senator in Illinois three years ago by voting McCain-Palin this Tuesday.

"

Patty Denton, Washington County Republican chairwoman: "We, as a country, should be past the days in which women were treated as inferior. Women are the backbone of this country. It's disappointing for Senator Obama, who has proclaimed change' as his mantra, to disregard the monumental progress women have made in this country.

"Governor Palin is an exceptional leader and has fought on the side of all Americans, regardless of race or gender. These types of ads show that the Obama campaign is willing to do anything to score a few political cheap shots at the expense of women. On November 4th, women will go to the polls and demand respect for themselves and their daughters from the type of negative attacks perpetrated by Senator Obama.

"

Missouri:

Rep. Jo Ann Emerson: "With more executive experience than Barack Obama and Joe Biden combined, Governor Sarah Palin holds her own on the national scene and embodies the values that Americans want in those who will lead our country. This ad is just one more example of the constant attacks from the Obama-Biden campaign. With each attack, they attempt to dismiss the intelligent, qualified, and experienced woman who will soon become our next vice president.

"

Sharon Barnes, state chair of Women for McCain: "These attacks . . . show the desperation of the Democratic Party to try to stem the overwhelming support for the maverick Republican team of John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin — a team dedicated to bringing about the right kind of change for the people of this country.

"The voters of this great nation will not be fooled. Governor Palin is a proven leader and serious reformer with experience in economics, defense and foreign policy that the Democratic candidate for president can only wish he had.

"

California:

Shelly Mandell, president of the Los Angeles chapter of the National Organization for Women: "I am outraged by the new ad put out by Barack Obama. It is sexist and demeaning to women. These tactics started with Hillary Clinton and continue, growing even more disgusting, with Governor Palin. I was a Hillstar for Hillary and an avid supporter. Trashing two women clearly in a sexist manner in one election is an outrage and must be identified and stopped. There must be consequences. Let female Obama supporters take a good look at this and still believe their candidate supports women's rights and women's dignity.

"

Prameela Bartholomeusz, DNC Platform Committee member: "I am once again stunned at the personal and sexist attacks by the Obama campaign against Governor Palin. This latest ad is sexist and offensive. The governor of Alaska has been managing and balancing a budget of $10 billion; I think she knows a bit about economics.

"Senator Obama never spoke up against sexism during the primary season, and is not speaking out against misogyny during this phase of the election season. He is contributing to it. I have no confidence that Senator Obama will fight for women's issues if elected. This sets women back decades.

"

Pennsylvania:

Christine J. Toretti, Pennsylvania Women for McCain co-chair and state national committeewoman: "Vice presidential running mate Sarah Palin is an experienced public servant. As governor of Alaska and as mayor of Wasilla, she proved to be an effective leader and businesswoman. Senator Obama's baseless attack on Governor Palin is preposterous.

God forbid a leader is not only competent, but beautiful and wears a skirt!"

Bernie Comfort, state chair of Pennsylvania Women for McCain: "Senator Obama's ad simply mocks Governor Palin. The real truth is Governor Palin has experience dealing with the economy as an executive running the state of Alaska and as a business owner. She is the experienced leader we need to lead this country with John McCain.

"

Stephanie Bressler, Hillary Clinton supporter and women and politics professor at the University of Scranton: "It's a sexist example of reducing a woman to an object — a wink — and denying her a voice. Her lips are actually moving, but she's not allowed to be heard.

"

Ohio:

Barbara Rosier-Tryon, member of the Warren Republican Women's Club: "This is yet another sexist cheap shot . . . Sarah Palin's record of reform and experience as governor of Alaska and commander of the state's National Guard is more distinguished than Barack Obama's one and only term in the U.S. Senate.

"

North Carolina:

Martha Jenkins, North Carolina Women for McCain state chairwoman: "Barack Obama chose Joe Biden to make up for his own lack of foreign policy expertise. He has absolutely no reason to criticize McCain's pick of Palin. Governor Palin is infinitely more qualified than Barack Obama.

"In running this ad, Obama is acknowledging that Governor Palin is an effective and a positive part of John McCain's candidacy. Otherwise, why focus on her at all? Barack Obama is using this ad to divert attention from the fact that the American public is realizing that Obama is just as radical as his associates, and that he lacks the experience and judgment to be President of the United States.

"

Florida:

Albert Chang, regional director of Citizens for McCain, which includes Democrats and Independents: "We look forward to winning Tampa and the surrounding counties for McCain-Palin. This ad is a distracting personal attack on an experienced executive and the voters of Florida will see through it. This campaign will remain focused on issues impacting the everyday lives of Floridians and Americans.

"

Mary Calderon, Tampa, former Hillary Clinton supporter: "I'm disappointed that Senator Obama has resorted to personal attacks at this point in the campaign. Would any male candidate for vice president of the United States be afforded similar treatment by the Obama campaign? I would say not.

"

Indiana:

Judy Singleton, Indiana Women for McCain co-chair: "Obama seems to have a problem with strong, smart women. Ask Hillary. Running an ad like this is an affront to talented women everywhere. To imply that Governor Palin doesn't understand economics because she's pretty and winks is ridiculous.

"As a governor, she's proved she understands the economy better than Barack Obama, who hasn't completed his first term in the Senate, does. All one has to do is look at her record of leadership on economic development and then look at his.

"

New York:

Amy Siskind, ambassador for Hillary: "When Senator Hillary Clinton was demeaned and degraded during the presidential primary, many of us of, myself included, vowed 'never again.' The treatment of Governor Palin by both the mainstream media, and now the Obama campaign, shows that the misogyny fest is alive and well in our country. There has been a complete and utter smear job of our fellow citizen, Sarah Palin, who is only trying to serve her country.

Re: Our view: No on Questions 1, 2 and 3

ftp — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 00:40:57 -0000

Vote Yes on #1 to stop the pork. anything you hear from the Teachers Union and the Boston Police Unions are just scair tactic don't be a fool if you feel dout just take a ride through Lawrence and see for yourselves where some of this money is spent this Teachers Union spent 1.5 Mil of the Teachers Dues just to defeat this bill and what they are sprouting is just lies. take your goverment back and take the 37 hundred but it in your Braaa. if you know what I mean. VOTE YES ON #1