BO only has 6 more months...

[Yer Pal Al]

...to put Americans out of work and onto food stamps. He's doing a
mighty fine job:

US manufacturing shrinks for first time in 3 years

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_ECONOMY_MANUFACTURING?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-07-02-11-11-45

[Moder@tor]

On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 08:51:48 -0700 (PDT), Yer Pal Al <caddys...@gmail.com>
wrote:

So if it shrinks for the first time in three years, it has either been staying
level or growing the rest of the time, right?

[re-Pete]

It's good to know you Dems believe in economic stagnation.

[Billy]

In article
<77814568-b4e0-4d36...@o4g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,

Yer Pal Al <caddys...@gmail.com> wrote:

Who said,

1. On abortion: łI will preserve and protect a womanąs right to choose
and am devoted and dedicated to honoring my word in that regard.˛

2. łI am fighting for an overturning of Roe v. Wade.˛

3. On gay rights: łAs we seek to establish full equality for Americaąs
gay and lesbian citizens, I will provide more effective leadership than
my opponent.˛

4. On the 2009 economic stimulus: łNo time, nowhere, no how.˛

5. łThere is need for economic stimulus. Americans have lost about $11
trillion in net worth. That translates into about $400 billion a year
less spending that theyąll be doing. ... Government can help make that
up in a very difficult time. And thatąs one of the reasons why I think a
stimulus program is needed.˛

6. On climate science: łI believe that climate change is occurring ‹ the
reduction in the size of global ice caps is hard to ignore. I also
believe that human activity is a contributing factor.˛

7. łDo I think the worldąs getting hotter? Yeah, I donąt know that, but
I think that it is. ... I donąt know if itąs mostly caused by humans.
... What Iąm not willing to do is spend trillions of dollars on
something I donąt know the answer to.˛

8. On health care: łItąs critical to insure more people in this country.
It doesnąt make sense to have 45 million people without insurance. Itąs
not good for them because they donąt get good preventative care ... but
itąs not good for the rest of the citizens either, because if people
arenąt insured, they go to the emergency room for their care when they
get very sick. Thatąs expensive. They donąt have any insurance to cover
it. So guess who pays? Everybody else.˛

9. On financial bailouts: łThe idea of trying to bail out an institution
to protect the shareholders or to protect a certain interest group,
thatąs a terrible idea. And that shouldnąt happen.˛

10. łTARP got paid back, and it kept the financial system from
collapsing. ... Well, it was the right thing to do.˛

<http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/28/opinion/election-2012-pop-quiz.html?_r
=1&ref=nicholasdkristof>

--
E Pluribus Unum

Know where your money is tonight?
It's making the lives of Wall Street Bankers more comfortable.


The GOP is chasing us towards a cliff called "Obama."
Vote 3rd Party

[Yer Pal Al]

On Jul 2, 9:14 am, "Moder@tor" <Mo...@tor.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 08:51:48 -0700 (PDT), Yer Pal Al <caddyshack...@gmail.com>

> wrote:
>
> >...to put Americans out of work and onto food stamps. He's doing a
> >mighty fine job:
>
> >US manufacturing shrinks for first time in 3 years
>

> >http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_ECONOMY_MANUFACTURING?SITE=...

>
> So if it shrinks for the first time in three years, it has either been staying
> level or growing the rest of the time, right?

Like Conservatives have been saying, stimulus was only a temporary
fix. Now as more and more companies are going Solyndra on us the only
thing we (tax payers) are left with is a huge debt.

[re-Pete]

Billy wrote:
> Who said,


Sod off, Auzzie troll.

[Yer Pal Al]

On Jul 2, 10:52 am, Billy <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote:
> In article
> <77814568-b4e0-4d36-a7de-4f8a99193...@o4g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,

>  Yer Pal Al <caddyshack...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > ...to put Americans out of work and onto food stamps. He's doing a
> > mighty fine job:
>
> > US manufacturing shrinks for first time in 3 years
>

> >http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_ECONOMY_MANUFACTURING?SITE=...
> > N=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-07-02-11-11-45
>
> Who said,
>
> 1. On abortion...

This has something to do with the loss of manufacturing jobs?

[Billy]

In article
<079c1d26-47af-44ca...@qz1g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>,

Yer Pal Al <caddys...@gmail.com> wrote:

Just about the guy you want to take the lead in creating jobs. What
makes you think that off shoring-jobs started with Obama (who I'm not
voting for)?

Now, manufacturing, I don't know, but if you look at an unemployment
graph (such as you'll find at
<http://www.macrotrends.org/1339/unemployment-rate-last-ten-years>)
you'll see that unemployment took off in 2006, and peaked shortly after
Obama took office. That's a 3 year run-up that you want to blame on
Obama, who started getting the rates to come down after about 9 months
in office.

Some people here really are about finding out what's going on. Some
others are just partisan shills.

[Yer Pal Al]

On Jul 2, 3:23 pm, Billy <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote:
> In article

> <079c1d26-47af-44ca-9113-65062ced1...@qz1g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>,

>  Yer Pal Al <caddyshack...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 2, 10:52 am, Billy <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <77814568-b4e0-4d36-a7de-4f8a99193...@o4g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
> > >  Yer Pal Al <caddyshack...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > ...to put Americans out of work and onto food stamps. He's doing a
> > > > mighty fine job:
>
> > > > US manufacturing shrinks for first time in 3 years
>
> > > >http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_ECONOMY_MANUFACTURING?SITE=...
> > > > N=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-07-02-11-11-45
>
> > > Who said,
>
> > > 1. On abortion...
>
> > This has something to do with the loss of manufacturing jobs?
>
> Just about the guy you want to take the lead in creating jobs.

BO had his chance and he screwed up. We're not voting for Romney so
much as we are voting against a certified loser.

[Al]

In article
<79bdae59-9a2e-4e4a...@d6g2000pbt.googlegroups.com>,

Yer Pal Al <caddys...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jul 2, 3:23 pm, Billy <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote:
> > In article
> > <079c1d26-47af-44ca-9113-65062ced1...@qz1g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>,
> >  Yer Pal Al <caddyshack...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > On Jul 2, 10:52 am, Billy <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <77814568-b4e0-4d36-a7de-4f8a99193...@o4g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
> > > >  Yer Pal Al <caddyshack...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > ...to put Americans out of work and onto food stamps. He's doing a
> > > > > mighty fine job:
> >
> > > > > US manufacturing shrinks for first time in 3 years
> >

> > > > >http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US ECONOMY

> > > > >MANUFACTURING?SITE=...
> > > > > N=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-07-02-11-11-45
> >
> > > > Who said,
> >
> > > > 1. On abortion...
> >
> > > This has something to do with the loss of manufacturing jobs?
> >
> > Just about the guy you want to take the lead in creating jobs.
>
> BO had his chance and he screwed up. We're not voting for Romney so
> much as we are voting against a certified loser.

It's beginning to look like Obama has all the worst qualties of our modern
presidents, and that's his best quality.

A testament to the wisdom of Reverend King.

[Baxter]

-
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Yer Pal Al" <caddys...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:79bdae59-9a2e-4e4a...@d6g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...

>BO had his chance and he screwed up. We're not voting for Romney so
>much as we are voting against a certified loser.

Yeah, he's a real loser - he went after bin Ladin and ... oops, got him. He
tried to save GM ... and he did. His signature legislation ACA ... is
Constitutional. Some loser!

[Sancho Panza]

On 7/2/2012 11:04 PM, Baxter wrote:
> -
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Free Software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "Yer Pal Al"<caddys...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:79bdae59-9a2e-4e4a...@d6g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...
>
>> BO had his chance and he screwed up. We're not voting for Romney so
>> much as we are voting against a certified loser.
>
> Yeah, he's a real loser - he went after bin Ladin and ... oops, got him. He
> tried to save GM ... and he did.

It's slipping majorly, losing important market share:

"By Ben Kesling

The head of General Motors Co. GM -0.76% on Thursday forecast that U.S.
auto sales would move back above the annualized rate of 14 million in
June following a weaker-than-expected performance by the industry last
month.

Dan Akerson, GM's chief executive, said he expected the closely watched
seasonally adjusted selling rate to be between 14 million and 14.2
million for June.

Many analysts had expected June sales to remain below 14 million after
dipping to 13.7 million in May, decelerating from the strong pace set
earlier in the year, when the rate averaged 14.5 million.

U.S. industry sales rose 16% in May but against a weak year-ago
comparison. GM's own unit sales rose just 2.4% in May, cutting its
market share below 20%."--
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/gm-ceo-sees-us-car-sales-rate-at-14-mln-in-june-2012-06-28

> His signature legislation ACA ... is
> Constitutional. Some loser!

Considering that taxes have been paid into it since it became law, but
benefits have not been deployed, the best anyone might be able to say is
that the jury is out.

[Billy]

In article <albert.finney000-17...@news.giganews.com>,

<http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/04/18/112346/obama-ran-against-bush-but-
now.html>

Obama ran against Bush, but now governs like him

By Steven Thomma | McClatchy Newspapers
WASHINGTON ‹ He ran as the anti-Bush.

Silver-tongued, not tongue-tied. A team player on the world stage, not a
lone cowboy. A man who'd put a stop to reckless Bush policies at home
and abroad. In short, Barack Obama represented Change.

Well, that was then. Now, on one major policy after another, President
Barack Obama seems to be morphing into George W. Bush.
(cont.)

[Unknown]

"Yer Pal Al" wrote in message
news:77814568-b4e0-4d36...@o4g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...

> US manufacturing shrinks for first time in 3 years

No matter what America does, it's just not enough for the racist
Republicans.
It's not that your life is hard - it's just that you don't appreciate your
blessings.

[Unknown]

"Moder@tor" wrote in message
news:j5i3v75927pq18h6l...@4ax.com...

> So if it shrinks for the first time in three years, it has either been
> staying
> level or growing the rest of the time, right?

Yeah - but he had dark skin when he did it, and Republicans simply cannot
forgive him for that.

[Unknown]

"Yer Pal Al" wrote in message

news:901b7b24-529c-4fb8...@qz1g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...

> Now as more and more companies are going Solyndra on us the only
> thing we (tax payers) are left with is a huge debt.

It's not that you don't have anything.
It's just that you don't appreciate anything.

[Obwon]

After the crash of '29 it took three years for the damage to
be felt on the street. So it should come as no surprise
that a financial market lock up, that should have destroyed
the entire economy, would take quite some time to be felt
by the common man in earnest, most especially since
"bailouts" kept the financial system alive, while the
people that system lives on, continued to reel and strain
under the increased load placed upon them.

The people have struggled and strained in an attempt to
maintain their lifestyles and hold onto their assets and
keep their jobs. They hoped against hope that the economy
would recover and things would improve, making it possible
for them to climb out from under. Instead things have gone
the other way. Their efforts to keep their jobs has
resulted in fewer of them being given more work, to
increase profits. Bailouts, that kept the banksters
afloat, also made them able continue to plunder the public,
and their debt loads made it necessary.

As was said before, it would have been cheaper and better
for the gov't to simply issue 100k checks to everyone,
instead of bailing out the businesses who caused these
problems. Of course, Rush Limbaugh said it best, when he
said they'd take down America to get Obama out of office.
So, Republicans went about doing just that, blocking every
peice of legislation designed to help the average citizen,
in favor of more tax cuts and benefits for the wealthy and
"the corporate friends" of Mitt.

This is just more of the Bush follies finally arriving in
earnest. Without the Bush years, we would not be having
these problems, either here or around the globe.

[Obwon]

Yah think? Republicans solve problems?

Hoover: '29
Nixon: Pol Pot, Watergate
Bush 1: Gulf War
Reagan: S&L 160 billion dollar disaster
Bush II: 9/11 (magically, none of our defense systems
worked), Invaded Afghanistan, Invaded Iraq, deregulated
markets, spent 30 trillion dollars stalling off the
financial lock up. Left the U.S. and the world with a
smorgasbord of terrible messes, financial, ecological,
political and more.

Now you're thinking that may be Mitt Romney is an answer?
Pray tell us why? Didn't he say "Corporations are people my
friends!"? Does that sound like a statesman talking?

[Unknown]

"Obwon" wrote in message news:fne5v7hel8b4ndtgl...@4ax.com...

> After the crash of '29 it took three years for the damage to
> be felt on the street.

That's simply not true.
Suppose a stock broker in the crash were to jump out of his window after
losing everything on Monkey Wards.
He leaps at 4:00:03 pm on Black Tuesday.
The force of gravity at sea level is 15 feet per second, per second.
He falls 15' the first second, 30' the second, 45' the third, etc.
In 10 seconds, he falls 1000 feet - taller tan the tallest building in
Manhattan at the time.
But instead of 10 seconds, he falls for 3 years before the impact was felt
on the street.

In just what galaxy is this street?

[Unknown]

"Obwon" wrote in message news:9lf5v7l6su0h2dahk...@4ax.com...

> Now you're thinking that may be Mitt Romney is an answer?

You've got the Republicans all wrong.
They're not FOR Romney; they're just against Obama.

Republicans don't vote FOR anyone or anything; they only vote AGAINST.
Once you understand that, you'll understand the Republican party.

[Yer Pal Al]

On Jul 3, 2:51 am, Obwon <Ob...@real.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 18:02:15 -0700 (PDT), Yer Pal Al
>
>
>
>
>

> <caddyshack...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Jul 2, 3:23 pm, Billy <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote:
> >> In article
> >> <079c1d26-47af-44ca-9113-65062ced1...@qz1g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>,
> >> Yer Pal Al <caddyshack...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > On Jul 2, 10:52 am, Billy <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote:
> >> > > In article
> >> > > <77814568-b4e0-4d36-a7de-4f8a99193...@o4g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
> >> > > Yer Pal Al <caddyshack...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > > ...to put Americans out of work and onto food stamps. He's doing a
> >> > > > mighty fine job:
>
> >> > > > US manufacturing shrinks for first time in 3 years
>
> >> > > >http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_ECONOMY_MANUFACTURING?SITE=...
> >> > > > N=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-07-02-11-11-45
>
> >> > > Who said,
>
> >> > > 1. On abortion...
>
> >> > This has something to do with the loss of manufacturing jobs?
>
> >> Just about the guy you want to take the lead in creating jobs.
>
> >BO had his chance and he screwed up. We're not voting for Romney so
> >much as we are voting against a certified loser.
>
>  Yah think?  Republicans solve problems?

2006 was great. The economy was smoking hot and Democrats were no
where to be seen.

Then in 2007 they started fucking it up.

[Deets]

"Obwon" wrote in message news:fne5v7hel8b4ndtgl...@4ax.com...

The buck stops with the half-niggah no matter who you blame!

[Arkadelphia]

On 7/2/2012 9:04 PM, Baxter wrote:
> -
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Free Software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "Yer Pal Al" <caddys...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:79bdae59-9a2e-4e4a...@d6g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...
>
>> BO had his chance and he screwed up. We're not voting for Romney so
>> much as we are voting against a certified loser.
>
> Yeah, he's a real loser - he went after bin Ladin and ... oops, got him.

Sure did, took out a bunch of other baddies too - now he's judge, jury
and executioner in chief - a new wrinkle in democracy...

> He tried to save GM ... and he did.

Paulson and Bush wrote that one up.

> His signature legislation ACA ... is Constitutional.

Now we can be penalized for anything as a tax, even eating too many Cheetos.

Nice, should be fun to see what else Congress wants to legislate us to do...

> Some loser!

Not at all, the losers would be all of us.

[Arkadelphia]

That's because there are no benefits the monies collected disappear into
the general fund and then Obama slashes almost 500 million from Medicare.

Coming soon - the breathing penalty/tax.

[Arkadelphia]

On 7/3/2012 3:39 AM, Obwon wrote:
> As was said before, it would have been cheaper and better
> for the gov't to simply issue 100k checks to everyone,
> instead of bailing out the businesses

Yes, the economy would have been instantly stimulated and the businesses
worth spending on would have survived as consumers voted with their $$.

[Arkadelphia]

On 7/3/2012 3:51 AM, Obwon wrote:
> Bush II: 9/11 (magically, none of our defense systems
> worked),

Sounds like you believe 911 was an inside job, do you?

[Peter Mormon]

In article <77814568-b4e0-4d36-a7de-
4f8a99...@o4g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>

Yer Pal Al <caddys...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ...to put Americans out of work and onto food stamps. He's doing a
> mighty fine job:
>
> US manufacturing shrinks for first time in 3 years
>
> http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_ECONOMY_MANUFACTURING?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-07-02-11-11-45

Why would anyone expect job creation from a politician who has
never worked an honest day in his life?

[Al]

In article
<wildbilly-92C89...@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au>,

<snip>

>
> Well, that was then. Now, on one major policy after another, President
> Barack Obama seems to be morphing into George W. Bush.
> (cont.)

He's keeping some Bush policies,but he's not Bush. He lies too much and he
doesn't understand America, or Americans.

[azjohn]

You just want other people's stuff.

[azjohn]

You are such a racist.

[azjohn]

I think he morphed into a feminine asshole.

[azjohn]

On 7/3/2012 3:05 AM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:

We vote against Maxism, Racism, and stupidity.

[azjohn]

15.1 feet per second per second is assuming a vacuum. Kinda like inside
your head. Maximum falling velocity is 135 miles per hour. You should
wire a air speed indicator to your head and jump off of something really
high.

[Baxter]

-
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"azjohn" <hab...@nothere.com> wrote in message
news:jsvjdk$l4c$4...@wieslauf.sub.de...

Actually you vote against "Marxism" which you know nothing about. Against
"Racism" only when you think whites are not being given preferential
treatment, otherwise you're all for racism. And you're so stupid you
regularly vote against your own best interests in the name of an ideology
that benefits the super rich and you'll never achieve.

[Unknown]

"Arkadelphia" wrote in message news:jsvds3$gfn$1...@dont-email.me...

> Yes, the economy would have been instantly stimulated and the businesses
> worth spending on would have survived as consumers voted with their $$.

And as long as it's funded by debt to foreign corporations, the Republicans
won't have a problem with it.

[Al]

In article <ChKIr.55950$ji7....@newsfe20.iad>,

Why would republicans have a problem selling bonds to a foreign corporation?

[Sancho Panza]

On 7/3/2012 5:51 AM, Obwon wrote:

> Yah think? Republicans solve problems?

> Nixon: Pol Pot

Your demonizing would benefit from checking some history. Nixon resigned
years before Pol Pot swung into major action. Check under Jimmy Carter.

> Reagan: S&L 160 billion dollar disaster

Four of the Keating Five were Democrats, and nobody except the poster
can forget Jim Wright's ironic 69 scandals.

> Bush II: 9/11 (magically, none of our defense systems

> worked).

Thanks to Clinton's taking most of the armaments off planes designated
to defend the U.S.

[Sancho Panza]

Well, when you don't have much, that is a natural result.

[Al]

In article <4ff3b067$0$6080$607e...@cv.net>,

Then they come for the air in your tires.

[254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

Raceism is all you have left. It's all you ever had.

[254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

On Mon, 02 Jul 2012 15:23:51 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
wrote:

>In article
><079c1d26-47af-44ca...@qz1g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>,

> Yer Pal Al <caddys...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Jul 2, 10:52 am, Billy <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote:
>> > In article
>> > <77814568-b4e0-4d36-a7de-4f8a99193...@o4g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
>> >  Yer Pal Al <caddyshack...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > ...to put Americans out of work and onto food stamps. He's doing a
>> > > mighty fine job:
>> >
>> > > US manufacturing shrinks for first time in 3 years
>> >

>> > >http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_ECONOMY_MANUFACTURING?SITE=...

>> > > N=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-07-02-11-11-45
>> >
>> > Who said,
>> >
>> > 1. On abortion...
>>
>> This has something to do with the loss of manufacturing jobs?
>

>Just about the guy you want to take the lead in creating jobs. What
>makes you think that off shoring-jobs started with Obama (who I'm not
>voting for)?
>
>Now, manufacturing, I don't know, but if you look at an unemployment
>graph (such as you'll find at
><http://www.macrotrends.org/1339/unemployment-rate-last-ten-years>)
>you'll see that unemployment took off in 2006, and peaked shortly after
>Obama took office. That's a 3 year run-up that you want to blame on
>Obama, who started getting the rates to come down after about 9 months
>in office.

No, You-Who-Lies-Like-Obama - that graph shows that unemployment
skyrocketed shortly after the 'Rats took over congress in 2007, and
only began to fall when it became clear that President Humptoy shits
deceit from his mouth, and the people began to listen to the Tea Party
and R's promises to reign them in that lead directly to the Great 'Rat
Roast of 2010.

>Some people here really are about finding out what's going on. Some
>others are just partisan shills.

But enough about you.

[254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 14:58:18 -0500, Al <albert.f...@gmail.com>

That shortcoming will become blazingly irrelevant in a few short
months when Barky heads back to Murder Town to organize the corpses.

[254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 20:04:50 -0700, "Baxter"
<baxter.s...@baxcode.com> wrote:

>"Yer Pal Al" <caddys...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:79bdae59-9a2e-4e4a...@d6g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...

>
>>BO had his chance and he screwed up. We're not voting for Romney so
>>much as we are voting against a certified loser.
>

>Yeah, he's a real loser - he went after bin Ladin and ... oops, got him.

Only because he somehow managed not to fuck up the mechanism set in
place by his predecessor.

>He tried to save GM ... and he did.

Only because GM is still propped up by Obamamoney.

>His signature legislation ACA ... is
>Constitutional. Some loser!

And will be his spectacular downfall. That fuckwit couldn't tell the
truth if it was stapled to his teleprompter.

[254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

On Mon, 02 Jul 2012 23:23:35 -0400, Sancho Panza
<otter...@xhotmail.com> wrote:

>On 7/2/2012 11:04 PM, Baxter wrote:
>> "Yer Pal Al"<caddys...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:79bdae59-9a2e-4e4a...@d6g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> BO had his chance and he screwed up. We're not voting for Romney so
>>> much as we are voting against a certified loser.
>>

>> Yeah, he's a real loser - he went after bin Ladin and ... oops, got him. He

>> tried to save GM ... and he did.
>

>It's slipping majorly, losing important market share:

Obama will soon propose a law forcing every American to buy an
Obamobile. He will then be accidentally run over 300 million times.

>"By Ben Kesling
>
>The head of General Motors Co. GM -0.76% on Thursday forecast that U.S.
>auto sales would move back above the annualized rate of 14 million in
>June following a weaker-than-expected performance by the industry last
>month.
>
>Dan Akerson, GM's chief executive, said he expected the closely watched
>seasonally adjusted selling rate to be between 14 million and 14.2
>million for June.
>
>Many analysts had expected June sales to remain below 14 million after
>dipping to 13.7 million in May, decelerating from the strong pace set
>earlier in the year, when the rate averaged 14.5 million.
>
>U.S. industry sales rose 16% in May but against a weak year-ago
>comparison. GM's own unit sales rose just 2.4% in May, cutting its
>market share below 20%."--
>http://www.marketwatch.com/story/gm-ceo-sees-us-car-sales-rate-at-14-mln-in-june-2012-06-28
>
>

>> His signature legislation ACA ... is
>> Constitutional. Some loser!
>

[254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

Don't think Barky will be able to afford that one...

[254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 05:51:19 -0400, Obwon <Ob...@real.com> wrote:

>Bush II: 9/11 (magically, none of our defense systems
>worked)

"Oh, Norman, listen! The Troofers are calling!" - On Moonbat Pond

[254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

On Tue, 3 Jul 2012 15:07:48 -0700, "Baxter"
<baxter.s...@baxcode.com> wrote:

>"azjohn" <hab...@nothere.com> wrote in message
>news:jsvjdk$l4c$4...@wieslauf.sub.de...
>> On 7/3/2012 3:05 AM, Sanders Kaufman wrote:
>>> "Obwon" wrote in message
>>> news:9lf5v7l6su0h2dahk...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>> Now you're thinking that may be Mitt Romney is an answer?
>>>
>>> You've got the Republicans all wrong.
>>> They're not FOR Romney; they're just against Obama.
>>>
>>> Republicans don't vote FOR anyone or anything; they only vote AGAINST.
>>> Once you understand that, you'll understand the Republican party.
>>>
>> We vote against Maxism, Racism, and stupidity.
>>
>Actually you vote against "Marxism" which you know nothing about.

Oops. You touched Barxter's G spot again...

[254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

Obwon holds Troofer Loon Club membership card #0001. He soils himself
here regularly...

[254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 22:53:15 -0400, Sancho Panza
<otter...@xhotmail.com> wrote:

>On 7/3/2012 5:51 AM, Obwon wrote:
>
>> Yah think? Republicans solve problems?
>> Nixon: Pol Pot
>
>Your demonizing would benefit from checking some history. Nixon resigned
>years before Pol Pot swung into major action. Check under Jimmy Carter.

Pol Pot was a wholly-owned subsidiary of the 'Rat bastards' "We Love
Communists" organization. The millions that suffered and died at the
hands of SE Asian murderers so eagerly supported by the left
constitute a blood debt they will have to pay one day.

May the devil take Fonda and Kerry and their ilk.

[Al]

In article <mai7v7d0qnd1l008n...@4ax.com>,
254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'

He has his mother, and now Juan E. Jimenez, the Penguin of Pilots. What more
does a guy in his forties who flunked out of community college need?

With all that, and a peanut butter sandwich with the crust cut off, a man
can rule the world!

[Al]

In article <t9k7v7pmc1nkh2fsg...@4ax.com>,

254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
<Charlie...@whitehouse.gov> wrote:

There's a growing sense that Obama is kind of an idiot.

[Al]

In article <dfl7v751r2vdrln7q...@4ax.com>,

254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
<Charlie...@whitehouse.gov> wrote:

He already did.

[Billy]

In article <vnk7v7dc3v658fork...@4ax.com>,

254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
<Charlie...@whitehouse.gov> wrote:

> On Mon, 02 Jul 2012 23:23:35 -0400, Sancho Panza
> <otter...@xhotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On 7/2/2012 11:04 PM, Baxter wrote:
> >> "Yer Pal Al"<caddys...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:79bdae59-9a2e-4e4a...@d6g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...
> >>
> >>> BO had his chance and he screwed up. We're not voting for Romney so
> >>> much as we are voting against a certified loser.
> >>
> >> Yeah, he's a real loser - he went after bin Ladin and ... oops, got him.
> >> He
> >> tried to save GM ... and he did.
> >
> >It's slipping majorly, losing important market share:
>
> Obama will soon propose a law forcing every American to buy an
> Obamobile. He will then be accidentally run over 300 million times.
>

And this is as rational as Republicans get. Obama is bad, but these guys
are nuts.

<http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/04/18/112346/obama-ran-against-bush-but-
now.html>
Obama ran against Bush, but now governs like him

--
E Pluribus Unum

Know where your money is tonight?
It's making the lives of Wall Street Bankers more comfortable.


The GOP is chasing us towards a cliff called "Obama."
Vote 3rd Party

[Billy]

In article <aek7v79qtaejbojoo...@4ax.com>,

254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
<Charlie...@whitehouse.gov> wrote:

Invective, and opinion, is blovination all you got? You know what they
say about opinion. You sound like a "Bagger". Got any "real world" facts
that you can back up with a credible source(s)?

[Billy]

In article <ooj7v794kecdbjmat...@4ax.com>,

254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
<Charlie...@whitehouse.gov> wrote:

You really are dumber than dirt aren't you? So tell us, Einstein, what
caused the sudden unemployment? Why were so many people out of work?
It couldn't have been a housing bubble that burst at the end of the Bush
Administration. I'm sorry, that was cruel of me to introduce reality
into your "Bagger" dream. The housing bubble started slowly in the
Clinton Administration, but really grew during the Dubya years.

Wall Street financial bankers made more money in 2009, than
they did in 2008. That money, of course, was tax-payer money. Commercial
banks are borrowing money from the FED at 0.5%, and buying T-Bonds at
2.5% (it is all tax-payer money except the banks 2% profits), so banks
aren't lending money that companies traditionally used as bridge loans,
or short term loans used to by raw materials, and paid back by profits
on finished goods. The lack of these loans lead to lay-offs, and loss of
pensions, which lead to home foreclosures, and now an increase in
poverty, homelessness, and hunger.

But the large corporations are also sitting on money that could create
jobs. One piece of economic data is a fairly staggering figure that
comes out of the Bureau of Economic Analysis: Despite widespread
unemployment, the BEA reports that U.S. corporations, reluctant to
expand in an uncertain economy, are sitting on $1.6 trillion in cash
reserves, a record amount, according to BEA economist Greg Key.

Even looking at the companies in the Standard & Poor's 500 index of blue
chips -- and stripping out financials, which are required by regulators
to keep large cash reserves in order to cushion against risk -- the cash
on hand number is still rather monstrous: $1.1 trillion. To put that in
perspective, as a percentage of companies' total market capitalization,
that $1.1 trillion is more than double the ratio seen before the crisis.

"Cash is piling up faster than companies can figure out what to do with
it," said David Bianco, head of U.S. equity strategy at Bank of America.
<http://abcnews.go.com/Business/hoarding-hiring-corporations-stockpile-mo
untain-cash/story?id=10250559#.T_SfY3DcsnU>
<http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/07/corporate-americas-pile-o-cash/>

It's as if Americans are being manipulated, and purposefully squeezed to
grab at straws (The Koch Brother's Baggerism) in an attempt to save
themselves. It's called "The Shock Doctrine".
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736oK9FPg>

And now "the best government that money can buy" wants to start a new
war with Iran, which means that people will pull their money from
investments (stock market), and put that money into something safe like
gold, which won't do society any good. If we are not very, very lucky,
the whole damn economy could collapse, and you'll be out in the street
trying to sell your sorry ass for something to eat.

I know this will slide off of you like water on a duck, so you may as
well go back to your ignorant "Bagger" rant.
----

Did you know that the original "Baggers" were inflamed that the British
were going to tax their tea? So John Hancock urged them to pretend to be
Indians, and throw the British tea into the Boston Harbor. Thing is that
John Hancock was a smuggler, and those damn British were going to sell
their tea, tax and all, for less than Hancock could afford to sell his
tea.
----

John Hancock - Smuggling Powerhouse

John Hancock did not directly participate in the Boston tea party. But
he stood to lose the most from the East India Company imports of English
tea to Boston. On the other hand Samuel Adams who led the Mohawks aboard
the British ships was so close to John Hancock that Bostonians even
joked that "Sam Adams writes the letters [to newspapers] and John
Hancock pays the postage". You do the math.

John Hancock was a wealthy shipping magnate, who made the bulk of his
money illegally by smuggling. Many colonials were smugglers, Hancock
just happened to have a flair for it. Because the ever-tightening
British policies that came about after the French and Indian War were
aimed at his sort, he wholeheartedly took part in the call for
Revolution.

It was a well known fact that John Hancock had made his fortune through
smuggling Dutch tea, which was cheaper than East Indian tea. A commonly
forgotten fact is that East Indian prices were cut before the
introduction of the three pence tax, in effect making its price, even
with the tax, cheaper than Hancockąs tea. Presented with this
information, many loyalists did not wonder at Hancockąs involvement in
the boycotting of East Indian tea and indeed, the entire war.
After he inherited a fortune in his mid-20s, this elegant dandy nearly
single-handedly bankrolled the early protests in Boston.
Hancock smuggled glass, lead, paper, French molasses and tea. In 1768,
upon arriving from England, his sloop Liberty was impounded by British
customs officials for violation of revenue laws. This caused a riot
among some infuriated Bostonians, depending as they did on the supplies
on board. In the late 1760s, he was formally charge with smuggling and
although certainly guilty, his attorney was able to get Hancock relieved
of all charges. The lawyer was Sam's cousin, John Adams.

And the manipulation of the American public continues.
----

>
> >Some people here really are about finding out what's going on. Some
> >others are just partisan shills.
>
> But enough about you.

I stand to gain nothing, except to maintain my present working class
existence. If you want to return to a Dickensian existence, please do it
without me.

Corporations, and the 1% (0.1% really) who own them, stand to take what
little wealth that they don't already have.
<http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/the-u.s.-middle-class-is-being-wipe
%20d-out-here%27s-the-stats-to-prove-it-520657.html?>
€    83 percent of all U.S. stocks are in the hands of 1 percent of the
people.
€    61 percent of Americans "always or usually" live paycheck to
paycheck, which was up from 49 percent in 2008 and 43 percent in
2007.
€    66 percent of the income growth between 2001 and 2007 went to the
top 1% of all Americans.
€    36 percent of Americans say that they don't contribute anything to
retirement savings.
€    A staggering 43 percent of Americans have less than $10,000 saved
up for retirement. (and most of that was in their homes)


We now return you to the mindless "Bagger" rant in progress.

[Billy]

In article
<b842f0dae228bb22...@msgid.frell.theremailer.net>,
Peter Mormon <inv...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:

> In article <77814568-b4e0-4d36-a7de-
> 4f8a99...@o4g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>

> Yer Pal Al <caddys...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > ...to put Americans out of work and onto food stamps. He's doing a
> > mighty fine job:
> >
> > US manufacturing shrinks for first time in 3 years
> >

> > http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_ECONOMY_MANUFACTURING?SITE=AP&SECT
> > ION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-07-02-11-11-45
>
> Why would anyone expect job creation from a politician who has
> never worked an honest day in his life?

You got some proof to back up your "hot air" Pete? Preferably from a
non-partisan source. I thought not. Why is it that facts seem to be
repulsive to "Baggers" like you?

[Billy]

In article <jsvdlb$eem$2...@dont-email.me>, Arkadelphia <o...@chi.ta> wrote:

> On 7/2/2012 9:23 PM, Sancho Panza wrote:
> > On 7/2/2012 11:04 PM, Baxter wrote:

> >> -
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

> >> ---------
> >>
> >> Free Software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> ---------
> >>
> >>

> >> "Yer Pal Al"<caddys...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:79bdae59-9a2e-4e4a...@d6g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...
> >>
> >>> BO had his chance and he screwed up. We're not voting for Romney so
> >>> much as we are voting against a certified loser.
> >>
> >> Yeah, he's a real loser - he went after bin Ladin and ... oops, got

> >> him. He

> >> tried to save GM ... and he did.
> >

> > It's slipping majorly, losing important market share:
> >

> > "By Ben Kesling
> >
> > The head of General Motors Co. GM -0.76% on Thursday forecast that U.S.
> > auto sales would move back above the annualized rate of 14 million in
> > June following a weaker-than-expected performance by the industry last
> > month.
> >
> > Dan Akerson, GM's chief executive, said he expected the closely watched
> > seasonally adjusted selling rate to be between 14 million and 14.2
> > million for June.
> >
> > Many analysts had expected June sales to remain below 14 million after
> > dipping to 13.7 million in May, decelerating from the strong pace set
> > earlier in the year, when the rate averaged 14.5 million.
> >
> > U.S. industry sales rose 16% in May but against a weak year-ago
> > comparison. GM's own unit sales rose just 2.4% in May, cutting its
> > market share below 20%."--
> > http://www.marketwatch.com/story/gm-ceo-sees-us-car-sales-rate-at-14-mln-in-
> > june-2012-06-28
> >
> >
> >

> >> His signature legislation ACA ... is
> >> Constitutional. Some loser!
> >

> > Considering that taxes have been paid into it since it became law, but
> > benefits have not been deployed, the best anyone might be able to say is
> > that the jury is out.
> >
>
> That's because there are no benefits the monies collected disappear into
> the general fund and then Obama slashes almost 500 million from Medicare.

Last I looked, the House passes spending bills.

>
> Coming soon - the breathing penalty/tax.

Many people will just be happy to get health care, and those who can't
afford it, will be subsidized, or would you rather just put them in
front of a death panel?

The main points of neo-liberalism include:

1. THE RULE OF THE MARKET. Liberating "free" enterprise or private
enterprise from any bonds imposed by the government (the state) no
matter how much social damage this causes. Greater openness to
international trade and investment, as in NAFTA. Reduce wages by
de-unionizing workers and eliminating workers' rights that had been won
over many years of struggle. No more price controls. All in all, total
freedom of movement for capital, goods and services. To convince us this
is good for us, they say "an unregulated market is the best way to
increase economic growth, which will ultimately benefit everyone." It's
like Reagan's "supply-side" and "trickle-down" economics -- but somehow
the wealth didn't trickle down very much.

2. CUTTING PUBLIC EXPENDITURE FOR SOCIAL SERVICES like education and
health care. REDUCING THE SAFETY-NET FOR THE POOR, and even maintenance
of roads, bridges, water supply -- again in the name of reducing
government's role. Of course, they don't oppose government subsidies and
tax benefits for business.

3. DEREGULATION. Reduce government regulation of everything that
could diminsh profits, including protecting the environmentand safety on
the job.

4. PRIVATIZATION. Sell state-owned enterprises, goods and services to
private investors. This includes banks, key industries, railroads, toll
highways, electricity, schools, hospitals and even fresh water. Although
usually done in the name of greater efficiency, which is often needed,
privatization has mainly had the effect of concentrating wealth even
more in a few hands and making the public pay even more for its needs.

5. ELIMINATING THE CONCEPT OF "THE PUBLIC GOOD" or "COMMUNITY" and
replacing it with "individual responsibility." Pressuring the poorest
people in a society to find solutions to their lack of health care,
education and social security all by themselves -- then blaming them, if
they fail, as "lazy."


Neo-Liberalism has also been the favorite tool of the I.M.F.

Throughout the 1980s and 1990s the U.S. has been a principal force in
imposing Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) on most countries of the
South. Starting in the 1980s, the U.S. also routinely began conditioning
its aid agreements on acceptance of a package of economic reforms and
adherence to the prescriptions of the World Bank and IMF. In addition,
U.S. trade representatives began to insist on changes in other nationsｹ
economic policies to facilitate increased U.S. trade and investment.
SAPs usually include several basic components geared toward reducing
inflation, promoting exports, meeting debt-payment schedules, and
decreasing budget deficits. They generally entail severe reductions in
government spending and employment, higher interest rates, currency
devaluation, lower real wages, sale of government enterprises, reduced
tariffs, and liberalization of foreign investment regulations.

SAPs share a common objective: to move countries away from self-directed
models of national development that focus on the domestic market and
toward outward-looking development models that stress the importance of
complete integration into the dominant global structures of trade,
finance, and production. Largely championed by the Reagan administration
and Margaret Thatcherｹs government in Britain, the neoliberal principles
that shape SAPs gained prominence in the IFIs (International financial
institutions) in the 1980s. The neoliberal philosophy of economic
development revived the old precepts of economic liberalism, which hold
that an unregulated free market and private sector are the engines for
unrestricted growth, the benefits of which will trickle down from the
owners of capital to the entire population.

Virtually all developing countries却articularly in Latin America and
Africa, and increasingly in the transition countries of east and central
Europe吃ave implemented or are in the process of acceding to SAPs. The
economic policies dictated by the IFIs and Washington have greatly
facilitated the process of global economic integration. SAPs have also
largely succeeded inshrinking government budget deficits, eliminating
hyperinflation, and maintaining debt-payment schedules. But while
government balance sheets may improve, SAPs have failed to establish a
base for sustainable, balanced economic development. In their wake, SAPs
have bankrupted local industries, increased dependency on food imports,
gutted social services, and fostered a widening gap between rich and
poor.

SAPs may achieve nominal GDP growth, but it is growth based on
unsustainable resource extraction and the exploitation of cheap labor.

Elites and foreign investors often benefit from tax breaks and
production incentives, while the domestic economy contracts
dramatically, along with the jobs that support the lower and middle
classes.

SAPs often succeed in achieving specific objectives such as privatizing
state enterprises, reducing inflation, and decreasing budget deficits.
Yet in many cases the GDP growth of countries undergoing structural
adjustment is stagnant. The growth that does occur is commonly limited
to a few sectors like raw materials extraction or goods produced with
cheap labor, instead of a more well-rounded and sustainable growth in
production. Even when a SAP-directed economy is growing, it is generally
failing to create employment and generate the revenues needed to pay for
the unregulated influx of foreign imports. Thus, reforms intended to
open countries to foreign trade, investment, and finance may result in
increased exports and greater access to foreign capital, but they also
heighten financial volatility and speculative investment, flood the
affected countries with imported luxury goods, undermine local industry,
and constrict local buying power. SAPs benefit a narrow stratum of the
private sector砧ostly those involved in export production, trade
brokering, and portfolio finance. These winners are usually
well-connected elites and transnational companies.

Layoffs of government workers, wage constraints, higher interest rates,
reduced government spending, and the shutdown of domestic industries all
contribute to the shrinking of the domestic market. The weak state of
the domestic market exacerbates the worsening socioeconomic conditions.
Although there may be a new dynamism in certain elite sectors, social
and economic insecurity deepens for most people in countries subjected
to SAPs. The result can be increasing political instability (such as
riots over food prices), outbreaks of guerrilla violence, and widespread
disaffection with (and nonparticipation in) electoral political systems.

Welcome to the New America.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736oK9FPg>

[Yer Pal Al]

On Jul 4, 2:04 pm, Billy <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote:

> In article <jsvdlb$ee...@dont-email.me>, Arkadelphia <o...@chi.ta> wrote:
> > On 7/2/2012 9:23 PM, Sancho Panza wrote:
> > > On 7/2/2012 11:04 PM, Baxter wrote:
> > >> -
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> ---------
>
> > >> Free Software - Baxter Codeworks  www.baxcode.com
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> ---------
>

> > >> "Yer Pal Al"<caddyshack...@gmail.com>  wrote in message

> > >>news:79bdae59-9a2e-4e4a...@d6g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...
>
> > >>> BO had his chance and he screwed up. We're not voting for Romney so
> > >>> much as we are voting against a certified loser.
>
> > >> Yeah, he's a real loser - he went after bin Ladin and ... oops, got
> > >> him.  He
> > >> tried to save GM ... and he did.
>
> > > It's slipping majorly, losing important market share:
>
> > > "By Ben Kesling
>
> > > The head of General Motors Co. GM -0.76% on Thursday forecast that U.S.
> > > auto sales would move back above the annualized rate of 14 million in
> > > June following a weaker-than-expected performance by the industry last
> > > month.
>
> > > Dan Akerson, GM's chief executive, said he expected the closely watched
> > > seasonally adjusted selling rate to be between 14 million and 14.2
> > > million for June.
>
> > > Many analysts had expected June sales to remain below 14 million after
> > > dipping to 13.7 million in May, decelerating from the strong pace set
> > > earlier in the year, when the rate averaged 14.5 million.
>
> > > U.S. industry sales rose 16% in May but against a weak year-ago
> > > comparison. GM's own unit sales rose just 2.4% in May, cutting its
> > > market share below 20%."--

> > >http://www.marketwatch.com/story/gm-ceo-sees-us-car-sales-rate-at-14-...

> > > june-2012-06-28
>
> > >> His signature legislation ACA ... is
> > >> Constitutional.   Some loser!
>
> > > Considering that taxes have been paid into it since it became law, but
> > > benefits have not been deployed, the best anyone might be able to say is
> > > that the jury is out.
>
> > That's because there are no benefits the monies collected disappear into
> > the general fund and then Obama slashes almost 500 million from Medicare.
>
> Last I looked, the House passes spending bills.

You are indicting the Democrat congress of 2009?

[Al]

In article
<wildbilly-3B8AD...@c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au>,

Billy <wild...@withoutta.net> wrote:

> You really are dumber than dirt aren't you? So tell us, Einstein, what
> caused the sudden unemployment?

Job loss?

[Billy]

In article
<e7f42dd1-75bb-44b1...@q5g2000pba.googlegroups.com>,

By and large, yes.

[Billy]

In article <a2l7v7pv57n8u286q...@4ax.com>,

254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
<Charlie...@whitehouse.gov> wrote:

So you're sayin' that you agree with

Hoover: '29
Nixon: Pol Pot, Watergate
Bush 1: Gulf War

Reagan: S&L 160 billion dollar disaster

Bush II: Invaded Afghanistan, Invaded Iraq, deregulated
markets, spent 30 trillion dollars stalling off the
financial lock up. Left the U.S. and the world with a
smorgasbord of terrible messes, financial, ecological,
political and more.

I'd add Eisenhower calling off the 1954 Vietnamese elections, which lead
to 18 years of war.

[Yer Pal Al]

On Jul 4, 1:52 pm, Billy <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote:
> In article

> <b842f0dae228bb22fe18adafb3f79...@msgid.frell.theremailer.net>,
>  Peter Mormon <inva...@not-for-mail.invalid> wrote:
>
> > In article <77814568-b4e0-4d36-a7de-
> > 4f8a99193...@o4g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>

> > Yer Pal Al <caddyshack...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > ...to put Americans out of work and onto food stamps. He's doing a
> > > mighty fine job:
>
> > > US manufacturing shrinks for first time in 3 years
>

> > >http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_ECONOMY_MANUFACTURING?SITE=...

> > > ION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-07-02-11-11-45
>
> > Why would anyone expect job creation from a politician who has
> > never worked an honest day in his life?
>
> You got some proof to back up your "hot air" Pete? Preferably from a
> non-partisan source. I thought not. Why is it that facts seem to be
> repulsive to "Baggers" like you?

BO is a politician. Has he ever worked as anything else?

[Billy]

In article <4ff3b01b$0$6080$607e...@cv.net>,

Sancho Panza <otter...@xhotmail.com> wrote:

> On 7/3/2012 5:51 AM, Obwon wrote:
>
> > Yah think? Republicans solve problems?
> > Nixon: Pol Pot
>
> Your demonizing would benefit from checking some history. Nixon resigned
> years before Pol Pot swung into major action. Check under Jimmy Carter.
>

> > Reagan: S&L 160 billion dollar disaster
>

> Four of the Keating Five were Democrats, and nobody except the poster
> can forget Jim Wright's ironic 69 scandals.
True, but it was Reagan Administration, and he didn't want to hear that
deregulation wasn't working.
During 1979, Keating served as head of fundraising in the Southwest for
John Connally's campaign for the 1980 Republican Party presidential
nomination.
The Keating Five Republican that you didn't mention, was John McCain.
The scandal seems to have ruined the Democrats careers, including
Wright's, but not the Republican's. In any event, it's a great argument
that elections be publicly funded.

>http://www.amazon.com/Best-Way-Rob-Bank-Own/dp/0292721390/ref=sr_1_1?s=b
ooks&ie=UTF8&qid=1341446159&sr=1-1&keywords=Best+way+to+rob+a+bank>
The Best Way to Rob a Bank Is to Own One: How Corporate Executives and
Politicians Looted the S&L Industry, by William K. Black

The catastrophic collapse of companies such as Enron, WorldCom, ImClone,
and Tyco left angry investors, employees, reporters, and government
investigators demanding to know how the CEOs deceived everyone into
believing their companies were spectacularly successful when in fact
they were massively insolvent. Why did the nation's top accounting firms
give such companies clean audit reports? Where were the regulators and
whistleblowers who should expose fraudulent CEOs before they loot their
companies for hundreds of millions of dollars?

In this expert insider's account of the savings and loan debacle of the
1980s, William Black lays bare the strategies that corrupt CEOs and
CFOs--in collusion with those who have regulatory oversight of their
industries--use to defraud companies for their personal gain. Recounting
the investigations he conducted as Director of Litigation for the
Federal Home Loan Bank Board, Black fully reveals how Charles Keating
and hundreds of other S&L owners took advantage of a weak regulatory
environment to perpetrate accounting fraud on a massive scale. He also
authoritatively links the S&L crash to the business failures of the
early 2000s, showing how CEOs then and now are using the same tactics to
defeat regulatory restraints and commit the same types of destructive
fraud.

Black uses the latest advances in criminology and economics to develop a
theory of why "control fraud"--looting a company for personal
profit--tends to occur in waves that make financial markets deeply
inefficient. He also explains how to prevent such waves. Throughout the
book, Black drives home the larger point that control fraud is a major,
ongoing threat in business that requires active, independent regulators
to contain it. His book is a wake-up call for everyone who believes that
market forces alone will keep companies and their owners honest.

>
> > Bush II: 9/11 (magically, none of our defense systems

> > worked).
>
> Thanks to Clinton's taking most of the armaments off planes designated
> to defend the U.S.

And that has what to do with interceptors flying east, out over the
Atlantic? And are you saying that all a country has to do to attack the
U.S. is to tell its bombers to turn off their transponders?

In the United States, when a passenger plane veers from its designated
course for more than a few minutes and/or fails to respond to messages
from ground control, standard operating procedures specify an automatic
response: The errant plane is to be intercepted by a military escort.
Note that "interception" has nothing to do with shooting down the plane
- which is an absolute last resort, requiring a special order. Rather,
interception is a routine matter of reconnoitering and attempting to
contact the off-course plane, and requires no special order.

On 9/11 NORAD was in peak form. It was fully staffed and alert, and
senior officers were manning stations throughout the US when the first
hijacking was reported. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02]
Because of the war game, NORAD "had extra fighter planes on alert." [ABC
News, 9/14/02] Colonel Robert Marr, in charge of NORAD's Northeastern US
sector, said, "We had the fighters with a little more gas on board. A
few more weapons on board." [ABC News, 9/11/02].

Then with all aircraft grounded after 9/11, only 2 planes were allowed
to fly. Both planes were carrying Saudi nationals, including members of
bin Laden's family, back to Saudia Arabia.
-----

House of Bush, House of Saud: The Secret Relationship Between the
World's Two Most Powerful Dynasties by Craig Unger

<http://www.amazon.com/House-Bush-Saud-Relationship-Dynasties/dp/07432533
96/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1296239042&sr=1-1>
(Available in better libraries near you.)

P 8 - 15
Within minutes of
the terrorist attacks on 9/11, the Federal Aviation Administration
had sent out a special notification called a NOTAM蟻 notice to airmen逆o
airports all across the country, ordering every airborne plane
in the United States to land at the nearest airport as soon as possible,
and prohibiting planes on the ground from taking off. Initially, there
were no exceptions whatsoever. Later, when the situation stabilized,
several airports accepted flights for emergency medical and military
operations誼ut those were few and far between.


HOUSE OF BUSH, HOUSE OF SAUD p.9

Nevertheless, at 1:30 or 2 p.m. on the thirteenth, Dan Grossi
received his phone call. He was told the Saudis would be delivered to
Raytheon Airport Services, a private hangar at Tampa International
Airport. When he arrived, Manny Perez was there to meet him,

At the terminal a woman laughed at Grossi for even thinking he
would be flying that day. Commercial nights had slowly begun to
resume, but at 10:57 a.m., the FAA had issued another NOTAM, a
reminder that private aviation was still prohibited. Three private planes
violated the ban that day, in Maryland, West Virginia, and Texas, and in
each case a pair of jet fighters quickly forced the aircraft down. As far
as private planes were concerned, America was still grounded.

"They got the approval somewhere," said Perez. "It must have
come from the highest levels of government."32

"Flight restrictions had not been lifted yet," Grossi said. "I was told
it would take White House approval. I thought [the flight] was not
going to happen."33

Grossi said he did not get the names of the Saudi students he was
escorting. "It happened so fast," Grossi says. "I just knew they were
Saudis. They were well connected. One of them told me his father or
his uncle was good friends with George Bush senior."34

How did the Saudis go about getting approval? According to the
Federal Aviation Administration, they didn't and the Tampa flight
never took place. "It's not in our logs," Chris White, a spokesman for
the FAA, told the Tampa Tribune. "... It didn't occur."35 The White
House also said that the flights to evacuate the Saudis did not take
place.

As the planes prepared for takeoff at each location across the country,
the FBI repeatedly got into disputes with Rihab Massoud, Bandar's
charge d'affaires at the Saudi embassy in Washington. "I recall getting
into a big flap with Bandar's office about whether they would leave
without us knowing who was on the plane," said one former agent
who participated in the repatriation of the Saudis.38 "Bandar wanted the
plane to take off and we were stressing that that plane was not leaving
until we knew exactly who was on it."


HOUSE OF BUSH, HOUSE OF SAUD p.11

In the end, the FBI was only able to check papers and identify
everyone on the flights. In the past, the FBI had been constrained from
arbitrarily launching investigations without a "predicate"喫.e., a
strong reason to believe that an individual had been engaged in criminal
activities. Spokesmen for the FBI assert that the Saudis had every
right to leave the country.

In an ordinary murder investigation, it is commonplace to interview
relatives of the prime suspect. When the FBI talks to subjects during an
investigation, the questioning falls into one of two categories. Friendly
subjects are "interviewed" and suspects or unfriendly subjects are
"interrogated." How did the Saudis get a pass?

Moreover, national security experts found it hard to believe that no
one in the entire extended bin Laden family had any contact whatsoever
with Osama. "There is no reason to think that every single mem-

CRAIG UNGER p.14

ber of his family has shut him down," said Paul Michael Wihbey, a fellow
at the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies.50
On Tuesday, September 18, at Logan Airport, a specially reconfigured
Boeing 727 with about thirty first-class seats had been chartered by the
bin Ladens and flew five passengers, all of them members of the bin
Laden family, out of the country from Boston.

How is it possible that Saudis were allowed to fly even when all of
America, FBI agents included, was grounded? Had the White House
approved the operation蟻nd, if so, why?

When Bandar arrived at the White House on Thursday, September 13,
2001, he and President Bush retreated to the Truman Balcony, a casual
outdoor spot behind the pillars of the South Portico that also provided
a bit of privacy.

This occasion may have marked the beginning of a new era, but
Bandar and President Bush had nothing to celebrate. Thousands of
Americans were dead. They had been killed in a terrorist operation
largely run by Saudis. Nonetheless, the two men each lit up a Cohiba
and began to discuss how they would work together in the war on terror.
Bush said that the United States would hand over any captured Al
Qaeda operatives to the Saudis if they would not cooperate. The
implication was clear: the Saudis could use any means necessary-
including torture逆o get the suspects to talk.52


And Sancho wants to blame Clinton, who is guilty of other crimes, just
not this one.

God, you "Baggers" are completely nuts.

[Billy]

In article
<ea13a7b4-37ac-4827...@wt8g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,

Yer Pal Al <caddys...@gmail.com> wrote:

He worked as a community organizer from June 1985 to May 1988.
He then taught at the University of Chicago Law School for twelve
years‹as a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996, and as a Senior Lecturer from
1996 to 2004‹teaching constitutional law.
From April to October 1992, Obama directed Illinois's Project Vote, a
voter registration campaign with ten staffers and seven hundred
volunteer registrars; it achieved its goal of registering 150,000 of
400,000 unregistered African Americans in the state, leading Crain's
Chicago Business to name Obama to its 1993 list of "40 under Forty"
powers to be.
In 1993, he joined Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, a 13-attorney law
firm specializing in civil rights litigation and neighborhood economic
development, where he was an associate for three years from 1993 to
1996, then of counsel from 1996 to 2004. His law license became inactive
in 2002.[43]

From 1994 to 2002, Obama served on the boards of directors of the Woods
Fund of Chicago, which in 1985 had been the first foundation to fund the
Developing Communities Project; and of the Joyce Foundation.[29] He
served on the board of directors of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge from
1995 to 2002, as founding president and chairman of the board of
directors from 1995 to 1999.

Come on Al, this is simple stuff to find out. Are you so simple a
"Bagger"?

--
E Pluribus Unum

Know where your money is tonight?
It's making the lives of Wall Street Bankers more comfortable.

[Sol R. System]

On 7/3/2012 11:34 AM spammydelphia actually thought someone would care and wrote:

> Sou

Dance, spammyshitstain! Earn your kibble!
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_dr-2WjWQtjE/THmd8F8fMEI/AAAAAAAACtU/1KaDoNAnHKA/s1600/IMG_1172.jpg

You don't deny that you're a gutless chickenshit, spammyshitstain.

You're a gutless lying pussy, spammyshitstain, and all you can do is
hide behind your anonymous phony nym and your keyboard.

YOU ARE, AND HAVE, NOTHING, YOU WORTHLESS PIECE OF SHIT!

You're a gutless chickenshit who never served in the military,
hates American values, and hates veterans who have served our country
with honor.

CHOKE ON IT, YOU TRAITOROUS AMERICA-HATING COWARD!

"LOOK AT MEEEEE! MEEEEE! MEEEE!" -- spammyshitstain

Shut the fuck up, spammyshitstain. You are a treason-loving, America-
hating piece of shit. You will die alone and afraid, just like you
are in your useless miserable excuse for a "life."

Only with the Internet can you conceal the sad truth that you're nothing
but a badly sewn sock puppet with Munchhausen syndrome and a chubby hand
up your cloaca.

Do you ever have anything of interest, or substance, to say,
spammyshitstain, you gutless little knock-kneed attention whore?

You are a little dick bitch who feels like it is his civic duty as
a Usenet troll to place his nose firmly in the sphincters of those he
dislikes every time they post. They all own you, spammyshitstain.

'Shit happens'
---Traitorous spammyshitstain's reply to the fact that 34
Americans died and 170 were injured when Israel attacked the USS
Liberty. Spammyshitstain is a gutless coward who has never served
his country in uniform, and hates anyone who has.

'There are a lot better places to be in life than here.'
--- spammyshitstain

'We tend to despise in others those flaws most evident in ourselves.'
--- "Jarbidge" (Spammyshitstain)

[Billy]

In article <dfl7v751r2vdrln7q...@4ax.com>,

254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
<Charlie...@whitehouse.gov> wrote:

How dumb are you ,"254? I guess we are going to find out.

<http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/US_ThirdWorld/US_PolPot.html>


Covert Action Quarterly magazine, Summer 1990

For the last eleven years the United States government, in a covert
operation born of cynicism and hypocrisy, has collaborated with the
genocidal Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. More specifically, Washington has
covertly aided and abetted the Pol Potists' guerrilla war to overthrow
the Vietnamese backed government of Prime Minister Hun Sen, which
replaced the Khmer Rouge regime.

The U.S. government's secret partnership with the Khmer Rouge grew out
of the U.S. defeat in the Vietnam War. After the fall of Saigon in 1975,
the U.S.-worried by the shift in the Southeast Asian balance of
power-turned once again to geopolitical confrontation. It quickly
formalized an anti-Vietnamese, anti-Soviet strategic alliance with
China-an alliance whose disastrous effects have been most evident in
Cambodia. For the U.S., playing the "China card" has meant sustaining
the Khmer Rouge as a geopolitical counterweight capable of destabilizing
the Hun Sen government in Cambodia and its Vietnamese allies.

When Vietnam intervened in Cambodia and drove the Pol Potists from power
in January 1972, Washington took immediate steps to preserve the Khmer
Rouge as a guerrilla movement. International relief agencies were
pressured by the U.S. to provide humanitarian assistance to the Khmer
Rouge guerrillas who fled into Thailand. For more than a decade, the
Khmer Rouge have used the refugee camps they occupy as military bases to
wage a contra-war in Cambodia. According to Linda Mason and Roger Brown,
who studied the relief operations in Thailand for Cambodian refugees:

...relief organizations supplied the Khmer Rouge resistance movement
with food and medicines.... In the Fall of 1979 the Khmer Rouge were the
most desperate of all the refugees who came to the Thai-Kampuchean
border. Throughout l900, however, their health rapidly improved, and
relief organizations began questioning the legitimacy of feeding them.
The Khmer Rouge. . . having regained strength...had begun actively
fighting the Vietnamese. The relief organizations considered supporting
the Khmer Rouge inconsistent with their humanitarian goals.... Yet
Thailand, the country that hosted the relief operation, and the U.S.
government, which funded the bulk of the relief operations, insisted
that the Khmer Rouge be fed.

During his reign as National Security Adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski
played an important role in determining how the U.S. would support the
Pol Pot guerrillas. Elizabeth Becker, an expert on Cambodia, recently
wrote, "Brzezinski himself claims that he concocted the idea of
persuading Thailand to cooperate fully with China in efforts to rebuild
the Khmer Rouge.... Brzezinski said, " I encouraged the Chinese to
support Pol Pot. I encouraged the Thai to help the DK [Democratic
Kampuchea]. The question was how to help the Cambodian people. Pol Pot
was an abomination. We could not support him but China could."

An Unholy Alliance

The U.S. not only permitted the Khmer Rouge to use the refugee camps in
Thailand as a base for its war against the new government in Phnom Penh
but it also helped Prince Norodom Sihanouk and former Prime Minister Son
Sann to organize their own guerrilla armies from the refugee population
in the camps. These camps are an integral factor in the ability of the
Khmer Rouge, the Sihanoukist National Army (ANS) and Son Sann's Khmer
People's National Liberation Front (KPNLF) to wage war against the Hun
Sen government.

In 1979, Washington began "a small program" of support for Sihanouk's
and Son Sann's guerrillas by providing "travel expenses" for the
"insurgent leaders" and funds "for the up keep of resistance camps near
the Thai-Cambodian border." In addition, since 1982, the U.S. has
provided the ANS and KPNLF with covert and overt "humanitarian" and "non
lethal" military aid. By 1989, the secret non lethal aid had grown to
between $20 million and $24 million annually and the overt humanitarian
aid had reached $5 million. The Bush administration requested $7 million
more in humanitarian aid for 1990.

When Congress approved the $5 million aid package for the ANS and KPNLF
in 1985, it prohibited use of the aid "...for the purpose or with the
effect of promoting, sustaining or augmenting, directly or indirectly,
the capacity of the Khmer Rouge...to conduct military or paramilitary
operations in Cambodia or elsewhere...." From the beginning, U.S. aid
for the ANS and KPNLF has been a complimentary source of aid for the
Khmer Rouge. According to a western diplomat stationed in Southeast
Asia, ".. .two-thirds of the arms aid to the noncommunist forces appears
to come from Peking [Beijing], along with more extensive aid to the
communist fighters [the Khmer Rouge].... China is estimated to spend $60
million to $100 million yearly in aid to all factions of the
anti-Vietnamese resistance."

In 1982, under pressure from the U.S., China, and the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Sihanouk and Son Sann joined forces
with the Khmer Rouge to form the Coalition Government of Democratic
Kampuchea (CGDK). The ANS and KPNLF, which were more politically respect
able than the Khmer Rouge, gained military credibility from the
guerrilla alliance. However, the Khmer Rouge gained considerable
political legitimacy from the alliance and Khmer Rouge diplomats now
represent the CGDK at the United Nations.

The CGDK receives large amounts of military aid from Singapore. When
asked about the relationship between money from the U.S. and arms from
Singapore, another U.S. diplomat in Southeast Asia replied, "Let's put
it this way. If the U.S. supplies [the guerrilla coalition] with food,
then they can spend their food money on something else."

Direct U.S. Aid

But there are indications of direct U.S. Iinks to the Khmer Rouge.
Former Deputy Director of the CIA, Ray Cline, visited a Khmer Rouge camp
inside Cambodia in November 1980. When asked about the visit, the Thai
Foreign Ministry denied that Cline had illegally crossed into Cambodian
territory. However, privately, the Thai government admitted that the
trip had occurred. Cline's trip to the Pol Pot camp was originally
revealed in a press statement released by Khmer Rouge diplomats at the
United Nations.
Cline also went to Thailand as a representative of the Reagan-Bush
transition team and briefed the Thai government on the new
administration's policy toward Southeast Asia. Cline told the Thais the
Reagan administration planned to "strengthen its cooperation" with
Thailand and the other ASEAN members opposed to the Phnom Penh
government. There have been numerous other reports about direct links
between the CIA and the Khmer Rouge. According to Jack Anderson,
"through China, the CIA is even supporting the jungle forces of the
murderous Pol Pot in Cambodia." Sihanouk himself admitted that CIA
advisers were present in Khmer Rouge camps in late 1989: "Just one month
ago, I received intelligence informing me that there were U.S. advisers
in the Khmer Rouge camps in Thailand, notably in Site B camp.... The CIA
men are teaching the Khmer Rouge human rights! The CIA wants to turn
tigers into kittens!
By late 1989 the distinction between "direct or indirect" U.S. support
for the Khmer Rouge was less clear. When CGDK forces launched an
offensive in September 1989, Sihanouk's and Son Sann's armies openly
cooperated with the Khmer Rouge. Moreover, by then the Khmer Rouge had
infiltrated the military and political wings of the ANS and KPNLF.

Sihanouk confirmed ANS and KPNLF military collaboration with the Khmer
Rouge in a radio message broadcast clandestinely in Cambodia. "I would
particularly like to commend the fact that our three armies know how to
cordially cooperate with one another...We assist each other in every
circumstance and cooperate with one another on the battlefield of the
Cambodian motherland...., Sihanouk specifically mentioned military
cooperation in battles at Battambang, Siem Reap, and Oddar Meanchey.
Evidence of increased involvement of U.S. military advisers in Cambodia
has also begun to surface. A report in the London Sunday Correspondent
noted that "American advisers are reported to have been helping train
guerrillas of the non communist Khmer resistance and may have recently
gone into Cambodia with them....Reports of increased U.S. involvement
have also emerged from the northern town of Sisophon, where local
officials say four westerners accompanied guerrillas in an attack on the
town last month.''

Although the U.S. government denies supplying the ANS and KPNLF with
military hardware, a recent report claimed that KPNLF forces had
received a shipment of weapons from the U.S. including M-16s, grenade
launchers, and recoilless rifles. It has also been reported that the
U.S. is providing the KPNLF with high resolution satellite photographs
and "several KPNLF commanders claim Americans were sent to train some 40
elite guerrillas in the use of sophisticated U.S.-made Dragon anti-tank
missiles in a four-month course that ended last month." When the KPNLF
launched a major offensive on September 30, a large number of U.S.
officials were sighted in the border region, near the fighting.

Washington's link to the anti-Phnom Penh guerrilla factions was
formalized in 1989 when KPNLF diplomat Sichan Siv was appointed as a
deputy assistant to President George Bush. Siv's official assignment in
the White House is the Public Liaison Office, where he works with
different constituency groups, such as Khmer residents in the U.S. and
other minority, foreign policy, youth, and education groups. Sives
escaped from Cambodia in 1976 and immigrated to the U.S., where he
joined the KPNLF. From 1983 to 1987, Siv served as a KPNLF
representative at the United Nations as part of the CGDK delegation
which was headed by Khmer Rouge diplomats.

As part of the Bush administration, Sichan Siv is significantly involved
in the formulation and conduct of U.S. policy in Cambodia. He was a
"senior adviser" to the U.S. delegation attending an international
conference on Cambodia held last summer in Paris, where the U.S.
demanded the dismantling of the Hun Sen government and the inclusion of
the Khmer Rouge in an interim four-party government. He was also the
moderator of a White House briefing on Cambodia in October 1989 for
Khmer residents in the U.S.
Another one of Siv's assignments has been to work as a liaison with far
Right groups which provide political and material support for the KPNLF.
He attended a World Anti Communist League (WACL) conference in Dallas,
Texas in September 1985 along with other anti-communist "freedom
fighters" from around the world. At the WACL conference, the KPNLF
openly sought "outside training and support in intelligence and
demolition.''

Siv has also worked with retired U.S. Army Brigadier General Theodore
Mataxis, who heads up the North Carolina-based Committee for a Free
Cambodia (CFC). Mataxis was approached by senior KPNLF generals in 1986
to set up the CFC to organize support in the U.S. for the KPNLF.

Right Wing Support

According to the Reagan doctrine, the goal of U.S. foreign policy was to
"contain Soviet expansion" by supporting counterrevolutionary groups in
Angola, Nicaragua, Cambodia, etc. and, in essence, "roll back" the
"Soviet empire." Many of the right wing groups which gained prominence
after Reagan's election immediately started programs to support contras
across the globe. The World Anti-Communist League, the Heritage
Foundation, the Freedom Research Foundation, as well as many others, all
pressed hard for support of the "freedom fighters.''

In its 1984 policy report entitled, Mandate for Leadership II:
Continuing the Conservative Revolution, the Heritage Foundation called
on the Reagan administration to focus even more closely on these
counterrevolutionary struggles and to: ...employ paramilitary assets to
weaken those communist and noncommunist regimes that may already be
facing the early stages of insurgency within their borders and which
threaten U.S. interests....Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam reflect such
conditions, as do Angola, Ethiopia, Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Iran and
Libya.

In 1984, right wing activist / adventurer Jack Wheeler stated that
"[t]here are eight anti-Soviet guerrilla wars being conducted in the
third world at this moment....Sooner or later, one of these movements is
going to win....The first successful overthrow of a Soviet puppet regime
may, in fact, precipitate a 'reverse domino effect,' a toppling of
Soviet dominos, one after the other.''

Not surprisingly, Wheeler is a big supporter of the Cambodian contra
movement and has openly solicited material and political support for the
KPNLF. In August 1984 he wrote an article for the Moonie-owned
Washington Times in which he said, "After spending a week with the KPNLF
inside Cambodia...one is drawn inescapably to the conclusion that the
KPNLF does indeed represent a real third noncommunist alternative for
Cambodia....[But] the KPNLF is...running seriously low on weapons and
ammunition. The lack of ammunition for rifles, rocket launchers, machine
guns and mortars, is especially critical.''

Just how "private" the support Wheeler solicits for the KPNLF is open to
question. Listed, along with Wheeler, on the Board of Directors of
Freedom Research Foundation are Alex Alexiev and Mike Kelly. Alexiev is
"with the National Security Division of the Rand Corporation. . . [and
is] an expert on Soviet activities in the third world." Kelly was Deputy
Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Manpower Resources and Military
Personnel in the early 1980s. Kelly had earlier been a legislative
assistant to the right wing Senators Bill Armstrong (Rep.-Colo.) and
John Tower(Rep.-Tex.).
Soldier of Fortune (SOF) magazine also journeyed to Cambodia in support
of the KPNLF. In an article written after their visit to the front, SOF
authors David Mills and Dale Andrade appealed for readers to contribute
to the KPNLF and to send their donations to a Bangkok address. "Any
private citizen who wants to give more than just moral support to help
the KPNLF rebels can send "Any private citizen who wants to give more
than just moral support to help the KPNLF rebels can send money." It
doesn't take much. Forty dollars will buy two uniforms, one pair of
shoes, two pairs of socks, knapsack, plastic sheet and a scarf for one
soldier. That's not a bad deal.''

Ted Mataxis Rides Again

Retired Brigadier-General Ted Mataxis personifies the historic ties of
the U.S. to the KPNLF. In 1971-72, Mataxis worked with General Sak
Sutsakhan when he was chief of the U.S. Military Equipment Delivery Team
(MEDT) in Phnom Penh. Mataxis's official role was to supervise the
delivery of U.S military aid to then-Cambodian Premier Lon Nol. However,
Mataxis's assignment also included a covert role-over seeing the
escalation of U.S. forces in Cambodia after the April 1970 U.S.
invasion. Mataxis was well suited for working on covert operations in
Cambodia, having trained at the Army's Strategic Intelligence School in
the late 1940s.

Despite a 1970 congressional ban on aid to the Lon Nol army, there
continued to be reports of MEDT personnel working as advisers to the
Cambodian military. There were also reports of U.S. helicopters
providing transport for Cambodian troops as well as supplying them with
ammunition during battles. The U.S. also opened a radio station at
Pochentong Airport, near Phnom Penh, to "help coordinate air support for
Cambodian troops."

When Mataxis retired from the U.S. Army in 1972, he began working as a
"military consultant" to the Defense Ministry of Singapore. "When I was
down in Singapore I worked with them [Sak and the other Lon Nol
generals] very closely. We used to do repairs on their ships and other
things," Mataxis explained. "When Congress cut off money to them in
1973, they came down to see what Singapore could do to help them out. I
got a team together from Singapore, and we went up to Phnom Penh. We
made arrangements to buy old brass, old weapons and other stuff [to sell
for profit] so they'd have money for supplies and other things." Under
U.S. law, old U.S. weapons and scrap metal military equipment provided
to allies is U.S. property, but there was no known official objection to
Mataxis's end run around the congressional ban on U.S. military aid to
the Lon Nol generals.

Mataxis recalled when Major General Pak Son Anh (who at the time worked
closely with General Sak, the military commander of the KPNLF) visited
him in Washington in 1986. "They [Pak and other KPNLF officers] came to
see me and asked what I could do. They came up to my office at the
Committee for a Free Afghanistan....They asked us to set up something
like that [for the KPNLF]. So I went over to see Admiral [Thomas]
Moorer. I took General Pak along and asked Admiral Moorer if he could
act as a Godfather for us. He said, 'Yes, you can use my name.' Moorer
was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff when Mataxis was head of the
MEDT, and Mataxis's work in Cambodia was supervised by Moorer and
Admiral John Mc Cain, Commander-in-Chief, Pacific Forces, 1968-72.
Mataxis spent much of 1987 setting up the Committee for a Free Cambodia
(CFC). He visited General Sak in Thailand to determine the KPNLF's needs
and promoted the KPNLF in the U.S. "I set it up for Pak to go to one of
those American Security Council meetings [in Washington] in 1986. Then
we had another one in 1987, where guerrillas from around the world
came.... They'd get together and each guerrilla group would have a
chance to get up and give his bit. It gave them a chance to exchange
ideas and say what they were doing," Mataxis stated. Right wing support
has been an important factor in keeping the Cambodian contras supplied.
Even though Ted Mataxis lost in Vietnam, his war is not over.

Conclusion

Although most people believe that the U.S. ended its intervention in
Southeast Asia in 1975, it is evident from the information provided here
that the U.S. continues to support repressive and non-democratic forces
in the jungles of Cambodia. When asked about U.S. policy in Cambodia
during an April 26, l990 ABC News special, Rep. Chester Atkins (Dem.
Mass.) characterized it as "a policy of hatred."

The U.S. is directly responsible for millions of deaths in Southeast
Asia over the past 30 years. Now, the U.S. government provides support
to a movement condemned by the international community as genocidal. How
long must this policy of hatred continue?

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmer_Rouge_rule_of_Cambodia>
The UN General Assembly voted overwhelmingly for the KR to retain their
seat at the UN. The seat was occupied by Thiounn Prasith, an old cadre
of Pol Pot and Ieng Sary from their student days in Paris and one of the
21 attendees at the 1960 KPRP Second Congress. The seat was retained
under the name 'Democratic Kampuchea' until 1982 and then 'Coalition
Government of Democratic Kampuchea' until 1993.

According to journalist Elizabeth Becker, former U.S. National Security
Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski said that in 1979, "I encouraged the Chinese
to support Pol Pot. Pol Pot was an abomination. We could never support
him, but China could."[14] Brzezinski has denied this, writing that the
Chinese were aiding Pol Pot "without any help or encouragement from the
United States."[15]

China, the U.S., and other Western countries opposed an expansion of
Vietnamese and Soviet influence in Indochina, and refused to recognize
the People's Republic of Kampuchea as the legitimate government of
Cambodia, claiming that it was a puppet state propped up by Vietnamese
forces. China funneled military aid to the Khmer Rouge, which in the
1980s proved to be the most capable insurgent force, while the U.S.
publicly supported a non-Communist alternative to the PRK; in 1985, the
Reagan administration approved $5 million in aid to the republican
KPNLF, led by former prime minister Son Sann, and the ANS, the armed
wing of the pro-Sihanouk FUNCINPEC party.

The KPNLF, while lacking in military strength compared to the Khmer
Rouge, commanded a sizable civilian following (up to 250,000) amongst
refugees near the Thai-Cambodian border that had fled the KR regime.
Funcinpec had the benefit of traditional peasant Khmer loyalty to the
crown and Sihanouk's widespread popularity in the countryside.

In practice, the military strength of the non-KR groups within Cambodia
was minimal, though their funding and civilian support was often greater
than the KR. The Thatcher and Reagan administrations both supported the
insurgents covertly, with weapons, and military advisors in the form of
Green Berets and Special Air Service units, who taught sabotage
techniques in camps just inside Thailand.

Critics such as Human Rights Watch alleged that U.S. policy was
contradictory; while claiming to not support the Khmer Rouge, the U.S.
continually supported UN recognition of the shadow Coalition Government
of Democratic Kampuchea (CGDK, formed in 1982) as the legitimate
Cambodian government, despite the fact that the tripartite alliance
included the Khmer Rouge. The U.S. government stated it would bolster
the position of groups not under the control of the Vietnamese-supported
government (including the Khmer Rouge) through humanitarian and military
aid.[16][17][18]
-----

Apparently, your ilk had a hand in supporting Pol Pot.

Why are you such an ass?

[Obwon]

On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 12:34:29 -0600, Arkadelphia <o...@chi.ta>
wrote:

>On 7/3/2012 3:51 AM, Obwon wrote:

>> Bush II: 9/11 (magically, none of our defense systems

>> worked),
>
>Sounds like you believe 911 was an inside job, do you?

I find it incredibly difficult to explain why missile
emplacements at the White House and Pentagon didn't work.
Why after all these years of successful intercepts of
wayward aircraft, on that day 4 of them managed to evade
every proceedure designed to, at the least, intercept
them. If I recall correctly, in that same year, nearly
127 intercepts of wayward aircraft were successfully
accomplished, only to have the entire system fail on one
day only. If that doesn't give one a feel that something is
wrong, nothing will.

[254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 09:35:53 -0500, Al <albert.f...@gmail.com>

Like the Pacific Ocean is kind of wet.

[Gunner Asch]

On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 22:32:24 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
wrote:

>In 1993, he joined Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, a 13-attorney law
>firm specializing in civil rights litigation and neighborhood economic
>development, where he was an associate for three years from 1993 to
>1996, then of counsel from 1996 to 2004. His law license became inactive
>in 2002.

As I recall reading..neither his nor his wife law license were kept
active after some questionable dealings.

Perhaps it was made inactive before it was revoked?

Gunner

--
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry
capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an
Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have
such a man for their? president.. Blaming the prince of the
fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of
fools that made him their prince".

[254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 12:33:07 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
wrote:

>In article <aek7v79qtaejbojoo...@4ax.com>,
> 254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
> <Charlie...@whitehouse.gov> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 20:04:50 -0700, "Baxter"
>> <baxter.s...@baxcode.com> wrote:
>>
>> >"Yer Pal Al" <caddys...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:79bdae59-9a2e-4e4a...@d6g2000pbt.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> >>BO had his chance and he screwed up. We're not voting for Romney so
>> >>much as we are voting against a certified loser.
>> >
>> >Yeah, he's a real loser - he went after bin Ladin and ... oops, got him.
>>
>> Only because he somehow managed not to fuck up the mechanism set in
>> place by his predecessor.
>>
>> >He tried to save GM ... and he did.
>>
>> Only because GM is still propped up by Obamamoney.
>>
>> >His signature legislation ACA ... is
>> >Constitutional. Some loser!
>>
>> And will be his spectacular downfall. That fuckwit couldn't tell the
>> truth if it was stapled to his teleprompter.
>
>Invective, and opinion, is blovination all you got? You know what they
>say about opinion. You sound like a "Bagger". Got any "real world" facts
>that you can back up with a credible source(s)?

You have an amazing talent for projecting your own hypocrisy onto your
betters.

Source: Your own words.

[254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 16:42:53 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
wrote:

>In article <a2l7v7pv57n8u286q...@4ax.com>,
> 254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
> <Charlie...@whitehouse.gov> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 05:51:19 -0400, Obwon <Ob...@real.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Bush II: 9/11 (magically, none of our defense systems
>> >worked)
>>
>> "Oh, Norman, listen! The Troofers are calling!" - On Moonbat Pond
>
>So you're sayin' that you agree with

...the fact that you are a raving moonbat? Wholeheartedly.

[254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 13:49:58 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>

Perhaps. But still way above you.

>So tell us, Einstein, what
>caused the sudden unemployment?

The realization by people who create jobs that their ability to do so
just got buried in 'rat shit.

>Why were so many people out of work?
>It couldn't have been a housing bubble that burst at the end of the Bush
>Administration. I'm sorry, that was cruel of me to introduce reality
>into your "Bagger" dream. The housing bubble started slowly in the
>Clinton Administration, but really grew during the Dubya years.

At the hands of people like Banking Queen Barney Frank and his 'rat
buddies.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled turd dropping:

[254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

He helped organize Chicago. Look at the results.

[254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 22:32:24 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
wrote:

Can you believe Billy cut'n'pasted all that one-handed?

[Unknown]

"Obwon" wrote in message news:memav75itbc08t8d4...@4ax.com...

> I find it incredibly difficult to explain why missile
> emplacements at the White House and Pentagon didn't work.
> Why after all these years of successful intercepts of
> wayward aircraft,

It's only hard because you can't let go of your conspiracy theory.
We haven't been shooting down all the lost lost, flight hobbyists over D.C.
We haven't even shot down one.
If you could just let go of that delusion, the rest might make more sense.

[Billy]

In article <1i0bv711hq3h293us...@4ax.com>,

Yawn, that's your opinion, and like your backside, nobody wants to hear
it.

>
> >So tell us, Einstein, what
> >caused the sudden unemployment?
>
> The realization by people who create jobs that their ability to do so
> just got buried in 'rat shit.

Any facts to back-up your opinion, Mary?

>
> >Why were so many people out of work?
> >It couldn't have been a housing bubble that burst at the end of the Bush
> >Administration. I'm sorry, that was cruel of me to introduce reality
> >into your "Bagger" dream. The housing bubble started slowly in the
> >Clinton Administration, but really grew during the Dubya years.
>
> At the hands of people like Banking Queen Barney Frank and his 'rat
> buddies.

Rat buddies like Phil and Wendy Gramm?

The Great American Stickup: How Reagan Republicans and Clinton Democrats
Enriched Wall Street While Mugging Main Street by Robert Scheer (Sep 7,
2010)

<http://www.amazon.com/The-Great-American-Stickup-Republicans/dp/15685843
42/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1333401165&sr=1-1>

1992

36 THE GREAT AMERICAN STICKUP

"Lately, I've been hearing various regulators raise con-
cerns about off-exchange markets and about derivatives gen-
erally," Gramm is quoted as saying. "The questions they're
raising include: Are derivative markets too big, too risky,
placing the clearing system in jeopardy? Are derivatives and
their risks simply too esoteric and complex for anyone but a
rocket scientist to understand? Are the derivative markets
under-regulated?"

Those were intended as rhetorical questions and dismissed
in the negative by Gramm. She claimed there wasn't that
much money involved, anyway: "First, there is [the] notion
that the size of the derivatives market could disrupt the fi-
nancial system. When people talk about swaps, we often hear
figures in trillions of dollars," she said. Gramm emphasized
that the actual value of the debt‹as opposed to the spiraling
quantity of offsetting bets and hedges on the value‹was
much more modest, and thus nothing to worry about.

If only. Five years later, the notional value of OTC deriv-
atives had grown to $24 trillion, and after another ten years,
when the meltdown occurred, we would be talking about
$640 trillion in the notional value of all unregulated deriva-
tive trading.

As for those "swaps" to which Gramm referred, scoffing
at alarmists who thought "trillions" were at stake and that
the swaps could "disrupt the financial system"‹boy, did they



The High Priestess of the Reagan Revolution 37

ever. "The Monster That Ate Wall Street: How 'credit default
swaps'‹an insurance against bad loans‹turned from a
smart bet into a killer" was the title and subheading of a
Newsweek article on October 6, 2008, referring to credit de-
fault swaps, "which ballooned into a $62 trillion market...
nearly four times the value of all stock traded on the New
York Stock Exchange."

Of course in hindsight, Gramm's glibness, whether cyni-
cal or naive, seems patently absurd; the worrywarts were
completely right. Clearly, as legislators across the board in
the United States and the European Union have indicated
with their votes on new regulations, the derivatives markets
were not just underregulated but in no significant way reg-
ulated at all. Yet it is important to pay attention to Wendy
Gramm's arguments back then because they in fact carried
the day, resulting in the passage eight years later‹at her sen-
ator husband's instigation‹of the Commodity Futures
Modernization Act, which would enshrine into law the
Gramms' hands-off approach to the derivatives market de
jure. The CFMA's blanket ban on any regulation by any gov-
ernment agency of these suspect derivatives could be seen
as taking direct aim at Wendy Gramm's successor as com-
mission chair, Brooksley Born, who would dare to raise sig-
nificant questions about the soundness of these products.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooksley_Born>
Born was appointed to the CFTC on April 15, 1994 by President Bill
Clinton. Due to litigation against Bankers Trust Company by Procter and
Gamble and other corporate clients, Born and her team at the CFTC sought
comments on the regulation of over-the-counter derivatives,[4] a first
step in the process of writing CFTC regulations to supplement the
existing regulations of the Federal Reserve System, the OCC, and the
National Association of Insurance Commissioners. Born was particularly
concerned about swaps, financial instruments that are traded over the
counter between banks, insurance companies or other funds or companies,
and thus have no transparency except to the two counterparties and the
counterparties' regulators, if any. CFTC regulation was strenuously
opposed by Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, and by Treasury
Secretaries Robert Rubin and Lawrence Summers.[5] On May 7, 1998, former
SEC Chairman Arthur Levitt joined Rubin and Greenspan in objecting to
the issuance of the CFTC¹s concept release. Their response dismissed
Born's analysis and focused on the hypothetical possibility that CFTC
regulation of swaps and other OTC derivative instruments could create a
"legal uncertainty" regarding such financial instruments, hypothetically
reducing the value of the instruments. They argued that the imposition
of regulatory costs would "stifle financial innovation" and encourage
financial capital to transfer its transactions offshore.[10] The
disagreement between Born and the Executive Office's top economic policy
advisors has been described not only as a classic Washington turf
war,[8] but also a war of ideologies,[11] insofar as it is possible to
argue that Born's actions were consistent with Keynesian and
neoclassical economics while Greenspan, Rubin, Levitt, and Summers
consistently espoused neoliberal, and neoconservative policies.

The derivatives market continued to grow yearly throughout both terms of
George W. Bush's administration. On September 15, 2008, the bankruptcy
of Lehman Brothers forced a broad recognition of a financial crisis in
both the US and world capital markets. As Lehman Brothers' failure
temporarily reduced financial capital's confidence, a number of
newspaper articles and television programs suggested that the failure's
possible causes included the conflict between the CFTC and the other
regulators.[5][13]

Born declined to publicly comment on the unfolding 2008 crisis until
March 2009, when she said: "The market grew so enormously, with so
little oversight and regulation, that it made the financial crisis much
deeper and more pervasive than it otherwise would have been."[8] She
also lamented the influence of Wall Street lobbyists on the process and
the refusal of regulators to discuss even modest reforms.[8]

An October 2009 Frontline documentary titled The Warning [14] described
Born's thwarted efforts to regulate and bring transparency to the
derivatives market, and the continuing opposition thereto. The program
concluded with an excerpted interview with Born sounding another
warning: "I think we will have continuing danger from these markets and
that we will have repeats of the financial crisis -- may differ in
details but there will be significant financial downturns and disasters
attributed to this regulatory gap, over and over, until we learn from
experience."[11]

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXUQZP4mmwU>

> >with the tax, cheaper than Hancock¹s tea. Presented with this
> >information, many loyalists did not wonder at Hancock¹s involvement in

--
E Pluribus Unum

Know where your money is tonight?
It's making the lives of Wall Street Bankers more comfortable.

[Gunner Asch]

On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 04:49:40 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 22:32:24 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
>wrote:
>
>>In 1993, he joined Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, a 13-attorney law
>>firm specializing in civil rights litigation and neighborhood economic
>>development, where he was an associate for three years from 1993 to
>>1996, then of counsel from 1996 to 2004. His law license became inactive
>>in 2002.
>
>As I recall reading..neither his nor his wife law license were kept
>active after some questionable dealings.
>
>Perhaps it was made inactive before it was revoked?
>
>Gunner

http://www.dailypaul.com/236950/obama-surrenders-law-license-in-2008-to-escape-charges-he-lied-on-bar-application

Wednesday, May 30, 2012
Obama Surrenders Law License in 2008 to Escape Charges He Lied on Bar

President Barack Obama, former editor of the Harvard Law Review, is no
longer a "lawyer". He surrendered his license back in 2008 in order to
escape charges he lied on his bar application.
I knew they had both lost their law license, but I didn't know why until
I read this.

This is legit. I check it out at https://www.iardc.org Stands for
Illinois Attorney Registration And Disciplinary Committee. It's the
official arm of lawyer discipline in Illinois; and they are very strict
and mean as hell. (Talk about irony.) Even I, at the advanced age of
almost 65, maintain (at the cost of approximately $600/year) my law
license that I worked so hard and long to earn.

Big surprise.

Former Constitutional Law Lecturer and U.S. President Makes Up
Constitutional Quotes During State Of The Union (SOTU) Address.

Consider this:

1. President Barack Obama, former editor of the Harvard Law Review, is
no longer a "lawyer". He surrendered his license back in 2008 in order
to escape charges he lied on his bar application. A "Voluntary
Surrender" is not something where you decide "Gee, a license is not
really something I need anymore, is it?" and forget to renew your
license. No, a "Voluntary Surrender" is something you do when you've
been accused of something, and you 'voluntarily surrender" your license
five seconds before the state suspends you.

2 Michelle Obama "voluntarily surrendered" her law license in 1993.
after a Federal Judge gave her the choice between surrendering her
license or standing trial for Insurance fraud!

3. So, we have the first black President and First Lady - who don't
actually have licenses to practice law. Facts.
Source:
http://jdlong.wordpress.com/2009/05/15/pres-barack-obama-editor-of-the-Harvard-law-review-has-no-law-license/

4. A senior lecturer is one thing, a fully ranked law professor is
another. Barack Obama was NOT a Constitutional Law Professor at
theUniversity of Chicago.

5. The University of Chicago released a statement in March 2008 saying
Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) "served as a professor" in the law school-but
that is a title Obama, who taught courses there part-time, never held, a
spokesman for the school confirmed in 2008.

6. "He did not hold the title of Professor of Law," said Marsha Ferziger
Nagorsky, an Assistant Dean for Communications and Lecturer in Law at
the University of Chicago School of Law.

Source:
http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/03/sweet_obama_did_hold_the_title.html
;

7. The former Constitutional Senior Lecturer (Obama) cited the U.S.
Constitution the other night during his State of the Union Address.
Unfortunately, the quote he cited was from the Declaration of
Independence ... not the Constitution.

8. The B-Cast posted the video:
http://www.breitbart.tv/did-obama-confuse-the-constitution-with-the-declaration-of-independence/

9. Free Republic: In the State of the Union Address, President Obama
said: "We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise
enshrined in our Constitution: the notion that we are all created equal.


10. Um, wrong citing, wrong founding document there Champ, I mean Mr.
President. By the way, the promises are not a notion, our founders named
them unalienable rights. The document is our Declaration of Independence
and it reads:


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.


11. And this is the same guy who lectured the Supreme Court moments
later in the same speech?


When you are a phony it's hard to keep facts straight.

[Billy]

In article <8rvav7tfhdkpvposb...@4ax.com>,

In my own words, you're full of shit and all you have are invectives,
dissembling, and prevarication. You're just another "Bagger" who is
proud of his profound ignorance.

People accustomed to hearing their president explain complicated policy
choices by snapping "I'm the decider" may find it almost impossible to
imagine the pains that Franklin D. Roosevelt took, in the grim months
after Pearl Harbor, to explain why U.S. armed forces were suffering one
defeat after another in the Pacific. In February 1942, Roosevelt urged
Americans to spread out a map during his radio "fireside chat" so that
they might better understand the geography of battle. In stores
throughout the country, maps sold out; about 80 percent of American
adults tuned in to hear the president. FDR had told his speechwriters
that he was certain that if Americans understood the immensity of the
distances over which supplies had to travel to the armed forces, "they
can take any kind of bad news right on the chin."

This is a portrait of a different country and citizenry, one that lacked
access to satellite-enhanced Google maps but was far more receptive to
learning and complexity than today's public. According to a 2006 survey
by National Geographic-Roper, nearly half of Americans between ages 18
and 24 do not think it necessary to know the location of other countries
in which important news is being made. More than a third consider it
"not at all important" to know a foreign language, and only 14 percent
consider it "very important."

That leads us to the third and final factor behind the new American
dumbness: not lack of knowledge per se but arrogance about that lack of
knowledge. The problem is not just the things we do not know (consider
the one in five American adults who, according to the National Science
Foundation, thinks the sun revolves around the Earth); it's the alarming
number of Americans who have smugly concluded that they do not need to
know such things in the first place. Call this anti-rationalism -- a
syndrome that is particularly dangerous to our public institutions and
discourse. Not knowing a foreign language or the location of an
important country is a manifestation of ignorance; denying that such
knowledge matters is pure anti-rationalism. The toxic brew of
anti-rationalism and ignorance hurts discussions of U.S. public policy
on topics from health care to taxation.

There is no quick cure for this epidemic of arrogant anti-rationalism
and anti-intellectualism; rote efforts to raise standardized test scores
by stuffing students with specific answers to specific questions on
specific tests will not do the job. Moreover, the people who exemplify
the problem are usually oblivious to it. ("Hardly anyone believes
himself to be against thought and culture," Hofstadter noted.) It is
past time for a serious national discussion about whether, as a nation,
we truly value intellect and rationality. If this indeed turns out to be
a "change election," the low level of discourse in a country with a mind
taught to aim at low objects ought to be the first item on the change
agenda.
---

I'm talking about you, Mary.

--
E Pluribus Unum

Know where your money is tonight?
It's making the lives of Wall Street Bankers more comfortable.

[Billy]

In article <931bv7t97e86ih0rk...@4ax.com>,

254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
<Charlie...@whitehouse.gov> wrote:

I answered the question, "BO is a politician. Has he ever worked as
anything else?", "Trou de Cul".

I see you still have nothing to say, and in true "Bagger" style, waste
words to do it.

[Billy]

In article <fovav714qigcfpi6p...@4ax.com>,

Gunneria Arschloch <gunneria...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 04 Jul 2012 22:32:24 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
> wrote:
>
> >In 1993, he joined Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland, a 13-attorney law
> >firm specializing in civil rights litigation and neighborhood economic
> >development, where he was an associate for three years from 1993 to
> >1996, then of counsel from 1996 to 2004. His law license became inactive
> >in 2002.
>
> As I recall reading..neither his nor his wife law license were kept
> active after some questionable dealings.
>
> Perhaps it was made inactive before it was revoked?
>

> Gunneria

Gunny, when are you going to get that brain transplant that you so
desperately need?

Q: Did Barack and Michelle Obama "surrender" their law licenses to avoid
ethics charges?

A: No. A court official confirms that no public disciplinary proceeding
has ever been brought against either of them, contrary to a false
Internet rumor. By voluntarily inactivating their licenses, they avoid a
requirement to take continuing education classes and pay hundreds of
dollars in annual fees. Both could practice law again if they chose to
do so.
<http://factcheck.org/2012/06/the-obamas-law-licenses/>
"Bagger" to "Bagger" isn't the best source of news, especially when
doing a web search is so easy (at least it is for most of us).

>
> --
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry

capable of voting against their own interest, by believing
the stooges of corporate America."

Jamie Dimon Fears Regulations Are Hurting the Economy. Do You?
<http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2011/03/30/jamie-dimon-bashes-financial-regul
ation/>
J.P. Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon was a happy patriot during the financial
crisis. He was among the first bank chieftains to accept government
money when the financial world seemed to be coming apart at the seams,
for example.
But Jamie Dimon, as Deal Journal has written about before, now has had
it up to his eyeballs in government regulation and banker bashing
(though there have been signs of Dimon's detante with the White House.)

<http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/jpmorgan-ceo-testifies-before-congres
s-1.3779417>
JPMorgan CEO testifies before Congress
Originally published: June 13, 2012 10:13 AM
The trading loss, disclosed May 10, has raised concerns that the biggest
banks still pose risks to the U.S. financial system, less than four
years after the financial crisis in the fall of 2008.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPMorgan_Chase_Bank#Multibillion-dollar_tr
ading_loss>
Major losses, $2 billion, were reported by the firm in May, 2012 in
relationship to these trades. The disclosure, which resulted in
headlines in the media, did not disclose the exact nature of the trading
involved, which remains in progress and as of June 28, 2012 was
continuing to produce losses which could total as much as 9 billion
dollars under worst case scenarios.

And in related news:
<http://www.marketplace.org/topics/business/newly-resigned-ceo-barclays-q
uestioned-parliament>
Marketplace Morning Report for Wednesday, July 4, 2012

Newly resigned CEO of Barclays questioned by Parliament
In the case of Barclays -- and any other banks involved in the LIBOR
rate rigging -- the costs could be huge. There are tens of thousands of
potential claimants. Anyone whose loan or investment was pegged to LIBOR
could claim they lost out from the bank's dishonesty.

Tens of billions of dollars could be at stake. U.S. banking expert
Professor William Black says, the U.S. litigation could be the biggest
thing in the history of anti-trust. He says "punitive damages awarded in
the U.S. could bring down any British bank, because Americans are big
enough players."
----

The banks say they don't need no stinkin' regulations, but it seems they
can't help themselves, and it's cheat, cheat, cheat day in and day out.

[Sancho Panza]

Not as much as you. You don't seem to know under whom Brzezinski was
national security adviser:

[Sancho Panza]

On 7/4/2012 5:04 PM, Billy wrote:

> Elites and foreign investors often benefit from tax breaks and

> production incentives.

They don't benefit anywhere near as much proportionately as those who
don't pay any income taxes whatsoever yet reap the benefits of a
generous society.

[Billy]

In article <4ff61917$0$6065$607e...@cv.net>,

So it's OK to give money to Banks and other corporations, who just sit
on the money while hard working Americans have to sit on their hands for
lack of jobs. If many people think like that then America is finished.

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/hoarding-hiring-corporations-stockpile-mou
ntain-cash/story?id=10250559#.T_SjOHDcsnU>
Hoarding, Not Hiring ­ Corporations Stockpile Mountain of Cash

<http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-03-12/news/31146859_1_financial
-crisis-banks-lending-money>
Meanwhile, The Fed's Still Paying Banks Not To Lend...

[Billy]

In article <4ff617f4$0$6079$607e...@cv.net>,

> Kampuchea, formed in 1982]. The question was how to help the Cambodian people. Pol Pot

> was an abomination. We could not support him but China could."

Helloooo. Who was president in 1982? Hmmmmmm? We were still pissed that
the Vietnamese didn't roll over for us, and so we tried to block them
from protecting Cambodians. Among other things, block the Cambodian
government supported by the Vietnamese from being seated at the U.N.

Get your facts straight.

[Sancho Panza]

Democratic Kampuchea, Pol Pot's regime, was founded after the defeat of
Lon Nol in 1975 and exited until 1979. Despite your incorrect and
invidious bracketing, in 1982, "Sihanouk and Son Sann joined forces with

the Khmer Rouge to form the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea

(CGDK)," an entirely different regime, as the post above
notes. Common sense would have dictated that having Brzezinski as
Reagan's national security adviser was utterly ludicrous in the extreme
and just goes to show basic ignorance of the subject matter and nothing
more than a desire to hurl infantile epithets.

[Sancho Panza]

On 7/5/2012 7:32 PM, Billy wrote:
> In article<4ff61917$0$6065$607e...@cv.net>,
> Sancho Panza<otter...@xhotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 7/4/2012 5:04 PM, Billy wrote:
>>
>>> Elites and foreign investors often benefit from tax breaks and
>>> production incentives.
>>
>> They don't benefit anywhere near as much proportionately as those who
>> don't pay any income taxes whatsoever yet reap the benefits of a
>> generous society.
>
> So it's OK to give money to Banks and other corporations, who just sit
> on the money while hard working Americans have to sit on their hands for
> lack of jobs. If many people think like that then America is finished.

How do you think banks make profits? Clue: It is not those "who sit on
the money."

>
> http://abcnews.go.com/Business/hoarding-hiring-corporations-stockpile-mou
> ntain-cash/story?id=10250559#.T_SjOHDcsnU>
> Hoarding, Not Hiring ­ Corporations Stockpile Mountain of Cash
>
> <http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-03-12/news/31146859_1_financial
> -crisis-banks-lending-money>
> Meanwhile, The Fed's Still Paying Banks Not To Lend...

Not really. But Obama/Bernanke/Geithner have established one of the
outright stupidest financial programs ever, as your last cite notes:

"One of the most annoying U.S. government policies these days is the
Federal Reserve's decision to pay big banks not to lend money.
This bank handout continues while average Americans who have been
responsible and lived within their means earn nothing on their savings.
The Fed initiated this pay-for-no-lending program during the financial
crisis, when it decided to pay big banks interest on their "excess
reserves."

What are "excess reserves"?

Money that the banks aren't lending out--money that banks are just
keeping on deposit at the Fed.
The Fed is paying banks 0.25% interest on this money.
0.25% interest isn't much, but it's more than the banks are paying you
to keep money in your savings or money-market account."

If you are receiving less than one-quarter of one percent, that is not
being very savvy about deploying one's assets.

[Gunner Asch]

On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 14:18:47 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>

Bagger? You are talking about gays? Oddly enough..most "baggers" are
Democrats.

Either you are utterly stupid..or simply evil and twisted.

Not to mention..obviously mentally ill.

Gunner

--
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry

[254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 09:46:52 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>

Yes. Your own hypocritical words.

Rest of your cut'n'paste snipped due to excessive boredom.

[254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 09:37:01 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>

Yet you expose your rosey ass like a bitch in heat every time you
post.

[254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 14:18:47 -0700, Billy <wild...@withoutta.net>
wrote:

> Continued to hump Obama's leg.

[258 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 23:41:16 -0700, Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com>
wrote:

"either"? "and" works better.

>Not to mention..obviously mentally ill.

Hat trick for Billy!

[Billy]

In article <4ff64953$0$6043$607e...@cv.net>,

<http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/US_ThirdWorld/US_PolPot.html>

The U.S. government's secret partnership with the Khmer Rouge grew out
of the U.S. defeat in the Vietnam War. After the fall of Saigon in 1975,
the U.S.-worried by the shift in the Southeast Asian balance of
power-turned once again to geopolitical confrontation. It quickly
formalized an anti-Vietnamese, anti-Soviet strategic alliance with
China-an alliance whose disastrous effects have been most evident in
Cambodia. For the U.S., playing the "China card" has meant sustaining
the Khmer Rouge as a geopolitical counterweight capable of destabilizing
the Hun Sen government in Cambodia and its Vietnamese allies.


When Vietnam intervened in Cambodia and drove the Pol Potists from power
in January 1972, Washington took immediate steps to preserve the Khmer
Rouge as a guerrilla movement. International relief agencies were
pressured by the U.S. to provide humanitarian assistance to the Khmer
Rouge guerrillas who fled into Thailand. For more than a decade, the
Khmer Rouge have used the refugee camps they occupy as military bases to
wage a contra-war in Cambodia. According to Linda Mason and Roger Brown,
who studied the relief operations in Thailand for Cambodian refugees:


...relief organizations supplied the Khmer Rouge resistance movement
with food and medicines.... In the Fall of 1979 the Khmer Rouge were the
most desperate of all the refugees who came to the Thai-Kampuchean
border. Throughout l900, however, their health rapidly improved, and
relief organizations began questioning the legitimacy of feeding them.

The U.S. not only permitted the Khmer Rouge to use the refugee camps in
Thailand as a base for its war against the new government in Phnom Penh
but it also helped Prince Norodom Sihanouk and former Prime Minister Son
Sann to organize their own guerrilla armies from the refugee population
in the camps. These camps are an integral factor in the ability of the
Khmer Rouge, the Sihanoukist National Army (ANS) and Son Sann's Khmer
People's National Liberation Front (KPNLF) to wage war against the Hun
Sen government.


In 1979, Washington began "a small program" of support for Sihanouk's
and Son Sann's guerrillas by providing "travel expenses" for the
"insurgent leaders" and funds "for the up keep of resistance camps near
the Thai-Cambodian border." In addition, since 1982, the U.S. has
provided the ANS and KPNLF with covert and overt "humanitarian" and "non
lethal" military aid. By 1989, the secret non lethal aid had grown to
between $20 million and $24 million annually and the overt humanitarian
aid had reached $5 million. The Bush administration requested $7 million
more in humanitarian aid for 1990.

In 1982, under pressure from the U.S., China, and the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Sihanouk and Son Sann joined forces
with the Khmer Rouge to form the Coalition Government of Democratic
Kampuchea (CGDK). The ANS and KPNLF, which were more politically respect
able than the Khmer Rouge, gained military credibility from the
guerrilla alliance. However, the Khmer Rouge gained considerable
political legitimacy from the alliance and Khmer Rouge diplomats now
represent the CGDK at the United Nations.

Conclusion


Although most people believe that the U.S. ended its intervention in
Southeast Asia in 1975, it is evident from the information provided here
that the U.S. continues to support repressive and non-democratic forces
in the jungles of Cambodia. When asked about U.S. policy in Cambodia
during an April 26, l990 ABC News special, Rep. Chester Atkins (Dem.
Mass.) characterized it as "a policy of hatred."


The U.S. is directly responsible for millions of deaths in Southeast
Asia over the past 30 years. Now, the U.S. government provides support
to a movement condemned by the international community as genocidal. How
long must this policy of hatred continue?

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmer_rouge#Sihanouk_and_the_GRUNK>
The US sided with the CGDK, which included the Khmer Rouge, in efforts
to overthrow the Vietnamese and the Vietnamese-backed People's Republic
of Kampuchea. This is in part because of the anti-Vietnamese and
anti-Soviet attitudes that were present, especially in the midst of the
Sino-Soviet Split, since the People's Republic of China also supported
the Khmer Rouge.

Despite its deposal, the Khmer Rouge retained its UN seat, which was
occupied by Thiounn Prasith, an old compatriot of Pol Pot and Ieng Sary
from their student days in Paris, and one of the 21 attendees at the

1960 KPRP Second Congress. The seat was retained under the name

"Democratic Kampuchea" until 1982, and then "Coalition Government of
Democratic Kampuchea" (see below) until 1993. Western governments
repeatedly backed the Khmer Rouge in the U.N. and voted in favour of
retaining the Cambodia's seat in the organization. Margaret Thatcher
stated that "So, you'll find that the more reasonable ones of the Khmer
Rouge will have to play some part in the future government, but only a
minority part.

Yeah, let freedom ring.

--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power."
- attributed to Benito Mussolini.
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYIC0eZYEtI>
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_vN0--mHug>

[Baxter]

-
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Gunner Asch" <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3sgbv7pli2n42v2ev...@4ax.com...

>
> Wednesday, May 30, 2012
> Obama Surrenders Law License in 2008 to Escape Charges He Lied on Bar
>

> 1. President Barack Obama, former editor of the Harvard Law Review, is
> no longer a "lawyer". He surrendered his license back in 2008 in order
> to escape charges he lied on his bar application. A "Voluntary
> Surrender" is not something where you decide "Gee, a license is not
> really something I need anymore, is it?" and forget to renew your
> license. No, a "Voluntary Surrender" is something you do when you've
> been accused of something, and you 'voluntarily surrender" your license
> five seconds before the state suspends you.
>
> 2 Michelle Obama "voluntarily surrendered" her law license in 1993.
> after a Federal Judge gave her the choice between surrendering her
> license or standing trial for Insurance fraud!
>

Bullshit!

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/lawlicenses.asp
http://www.factcheck.org/2012/06/the-obamas-law-licenses/
http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/barackobama/a/Obama-Law-License.htm

[Billy]

In article <4ff64953$0$6043$607e...@cv.net>,

All I was saying was that Pol Pot was supported by Bush I, and Reagan,
as well as by Carter. Their intended purpose was to punish the
Vietnamese, but they supported murder of Holocaust proportions.


<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Kampuchea>
Democratic Kampuchea was the name of the Khmer Rouge-controlled state
that, between 1975 and 1979, ruled the Southeast Asian country of
Cambodia. It was founded when the Khmer Rouge forces defeated the Khmer
Republic of Lon Nol. After losing control of most of Cambodian territory
to Vietnamese occupation, it SURVIVED as a shadow state supported by
China. In June 1982, the Khmer Rouge formed the Coalition Government of
Democratic Kampuchea with two non-communist guerilla factions, which
retained international recognition.

Immediately following the Khmer Rouge victory in 1975, there were
skirmishes between their troops and Vietnamese forces. A number of
incidents occurred in May 1975. The following month, Pol Pot and Ieng
Sary visited Hanoi. They proposed a friendship treaty between the two
countries, an idea that met with a cool reception from Vietnam's leaders.

Faced with growing Khmer Rouge belligerence, the Vietnamese leadership
decided in early 1978 to support internal resistance to the Pol Pot
regime, with the result that the Eastern Zone became a focus of
insurrection. War hysteria reached bizarre levels within Democratic
Kampuchea. In May 1978, on the eve of So Phim's Eastern Zone uprising,
Radio Phnom Penh declared that if each Cambodian soldier killed thirty
Vietnamese, only 2 million troops would be needed to eliminate the
entire Vietnamese population of 50 million. It appears that the
leadership in Phnom Penh was seized with immense territorial ambitions,
i.e., to recover the Mekong Delta region, which they regarded as Khmer
territory.

Massacres of ethnic Vietnamese and of their sympathizers by the Khmer
Rouge intensified in the Eastern Zone after the May revolt. In November,
Vorn Vet led an unsuccessful coup d'état. There were now tens of
thousands of Cambodian and Vietnamese exiles in Vietnamese territory. On
December 3, 1978, Radio Hanoi announced the formation of the Kampuchean
National United Front for National Salvation (KNUFNS). This was a
heterogeneous group of communist and non-communist exiles who shared an
antipathy to the Pol Pot regime and a near total dependence on
Vietnamese backing and protection. The KNUFNS provided the semblance, if
not the reality, of legitimacy for Vietnam's invasion of Democratic
Kampuchea and for its subsequent establishment of a satellite regime in
Phnom Penh.
------

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Republic_of_Kampuchea>

The People's Republic of Kampuchea (PRK) (Sathearanakrath Pracheameanit
Kampuchea), was founded in Cambodia by the Salvation Front, a group of
Cambodian leftists dissatisfied with the Khmer Rouge, after the
overthrow of Democratic Kampuchea, Pol Pot's government. Brought about
by an invasion from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, which routed the
Khmer Rouge armies, it had Vietnam and the Soviet Union as its main
allies.

The PRK failed to secure United Nations endorsement due to the
diplomatic intervention of the People's Republic of China, the United
Kingdom, the United States and the ASEAN countries on behalf of the
ousted Pol Pot regime. The Cambodian seat at the United Nations was held
by the Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea, which was Pol Pot's
Khmer Rouge regime in coalition with two non-communist guerrilla
factions. However, the PRK was considered the de facto government of
Cambodia between 1979 and 1993 albeit with limited international
recognition.

------

In 1982, under pressure from the U.S., China, and the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Sihanouk and Son Sann joined forces
with the Khmer Rouge to form the Coalition Government of Democratic
Kampuchea (CGDK). The ANS and KPNLF, which were more politically respect
able than the Khmer Rouge, gained military credibility from the
guerrilla alliance. However, the Khmer Rouge gained considerable
political legitimacy from the alliance and Khmer Rouge diplomats now
represent the CGDK at the United Nations.

The CGDK receives large amounts of military aid from Singapore. When
asked about the relationship between money from the U.S. and arms from
Singapore, another U.S. diplomat in Southeast Asia replied, "Let's put
it this way. If the U.S. supplies [the guerrilla coalition] with food,
then they can spend their food money on something else."

By late 1989 the distinction between "direct or indirect" U.S. support
for the Khmer Rouge was less clear. When CGDK forces launched an
offensive in September 1989, Sihanouk's and Son Sann's armies openly
cooperated with the Khmer Rouge. Moreover, by then the Khmer Rouge had
infiltrated the military and political wings of the ANS and KPNLF.

Support from UN

During the Khmer Rouge regime and a period of time directly after, the
Khmer Rouge was recognised by UN as a legitimate government, therefore
retaining a seat at the UN. While many leaders at the UN attempted to
appeal this, the majority allowed the Khmer Rouge (later titled
"Democratic Republic of Kampuchea") to keep their seat for 15 years
following the genocide.

[258 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities']

On Sat, 7 Jul 2012 15:04:10 -0700, "Baxter"
<baxter.s...@baxcode.com> wrote:

>Bullshit!

Bax is bragging again.

[Billy]

In article <mai7v7d0qnd1l008n...@4ax.com>,

254 murdered in Obama's 'organized communities'
<Charlie...@whitehouse.gov> wrote:

> On Tue, 3 Jul 2012 04:24:15 -0500, "Sanders Kaufman"
> <[bu...@kaufman.net]> wrote:
>
> >"Moder@tor" wrote in message
> >news:j5i3v75927pq18h6l...@4ax.com...
> >
> >> So if it shrinks for the first time in three years, it has either been
> >> staying
> >> level or growing the rest of the time, right?
> >
> >Yeah - but he had dark skin when he did it, and Republicans simply cannot
> >forgive him for that.
>
> Raceism is all you have left. It's all you ever had.

August 27, 2000

UV light, skin color linked

Variations due to geography

Associated Press

SAN FRANCISCO -- Two San Francisco scientists using data from a NASA
satellite say they have discovered why people come in different colors.

Variations in human skin color are the result of adaptations to the
amount of ultraviolet light from the sun falling on different regions of
Earth, according to Nina Jablonski and George Chaplin, scientists with
the California Academy of Science.

People's bodies change their skin color over time to let in just the
right amount of UV light, which is key to having healthy babies.

UV light affects the skin's production of folate, part of the B vitamin
complex, and vitamin D-3, both of which are essential for having healthy
children.

Folate is necessary for the proper development of the nervous system in
fetuses and for sperm production in adult males. Vitamin D-3 helps build
and maintain strong bones and a healthy immune system.

But too much solar UV light can not only cause skin cancer, it can also
damage those chemicals, thereby hurting a person's chances for
reproductive success.

The scientists' finding may also explain why women tend to be
lighter-skinned than men. Lighter skin lets in more solar UV light,
increasing a woman's vitamin D-3 production, which helps the fetus grow
during pregnancy and helps nourish newborns through breast feeding.

UV light from the sun varies from region to region for reasons including
latitude, humidity and cloudiness.

Jablonski and Chaplin's discovery isn't entirely new. For a long time,
scientists have thought there was a correlation between UV light and
skin color, and they knew the light helped produce vitamin D and that it
could cause cancer.

"But this explanation was considered weak by some scientists because
skin cancer has little or no effect on people's ability to reproduce,
which is really the bottom line of every evolutionary spreadsheet,"
Jablonski said.

Jablonski developed the hypothesis that links UV light to reproduction
in 1991. The scientists analyzed published measurements of human skin
color from around the world and data from NASA's Total Ozone Mapping
Spectrometer satellite, which orbited Earth from 1978 to 1993 and
gathered direct UV measurements for the entire globe to find the
correlation between skin color and UV light.

Jablonski and Chaplin found that dark skin acts as a natural sunscreen
to help prevent UV light from breaking down folate, so it is helpful in
areas with a lot of sun. But in less sunny areas, dark skin screens out
too much sunlight, and can inhibit the production of vitamin D-3, so
lighter skin is helpful for reproductive success.

Skin color is based on the level of melanin, an organic molecule with an
undetermined chemical structure. Those with more melanin have darker
skin, and melanin levels are genetic. But the variations in skin color
are adaptations to solar UV light, not biological differences among
people, according to Jablonski and Chaplin.

"We're all the same under the skin," Jablonski said.

Genetic evidence suggests they are closer to non-African than African
anatomically modern humans, which is probably due to interbreeding
between Neanderthals and the ancestors of the Eurasians. This is thought
to have occurred between 80,000 and 50,000 years ago, shortly after (or
perhaps before) the proto-Eurasians emigrated from Africa, and while
they were still one population. It resulted in 1-4% of the genome of
people from Eurasia having been contributed by Neanderthals.[3][4][5]

The only real humans are sub-Saharan Africans, who don't carry the
Neanderthal genes.

--
E Pluribus Unum

If God wanted us to vote, he would have given us a candidate.

[hal lillywhite]

On Jul 9, 5:14 pm, Billy <wildbi...@withoutta.net> wrote:

> Variations in human skin color are the result of adaptations to the
> amount of ultraviolet light from the sun falling on different regions of
> Earth, according to Nina Jablonski and George Chaplin, scientists with
> the California Academy of Science.

...

> Jablonski developed the hypothesis that links UV light to reproduction
> in 1991. The scientists analyzed published measurements of human skin
> color from around the world and data from NASA's Total Ozone Mapping
> Spectrometer satellite, which orbited Earth from 1978 to 1993 and
> gathered direct UV measurements for the entire globe to find the
> correlation between skin color and UV light.
>
> Jablonski and Chaplin found that dark skin acts as a natural sunscreen
> to help prevent UV light from breaking down folate, so it is helpful in
> areas with a lot of sun. But in less sunny areas, dark skin screens out
> too much sunlight, and can inhibit the production of vitamin D-3, so
> lighter skin is helpful for reproductive success.

Interesting theory and in many ways it seems to make sense. However I
wonder if they have done the obvious testing. That would be to look at
the reproductive success of dark-skinned people in places like
Seattle, or even those who spend most of their time indoors away from
the sun and its UV rays. If those people are able to reproduce as
well as their dark-skinned brethren in more sunny climates it would be
a blow to the theory.

[Unknown]

"hal lillywhite" wrote in message
news:a18b1f48-2d6f-4c9b...@l6g2000pbf.googlegroups.com...

> Interesting theory and in many ways it seems to make sense. However I
> wonder if they have done the obvious testing.

Yeah, that kind of "wondering" is common among anti-science folks.
It's a passive-aggressive tool you use to bear false witness against
innocent people.
It's like when Rick Perry "wondered" into a microphone if Obama was born in
America.

[Sancho Panza]

As a matter of fact, that is precisely the scientific method. And if the
theory cannot be duplicated, what with using control groups and similar
standard processes, it remains just another of the millions of unproven,
and mostly half-baked, theories.

[Billy]

In article <cn3dv79tv4h9li9hm...@4ax.com>,

What is it with you "Baggers" always being interested about what I have
in my pants? Your into butts, huh? Figures.

--
E Pluribus Unum

If God wanted us to vote, he would have given us a candidate.