Bug

Yes. I feel guilty. You guys have been perfect gentlemen for so long. Bad libtard. Go to your ashram.

I'm still here. No headlines here. Maybe God is waiting until after that preist in Spokane pays off the kids he raped.

Toofless and Wurthless have spoken.

If that was what you were actually doing. Seems you would rather bicker with repubs re: mudslinging. That has nothing to do with anything pertinent to the Nation. Bug. You can stick your fingers in the holes 22Dec - 04Jan. Peace. I'll buy the beer. We can watch it pore out the holes. Get well soon!

The Engles doctrine talks about free market valuation vs fixing prices. Is says nothing about regulation vs deregulation of risk analysis and cash assets balancing. If a bank used all of its cash that we deposited in it to invest and make money, we would have to carefully schedule our withdrawals. Also, the portfolio of the bank should include elements that both make a profit for the bank (the business model has to work for everybody) and provide sufficient liquidity for forseeable and unforseeable liquidity demands (statistically predictable withdrawal and catestrophic events). By deregulating that ratio requirement, banks were allowed to set their own risk/profit ratio at the highest profit setting. Greenspan "Assumed" that banks would have the good sense to keep those expectations within long term fluxuation limits. They did not. Our bankers left the long established practice of planning for the inevitable "unpredictable" catastrophy and extended themselve to "current market risk tollerance". This had nothing to do with "free market" practices or price fixing. 50 years ago, 99% of the bankers in the world would have looked at our last 12 years and shook their heads and planned their strategy for cherry-picking a failed bank's book of business. Alas, they all jumped on board. That is WHY the SEC and FED are supposed to be regulating these things. A wide scale risk is a threat to national security. We have only to look back to the twenties to see why we need federal regulation of risk in the various types of lending institutions. Or go back to the Reagan years when he deregulated the S&L's. They failed almost overnight.

Maybe he's not satisfying her "innermost needs"? Maybe she, umhmmm, "just doesn't feel it anymore"? Or maybe they've "grown apart"? ...Or it could just be the dead body in the garage. :shrug: My x petitioned for divorce and started dating. Once I started dating, she freaked and wanted me back. Yeah right. Back to that nerotic nightmare. If he wants to save the marriage, separate and date. Make it clear that life goes on without her. That reality is very different from the perception of what it "Will" be. Or move on. I am SOOO much happier now. You can see it in my posts. right?

You are not required to read any of this. Nor does anybody care if you think we shouldn't talk about what interests us. In short, your whine was heard and will henceforth be ignored. Why don't you post a TR on your "adventures" in Iraq. You mentioned "taking a bullet" in a thread last week. Did that really happen? Do you care to talk about it? Seriously, post a TR.

We clearly need more of everyone trading slams around here, but do you dispute the premise that McCain ran a disgraceful campaign based in large part on smear and innuendo and that Obama mostly rose above it? Maybe you and TomTom can get together and cite examples of how Obama and Biden were just as lowlife as McCain and Palin? I'd like to see it. Jeeze Matt. That is really nasty. You arrogant f.... There FW, I spared you the keystrokes. But can you answer the question?

13 yr old in WWII Cheers guys! I'll buy you a beer if you are in town.

Actually, you may be neglecting one very important point, Obama is a helluva lot smarter than Bush or Clinton. Just because he is picking the people who know how we got here, he is not neccessarily planning on staying the course. He has a mandate to change. He comes from a service to the poor background. Perhaps he is giving these guys the benefit of the doubt for being wrong inadvertantly and moving forward without having to re-tool. This really is no time for "on-the-job training."

Well not meaning to pick nits as I value your posts, but you did say "During the last 30+ years, there has been far more agreement in terms of economic outlook and policy between Democrats and Republicans ". That is broader than the article and led to my reply. So,.....you started it.

Hopefully he will focus initially on getting the justice department back in balance. Bush really hacked that all to peices for partisan purposes.

Yeah. It sounds a lot like the Clinton plan overall.

You don't see the differences because you choose not to imo. The Clinton plan did not raise gas prices by 150%. The Clinton plan did not spend billions a day on a war in Iraq. The Clinton plan did not strip federal support for State programs to the bone thereby forcing states to raise taxes or cut infrastructure funding or both. You are defining the "whole picture" as one little section of what it really is.

I saw no mention of the increase in gas prices. This sucked vasr amounts of $ out of the middle and lower classes who had no way to invest and make up the diference. Those (US citizens counted only) that hold a majority share in the big oil companies are in the top 1% of wealthy in the US. They are not going to spend more on consumables based on a 5% rise in a multi-billion dollar portfolio. Meanwhile, the effect of removing that cash from the main stream consumer market reduces the velocity of transactions and is amplified by what is called the "multiplier effect". If you make a dollar, you spend it at the store which pays its workers eacha portion. They spend it at the movie theater, etc. This is not taken into consideration at all in the article.

Wow Ivan. In league with Fairyweather now? I am dissapointed.

According to the family story..... My great, great grandfather was a german prince. My great, great grandmother was his chamber maid. My great grandfather was born in America after his mother "immigrated there" with a reasonable sum of money with which to establish a seamstress business. So that makes me german royalty. I hereby proclaim this board as mine. You are all welcome to stay awhile if you behave according to good german doctrine. If you do not go along with this proclomation I will invade with my superior military mind and decimate your every feign and thrust. Now, rule #1; Bark like a dog every time you post in spray.

Yes, look back often. I would not go out without a compass. Use wands if weather looks iffy. Every rope length might be excessive. I place one at turns and cross two above crevasse crossings. Compass and good topo map are essential. I don't take bearings on every turn but I do look back and get a feel for where the route down will go and get general compass bearings once in awhile. One person I know marks his wands, 1 ,2 ,3 and takes bearings at key points.

Not to diss you here. If you have research on who was effected and how they were diagnosed and treated or not treated I would frankly be surprised. A friend of mine returned from Vietnam, Ranger 101st, and never fully re-entered society. I worked with him in the woods where he was fine. When we went into a city, I had to be very careful about where I took him. I will spare you the stories. My point is that, I started looking into finding help for this guy and met several people in a Vietnam Vet organization who were trying to get funding for this type of malady. They had done a lot of research themselves back through WWII and found very little documentation of diagnosis, or treatment. Primarily, they were given downers and sent home. There was also some research that was kind of ad hoc in academic research about the effects of WWII veterans on 50's and 60's society. There was a lot of violence in families of veterans. And a much higher rate of divorce which was a much bigger deal back then. So be careful saying "they coped with their experiences". You might ask the wives, the children, and grandchildren how that all played out. Cheers.

Be careful. We have some 8-YO's on this site. We don't want to start a war with them when it is still so easy to buy guns.

Marijajuana is considered a sacred plant by Rastafarians. Amanita Muscaria was once believed to be the reincarnation of Christ. Hopi and Ute's us Peyote in ceremonial settings. But since they are all on the fringe, we will not include them in the first ammendment. More Wikpedia "The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that expressly prohibits the United States Congress from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion" or that prohibit the free exercise of religion, laws that infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to peaceably assemble, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. Although the First Amendment explicitly prohibits only the named rights from being abridged by laws made by the Congress, the Supreme Court has interpreted it as applying more broadly. As the first sentence in the body of the Constitution reserves all legislative authority to the Congress, the courts have held that the First Amendment's terms also extend to the executive and judicial branches. Additionally, in the 20th century the Supreme Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applies the limitations of the First Amendment to each state, including any local government within a state."

Would that it were only our reputation.

So your question is mute IMO.

Does Wikpedia trump the BIA? A native American can claim tribal status if they are 25% native.

Actually, Obama made a strong stand on improving federal support for education in two of the debates (I didn't see the first one)his infomercial, and his acceptance speech. That don't mean we can cash the check but it was very strong wording.