Wednesday, December 29, 2010

A Racist Rant in the Name of Holocaust Survivors

Once again, a racial hate piece.  Thanks, Dad.  For letting me know that everyone who practices Islam is out to destroy society and kill us all. [Sarcasm]

Again, I can't make this funny.  Here it is.  Shared in the hopes that you'll share my reaction of, "Oh, my G-d".

Something to Consider

The following is a copy of an article written by Spanish writer Sebastian Vilar Rodriguez and published in a Spanish newspaper on Jan. 15, 2008. It doesn't take much imagination to extrapolate the message to the rest of Europe - and possibly to the rest of the world.

REMEMBER AS YOU READ -- IT WAS IN A SPANISH PAPER 
Date: Tue. 15 January 2008

ALL EUROPEAN LIFE DIED IN AUSCHWITZ By Sebastian Vilar Rodriguez

I walked down the street in Barcelona , and suddenly discovered a terrible truth - Europe died in  Auschwitz.  We killed six million Jews and replaced them with 20 million Muslims. In Auschwitz we burned a culture, thought, creativity, talent. We destroyed the chosen people, truly chosen, because they produced great and wonderful people who changed the world.

The contribution of this people is felt in all areas of life: science, art, international trade and , above all, as the conscience of the world. These are the people we burned.

And , under the pretense of tolerance and because we wanted to prove to ourselves that we were cured of the disease of racism, we opened our gates to 20 million Muslims, who brought us stupidity and ignorance, religious extremism and lack of tolerance, crime and poverty, due to an unwillingness to work and support their families with pride.

They have blown up our trains and turned our beautiful Spanish cities into the third world, drowning in filth and crime.

Shut up in the apartments they receive free from the government, they plan the murder and destruction of their naive hosts.

And thus, in our misery, we have exchanged culture for fanatical hatred, creative skill for destructive skill, intelligence for backwardness and  superstition.

We have exchanged the pursuit of peace of the Jews of Europe and their talent for a better future for their children, their determined clinging to life because life is holy, for those who pursue death, for people consumed by the desire for death for themselves and others, for our children and theirs.

What a terrible mistake was made by miserable Europe.

***********************************
The Global Islamic population is approximately 1,200,000,000; that is ONE BILLION TWO HUNDRED MILLION or 20% of the world's population. They have received the following Nobel Prizes:
Literature:
1988 - Najib Mahfooz
Peace:
1978 - Mohamed Anwar El-Sadat
1990 - Elias James Corey
1994 - Yaser Arafat:
1999 - Ahmed Zewai
Economics:
(zero)
Physics:
(zero)
Medicine:
1960 - Peter Brian Medawar
1998 - Ferid Mourad
TOTAL: 7 SEVEN

The Global Jewish population is approximately 14,000,000; that is FOURTEEN MILLION or about 0.02% of the world's population. They have received the following Nobel Prizes:

Literature:
1910 - Paul Heyse
1927 - Henri Bergson
1958 - Boris Pasternak
1966 - Shmuel Yosef Agnon
1966 - Nelly  Sachs
1976 - Saul Bellow
1978 - Isaac Bashevis Singer
1981 - Elias Canetti
1987 - Joseph Brodsky
1991 - Nadine Gordimer World

Peace:
1911 - Alfred Fried
1911 - Tobias Michael Carel Asser
1968 - Rene Cassin
1973 - Henry Kissinger
1978 - Menachem Begin
1986 - Elie Wiesel
1994 - Shimon Peres
1994 - Yitzhak Rabin

Physics:
1905 - Adolph Von Baeyer
1906 - Henri Moissan
1907 - Albert Abraham Michelson
1908 - Gabriel Lippmann
1910 - Otto Wallach
1915 - Richard Willstaetter
1918 - Fritz Haber
1921 - Albert Einstein
1922 - Niels Bohr
1925 - James Franck
1925 - Gustav Hertz
1943 - Gustav Stern
1943 - George Charles de Hevesy
1944 - Isidor Issac Rabi
1952 - Felix Bloch
1954 - Max Born
1958 - Igor Tamm
1959 - Emilio Segre
1960 - Donald A. Glaser
1961 - Robert Hofstadter
1961 - Melvin Calvin
1962 - Lev Davidovich Landau
1962 - Max  Ferdinand Perutz
1965 - Richard Phillips Feynman
1965 - Julian Schwinger
1969 - Murray Gell-Mann
1971 - Dennis Gabor
1972 - William Howard Stein
1973 - Brian David Josephson
1975 - Benjamin Mottleson
1976 - Burton Richter
1977 - Ilya Prigogine
1978 - Arno Allan Penzias
1978 - Peter L Kapitza
1979 - Stephen Weinberg
1979 - Sheldon Glashow
1979 - Herbert Charles Brown
1980 - Paul Berg
1980 - Walter Gilbert
1981 - Roald Hoffmann
1982 - Aaron Klug
1985 - Albert A. Hauptman
1985 - Jerome Karle
1986 - Dudley R. Herschbach
1988 - Robert Huber
1988 - Leon Lederman
1988 - Melvin Schwartz
1988 - Jack Steinberger
1989 - Sidney Altman
1990 - Jerome Friedman
1992 - Rudolph Marcus
1995 - Martin Perl
2000 - Alan J. Heeger

Economics:
1970 - Paul Anthony Samuelson
1971 - Simon Kuznets
1972 - Kenneth Joseph Arrow
1975 - Leonid Kantorovich
1976 - Milton  Friedman
1978 - Herbert A. Simon
1980 - Lawrence Robert Klein
1985 - Franco Modigliani
1987 - Robert M. Solow
1990 - Harry Markowitz
1990 - Merton Miller
1992 - Gary Becker
1993 - Robert Fogel

Medicine:
1908 - Elie Metchnikoff
1908 - Paul Erlich
1914 - Robert Barany
1922 - Otto Meyerhof
1930 - Karl Landsteiner
1931 - Otto Warburg
1936 - Otto Loewi
1944 - Joseph Erlanger
1944 - Herbert Spencer Gasser
1945 - Ernst Boris Chain
1946 - Hermann Joseph Muller
1950 - Tadeus Reichstein
1952 - Selman Abraham Waksman
1953 - Hans Krebs
1953 - Fritz Albert Lipmann
1958 - Joshua Lederberg
1959 - Arthur Kornberg
1964 - Konrad Bloch
1965 - Francois Jacob
1965 - Andre Lwoff
1967 - George Wald
1968 - Marshall W. Nirenberg
1969 - Salvador Luria
1970 - Julius Axelrod
1970 - Sir Bernard Katz
1972 - Gerald Maurice Edelman
1975 - Howard Martin Temin
1976 -  Baruch S. Blumberg
1977 - Roselyn Sussman Yalow
1978 - Daniel Nathans
1980 - Baruj Benacerraf
1984 - Cesar Milstein
1985 - Michael Stuart Brown
1985 - Joseph L. Goldstein
1986 - Stanley Cohen [& Rita Levi-Montalcini]
1988 - Gertrude Elion
1989 - Harold Varmus
1991 - Erwin Neher
1991 - Bert Sakmann
1993 - Richard J. Roberts
1993 - Phillip Sharp
1994 - Alfred Gilman
1995 - Edward B. Lewis
1996- Lu RoseIacovino
TOTAL: 129!

The Jews are NOT promoting brain washing children in military training camps, teaching them how to blow themselves up and cause maximum deaths of Jews and other non Muslims. The Jews don't hijack planes, nor kill athletes at the Olympics, or blow themselves up in German restaurants. There is NOT one single Jew who has destroyed a church. There is NOT a single Jew who protests by killing people.

The Jews don't traffic slaves, nor have leaders calling for  Jihad and death to all the Infidels.

Perhaps the world's Muslims should consider investing more in standard education and less in blaming the Jews for all their problems.

Muslims must ask 'what can they do for humankind' before they demand that humankind respects them.

Regardless of your feelings about the crisis between Israel and the Palestinians and Arab neighbors, even if you believe there is more culpability on Israel 's part, the following two sentences really say it all:

'If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more  Israel" – Benjamin Netanyahu

General Eisenhower Warned Us It is a matter of history that when the Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces, General Dwight Eisenhower, found the victims of the death camps he ordered all possible photographs to be taken, and for the German people from surrounding villages to be ushered through the camps and even made to bury the dead.
 He did this because he said in words to this effect:
 ' Get it all on record now - get the films - get the witnesses - because somewhere down the road of history some bastard will get up and say that this never  happened' 

Recently, the UK debated whether to remove The Holocaust from its school curriculum because it 'offends' the Muslim population which claims it never occurred. It is not removed as yet. However, this is a frightening portent of the fear that is gripping the world and how easily each country is giving into it.

It is now more than 60 years after the Second World War in Europe ended. This e-mail is being sent as a memorial chain, in memory of the, 6 million Jews, 20 million Russians, 10 million Christians, and 1,900 Catholic priests who were 'murdered, raped, burned, starved, beaten, experimented on and humiliated' while the German people looked the other way.

Now, more than ever, with Iran , among others, claiming the Holocaust to be 'a myth,' it is imperative to make sure the world never forgets.

This e-mail is intended to reach 400 million people. Be a link in the  memorial chain and help distribute this around the world.

How many years will it be before the attack on the World Trade Center 'NEVER HAPPENED' because it offends some Muslim in the United States ?

Do not just delete this message; it will take only a minute to pass this along.

Monday, December 27, 2010

Soldiers' Death Benefits vs. 9/11 Victim Compensation?

And now, fresh from my inbox, here's another viral email:

Don’t like Limbaugh? No matter. You will be stunned by what he says….so….please read….you will learn the truth about the way we treat those who give up their all so we can be free.

Delete all names before forwarding to respect confidentiality


  Love him or hate him ...
~Limbaugh Nailed This One~


Love him or loathe him, he nailed this one right on the head..........

By Rush Limbaugh:

I think the vast differences in compensation between victims of the September 11 casualty and those who die serving our country in Uniform are profound. No one is really talking about it either, because you just don't criticize anything having to do with September 11. Well, I can't let the numbers pass by because it says something really disturbing about the entitlement mentality of this country. If you lost a family member in the September 11 attack, you're going to get an average of $1,185,000. The range is a minimum guarantee of $250,000, all the way up to $4.7 million..  If you are a surviving family member of an American soldier killed in action, the first check you get is a $6,000 direct death benefit, half of which is taxable.

Next, you get $1,750 for burial costs. If you are the surviving spouse, you get $833 a month until you remarry. And there's a payment of $211 per month for each child under 18. When the child hits 18, those payments come to a screeching halt.

Keep in mind that some of the people who are getting an average of $1.185 million up to $4.7 million are complaining that it's not enough. Their deaths were tragic, but for most, they were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Soldiers put themselves in harms way FOR ALL OF US, and they and their families know the dangers.. (Actually, soldiers are put in harms way by politicians and commanding officers.)

We also learned over the weekend that some of the victims from the Oklahoma City bombing have started an organization asking for the same deal that the September 11 families are getting. In addition to that, some of the families of those bombed in the embassies are now asking for compensation as well.

You see where this is going, don't you? Folks, this is part and parcel of over 50 years of entitlement politics in this country. It's just really sad. Every time a pay raise comes up for the military, they usually receive next to nothing of a raise. Now the green machine is in combat in the Middle East while their families have to survive on food stamps and live in low-rent housing. Make sense?

However, our own US Congress voted themselves a raise. Many of you don't know that they only have to be in Congress one time to receive a pension that is more than $15,000 per month. And most are now equal to being millionaires plus. They do not receive Social Security on retirement because they didn't have to pay into the system. If some of the military people stay in for 20 years and get out as an E-7, they may receive a pension of $1,000 per month, and the very people who placed them in harm's way receives a pension of $15,000 per month.

I would like to see our elected officials pick up a weapon and join ranks before they start cutting out benefits and lowering pay for our sons and daughters who are now fighting.  "When do we finally do something about this?" If this doesn't seem fair to you, it is time to forward this to as many people as you can.

How many people CAN YOU send this to?

****************************
How many WILL YOU???
It's hard to tell what this email is proposing.  It's clearly had several authors.

One way to interpret this is : "The 9/11 bombings were tragic...  but victims' families don't deserve more than the people in the armed forces who put their lives in harm's way.  $1 million per family is just much too much to pay."

I'm somewhat sympathetic.  I'm saddened for the losses of families that have had their lives cut short after the 9/11 bombings.  I'd love to see the the perpetrators forced to pay restitution.

However, the perpetrators are all dead.  And the people who were peripherally involved are now "enemy combatants" who aren't likely to answer to American lawsuits.

The government, in it's reasoning, saw what was likely to happen - since many families were looking to sue someone, they'd probably clog the judicial system with lawsuits against the airline industry, the government, the buildings' owners, or their contractors.  And there are likely to be a few clever prosecutors who can exploit a potential jury's natural desire to help the 9/11 victims.

In short:  This is a settlement.  It has nothing to do with "worth".  It has to do with practicality.  I don't know how folks get together to decide "how much is it worth to settle this case."  A reasonable discussion of this subject would talk about how these numbers were derived.  Not just with "One million dollars is too much."

That's one way to interpret this email message.  The other is, "Why can't soldiers get a million dollars when they fall in combat?  Why is it so much less than the 9/11 victims?"

For one?  Soldiers give up their ability to seek compensation through the courts when they enlist.  It's part of the package.

Now, looking at these figures, it seems like a pretty bad deal for our servicemen.  If I was thinking about enlisting, and my family was depending on my future income, a $6000 lump-sum benefit on my death, $800/month in compensation to my wife and $211/month/child in survivor benefits would make me think more than twice about whether I should sign up.  Because my odds of dying are pretty high in wartime.  And this wouldn't be much to leave my family.

In fact, with those figures, it would be surprising that any military families could be successfully recruited in a time of war.  Something doesn't seem right here.

Turns out Snopes has a long history of this particular viral email.  Turns out that the origin of this email is in 2002.

Now, let's turn back the clock.

In 2002, there was no Iraq war.  The war in Afghanistan was in a lull - the US role at that time was to support the Northern Alliance and the new government, and long before a resurgent Taliban.

In short, the pay structure reflected what was necessary to recruit during a period of peace, when few potential soldiers thought it was likely they would face a significant insurgency.

Since the "real war" started, the military has had to sweeten the deal.

At this point, the death benefit for an active-duty serviceman in a combat zone is $100,000 and is non-taxableSurviving spouses recieve dependency and indemnity compensation of $1154/month, and surviving children recieve more than this email suggests.  (Look here to see how much.)  And if they leave behind a spouse or children who are unable to earn a living, they're eligible for even more.

Plus, if they've enrolled in SGLI (the military's life insurance plan) for $27/month, they're eligible for a death benefit of $400,000.

In short - the surviving family probably won't be living the high life - but, at least, with this financial package, they're off to a secure start.

Finally, it wouldn't be a right-wing email without comparing the lives of "victims" with the fictional congresspeople.

You know, the ones who don't pay social security.  (Sorry, they do.)

The ones who earn over $15,000/month for serving one year in congress.  (Here's their real package.  And it's not even close.)

Although, to give them credit?  When this was written, they probably did write themselves pay raises - like those most Americans recieved.  But for the last two years, they've kept their salaries the same.

So, all in all, this is, at best, an outdated rant piece.  With a little bit of out-and-out lying on the side.

Friday, December 24, 2010

Iran's been punked. Really!

Here's one that I originally thought had to be a fabrication.  But, several reputable sources are lining up to report it.  Broken clocks do give the correct time twice daily, I suppose.

ISRAELIS MAKE IT A VERY HAPPY CHANUKAH IN IRAN!

POSTED BY BLACKFIVE • [DECEMBER 02, 2010]
The Israelis built this airport for the Iranians sometime in the early 1970's... They put a Star of David on the roof with the Iranians remaining absolutely clueless about it. Almost four decades later, the Iranians find out via Google Earth imagery what the Israelis did...and they ain't happy about it.
 
This is all over the news right now.  Here's a report from FoxNews 
 
about how the Iranians are outraged (that they never noticed, in 38 years, that there was a Star of David on top of their airport).
Happy Chanukah!


Some sources backing this up, from all over the political spectrum:



Of course, Israel had relatively good relations with Iran at the time - it was built when the Shah's government was in power.  Not much as far as political statements go - except for the fact that most folks never really look at their rooftops.

Monday, December 20, 2010

When Half-Correct is Fully Wrong

And, once again, in the "White House is Spending Too Much" file, my father sends me these facts:

First Lady Michelle Obama's Servant List and Pay Scale

The First Lady Requires More Than Twenty Attendants   (Thats 22 Attendants to be exact)
1. $172,200 - Sher, Susan (Chief Of Staff)
2. $140,000 - Frye, Jocelyn C. (Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of Policy And Projects For The First Lady)
3. $113,000 - Rogers, Desiree G.  (Special Assistant to the President and White House Social Secretary)
4. $102,000 - Johnston, Camille Y. (Special Assistant to the President and Director of Communications for the First Lady)
5. $100,000 - Winter, Melissa E. (Special Assistant to the President and Deputy Chief Of Staff to the First Lady)
6. $90,000 -   Medina   , David S. (Deputy Chief Of Staff to the First Lady)
7. $84,000 - Lelyveld, Catherine M. (Director and Press Secretary to the First Lady)
8. $75,000 - Starkey, Frances M. (Director of Scheduling and Advance for the First Lady)
9. $70,000 - Sanders, Trooper (Deputy Director of Policy and Projects for the First Lady)
10. $65,000 - Burnough, Erinn J. (Deputy Director and Deputy Social Secretary)
11. $64,000 - Reinstein, Joseph B. (Deputy Director and Deputy Social Secretary)
12. $62,000 - Goodman, Jennifer R. (Deputy Director of Scheduling and Events Coordinator For The First Lady)
13. $60,000 - Fitts, Alan O. (Deputy Director of Advance and Trip Director for the First Lady)
14. $57,500 - Lewis, Dana M. (Special Assistant and Personal Aide to the First Lady)
15. $52,500 - Mustaphi, Semonti M. (Associate Director and Deputy Press Secretary to The First Lady)
16. $50,000 - Jarvis, Kristen E. (Special=2 0Assistant for Scheduling and Traveling Aide to The First Lady)
17. $45,000 - Lechtenberg, Tyler A. (Associate Director of Correspondence For The First Lady)
18. $43,000 - Tubman, Samantha (Deputy Associate Director, Social Office)
19. $40,000 - Boswell, Joseph J. (Executive Assistant to the Chief Of Staff to the First Lady)
20. $36,000 - Armbruster, Sally M. (Staff Assistant to the Social Secretary)
21. $35,000 - Bookey, Natalie (Staff Assistant)
22. $35,000 - Jackson, Deilia A. (Deputy Associate Director of Correspondence for the First Lady)
(This is community organizing at it's finest.)
     
There has NEVER been anyone in the White House at any time who has created such an army of staffers whose sole duties are the facilitation of the First Lady's social life. One wonders why she needs so much help,at taxpayer expense, when even Hillary, only had three; Jackie Kennedy one; Laura Bush one; and prior to Mamie Eisenhower social help came from the President's own pocket.
     
Note: This does not include makeup artist Ingrid Grimes-Miles, 49, and "First Hairstylist" Johnny Wright, 31, both of whom traveled aboard Air Force One to   Europe  .
     
FRIENDS.....THESE SALARIES ADD UP TO SIX MILLION, THREE HUNDRED SIXTY FOUR THOUSAND DOLLARS ($6,364,000) FOR THE 4 YEARS OF OFFICE?????   AND WE ARE IN A RECESSION?????  WELL....MOST OF US ARE.  I GUESS IT'S OK TO SPEND WILDLY WHEN IT'S NOT YOUR OWN MONEY?????
     
Copyright 2009 CanadaFreePress.Com   
      
Yes, Yes, I know, The Canadian Free Press has to publish this because the   USA   media is too scared they might be considered racist.
                  Sorry   USA !

Yep.  It looks pretty expensive.

Now, I'm sure that the demands on the First Lady's time are extraordinary.  I've never run such an office, and don't know what it would take to retain skilled staff.  So, once again, I will hedge my bets (as well as some of my personal feelings), and call the cost of this staff "a subject of reasonable debate".

"Wait a minute", you may ask.  "If 22 staff members' salaries are unprecedented, then why would you even consider this debateable?"

That's where our anonymous emailer has his facts wrong.

First of all, the claim that Laura Bush had only one staff member?  Wrong.  Here's her list, gathered from the Washington Post:
  1. $172,200 - McBride, Anita (Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff to the First Lady)
  2. $147,500 - Medina, Sonya (Deputy Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy and Director of Projects for the First Lady)
  3. $113,000 - Zantzinger, Amy (Special Assistant to the President and White House Social Secretary)
  4. $102,000 - Niemec, Sally (Special Assistant to the President and Director of Communications and Press Secretary to the First Lady)
  5. $102,000 - Armstrong, Sara (Special Assistant to the President and Deputy Chief of Staff to the First Lady)
  6. $88,500 - Miller, Sonja Maria (Deputy Chief of Staff to the First Lady)
  7. $78,400 - Ballard, Deanna (Director of Scheduling for the First Lady)
  8. $63,000 - McArthur, Nikki (Speech Writer for the First Lady)
  9. $62,700 - Knutson, Lindsey (Special Assistant and Personal Aide to the First Lady)
  10. $62,400 - Marshall, Misty (Director of Correspondence for the First Lady)
  11. $57,500 - Adams, Julie (Deputy Press Secretary to the First Lady)
  12. $53,000 - Mende, Kirstin (Deputy Director of Policy and Projects for the First Lady)
  13. $52,200 - Thornton, Dorothy (Deputy Social Secretary)
  14. $52,200 - Etter, Marisa Leigh (Deputy Director of Scheduling for the First Lady)
  15. $52,200 - King, Kristin (Deputy Director of Advance for the First Lady)
  16. $47,000 - Segura, Millicent (Deputy Director of Correspondence for the First Lady)
  17. $43,000 - Miller, Kasdin (Assistant Press Secretary to the First Lady)
  18. $41,800 - O'Connor Erin (Executive Assistant to the Chief of Staff to the First Lady)
... and if I wasn't such a half-assed researcher, I'm sure I'd find more.

It's funny how folks only care about the White House budget when their party is out of power...
 

Sunday, December 19, 2010

This one is probably 100% correct.

From my father:


There were probably many, many

times this year when I 
 

Disturbed You, 
Troubled You, 
Pestered You, 
Irritated You, 
Bugged You, 
Or got on your Nerves!! 
  

So today, I just wanted to tell you…
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

cid:1..3009042201@web50107.mail.re2.yahoo.com
Suck it up,Cupcake!!
 
Cause there 
AIN'T NO CHANGES 
Planned for 2011!! 


Good to know.

Monday, December 13, 2010

What do Bernie Madoff and Social Security Have In Common? Not Much.

It seems the Right-Wing Viral Message folks enjoy calling government officials "crooks".

Here's one where they take it too far.

Why did Bernie Madoff go to prison?  To make it simple, he talked people into investing with him.  Trouble was, he didn't invest their money.  As time rolled on he simply took the money from the new investors to pay off the old investors.
Of course, they've overlooked the whole "used the money to buy mansions, yachts, and live the high life" part...
Finally there were too many old investors and not enough money from new investors coming in to keep the payments going.
Of course.  Because he spent the money on himself.  And represented an unrealistic expectations of his ability to obtain returns on his investments.  And hid his operational details from regulators.  That's why it was fraud.
Next thing you know Madoff is one of the most hated men in America and he is off to jail.
You got that right...
Some of you know this.  But not enough of you. 
Maybe.  If "you" refers to "the average right-wing email forwarder".  Their average intelligence and knowledge of world events seems pretty spotty to me...
Madoff did to his investors what the government has been doing to us for over 70 years with Social Security. 
A bold statement, my friend - actually accusing the developers of social security with fraud.  Let's see the proof.
There is no meaningful difference between the two schemes, except that one was operated by a private individual who is now in jail, and the other is operated by politicians who enjoy perks, privileges and status in spite of their actions.
Restating what you've already said isn't proof, yet.  Sure, congressmen live pretty nicely.  But any citizen has access to the operating details of the social security trust fund.  And, yet, in spite of this transparency, this emailer can provide no proof that this money has directly lined the pockets of our congressmen. 


Do you need a side-by-side comparison here?  Well here's a nifty little chart.


BERNIE MADOFF
Takes money from investors with the promise that the money will be invested and made available to them later.
Instead of investing the money Madoff spends it on nice homes in the Hamptons and yachts.
When the time comes to pay the investors back Madoff simply uses some of the new funds from newer investors to pay back the older investors.
When Madoff's scheme is discovered all hell breaks loose.  New investors won't give him any more cash.
Bernie Madoff is in jail.
Again, seems like more of the same thing.  But the basics seem right - he said he'd invest the money, promised an impossible return, kept phony books, kept most of the money, and used new investors to pay old investors during times they wanted to cash out.  This is illegal.
SOCIAL SECURITY
Takes money from wage earners with the promise that the money will be invested in a "Trust Fund" (Lock Box) and made available later.  Instead of depositing money in a Trust Fund the politicians  transfer it to the General Revenue Fund and use it for general spending and vote buying.
All with complete transparency, to anyone who watched.  Voted into law in open congress, and signed by the president - all of whom were elected.  Democracy isn't perfect.  Bad laws happen.  (As far as whether a transfer was bad policy is a legitimate topic for reasoned debate.)  But bad laws aren't fraud -they're just bad laws.  As far as "vote buying" goes - our unnamed writer doesn't provide any specifics.  I wonder why?
When benefits for older investors become due the politicians pay them with money taken from younger and newer wage earners to pay the older geezers.
When you're a government, with the powers of an unlimited lifetime and the ability to print money, this might be okay.  As long as the end results are accounted for.  If they haven't (a debateable point, for forums other than this one) - they should be taken to task for this.  But, reasonable people disagree on this point.  And even if it is correct, bad ideas are just bad ideas.  It may be bad policy.  But it isn't outright fraud.
When Social Security runs out of money the politicians try to force the taxpayers to send them some more; or they cancel S/S to all those who paid into it.
Show me the proposed bills.  Because I don't see any.  Sure, there are some that delay benefits to future recipients - but no one talking about cancelling social security.  Except, perhaps, for asking folks to "volunteer" to put some money into private accounts.
Politicians remain in  Washington .. with fat medical and retirement benefits.
Do you want the job?  It's potentially yours.  All you have to do is get elected.

Oh, you can't win against more qualified opponents? Good.  I'm glad that they're paying enough for people to want to compete for the job.

Oh, I get it.  You're only for free enterprise when it suits you.  Gotcha.

Saturday, December 11, 2010

More lame Right-Wing "Humor"

I'm sorry.  Anyone who reposts this one DESERVES a "I know you are" in return.






There's an old saying that seems to apply:


Creative minds are rarely tidy.

A picture is worth a thousand words.

A person's mind and his desk…

William F. Buckley

Nat Hentoff

Albert Einstein 

Numb Nuts

 

Monday, November 29, 2010

When Reality is Bad Enough

My dad's been pretty quiet - but here's a new one.


  • Who lives in a house

  • like this? Soon the
  • world will know. 

  • Imagine 

  • who would have such taste and live in such

  • opulence? An American Billionaire?  A Saudi

  • Prince?  Louis XIV of France?

    Have a good look at these pictures, then scroll  to

  • the bottom of  the page to see who owns this work

  • of Art. 
    >  

    >











         This Mansion is in

  • Harare and belongs to:      The President of

  • Zimbabwe - Robert Mugabe - 
    While his people starve, they do not have food,
     and die because of no medical

  •   help... And we are asked to help his people over and over again.. He and his

  • family live like this....... his GREED kills his people.....
     
    If you send this to everyone you know,

  •  (gjerne ogsÃ¥ til Erik Solheim), they

  • can send it to everyone they know:

  •  Soon the whole world will knowwhat

  • this man is doing to his people.  

      
     

    The citizens he supposedly serves?  
     

     

     




     



     
    "For evil to flourish, all that is needed is for good people to do nothing."
    - Edmund Burke

I'll save you the effort of looking this one up on Snopes - You've seen this house before.  It's a commonly used set in cinema.  It is a real house, but it's in California.  And Mugabe doesn't own it.




Here's a picture of one of his homes.  Who's value, according to a source that describes the home, is about 8 million pounds. That's 16 million dollars to us American folks.  Unfortunately, photography is strictly prohibited.  A good reason why only aerial photos are available.



And, if that isn't enough, the picture on your right is a photo of his retirement home in Hong Kong.  Nice place.  According to Time Magazine, it could have been yours last year for about 5.7 dollars.  Too bad he beat you to it, huh?



Quite frankly, why do viral emailers need to manufacture facts?  Oftentimes, the reality is bad enough.