Credit fraud-hacking:
This link, and this link.
Comments expressing thoughts on issue, would be greatly appreciated, especially with reasoning stated that led to a conclusion.
Should service providers, those enabling a fraudster's link from a workstation to the Internet, be held to a policing standard, and be liable in some fashion, to some degree?
In China certain "corruption" crimes have led to execution of the offender.
If that strong a general deterrent were in law, would you think there would be less Internet crime of this kind? Certainly it would reduce recidivism, but beyond that?
__________UPDATE_______
Honor among theives? This link.
Should one who abuses a public trust to enrich family be let off easier; i.e., where mixed-motive situations can be argued - and public benefit vs. private are arguably hazy, is that cause for restraint in criminalization of behavior? NOTE: The question is not whether there should be some ex post facto reach back at conduct not criminally culpable at the time the conduct occurred; moral judgments can exist, but I would not suggest ex post facto criminalization is at all sound, and instead I believe it would threaten some basic values our nation is said to treasure.
Any reader thoughts on either update paragraph?
Monday, December 21, 2009
A comment - republished as a "guest post." It is for thinking persons like Janet that I have not simply barred comments.
Most comments have been from numbskulls, or for all I know one anonymous numbskull [or jokester, being provocative], but when thoughtful things emerge it reassures me that moderating comments instead of shutting them down entirely is best. Below the dotted line, the guest statement. And remember, it was thinking at a point in time before Ben Nelson's buyout. May Nebraska and Louisiana ever prosper, they have secured something out of the entire situation where many more lost a lot, etc.
..................
I have somewhat mixed emotions on this but lean toward, kill the bill. I understand what it's like to not have insurance. I have a safety net when I say kill it so its easy for me to say. Paul Krugman had this editorial about "just pass it, we'll fix it later BS. The letter is not Krugman's usually well thought out argument, he goes back and forth, do it, don't do it. Hostage taker payment, better than what we've had.
When Medicare Part D was passed, this was the same logic. It is corrupt logic! That was a sell out of epic proportions. Give seniors pharmaceutical coverage but hey, don't allow price negotiation on the biggest customer base in the world and jack the prices up 30% right before the program starts.
Clinton is very responsible for the economy now, plus the Republican congress that allowed for usuary laws and regulations to be repealed plus NAFTA. He's saying "just pass it, we'll fix it later". I won't listen to a darn thing he says, can't stand to look at him, nor will I "listen" to the bozo's that say "just pass it". It is a massive giveaway. Insurance stocks are up tremendously, take a look at this: Health care's healthy decade: Corporate America's profit powerhouse seems poised to keep its model intact
By Russ Britt, MarketWatch Nov. 19, 2009
Now, when you look at "required" insurance (or have a fine), "can't afford" $12-18,000 a year family premiums when you make $40,000, (our average wage), have limits annually on care cost, mandatory vacinations, etc., etc., I say kill the beast because this is worse for Americans than it is better. Put the Blue Dogs back in their original party and call congress what it is, Republican! You know darn well understand that when the heat gets turned up, those Blue Dogs are going to hop back into the party of the right again. How's that for opinion today!
Gee, I feel better! Got that off my chest.
................
Thank you, Janet. We all benefit from having it said, Janet. Now we can only hope that reconciliation improves things. Fat chance, eh?
True about Clinton. His M.O. was to steal the GOP agenda, and thus get corporate and media backing in order to leave the GOP with only the bible-beaters; but in doing that he sold his soul and the soul of the Democratic party to the devil. That is why I could not envision his spouse as fit for the Whitehouse - independent of gender issues and any estrangement from the meanderanderings - the two are peas in a pod on policy and humaneness. "The Clintons," is the term, and it's been justified.
That is why I favored Obama, as the one choice from two allowed people by the Party, and I had misgivings from the start over the rock-star event packaging, the press love, and promises of change.
That's been a big falsehood, hasn't it?
I would say from Reagan onward there's been continuity you can count on - fleecing of the sheep, with their bleating approvingly, and it is sickening. Obama so far has just been one guy in the parade. And those getting fleeced - most deserve it. As long as they can gas the Chevey, they are happy unless the local football team loses - but they get over it. Happy sheep are --- sheep. Kept for the fleecing.
Perhaps saying from Nixon onward is a truer span; from Grant onward possibly.
J.P. Morgan is laughing in his marble mausoleum. For thinking people without massive wealth, it is heartbreaking to see this nation as it is because of what it could be.
________UPDATE________
Two comments so far on this post. One showing why I am tempted to bar comments, the other showing why I do not. Comments are moderated. Some I publish, some I reject. Overly offensive name calling, or extreme stupidity gets blocked. Moderate stupidity has generally not been rejected. Advertisements, or political candidate stuff is not published if anonymous. Somebody from a campaign office could abuse anonymity, etc.
_______FURTHER UPDATE_______
Sibel Edmonds has two posts; here and here; the first dealing with the two party vexation Janet's comment mentions, in terms of "wasting a vote;" the second dealing with two sides of the same coin - aka consistency you can count on in contexts beyond some that other Crabgrass posts have examined. Edmonds is well known in whistleblower contexts and by the ACLU. Comments to both posts are worth reading.
..................
I have somewhat mixed emotions on this but lean toward, kill the bill. I understand what it's like to not have insurance. I have a safety net when I say kill it so its easy for me to say. Paul Krugman had this editorial about "just pass it, we'll fix it later BS. The letter is not Krugman's usually well thought out argument, he goes back and forth, do it, don't do it. Hostage taker payment, better than what we've had.
When Medicare Part D was passed, this was the same logic. It is corrupt logic! That was a sell out of epic proportions. Give seniors pharmaceutical coverage but hey, don't allow price negotiation on the biggest customer base in the world and jack the prices up 30% right before the program starts.
Clinton is very responsible for the economy now, plus the Republican congress that allowed for usuary laws and regulations to be repealed plus NAFTA. He's saying "just pass it, we'll fix it later". I won't listen to a darn thing he says, can't stand to look at him, nor will I "listen" to the bozo's that say "just pass it". It is a massive giveaway. Insurance stocks are up tremendously, take a look at this: Health care's healthy decade: Corporate America's profit powerhouse seems poised to keep its model intact
By Russ Britt, MarketWatch Nov. 19, 2009
Now, when you look at "required" insurance (or have a fine), "can't afford" $12-18,000 a year family premiums when you make $40,000, (our average wage), have limits annually on care cost, mandatory vacinations, etc., etc., I say kill the beast because this is worse for Americans than it is better. Put the Blue Dogs back in their original party and call congress what it is, Republican! You know darn well understand that when the heat gets turned up, those Blue Dogs are going to hop back into the party of the right again. How's that for opinion today!
Gee, I feel better! Got that off my chest.
................
Thank you, Janet. We all benefit from having it said, Janet. Now we can only hope that reconciliation improves things. Fat chance, eh?
True about Clinton. His M.O. was to steal the GOP agenda, and thus get corporate and media backing in order to leave the GOP with only the bible-beaters; but in doing that he sold his soul and the soul of the Democratic party to the devil. That is why I could not envision his spouse as fit for the Whitehouse - independent of gender issues and any estrangement from the meanderanderings - the two are peas in a pod on policy and humaneness. "The Clintons," is the term, and it's been justified.
That is why I favored Obama, as the one choice from two allowed people by the Party, and I had misgivings from the start over the rock-star event packaging, the press love, and promises of change.
That's been a big falsehood, hasn't it?
I would say from Reagan onward there's been continuity you can count on - fleecing of the sheep, with their bleating approvingly, and it is sickening. Obama so far has just been one guy in the parade. And those getting fleeced - most deserve it. As long as they can gas the Chevey, they are happy unless the local football team loses - but they get over it. Happy sheep are --- sheep. Kept for the fleecing.
Perhaps saying from Nixon onward is a truer span; from Grant onward possibly.
J.P. Morgan is laughing in his marble mausoleum. For thinking people without massive wealth, it is heartbreaking to see this nation as it is because of what it could be.
________UPDATE________
Two comments so far on this post. One showing why I am tempted to bar comments, the other showing why I do not. Comments are moderated. Some I publish, some I reject. Overly offensive name calling, or extreme stupidity gets blocked. Moderate stupidity has generally not been rejected. Advertisements, or political candidate stuff is not published if anonymous. Somebody from a campaign office could abuse anonymity, etc.
_______FURTHER UPDATE_______
Sibel Edmonds has two posts; here and here; the first dealing with the two party vexation Janet's comment mentions, in terms of "wasting a vote;" the second dealing with two sides of the same coin - aka consistency you can count on in contexts beyond some that other Crabgrass posts have examined. Edmonds is well known in whistleblower contexts and by the ACLU. Comments to both posts are worth reading.
The most unsettling thing about the Peterson bank wanting a contract extension is that just short of ten million was wasted so a handful could profit.
That entire sewer-water thing, per the Ramsey document pages posted here, cost just short of ten million. Peterson put himself on the hook for six of that, but the document pages clearly say that Ramsey taxpayers ate $3.5 million on it - whether it was paid out of a reserve fund, bonded, or financed some other way, the document does not lie. It was costly, so that Jerry Bauer could cash out the gun club investment and Peterson could roll the dice on the cornfield.
It was and remains a boondoggle of immense proportion, for a town the size of Ramsey.
That and the Town Center, the lack of referenda when tons of cash are spent, the leadership of James Norman, the old gray mayor since retired, the Met. Council diva wanting her legacy, the mess of them are as bad as the pack of DC luminaries that gave us chopped liver instead of healthcare reform.
The mayor and diva, they now have a legacy.
Aside from the Coborns store, name one good thing to say about the "smart growth" this pack of luminaries brought to Ramsey.
Dumb is as dumb does, and did.
May the newbies on council prove better.
It was and remains a boondoggle of immense proportion, for a town the size of Ramsey.
That and the Town Center, the lack of referenda when tons of cash are spent, the leadership of James Norman, the old gray mayor since retired, the Met. Council diva wanting her legacy, the mess of them are as bad as the pack of DC luminaries that gave us chopped liver instead of healthcare reform.
The mayor and diva, they now have a legacy.
Aside from the Coborns store, name one good thing to say about the "smart growth" this pack of luminaries brought to Ramsey.
Dumb is as dumb does, and did.
May the newbies on council prove better.
The pass anything folks passed something.
Next they will call it a landmark. It is a mess. The House bill was a mess.
What Obama signs will be a mess. He will have a bunch around, hand out memorabilia pens, and the bunch of them will call it a landmark. None will admit it to be a mess, but will, indirectly imply that it was the Republicans alone that were the cause of having to let obstructionist Dems. hold sway. It will be largely true, but will be largely false also. It is shameful that 30,000 additional troops will be funded for a lost war with a corrupt puppet to boot, and it would not surprise me if before the November 2010 election Obama will be calling his "Af-Pak Surge" a landmark.
And the funding for healthcare will be squeezed out by a privatized flat tax arraingement that is obscene, while the Pentagon is brass heavy and will stay that way, while the Genearls will be joining the defense contractors while on their incredible pansions, and the people will continue to be sheep, or worse, Republicans.
Throughout it all one thing was apparent.
The Republicans can only impede progress, and worsen things, and they have been steadfast and united in doing exactly that and little, indeed nothing, else.
The Blue Dogs, the Dem. Senators that vote Dem. on organizing but are otherwise against progress need to be replaced.
Let us hope Ned Lamont has another run in him.
Lieberman is totally worthless. If not Ned Lamont, somebody needs to replace that embarrassing national nuisance. In his own way, he is worse than Rick Santorum. That bad. And that is really, really, really worthless, to be worse than him.
What Obama signs will be a mess. He will have a bunch around, hand out memorabilia pens, and the bunch of them will call it a landmark. None will admit it to be a mess, but will, indirectly imply that it was the Republicans alone that were the cause of having to let obstructionist Dems. hold sway. It will be largely true, but will be largely false also. It is shameful that 30,000 additional troops will be funded for a lost war with a corrupt puppet to boot, and it would not surprise me if before the November 2010 election Obama will be calling his "Af-Pak Surge" a landmark.
And the funding for healthcare will be squeezed out by a privatized flat tax arraingement that is obscene, while the Pentagon is brass heavy and will stay that way, while the Genearls will be joining the defense contractors while on their incredible pansions, and the people will continue to be sheep, or worse, Republicans.
Throughout it all one thing was apparent.
The Republicans can only impede progress, and worsen things, and they have been steadfast and united in doing exactly that and little, indeed nothing, else.
The Blue Dogs, the Dem. Senators that vote Dem. on organizing but are otherwise against progress need to be replaced.
Let us hope Ned Lamont has another run in him.
Lieberman is totally worthless. If not Ned Lamont, somebody needs to replace that embarrassing national nuisance. In his own way, he is worse than Rick Santorum. That bad. And that is really, really, really worthless, to be worse than him.
Saturday, December 19, 2009
RAMSEY - Real Estate - Market dynamics questions. The Brookfield Cornfield of Dreams; the Gun Club; the sewer-water routing; and the future.
I did a Google = oakwood-land-development brookfield "john peterson"
The first return list item was for the City's Work Session Agenda for a Council meeting Dec. 8, 2009, containing the following notice (click either thumbnail to enlarge and read the item - note, also, the online source did not have referenced attached pages):
I am curious not only how this affects the public interest regarding the "Brookfield" thing, and its neighbors; but also, recall, the routing of sewer-water involved a stopover at the gun club, for development venturing there also; so how will that thing, and its neighbors be impacted? What aspect of public interest attaches to each locale in this changed situation?
And this thing seems to have been kept under a hat by city officials. "Staff and 21st Oakwood have been meeting on these issues at least since May of this year," the item now tardily discloses. Were the neighbors who suffered that development being foisted next-door without a shred of density transition even given a single word of notice during the months-long pendancy of this latest mischief revisionism effort? Or were they like the general Ramsey public treated like mushrooms?
By email I am requesting City officials to provide for review and possible copying public data documents that may exist in city files and records about the described situation which might shed more sunlight on things. By law, the City must reveal documents not privileged per pending or possible litigation-related issues (where the City Attorney might review my request for ongoing disclosure and documents may become available over time in a peicemeal fashion as things presently exempt from disclosure under the Minnesota Public Data Act change status with time). We wait. We see.
Some may recall that sewer-water routing for dense housing at the gun club and then at the cornfield across Nowthen Blvd from the Peterson home and acreage on the east side of the road was a contentious issue. Citizens petitioned against it and attained sufficient charter amendment signatures of Ramsey citizens to qualify for a special election on proposed amendment wording; but then City Administrator James Norman, and/or others, brought in two law firms to opine that the election should be forestalled on ostensible legal grounds; the Council then showing the citizenship and awareness to deny the citizens their due, electing instead, unanimously, to sheepishly follow the procured legal opinions - presumably whether or not their consciences were in accord with what the paid lawyers said.
It was a rancorous thing for those involved in the effort to advance citizen initiative and driving effort, in City of Ramsey.
Well, the pipe got put into the ground as Ms. Steffen was noted as favoring in one set of work session minutes while serving as Met. Council member; and we live with the results, whether good or bad for the community - it was far from the BNSF tracks, but like the Norman Castle and Ramp there, it got railroaded through - absent any referendum or other chance for citizens to have any real say.
I know some residents were heart broken to have that dense "Brookfield" stuff stuck right up against their property lines, with no requirement of density transitioning between the dense housing and the existing large-lot neighboring lands - thus failing to preserve the local neighborhood characteristics so highly valued in that part of town, before "Brookfield." I expect they still are upset that density transition was not then a priority of those in City decision making positions. They were callously treated and I would hope the affected homeowners still keep a sense of history so that less of that nature of ill-restrained "development" will occur in Ramsey's future. Politicians are as they do, and some did a quite poor job of citizen accomodation during those times. The city administrator from then has since removed himself, as has the lead planner, Ward 1 representation continues as it was, and Cook, the more vocal of the at large representatives over repressing the citizen charter initiative effort then, is off council - as is the mayor from those sad days, and as is Ms. Olson.
Hopefully new blood and new market realities and viewpoints will show change in demeanor and considerations. Not that it is much consolation to the neighbors who bore the brunt of the dense housing growth offensive back then.
It was: Done for us? Done to us? That debate is not yet over, with some feeling that the battle to save the character of the town was irretrievably lost with that hop-scotch imposition of dense housing into north Ramsey - north of any prior "MUSA line" which had delineated Alpine Blvd. as the line. Now we have "MUSA areas." This map is illustrative, with the Gun Club MUSA area being shown detached from the southern dense housing "MUSA line" situation:
Those who did it, I hope they now are really proud of themselves. Their legacy. Their judgment. Their motives. From Met. Council to James Norman, may they perform better and less arrogantly and self-certain in the future. May they have an upward sloping learning curve of some kind.
MY BOTTOM LINE IN ALL OF THIS: Peterson and pals could not have done us all in with that sewer-water extension to gun club and all, without the money behind them, facilitating their mischief. Now the lender, the money funding the mischief, wants grace - more time on a contract with it wholly unclear that any consideration for a modification of contract is being offered [no referenced pages present with the online version of the agenda]. I say, never give them an inch. Hold them to the exact term of time to recoup cash. We owe them nothing. They were complicit in a profit-motivated effort to ruin better aspects of Ramsey.
Screw them.
They screwed Ramsey. Or helped others to.
A contract with a fifteen year term has to have contemplated changing circumstances over that long of a time frame. These particular lenders - why cut them one minute of slack? They presumably knew the terms between the borrower and the city, and approved. They put the six million into escrow to allow the fiasco. They were complicit. They facilitated.
I see no reason to allow them one single minute more on the deal. Can they offer any amelioration to the adversely impacted neighbors? Have they? Have they any such sense of complicity and a current willingness to somehow change? I cannot see how they can undo a thing. So, feet to the fire. No extra time. It is the only way people like that will learn a thing.
The first return list item was for the City's Work Session Agenda for a Council meeting Dec. 8, 2009, containing the following notice (click either thumbnail to enlarge and read the item - note, also, the online source did not have referenced attached pages):
I am curious not only how this affects the public interest regarding the "Brookfield" thing, and its neighbors; but also, recall, the routing of sewer-water involved a stopover at the gun club, for development venturing there also; so how will that thing, and its neighbors be impacted? What aspect of public interest attaches to each locale in this changed situation?
And this thing seems to have been kept under a hat by city officials. "Staff and 21st Oakwood have been meeting on these issues at least since May of this year," the item now tardily discloses. Were the neighbors who suffered that development being foisted next-door without a shred of density transition even given a single word of notice during the months-long pendancy of this latest mischief revisionism effort? Or were they like the general Ramsey public treated like mushrooms?
By email I am requesting City officials to provide for review and possible copying public data documents that may exist in city files and records about the described situation which might shed more sunlight on things. By law, the City must reveal documents not privileged per pending or possible litigation-related issues (where the City Attorney might review my request for ongoing disclosure and documents may become available over time in a peicemeal fashion as things presently exempt from disclosure under the Minnesota Public Data Act change status with time). We wait. We see.
Some may recall that sewer-water routing for dense housing at the gun club and then at the cornfield across Nowthen Blvd from the Peterson home and acreage on the east side of the road was a contentious issue. Citizens petitioned against it and attained sufficient charter amendment signatures of Ramsey citizens to qualify for a special election on proposed amendment wording; but then City Administrator James Norman, and/or others, brought in two law firms to opine that the election should be forestalled on ostensible legal grounds; the Council then showing the citizenship and awareness to deny the citizens their due, electing instead, unanimously, to sheepishly follow the procured legal opinions - presumably whether or not their consciences were in accord with what the paid lawyers said.
It was a rancorous thing for those involved in the effort to advance citizen initiative and driving effort, in City of Ramsey.
Well, the pipe got put into the ground as Ms. Steffen was noted as favoring in one set of work session minutes while serving as Met. Council member; and we live with the results, whether good or bad for the community - it was far from the BNSF tracks, but like the Norman Castle and Ramp there, it got railroaded through - absent any referendum or other chance for citizens to have any real say.
I know some residents were heart broken to have that dense "Brookfield" stuff stuck right up against their property lines, with no requirement of density transitioning between the dense housing and the existing large-lot neighboring lands - thus failing to preserve the local neighborhood characteristics so highly valued in that part of town, before "Brookfield." I expect they still are upset that density transition was not then a priority of those in City decision making positions. They were callously treated and I would hope the affected homeowners still keep a sense of history so that less of that nature of ill-restrained "development" will occur in Ramsey's future. Politicians are as they do, and some did a quite poor job of citizen accomodation during those times. The city administrator from then has since removed himself, as has the lead planner, Ward 1 representation continues as it was, and Cook, the more vocal of the at large representatives over repressing the citizen charter initiative effort then, is off council - as is the mayor from those sad days, and as is Ms. Olson.
Hopefully new blood and new market realities and viewpoints will show change in demeanor and considerations. Not that it is much consolation to the neighbors who bore the brunt of the dense housing growth offensive back then.
It was: Done for us? Done to us? That debate is not yet over, with some feeling that the battle to save the character of the town was irretrievably lost with that hop-scotch imposition of dense housing into north Ramsey - north of any prior "MUSA line" which had delineated Alpine Blvd. as the line. Now we have "MUSA areas." This map is illustrative, with the Gun Club MUSA area being shown detached from the southern dense housing "MUSA line" situation:
Those who did it, I hope they now are really proud of themselves. Their legacy. Their judgment. Their motives. From Met. Council to James Norman, may they perform better and less arrogantly and self-certain in the future. May they have an upward sloping learning curve of some kind.
MY BOTTOM LINE IN ALL OF THIS: Peterson and pals could not have done us all in with that sewer-water extension to gun club and all, without the money behind them, facilitating their mischief. Now the lender, the money funding the mischief, wants grace - more time on a contract with it wholly unclear that any consideration for a modification of contract is being offered [no referenced pages present with the online version of the agenda]. I say, never give them an inch. Hold them to the exact term of time to recoup cash. We owe them nothing. They were complicit in a profit-motivated effort to ruin better aspects of Ramsey.
Screw them.
They screwed Ramsey. Or helped others to.
A contract with a fifteen year term has to have contemplated changing circumstances over that long of a time frame. These particular lenders - why cut them one minute of slack? They presumably knew the terms between the borrower and the city, and approved. They put the six million into escrow to allow the fiasco. They were complicit. They facilitated.
I see no reason to allow them one single minute more on the deal. Can they offer any amelioration to the adversely impacted neighbors? Have they? Have they any such sense of complicity and a current willingness to somehow change? I cannot see how they can undo a thing. So, feet to the fire. No extra time. It is the only way people like that will learn a thing.
RAMSEY, a walkable community. May they in the future plow the paved Alpine Park footpath at 153rd Court joining the main path parallel to a driveway.
Our senior citizens, in Ramsey and the entire state, are urged (by TV ads even played to us while we sit watching Vikings exercise), to ourselves regularly exercise, to keep fit and avoid undue time at healthcare offices.
And never forget, Ramsey is a walkable city.
That's been said not only of parts adjacent to BNSF tracks, but of all of it.
As a holiday present from two senior citizens to City of Ramsey and to its walking citizens, over the weekend the two shoveled the newly paved footpath which city crews had neglected, running from the main walkway, which the City has graciously maintained, to Alpine Blvd., which the City has also graciously maintained.
The two maintained the connection. For now. This is where the footpath runs in part roughly parallel to the skateboard park driveway and parking, which the City has maintained, both assured in their hearts that from now on the City will maintain that stretch of walkway also.
Happy holidays to all.
Firedoglake is all fired up: "Obama Quits, Cedes Presidency To Joe Lieberman” -- And more. Healthcare hoodwinking riles and galls the good folks.
I start the post via a comment [slightly modified] that I left at another blog. And don't worry, all the links are in the following:
With a touch or two of editing, (the RobinLieberHood bit), that's basically a comment left under moderation at letfreedomringblog.com, appended to this post. It's being moderated because of the links - links being a flag for moderation because some nefarious people attack blogs with malware linking or worse, advertising.
I like the touch of what Gary's freedom ringing voice has alternately called "Obamacare" and "Pelosicare." Now it's acquired the far worse and super-pejorative term, "Liebercare." And that accomplished, strangely enough, without help from Gary.
Robin LieberHood is of course a GOP-lite variant of Robin Hood, in this instance stealing from the poor to give to the rich, indeed to the uber-rich. His cohort per the Strib item, Little John, qualifies for that uber-rich class rubric.
Uber-dumb and uber-mean, yet uber-rich via swimming in swill beer per the spousal ticket; the two, Robin and Little John, being the top class act at the last RNC.
You remember - the one where the Alaskan moose murderer showed up (in new wardrobe, hair redone, designer glasses added) to savage the press as unfair. Remember all that?
Gilbert and Sullivan could not have put on a better show. And now that pair of Brits are again being trumped stateside, by the US of A Senate.
And without a musical score.
Can Ben Nelson sing? The pack of Catholic bishops as his chorus? Stupak applauding.
And when you read the Firedoglake lead item, (the one Crabgrass headlined), look at the comments. Obama should. My favorites, two:
-and-
The last quote, the "last 50 years" part, got me thinking. The Nazi invasion of Poland was Sept. 1, 1939, while the capitulation on the Berlin Wall was Nov. 9, 1989, almost exactly 50 years, with only a month and some change difference. Orwell, if alive, would be interested in the coincidence and irony of that.
As long as irony and coincidence are a topic; almost exactly 20 years after that Berlin Wall capitulation (with reunification within a year after the wall thing) we are ramping up our [the US] troop levels in the Af-Pak situation, with the rest of NATO involved but at substantially lower troop levels yet with the European population well beyond ours.
Orwell, again, would be interested.
Churchill would be pleased. Very much so.
______UPDATE______
Orwell, presumably knowing some German, would also appreciate irony in "Lieberman," and "Liebercare" being the new name for what, some very tough love - from the populist-progressive perspective? Lovingly crafted, from the insurance cabal's Remy Martin toastings and lobbying-holiday view.
_____FURTHER UPDATE______
Blog evidence indicates Little John is having memory deficit disorder, as father time catches up. [Note - this update was itself updated because of a dead link problem - the replacement link is expected to remain alive].
Gary, your GOP dominated hack-job crew overstepped. Now there's a backlash. Now it's Liebercare.
Make a double batch of holiday popcorn, or make it frequently.
Firedoglake's fired up. Perhaps they'll be asking Glen and Michele for disruptive rally tips.
http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/12/15/obama-quits-cedes-presidency-to-joe-lieberman/
http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/12/11/sign-letter-to-susan-b-komen-foundation-donations-shouldnt-go-to-hadassah-lieberman/
http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/12/14/insurance-stocks-soar-with-joe-liebermans-statements/
http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/12/15/kill-the-senate-bill/
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/19581
Even gentle Al is piling on, while Robin LieberHood's Little John is appalled at lack of decorum.
http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/congress/79561122.html
We'll do popcorn, Gary, as we are. The country club set will be doing Remy Martin.
With a touch or two of editing, (the RobinLieberHood bit), that's basically a comment left under moderation at letfreedomringblog.com, appended to this post. It's being moderated because of the links - links being a flag for moderation because some nefarious people attack blogs with malware linking or worse, advertising.
I like the touch of what Gary's freedom ringing voice has alternately called "Obamacare" and "Pelosicare." Now it's acquired the far worse and super-pejorative term, "Liebercare." And that accomplished, strangely enough, without help from Gary.
Robin LieberHood is of course a GOP-lite variant of Robin Hood, in this instance stealing from the poor to give to the rich, indeed to the uber-rich. His cohort per the Strib item, Little John, qualifies for that uber-rich class rubric.
Uber-dumb and uber-mean, yet uber-rich via swimming in swill beer per the spousal ticket; the two, Robin and Little John, being the top class act at the last RNC.
You remember - the one where the Alaskan moose murderer showed up (in new wardrobe, hair redone, designer glasses added) to savage the press as unfair. Remember all that?
Gilbert and Sullivan could not have put on a better show. And now that pair of Brits are again being trumped stateside, by the US of A Senate.
And without a musical score.
Can Ben Nelson sing? The pack of Catholic bishops as his chorus? Stupak applauding.
And when you read the Firedoglake lead item, (the one Crabgrass headlined), look at the comments. Obama should. My favorites, two:
If I wanted Joe Lieberman writing a health care bill, I would’ve voted for John McCain…!
-and-
Let me just pass on something I was told by a European last year.
She said US is strange country. US has been paying for the defense of all the EU countries with NATO for the last 50 years leaving them to spend their money on their own people with free healthcare, education and other programs while the US lets its’ people die. This started after WWII and the money going there is never questioned.
How is it that we never say no to these programs, we have troops in 190 countries! We could use that money here now. Always money for outsiders but not for your own family. Never hear so much complaints about not having enough money in Europe UK even with their extensive social programs from cradle to grave but the richest country in the world just never has money for its own. There is something very wrong.
The last quote, the "last 50 years" part, got me thinking. The Nazi invasion of Poland was Sept. 1, 1939, while the capitulation on the Berlin Wall was Nov. 9, 1989, almost exactly 50 years, with only a month and some change difference. Orwell, if alive, would be interested in the coincidence and irony of that.
As long as irony and coincidence are a topic; almost exactly 20 years after that Berlin Wall capitulation (with reunification within a year after the wall thing) we are ramping up our [the US] troop levels in the Af-Pak situation, with the rest of NATO involved but at substantially lower troop levels yet with the European population well beyond ours.
Orwell, again, would be interested.
Churchill would be pleased. Very much so.
______UPDATE______
Orwell, presumably knowing some German, would also appreciate irony in "Lieberman," and "Liebercare" being the new name for what, some very tough love - from the populist-progressive perspective? Lovingly crafted, from the insurance cabal's Remy Martin toastings and lobbying-holiday view.
_____FURTHER UPDATE______
Blog evidence indicates Little John is having memory deficit disorder, as father time catches up. [Note - this update was itself updated because of a dead link problem - the replacement link is expected to remain alive].
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)