http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Corporation To Run For Public Office! - 17 messages, 8 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/025ce6dd19c25e00?hl=en
* Bin Laden's global warming message makes perfect sense - 2 messages, 2
authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/f1477a7b6260bb36?hl=en
* TOYOTA SEZ IT HAS [another] FIX FOR PEDAL ... DO YOU BELIEVE IT? - 2
messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/b3778869cfbea966?hl=en
* Join the"Global Information Network"& learn how to make $100K in 90 days! -
1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/b86ecaf1d0e977ae?hl=en
* I finally get it: If GW is not man-made, then God is punishing us with it -
2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/a0a0ec86da3faf9a?hl=en
* A tv on a dresser can kill your kid - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/c64894dbc78dc8c5?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Corporation To Run For Public Office!
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/025ce6dd19c25e00?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 17 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 11:18 am
From: "Rod Speed"
hls wrote:
> "krw" <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
>>> If you have a point, make it, but dont just spout crap.
>>
>> Read the decision, is my point. You clearly have been listening to
>> Obama, not reality.
>
> This is the decision of the Court.
> http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf
>
> It is a bit broad, in a place or two, about expenditures of political
> action committees. It IS couched in terms of free speech and
> communication, and frees organized to spend in these areas - in
> other words to get the candidate of advantage by the juridical
> "person" elected.
>
> I still say it is a way for big money interests to buy a candidate.
Of course it is, and if you dont like that, campaign to amend the constitution.
Corse you will have to do that in the face of corporate TV advertising opposing that.
If you dont like that, blame those who wrote that constitutional amendment that did not have
the forsight to predict that downside of their very swingeing wording they chose to have.
But hard to lynch a corps now tho.
== 2 of 17 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 11:19 am
From: "Rod Speed"
Bill wrote:
> If a corporation is a "person", then it should also be able to get a birth certificate, passport, and register to
> vote!
Nope, you cant get birth certificates for corps.
> (Someone with a corporation, register the corporation to vote, then
> let's see the Supreme Court say they can't do that because a
> corporation is NOT a person!)
You wont even get the birth certificate.
== 3 of 17 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 12:15 pm
From: "hls"
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7src45F4f2U1@mid.individual.net...
> hls wrote:
>> "krw" <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
>>>> If you have a point, make it, but dont just spout crap.
>>>
>>> Read the decision, is my point. You clearly have been listening to
>>> Obama, not reality.
>>
>> This is the decision of the Court.
>> http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf
>>
>> It is a bit broad, in a place or two, about expenditures of political
>> action committees. It IS couched in terms of free speech and
>> communication, and frees organized to spend in these areas - in
>> other words to get the candidate of advantage by the juridical
>> "person" elected.
>>
>> I still say it is a way for big money interests to buy a candidate.
>
> Of course it is, and if you dont like that, campaign to amend the
> constitution.
>
> Corse you will have to do that in the face of corporate TV advertising
> opposing that.
>
> If you dont like that, blame those who wrote that constitutional amendment
> that did not have
> the forsight to predict that downside of their very swingeing wording they
> chose to have.
>
> But hard to lynch a corps now tho.
We, the lowly citizens, cant even get our elected officials to look at term
limits, real
campaign finance reform, etc.
And, no, I dont like the fact that our government is effectively steered by
lobbyists
representing big money groups.
We tread along the tightwire of the law, sometimes, but I feel that the
intent for
government by, of, and for the people is being hijacked.
It is all about money and power.
== 4 of 17 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 12:41 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
hls wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> hls wrote
>>> krw <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote
>>>>> If you have a point, make it, but dont just spout crap.
>>>> Read the decision, is my point. You clearly have been listening to Obama, not reality.
>>> This is the decision of the Court.
>>> http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf
>>> It is a bit broad, in a place or two, about expenditures of
>>> political action committees. It IS couched in terms of free speech
>>> and communication, and frees organized to spend in these areas - in
>>> other words to get the candidate of advantage by the juridical
>>> "person" elected.
>>> I still say it is a way for big money interests to buy a candidate.
>> Of course it is, and if you dont like that, campaign to amend the constitution.
>> Corse you will have to do that in the face of corporate TV advertising opposing that.
>> If you dont like that, blame those who wrote that constitutional amendment that did not have the forsight to predict
>> that downside of their very swingeing wording they chose to have.
>> Bit hard to lynch a corpse now tho.
> We, the lowly citizens, cant even get our elected officials to look at term limits, real campaign finance reform, etc.
Hardly surprising given that they are dug in now.
> And, no, I dont like the fact that our government is effectively
> steered by lobbyists representing big money groups.
Blame that on the farts that wrote the constitution.
> We tread along the tightwire of the law, sometimes, but I feel that
> the intent for government by, of, and for the people is being hijacked.
> It is all about money and power.
Then set fire to yourself outside Congress or sumfin.
== 5 of 17 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 3:06 pm
From: "hls"
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
>> It is all about money and power.
>
> Then set fire to yourself outside Congress or sumfin.
>
>
"Or sumfin" sound better to me.
== 6 of 17 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 3:24 pm
From: krw
On Tue, 2 Feb 2010 06:40:10 -0800, "Bill"
<billnomailnospamx@yahoo.com> wrote:
>If a corporation is a "person", then it should also be able to get a birth
>certificate, passport, and register to vote!
A corporation certainly does have a "birth certificate".
>(Someone with a corporation, register the corporation to vote, then let's
>see the Supreme Court say they can't do that because a corporation is NOT a
>person!)
It is by law person. It can be sued in both criminal and civil court.
== 7 of 17 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 3:25 pm
From: krw
On Tue, 2 Feb 2010 08:18:02 -0600, "hls" <hls@nospam.nix> wrote:
>
>"krw" <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
>>>If you have a point, make it, but dont just spout crap.
>>
>> Read the decision, is my point. You clearly have been listening to
>> Obama, not reality.
>
>This is the decision of the Court.
>http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf
>
>It is a bit broad, in a place or two, about expenditures of political
>action committees. It IS couched in terms of free speech and
>communication, and frees organized to spend in these areas - in
>other words to get the candidate of advantage by the juridical
>"person" elected.
>
>I still say it is a way for big money interests to buy a candidate.
So you admit to being a liar?
== 8 of 17 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 3:27 pm
From: "Bob F"
Mike Hunter wrote:
> Was he referring to the government Unions, the ones who REALLY own the
> government? LOL
>
Are you serious???? That's just idiotic.
== 9 of 17 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 3:27 pm
From: krw
On Tue, 2 Feb 2010 14:15:39 -0600, "hls" <hls@nospam.nix> wrote:
>
>"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:7src45F4f2U1@mid.individual.net...
>> hls wrote:
>>> "krw" <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
>>>>> If you have a point, make it, but dont just spout crap.
>>>>
>>>> Read the decision, is my point. You clearly have been listening to
>>>> Obama, not reality.
>>>
>>> This is the decision of the Court.
>>> http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf
>>>
>>> It is a bit broad, in a place or two, about expenditures of political
>>> action committees. It IS couched in terms of free speech and
>>> communication, and frees organized to spend in these areas - in
>>> other words to get the candidate of advantage by the juridical
>>> "person" elected.
>>>
>>> I still say it is a way for big money interests to buy a candidate.
>>
>> Of course it is, and if you dont like that, campaign to amend the
>> constitution.
>>
>> Corse you will have to do that in the face of corporate TV advertising
>> opposing that.
>>
>> If you dont like that, blame those who wrote that constitutional amendment
>> that did not have
>> the forsight to predict that downside of their very swingeing wording they
>> chose to have.
>>
>> But hard to lynch a corps now tho.
>
>
>We, the lowly citizens, cant even get our elected officials to look at term
>limits, real
>campaign finance reform, etc.
You mean corporations are *forcing* you to vote for their politicians?
You know, corporations cannot vote, so someone is voting them into
office.
>And, no, I dont like the fact that our government is effectively steered by
>lobbyists
>representing big money groups.
You don't like the likes of the Sierra Club either then?
>We tread along the tightwire of the law, sometimes, but I feel that the
>intent for
>government by, of, and for the people is being hijacked.
>It is all about money and power.
Of course it is. Use yours and stop whining.
== 10 of 17 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 3:28 pm
From: "Bob F"
Mrs Irish Mike wrote:
> On Feb 1, 9:02 am, "Mike Hunter" <Mikehunt2@lycos,com> wrote:
>> You need to do a bit more research! The Supreme Court had ruled, if I
>> recall correctly, way back in 1922 that "corporations are "People,"
>> who can be sued in the courts.
>>
> Link or lie? I say urban legend.
Not even that. Pure fantasy.
== 11 of 17 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 3:32 pm
From: "Bob F"
krw wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Feb 2010 19:53:46 -0600, "hls" <hls@nospam.nix> wrote:
>
>>
>> "krw" <krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
>>>> The latest ruling that opens the gate for company "donations" to
>>>> political campaigns is just a way for industry (or other wealthy
>>>> interest groups) to BUY congress.
>>>
>>> Bullshit. You really should learn something before spouting such
>>> nonsense.
>>>
>>>> Now, surely enough, congress has pimped itself for years, but
>>>> this brings pimpdon to a holy acceptable status.
>>>
>>> Ditto.
>>
>> I dont need to learn anything about this bill, and I cant believe you
>> would respond in such an ignorant way. Now businesses can
>> donate to campaigns at essentially unregulated levels..
>
> Wrong. They cannot donate to campaigns at all. They may state their
> opinions, but not give one thin dime to a candidate.
Right. Thay cannot donate to campaigns. But they can run all the ads they want
for or against any cantidate, at any expanse. Which gives them the same undue
influence.
== 12 of 17 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 3:42 pm
From: "Jomo"
krw wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Feb 2010 06:40:10 -0800, "Bill"
> <billnomailnospamx@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> If a corporation is a "person", then it should also be able to get a
>> birth certificate, passport, and register to vote!
> A corporation certainly does have a "birth certificate".''
Not one that is any use to get to vote with.
>> (Someone with a corporation, register the corporation to vote, then
>> let's see the Supreme Court say they can't do that because a
>> corporation is NOT a person!)
>
> It is by law person. It can be sued in both criminal and civil court.
== 13 of 17 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 4:46 pm
From: Canuck57
On 02/02/2010 4:32 PM, Bob F wrote:
> krw wrote:
>> On Mon, 1 Feb 2010 19:53:46 -0600, "hls"<hls@nospam.nix> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "krw"<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
>>>>> The latest ruling that opens the gate for company "donations" to
>>>>> political campaigns is just a way for industry (or other wealthy
>>>>> interest groups) to BUY congress.
>>>>
>>>> Bullshit. You really should learn something before spouting such
>>>> nonsense.
>>>>
>>>>> Now, surely enough, congress has pimped itself for years, but
>>>>> this brings pimpdon to a holy acceptable status.
>>>>
>>>> Ditto.
>>>
>>> I dont need to learn anything about this bill, and I cant believe you
>>> would respond in such an ignorant way. Now businesses can
>>> donate to campaigns at essentially unregulated levels..
>>
>> Wrong. They cannot donate to campaigns at all. They may state their
>> opinions, but not give one thin dime to a candidate.
>
> Right. Thay cannot donate to campaigns. But they can run all the ads they want
> for or against any cantidate, at any expanse. Which gives them the same undue
> influence.
And political and economic favors. Say an inside tip on a stock or hey
my cousin from Harvard needs a good start...is VP good enough?
== 14 of 17 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 4:52 pm
From: Canuck57
On 02/02/2010 1:41 PM, Rod Speed wrote:
> hls wrote
>> Rod Speed<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>> hls wrote
>>>> krw<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote
>
>>>>>> If you have a point, make it, but dont just spout crap.
>
>>>>> Read the decision, is my point. You clearly have been listening to Obama, not reality.
>
>>>> This is the decision of the Court.
>>>> http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf
>
>>>> It is a bit broad, in a place or two, about expenditures of
>>>> political action committees. It IS couched in terms of free speech
>>>> and communication, and frees organized to spend in these areas - in
>>>> other words to get the candidate of advantage by the juridical
>>>> "person" elected.
>
>>>> I still say it is a way for big money interests to buy a candidate.
>
>>> Of course it is, and if you dont like that, campaign to amend the constitution.
>
>>> Corse you will have to do that in the face of corporate TV advertising opposing that.
>
>>> If you dont like that, blame those who wrote that constitutional amendment that did not have the forsight to predict
>>> that downside of their very swingeing wording they chose to have.
>
>>> Bit hard to lynch a corpse now tho.
>
>> We, the lowly citizens, cant even get our elected officials to look at term limits, real campaign finance reform, etc.
>
> Hardly surprising given that they are dug in now.
>
>> And, no, I dont like the fact that our government is effectively
>> steered by lobbyists representing big money groups.
>
> Blame that on the farts that wrote the constitution.
Hey, they did pretty good really, better than most other countries. But
given liberalism and the corrupt time they will always run anything down
to decay unless the people are hard nosed about it.
I say hard nosed, as someone needs to publically tell Obama his
corruption and mamoth debt spend is screwing people. And call him a
corrupt prick.
>> We tread along the tightwire of the law, sometimes, but I feel that
>> the intent for government by, of, and for the people is being hijacked.
>
>> It is all about money and power.
>
> Then set fire to yourself outside Congress or sumfin.
I hope he does not.
== 15 of 17 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 4:56 pm
From: Canuck57
On 02/02/2010 4:27 PM, krw wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Feb 2010 14:15:39 -0600, "hls"<hls@nospam.nix> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Rod Speed"<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:7src45F4f2U1@mid.individual.net...
>>> hls wrote:
>>>> "krw"<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
>>>>>> If you have a point, make it, but dont just spout crap.
>>>>>
>>>>> Read the decision, is my point. You clearly have been listening to
>>>>> Obama, not reality.
>>>>
>>>> This is the decision of the Court.
>>>> http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf
>>>>
>>>> It is a bit broad, in a place or two, about expenditures of political
>>>> action committees. It IS couched in terms of free speech and
>>>> communication, and frees organized to spend in these areas - in
>>>> other words to get the candidate of advantage by the juridical
>>>> "person" elected.
>>>>
>>>> I still say it is a way for big money interests to buy a candidate.
>>>
>>> Of course it is, and if you dont like that, campaign to amend the
>>> constitution.
>>>
>>> Corse you will have to do that in the face of corporate TV advertising
>>> opposing that.
>>>
>>> If you dont like that, blame those who wrote that constitutional amendment
>>> that did not have
>>> the forsight to predict that downside of their very swingeing wording they
>>> chose to have.
>>>
>>> But hard to lynch a corps now tho.
>>
>>
>> We, the lowly citizens, cant even get our elected officials to look at term
>> limits, real
>> campaign finance reform, etc.
>
> You mean corporations are *forcing* you to vote for their politicians?
> You know, corporations cannot vote, so someone is voting them into
> office.
In a way yes. Say I have the republican AND the democrat would be
president in my pocket. Have squeeze on his corruption and pay them lots.
Going into an eletion, how mny people have voted but not voted for a
democrat or republican? That is vote without the two parties in mind?
>> And, no, I dont like the fact that our government is effectively steered by
>> lobbyists
>> representing big money groups.
>
> You don't like the likes of the Sierra Club either then?
>
>> We tread along the tightwire of the law, sometimes, but I feel that the
>> intent for
>> government by, of, and for the people is being hijacked.
>
>> It is all about money and power.
>
> Of course it is. Use yours and stop whining.
He is right, follow the money and power. The rest is bullshit for the
naive.
== 16 of 17 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 5:33 pm
From: "Mike Hunter"
Jus WHO IS this naive, to whom you are referring? ;)
"Canuck57" <Canuck57@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:7R3an.50672$kQ5.19973@newsfe08.iad...
> On 02/02/2010 4:27 PM, krw wrote:
>> On Tue, 2 Feb 2010 14:15:39 -0600, "hls"<hls@nospam.nix> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Rod Speed"<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:7src45F4f2U1@mid.individual.net...
>>>> hls wrote:
>>>>> "krw"<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
>>>>>>> If you have a point, make it, but dont just spout crap.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Read the decision, is my point. You clearly have been listening to
>>>>>> Obama, not reality.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the decision of the Court.
>>>>> http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>> It is a bit broad, in a place or two, about expenditures of political
>>>>> action committees. It IS couched in terms of free speech and
>>>>> communication, and frees organized to spend in these areas - in
>>>>> other words to get the candidate of advantage by the juridical
>>>>> "person" elected.
>>>>>
>>>>> I still say it is a way for big money interests to buy a candidate.
>>>>
>>>> Of course it is, and if you dont like that, campaign to amend the
>>>> constitution.
>>>>
>>>> Corse you will have to do that in the face of corporate TV advertising
>>>> opposing that.
>>>>
>>>> If you dont like that, blame those who wrote that constitutional
>>>> amendment
>>>> that did not have
>>>> the forsight to predict that downside of their very swingeing wording
>>>> they
>>>> chose to have.
>>>>
>>>> But hard to lynch a corps now tho.
>>>
>>>
>>> We, the lowly citizens, cant even get our elected officials to look at
>>> term
>>> limits, real
>>> campaign finance reform, etc.
>>
>> You mean corporations are *forcing* you to vote for their politicians?
>> You know, corporations cannot vote, so someone is voting them into
>> office.
>
> In a way yes. Say I have the republican AND the democrat would be
> president in my pocket. Have squeeze on his corruption and pay them lots.
>
> Going into an eletion, how mny people have voted but not voted for a
> democrat or republican? That is vote without the two parties in mind?
>
>>> And, no, I dont like the fact that our government is effectively steered
>>> by
>>> lobbyists
>>> representing big money groups.
>>
>> You don't like the likes of the Sierra Club either then?
>>
>>> We tread along the tightwire of the law, sometimes, but I feel that the
>>> intent for
>>> government by, of, and for the people is being hijacked.
>>
>>> It is all about money and power.
>>
>> Of course it is. Use yours and stop whining.
>
> He is right, follow the money and power. The rest is bullshit for the
> naive.
== 17 of 17 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 6:37 pm
From: edspyhill01
On Feb 2, 8:33 pm, "Mike Hunter" <Mikehunt2@lycos,com> wrote:
> Jus WHO IS this naive, to whom you are referring? ;)
>
This?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-klein/supreme-court-ruling-spur...
William KleinPolitical strategist, writer, humorist in Washington,
D.C.
Posted: January 26, 2010 08:45 PM
Supreme Court Ruling Spurs Corporation To Run for Congress:First Test
of "Corporate Personhood" In Politics
I've agreed to serve as campaign manager for the first "corporate
person" to exercise its constitutional right to run for office.
Following the recent Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v.
Federal Election Commission to allow unlimited corporate funding of
federal campaigns, Murray Hill Incorporated, a diversifying
corporation in the Washington, D.C. area, has filed to run for U.S.
Congress in the Republican primary in Maryland's 8th Congressional
District. You can see our first campaign video on YouTube and follow
us on Facebook.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHRKkXtxDRA
Until now,corporate interests had to rely on campaign contributions
and influence peddling to achieve their goals in Washington. But
thanks to an enlightened Supreme Court, now multinational
corporations
can eliminate the middle-man and run for office themselves.
Finally, the vision of the novelist Ralph Nader has come to pass--We
are a government of the Exxons, by the General Motors, and for the
Duponts.
Murray Hill Inc. is believed to be the first "corporate person" to
exercise its constitutional right to run for office. As Supreme Court
observer Lyle Denniston wrote in his SCOTUSblog, "If anything, the
decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission conferred
new dignity on corporate "persons," treating them -- under the First
Amendment free-speech clause -- as the equal of human beings."
Murray Hill Inc. agrees. "The strength of America," Murray Hill Inc.
says, "is in the boardrooms, country clubs and Lear jets of America's
great corporations. We're saying to Wal-Mart, AIG and Pfizer, if not
you, who? If not now, when?"
Murray Hill Inc. plans on spending top dollar to protect its
investment. "It's our democracy," Murray Hill Inc. says, "We bought
it, we paid for it, and we're going to keep it."
The campaign's designated human, Eric Hensal, will help the
corporation conform to antiquated "human only" procedures and sign
the
necessary voter registration and candidacy paperwork. Hensal is
excited by this new opportunity. "We want to get in on the ground
floor of the democracy market before the whole store is bought by
China," he says.
I plan on running an aggressive, historic campaign that "puts people
second" or even third, employing social media, automated robo-calls,
"Astroturf" lobbying and computer-generated avatars to get out the
vote.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Bin Laden's global warming message makes perfect sense
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/f1477a7b6260bb36?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 12:22 pm
From: TheTibetanMonkey
Wait a minute, that title doesn't mean what it seems. The SneakySnake
is saying that because Bin Laden is an enemy of Israel (she's Jewish)
and America, he's wrong and it implies that ALL who believe in GW
indirectly support Bin Laden! Well, I still say he makes perfect
sense... ;)
"Bin Laden's global warming message makes perfect sense"
By Miriam Shaviv
I actually almost feel sorry for the global warming true believers. In
the past couple of months they have seen the science behind their
theory severely undermined; the motivations and professionalism of
their scientists cast into serious doubt; and the Copenhagen summit
ended in failure. Now, to top it all off, their cause has been very
publicly endorsed by the world's most wanted terrorist, Osama bin
Laden himself!
"Speaking
about climate change is not a matter of intellectual luxury — the
phenomenon is an actual fact," [bin Laden's] tape says according to al-
Jazeera. "All of the industrialized countries, especially the big
ones, bear responsibility for the global warming crisis"...
In the latest recording, he calls out developed world economies for
continuing to produce global warming pollution even after signing on
to
the Kyoto protocol. America stayed outside Kyoto, which Osama noted.
"George
Bush junior, preceded by [the US] congress, dismissed the agreement to
placate giant corporations. And they are themselves standing behind
speculation, monopoly and soaring living costs."
"They are also
behind 'globalisation and its tragic implications'. And whenever the
perpetrators are found guilty, the heads of state rush to rescue them
using public money."
Talk about a nail in the coffin.
But all gloating aside, bin Laden's green turn makes perfect sense.
The global warming movement has always been about politics; about
finding more sticks with which to beat up and tame the developed
world, capitalism, "giant corporations", globalisation etc - all
targets the left hates. Bin Laden's pitch-perfect message shows he
understands this, perfectly. And since he shares many of the same
political targets (not - I emphasise - that I am saying global warming
activists are equivalent in any way to terrorists), why is anyone
surprised when he jumps on the bandwagon?
http://www.thejc.com/blogpost/bin-ladens-global-warming-message-makes-perfect-sense
--------------------------------------------------------
"In the jungle there are two paths: one says 'dead end.'"
http://webspawner.com/users/BANANAREVOLUTION
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 12:32 pm
From: TheTibetanMonkey showing-the-path-of-enlightenment-in-the-jungle
On Feb 2, 1:52 pm, BRYAN <lotterypredict...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am sure we will meet very soon,very soon!
>
The way you are dragging the world toward a nuclear/environmental
holocaust, we all may as well meet in hell pretty soon.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: TOYOTA SEZ IT HAS [another] FIX FOR PEDAL ... DO YOU BELIEVE IT?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/b3778869cfbea966?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 12:21 pm
From: A VFW
In article <hk84n1$u8u$1@news.eternal-september.org>,
"The Henchman" <yup@yup.org> wrote:
> "hls" <hls@nospam.nix> wrote in message
> news:e96dneGWwqoF1frWnZ2dnUVZ_r-dnZ2d@giganews.com...
> >
> > "slightly horny" <lilhornie@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:dd41af9d-1273-4337-8f58-16d3694a1d4c@b10g2000vbh.googlegroups.com...
> >> Time to buy another BROOM?
> >>
> >> I kinda think the problem is more technologically related than just an
> >> ordinary "pedal."
> >>
> >> You?
> >>
> >> ----------------------
> >>
> > I saw a blurb that the Feds had approved the fix. If that means
> > anything....
>
> if by "feds" you mean the HTSA they have been investigating Toyota's
> acceleration problems since 2004. Those models involved dated back to
> model year 2000. Throttle control was lost in reverse. In that
> investigation 1 million automobiles, Toyota and lexus models, were thought
> susceptible.
>
ya, know the engineers have to keep re-designing things to justify their
jobs. Lots of time the reason given for need to re-design is the new
idea "costs" less to manufacture. And in this case it was false economy.
Oh, well. That's why I like driving a classic. a daily driver that you
can and sometimes have to/ fix yourself. I drive a 50 y.o. VW. sometimes.
If the sun is out.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 3:44 pm
From: ransley
On Feb 1, 8:38 am, slightly horny <lilhor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Time to buy another BROOM?
>
> I kinda think the problem is more technologically related than just an
> ordinary "pedal."
>
> You?
>
> ----------------------
> "Toyota tells dealers parts on way to fix pedals"
>
> By KEN THOMAS and TOM KRISHER
> The Associated Press
> Monday, February 1, 2010; 8:52 AM
>
> WASHINGTON -- Toyota Motor Corp. said Monday its dealers should get
> parts to fix a sticky gas pedal problem by the end of this week as the
> automaker apologized to customers and tried to bring an end to a
> recall that has affected 4.2 million vehicles worldwide.
>
> The company said in a statement that it has begun shipping parts and
> is training dealers on the repairs. Some dealers will stay open 24
> hours to fix the 2.3 million cars and trucks affected by the recall in
> the U.S.
>
> Technical bulletins on how to install the new parts should arrive at
> dealers by midweek, the company told dealers in an e-mail. It was not
> clear exactly when repairs would start, although dealers have said
> they'll begin as soon as possible.
>
> The automaker also said Monday it would suspend production of eight
> U.S. models affected by the recall for this week. The company also
> suspended sales of the models last week until repairs can be made.
>
> Jim Lentz, president and chief operating officer of Toyota Motor
> Sales, said in the statement that nothing is more important than
> customer safety.
>
> In a video clip released by the automaker, Lentz said he wanted to
> "sincerely apologize to Toyota owners. I know that our recalls have
> caused many of you concern and for that I am truly sorry."
>
> "Toyota has always prided itself on building high-quality, durable
> cars that customers can depend on and I know that we've let you down,"
> Lentz said.
>
> Lentz, in an interview on NBC's "Today," said the automaker was
> "confident that we have the fix" for the gas pedal system. He said the
> company first developed a report on the problems in late October, and
> he denied that Toyota had delayed addressing the problem.
>
> "I drive Toyotas. My family members drive Toyotas ... I would not have
> them in products that I knew were not safe," Lentz said.
>
> Tammy Darvish, a dealer in the Washington, D.C., area, said she
> expects to get parts Thursday night or Friday morning, and her
> dealership will begin repairs immediately, staying open around the
> clock.
>
> Darvish said she has set up a 24-hour hotline for her 30,000 Toyota
> customers and had already begun to schedule appointments for later
> this week. She estimated it could take about two weeks for all the
> vehicles to be fixed.
>
> "No matter what Toyota does, they always do it right," Darvish said.
> "They might be a little slow in coming out, but that's because they're
> diligent."
>
> Toyota recalled the vehicles on Jan. 21, determining that excess
> friction in the gas pedal assembly could in rare cases cause the
> pedals to stick.
>
> Engineers traced the problem to a friction device in the assembly that
> is supposed to provide the proper pedal "feel" by adding resistance,
> Toyota said in a statement.
>
> The device has a shoe that rubs against a nearby metal surface during
> normal pedal use. But wear and environmental conditions can over time
> cause the pedals to not operate smoothly or in rare cases stick
> partially open.
>
> The company said a steel reinforcement bar will be installed, reducing
> the friction.
>
> "With this reinforcement in place, the excess friction that can cause
> the pedal to stick is eliminated," the statement said. "The company
> has confirmed the effectiveness of the newly reinforced pedals through
> rigorous testing on pedal assemblies that had previously shown a
> tendency to stick."
>
> The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration told Toyota last
> week that it was satisfied with the repair plan. Legally Toyota did
> not need NHTSA's approval, but the company would be unlikely to
> proceed without the government's blessing.
>
> Toyota told its dealers in an e-mail that they should determine what
> vehicles to repair first. The company said it "strongly recommends
> dealers prioritize consumer vehicles first, followed by dealer owned
> inventory." The repairs are expected to take about 30 minutes of work,
> and drivers should not notice any change in the feel of the pedal.
>
> Owners are expected to receive information by mail beginning this
> week. The company will cover all repair costs.
>
> Since the recall was announced, dealers have been in the difficult
> position of telling angry customers that they have no parts to fix the
> cars.
>
> The recall in the U.S. includes the 2009-10 RAV4 crossover, the
> 2009-10 Corolla, the 2009-10 Matrix hatchback, the 2005-10 Avalon, the
> 2007-10 Camry, the 2010 Highlander crossover, the 2007-10 Tundra
> pickup and the 2008-10 Sequoia SUV. It also has been expanded to
> another 1.9 million vehicles in Europe and China.
>
> Toyota said that not all the models of Camry, RAV4, Corolla and
> Highlander listed in the recall have the faulty gas pedals, which were
> made by CTS Corp. of Elkhart, Ind. Dealers can tell which models have
> the CTS pedals. Models made in Japan, and some models built in the
> U.S., have pedal systems made by another parts supplier, Denso Corp.,
> which function well.
>
> All Matrix, Avalon, Tundra and Sequoia models covered by the recall
> have the faulty pedals.
>
> Toyota announced late Friday that it would begin shipping new gas
> pedal systems to dealers as well.
>
> On Sunday, Toyota took out full-page ads in 20 major newspapers to
> reassure customers.
>
> But crisis management experts said the company's reputation for
> impeccable reliability has been damaged.
>
> Meanwhile, Consumer Reports, an influential publication for car
> buyers, on Friday suspended its "recommended" status for the eight
> recalled Toyota models.
>
> The pedal recall is separate from another recall involving floor mats
> that can bend and push down accelerators. The two recalls combined
> affect more than 7 million vehicles worldwide.
>
> The repairs will not bring an end to public scrutiny on how Toyota
> handled the problems.
>
> The U.S. House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is launching
> an investigation. It has scheduled a Feb. 10 hearing titled "Toyota
> Gas Pedals: Is the Public at Risk?" and asked Yoshi Inaba, chairman
> and CEO of Toyota Motor North America, to testify. Separately, a House
> investigative panel is planning a Feb. 25 hearing.
>
> ---
>
> [Tom Krisher reported from Detroit.]
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/01/AR201...
Could it be computer related.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Join the"Global Information Network"& learn how to make $100K in 90
days!
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/b86ecaf1d0e977ae?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 1:39 pm
From: Vastcom Publishing
If you are looking for wealth creation, financial freedom, emotional
well-being, privileged information, information on what is really
going on in the world, or natural health remedies then you have come
to the right place. This is a special invitation for you to join the
Global Information Network (GIN). Visit the main website at
http://www.globalinformationnetwork.com for more information. There
you can listen to an invitation audio that will describe what GIN is
all about and read how GIN was formed and by whom. I have been a
member for four months now and have seen how GIN has evolved and
proven itself to be all that it claims.
When you go to the main webpage you have the choice of signing up as
an affiliate or a member. Joining as an affiliate is free and has
some good benefits, but is obviously limited. Joining as a member has
infinitely more benefits and costs an initial due of $1,000 and
monthly dues of $150. You will see that this is an amazing bargain
once you gain access to the member's area. It is hard to put a price
on truly changing your life for the better. I have yet to meet a
member who has attended a live event or studied the information that
hasn't been changed in a positive and profound way. Attending a live
event and meeting the high level members is life changing. It is hard
to describe the value of talking one-on-one with multi-millionaires
and billionaires up in their presidential suites in luxurious
settings. How much would you pay to have personal time with some of
the most successful people in the world? I have had this privilege
and would like for you to have this opportunity as well.
So, go to http://www.globalinformationnetwork.com and sign up today.
If you are tight on cash right now, I would encourage you to join as
an affiliate first. As an affiliate you can participate in the
commission structure, listen to the weekly audio updates, and have
access to the affiliate training (seminars and marketing tools).
Later on you can join as a member and have access to the confidential
information, training events, and greater money making opportunities.
If you are asked for an access code, use 80251. I look forward to
sharing this exciting experience with you! If you have any questions
or concerns, you can contact me by emailing me at
mastercondorcop@aol.com
==============================================================================
TOPIC: I finally get it: If GW is not man-made, then God is punishing us with
it
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/a0a0ec86da3faf9a?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 3:20 pm
From: delboy
On 2 Feb, 16:51, jeff <jeff_th...@att.net> wrote:
> delboy wrote:
> > On 2 Feb, 14:02, jeff <jeff_th...@att.net> wrote:
> >> delboy wrote:
> <snip>
>
> >> The arguments against global warming are of the same type, to cloud
> >> and confuse, as those used against the smoking/cancer link. Or against
> >> seat belt use (too costly), or so may others.
>
> >> What we do is another matter, but the link is clear. Only those who
> >> believe in fairy tales, like Intelligent Design or Trickle Down
> >> Economics, disbelieve.
>
> >> Jeff- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -
>
> > Typical arguments from those who earn a living by studying AGW/Climate
> > Change, or believe that it is true.
>
> Except, I'm not. I didn't get my information out of the Telegraph or
> some such either.
>
> The climate change scientists have
>
> > been caught being selective with their data, or even making it up! Why
> > should we believe them?
>
> The overall evidence is overwhelming. You are quibbling over details.
> Even Dr Roy Spencer, Limbaugh's Expert, does not deny man made CO2 is
> causing global warming. He only can argue the force of the effect.
>
>
>
> > Are you happy to pay much increased 'carbon taxes' to be given to
> > third world dictators as 'carbon offsets'? I'm not!
>
> So much fear of what might happen, instead of what is happening.
>
> Your side has abrogated the say in how to deal with this because they
> are off in la la land living in denial of that which is only not real by
> force of wishful thinking.
>
> I'll tell you exactly what is the problem with Conservatives.
>
> They hate government and want to break it. And when they are in power
> that is what they deliver: broken government.
>
> It's a one trick pony where *every* solution is less taxes, less
> regulation and less government. To believe this, you have to deny
> reality and push the blame off somewhere else.
>
> In my country, we have seen exactly what faithfully following such
> practices can lead to.
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
>
>
> > DC.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Himalayan Glaciers are not Melting!
A pro climate change scientist recently claimed that all the Himalayan
glaciers would be gone by 2032, based on the 20th Century rate of
global warming. In fact these glaciers are not only holding their own,
but getting longer!
DC.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 6:55 pm
From: jeff
delboy wrote:
> On 2 Feb, 16:51, jeff <jeff_th...@att.net> wrote:
>> delboy wrote:
>>> On 2 Feb, 14:02, jeff <jeff_th...@att.net> wrote:
>>>> delboy wrote:
>> <snip>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> DC.- Hide quoted text -
>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Himalayan Glaciers are not Melting!
>
> A pro climate change scientist recently claimed that all the Himalayan
> glaciers would be gone by 2032, based on the 20th Century rate of
> global warming. In fact these glaciers are not only holding their own,
> but getting longer!
Nope:
http://blog.taragana.com/science/2010/01/22/himalayan-glaciers-are-in-retreat-un-body-4218/
NEW DELHI - Himalayan glaciers are retreating, and small glaciers will
probably disappear by the end of the century, the UN body in charge of
the Himalayas said Friday.
It was commenting on another UN report that had admitted it blundered by
predicting disappearance of all Himalayan glaciers by 2035.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of the UN is under
fire for having included in its 2007 report — without adequate peer
review — an assertion that glaciers in the Himalayas will disappear by
2035 due to global warming. It has since retracted the statement.
The International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (Icimod),
however, supported the overall conclusions of the IPCC.
"We can state that the majority of glaciers in the region are in a
general condition of retreat, although with some regional differences;
that small glaciers below 5,000 metres above sea level will probably
disappear by the end of the century, whereas larger glaciers well above
this level will still exist but be smaller; and that deglaciation could
have serious impacts on the hydrological regime of the downstream river
basins," it said in a statement.
>
Among many other articles...
On another note, there is increasing evidence that Sarah Palin's brain
is shrinking faster than anyone could have imagined:
http://trueslant.com/johnknefel/2010/01/14/oh-god-sarah-palin-cant-name-a-founding-father-haha-tear/
With the current rate of mental decline, analysts predicts she will will
be a shoe in for the 2012 GOP nomination.
Jeff
> DC.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: A tv on a dresser can kill your kid
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/c64894dbc78dc8c5?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Feb 2 2010 3:49 pm
From: zeez
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "misc.consumers.frugal-living"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to misc.consumers.frugal-living+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
