<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/rss2full.xsl" type="text/xsl" media="screen"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
	<title>Tioga-George Forum</title>
	<link>http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net</link>
	<description>Tioga-George Forum</description>
	<ttl>60</ttl>
	<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 16:05:41 GMT</pubDate>
	<item>
		<title>Our politics are STUPID!</title>
		<link>http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4822603</link>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_politics_of_stupidity_strikes_again_20100728/?ln&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_politics_of_stupidity_strikes_again_20100728/?ln&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div align=center&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;width:90%;text-align:left;&quot;&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;margin-bottom:2px&quot;&gt;Quote:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;border:1px inset; border-bottom:1px solid #E8E8E8; border-right:1px solid #E8E8E8; padding:6px; spacing:3px;&quot;&gt;&lt;br&gt;Posted on Jul 28, 2010&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;By E.J. Dionne, Jr.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Can a nation remain a superpower if its internal politics are incorrigibly stupid?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Start with taxes. In every other serious democracy, conservative political parties feel at least some obligation to match their tax policies with their spending plans. David Cameron, the new Conservative prime minister in Britain, is a leading example.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;He recently offered a rather brutal budget that includes severe cutbacks. I have doubts about some of them, but at least Cameron cared enough about reducing his countrys deficit that alongside the cuts, he also proposed an increase in the value-added tax from 17.5 percent to 20 percent. Imagine: a fiscal conservative who really is a fiscal conservative.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;That could never happen here because the fairy tale of supply-side economics insists that taxes are always too high, especially on the rich.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;This is why Democrats will be fools if they dont try to turn the Republicans refusal to raise taxes on families earning more than $250,000 a year into an election issue. If Democrats go into a headlong retreat on this, they will have no standing to govern.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The simple truth is that the wealthy in the United Statesthe people who have made almost all the income gains in recent yearsare undertaxed compared with everyone else.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Consider two reports from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. One, issued last month, highlighted findings from the Congressional Budget Office showing that the gaps in after-tax income between the richest 1 percent of Americans and the middle and poorest fifths of the country more than tripled between 1979 and 2007, the period for which figures are available.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The other, from February, used Internal Revenue Service data to show that the effective federal income tax rate for the 400 taxpayers with the very highest incomes declined by nearly half in just over a decade, even as their pre-tax incomes have grown five times larger.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The study found that the top 400 households paid 16.6 percent of their income in federal individual income taxes in 2007, down from 30 percent in 1995. We are talking here about truly rich people: Using 2007 dollars, it took an adjusted gross income of at least $35 million to get into the top 400 in 1992, and $139 million in 2007.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The notion that when we are fighting two wars, were not supposed to consider raising taxes on such Americans is one sign of a country thats no longer serious. Why do so few foreign policy hawks acknowledge that if they lack the gumption to ask taxpayers to finance the projection of American military power, we wont be able to project it in the long run?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;And if we are unwilling to have a full-scale debate over whether nation-building abroad is getting in the way of nation-building at home, we will accomplish neither.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Our discussion of the economic stimulus is another symptom of political irrationality. Its entirely true that the $787 billion recovery package passed last year was not big enough to keep unemployment from rising to over 9 percent.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;But this is not actually an argument against the stimulus. On the contrary, studies showing that the stimulus created or saved up to 3 million jobs are very hard to refute. Its much easier to pretend that all this money was wasted, although the evidence is overwhelming that we should have stimulated more.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Then theres the very structure of our government. Does any other democracy have a powerful legislative branch as undemocratic as the U.S. Senate?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;When our republic was created, the population ratio between the largest and smallest state was 13 to 1. Now, its 68 to 1. Because of the abuse of the filibuster, 41 senators representing less than 11 percent of the nations population can, in principle, block action supported by 59 senators representing more than 89 percent of our population. And you wonder why its so hard to get anything done in Washington?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Im a chronic optimist about America. But we are letting stupid politics, irrational ideas on fiscal policy and an antiquated political structure undermine our power.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;We need a new conservatism in our country that is worthy of the name. We need liberals willing to speak out on the threat our daft politics poses to our influence in the world. We need moderates who do more than stick their fingers in the wind to calculate the halfway point between two political poles.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;And yes, we need to reform a Senate that has become an embarrassment to our democratic claims.&lt;br&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt; &lt;p&gt;Forum: &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/?forum=115068&quot;&gt;Political &amp; Religious&lt;/a&gt;
</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4822603</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 00:45:16 GMT</pubDate>
		<author>Fezziwig</author>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Economist Alan Blinder says TARP and stimulus prevented depression</title>
		<link>http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4821251</link>
		<description>Alan Blinder is usually considered a conservative economist.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/07/saved-from-a-second-depression.html&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/07/saved-from-a-second-depression.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div align=center&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;width:90%;text-align:left;&quot;&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;margin-bottom:2px&quot;&gt;Quote:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;border:1px inset; border-bottom:1px solid #E8E8E8; border-right:1px solid #E8E8E8; padding:6px; spacing:3px;&quot;&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;h1 class=&quot;blogEntryTitle&quot;&gt;Saved From A Second Depression?&lt;/h1&gt;                       &lt;p class=&quot;blogByline&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;blogEntryDate&quot;&gt;28 Jul 2010 04:01 pm&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;                                        &lt;!-- sphereit start --&gt;                 &lt;p&gt;A paper by Alan S. Blinder and Mark Zandi is pinging around the economics blogs. From the &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/28/business/economy/28bailout.html?_r=2&amp;amp;refsite=twitter&quot;&gt;NYT&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;In a new paper, the economists argue that without the Wall Street bailout, the bank &lt;span class=&quot;meta-classifier&quot;&gt;stress tests&lt;/span&gt;, the emergency lending and asset purchases by the &lt;span class=&quot;meta-org&quot;&gt;Federal Reserve&lt;/span&gt;, and the Obama administrations fiscal stimulus program, the nations &lt;span class=&quot;meta-classifier&quot;&gt;gross domestic product&lt;/span&gt; would be about 6.5 percent lower this year. In addition, there would be about 8.5 million fewer jobs, on top of the more than 8 million already lost; and the economy would be experiencing &lt;span class=&quot;meta-classifier&quot;&gt;deflation&lt;/span&gt;, instead of low inflation...&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;The full paper is &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/End-of-Great-Recession.pdf&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt; (pdf). Avent &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2010/07/stimulus_0&quot;&gt;gives&lt;/a&gt; a tentative response. Stephen Spruiell &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YzQ1NDE5NmJjZTQxYTU1YTkwMjM1NDNmOGVhNTE1MDM=&quot;&gt;thinks&lt;/a&gt;  it is &quot;still pretty early in the game to be evaluating what effects the  bailouts, the Fed interventions, and the stimulus actually had'.  Delong's &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/07/the-no-stimulus-baseline.html?utm_source=feedburner&amp;amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BradDelongsSemi-dailyJournal+%28Brad+DeLong%27s+Semi-Daily+Journal%29&amp;amp;utm_content=Google+Reader&quot;&gt;reading&lt;/a&gt;:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;p&gt;The hard part of it, of course, is figuring out what would have happened to the flow-of-funds through financial markets in the absence of TARP, of quantitative easing, and of other extraordinary financial policy interventions. That they were, collectively, about twice as big as the ARRA smells right to me, but the only pieces of information I have to support that are even shakier than back-of-the-envelope calculations.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt; &lt;p&gt;Forum: &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/?forum=115068&quot;&gt;Political &amp; Religious&lt;/a&gt;
</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4821251</guid>
		<pubDate>Thur, 29 Jul 2010 02:07:53 GMT</pubDate>
		<author>Fezziwig</author>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Injustice in Arizona</title>
		<link>http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4821104</link>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ODg2MWRmNWNlOTUwNDdiMWMwNGVlZDM0YjJkM2M3Mzg%3D&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ODg2MWRmNWNlOTUwNDdiMWMwNGVlZDM0YjJkM2M3Mzg%3D&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;blog_title&quot;&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;div align=center&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;width:90%;text-align:left;&quot;&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;margin-bottom:2px&quot;&gt;Quote:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;border:1px inset; border-bottom:1px solid #E8E8E8; border-right:1px solid #E8E8E8; padding:6px; spacing:3px;&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;blog_title&quot;&gt;&lt;br&gt;What Judge Boltons Injunction Doesnt Say&lt;/span&gt;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; (Heather Mac Donald)&lt;br&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: &amp;quot;Times New Roman&amp;quot;,&amp;quot;serif&amp;quot;;&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;In  enjoining Arizonas landmark immigration law, U.S. District Judge Susan  Bolton maintains the Obama administrations carefully cultivated  fiction: that what concerns the White House regarding S.B. 1070 is its  effect on legal, rather than illegal, aliens. Almost nowhere in the  governments briefs or the judges ruling is the arrest and detention of  illegal aliens addressed. This fiction is transparent, however. The  real threat posed by S.B. 1070 was that it would disrupt the de facto  amnesty that the executive branch has accorded to the vast majority of  illegal aliens. It would start to implement congressional mandates and  the public will that the immigration laws be enforced. For that reason,  it had to be stopped. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;So determined was Judge Bolton to follow  the Obama administrations political strategy regarding the laws  putative impact on legal immigrants that she exploited a drafting error  in the law that Arizona had already acknowledged and repudiated. S.B.  1070 authorizes local law-enforcement officers to check the immigration  status of individuals they have lawfully stopped, if they have  reasonable suspicion that the individual is in the country illegally,  and if the inquiry into immigration status is practicable. S.B. 1070  also required that any person who is arrested shall have the persons  immigration status determined before the person is released. Arizona  stated in its brief and testified in court that the legislative intent  behind that sentence regarding arrestees was that only people for whom  there is &lt;em style=&quot;&quot;&gt;already&lt;/em&gt; reasonable suspicion that they are in  the country illegally would have their immigration status checked after  arrest. The section does not apply to every arrestee. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Judge  Bolton rejected that testimony, however, in order to buttress the White  House claim that large numbers of legal aliens would be subject to  immigration inquiries if S.B. 1070 went into effect. As the Justice  Department portrayed it, and as Judge Bolton affirmed, massive  categories of legal aliens by definition do not have proof of their  legal status with them. If those legal aliens are now to be queried  about their immigration status following every arrest in Arizona, they  will be subject to undue harassment, the federal government and the  judge concluded. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The only lawful aliens to whom the judge could  point who would not necessarily have proof of status readily available  to them, however (neither the federal government nor the judge asserted  that proof of status was unavailable to such individuals), were  visitors from visa-waiver countries, asylum applicants who have not yet  received a green card, victims of certain enumerated crimes such as  trafficking who are assisting law enforcement, and women who have  petitioned for relief under the Violence Against Women Act. But  presumably the lawful status of such aliens would be known to the  federal government. If an Arizona officer inquired into those aliens  immigration status, ICE would tell the officer that the person is  authorized to be in the country, ending the investigation. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Furthermore,  the number of such individuals who would also be in a position to raise  an officers reasonable suspicion that they were in the country  illegally is extremely small. In a petition for injunctive relief, a  judge must balance the equities in favor of both parties. The interest  of Arizona, where 500,000 illegal aliens reside, in restoring the rule  of law should be weighed against the interest of those small numbers of  legal aliens or aliens whose status is in abeyance and who might be  questioned regarding their immigration status because they have raised a  reasonable suspicion that they are in the country illegally. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Judge  Boltons ruling regarding S.B. 1070s provision on the possession of  immigration documents verges on bad faith. S.B. 1070 adopts virtually  verbatim a federal law requiring lawful aliens to carry their  immigration papers with them; the Arizona version merely lessens the  federal penalties regarding the amount of the fine and possible jail  time for violation of the federal document requirement. As the judge  notes, federal registration power is exclusive; Congresss registration  scheme may not be altered by the states. But nothing in S.B. 1070  changes the rules for registration; the Arizona law merely confirms  those rules in state law. Judge Bolton alleges that the Arizona  provision alters the penalties in the federal law, without disclosing  that the Arizona law lowers them. She concludes without the slightest  trace of argument that the Arizona document provision stands as an  obstacle to the uniform federal registration scheme and is therefore  impermissible. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The only factually plausible objection to S.B.  1070s document requirement and to the provision authorizing inquiries  into an aliens status is that Arizona may penalize someone for being in  the country illegally whom the federal government intends to ignore. It  is the effect of the law on illegal aliens, not on legal ones, that has  most upset the Obama administration and illegal-alien advocates (the  Bush administration would probably have reacted similarly). A large  reason why S.B. 1070s impact on illegal aliens was so carefully kept  offstage in the federal governments brief and the judges ruling is  that Congress has repeatedly expressed its intention that local  governments cooperate with the federal government in the apprehension,  detention or removal or   aliens, as a 1996 federal law  declares. The very immigration-information clearinghouse that Judge  Bolton worries would be overtaxed by S.B. 1070 was created to effectuate  Congresss mandate that the federal and local governments share  information regarding illegal aliens. As the Senate declared in 1996  when banning sanctuary laws (a ban whose disregard in Arizona led to  S.B. 1070): illegal aliens do not have a right to remain in the U.S.  undetected and apprehended. If in fact that information clearinghouse  becomes burdened with too many inquiries from Arizona, its for the  executive branch to seek greater funding. Congress never said: We want  information sharing, but only up to a point. Moreover, many of Arizonas  own law-enforcement officers are capable of using the federal  immigration database without needing to go through federal channels. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The  vast majority of the public supports immigration enforcement. S.B. 1070  promised to make such enforcement a reality. For the moment, the public  will has been defeated, which is why S.B. 1070s effect on illegal  immigration was the one aspect of the law that neither the Obama  administration or Judge Bolton dared to address.&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: &amp;quot;Times New Roman&amp;quot;,&amp;quot;serif&amp;quot;;&quot;&gt;&lt;font size=&quot;3&quot;&gt;&lt;/font&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br&gt; &lt;p&gt;Forum: &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/?forum=115068&quot;&gt;Political &amp; Religious&lt;/a&gt;
</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4821104</guid>
		<pubDate>Thur, 29 Jul 2010 00:26:48 GMT</pubDate>
		<author>Don</author>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Adam Ash: Capitalism vs. post-capitalism</title>
		<link>http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4820863</link>
		<description>AA says that capitalism has out-lived it's usefulness and must be reformed before we are all swept away.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://adamash.blogspot.com/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://adamash.blogspot.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div align=center&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;width:90%;text-align:left;&quot;&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;margin-bottom:2px&quot;&gt;Quote:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;border:1px inset; border-bottom:1px solid #E8E8E8; border-right:1px solid #E8E8E8; padding:6px; spacing:3px;&quot;&gt;&lt;br&gt;Monday, July 26, 2010&lt;br&gt;The Capitalist Manifesto: How to Modernize Capitalism from Feudalism to Democracy&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;There is a specter haunting the planet. It is the specter of the failure of Western capitalism.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;All that is solid -- jobs, homes, retirement savings -- melts into air. Our cock-a-hoop capitalism is staring into a pesky abyss which is either Lacan's mirror or the funky Weltschmerz of its own behind.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Yet far away in communist China, capitalism is alive and well -- maybe because China is not a democracy.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;In Western democracies, capitalism is in crisis -- maybe because capitalism is not democratic.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The fact is that capitalism is a feudal system, which therefore works well in a feudal society like China.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;But in modern, highly evolved democracies, capitalism is a handicap.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Why? Democracy has evolved, but capitalism hasn't. It's essentially unchanged from its 18th century origins. Capitalism is so feudal, it's almost medieval. It requires a subservience from its minions that hints at slavery, serfdom, or peonage. It grants its captains of industry the freedom to lord it over everyone else like banana-republic dictators or command-economy Kremlin bosses. It booms and busts with the fervor of a yo-yo being yanked by a tuning fork on steroids. Every so often it poops itself like a toddler sans toilet training, and sits there bawling in its own excreta until the state steps in to clean its unruly bottom.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Democracy, on the other hand, has advanced like a nimble marsupial -- maybe because democracy had an earlier start than capitalism.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Today, feudal capitalism is just a painful drag on modern democracy. A bad fit, mixing awkwardly with democracy, like sand on the beach gumming up the lubrication of mating; like original sin damning an innocent newborn.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;What follows is a radical prescription to drag capitalism out of its fuddy-duddy necrosis: we're going to give it the tools to act in the sentimental spirit of humane socialism, yet retain the animal vigor of brute capitalism.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;It is a simple three-point program to democratize capitalism, which will find agreement from the entire spectrum of economists -- Marxists and Keynesians alike, not to mention Schumpeterians, Hayekians, Minskyites and even out-of-favor Friedmanists. The whole bloody lot, from Adam Smith to Paul Krugman.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Now that's a mighty big tent, and you may think I'm out of my way-too-inclusive mind, but bear with me, my fellow-capitalist: your own mind is about to be turned upside down and then spun around like a tween girl at her first dance party, and you're going to love it.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Let's start with a statement that may upset you Friedmanists (as if your world hasn't been rocked enough already).&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Capitalism is too irrational to be left to capitalists.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The capitalist market believes it can operate independently of the state until, in the manner of a drugged-out rock star, it chokes on its own vomit. Then, ever so patient, Papa Democracy has to spank Brat Capitalism and bail it out of yet another reckless adventure that threatens to ruin the whole family.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Attached to democracy, capitalism is as dysfunctional as wagon wheels on a Maserati.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;...&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Read the whole thing!&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt; &lt;p&gt;Forum: &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/?forum=115068&quot;&gt;Political &amp; Religious&lt;/a&gt;
</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4820863</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 21:01:36 GMT</pubDate>
		<author>Fezziwig</author>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Justice In Arizona</title>
		<link>http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4820611</link>
		<description>Key provisions of Arizona's SB 1070 (Breathing While Latino) Immigration Law were overturned by the Court. Maybe there is justice after all.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/28/judge-blocks-part-of-controversial-arizona-immigration-law/?hpt=T1&amp;amp;iref=BN1&quot;&gt;Link&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt; &lt;p&gt;Forum: &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/?forum=115068&quot;&gt;Political &amp; Religious&lt;/a&gt;
</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4820611</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 18:29:12 GMT</pubDate>
		<author>Croft</author>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Billions unaccounted For In Iraq</title>
		<link>http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4819549</link>
		<description>The military is unable to account for Billions of dollars intended for Iraq reconstruction. I wonder how much found it's way into Halliburton's pockets?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-10774002&quot;&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-10774002&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-10774002&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;p class=&quot;introduction&quot;&gt;&lt;i&gt;A US federal watchdog has criticised the US  military for failing to account properly for billions of dollars it  received to help rebuild Iraq. &lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;         &lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;The Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction says  the US Department of Defence is unable to account properly for 96% of  the money.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;         &lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;Out of just over $9bn, $8.7bn is unaccounted for, the inspector says.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt; &lt;p&gt;Forum: &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/?forum=115068&quot;&gt;Political &amp; Religious&lt;/a&gt;
</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4819549</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jul 2010 01:58:59 GMT</pubDate>
		<author>Croft</author>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>No drilling experts on Obama's Spill Investigation team</title>
		<link>http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4819124</link>
		<description>&lt;div align=center&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;width:90%;text-align:left;&quot;&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;margin-bottom:2px&quot;&gt;Quote:&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;border:1px inset; border-bottom:1px solid #E8E8E8; border-right:1px solid #E8E8E8; padding:6px; spacing:3px;&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;home_blog_date&quot;&gt;July 26, 2010&lt;/span&gt;                         &lt;h1&gt;The Anti-Drilling Commission&lt;/h1&gt; &lt;strong&gt;By&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://www.americanthinker.com/jeffrey_folks/&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Jeffrey Folks&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;  &lt;div id=&quot;article_box_ad&quot;&gt; &lt;!-- google_ad_client = &quot;pub-4560167926987914&quot;; google_ad_width = 300; google_ad_height = 250; google_ad_format = &quot;300x250_as&quot;; google_ad_type = &quot;text_image&quot;; //2006-11-22: AT - Articles - 300 by 250 google_ad_channel = &quot;0110545599&quot;; google_color_border = &quot;336699&quot;; google_color_bg = &quot;FFFFFF&quot;; google_color_link = &quot;999966&quot;; google_color_text = &quot;000000&quot;; google_color_url = &quot;003399&quot;; //--&gt;   &lt;/div&gt;                         &lt;div class=&quot;article_body&quot;&gt;                               &lt;div&gt;The commission appointed by President  Obama to investigate the Gulf oil spill (the National Commission on the  BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling) does not include a  single member with specialized knowledge of petroleum engineering. This  is akin to performing a heart transplant with a surgical team that has  never set foot in an operating room. &lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div&gt;Of the &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/president-obama-announces-members-bp-deepwater-horizon-oil-spill-and-offshore-drill&quot;&gt;seven members&lt;/a&gt;  appointed to the commission, not one is a petroleum engineer, and all  have long-standing ties to the environmental movement. This is certainly  the case with Frances Beinecke, Donald Boesch, Terry Garcia, and  Frances Ulmer, all of whom have close ties to environmentalist research  and policy groups. Beinecke, in fact, is president of the Natural  Resources Defense Council, while Ulmer is a member of the Union of  Concerned Scientists. How's that for an unbiased commission on drilling?&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div&gt;If  the president's intention was to prevent future leaks, why would he  appoint a commission with no knowledge of drilling? The answer, it would  seem, is that this commission was never meant to perform the task it  was officially charged with. It was never really intended to be a  commission on drilling safety, but rather a group of environmental  activists intent on regulating and taxing the oil and gas companies out  of business. Its report is unlikely to focus on improved safely measures  with the intent of increasing oil and gas exploration and production.  It will more likely issue a blueprint on how to restrict drilling while  extorting profits from oil companies by way of new fees and regulation.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div&gt;Even as the commission hears impassioned &lt;a target=&quot;_blank&quot; href=&quot;http://blog.heritage.org/2010/07/14/obamas-oil-spill-commission-criticizes-offshore-drilling-moratorium/&quot;&gt;testimony&lt;/a&gt; from Gulf Coast residents about the economic devastation of Obama's ban on deep-water drilling (his &lt;em&gt;second&lt;/em&gt;  ban, the first having been ruled illegal by a federal court), its  members continue to register their opposition to drilling of any sort.  Following recent testimony in New Orleans, during which prominent Gulf  leaders pleaded for a resumption of offshore drilling, the commission's  directors, William Reilly and Bob Graham, offered lip service to the  resumption of drilling. But where were Ms. Beinecke and the commission's  other environmental activists during these hearings? From all accounts,  they have been silent about the economic damage caused by Obama's  drilling ban.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div&gt;There are two crucial lessons to be learned  from the Deepwater Horizon accident, but it is doubtful whether the  commission will comprehend either of them. The first is that &quot;best  practices&quot; exist which, had they been strictly adhered to, may have  prevented the Deepwater Horizon accident. It is for the commission to  determine whether they were followed in that case, but it is  incontrovertible that best practices have prevented significant  accidents on all of the other 40,000 wells drilled in the Gulf. These  practices, with continual improvement, should prevent spills in the  future as well.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div&gt;The second lesson, and one that no one in  government or the mainstream media seems to have considered, is that the  Deepwater Horizon, however flawed its management might have been, had  the capacity to produce a great deal of oil and gas. Based on the  enormous flow of oil from the Deepwater Horizon and others among the 33  deep-water rigs operating in the Gulf, &amp;nbsp;it is clear that vast reserves  of oil and gas exist off America's shores. These reserves are enough to  make the United States energy-independent. They are enough to revive our  flagging economy, enough to produce jobs for hundreds of thousands of  workers and to create secondary and tertiary jobs for millions of  others. &lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div&gt;Estimates of oil flow from the Deepwater Horizon  have come in at between 40,000 and 100,000 barrels. Taking a mean  estimate of 70,000 barrels, the annual production from the well, not  counting natural gas and condensates, would have amounted to 25,555,000  barrels per year. One hundred such deep-water wells in the Gulf,  producing equal quantities of oil, would produce over 2.5 billion  barrels per year, enough to supply one-third of the petroleum needs of  the United States. This new production alone would add over $175 billion  to annual GDP, and it would cut America's annual trade deficit by the  same amount. Combined with increased onshore drilling, conservation  measures, and increased production of natural gas made possible by  advances in drilling technology, offshore drilling would render the  United States energy-independent for the first time in a half-century. &lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div&gt;Moreover,  deep-water drilling has the potential to transform America from the  slow-growth, high-unemployment welfare state that President Obama  envisages into a prosperous, full-employment economy. This new economy  would not only be energy independent, but it might well become an  exporter of oil and gas -- as it is now an exporter of coal.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div&gt;Expansion from the current 33 wells to 100 is a realistic goal, since it would not be necessary to drill 100 deep-water wells &lt;em&gt;annually&lt;/em&gt;.  Oil flow from wells such as the Deepwater Horizon continues for ten to  thirty years, or even more (as it has in the North Sea). Ten additional  deepwater wells per year, combined with fracking for natural gas on  shore, would soon move the country toward energy independence.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div&gt;For  most Americans, new drilling and the energy independence that comes  with it seem like a good thing, but that is the very reason why the  president has appointed a commission hostile to increased drilling. The  success of the free market in the United States depends to a great  extent on the availability of cheap energy. By cutting off the supply of  oil, natural gas, and coal, Obama ensures a continuation of high  unemployment and an extended period of slow growth, and with these, the  expansion of the socialist welfare state. &lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;div&gt;Nothing could  be further from the interests of the modern-day Democratic Party than  the transformation of the American economy into a flourishing  free-market economy powered by cheap and reliable fossil fuels. The  fight over drilling, in this sense, is nothing less than a struggle for  the future of capitalism in America.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;em&gt;Dr. Jeffrey  Folks taught for thirty years in universities in Europe, America, and  Japan. He has published many books and articles on American culture and  politics.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;                                                         &lt;/div&gt; &lt;br&gt;&lt;b&gt;Page Printed from: &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/07/the_antidrilling_commission.html&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/07/the_antidrilling_commission.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/b&gt; at July  27, 2010 - 03:03:14 PM CDT  &lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.americanthinker.com%2F2010%2F07%2Fthe_antidrilling_commission.html&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.americanthinker.com%2F2010%2F07%2Fthe_antidrilling_commission.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt; &lt;p&gt;Forum: &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/?forum=115068&quot;&gt;Political &amp; Religious&lt;/a&gt;
</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4819124</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jul 2010 20:06:29 GMT</pubDate>
		<author>Don</author>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>It's not Big Government, it's Big Business that is at fault.</title>
		<link>http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4817564</link>
		<description>Adam Ash on Obama, etc.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://adamash.blogspot.com/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://adamash.blogspot.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Tuesday, July 06, 2010&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Government Isn't The Problem, Private Enterprise Is: The Global Terrorism Of Al Qaeda, BP And Goldman Sachs -- by Adam Ash&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Today there are three forms of terrorism threatening the world: political, financial and environmental terrorism. These three forms of terrorism are responsible for the destruction of human lives, livelihoods, property and the environment to a degree that rivals the ravages of war.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;All three forms are executed by global, private-enterprise, non-state agents. Our inch-deep media have bestowed the moniker of terrorism on only one of these forms -- the political-religious Al Qaeda variety -- while leaving the other two off the hook. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;This is a little like calling Ted Bundy a crazy serial killer and Jeffrey Dahmer a highly sensitive connoisseur of human protein.&amp;nbsp; &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Just consider the many attributes these three forms of terrorism have in common. All three are partly funded by tax dollars -- via tax credits and subsidies, tax-payer bail-outs, and taxpayer-funded wars that serve as recruitment drives for political terrorists. All three expound a crazed fundamentalist faith affirming the rectitude of their respective causes. All three feel entitled to huge rewards for their destructive behaviors. All three leave it up to regular folks to clean up after them. All three are unapologetic about their activities (adding insult to injury, some may issue a belated apology to their victims). And all three display a bizarre indifference to human suffering, despite their rhetoric to the contrary. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Moreover, all three forms of terrorism have been enabled by one gaping sinkhole in the social fabric: they appear to have been aided, abetted and promoted by a lamentable lack of government oversight. In all three cases, the problem isn't too much government: it's too little government. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Here's a brief recap of the three forms of terrorism and their main achievements so far.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Political terrorism. Achievements: the death of 2,976 Americans in NYC on 9/11, and many other deaths in London, Madrid, Bali, India, and Iraq. Motive: anger at America's interference in the Middle East, including US backing of Israel against Palestinians and support of repressive Arab regimes, and US wars against Islamic states. Main agent of terrorism: Al Qaeda. Weapons: airplanes, suicide bombs, car bombs, IEDs, websites.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Financial terrorism. Achievements: Loss of 100 million jobs worldwide. Millions suffering from food insecurity. Wrecked economies. Many small business closings. A great loss of family homes. Motive: profit. Main agent of terrorism: Goldman Sachs. Weapons: speculative bubbles, debt securitization, unsafe derivatives, campaign contributions, regulatory capture, bad mortgages.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Environmental terrorism. Achievements: Bhopal, Exxon Valdez oil spill, Nigerian oil spills, Gulf of Mexico oil spill. Motive: profit. Main agent of terrorism: BP. Weapons: unsafe drilling practices, indifference to worker safety, 1960s clean-up technology, useless contingency plans, campaign contributions, takeover of regulatory agencies, misinformation about climate change, managerial indifference to risk and the environment.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Now let's take a look at the three main agents of terrorism in turn and see what government should be, but isn't, doing about them. In this order: Goldman Sachs, Al Qaeda and BP.&lt;br&gt;...&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt; &lt;p&gt;Forum: &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/?forum=115068&quot;&gt;Political &amp; Religious&lt;/a&gt;
</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4817564</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 20:27:52 GMT</pubDate>
		<author>Fezziwig</author>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Pakistan uses US aid to support Taliban!</title>
		<link>http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4817351</link>
		<description>With allies like Pakistan who needs enemies?!&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://caffeinatedthoughts.com/?p=8208&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://caffeinatedthoughts.com/?p=8208&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;We're pumping in a billion a year to fund the Taliban.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;End the madness! get out of Afghanistan and Iraq.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt; &lt;p&gt;Forum: &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/?forum=115068&quot;&gt;Political &amp; Religious&lt;/a&gt;
</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4817351</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 18:16:07 GMT</pubDate>
		<author>Fezziwig</author>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>WikiLeaks: US government kills Afghans and lies to us</title>
		<link>http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4817348</link>
		<description>The US government has been killing Afghans indiscriminately and lying to us about it. Assassination squads &quot;Task Force 373&quot;roam in Afghanistan killing politicians.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://wardiary.wikileaks.org/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://wardiary.wikileaks.org/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt; &lt;p&gt;Forum: &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/?forum=115068&quot;&gt;Political &amp; Religious&lt;/a&gt;
</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4817348</guid>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 18:12:43 GMT</pubDate>
		<author>Fezziwig</author>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Out of Afghanistan!</title>
		<link>http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4815199</link>
		<description>The American death toll in Afghanistan will reach a new high this month. After all the BS talk about the progress we are supposed to be making, the death toll goes up every month.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Get out!&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;In the next few days we will be treated to seeing the Taliban trot out the US soldiers they've captured. Of course,&amp;nbsp; that violates the Geneva Conventions, but so what: we don't follow them either!&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Get out!&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Don't send any more USA soldiers into that meat-grinder.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;All we are fighting for now is to save George W Bushes vanity. It isn't worth it.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt; &lt;p&gt;Forum: &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/?forum=115068&quot;&gt;Political &amp; Religious&lt;/a&gt;
</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4815199</guid>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jul 2010 00:27:00 GMT</pubDate>
		<author>Fezziwig</author>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Sir James Goldsmith</title>
		<link>http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4814476</link>
		<description>In 1994 Sir James Goldsmith appeared in a Charlie Rose interview program. &amp;nbsp;I've found that interview very telling on the present economic crisis  .&lt;div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;George&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;/div&gt; &lt;p&gt;Forum: &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/?forum=115068&quot;&gt;Political &amp; Religious&lt;/a&gt;
</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4814476</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 08:05:08 GMT</pubDate>
		<author>TiogaGeorge</author>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>What can we learn from the Sherod case?</title>
		<link>http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4812507</link>
		<description>1-That Breitbart is a clumsy liar and no one should henceforward listen to him.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;2-That Hannity and O'reilly are sheep and no one should listen to them, either.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;3-That Vilsac has brain damage and should be fired.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;4-That democrats are cowards who flea when a rightist looks angry.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt; &lt;p&gt;Forum: &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/?forum=115068&quot;&gt;Political &amp; Religious&lt;/a&gt;
</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4812507</guid>
		<pubDate>Thur, 22 Jul 2010 20:15:50 GMT</pubDate>
		<author>Fezziwig</author>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>July 20, 2010 Documents show media plotting to kill stories about Rev. Jeremiah Wright</title>
		<link>http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4809563</link>
		<description>Not really surprising...&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/20/documents-show-media-plotting-to-kill-stories-about-rev-jeremiah-wright/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;http://dailycaller.com/2010/07/20/documents-show-media-plotting-to-kill-stories-about-rev-jeremiah-wright/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt; &lt;p&gt;Forum: &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/?forum=115068&quot;&gt;Political &amp; Religious&lt;/a&gt;
</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4809563</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 21:36:58 GMT</pubDate>
		<author>Don</author>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>The democrat party is over.</title>
		<link>http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4808899</link>
		<description>This OBAMA!, Pelosi, Reid, Dodd, Schumer, Kerry, Frank, etc. etc. Change! fiasco is going to set the democrat party back for a decade if not longer.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Nov. is going to remove most of the dems in congress now and in 2012 Hillbillary will challenge OBAMA! (if he runs for reelection) and probably whip is ass easily for the nomination but then lose the election to fiscal conservative Republicans.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt; &lt;p&gt;Forum: &lt;a href=&quot;http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/?forum=115068&quot;&gt;Political &amp; Religious&lt;/a&gt;
</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.vagabonders-supreme.net/post?id=4808899</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2010 13:34:02 GMT</pubDate>
		<author>GaryS</author>
	</item>

</channel>
</rss>