World Forums

UEFA Team of 2007

Iker Casillas (Real Madrid CF)
Daniel Alves (Sevilla FC)
Alessandro Nesta (AC Milan)
John Terry (Chelsea FC)
Eric Abidal (FC Barcelona)
Cristiano Ronaldo (Manchester United FC)
Steven Gerrard (Liverpool FC)
Kaká (AC Milan)
Clarence Seedorf (AC Milan)
Zlatan Ibrahimović (FC Internazionale Milano)
Didier Drogba (Chelsea FC)
Coach: Sir Alex Ferguson (Manchester United FC)


http://www.uefa.com/fanzone/teamoftheye ... 47292.html

So Nevada will allow their caucuses to take place in casino's which not only will be under the eye of the bosses of the culinary union (who have endorsed Obama) but also makes you question how many of those union members are legitimate voters. No one else sees the issue here? Where is the media? And a judge approved it?

bineaz wrote:UEFA Team of 2007

Iker Casillas (Real Madrid CF)
Daniel Alves (Sevilla FC)
Alessandro Nesta (AC Milan)
John Terry (Chelsea FC)
Eric Abidal (FC Barcelona)
Cristiano Ronaldo (Manchester United FC)
Steven Gerrard (Liverpool FC)
Kaká (AC Milan)
Clarence Seedorf (AC Milan)
Zlatan Ibrahimović (FC Internazionale Milano)
Didier Drogba (Chelsea FC)
Coach: Sir Alex Ferguson (Manchester United FC)


http://www.uefa.com/fanzone/teamoftheye ... 47292.html

Are these 12 part of the Nevada Caucus?

Is that a Chris Matthews production?

Time for me to get on the soap box .....

First, on Matthews. His analysis is correct. If Hillary does not get mad and react to her husband "messing around" but instead hid in the White House or someplace else, her career as New York Senator would never had taken off. Why are so many idiots, especially from Media Matters trying to make a big deal out of this?

When is the media and the public going to ask Little Red Riding Hood questions of Obama? I hear some of the political pundits ask why Obama does not look so great during debates as he does when giving a speech. Duh. He lacks substance. He has a movement. Movement of what? Seriously, in the two years he has been in the Senate, what has he done to invoke change. It is not "Where is the beef?" It is "Show me the money?" And I guess being the next JFK is not good enough. He wants to be Reagan too. Here is the thing about Kennedy. He served in Congress as both a Representative and Senator for 14 years before taking the Office of the President. He almost was nominated as the Vice Presidential candidate in '56. He served as an officer in the U.S. Navy during WWII. He did something to distinguish himself as other than a movement of change. As for Reagan (and many of you know that I am no fan of his), he did at least govern one of the biggest states in the Union. When will America wake up concerning this fraud.

Why do the media pundits want this whole thing to end? So the race has not been decided after Iowa and New Hampshire. Why should it? If you are having great sex do you want to smoke a cigarette and go to sleep? Or do you want to keep going all night long, the next morning and through the afternoon? This is the election for our next president. Not the choice that Iowa and New Hampshire left us. Let the race continue.

And speaking of which, why the need to make it a two-candidate race among the Democrats? It is not winner takes all on the Democrat side. And then after two races, there is no winner. But as long as the media continues to concentrate on Clinton and Obama, guess who gets the short end of the stick. I really don't give a fuck about making history because one is a woman and the other is black. Race and gender should never be a reason to elect someone and it works in reverse too.

I already mentioned how the caucus is fixed in Nevada. I will do it again. To control the location with union bosses in charge with a membership that certainly is not made entirely of U.S. citizens, why is everyone turning a blind eye. Oh, because the union endorses Obama?

And what is a permanent tax cut? There are no rules of perpetuity. If Congress wants to grant a tax cut, it can. If it wants to increase taxes, it can. It can do whatever it wants. And let's not joke about these rebates. Like a few hundred bucks will help anyone. Someone tell the mortgage companies to quit being idiots, buckle their belts and renegotiate their mortgages. They made a fistful of money ripping people off with all of their fees anyway. Sure, foreclosing on homes will add to their portfolios. Not going to create any income. Extend the payment period. Fix the loans at a reasonable rate. Better off to have the mortgagee pay something each month than nothing at all.

The DOW is down to almost 12,000. I bet Wall Street is happy that Monday is a federal holiday. Let it drop more. Let it crash. Let's start from scratch. We'll survive. Might do us good.

Did I give each of you enough? Want more? Someone needs to grab a big 2x4 and hit the people in this country over the head. Wake up America.

"Let it crash. Let's start from scratch"

Where do we go from here, Counselor?

Stone Age? Bronze Age? Further back in time (palo's age)? -

How about a chocolate bar for a nickel. Cup of coffee for a dime. Gallon of gas at 49-cents.

The market won't crash. But is should adjust. It is inflated. But what do I know. I think companies ought to produce better widgets. And if they do so, they will be profitable. But have the widgets made in China for cheap labor, let the complaint calls be diverted to India, send the defective widgets to the Dollar Store and let some big law firm negotiate a settlement. That is the American way.

I shall remind you, Counselor, that n.azis in Germany and fascists in Italy hated the Wall Street too and that the distance between that kind of a hatred and socialism of Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, el al is much shorter than you imagine. No, I'm not implying anything.

Other than that, enjoy your dreams. Cheap populism isn't my cup of tea.

"That is the American way."

The American way isn't about John Edwards and his acolytes telling me where and how I should manufacture my widgets.

Do you want the cup of tea for a dime too?

What made this country great, what made its companies great, is that it made great products. And those products were made here, in the USA. There was pride in being the best. That is no longer the case. All Wall Street cares about is how many points its system goes up and down. Make a great product, it will go up. Take short cuts and don't be surprised at what we see.

No one's preventing you to establish a private enterprise and manufacture whatever product your heart desires. You don't have to issue shares on the Wall Street.

The Wall Street doesn't force Ford Motor to manufacture lemons.

Liberals are hilarious fellas. They want high corporate taxes, tough environmental regulations, zoning laws, unlimited immigration (yeah, Falc, there you have it, great engineering talent - Pakis, Saudis and Mexicans), class action lawsuits, affirmative action and quotas, teacher unions - and then they complain about outsourcing.

What did you expect? Socialist paradise?:)

Nope, it is not Wall Street that is making Ford to produce lemons. It is the idiots in charge of Ford who are worried about Wall Street that are producing the lemons. And then with just a competent idiots running the unions, who would rather have their members take an unemployment check instead of squeezing lemonade, we just continue the slide. Face it, it is both the liberals and the conservatives that are screwing the whole thing up.

BTW, I sure hope you don't think that I am a socialist. Far from it.

Conservatives, what conservatives? Ronald Reagan and Milton Friedman were the last ones:)

Here is a modern conservative to you, he's at least one of the below:

1. Foreign policy isolationist - Ron Paul
2. Preaching populist/socialist - Mike Huckabee
3. Troglodite Jew-hater - Pat Buchanan
4. Televangelists (you name 'em)
5. Saudi stooge/bumbling idiot - George Bush I and II, Gen. Scowcroft, Condi Rice, James Baker
6. Free speech killer - John McCain
7. Pro-abortion adulterer - Rudi Giuliani

Imagine now what I have to say about liberals... I better not:)

Hear it form the escaped Commie.

Leonid wrote:"That is the American way."

The American way isn't about John Edwards and his acolytes telling me where and how I should manufacture my widgets.

But, perhaps, the electorate would have been much happier if there were still American jobs producing the widgets. After all, how can someone celebrate the new 100,000 McDonald's jobs when middle class is squeezed out.

Eugene

I don't see Ford and GM competing well against Toyota and Honda, just as I don't recall Zenith TVs doing well vs Sony Trinitrons.

To create jobs isn't a problem, to sustain them is.

The United States is a champion of free enterprise and free trade all around the world. Moreover, we insist that the rest of the world adopt our ways.

When they (other countries) eventually do, America...loses the beauty contest....Painful irony, isn't it?

In 1992 the Dream Team demonstrated our greatness to the world. The world proved to be a very diligent student.....You know the rest.

In 1945 what country wouldn't dream of having Big Three-made cars? Then other countries learned. Would you buy Chrysler if you lived in Italy, France, Germany and Japan?

There is no simple answer as an explanation. But unless the problem is recognized for what it is, there will be no cure.

The most idiotic thing about the U.S. corporations is when the going gets tough, they lay off the most productive, educated and technically skilled people, leaving the fat intact..

Seriously, read Merrill Lynch top ranks' resumes....and what do they have to show for all their Harvards, Yales, Dartmouths and Princetons? $18 billion of losses? Palo chosen randomly from the Amazon rainforest would do better. And he'd work for a plate of beans, saving you multimillion retirement package:)

Oh, oh, we have Leo joining our movement. Welcome brother Leo. It is frustrating. We have CEO's making multimillions with golden parachutes that give them more. And why? Who knows.

Falc

I don't mind oversized salaries, bonuses and stock options. Providing folks receiving them can show something to shareholders for it. Like Goldman Sachs's CEO recently did.

Otherwise they should forfeit their salaries completely. Even then they wouldn't be starving.

In short, class hatred I don't like, fair play I do.

trickle tricke trickle.

I don't mind oversized salaries, bonuses and stock options. Providing folks receiving them can show something to shareholders for it.

That does sound a bit like a contradiction in terms. If you prove your worth of the salary, bonus etc it's not "oversized".

What made this country great, what made its companies great, is that it made great products

Part of the story, you also have a rather large domestic market which have been surrounded by various protectionistic measures. And gradually those workers want some raised living standards as well.

What puzzles me is that though that, and here I agree with Mate to some degree, is that so many seem to have "forgot" (I'm being diplomatic because a lot does not seem to have a clue about what various instruments really are) that owning shares is basically that you have a part of a company which includes some amount of risk. And all the same, some investorfirms does have a tendency to lace their prospects perhaps as too much as sounding as if it's "a safe and lucrative way of saving".

But one may as well consider another issue, the other day former SSU youthfederation chairman made another populistic showoff in one of the tabloids where she had written a piece for debate. And the focus of it was that she didn't like the taxauthorities what she saw as "arrogant" positioning to their services. Some things may have failed Mrs Sjödin....the tax authorities can not disrespect laws enacted by the parliament in democratic order, they can not thus chose to not hand out fines in a case of a reconsideration of a tax decision all by their own discretion just because the person liable for the tax states "I didn't know".

When signing on to run an enterprise (which is a voluntary thing and not compulsory) or agreeing to be on a board in a company or another association (neither a compulsory act) you are expected to place some effort of time in getting some knowledge about what the rules that govern your activity consists us. Nothing different from when Mrs Sjödin played rugby. The content of what expectations of you are provided for free together with the forms you hand in to the taxauthorities when you register and they can be obtained for free afterwards as well.
And if you find it boresome (as I suspect many does) well then you have to dig up the money to pay someone who oversees that your enterprise is ran in accordance with legislation.

Similar with about whether they should be entitled to a defence on public expenses. If they are proceeded to a criminal case they will have it if their income is found to be inadequate (which may not be the case if they find that you've been able to afford a new BMW plus a Prsche and traveled to exotic resorts several times per year.
And most entrepeneurs would not like to carry the taxburden of granting unwilling (or inadequate) entrepeneurs free help in form of lawyers or accountants (other than the free help that they can obtain already in form of information from the public institutions and authorities like for instance the tax authorities).

This was a similar situation to what I came out to when I started my job in 1999. Then it got somewhat better and now it seems like it's heading that way again.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... id=topnews

I am though somewhat in doubt towards some of the current governments remedies to handle an approaching slowdown of the economy. Some are necessary (while much complained about from the lefties) while I think that cutdowns in the opportunities to study for other skills and broaden your skills are rather counterproductive (unless the idea is to have the tax cut for home services like cleaners and such made to look like a success).

In short, class hatred I don't like, fair play I do

You know, a lot of the matters being discussed are theoretical concepts and may not have anything with any emotions (such as "hatred" in respect to classes). And despite my occasional keen liking in slandering "commies" there is though disticntions, as I'd expect any Russian expatriate to know, my ex, who was a Trotskyist (and presumably still is) could in some context elaborate on whether it be worth to shoot you would you throw him in the same category as a Leninist, or worse, a Stalinist. Not that he actually would, but rather to illustrate what he would show you what a Stalinist is. He was also a sympathizer for the Rote Arme Fraktione, whose main targets were to deal with nazisympathizers that Nuremberg forgot albeit he was not particularly active. And as most of those he have also an upper middleclass background.

Similar with femists, sure there are some irrational emotional driven bannercarriers among them while a whole lot of them just observe that in many societies there are differences in expectations and opportunities between men and women that are not explained by "natural" nor rational grounds.

So, for your alleged distaste for "classhatred", what are you doing with such rough classification insinuating that one group would vote in a certain direction?

But I suppose some facts are like with your hero Karl Rove, if you cut him he bleeds bacon


http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/01/1 ... -on-obama/

mate wrote:Americans are going to relearn a hard lesson: you can't get something for nothing. Sorry, but this isn't some banal quip. There's a price to be paid for endless debt and currency devaluation and pandering to the least common denominator, namely consumers who want to consume but not produce.

Excuse me but what do you mean? Aren't we all working more hours than before??? Back in the 80s we were all working 35-40 hour weeks. By the time I left in 2002, I was working 50-60 hours per week, as well as all of my colleagues. And management still had a beef with us.

So, what do you mean?

Indeed pramzan....I could also quote Coulter on

How much does Pinch Sulzberger make for driving The New York Times stock to an all-time low? Probably a lot more than your podiatrist.

http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/coulter092007.php3

It is called bad consumer credits but it's not like the consumers (knowledgeable or ignorant) themselves have granted and issued the credits. What about the responsibility for those various institutes that handed them out on a provision basis for those who sold them? Is it written in stone that the old saying about being an enterpeneur comes with a risk is somehow not valid to some people?

Another perspective about "ordinary people's" responsibility. What about when relative wealthy news publishers and broadcasters hire "journalists" that aren't adequately knowledgeable enough (or whether they are lazy or going someones errands behind curtains ) to get to the crucial angle of an story?
Some guy posted this on another forum and it's something to think about as well.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080123/ap_ ... tion_study

What Falc and Leo are saying (and I agree 100%) is that CEOs need to be held accountable. It's very frustrating to see CEOs earning $25-$30million per year for sub-par performance and they get to keep their jobs for another year while the ones who do the real work get laid off to keep the costs down.

Well, as per usual leo is rather ambigious about ewhat he really say and mean (he doesn't really say that much). He talks about symapthy for the shareholders, which often may be as well the CEOs as those employed and not necessarily external investors.

From the misinformation study article:

The cumulative effect of these false statements — amplified by thousands of news stories and broadcasts — was massive, with the media coverage creating an almost impenetrable din for several critical months in the run-up to war," the study concluded.

"Some journalists — indeed, even some entire news organizations — have since acknowledged that their coverage during those prewar months was far too deferential and uncritical.

I guess they all just wanted to be polite, pleasant and nice and cautious to not bite the hand that currently feed them. As in case they're not comfortable enough with what they deliver they may not get another chat with the one that delivers the stories.

Study: False Statements Preceded War

Like we didn't already know, but the amount of disinformation is astounding.

Do the politicians really want to boost the economy? Create an employment incentive program. Get businesses to insource jobs back to the U.S. Give incentives to produce in the U.S. If people are working, they have money, which means that they are spending it. This idea of giving people a $200 rebate to pump the economy is a joke. Do we really think that buying an ipod is going to make a difference? And someone please explain to me what a permanent tax cut is? Bush loves to repeat this expression. Congress gives it and Congress takes it away. Nothing is permanent.

Well the $200 rebate is silly. By the time it comes around, you will have even forgotten why it was sent. But I would take it anyway.

$200 rebate

I'll take it and put towards the family ski getaway in February. I was still going w/o it.

If people are working, they have money, which means that they are spending it

That ambition is good but there's need to consider what sorts of jobs that are created. Landing a job at Wal Mart or cleaning other people's houses doesn't bring about much to consume for. They're good as temporary jobs perhaps, or as a job you hold for a while you study or something.
Hence I don't think it's all that an terrific idea to be overly idealistic about domestic produced goods. If all americans (as an example, I'm swedish and live in Sweden) are expected to by domestically manufactured products and those producing it will have a decent pay you will have a workforce that is very expensive overall.

in sweden they have launched a tax cut designed to create more jobs in a sector that was somewhat tarnished with untaxed work, however even after that taxbreak (incentive to hire) the services aren't really that much sought for (typically household services).