AMERICA - The Right Way!! (Day 1156) [Remember the Trade Center!!]

Various News Sources and FReepers | March 25, 2004 | All of Us

[Chairman_December_19th_Society]

America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our country!

Good morning!!

Do not let the victims of the attacks on New York and Washington, nor the brave members of our Nation's military who have given their lives to protect our freedom, die in vain!!

Hamas has threatened retaliation for yesterday's killing of its leader, and has, for the first time, directly threatened the United States for terrorist activity.

OPEC is hesitating on production cuts, which is causing world oil prices to ease somewhat.

CBS' 60 Minutes did not reveal the stake that it's parent company had in selling Clarke's new book when it broadcast Clarke's interview Sunday last.

For AMERICA - The Right Way, I remain yours in the Cause, the Chairman.

[TBarnett34]

Whichever you'd be more comfortable with..I am curious.

[tillacum]

I have a dish and it's coming in loud and clear. I thought this was going to be a "bipartisian" committee. They have that fellow Vin something or other, former counsel for the demiflops and when he was questioning Rummy, he pretended nothing untoward really happened until 2000 and all heck broke lose on 9/11/2001. Following him was a former attorney general in the x42 administration. (A red head woman) Did anyone see Cohen turn RED? He sat down and was a normal color, but as he was questioned he turned a beautiful shade of almost HOT pink. Hannity, I was in the car, said the committee has already "discovered" there is "no credible evidence" that bin laden was offered to x42 at any time. After all that has been said it's hard for me to believe that. So that administration is in the clear, as far as any talilban or alqueda threats or damage to this country, is concerned.

I'm reading Madame Hillary. I've always known she's dangerous, but she's spooky,(talks to ghosts) dangerous, conniving, sneaky,a liar, and the list goes on. Like the bolsheviks, she believes in changing the government from within and uses our laws against us. The more I read of this poor example of a woman, the more I dislike her. She's BAD NEWS!

[Guenevere]

Computers are like cars.....

You either push a button or turn an ignition and it works :) ..ta da!...so simple, yes :)

[prairiebreeze]

If you are by a TV right now, tune in John Gibsons show. He is going to talk about the assassination plot in 1971 of VVAW and have somebody on that knew Kerry

Prairie

[jtill]

Saw just the end of it, but if JFKerry made an impassioned speech about just continuing to oppose the war and had nothing to do with the "plot", then why did he "forget" he had been there. It don't hang for me!

[Peach]

Just got back here and caught the last few seconds. I think the guy was saying that Kerry was urging non-violence.

Wish I could take a look at that guy's bank account for a sudden infusion of cash.

[prairiebreeze]

The guest was Kerry's MO campaign stooge. Can't think of the name but he mostly tried to trash the NY Sun report and reporter. Said only ONE person at the meeting suggested the assassination plot and he was hooted down by everybody else.

Doesn't matter one bit. Kerry had a responsibility to report a "proposal" of assassination attempts IMO.

I missed the very end of the interview. But yes, it's odd that Kerry wasn't there, then admitting to being there. Kerry knows it smells.....

Prairie

[MozartLover]

[MozartLover]

I...am...having...a.very normal day............

Hope you are too.

[Mo1]

If you are by a TV right now, tune in John Gibsons show. He is going to talk about the assassination plot in 1971 of VVAW and have somebody on that knew Kerry

I saw it ... I also notice he kept looking down to read his notes

[Mo1]

FYI
Brit Humes is going to talk about the KC meeting had was at

[prairiebreeze]

listening...

[prairiebreeze]

Whoa! The thing about Kerry and the KC meeting wasn't much of a report by Brit but had you heard that letter that Walter Cronkite sent to Kerry wanting to know why Kerry denied being a liberal.

Cronkite needs to go to the pasture and stay there.

Prairie

[gulfcoast6]

Afternoon ML and to all you good folks out in our little neighborhood. I am getting a late start today, spent all day from 6 AM to 4 PM on the farm getting my garden in shape. I doubled the size of it which means more planting.
With all the veggies I will have I won't be lacking for sure, now to learn how to can.

I see 'Lurch' is off of his vacation and getting ready to hit the circuit again, whoopie, exciting huh?

The foundation men were laying out the new house today, it is finally taking shape. The power folks layed out the lines to the site yesterday. D is concerned about folks stealing lumber but I told her not to worry, it is 'against the law' to steal in the county. I am going to put a security light up there in case someone from out of states does go up and steal something.

HELP! I am stuck on 219 lbs on my Atkins diet and have been for about a week now but never fear, I shall prevail, I will not give up.

Don't forget to keep OUR President W in our prayers, he surely can use them, we got to help him for sure. Toby

[Chairman_December_19th_Society]

Well, I've been using E-bay for three years, and I am, sadly, having to send this to E-bay Customer Support:

---

RE: Bidder ID []

Subject bidder may be engaging in shill bidding. Pattern on both listed auctions fits the description provided at:

http://pages.ebay.com/help/community/shillBidding.html

On Item #[], bidder [] entered the bidding at 12:23:25 PST on 3/14/04, posting a bid of $52.00, well underneath my standing proxy of $100.00 for the item. Within a time span of less than one minute, bidder [] posts the following bids (in $US): 60, 70, 80, 90, 100. Note, the last bid matches my initial proxy, but would leave me the winner as I placed the bid first.

At 12:24:45 PST on 3/14/04, just over one minute after [] has been raising his bid, he posts a bid that he then retracts, which is, at the time, a winning bid. Bidder [] "claims" he "entered the wrong bid amount," but after $100, any bid he entered would be a "winning" bid (until I raise my proxy, which I ultimately do). Bidder [] does not enter a new bid. Bidder [] was content in raising the price to my bid proxy and exiting the bidding. Bidder [] was not serious in bidding on this product.

This gets compounded because, twice in as many weeks, I cross paths with bidder [] again. This time on item []. Here, bidder [] enters the bidding at 07:53:59 PST on 3/22/04 and posts a winning bid, exceeding my proxy of $200 on the first shot. As before, bidder [] retracts this bid, again claiming he "entered the wrong bid amount". This time, he posts a bid at, guess what, my proxy amount.

Two auctions, two bid retractions, two set pats at the standing proxy amount. And two bid retractions of what would otherwise have been a winning bid. More than a little interesting.

This gets serious because in the case of auction [] he caused the standing price of the product, and ultimately what I had to pay, to increase by 100% with no serious intent to buy the product himself. In the other auction, [], he might have contributed in a small measure to my losing the product (though I suppose I could have increased my proxy, but with bidder [] sitting at a level equal to my proxy, it would have cost me money to raise what is nominally a winnning bid).

In short, what appears to be on the face shilling by [] has cost me real money ($52.50) and what a feel a legitimate shot at a product that I desired.

Now, as to the bid retractions themselves, it turns out that bidder [] has exercised the priviledge three times in the approximately two weeks he has been an E-Bay member. Interestingly, in the three years I have participated here, I have yet to use it once. It is all the more suspicious because two of the three retractions were to pull winning bids that were not then immediately followed by another winning bid.

I am truly sorry to have to bring this matter up, but I am hopeful that bidder [] can be educated on the characteristics of being a responsible bidder and that bidding on some of the auctions I participate in is serious money, and not a game.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. --bidder []

[prairiebreeze]

Hitting a plateau on a diet is common Toby. Usually a sign your body metabolism is adjusting. Stay on track and you will usually start losing again after a bit

good luck

Prairie

[MozartLover]

Hi Toby,

Gardening? We won't even be able to think about that stuff for another 2 months.

It will be warm this week, though......up to 50 tomorrow!

[Neets]

Was the Spet 11 commision hearings today, the commission that was appointed by the President?

[nicollo]

Hello, ATRW! Thought I'd bounce in a moment and vent about something I noticed in the news today...

The com(post) today claims that Hillary Clinton's book sold 2.8 million copies. Assuming it's true, although I am certain it is not, here's how the numbers would play out:

$28.00 SRP
(11.20) less 40% retailer discount
16.80 Publisher's gross per book
$1.68 Author 10% royalty per book

$1.68 x 2,800,000 = $4,704,000 royalties due the Hitlery.

We're talking BEST CASE scenario, and even with this fantasy number of 2.8 million, there ain't no way they'll sell the other 2 million copies needed to justify the $8 million advance.

They only way the advance can be met, even by these oh-so-generous numbers would be if Hitlery is getting a 20%+ royalty, which would be, shall we say, highly unusual.

If -- if -- 2.8 million books were shipped, there still needs to be some accounting for returns, which typically reach 40% of sales. So chalk off 40% right away. I'd bet that this book had an unusually high number of returns. Retailers were happy to give it great space at the launch, if only for the foot traffic it generated in the stores. And they did it risk free, for what they don't sell the publishers have to eat.

Next, the book is typically sold at 30-50% off SRP. So, with the unusual discounting it has gotten, the publisher's gross per book is likely much lower than the $16.80 I used to calculate it as a normal deal. My guess is their gross sales numbers are around twelve bucks and they've gotten half the books sold back as returns.

Now, a book advance is just that -- it is an advance against sales. If the sales don't justify the advance the author owes the difference -- under a normal deal, that is.

Whatever money Simon & Schuster has made off the book will have to go towards building a new warehouse to store all the unsold and returned copies...

[hayburner]

Tinfoil hat alert.

It seems that the two latest hit books on our administration come from Simon & Shuster - aka Viacom, source of MTV, Superbowl Halftime, CBS, and heavy payer for a couple of lying histories which pad the coffers of a couple of notorious criminals. Would it be possible that these current hit books could be traced back to some convoluted political manipulations by said criminal couple?

Just a suspicion - still think she will be on national ticket this fall, particularly if can undermine dear W.