Will "reinvention" of IRS include Scientology tax deal probe?: "But if this commitment to change the IRS is genuine, the agency should consider remedying what may be one of its largest blunders ever: its secret 1993 tax settlement with Scientology in which the IRS granted Scientology tax-exempt status and cut its estimated billion-dollar tax debt to about 1% of that amount. Not only was this deal a reversal of the IRS' 25-year policy regarding the cult's improper, illegal tax procedures, but it also cost taxpayers almost a billion dollars in unpaid taxes and gave Scientology private/religious education tax exemptions not given to any religion.
This 1993 tax deal was secret until recently exposed by the Wall Street Journal and New York Times, and has since captured the interest of tens of millions of US taxpayers, major worldwide corporations with US tax liabilities, and diverse special interest groups with concerns ranging from taxation to religion to separation of church and state.
After repeatedly and justifiably denying Scientology's tax-exempt status, the IRS suddenly reversed its position in 1993 with the secret settlement which granted Scientology religious status and canceled most of the organization's huge tax debt. The mysterious and shocking reversal for the U.S. tax agency came after 25 years of steadfastly refused to provide Scientology with the tax exemption given to normal bona fide churches. Many believe that the scope of what was given away by the IRS to the multi-billion dollar Scientology organization, in financial benefit and other special considerations, is far beyond anything that has been given to any other religious group, corporation, or normal taxpayer."
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
obama
In Your Heart, You Know He's TriteThe Chicago Tribune has an amusing report on Barack Obama, who appeared over the weekend on ABC's "This Week With George Stephanopoulos":
Obama's criticism of [President] Bush for his combative rhetoric came in answer to a question about whether the senator had the capacity to act ruthlessly when necessary if elected president.
"It's not just talking tough, because the truth is nobody's talked tougher than George Bush over the last six years. Being tough means, first of all, not having to talk about it all the time," Obama said. . . .
Without going into any specifics, Obama cited his testing in Chicago politics as a sign that he had an inner toughness. "Somebody who has arrived where I am out of Chicago politics has to have a little bit of steel in them," he said. "I have the capacity, I think, to make strong decisions even if they're unpopular, even if they're uncomfortable, even if sometimes I lose some friends."
So Obama says the first test of toughness is "not having to talk about it"--and he then proceeds to talk about how tough he is. By his own standard, he is a a jellyfish.
National Journal's Hotline transcribes another bit of the interview:
Stephanopoulos: You've also said that with Social Security, everything should be on the table.
Obama: Yes.
Stephanopoulos: Raising the retirement age?
Obama: Everything should be on the table.
Stephanopoulos: Raising payroll taxes?
Obama: Everything should be on the table. I think we should approach it the same way Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan did back in 1983. They came together. I don't want to lay out my preferences beforehand, but what I know is that Social Security is solvable. It is not as difficult a problem as we're going to have with Medicaid and Medicare.
Stephanopoulos: Partial privatization?
Obama: Privatization is not something that I would consider . . .
So when Obama says that "everything should be on the table," what he means is, "Not everything should be on the table." Of course the real problem isn't privatization, it's cynicism.
Obama's criticism of [President] Bush for his combative rhetoric came in answer to a question about whether the senator had the capacity to act ruthlessly when necessary if elected president.
"It's not just talking tough, because the truth is nobody's talked tougher than George Bush over the last six years. Being tough means, first of all, not having to talk about it all the time," Obama said. . . .
Without going into any specifics, Obama cited his testing in Chicago politics as a sign that he had an inner toughness. "Somebody who has arrived where I am out of Chicago politics has to have a little bit of steel in them," he said. "I have the capacity, I think, to make strong decisions even if they're unpopular, even if they're uncomfortable, even if sometimes I lose some friends."
So Obama says the first test of toughness is "not having to talk about it"--and he then proceeds to talk about how tough he is. By his own standard, he is a a jellyfish.
National Journal's Hotline transcribes another bit of the interview:
Stephanopoulos: You've also said that with Social Security, everything should be on the table.
Obama: Yes.
Stephanopoulos: Raising the retirement age?
Obama: Everything should be on the table.
Stephanopoulos: Raising payroll taxes?
Obama: Everything should be on the table. I think we should approach it the same way Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan did back in 1983. They came together. I don't want to lay out my preferences beforehand, but what I know is that Social Security is solvable. It is not as difficult a problem as we're going to have with Medicaid and Medicare.
Stephanopoulos: Partial privatization?
Obama: Privatization is not something that I would consider . . .
So when Obama says that "everything should be on the table," what he means is, "Not everything should be on the table." Of course the real problem isn't privatization, it's cynicism.
Clayton Cramer's BLOG
Clayton Cramer's BLOG
Down the Memory HoleRemember in 1984, where Winston's job was to revise newspapers of the past to keep up with the ever changing present? This is very interesting. A couple years ago, during the Katrina disaster, I linked to a CNN report and quoted it:
Overnight, police snipers were stationed on the roof of their precinct, trying to protect it from gunmen roaming through the city, CNN's Chris Lawrence reported.One New Orleans police sergeant compared the situation to Somalia and said officers were outnumbered and outgunned by gangs in trucks."It's a war zone, and they're not treating it like one," he said, referring to the federal government. ...One of my readers ran into that posting of mine--and noticed that the CNN report at that link no longer said anything like that. It was much, much more upbeat. Nothing about the police snipers on the roof. Did I copy the wrong link? Did I have a brief attack of delusion, and make something up?Nope. Lots of other people linked to that same CNN page, and quoted the same text. Like http://paulsplanet.blogspot.com/2005/09/fall-of-new-orleans_02.html and http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/002476.html .There were bloggers who quoted CNN exactly as I did, although with no link to the story: http://knemeyer.com/dk.cfm?a=cms,c,318,1 and http://www.flaregun.org/?feed=rss2&p=51 and http://gutternickle.net/blog/index.php/2005/09/02/something_i_don_t_want_to_forget_about_kDid something go down the memory hole? If that story was inaccurate, they should have identified it as inaccurate, and updated it. This dramatic transformation of a story that played a big part in creating bad press for President Bush really smacks of something very Orwellian."We have always been at war with Eastasia."
Down the Memory HoleRemember in 1984, where Winston's job was to revise newspapers of the past to keep up with the ever changing present? This is very interesting. A couple years ago, during the Katrina disaster, I linked to a CNN report and quoted it:
Overnight, police snipers were stationed on the roof of their precinct, trying to protect it from gunmen roaming through the city, CNN's Chris Lawrence reported.One New Orleans police sergeant compared the situation to Somalia and said officers were outnumbered and outgunned by gangs in trucks."It's a war zone, and they're not treating it like one," he said, referring to the federal government. ...One of my readers ran into that posting of mine--and noticed that the CNN report at that link no longer said anything like that. It was much, much more upbeat. Nothing about the police snipers on the roof. Did I copy the wrong link? Did I have a brief attack of delusion, and make something up?Nope. Lots of other people linked to that same CNN page, and quoted the same text. Like http://paulsplanet.blogspot.com/2005/09/fall-of-new-orleans_02.html and http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/002476.html .There were bloggers who quoted CNN exactly as I did, although with no link to the story: http://knemeyer.com/dk.cfm?a=cms,c,318,1 and http://www.flaregun.org/?feed=rss2&p=51 and http://gutternickle.net/blog/index.php/2005/09/02/something_i_don_t_want_to_forget_about_kDid something go down the memory hole? If that story was inaccurate, they should have identified it as inaccurate, and updated it. This dramatic transformation of a story that played a big part in creating bad press for President Bush really smacks of something very Orwellian."We have always been at war with Eastasia."
gethuman 500 database
Another nifty site from Kim Komando
gethuman 500 database
Hello, operator?
Few things annoy me as much as automated telephone systems.
I know they save companies money. But I think it is bad customer service to make callers jump through hoops to speak to someone.
That’s why I’m such a big fan of Gethuman. This site lists telephone numbers for a wide variety of companies. The companies are divided into categories for ease of use.
You’ll find the customer service number for the company. Then, you’ll find out how to get through to an operator. No more voice prompts!
gethuman 500 database
Hello, operator?
Few things annoy me as much as automated telephone systems.
I know they save companies money. But I think it is bad customer service to make callers jump through hoops to speak to someone.
That’s why I’m such a big fan of Gethuman. This site lists telephone numbers for a wide variety of companies. The companies are divided into categories for ease of use.
You’ll find the customer service number for the company. Then, you’ll find out how to get through to an operator. No more voice prompts!
Environmental 'Intelligence'? - WSJ.com
Environmental 'Intelligence'? - WSJ.com
May 10, 2007
COMMENTARY
Environmental 'Intelligence'?
By PETER HOEKSTRAMay 10, 2007;
Here we go again. The 2008 intelligence authorization bill, which the House may vote on this week, diverts CIA and other intelligence resources away from critical terrorism-related missions to study global climate change. If it becomes law, the legislation will force agencies to complete a National Intelligence Estimate with a 30-year assessment on the effects of environmental change within nine months.
We've been down this road before. In the mid-1990s, Bill Clinton's first Secretary of State, Warren Christopher, declared that environmental concerns and national security would share equal status in U.S. foreign policy. Immediately following that announcement, CIA Director John Deutch said in July 1996 that the U.S. was diverting spy satellites to photograph "ecologically sensitive" sites.
This was in the heady days that followed the Cold War, when our beleaguered intelligence community -- considered passé, downsized and suffering under the strain of budget cuts -- was searching for a politically popular mission.
Instead of focusing on looming national security threats -- the first World Trade Center bombing came in 1993 and in August of 1996 Osama bin Laden issued his fatwa, "Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places" -- Mr. Deutch was currying favor with then-Vice President Al Gore.
George Tenet, Mr. Deutch's successor at the CIA, notes in his new book "At the Center of the Storm," Mr. Gore's interest in "wonkish" issues that he refers to as "bugs and bunnies." What Mr. Tenet fails to mention is that he kept open the ultimate expression of the politically correct "Deutch doctrine," the Director of Central Intelligence Environmental Center.
The Center had ordered intelligence analysts and collectors to write about volcano eruptions, fish schools and air pollution. And it also produced an annual Earth Day edition of the highly classified President's Daily Brief.
At the direction of the Center, spy satellites were tasked to conduct what some in the press dubbed "environmental peeking." The diversion meant fewer overhead images of vital national security concerns, such as Iran, North Korea and al Qaeda. It's impossible to know, but I wonder what intelligence clues in the run up to 9/11 were missed because our spy satellites were focused on the polar ice caps and schools of fish instead of Afghanistan and bin Laden.
Now House Democrats want to return to the days when the CIA wasted valuable resources on "bugs and bunnies." My objection is not about the validity of global climate change. I am concerned about whether it is an intelligence issue. Does it require analysts to make assessments using classified information that can only be acquired from sensitive human sources and billion-dollar spy satellites? Does it take holding a high-level security clearance and reviewing information in high-security, classified offices to write assessments about the environment?
The answer to these questions is no, at least according to one Democratic House Intelligence Committee staff member. The aide, who did not want to be named, told the Associated Press that, "a vast majority of the information used by intelligence analysts could come from unclassified, openly available sources and data in the government's possession." Why then divert intelligence assets to collect it?
The Democrats' 2008 intelligence authorization bill is a throwback to the mistakes of the 1990s when scarce resources were diverted to issues that clearly were not related to the businesses of intelligence. There was a mistaken belief then that serious threats to U.S. national security diminished or disappeared with the end of the Cold War. Intelligence spending was slashed in what was called then a post-Cold War "peace dividend."
I fear the intelligence authorization being voted on by Congress demonstrates some of the same short-sightedness of the 1990s. While Democrats call for U.S. intelligence agencies to study global climate change, they continue to grossly underestimate the terrorist threat. They willfully ignore or play down world-wide activity by radical jihadists, including this week's arrest in New Jersey of six men -- who may have been influenced by al Qaeda terrorist training tapes -- for allegedly planning to kill hundreds of soldiers at Fort Dix and other military installations in the Northeast. This past weekend, Ayman al-Zawahiri, al Qaeda's No. 2 leader, in a videotape message, mocked Democratic legislation to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq as a sign of American weakness and mentioned using Afghanistan and Iraq as bases to launch attacks.
The world remains a dangerous place. We need to spend our limited intelligence dollars wisely. We need our intelligence analysts focused on threats that require clandestine effort and classified information, such as rogue state weapons of mass destruction programs, al Qaeda and threats to American lives.
Let other federal agencies, as more than a dozen already do, cover the "bugs and bunnies." But let our spies be spies.
Mr. Hoekstra is a Republican congressman from Michigan and a former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.
May 10, 2007
COMMENTARY
Environmental 'Intelligence'?
By PETER HOEKSTRAMay 10, 2007;
Here we go again. The 2008 intelligence authorization bill, which the House may vote on this week, diverts CIA and other intelligence resources away from critical terrorism-related missions to study global climate change. If it becomes law, the legislation will force agencies to complete a National Intelligence Estimate with a 30-year assessment on the effects of environmental change within nine months.
We've been down this road before. In the mid-1990s, Bill Clinton's first Secretary of State, Warren Christopher, declared that environmental concerns and national security would share equal status in U.S. foreign policy. Immediately following that announcement, CIA Director John Deutch said in July 1996 that the U.S. was diverting spy satellites to photograph "ecologically sensitive" sites.
This was in the heady days that followed the Cold War, when our beleaguered intelligence community -- considered passé, downsized and suffering under the strain of budget cuts -- was searching for a politically popular mission.
Instead of focusing on looming national security threats -- the first World Trade Center bombing came in 1993 and in August of 1996 Osama bin Laden issued his fatwa, "Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places" -- Mr. Deutch was currying favor with then-Vice President Al Gore.
George Tenet, Mr. Deutch's successor at the CIA, notes in his new book "At the Center of the Storm," Mr. Gore's interest in "wonkish" issues that he refers to as "bugs and bunnies." What Mr. Tenet fails to mention is that he kept open the ultimate expression of the politically correct "Deutch doctrine," the Director of Central Intelligence Environmental Center.
The Center had ordered intelligence analysts and collectors to write about volcano eruptions, fish schools and air pollution. And it also produced an annual Earth Day edition of the highly classified President's Daily Brief.
At the direction of the Center, spy satellites were tasked to conduct what some in the press dubbed "environmental peeking." The diversion meant fewer overhead images of vital national security concerns, such as Iran, North Korea and al Qaeda. It's impossible to know, but I wonder what intelligence clues in the run up to 9/11 were missed because our spy satellites were focused on the polar ice caps and schools of fish instead of Afghanistan and bin Laden.
Now House Democrats want to return to the days when the CIA wasted valuable resources on "bugs and bunnies." My objection is not about the validity of global climate change. I am concerned about whether it is an intelligence issue. Does it require analysts to make assessments using classified information that can only be acquired from sensitive human sources and billion-dollar spy satellites? Does it take holding a high-level security clearance and reviewing information in high-security, classified offices to write assessments about the environment?
The answer to these questions is no, at least according to one Democratic House Intelligence Committee staff member. The aide, who did not want to be named, told the Associated Press that, "a vast majority of the information used by intelligence analysts could come from unclassified, openly available sources and data in the government's possession." Why then divert intelligence assets to collect it?
The Democrats' 2008 intelligence authorization bill is a throwback to the mistakes of the 1990s when scarce resources were diverted to issues that clearly were not related to the businesses of intelligence. There was a mistaken belief then that serious threats to U.S. national security diminished or disappeared with the end of the Cold War. Intelligence spending was slashed in what was called then a post-Cold War "peace dividend."
I fear the intelligence authorization being voted on by Congress demonstrates some of the same short-sightedness of the 1990s. While Democrats call for U.S. intelligence agencies to study global climate change, they continue to grossly underestimate the terrorist threat. They willfully ignore or play down world-wide activity by radical jihadists, including this week's arrest in New Jersey of six men -- who may have been influenced by al Qaeda terrorist training tapes -- for allegedly planning to kill hundreds of soldiers at Fort Dix and other military installations in the Northeast. This past weekend, Ayman al-Zawahiri, al Qaeda's No. 2 leader, in a videotape message, mocked Democratic legislation to withdraw U.S. troops from Iraq as a sign of American weakness and mentioned using Afghanistan and Iraq as bases to launch attacks.
The world remains a dangerous place. We need to spend our limited intelligence dollars wisely. We need our intelligence analysts focused on threats that require clandestine effort and classified information, such as rogue state weapons of mass destruction programs, al Qaeda and threats to American lives.
Let other federal agencies, as more than a dozen already do, cover the "bugs and bunnies." But let our spies be spies.
Mr. Hoekstra is a Republican congressman from Michigan and a former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
Democrat madness!
The US owes Carthage reparations for the Punic Wars Redstate: "House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and his eight compatriots, all of whom have co-sponsored a bill that would require that America pay reparations to the people of Guam for - get this - the actions of the Japanese in World War II."
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and his eight compatriots, all of whom have co-sponsored a bill that would require that America pay reparations to the people of Guam for - get this - the actions of the Japanese in World War II.
According to the bill (HR.1595, the "Guam World War II Loyalty Recognition Act"), the people of Guam:
suffered unspeakable harm as a result of the occupation of Guam by Imperial Japanese military forces during World War II , by being subjected to death, rape, severe personal injury, personal injury, forced labor, forced march, or internment.
For this reason (?), "the Secretary of the Treasury shall make payments" to WWII survivors and their descendants on Guam for the brutal actions of a third party.
Makes perfect sense, doesn't it? After all, the US is the largest aid donor on the planet; it's only logical that we should rebuild, repatriate, and reparate every country that has been hurt by every war that we can find. Let's not stop with Guam - let's include everybody from Carthage on up to the present. Should we pay reparations to the Koreans for the Mongol invasions of the 14th century, and to the Spanish for the loss of their Armada in 1588? Why not?
And while this bill holds up $126,000,000.00 for the repayment of the people of Guam for what the Japanese did (as well as $5,000,000.00 for "the Secretary of the Interior [to] establish a grants program [to]...award grants for research, educational, and media activities that memorialize the events surrounding the occupation of Guam during World War II, honor the loyalty of the people of Guam during such occupation, or both, for purposes of appropriately illuminating and interpreting the causes and circumstances of such occupation and other similar occupations during a war"), our soldiers can't even get a dime in supplemental appropriations.
Way to go, Democrats. Your "blame America first" (even for things we have nothing to do with), anti-US soldier attitudes, actions, and mindsets have just been taken to a new level.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and his eight compatriots, all of whom have co-sponsored a bill that would require that America pay reparations to the people of Guam for - get this - the actions of the Japanese in World War II.
According to the bill (HR.1595, the "Guam World War II Loyalty Recognition Act"), the people of Guam:
suffered unspeakable harm as a result of the occupation of Guam by Imperial Japanese military forces during World War II , by being subjected to death, rape, severe personal injury, personal injury, forced labor, forced march, or internment.
For this reason (?), "the Secretary of the Treasury shall make payments" to WWII survivors and their descendants on Guam for the brutal actions of a third party.
Makes perfect sense, doesn't it? After all, the US is the largest aid donor on the planet; it's only logical that we should rebuild, repatriate, and reparate every country that has been hurt by every war that we can find. Let's not stop with Guam - let's include everybody from Carthage on up to the present. Should we pay reparations to the Koreans for the Mongol invasions of the 14th century, and to the Spanish for the loss of their Armada in 1588? Why not?
And while this bill holds up $126,000,000.00 for the repayment of the people of Guam for what the Japanese did (as well as $5,000,000.00 for "the Secretary of the Interior [to] establish a grants program [to]...award grants for research, educational, and media activities that memorialize the events surrounding the occupation of Guam during World War II, honor the loyalty of the people of Guam during such occupation, or both, for purposes of appropriately illuminating and interpreting the causes and circumstances of such occupation and other similar occupations during a war"), our soldiers can't even get a dime in supplemental appropriations.
Way to go, Democrats. Your "blame America first" (even for things we have nothing to do with), anti-US soldier attitudes, actions, and mindsets have just been taken to a new level.
Monday, May 07, 2007
Didn't they try this in the 1980's?
Simply saying your product is "engineered beautifully" won't cut it when consumers have a real choice. It didn't work in the 80s, it won't work until they make a car that isn't junk. And that time hasn't arrived yet.
New Chrysler ad campaign focuses on engineering, quality: "The new spots, with the tag line of 'Engineered Beautifully,' will debut on prime-time television shows starting Tuesday night. The company also plans to carry the theme into print and Internet advertising."
Spartan hoops. Wow!
ESPN.com - NCB - Katz: Best program of the past decade? Try Michigan State: "Every four-year player recruited by Izzo in the past 10 years has played in at least one Final Four. "
"Limited jurisdiction...."?
The libs must love the fact that we don't teach "American" history in schools anymore.......
"In the first place, it is to be remembered, that the general government is not to be charged with the whole power of making and administering laws: its jurisdiction is limited to certaine numerated objects, which concern all the members of the republic, but which are not to be attained by the separate provisions of any."-- James Madison (Federalist No. 14, 30 November 1787)
Sunday, May 06, 2007
Ummm...case closed.....
I love "case closed".
Soldier in Augusta comes home early, kills burglar SavannahNow.com: "AUGUSTA - A man who police said broke into a U.S. Army officer's south Augusta house to steal guns was fatally shot Wednesday by the soldier living there......
Neighbors told police that Bollinger, who is stationed at Fort Gordon, generally works from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., but occasionally he returns home early.
There were no plans to charge Bollinger in the shooting, police said."
Neighbors told police that Bollinger, who is stationed at Fort Gordon, generally works from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., but occasionally he returns home early.
There were no plans to charge Bollinger in the shooting, police said."
The lib tsunami continues
This is a class-action lawyer's dream. "Soft ground" harms disabled kids. "Hard ground" harms non-gimp kids. Until all playgrounds are closed and turned into homeless "sanctuaries", the democrat class-action lawyer money fountain will gush. Disgusting!
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY / Wood chips ruled unfriendly to disabled kids: "A Contra Costa County school district's use of wood chips in play boxes makes it harder for boys and girls in wheelchairs to get to swings and slides, a violation of the disabled children's rights, a federal judge has ruled.
The decision by U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken of Oakland could lead to replacement of wood chips with firmer surfaces in public playgrounds at other schools and parks around the country,"
The decision by U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken of Oakland could lead to replacement of wood chips with firmer surfaces in public playgrounds at other schools and parks around the country,"
A bit of history
Seems kind of important if we're going to be informed about a potential President of the USA. Don't you think?
Hillary's assets - Editorials/Op-Ed - The Washington Times, America's Newspaper: "The odds of a retail trader executing the intraday transactions that generated a 530 percent overnight return, which Mrs. Clinton achieved on her first day, 'are about the same as [the odds] of finding the Dead Sea Scrolls on the steps of the State House in Little Rock,' according to estimates by Wall Street Journal financial columnist Caroline Baum and commodities speculator Victor Niederhoffer in their devastating account (Feb. 20, 1995; National Review) of Mrs. Clinton's trading activity. "
Saturday, May 05, 2007
This poll explains alot.
61% of American, democrat party members think Bush might have known in advance of 9-11!
Rasmussen Reports™: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a mid-term election.: "Democrats in America are evenly divided on the question of whether George W. Bush knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Democrats believe he did know, 39% say he did not know, and 26% are not sure."
Friday, May 04, 2007
Great driving combo
My Way - Sports News: "St. Louis Cardinals pitcher Josh Hancock was drunk and talking on his cell phone at the time of his fatal accident, and marijuana was found in the sport utility vehicle he was driving. "
Of course.......
Help! A child has been injured! Someone call a lawyer!
Boy who fell 17-feet at museum can move arms, legs - MLive.com blog : Muskegon Chronicle: "The boy was with his mother when she briefly became distracted by her 6-month-old, and Jacarious somehow fell over the railing, his father said. He said the museum should do more to protect children."
Talk Show Host Says He's Glad Radio Rival's Mother Is Dead - News Story - WISN Milwaukee
No big deal. The hating talker is black. Mrs. Sykes is white. No job will be lost... unless Sykes gets uppity.....
Talk Show Host Says He's Glad Radio Rival's Mother Is Dead - News Story - WISN Milwaukee: "'Mother Sykes, she dead. To me it's the vengeance of God. I ain't got no tears. Matter of fact a woman that would have a fool like that deserve whatever is coming her. She raised a sure enough idiot,' McGee said on his radio show. 'My instincts say Charlie Sykes killed his momma, cuz she live out in this big palace in Mequon all isolated. He got tired of waiting for her money.'"
Talk Show Host Says He's Glad Radio Rival's Mother Is Dead - News Story - WISN Milwaukee: "'Mother Sykes, she dead. To me it's the vengeance of God. I ain't got no tears. Matter of fact a woman that would have a fool like that deserve whatever is coming her. She raised a sure enough idiot,' McGee said on his radio show. 'My instincts say Charlie Sykes killed his momma, cuz she live out in this big palace in Mequon all isolated. He got tired of waiting for her money.'"
What revenue shortfall?
$30 million here, $80 million there. No problem, just increase taxes. Although we may need some good PR if we raise the sales taxes any more.
WZZM13 - Tourism leaders want more money spent touting state: "Leaders in Michigan's tourism industry today called for a giant boost in state spending to attract travelers as a way to revive the state economy and generate new tax revenue. ...
The TIME campaign (Tourism Improving Michigan's Economy) wants the Legislature and Gov. Jennifer Granholm to double spending on “Pure Michigan” advertising to $30 million from $15.6 million."
WZZM13 - Tourism leaders want more money spent touting state: "Leaders in Michigan's tourism industry today called for a giant boost in state spending to attract travelers as a way to revive the state economy and generate new tax revenue. ...
The TIME campaign (Tourism Improving Michigan's Economy) wants the Legislature and Gov. Jennifer Granholm to double spending on “Pure Michigan” advertising to $30 million from $15.6 million."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)