Afscme 3357 is famous in Hawaii
From the University of Hawaii's Center for Labor Education and Research's Clear Newsletter:
Denial of Paid Sick Leave Challenged in FMLA Situation
An employer improperly denied an employee the use of paid sick leave for time off under the Family and Medical Leave Act, said arbitrator Robert E. Allen.
An attorney working for the United Auto Workers Legal Services Plans in St. Louis took time off under the FMLA to care for her ill husband. She attempted to claim two weeks of paid sick leave for the time off, but the employer charged two weeks of annual leave instead. The attorney was represented by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, which grieved over the leave substitution. AFSCME Local 3357 cited a contract provision stating that when "a staff attorney's spouse or dependent child is ill or disabled and requires the care of the staff attorney, the staff attorney can use sick leave to provide care." The employer argued that the use of annual leave in such situations was a longstanding past practice to which the union had acquiesced.
Calling the collective bargaining agreement's language about the use of sick leave in such situations "clear and unambiguous," Allen upheld the grievance. As for the past practice claim, the employer's own defense of its policy cited eight similar FMLA leave requests. In two cases, there were grievances, and in two others, managers ignored the annual leave policy. Given this evidence, Allen said he found it "difficult to conclude such a practice was mutually accepted" or "consistent" (UAW-Legal Services Plans, 119 LA 1217 (Allen, 2004)). [CLEAR Source: BNA's Union Labor Report (7-30-04), p. 127]
CLEAR Newsletter
Monday, October 18, 2004
George W. Bush Quote of the Day:
I'm not the expert on how the Iraqi people think, because I live in America, where it's nice and safe and secure.
DubyaSpeak.com : : We record the damage.: "
A St. Peter Joke
A man died and went to heaven. As he stood in front of St. Peter at the Pearly
Gates, he saw a huge wall of clocks behind him.
He asked, "What are all those clocks?"
St. Peter answered, "Those are Lie-Clocks. Everyone on Earth has a Lie-Clock.
Every time you lie the hands on your clock will move."
"Oh," said the man, "whose clock is that?"
"That's Mother Teresa's. The hands have never moved, indicating that she never
told a lie."
"Incredible" said the man. "And whose clock is that one?"
St. Peter responded, "That's Abraham Lincoln's clock. The hands have moved
twice, telling us that Abe told only two lies in his entire life."
"Where's George W. Bush's clock?" asked the man."
I'm not the expert on how the Iraqi people think, because I live in America, where it's nice and safe and secure.
DubyaSpeak.com : : We record the damage.: "
A St. Peter Joke
A man died and went to heaven. As he stood in front of St. Peter at the Pearly
Gates, he saw a huge wall of clocks behind him.
He asked, "What are all those clocks?"
St. Peter answered, "Those are Lie-Clocks. Everyone on Earth has a Lie-Clock.
Every time you lie the hands on your clock will move."
"Oh," said the man, "whose clock is that?"
"That's Mother Teresa's. The hands have never moved, indicating that she never
told a lie."
"Incredible" said the man. "And whose clock is that one?"
St. Peter responded, "That's Abraham Lincoln's clock. The hands have moved
twice, telling us that Abe told only two lies in his entire life."
"Where's George W. Bush's clock?" asked the man."
Friday, October 15, 2004
The HCCI engine - throw away your spark plugs
CMS?The Internal Combustion Engine at Work: "omogeneous Charge Compression Ignition (HCCI). "
CMS?The Internal Combustion Engine at Work: "omogeneous Charge Compression Ignition (HCCI). "
Wednesday, October 13, 2004
Where to buy Clothes Union Made in the USA?
Try Union Jean & Apparel. They have solid-looking jeans for $29.95
Denim Jeans: Union Jean and Apparel Co.
Try Union Jean & Apparel. They have solid-looking jeans for $29.95
Denim Jeans: Union Jean and Apparel Co.
Monday, October 11, 2004
Bush - Kerry Chose Trial Lawyers over Doctors - Are you mad because they wouldn't let you into the club?
George W. Bush told an audience of supporters that John Kerry chose to reach out to lawyers rather than doctors when he chose John Edwards as a running mate. It has been reported (but not frequently enough) that George W. Bush applied to law school at the University of Texas, but was not accepted. Are you mad because we wouldn't let you into the shark club, George? Is that why you get this pissed-off face whenever you talk about lawyers.
I'm sorry they didn't let you in George. I You might have learned something about due process. You might have learned something about an independent judiciary. You might have learned something about separation of church & state. You might have learned that when a doctor commits malpractice enough, and damages enough people, that doctor might have problems getting insurance. Eventually, that doctor gets out of business and stops killing and maiming people. If enough bad doctors get out of the profession, then malpractice rates (both rates of injuries and insurance rates) go down.
Instead of law school, you went to business school. Now, if there is one thing they teach you in business school it's that there's no such thing as a free lunch. But that can't be right, how can we not have record deficits and lowered taxes, especially for the rich?
Google Search: bush "applied to law school" university of texas
George W. Bush told an audience of supporters that John Kerry chose to reach out to lawyers rather than doctors when he chose John Edwards as a running mate. It has been reported (but not frequently enough) that George W. Bush applied to law school at the University of Texas, but was not accepted. Are you mad because we wouldn't let you into the shark club, George? Is that why you get this pissed-off face whenever you talk about lawyers.
I'm sorry they didn't let you in George. I You might have learned something about due process. You might have learned something about an independent judiciary. You might have learned something about separation of church & state. You might have learned that when a doctor commits malpractice enough, and damages enough people, that doctor might have problems getting insurance. Eventually, that doctor gets out of business and stops killing and maiming people. If enough bad doctors get out of the profession, then malpractice rates (both rates of injuries and insurance rates) go down.
Instead of law school, you went to business school. Now, if there is one thing they teach you in business school it's that there's no such thing as a free lunch. But that can't be right, how can we not have record deficits and lowered taxes, especially for the rich?
Google Search: bush "applied to law school" university of texas
Howard Stern gets Sirius
Last week, shock jock Howard Stern announced that he would be moving his radio show to the Sirius satellite service in 2006. Sirius so far has been in a week second place in the satellite radio business as compared to rival XM. According to the Wall Street Journal, Sirius has a little over 600,000 subscribers, and last year had revenue of about 12 million. This makes it both gutsy and surprising for Sirius to announce what was termed a $500 million multi-year package with Howard Stern. The CNN article linked below said that the annual budget for Howard Stern's show, including his and other salaries, is about $100 milliion per year. How much of that is cocaine?
Howard Sterns leaves commercial radio - Oct. 6, 2004
Last week, shock jock Howard Stern announced that he would be moving his radio show to the Sirius satellite service in 2006. Sirius so far has been in a week second place in the satellite radio business as compared to rival XM. According to the Wall Street Journal, Sirius has a little over 600,000 subscribers, and last year had revenue of about 12 million. This makes it both gutsy and surprising for Sirius to announce what was termed a $500 million multi-year package with Howard Stern. The CNN article linked below said that the annual budget for Howard Stern's show, including his and other salaries, is about $100 milliion per year. How much of that is cocaine?
Howard Sterns leaves commercial radio - Oct. 6, 2004
Friday, October 08, 2004
Senator Robert Byrd
Pork Barrel politician or wise statesman. Until recently, my opinion of Senator Robert Byrd was that he was an anachronism. I thought he stood for the worst kind of pork barrel politics. Whenever his name came up it was in conjunction with some special project for West Virginia. In recent times, however, this septuagenarian has had the courage to speak up in when others have just taken the path of least resistance. I ran across this speech of his from May 21, 2003, almost a year and a half ago. He outlined almost line for line the reasons why Bush and Cheney were being less than honest about the war in Iraq, and why our involvement there would not be the mission accomplished that was being touted. Since it is from all appearances in the public domain, I'm going to lift the entire speech and reprint it. I found it at the site below.
Truth has a way of asserting itself despite all attempts to obscure it. Distortion only serves to derail it for a time. No matter to what lengths we humans may go to obfuscate facts or delude our fellows, truth has a way of squeezing out through the cracks, eventually.
But the danger is that at some point it may no longer matter. The danger is that damage is done before the truth is widely realized. The reality is that, sometimes, it is easier to ignore uncomfortable facts and go along with whatever distortion is currently in vogue. We see a lot of this today in politics. I see a lot of it -- more than I would ever have believed -- right on this Senate Floor.
Regarding the situation in Iraq, it appears to this Senator that the American people may have been lured into accepting the unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation, in violation of long-standing International law, under false premises. There is ample evidence that the horrific events of September 11 have been carefully manipulated to switch public focus from Osama Bin Laden and Al Queda who masterminded the September 11th attacks, to Saddam Hussein who did not. The run up to our invasion of Iraq featured the President and members of his cabinet invoking every frightening image they could conjure, from mushroom clouds, to buried caches of germ warfare, to drones poised to deliver germ laden death in our major cities. We were treated to a heavy dose of overstatement concerning Saddam Hussein's direct threat to our freedoms. The tactic was guaranteed to provoke a sure reaction from a nation still suffering from a combination of post traumatic stress and justifiable anger after the attacks of 911. It was the exploitation of fear. It was a placebo for the anger.
Since the war's end, every subsequent revelation which has seemed to refute the previous dire claims of the Bush Administration has been brushed aside. Instead of addressing the contradictory evidence, the White House deftly changes the subject. No weapons of mass destruction have yet turned up, but we are told that they will in time. Perhaps they yet will. But, our costly and destructive bunker busting attack on Iraq seems to have proven, in the main, precisely the opposite of what we were told was the urgent reason to go in. It seems also to have, for the present, verified the assertions of Hans Blix and the inspection team he led, which President Bush and company so derided. As Blix always said, a lot of time will be needed to find such weapons, if they do, indeed, exist. Meanwhile Bin Laden is still on the loose and Saddam Hussein has come up missing.
The Administration assured the U.S. public and the world, over and over again, that an attack was necessary to protect our people and the world from terrorism. It assiduously worked to alarm the public and blur the faces of Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden until they virtually became one.
What has become painfully clear in the aftermath of war is that Iraq was no immediate threat to the U.S. Ravaged by years of sanctions, Iraq did not even lift an airplane against us. Iraq's threatening death-dealing fleet of unmanned drones about which we heard so much morphed into one prototype made of plywood and string. Their missiles proved to be outdated and of limited range. Their army was quickly overwhelmed by our technology and our well trained troops.
Presently our loyal military personnel continue their mission of diligently searching for WMD. They have so far turned up only fertilizer, vacuum cleaners, conventional weapons, and the occasional buried swimming pool. They are misused on such a mission and they continue to be at grave risk. But, the Bush team's extensive hype of WMD in Iraq as justification for a preemptive invasion has become more than embarrassing. It has raised serious questions about prevarication and the reckless use of power. Were our troops needlessly put at risk? Were countless Iraqi civilians killed and maimed when war was not really necessary? Was the American public deliberately misled? Was the world?
What makes me cringe even more is the continued claim that we are "liberators." The facts don't seem to support the label we have so euphemistically attached to ourselves. True, we have unseated a brutal, despicable despot, but "liberation" implies the follow up of freedom, self-determination and a better life for the common people. In fact, if the situation in Iraq is the result of "liberation," we may have set the cause of freedom back 200 years.
Despite our high-blown claims of a better life for the Iraqi people, water is scarce, and often foul, electricity is a sometime thing, food is in short supply, hospitals are stacked with the wounded and maimed, historic treasures of the region and of the Iraqi people have been looted, and nuclear material may have been disseminated to heaven knows where, while U.S. troops, on orders, looked on and guarded the oil supply.
Meanwhile, lucrative contracts to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure and refurbish its oil industry are awarded to Administration cronies, without benefit of competitive bidding, and the U.S. steadfastly resists offers of U.N. assistance to participate. Is there any wonder that the real motives of the U.S. government are the subject of worldwide speculation and mistrust?
And in what may be the most damaging development, the U.S. appears to be pushing off Iraq's clamor for self-government. Jay Garner has been summarily replaced, and it is becoming all too clear that the smiling face of the U.S. as liberator is quickly assuming the scowl of an occupier. The image of the boot on the throat has replaced the beckoning hand of freedom. Chaos and rioting only exacerbate that image, as U.S. soldiers try to sustain order in a land ravaged by poverty and disease. "Regime change" in Iraq has so far meant anarchy, curbed only by an occupying military force and a U.S. administrative presence that is evasive about if and when it intends to depart.
Democracy and Freedom cannot be force fed at the point of an occupier's gun. To think otherwise is folly. One has to stop and ponder. How could we have been so impossibly naive? How could we expect to easily plant a clone of U.S. culture, values, and government in a country so riven with religious, territorial, and tribal rivalries, so suspicious of U.S. motives, and so at odds with the galloping materialism which drives the western-style economies?
As so many warned this Administration before it launched its misguided war on Iraq, there is evidence that our crack down in Iraq is likely to convince 1,000 new Bin Ladens to plan other horrors of the type we have seen in the past several days. Instead of damaging the terrorists, we have given them new fuel for their fury. We did not complete our mission in Afghanistan because we were so eager to attack Iraq. Now it appears that Al Queda is back with a vengeance. We have returned to orange alert in the U.S., and we may well have destabilized the Mideast region, a region we have never fully understood. We have alienated friends around the globe with our dissembling and our haughty insistence on punishing former friends who may not see things quite our way.
The path of diplomacy and reason have gone out the window to be replaced by force, unilateralism, and punishment for transgressions. I read most recently with amazement our harsh castigation of Turkey, our longtime friend and strategic ally. It is astonishing that our government is berating the new Turkish government for conducting its affairs in accordance with its own Constitution and its democratic institutions.
Indeed, we may have sparked a new international arms race as countries move ahead to develop WMD as a last ditch attempt to ward off a possible preemptive strike from a newly belligerent U.S. which claims the right to hit where it wants. In fact, there is little to constrain this President. Congress, in what will go down in history as its most unfortunate act, handed away its power to declare war for the foreseeable future and empowered this President to wage war at will.
As if that were not bad enough, members of Congress are reluctant to ask questions which are begging to be asked. How long will we occupy Iraq? We have already heard disputes on the numbers of troops which will be needed to retain order. What is the truth? How costly will the occupation and rebuilding be? No one has given a straight answer. How will we afford this long-term massive commitment, fight terrorism at home, address a serious crisis in domestic healthcare, afford behemoth military spending and give away billions in tax cuts amidst a deficit which has climbed to over $340 billion for this year alone? If the President's tax cut passes it will be $400 billion. We cower in the shadows while false statements proliferate. We accept soft answers and shaky explanations because to demand the truth is hard, or unpopular, or may be politically costly.
But, I contend that, through it all, the people know. The American people unfortunately are used to political shading, spin, and the usual chicanery they hear from public officials. They patiently tolerate it up to a point. But there is a line. It may seem to be drawn in invisible ink for a time, but eventually it will appear in dark colors, tinged with anger. When it comes to shedding American blood - - when it comes to wreaking havoc on civilians, on innocent men, women, and children, callous dissembling is not acceptable. Nothing is worth that kind of lie - - not oil, not revenge, not reelection, not somebody's grand pipedream of a democratic domino theory.
And mark my words, the calculated intimidation which we see so often of late by the "powers that be" will only keep the loyal opposition quiet for just so long. Because eventually, like it always does, the truth will emerge. And when it does, this house of cards, built of deceit, will fall.
Pork Barrel politician or wise statesman. Until recently, my opinion of Senator Robert Byrd was that he was an anachronism. I thought he stood for the worst kind of pork barrel politics. Whenever his name came up it was in conjunction with some special project for West Virginia. In recent times, however, this septuagenarian has had the courage to speak up in when others have just taken the path of least resistance. I ran across this speech of his from May 21, 2003, almost a year and a half ago. He outlined almost line for line the reasons why Bush and Cheney were being less than honest about the war in Iraq, and why our involvement there would not be the mission accomplished that was being touted. Since it is from all appearances in the public domain, I'm going to lift the entire speech and reprint it. I found it at the site below.
Truth has a way of asserting itself despite all attempts to obscure it. Distortion only serves to derail it for a time. No matter to what lengths we humans may go to obfuscate facts or delude our fellows, truth has a way of squeezing out through the cracks, eventually.
But the danger is that at some point it may no longer matter. The danger is that damage is done before the truth is widely realized. The reality is that, sometimes, it is easier to ignore uncomfortable facts and go along with whatever distortion is currently in vogue. We see a lot of this today in politics. I see a lot of it -- more than I would ever have believed -- right on this Senate Floor.
Regarding the situation in Iraq, it appears to this Senator that the American people may have been lured into accepting the unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation, in violation of long-standing International law, under false premises. There is ample evidence that the horrific events of September 11 have been carefully manipulated to switch public focus from Osama Bin Laden and Al Queda who masterminded the September 11th attacks, to Saddam Hussein who did not. The run up to our invasion of Iraq featured the President and members of his cabinet invoking every frightening image they could conjure, from mushroom clouds, to buried caches of germ warfare, to drones poised to deliver germ laden death in our major cities. We were treated to a heavy dose of overstatement concerning Saddam Hussein's direct threat to our freedoms. The tactic was guaranteed to provoke a sure reaction from a nation still suffering from a combination of post traumatic stress and justifiable anger after the attacks of 911. It was the exploitation of fear. It was a placebo for the anger.
Since the war's end, every subsequent revelation which has seemed to refute the previous dire claims of the Bush Administration has been brushed aside. Instead of addressing the contradictory evidence, the White House deftly changes the subject. No weapons of mass destruction have yet turned up, but we are told that they will in time. Perhaps they yet will. But, our costly and destructive bunker busting attack on Iraq seems to have proven, in the main, precisely the opposite of what we were told was the urgent reason to go in. It seems also to have, for the present, verified the assertions of Hans Blix and the inspection team he led, which President Bush and company so derided. As Blix always said, a lot of time will be needed to find such weapons, if they do, indeed, exist. Meanwhile Bin Laden is still on the loose and Saddam Hussein has come up missing.
The Administration assured the U.S. public and the world, over and over again, that an attack was necessary to protect our people and the world from terrorism. It assiduously worked to alarm the public and blur the faces of Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden until they virtually became one.
What has become painfully clear in the aftermath of war is that Iraq was no immediate threat to the U.S. Ravaged by years of sanctions, Iraq did not even lift an airplane against us. Iraq's threatening death-dealing fleet of unmanned drones about which we heard so much morphed into one prototype made of plywood and string. Their missiles proved to be outdated and of limited range. Their army was quickly overwhelmed by our technology and our well trained troops.
Presently our loyal military personnel continue their mission of diligently searching for WMD. They have so far turned up only fertilizer, vacuum cleaners, conventional weapons, and the occasional buried swimming pool. They are misused on such a mission and they continue to be at grave risk. But, the Bush team's extensive hype of WMD in Iraq as justification for a preemptive invasion has become more than embarrassing. It has raised serious questions about prevarication and the reckless use of power. Were our troops needlessly put at risk? Were countless Iraqi civilians killed and maimed when war was not really necessary? Was the American public deliberately misled? Was the world?
What makes me cringe even more is the continued claim that we are "liberators." The facts don't seem to support the label we have so euphemistically attached to ourselves. True, we have unseated a brutal, despicable despot, but "liberation" implies the follow up of freedom, self-determination and a better life for the common people. In fact, if the situation in Iraq is the result of "liberation," we may have set the cause of freedom back 200 years.
Despite our high-blown claims of a better life for the Iraqi people, water is scarce, and often foul, electricity is a sometime thing, food is in short supply, hospitals are stacked with the wounded and maimed, historic treasures of the region and of the Iraqi people have been looted, and nuclear material may have been disseminated to heaven knows where, while U.S. troops, on orders, looked on and guarded the oil supply.
Meanwhile, lucrative contracts to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure and refurbish its oil industry are awarded to Administration cronies, without benefit of competitive bidding, and the U.S. steadfastly resists offers of U.N. assistance to participate. Is there any wonder that the real motives of the U.S. government are the subject of worldwide speculation and mistrust?
And in what may be the most damaging development, the U.S. appears to be pushing off Iraq's clamor for self-government. Jay Garner has been summarily replaced, and it is becoming all too clear that the smiling face of the U.S. as liberator is quickly assuming the scowl of an occupier. The image of the boot on the throat has replaced the beckoning hand of freedom. Chaos and rioting only exacerbate that image, as U.S. soldiers try to sustain order in a land ravaged by poverty and disease. "Regime change" in Iraq has so far meant anarchy, curbed only by an occupying military force and a U.S. administrative presence that is evasive about if and when it intends to depart.
Democracy and Freedom cannot be force fed at the point of an occupier's gun. To think otherwise is folly. One has to stop and ponder. How could we have been so impossibly naive? How could we expect to easily plant a clone of U.S. culture, values, and government in a country so riven with religious, territorial, and tribal rivalries, so suspicious of U.S. motives, and so at odds with the galloping materialism which drives the western-style economies?
As so many warned this Administration before it launched its misguided war on Iraq, there is evidence that our crack down in Iraq is likely to convince 1,000 new Bin Ladens to plan other horrors of the type we have seen in the past several days. Instead of damaging the terrorists, we have given them new fuel for their fury. We did not complete our mission in Afghanistan because we were so eager to attack Iraq. Now it appears that Al Queda is back with a vengeance. We have returned to orange alert in the U.S., and we may well have destabilized the Mideast region, a region we have never fully understood. We have alienated friends around the globe with our dissembling and our haughty insistence on punishing former friends who may not see things quite our way.
The path of diplomacy and reason have gone out the window to be replaced by force, unilateralism, and punishment for transgressions. I read most recently with amazement our harsh castigation of Turkey, our longtime friend and strategic ally. It is astonishing that our government is berating the new Turkish government for conducting its affairs in accordance with its own Constitution and its democratic institutions.
Indeed, we may have sparked a new international arms race as countries move ahead to develop WMD as a last ditch attempt to ward off a possible preemptive strike from a newly belligerent U.S. which claims the right to hit where it wants. In fact, there is little to constrain this President. Congress, in what will go down in history as its most unfortunate act, handed away its power to declare war for the foreseeable future and empowered this President to wage war at will.
As if that were not bad enough, members of Congress are reluctant to ask questions which are begging to be asked. How long will we occupy Iraq? We have already heard disputes on the numbers of troops which will be needed to retain order. What is the truth? How costly will the occupation and rebuilding be? No one has given a straight answer. How will we afford this long-term massive commitment, fight terrorism at home, address a serious crisis in domestic healthcare, afford behemoth military spending and give away billions in tax cuts amidst a deficit which has climbed to over $340 billion for this year alone? If the President's tax cut passes it will be $400 billion. We cower in the shadows while false statements proliferate. We accept soft answers and shaky explanations because to demand the truth is hard, or unpopular, or may be politically costly.
But, I contend that, through it all, the people know. The American people unfortunately are used to political shading, spin, and the usual chicanery they hear from public officials. They patiently tolerate it up to a point. But there is a line. It may seem to be drawn in invisible ink for a time, but eventually it will appear in dark colors, tinged with anger. When it comes to shedding American blood - - when it comes to wreaking havoc on civilians, on innocent men, women, and children, callous dissembling is not acceptable. Nothing is worth that kind of lie - - not oil, not revenge, not reelection, not somebody's grand pipedream of a democratic domino theory.
And mark my words, the calculated intimidation which we see so often of late by the "powers that be" will only keep the loyal opposition quiet for just so long. Because eventually, like it always does, the truth will emerge. And when it does, this house of cards, built of deceit, will fall.
Thursday, October 07, 2004
Indiana Woman Puts Anti-Bush Tattoo on her Head
Polls say Indiana is squarely in the Bush camp. What would cause a woman named Kerra Fowler to shave her head and put a big anti-bush tattoo on skull? Desperation? I ran a Google.com search on Kerra Fowler, and the only thing that came up was a letter she sent to the Central Indiana Mensa Association. I agree with her. That must mean I'm smart. I didn't tattoo my head, does that mean she's smarter or I'm smarter?
There's the old proverb about the difference between being involved and being committed. The chicken is involved in making a bacon and egg breakfast, the pig is committed.
phref="http://www.theindychannel.com/politics/3788886/detail.html">TheIndyChannel.com - Politics - Indiana Woman's Skull Bears Anti-Bush Tattoo
Polls say Indiana is squarely in the Bush camp. What would cause a woman named Kerra Fowler to shave her head and put a big anti-bush tattoo on skull? Desperation? I ran a Google.com search on Kerra Fowler, and the only thing that came up was a letter she sent to the Central Indiana Mensa Association. I agree with her. That must mean I'm smart. I didn't tattoo my head, does that mean she's smarter or I'm smarter?
There's the old proverb about the difference between being involved and being committed. The chicken is involved in making a bacon and egg breakfast, the pig is committed.
phref="http://www.theindychannel.com/politics/3788886/detail.html">TheIndyChannel.com - Politics - Indiana Woman's Skull Bears Anti-Bush Tattoo
Fahrenheit 9/11 is #1 on Amazon.com sales chart
Two days after its release, already 1237 people have taken the time to submit an Amazon.com review. Average customer review 4 out of 5 stars. I have a hunch that most of these reviews are either 0 or 5 stars.
I intend to buy my copy this weekend. I might even buy two & pass one around.
Amazon.com: DVD: Fahrenheit 9/11 (2004)
Two days after its release, already 1237 people have taken the time to submit an Amazon.com review. Average customer review 4 out of 5 stars. I have a hunch that most of these reviews are either 0 or 5 stars.
I intend to buy my copy this weekend. I might even buy two & pass one around.
Amazon.com: DVD: Fahrenheit 9/11 (2004)
Suspicious Florida voter registrations - Another reason to distrust ACORN
The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN was implicated in submitting suspicious voter registrations in Florida.
I don't need another reason to dislike ACORN. I've spent countless hours working on what would have been an easy TILA Case against Household International. The reason why it is difficult is because ACORN settled a class action case against Household that included an mandatory opt-out provision. This is just months after the Attorneys General settled a class action covering mostly the same class with an Opt-in provision. The main reason the Attorneys General settled for less than they would have otherwise against Household was to keep the class an Opt-in class. By making it an opt out class, every time an aggrieved consumer comes to your office with a prospective TILA or HOEPA claim against a Household entity there is a good bet that you'll have to send them away empty-handed no matter how bad the violation unless there is a foreclosure pending.
local6.com - News - FDLE Investigating Suspicious Florida County Voter Applications
The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN was implicated in submitting suspicious voter registrations in Florida.
I don't need another reason to dislike ACORN. I've spent countless hours working on what would have been an easy TILA Case against Household International. The reason why it is difficult is because ACORN settled a class action case against Household that included an mandatory opt-out provision. This is just months after the Attorneys General settled a class action covering mostly the same class with an Opt-in provision. The main reason the Attorneys General settled for less than they would have otherwise against Household was to keep the class an Opt-in class. By making it an opt out class, every time an aggrieved consumer comes to your office with a prospective TILA or HOEPA claim against a Household entity there is a good bet that you'll have to send them away empty-handed no matter how bad the violation unless there is a foreclosure pending.
local6.com - News - FDLE Investigating Suspicious Florida County Voter Applications
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
