♪

My boyfriend is writing his biography. His family is of historical importance. We've been in contact with a director who might be interested in doing a documentary. We're interested in pursuing this but want to be sure we are protected too. Where can we find a non-disclosure agreement for this purpose?

I'm looking to repatriate an artifact (through the Native American Repatriation Act) claimed to have belonged to an ancestor but don't know where to begin.

Do I take a DNA test? If so, what type? Do I then contact the Dept of the Interior?

Anyone know anything about DNA tests and matches or how to go about doing this?

Thanks in advance.

and what is the difference between fate and destiny?

if you believe in destiny, what does it mean to you?

a question inspired by John Trudell's recent poem

"deal with that"

and sometimes when

i have to question my behavior

my behavior won't answer me

so thats how me and my behavior

deal with that

while the won't happen agains

battle it out with the want to agains

My 10 year old daughter has been asking for a Wii. She has a PS3 from a few years ago which has a couple of games that she played all the way through and then never picked it up again.

It is my understanding that the Wii graphics are not as good as the PS3, ... come to think of it, it might be a PS2, not a PS3... anyway

Can anyone make recommendations as to which components I would need and if it is better than what we already have?

Thanks

Are you ready now for the work to be done? What will you do personally to enact that change?

in lieu of the bail out, if enough people got together and paid their tax money into such an account, would this be possible?

In California, you must have 55 declared electors filed with the Secretary of State's office before you become an "official" write-in candidate for president. Unless a voter writes in an "official" write-in candidate for an office, his or her vote doesn't count. Gail Lightfoot has been spearheading a drive to get the required number of electors, and I just got an email from her that Evelyn Mendez, Program Manager Candidates & Elections in the California Secretary of State's office, indicates we have 70 completed elector forms! Gail is working with her to finalize the 55 electors. Bottom Line: Ron Paul will be an official write-in candidate for the office of president in California! If you write in "Ron Paul," it WILL count!!! Now I can actually vote for someone! UPDATE (10/23/08 12:30 A.M. PDT): Gail says the Secretary of State called her today to expedite finalizing the list. It should be on the web site TODAY sometime (Thursday)!"

From www.dailypaul.com/node/69997

Date: Oct 23, 2008 7:05 AM

Subject: 3rd Party Presidential Debate, tonight.

Body: (C-Span.org will stream the debate live.

) 8pm central

WASHINGTON, DC- Rep. Ron Paul's (R-TX) choice for President is among those invited to a debate for all presidential candidates on Thursday, October 23, in Washington, D.C.

Constitution Party presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin ( www.Baldwin08.com) will join other third party candidates at the 90-minute forum, which is being sponsored by The Free and Equal Elections Coalition ( www.freeandequal.org).

The Third Party Presidential Candidates Debate will be held at 9 p.m. (EST) at the Mayflower Hotel, 1127 Connecticut Ave., NW, in Washington, D.C.

A total of six presidential candidates who are on enough state ballots to be eligible to win the election have been invited to participate.

The recent endorsement of CP candidate Chuck Baldwin by former GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul has directed many of Paul's supporters to Baldwin.

See Ron Paul's endorsement of Baldwin at http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog. php?view=547 .

The 90-minute debate will focus on the issues that distinguish Chuck Baldwin from the major and minor party presidential candidates in the race: opposition to the so-called 'bail-outs', opposition to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, support for secure borders, the overturning of Roe v Wade, and a return to limited, Constitutional government.

In addition to Baldwin, the other invited candidates are Republican Party nominee John McCain, Democratic Party nominee Barack Obama, Independent Ralph Nader, the Green Party's Cynthia McKinney, and the Libertarian Party's Bob Barr.

Better read up on your patriot act . . .

http://kstp./ com/article/stories/S627869. shtml?cat=1

Okay now the vandalism that occurred at senators' houses is considered "clearly a terrorism threat"

It apparently ok for them to steal taxpayer dollars but a few vandals get angry and now they are called terrorists?

*sniffs Don't you smell fascism in the air?

What is next? Torture... wait aren't they already doing that in Puerto Rico?

Please state who you're leaning towards and pick the issues.

war

economy

limited government

abortion

environment

constitution

or other (please specify)

McCain's plan?

Why do we have to find out months later through foreign newspapers?

http://kucinich.house.gov/NEWS/DocumentSingle.aspx...

http://justanothercoverup.com/?p=494

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/oct/17/exe...

Do you think it is time to protest?

Financial workers at Wall Street's top banks are to receive pay deals worth more than $70bn (£40bn), a substantial proportion of which is expected to be paid in discretionary bonuses, for their work so far this year - despite plunging the global financial system into its worst crisis since the 1929 stock market crash, the Guardian has learned.

Staff at six banks including Goldman Sachs and Citigroup are in line to pick up the payouts despite being the beneficiaries of a $700bn bail-out from the US government that has already prompted criticism. The government's cash has been poured in on the condition that excessive executive pay would be curbed.

Pay plans for bankers have been disclosed in recent corporate statements. Pressure on the US firms to review preparations for annual bonuses increased yesterday when Germany's Deutsche Bank said many of its leading traders would join Josef Ackermann, its chief executive, in waiving millions of euros in annual payouts.

The sums that continue to be spent by Wall Street firms on payroll, payoffs and, most controversially, bonuses appear to bear no relation to the losses incurred by investors in the banks. Shares in Citigroup and Goldman Sachs have declined by more than 45% since the start of the year. Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley have fallen by more than 60%. JP MorganChase fell 6.4% and Lehman Brothers has collapsed.

At one point last week the Morgan Stanley $10.7bn pay pot for the year to date was greater than the entire stock market value of the business. In effect, staff, on receiving their remuneration, could club together and buy the bank.

In the first nine months of the year Citigroup, which employs thousands of staff in the UK, accrued $25.9bn for salaries and bonuses, an increase on the previous year of 4%. Earlier this week the bank accepted a $25bn investment by the US government as part of its bail-out plan.

At Goldman Sachs the figure was $11.4bn, Morgan Stanley $10.73bn, JP Morgan $6.53bn and Merrill Lynch $11.7bn. At Merrill, which was on the point of going bust last month before being taken over by Bank of America, the total accrued in the last quarter grew 76% to $3.49bn. At Morgan Stanley, the amount put aside for staff compensation also grew in the last quarter to the end of August by 3% to $3.7bn.

Days before it collapsed into bankruptcy protection a month ago Lehman Brothers revealed $6.12bn of staff pay plans in its corporate filings. These payouts, the bank insisted, were justified despite net revenue collapsing from $14.9bn to a net outgoing of $64m.

None of the banks the Guardian contacted wished to comment on the record about their pay plans. But behind the scenes, one source said: "For a normal person the salaries are very high and the bonuses seem even higher. But in this world you get a top bonus for top performance, a medium bonus for mediocre performance and a much smaller bonus if you don't do so well.

"

Many critics of investment banks have questioned why firms continue to siphon off billions of dollars of bank earnings into bonus pools rather than using the funds to shore up the capital position of the crisis-stricken institutions. One source said: "That's a fair question - and it may well be that by the end of the year the banks start review the situation.

"

Much of the anger about investment banking bonuses has focused on boardroom executives such as former Lehman boss Dick Fuld, who was paid $485m in salary, bonuses and options between 2000 and 2007.

Last year Merrill Lynch's chairman Stan O'Neal retired after announcing losses of $8bn, taking a final pay deal worth $161m. Citigroup boss Chuck Prince left last year with a $38m in bonuses, shares and options after multibillion-dollar write-downs. In Britain, Bob Diamond, Barclays president, is one of the few investment bankers whose pay is public. Last year he received a salary of £250,000, but his total pay, including bonuses, reached £36m.

I honestly don't understand. Take travel to Cuba as just one example. What is the deal with traveling to Cuba? I've never been, but I hear that its near impossible as a US citizen to travel there. I hear from other people around the world, that it is a wonderful place to visit. So how free are you, as an American citizen, when there are restrictions as to where you can travel? I've read about people who are afraid of being arrested once they come back to the US!

The government belongs to the people, not the other way around. Where is your real freedom? And why would you consider voting for someone who will surely restrict that freedom further?

At least you have a voting right with credit unions and it is local, community banking

I'm independent not republican, so don't assume anything.

It's a legitimate question. Why should nearly half of my income that I work hard for go to support people who will spend it in any way they like?

Why should it be funneled through a larger government where I cannot SEE where it is going?

How is this larger government going to account for those billions of 'illegal immigrants' many of whom are nearing retirement age and in need of more medical care. Is this going to be on my dime too?

If so, why would I want to pay taxes or even work for that matter? Why wouldn't I just try to get social programs like some people do?

Why would anyone participate in modern slavery?

I'm an independent voter. It appears to me that democrats want larger government. I'd like to know why when the one we have is so inefficient (ex: Katrina) It is puzzling to me because I would think that with liberal viewpoints, which I support socially, democrats would prefer to work together at the community level. What I see happening, however is supporting large corporations and big government and now some blending of the two. Please clear this up for me. Thanks