TrueThat

I think the stock market has already tanked.

Lets have the bright minds of this country solve the problem that effects most of us ordinary people. $700 billion dollars will help wall street but says nothing directly about the credit crunch conditions. However if the problem being addressed is determined to be the credit crunch then most likely the solution would come in the form of addressing or solving the credit crunch problem.

Personally I think wall street is behaving like a child who is denied candy. If wall street does not get the bail out then the country will suffer from the credit crunch.

If banks don't lend then the banks have no business being in the banking business.

Congress needs to force banks to lend when the borrower's background checks out legitimately. This is the more direct approach to the problem: credit crunch. Wall street needs to accept responsibility and be accountable for the reckless decision making.

Lets have the bright minds of this country solve the problem that effects most of us ordinary people. $700 billion dollars will help wall street but says nothing directly about the credit crunch conditions. However if the problem being addressed is determined to be the credit crunch then most likely the solution would come in the form of addressing or solving the credit crunch problem.

Personally I think wall street is behaving like a child who is denied candy. If wall street does not get the bail out then the country will suffer from the credit crunch.

If banks don't lend then the banks have no business being in the banking business.

Congress needs to force banks to lend when the borrower's background checks out legitimately. This is the more direct approach to the problem: credit crunch. Wall street needs to accept responsibility and be accountable for the reckless decision making.

At least their [MEDIA's] plan appears to be working.

The presidential race is so close that anything can push the results to either side. I wonder... really wonder what that means as far as media's influence on the campaign.

A developing country may often be managed by military leaders.

Anyway I wondered if this was what other countries are capable of.

The government of Boyohboy decided one day to take over the country's telecommunication service and started a popular campaign to give each and every Boyohboy citizen a cellular phone to use in an emergency. Furthermore the government leader said for the next two years there will be no charge to the calling service, complements of the government. Without delay, the citizens of Boyohboy were elated to receive such great news that now they can keep in touch with relatives and friends as much as they want. In the meanwhile in the back room...

Who's ever livelihood it may impact, don't we all want someone who will set the right priorities when things happen out of the blue?

Lets see what have we seen that we have not forseen until recently: Katrina, Violent storms accross the nation out of no where (some claim linkage to global warming), countless Government scandals, Housing bubble bust, Bush family reunion Recession, and so on...

We can't predict quite that well what's going to happen other than we know we will not expect whatever it will be.

Who is better at dealing with the unexpected situations?

Wouldn't the FCC just as well do better by trading in the old CRT TVs and donating them to developing countries and giving the public discount coupons for HDTVs?

I would guess most college students do their homework.

But do they really do their own homework or do they take the easy way out? Simply the easy way would be to make a lot of friends who also have the same classes in which they share the same homework assignments. I'm not saying anything about anyone in particular. But in my days of being a student of burning the midnight oil, I did see a number of instances where students piggybacked their way through classrooms so to speak. Anyway I wondered if there were a student out there who can share some information about historical facts or more precisely the statistics in presidential elections in respect to BLUE states and RED states. And I have some questions that maybe addressed by those numbers.

In another words without having work experience in the working class environment, visa vis corporate world, can someone truely implement the power of influence and have someone do things without actually telling them what to do?

I'd find it hard to believe that universities today is any different from yester-years. But please correct me if I'm assuming incorrectly.

Its kind of like the cliche from Godfather movie...

"I'm gonna give you an offer you can't refuse."

This phrase can mean different things to people of different level of experience. How can this be, you may ask?

If you have to ask then you don't know what experience that is being talked about here. People sometimes say that they can read other people's reaction, emotions, body language, and so on. There are multiple layers of communication that we humans implement beyond just spoken linguistics.

Could this conspiracy theory be possible?

The media along with friends of the defense department and stock market futures traders have conspired to hurt the transportation industry, more specifically the airline industry.

The media keeps pumping bad news about flying like more delays, safety issues, and terror threat concerns.

The FAA which is comprised of many former defense department employees is bullying the airline industry into costly overly excessive examinations, kind of like a hypochondriac for airplane maintenance.

The oil prices don't make any sense as far as supply and demand are concern. Someone is manipulating the oil prices.

Could this conspiracy theory be possible?

The media along with friends of the defense department and stock market futures traders have conspired to hurt the transportation industry, more specifically the airline industry.

The media keeps pumping bad news about flying like more delays, safety issues, and terror threat concerns.

The FAA which is comprised of many former defense department employees is bullying the airline industry into costly overly excessive examinations, kind of like a hypochondriac for airplane maintenance.

The oil prices don't make any sense as far as supply and demand are concern. Someone is manipulating the oil prices.

The media along with friends of the defense department and stock market futures traders have conspired to hurt the transportation industry, more specifically the airline industry.

The media keeps pumping bad news about flying like more delays, safety issues, and terror threat concerns.

The FAA which is comprised of many former defense department employees is bullying the airline industry into costly overly excessive examinations, kind of like a hypochondriac for airplane maintenance.

The oil prices don't make any sense as far as supply and demand are concern. Someone is manipulating the oil prices.

If you split the delegates in Michigan and Florida in half then the effective result becomes not counting those delegates at all.

So does that mean Obama wants to be fair to those states by effectively not counting those delegates?

The first question that comes to my mind is:

how in the world do you know the candidate

that you are endorsing?

I don't jump to the conclusion that there must be a good reason.

In politics I reason that someone is getting a favor out of the endorsement.

Shouldn't the endorsement weigh the consideration that the candidate have shown past evidence of deserving the endorsement?

For instance, if you had a lab partner in class, you would know if the person was tidy enough to endorse to your neighbor about cleaning the yard.

Most recently I recall that the media had down played the amount of money that was spent on Texas and Ohio by each of the running candidates.

From a return on investment stand point I think there is a significant difference between the candidates.

Furthermore I think the country will be more appreciative of a candidate who is less willing to waste tax payers' money.

I think bringing the country together has a lot to do with fiscal responsibilities. I don't know anyone who invests their hard earn money to have someone else just wasting it away in Margaritaville so to speak.

I have heard investment advisors often if not always suggest balancing your risk in your investment holdings so that not all of your money goes to waste suddenly. If Bear Stearns is not a reminder then I don't know what is. But with this country becoming the most disliked country around the world (not blaming David Letterman) and everything else pretty much on the edge of failure, this begs the question asked above.

Again I can't emphasize more that caucus is the end to democracy. Employers and social butterflies will make people's lives miserable.

I believe the grounds to be conflict of interest and ethics.

Gulf War:

Joint Chiefs: Collin Powell

Commanding General: Gen. Schwarzkopf

Iraq War:

Joint Chiefs: Gen Myers, Gen Pace, Gen Mullen

Commanding General: Gen Abizhaid, Gen Casey, Gen Fallon, Gen Petraeus

It seems like media does not like Hillary and any political figure that supports Hillary appears to be targets to the media.

For instance Los Angeles mayor supports Hillary, and soon after his return from campaigning for Hillary the local media bombards the press with negative news about gang violence and making gang violences a racial issue to divide ethnic groups.