Entries for a competition to unearth the most stunning example - organised by the German language council - have been flooding in. More than 20,000 words, ranging from the sublime to the ridiculous, have been sent in by email and letter. German, for example, has a word to describe that niggling melody you just cannot get out of your head - "Ohrwurm", literally "earworm". "Eisenbahnknoten" is a "knot of rail-lines" or, in other words, a railway junction. The competition comes at an interesting time for German scholars, with renewed controversy about changes to spelling rules introduced a few years ago, says the BBC's Ray Furlong. These are widely detested and ignored by the leading newspapers. So will it be a simple word like "Liebe" - love, or the more involved "Geheimratsecken," which means receding hairline? Sunday is the deadline for submissions, with the jury expected to make its decision by October.
I vote for "Hefe-Weissbier", the word may not be beautiful but the taste is.
Posted by: Steve ||
08/02/2004 9:14:22 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Schlampen.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
08/02/2004 9:32 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Currywurst mmmmmmmm..
Posted by: Howard UK ||
08/02/2004 9:34 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Fred ||
08/02/2004 11:06 Comments ||
Top||
#8
kindersportswagon = baby stroller
My all-time fav. At some point, the Germans must have decided that they had all the words they needed and would just combine words if something new came up.
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
08/02/2004 13:48 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Two words come to mind. (1) Schaudenfraude (joy at someone elses misery) which is just so useful when describing my opinions of Germany and France these days (2) Shitzkopf (shit head, forgive the spelling) the word that got the taunting Parisian morons "American, McDonald's Sucks!" to run like little cowards back in 1987.
#12
Does German have any beautiful words? It looks to me like German love poetry would sound like a threat.
Posted by: Formerly Dan ||
08/02/2004 14:31 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Shiesse-kopf. Pimmel-kopf.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
08/02/2004 14:47 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Why is it that the world never remembered the name of Johann Gambolputty de von Ausfern- schplenden-schlitter-crasscrenbon-fried-digger-dingle-dangle-dongle-dungle-burstein-von-knacker-thrasher-apple-banger-horowitz-ticolensic-grander-knotty-spelltinkle-grandlich-grumblemeyer-spelterwasser-kurstlich-himbleeisen-bahnwagen-gutenabend-bitte-ein-nürnburger-bratwustle-gerspurten-mitz-weimache-luber-hundsfut-gumberaber-shönedanker-kalbsfleisch-mittler-aucher von Hautkopft of Ulm? [/MP]
Achtung! Alles lookenpeepers, das instrumenten is nicht fer gerfingerpoken und hittengrabben. Ist easy schnappen der springerverk, poppen corken und blowen fusen mit spitz und sparken. Ist nicht fer geverken by das dumbkopf, alles rubbernecken sightseeren keepen hands in der pockets, relax und vatch der blinkin lights!
A Saudi man who was questioned in Britain about a sexual assault on an 11-year-old girl has been released after claiming diplomatic immunity.
Saudi.
sexual assault.
11-year old girl.
diplomat.
I'd like to add my own word. Handgun.
.38 vasectomy.
Scotland Yard said police took "no further action", but it had reported the matter to the Foreign Office (FO). The man, 41, was arrested on suspicion of indecently assaulting the girl in west London on 26 July. An FO spokesman said it was usual in such cases for there to be a request to waive diplomatic immunity.
Here's two more words. Fat. Chance.
He added: "I can confirm we are aware of this case. We are in contact with the Saudi Embassy."
Posted by: Steve ||
08/02/2004 9:27:27 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
He's lucky he's in Britain. Here in Texas I think we could organize a posse in less than 5 minutes....
Posted by: Howard UK ||
08/02/2004 08:57 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sorry to read this. He was well known among spaniel breeders / fanciers. Knowing how spaniels can grab your heart when you work with them, I suspect his handler is pretty broken up about losing him.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
08/02/2004 9:35 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I breed and train English Cocker Spaniels (closely related to Springers) who are show dogs and tested for field (hunting) ability. As such, I'm part of several online communities where other breeders and veterinarians share information about things that can kill dogs if eaten or breathed in.
What really annoys me is that the article says no drug arrests were made, despite the clear evidence that someone was transporting the stuff.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
08/02/2004 10:01 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I posted this link very late the other day, but I'm sure many people missed it - and it's so funny and cool that it derserves more exposure: Smart Dog movie
#10
rkb, my wife and I are English Cocker fans from way back -- had one, and currently have an English Cocker-American Cocker mix (we call her a "Canadian Cocker"). We're planning on another English Cocker before the year is out -- family pet only, no breeding or hunting. If you know of a great breeder in the Midwest I'd appreciate an e-mail, and thanks!
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/02/2004 11:28 Comments ||
Top||
#11
I emailed Steve with some contact info of reputable breeders in his area. If anyone else is looking for a purebred dog of any breed, feel free to email me and I'll be glad to help put you in touch with responsible breeders who do health screenings, temperament selection etc. as it ought to be done.
#14
Ditto #13. I have .com's "Smart Dog Movie" on my favorites list. I've watched it about half a dozen times already, and .com only posted last week.
I confess. Though I'm a conservative, I'm an animal lover and actually am known to send massive amounts of money to the local humane society and a couple of doggie adoption organizations.
I had a much beloved golden retriever who broke my heart when he died unexpectedly of Splenic Hemangio Sarcoma (an aggressive cancer of blood vessels)5 years ago. I could never get another dog, so .com's movie allows me to enjoy a golden and its notorious playfulness vicariously.
Posted by: rex ||
08/02/2004 17:27 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Get another Goldie immediately Rex, I've been there. Ask our RKB for local good breeders.
I'm not sure if you are joking or not. The amazing .com.
Loved the video!!
Posted by: B ||
08/02/2004 21:44 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Lol! Ship's imagination is working on overtime, as usual - lol! I make about 15-20 % of what I post - most is off some weird site and too good to touch!
Here are a few sites with some good vids and pix. The problem always is that the artistic crowd tends to be loonier than Jeneane Garbuffalo, so you have to grit your teeth and ignore the stupidity... and you have to be porn-tolerant. If you can't deal with these, then you're on your own, heh, cuz that's they way they're wired. Roll your own. Every one of these has links to 10-20 other places so check 'em all out and find the few you're can find stuff on that works for you - and isn't branded to death. Some go overboard branding stuff other people created with their dipshit name. If it were the other way around, they'd pee their short pants and stomp their tiny little feet, I'm sure.
Anyway - have fun and make sure you have a good adware and spyware sweeper to clean up with afterwards -- and that includes you Macnoids. They make 'em for you, too - for a reason, heh. Go here to get such goodies - not to mention a 1000 other things - search on "spyware" and look for SpyBot and AdAware, in particular, since they work and they're free. EBaum's World (where this vid came from) Compfused Baker Media SideTraked Kontraband (brands all vids and reformats to QTime MOV)
I am not responsible for any infections you, or your machine, picks up during your adventure. I would stay away from any link to the .RU domain, heh, they're notorious assholes.
We've talked about China's future here many times. Here's another doomsday scenario.
Along the river's banks live a third of China's enormous population, more than 400 million people. The vast plains that are irrigated by its muddy waters produce most of China's wheat, much of its maize and even some of its rice. The Yellow River is also known as "China's sorrow". The name comes from its propensity to run wild, regularly inundating large swathes of the North China plain, and drowning tens of thousands of its inhabitants. But today the Yellow River is more famous for the exact opposite. For more than 200 days of the year this once mighty river no longer makes it to the sea. It's like the Rhine petering out in central Germany, or the Nile drying up in northern Sudan.
Why? In large part humans are to blame, in particular China's communist rulers, who have long believed nature should be bent to man's will. The river has been overused and abused. Dozens of dams block its flow, drawing off huge quantities of water to grow cotton in the desert. In 50 years the communists have done more to destroy the river than their predecessors in the last 5,000.
#1
China just needs to get Halliburton connected to this somehow and then we'll have lefties swinging from the rafters demanding that the US send aid.
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
08/02/2004 15:06 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Rupert Wingfield Hayes is one of the BBC's pet morons. His reporting on Afghanistan was just some of the most moronic crap I have ever seen, ripe with the generalizations necessary for "reporters" who are too scared, lazy or appreciative of creature comforts to go to the front lines. I doubt his China reporting is any better - note the graphic accompanying the article on the supposed link between global warming and industry (when the actual cause is the sun getter hotter). Anything the BBC reports that has anything to do with the environment should be taken with buckets of salt.
#3
They should have the North Koreans draft an appropriate triumphal press release for them, quickly before somebody notices that anti-imperialist non-capitalists are bad for the enviroment.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
08/02/2004 16:56 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Thank you, Zhang Fei, for the background on this particular journalistic cretin. Wingfield-Hayes is the one who wrote the drivel glowing article titled "On Chinaâs fast-track to luxury" that I posted yesterday.
He consistently fails to mention any downside of the massively top-heavy Chinese regime while spouting all sorts of positivistic twaddle, even when it is directly contradicted by common knowledge or outright facts.
#5
Sounds like an efficient use of resources. What good is having the Yellow River reach the ocean? It then becomes unusable. Might as well use it up before it gets there.
#6
"The Origin of the Yellow River" by I.P. Daily.
An oldie but a goodie.
Posted by: Tibor ||
08/02/2004 21:50 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Isn't this the river that flooded like a mother a last year and burst through its banks and levys? Could that be part of why it isn't flowing to the ocean: it is busy making lakes?
Next we'll hear about how the Yangtze is Drying up while they fill the resevoir behind the Fuck You Econazis Three Gorges Dam.
#8
more research. I'll bet that this guy is all pissed
off at the Xiaolangdi Multipurpose Dam Project
which is part of a flood control/power generation
plan for the Yellow River. Mayhap they're filling it up, too?
Fortunately, Green power in China probably means stoking the furnaces *with* greens.
Heavy rains and floods have devastated swathes of North Korea, leaving hundreds of people homeless and severely damaging crops, reports say. The North's official news agency, KCNA, said at least 100,000 hectares (247,105 acres) of farmland had been washed away by the unusually strong monsoon rains. It said homes of more than 1,000 families were destroyed in July alone. Some five million North Koreans depend on foreign food aid, and famine has caused many to flee the country.
Just the human scum, mind you.
"At least 100,000 hectares of paddy and non-paddy fields were submerged or washed away and dwelling houses for more than 1,000 families and public buildings destroyed," KCNA said. "It is hard to expect any harvest from the fields washed away and silted. Harvest in many fields is expected to drop 30%," the agency added.
If they are admitting that, it's much worse.
It said hundreds of sections of roads and railways were destroyed and communications links affected, without providing any details on casualties. An estimated quarter of the North Korea's 22 million people depend on food aid from abroad to survive.
Posted by: Steve ||
08/02/2004 8:40:36 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"It is hard to expect any harvest from the fields washed away and silted. Harvest in many fields is expected to drop 30%," the agency added.
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
08/02/2004 10:23 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Mike - thought about it, but the pay sucks. El Capo Grande pays his workers in cognac and smokes. I need to find a dictator who can more fully appreciate my Juche-inspired madness and keep me in the despotic lifestyle to which I have become accustomed.
A female security guard in Sydney who shot dead a man who attacked and tried to rob her has been charged with murder, Australian police said.
Saw this coming, but I'm still disappointed in you, Australia.
Karen Brown is said to have suffered a fractured skull, a broken nose and left hand, and possible brain damage after William Aquilina attacked her. He was attempting to steal A$30,000 ( US $21,000) in takings from the Moorebank Hotel in south-west Sydney.
Down here in Texas we call this grand theft, assault with a deadly weapon and possibly attempted murder during commission of a felony. Karen would be a hero, not up on charges. But then, we're just a bunch of dumb cowboys.
Ms Brown, 42, was interviewed by detectives on Monday. "The court attendance notice is akin to a summons... legal proceedings are now underway," he said.
Since she got clobbered on the nut, she can probably get off with a non compos mentis defense, since the Aussie courts don't seem to recognize justifiable homicide anymore.
The incident, which happened on 26 July, is being covered extensively in the Australian media, where there has been widespread sympathy for Ms Brown. But she has angered the authorities by reportedly accepting money for media interviews while refusing to talk to police on health grounds.
"Piss off! I'm sick! I got conked on the nut, remember? And where the hell were you when it happened?"
"I'm extremely disappointed, more than anything else, at the way in which some media outlets have approached this whole issue," New South Wales Police Commissioner Ken Moroney told the Sydney Morning Herald newspaper. He said the matter should now be handled through the court system. "We need to allow police to look at the facts as we have been able to gather them, both forensically and through other witnesses," he told ABC News. As an employee of a security firm, Ms Brown was licensed to carry a gun.
But not, apparently, to use it...
New South Wales Police Commissioner Ken Moroney said she had been handed a court attendance notice to appear at Liverpool Local Court on 13 September.
Hope you have a good lawyer, honey.
Posted by: Steve ||
08/02/2004 8:46:49 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sentence her to the Aussie Olympic shooting team.
Posted by: ed ||
08/02/2004 9:12 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"As an employee of a security firm, Ms Brown was licensed to carry a gun."
Apparently just cuz they're real purdy. Using it, however, must be another matter. She shouldn't be playing footsie with the cops, assuming that dig about interviews is true - it only gives them a justification for this idiocy.
#4
I just love this (no I don't really.)
Why do the police think that you must talk with them? The reason she didn't talk to them was because she is aware they would be using it against her interest. I bet similar to the U.K. you don't have a right to remain silent.
As far as the gun thing, Australian imigration from the U.K. is huge. It's apperent that those folks are not willing to stand up a insist on the right of or too the tools of self defense. It appears the folks in the U.K. are more than willing to hang out to life any one that does (that is not the issue in this case.) The Australian government appears to share this mindset.
A French electricity board worker is in trouble with her bosses after writing a guide on how to survive in the French corporate world without doing any work. Corinne Maier's tongue-in-cheek book Bonjour Paresse, or Hello Laziness, has earned her a disciplinary hearing. Hello Laziness or "the art of doing the least work possible for your employer" was written as a comic antidote to all the "how to succeed" management books. But sadly, Ms Maier's bosses haven't seen the funny side. She is an economic advisor at the French state-owned electricity board (EDF), which is currently facing partial privatisation - to make it more efficient. EDF bosses seem to feel the book reflects badly on them, though the company is never mentioned by name.
Bonjour Paresse chapter headlines:
The Morons Who Are Sitting Next To You
Business Culture, My Arse
Why You Can't Lose By Resigning
Corporate Culture - Stupid People
Sounds like the French "Dilbert"
With chapter headings such as Corporate Culture - Stupid People, and swipes at useless middle management, it has certainly touched a raw nerve. But it was Ms Maier's advice to readers that probably stung the most: "You don't have much to lose if you don't do much at work," she wrote, telling readers to choose the most useless sort of job - become a consultant, an expert or an adviser.
It is Dilbert!
Ms Maier isn't sure what to expect at her disciplinary hearing on 17 August. But when it happens, she'll almost certainly arrive with a bulging bundle of files under her arm - the best way, she says, to avoid questions from your boss about what exactly it is you have been doing all day.
Hummmm (makes note)
Posted by: tipper ||
08/02/2004 3:26:27 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
EFL - on the lighter side - from The Smoking Gun....
AUGUST 2--Arnold Schwarzenegger's ill-conceived legal fight to curb the sale of a bobblehead doll featuring a likeness of the California governor came to an end today. The Republican politician has agreed to allow an Ohio manufacturer to continue producing the dolls, though future Arnold bobbleheads will not be carrying an assault rifle (as does the original, pictured at right). In addition, Ohio Discount Merchandise will donate a portion of future doll sales to a Schwarzenegger charity, according to a settlement agreement.
EFL: After having the luxury of talking virtually unchallenged about their politics at the Democratic National Convention, John F. Kerry and John Edwards found themselves defending their records and their plans for the country yesterday, while their campaign planned what it deemed a ''truth" offensive.
"You want the truth? You can't handle the truth!"
The launching point was Kerry's admittedly vague references lately that ''I have a plan for Iraq," where about 140,000 US troops are stationed and Bush is facing questions about postwar violence and long-term stability.
Speaking on the ABC news program ''This Week," the Massachusetts senator declared:
''I've been involved in this for a long time, longer than George Bush. I've spent 20 years negotiating, working, fighting for different kinds of treaties and different relationships around the world. I know that as president there's huge leverage that will be available to me, enormous cards to play, and I'm not going to play them in public. I'm not going to play them before I'm president."
So he has a secret plan, we just have to trust him. Oh, and since when do Senator's negotiate treaties? They just vote on them, when they're in town.
Asked whether he would promise to have US troops home from Iraq by the end of his first term, Kerry replied:
''I will have significant, enormous reduction in the level of troops. We will probably have a continued presence of some kind, and certainly in the region. If the diplomacy that I believe can be put in place can work, I think we can significantly change the deployment of troops, not just there but elsewhere in the world -- in the Korean Peninsula perhaps, in Europe perhaps."
Then what do you need that additional 40,000 troops for, Senator Kerry? You remember, the ones you promised to add during your speech last week?
Posted by: Steve ||
08/02/2004 2:25:42 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"I've spent 20 years negotiating, working, fighting for different kinds of treaties and different relationships around the world." I bet the President and the State Department would be interested in what negotiating Senator Kerry has done on behalf of the U.S. The full statement makes it sound like he knows where all the bodies are buried and will use that to blackmail foreign leaders. I love the idea of a secret plan after he told everyone how his admistration won't be conducting business in secrecy. But then that was Thursday and this is Monday, times do change.
Posted by: jojo the amazing circus boy ||
08/02/2004 15:02 Comments ||
Top||
#3
first prong- secret! ...secret prong!
Posted by: Comment Top ||
08/02/2004 15:16 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Oh, and since when do Senator's negotiate treaties?
Perhaps Kerry is referring to the time he met with Madam Binh, then Foreign Minister of the North Vietmanese / Viet Cong during the Vietman war. Soon after he joined the VVAW who later signed the Peoples Peace Treaty.
Or maybe its his settlement of the Vietnam MIA issue......
#5
CF, I think he's talking about the plan he came up with at a secret summit with Daniel Ortega.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
08/02/2004 16:59 Comments ||
Top||
#6
If we elect this lying, fatuous jackass as our President, we will richly deserve the dhimmitude he will bring upon us.
Or, I should say, those who vote for him will deserve it.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
08/02/2004 17:05 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Then what do you need that additional 40,000 troops for, Senator Kerry? You remember, the ones you promised to add during your speech last week?
I also want to know what the purpose would be of doubling the size of the special forces; their primary mission is working with indigenous allies, like the ones who are probably going to stop trusting us if he's elected president.
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
08/02/2004 17:07 Comments ||
Top||
#8
"...indigenous allies, like the ones who are probably going to stop trusting us if he's elected president."
Now, that is a damn good point. And it leads to an important question: What conclusions would be drawn from a Kerry victory by our allies and enemies?
And more important still, what will our allies and our enemies do as a result of the conclusions they've drawn?
Will the jihadis conclude that bin Laden was right, that America really doesn't have the stomach for a long, tough fight? If so, what will they do?
Will the Chinese Communists conclude that their long-ago assessment of us as a "paper tiger" was correct? If they do, what will their next action be?
Will Israel conclude that America really cannot be counted on as an ally when the going gets tough? If they do, what will they decide regarding the growing Iranian nuclear threat?
What will any future American president (including Kerry himself) conclude about the willingness of the American people to back a wartime president through a long period of struggle in the face of cynical, calculated political opposition to the war? In the event of another 9/11-style terrorist attack, how many months will a future president figure he has to bring the matter to a decisive conclusion before the American people lose interest or are distracted by the political opposition? Based on that calculation, what means will he chose to fight the war?
I've been struggling a lot with these questions lately, and I'm not able to conjure up a lot of pleasant answers.
What do you all think?
Posted by: Dave D. ||
08/02/2004 17:28 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Dave, as most of us recall, after 9-11, the President told everyone this would be a long, hard war. Most of the folks were on the bandwagon except for the typical LLL morons. When we went to Iraq he again reaffirmed that Iraq was but one stage in the WoT - again, most of the folks were on the bandwagon except as mentioned above. I believe you may be right, in the long run, constant media barages of bad news and twisted reporting has sucked the life out of a lot of un-informed Americans. I also am feeling more and more that a lot of Americans are candy asses. Maybe we've had it so good for so long people have forgotten what it means to truly endure in strife. Plus, the 24 media coverage has created fiascos and blown certain situations way out of proportion (abu ghraib). If we had this type of media stupidity during WWII I'm convinced we would've fought Japan for another 5 years because no Pres would've had the nutz to drop the bomb. If people are stupid or apathetic enough to elect skerry then we deserve what we get. Just my $.02, I could go on but you get the drift.
My best guess is that if Kerry is elected, one or more of our cities is likely to get obliterated by jihadis encouraged by our frivolity and armed with nuclear weapons supplied by Iran-- maybe even manufactured using Uranium or Plutonium derived from nuclear reactor fuel supplied by Kerry and his own foreign policy geniuses.
And in response, the American president-- knowing the American people lack the staying power needed to pull off the kind of reformative effort we are engaged in now-- will just say "Fuck it" and order the destruction of the entire Arab world in a war that will last barely 20 minutes, but will leave a half a billion people dead.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
08/02/2004 21:03 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Howard UK ||
08/02/2004 11:06 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Lol! The original American terrorists! I briefly tolerated a roommate many many years ago who was an IRS investigator. He was a kind of nasty prick - touchy, carried grudges forever, and very quick to anger. He was incredibly addicted to bennies and meth white crosses. He got lots of promotions. I threw him out.
#10
Excellent point Mr D! But it can happen... it just won't be easy. Imagine the Hue and Cry of the Accounting and Tax Prep lobbies! Whew!
I've been googling for the last 20+ minutes looking for some reasonably unbiased info on taxation alternatives - and everybody's offering pure axe-grinding, so far.
If anyone has some links to relatively independent studies on alternative taxation, I'd appreciate it. I've wondered about what Forbes and Armey offered back in the mid-90's - ranged from 17% to 20% with various twists and turns - and it was even harder back then - the 'Net was so much smaller and had so much less content.
#11
If this report is true, it would be a stake pounded right through the dark, evil, redistributionist heart of the Democratic Party.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
08/02/2004 11:45 Comments ||
Top||
#12
A consumption tax is a lot less regressive than income taxes, and a lot less complex. Talk has been floating around conservative & libertarian think tanks for a while on this ... an interesting proposal for an election year.
It would re-direct election discussion, no?
Posted by: too true ||
08/02/2004 11:47 Comments ||
Top||
#13
How is a sales tax less regressive than an income tax? That makes no sense. A sales tax is just about the most regressive tax you can have. The poor spend the highest as a % of their income on goods and services that would be taxes. Thus their effective tax rate would be highest, followed by the middle class then the rich.
This is an AWEFUL idea. US spending on goods and services is about 7.5 trillion. We raise about 2 trillion from our current tax structure. That means we would have to tax goods and services about 2/7.5 or 26.6% + current state/local sales tax.
This would a) lower the sales of goods and services due to the increased price (supply/demand) decreasing our economy and b) Cause an additional increase in the sales tax rate to make up for the decrease in sales.
Prices due to corporations no longer having corporte income tax would only drop about 3% (we collect about 250 billion in corporate income taxes vs the 7.5 trillion = 3.3%). A decrease of 3% in prices is nothing compared to the 26.6% (probably higher) sales tax required to generate tax revenue.
Couple all of this with the fact that it would lower the standard of living of most americans (since they could afford less due to the regressive nature of sales tax) and it's pretty clear this is a HORRIBLE idea.
#14
Btw too true, in case your curious... sales tax is often referred to as the PRIMARY example of what a regressive tax is in every economics book that deals in this subject. Income tax is referred to as the primary example of what a progressive tax is in every economics book.
You couldn't have gotten it anymore backwards (being that sales tax is a consumption tax).
#15
I'm not sure from reading the article if the effort is to abolish the corporate income tax first then the personal tax or the reverse or neither.
However, if we replace the income tax with a value added tax, we will need people to prevent value tax avoidance just as we need people to prevent income tax avoidance.
The site has some good attempts at trying to spell out how it could work ... especially on how it is less regressive than the current system and how it will generate capital investment, etc.
But I still have a few questions that I think I'll throw at them to see what they think the answer is.
For example, how realistic is it that companies will reduce their product prices as much as the national sales tax will add to those prices? In other words, if companies will see a major savings then I *can* see a 15 to 20 percent drop in their product prices ... but if the FairTax then adds a 30 percent increase ... its a net loss for the consumer.
Also, how would the transition work? Stop paying income tax on 31-December, then start with the sales tax on ... when? 1-Jan -- that will put a hurt on consumers ... Give a 3 or 6 month window before the sales tax starts? That'll mean a loss of revenues for the government. I can see the transition being painful no matter what.
And yet, on top of these questions, I'd really like to see such a thing work out ...
How could companies possibly lower their prices 15-20%... it makes no sense. Right now as a % of revenues the corporate income tax is about 3% of sales for corps... not 15-20.
If they reduce salaries to make it to the 15-20 because there is no longer a personal income tax then the consumers will have less money in their pockets anyway (net same with higher salaries and personal income tax) and they will STILL be paying more for goods and services since the sales tax will increase prices more than the price drop would decrease them.
#19
My home representative (John Linder R-GA) is one of the biggest proponents of this idea. According to seeing him speak twice now when he's home stomping (he's rated as one of or the most conservative Reps. in the country by Nat'l Journal I think it is), theoretically it makes sense. Here's my take of it, according to him: First, the bill would scrap the 16th Amendment and make this the tax of the land (income wise). Second, there are only taxes on a NEW, FINAL product...in other words, instead of taxing the steel, bolts, plastic, wiring, etc. that goes into your new car, they just tax the car itself at the end (no taxes on USED items). According to him, and they've had many economists study this (Harvard grads, etc.), the percentage of average price of a typical item in the US that is a result of federal taxes is somewhere around 26% (a lot of this is tied up in skirting the rules, paying tax attorneys, paying people & staff for time for filing out IRS paperwork, etc.). Also, according to Mr. Linder, they've interviewed NUMEROUS CEOs of the top 500 firms in the US, and every SINGLE one of them said they'd build their next office/plant here in the US if this passes. Many people don't realize, but US businesses get taxed on profits they make at home AND overseas! This would do away with it. Libertarian here in Atlanta is all over the fairtax and it should (in theory) help this economy BOOM!
Posted by: BA ||
08/02/2004 14:04 Comments ||
Top||
#20
First this seems a bit of a leap for drudge. Just because Hastert puts it into his book doesn't mean Bush will make a plank out of it. Of course he might be watching the dicussions the next week and deciding on the reaction.
If they dumped the income tax and moved to an all sales tax system they would now be able to get taxes from illegal professions such as drugs and prostitution since those people buy things. They would also have to worry about the black market and smuggling that might appear to avoid the tax.
You also put tens of thousands of accountants out of work as well as the numerous IRS folks.
Still, I like the idea and I hope the debate is taken up by the mainstream media.
Regarding the regressive taxation, the FairTax.org fellows suggest that things are only taxed the first time they are sold so used books, used records, used clothing stores, and used cars would not have any taxes. So it would become possible to avoid paying any taxes at all. The richer people are more likely to buy new shiney stuff. I like the idea and would throw all food into the mix as well to ensure that even the poorest can eat.
#21
A sales tax is just about the most regressive tax you can have. The poor spend the highest as a % of their income on goods and services that would be taxes
You're making a couple of assumptions here that need not be true. For instance, food and some other essentials could be exempted from the tax. Or, there could be lesser tax rates on certain categories of items.
Yes, there would still be a bureaucracy to manage this. And that would cost something. If there are tiers of tax rates, there will be some jousting over what goes where, too.
But DAP's reaction is way overstated.
PS: My MBA from a top-10 B-school was in finance and operations .... I'm familiar with most economic textbook theories LOL>
In any case, I wasn't arguing we SHOULD adopt this tax approach, just that it makes the election debate interesting. And I stand by my point that such a tax has been discussed in the economic / policy think tanks since at least the early 90s. This didn't just come out of the blue .....
How could companies possibly lower their prices 15-20%... it makes no sense.
First, a couple of caviats ... at this point I'm merely curious, and this was the first website that seemed to answer the majority of my questions. I think there are plenty of questions that still need answering, but the FAQ and research areas of that website talk through some of the points you raise. Also, I simply pulled 15-20% out of the air ... I doubt prices will be lowered the same amount as the potential savings that companies will see. (In a way, you re-iterated my point -- the price drop + new tax may likely be a net loss for the consumer.)
BA did a fine job of explaining the additional costs that would be saved by the companies due to having simply to deal with federal imcome and corporate taxes. The savings would be much greater than simply the amount of tax they have to pay.
Also, the idea behind this particular type of tax alternative includes in it a montly payment to every family that would cover the taxes on the basics up to the poverty line. (How well the government could handle producing and mailing this many monthly checks without problems and/or its own abuse is another area that I have concerns about.)
So, in theory, if someone spends at or below what's needed to live at the poverty line, then they should be netting no taxes paid in the end. I would recommend reading through the site's info on it ... I'm sure I'm not explaining it justly.
"According to him, and they've had many economists study this (Harvard grads, etc.), the percentage of average price of a typical item in the US that is a result of federal taxes is somewhere around 26% (a lot of this is tied up in skirting the rules, paying tax attorneys, paying people & staff for time for filing out IRS paperwork, etc.). "
I find it amusing that they needed economists and harvard grads to divide 7.5 trillion (US sales of goods and services) by 2 trillion (our current tax revenues) and get 26.6%. I wonder how much money your congressmen wasted on those studies.... he could have just asked a 5th grader. :) The question is how is the tax burden being split up among the population... and how does changing this distribution effect our economic growth.
"Also, according to Mr. Linder, they've interviewed NUMEROUS CEOs of the top 500 firms in the US, and every SINGLE one of them said they'd build their next office/plant here in the US if this passes. "
There is a MUCH better and easier way to get them to do this. Simply eliminate the corporate income tax. That doesn't mean we need to implement this AWEFUL regressive sales tax idea that would slam the breaks on our economy.
too true,
"You're making a couple of assumptions here that need not be true. For instance, food and some other essentials could be exempted from the tax. Or, there could be lesser tax rates on certain categories of items."
So you're gonna go from an income tax system to a system that arbitrarily decides the taxes on hundreds of thousands of different products in the hopes of reaching the goal of the progressive tax system already in place with income taxes... ummm no thanks
"Yes, there would still be a bureaucracy to manage this. "
Unfathomably huge... and unfathomable huge levels of corruption to go with it. Just think about lobbying groups to get the sales tax on THEIR products reduced... ugh. can you say disaster?
Btw, I'm sorry if I came off condescending... I just read what I wrote again and it definitely sounds that way. I know people have been talking about this for decades but that doesn't change the fact that it's a horrible idea ;)
I read through the site. You're right and they're right. You can eliminate income tax and create a sales tax system and then create a rebate system based on income and a bueracratic scaling of sales taxes on different products system to HOPEFULLY, if you're incredibly lucky and there is very little corruption or mistakes, get to a point where you accomplish the progressive tax results of an income tax system. Or... you can just use an income tax system.
#26
Here's the FAQ page that answered a lot of my initial questions (and gave fodder to a whole *new* set of follow-up questions ;-D):
DPA snuck in: and a bueracratic scaling of sales taxes on different products
Except that they would tax *everything* ... according to them, the monthly rebates (the subject of my own skepticism) would be the only way to "square" the lower income tax question without lending itself to the beauracratic games that would naturally flow.
Quoting ... Why not just exempt food and medicine from the tax? Wouldnât that be fair and simple?
Exempting items by category is neither fair nor simple ... {snip} ... exempting one product or service, but not another, opens the door to the army of lobbyists and special interest groups that plague and distort our taxation system today. Those who have the money will send their lobbyists to Washington to obtain special tax breaks in their own self-interest. This process causes unfair and inefficient distortions in our economy and must be stopped.
#27
DPA, in most of the suggested implementations, basics like food and utilities are exempted. Such exemptions would obviate the regressive elements of a national sales tax or a VAT scheme. By the way, the national sales tax would be simpler and less prone to exploitation by special interests than a VAT.
#29
DPA, I luv ya', but economics is not your strong suit.
To begin with, the corporate income tax is only one part of the cost of doing business in the US. Add in FICA, the hidden tax costs on the purchase of raw materials, the staff and legal cost of tracking and complying with different tax codes in different states, ditto the bookkeeping costs. I could go on and on .... when I had my little consultancy as a Schedule C corporation, it was a ghastly mess to keep up with.
Furthermore, a whole lot of non=productive energy and money goes into planning accounting, payroll, pricing and marketing decisions in light of the tax code. I took a 4 credit graduate level course in this ... and it was only the 1st of several such courses that the specialists took in the subject.
It's nice you can divide, but that's not the hard part .... LOL.
One last point: a sales tax is only one of several flat tax approaches that would greatly simplify our tax code and release a lot of money and energy into more productive approaches. Some of these have strong think tank backing instead of the sales approach.
Note that, in any case, the European Value Added Tax is not what is being bandied about here ... it's precisely the costs of taxing things at every step of the production / sales process that Hastings is not recommending.
#30
ExtremeModerate, Yah I read that on their faq. I was kind of mixing up what you said with what other people said about eliminating sales tax on "neccisity" goods. You're still backing into a progressive income tax equivalent through a regresive sales tax with a rebate system on top. On top of that you're creating a tax system that encourages saving and discourages spending... exactly what will lead to a recession or worse.
RWV,
Once you start exempting individual items you open the door to lobbying groups.
too true,
Actually economics is one of my strong suits ;) Divide is all you need to do because all the details of our tax system add up to the total taxes collected by the IRS (2 trillion). Because part of it is FICA or income tax or anything else is not relevant to the fact that the entire number adds up to 2 trillion. To determine what % of our total goods and services sold 2 trillion is you just divide 2 trillion by our total goods and services sold (26.6%). It is very simple.
I estimate that our current tax system costs the US about 130 billion a year, or 1.2% of our GDP, in adminstration etc. What makes you think the sales tax system would cost any less when you need an IRS equivalent to manage rebates etc. and over look the sales tax and you still need accountants to veryify books for sales tax?
"One last point: a sales tax is only one of several flat tax approaches that would greatly simplify our tax code and release a lot of money and energy into more productive approaches."
Assuming you are going to collect in the end the same revenue for the fed. All the different tax strategies do is breakdown who is paying what % of the total and what the tax strategy provides incentives for (in the case of a sales tax it provides incentives on saving... which is a BAD idea). But in the end a sales tax needs to collect just as much tax from the population as an income tax to provide the same revenue to the fed... the money doesn't just magically appear...
#32
Assuming you are going to collect in the end the same revenue for the fed. All the different tax strategies do is breakdown who is paying what % of the total and what the tax strategy provides incentives for (in the case of a sales tax it provides incentives on saving... which is a BAD idea). But in the end a sales tax needs to collect just as much tax from the population as an income tax to provide the same revenue to the fed... the money doesn't just magically appear...
In point of fact, it matters a lot how many hands the $$ pass through, and to what economic impact, along the way. Focusing on raw $$ and raw expenses misses the whole economic benefit of this.
#33
"In point of fact, it matters a lot how many hands the $$ pass through, and to what economic impact, along the way. Focusing on raw $$ and raw expenses misses the whole economic benefit of this."
#35
"Nor do you necessarily want to collect the same revenue."
That's a completely different discussion. How much revenue we should generate is not relevant to the discussion about what is the most efficient way to generate revenue and promote growth.
#36
When economists try to measure, say, the money in circulation in the economy, they note that there's a big difference between $100 in a mattress and $100 I use to pay the odd chore guy, who uses it to pay for some tools (which he uses on other jobs), and the store uses it to upgrade the merchandise they carry.
It's that movement of money that creates overall wealth in the economy -- providing the interim uses are productive. If they simply go to overhead costs in a bureaucracy, or to things like regulatory compliance, then additional wealth is not generated, or is generated at a much lower rate.
That is the biggest argument for a fairly flat, consumption-oriented tax. It reduces the times that money is left idle or is used up in non-productive ways. Moreover, if the tax is applied only to finished goods the first time they are sold, there is a tremendous incentive for economic growth (as the comment earlier about purchases of used goods notes).
And who decides what's new and final? If I buy, some wire from Home Depot to move an electrical box, is that new or final? How about repair parts?
If I fix my car is it new and final? How about if I fix your car?
Too complicated, too much bureaucracy, too much room for the lobbyists.
#39
How much revenue we should generate is not relevant to the discussion about what is the most efficient way to generate revenue and promote growth.
Actually, they are closely related (although not identical) issues. At present, a good part of the tax code is written to try to achieve social goals (encourage home ownership and marriage, for instance). Other parts fund things like national defense and the court system.
The question is: what part of our currently collected taxes are needed simply to deal with the complexity of the current tax code and it's unanticipated or secondary side effects?
Estimate that, and you might indeed consider lowering tax revenues to some degree with a flat / consumption-oriented tax.
#40
"It reduces the times that money is left idle or is used up in non-productive ways."
How is that? The sales tax would be paid on a schedule (assume quarterly) like any other tax and thus be removed from the econmomy.
Actually removing the tax on used goods promotes the purchases of used goods instead of newly completed goods. Which in turn decreases our production (lowered demand for new goods) and thus decreases our GDP through less production and also less need for employees. The point the poster was making about used goods was that since the poor would buy used goods and not new goods to avoid taxes this would in fact not be as regressive a tax. Increasing the market for used goods greatly decreases our economy, not increases it.
Rich societies are the ones with the new cars and new DVD players... poor societies are the ones with the cars from 1980... not the other way around.
#41
"The question is: what part of our currently collected taxes are needed simply to deal with the complexity of the current tax code and it's unanticipated or secondary side effects?
Estimate that, and you might indeed consider lowering tax revenues to some degree with a flat / consumption-oriented tax."
LOL, figure out a way to determine that and you'll win the nobel prize guaranteed.
I gotta run but hopefully we'll continue this later.
#42
How is that? The sales tax would be paid on a schedule (assume quarterly) like any other tax and thus be removed from the econmomy. Actually removing the tax on used goods promotes the purchases of used goods instead of newly completed goods. Which in turn decreases our production (lowered demand for new goods) and thus decreases our GDP through less production and also less need for employees.
Two quick responses:
First, fewer entities would be setting funds aside for tax payments and others would not be paying at all and therefore would be free to use it otherwise. While large corporations can do all sorts of short-term investments with funds they are saving for tax payments, smaller businesses are on a cash basis and have less safety margin, so that cash tends to get parked until the 8th-ly tax payment date.
Second, your assumption is that price (including tax) is the main reason people purchase products. However, as any marketing pro knows, image, quality and a desire to differentiate oneself from those with fewer means are major inducements for higher income people to buy products.
What a flat/consumption based tax on final goods would do is to make the purchase of good used items easier for the poorest ... and that is as non-regressive as it gets.
Moreover, goods will still be manufactured and purchased, but overall consumers will have a wider range of price, quality and condition to choose from.
Re: manufacturing jobs, those are going away for structural reasons. But the creation of a lot of small businesses that recondition and resell used goods might be a great way for lesser-skilled people to enter the job market.
Finally, when cash stays in consumer and small business hands longer, new jobs are created in response to new leisure and other opportunities. The GDP is not a zero-sum game.
#43
"And who decides what's new and final? If I buy, some wire from Home Depot to move an electrical box, is that new or final? How about repair parts? If I fix my car is it new and final? How about if I fix your car? Too complicated, too much bureaucracy, too much room for the lobbyists. "
The government would regulate that. Stores might have different licence requirements to sell new and used products. The first time the product is sold to a customer it is taxed.
Services such as repairwork wouldn't be taxed because its not a product, but if you put a new carb in the car the new carb would be taxed depending upon where the garage got the carb and if they wanted to eat the tax or pass it along to the end user. It really wouldn't be a concern to most consumers and I think most businesses would quickly find their groove.
#44
#38: I think yank just explained it. Basically, the way it comes down is that its a tax on FINAL products (to consumers) much like our current (well, at least in most states) sales tax. DPA: I like to keep things simple, too, but if you think about it, there's federal taxes in EVERYTHING we see (direct tax on gasoline for the feds, indirect tax in just about anything you buy for regulatory compliance- think EPA, FDA, IRS, OSHA, etc. But basically (and if you look at your paystubs, you might see something (assuming you still are working), if you ELIMINATE the Income tax, the Medicare tax, the Soc. Security tax, etc. you take out of your paycheck and then compare that to what you spend in a year on NEW goods, it might just pale in comparison (especially if you exempt foods and utilities or things like that up to the poverty line). Then, if you do away with a certain % of production, distribution, and consumption costs (through "hidden" costs with complying with IRS regs.), we just might end up with CHEAPER goods.
Posted by: BA ||
08/02/2004 18:14 Comments ||
Top||
#45
re: 43 Ahhhh..."The government would regulate it..." Isn't that the same problem discussed before vis a vis different rates on different categories of product? If sales tax is charged on every item sold there's no room for favoritism, as soon as the government gets to play God.....well let's just reference unintended consequences. Do you really mean to make used cars tax free? How about reconditioned engines, just tax the individual new components?
I'm afraid that the tax rate on new goods will be stupendous! Then, as previously mentioned, new production crawls to a halt. Might save in land-fill use, but the economy will go in the toilet.
#46
AlanC, the fairtax folks do say used cars would be tax free according to their plan. The tax would be payed the first time the cars sold, after that it can be sold by anyone without a tax problem. Yes the government will have to be involved, but they are involved now in a much more intrusive way by taking a large chunk of everyone paycheck. It would be far easier to track companies that sell finished products than the current system of tracking all sales (for sales tax) and all employed citizens (for income tax) and then sorting through the loopholes.
If you take home your paycheck without that 30% or 40% missing you will have a lot more money to spend. The increased sales tax won't be that big a difference once the shock of the whole thing has passed.
That shock might be tremendous, and unworkable, but in the long run I thought the fairtax system seemed workable and worthy of debate.
#47
Sorry but I think I'm missing something here. Lets say you go flat tax scheme or rate or whatever. If you think Congress is going to give up 2 trillion in tax revenue you're crazy, hence whatever plan to replace the IRS comes forward has to make up for at least that much money. So I ask simply how the heck is a sales tax (or whatever other form of flat tax you can come up with) going to come up with 2 trillion bucks unless it is something around a 27% rate on TOP of state and local taxes? I'd like to see some hard numbers here.
In what way is this "regressive"? I see no regression in allowing people to keep their money and see the real full impact of taxes. Why do you object to people realizing that they are in reality paying 30% or more of their purchase price in taxes and related fees? Look at excise taxes, etc that get piled on, but are never noted up front.
And what in the hell is "progressive" about charging people more and more on their income? If anything, THAT is regressive in that it discourages the creation of capital trhough usurpation of the fruits of one's labors.
Also, this was not a sales tax only - last one I heard was a flat tax (and no deductions), along with a sales tax, and tax relief below the poverty line (i.e. those below the poverty line are expmted from both taxes).
If anything this is a more honest tax - far more honest than your dishonest inflammatory wording of the proposal.
#49
Regressive insofar that Joe Schmoe pays as much in taxes as Bill Gates when he buys toothpaste. On a one on one scenario, it seems fine if not a bit unfair, but what happens is that there a lot more poor people buying toothpaste than rich people, so the poor as a group ends up fitting the tax bill. The fact of the matter is that rich people save a lot more of their income than poor people do so the poor will end up with a disproportionate share of the tax burden. Now if you were to combine this regressive tax with an intangibles/cash on hand tax high real estate taxes for luxury homes and expensive land and buildings, and completely eliminate corporate taxes then we might just have something... :)
#50
ODA why not jsut go ahead and confiscate all private property and all income - and give to each according to his needs adn take from each according to his ability?
Thats the end result of "progressive" policies. Mr Marx and Mr Engels would love that policy.
Fair is fair, and thats what a flat tax and a consumption tax are all about. Everyone above the poverty line pays the same percentage of their income. Anyone below the poverty line gets rebates to bring them up to the poverty line.
If they consume more, they pay more. The rich tend to spend more, so they would pay more.
There is nothing inherently fair about the top 50% paying 95% of the taxes.
Also, remove the automatic withholding which hides the impact. Make everyone write a check and they will be a lot more concerned about how much taxes they are paying and where their taxes go.
And saying that the 'poor' would pay more percentage as a group of the total tax bill because they are a much, much, larger group is BS. They pay more not because their taxes are more but because they are a much, much, much bigger group. Individually they pay the same percentage-wise as everyone else.
#52
CF: Individually, the poor would pay a larger percent of the total tax bill and their earnings through a sales tax because they spend more as a percentage of their incomes. I am not talking about the system we have in place today.
OS:
I am not as concerned about the flat tax rate as long as there are no deductions. From a personal standpoint I think wealthier people should have more of a tax burden than poorer people, I also think from a practical standpoint it is better for the economy because rich people save and poor people spend and as MBA said, you want to keep the velocity of money high. I think an asset tax may be as efficient, if not moreso than an income tax as it is more difficult to hide how much stock you own, etc. I do not think the rate on such a tax should be high however and at the end of the day you would probably need some sort of flat rate income tax.
The real issue to me is waste in government spending and how do we get rid of that. My guess is that, if we could, tax rates could be much lower for everyone and it would not be nearly as big a deal...
I actually find this discussion very enjoyable and my guess is that a lot of others do too. Is it OK to post the same article on today's news as well to continue the discussion, or is that uncool?
EFL
When John sKerry, John milk'em for all they got Edwards and their wives descended on a Newburgh, N.Y., Wendy's restaurant on Friday for a "light" lunch with the common people, it was all just a photo op. No suprises here.
Team Kerry-Edwards had already ordered their real lunches - consisting of five-star gourmet food from a metrosexual tony local restaurant - with instructions to have the haute cuisine ready for pickup after the top Democrats ditched Wendy's. See, they really do understand the working man.
After tossing out their bluecollar cheeseburgers and chili, Kerry and Edwards feasted on shrimp vindallo, grilled diver sea scallops, prosciutto, wrapped stuffed chicken and steak salad. Yeah, but there weren't any kickbutt Marines at that fancy place!
Posted by: Dragon Fly ||
08/02/2004 10:10:25 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Management at the restaurant, which is operated by CIA graduate chef Michael Dederick, was told the meals would be for the Kerry and Edwards families and actor Ben Affleck who was with them on the tour."
#2
CF,
http://www.platinum-celebs.com/hollywood/news/011049.html
But I remember reading a recent story where he was hitting on both of them. That Horn Dog Affleck.
Posted by: ed ||
08/02/2004 18:25 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I seem to recall a story about a phony turkey.....
Posted by: john ||
08/02/2004 18:38 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Found it.
http://sonofnixon.blogspot.com/2004/07/i-can-get-you-matt-damons-autograph.html
Posted by: ed ||
08/02/2004 18:51 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Hey, I was in favor of having lunch with the little people before I was against it.
Posted by: John Kerry ||
08/02/2004 21:13 Comments ||
Top||
#8
I don't think those Marines would think much of Kerry's dining, but they probably wouldn't object to a good hunk of rare sirloin form Black Angus washed down with a couple of brews.
#1
Despite having French features and speaking French he is still so, how do you say, American? That is unacceptably unilateral and demand further internationalization of the entire process.
-Frog Press
Some of John Kerry's fellow Swift Boat veterans — the ones who were not on stage with him at the Democratic National Convention Thursday night — are questioning the account of Kerry's Vietnam service as presented in a nine-minute biographical video played at the convention. In particular, the film portrayed an incident in which Kerry, in command of a Swift Boat, rescued Army Green Beret Jim Rassman during a fight on a river in South Vietnam. The film graphically illustrated the incident, in which a group of Swift Boats, including Kerry's, came under attack on March 13, 1969. The film recounted the often-told story of how a wounded Kerry pulled Rassman out of the water while under enemy fire.
The veterans raise two objections to the story. First, they question Kerry's version of events. Second, they question the convention video's portrayal of Kerry's version of events.
Posted by: ed ||
08/02/2004 8:35:23 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Thurlowâs recollection of events, along with those of other veterans who were there, will be part of an upcoming book by John OâNeill, a leader of Swift Boat Veterans For Truth, a group of Kerryâs former colleagues, mostly his fellow Navy officers, who oppose Kerryâs presidential candidacy.
The book, Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry, from Regnery Publishing, is written by John E. O'Neill. Mr. O'Neill served in Vietnam at the same time as Mr. Kerry and followed him as commander on the swift boat. Mr. O'Neill, riled by what he considered Mr. Kerry's false charge in 1971 of widespread war crimes committed by U.S. troops, has waged a public debate with the politician dating back to the "Dick Cavett Show" that year. The book quotes Mr. Kerry's fellow combatants as saying two of his Purple Hearts came from friendly fire, not the enemy. The veterans also will dispute other stories Mr. Kerry has told. "Unfit for Command" will not be released until Sept. 25, but the online Drudge Report yesterday broke news of what it called a "bombshell book." The book hit No. 2 on Amazon.com's best-seller list. Radio and TV hosts were clamoring for Mr. O'Neill to appear. Regnery, which boasts a long list of best-selling conservative books, has put a tight hold on information until the official release. Some of the book's charges have been aired by Veterans for Truth. Retired Rear Adm. Roy Hoffmann, who commanded Mr. Kerry's task force in Vietnam, is one of the book's sources. Adm. Hoffmann said yesterday he has supplied several instances of Mr. Kerry's purported lies. One example, he said, is Mr. Kerry's contention that he warned admirals of the folly of a certain river operation. Adm. Hoffmann said he and others were at the meeting, and that Mr. Kerry never made such a statement. "The real truth is he didn't say a ... word," Adm. Hoffmann said. Mr. Hoffmann is chairman of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which plans what it calls a grass-roots campaign. "We're going to tell the truth â the fact that he was a perpetual, habitual liar," Adm. Hoffmann said. "I don't care whether it was perjury or lying before the Senate of the United States, or that two of his Purple Hearts are at least very specious, if not absolutely false, because he filed false after-action reports."
b) Here's the website for Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which is referred to in aforementioned paragraph. The site is informative and quite heart breaking as well.
#4
Okay, let's try again, Scene 2: In this scene the brave John Kerry will be confronted with a moral decision of his life. Does he reach down and rescue a green beret or choose instead to administer mouth-to-mouth to licorice? Do we have John Kerry's 8 mm ready? Scene 2: Take 1!
Posted by: Capt America ||
08/02/2004 11:21 Comments ||
Top||
#5
"Bring in the stunt hamster!"
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/02/2004 11:43 Comments ||
Top||
#6
"Sorry, Lt. Looks like the Super 8 took a round! It's toast!"
"NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!"
From The New York Times, an article by Nazila Fathi
.... But these days, Iran's Muslim clerics, who dominate the judiciary, are considerably better informed about transsexuality. Some clerics now even recommend sex-change operations to those who are troubled about their gender. The issue was discussed at a conference in Tehran in June that drew officials from other Persian Gulf countries. One cleric, Muhammad Mehdi Kariminia, is writing his thesis on transsexuality at the religious seminary of Qum. ...
One early campaigner for transsexual rights is Maryam Hatoon Molkara, who was formerly a man known as Fereydoon. Before the revolution, under the shah, he had longed to become a woman but could not afford surgery. Furthermore, he wanted religious guidance. In 1978, he wrote to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who was to become the leader of the revolution but was still in exile, explaining his situation. The ayatollah replied that his case was different from that of a homosexual and therefore he had his blessing.
However, the revolution intervened and men like himself or those who had already changed their sex were harassed, even jailed and tortured. "They made me stop wearing women's clothes, which I had worn for many years and was used to," Ms. Molkara recalled. "It was like torture for me. They even made me take hormones to look like a man."
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
08/02/2004 8:54:12 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
His operation was paid for by a Muslim cleric he had worked for as a secretary. After the surgery, the man-turned-woman divorced, and then married the cleric. ...
Really, Really Extreme Makeover Meets Mullah Jerry Springer
Posted by: Steve ||
08/02/2004 11:46 Comments ||
Top||
#3
the man-turned-woman divorced, and then married the cleric. ...
I realy didn't need that mental picture.
ick!!!
Posted by: N Guard ||
08/02/2004 17:50 Comments ||
Top||
EFL
Everything about Amir appears masculine: his broad chest, muscled arms, the dark full beard and deep voice. But, in fact, Amir was a woman until four years ago, when, at the age of 25, he underwent the first of a series of operations that would change his life. Since then he has had 20 surgical procedures and expects another 4. And Amir, who as a woman was married twice to men - his second husband helped with the transition and remains a good friend - is now engaged to marry a woman. I'm confused. How does this work with this? Or, this?
After decades of repression, the Islamic government is recognizing that some people want to change their sex, and allowing them to have operations and obtain new birth certificates. Iran's Muslim clerics, who dominate the judiciary, are considerably better informed about transsexuality. Some clerics now even recommend sex-change operations to those who are troubled about their gender. I am really, really confused.
Posted by: Dragon Fly ||
08/02/2004 8:30:35 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Iranâs Muslim clerics, who dominate the judiciary, are considerably better informed about transsexuality.
Talk about things that make you go hmmmmmmmmmmmm...
#6
if memory serves me, the late Ayatollah Khomeni recommended that young boys could be considered 'girls' temporarily for the purpose of older men using them for sex; the idea was to get around a set of sharia prohibitions on homosexuality
#8
Lol! So I shoulda directed to DF. The sex-change topic is uninteresting to me - the under the burqas comment is - I've seen the remarkable number of Fredericks-style lingerie shops in Saudi. They may look like ninjas on the outside, but there's definitely something else happening underneath to support all those stores, heh. Ya gotta see how many there are to believe it. And I decided not to repost the image(s) sans request, heh. So sue me tu!
A group of progressive media activists covering the Democratic National Convention in Boston plans to launch a new television network to counter the conservative news coverage they see on Fox News and CNN.
#5
What about ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN? Peter Jennings had such a hard-on while waxing that only Democrats could display such passion.
Posted by: Michael ||
08/02/2004 15:34 Comments ||
Top||
#6
It's like the movie, Momento.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
08/02/2004 16:57 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I desperately want them to succeed and have a far left moonbat channel. (perhaps this is the niche msnbc needs to exploit: moonbats, just like fox
targets conservatives).
Such a news channel would make it even more clear to people how nutzo they are, and, more importantly, provide competetive pressure to the alphabet nets (CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, etc) to head towards the middle.
Knowing the highway code is no longer enough to get a driving license in Turkmenistan, whose autocratic President Saparmurat Niyazov has told future drivers to cram his "sacred" writings to qualify. "A 16-hour course of the sacred Rukhnama is one of the most important innovations in the (driving learning) program ... to ensure future drivers are educated in the spirit of high moral values of Turkmenistan's society," the state news agency quoted a Niyazov decree as saying Monday. Niyazov, Turkmenistan's "president for life" and focus of a flourishing personality cult, wrote the Rukhnama (Spiritual World) as a moral guide to his desert nation of 6 million. The book is already a core part of the school and university curriculum, and a copy of Rukhnama is kept next to the Koran in the Central Asian nation's state-controlled mosques.
We don't make this stuff up, really!
Posted by: Steve ||
08/02/2004 1:48:25 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
A Turkmenstani student of mine says Niyazov is a complete lunatic. If he were in charge of a Carribean island nation, it wouldn't be so bad, but he's right in the middle of WOT country and on our side in WOT. What to do? Engagement or stay away? There appear to be no institutions out of his control. Ah, yes, one of the drawbacks to fighting AQ types is having to deal with morons like him.
Posted by: Michael ||
08/02/2004 14:49 Comments ||
Top||
#2
And Aaron drove around the walls in his Triumph!
Thank goodness the liberals are always so civil and well-behaved.
A week ago tonight, I asked Teresa Heinz Kerry a simple question here: "What did you mean?" And a wicked firestorm was sparked. Incredibly, most of it was directed against me.
Moments earlier, Mrs. Heinz Kerry had talked of "un-Pennsylvanian and sometimes un-American traits" that supposedly have crept into our political discourse. Her talk before the Pennsylvania delegation was, in part, a plea for a return to civility. She was not specific. As any journalist would, or should, I sought an example. Instead, I got a finger in the face and was told to "shove it." I have been told worse things by more important people.
By week's end, I and/or the exchange had been immortalized in some hilarious editorial page cartoons and become a part of David Letterman's "Top 10." But liberals also did their best to demonize not only me but the Trib. "Right-wing rag" became the pejorative du jour, vomited repeatedly by liberal media elitists. Heinz Kerry said I attempted to "trap" her. To defend her intemperance, she publicly impugned my personal and professional integrity. On national television the woman who herself raised the specter of McCarthyism with her unexplained remarks insinuated I was engaging in the same tactic. Democrat presidential nominee John Kerry called his wife's actions appropriate.
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/02/2004 1:06:44 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
One of my daughters back in Pittsburgh was brought to tears by a caller to our house. The clever woman identified herself as a Washington reporter seeking to interview me but then embarked on a filthy tirade. It seems a member of the Heinz Kerry Civility Enforcement Patrol posted our home address and telephone number on the response part of my convention blog.
Nah, this has gotta be wrong. I thought Ashcroft was in charge of the Climate of Fear?
#5
Let's hope Mrs. Edwards remark in her speech that Teresa would be "the most generous 1st Lady ever" got Hillary's blood boiling. Otherwise folks, we'll be talked down to so much by the Mozambican, we'll wish we were back being taught by the Sisters of St. Joseph during catechism. Sorry, non-parochial school folks.
Teresa has put her hat into the ring in a very public and ostentatious way. She wears the pants in the family and I want to see her tax records.
Posted by: Michael ||
08/02/2004 15:32 Comments ||
Top||
#6
'Tay-rayyyy-sa' vs. 'The Hildebeast'
I think I might pay to see that! Someone contact WWF quick!
EFL - the english literate and internet capable people in the Arab world seem to have a lot of pro Bush and anti Kerry members
Thursday, July 29, 2004
Comments (44) | Trackback (0)
Do Me and John Kerry a Favor
Could someone do John Kerry a favor. Please call the flip-flopper up and tell him that he saw the SAME intelligence reports that President Bush saw and that he saw the SAME threats that President Bush saw and that he voted for the SAME war.
Also, could someone do me I favor. Call John Kerry and tell him that I feel I need to apologize to him. I think I slept in the middle of his acceptance speech because I don't recall him mentioning any words about his senate years. I am sure he mentioned them because those 20 years earned him the "Most Liberal Senator" title. I am so upset with myself, I should have stayed awake!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: mhw ||
08/02/2004 10:27:33 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
As long as you stayed awake for Teddy Kennedy's "fired the shirt heard round the world speech", you're forgiven.
It's been 60 years since Dwight Nesmith piloted a B-24 bomber in the last of 40 Air Force combat missions he flew during the latter stages of World War II. But as part of the Collings Foundation Wings of Freedom Tour's three-day stop in Manhattan in July, the 84-year-old Nesmith climbed aboard a restored Consolidated B-24 Liberator for a 30-minute flight. The bomber, along with a Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress, was on display at the Manhattan Regional Airport historic aircraft tour.
Nesmith's flight was a Father's Day gift from his son, Thomas Nesmith of Albuquerque, N.M., who helped bring the Wings of Freedom Tour to Manhattan. He said his son had seen the bombers in New Mexico and learned the tour was making a stop in Kansas City. The tour will stop in 120 cities this year. "My son thought, as long as you're coming this close you might as well come to Manhattan," Nesmith said. "I haven't seen a B-24 since I got out of the service."
The Collings Foundation asked for a $400 tax-deductible donation for the 30-minute flight. Nesmith said one of his neighbors questioned why someone would pay that much money to take off and land in the same place. "I told him every time I took off I was hoping I would land in the same place," Nesmith said.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/02/2004 12:19:25 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
...FWIW, stop by and see these magificent old warriors if they are in your neighborhood. I spoke to a Collings rep a couple years ago at an airshow and he said that as popular as they are (they usually pay their own way in tour admissions) the costs of insuring them is getting to the point where there will only be a few more nationwide tours before thy're restricted to their home fields forever.
Believe me when I tell you that there is nothing that is as stirring as meeting the men - and sometimes the women - who helped build, fly, and maintain these old beasts.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
08/02/2004 13:55 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I'm holding out for B-36s. Don't think there're any left flying?
#3
Ship - I believe, not certain, that there is only one intact and flyable B-36 left - period. It sat at an airfield between Dallas and Ft Worth on Hwy 183 (Amon Carter Airfield, I think - where AA has it's training center and there's an FAA Enroute Center there, too, IIRC) for a long time - 35 years? - and people crawled through it to see - and pilfer souvenirs. Then sometime in the late 70's or early 80's some group decided to restore it. I believe they succeeded over the course of about 20 years to complete the job.
A long-time DFW person could confirm - Jen?
BTW - it was super-cool to crawl around inside it.
#4
Our local Jr. HS has an annual WWII rememberance night. My 8th grade twins and I went not knowing what to expect. It blew me away. No rah, rah I'm reporting for duty BS. Just like the science fair, the gym was dominated by cafeteria tables and poster boards. One vet told stories of his Battle of Leyte Gulf experience and showed me photos, letters, post-cards, paintings relating to the fight and putting 1944 into context. But the kicker was the B-17 pilot whose plane's nose had been hit by flak or ME 109 over Germany, can't remember which. Bombadier dead, other crew members wounded. If you remember the scene from film "Memphis Belle", you'll know what I'm talking about. Anyway, the pilot had two choices. Try to make it back to England or land. He decided to land since he didn't think his plane was capable of making it back/evade fighters, plus he wanted to save the wounded crew members. He had the photos displayed that the Germans had taken of his aircraft. A crater instead of a plexiglass nose. But he had made a perfect landing in some meadow or forest clearing. Spent the rest of the war in a Stalag. Showed me the posters he and a group of theatre buffs made advertising their prison camp productions. Modest but proud guy. I was in awe. This from a guy you might see today at Walgreen's asking the pharmacist to speak up. That's how I look at the old fellows today at the supermarket. What could he tell me about the war? Wish I could talk to my late submariner dad.
Posted by: Michael ||
08/02/2004 15:20 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Cool post, Michael - I feel the same way. When that generation is gone, our loss will be beyond calculation.
#6
.com, full story of the DFW B-36 can be found here. To make a long story short, no can fly.
Posted by: Steve ||
08/02/2004 15:34 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Thx, Steve! BTW,though it doesn't say it on the page, for years it was wide open to anyone who wanted a look. Not even fenced in and with stairs to get inside. And I had forgotten that Amon Carter was later renamed GSW.
Thx, again! My dad was a VP at General Dynamics when he died. Started out changing flats and such on the flight line at Carswell AFB in '46 when it was Convair. He moved up steadily and participated in developing the B-58 Hustler through the F-16. He was a member of the GD team that pitched the F-16 to NATO countries and set up joint mfg agreements for F-16 components. What a memory trip.
#8
Another B-36 can be seen for free at the wright patt air museum in Dayton Ohio. They even have the goblin parasite fighter (XF-85) that would theoretically stayed in the B-36 and flown out to engage enemy fighters.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
