Homestead mailing list

[Akka Homestead <akkabhomestead AT yahoo.com>]

My state has 13 Reps, 7 Republicans and 6 Democrats.
11 voted NO, 2 voted YES.  Those two were Democrats.

I agree that those who voted for the bill are going to be chastized come 
re-election time.  IMO, it means either one of two things, either they are in 
the pocket of Wall Street with a lot of their own money on the line, OR, they 
are simply followers of Pelosi/Bush.  Either reason is damning, I think.  We 
need leadership.  We need someone who is not afraid to go against the flow, 
to be unpopular for the sake of the country.

I wonder...
could it be that the lines of the parties is so convoluted now that a 
Southern Republican might approach, in his thinking, a Northern Democrat, and 
visa versa?  I know Maine is full of self sufficient, hard working mountain 
types who stick to themselves.  Sorry for the stereotype.  North Georgia is 
the same.  North Georgia is Republican.  Is Northern Maine Democratic?  Could 
they economically be the same and only differ in social conservatism vs. 
social liberalism?



SJC wrote:
> Akka Homestead wrote:
>> .........Y'all blame what you will on Bush and the GOP-they do
>> deserve their share of the blame, but this bill passing shit falls
>> squarely on Democratic shoulders as far as I am concerned.  If they
>> were truly anti-Bush, if they were truly for the little guy, if
>> they honestly had their constituents at heart instead of their rich
>> friends, if they truly the party of CHANGE, then we would not have
>> a signed bailout tonight.
>> 
>> Akka
>> 
> Maine's Democrats voted against and both Republicans for......and at
>  least one of them did it without apology.  So much for her.  She
> won't have a chance in November.  I think she forgot yesterday where
> she lives and hopes to be re-elected.  She was pretty much doomed
> anyway, I think, as she's been sitting in Bush's lap the whole last
> term and that doesn't sit well with Mainers.
> 
> SJ, in Maine, where it looks like the sun just might make it out





>From akkabhomestead AT yahoo.com  Thu Oct  2 14:40:48 2008
Return-Path: <akkabhomestead AT yahoo.com>
X-Original-To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix, from userid 3002)
        id 121714C02C; Thu,  2 Oct 2008 14:40:48 -0400 (EDT)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on malecky
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE
        autolearn=disabled version=3.2.3
Received: from n1a.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com (n1a.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com
        [76.13.13.64]) by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C27D64C02F
        for <homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Thu,  2 Oct 2008 14:40:41 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from [76.13.13.26] by n1.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with NNFMP;
        02 Oct 2008 18:40:41 -0000
Received: from [76.13.10.170] by t3.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with NNFMP;
        02 Oct 2008 18:40:41 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp111.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with NNFMP;
        02 Oct 2008 18:40:41 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 167145.3195.bm AT omp111.mail.ac4.yahoo.com
Received: (qmail 34605 invoked by uid 60001); 2 Oct 2008 18:40:41 -0000
X-YMail-OSG: 
dAu1VhQVM1l2cZaAaTFsixQWpZIDZ0ntK9A0xYf37U68zTAxU68GzD.v5WJEwrpQ4pv.bLbAZe0XnzVW4OWC5NSMLDJ6ZUIf6TKualiJt6ynf8_8HpYbIUokx5R0p_rr2TTQdG4-
Received: from [216.78.38.215] by web59913.mail.ac4.yahoo.com via HTTP;
        Thu, 02 Oct 2008 11:40:40 PDT
X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.7.218.2
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 11:40:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Akka Homestead <akkabhomestead AT yahoo.com>
To: Homestead List <homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org>
In-Reply-To: <BAY138-W1432E1DE79EBF9E98DBECCAF3D0 AT phx.gbl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <43286.30142.qm AT web59913.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.9
Subject: Re: [Homestead] Parties 1,2 and 3, was Reading the bailout bill
X-BeenThere: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: akkabhomestead AT yahoo.com, homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
List-Id: <homestead.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/homestead>,
        <mailto:homestead-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/homestead>
List-Post: <mailto:homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/homestead>,
        <mailto:homestead-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2008 18:40:48 -0000

I haven't seen a difference yet.  Oh, and I don't think Democrats are tax and 
spend anymore,,,,I think they are borrow and spend as well, or maybe just 
spend...lol..they(R+D) are all just spend...spend now, live the good life 
now, pay for it later...I told my daughter once that generally this is the 
way Democrats are, but Bush has put himself square into the Democratic 
stereotype...go out and go shopping now, your kids and grandkids will pay 
later...
My own cynism goes back a few decades.
Kennedy choose one of those middle, Diplomatic routes that the Democrats are 
always offering as an alternative, he committed us to a course that the 
Republicans would follow....he stepped us right into a war that had been 
fought for decades. Johnson had to send even more troops, and Nixon even more 
after that.  Fast forward...If Clinton had acted and made decisive steps 
against Al Qaida early on, we wouldn't be in Afghanistan today.  For that 
matter, had GHWB allowed Schwartzkopf to march to Baghdad, we wouldn't have 
lot so many young lives in Iraq today.  We still haven't paid ( in lives ) 
for all the technology Clinton sold to North Korea and China.  Anyway,Bush 
stepped us right into a war that had been going on, whether you are talking 
about Afghanistan or Iraq. 
So I really started looking at parties differently.   Just like they no 
longer represent us, they no longer represent their parties' platform either. 
 That's why there were Reagan Democrats. It is all in who you know and who 
you can buy.   People have short memories, and there is no more balance.  For 
example, remember the whole story about Clinton dodging the draft?  Then you 
have the story of W's very weak NG service...which is better?  Well, Kerry 
tried to make a go of being a war hero, but failed, and McCain is doing the 
same.  Biden also dodged the draft(no real mention of this lately), and as we 
all know, Palin is female, but now has a son in Iraq.    It's time we forget 
or make excuses or make one guy sound worse than the rest, but both parties 
do the same thing.  Worse, now, we have such a nasty climate for military 
service now, with two+ unpopular wars going on, I am afraid for the guys 
coming back.  Everyone says they support the
 troops, but not the policy that sent them there, but do they really?  Our 
troops are now volunteers, not draftees, so will they really feel the 
support, or will they be seen as Bush supporters or fanatical right wing 
conservatives (the Palin is being painted) over time.  It worries me.  People 
won't care that each kid had his own reason for joining because there is 
general belief that those who volunteer have no better choice.  But I 
digress....
War aside, these politicians are all tied to PACs and special interests.  
They are crooked, smooth talking manipulators.  They spend money like it 
grows on trees.  The amount of money spent on political ads alone is 
staggering.  The most successful politicians work the debt so that the 
payment comes due in a future administration.  The country has been dumbed 
down by stupid programs like NCLB that sheeple no longer take a good hard 
look at candidates, but sadly, they vote on appearances...or things that 
don't matter like whether or not he's handsome(I heard those comments about 
Al Gore) or now, unfortunately, black.  I hear blacks talking about voting 
for Obama simply because he is a 'brother'.  Is this any better than whites 
not voting for Obama because he is 'a brother'.  I've also heard comments, in 
my own family even, of how McCains arm movements make him seem less 
presidential or how Obama's suit makes him look more presidential.  In all
 these instances, a judgment is made on appearances and not on 
qualifications.  People vote a party because their friends and family vote 
that party, not necessarily because the candidate believes a certain way on 
the issues.  I mean let's get real.  Are the people in Illinois(Blue state) 
really that different from the folks in Indiana(Red)...no...


To answer Roy's question of where is the third party...they have already been 
locked away in the basement.  They can see through the window, but can't get 
out to do much about the mudslide happening around them.  We need to get back 
to issues, and not personalities.  If the issues of the  third parties were 
publicized more, you would find more young people, and maybe old, too, 
aligning with those parties.  On equal footing, equal advertising, and equal 
access to debates, you might see a different government evolving.  Until that 
time, the only thing us third party folks can do is spread the word and not 
be ashamed to stand up and say "I'm for Paul" or "I'm for Nader" or I voted 
for Perot or I voted for McKinney, or Jackson or Larouche, etc.  It makes 
people realize that they really do have a choice.


Lynn Wigglesworth wrote:
> There's plenty of blame to go around. Do you really see a difference 
> between the two parties? Listening to any of them, I can't tell if they 
> are a tax and spend Democrat or a borrow and spend Republican. So few 
> have the guts to do what their constituents want. 
> 




>From akkabhomestead AT yahoo.com  Thu Oct  2 14:42:43 2008
Return-Path: <akkabhomestead AT yahoo.com>
X-Original-To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix, from userid 3002)
        id 1CFD64C02F; Thu,  2 Oct 2008 14:42:43 -0400 (EDT)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on malecky
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE
        autolearn=disabled version=3.2.3
Received: from n1b.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com (n1b.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com
        [76.13.13.71]) by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 74DD54C02C
        for <homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Thu,  2 Oct 2008 14:42:37 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: from [76.13.13.25] by n1.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with NNFMP;
        02 Oct 2008 18:42:37 -0000
Received: from [76.13.10.165] by t4.bullet.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with NNFMP;
        02 Oct 2008 18:42:37 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp106.mail.ac4.yahoo.com with NNFMP;
        02 Oct 2008 18:42:37 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 13267.41242.bm AT omp106.mail.ac4.yahoo.com
Received: (qmail 36653 invoked by uid 60001); 2 Oct 2008 18:42:36 -0000
X-YMail-OSG: 
jXzB0NgVM1kRFy5sM.8MGdW2v1B7ocpDmpO4iUL87pJqX5xJtEsws2iZfp.blRAuT2aawVlg6UDneUaSq3NYYA.9V.et1nfeWLt0T5CBbIiDJRq7EC.2iVAVjFTcWFauXGnNWNg-
Received: from [216.78.38.215] by web59912.mail.ac4.yahoo.com via HTTP;
        Thu, 02 Oct 2008 11:42:36 PDT
X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.7.218.2
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 11:42:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Akka Homestead <akkabhomestead AT yahoo.com>
To: Homestead List <homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <893131.35912.qm AT web59912.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.9
Subject: Re: [Homestead] Mccain on Morning Joe
X-BeenThere: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: akkabhomestead AT yahoo.com, homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
List-Id: <homestead.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/homestead>,
        <mailto:homestead-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/homestead>
List-Post: <mailto:homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/homestead>,
        <mailto:homestead-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2008 18:42:43 -0000

You aren't really confused, you are too smart for that.
It's called Hardball.  Attach all kinds of crap to a bill that you know will 
get lots of play; one that others will have to pass else look bad,  damned if 
you do and damned if you don't.  I seriously doubt McCain added any earmarks 
since he has been against them for years.  But this does sound like a 
Democratic ploy to make McCain look bad.  I suppose that is the way the game 
is played.  My question is, who earmarked money for Rum producers?

Lynn Wigglesworth wrote:
> 
> 
> Mccain did an interview on MSNBC's Morning Joe this morning. The host 
> asked specifically about all the earmarks in the bailout bill that 
> Senate signed (have you SEEN the crap they added to that bill?...money 
> for rum producers?). Mccain went on and on about how all the porkbarrel 
> earmarks have "got to be stopped". He said that it's "up to the 
> President to veto these bills". Ummm....didn't Mccain vote FOR that 
> bill? Didn't he say it was vitally important to pass it? Did he forget 
> which bill they were talking about? I'm confused.



>From genegerue AT ruralize.com  Thu Oct  2 15:29:59 2008
Return-Path: <genegerue AT ruralize.com>
X-Original-To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix, from userid 3002)
        id 890114C032; Thu,  2 Oct 2008 15:29:59 -0400 (EDT)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on malecky
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE
        autolearn=disabled version=3.2.3
Received: from mail.itsamac.com (mail.itsamac.com [216.183.98.6])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3FD44C02F
        for <homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Thu,  2 Oct 2008 15:29:58 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: (qmail 10843 invoked by uid 0); 2 Oct 2008 19:29:57 -0000
Received: from d5-178.rb3.clm.centurytel.net (HELO ?192.168.1.47?)
        (genegerue AT ruralize.com@69.29.84.178)
        by mail.itsamac.com with ESMTPA; 2 Oct 2008 19:29:57 -0000
Message-Id: <DD057B39-AF88-436E-A187-E6A847FBD234 AT ruralize.com>
From: Gene GeRue <genegerue AT ruralize.com>
To: akkabhomestead AT yahoo.com, homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
In-Reply-To: <394436.88034.qm AT web59906.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v929.2)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 14:29:57 -0500
References: <394436.88034.qm AT web59906.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.929.2)
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset=US-ASCII;
        format=flowed;
        delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.9
Subject: [Homestead] Politicians vesus voters
X-BeenThere: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
List-Id: <homestead.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/homestead>,
        <mailto:homestead-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/homestead>
List-Post: <mailto:homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/homestead>,
        <mailto:homestead-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2008 19:29:59 -0000


On Oct 2, 2008, at 1:19 PM, Akka Homestead wrote:
>
> I agree that those who voted for the [bailout] bill are going to be
> chastized come re-election time.

Probably not. Of those who vote, most vote for incumbents.

> IMO, it means either one of two things, either they are in the
> pocket of Wall Street with a lot of their own money on the line, OR,
> they are simply followers of Pelosi/Bush.

To become elected means raising a huge amount of money. To be
reelected means raising another huge amount of money. Incumbents,
depending on their voting records, receive lots of money from those
who can both afford the contributions and want to influence how
politicians act. A large number of such are Wall Street investment
firms, huge banks, huge legal firms, huge businesses.

Any political campaigner needs a huge amount of money to run a
successful campaign, the higher the office, the larger the sum. Most
people either can't afford to donate or are insufficiently motivated
to do so. The percentage of Americans who vote or not vote is evidence
of the level of interest versus apathy.

>   Either reason is damning, I think.  We need leadership.  We need
> someone who is not afraid to go against the flow, to be unpopular
> for the sake of the country.

Such a person would likely last one term; the only chance for a second
term is if they had large personal resources and employed very
sophisticated (expensive) campaign managers. They need both huge
personal money and driving ambition to change the country. The Ross
Perot story is instructive.

In addition to sophisticated campaigns that persuade those susceptible
to clever manipulation and lies because of modest intellectual
capacity or naivete or--pick your own reason--earmarks are a way that
politicians get voters to vote for them. Such action is blatant, and
effective, pandering.

Whether PT Barnum or someone else first made the observation, it is
obvious that there is at least one sucker born every minute. Others
have wryly observed that such people never die.

Please vote against the incumbents.
>