"""Because the PROCESS of dispensing justice had absolutely NO deterrent value.""
it sure as heck "deterred" mcveich from doing much more, didn't it? THAT's the kind of deterrant i'm looking for.
"By treating the OKie Chitty bomber as just another criminal felon with murderous intent, no messages were conveyed to the world that we are not pushovers, soft on terrorism, or more concerned by process than results."
since when has the american justice system been meant "to convey messages around the world".? it's meant to dispense justice in this country. justice was done in the mcveigh case and having the same kind of justice displayed in this case is enough to satisfy me.
F.....U....C....K whatever the world may think about it.
P.S repeating your statement: " no messages were conveyed to the world that we are not pushovers, soft on terrorism"
if executing a terrorist is what you call "soft on terrorism", i'm all for a little more "softness"!!!!
#$%$ did these guys get the money to live on, let alone drive around in a luxury car and pay for a 6 month trip to russia?
i have yet to hear one talking-head suggest the idea of
FOLLOW THE MONEY!!!!!!
who's the extremist that made the following statement:
"As investigation progresses, it is becoming more readily apparent that the perpetrators are connected with a right-wing extremist militia group. Why am i not surprised?"
assuming he gets apprehended alive, will the list of charges against him include "leaving the site of an accident" (running over his own brother)?
don, they certainly looked young but i'm not about to comment on their political persuasions.
but not only did they look young, i thought they also looked rather athletic.
days ago i wondered to my wife if it might not be possible that might be runners themselves that had been kept out of the race for some reason or other and were trying some kind of retaliation?
with the obvious damage that was done to the legs of the victims, could those bombs have been intended to do more damage to the runners than the spectators.
btw, i watched the videos of those two guys with the back packs. did anyone ever mention that the guy in back of them (the third guy in a yellow shirt) also had a back pack?
here's a msg that was posted by your pal "bubbles" a few days ago to someone else:
You may be younger, but age means nothing when you get past your forties. Your weight is your bane. The junk food you eat on a daily basis will finish you off summarily as your devoted inactivity will provoke a heart attack.
Your stature and dignity leave nothing to be desired. I would sooner be six feet tall than five foot three any day. Five foot three is extremely short when one's girth is seventy eight inches. Having the looks of a barrel is not what I call looking svelte. A man of your age should definitely know that a lack of nattiness invites all types of health issues down the road.
other than the sarcastic part about "five foot three", don't you think bubbles' msg was one that was more appropriately sent to you. (a point he chose to ignore when i pointed it out to him).
come on PINOCCHIO. respond to the strings i just pulled.
Another piece of advice that has served me well is not to trade in the first 30 minutes of the market open. With a lot of fear kicking in right now, you may see a gap down but an immediate rise.
i'm looking to sell the 4/20 23 puts.
my gawd bubbles; if you ever mis-directed a msg , that last one is the big miss of all-time.
why wasn't that msg sent to the one & only guy on this msg board that has had lap-band surgery (which FAILED)?
do a yahoo search on "average inheritance" and you'll see this story:
BEND, Ore. (CNN/Money) � Are you banking on an inheritance some day?
Don't hold your breath.
Only a small percentage of Americans can expect to inherit anything from their parents, according to a study conducted by Jagadeesh Gokhale and Laurence Kotlikoff for the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.
Nearly 92 percent of the population will receive nothing at all, the study concluded.
Of the 8 percent who stand to inherit something, half will inherit less than $25,000, while just 1.7 percent of the population can expect to inherit more than $50,000.
The study was initially published in 2000, but the authors say if anything, the picture has worsened.
You can't take it with you
Percentage of the population receiving inheritances.
Inheritance� % of population�
$1 - $25,000� 4.3%�
$25,000 - $50,000� 1.1%�
$50,000 - $100,000� 0.1%�
More than $100,000� 1.6%�
�Source:��Calculated from the Federal Reserve Board's 1998 survey of consumer finances.
In fact, if current trends continue, younger generations will have even less of a chance of getting a piece of their parents' nest egg. Not only are retirees living longer and paying more for health care, they feel less pressure to leave money to the next generation.
Your inheritance "could even be negative if you end up taking care of your parents," said Kotlikoff, a professor of economics at Boston University.
No huge boon for boomers
When Gokhale and Kotlikoff released their study three years ago, the findings opened the eyes of baby boomers, who for years were told that they stood to inherit, by one count, $10 trillion between 1990 and 2004, with an average inheritance of about $135,000 for every boomer. (Most demographers label boomers as people born between 1946 and 1965.)
Boomers, however, have since been warned not to count on such a windfall to fund their retirement.
"Whatever is coming down has to be split up among many siblings," said Gokhale, now a visiting scholar for the American Enterprise Institute.
The parents of pre-boomers had 2.6 children, according to the National Center for Health Statistics, but boomers' parents had 3.3 children.
The AARP recently released its own study on inheritance, this one based on what individuals said they already have inherited or expect to inherit.
By that measure, 17 percent of boomers had received an inheritance by 2001, averaging $47,909. Less than 15 percent of boomers said they expected to receive an inheritance in the future.
"The thing I personally think is most daunting is the uncertainty of the cost of aging," said John Gist, associate director of the AARP's Public Policy Institute.
Outlook for younger generations
All things being equal, boomers' children, the "echo boom," stand to inherit more (as a percentage of their compensation) than their parents simply because boomers have fewer children than their parents, according to Gokhale and Kotlikoff's study.
But, such estimates don't account for increased longevity, said Gokhale. Nor do they allow for higher health care costs or greater consumption patterns by retirees.
In fact, if trends continue as they have, inheritance could be even more out of reach for younger generations for these reasons:
Longer life expectancy: Retirees now need to worry about outliving their savings, said Don Blandin, president of the American Savings Council. According to the statistics from National Center for Health Statistics, the average life expectancy at birth for both sexes is now about 77 years old, a 13 percent increase in the last 50 years.
Rising health-care costs: Retirees continue to spend more of their income on health care, with people over age 65 spending 13 percent of their income on health care, according to analysis by the MetLife Mature Market Institute. The average annual cost of a private room at a nursing home, meanwhile, is $61,000,according to MetLife.
More "annuitized" savings: Social Security, pension plans and private insurance annuities generally pay a set amount to beneficiaries until they die (or until their spouses die). While such savings vehicles dampen the risk of outliving one's savings, they leave less to bequeath, Blandin said.
A change in attitude: During the 1990s alone, the percentage of people who said it's important to leave an estate declined from 52.5 percent to 48.5 percent, and that trend is expected to continue.
This is not to say that everyone will aspire to spend their kids' inheritance.
"I still see quite a few clients who are planning to pass the wealth to their children or grandchildren," said Michael Kutzin, a partner Goldfarb Abrandt Salzman & Kutzin, a law firm that specializes in elder law. He says this is true not just of the very wealthy but of the middle and upper-middle class.
But unless you have an ironclad lock on an inheritance, don't count on the good intentions of your parents or grandparents, Blandin said.
"There are some people who think someone will be leaving them money, and in some cases they're correct," he said. "But for every person out there who is correct there are people who miscalculate."
i'm fine; thx. just been keeping MY bfm shut quite a bit lately, but PINOCCHIO gave me an opportunity to "goad" so i took it.
i've got no complaints about how the market has performed the last few months. pfe is just one of the better movers i'm holding altho the wife sold a few hundred to round off her holdings to an even 1000. she likes the dividend even at these prices.
this stock having gotten away from him?
How many presidents have the US had throughout its history?
When you add up the numbers in each deck of the array, how many presidents does that calculation total?
come on mr c. it totals 44 and obama is the 44th.
the msg was an obvious (except to you, perhaps) a satirical play & comment about obama's position on that list.
i thought it was pretty clever.
i'm surprised you needed to post that msg even with your "IMHO".
AAPL, MSFT or whatever will not pay some absurd price over the market for a company that offers virtually no fit to their existing business
what do you consider an "absurd price"?
why did msft, years ago, offer to buy yhoo for $31 per share at a time when yahoo was selling for only about $19 per share?
don't you believe yhoo is in a better position now than it was years ago?
since i voiced the opinion that ballmer would come back at yahoo in the 22-24 range. we're past that stage now.
i'm looking for ballmer to go back to at least his first time offer in the 31 range when yahoo was selling only in the 19 range.
apparently someone doesn't know the difference between buying a residence and making a real estate investment and the consequences of either.
and come back to find nothing but a lot more clowns jumping in here with all their CRApxxx.
that's enuf to tell me to stay out of here (and most other yahoo msg boards) with perhaps an occasional visit to see if anything has improved.
so good luck to all you good guys who have been here with me for so long.
on last thought and that's for PINOCCHIO:
you're still a LYING, COWARDLY BIGOT. let's see if (for once) you can keep your BFM shut and not respond to me as you "threatened" to do so often but couldn't control yourself.
i'll say it again and you can DODGE it again: what does ryan's suggestions about sequestration in 2004 have to do with what obama "suggestions" were YEARS LATER???
have you done the search i suggested on ""Obama Caught Lying about Sequester"????
THAT'S the point i'm making and you keep coming up with what ryan had to say almost 8 years ago.
do the search i suggested; read the story that comes up from that search and THEN come back with more RELEVANT points about what has happen with OBAMA's strategy about sequestration and not ryan's!!!!
can you do that?-