 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
marc
Supporter
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 07:26 pm |
|
Dave wrote: WTF???
Why are tax-payers expected to pick up the tab for protecting these two? What a frickin ripoff...Thats BS...That should be paid for by campaign contributions not us...JMHO...
|
Dave
Supporter
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 07:22 pm |
|
WTF???
Why are tax-payers expected to pick up the tab for protecting these two?
Secret Service Wants More Money - $106.65 Million Budget Not Enough For Unusual Year
POSTED: 6:01 am PDT July 25, 2008
UPDATED: 6:03 am PDT July 25, 2008
WASHINGTON -- The Secret Service has asked for an extra $9.5 million to cover unexpected costs of protecting the presidential candidates during what has turned into an historic year for the agency's campaign security job.
Among other things, the extra money would be used for the added costs for the candidates' international travel and a late-in-the-game decision by Barack Obama to accept the Democratic nomination at Denver's Invesco Field at Mile High -- an open-air, 76,000-seat stadium -- instead of the 20,000-seat Pepsi Center, which is the site of the party's national convention.
Presidential candidates are traveling overseas with Secret Service protection more than ever before.
Obama is on a six-day trip to Jordan, Israel, Germany, France and Britain. Before that he was on a three-day congressionally sponsored trip to Afghanistan and Iraq. Republican candidate John McCain has traveled to Canada, Colombia and Mexico under the agency's protection.
The 2008 presidential campaign cycle is the longest in Secret Service history by about five months. The Secret Service budgeted $106.65 million for the 2008 campaign cycle, compared to $73.3 million in 2004.
"I thought we had a very, very good plan in place for the campaign," Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan said in an interview with The Associated Press earlier this week. "If past history was any type of an indicator, we anticipated picking up protection somewhere in January, February, March of 2008."
"But the campaigns are different now," Sullivan said.
Obama received Secret Service protection on May 3, 2007 -- the earliest the agency has ever stepped in to protect a candidate.
|
Dave
Supporter
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 01:12 pm |
|
empty wrote:
Vero Steve wrote: Ford has been selling cars for years overseas that get 30-40 MPG, I was wondering how long it was going to take before they finally got smart and sold them here.
We have been getting alot of people with big trucks and SUV begging us to write the estimate has high as possible so the insurance companies will total them and they get get them paid off. I have to remind them about insurance fraud........
They would have been selling them here if there was someone buying them here. Fuel prices have been high overseas for a long time. Damn good point. You hear a lot of people complaining about the "Big 3" and their big cars and wantin' to know why it took 'em so long to downsize cars and truck. All the while they've got a Suburban or Excursion parked out in the driveway next to a Queen Mary-Sized luxury car of one make or another.
Look WTF ya bought and you wonder why they didn't put out more smaller cars??? They've had smaller cars on the market for decades. People keep buyin' the bigger ones though...
But, there are still folks that do actually need the bigger car or truck. So, they've got to fill that demand too...
|
empty
Supporter
| Joined: | Tue Jun 28th, 2005 |
| Location: | Plano, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 1658 |
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 12:28 pm |
|
Vero Steve wrote: Ford has been selling cars for years overseas that get 30-40 MPG, I was wondering how long it was going to take before they finally got smart and sold them here.
We have been getting alot of people with big trucks and SUV begging us to write the estimate has high as possible so the insurance companies will total them and they get get them paid off. I have to remind them about insurance fraud........
They would have been selling them here if there was someone buying them here. Fuel prices have been high overseas for a long time.
|
Vero Steve
Supporter
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 12:00 pm |
|
Ford has been selling cars for years overseas that get 30-40 MPG, I was wondering how long it was going to take before they finally got smart and sold them here.
We have been getting alot of people with big trucks and SUV begging us to write the estimate has high as possible so the insurance companies will total them and they get get them paid off. I have to remind them about insurance fraud........
|
jeffy ole boy
Supporter
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 12:19 am |
|
marc wrote: jeffy ole boy wrote: Yeah used is the way to go- save on the depreciation, but its killing the new car sales until people can start saving again...
That is our problem...We are a nation of spenders not savers...All these people that believe in debt financing are not helping the situation...Their just digging a deeper hole to die in...JMHO The American Way today....
|
marc
Supporter
|
Posted: Fri Jul 25th, 2008 12:12 am |
|
jeffy ole boy wrote: Yeah used is the way to go- save on the depreciation, but its killing the new car sales until people can start saving again...
That is our problem...We are a nation of spenders not savers...All these people that believe in debt financing are not helping the situation...Their just digging a deeper hole to die in...JMHO
|
jeffy ole boy
Supporter
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 08:57 pm |
|
Dave wrote: Hey, I saw a car-hauler full of new Challengers on the road yesterday...
Would love to have one. But, I can't afford it. Maybe I can and don't want to tie up my money in a car payment. One of the guys at work had an Escalade (Cadillac) and his payment was over $700.00 a month, for 6 or 7 years. Best thing ever happened to him is when he totalled it...
So, I'll continue to buy used cars and trucks... Yeah used is the way to go- save on the depreciation, but its killing the new car sales until people can start saving again...
|
Dave
Supporter
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 08:45 pm |
|
Hey, I saw a car-hauler full of new Challengers on the road yesterday...
Would love to have one. But, I can't afford it. Maybe I can and don't want to tie up my money in a car payment. One of the guys at work had an Escalade (Cadillac) and his payment was over $700.00 a month, for 6 or 7 years. Best thing ever happened to him is when he totalled it...
So, I'll continue to buy used cars and trucks...
|
the preacher
Supporter
| Joined: | Wed Oct 17th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 253 |
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 08:25 pm |
|
Marc:
Here is another thought, something I been doing for years now:
I find a vehicle I like, i.e., my F150 Lariat 4wd shortwheelbase stepside, in the color I like, and buy it used. Then, as I fix things, I always buy the lifetime warranty. As it stands right now, I have 227K on the original engine, it burns no oil, the trans is fine, and I will never have to buy another set of brakes, rotors,shocks, starter, waterpump, or battery. I take care of my stuff, fix stuff when it gets bad before it breaks, and I am looking at at least 1/2 million out of this truck before I need an engine. (Castrol and Lucas, the poor mans friend)
besides: the only cars on the market I like are the Buick Lucerne, (which I will NEVER be able to afford) and the SmartCar, which we are probably going to buy when I sell the NY house, but there is a waiting list a year long.
SO: I drive the f150 on long trips, and will soon be driving the 63 Econoling to work when it is raining and I cant take the bike..lol
|
jeffy ole boy
Supporter
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 08:22 pm |
|
marc wrote: jeffy ole boy wrote: Until Ford and other US auto makers can make cars and trucks that get 40 to 50 mpg and don't cost as much as a house and/or make financing affordable with 15 yr loans lets say-- its going to remain a dismal auto market.. JMO I doubt many cars today will last 15 years...If you need 15 years to pay off a car you are probably in bad shape financially and should not be buying a new car....Buy a used one...JMHO... Thats true, but thats why new cars are not selling. The majority of consumers can't afford a new car because they are strapped. The only way to sell the new cars is to make them affordable stretching out the payments to create a payment people can afford. Most people base their payments on a monthly payment they can afford. I know its this way in the housing industry or at least it was.. LOL!
|
marc
Supporter
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 07:57 pm |
|
jeffy ole boy wrote: Until Ford and other US auto makers can make cars and trucks that get 40 to 50 mpg and don't cost as much as a house and/or make financing affordable with 15 yr loans lets say-- its going to remain a dismal auto market.. JMO I doubt many cars today will last 15 years...If you need 15 years to pay off a car you are probably in bad shape financially and should not be buying a new car....Buy a used one...JMHO...
|
jeffy ole boy
Supporter
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 07:48 pm |
|
| Until Ford and other US auto makers can make cars and trucks that get 40 to 50 mpg and don't cost as much as a house and/or make financing affordable with 15 yr loans lets say-- its going to remain a dismal auto market.. JMO
|
marc
Supporter
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 05:43 pm |
|
Not a surprise...I'm sure there is more bad news to come...
Ford posts $8.7 billion loss on asset write-downs
By DEE-ANN DURBIN and TOM KRISHER, AP Auto Writers1 hour, 46 minutes ago
Ford Motor Co. posted the worst quarterly performance in its history Thursday, losing $8.67 billion in the second quarter.
The company also said it will retool two more North American truck and sport utility vehicle plants to build small, fuel-efficient vehicles, and it announced plans to bring six new small vehicles to North America from Europe by the end of 2012.
The net loss includes $8.03 billion worth of write-offs because the sharp decline in U.S. truck and SUV sales has reduced the value of Ford's North American truck plants and Ford Motor Credit Co.'s lease portfolio. Even excluding those items, Ford lost 62 cents per share, worse than Wall Street expected. Twelve analysts surveyed by Thomson Financial, on average, expected a 27 cent loss per share.
Including the write-downs, Ford lost $3.88 per share in the April-June quarter, compared with net profit of $750 million, or 31 cents per share, in the same quarter a year ago.
The second-quarter loss surpassed Ford's previous record quarterly loss, $6.7 billion in the first quarter of 1992.
Second-quarter revenue was $38.6 billion, down $5.6 billion from the year-ago period. Analysts expected $34.6 billion.
Ford has been successful selling cars in Europe, and the company is banking on the new European models to boost sales and revenue as it deals with a market shift from trucks to cars brought on by high gasoline prices.
The company said it has sufficient liquidity to weather the latest downturn in the U.S. auto market without additional borrowing. Ford borrowed $23.4 billion in 2006 to fund its North American turnaround.
"We are pleased that we went to the capital markets at the right time," Ford President and CEO Alan Mulally said in a conference call with investors and media. "We have the scale, the expertise and the financing to execute our plan."
Wall Street wasn't impressed, at least initially. Ford shares dropped 58 cents, or 9.6 percent, to $5.45 in morning trading.
The company said it will retool the Michigan Truck plant in suburban Detroit, shifting its products from large SUVs to make global vehicles off the European Focus platform by 2010.
The SUVs made at Michigan Truck — the Lincoln Navigator and Ford Expedition — will be shifted to the Kentucky Truck plant in Louisville, which makes Ford Super Duty pickups.
The company also will retool the Louisville Assembly Plant, which now builds the Ford Explorer midsize SUV, to produce vehicles on the European Focus frame, starting in 2011.
The company had previously announced it would retool its pickup truck factory in Cuautitlan, Mexico, to build the Fiesta subcompact for North America starting in 2010.
Ford also said its Twin Cities Assembly Plant in St. Paul, Minn., will continue producing the Ranger small pickup through 2011. The plant was scheduled to close next year, but Ranger sales are down just 4 percent in the first half of this year, versus 18 percent for the U.S. light truck market as a whole.
The company also plans to revamp the body shops in nearly all its North American assembly plants so that they will be more flexible and able to respond more quickly to changes in market demands. Chief Financial Officer Don Leclair said it costs about $250 million per plant to make those changes.
Leclair said Ford's capital expenditures will reach $6 billion annually between now and 2010 because of the cost of revamping plants and introducing new products and engines. Ford plans to upgrade or replace all of its engines by 2010.
"What you're seeing is kind of a bubble that we're going to go through ... but early on we're going to see cost savings because of the economies of scale that we're getting as we develop more and more vehicles off of fewer platforms," he said.
Cost cuts also will come from employee layoffs. Ford said 4,000 U.S. hourly workers took buyouts in the second quarter, and the company will continue offering buyouts at targeted U.S. plants. Ford also has announced plans to cut its salaried costs by Aug. 1 through voluntary and involuntary layoffs.
The company said its write-offs included $5.3 billion in North American auto operations and $2.1 billion for Ford Credit because of the drop in the value of the plants and equipment that make trucks and SUVs, and the lower price Ford Credit can fetch for them at auction when leases expire. Leclair said 85 percent of the Ford Credit write-down was triggered by the drop in truck and SUV values.
Ford reported a pretax loss of $1.3 billion in North America because of the deteriorating U.S. market and the shift away from trucks. U.S. sales overall were down 10 percent in the first half of the year, with Ford's sales down 14 percent.
The company, though, continued to be profitable overseas, posting a $582 million profit in Europe and $388 million in South America. The company also made $50 million at its Asia-Pacific-Africa division.
"The second half will continue to be challenging, but we have absolutely the right plan to respond to the changing business environment and begin to grow again for the long term," Mulally said in a statement.
Ford said it does not expect a U.S. economic recovery to start until early 2010.
The company identified only three of the European small vehicles it will bring to North America: the Transit Connect small van, the European Focus and the subcompact Fiesta. Most will be built in North America, and Leclair said some might be exported. Ford already has announced that the Transit Connect will be imported from Turkey.
Ford said the other three vehicles would be identified later, including one that is unique within its segment.
Other possible vehicles are the Kuga small crossover, the C-Max small van and the Mondeo midsize car.
Ford also announced that the next-generation Ford Explorer midsize SUV will come out in 2010 and be built on car underpinnings, making it more fuel efficient than the current truck-based model. And it announced it will build a seven-passenger car-based crossover vehicle for Lincoln in mid-2009.
|
empty
Supporter
| Joined: | Tue Jun 28th, 2005 |
| Location: | Plano, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 1658 |
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 11:55 am |
|
Dave wrote: This is going to get real interesting. Russia is posturing, Rattling the saber, trying to regain "Super-Power" status with the world. Guess the fact that these missiles do not carry any war-head is a problem or maybe it just scares them.
What they don't seem to think about, is that we have more of them, closer to Russia than those that are planned for Poland and the Czech Republic.
In the grand scheme of things, these missiles were designed to shoot other missiles out of the sky. They do not carry a warhead. They carry a "Kill Vehicle". Basically its exactly like hitting a bullet with a bullet. They've been tested and they work...
That's what my son in law is doing in Korea. I hear if all goes well in the next few months in Korea he may be re-deployed to somewhere in Europe on his next go around.
|
Dave
Supporter
|
Posted: Thu Jul 24th, 2008 11:05 am |
|
This is going to get real interesting. Russia is posturing, Rattling the saber, trying to regain "Super-Power" status with the world. Guess the fact that these missiles do not carry any war-head is a problem or maybe it just scares them.
What they don't seem to think about, is that we have more of them, closer to Russia than those that are planned for Poland and the Czech Republic.
In the grand scheme of things, these missiles were designed to shoot other missiles out of the sky. They do not carry a warhead. They carry a "Kill Vehicle". Basically its exactly like hitting a bullet with a bullet. They've been tested and they work...
I don't know how much more I can say about that part of this system. I don't want the "Men in Black" paying a visit to my house or my desk at work 
Castro cryptic on Russian bomber report
By ANITA SNOW – 8 hours ago
HAVANA (AP) — Ailing Fidel Castro said Wednesday that Cuba's president was right to adopt a "dignified silence" over a Moscow newspaper report that Russia may send nuclear bombers to the island, and said Cuba doesn't owe any explanation to Washington about the story.
In a brief, cryptic essay posted on a government Web site Wednesday night, the 81-year-old former president neither confirmed nor denied the Monday report in Izvestia newspaper.
Moscow is angry about U.S. plans for missile-defense sites in eastern Europe and Izvestia cited a "highly placed" military aviation source as saying, "While they are deploying the anti-missile systems in Poland and the Czech Republic, our long-range strategic aircraft already will be landing in Cuba." Izvestia said this apparently refers to long-range nuclear-capable bombers.
Izvestia points out that there would have to be a political decision on landing bombers in Cuba, and quoted the unnamed source as saying there have been such discussions.
In Washington, U.S. State Department Acting Deputy spokesman Gonzalo R. Gallegos said that American officials had received no official confirmation from the Russian government about the newspaper report, and was unaware of any U.S. efforts to directly contact Moscow about it.
"We continue to continue to work with the Russians on this issue," Gallegos said Tuesday, referring to talks aimed at explaining the U.S. government's missile defense plan. "We have consistently made it clear to them that our proposed deployment of a limited missile defense system in Europe poses no threat to them or to their nuclear deterrent."
While Fidel Castro said the president, his brother Raul Castro, was wise not to respond to the newspaper report, he did not make clear why he was commenting.
Fidel Castro also said Cuba is not obligated to offer the United States an explanation about the newspaper report, "nor ask for excuses or forgiveness."
Despite Cuba's one-time alliance with the former Soviet Union, it seems unlikely that Raul Castro would allow Russian bombers on the island and risk the ire of the U.S. government.
Raul Castro has been president only since February, securing a seamless transition from his brother, who ruled for nearly a half-century. He has repeatedly said he is willing to discuss the two countries' differences in talks held on equal terms with America's next president.
Soviet nuclear missiles stationed in Cuba during the height of the Cold War pushed the world to the brink of nuclear conflict on Oct. 22, 1962, after President John F. Kennedy announced their presence to the world. After a tense week of diplomacy, Soviet leader Nikita Krushchev removed them.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gw_g2N1YLMvLFCuCLPrq6LNB1VcQD923UV3G0
|
Dave
Supporter
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 10:14 am |
|
jeffy ole boy wrote:
empty wrote: AUSTIN, Texas -- The head of the Texas agency that removed more than 400 children in the raid of a supposed polygamist group is retiring.
Carey Cockerell is the commissioner of the Department of Family and
Protective Services, who staged the April raid on the Yearning For Zion
Ranch in Eldorado.
The raid and its legal issues have cost Texas $14 million so far.
Let me guess; Cockerell wants to spend more time with his wives and children... What a waste.......
That whole thing stunk from the beginning...
|
jeffy ole boy
Supporter
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 01:07 am |
|
empty wrote: AUSTIN, Texas -- The head of the Texas agency that removed more than 400 children in the raid of a supposed polygamist group is retiring.
Carey Cockerell is the commissioner of the Department of Family and
Protective Services, who staged the April raid on the Yearning For Zion
Ranch in Eldorado.
The raid and its legal issues have cost Texas $14 million so far.
Let me guess; Cockerell wants to spend more time with his wives and children... What a waste.......
|
empty
Supporter
| Joined: | Tue Jun 28th, 2005 |
| Location: | Plano, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 1658 |
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 12:18 am |
|
AUSTIN, Texas -- The head of the Texas agency that removed more than 400 children in the raid of a supposed polygamist group is retiring.
Carey Cockerell is the commissioner of the Department of Family and
Protective Services, who staged the April raid on the Yearning For Zion
Ranch in Eldorado.
The raid and its legal issues have cost Texas $14 million so far.
Let me guess; Cockerell wants to spend more time with his wives and children...
|
the preacher
Supporter
| Joined: | Wed Oct 17th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 253 |
|
Posted: Fri Jul 18th, 2008 04:52 pm |
|
Hey Fritz:
Ya might better go back and look at what I was responding to when I said..
"who they gonna blame after January"
I was talking about Pelosi and the rest of the losers that stupid americans elected who have done NOTHING for anyone but THEMSELVES...
THEY don't blame Clinton for anything, remember he was the first black president, and God's gift to mankind along with the gift to corporate america so they could move all their jobs to cheaper labor markets...
in case you missed it, we was talking about the LIBERALS who are screwing up everything, not the Conservatives who lost cause they forgot who they served.
then again, libs dont serve anyone but themselves and unions...lol roflmbo
p.s.: re: "The Liberal Agenda, those devils!"...ya finally got it almost right, ya just left off pillaging union pension plans to pay for personal stuff...ROFL
|
|
|
|
|
|
