Submitted by Michael Moynihan on Thu, 06/19/2008 - 8:44am.   

Of the various false solutions being proposed to the current oil shockperhaps none is more disingenous than the idea that it can be solved bydrilling in the Alaskan wilderness and along the continental shelf.This is the idea that the right wing media, recently, John McCain andnow President Bush have been pushing as a cureall for soaring oilprices. Since many Democrats oppose this drilling, the next false stepof logic is to say Democrats are to blame. This was the thrust ofPresident Bush's energy proposal yesterday, one that only highlightsthe intellectual dishonesty and partisanship of this failedAdministration.

Is more drilling the answer?  No for three reasons.

First, the amount of potential oil in the Arctic National WildlifeRefuge or ANWR is simply not enough to make a dent in global worldconsumption. The entire estimated reserves of ANWR are estimated toequal current US consumption in one year. The mere increase in China'sconsumption in the next few years will exceed the entire Alaskanreserves. Since the reserves would be harvested over decades, thequantity of oil they would produce each year would amount at most to afew drops in the global oil bucket.

Second, oil exploration and drilling takes years. Even ifexploration began tomorrow, we would probably not see significantquantities of oil from Alaska or offshore for close to a decade.

Third, the oil companies already have millions of acres allocated tothem that they have not gotten around to exploring let alone drillingin. When asked the delicate question, as some have been recently, whythey have not explored these millions of acres to which the federalgovernment has granted them rights, oil companies typically respondthat the public should understand that oil exploration takes time.

There may be some opportunities for targeted, ecologicallysensistive drilling off of America's shores that would make economicsense. But more drilling will not address either the current oil shockshock or the long term situation. And of course, it will worsen, notmitigate the climate.

FedOutlook is a blog on the Fed and Federal Reserve actions written by Greg McBride, CFA.

-- Posted: Jun. 6, 2008

TO ALL THE KIDS WHO SURVIVED the 1930's, 40's, 50's, 60'sand 70's!!

First, we survived being born to mothers who smoked and/or drank

while they were pregnant.

They took aspirin,ate blue cheese dressing, tuna from a can,

and didn't get tested for diabetes.

Then after that trauma, we were put to sleep on our tummies in

baby cribs covered with bright colored lead-based paints.

We had no child proof lids on medicine bottles, doors or cabinets

and when we rode our bikes, we had no helmets, not to mention, the risks we took hitchhiking.

As infants&children, we would ride in cars with no car seats,

booster seats,seat belts or air bags.

Riding in the backof a pick up on a warm day was always a

special treat.

We drank water from the garden hose and NOT from a bottle.

 We shared one soft drink with four friends, from one bottle and

 NO ONE actually died from this.

 We ate cupcakes,white bread and real butter and drank Kool-aid

 made with sugar,but we weren't overweight because,

 WE WERE ALWAYS OUTSIDE PLAYING!

 We would leave home in the morning and play all day, as long as

 we were back when the street lights came on.

 No one was able to reach us all day And we were O.K.

 We would spend hours building our go- carts out of scraps and

 then ride down thehill, only to find out we forgot the brakes After

 running into the bushes a few times, we learned to solve the problem.

 We did not have Playstations, Nintendo's, X-boxes, no video

 games at all, no 150 channels on cable, no video movies or DVD's, no

 surround-sound orCD's, no cell phones, no personal computer! s, no

 Internet or chatrooms......

 WE HAD FRIENDS and we went outside and found them!

 We fell out of trees, got cut, broke bones and teeth and there

 were no lawsuitsfrom these accidents.

 We ate worms and mud pies made from dirt, and the worms did not

 live in us forever.

 We were given BB guns for our 10th birthdays, made up games with

 sticks and tennis balls and, although we were told it would happen, we

 did not poke out very many eyes.

 We rode bikes or walked to a friend's house and knocked on the

 door or rang thebell, or just walked in and talked to them!

 Little League had try outs and not everyone made the team. Those

 who didn't had to learn to deal with disappointment. Imagine that!!

 The idea of aparent bailing us out if we broke the law was

 unheard of. They actually sided with the law!

These generations have produced some of the best risk-takers,

problem solvers and inventors ever!

The past 50 years have been an explosion of innovationand new

ideas.

We had freedom, failure, success and responsibility, and we

learned HOW TO DEAL WITH IT ALL!

 If YOU are one of them CONGRATULATIONS!

 You might want to share this with others who have had the luck

to grow up as kids, before the lawyers and the government regulated so

much of our lives for our own good.

 While you are at it, forward it to your kids so they will know

how brave (and lucky) their parents were.

 Kind of makes you want to run through the house withscissors,

doesn't it?!

Received this in an email - I don't know the original source.

USA For Africa - We Are The World

Wow - it was so refreshing to see all these people at one time again.


Some I don't even know who they were.


A few are no longer with us.


This is a far cry to what the world is singing about today.


I can see this happening again for a cause.  The spirit of giving.

Why Spitzer Was Bushwhacked

Mar 20, 2008

The spectacular and bizarre release of secret FBI wiretap data to the New York Times exposing the tryst of New York State governor Eliot Spitzer, the now-infamous client "No 9", with an upmarket call-girl had relatively little to do with the George W Bush administration’s pursuit of high moral standards for public servants. Spitzer was likely the target of a White House and Wall Street dirty tricks operation to silence one of the most dangerous and vocal critics of their handling of the current financial market crisis.

A useful rule of thumb in evaluating spectacular scandals around prominent public figures is to ask who might want to eliminate that person. In the case of former governor Eliot Spitzer, a Democrat, it is clear that the spectacular "leak" of the government's FBI wiretap records showing that Spitzer paid a high-cost prostitute US$4,300 for what amounted to about an hour’s personal entertainment, was politically motivated.

The press has almost solely focused on the salacious aspects of the affair, not least the hefty fee Spitzer apparently paid. Why the scandal breaks now is the more interesting question.

Spitzer became governor of New York following a high-profile record as a relentless state attorney general going after financial crimes such as the Enron fraud, and corruption by Wall Street investment banks during the 2002 dotcom bubble era. Spitzer made powerful enemies by all accounts. The former head of the large AIG insurance group, Hank Greenburg, was among his detractors. He was bitterly hated on Wall Street. He had made his political career on being ruthless against financial corruption.

Most recently, from his position as governor of the nation’s second largest state, home to its financial industry, Spitzer had begun making high-profile attacks on the complicity of the Bush administration in covertly arranging bailouts of its Wall Street friends at the expense of ordinary homeowners and citizens, all paid for by taxpayer funds.

Curiously, Spitzer, who had been elected governor in 2006, defeating a Republican by winning nearly 70% of the vote, has not been charged with any crime. However, the day the scandal broke, New York Assembly Republicans immediately announced plans to impeach Spitzer or put him on public trial were he to refuse to resign. Spitzer could be asked to testify in any trial involving the Emperors Club prostitution ring. But so far he hasn’t been charged with a crime.

Prostitution is illegal in most US states, but clients of prostitutes are almost never charged, nor are their names usually leaked in a case in process. The Spitzer case is in the hands of Washington and not state authorities, underscoring the clear political nature of the Spitzer "Watergate".

The New York Times said Spitzer was an individual identified as Client 9 in court papers filed last week. Client 9 arranged to meet with "Kristen", a prostitute who officially charged $1,000 an hour, on February 13 in a Washington hotel. Whatever transpired, Spitzer paid her $4,300, according to the official documents. The case is clearly political when compared with more egregious recent cases involving Republicans. Republican Mark Foley was exposed propositioning male interns in Congress and Rudolph Giuliani was discovered cheating on his wife, but no or few Republican calls for resignations were heard.

Why the attack now?

Spitzer had become increasingly public in blaming the Bush administration for the nation’s current financial and economic disaster. He testified in Washington in mid-February before the US House of Representatives Financial Services subcommittee on the problems in New York-based specialized insurance companies, known as "monoline" insurers. In a national CNBC TV interview the same day, he laid blame for the crisis and its broader economic fallout on the Bush administration.

Spitzer recalled that several years ago the US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) went to court and blocked New York State efforts to investigate the mortgage activities of national banks. Spitzer argued that the OCC did not put a stop to questionable loan marketing practices or uphold higher underwriting standards.

"This could have been avoided if the OCC had done its job," Spitzer said in the interview. "The OCC did nothing. The Bush administration let the housing bubble inflate and now that it's deflating we're dealing with the consequences. The real failure, the genesis, the germ that has spread, was the subprime scandal," Spitzer said.

Fraudulent marketing and very low "teaser" mortgage rates that later ballooned higher, were practices that should have been stopped, he argued. "When mortgages are being marketed, there is a marketplace obligation to ensure the borrower can afford to pay back the debt," he said.

That TV interview was only one instance of Spitzer laying blame on the Bush Republicans. On February 14, Spitzer published a signed article in the influential Washington Post titled, "Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime: How the Bush Administration Stopped the States From Stepping In to Help Consumers."

That article, laying clear blame on the administration for the development of the subprime crisis, appeared the day after his ill-fated tryst with the prostitute at the Mayflower Hotel. Just a coincidence? Spitzer wrote, "In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act pre-empting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative. The OCC also promulgated new rules that prevented states from enforcing any of their own consumer protection laws against national banks."

In his article, Spitzer charged, "Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye."

Bush, said Spitzer right in the headline, was the "predator lenders' partner in crime". The president, said Spitzer, was a fugitive from justice. And Spitzer was in Washington to launch a campaign to take on the Bush regime and the biggest financial powers on the planet. Spitzer wrote, "When history tells the story of the subprime lending crisis and recounts its devastating effects on the lives of so many innocent homeowners the Bush administration will not be judged favorably."

With that article, Spitzer may well have signed his own political death warrant.


F William Engdahl is author of the book Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation, about to be released by Global Research Publishing, and of A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order, Pluto Press. He may be reached via his website, www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net.

The corporate controlled media is finally starting to talk about the economic problems that the alternative media and assorted precious metals advocates have been talking about for years now. We are facing a potential inflationary depression. Independent estimates of the M3 money supply show that we are seeing an annual increase in the M3 money supply by around 16 to 17 percent. The Federal Reserve chose to stop producing this report right around the time when these figures began going parabolic on their chart showing a massive increase in the money supply. An increase in the money supply results in a devalued currency and that’s one of the primary reasons why we are seeing the price of gold flirt with the $1,000 an ounce mark and silver explode past the $20 an ounce mark. The U.S. Dollar Index is now treading water around the 72 to 73 mark and it is becoming increasingly clear that the role of the world’s reserve currency is shifting from the U.S. Dollar to the Euro. Some ask how low the U.S. Dollar could go and that answer is simple. The U.S. Dollar could go to zero because it is a fiat currency with no real tangible backing. Every fiat currency in the history of man has been replaced or collapsed and there is nothing fundamentally different between the U.S. Dollar and these other fiat monetary systems of the past.

            

The people who are in control of the private central banks that fix the value of the U.S. Dollar through their policies are monopoly men. The Federal Reserve consolidated much wealth during the Great Depression by intentionally making money scarce following the excesses of the roaring 1920s. Prior to the Great Depression there were many local community banks. Following the Great Depression the vast majority of banks were under the Federal Reserve’s umbrella. The Federal Reserve was assisted by FDR who had the nerve to blame gold hoarders for the economic problems even though the gold hoarders were only attempting to protect their hard earned wealth. As FDR used the gold hoarders as a scapegoat for the economic problems that were created by the Federal Reserve’s policies, he issued Executive Order 6102 which made any significant amount of gold ownership illegal. The government confiscated a large portion of the American people’s gold and in return issued them paper notes. Following the confiscation, the price of gold was revalued from $20 an ounce to $35 an ounce. The confiscated gold was melted down and hauled off to Fort Knox, KY. Bluntly, what took place during the Great Depression was a giant scam by FDR and the assorted controllers of the Federal Reserve to consolidate more wealth and power under this criminal banking system.

            

History is repeating itself. Instead of destroying the economy and consolidating wealth through monetary deflation, it looks as if the bankers have decided that they will use monetary inflation as their weapon of choice. Alan Greenspan encouraged member banks to loan out large quantities of money and encouraged individuals to get these loans by setting interest rates at absurdly low levels in the early part of this decade. By making money cheaper, more people went out and got loans and the bankers accommodated the increased demand for loans by providing all sorts of creative financing packages. These packages included adjustable rate mortgages, interest only loans and other risky financial instruments. The bankers knew that this would eventually create a major financial calamity later when interest rates moved higher. The Federal Reserve’s policies is what primarily created the crash in the U.S. housing market and it is disgusting that people are looking to this same institution for a solution to the mess they created in the first place.

            

There is no doubt that the Federal Reserve is the culprit behind the current housing market collapse. Instead of questioning Alan Greenspan for his mishandling of interest rates in the early part of the decade, Congress decided to hold hearings with mortgage company CEOs. These hearings were nothing more than a dog and pony show designed to place the blame of the housing crisis on these mortgage companies. Although these CEOs do have some responsibility in this mess, the primary responsibility rests with Greenspan because his policies encouraged this market behavior. Greenspan should have been at these hearings especially after he encouraged Arab nations to drop their pegs to the U.S. Dollar. Greenspan actually had the nerve to tell these Arab states that they are having inflation because they are pegged to the U.S. Dollar. This is a criminal act on the part of Greenspan and has undoubtedly played a role in the sharp decline of the U.S. Dollar.

            

It is entirely insane that we continue to put up with a private central bank that manipulates the value of our money. It is absurd to believe that we have a free market if there is a monolithic private bank fixing the price of our money. The free market should dictate what money is and what money isn’t and if the government issues legal tender it should be gold or silver as the Constitution demands.

            

As a result of the housing market crash created by the Federal Reserve, smaller banks are failing and being bought out by larger financial institutions. Ben Bernanke has even stated that there will be bank failures as this crisis continues to unfold. This engineered crisis will be used to consolidate more wealth and power amongst fewer corporations. The crisis is also destroying the American middle class financially as an increase in the supply of homes coming on to the market has resulted in a deflationary environment. This has made it more difficult for home owners to use their homes as piggy banks.

            

The collapse of the U.S. Dollar in the past couple of weeks has been spectacular. In fact, each day this week we saw the U.S. Dollar reach new consecutive new lows. At this point, global confidence in the U.S. Dollar is eroding and it cannot be considered a tangible investment vehicle. Many highly respected economists are predicting further problems for the U.S. Dollar with some predicting that an inflationary depression is right around the corner.

            

Weakness in the U.S. Dollar has further accelerated due to poor economic data. Generally statistics from the Federal Reserve and the U.S. government understate economic problems so some of this new data that is coming out is fairly disturbing. According to data released by these two institutions, home owner equity is at its lowest levels since 1945, consumer debt has grown to $2.52 trillion and employers slashed more jobs in February than in any other since 2003 These are not good signs at all and the figures are likely understating how bad it really is.

            

The Federal Reserve and the U.S. government will never be honest about what’s really happening in an economic downturn because these are the two institutions that people look to first when there are economic problems. The U.S. economy has conservatively been in a recession since 2006 and it has taken George W. Bush and Ben Bernanke until now to finally admit that we are having difficulties. These guys are a little late to the party. Of course, if these two men actually told the truth about the monetary system, the U.S. Dollar would likely collapse and millions of folks would descend on Washington DC demanding their heads on a platter. Either way, you aren’t going to get the truth from the Federal Reserve or the U.S. government on the economy. It isn’t in their interest to provide the truth.

            

In terms of gold and silver, we are likely going to see an increasing amount of price volatility with these two metals on a day to day basis. Short term, central banks are likely going to dump more gold into the marketplace in order to prevent gold from hitting the $1,000 an ounce mark. This is exactly what happened on Friday when a slew of bad economic data came out that would normally be bullish for gold. Instead, gold dropped sharply. The $1,000 an ounce mark represents a key psychological barrier that will likely be broken in the very near future. The central banks want to keep it under this mark as long as they can, because once it goes over this mark it is likely to move much higher. Long term, these two metals will see substantial gains in U.S. Dollar denominated terms. It is not out of the question to see a $5,000 an ounce gold price or a $100 an ounce silver price in the next several years.

            

The Federal Reserve is stuck between a rock and a hard place. If they raise interest rates to the point where holding U.S. Dollars can outpace inflation they would need to raise them to around 20%. This would hurt not only the American people but the elite financial interests as well. As a result, the Federal Reserve is attempting to manage a slow inflationary decline of the U.S. Dollar which will allow the financial elite to more easily reposition themselves. Inflation hurts the poor and the middle class far more than the financial elite where as a deflation like what we saw during the Great Depression would hurt everybody across the board.

            

As this financial calamity continues, the corporate controlled media will likely say we are in a recession even though it will resemble more of a depression. Gold and silver remain good hedges against inflation and their price will rise in U.S. Dollar denominated terms. There continues to be more upside to silver but there will also be more short term volatility in silver. There is no doubt that an inflationary depression is a very likely scenario and there is always the chance that the U.S. Dollar could go to zero. This is why having physical gold and silver is always a smart move.    

            

 

       03-09-2008 Lee Rogers RogueGovernment.com

I got this idea from the Matt and Ramona Show on 107.9. They have a show called Tirade Tuesdays.   People call in and tirade on something crazy that recently happened while shopping, on the road, at work; at home, anything that was just crazy and it pissed them off or caused them grief when they were in the right. It was for venting in a healthy humorous way. It would have me rolling in laughter.

Also Pacattack inspired me to do this on his recent tirade on people who drive slow in the left lane.

So if you have a legitimate tirade – post it here. It’s better if it’s fresh. It makes the tirade better. It's not a place to just complain about something and create negative energy. It has to be something that happened and the other person or situation has to be the crazy for it to be a legitimate tirade and you just want to vent. Not something that you just don’t like about people, or your negative opinion (especially politics) on something but a real event.   

Or nobody could be at fault - just something crazy that happened and you happened to be there. Like the fight that happened while I was standing in line at the grocery store and this old guy in front of me made a smart remark about the women who was checking out using a food stamp card and he said loud enough for everyone to hear that she should get a job. Needless to say what that women said to him and waited for him in the parking lot. Say what you thought, what you felt and make it laughable.

   

Example:   

I went to renew my personalized tag at the DMV and the clerk told me that someone else owned the tag and that it was attached to another vehicle– but get this - the owner was me. I told her that nobody else could possibly own that tag because I’ve owned it for 15 years. I’m thinking no please not today. I have somewhere else to go and after standing in line for 30 minutes.

Then she said that the records show that someone else owned it and she had to do what was showing in the computer. I asked her who and she said that she couldn’t give me that information, only that it was showing to be attached to another vehicle.   I told her that it use to be attached to another vehicle that I sold but that was years ago.

Then I asked her to call Raleigh and it took forever for her to get through and they showed the same thing and that someone was going to have to research it but I had to in the meantime fill out special papers to have the owner release it. I’m standing there with all the other people in line looking on – saying to the clerk but that owner is ME.

So I ended up having to put a temporary tag on my car until they figure out that the owner of the tag was me. What’s wrong with these people! I had to take a tag off my car that they said I didn’t own! I’m like just give me the freakin stickers people!

If that wasn’t bad enough someone had walked off with the screw drivers that they supplied to loosen the tags from the cars. I had to stand in the parking lot and ask strangers who drove up if they had a screw driver or knife to take the tag off. Finally there was a guy who had his tool box and I was able to replace the tag with the temporary one and had to stand back in line to turn in a tag they said I didn’t own.

 Employers slash jobs by most in 5 years

           

WASHINGTON - Employers slashed jobs by 63,000 in February, the most in five years, the starkest sign yet the country is heading dangerously toward recession or is in one already.

The Labor Department's report, released Friday, also showed that the nation's unemployment rate dipped to 4.8 percent as hundreds of thousands of people — perhaps discouraged by their prospects — left the civilian labor force. The jobless rate was 4.9 percent in January.

   

 Job losses were widespread, with hefty cuts coming from construction, manufacturing, retailing, financial services and a variety of professional and business services. Those losses swamped gains elsewhere including education and health care, leisure and hospitality, and the government.

   

 The latest snapshot of the nation's employment climate underscored the heavy toll of the housing and credit crises on companies, jobseekers and the overall economy.

   

 To provide relief to persistent credit problems, the Federal Reserve announced Friday additional steps to inject cash into the nation's financial system to keep banks lending to customers.

   

 The central bank will increase the amount of loans it will auction to banks on March 10 and March 24 to $50 billion each, up from the $30 billion apiece originally planned.

   

 The Fed also said that starting Friday it will enlarge another series of transactions, called repurchase agreements, so that they will pump a net total of $100 billion into the financial system at any one time.

   

 The Labor report also showed that the job losses suffered in January were worse than the government first reported. Employers cut 22,000 jobs, versus 17,000.

   

 It was the first monthly back-to-back job losses since May and June 2003, when the job market was still struggling to recover from the blows of the 2001 recession.

   

 The health of the nation's job market is a critical factor shaping how the overall economy fares. If companies continue to cut back on hiring, that will spell more trouble.

   

 "It certainly solidifies the notion that the economy has fallen into a recession," said Ken Mayland, economist at ClearView Economics.

   

 Friday's report was much weaker than economists were expecting. They were forecasting employers to boost payrolls by around 25,000. However, they were expecting the jobless rate to edge up to 5 percent. The reason why the jobless rate went down, rather than up, is because so many people stopped looking for work and left the labor force.

   

 Workers with jobs, however, saw modest wage gains.

   

 Average hourly earnings for jobholders rose to $17.80 in February, a 0.3 percent increase from the previous month. That was on target with economists' forecasts. Over the last 12 months, wages were up 3.7 percent. With high energy and food prices, though, workers may feel squeezed and feel like their paychecks aren't stretching that far.

   

 With the economy losing momentum, fears have grown that the country in on the brink of its first recession since 2001 or is in one already.

   

 Economic growth slowed to a near standstill of just a 0.6 percent pace in the final quarter of last year. Many economists predict growth in the January-to-March quarter will be worse — around a 0.4 percent pace. Some believe the economy is shrinking now.

   

 Spreading fallout from the housing and credit debacles are the main factors behind the economic slowdown. People and businesses alike are feeling the strains and have turned cautious. Adding to the stresses on pocketbooks, budgets and the economy: skyrocketing energy prices. Oil prices have set a string of record highs in recent days. Gasoline prices have marched higher, too.

   

 To help shore up the economy, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke signaled last week that the central bank is prepared to lower interest rates again. Economists predict another cut on March 18, the Fed's next meeting. The Fed, which has been slicing the rate since September, recently turned more forceful. It slashed the rate by 1.25 percentage points in the course of just eight days in January — the biggest one-month reduction in a quarter century.

   

 The White House and Congress, meanwhile, speedily enacted an economic relief package, including tax rebates for people and tax breaks for businesses. That — along with the Fed's rate cuts — should help give a lift to the economy in the second half of this year, says Bernanke.

   

 Still, unemployment is expected to move higher this year. The Federal Reserve predict the jobless rate will rise to as high as 5.3 percent in 2008. Last year, the unemployment rate averaged 4.6 percent.

   

 All the economy's troubles are putting people in a gloomy mood.

   

 According to the RBC Cash Index, confidence sank to a mark of 33.1 in early March, the worst reading since the index began in 2002.

   

 By JEANNINE AVERSA, AP Economics Writer

Do-over in Michigan and Florida?

By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer   

WASHINGTON - Officials in Michigan and Florida are showing renewed interest in holding repeat presidential nominating contests so that their votes will count in the epic Democratic campaign.

The Michigan governor, along with top officials in Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign and Florida's state party chair, are now saying they would consider holding a sort of do-over contest by June. That's a change from their previous insistence that the primaries their states held in January should determine how the their delegates are allocated.

Clinton won both contests, but the results were meaningless because the elections violated national party rules.

The Democratic National Committee stripped both states of all their delegates for holding the primaries too early, and all Democratic candidates — including Clinton and rival Barack Obama — agreed not to campaign in either state. Obama's name wasn't even on the Michigan ballot.

Florida and Michigan moved up their dates to protest the party's decision to allow Iowa and New Hampshire to go first, followed by South Carolina and Nevada, giving them a disproportionate influence on the presidential selection process.

But no one predicted the race would still be very close this late in the year.

Ironically, Michigan and Florida could have held crucial primaries if they had stayed with their traditional later dates.They may yet do so if they decide to hold new contests as Clinton and Obama compete to the wire.

Clinton has been insisting that the desires of more than 2 million people who cast Democratic ballots in the two states should be reflected at the convention, which would help her catch up to Obama in the race for convention delegates. Obama has said he wants to see the delegates from the two critical swing states participate, too, but not if Clinton is rewarded for victories in boycotted primaries.

Now the Clinton campaign has begun expressing openness to a do-over. "Let's let all of the voters go again if they are willing to do it," Clinton adviser Terry McAuliffe said Tuesday night on MSNBC. "Whatever we have to do to get people in the system, let's do it."

The new contests could be part of a strategy for Clinton to come back in the race and attract votes from superdelegates who are not bound by any primary or caucus votes, Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell told the network. "Let's assume for the moment Hillary Clinton wins Ohio and Texas, she wins Pennsylvania, Florida and Michigan have primaries in June, she wins both of those," said Rendell, who has endorsed Clinton. "Then, can the superdelegates look at that and say, `Gosh, she's won the last five big primaries in a row. She's won almost every big primary since we began.'"

Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, a Clinton supporter, told the Detroit Free Press that Clinton's victory in Ohio changes "the landscape a bit." She said it could open the door to a caucus, if it can be privately funded and both candidates agree.

Granholm, a Democrat, and Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, a Republican, issued a joint statement Wednesday demanding that their states' delegates be seated. "We each will call upon our respective state and national party chairs to resolve this matter and to ensure that the voters of Michigan and Florida are full participants in the formal selection of their parties' nominees," the statement said.

Crist told reporters at a news conference Tuesday that he does not support having another primary at taxpayer expense. He said he discussed the option with Sen. Bill Nelson, the state's senior Democrat. "He said the only way to consider the possibility of that is to have the Democratic National Committee pay for it," Crist said. The Florida Democratic Party said the state estimates the cost would be $25 million.

Getting funding from the national committee might be difficult when the party has a general election to wage. Last August, the DNC offered to spend $800,000 for a later caucus, but the Florida state party rejected the idea because the amount would have only been enough to set up 150 caucus sites for the state's 4.1 million Democrats. "It wasn't a real offer. It just wasn't. It was not something anybody could agree to with a straight face," said state party spokesman Mark Bubriski.

DNC Chairman Howard Dean issued a statement Wednesday that seemed to leave the matter for the states to resolve.

Dean said Michigan and Florida have two options: either submit a new plan for a process for choosing their convention delegates, or appeal to the Convention Credentials Committee, which resolves issues about the seating of delegates.

"The Democratic Nominee will be determined in accordance with party rules, and out of respect for the presidential campaigns and the states that did not violate party rules, we are not going to change the rules in the middle of the game," he said. Michigan Democrats are discussing holding a "firehouse" contest in May or June that would be an alternative to a traditional primary or caucus and run by the state party, said a Democratic Party official who has been part of the discussions. "Firehouse" contests usually have fewer polling places and shorter voting hours than traditional state-run primary elections.

The party official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions are private, said there was general consensus that it could not be held at taxpayers' expense and would attempt to generate participation from about 1 million state Democrats.

House and Senate Democrats from Florida and Michigan planned to meet Wednesday night on Capitol Hill to discuss ways of getting their state's delegates seated at the Democratic National Convention in Denver in late August, Democratic aides said.

Florida Democratic Party Chairwoman Karen Thurman said the party is open to another vote, as long as it meets three criteria. Both candidates would have to fully participate, a source of funding would have to be provided and it would have to allow all the state's Democrats to participate, including those serving in the military overseas. So far, she said, no suggested alternative has met those requirements.

"It is very possible that no satisfactory alternative plan will emerge, in which case Florida Democrats will remain committed to seating the delegates allocated by the January 29th primary," Thurman said in a statement.

Obama's campaign says whether to have a repeat contest is up to the national committee, but has signaled a willingness to participate. "We're going to abide by their rules as they exist now and whatever happens in the future," Obama campaign manager David Plouffe told reporters Wednesday.

"I don't think it's for our campaign or her campaign — we're in a heated contest here — to have to be the facilitators here," Plouffe said. "This is between the DNC and those state parties."

___ Associated Press writers Ken Thomas in Washington, Kathy Barks Hoffman in Lansing, Mich., and Brendan Farrington in Tallahassee, Fla., contributed to this report.

Excerpts from Tenaj’s 111 Minus:123 Plus Rundown Tutorial E-Book – Lottery Math Chapter

BASIC LOTTERY MATH

   

Lottery Math is the blueprint of the Minus 111: Plus 123 Rundown. It has its own math and is quite different from math as we know it. The math we've learned is infinite. It goes on and on and is innumerable; however, Lottery Math maintains a loop. It stays within the realm of 000-999, never going outside of it. The digits 0-9 wrap continuously. The count doesn't go past 9. In regular math 9+1 = 10; in lottery math, the digits do not go below 0 nor above 9 so 9+1= 0. This is what happens with the Rundown; the digits continuously wrap around each other, to form 3 digit numbers.

   

 

                                                                        

Minus 111	Plus 123
000	000
999	123
888	246
777	369
666	482
555	505
444	628
333	741
222	864
111	987
000	000

   

Left Column - Minus Side

First digit minus1 down,
Second digit minus 1 down
Third digit minus 1 down - continue in this manner until returning to original digit

Right Column - Plus Side

First digit plus 1 down, (0+1=0)
Second digit plus 2 down (0+2=2)
Third digit plus 3 down (0+3=3) thus giving 123 below 000.
Proceed as above until returning to 000 

Two important components of Lottery Math are the Mirror, and the Total. They play a special part in the Rundown.

 

THE MIRROR

This is a mirror chart. It is only two rows, but contains all 10 digits.

                              

0	1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9

   

Note each vertical pair; the digit directly below the top row digit is its' mirror and the digit directly above the bottom row digit is its' mirror. A good rule is to remember that each digit has one and only one mirror. The mirrored pairs are each other and completely interchangeable.

     

 

THE TOTAL

Subtract the number from 999 DO NOT CARRY!

  999            999

-444           -555

 555            444

The purpose of the Total is to turn over a number and send it back in the other direction. It's like going to the end and starting all over backwards. That is exactly what is happening many times when a workout is thought to stop working.

   

Even though it’s not necessary to understand the Rundown to do Lottery Math techniques - it would be helpful.  The following examples are not in the E-book but simple techniques that I’ve learned over the years that can be used as a workout of the last number draw.  Often you will see in past draw history that number drawn was a product of its Lottery Math.

 

Lottery Math Workout Examples

   

Numbers often travel in clusters comprised of the Mirror, Total, and Mate and very often the followers and relatives follow with no apparent reason.  But with Lottery Math you can put you hands on what’s most likely to follows by a simple Lottery Math workout that takes the number drawn and use the Mirror and Total in all of its scenarios.   

   

If you do these shortcuts to a number: The Mirror, Total, Mate, Total to the Mirror, Mate to the Number, Mate to the Mirror, Mate to the Total and Mate to the Total/Mirror then you have covered all basics to what it is associated with that number.  And if you use workouts like pairs, root sums, hot, cold etc.  It cuts down on choices and actually keeps you in the proper direction because Lottery Math keeps you in the loop that number is in.

   

Most often when a number draw in your state, you will see one or several of the Lottery Math in its recent history.

   

A Mirror – 456-901

Count five down on the original Rundown to get the Mirror. It is always located on the left (minus side) in the fifth position down. The Mirror to 000 is 555 and the Mirror to 456 is 901.

 

                                                                  

456	456
345	579
234	692
123	715
012	838
901	951
890	074
789	197
678	210
567	333
456	456

 

The Total for 456-543

 

But the shortcut is

999
456
543

 

Only Doubles Have mates

 

Six-Way Number

 

Tips

A Mate 223-332 - Transpose the double digits. (The two digits that are the same) example 665 is 556 and vice versa

   

  A Follower (or travels with) - 456-379,500 - a cluster is obtained through observing patterns and tracking

   

 A Cluster -116,166,074,106,401,726 - a cluster is obtained through observing patterns and tracking

   

Series Numbers – 012, 089,019,123, 234, 456, 678, 789, - numbers with consecutive digits- usually when you see one you will see the other.  Certain ones trigger the other.  Also, numbers outside the series trigger the series numbers as well and it doesn’t matter what state just as long as it hit the board.   

   

 
True Examples:

   

123/678 – 100 will trigger 678 vice versa

089/504/048/789/019

678/789

234/579/666/366

379/456,500

             

When you see posters calling numbers, don’t be envious – you can do it too – it’s no secret.  And when a number hit your state rather than saying “where did that come from” you’ll say “yes” I hit that.

Microsoft is finally growing up

With a new move to make its products work better with open source and its effort to buy Yahoo, Microsoft shows it wants to move into the present.

By David Kirkpatrick, senior editor

 

    cnnad_createAd("636629","http://ads.cnn.com/html.ng/site=cnn_money&cnn_money_position=220x200_ctr&cnn_money_rollup=technology&cnn_money_section=quigo¶ms.styles=fs","200","220");                      NEW YORK (Fortune) -- Microsoft is at a critical moment in its history and is taking brilliant steps to remake itself. Thursday's announcement that it would open itself up to far greater interoperability with other types of software, including open source, is the latest big move. But the bigger step is its $44 billion bid for Yahoo.

The crisis Microsoft (MSFT, Fortune 500) faces is multi-part: Google (GOOG, Fortune 500) continues to grow, lapping up the majority of revenue created by online advertising. Since such ads may someday be the primary source of revenue to pay for software, especially for consumers, that part of the crisis is grave. Microsoft has failed to build a massive online advertising business and has fared poorly in creating online services that capture the imagination of customers.

On the enterprise side, open source alternatives to Microsoft software, particularly in the back end of corporate infrastructures, have clearly diminished revenue growth. Finally, founder Bill Gates retires from his management role this summer, remaining part-time chairman of the board. But for all those challenges, the company remains a money factory, with 2007 net profits of $14 billion on revenues of $51 billion - a net margin of more than 27%.

So Microsoft needs to move beyond Gates and maintain profits, while segueing into a world filled with new and mostly unfamiliar competitors.

This week's move was a very canny step to neutralize the ability of open source to pull more business away from Microsoft.

In November 2006, Microsoft and Novell (NOVL) announced a historic partnership that aimed, among other things, at making Windows-family products work better with Novell's open-source SUSE Linux software. It was in part a response to customers outraged with how hard Microsoft makes it to get its products to interoperate with open-source software. A few months prior to the Novell deal, Microsoft had set up a Interoperability Customer Executive Council to placate big customers.

The Novell deal has been a success. Microsoft executives learned they can actually sell more products once it is easier to dovetail Windows with Linux.

This week's announcement takes the logic of the Novell deal to the next stage. It makes it easier for Microsoft's customers and competitors to modify its products for their particular needs - a longtime lure of open-source alternatives -as well as to more easily connect other sorts of software to Microsoft products.

So look at it as a canny response to market realities. It's a pragmatic realization that the days of true monopoly may be over, even as the company seeks to ensure that the days of dominance are not. (The deal is also, of course, a response to the continued prodding of never-satisfied regulators in the European Union.)

As recently as 2004, Microsoft Chief Research and Strategy Officer Craig Mundie was telling me open source was "socialism." But by the time I wrote a piece in Fortune two years later about the rising influence of new Chief Software Architect Ray Ozzie, it was apparent the company was moving in new directions.

That article explained the urgency with which Microsoft was treating the challenges of advertising and moving to the Web. "Put simply," I wrote, "Ozzie's assignment is to Webify everything: To intertwine Microsoft's entire product line - software for consumers, software for businesses, Xboxes, all of it - with the vast and ever-growing power of the Net."

Bill Gates did not participate in the announcement this week about openness. CEO Steve Ballmer spoke along with Ozzie, server head Bob Muglia, and General Counsel Brad Smith. I doubt that if Gates were still in charge of Microsoft it would be making such moves. He created the old world of "shrink-wrapped" software with superb success. The new coexistence with open source and the move to the Web present fundamentally different challenges.

Think of this week's opening up of Microsoft's proprietary software alongside its effort to buy Yahoo (YHOO, Fortune 500). That deal is intended, I believe, as much to prod Microsoft's culture toward a Web-centric mentality as to acquire powerful new advertising properties. Ozzie has had trouble getting the company to move as quickly toward the Web as he said it should in 2006. Spending more than $40 billion dollars signifies the company's seriousness much more than exhortations ever could. I suspect it will work. And recent alarms raised by Google execs suggest they worry it might.

Open source and Web software are Microsoft's two major challenges. As Gates departs, both are being addressed by the company's new leadership with creativity and deftness. The monopoly mentality no longer works. But Microsoft can still thrive in a world of cooperation.

Saudis Arrested for Flirting With Women

Published: 2/23/08, 5:06 PM EDT

     

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia (AP) - Saudi Arabia began interrogating 57 men Saturday who were arrested after allegedly flirting with women in front of a shopping mall in the holy city of Mecca, a local newspaper reported.

The country's religious police arrested the men Thursday night, alleging behavior that included dancing to pop music blaring from their cars and wearing improper clothing, according to the Okaz newspaper, which is deemed close to the government.

The Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice runs the religious police, who are charged with enforcing Saudi Arabia's strict Islamic lifestyle.

Its members patrol public places to make sure women are covered and not wearing make up, the sexes don't mingle, shops close five times a day for Muslim prayers and men go to the mosque and worship.

The police - informally known as the muttawa, literally "enforcer" - don't wear uniforms. But they are recognizable by their long beards and their robes, shorter than the ones normally worn by Saudi men. They also shun the black cord that sits atop the headdress worn by most Saudi men.

Women in Saudi Arabia are required to wear a long, enveloping black cloak called an abaya and to cover their hair with a headscarf.

The newspaper report said the men who were arrested Thursday could be released if they could prove they did not flirt with any women. Otherwise, they will be transferred to court and stand trial, the paper added.

     Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

This article has embedded links on the site where you see numbers for farther explanations. This is the URL.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Economy/wm1778.cfm#_ftn1

                                                                         

A bipartisan deal on a stimulus package has been reached between House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D–CA) and House Minority Leader John Boehner (R–Ohio). The package reportedly includes tax rebates for wage earners and tax cuts for businesses.[1] Certain elements would boost the economy both in the short- and long-term, but other elements would do little and should not make the final cut in any stimulus package. As the agreement is being reported by the media, its positive aspects are tax cuts to boost business investment and a rejection of new government spending. The negative aspects are refundable rebates that function more as handouts than stimulus, no new tax cuts that could be returned as a rebate, and an expanded government role in the housing market. The Good The best part of the agreement is tax cuts for businesses. "Bonus depreciation," which allows companies to rapidly deduct qualified investment from their tax liability, makes new investment opportunities more profitable and attractive. This provision would increase business investment, which would create jobs and strengthen the economy. An even better approach would have been to extend the pro-growth elements of the 2003 tax cuts, which reduced taxation of capital gains and dividends. Those tax cuts and the bonus depreciation helped spark the economy in the latter part of 2003. Since investment is forward-looking, many businesses are in the process of making investment decisions for 2011 and beyond. Permanent reductions in the cost of capital would help the economy by eliminating the uncertainty that businesses face when making investment considerations. Business investment was flat in the second quarter of 2003 but grew by 3 percent and 5.1 percent, respectively, in the third and fourth quarters after passage of the 2003 tax cuts. The increase in business investment reversed the trend of the earlier three quarters, when investment declined by 6.5 percent, 3.8 percent, and then grew at 0 percent, respectively. In the quarter immediately following the 2003 tax cuts, the economy began to add jobs, and job growth has continued every month since. The stimulus package appears to have rejected some of the additional spending that many politicians wanted. A number of new spending proposals, from bridges to renewable energy, were described as stimulative. Because the government is running a deficit, funds for new spending must be borrowed from domestic savers (which reduces investment spending) or from foreigners (which reduces net exports). There is little reason to trust politicians to make the right public investments. It is better to reduce tax rates and let businesses, families, and markets decide on the most productive way to spend money. Also, the new stimulus package does not extend unemployment insurance (UI) benefits. Extending unemployment benefits does not stimulate the economy as some politicians assume. Instead, it reduces the incentive of workers to look for a new job. Studies are almost unanimous in concluding that extending UI leads to workers staying unemployed for longer periods of time. UI also encourages employers to wait longer to hire workers after temporary layoffs. Also, extending UI does not increase consumption as expected. When workers get additional benefits, they do not spend their personal savings, and spousal earnings fall. Only 50 cents of each dollar spent on UI funds new consumption. The UI system is designed to cushion the pain of losing a job, not to improve the economy. Studies find that it has, at best, a modest effect on economic growth. Like most legislation, the stimulus bill is likely to become increasingly expensive as it makes its way through Congress. Lawmakers sensing a "Christmas tree" bill are likely to each demand their own spending ornaments in exchange for their votes. As sound economic policies take a backseat to political expediency, taxpayers will be left funding a massive increase in government (and future taxes) that does little to stimulate economic growth. To avoid that scenario, responsible lawmakers must draw a line in the sand and reject any new spending initiatives from being added on the House and Senate floors. The Bad One of the key components of the package is a targeted rebate that is refundable against payroll taxes. Proponents of rebates believe that people would quickly spend their rebates, thus providing a short-term boost to consumption and the economy. However, traditional economic theory holds that rebates have limited impact unless recipients believe their permanent income will increase. The rebate would also do little to change incentives to work or invest; thus, it would not be effective in boosting long-term economic growth. Tax rebates and similar cash transfers don’t stimulate the economy. The federal government cannot just wish new purchasing power into existence. The government must borrow the funds for the rebates, which means either less money available for investment or an increase in the trade deficit. In the fall of 2001, the government attempted a rebate in the form of an advance payment of the 2001 tax cut. A survey of rebate recipients found that less than a quarter of households planned to spend their rebate.[2] Most respondents said they would use the rebate to pay down their debt. A different study of the rebate found that spending over the next year did increase by approximately one-half to three-fourths of the rebate.[3] But it is possible that this relatively high amount of consumption occurred because the rebate was a pre-payment of a larger tax cut that some taxpayers might have considered permanent.[4] Unlike 2001, the rebate in the new stimulus agreement is not attached to a larger, long-lasting tax cut that could alter incentives to work or save more. Individuals would likely see the rebate as a temporary addition to income, in which case they would be more likely to save it or pay down debt. Supporters of rebates believe that low-income households are more likely to spend their rebate. However, two recent studies of the 2001 rebate and the 2003 rebate challenge that notion. A Joint Tax Committee report states that the 2001 study "found no evidence that low income individuals were more likely to spend their rebate."[5] More surprisingly, a Federal Reserve Board study found that households with an income of more than $100,000 were more likely than households with less than $30,000 to spend the 2003 child tax credit rebate or to spend more of the reduced tax withholdings in a paycheck.[6] In reality, the rebate appears to be little more than a targeted government handout for low-income Americans, dressed up as a stimulus. A more disturbing aspect of the package is a provision that will allow the federal government to get even deeper into the residential finance market by being able to acquire more mortgages. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—companies that are given extensive, special privileges by the federal government—would be allowed to purchase more expensive home mortgages valued at up to $725,000, which is well above the median home price. The government should be reducing its role in the mortgage market instead of expanding it and crowding out private companies. Conclusion The stimulus package has one element that would contribute to both short-term stimulus and long-term economic growth: the business tax cuts. Also, Representatives Pelosi and Boehner deserve praise for resisting, thus far, the urge to load up the agreement with all sorts of new spending programs. Such spending would increase the deficit and would have little impact on economic growth. However, the provision that allows government-sponsored mortgage companies to buy more expensive houses is misguided. A stimulus bill is not the place to expand government interference in the economy, bail out banks that make bad loans, or pile on unrelated new spending. Congressional leadership should resist any attempts to do so. Instead, they should focus on pro-growth policies. The bonus depreciation proposal is the strongest part of the agreement and should be strengthened by extending current tax rates on dividends and capital gains and indexing capital gains. While a tax rebate may be inevitable at this point, the public should recognize that this rebate is poorly targeted and would not have a significant effect on the economy. Rea S. Hederman, Jr., is Assistant Director and Senior Policy Analyst in the Center for Data Analysis at The Heritage Foundation. [1] Andrew Taylor, "Tax Rebates Deal Announced," Associated Press, January 24, 2008, at http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080124/ap_on_go_co/ economy_stimulus;_ylt=AiZy737sR1oVn6od2Za.lXqs0NUE. [2] Matthew Shapiro and Joel Slemrod, "Consumer Responses to Tax Rebates," American Economic Review, 2003, Vol. 93, No. 1, pp. 274–283. [3] David S. Johnson, Jonathan A. Parker, and Nicholas S. Souleles, "Household Expenditure and the Income Tax Rebates of 2001," American Economic Review, Vol. 96 No. 1 (December 2006), , pp. 1589–1610. [4] Joint Tax Committee, "Overview of Past Tax Legislation Providing Fiscal Stimulus and Issues in Designing and Delivering a Cash Rebate to Individuals," January 21, 2008. [5] Ibid, citing Shapiro and Slemrod. [6] Julia L. Coronado, Joseph P. Lupton, and Louise M. Sheiner, "The Household Spending Response to the 2003 Tax Cut: Evidence from Survey Data," 2005–32, July 25, 2005, at http://www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/ feds/2005/200532/200532pap.pdf(January 24, 2008).

 

 

Watch this police chase - it pauses for a second but keep watching.  This is wild.  Other people could have gotten hurt.  I know the guy trying to get away is a jerk but should the police have chased him to the extent where others could have been killed?

They had a helicopter overhead and had him in view. They could have called ahead and said - head him off at the path, rather than chase a fool going 100 miles an hour going the wrong way.  How would you liked to have been one of those people he almost hit.

http://www.wsbtv.com/video/15314851/index.html

Anti-Semitic Note Attacks Tenn. Lawmaker

Published: 2/14/08, 2:06 PM EDT
By WOODY BAIRD

     

MEMPHIS, Tenn. (AP) - Steve Cohen, a white congressman representing a mostly black district, is no stranger to political attacks tinged with race. A new political flier circulating in the district is forcing him to confront anti-Semitism, too.

The flier, which showed up in mailboxes this week, aims to rally black Christians to oppose Cohen because he's Jewish. "Memphis Congressman Steve Cohen and the Jews hate Jesus," the flier reads in bold letters.

The origin of the flier was unclear, but Cohen said he worried it was a sign of more nastiness to come during the campaign. It urges voters to unite behind "one black Christian to represent Memphis in the United States Congress in 2008."

"It was very bizarre," said Cohen, a first-term Democrat.

Cohen is the first white congressman from Memphis in more than three decades. Nikki Tinker, a black lawyer expected to be Cohen's chief opponent for re-election in the Democratic primary in August, said she was incensed by the anti-Semitic attack.

"My faith teaches me to love, not hate," said Tinker, who is Christian.

The Anti-Defamation League issued a statement from Atlanta describing the flier as an attempt "to incite tension between the Memphis African-American and Jewish communities."

The flier, which was also sent by mail to the Memphis Jewish Federation, included a contact name, the Rev. George Brooks, and a phone number in Murfreesboro, a town near Nashville and some 200 miles outside Cohen's district.

A woman who would only identify herself as a friend of Brooks answered a call to the number and said he was out of town. Repeated subsequent calls went unanswered and messages were unreturned.

Cohen easily won the 2006 general election in the heavily Democratic district, but he took a crowded primary with just barely 30 percent of the vote. Four black candidates split almost 60 percent of the vote.

Cohen's most vocal opposition has come from critics arguing that the Memphis district, which is 60 percent black and 34 percent white, should have a black representative in Washington.

Cohen was challenged last year at a meeting of the Memphis Baptist Ministerial Association as being unable to represent the 9th District because of his race.

"He's not black, and he can't represent me. That's the bottom line," one pastor told the local newspaper as the raucous meeting broke up.

The Rev. O.C. Collins, a member of the ministerial association, later invited Cohen to speak at his church as a way to apologize for the group's "impoliteness."

Collins said he wondered why a preacher from another part of Tennessee would care about the Memphis election or launch such a distasteful attack. But he said the anti-Semitic flier is unlikely to sway Memphis voters and the racial arguments will have limited success.

"It stinks. It really, really stinks," he said. "But I think the people Congressman Cohen represents are a whole lot smarter than some people are giving us credit for."

     Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.