Gene's CoffeeTalks


Dates: July 2002-December 2003
From: "GZarwell" <1GZarwell@gmail.com>


Subjects below:


Military Terminology

Sunday Morning Quarterbashing

What Republican Party?

Democrats and the law

Gun Control

An Issue that may/may not Stick

The Pledge to what---

Smell the roses

Provocations to Ponder

Comments to ponder

Military Intelligence Exploited

Addendum to "Military Intelligence Exploited"

New definition

Bob Kerry - Presidential Candidate or Traitor

News media - when will they learn

Left-Overs or…

Your homework assignment

Ted Kennedy

Kennedy Hindsight - left by the horse's...

Not to discredit

Marital Rights

Vulnerable or stupid

Soros & Governors

Dingbats and Camel Dung

Eliminate Pencils - Keyboards are safer

Re:








Back to Subjects
Coffeetalks 2004


Message: 5
   Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 12:47:51 -0500
   From: "GZarwell" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: Sunday Morning “Quarterbashing”

Et al.:

I don’t know which is more dangerous – Sunday morning quarterbashing on White House policy or Monday morning quarterbacking on NFL football.  Golf on the other hand is safe. It’s an individual sport.

It seems that Sunday morning quarter bashers don’t understand teamwork and the Monday morning quarter backers don’t understand team sports.  In one we work hard to have 7-man squads win globally to protect life from death with as little assets an resources possible; and the other one to have an 11-man squad move a ball 100 yards with a lot of energy.  See, in golf we use odd-looking hammers to move a really small ball up to an eighth of a mile with as little energy as possible.

John Kerry hit the nail on the head but he should hit his head instead.  Quoting him that “campaign 2004 is all about who can be President” is seriously wrong.  This is not a personality race.  It’s about national and world issues.  He says, “he hit the ground running”, but he’s slipping as is his nemesis Howard Dean.  They should keep running right over to Iraq where both their expertise would be welcome with or with out public funding.

Dean says he doesn’t need public monies and Kerry says Dean doesn’t understand the Democratic way of campaigning– “use all the taxpayer monies you can get without a return to the taxpayers”.

He claims that Clinton’s (lies about his) budget was good for the country (even if it the books showed it was fraudulent) and Kerry condones it.  Good leadership Senator.  Sharpen wants your wife.

Kerry truly believes in the Washington ATM machine. 

Why does Senator Kerry cry like Senator Lieberman about campaign politics?  They both sound like they’re using petty schoolgirls tactics now called “bullying”.  They really establish in our youth’s minds that concept of “Adult leadership” and we all know the jokes about that subject.

Kerry’s policies are baseless.  He has no clue about the global politics and ethnic conflict, or about cultural differences over the ages.  He wants Democrats to stand together and lie about the world situation and the insecurity of our homeland as though it’s an issue for discussion. 

Duh! Senator – it’s an issue of survival and prominence.

He stated that 250,000 people gave up looking for work this month because White House policy in growing the economy isn’t adding enough water to instant mix.  He said, “There are 200 people looking for one-job”.  It sounds like the slate of presidential candidates on the Democratic primary ballot.  Kerry should follow the lead of the other 250,000 looking for that job who obviously couldn’t sell themselves either.

Making the Confederate Flag a campaign issue isn’t even funny let alone something major politicians should be concerned with.  The Confederacy fought hard for their ideals and lost.  Many families have the same feelings about their legacy, as do the Jews about the Holocaust, the British about the American Revolution and Americans about the French and Germans.  Those are not issues in today’s politics.  They are historical events and no one can change history – we just don’t have to repeat it.

Flying the United States Flag is the people’ right not a Government imposition.  People can fly whatever flag they want and if others want to impose their distorted views to make an issue it’s their right – just don’t be bothered.  Just because someone has bad morals, its not contagious even if they use innuendo.

Why do we have gangs in the cities anyways?  They have their symbols and they learn from those before them how use that power.  The very same reason union leadership and flag wavers get behind mavericks –access and understanding through fear.

By the way, Kerry claims he has 35 years experience spending “pork barrel” compared to Howard Dean’s four-years as Governor.  I wonder who could outspend the other.  Seems the doctor has the right medicine and credentials to out-spend the Senator.

Kerry claims that most Democrats don’t want to spend US dollars on Iraq redevelopment because US firms are being paid to do it.  Or was he implying he wanted to be involved with those contracts to get a piece of it.  Kerry seems too disjointed to make sense under Bob Schieffer's pressure.  The gentleman host couldn’t get a straight answer out Kerry in the 12-minute segment.  Think about what Tim Russert would do to him.

On another note-Senator John McCain started out with a bold perception about misaligned force structure in Iraq that he wiggled out of in favor of support for the President.  He based all of his criticism using projections six-months out without any concern for accomplishments by our troops who are organized and trained to reach those certain goals earlier then March.  I guess he lost perspective as a POW.

McCain doesn’t even qualify as a Sunday morning quarter basher because he isn’t even considering what the team has done.  He obviously got a lot of free airtime for nothing constructive.

It should be noted that the solution to McCain’s approach is to reestablish the draft so the “Reservists” (backup troops) don’t have to shoulder the war – that takes money and more so, guts, to tell Americans that they all have a responsibility to their country.  Right now, perceptions are “that providing security, jobs, and economic benefits comes from someone else – not me!” (It’s how most young people see their loyalty to the United States – and by the way there are more of them concentrated in the Congress and the media negatively influencing American loyalty than anywhere else).  How do these people get there?

The voters elect them because they don’t think “one-vote” matters until we’re attacked or it affects their pocketbooks and investments.  Those in Congress sold their lack of values and their understanding of the Washington ATM machine to bring federal dollars back to their states with the idea it would save jobs, provide security, but it cost Governor’s their militia, their internal security, and respect of their citizens to raise monies needed to pay state bills.

By the way there is nothing wrong with the draft.  It should never have gone to a lottery – there’s that word again – risk of some and benefits to a few.  Slots for pay – the right kind in military units where they provide a benefit- training, awareness and self-defense skills.  WOW!  All that in two to six years!  Think of the power we’d have if everyone were sensitive to the needs of the country and not just their pocketbooks.

Now, the solution seems to be to tax the public’s Internet, set up gambling venues, and go to the well again and again for more pork out of the Federal budget and blame the President for their failures as long as someone else pays for it.

Anyone in Politics ever consider available assets to create programs?  Not everything is resolved by throwing money at it.  I can tell you stories of how I achieved fantastic results will very little use of promissory notes {money}.  I’ll tell for you “one-vote”.  Just go to www.gzarwell.us/one-vote.htm.
Gene

Back to Subjects


Message: 1
   Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 19:29:26 -0500
   From: "GZarwell" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: Military Terminology - Not just sexy enough for the media

Et al.:

It seems the liberal media is having difficulty with military terms.  Canadian expatriate Peter Jennings makes light of the Operation Nomenclature probably because he believes the Titles created by the Mickey Mouse Network ABC promotion department, who are far more adept at sensationalism and come up with really poignant titles for their stupidity when dealing with serious subjects.

 Do you think that Peter is creative?  He’s not nearly as creative as Dan Rather who makes up the entire story, not just the title. 

 So, Mickey has too come up with things like “Election 2004”- A vote for liberals who cannot understand commitment but want recognition for Treason”, or how about “Challenger – The Last Flight”.  Or, maybe “Bush Wins – Donkeys can’t count!”

Let’s face it- when it comes to fiction, network news teams has it down pat.

For every time the network anchors comment on the stories rather than report the facts, they should assess taxes for the additional cost of government to correct the misstatements.  Just like they and the unimaginative Democrats who want to go after charities who have the good heart of a Republican Senator who says, “ I don’t need the funds but they do”. 

I know another candidate who doesn’t want contributions in excess of the minimum reporting amount so that Democrats cannot add contributors to the retribution list.  Only they who think in terms of fraud as do the Democrats would want to go on an offensive to quash charity if they cannot get a piece of it.

Why is it that when someone contributes to a Republican, or a charity of his choice the Democrats want to send the IRS to his door?  Their extortion to avoid that fraudulent harassment is contributions to them.  Mike Miller can attest to that.

They would rather you give your money to them so they can give it to whomever they want to give it to – “kinda” like Mikulski and Hillary whose only charity is their pocketbooks and those of their “pork bellied” friends.  In Maryland you can get government money from your democratic relatives if you vote for them or they get an appointment to work in a funding agency like Social Services, Transportation or the judiciary or they’re dead but no one reported it. That's just the facts "ma'm".

I guess Geraldo hit a nerve with his reports about our troop successes in Iraq.  That seems to be the motivation for Peter Jennings to go to war in Viet Nam where he can disgrace the Americans again.  After all he was a combat reporter for the highly conservative Canadian BBC or was it ABC before the mouse tracks led him to…

I’m sure Dan Rather will be able to create a news story to counter the success that “ABC’s only professional” – Peter can fabricate and promote to further disarm the soldiers securing Iraq.

So, we all have be careful when someone tries to sell us something we don’t want or need – when they do that it usually benefits only them. 

When the network anchors finish with their caustic misstatements of reality, we’ll be left with the “Tab” and they’ll complain about the cost to American taxpayers.  It would cost less if they would just get in step with the facts and not try to sensationalize everything to boost the wealth and ratings.
Gene
Asks you for "one-Vote"
301.262.5064
 www.gzarwell.us/senate.htm

#Back to Subjects


Message: 4
   Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 09:15:02 -0400
   From: "GZarwell" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: dingbats and camel dung

et al.:
This story kind of tells it all.

Those criticizing the President's pre-emptive strike, should get
their heads out of the Camel Dung.

When I read this account of the planning, I shuddered knowing that I had
been in Singapore at the time they made the plans.  I was enroute to Perth
with a long layover.

If any of those seeking the Presidency don't have military experience or
training, they should be eliminated from the mix.  However, Military
experience alone is not enough to lead the free world in the global
environment we have helped create.

The President has what it takes - corporate, business, military, and
political.  He needs more Senators with similar experience.

Not many other candidates have that or many members of the Congress and the
media.  To give the government assistance to those who need it is not enough
to ward off those who are willing to take it all away from us.

George W. Bush went through Officer training to understand the seriousness
of planning for defense and offense.  Thank God he took the offense or both
coasts would be in ashes.

Our economics and our standard of living would not be where it is if we
didn't protect it.  This is something the Clinton's never understood.  What
would have happened if the Al-Qaida could've gotten their act together when
they started in 1995?   Their objective was to undo the last 5 decades
of growth and dismantle the global financial network.  It has very little to
do with American "pork barrel spending" by dingbat "pork bellies".

Gene
Asks you for "one-Vote"
301.262.5064
 www.gzarwell.us/Senate.htm 

#Back to Subjects


Message: 5
   Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 19:01:50 -0400
   From: "GZarwell" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: Vulnerable or stupid

et al.:
Why would a Congressman or Senator criticize a vulnerability test?

(1) If Democrat - to take a cheap shot at the President and his security policies.
(2) If naive - to show how stupid they really are.

Let's analyze a vulnerability test.  It is designed to find the weaknesses in a system or procedure.  It fails when it doesn't find a perceived problem.  It is successful if it uncovers a "vulnerability" and in most cases results in addressing a remedy to the perceived problem.

So, what the latest vulnerability test showed was that Congressmen and Senators still cannot support a security policy and are willing to compromise our security for their personal gain.  We need to get rid of them before they make it easier to kill all of us.  It takes a vote.
Gene
Asks you for "one-Vote"
301.262.5064
 www.gzarwell.us/Senate.htm 

#Back to Subjects


Message: 1
   Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 08:51:22 -0400
   From: "GZarwell" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: Not to discredit

et al.:
While serious political leaders address important issues with sensitivity to all, Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barbara Mikuski seem to be out of step and self serving.

Presidential candidates and the current President all decided that the people should have the day, September 11, focused on their lost loved ones.  I agree.

It is not a day for Political figures to determine that their words are more important the families' thoughts and memories.

However, there was one voice that didn't honor the day - Senator Hillary Clinton from New York who just isn't dignified enough to pass up an inappropriate moment to be quoted at Ground Zero.  There she stood representing "Zero" before the New York Skyline spouting off nonsense about what should be rebuilt at Ground Zero.  Obviously self serving.

I would expect that from locals Doug Duncan, Barbara Mikulski, Paul Sarbanes and Paris Glendenning to do something like that, but alas there was no incident in Maryland that day.  Remember them from their self serving Sniper press show instead.

On the other note: When private sector professionals and employees of a majority of our nation's businesses are cutting costs, dissolving jobs because of the knee jerk reactions caused by the media spin to Congress' failure to protect our economy, Senator Mikulski claims a victory to spend more of productive workers tax monies to pay her non productive constituents.

Now, I have nothing against giving pay raises to Federal employees when the playing field is equal.  I remember about 15 years ago when the Federal Employees Union wanted parity with the private sector, Now they get a 4.1% pay raise when others are losing their pay and tax revenues are needed for the security of all and to build a private sector business economy.  Where's the feeling of parity today?

She chides the President for putting priority on Security that results in a deficit, but deepens the deficit with her attention to increasing pay for her constituents who for the most part are embarrassed by the fact they get a pay raise when their private relatives and friends lose their jobs.

It seems rather self serving for Mikulski to push for more of our tax payer's money for a non-productive sector of the economic food chain.  It would have more honorable to put the emphasis on parity and try to strengthen the economy than to invest (spend) more money in the non-contributing tax base.  After all, their salaries come from our taxes and their taxes merely don't count because it is another 6.7 - 28% more that we pay to them so they can rebate the government under the guise of income taxes.

Her justification - it is only equivalent to two weeks in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Hopefully it won't be the two weeks terrorists decide to attack our Nation again.

The solution would be to cut Federal employee income taxes out of the payroll and pay 28%  less payroll.  Then lets talk about pay raises in step with the private sector.  If 6.2% private sector is unemployed, where is the parity?  Government should be only those whose jobs are considered essential  The others should be privatized so parity could be reached.
Gene
Asks you for "one-Vote"
301.262.5064
 www.gzarwell.us/Senate.htm 

#Back to Subjects


Message: 1
   Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 13:28:05 -0400
   From: "GZarwell" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: Ted Kennedy

et al.:
Where does Ted Kennedy, a Senator, get his qualifications to speak out about White House Policy?  He's never been in the military.  Hasn't had any private sector experience.  Is not a credible expert in anything but spending our money.   Doesn't have the courtesy to shut up and answer the questions asked.  Probably the reason why he doesn't practice law.  Doesn't contribute to the debate.  What can he do?  Drive?

Ask rhetorical questions and criticize with innuendo about matters he knows nothing about similar to an old man rambling about his long-lost worth.  This is what Democrats call responsive leadership!  Talk about crooks!

Seems they need another icon that isn't always looking for an exit strategy.  That's all we got from Bill Clinton.  Is Howard Dean their answer?  Heaven forbid.  Or, is Joe Lieberman going to cry his way through the primaries after Dick Gerhard realizing he stands for nothing hangs it up.

At least George W. Bush, The President, is responsible to the people to address them after the assessments are in.  When he told the terrorists he would take action, he did, much to International leadership surprise because in recent past incidents, US leadership never followed through when their bluff was called.  At least they know our President takes action - not idle threats.  And, yes through the ages there have always "spoils of war"  from cavemen to present.  George Bush's decisions will pay-off big time as each obstacle is addresses and overcome.

It is my firm belief that everyone who criticizes White House policy only weakens our resolve while contributing to terrorist resolves to do us in. 

Thanks guys, you're responsible for putting our troops in harms way.  Never, never, show your opponent your weaknesses.  It comes back to bite you in the ass.

From my experience with CENTCOM in the '80s, I learned you couldn’t assume logic when dealing with multicultural situations.  There are just too many traditions and language barriers to reach a common consensus.

In past candidate forums that I appeared in I was prepared to respond to 1500 issues.  What I learned was that you cannot assume two viewpoints because if there are 1,000 people in the audience, there are 1,000 viewpoints to every issue. You must listen and discern a common thread in order to assess the impact on the majority and not every individual's perception or misperception.

Governing is for everyone's benefit not just a few. And, some things, government should stay out of.

Patience pays off through analysis and experience to credibly assess the causes and effect with several courses of action based upon intelligence - something the Democrats lack big time.  Knee jerk reactions to media immediacy don't give the International community any sense of responsibility or stability in global leadership.  Media anchors know this and use their self-importance to create controversy to sell time or print for personal gain - any benefit to readers or viewers in inconsequential.  They're whole purpose in life is to destroy leadership in favor of chaos (I had to look up the spelling now that I work in 17 languages and phonetics in most languages give you multiple spelling options).

Speculation for sensationalism has no place in governing.  Kennedy doesn't seem to know that and his leadership shows.  He's a second fiddle.  What makes him think he should tell the President what to say about misinformed Democratic perceptions of "war"?   They all voted for it.  Now, there's heat and they want out of the kitchen - inedible and unpalatable stew!

By the way, does anyone really know how many in Congress have military or corporate leadership experience?  Not many and none in the media except the wannabe broadcasters - retired military who cannot prosper in private life and want to demonstrate their knowledge of outdated doctrine.
Gene
Asks you for "one-Vote"
301.262.5064
 www.gzarwell.us/Senate.htm

#Back to Subjects


Message: 1
   Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 11:39:50 -0500
   From: "GZarwell" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: Kennedy Hindsight - left by the horse's...

et al.:
Sunday morning quarterbashing from the guru (Senator Ted Kennedy) of misinformation on behalf of the left seems to always be the reverse side of issues when decisions should be made.  Touted as an intellect, he know blames the Republicans for not taking the actions he now believes they should've done earlier but in reality did.  He'd kill any good reasonable discussion with cover-up.  When the actions he discussed were on the table a year ago he was bashing them. Now, he is tryingto make peopel believe those ideas were never on the table.

But, earlier he didn't give his support to those actions which could've prevented going to war if global support had been encouraged.  Now, with a leftist debacle created, the same strategy proposed by the administration back then seems to be the solution now.

First Kennedy wanted the war, then he criticized the war and now he wants hindsight to be forthright.  Just like the Maryland Senate Delegation, they're always there on the wrong side at the wrong time but in time to get their face on TV after the hard decisions are made.

Kennedy should put his money up for grabs and not the taxpayers when he espouses higher rates for Medicare.  His doom and gloom predictions are exactly what he prescribes for the controversy.  He speaks for others as though he knows and yet he is speculating on ninety percent of his rhetoric.  Yes, rhetoric - comments that ask nothing and say nothing.

He claims the Medicare bill will be far more costly than just prescription drugs - and he is probably right after all the amendments are totaled up for projects that are 'left' from other i$$ues.

On Presidential politics he stammers like a nervous college debater.  Why can't Ted Kennedy ever answer the question that is asked instead of giving us his misperception of reality?  A question about Dean's electability turns into policy bashing at time when the economy is turning around. He goes back to the aftermath of the Clinton administration attempting to blame the current administration for the false and phony accounting -  sound familiar.  That whole era (1992-2000) was fraught with government and corporate fraud now being corrected.  I wonder who taught whom on how to defraud the population?

I noted that Bob Schieffer couldn't get Kennedy off his "highchair" soon enough onto another subject. 

Ted Kennedy's tribute to his two brothers was very solemn and touching.  Although he himself has no military experience or real business experience he credited his two brothers who did have some experience in security matters with foresight and giving, something he will never be able to do himself.

In follow up news programs I noticed, too, the sheep (anchors) followed the debacle as though they were on the inside when in fact their speculation seems to be directed by heresy of the weak kneed thinkers without military or private sector experience.  I'm assuming that its fair to speculate that  media reporters in public media never had  experience in the private sector.

Even Even Thomas admits his article on the workings of the administration is not completely truthful.  I never hear the media explore the reasons Russia and others were unsuccessful in Iraq.  Could it be they ran into the exact same tactical forces as the US troops are now running into.  And, the Russians finally gave up and went home. 

When we went into Kuwait we propositioned materiel for years beginning as early as 1983.  Do you think we didn't anticipate that Sadam Hussein didn't do the same?  Of course not, now we are finding those weapons that never existed being used against our troops and the media still insists their was no prior planning.  It has taken Russia over 10 years (my projection was 5-10 years in 1990 on Novesti TV) to overcome 70 years of Soviet Union.  Based upon that case study, it should take 4-8 years to establish a democracy by the people in Iraq after 30 years of Sadam Hussein and thousands of years steeped in the traditions from the years B.C.

Did all the media anchors and Squawk show hosts go to the Harvard school of media reporting according to law? (supposition presupposes fact and testimony doesn't necessarily have to be the truth as long a$ consideration is offered from both $ide$.)

Isn't that why Europe stepped in for the natural resources before the "well ran dry"?
Gene
Asks you for "one-Vote"
301.262.5064
 www.gzarwell.us/senate.htm

Back to Subjects


Message: 5
   Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2003 11:28:05 -0400
   From: "GZarwell" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: Eliminate pencils - Keyboards are safer with a delete key

et el.:
Sharpen your pencils on this one.

Its extremely dangerous to allow schools to enact laws that are enforced without opportunity for review when the courts with real judges cannot enforce the millions of laws restricting human behavior with professional policing organizations and the help of lawyers (officers of the court) who continually undermine the justice system.

I would say that it is not stupidity in Texas. Just a bad precedent to force kids to a standard that makes them think that in the real world adults uphold the law.  When they find out they can get away with stupidity as do grown ups, they too will lose faith in government as the protector of our rights and provider of our safety.

Stupidly struck at the Supreme Court and was ruled upon as the guidance to the lower courts. Remember all those Justices were lawyers at one time.  No wonder.

They are succeeding with that doctrine.  Perhaps if the schools feel the need to be strict with those who are supposed to be taught, the precedent should be set in the courts as an act of leadership and not the comedy it has become.

In a real court, I'm sure she could've paid off the magistrate to ignore the law - that's the precedent.  "Quoting school district lawyer Christopher Gilbert: 'If we vary from the rules, that's
when the rules fall apart."  He should know.  He probably drives over the white line when entering the expressway.  Was he paid for that wisdom?  Check his pockets, you'll probably find a long key with an electronic device embedded in it. It could be used to set off an bomb.
Gene Zarwell
Asks for your one-vote March 2.
www.gzarwell.us/senate.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stupidity Virus Strikes in Texas...Again

"Thirteen-year-old Christina Lough, a straight-A student at Garland
McMeans
Junior High in Katy, Texas, was ordered to attend a 'special
disciplinary
class' for seven days and stripped of her posts as president
of the student
council and the honor society. Her crime: bringing a pencil sharpener
to
school.

"Christian's mother, Sumi Lough, had brought the sharpener, a
two-inch blade
that folds into a small handle, from her native South Korea.
'District
officials said they had no choice but to follow their zero-tolerance
policy
to the letter,' reports the Houston Chronicle, quoting school
district
lawyer Christopher Gilbert: 'If we vary from the rules, that's
when the
rules fall apart.'"

- "Best of the Web," OpinionJournal.com, 10/22/03

( Editor's Note:  For those who might doubt that such stupidity
actually
exists or is based on "erroneous information," you can read the
original
story from the Houston Chronicle and judge for yourself at:
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/2171872 )

#Back to Subjects


Message: 2
   Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2003 21:25:55 -0400
   From: "GZarwell" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: Your homework assignment

et al.:
Do you have any idea why the Democrats blame the President for budget shortfalls?

Well, I don't either except that I'm quite sure they believe we cannot find out either.  It's easy to equate the deficits to "pork barreling" if you accept this assignment you too will find out who in Congress (they spend the money) is
responsible for the "out of budget" expenditures. 

We know that terrorism has taken its toll, but wait to see how much was stolen by your congressman or congresswomen.  You be the judge.

Your assignment should you choose to take it is to write, on personal letterhead, a request of the last two years list of non-essential amendments to all bills passed in Congress.  Then after receiving that list, note how many were not listed but appeared in the "Congressional Record" or ask your Congressman or woman to provide that information.

The time between your request and their answer will be your first clue as to whom abused the privilege of spending your money on their "pork barrel" friends.  Then total the amount of non-essential funding and compare with speculated deficits against any "real" increases in defense/security spending.  The difference will be astounding and there are names attached to each "pork barrel" line item.

If you do find out some facts that would interest all of us - send your findings to coffeetalks@yahoogroups.com.

Gene
Asks you for "one-Vote"
301.262.5064
 www.gzarwell.us/Senate.htm

#Back to Subjects


Message: 1
   Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2003 09:30:30 -0400
   From: "GZarwell" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: News media - when will they learn

Et al.:
This is commentary for the most part.

I woke up this morning to CBS news “morning show” announcing that more soldiers “were killed and the total is now 61 since President Bush declared the end of major fighting in Iraq in March”.  The reporter didn’t say that our troops were there because President Clinton didn’t have the guts to make tough decisions in the ‘90’s because his Monica distracted him.  Nor did she say that the economy was recovering from the Clinton years when false numbers were reported to deceive investors. Or, that the Bill went to Canada to avoid serving his country and failed to complete his Rhoads Scholarship at Oxford.

 However; the title “The CBS Morning Show” should’ve given me a clue that it was not really news and I should not expect it to be factual.

Perhaps the news media should begin to act a little more responsible.  Instead of always sensationalizing headlines and quickly following with their poll numbers of a small number of random believers in their misinformation they should wait for the vote in 2004.  Their partisan reporting should qualify for equal time under the FCC rules.  That means that Republicans should be able to get at least 2.5 hours of free TV airtime per day unless the democrats are paying the news writers and stations for the time.

 News teams should also restrain from asking those who had the responsibility and didn’t take it from commenting on what current responsible appointees are doing.  In most cases the speculation is misleading the public and opening doors to terrorist activities at home.  If those they interview had done their jobs when they had the chance, we wouldn’t be doing it for them now.

CBS is the network that let Dan Rather “get ahead at all cost” by fabricating truth in news reporting and whose leadership has made CBS the least credible.  Local anchors like smirking Gordon Peterson tout insider knowledge but cannot even identify the facts without spin. 

ABC is the network that places more entertainment value on the news and has its Canadian anchor Peter Jennings now an American after 30+ years receiving millions of U.S. Dollars espousing the network’s Mickey Mouse views.  Even local anchor Kathleen Mathews laughs through most stories while credible anchors like Ted Koppel and Maureen Bunion try to stick to the facts.  Why is Elizabeth Vargas always angry in her delivery of the “news”?

NBC anchors have lost their ranking in most minds and are the least watched thanks to its lead anchor Tom Brokow who cannot tell time.  The network has lost its decorum, sense of respect for their audiences while production values are lacking. 

Maybe each time one of the “Spokespersons” gets airtime to report on the news, they too should be introduced with a statement of their political affiliation and salary or annual income so the people can judge their legitimacy.  How many of them have had military experience (served their country)?  How many of them can conduct an interview without leading the “witness” and without putting their spin on the answer?”  How many of them are paid comparable to the viewers?

For instance:  A media introduction could be: “George Stephanoupolis, never elected to public office was politically active in Gebhart’s senate staff before his stint with the Clintons, resigned when the heat developed at the White House, was never in the military and earns millions of dollars to sensationalize the news where he has no responsibility to the American people for truth or accuracy”. He’s a talk show host!

And, how many times in a 30-minute newscast do you hear a sensational teaser for the weather and two commercials later they show you a map with no weather on it?  I guess they know why people turn into the news - to find out what the weather will be when they wake up the next day.

There was more news and less sensationalism when the FCC limited TV news to 10 minutes.  Now we get 18 minutes of commentary (spin), two minutes of news, and everything is sensationalized from a rainstorm west of the Shenandoah Mountains to reporting 90 times about the death of a Hamas leader.

You wonder why American soldiers die in Iraq.  Terrorists think its fair shooting American soldiers and they get global recognition weeklong.  After all, Iran, the Soviet Union, and Russia could not make a difference in Afghanistan or Iraq, during 3 decades.  American troops have been there only 6 months and run into media interference because it isn’t the Boy Scout jamboree reporters expected or the Rambo action movies they emulate in the edit suite.

Hold the “unelected” media responsible for their words and photo ops at the same level they hold America’s elected leaders.  All newscasts should have “commentary” banners across the screen when the language is more commentary rather than well-supported facts.  And, definitely identify in the graphic, the reporter’s name, political affiliation, military rank attained or alternative service to the country, and salary paid to give the viewing public a sense of why they say the things they “report”.  Is it profiling?  Probably, but they profile everyone they report on. 

We all know President George W. Bush is a combat pilot, is paid $200,000 per year, makes the tough decisions, and is a family man with successful business experience and was elected by the people in accordance with the rules.  Seven recounts and his lead extended.

Did Gore think he could change the rules after the vote?  We know Richard Daily did? 

Yes, there were 10,000 Florida votes that were not counted.  According to news reports I viewed in Australia, those votes weren’t ready to be counted until two days after the election.  Fox news had video of the guy still punching chads in a white box truck on Wednesday.  And, yes the Supreme Court ruled, but not to elect the President - to discredit the voter fraud by the Gore team.

I told you up front this is commentary, but not speculation.
 Gene
Asks you for "one-Vote"
301.262.5064
 www.gzarwell.us/Senate.htm

#Back to Subjects


Message: 1
   Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 12:20:54 -0400
   From: "GZarwell" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: Marital Rights

et al.:
I witnessed on the Sunday morning talk shows the rhetoric of Gay Marriages. Main reasons given seem to be those that can be resolved with a good attorney writing "Powers of Attorney" to a responsible partner.

Citing "Civil Unions" as an alternative to "Religious Marriages" suggesting that Men and Women who can produce offspring have an edge is ridiculous. 

The spokespersons for the gay movement seem to think that their children need to be protected for future benefits of inheritance because of a gay couples inability to produce flesh and blood offspring.

The whole discussion was one voice - monetary benefits for a select group of individuals using terms of discussion that would create controversy. 

Honestly, get off the soap box and see an attorney or write your own power of attorney from the text books and law books in the University and courthouse libraries. The discussion has no relevance in politics as is with most one-sided issues.

You cannot legislate human behavior - god-given or otherwise - all you can do is give guidelines and those are being challenged by the non-initiated.

The arguments they levy against the child bearing years vs. elderly divorcees comes from tax laws as well.  To protect their life-long earnings from HMO and Medicaid theft - divorce protects each spouse's share - at least under the law.

Yea! to George Wills on the matter.
Gene
Asks you for "one-Vote"
 www.gzarwell.us/Senate.htm

#Back to Subjects


Message: 6
   Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 10:29:15 -0500
   From: "GZarwell" < 11gzarwell@ccconline.net >
Subject: Bob Kerry - Presidential Candidate or Traitor

et al.
Senator Kerry obviously has Alzheimer's because he cannot remember the OATH of Office he took allowing him to represent the "Patriots" of the U.S. of A.. Instead, he is, very bold behind the doors of  a Peterborough, NH, Town Library.  Perhaps he should find Peter Arnett and see if he could get some air time in Baghdad or at least he should stand in the square facing the American Troops and give his oratory while Sadam Hussein cares for him like his own.

Do you think Sadam Hussein wants to be compared to our compassionate and caring President Bush?  A man with conviction and the power to stand up to those who threaten American lives around the world.

Where does that leave the Senator?  As another role model of the likes of Brutus, Judas, Arnold, or with Arnett and Rather?  Solid Presidential material???

Perhaps a recall vote, or impeachment from the Senate, or hanging!  Justifiable for putting our sons and daughters in the military at risk.

If the leaders of the Euro-world would have gotten behind our President's program, and the liberals who wanted to become human shields but ran when it looked evident that their role model was in jeopardy stood solidly behind our Leadership, there may never have been a war.

Showing support for the Sadam Hussein regime weakened the deterrence forcing the war to begin and put our soldiers, airmen, seamen, and Marines in harms way.  Confidently, we can rely on the honor, integrity, and values instilled in our Military to get the job done with as little harm to innocent citizens of Iraq.

Another observation of Kerry, he probably loses at poker cause he can't hold the cards long enough to bluff, and he probably forgets some strokes on his golf score since it takes memory and values to be honest among your peers.
Gene
410-741-0370
Go to www.gzarwell.us

#Back to Subjects


  Message: 2
   Date: Fri, 23 May 2003 13:01:18 -0400
   From: "GZarwell" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: New definition

et al.:
Heard on the news as defined by the liberals.

The tax break only applies to the "wealthy elite" - those people who pay taxes, duh!  Perhaps, Democrats aught to encourage their constituents to participate in that great American institution and they, too, would receive a tax cut.

Blowing wind or blaming others is another Democratic Party problem being touted by the media:  $Billion+ State deficits are caused by the White House, duh! 

If a State cannot govern within it's legislative budget guidelines, perhaps they should withdraw from the union as a "Sovereign" entity and become dependent Democratic Under Funded Financial Entities in our Republic Structure (DUFFERS), or they can manage their affairs to try to hold their seats in the legislature in light of their non-performance or fiduciary responsibility, but please quit blaming Republicans for over-spending and lack of fiscal restraint in their "Sovereign State".

Perhaps a stronger Central Government modeled after the Soviet Union would best suit the "Clintonesque" mentality or the Hillary attitude about class structure and dependence on the Federal Money Tree.  The leaves of which, by the way, come from the "Wealthy Elite" not from misstated policies of the "clown class of 2004" and is followers (media).
Gene 

Back to Subjects


Message: 1
   Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 12:24:34 -0500
   From: "GZarwell" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: Addendum to "Military Intelligence Exploited"

et al.
It's always important to have Tom Brokaw's stuttering and continuing play calls bringing in stingers' "color" to exploit the "like  radio coverage" of the Fourth of July fireworks, but without music.  Is it required in American journalism to broadcast their round table chatter of things past from those who were there years ago whole nothing is really happening on the battlefield except troops trying to arrive in Baghdad via war machinery. 

gene

#Back to Subjects


Message: 2
   Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 12:02:07 -0500
   From: "GZarwell" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: Military Intelligence exploited

et al.
It was great to read Anthony Cordesman's scariest thoughts.  His assessment of the battlefield is far from modern interpretation.

To listen to ABC's (Disney show) of babbling commentators lead by Canadian Peter Jennings is even scarier.  Their combined suppositions, speculations and inane commentary to fill time violate any ethical standard of journalism I learned at the University of Wisconsin. 

And, crying somber, traitor Dan's sensationalism over planes enroute and troop movements to Baghdad are about as urgent as learning the major grocery chains are out of toilet paper.  We need to know that he doesn't know what he is talking about and if he did he wouldn't disclose it.  How lame!  He fabricates war stories for sensationalism and even fained an anthrax letter because the source of those didn't send him one.  I think from listening to him, I believe he has a great future career in urban traffic reporting.

All three network news teams should think about their back seat analysis and quit disclosing their thoughts about military operations setbacks and as they say "failures."  If their tails were on the line they wouldn't disclose activities through their fabricated babble. If the news media would contribute the amount of money they spend to spin the war for payment of the war , there would no deficit.

As a former commander of several combat public affairs units, and a heavy hitter, policy officer at the pentagon, I find the loose interpretation and abuse of the privilege to report from the field has represented journalists as some kind of bad joke played upon Sadam Hussein.

Report on the war, but don't create it.

There is hope for media representatives in the field because they are "playing" with the big boys toys. They don't disclose the future but report on what they experience on location.

The media at home are frustrated by the fact that they are not there, and they report on what they think should be done without knowledge of the plans, situations, or events on the playing field. They seem to be anguished by the fact that the Defense Secretary holds national security as far more important than loose lips, fingers, and distorted fabrications in the press.

If any of them had previous military training, they would see these tools of war as fine arts of weaponry and not sand box toys.  It takes highly trained soldiers, seamen, airmen and marines to operate them with great skill and precision.  Each having high levels of education, dedication and team trust.  Something most journalists have no appreciation of.

I trained my troops as combat soldiers first, then journalists and we were capable of producing any media available at any time, in real time without many assets.  Big difference in our stories and media materials was credibility because we knew the game plan without disclosing critical actions until they were accomplished.  We were capable of stalking, capturing and securing enemy combatants while continuing to publish and produce our media.

Diane Sawyer thought enough of Congress to say, "As they came out of a confidential meeting, it was only time when all the information disclosed would be available." She apologized and confirmed "that's the way it is with Congress".  I'm sure she was just referring to Democratic members of Congress with French ancestry and California constituents with summer homes in New England.

Later she was cut off when the network went to commercial break as she was disclosing sensitive information without credibility.  It use to be that the commercials were funny, now it is the media who before the war - opposed it and now they find it intriguing and are impressing us with elementary observations of our Finest Fighting Force as "W" confidence is proving and "41" dubbed in a 1991 Congressional session.

The best contribution of the media is the real time thanks combat troops express to their loved ones back home.  Stick to that, you "prose".

Good job Ted Koppel - a real pro.
Gene
www.gzarwell.us/page8.htm

#Back to Subjects


Message: 10
   Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2003 12:07:06 -0500
   From: "GZarwell" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: Comments to ponder

et al.
"Since we're in America, wouldn't it be a big help if we could
screen out the Americans?"

Since it is obvious that profiling is against the liberals religion, and they don't want to deny terrorists access to America, then we should use voter registration cards to assure that only liberals and foreigners are screened since conservatives usually have their patents, papers and visa's in order.

Plus, conservatives usually have military ID's (active, Reserve or retired), passports and pay taxes from private sector earnings rather than government contracts and public sector jobs.

To prove torture doesn't work, we should interrogate any resistor to Identity checks with threat of losing their flight time and status while revoking their passport privileges for return until they can prove intent.  Then let Sen. Kennedy drive them to Martha's vineyard.

Regarding guns - good points made by Ann Coulter.  Usually guns in the home are not used in homicides or robberies.  Those used crimes are usually brought in by intruders rather then responsible homeowners.  However, we all know that the liberal approach is to be killed rather than defend one's self with a weapon owned to protect from homicidal intruders.

"Please Sign Petition Against Junk Lawsuits"

Isn't it ridicules to sign a petition for lawmakers (lawyers elected to protect our interests) to outlaw junk lawsuits - after all, that's how they earned the respect and money to seek election.  They wrote the "entitlements" to frivolity in their tort acts years ago realizing that unless they have access to collect in a judgment, they have no retirement other than Probate and elected pensions.

 "RICHMOND - "On March 5, 2003, the Reston Connection reported on the remarks made by Democrat Congressman Jim Moran in which he blamed the war with Iraq on the Jewish community."  Why the concern for Governor Mark Warner's opinion?  He didn't elect the Congressman.  The Liberal Democrats did, bought and paid for his election, and if they want to recall him - they should stand up and do it- not transfer their irresponsibility for not checking out their candidates views to someone else. Could it be the same people wanting him out now supported his campaign?  How cowardly!  Or, do those who don't want to risk their reputation from innuendo from casual remarks that are taken out of context have their own - out of the box - agenda? 

If that's the case, no political aspirant has a chance to please anybody.  Perhaps, special interests could influence other government's behavior to comply.

Is America overly protective of everyone's right to happiness at the expense of thousands and millions of regulations telling us what we can't do?  I believe the list of what we can do amounted to a preamble and several amendments.  Where the rest of this stuff come from? (suggested answer:  Special Interests.  This is not to imply an only answer, but a call to look into lawmaking motivation and its economic impact on the America way of life as documented in or about 1786).
Gene

#Back to Subjects


Message: 2
   Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 08:54:03 -0500
   From: "GZarwell" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: Soros & Governors

et al.:
Art Downs strikes a bull's-eye with his analysis of George Soros. 

Unfortunately, his analysis also describes many current Governors who espouse that exact same philosophy.  Why work hard to build business and create jobs to build a tax base when you can push slots and casinos to create "easy" money to run amuck with little effort?

Many elected State officials just want prestige of high political office, but not its associated responsibility of honest leadership.  They want access to Washington's ATM government.  They don't want to be tied to commitment
or leadership responsibility. And, they don't have the talent and skill to raise operating capital.

Why?  Because.  Because it means if they take a stand on solid fiscal issues they may not get reelected by the few who benefit from machine politics. Besides, what about all those gurus who have access to government funding? WHERE WOULD THEY GO?

Has anyone taken a poll to determine how few in Congress ever served their country before they were 25 years of age?  Military experience is not a bad thing.  At very early ages, men and women are given great responsibilities, learn strict discipline, and earn respect through team leadership.  Isn't that missing in society today? 

Too, many self made, non caring, easy money gurus (financial advisors, lawyers, and disgruntled Doctors) who ignore the rules for material things want to be leaders without the prerequisites.  Are real values dying with our grandparents? 

Ted Kennedy is a prime example.

He believes that government should replace self worth, common sense, and individual fiscal responsibility.  

Listen to him cry now about not being able to pass a flawed bill of prescription drugs for those seniors the system forgot about years ago.  Where was the Congressional leadership when Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security were implanted in the government's bag of tricks to give a false retirement security to those affected by the Great Depression or the effects of two World Wars?

If the proposed program is so good, why are advocates running commercials to sell it - hmm, maybe it's hard to sell with its flawed concept. Who makes out from it?

Does anyone even think that Kennedy cares?

I guess if you never experience hard work, its easy to throw public money on questionable programs while letting profiteers run amuck.  Whose idea was it anyway to form HMO's and discourage medical professionalism?

Isn't George Soros the pinnacle of exploitation?  Let us learn from his ego.  There are an awful lot of "him" out there that are silently destroying America by exploiting the system. Kennedy isn't silent though.

This brings to mind some thoughts about sticking it to the rich to pay the bills.  Several campaigns ago, we did a study of average taxes paid by people in all tax brackets.  It was surprising that taxpayers on average at all levels paid between 6.4 and 6.7 percent of their income in taxes.  So, what's the gripe by those who want to stick it to the wealthy? -  There is parity among the ranks.

Perhaps a flat 6.6 percent income tax should be enacted without any deductions or exemptions - loopholes.  At the same we should back out taxes paid by government employees as non-contributing funds to establish a real budget.  Then, we set government wages at below average private sector wages to encourage more people into tax contributing jobs.

Maybe then we can get government to work without its inherent scams to charge fees to pay for the administration of government.  Isn't that just an added tax anyway?

It is much easier to balance a budget when you now how much is real and how much is not. "Cash economy 101".
Gene
Asks you for "one-Vote"
301.262.5064
 www.gzarwell.us/senate.htm

#Back to Subjects


Message: 3
   Date: Mon,  3 Mar 2003 17:27:23 -0500 (EST)
   From: "Gene" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: Provocations to ponder

et al:

(1) Dan Rather brought us the concept of 'anything goes to get ahead" and then espoused to University Students - that was bad.  He fabricated news when it didn't exist, and now he has committed near treason beyond that of any of the recent spies.  What to do with him?  Make him house boy to Saddam Hussein and see how long he lasts.  Or, just don't watch CBS News - it isn't even close to reality TV except in Traitor Dan's confusing motives: to wit: obsessive replacement of Walter Cronkite. This brings up another point: 

(2)  When did news reporters become experts in everything without having credentials in anything?  Watching network News is like listening to cynical neighborhood gossip.  There is no reality or credibility in their reporting.  It is commentary and very insincere and smacks of sensationalism for sake of ratings.  Their fear of reality has given the masses an insidious mindset of failure to protect our country.  They should stick to the news as it happens and skip the analysis - 99% of the time their analysis is counter to the news result.  After all that is why we have successful conservative talk show hosts - they are the other viewpoint.  The liberals are salaried high paying anchors - good "moniker" for them.  And that takes us to: 

(3) Why do News anchors and talk show hosts think they have more information, insight and knowledge to question the President with all his resources about domestic policies, foreign interests, and global events?  From the reports I view and hear, they don't even sit in on the security council briefings, but instead use hearsay to spread fear and misinformation.  Note, how eager the Democrats (most of them are lawyers) are to discredit positive actions to verifiable acts as long as their name is spelled right for the ballot next cycle.  At the same time, why do Democrats think their wimpy policies are better than those of the Cabinet with the "power"?  If they are so concerned now, they should have thought about it during the 1990's when they did have the power and didn't use it legitimately.   

(4) Remember that our "boomer" media anchors, teachers, Hollywood actors; all avoided patriotism through deferments leaving them with no concept of homeland security other than their safe celluloid re-enactments.  They all know where the Canadian Border is - to some its homeland - and they tell more terrorists where, when and how to attack America than does Asama Ben Ladin and Saddam Hussein.  No wonder anchors, teachers, and Hollywood actors encourage kids to divorce their parents, shirk their patriotic rights as well as any "allegiance to the Flag" - "Under God" - "In God We Trust".  Where would these people rather be?  There are a lot of empty seats going that way and "wholesale".  Or, are they worried that they would lose their access to the "other consumable commodity" exported by the region?   

(5) Liberalism is all right if you use other's assets rather than commit one's own resources.  I still think budget deficits should be paid from the salaries of those who vote for them and not from mine. When did I agree to paying for other's interests and not mine?  When did American taxpayers give the Democrats "carte blanc" with our hard earned money anyway?

(6)  Regarding Danson's comment - there's nothing lower than a Democrat who needs Harvard scholars to give him words he can use to undermine our founding fathers guidelines.  This country was founded under the principle of "trust in God" regardless of which religious doctrine you believe in.  Don't like it?  Get a ticket elsewhere! 

(7) Airport security has nothing to do with airport security - it has a lot to do with making luggage screening a federal job with high federal pay.  When a properly ID'd pilot is screened for "tools to break into the cockpit of the plane she will be flying" is not asked if she has a key in her pocket illustrates the inane rules espoused by the trainers who obviously haven't got a clue about airport security.  I listen to experts talk about traveler security and luggage theft telling perpetrators how to do it and interviewers talking to people who lost everything to thieves - but in 13 seconds in Zurich I stopped an International Luggage theft operation in five major hubs by allowing the police there to finally arrest one.  We all now what is being checked and so do the terrorists which is how they got through the system on 9/11. 

(8) In the U.S.A. we issue ID cards to our citizens - Military ID, Drivers Licenses, Passports, and clearances -  How come we don't trust our issuing agencies?  Are these the same agencies that are now going to conduct - at additional personal cost - the "new more complete investigation" or just check already gathered information that we paid for when requesting the ID's. So, what's the point of another "quick" check?  It generates another hidden tax.  

(9) Agencies that issue ID is where terrorism can be stopped.  At the visa office.  Why do wealthy foreigners get visas when normal invited friends and business associates following the rules cannot?  I can answer this one - $$$$ under the table.  I would guess that showing a U.S.A. issued photo ID should preclude security harassment because they can be checked by computer in seconds -  if not rethink IDs.  ID's and regional Passports work in Russia and other countries through their foreign ministries. 

(10) Junk law suits are perpetrated by lawyers who cannot collect past due debts from debtors so, they go after companies and corporations.  However, once elected to public office they feel they have power and sovereign immunity from honesty, legitimacy, responsibility, and accountability.  Instead it seems they believe they are above the law because they make the laws. They, then, fabricate political cases for their own ambitions.  "Lawmakers" should be citizens and not "lawyers" -  notice the conflict of interest in the two words.  One writes the "dribble" and the other one practices it for profit.  Corporate executives are held to a much higher standard than "Lawmakers", but some learn from their Congressional leaders how to reinterpret the rules. 

(11)  Why do State governments think $1 from gambling exceeds the cost of $1.90 to get that return?  Sounds like business as usual - spend more than you receive.  See, that's where industry learns from government!  In one case the tax payers pay, and the other; shareholders pay.  Aren't they mostly the same people? 

(12)  If the DC government cannot collect enough income taxes from their residents because most have low incomes or are exempt, what makes them think they can pay more to register their vehicles, renew their driver's licenses, or pay for parking.  Wouldn't it make more cents if they had toll bridges??? 

(13)  Why do we tell responsible people that they cannot protect their homes and families from intruders - murderers, rapists, child kidnappers, etc.?   Is it to justify police force salaries for an inept intrusion in others' domain or protect the intruders from being injured or killed.  Better them than me. I'll protect my family - yes, family - while the courts protect intruders.  I always thought a good police force was one that had little to do because when they did do something it was respected not challenged.  Seems our forefathers had a better idea - to wit - when needed Paul Revere lit the lamp - everyone showed up to protect the community because they all had the guns. 

(14)  Hooray!! for Sen. Zell Miller of Georgia for supporting and encourage our valiant leader.  Your comments are welcome to these questions - gene@gzarwell.us  Please keep in mind that they may appear in Coffeetalks.

Gene

#Back to Subjects

 

Message: 3
   Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2003 09:38:53 -0500
   From: "GZarwell" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: Smell the roses

"Governor Ehrlich promised to bring principled, accountable leadership to
Annapolis. By eschewing old tax-and-spend solutions in favor of a new
direction, he is honoring his commitment. The citizens of Maryland voted
for change. It is time for their representatives in Annapolis to do the
same." Coffeetalks 02/22/2003

A campaign paid for by the Democrats in the last moments who favored him over KKT who refused to include slots in her plan.  He brings with him a comptroller who although revered by many of us -  brought us lotto, keno and ....  now maybe casinos from other states who cannot balance their budgets from slots and gambling.  Is he really the back office governor as accused by former Gov. Glendenning. 

Maybe we should send our kids to Atlantic City or Las Vegas for an education.  They could pay their way from slots and lotto machines and we could save a lot of expense for education.

An alternative was available but was short in the vote count as was expected, but much higher than any alternative in the past.

It sickens me to see Sen. Barbara Mikulski go begging to Congress for pork in the bills as though it was good for Maryland.  Those programs pay a few who stand to lose a lot if accountability, legitimacy, credibility, and responsibility actually materialize as an ethic in Maryland government.  Every time she announces how much more federal money out of our pockets is being spent on her pork belly is just another reason to vote her out.

Listen to Sen. Sarbanes - first wake him up to reality - then see if he has an opinion on any thing that doesn't already have a secure vote either way.

Although it is all right for both of them to bring in pork for a few of their supporters, they fear a tax cut for the many, tax payers, who provide for their pork bellied constituents.

I sincerely believe that Democrats want tax cuts for those who don't pay taxes - so lets give them rebates on their paid taxes - what an idea!  They still get nothing even though the Democratic spin doctors think they should as media reporters (soft democratic supporters who gave up reporting for commentary years ago) go out of their way to find people who don't qualify for tax cuts and rebates to comment on the inequity.  But, they don't pay into the program.  Amazing!  Let's take their share out of the Senate and Congressional payrolls; from those who oppose tax cuts and rebates.

Taxpayers - Governor Ehrlich got in as a Republican candidate, but he got neither a mandate nor did the vote build a Republican government.  Straight Republican leadership is needed at all levels including appointments to serve the State in Cabinet positions and as agency heads.  If you see that happening then Republicans have won.  According to media reports, mostly democrats are being appointed or considered.  Why?

Who won?
Gene

#Back to Subjects


  Message: 2
   Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 14:20:22 -0500
   From: "Gene's" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: Left overs or

et al.
It has been a known factor that doing "big" business in Maryland has been disrupted by previous administrations through its "tough" attorney general" who fabricates litigation and uses "Fraud of the Court" tactics to achieve headlines.   Corporations instead of dealing with this type government take there jobs elsewhere.

How do they get away with it?  The Attorney General and Top Judge get together to decide how cases will be resolved and tie everything up in fabricated rules and decisions until the plaintiff or defendant give up or are destroyed.

Is this justice or politics?

Well, it opens the door again for gambling to balance the budget.  Not good for Maryland but for those who bought the politicians.  First it was a multi-state lottery, then Keno, now slots and the hotels are already lining up with slot machine ready "ball rooms".   When does government get legitimate?  When it did it start to go bad -after the repeal of the "blue laws in the '70's?

For details on a recent case that caught the "team" with their hands in our pockets and the belts too loose - go to http://www.cccwebs.com/gzarwell/newsrelease5.html
Gene

#Back to Subjects


Message: 2
   Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 14:41:33 -0500
   From: "Gene's" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: The Pledge to what---

et al.
It seems Liberals don't want to pledge allegiance because they would then be committed to defending their country.  Without commitment, you take, give it away, and subvert the initiative.  Breaks up most marriages.  Builds divisive social patterns and make a few wealthy who can in turn call the kettle black from their glass houses.

What this country needs most is to instill loyalty and allegiance in our young people to give them a leg up on the competition (186 countries wanting what Americans take for granted) - best way to do that is thru 2-4 years of Government service in the military or if not physically qualified some other Government agency at State or Local level.  If not mentally qualified (test scores) make them repeat until they are; so they can reap the benefits of being an American. 

It should be mandatory after high school with deferments until after college with no exception except to deny those long term graduates access to military training after age 34 and requiring them to teach, administer or contribute to this country's government with physical presence and dedication before being turned over to the private sector.

Political office would be out of the question for any individual who has not completed their mandatory 2-4 year term of service.  Appointments to government positions would be limited to non-executive level without U.S. military experience, and prime contracts would be denied those not in compliance with the mandatory government service.  Military contracts could not be awarded to non-military experienced personnel unless their government service was with Defense or Homeland Security. This does not mean that work on the contract was limited to only ex-military but the responsibility to satisfy the contract would require Military leadership experience.

What we have today is a nation of exemptions.  Leadership who never experienced real commitment to the basic freedoms and the constraints of Government to provide, protect, and give back.  This leadership of deception, greed, and power came to us from educational deferments, lotteries for slots to serve, a lack of respect for real leadership, and media who seem to think their limited knowledge makes them experts in everything including their lack of respect for leadership, patriotism and fiscal restraints;  thus qualifying them to speak for "we the People" without responsibility for their words, actions, and deceptions and lack of International intelligence. 

"We the people" have let them become "I the only one that counts" and "you don't count so get out of my way".  The fruits of America don't belong to the Government but to "We the People" who work to preserve and conserve it.  In other words, get in step - your Right - Left - Right. Your Right - not your other Right.

We need a government that everyone can experience - to enable an appreciation of where the fruits are picked, and where the fruits are extorted.  Along with that knowledge comes responsibility, tolerance, understanding, legitimacy, credibility and accountability.

Did I miss anything?
Gene

Yes!  I did.  Government service should be limited to no more than 5 years of unbroken service and no vested interest in the "pot".  It doesn't eliminate 20 years service if performance meets the standards of conserve, preserve, efficiency which could be reviewed by an independent board of executives to determine if entitlements can be granted for "outstanding service" and not mediocre performance.

Rewards should be based upon "cost savings with greater value" to the taxpayers instead of today's parameters of "greater costs while diminishing value". And, this goes along with the Congress and Legislatures as well.

It seems most political campaigns talk about how much money their Congressional candidate spends in the media instead of how much their constituents contribute.  And, when they get elected, do they follow suit or try to save government expenditures through sound fiscal planning and concern$ for efficiency.  Quote "I'll raise the spending for..." without concern for..."  Maybe the beneficiaries of all these "spending for..." should give up some of their "concern$" for the good of all.

Remember the 1950's dollar was close to $1 of buying power and a million dollars was an accomplishment.  Now, we give away millions in lotteries and lose millions through contracting...
(c) Gene Zarwell, 01/17/2003

#Back to Subjects


Message: 9
   Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 16:43:59 -0500
   From: "Gene's" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: An Issue that may/may not stick

et al.

Listening to the media and the Democrats trying to sell a divisive issue over constitutional rights for the 2002 election is almost ludicrous with what is at stake for each of us over semantics. To think that both would prey on events of recent weeks to sell a weak appeal clouds over the real issues in Maryland - lack of integrity (lies, fabrications, and misinformation) in the State House, Governor's Mansion and Judiciary, and too much familiarity to conduct state business without political paybacks.

Violation of "individual" rights held up the signing of the Constitution in 1789 when George Mason of Virginia refused to sign, telling George Washington, "There is no declaration of rights."  Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts also dissented, declaring: "The liberties of America were not secured."

U.S. Minister to France Thomas Jefferson wrote to James Madison, framer of the Constitution and its ten amendments, of his concern about "the omission of a bill of rights...providing clearly for freedom of the press, protections against standing armies, and restrictions against monopolies."

How times haven't changed!

George Washington urged the Congress that year in his first inaugural address to move swiftly to propose amendments showing "a reverence for the characteristic rights of freemen and a regard for public harmony."

In 1792 on March 1 after much debate Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson announced ratification of 10 of the proposed 17 articles that became amendments to the Constitution to the Governors of the fourteen States.

Amendment II is of real concern today because of misinterpretation by eager candidates to control the populous and take advantage of "the sniper..."

The Amendment as ratified read:  "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Isn't Maryland the "Free State?"  And, what happened to "Harmony?"  How come is tit that people who give up and have no record are the most critical of those who stand up and get counted?

Perhaps if we violate those tenets of American democracy the others are in jeopardy as well.  First to go would obviously be the First Amendment that combined three rights as the Fourth article, and then, perhaps the Fourth amendment that was originally proposed as the third article.

Two articles never made it to the Constitution.  The first two listed: One article dealt with the number of citizens each member of the House would represent.  The other concerned Congressional salaries.

Some concerns never change.

As a note; The House adopted the amendments in the form of 17 articles.  The Senate reduced the number to 12 and expanded the preamble.  By October 1789, the document was written on parchment and signed by Augustus Muhlenberg, Speaker of the House, and John Adams, Vice President and President of the Senate.  It took until December 15, 1791 to gain the required number of states to ratify it.  That March 4, 1789 document became known as the "Bill of Rights" three years later.

Summary: ARTICLE I-Regulating the number of Representatives according to population of the State.  ARTICLE II-Senators and Representatives cannot increase their salaries during their present term of office.  ARTICLE III-Freedom of religion; Freedom of speech; Freedom of the press; Freedom of assembly; Right to petition the government for redress of grievances.  ARTICLE IV-Right to keep and bear arms, since a well-regulated militia is necessary for the security of a free Sate.  ARTICLE V-No soldier to be quartered in any house in time of peace unless with the consent of the owner.  ARTICLE VI-Freedom from unreasonable search and seizure. ARTICLE VII-Provisions concerning prosecution, trial and punishment; just compensation for property taken for public use.  Article VIII-Right to speedy and public trail, and provisions for its procedure.  ARTICLE IX-Right of trail by jury.  ARTICLE X-Excessive bail or fines and cruel punishment prohibited.  ARTICLE XI-All rights to be retained by the people except those regulated in the Constitution.  ARTICLE XII-The powers reserved to the States or to the People.

Gene
Vote Zarwell Comptroller

#Back to Subjects


Message: 5
   Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 23:26:12 -0400
   From: "Gene's" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: Gun Control

Question of the day.
Can two Democrats agree on gun laws?  Not if they're running for public
office?

KKT wants to keep outdated gun laws and make some more without funding or
re-evaluating the ones on the books.  Seems the gun laws she refers to were
unfunded since March 2002.  How effective can they be?

Van Holland wants to revisit the existing laws because he sees that as more
popular thanks to the Republicans.
Gene
Vote Zarwell Comptroller
301 805-5064
PMB 98, 1153 Rt. 3 North
Gambrills, MD 21054
Go to www.cccwebs.com/gzarwell/compt1.htm to download a $1 Million bill.

A friend forwarded this to me:.
Subject: Gun Control

a. An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.
b. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone.
c. Colt: The original point and click interface.
d. Gun control is not about guns; it's about control.
e. If guns are outlawed, can we use swords?
f. If guns cause crime, then pencils cause misspelled words.
g. Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.
h. If you don't know your rights you don't have any.
i. Those who trade liberty for security have neither.
j. The United States Constitution (c) 1791. All Rights reserved.
k. What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?
l. The Second Amendment is in place in case they ignore the others.
m. 64,999,987 firearms owners killed no one yesterday.
n. Guns only have two enemies: rust and liberals.
o. Know guns, know peace and safety. No guns, no peace nor safety.
p. You don't shoot to kill; you shoot to stay alive.
q. 911 - government sponsored Dial-a-Prayer.
r. Assault is a behavior, not a device.
s. Criminals love gun control -- it makes their jobs safer.
t. If guns cause crime, then matches cause arson.
u. Only a government that is afraid of its citizens tries to control
 them.
v. You only have the rights you are willing to fight for.
w. Enforce the "gun control laws" we have, don't make more.
x. When you remove the people's right to bear arms, you create slaves.
y. The American Revolution would never have happened with gun control.
z.  Guns don't kill its the one pulling the trigger who does.
Cheers,

#Back to Subjects


Message: 1
   Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 11:37:29 -0400
   From: "Gene's" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: Democrats and the law

It's about time to hold the law above the Democrats heads.  They continually demand concessions to written and published law even when they write it.

N.J. and Maryland run neck and neck with Democratic distortion of truth and dishonesty.  Maryland, until this last fiasco with Torricelli, was wining the race for most illegitimate, incredible, irresponsible, and least accountable government in the country.

Its "Top Cop" condones and practices "Fraud on the Court" for political gain through his colluded judiciary beginning at the top justice level.  The Judicial Disciplinary Commission condones it as "normal procedure."

Several judges when approached to produce certain documents that were dismissed could not find any such documents for cases that were dismissed to close an unrelated case that was filed with "no appearance" from the State.

This has been documented over several years in the various levels of the courts' records with nine motions to allow them to correct "the error of their ways".  There are plans to publish this matter now contained in nine 3-ring binders and of course CD's.

Regarding extension of campaign periods.  Tough break for the Democrats - Can’t they plan ahead or predict their fate.   Their option is published in the law - too late to file for a write-in - a precedent established in the Nation's Capitol.

If the Democrats want to make the rules, they need to abide by them even when they favor the Republicans.

Maryland is ready to take the step to correcting the errors of the past electorate by ousting the Glendenning residue from all levels of its government.  Removing the familiarity between elected and appointed officials will best serve taxpayer interest.

How will they do it?  Vote straight Republican.

Gene
Vote Zarwell Comptroller

#Back to Subjects


Message: 10
   Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 15:18:32 -0400
   From: "Gene's" <11gzarwell@ccconline.net>
Subject: Re: What Republican party?

Mike Netherlands
Moderator,
Elephant Club Group

You bring up some good points.

I'm not into building machines either - I create virtual products and
organizations globally that are cohesive and focused as opposed to
disjointed and disconnected.

My comments are from observations of what I hear and see from other
candidates and Republican clubs struggling to find someone to provide
leadership with a vision.  It hasn't happened in the last 12 years.

Why isn't the money flowing into Central Committees?  This question has to
be answered.  Without the money, there are no "economies" to work from.
That's been lacking over the years.

Is it because the Republicans don't believe their fielded candidates can
win?  Is it because there is no real vision to work toward?  Why?

A group advertising program to support the "Republican Candidates" is
solicited from candidate funding.  So, where's the support?  The Candidates
are committed, they need Republicans to show their support for them -to
network, to recruit new Republicans, to demonstrate their commitment to
Republican ideals, and not be ashamed of saying they're Republican.

Your frustration is generally the norm in all Maryland counties.

There is no goal driven consensus.  There is talk about platforms without
any discussion of how to get there.  Platforms are great emotional tools if
you have the cement to hold them together and you have a market that is
willing to buy in.

It is obvious from the past 29 years, the Republicans have not presented a
platform that was viable to the electorate.  Or, they haven't been able to
sell it to the messengers.  I have no idea of which option above to
consider.

To present a platform that has been rejected so many times should tell you
something.  Republicans need to sell it to the Democrats because the
Democrats have sold theirs to the electorate.

You need more than a platform committee to agree to the principles and the
issues.  You cannot parrot others' platforms without a consensus, and you
need 51% of the vote to have the right to address those planks.  If the only
consensus is from supporters of the platform, then there is no outreach.

In Maryland, the top four elected positions plus the U.S. Senate receive an
almost guaranteed 43% of the vote in the general.  They need the remaining
10% from the Democrats.  Not a tough target.

There is no second place in an election.

It's easier to sell a platform after you win an election than it is if you
lose because you destroyed the planks and the standards collapsed in the
process.

Politics is an unscientific role of the dice.

In America, we tend to use it to destroy successful individuals and anyone
with an opinion not of ours.  The media is good with this concept because it
sells papers and ratings.

There was a time, believe it or not when the media was objective.  Then they
experienced "power of suggestion" to which they succumbed, and lost their
ethical responsibility to present the news and they started creating news as
the government involved itself in misinformation.

In several candidate forums over the years, I been asked about issues.  Most
of them were not relevant to current election cycles.  People wanted to know
my position on their passion.  I wanted to know why they were so passionate
about an issue that didn't sell the last time around.

For every audience member you have a different opinion on an issue.  An
audience of 1,500 persons, additionally, provides 1,500 issues.  Everyone of
those issues has relative importance to someone.  Not all issues can be
discussed in a lifetime let alone 2-5 minutes. So, candidates are not heard
they are ridiculed for taking a stand on issues the opposition is trying
hard to sell to win elections.

Look at KKT and her issues - she's pushing education and she should go back
to learn public speaking so she can develop an ability to speak about a
record on something besides her family history.

Where's the focus?  I ask my audiences questions before I speak.  That way,
I can focus them on the point of the meeting - get some representation in
government where you can present your issue for consideration.  If the reps
aren't there, there's no ear.  And, if you destroy the reps before they get
there - they will never be there  [not in those words].

Did you read my draft speech?  It should give you some idea of how to build
a voter base.  You cannot assume all Democrats are aware that they can vote
Republican.  If we can educate them to a need for real change, maybe, just
maybe, we can provide that.  After all, their candidates are saying what our
candidates should be saying about change.

Please call me.  You are onto something.
Gene
Vote Zarwell Comptroller

#Back to Subjects