echoDonations.org

Why are they so corrupt sluggish and stupid? What is WRONG with them? All they have is ONE JOB to ENFORCE THE CONSTITUTION which strictly prohibits government from fooling around in private contracts of any sort.

Not only did the bailouts lead to hostile takeover by the government, then unfair bankrupty practices and now sale to a foreign auto manufacturer (bye bye American jobs forever), but Chrysler dealerships were closed based on donation history to republicans versus democrats!

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS STUPID SUPREME COURT?

Obama scares them, they are afrid they will be called bigots if they disagree like everyone else is.~!

Read this….long but illuminating…

I know that most of you have seen or heard parts of this auto deal!! But you won’t believe what you read that you didn’t know. And it just keeps going.

Chrysler’s Railroad
This could be a scandal of epic proportions and one that makes Nixon’s Watergate or Clinton ’s Monica Lewinsky affair pale by comparison.
Why was there neither rhyme nor reason as to which dealerships of the Chrysler Corporation were to be closed? Roll the clock back to the weeks just before Chrysler declared bankruptcy. Chrysler, like GM, was in dire financial straits and federal government graciously offered to "buy the company" and keep them out of bankruptcy and "save jobs." Chrysler was, in the words of Obama and his administration, "too big to fail," same story with GM..

The feds organized their "Automotive Task Force" to fix Chrysler and GM. Obama, in an act that is 100% unconstitutional, appointed a guy named Steve Rattner to be the White House’s official Car Czar- literally, that’s what his title is. Rattner is the liaison between Obama, Chrysler, and GM.

Initially, the national media reported that Chrysler had made this list of dealerships. That is not true. The Washington Examiner, Newsmax, Fox New and a host of other news agencies discovered that the list of dealerships was put together by the "Automotive Task Force" headed by no one other than Mr. Steve Rattner. Now the plot thickens.

Remember earlier we said earlier that there was neither rhyme nor reason why certain dealerships were closed? Actually there’s a very interesting pattern as to who was closed down. Again, on May 27, 2009, The Washington Examiner and Newsmax exposed the connection.

Amazingly, of the 789 dealerships closed by the federal government 788 had donated money, exclusively, to Republican political causes, while contributing nothing to Democratic political causes. The only "Democratic" dealership on the list was found to have donated $7,700 to Hillary’s campaign, and a bit over $2,000 to John Edwards. This same dealership, reportedly, also gave $200 to Obama’s campaign. Does that seem a little odd to you?

Steve Rattner, the guy who put the list together. Well, he happens to be married to a woman named Maureen White, who happens to be the former national finance chairman of the Democratic National Committee. As such, she would have access to campaign donation records from everyone in the nation, Republican or Democrat. But of course, this is just a wacky coincidence, we’re certain.

Then comes another really wacky coincidence. On that list of dealerships being closed down, a weird thing happen in Arkansas , North Louisiana, and Southern Missouri .

It seems that Bill Clinton’s former White House Chief of Staff, Mack McClarty, owns a chain of dealership in that region, partnered with a fellow by the name of Robert Johnson. Johnson happens to be founder of Black Entertainment Television and was a huge Obama supporter and financier. These guys own a half dozen Chrysler stores under the company title of RLJ-McClarty-Landers.

Interestingly, none of their dealerships were ordered closed – not one- while all of their competing Chrysler/Dodge and Jeep dealership were! Eight dealerships located near the dealerships owned by McClarty and Johnson were ordered shut down. Thus, by pure luck, these two major Obama supporters now have virtual monopoly on Chrysler sales in their zone. Isn’t that amazing? Go look in The Washington Examiner, the story’s there, and it’s in a dozen or so other web-based news organization, this isn’t being made up.

Now if you thought Chrysler was owned by Fiat, you are mistaken. Under the federal court ruling, 65% of Chrysler is now owned by the federal government and the United Auto Workers union- Fiat owns 20%. The other 15% is till privately owned and presumably will be traded on the stock market. Obama smiles and says he doesn’t want to run the auto industry.

As horrifying as this is to comprehend, and being as how this used to be the United States of America, it would appear that the president has the power to destroy private businesses and eliminate upwards of 100,000 jobs, just because they don’t agree with his political agenda. This is Nazi Germany stuff, and it’s happening right here, right now, in your back yard.

There are voices in Washington demanding an explanation, but the "Automotive Task Force" has released no information to the public or any of the senators demanding answers for what has been done. Keep your ear to the ground for more on this story. If you’ve ever wanted to make a difference about anything in your life, get on the phone to your national senator or representative in the House and demand an investigation on this.

Benjamin Franklin had it right when he said, "All that’s necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

Car Czar No More

An amazing thing happed as this story was going to press. Obama’s Car Czar,

Did you know that 68% of all statistics are completely made up?

Didn’t link a source, did you? It would be very interesting to actually see the information and read it myself instead of just trusting some anonymous poster.

There are no official "Czar" titles in the White House. This is all something that the media started calling them. And, there is nothing unconstitutional about the President having advisers (which is what these so-called "Czars" really are).

And, here is something else to chew on. Our local GM dealership also owns the local Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep dealership. And you know something? THEY JUST BOUGHT THE LOCAL FORD/MERCURY DEALERSHIP ALSO!!!! There must be some type of conspiracy angle you can come up with for this, isn’t there?

The most successful lawyer in town had never made a contribution to the Red Cross.

The chairman of the local Red Cross, Mr. Wilson, called on the lawyer, hoping to convince him to make a donation.

"You made over $600,000 last year but you haven’t given anything back to the community. How do you reconcile that?"

The lawyer sighed, leaned forward and said, "If you only knew… My mother is terminally ill; her medical bills far exceed her income. My brother is a disabled veteran, blind and in a wheelchair. My sister is raising three children alone since her husband died in an auto accident."

Mr. Wilson offered his sympathy, admitting he had no idea there were so many demands on the lawyer’s profits.

The lawyer nodded and said, "Exactly…Why should I give to the Red Cross when I don’t even give to my own family!"

^Lol !!! A star for u !

surprise

A couple had been debating the purchase of a new auto for weeks. He wanted a new truck. She wanted a fast little sports-like car so she could zip through traffic around town. He would probably have settled on any beat up old truck, but everything she seemed to like was way out of their price range.

"Look!" she said. "I want something that goes from 0 to 200 in 4 seconds or less. And my birthday is coming up. You could surprise me."

So, for her birthday, he bought her a brand new bathroom scale.

Services will be at Downing Funeral Home on Monday the 12th. Due to the condition of the body, this will be a closed casket service. Please send your donations to the "Think Before You Say Things To Your Wife Foundation," Dallas, Texas.

Poll – Sherbet or Italian Ice

L.M.A.O. ~ No I haven’t.

sherbert

seattle auto Parts asked its workers to donate to alocal charity.Altogether the company gathered $1,653.The everage donation was $28.50.how many wokers donated to the charity??please answer,and please explain how you got the answer??

Let n = number of workers who donated
28.5 n = 1653
n = 1653 / 28 . 5
n = 58

Basically instead of writing legislation that gives people the option to opt in, you instead write the legislation so that people are in by default and must opt out. This seems to imply that the govt. knows better what’s best for the people than the people themselves. The "default" would be for all the stupid people not smart enough to opt in on their own.

Do you think this is a good way to write legislation??

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20091028/us_time/08599193278900

The classic example of the power of the default is the opt-out 401(k) savings plan. In a 2001 study, only 36% of the participants signed up for a retirement savings plan when they had to opt in – even though their employers were matching their contributions. Free money, and only 36% took it! But when participants were automatically signed up for the same plan but given the chance to opt out, 86% of them stuck with it. Scholars have found similar status-quo results with organ donations. If we have to sign up, very few of us become organ donors. If we have to opt out, most of us remain organ donors. Similarly, when our electronic gadgets come with the energy-saving auto-power-down function enabled, we’re cool with that; if we have to enable it ourselves, we rarely bother. (See 10 players in health-care reform.)

This kind of behavior doesn’t fit into neoclassical economic models, which assume that human beings are rational agents who act in their own best interests. In the real world, human beings are human beings. Sometimes we’re too dumb to know our own best interests. Sometimes we’re too lazy to slog through the forms to figure out our own best interests. Often we’re conformists; we assume the default must be the default because that’s what most people do, and we’re desperate not to be social deviants.

These insights are at the core of the challenge to traditional neoclassicism posed by behavioral economics, which has burst into prominence in the Obama Administration. Budget director Peter Orszag is so obsessed with defaults that he used to bring a copy of that 401(k) study to all his meetings; chief regulator Cass Sunstein co-authored a book called Nudge that’s all about defaults and other noncoercive policies that can promote desired behaviors. The Administration has pushed one nudge after another, from simplified financial-aid forms after studies showed they could increase college-attendance rates to automatic savings plans for small businesses. It even doled out our payroll-tax cuts in the stimulus bill by decreasing our weekly withholding rather than cutting us big lump-sum checks, because the research suggested we’d be less likely to notice it and more likely to spend it.
guru…………Don’t you see a difference between educated individuals and a mass of drones??

Those insights are interesting, especially the 401k example. I think that there should be a public option, period. It is impossible to properly plan a government insurance program based on uncertainty. Also, if people and businesses have to purchase insurance they should have the choice of not having to deal with the private insurers.

If however the opt-out provision pacifies critics and states lack the energy to opt-out, then all the better. It sounds like a good common sense approach.

This was the first Christmas my husband I had as newlyweds. When we went over to my father-in-laws parents home on Christmas Eve for dinner. My husband asked me if I had bought a present for his grandparents, I said no because I was too busy with work; we had just sunk over $300 into an auto repair and these people literally have everything. I suggested telling them I was making a charitiable donation in their name, and do it when I got paid later in the week. My mother-in-law said that grandma "bootsy" wouldn’t accept that, she HAS to have a gift. When grandma opened the card that my mother in law gave her, like a little kid, she grabbed for the gift card enclosed first and then complained about the amount in front of everyone! My mother-in-law told grandma that my husband and I really didn’t have the money for a gift. Greed is not tolerated at all in my family. I would have gotten spanked as a young child for something like that. I do not want to associate with her because of this.
Grandma Bootsy is also a MAJOR re-gifter. She buys things at yard sales and gives them out as presents. I was raised low-income but we consider that tacky unless you KNOW that its something the person will really love.

We also only buy gifts for the people closest to us. I bought only for my in-laws, parents and a close friend.

My husband is a full-time student so I’m the only breadwinner. Its not like we have huge amounts of discretionary income anyway.
I just wanted to know if anyone would associate with her.

your question is……………?
Sounds like granny is judgeing you. Sounds like you are judgeing granny.
Agree to disagree and get over it. Your husband can’t change his family traditions any more than you can.
If grandma has to have a gift, and she is a re-gifter then give her what you can afford toward a gift card.

Im currently staying in a homeless shelter that charges $5.00 a day for "rent" if you are working. At the same time people are only allowed to be there from 5pm until 8 am. Regardless of work/school schedules rain, snow .. you get the point. Were expected to go to the library. So since this is a non profit place… that receives alot of donations and grants… but also charges me rent with no lease.. am I liable to pay them or is it even legal? (im by no means lazy I walk 2 miles to work a day and 2 miles back. I work 30 hours a week and go to college full time. I ended up homeless in a strange town with no friends or family near by after being in an auto accident and having to leave my job due to injuries) Now im doing all I can to pay this place scrape away money for an apartment and deal with school finances. It bugs me that this is a place that is suppose to help you up but seems to be wearing me out and bringing me down. (though I know im not "entitaled to be there and im lucky im not on the streets) But its like, if im being charged rent why do i have to sit outside… and if its non profit can they even do this to me and kick me out if I cant/dont pay.
They get donations and GRANTS from the GOVERNMENT. I said I was thankfull but its kinda hard to be thankfull when your giving 1/2 a months rent to a place your only at to sleep for 5 or 6 hours.. I asked if it was legal…..
As in my days off consist of sitting out side in the snow when theres no where else to go on sundays bc no one else is open
So bc im homeless I should forgo school which will help me to a better place in 10 years and if I could work more I would.. however its slow at my job… I mostly get grants but that dont cover everything. its 5 bux a day but still when im reciving 700 from my job a month… egh.. thats kinda insulting to tell someone to not get an education bc there homeless…
And btw Im never there to eat. and they only serve 1 meal a day.
yeah im actually 20 so im not forgoing my edu. so thanks for the "judgement calls" but im not lazy. Most people my age are at home with mommy and daddy… so.. yeah I dont have those…
And I never even asked for free I just didnt think it sounded right that there chargeing rent while I have to sit out in the snow. Thats all.

Man, people are rough. I for one applaud your fortitude in continuing your education in even the most difficult of times. God knows a college degree is practically required in the work force these days. Working almost full time while going to college and not having a place to stay – I’d like to see any of these other folks try to live like that. Makes my complaints about having to walk 10 minutes in the cold from my dorm to my class seem pretty pathetic.

While $5 might not seem like a lot, I’m sure it adds up, especially when you’re pinching every penny. That being said, I’m sure it is completely legit for them to be charging you. I wish you the best of luck – keep your head up, try to look for a cheap apartment to stay in, and you’ll be doing better in no time.

My employer has a section for contributing to the community (thru donations and volunteer work) as part of the annual review. I am very good at my job, and I am surprised this is part of the review when it is not really a part of my job. I was assured when I was hired that community stuff is TOTALLY voluntary. I do not do auto payroll deductions or volunteer work. I feel charity begins at home, and the main organization that they want us to donate to is not one of my favorites. I was thinking of saying something to my boss like, "I am surprised that community thing is part of my review. It is supposed to be voluntary and has nothing to do with how I perform my actual job that I was hired for.I cannot help my own family as much as I would like to and would be funny with helping strangers" I have also not been given the shift I was promised, but I have already mentioned that. Please dont tell me how satisfying you find volunteer work, I am sure it is but I have a lot on my plate right now with my family and do not have the time.
I have donated some money, but what they ae looking for is auto payroll deductions, and volunteer work.
OH!! and they were keeping track on one charity drive, a list of everyones namesand whether or not they had "paid yet"

I think your employer has a right to ask about your involvement if they have a strong background in community involvement. I don’t think that a lack of participation should be held against you, however, given that the company states that community service is voluntary.

I worked several years in a small community bank. As an officer of the organization, I was expected to attend charity events like the Race for the Cure cancer walk and fundraisers for local arts program in order to show good faith on behalf of the bank in the community. Although there were no stated penalties for not attending, I was promoted up through the organization faster than my coworkers who were less involved.

If this is a career for you, and not just a job, I would try to meet their expectations even if they say that participation is voluntary. Sometimes you have to play the game by their rules to get ahead.

Construction jobs are already growing "faster than average" according to US Labor Statistics. Developers have access to government contracts and municiple and state taxes when they get infrastructure projects. Lawmakers get payoffs. Isn’t the stimulus package misplacing the job creation? I think it is just another way legislators, local and in Washington, can get kickbacks for assigning the "stimulus" funds. Unions, will of course be winners. The Dem party will get "donations"…I think this is a corrupt plan. Why not start by ending H1B Visas, outsourcing and Green card employment? Why not start with non-union protected jobs that are not growing in this economy? Why not start with IT retraining programs? Why not put people into school (college and trades)? This bill does nothing to help the average worker short or long-term. Just like the Auto-workers bailout, it is the same old Dem Union corruption.
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues/alert/?alertid=12498191&type=ML
US Bureau of Labor statistics says that trade union jobs are expected to grow faster than average with the exception of "extraction" (mining) jobs. Regardless of how you feel the industry is doing, there are positions that were in trouble before the crash and are in serious jeopardy of being outsourced or destroyed without assistance.

"Construction: Employment of these workers is expected to grow 9.5 percent, adding 785,000 new jobs. Construction trades and related workers will account for nearly 4 out of 5 of these new jobs, or 622,000, by 2016. Minor declines in extraction occupations will reflect overall employment stagnation in the mining and oil and gas extraction industries."
The stimulus has added mining, gas and oil extraction jobs to the stimulus, so even that stat is likely to become an even faster job growth area…again…a union job.
http://www.bls.gov/oco/oco2003.htm
If there weren’t so little going to create jobs in the first place I wouldn’t mind having union jobs increased…but only a small part is going to involve hiring, and I just don’t see it impacting the unemployment rolls.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/26/MNU515G2DD.DTL

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2154429/posts

And, by the way…I am hoping the stimulus works…we need it.
Take a look at the $130/hr SAP consulting jobs that go to foreigners who are paid to come here and work. I know…I have roomed with SAP consultants from India here on H1Bs. I work with H1Bs from Uganda. They won’t even look at a job that pays less than $110 and that is WITH expenses paid…all housing, food, utilities, gas, car rental, and air travel to and from the location with leisure travel allowances!!!
http://www.h1base.com/
Yes…that is $110/hr.

Spot on sweetheart.