This has got to be great for employee morale with sheriffs coming by to take company property, vehicles and cash.
02/27/2012 Garnishment Returned Non-Est
Document ID - 11-EXEC-4211; Served To - CONCORD PUBLICATIONS INC; Server - GOODRICH, ROBERT; Served Date - 31-JAN-12; Served Time - 00:00:00; Service Type - Execution 3; Reason Description - No Cash Found; Service Text - NULLA BONA
12/02/2011 Execution/Garnishment Issued
This is garnishment 11-EXEC-4211 for CONCORD PUBLICATIONS INC; LEVY UPON CASH REGISTER & SAFE LOCATED AAAAT 9977 LIN FERRY RD 63123; returnable date: 31-JAN-2012
10/14/2011 Garnishment Returned Non-Est
Document ID - 11-EXEC-3021; Served To - CONCORD PUBLICATIONS INC; Server - GOODRICH, ROBERT; Served Date - 07-OCT-11; Served Time - 00:00:00; Service Type - Execution 3; Reason Description - Property Not Found; Service Text - NULLA BONA
09/07/2011 Execution/Garnishment Issued
This is garnishment 11-EXEC-3021 for CONCORD PUBLICATIONS INC; VEHICLE LEVY; returnable date: 07-OCT-2011
Friday, March 30, 2012
Sunday, March 25, 2012
Friday, March 2, 2012
Flush Rush Updated 3/13/12 06:33 am
Saturday, March 13th, 2011
Boycott Rush Limbaugh’s Sponsors
It was the loss of sponsors is what forced Fox Programming to Fire Glenn Beck. His over the top Conservative Extremism was just too much for Sponsors to take a chance of having their products Brand Labeled to this Nut Job.
Well I am proposing that by boycotting those who sponsor Rush Limbaugh could be just as effective. Please take note and not purchase any of the sponsor’s products and services.
Oreck Upright Vacuum Cleaners
Oreck Corporation
100 Plantation Road
New Orleans, Louisiana 70123
800-289-5888
Instead of buying Oreck, may I suggest:
Tacony Corp. (St. Louis, MO): in 2000, Tacony brought production of Riccar and Simplicity upright vacuums from Taiwan to the U.S. at a new facility in St. James, MO. (Cannister vacuums are imported.) Find a Simplicity or Riccar retailer at SimplicityVac.com or Riccar.com
AutoZone Inc.
901-495-7185; Fax: 901-495-8374
P.O. Box 2198, Memphis, TN 38101
investor.relations@autozone.com
Citrix Online (GoToMyPC)
6500 Hollister Avenue, Goleta, CA 93117
Phone: 805-690-6400; Fax: 805-690-6471
info@citrixonline.com
American Forces Network
Contact Us: @MyAFN.net
Mission Pharmacal Company
10999 IH-10 West Suite 1000
P.O. Box 786099
San Antonio, TX 78278-6099
Telephone: (800) 531-3333
Bennett Kennedy - Citracal Product Manager
Life Quotes, Inc.
32045 Castle Court
Evergreen, CO 80439
1-800-670-5433
info@lifequotes.com.au
Lending Tree
(704) 541-5351
Online Contact page
With any luck, by cutting off the finanicial gains of those who sponsor this ASS WIPE that is Rush Limbaugh, they will soon drop him like the plague and possible any future sponsors.
Posted by Engineer of Knowledge at 5:31 PM
Labels: conservative politics, Conservative Radio, Fox News, Republican Con jobs and scams, Rush Limbaugh, U.S. Right Wing Extremist
Boycott Rush Limbaugh’s Sponsors
It was the loss of sponsors is what forced Fox Programming to Fire Glenn Beck. His over the top Conservative Extremism was just too much for Sponsors to take a chance of having their products Brand Labeled to this Nut Job.
Well I am proposing that by boycotting those who sponsor Rush Limbaugh could be just as effective. Please take note and not purchase any of the sponsor’s products and services.
Oreck Upright Vacuum Cleaners
Oreck Corporation
100 Plantation Road
New Orleans, Louisiana 70123
800-289-5888
Instead of buying Oreck, may I suggest:
Tacony Corp. (St. Louis, MO): in 2000, Tacony brought production of Riccar and Simplicity upright vacuums from Taiwan to the U.S. at a new facility in St. James, MO. (Cannister vacuums are imported.) Find a Simplicity or Riccar retailer at SimplicityVac.com or Riccar.com
AutoZone Inc.
901-495-7185; Fax: 901-495-8374
P.O. Box 2198, Memphis, TN 38101
investor.relations@autozone.com
Citrix Online (GoToMyPC)
6500 Hollister Avenue, Goleta, CA 93117
Phone: 805-690-6400; Fax: 805-690-6471
info@citrixonline.com
American Forces Network
Contact Us: @MyAFN.net
Mission Pharmacal Company
10999 IH-10 West Suite 1000
P.O. Box 786099
San Antonio, TX 78278-6099
Telephone: (800) 531-3333
Bennett Kennedy - Citracal Product Manager
Life Quotes, Inc.
32045 Castle Court
Evergreen, CO 80439
1-800-670-5433
info@lifequotes.com.au
Lending Tree
(704) 541-5351
Online Contact page
With any luck, by cutting off the finanicial gains of those who sponsor this ASS WIPE that is Rush Limbaugh, they will soon drop him like the plague and possible any future sponsors.
Posted by Engineer of Knowledge at 5:31 PM
Labels: conservative politics, Conservative Radio, Fox News, Republican Con jobs and scams, Rush Limbaugh, U.S. Right Wing Extremist
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Does Someone Have This Stipulation of Facts
Mike--
This comment has nothing to do with this post, so no need to publish it. But I was writing to ask if you could follow up on the Mehlville Fire Board's agreement with the attorney general. In my mind these are agencies funded by public dollars, so any non-personnel documents should be available to the public. The case is viewable on Case.net under this information:
Case number 10SL-CC00741. Here is the last docket entry:
"
Judgment Entered
JUDGMENT IS ENTERED DECLARINGT THAT THE DISTRICT'S PROPOSED LEVY FOR 2009 DID NOT VIOLATE STATE LAW. EACH PARTY IS TO BEAR THEIR OWN COSTS. SO ORDERED: JUDGE PATRICK CLIFFORD
THE PARTIES HAVE ENTERED INTO A STIPULATION OF FACTS THAT WAS FILED WITH THE COURT ON MARCH 18, 2011.
I have searched the Attorney general's website for a copy of this stipulation but find nothing. I would be very interested to know how the tax levy was deemed appropriate. Perhaps you have contacts that can get a copy? If so, please please post.
Thanks Mike
This comment has nothing to do with this post, so no need to publish it. But I was writing to ask if you could follow up on the Mehlville Fire Board's agreement with the attorney general. In my mind these are agencies funded by public dollars, so any non-personnel documents should be available to the public. The case is viewable on Case.net under this information:
Case number 10SL-CC00741. Here is the last docket entry:
"
Judgment Entered
JUDGMENT IS ENTERED DECLARINGT THAT THE DISTRICT'S PROPOSED LEVY FOR 2009 DID NOT VIOLATE STATE LAW. EACH PARTY IS TO BEAR THEIR OWN COSTS. SO ORDERED: JUDGE PATRICK CLIFFORD
THE PARTIES HAVE ENTERED INTO A STIPULATION OF FACTS THAT WAS FILED WITH THE COURT ON MARCH 18, 2011.
I have searched the Attorney general's website for a copy of this stipulation but find nothing. I would be very interested to know how the tax levy was deemed appropriate. Perhaps you have contacts that can get a copy? If so, please please post.
Thanks Mike
Saturday, February 4, 2012
Bevis and Buttheads Continued
Nobody likes getting a ticket. Nobody likes the idea of it being easier through a
camera to get a ticket. But as a civilized society, we realize that we must conform to rules that promote the public safety. Certainly rational people can agree on this.
But Senator Lembke doesn't care about public safety. Or should I say, Senator Lembke cares more about politics than he cares about public safety?
Lembke has been fighting his ticket for running a red light for a year now. A year!
He's gotten the assistance of the Show Me Institute's lawyers in trying to overturn his violation of the law.
Perhaps I'm being nostalgic when I remember a time when conservatives were about law and order and responsibility.
Upcoming: defendant JAMES LEMBKE and court case number 1122CR00921. A(n) Hearing has been scheduled for 1/26/2012 at 9:30 AM. This will take place in St Louis City Circuit Court, located at: 10 N. Tucker Blvd. in St. Louis, MO 63101.
Defendant Lembke may seek another delay again to further serve his political interests.
camera to get a ticket. But as a civilized society, we realize that we must conform to rules that promote the public safety. Certainly rational people can agree on this.
But Senator Lembke doesn't care about public safety. Or should I say, Senator Lembke cares more about politics than he cares about public safety?
Lembke has been fighting his ticket for running a red light for a year now. A year!
He's gotten the assistance of the Show Me Institute's lawyers in trying to overturn his violation of the law.
Perhaps I'm being nostalgic when I remember a time when conservatives were about law and order and responsibility.
Upcoming: defendant JAMES LEMBKE and court case number 1122CR00921. A(n) Hearing has been scheduled for 1/26/2012 at 9:30 AM. This will take place in St Louis City Circuit Court, located at: 10 N. Tucker Blvd. in St. Louis, MO 63101.
Defendant Lembke may seek another delay again to further serve his political interests.
Friday, February 3, 2012
The Tenther Movement and State Senator James Lembke
It’s difficult for me to accept the fact that Lembke is currently our state senator. I realize he’s a good salesman but his product, himself, is not what’s good for our community. It’s more than his unethical actions such as targeting judges that don’t rule in favor of his friends. It’s more than just about his attempts to stifle the use of technology to make our highways safer. It's about his ideology. It’s hard for me to describe so let me just say Lembke is a Tenther. Go ahead and ask him. This is the kind of stuff he pushes in our state legislature. These folks aren’t right and Lembke shouldn’t be our state senator.
Below is verbatim as it appeared in Wikipedia. Note the word "bipartisan" in the opening paragraph. It was slid in by the Tenthers but removed by Wikipedia.
Look at their website and see if you think they’re “bi-partisan.”
Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
State Sovereignty Resolutions and Nullification Acts
The Tenth Amendment Center, an organization seeking to promote the concept of state sovereignty, has gathered information on various actions taken by state legislatures in protest to federal actions. The organization is bipartisan. The movement has quietly gained support in a number of states.
* State Sovereignty Resolutions ("10th Amendment Resolutions") – During 2009, "state sovereignty resolutions" or "10th Amendment Resolutions" were introduced in the legislatures of 37 states; in seven states the resolutions passed (Alaska, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and Tennessee). As of April 2010[update], resolutions were introduced or reintroduced into the legislatures of 19 states; the resolution has passed in five states (Alabama, Kansas, South Carolina, Utah, and Wyoming).[4] [5]
* State Sovereignty Bills ("10th Amendment Bills") – As of March 2010[update], in five states (Georgia, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, and Oklahoma) Tenth Amendment supporters have introduced "State Sovereignty Bills" (one step beyond the Resolution stage discussed above), which would mandate action against what the state legislature perceives as unconstitutional federal legislation; none have made it past the introductory stage.[6]
* Firearms Freedom Act Legislation and Federal Gun Laws Nullification – As of April 2010[update], resolutions have been introduced in the legislatures of 27 states that would "declare[] that any firearms made and retained in-state are beyond the authority of Congress under its constitutional power to regulate commerce among the states". During 2009 the legislation passed in Montana and Tennessee and during 2010 the legislation passed in Arizona, Idaho, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming.[7] South Carolina has taken the issue one step further: in 2010 a bill was introduced which would effectively nullify all gun registration laws within the state.[8]
* Medical Marijuana Laws – As of March 2010[update], 14 states (Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington) have passed legislation which permit the use of medicinal marijuana.[9] California has a proposed November 2010 constitutional amendment which would go one step further, and legalize marijuana use by persons over age 21 for any purpose whatsoever.[10] The Obama Administration announced in October 2009 that it advised federal prosecutors not to target medicinal marijuana users, or their suppliers, in states that have passed such laws.[11]
* REAL ID Act – As of March 2010[update], 25 states (beginning with Maine in 2007) have passed legislation and/or resolutions which opposed this legislation. Though the legislation is still on the books, its implementation has been delayed on several occasions and is currently not being enforced.[12]
* National Health Care Nullification – As of March 2010[update], 30 states have introduced legislation which would declare certain provisions of any proposed national health care bill to be null and void within the state; the legislation passed in Arizona, Idaho, Utah, and Virginia.[13] Such provisions include mandatory participation in such a system as well as preserving the right of a patient to pay a health care professional for treatment (and for the professional to accept it) outside of a single-payer system. Arizona's legislation passed as a proposed constitutional amendment, to be submitted to the voters in 2010.[14] On February 1, 2010, the Virginia Senate took a stand against a key provision of a proposed federal health care overhaul, passing legislation declaring that Virginia residents cannot be forced to buy health insurance. On March 17, 2010, the Governor of Idaho signed a bill requiring the Attorney General to sue the Federal Government if Idaho residents are required to buy health insurance.[15]
* "Bring the Guard Home" – As of March 2010[update], seven states have introduced legislation which would permit the Governor of the state to recall any National Guard troops from overseas deployments (such as in Iraq and Afghanistan); the bills failed in Maryland and New Mexico.[16]
* Constitutional Tender – As of March 2010[update], seven states have introduced legislation which would seek to nullify federal legal tender laws in the state by authorizing payment in gold and silver or a paper note backed 100% by gold or silver; the legislation failed in Colorado and Montana.[17]
* "Cap-and-trade" Nullification – As of March 2010[update], four states have introduced legislation which would nullify any proposed federal emissions regulation under the "cap and trade" model); none have advanced beyond the introductory stage.[18]
* State Sovereignty and Federal Tax Funds Acts – As of March 2010[update], three states have introduced legislation which would require businesses (and in some cases, individuals) to remit their Federal tax payments to the state Treasurer (or equivalent body) for deposit into an escrow fund. If the state Legislature determined that a portion of the federal budget was not constitutional, or if the federal government imposed penalties or sanctions upon the state for creating the fund, then the money would be withheld.) None have advanced beyond the introductory stage[19]
* "Sheriffs First" Legislation – As of March 2010[update], three states have introduced legislation which would make it a crime for any federal agent to make an arrest, search, or seizure within the state without getting the advanced, written permission of the sheriff of the county in which the event would take place); none have advanced beyond the introductory stage.[20]
* "Federal Land" Legislation – As of February 2010[update], Utah has introduced legislation to allow the use of Eminent domain on federal land. Rep. Christopher Herrod has introduced the bill in a state where the Federal Government controls over 60% of the land. The effort has the full support of Republican Attorney General Mark Shurtleff, who would have to defend the law. The proposal includes setting aside $3 million for legal defense.[21]
* "Nullification of Federal Intrastate Commerce Regulation" – As of March 2010[update], four states have introduced legislation which would nullify federal regulation of commerce and activities which are solely within the boundaries of a state and which do not cross state lines. The Virginia legislation has passed one house.[22]
Source: WikiPedia/10th_Amendment
Related
About the "Tenthers" (Wikipedia)
Tenth Amendment Center — Where the Wild Things Are
The 10th_Amendment (Wikipedia)
Below is verbatim as it appeared in Wikipedia. Note the word "bipartisan" in the opening paragraph. It was slid in by the Tenthers but removed by Wikipedia.
Look at their website and see if you think they’re “bi-partisan.”
Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
State Sovereignty Resolutions and Nullification Acts
The Tenth Amendment Center, an organization seeking to promote the concept of state sovereignty, has gathered information on various actions taken by state legislatures in protest to federal actions. The organization is bipartisan. The movement has quietly gained support in a number of states.
* State Sovereignty Resolutions ("10th Amendment Resolutions") – During 2009, "state sovereignty resolutions" or "10th Amendment Resolutions" were introduced in the legislatures of 37 states; in seven states the resolutions passed (Alaska, Idaho, North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and Tennessee). As of April 2010[update], resolutions were introduced or reintroduced into the legislatures of 19 states; the resolution has passed in five states (Alabama, Kansas, South Carolina, Utah, and Wyoming).[4] [5]
* State Sovereignty Bills ("10th Amendment Bills") – As of March 2010[update], in five states (Georgia, Michigan, Missouri, New Hampshire, and Oklahoma) Tenth Amendment supporters have introduced "State Sovereignty Bills" (one step beyond the Resolution stage discussed above), which would mandate action against what the state legislature perceives as unconstitutional federal legislation; none have made it past the introductory stage.[6]
* Firearms Freedom Act Legislation and Federal Gun Laws Nullification – As of April 2010[update], resolutions have been introduced in the legislatures of 27 states that would "declare[] that any firearms made and retained in-state are beyond the authority of Congress under its constitutional power to regulate commerce among the states". During 2009 the legislation passed in Montana and Tennessee and during 2010 the legislation passed in Arizona, Idaho, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming.[7] South Carolina has taken the issue one step further: in 2010 a bill was introduced which would effectively nullify all gun registration laws within the state.[8]
* Medical Marijuana Laws – As of March 2010[update], 14 states (Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington) have passed legislation which permit the use of medicinal marijuana.[9] California has a proposed November 2010 constitutional amendment which would go one step further, and legalize marijuana use by persons over age 21 for any purpose whatsoever.[10] The Obama Administration announced in October 2009 that it advised federal prosecutors not to target medicinal marijuana users, or their suppliers, in states that have passed such laws.[11]
* REAL ID Act – As of March 2010[update], 25 states (beginning with Maine in 2007) have passed legislation and/or resolutions which opposed this legislation. Though the legislation is still on the books, its implementation has been delayed on several occasions and is currently not being enforced.[12]
* National Health Care Nullification – As of March 2010[update], 30 states have introduced legislation which would declare certain provisions of any proposed national health care bill to be null and void within the state; the legislation passed in Arizona, Idaho, Utah, and Virginia.[13] Such provisions include mandatory participation in such a system as well as preserving the right of a patient to pay a health care professional for treatment (and for the professional to accept it) outside of a single-payer system. Arizona's legislation passed as a proposed constitutional amendment, to be submitted to the voters in 2010.[14] On February 1, 2010, the Virginia Senate took a stand against a key provision of a proposed federal health care overhaul, passing legislation declaring that Virginia residents cannot be forced to buy health insurance. On March 17, 2010, the Governor of Idaho signed a bill requiring the Attorney General to sue the Federal Government if Idaho residents are required to buy health insurance.[15]
* "Bring the Guard Home" – As of March 2010[update], seven states have introduced legislation which would permit the Governor of the state to recall any National Guard troops from overseas deployments (such as in Iraq and Afghanistan); the bills failed in Maryland and New Mexico.[16]
* Constitutional Tender – As of March 2010[update], seven states have introduced legislation which would seek to nullify federal legal tender laws in the state by authorizing payment in gold and silver or a paper note backed 100% by gold or silver; the legislation failed in Colorado and Montana.[17]
* "Cap-and-trade" Nullification – As of March 2010[update], four states have introduced legislation which would nullify any proposed federal emissions regulation under the "cap and trade" model); none have advanced beyond the introductory stage.[18]
* State Sovereignty and Federal Tax Funds Acts – As of March 2010[update], three states have introduced legislation which would require businesses (and in some cases, individuals) to remit their Federal tax payments to the state Treasurer (or equivalent body) for deposit into an escrow fund. If the state Legislature determined that a portion of the federal budget was not constitutional, or if the federal government imposed penalties or sanctions upon the state for creating the fund, then the money would be withheld.) None have advanced beyond the introductory stage[19]
* "Sheriffs First" Legislation – As of March 2010[update], three states have introduced legislation which would make it a crime for any federal agent to make an arrest, search, or seizure within the state without getting the advanced, written permission of the sheriff of the county in which the event would take place); none have advanced beyond the introductory stage.[20]
* "Federal Land" Legislation – As of February 2010[update], Utah has introduced legislation to allow the use of Eminent domain on federal land. Rep. Christopher Herrod has introduced the bill in a state where the Federal Government controls over 60% of the land. The effort has the full support of Republican Attorney General Mark Shurtleff, who would have to defend the law. The proposal includes setting aside $3 million for legal defense.[21]
* "Nullification of Federal Intrastate Commerce Regulation" – As of March 2010[update], four states have introduced legislation which would nullify federal regulation of commerce and activities which are solely within the boundaries of a state and which do not cross state lines. The Virginia legislation has passed one house.[22]
Source: WikiPedia/10th_Amendment
Related
About the "Tenthers" (Wikipedia)
Tenth Amendment Center — Where the Wild Things Are
The 10th_Amendment (Wikipedia)
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Letter to the St. Louis Post Dispatch Editor
The article “A to-do list for legislators” offered opinions on state funding for the St. Louis Public Schools and the State of Missouri.
The authors share their conclusions but offered zero facts from which they were based. The article suggested the funding formula be changed because the city schools (according to them) were not using their money effectively. The State of Missouri took over the city school district several years ago. If there is something wrong with the district, it’s the state’s fault. That’s not a good reason to change policy for the other 523 school districts.
The Missouri K-12 budget is short some 500 million dollars.To suggest that the legislature give out tax credits worsens the problem.
Perhaps since these doctoral fellows are working from Arkansas, they aren’t familiar with public education in the state of Missouri and have no idea about what’s going with the St. Louis Public Schools. But likely they do. We know the authors are KIPP school promoters. KIPP, like Imagine, is a corporate school operator. Like any business, they are motivated by profits. They make promises and take over schools. They selectively weed out the underperforming kids and your left with the same problems and a lot less money.
The legislature must deal with the state’s education funding formula. They also have a challenge dealing with the St. Louis Public School District since they took it over. These simple solutions offered by those with corporate agendas will only help their shareholders.
Mike Heins Concord/SouthCounty
The authors share their conclusions but offered zero facts from which they were based. The article suggested the funding formula be changed because the city schools (according to them) were not using their money effectively. The State of Missouri took over the city school district several years ago. If there is something wrong with the district, it’s the state’s fault. That’s not a good reason to change policy for the other 523 school districts.
The Missouri K-12 budget is short some 500 million dollars.To suggest that the legislature give out tax credits worsens the problem.
Perhaps since these doctoral fellows are working from Arkansas, they aren’t familiar with public education in the state of Missouri and have no idea about what’s going with the St. Louis Public Schools. But likely they do. We know the authors are KIPP school promoters. KIPP, like Imagine, is a corporate school operator. Like any business, they are motivated by profits. They make promises and take over schools. They selectively weed out the underperforming kids and your left with the same problems and a lot less money.
The legislature must deal with the state’s education funding formula. They also have a challenge dealing with the St. Louis Public School District since they took it over. These simple solutions offered by those with corporate agendas will only help their shareholders.
Mike Heins Concord/SouthCounty
Monday, January 2, 2012
Friday, December 30, 2011
Mehlviile Fire Board 2012 Meeting Dates
Mehlville Fire Protection District
2012 Board Meeting Dates
January 11 5:00 p.m.
January 25 5:00 p.m.
February 8 5:00 p.m.
February 22 5:00 p.m.
March 7 5:00 p.m.
March 21 5:00 p.m.
April 11 5:00 p.m.
April 25 5:00 p.m.
May 9 5:00 p.m.
May 23 5:00 p.m.
June 6 5:00 p.m.
June 20 5:00 p.m.
July 4 (reschedule) 5:00 p.m.
July 18 5:00 p.m.
August 1 5:00 p.m.
August 15 5:00 p.m.
August 29 5:00 p.m.
September 12 5:00 p.m.
September 26 5:00 p.m.
October 10 5:00 p.m.
October 24 5:00 p.m.
November 7 5:00 p.m.
November 21 5:00 p.m.
December 5 5:00 p.m.
December 19 5:00 p.m.
2012 Board Meeting Dates
January 11 5:00 p.m.
January 25 5:00 p.m.
February 8 5:00 p.m.
February 22 5:00 p.m.
March 7 5:00 p.m.
March 21 5:00 p.m.
April 11 5:00 p.m.
April 25 5:00 p.m.
May 9 5:00 p.m.
May 23 5:00 p.m.
June 6 5:00 p.m.
June 20 5:00 p.m.
July 4 (reschedule) 5:00 p.m.
July 18 5:00 p.m.
August 1 5:00 p.m.
August 15 5:00 p.m.
August 29 5:00 p.m.
September 12 5:00 p.m.
September 26 5:00 p.m.
October 10 5:00 p.m.
October 24 5:00 p.m.
November 7 5:00 p.m.
November 21 5:00 p.m.
December 5 5:00 p.m.
December 19 5:00 p.m.
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Bevis and Buttheads
This week, Missouri State James Lembke, known often as defendant, goes to court in the city of St. Louis with a a red light violation. Again, our state senator is more interested in publicity for himself than the safety of Missourians. His attorney is Bevis Schock. Bevis just lost a round with the City of Clayton with their no smoking ordinance.
Did you ever notice these conservatives are always worried about constitutional issues except when it might help out someone of a different color?
Challenge to Clayton outdoor smoking ban rejected
BY Margaret Gillerman • mgillerman@post-dispatch.com > 314-725-6758 STLtoday.com | Posted: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 12:05 am |
Smoking Ban starts Thursday in Clayton
J.B. FORBES
6/30/10 Wednesday Clayton Lawyers Charles Teschner, left, and Nathan Collins finish their lunch at Barrister's in Clayton Wednesday afternoon. Teschner finished his cigarette and said the majority of people had spoken when it came to a cigarette ban. J.B. Forbes Jforbes@post-dispatch.com
loading Loading…
* Smoking Ban starts Thursday in Clayton
* Smoking Ban starts Thursday in Clayton
CLAYTON • A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit against Clayton that sought to overturn the city's ban on smoking on outdoor, city-owned property, including public parks.
"The city was confident that our ordinance was enacted properly and within the authority of municipal public health concerns," said Mayor Linda Goldstein.
Attorneys W. Bevis Schock and Hugh Eastwood filed the suit on behalf of resident Arthur Gallagher, who enjoyed smoking cigars in city parks. The suit claimed that the ordinance violated Gallagher's constitutional rights. Among the arguments, the suit said that 'smoking is a fundamental right" and asserted that smokers are persecuted and members of a legally protected class.
Schock said Monday that his client would appeal.
"It really comes down to whether the federal courts are going to hold the line where there really isn't any evidence of health benefits at all" for banning outdoor smoking, he said. "The question is whether they are going to let the members of the Board of Aldermen — who respond to fashion — infringe on our liberty.
From the Cayton Richmond Heights Patch: In a statement issued shortly after Goldstein's, City Attorney Kevin O'Keefe claims Schock took out an ad in the West End Word advertising for plaintiffs in a complaint that had already been drafted against the city. A copy of the ad, provided by O'Keefe, is attached to this article file.
"I hope Mr. Schock enjoys the publicity he so avidly seeks," O'Keefe stated. "The fact that Mr. Schock paid to advertise for a volunteer plaintiff for a suit he had written in advance and, in writing, said he would 'be paid by The City of Clayton' is a sad and embarrassing commentary on the state of the legal profession. I also believe the fact that his pleading is prefaced by the musical musings of Groucho Marx in a make-believe place is telling evidence of the merits of the case.
I'm guessing Hugh Eastwood, Show-Me Institute's Counselor of Silliness will also be involved.
Did you ever notice these conservatives are always worried about constitutional issues except when it might help out someone of a different color?
Challenge to Clayton outdoor smoking ban rejected
BY Margaret Gillerman • mgillerman@post-dispatch.com > 314-725-6758 STLtoday.com | Posted: Tuesday, December 13, 2011 12:05 am |
Smoking Ban starts Thursday in Clayton
J.B. FORBES
6/30/10 Wednesday Clayton Lawyers Charles Teschner, left, and Nathan Collins finish their lunch at Barrister's in Clayton Wednesday afternoon. Teschner finished his cigarette and said the majority of people had spoken when it came to a cigarette ban. J.B. Forbes Jforbes@post-dispatch.com
loading Loading…
* Smoking Ban starts Thursday in Clayton
* Smoking Ban starts Thursday in Clayton
CLAYTON • A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit against Clayton that sought to overturn the city's ban on smoking on outdoor, city-owned property, including public parks.
"The city was confident that our ordinance was enacted properly and within the authority of municipal public health concerns," said Mayor Linda Goldstein.
Attorneys W. Bevis Schock and Hugh Eastwood filed the suit on behalf of resident Arthur Gallagher, who enjoyed smoking cigars in city parks. The suit claimed that the ordinance violated Gallagher's constitutional rights. Among the arguments, the suit said that 'smoking is a fundamental right" and asserted that smokers are persecuted and members of a legally protected class.
Schock said Monday that his client would appeal.
"It really comes down to whether the federal courts are going to hold the line where there really isn't any evidence of health benefits at all" for banning outdoor smoking, he said. "The question is whether they are going to let the members of the Board of Aldermen — who respond to fashion — infringe on our liberty.
From the Cayton Richmond Heights Patch: In a statement issued shortly after Goldstein's, City Attorney Kevin O'Keefe claims Schock took out an ad in the West End Word advertising for plaintiffs in a complaint that had already been drafted against the city. A copy of the ad, provided by O'Keefe, is attached to this article file.
"I hope Mr. Schock enjoys the publicity he so avidly seeks," O'Keefe stated. "The fact that Mr. Schock paid to advertise for a volunteer plaintiff for a suit he had written in advance and, in writing, said he would 'be paid by The City of Clayton' is a sad and embarrassing commentary on the state of the legal profession. I also believe the fact that his pleading is prefaced by the musical musings of Groucho Marx in a make-believe place is telling evidence of the merits of the case.
I'm guessing Hugh Eastwood, Show-Me Institute's Counselor of Silliness will also be involved.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Lembke Supports Martin Over Spence
Surprise , surprise! One Tenther supports another for governor. Hey Jim, do you remember what Martin did during the Blunt administration?
Lembke Supports Martin Over Spence By .Sean at Fired Up on November 30, 2011 - 1:54pm
Sen. Jim Lembke wrote the following to the Draft Ed Martin for Governor Facebook group this afternoon: "We need a candidate for governor that embraces the constiution, knows the proper role of government and is not afraid to stand firm against the tyranny of the federal government. We need a leader at the top of our ticket that will take the fight to Nixon. This race is an uphill climb and will take a candidate that is seasoned, and has been around the block. I believe the right man for the job is ED MARTIN."
Lembke Supports Martin Over Spence By .Sean at Fired Up on November 30, 2011 - 1:54pm
Sen. Jim Lembke wrote the following to the Draft Ed Martin for Governor Facebook group this afternoon: "We need a candidate for governor that embraces the constiution, knows the proper role of government and is not afraid to stand firm against the tyranny of the federal government. We need a leader at the top of our ticket that will take the fight to Nixon. This race is an uphill climb and will take a candidate that is seasoned, and has been around the block. I believe the right man for the job is ED MARTIN."
Sunday, November 27, 2011
Be Thankful for Government
By Mark Sumner
Like many of you, I was lucky enough to spend Thanksgiving with my family. Big breakfast, bigger lunch. My son had to leave early so he could go to his night shift job, but hey, I'm thankful he has a job. I'm thankful for all of it—the family, the home, the food, the moments of peace and satisfaction. I realize how many people were missing family, missing homes, missing jobs, missing the chance to enjoy the day.
While I was being thankful, I gave my thanks for what made a good day possible. I gave thanks for government.
Thanks for the highways and railroads that brought my family swiftly and safely together. The need for an system of federal roads to connect the nation was so clear that the first major effort was commissioned by George Washington and the legislation signed by Thomas Jefferson in 1806. The value of the railroads so obvious that the acts to put lines across the nation were signed by Abraham Lincoln in 1862 and 1864 while the Civil War was underway.
Thanks for the safety of the food we ate. I'd like to say that everything we had was organic and locally owned, but I'm thankful that when a Midwesterner resorts to canned cranberries, he can do so with the assurance that the contents of the can will be cranberries, and not sawdust or simply garbage. For that I can think the Pure Food and Drug Act that Theodore Roosevelt signed in 1906. Roosevelt was a skeptic who didn't believe the horror stories that Upton Sinclair wrote in The Jungle. So he sent his own team out to investigate. Within weeks the legislation was passed. Thirty years later, another Roosevelt signed the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, strengthening the ability of the new FDA to make sure our food was safe and labeled correctly.
Thanks for the safety of the water we drank. Yes, there might be problems with that water we don't yet recognize, but I can drink it with some assurance that it won't hold raw sewage thanks to the Rivers and Harbors Act that William McKinley signed in 1899, and that it won't be laced with toxic chemicals thanks to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act that Harry Truman signed in 1948, and the Clean Water Act which a Democratic House and Senate passed in 1972 over the veto of Richard Nixon.
Thanks for the safety of the air we breathed. On Thanksgiving week in 1939, the area where I live was shrouded in a smog so thick that day and night were the same. Street lights glowed in the gloom of noon, and people passed out just walking along their sidewalks. This week we looked out on beautiful blue skies and the only smell in the air was the last autumnal hint of fallen leaves. For that I thank the Clean Air Act signed by John Kennedy in 1963 and the expansions of that law that came later, including the one Nixon had the sense to sign in 1970. I thank that same legislation for the beautiful woodlands out my window, woods that could easily have have died from pollution, acid rain, and disease were it not for the legislation that protects them.
Thanks for the teachers that went all out to see that we got good educations at public grade school, high school, and college. While I'm at it, some thanks for the fantastic national benefits of an educated populace, and to the incalculable rewards in dollars, health, and standard of living that have come from an extensive system of public research universities.
I give thanks for the system that saw so many travelers safely through the air this week. I know that you guys don't like looking in our shoes any more than we like taking them off.
I certainly give thanks for those in the military who are, let's hope, spending their last Thanksgiving away from their families. My brother-in-law who is actually older than me (such people exist) was still required to spend this holiday in Iraq; everyone in the family will give special thanks when that's no longer true.
Thanks for Social Security and for how it has transformed this nation from the place where the majority of the elderly lived in poverty.
Mostly I give thanks the words that Lincoln said: government of the people, by the people, for the people.
There are those who see government as the problem. As the enemy. They want to reduce government's role. There are candidates for president running on the idea of destroying the government as a tool to protect health, safety, and envionment; campaigning in the name repealing some of those same laws i just listed and eliminating the agencies that enforce them. The thing is, none of those laws exist because someone thought it would be a peachy idea. They exist because there was a need. Government is not a power grab by some outside force, it is the body of the people, acting in the people's own self interest.
I suppose it would be possible to live in a country were every road was a private road. Where only the children of the fortunate were educated. Where the elderly were on thir own. A country where the only law protecting your family's food was caveat emptor and clean air was available to those who could buy it in bottles. A place where safety was measured in the caliber of your weapon, and peace in the height of your walls. It might be possible, but it would be ugly. It wouldn't be America.
Our government exists for many purposes. These purposes include protecting the resources we hold in common, regulating the activity of business, protecting our health and welfare, and seeing that the people are given the information they need to make informed choices.
Says who? Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, McKinley, Roosevelt, Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy... and that's just scratching the surface. America is only as good as its government, and that government deserves people who want to make it better, not worse.
I'll be thankful if eleven months from now we elect a few.
Like many of you, I was lucky enough to spend Thanksgiving with my family. Big breakfast, bigger lunch. My son had to leave early so he could go to his night shift job, but hey, I'm thankful he has a job. I'm thankful for all of it—the family, the home, the food, the moments of peace and satisfaction. I realize how many people were missing family, missing homes, missing jobs, missing the chance to enjoy the day.
While I was being thankful, I gave my thanks for what made a good day possible. I gave thanks for government.
Thanks for the highways and railroads that brought my family swiftly and safely together. The need for an system of federal roads to connect the nation was so clear that the first major effort was commissioned by George Washington and the legislation signed by Thomas Jefferson in 1806. The value of the railroads so obvious that the acts to put lines across the nation were signed by Abraham Lincoln in 1862 and 1864 while the Civil War was underway.
Thanks for the safety of the food we ate. I'd like to say that everything we had was organic and locally owned, but I'm thankful that when a Midwesterner resorts to canned cranberries, he can do so with the assurance that the contents of the can will be cranberries, and not sawdust or simply garbage. For that I can think the Pure Food and Drug Act that Theodore Roosevelt signed in 1906. Roosevelt was a skeptic who didn't believe the horror stories that Upton Sinclair wrote in The Jungle. So he sent his own team out to investigate. Within weeks the legislation was passed. Thirty years later, another Roosevelt signed the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, strengthening the ability of the new FDA to make sure our food was safe and labeled correctly.
Thanks for the safety of the water we drank. Yes, there might be problems with that water we don't yet recognize, but I can drink it with some assurance that it won't hold raw sewage thanks to the Rivers and Harbors Act that William McKinley signed in 1899, and that it won't be laced with toxic chemicals thanks to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act that Harry Truman signed in 1948, and the Clean Water Act which a Democratic House and Senate passed in 1972 over the veto of Richard Nixon.
Thanks for the safety of the air we breathed. On Thanksgiving week in 1939, the area where I live was shrouded in a smog so thick that day and night were the same. Street lights glowed in the gloom of noon, and people passed out just walking along their sidewalks. This week we looked out on beautiful blue skies and the only smell in the air was the last autumnal hint of fallen leaves. For that I thank the Clean Air Act signed by John Kennedy in 1963 and the expansions of that law that came later, including the one Nixon had the sense to sign in 1970. I thank that same legislation for the beautiful woodlands out my window, woods that could easily have have died from pollution, acid rain, and disease were it not for the legislation that protects them.
Thanks for the teachers that went all out to see that we got good educations at public grade school, high school, and college. While I'm at it, some thanks for the fantastic national benefits of an educated populace, and to the incalculable rewards in dollars, health, and standard of living that have come from an extensive system of public research universities.
I give thanks for the system that saw so many travelers safely through the air this week. I know that you guys don't like looking in our shoes any more than we like taking them off.
I certainly give thanks for those in the military who are, let's hope, spending their last Thanksgiving away from their families. My brother-in-law who is actually older than me (such people exist) was still required to spend this holiday in Iraq; everyone in the family will give special thanks when that's no longer true.
Thanks for Social Security and for how it has transformed this nation from the place where the majority of the elderly lived in poverty.
Mostly I give thanks the words that Lincoln said: government of the people, by the people, for the people.
There are those who see government as the problem. As the enemy. They want to reduce government's role. There are candidates for president running on the idea of destroying the government as a tool to protect health, safety, and envionment; campaigning in the name repealing some of those same laws i just listed and eliminating the agencies that enforce them. The thing is, none of those laws exist because someone thought it would be a peachy idea. They exist because there was a need. Government is not a power grab by some outside force, it is the body of the people, acting in the people's own self interest.
I suppose it would be possible to live in a country were every road was a private road. Where only the children of the fortunate were educated. Where the elderly were on thir own. A country where the only law protecting your family's food was caveat emptor and clean air was available to those who could buy it in bottles. A place where safety was measured in the caliber of your weapon, and peace in the height of your walls. It might be possible, but it would be ugly. It wouldn't be America.
Our government exists for many purposes. These purposes include protecting the resources we hold in common, regulating the activity of business, protecting our health and welfare, and seeing that the people are given the information they need to make informed choices.
Says who? Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, McKinley, Roosevelt, Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy... and that's just scratching the surface. America is only as good as its government, and that government deserves people who want to make it better, not worse.
I'll be thankful if eleven months from now we elect a few.
Friday, November 25, 2011
Oakville Gets New Pizza
From the STL Core
Joanie’s Pizza Opens in South County
By Mary Miller Cullins
St. Louis Core wants to give a shout out to our friend, Joanie Thomas! Last week, due to popular demand, Joanie Thomas and her staff opened a 3rd Pizzeria in Oakville. Many of you are familiar with Joanie’s Pizzeria and Joanies-To-Go located in the Soulard neighborhood near downtown St. Louis. But did you know that as of last week if you live in the South County/Oakville area Joanie opened a new location to serve you? That’s right, Joanies famous pizza, pasta, and sandwiches are now just a phone call away for south county residents.
The restaurant offers delivery and carry-out for now, but Joanie plans to make renovations next year and open a dining area that will seat 35-40 guests. Located at 5441 Telegraph Rd., Joanie’s Pizzeria Oakville is open Tuesday-Thursday and Sunday until 10:00 p.m. and is open until midnight on Friday’s and Saturday’s.
Congratulations Joanie! Good Luck to you and your staff from your friends at St. Louis Core. And from the South County News as well.
Joanie’s Pizza Opens in South County
By Mary Miller Cullins
St. Louis Core wants to give a shout out to our friend, Joanie Thomas! Last week, due to popular demand, Joanie Thomas and her staff opened a 3rd Pizzeria in Oakville. Many of you are familiar with Joanie’s Pizzeria and Joanies-To-Go located in the Soulard neighborhood near downtown St. Louis. But did you know that as of last week if you live in the South County/Oakville area Joanie opened a new location to serve you? That’s right, Joanies famous pizza, pasta, and sandwiches are now just a phone call away for south county residents.
The restaurant offers delivery and carry-out for now, but Joanie plans to make renovations next year and open a dining area that will seat 35-40 guests. Located at 5441 Telegraph Rd., Joanie’s Pizzeria Oakville is open Tuesday-Thursday and Sunday until 10:00 p.m. and is open until midnight on Friday’s and Saturday’s.
Congratulations Joanie! Good Luck to you and your staff from your friends at St. Louis Core. And from the South County News as well.
Saturday, November 19, 2011
Tesson Ferry/21 Development
It looks like the Siteman project will soon be breaking ground on their new site here in South County.Delays in obtaining the state's certificate of need have pushed back the start of this 17 million dollar development. St. Anthony's Hospital opposed it. This is good news for area cancer patients, homeowners and workers in our community.
Have you heard much about it in the local media?
Siteman Plans New South St. Louis County Location
South_County_Map
The 16.28-acre site is immediately south and east of the intersection of Interstate 55 and Butler Hill Road, with access from Butler Hill Road. View a larger version of the map.
July 29, 2010 – Washington University School of Medicine and Barnes-Jewish Hospital have signed a contract to purchase property and filed a Certificate of Need Letter of Intent to build a new Siteman Cancer Center location in south St. Louis County that will serve the Interstate 55 corridor and southern Illinois.
Upon completing obligations related to the sale, zoning and Certificate of Need application and obtaining final approval from Washington University and Barnes-Jewish Hospital boards, construction is estimated to begin in spring 2011, with an opening anticipated in about two years.
The 16.28-acre site is immediately south and east of the intersection of Interstate 55 and Butler Hill Road, with access from Butler Hill Road. The site is generally construction-ready, having been cleared for construction of an apartment complex that went into foreclosure following the market downturn.
Currently, more than 4,500 cancer patients in the area near the new location come to the Siteman Cancer Center, Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University for evaluation and treatment. This includes approximately 850 newly diagnosed cancer patients yearly.
The new outpatient center will provide the latest advances in cancer diagnosis and treatment to south county and southern Illinois patients in a convenient, comfortable setting closer to their homes. Barnes-Jewish Hospital will place a linear accelerator in the facility for state-of-the-art radiation therapy. Washington University will operate a chemotherapy infusion center.
Washington University medical oncologists and radiation oncologists will treat patients at the new location, and surgical oncologists will provide consults there. Medical staff at the new facility will be Washington University faculty physicians.
A 40,000-square-foot facility is planned, and Washington University programs will occupy about 70 percent of the space. The one-story outpatient center will operate during daytime hours Monday through Friday.
Siteman, through Washington University, has one of the largest cancer research programs in the nation, providing access to hundreds of clinical studies that greatly expand the options available to patients. Clinical studies also will be offered at the South County location.
Siteman, which encompasses the combined cancer-related programs of Washington University and Barnes-Jewish Hospital, is the only cancer center within 240 miles of St. Louis designated as a Comprehensive Cancer Center by the National Cancer Institute.
Construction of the $17-million facility will generate nearly 300 jobs. Once open, the facility will create about 50 new permanent positions with Washington University’s departments of medicine and radiation oncology or with Barnes-Jewish Hospital.
Siteman’s other locations are at Washington University Medical Center in the Central West End area of St. Louis, Barnes-Jewish West County Hospital and Barnes-Jewish St. Peters Hospital.
Have you heard much about it in the local media?
Siteman Plans New South St. Louis County Location
South_County_Map
The 16.28-acre site is immediately south and east of the intersection of Interstate 55 and Butler Hill Road, with access from Butler Hill Road. View a larger version of the map.
July 29, 2010 – Washington University School of Medicine and Barnes-Jewish Hospital have signed a contract to purchase property and filed a Certificate of Need Letter of Intent to build a new Siteman Cancer Center location in south St. Louis County that will serve the Interstate 55 corridor and southern Illinois.
Upon completing obligations related to the sale, zoning and Certificate of Need application and obtaining final approval from Washington University and Barnes-Jewish Hospital boards, construction is estimated to begin in spring 2011, with an opening anticipated in about two years.
The 16.28-acre site is immediately south and east of the intersection of Interstate 55 and Butler Hill Road, with access from Butler Hill Road. The site is generally construction-ready, having been cleared for construction of an apartment complex that went into foreclosure following the market downturn.
Currently, more than 4,500 cancer patients in the area near the new location come to the Siteman Cancer Center, Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University for evaluation and treatment. This includes approximately 850 newly diagnosed cancer patients yearly.
The new outpatient center will provide the latest advances in cancer diagnosis and treatment to south county and southern Illinois patients in a convenient, comfortable setting closer to their homes. Barnes-Jewish Hospital will place a linear accelerator in the facility for state-of-the-art radiation therapy. Washington University will operate a chemotherapy infusion center.
Washington University medical oncologists and radiation oncologists will treat patients at the new location, and surgical oncologists will provide consults there. Medical staff at the new facility will be Washington University faculty physicians.
A 40,000-square-foot facility is planned, and Washington University programs will occupy about 70 percent of the space. The one-story outpatient center will operate during daytime hours Monday through Friday.
Siteman, through Washington University, has one of the largest cancer research programs in the nation, providing access to hundreds of clinical studies that greatly expand the options available to patients. Clinical studies also will be offered at the South County location.
Siteman, which encompasses the combined cancer-related programs of Washington University and Barnes-Jewish Hospital, is the only cancer center within 240 miles of St. Louis designated as a Comprehensive Cancer Center by the National Cancer Institute.
Construction of the $17-million facility will generate nearly 300 jobs. Once open, the facility will create about 50 new permanent positions with Washington University’s departments of medicine and radiation oncology or with Barnes-Jewish Hospital.
Siteman’s other locations are at Washington University Medical Center in the Central West End area of St. Louis, Barnes-Jewish West County Hospital and Barnes-Jewish St. Peters Hospital.
Friday, November 18, 2011
Taxes
Corporate CEO: The Rich, ‘Including Me, Should Be Paying More’ In Taxes
By Pat Garofalo on Nov 18, 2011 at 10:30 am
Dow Chemical CEO Andrew Liveris
Patriotic Millionaires for Fiscal Strength has been meeting with congressional leaders this week, continuing their push to raise taxes on the very richest Americans. “We want to pay more taxes,” said California millionaire Doug Edwards, a former marketing director for Google. “If you’re fortunate, and you make more than a million dollars a year, you ought to pay more taxes.” The group even told anti-tax zealot Grover Norquist that he should take his extreme positions and “move to Somalia.”
In a speech before the U.S. Council for International Business yesterday, Dow Chemical CEO Andrew Liveris joined the tax-me-more crowd, saying, “I can tell you the highest taxpayers, including me, should be paying more“:
“Come on, everyone over a certain threshold of money — and you can define what it is — but I can tell you the highest tax payers, including me, should be paying more,” Liveris said during a speech on Wednesday night…”Come on, we are underpaying for our future.”
CNN Money noted that “while his speech did garner applause a few times, his call to raise taxes was not applauded.”
Poll after poll has shown that the American people favor higher taxes on millionaires, while several ultra-wealthy citizens like Liveris, Edwards, and investor Warren Buffett have all said that they should be paying more to support the country. A survey by the Spectrem Group found that “68% of millionaires (those with investments of $1 million or more) support raising taxes on those with $1 million or more in income.”
We can’t lose sight of the fact that Liveris’ company, Dow Chemical, makes its money flaunting environmental rules and corrupting the EPA. But when it comes to taxing the rich, Liveris is on the right side of public policy, along with a majority of both his income cohort and the American people. In fact, the only ones adamantly standing against such an increase at the moment are congressional Republicans.
Tags:
* Taxes
By Pat Garofalo on Nov 18, 2011 at 10:30 am
Dow Chemical CEO Andrew Liveris
Patriotic Millionaires for Fiscal Strength has been meeting with congressional leaders this week, continuing their push to raise taxes on the very richest Americans. “We want to pay more taxes,” said California millionaire Doug Edwards, a former marketing director for Google. “If you’re fortunate, and you make more than a million dollars a year, you ought to pay more taxes.” The group even told anti-tax zealot Grover Norquist that he should take his extreme positions and “move to Somalia.”
In a speech before the U.S. Council for International Business yesterday, Dow Chemical CEO Andrew Liveris joined the tax-me-more crowd, saying, “I can tell you the highest taxpayers, including me, should be paying more“:
“Come on, everyone over a certain threshold of money — and you can define what it is — but I can tell you the highest tax payers, including me, should be paying more,” Liveris said during a speech on Wednesday night…”Come on, we are underpaying for our future.”
CNN Money noted that “while his speech did garner applause a few times, his call to raise taxes was not applauded.”
Poll after poll has shown that the American people favor higher taxes on millionaires, while several ultra-wealthy citizens like Liveris, Edwards, and investor Warren Buffett have all said that they should be paying more to support the country. A survey by the Spectrem Group found that “68% of millionaires (those with investments of $1 million or more) support raising taxes on those with $1 million or more in income.”
We can’t lose sight of the fact that Liveris’ company, Dow Chemical, makes its money flaunting environmental rules and corrupting the EPA. But when it comes to taxing the rich, Liveris is on the right side of public policy, along with a majority of both his income cohort and the American people. In fact, the only ones adamantly standing against such an increase at the moment are congressional Republicans.
Tags:
* Taxes
Sunday, November 6, 2011
He's Back.
That's right. I'm back and you are better for it. I must warn you, I've changed. No, I haven't gone batshit crazy and started voting with the Tea-Party or anything like that. But I'm older, wiser and I'm much better looking. That last part may have been added strictly for humor. Seriously, I plan to get back to discussing issues in South St. Louis County that I feel aren't being discussed in our local media. I do plan to keep it more civil. That includes censoring of comments. I'll welcome differing points of views but I need to keep out the mean.
One other thing. Many people tell me I should write about this or that. I have a suggestion for you. You can write about it and send it in. If you don't like to write, ask someone else to send it in. Alright.
One other thing. Many people tell me I should write about this or that. I have a suggestion for you. You can write about it and send it in. If you don't like to write, ask someone else to send it in. Alright.
Destroy the Sweatshops: Buy Alta Gracia
(by: Yellow Dog
Thu Nov 03, 2011 at 17:00:00 PM CDT
By @KYYellowDog
Yeah, capitalism sucks. But you don't have to destroy it to eliminate the suckiness; you can beat it at its own game.
Peter Drier at The Nation:
Aracelis "Kuky" Upia, a 39-year-old factory worker in the Dominican Republic, is participating in an experiment that, if successful, could help end sweatshops as a staple of the global economy.
A single mother of four, Upia has been sewing in factories since she was 15. For years she earned less than $50 a week. Some employers simply refused to pay her. At one point she was so deeply in debt, the local market stopped extending her credit.
Today Upia sews T-shirts for $2.85 an hour, a leap in income and nearly three times the country's minimum wage. She has paid off her loans and can shop again at the grocery store. She has purchased a refrigerator, plans to add rooms to her home to rent out for additional income and has paid for her son Nisael's long-postponed dental work. Her son Yacer is studying accounting at the university.
Upia was among the first workers hired by Alta Gracia, an apparel company named after the town where she has lived all her life and where the factory is based. One of 120 nonmanagement employees-mostly sewing-machine operators, but also cutters, packers and maintenance staff-Upia, like her co-workers, earns a living wage, plus at least 35 percent overtime for more than forty-four hours of work a week, and more on weekends and holidays. Alta Gracia's T-shirts and sweatshirts are sold mainly at US colleges and universities at about the same prices as clothing made by Nike, Russell and other brands.
Beginning in the mid-1990s, students on American campuses used various forms of protest to pressure universities to adopt "codes of conduct" as a condition of allowing companies to use their names and logos. But implementing these standards was extremely difficult. College-bound goods are only a small fraction of the products made by the thousands of apparel factories around the world, and monitoring all these workplaces would be impossible. For years campus groups like United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS) refused to support companies claiming to make "sweatshop-free" clothing, because they couldn't be sure the companies would keep their commitment. Today, USAS, as well as the Worker Rights Consortium (WRC), which was founded in 2000 to help enforce the "codes of conduct" drafted in the '90s, have embraced Alta Gracia as a model that proves socially responsible clothing production is not only possible; it's profitable.
SNIP
Can the Alta Gracia label compete with Nike's swoosh? Are consumers willing to look for the Alta Gracia union label? These questions, too, will determine its success. If clothing companies can make profitable merchandise under humane conditions and sell it at competitive prices, it will challenge the basic race-to-the-bottom economics of the apparel industry and prove that conscientious consumers can have an impact on humanizing the forces of global capitalism.
Read the whole thing.
Discuss :: (0 Comments)
Thu Nov 03, 2011 at 17:00:00 PM CDT
By @KYYellowDog
Yeah, capitalism sucks. But you don't have to destroy it to eliminate the suckiness; you can beat it at its own game.
Peter Drier at The Nation:
Aracelis "Kuky" Upia, a 39-year-old factory worker in the Dominican Republic, is participating in an experiment that, if successful, could help end sweatshops as a staple of the global economy.
A single mother of four, Upia has been sewing in factories since she was 15. For years she earned less than $50 a week. Some employers simply refused to pay her. At one point she was so deeply in debt, the local market stopped extending her credit.
Today Upia sews T-shirts for $2.85 an hour, a leap in income and nearly three times the country's minimum wage. She has paid off her loans and can shop again at the grocery store. She has purchased a refrigerator, plans to add rooms to her home to rent out for additional income and has paid for her son Nisael's long-postponed dental work. Her son Yacer is studying accounting at the university.
Upia was among the first workers hired by Alta Gracia, an apparel company named after the town where she has lived all her life and where the factory is based. One of 120 nonmanagement employees-mostly sewing-machine operators, but also cutters, packers and maintenance staff-Upia, like her co-workers, earns a living wage, plus at least 35 percent overtime for more than forty-four hours of work a week, and more on weekends and holidays. Alta Gracia's T-shirts and sweatshirts are sold mainly at US colleges and universities at about the same prices as clothing made by Nike, Russell and other brands.
Beginning in the mid-1990s, students on American campuses used various forms of protest to pressure universities to adopt "codes of conduct" as a condition of allowing companies to use their names and logos. But implementing these standards was extremely difficult. College-bound goods are only a small fraction of the products made by the thousands of apparel factories around the world, and monitoring all these workplaces would be impossible. For years campus groups like United Students Against Sweatshops (USAS) refused to support companies claiming to make "sweatshop-free" clothing, because they couldn't be sure the companies would keep their commitment. Today, USAS, as well as the Worker Rights Consortium (WRC), which was founded in 2000 to help enforce the "codes of conduct" drafted in the '90s, have embraced Alta Gracia as a model that proves socially responsible clothing production is not only possible; it's profitable.
SNIP
Can the Alta Gracia label compete with Nike's swoosh? Are consumers willing to look for the Alta Gracia union label? These questions, too, will determine its success. If clothing companies can make profitable merchandise under humane conditions and sell it at competitive prices, it will challenge the basic race-to-the-bottom economics of the apparel industry and prove that conscientious consumers can have an impact on humanizing the forces of global capitalism.
Read the whole thing.
Discuss :: (0 Comments)
Thursday, March 24, 2011
Mehlville Fire Department Tax Decrease Shell Game
As sent in by a reader:
In the latest issue of the Call, there is an article about the MFPD and the MO Attorney General signing off on "stipulation of facts" document. Mike, I really hope you can get your hands on a copy and post it in full and comment on it.
A couple of things that caught my attention. Regarding the ballot language of the "historic tax decrease": "But the agreement also notes Missouri statute 321.244 sets forth "the required form of the ballot language for increasing — or decreasing — the general levy for fire protection districts. By adding the last two sentences to the form of ballot, neither Proposition 1 nor 2 followed the ballot form set out in Section 321.244 RSMo.''"
Hmmmm, was the ballot language illegal??? Next comment: "The agreement also states, "If Mehlville's certified rate is calculated disregarding the ballot
language as worded, the certified rate would exceed the levy rate used to calculate tax bills for 2009.''"
Now I'm no attorney, but to me these two quotes are saying this: The ballot language was illegal, therefore the decrease is declared void. MFPD can collect the higher tax rate because the ceiling was never reduced due to illegal language.
Wouldn't this mean that no Hilmer, you did NOT pass the first tax decrease????
In the latest issue of the Call, there is an article about the MFPD and the MO Attorney General signing off on "stipulation of facts" document. Mike, I really hope you can get your hands on a copy and post it in full and comment on it.
A couple of things that caught my attention. Regarding the ballot language of the "historic tax decrease": "But the agreement also notes Missouri statute 321.244 sets forth "the required form of the ballot language for increasing — or decreasing — the general levy for fire protection districts. By adding the last two sentences to the form of ballot, neither Proposition 1 nor 2 followed the ballot form set out in Section 321.244 RSMo.''"
Hmmmm, was the ballot language illegal??? Next comment: "The agreement also states, "If Mehlville's certified rate is calculated disregarding the ballot
language as worded, the certified rate would exceed the levy rate used to calculate tax bills for 2009.''"
Now I'm no attorney, but to me these two quotes are saying this: The ballot language was illegal, therefore the decrease is declared void. MFPD can collect the higher tax rate because the ceiling was never reduced due to illegal language.
Wouldn't this mean that no Hilmer, you did NOT pass the first tax decrease????
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)