| Author |
|
Michael Myers
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 December 2004
Posts: 831
|
| Posted: 22 September 2008 at 7:52am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
On topic.
And, an echo of the list Chris has already offered, to put resistance
to the proposed financial GSE regulation into perspective:
"In the 2006 election cycle, Fannie Mae was giving 53 percent of its
total $1.3 million in contributions to Republicans, who controlled
Congress at that time. This cycle, with Democrats in control, they've
reversed course, giving the party 56 percent of their total $1.1
million in contributions."
GSE Contributions
In ten years, John McCain has received a grand total of $21,550 in
contributions from Fanie Mae and Freddie Mac; while, in just three
years, Senator Obama has received a grand total of $126,349, with
$6,000 coming directly from PACs. In just three years, Senator Obama
manages to rank second in total contributions received from Freddie Mac
and Fannie Mae, when stacked among politicians in Washington for ten
years or more? Change from "the culture of
corruption"..the freeing of Washington, D.C., from evil "corporate
interests?"
Really? And what about these efforts by Senator McCain and other Republicans?
2002-2003, "The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago."
New York Times
2005, "Limits on Mortgage Portfolios Have Support on House Panel"
NYTimes House Panel
Senator McCain, co-sponsor, introducing the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 (a bill to address the regulation of secondary mortgage market enterprises) on the floor of the US Senate:
McCain
"The OFHEO report also states that Fannie Mae used its political power to lobby Congress in an effort to interfere with the regulator's examination of the company's accounting problems....If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole."
"I urge my colleagues to support swift action on this GSE reform legislation."
Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005:
S.109
2008, "Sen. Dodd wonders what the Bush administration did to address the risks of Fannie and Freddie. Now, he knows. The real question is: Where was he?"
Se. Dodd Accusations
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Myers
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 December 2004
Posts: 831
|
| Posted: 22 September 2008 at 8:22am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
QUOTE:
| Tremonti is a fascist? Do the Italians knows this? Considering Mussolini I'd think that they would be adverse to that. The reason you dislike him is because he doesn't like the free market. He is against globalisation. So? You've read his whole book from 2008? No you didn't. Authoritarian? That's a pretty ridiculous statement considering the authoritarian actions taken this week to attempt to salvage a bankrupt monetary system. |
|
|
1. He is anti-globalization? Based on an excerpt from his last book, I'd agree. Tremonti, however, oddly claims his plans are NOT anti-globalization. According to Tremonti, "The key proposal in the book is the proposal for a new Bretton-Woods, that is, a new global agreement on the terms of currency exchange and trade. This is exactly the opposite of anti-globalization, is the opposite of a chain of errors that would lead to a crisis which I want to avert with instruments for governing globalization."
But then, that interview is from a LaRouche site, so who could ever take it at face value? And this brings us back to yet another very pertinent point regarding Tremonti and his proposals, which you apparently couldn't address:
"Well, Michael, why did the proposal for the sort of conference you're touting get laughed out of even the Italian parliament the last time it came up in 2005? Or when it came up before the Italian parliament in 2003? Or, when it was proposed in Italy in 2002? Too many "brainwashed" shills in the Italian parliament, too?"
How would you propose to convince America, The United Kingdom, France, Germany, Japan, and all the other genuine economic powers to go along with something not in their best interests...when Tremonti has failed three times (look at the dates corresponding with his terms as Minister) to get so much as a period of debate on the subject in his nation's own parliament?
No, what Tremonti really doesn't like is the fact that Italy can't seem to compete without the crutch of protectionism. Hence, his push to ban the activities of sovereign funds within Europe and his fierce condemnation of any opposition to the bond question in the EU. All while touting minimal taxation on foreign investment in his own country, of course. Unfortunately, his lack of training as an economist and apparent lack of enthusiasm for history prevent him from recognizing the obvious lesson to be taken from the Smoot-Hawley Act.
Remember the truly awful Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, Michael, and its effects in the real world? This little piece of Republican -backed agenda contributed HUGELY to both the depth and length of the Great Depression, as our nations imports AND exports fell by half with the effects of its passge. Oh, and a veritable horde of economists urged Hoover to veto the bill. They were correct, he should have fought it tooth and nail.
2. Tremonti has been more than kind enough to offer his own comments on his book. There is, as yet, no English translation with which I'm familiar. Reuters, the Wall Street Journal, and about a dozen other sources carry his *numerous* interviews touting the book and its contents, even to the extent of providing excerpts. Why, there are a ton on the LaRouche sites, alone.
3.What can be termed "authoritarian" about ANY of the actions taken in the U.S.? You do realize what "Authoritarian" means, right? Now, authoritarian, in my view, would be Tremonti's push to give the European Parliament full *legislative* power over ALL areas which are already under the aegis of the EU Commission.
QUOTE:
| Schwarzenegger I'd consider calling a fascist. I am sure I'd get agreement from people in California on that one too. The Chicago Boys that installed Pinochet were real fascists Mike but you'd deny that. All were economists trained at the Chicago School and all were monetarists that loved Friedman, Hayek, etc. What were the fascist dictator's policies Mike? Dergegulation. Privatization. Pinochet killed people Mike. Pinochet tortured people. The US backed him. So who's the fascist? |
|
|
You'd consider calling Gov. Schwarzenegger a fascist, but not someone *openly* advocating the creation of an authoritarian, national-conservative order? Right. Here's what I've said about Pinochet: "Now, I claimed Milton Friedman was latin? I was a little young to now recall the press furor, Michael, but I do know that Friedman was referring to the first round of economic reforms in Chile as an "economic miracle", and not to Pinochet's atrocities in consolidating the coup."
Old Times
It's there, right along with the fact of the mistake you made regarding Friedman's supposed quote. That's another thing you've tried to dance away from. Ready to address your mistake, yet? Oh, and, with you, a source would be comforting.
QUOTE:
| If I was with LaRouche Mike I'd be singing about it. I read these things with letters in them called books. One I read was by Lincoln's economic adviser and you'd object to him as well I can assure you. Is that too outdated for you? Carey? He'd be called authoritarian by you but you don't attach a definition to the word. I read the Perkins book too. Plenty of others as well. Galbraith's one on financial euphoria. Even more. I love to read. Sorry, Mike you don't have to be with Lyndon LaRouche to read books that debunk your theories on economics, GDP, GNP, the BLS fakery, etc. |
|
|
Would you tell me one thing I've offered with regard to "economics, GDP, GNP, the BLS fakery, etc." which you've managed to debunk? Or, which you've even directly addressed in ANY substantive fashion? In the last response, I listed some of the obvious pitfalls inherent in the notion of a fixed-exchange rate system in the global economy. Why not break precedent and actually address actual economic points for once?
So, you'd be singing about being with LaRouche? Michael, your entire spiel is LaRouche to the letter, even your phrasing. But good, so tell me, do you agree with all of the policies he advocates along the lines of your "four steps" cribbed from his wacky writings?
QUOTE:
| Calling people fascists, nuts, etc. doesn't strengthen any argument you have (I don't think you have one either). Tremonti is about as much a fascist as Dave Letterman. |
|
|
Really? Has David Letterman called for national and regional flag raising ceremonies "because simple things like that are all the people understand?"
QUOTE:
Let's just see if time proves me right. The bailouts won't work Mike. It isn't a business cycle....[::::SNIP:::::]....I am going to tell you the bailouts won't work. Nothing short of FDR-style reforms will work. It's too late for band-aids.
Let's see who is right because time will prove one of us wrong won't it? |
|
|
Well, considering that your stance is the prophecy of the utter dissolution of every financial institution to an unrecoverable state in conjunction with the adoption of the most whacked out economic ideas to ever come down the pike, sure, I'll gladly bet you that the world as we know it isn't going to be ending any time soon. I'll also tell you that the reforms that *cannot* be employed are just exactly the reforms you've touted: formal bankruptcy of every global economy, adoption of a Bretton Woods-style fixed-exchange rate system based on "credit", doing away with the global monetary system, etc.
Regarding economic doom, in a September 11th article, it seems ol' Giulio Tremonti agrees with me regarding prospects for the future: “Italy is flat but not worsening. We are confident of the future,” says Mr Tremonti, the number two in Mr Berlusconi’s Forza Italia party. solid
Of course, he's had high hopes before. BTW, who was the first person to mention an RTC-like entity as a possible option, in this thread? And I did so, while you were going on about utter, unrecoverable collapse and the need to "start everything all over." Hey, remember the following?
"So, those are your likely options: RTC-like entity, an untested SEC crackdown that everyone is in favor of in theory, or some out-of-the-blue longshot that gains interest....(Prussian covered bonds, etc.)"
"Bretton Woods? No. At the regulator level, the most you'll see domestically is a revamped RTC-like move. The idea is already floated--as it always is after ANY economic event."
Its difficult to address a lot of this very basic economic 'stuff' when the questions veer away from LaRouche propaganda, huh? But then, that's really the problem. It is always utter economic collapse and what LaRouche has dreamed up for that eventuality...but reality, gosh darn it, doesn't seem to want to cooperate.
Isn't LaRouche on like his thirtieth-annual "Utter Collapse" prediction? When do you think LaRouche and guys like you will finally get it right?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Myers
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 December 2004
Posts: 831
|
| Posted: 22 September 2008 at 8:27am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
QUOTE:
| Myers how about FDR? He a nut too? Authoritarian? A fascist? You know his speeches on the "economic royalists" don't you? Now did LaRouche write those for FDR? I told you a long time ago I was a FDR Democrat and that is it. To the extent old Lyndon is proposing FDR-style measures to save the 10s of 1000s of foreclosures, of people being tossed into the street I support those actions. So what? |
|
|
FDR-style measures? This stuff?
1. a general bankruptcy reorganization of the US economy
2. a general bankruptcy reorganization of EVERY other developed economy in the world
3. a global regulatory agency overseeing what could only amount to a non-fiat money supply with fixed exchange rates, high tariff trading, and direct challenge to national sovereignty
Are you high? Even the Bretton-Woods conference was based on the concept of linking currencies to our dollar and gold standard; not, as you've suggested, to the absurd notion of doing away with international currency all together in favor of a nebulous "credit-based" system. Not to mention the fact of implementation and enforcement under LaRouche's "Crazy MF" version of same.
QUOTE:
Here is a snippet of what FDR said about certain people. Sounds like Tremonti to me. You?
"For out of this modern civilization economic royalists carved new dynasties. New kingdoms were built upon concentration of control over material things. Through new uses of corporations, banks and securities, new machinery of industry and agriculture, of labor and capital - all undreamed of by the Fathers - the whole structure of modern life was impressed into this royal service."
If I remember the regulations that have been dismantled were put in place because the "economic royalists" were robbing everyone blind and crashing our economy. FDR acted with authority, lol. |
|
|
How about this one from FDR's first inauguration: "Nor need we shrink from honestly facing conditions in our country today. This great nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So first of all let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear. . .is fear itself. . . nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance."
Or this, from Eco's Ur-Fascism: "Sticking close to the radio, I spent my nights – the windows closed, the blackout making the small space around the set a lone luminous halo –listening to the messages sent by the Voice of London to the partisans. They were cryptic and poetic at the same time (The sun also rises, The roses will bloom) and most of them were "messaggi per la Franchi."
QUOTE:
| Same thing as today Mike. You are just dead wrong about everything you say. |
|
|
Great! Then, this time, you should be able to get back to me on the very basic economic objections I've raised.
Edited by Michael Myers on 22 September 2008 at 8:40am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Myers
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 December 2004
Posts: 831
|
| Posted: 22 September 2008 at 8:30am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
Wow, now this was a rant and a half...
QUOTE:
Myers doesn't like this sort of fact being exposed so he calls people that expose it fascists, nuts, etc.
Deal with the issue Mike. Enron. Deal with the dereg that allowed Enron to get away with it. You can't possibly argue it was a good thing so you say nothing. |
|
|
Smiling. Tell me, was I supposed to jump in and argue somewhere between the second sentence and the third?
Have we *ever* discussed Enron or its 2001 collapse prior to this post? As far a I know, the closest we've come was my correcting you on your mistaken notion that the energy derivatives market is completely unregulated, by reminding you that there are BOTH exchange-traded energy derivatives and OTC energy derivatives.
QUOTE:
| Don't let Myers fool you either. The bailouts are not about saving your home from being foreclosed but about saving some bankers. Their credit default swaps are of major concern. Paulson wants immediate action to protect the banks. What about the people? How about health care? How about immediate action on that? I'd like a several trillion dollar bailout of the health care system for Americans. How about Detroit? Let's bailout them too. At least making something is useful. What use is a credit default swap and Myers no amount of your Econ 101 is going to convince anyone of your position so you might as well just call me nuts. |
|
|
You're nuts.
QUOTE:
| You can't name one sector of the US economy that is healthy. In all this time. You come up with fake numbers that show "growth" but there is no growth. There is a lot of rot. Where do you live? You know how many bridges need repair? You don't. You don't have a clue about it. You know how many roads need repair? Ask the engineers. They issue reports too. You read those or do you confine yourself to the fake ones you tell me I've never read? I actually find more truth in the comic books I read than government stats on the economy. The government is lying. Now, they're desperate to ram this bailout through. Desperate because they know what you haven't said you know is true. |
|
|
LMAO. You mean, your knowing the truth of what I know they know is true, being true?
And, on this one, I was supposed to jump in somewhere about the sixth sentence? Hey, remember my questions to you the last time you brought up infrastructure? Well, they still pertain.
"Michael, what other nation has our infrastructure, ever growing over those same thirty years you speak of, *to even maintain*? What exactly is it which nations like China hope to aspire to? Now, you want to crackdown on the unions and eco-nuts to revitalize manufacturing in America? You want to oppose a tax increase aimed at those reporting $250,000, because it hits exactly at small to medium business growth and everyone they employ and all that they might accomplish? I'm completely behind you. But again, exactly what are you suggesting? I don't need a labored, peer-reviewed economic model to dissect, I'm simply asking what it is that you think you are saying in real terms and with ALL the various aspects and questions considered?"
See, Michael, it's a little more complicated than simply saying, "We need to spend more on infrastructure!" Hell, I'll agree with that. What you haven't done and cannot do, is address the issue from a realistic standpoint of even a vaguely feasible solution for improvement. Preferably one which doesn't engender its own host of difficulties. You know, the very basic economic questions.
QUOTE:
| Mike you thought you were the eminence grice of the Forum on economics huh? |
|
|
Why would I have to be the economics eminence grise of the forum to point out the obvious fallacy of fixed exchange rates in a global economy? How about the *inherent* difficulties of anti-globalization via my reminding you of the disaster that was the Smoot-Hawley Act? How about the whacky bullshit that is suggesting every economic power should declare bankruptcy because of a recession, and start all over?
QUOTE:
| Shall I hold my breath for that one sector of the US economy that is healthy? Get out your fake stats and read something off to me. |
|
|
Michael, by definition, there are only three "sectors" in ANY economy.
Our strongest sector, accounting for for three-quarters of the world's largest GDP, is the service sector. The service sector comprises wholsesale trade and export; transportation and communications; finance; healthcare; insurance; transportation; research and development; etc. Even book publishers and your favorite restaurant. In May of this year, the sector's index was at 52.0, up from 49.6 in March, with anything above 50 signaling positive growth. Real GDP for the last quarter clocked in at above 3% growth based on this very real strength.
No, let me guess? I, and every financial institution of every foreign economy in the world, have been brainwashed.
Right?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Retour
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 May 2006
Posts: 932
|
| Posted: 22 September 2008 at 8:31am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
"Those who know the markets well are not surprised by what is
happening. We may take a loss in the short term, but we'll profit in
the long run."
The heck they weren't surprised. They were panicked and acted panicked. That's just a Finance Minister that's just trying to soothe frayed nerves.
The good times are coming back! The worst is over! Right. A chicken in every pot.
Officials can make all the statements they want after the fact. Line up quotes from 1929 and add the one above to the after the fact statements.
The Fed had to jump again for Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs.
Face The Nation yesterday: Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) "It's kind of hard to tell the average American that we're going to
continue to have foreclosures that destabilize neighborhoods and
deprive cities of revenues they need, but we're going to buy up the bad
paper."
Paulson wants to ram this through real quick to rescue banks not save anyone from foreclosure. If he was concerned about saving people from foreclosure and wasn't surprised by economic events he should have acted sooner. Why didn't he? Or was he behind the scenes and everything being tried wasn't working?
Sen. Charles Schumer, the Democrat who chairs
the congressional Joint Economic Committee, said after meeting with
Bernanke last week, he understood what was at stake if lawmakers did
not come up with a quick rescue plan. "When I heard his description of what might happen to our economy if we failed to act, I gulped," he said. - MSNBC
Millions at risk of foreclosure fraud
"In Florida, which some have called the mortgage fraud capital of the
country, a recent Miami Herald investigation found that 10,000
convicted felons had been granted mortgage broker licenses from
2001-2007." That is in Florida alone as I read it.
Can you read that stat? Like I've said, these brokers are crooks and there is the proof. 10,000 convicted felons?
The FBI provided that one.
Now what is Bush or Obama or McCain going to do about the thieves that robbed everyone blind. The thieves on Wall St. Paulson is so desperate to bail out?
Global economic growth doesn't depend on financial fraud. It depends on production.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Myers
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 December 2004
Posts: 831
|
| Posted: 22 September 2008 at 8:36am | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
QUOTE:
| An analysis done for the Wall Street Journal shows::::SNIP::::::Alt A's also rose 1.17 points to hit 10.73%. Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody's Economy.com, told the Journal that "The disturbing thing is that mortgage quality is bad and getting worse." He said the latest data "argues that foreclosures will remain very, very high well into 2009 and 2010." So much for Barney Frank's bailout bil |
|
|
You didn't believe me when I mentioned the warnings about Alt A's hitting a 10% default, before? You had to wait for what you've previously termed "The Wall Street Urinal"? I'm crushed. Here's what I said, on the 9/6:
"And it's no different than the warning that was raised about Alt A loans which began to be heard in 2007, but haven't yet fully materialized (though defaults are at the 10% mark) to the point of making headlines."
And this, from the article you kinda, sorta quoted:
"The new analysis suggests foreclosures are increasing at a slower pace or leveling off for subprime mortgages and Alt-A loans. That, said analysts, may partly reflect the widening use of foreclosure moratoriums and efforts by lenders to modify troubled mortgages."
And
"One sign that credit tightening is having some effect: Delinquencies are lower for mortgages backed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that were issued in the first quarter of 2008, compared with 2007 loans backed by the agencies at the same point in their life. Still, the early track record for the 2008 loans is worse than that for loans issued in 2005 and 2006."
Hardly, a rosy picture. But contrast it to what you're suggesting, Michael. During the Great Depression, according to Wheelock's (you wouldn't like him, unlike LaRouche, he's an actual economist) research, more than 50% of ALL home loans were in default. But then, you're not even suggesting something the depth of the Great Depression. Nope. You're suggesting nothing less than the utter, irrevocable collapse of the economic fabric of the world!
And, of course, here's the actual article you tried to cribbed: Mortgage
QUOTE:
| On Thursday evening, Paulson and Bernanke met with Congressional leaders to try to bludgeon them into passing the bailout package. Paulson gave a "chilling" description of current conditions, describing "frozen credit markets, busted commercial paper markets and attacks on investment banks." |
|
|
Gee, did the article really say, or even imply, "Paulson and Bernanke met with Congressional leaders to try to bludgeon them into passing the bailout package?"
I mean, I know it didn't, but your selective quoting makes it difficult to discern what you were after with such purple prose. Your description is certainly more thrilling than the WSJ's actual account:
"One day later, Mr. Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke sped to Congress to seek approval for the biggest government intervention in financial markets since the 1930s."
QUOTE:
| When one participant asked, what would happen if Congress didn't pass the bailout bill, Paulson reportedly answered simply, “If it doesn't pass, then heaven help us all. |
|
|
Now, see? You've done it, again. Why not provide the proper context? From the *same* article:
"If we don't do this, we risk an uncertain fate," Mr. Bernanke added. He said that if the problem wasn't corrected, the U.S. economy could enter a deep, multi-year recession akin to Japan's lost decade of the 1990s, or what Sweden endured in the early 1990s when a surge in bad loans plagued the economy and sent unemployment to 12%."
Sound as bad as you've tried to portray it? Here's the article, to refresh your memory:Run for your lives!
QUOTE:
| Or as Frank Miller must have said in SIN CITY: BLAM BLAM BLAM goes the financial system!!! |
|
|
Well, you can keep hoping, if you like, Michael. Don't give yourself a heart-attack in the mean time, huh? "BLAM BLAM BLAM?"
QUOTE:
| Just a business cycle right Myers? |
|
|
Yep. By definition.
Now, which makes more sense? My previous statements of a likely recession and the possibility of a two-year downturn? Or, your prediction of the utter collapse of the economic system as we know it; with the coming of a credit-based economy and new world order?
Hey, why don't you tell us what happens to the people who don't want to go along with LaRouche's crazy plan, huh? According to LaRouche's own words? And what happens to all those black Jazz lovers he gets so worked up about?
Crazy MF.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Myers
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 December 2004
Posts: 831
|
| Posted: 22 September 2008 at 8:38am | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
Hey, Michael, I've indulged you're bullshit by quoting your posts, so why not answer all of the unanswerable, common sense objections that are already on your plate.
Remember, you this stuff like the back of your hand?
Edited by Michael Myers on 22 September 2008 at 8:41am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Retour
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 May 2006
Posts: 932
|
| Posted: 22 September 2008 at 8:45am | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
Telecommunications is infrastructure Mike. TV is a service. No? Yes? Maybe?
Do you dream this stuff up?
I asked you to name me a sector of the US economy that is growing and you named the service sector. Okay. Fair enough.
Now tell me the kind of pay packet someone in the service sector takes home? Not the owner, the honchos etc. but the person that works there?
The goods produced for the service sector come from where? Pick up your phone and tell me where it was made. Your TV? Your car? Go ahead. Your clothing? Nearly everything you own.
Just the fact we have no high speed rail whatsoever in this country says it all. Is rail outdated? Inefficient?
Sure, if you get people in China to produce your goods and lend you the money to buy them we're doing great! If you get some poor person in Guatemala to produce your goods we're doing wonderful!
Skip LaRouche. Get to the meat of it. Financial speculation and services have been driving this economy and that's about it. Now that has hit home and the people you claim knew were caught with their pants down. They didn't get it. Or maybe they did and wanted to loot the USA? You tell me.
Edited by Michael Retour on 22 September 2008 at 8:48am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Retour
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 May 2006
Posts: 932
|
| Posted: 22 September 2008 at 8:47am | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
Dow Jones still own the Journal Mike? That discredits them.
Yet it does state "Shock forced Paulson's Hand" right? Didn't he realize the status and who was running out of money market funds? The average Joe or the institutions? Articles I've read claim it was the institutions and not the average Joe on the main.
Edited by Michael Retour on 22 September 2008 at 8:54am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Retour
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 May 2006
Posts: 932
|
| Posted: 22 September 2008 at 8:50am | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
Jazz? I like it. So what does that have to do with the economy? Sales of jazz records aren't going to help.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Myers
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 28 December 2004
Posts: 831
|
| Posted: 22 September 2008 at 9:05am | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
Yep. Crazy MF.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Al Cook
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 December 2004
Posts: 12735
|
| Posted: 22 September 2008 at 9:06am | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
What does MF stand for, Michael?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
|
|
Topic Closed)
