Muscatine

hey::: you guys!

I actually saw a green sky ahead of a twister and we have driven through a place not far from here:::Blue Grass. Cute huh?

Okay, been doin some lernin::: After about an hour long back and forth this morning with me father, I realize it's a "My Bad" situation. Dad says "Yes! Big Brother is absolutely correct. Congress does control spending and the president doesn't get to sign the budget bill. But he is the one who proposes the specifics in the first place." Unlike now, prior to 2006, the president and his congress could and did collude to batter out tax code through Reconciliation. My short attention span is why we bantered over that issue.  I bow to his and Big Brother's knowledge. But the my bad thing::: is that my father was right too. He was talking about what Clinton signed just a couple weeks prior to GW Bush taking the office. He wasn't talking about the CBOas we normally think of it's duties, but the Omna-mini-bus:::He hated the "Omnibus Budget" saying it should be illegal too. He said it's why clinton fought congress to get a line item veto measure passed. I didn't even know Clinton tried that until this morning. It also sorta exoneratedClinton regarding the first major step in deregulating our SEC principles established in 1937 that Sen. P Gram snuk into that budget bill. Dad also was referring to 6 free trade deals signed by Bush, five of which were his desire and the redesigning of NAFTA's tax structure. And that Glass Steigle? needs re-established. He never did refer to the budget we/I was learning about. He was referring to those signatures until 2007 that helped to wipe out so many millions of jobs. He says the CBO didn't actually cause those losses, it was a different set of signatures that did that.

It might surprise you BB::: perhaps not? But my father actually told me to give you a big hand, you seem to have a sound take on the right road with this political mumbo jumbo. I tried to read up a little at your advice::: but quickly got lost in all the committee this, resolution that, discretionary what, appropriate that, mandatory who, outlay here, reconciliation this and PAYGO there. But you guys seem to understand how this all works. 

So :::do we work on pollution now or what.

Lucy

HiHiR

I kinda thought a place like that would be involved in many many products along the food chain. Made sense since everything we consume, seems to be a corn based product of some kind. I'm sure mallory knows that too. But if we can't just walk into "Corn headquarters," make a speech and leave with cleaner air, what do we do. Look at the Postal malaise. Higher and higher rates, less service in the works, and perhaps fewer employees and all they can talk about is higher rates again. So since every service or commodity we buy, is somehow incumbent upon the ever more broken consumer to pay more for less::: because they refuse to let some profits fall, then what's ahead. I think it was you? that pointed out that they either raise the costs to us or go broke. My sister was an assistant manager at a McDonald's in Minnesota several years ago, and said that every time they offered some super deal to the people, they made loads of profit. I think these places should try that once. Cut rates to accommodate the ever poorer consumers and watch them spend more with savings in mind? That reminds me of a movie I saw some time back, Mr Mom? I think, in that film they cut Tuna costs to the consumer to help lessen the economic burden. Fiction I know, but why not do that. Look at how people flock to garage, yard sales, and flea markets to save. Auctions galore and the big box places sell less. Every time they drop gas prices to a fair level, we buy lots more of it. What do they do? They take months to drop it a few cents and raise it three times the drop in a matter of days. They should set it at $1.75 and leave it alone for a year. The economy would start to spin around almost immediately? Well it sounds good anyway.

I hate corn dust in my sugar pops

Lucy