I want her house in the Hamptons for incall!

-- Modified on 3/5/2004 12:31:03 PM

Will the donation be the same?

A Friend sent this to me a couple of days ago. You need audio for this link. ROFLMBAO

She'll kill you if you dirty her K-mart sheets!

What bullshit!

People get ripped off by  Enron, WorldCom, Tyco, Xerox, Rite Aid, Adelphia and a shitload of Mutual Fund managers for years, they get caught during the Bush Administration and you blame Bush?  

I guess it makes sense if...  you're a moron!

What else is bullshit is that Martha may go to jail and yet OJ Simpson is probably playing golf!

I can't stand Bush, he is hopelessly insane but right now all I care about is MY tax rates and the Democrats have my net worth squarely in their cross hairs. I am not interesting in ushering in higher rates with my vote. California is basically sewn up as a Democratic state, so it doesn't really matter, lol

If Arnold could talk Californian's "wacko electorate" into voting for that bond issue without any movement towards or evidence of any budget cuts, he might be able to deliver the votes to put Bush over the top in November too.  Probably wishful thinking, but California went Republican just a couple of months ago!

Actually, Kerry and Bustamataxes have quite a bit in common, they could both put a guy on speed to sleep!

I did vote for Arnold, but I can't vote for Bush nor Kerry. Between Bush anf Gore i did vote for Gore only because he was, in my opinion, the lesser of the two evils. But again also Al Gore is an IDIOT, go get his college transcripts, a dumbass,a rich, third generation money jackass, ditto for Bush. Between Bush and Kerry they are both equal evils, so i won't vote.

For those who compares Clinton and Kerry as if they were similar, I disagree. There are a few defining differences between Clinton and Kerry. First, Clinton is way smarter, he wasn't and isn't an idealoque and had the brains to surround himself with top notch people. Kerry is more analgous to Hillary, who, if ever elected, will be a disaster.
I actually could make a case that a split Dem/Rep president/Congress would be good in that they would so dispise one another that nothing, including run away spending, would get done, that is what we are left with, the hope of completely ineffectual sorts running things. Is basic competency too much to ask?
I read the other day that the Dept of Education budget is $55BB, can you believe that.I need to look up how many K-12 kids there are in this country but I bet it works out to about $1K per kid, now, just what in Sam hell does the DOE do for $55BB.
I'd like to see the US Defense spending as a % of total GLOBAL defense spending. It is time for the country with 5% of the worlds population to stop spending what I bet is something like 30-50% of the Worlds defense budget. I'm officially getting worked up now so I'm gonna go PERTURBATE to relax lol









-- Modified on 3/6/2004 9:38:09 AM

Dude there's your fabulous America at work!  Your precious constitution!  Are you falling off the bandwagon?

I thought everything AMERICAN was good?  Dude- your lack of faith is bumming my high!

BTW in REAL terms the actions of your business criminals (like Cheney, Bush etc- let's not forget that public money was used in the whole Ranger value inflation maneuver) are worse than what O.J. did!  
He killed one woman (albeit horribly may he rot in some sort of hell for it) while they made thousands destitute and corrupted the moral fibres of folks like you.

Had to yank the chain for weekend bro- happy hobbying!

...all this is over is $51,000. Yep, Martha Stewart pissed away God-only-knows-how-many millions to lie about a stock deal where the difference was only $51,000.
  Her legal fees had to be a multiple of that figure. Nevermind the bad publicity, or own stock (Martha Stewart Omnimedia) tanking. You wanna buy a collectible?? Go latch on some editions of her magazine; chances are it will be extinct within 2 yrs.
  BTW, GWB is the cause of my hemorrhoids!!

-- Modified on 3/5/2004 5:31:35 PM

No question!  How could someone as intelligent as Stewart has to be to accomplished so much, be so completely  stupid to attempt this?

It just doesn't make sense.

In business, My Daddy used to tell me to leave a little bit on the table for the next guy. On the other hand, there are people who believe you have to make as much as you can while you can. Even to the point of forcing one party into bankruptcy; or, even dissolution.
  Perhaps, Martha belongs to the second group noted above. I know some people in the trucking business (where I have a good deal of experience) who absolutely believe that laws and DOT regulations don't apply to them. Even after paying $25K-$50K fines.
  I can't explain it. However, according to the US Sentencing Commission guidelines, she's gonna have 6-18 months to ponder the question.

Dude- She's a venal American- a Euro might have done the CBA

When Euros go bad they go large- Hitler/ Parmalat!

It's a joke! (Americans often have to have things explained to them)

I wrote the above passage on the LA board regarding a different subject, but it applies to Martha as well. In the case of Martha is double ingnorance, she should have known better, and she never thought to be caught, she felt above the law.

You're saying you want to bite my ass?

And I totally agree with you. It just shows that greed knows no boundries. Too bad, most federal prisons aren't coed. Honest to goodness, there are some *fine* men in federal prison. I have to remind myself I'm in a prison when I visit.

Martha wasn't found guilty of trading on insider information. Even though that is the underlying premise. On the insider trading charge, Martha (as they say on the street)was stone cold busted. However, Martha was charged with obstruction of justice; i.e. lying to investigators about this transaction.
  Had Martha admitted she had traded on inside info, for $51,000, all she would have done was disgorge the profit and pay, maybe a $100K fine. In this instance, her broker would have lost his license because he supplied the inside info. But as far as she was concerned, the public would have forgotten about this in a year; two years, tops.
  But, as I have posted on this board a number of times: STUPID is the perfect crime; the sentence is immediate and there is no appeal!!

Yep

A long time ago, in a place far, far away (college) I played rugby at the club level. One of our most endearing traits (or habits) was to sneak up behind an unsuspecting female and take a good chomp out of her rear. The trick was to stay low. This because the incensed object of your desire would turn around and blindly attempt to slap you where she believed your face would be.
  Please understand that was more than a couple of years ago, so I'm a bit out of practice. However, I am more than willing to make the effort if you're willing to provide the tuchass.

Re:Yep

That was the funniest thing I've read all day. That would hurt! Oh, you'll never outgrow ass biting. Like you said, you're just out of practice.

My comment was directed to Martha and to those people who think they can get away with anything just because they are powerful. Insider information are very hard to prove, I knew that, no way she was ever going to be found guilty of insider information, but it gives an idea on how certain rich powerful people don't give a damn about shareholders, and the law. Just greed for a little amount of money, little for Martha.



-- Modified on 3/5/2004 6:19:17 PM

Re:Yep

I'll be going into training tomorrow morning. I believe I owe you that much. BTW, I hope you like hot corned beef sandwiches, Dr Brown's cream soda and half-dill (new) pickles??

I find it depressing that hardly anyone is concerned that Martha Stewart was charged and convicted of lying to the feds about a crime she was not even charged with.  There's a trend in America where the federal government is criminalizing more and more behavior, including actions that by themselves are not illegal, but grouped together the government can pile on the charges (like obstruction of justice, mail fraud, etc.) to make a conviction easier.

Since most of us in this "hobby" are basically doing something illegal, and America is becoming more conservative, applauding what the govenment did to Martha Stewart is short-sided IMHO.  Although prostitution is still mainly a state issue, the feds do sometimes get involved, and that's when they pile on all the other charges and basically ruin the accused's life.

I'm no fan of Martha Stewart, but I do treasure my freedom.  And I see our freedoms eroding away everyday.  And it's not just because of George Bush or John Ashcroft, but because of most politicians of all stripes.  I just don't understand what we should be happy about today.

That's B.S.  We know the rules ahead of time.  She broke the law and should pay.  Too many people get slap on the wrists for stuff like this, yet we throw people in jail for 10 years for selling weed.  WTF?

...if yer gonna get a CHOMP, yer tuchass is gonna carry the faint aroma of a hot corned beef sandwich (on seeded rye w mustard, natch), Dr Brown's cream soda and new pickles.
  Why?? you ask. It's real simple. Those are the foods on which a nice boy from Brooklyn trains.
  Sedona, for you, I'll "CHOMP" lightly and make sure that I eat extra pickles before doing the deed!!
  Oh, remember, recovery from the deed is GREATLY more enjoyable than the deed itself!! My dance card is open...  

Hmmm ...

I totally agree with you about celebrating her conviction.  It does seem very odd that so many people seem to have been made happy about her troubles.  However, in these times of corporate debauchery, I would think that it was intended to send a message to other corporate elites.

In talking to my broker about this he felt that when most people are confronted with insider trading issues, they usually just plead no contest, refund the gain and pay a modest fine. He says it happens fairly frequently, but rarely as newsworthy.  If Stewart had done this, shes home free!  You just have to wonder was it arrogance, poor counsel, a belief that she was righteous?  Too wierd, and too bad, probably quite a few people will be unemployed at Martha stewart Inc. because of this.

I personally thought the intrusion into Microsoft by Reno's justice department was bogus.  I am a Mac guy, so I usually refer to Bill Gates as the Anti-Christ, but what the hell was that all about?  

I believe that Microsoft was hughly responsible for the computer boom of the 80's & 90's.  I'm old enough to remember that when the microcomputer industry started, everyone was on different pages with different operating systes and it was murder if your hardware company tanked!  And plenty of them did.  MS DOS and Windows really pulled the industry together and look at the industry spin-offs!

I am more concerned with government going after companies like MS that individual raiders like Stewart.

Martha Stewart failed to learn any lessons from Richard Nixon or Bill Clinton. The rich and powerful in many cases feel that they are either above the law or can get away with breaking the law and never be caught.  Had she admitted insider trading she probably would have had to disgorge the profits and pay a fine.  Unfortunately she decided to arrange a cover up and that made the feds go after her with a vengeance.  Tricky Dick would have probably not faced impeachment except that he got caught covering up the Watergate burglary.  Bill Clinton screwed up the last two years of his presidency because he lied in court and to the public about Monica Lewinsky.  Except for perjuring himself in court the most he could have been accused of was being a philanderer which most of the people in the country already believed.

An example of someone who got away with more crap that Nixon, Clinton or Martha was LBJ.  However his affairs were never looked into because of an overwhelming democratic majority in congress based upon his landslide victory over Goldwater.  Eventually his lies to the public did eventually catch up to him and force him not to run for another term as President.

The boys at Worldcom, Enron and Tyco have some miserable days ahead.

Martha was on one of the morning radio shows here in Atlanta visiting with two longtime morning personalities a few years back and they're still talking about what a bitch she was! The lady on the show, Vickie Locke is still stunned by the experience. I don't ordinarily listen to their show, but I will Monday morning just to hear what they have to say.

You said........"He killed one woman." He killed Ron Goldman too.

...however, in this case, I'll make an exception. Please state your evidence that WJC "surrounded himself with 3rd rate people."
  Robert Rubin? He was the Treasury Secretary who gave up an eight (that's right, eight) figure salary for government service. Who, when he returned to the private sector, accepted the top position at one of the most prestigious private banking houses.
  G. Robert Blakey? A conservative constitutional scholar, he wrote the RICO laws that Republicans loved when they were being used against the Italian and Jewish organized criminals. But quickly fell out of favor with Republicans when he wouldn't support their legal briefs arguing that this statute shouldn't apply to Wall Street bankers. He served under Janet Reno.
  What about Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan? His resume and accomplishments speak for themselves.
  William Cohen? A Republican, he served WJC as SecDef. A former ranking member of the Senate Defense and Senate Intelligence committees.  
  Oh yes, WJC also managed to win a Rhodes Scholarship. An award granted to about 30 students out of approximately 8500 who apply for it each year. So, WJC is not exactly a dunce himself.
  I'm not pissed off at WJC because he was getting BBBJCIM from a 22 yr old intern. I'm pissed at WJC because the mistress of the President, the leader of the free world was so frumpy.
  I think you get the picture. Please, the next time you go shooting off your mouth (or your keyboard), please have your facts straight so as a consequence you aren't shooting yourself in the foot.


-- Modified on 3/6/2004 8:11:25 AM

Hate to admit thinking this, but how much of her conviction comes about from being a strong--threatening--woman?  Been thinking about this alot lately and how women thru the ages have gotten a raw deal.

Whatever you think of Clinton, he was the smartest president we ever had in any of our lifetimes.  He certainly may have tripped over his own cock, but he was effective against a house and senate of Republician goofballs who were not fit to hold a conversation with him intellectually.  

Beside the people presented in another post to you, don't forget Larry Summers.  That man deserves to have his head put on a Mexican coin for literally saving that country.  Willaim Cohn was also no slouch.  Clinton's worst choice was Ms Reno, but he was never really sensible about women in his life.  However, even she towered above Ashcroft's petty legal and intellectual talents.

The Republican party is a praty of conviction and principle.  Those can take you a long way and be very successful.  However, the current leadership in the Bush administration is staffed with spoiled rich boys with nothing going for them other than inherited privilege (exception Carl Rove, the evil genius).  Bush II is by far more stupid than his dad.  

Just my $0.02.  Harry

would be shrugged off if in a man. But in a woman, she's a bitch, and hated.

I think that you're correct that women are held to a different standard then men. I don't however agree that when a man's an asshole that people somehow accept that as somehow more socially acceptable in general. When a guy's a jerk, most people walk away in disgust just the same, with a few noting in admiration that said jerk is somehow just "more courageous" then the rest of us. The same happens with a woman when she displays the same characteristics with most feeling admonishment and a few admiring those prickly traits. The only difference is that we as a society tend to be more surprised when a woman acts in such a manner. Yes, I believe we expect that women would be more diplomatic, empathetic, nurturing and kind regarding most situations in life, almost unilaterally in fact. Not because most think they should be resigned to a life that is more difficult then a man's (although the case that a woman's life IS more difficult can certainly be made) but because we mostly believe them to be better and more complete human beings then men. For this belief, born mostly from my general experience with woman, I admit in all honesty.

Does a woman have a right to be just as much of an asshole as a man? Absolutely and to loosely quote "I will defend to the death her right to do so..." but from my perspective, I am eternally thankful that most are not. Only my opinion with all due apologies for all who may be offended.

The idea of acting a bit more like an ass may be better accepted from a man.

However her greed, the idea that she is above the law and the idea that she could basically thumb her nose at the federal government has also caused the downfall of a number of men.  Her buddy the head of Imclone has already been convicted.  The boys at Worldcom, Tyco, Adelphia and Enron will enventually all feel the heat.

I suspect that justice may take longer in the Enron case because unlike Worldcom, Tyco and Adelpphia where very straightforward illegal acts were comitted, the boys at Enron at least tried to create a number of limited partnerships and other entities to make the thing one big murky mess.

-- Modified on 3/7/2004 1:18:11 AM

lmao....yeah....its about time the rich have to suffer too.

Shaye