Dear, dear Brad -

You absolutely astounded us! Thank you from the bottom of my (our) heart(s) for your talent and earnest dedication to FACTS and TRUTH - matters that have been abandoned in partisan plays for power.

You are a very gifted spokesman. We thank whatever deity is in charge that you are out there, in the ether, fighting for us.

Peg,
Thanks for expressing my feelings exactly. Thank you, Brad, for EVERYTHING!!
I thought I would post my first email of the day, to Chris Matthews, since it's short. Most my letters & emails will focus on election fraud & other major issues, but I felt compelled to weigh in on this one:
Dear Mr. Matthews,
I heard you ask your panel this question this morning (4/17/05): "Why does the left hate Tom Delay so much?"--an absurd question--as if the left is simply displaying emotional over-reaction (your spin) rather than justifiable outrage over Mr. Delay's many ethical transgressions (the truth).
Thank you for providing yet another example of the right's relentless twisting of fact into fantasy.

I just sent an email to the network thanking them for The Brad Show. I hope alot of people do this so they know we're listening & there are alot of us.

Chris Matthews is a provocateur, not a journalist. His mission isn't to inform the public or expand on its understanding of any subject. It is to create controversy and raise the emotional level of his listeners, a la "Crossfire" or "McLaughlin Group."

His ideology is neither left or right, but that doesn't mean he provides balance. He substitutes a phony smile and a compulsion to interrupt any guest for any interpretive function. Watch him whenever he asks a question, and the answer takes him where he doesn't want to go. He interrupts in the middle of the response; why his guests put up with it, I have no clue.

re #4 - pretty much the same for limbaugh and hannity.

RECORD THE SHOW!
I listened to it last night and am again right now. I clicked to listen to it using Windows Media player and it automatically opened a program I have called Ripcast 1.9 (which one can use to download music off internet streams). So now im recording it through ripcast. You can download the program through downloads.com.

{ed note: post edited to remove "software crack" info. Please do not post note advocating illegal activity! Thanks!}

Very good show:)

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed people can change the world - it's the only thing that ever has. - Margaret Mead

Just adding my thanks. :hehe:

I sent an email to the Satellite Network a few hours before the show went on air, thanking them. I am so thrilled to see your success and hope it will make a difference in the election process and the MSM. You came through loud and clear in the NW and sounded very professional. Thanks Brad for all you are doing. I've given out your website to many and will also tell others about the radio show.

Cool! I have the Brad Show streaming wirelessly to my Squeezebox device, sending the audio to my home stereo.

I love the smell of internet in the morning...It smells like...victory

{ed note: post edited to remove "software crack" info. Please do not post note advocating illegal activity! Thanks!}

The show was great Brad. Can't wait for future shows.

{ed note: post edited to remove "software crack" info. Please do not post note advocating illegal activity! Thanks!}

:crazy: I missed the first hour with the clint curtis interview because i tuned in Sunday but the time zones confused me.

:doze:

Any way we'll get the files up somewhere?

Brad

I really appreciate your clarity and reasonableness in your radio presence. Those qualities translate so well to the general public; of course, having the informational ammo to express gives you a powerful forum.

Hope you can persuade more mainstream writers to come on the show. Your third-segment guest expressed the dawning realization of the enormity of the situation, and his story of that transition was important and believeable in a personal way.

And I'll tip the hat the Bejammin075: I love the smell of internet in the morning...It smells like...victory. At least this morning it certainly did, even if it was merely a small one piece of cheer in the face of the administration's enormous campaign. We need those big smiles.

Perhaps you spoke about it in two of the segments I missed, but you might remember that the administration sold the "results" - the "win" by Bushco - from the second the election was declared in his favor. That selling campaign was thorough and complete; that's why so few question it now, like it is completely over and done. The same was true of Nixon in 1972 in a little more low key, formal manner. If you'll review the news from November, you can see that blitz in action, in almost ever official utterance and its reverbation through the MSM and talkradio. That's the psychological state of mind that has to be overcome across the nation. It's like adobe construction; it can be washed away, but hitting it when it is solidifed and hard makes it seem much less vulnerable than it really is.

Keep chipping away and pouring on the water of truth and the walls of official oppression will fall.

Walkshills - Thanks! We'll keep at it!

Me - Will try to get up MP3's from each hour of the show as soon as I can get 'em!

Walkshills #14-

I'll second that!

It's not the technical problems with the first show, it's the content that's important. Thank you Brad for your efforts in keeping us informed of the truth.

Since the sub-humans are in total charge on what goes on I think it's going to take a "French Revolution" type event to get back to normal in this country. What do you think folks?

Re #10: So sorry! I had no idea...

Joan

Here is the link to the company that makes RipCast (current version is 1.9)

It's "shareware" which means you get limited usage "free", and they want you to buy it if you want to keep using it. The cost listed on the site is $18 if you like it. I'm using it now (under the "free" portion) to see what the limits are.. Sojo said it was 30 Megabytes (I'm presuming that's one file of that size, but it seems you might be able to make unlimited numbers of files as long as they are under 30 megabytes (it was almost 4 megs for 11 minutes with one test here).

Thank you, Savantster! Will try it...

Hey Savanster - is there a way to directly copy to a CD from streaming audio? TIA

Once again, you all rock but the the Bradmeister rocks the mostest.

Once I get paid, I shall be passing on my good fortune - wll some of anyways.

Is there anychance of the broadcasts being downloadable? There were broadcast at silly o'clock in the morning London time. If I could download them and put them on my iPod, I can listen to them on the to/from work journey.

Well done Brad, the truth IS out there - now.

Kira #21

I'm not sure off the top of my head, but I'd presume you could set your CD-drive to be an open file system (not sure if that requires the RW stuff or not, might depend on your software?) and have the files be recorded to the CD.. Not sure if that would work, but you would probably end up with some junky files. The problem (last I was looking into such things) is that you have the data comming in sub-optimally for CD-writing. The lazer on the CD-drive wants to stay "lit" and "burning" the data, but it won't be coming in as fast as the drive wants to write. Given that most drives have multiple speeds, this might not be too much of a problem, but I'm not sure.

When you pull stuff to mp3, it looks to be pretty small. The 30 minutes of Brad's show I pulled only took up 10 megabytes (puny for most systems), where as when I saved it in Windows format (wmv I think), it was 177 megabytes. Clearly, you want to stream into mp3 if you can (RipCast does that by default it looks like). Once you have your data, burning it to CD to save space is a simple matter (relatively speaking, of course).. once it's on CD, you can just delete the file from your PC..

But, to take a swing at your question.. I'd say, if you set the "download location" to your blank CD and have your CD software running to allow your CD to act like a "normal drive" (some programs out there let you do that.. not sure which ones off the top of my head, I'd guess anything that came with a new drive in the past year or 2 might/should/could/would), you should be able to dump the raw data right to CD..

Thank you Savanster! The way you've described it, the mp3 option seems to be the best method. Thanks for the great info!

Haha, my husband is a computer guru - educated in Canada where education seems to be much better quality than here in the US - but you know the old saying about the Shoemaker's family never having shoes !

Oops - what I left out in my post #24 is that my husband's work takes up ALL his time lately.

Ah well, so much for my multi-tasking ... back out to finish mowing my overgrown yard!

SAVANTSTER #7 (re-post from other thread)
Didn't go for the Jazz theme!
How about "We're Not Going To Take It"
by Twisted Sister, for The Brad Show signature tune?

Oh We're Not Gonna Take It
no, We Ain't Gonna Take It
oh We're Not Gonna Take It Anymore

we've Got The Right To Choose And
there Ain't No Way We'll Lose It
this Is Our Life, This Is Our Song
we'll Fight The Powers That Be Just
don't Pick Our Destiny 'cause
you Don't Know Us, You Don't Belong

oh We're Not Gonna Take It
no, We Ain't Gonna Take It
oh We're Not Gonna Take It Anymore

oh You're So Condescending
your Gall Is Never Ending
we Don't Want Nothin', Not A Thing From You
your Life Is Trite And Jaded
boring And Confiscated
if That's Your Best, Your Best Won't Do

oh.....................
oh.....................
we're Right/yeah
we're Free/yeah
we'll Fight/yeah
you'll See/yeah

oh We're Not Gonna Take It
no, We Ain't Gonna Take It
oh We're Not Gonna Take It Anymore

oh We're Not Gonna Take It
no, We Ain't Gonna Take It
oh We're Not Gonna Take It Anymore
no Way!

oh.....................
oh.....................
we're Right/yeah
we're Free/yeah
we'll Fight/yeah
you'll See/yeah

we're Not Gonna Take It
no, We Ain't Gonna Take It
we're Not Gonna Take It Anymore

we're Not Gonna Take It, No!
no, We Ain't Gonna Take It
we're Not Gonna Take It Anymore

just You Try And Make Us
we're Not Gonna Take It
come On
no, We Ain't Gonna Take It
you're All Worthless And Weak
we're Not Gonna Take It Anymore
now Drop And Give Me Twenty
we're Not Gonna Take It
oh Crinch Pin
no, We Ain't Gonna Take It
oh You And Your Uniform
we're Not Gonna Take It Anymore

Amen

From From Frontline PBS (April 12th, 2005)

Here's what was said:

Narrator: By late afternoon, they were crunching the numbers at the white house. Rove had spent years courting the conservative republican base. He knew if the base was turning out to vote, the exit polls were wrong.

Matthew Dowd: You know exits are usually never that wrong, they've been wrong, but usually never that wrong, and I thought the either we fundamentally misunderstood what was going on in the electorate and what we counted on and turnout wasn't going to happen, or these were completely screwed up.

Mark McKinnon: I talked to the president about an hour later and he got to the white house and he gave me a call and said what do you think? Of course, I put a great face on, I said it complete baloney, it's all fine, methodically flaw. Meanwhile I'm (raising his hand to his mouth like he's drinking) laughs.

Narrator: Rove had an elaborate system designed to plug into key precincts for real time results.

Ken Melman (RNC Chairman, gay man): We had set up a whole war room at the campaign, we were not only getting tracking polling that we'd get from the network but we had our own system of monitoring returns and monitoring information.

Narrator: the information generated at campaign headquarters dramatically contradicted the exit polls. Rove had been right, the base was turning out.

Matthew Dowd: As each state came in, they matched our forecast as opposed to the exit polls.

My Question:
What other information could they possibly have, except the exit polls?

So much extraneous noise clogs the conscious mind through the media. Michael Jackson (who really cares one way or the other?), Britney Spears' pregnancy (could anything matter less, except to her?), Charles and Camilla, endless Scott Peterson talk, theological masturbation within the Episcopal Church over gay priests, and nonstop speculation about who the next Pope will be.

Meanwhile, the last two presidential elections have been stolen. American soldiers continue to return home in body bags from an endless war in Iraq (but none can be shown on TV). Thousands of "detainees" are held incommunicado without access to lawyers, in the name of national security, while others are tortured without recourse against the torturers. A cabal of partisan politicians hijacks democracy for its own ends, and converts a family's private tragedy into a theocratic crusade. Energy companies milk consumers and taxpayers with the cooperation of the vice president, whose private negotations with energy executives remain undisclosed to the same consumers and taxpayers. The government itself bribes media outlets to present news filtered through its biased prisms.

None of this is considered news. That's why we need "Radio Free Democracy," or "Radio Free Bradblog," or whatever we decide to call it.

God Bless you, Brad. You have unlimited support.

BUSH@WACKER
SAVANTSTER #7 (re-post from other thread)
Didn't go for the Jazz theme!

How about Supertramp
"Crime of the Century"
it fits real nice.
"Right ,right bloody well right ,got a bloody right to say"

Brad,
any chance of seeing the questions put to Clinton Curtis during the polygraph.

Now they’re planning the crime of the century
Well what will it be?
Read all about their schemes and adventuring
It’s well worth a fee
So roll up and see
And they rape the universe
How they’ve gone from bad to worse
Who are these men of lust, greed, and glory?
Rip off the masks and let see.
But that’s no right - oh no, what’s the story?
There’s you and there’s me
That can’t be right

LYRICS from CRIME OF THE CENTURY
so,so fitting

I just came away from Jeff Wells' blog "Rigorous Intuition" with a paragraph I'd like to share with Bradvillians, because it describes them perfectly:

"Rather than bleeding hearts, we need big hearts. Heavy, swollen hearts, that just can't bear anymore. And because they can drive us to action, rather than to the dead end of cheap sentiment, hearts like those can become weapons."

Thanks so much, Jeff.

mmiixx #32
... You're Bloody well right! Crime of the Century is a perfect fit, well done Mick!

Well done Brad. I'd love to have mp3's of all of it so I could burn it and re-send it to all of my friends who missed it. But I know you must be busy as all get out. But I'll keep an eye out for it. Kudos, thanks and peace dearheart - you've got us behind you.

Peace

Bradvillians -

Rather than bleeding hearts, we need big hearts. Heavy, swollen hearts, that just can't bear anymore. And because they can drive us to action, rather than to the dead end of cheap sentiment, hearts like those can become weapons.

I'm wondering, just before crashing, if anyone else noticed how many times Brad commented on the engineer in last night's broadcast who was a "Bush supporter?" What did he, Brad, mean to telegraph by announcing this? Was he protecting himself? I don't think Brad is a paranoiac. He was in an unfamiliar sound-proofed room being serviced by someone he "jokingly(?)" referred to as a Bushie? I picked up on strange vibes there. Did anyone else? Brad, do you have any comments?

I nominate "Won't get fooled again" by The Who as the Theme tune to Radio Free Bradville.

It lists everything we should be fighting against - and it rocks.

I've expressed here, & others have also, some frustration that we seem always to be 'preaching to the choir', talking only to each other. People like Conyers are in the public arena; and Brad has now expanded his reach via radio (!!!); what can the rest of us do? I write letters but my efforts are so small...
VR is a great undertaking also and I'm wondering if the Rainforest Action Network knows of VR & vice versa. Their site is ran.org. They decided that trying to speak truth to politicians was not very effective because it isn't the pols who run the world, it's the banks & the corporations, as we know, so they thought 'Why go through the middleman who ignores us, why not go to these people directly?' And they've been getting results, if one can believe what I've been hearing. Ceo's don't like it when hordes of people show up on theit doorstep to point out their hideous practices, as it turns out. Similar to what M Moore did with WalMart selling guns.
So I'm asking: is this an avenue we could pursue, linking this type of protest action to the '04 election issue, e.g., going en masse to the corporate offices of voting machine manufacturers perhaps? Making ourselves more visible?
I have not contacted them to ask if they are hooked up with Velvet Revolution...anyone know if they are?
Any thoughts?

Joan: Corporate America does run the show, but only to the extent that Mr. and Mrs. American Consumer allows it to happen. These corporations depend (directly or indirectly) on the willingness of the consumer economy to sustain itself...currently it represents 2/3 of Gross Domestic Product.

Showing up on the doorstep is an annoyance to corporate titans, but even better is ignoring their companies altogether. That means not buying their products or watching their ads on TV. It means joining organizations like "Killer Coke." It means not buying these stocks, or mutual funds that invest in these stocks.

If only 10% of American consumers stopped buying Coke, McDonald burgers, Budweiser beer, and Exxon-Mobil, Shell, and Texaco gas, stopped banking at Citicorp and terminated all accounts with Disney and Time-Warner (to name a handful), the effect on these companies' bottom lines would be exponentially greater than 10% (because of leverage)...maybe 20% or 25%. Trust me on that.

Consumer discretion is power.

Well RLM, I wish you the very best of luck with THAT dream. It would appear that the average American consumer is way too interested in Michael Jackson, Faux news and the general "reality TV" shite pit to give much of a crap about the behaviour of the Corporations. They are only taking any kind of notice now because gas prices have jumped at the pump.

The bread and circuses stage of the Pax Americana is well underway.

I'd love to say that a nationwide awakening is underway, but the truth is that the corporate ploy of deliberate uncertainty is keeping the public preoccupied with maintaining their quantity of life that they are way too busy to watch their freedoms being stolen and their environment destroyed.

If there is compelling evidence to the contrary, no-one would love to see it more that I.

#39
Yes, I agree, and organized boycotts have had results in the past, but is this practical, will people do it? I doubt masses of people are going to stop consuming Coke or Bud or burgers, for example UNLESS there is an organized effort behind it.
My point in bringing up Rainforest Action Network is that they have targeted companies such as JP Morgan/Chase & CitiBank & have gotten their attention.
Good if people like us stop buying Coke, yes. BETTER if wealthy people stop INVESTING in these companies. RAN's 'Global Finance project, as I understand it, seeks to influence those higher up in the financial food chain. More money, more power.
This is from a page on their site called 'BankTrack':

"Leading socially responsible blue-chip investment funds such as Investec Henderson Crosthwaite and Morley Fund have already sold all their Shell shares over concerns about the oil giant’s lack of environmental ethics".
BankTrack is "a network of fourteen civil society organisations tracking the operations of the private financial sector and its effect on people and the environment."
Rainforest is obviously concerned with environmental issues, but the point is that they are targeting the "top", the people & companies that deal in billions of dollars. I think we need to bypass politicians (not entirely, of course, but on certain issues) because demanding that a senator or congressman vote no or yes on a given issue is rather like demanding that an employee boycott his boss's product when his boss is paying him handsomely.
We have been brainwashed into believing that politicians work for us, the people. But they don't answer to us because we are not the ones stuffing their pockets with cash. It's corporations that do that.

I think I have to agree with Da Wookie in #40.. There is a LOT more going on here than what "we" can realistically hope to achieve by having "some people boycot".. We just can't get the numbers, and I don't think it's because "people don't care", I think it's more on the fact that as the poverty line climbs wages drop. As good jobs leave the country, minimum wage jobs are created (in the service sector) where you can't even get 1/2 of what the poverty line is. If you have a family today, chances are both parents work at least 1 job, in a lot of cases at least one parent works 2. That's with no benifits so if something happens, they are screwed. That kind of pressure day to day feeds into the consumer mindset.. not knowing if you will lose what little you have tomorrow so you "live today" and go out to fast food (not to mention it's easier than making dinner and kids like it a lot more as well, and with all the $0.99 menues out there, can cost near the same as making your own meal).

I suggest watching "The Corperation" to everyone (I mentioned it on a few other threads, but it warrents mentioning here as well). It talks about how companies have grown into international conglomerates and just what kind of force they are. It also shows that -lots- (they don't mention a number, but there is a bit where they show fines to companies and there are a lot) of companies engage in illegal (and some times morally reprehensable) activities because it's "cost effective". The other part of the problem is, companies aren't worried about "the U.S. market" so much since they are international. They are just headquartered here.

The trade deficit is at an all time high ($700 billion?) and getting worse. "We" aren't buying U.S. goods anymore, we're buying foriegn goods. If you look at what companies are doing the "best" today (really today, April 18, 2005) they are all banks and credit card companies, on the heals of the Bankruptcy Bill. Nevermind it was already a $30 billion per year industy (I think it was 30..), they are all posting "record profits" now while the rest of the market plumets.

Basically, we need a fundamental ideology shift in this country. We need to stop letting corperations "combine" (we have all kinds of near monopoly situations now) as much as they have.. we need to stop letting them pay for representation in government (unless you want to let them be "persons" like they are under the law, but force them to get their "own" representitives based on population/enumeration, just like the Constitution suggests) and force our "representitives" back into representing us.. We need laws passed that take -all- the profits from a time in which a company was doing something illegal; committing crime should not be cost effective, ever. Until we force companies back into their boxes, and stop making laws that benifit them more than 'real' people, until we prevent them from currupting politicians (worse than they already tend to be), until we take charge again, we're screwed.

#42:
Savantster, you say "We need to... force our "representitives" back into representing us."
"We need laws passed that take -all- the profits from a time in which a company was doing something illegal..."
"Until we force companies back into their boxes...until we prevent them from currupting politicians..."until we take charge again, we're screwed."

I agree with all that. But do we have the power to do any of that? No!
That's exactly my point. Having "some people boycot", as you say, achieves very little, especially if they are "little people". This is true even when vast numbers of "little people" come together, as happened just before the war. Millions in numerous countries demonstrated & were ignored, because they (we) were powerless to impose a consequence on those in power.
Getting back to one of your statements ...

"We need laws passed that take -all- the profits from a time in which a company was doing something illegal..."

How about Halliburton, which did business with "rogue states"...illegal, no? Would it be feasible to target them with a protest action a la RAN's methods, is what I'm asking? And I'm a bit horse-before-the cart here because I've not done much research into WHAT they do & HOW, exactly... but they set their sights on bigger fish, ceo's, investors, banks etc, people who make the rules, the REAL rules, not the bogus baloney we are fed from THEIR media & THEIR politicians.
Am I making sense to ANYBODY???

And the best part of the trade deficit (if I understand it correctly - I'm an network engineer, not an economist) is that:

1. The imported goods are from American companies production facilities overseas.

2. The moved those manufacturing jobs from the US, doing Americans out of jobs and reducing the amount of taxes paid into the federal coffers and increasing the taxes paid by everyone else - except the rich folks 'o course.

3. THEY GOT TAX BREAKS FOR DOING IT.

4. If a US government (not this one, obviously) tried to put up trade tariffs to protect what pitiful few manufacturing jobs are left, then the WTO will give them the shaft so bad, a new position will have to be invented.

This has been the plan for a long, long time and I can't see anyway of stopping it and it's not just the US. The same show has toured the western world, third world cheap labour has been used to lower our wages and keep us in our place, all with the complicity of our governments - labour, democrat, conservative and republican. We have all been systematically screwed over by those we thought were protecting our interests.

I genuinely believe in "Self Precluding Interests", that there are interests from which desire should bar you from being involved in eg. the desire to own a gun should bar you from owning one - look at the type of person who WANTS a gun and you'll see what I mean. Let's add politician to that list, because I really don't trust any of them anymore.

First call of arms is to get corporations the fuck out of politics, they just poison the process. Any Corporation that invloves itself in the political process should have it's Incorporation revoked and be thrown to the winds - I hate 'em.

Won't happen though, too many pockets lined too deep with too much corporate cash.

http://www.jumpstartford...hp?id=1283&area=ford

This link takes you to RAN's "Jumpstart Ford...Zero Emissions" campaign, an effort to address global warming (sez Joan, as she continues to beat a dead horse?)
Please understand that I do not mean to denigrate in any way (heaven forfend!) the Bradblog's & VR's important work. I just think maybe the VR people should talk to the RAN people....perhaps.

I have downloaded and I WILL enjoy, I've just got to split 'em up into 9 meg segments otherwise they'll chew up the batteries in my iPod. When I get them split, any other iPodders out there like a copy?

Brad, I love you! In a purely heterosexual, platonic, non-church threatening kind of a way you understand, nothing that would give Pat Robertson heart burn or anything

It really is time to rip the MSM a new one.

RLM #39

ABSOLUTELY, TOTALLY CORRECT.

You have to do anything at all you can. All of this complaining about the uncontrollable is energy that can be used productively.

YOU CANNOT RIGHTFULLY BITCH ABOUT CORPORATIONS WHEN YOU HAVE MONEY INVESTED IN THEM. IT'S HYPOCRITICAL.

A massive boycott of course isn't likely soon, but every individual effort counts. If we were at least aware of the amount we are consuming every day... the amount of petroleum product.

I withdrew all my money from the stock market. I could no longer in good conscience contribute.

Da Wookie #44

I'm not sure what you mean when you say "look at the people that desire guns".. I like guns.. I think they're cool. And I think we, the citizens, the last defense against invasion from without or within, need guns to protect our country, democracy, and Constitution. The second amendment isn't there to apease nut-jobs, it's there to make sure "the people" aren't defenseless.

Did you know we aren't supposed to have a standing army? States are supposed to have a militia, supported (at least partially) by the Federal Government, that is to act as our "defense".. The second amendment is about making sure we can "raise a force" in a hury if needed. And, it's intent is -also- to make sure citizens can fend off a rogue government, should the need arise. What are you going to do when Shrubman decides to put troops in the streets? When he decides to prevent you, with force, from excersizing your rights?

I'm all for putting guns in the hands of non-violent people. The only people that should -not- have guns are people who engage in violent crimes. I also support people having assault rifles.. hey, the military has them, and when they come to your door, don't you want to be on even ground? not waving a spatula and yellling "no, don't shoot me, let me thwack you with my spatula!".

Like I said, I'm no Democrat I'm no Repugnecon either.. and my general ideology is VERY Left in general. *shrug*

Teresa #47

What about us that only get "matching contributions" while we have money tied up in our 401(k), vested in the market? I wish like hell I could put that money someplace else, but when the company you work for only matches in a 401(k), you kind of get stuck.

I don't make enough (single guy, paying for all my bills by my lonesome, etc) to live and put money away for retirement. Putting money in that 401(k) (to get the free money matching up to 5% of my pay) is the only way to double some of my money (though, I'm also losing some with the market tanking). I sure wish I could put it in a savings account, but I can't. Couple that with the fact that Social Security is being beaten up and you have a real problem for people that don't want to work (or won't be able to) till the day they die (well, after 70 years old, with 50 years working).

I don't condone the market either. It's a scam for the most part, and the "little man" is gonna lose in the long run. Big money makes fast money and gets in and out in the short term. The average person hoping their investments hold out long enough to let them reitre at some point are the ones putting money into the damn. But, failing our "leaders" putting a stop to it, we're a slave to their devices. But, at some point, you have to say "in order to survive, I have to use the tools at my disposal".. where is that line? I'd guess it's different for everyone (lots of people are getting rich on online-porn.. but I can't bring myself to get rich that way.. not that it's hard to do.. but it feels wrong), but trying to do the minimum to get by seems reasonable (at least to me and my 401(k), even though I'd rather not put my money there.. it's part of my "perks" for my job, and my salary is based on taking advantage of that perk, regardless of if I actually do).

*shrug*

Savanster #49.

I do understand. But there is always an excuse. This country was built on incredibly creative, resourceful people. We can always come up with something.

We are being taken so much by the stock market. We are the suckers and the losers. They take all of our money in their day trading scam and we are left with the crumbs. Now, some say, we are in a long down cycle and the alternative ways to make money might be more effective.

I believe we should pool our funds on the grass roots level. The Asians have always done this and look at their success.

Great job! Thanks for being there for all of us. I plan to advertise again next week!
Walt & Family

Since I live in N. Central Florida, I couldn't get the broadcast live but have been listening for the last two hours to the first two hours of your show on the MP3's It sounds real good and Brad you are great at covering the issues. I agree the music leaves something to be desired but that's not what I was listening for anyway. It's the content that is so important. So thrilled that you on "on" Will send along my contribution as soon as I can. It's not for lack of desire to do so... but every check has to be planned ahead. This month our little great grandson's 7th birthday had to take precedence. No families' birthday's next month so barring unforseen circumstances.....we could get lucky!

Re:49

Yep, I did know that the US isn't supposed to have a standing army. As to when the Army takes to the streets in the US, I'd be sad and afraid for you all, but I'm at least 3,000 miles away.

My statement wasn't intended as an attack on all gun owners, please let me clarify my position.

My opinion has been formed by the people here in the UK who would like to own guns - so far, without exception they have been the sort of person who I wouldn't want living next door WITHOUT access to firearms. Much like the people I've met who want to join the Police force have been (with only two exceptions, both women) exactly the sort of person who should not be put in a position of authority over anyone.

I have been very strongly in favour of gun control pretty much everywhere. Like most young boys I had a fascination with firearms, but as I grew older I saw the devastation one person with a firearm and no scruples can do amongst an unarmed community and went off them real quick.

However, I am re-evaluating my stance as I can see the situation that you suggest coming to pass and I agree that a citizen has a right to defend themselves against an unjust administration, so I see the value in gun ownership. I still have a problem with the biggest proponent of gun ownership openly supporting the very people who will be signing the orders for the kicking in of doors - see what I mean?

After a couple of massacres here in the UK, gun ownership is basically illegal and I'm perfectly happy with that - how gun ownership is handled in the US is none of my business as I'm not a US citizen. However, I will say that the statistic that 48% of adult American males have a serious phsychological neuroses coupled with the ability of these same people to acquire rapid fire high calibre firearms is not a good mixture. I'm aware that the relationship of Americans with their guns is a long held one, but it doesn't make me like guns any more or feel any safer in their presence. To me, expanding gun ownership means that TPTB are winning in their attempt to make people paranoid, afraid and isolated which also means that those same people won't be getting together with anyone else and creating trouble - like demonstrating or wanting the staus quo changed.

Just my two cents worth.

Da Wookie at #53

And, given that you are from the UK and people there tend to be a LOT more.. sane? (from what I gather) and honor and being a gentleman 'matters' there, I can see where guns are a different issue than here.

But, in the U.S., we were born of strife and contention. It's in our blood to be combatitve and untrusting (and uncooth most days). In that context, we know all too well that the guy "next door" might be off his nut and come knocking at 2am looking for some trouble. Crime is very high in the states.. mostly because of the poverty caused by big business and republicans.

I agree, the 'wacked out right' are the ones fighting "most" for guns (lack of controls), but that should tell you something too.. the "haves" know all too well that they are pissing down the backs of the "have nots"... they want guns for when people wake up and storm the streets.

While I tend to be pretty Liberal, I also don't buy into the mantra "just because".. I've not seen ONE gun, ever, kill anyone while it was just sitting on the table. Never, not once. I've never seen a kitchen knife kill anyone either, yet it's been a murder weapon in domestic violence for.. well, probably a hundred years. I have to agree with the "right-wing, NRA" statement of "guns don't kill people, people kill people".. sorry, but that's a fact. I also agree that "guns make it easier", yet some of the -worst- crimes don't involve guns at all.. the bombings that take more lives in a single shot than any "homicidle shooting spree" are done with "common materials"..

I'm not sure where you got your "48% are nuts" thing.. I've met a lot of wack-jobs.. not sure a full 1/2 of all American men are as likely to shoot as wave hello.. "nuts" would mean they are.. Are men here aggresive? yeah.. nuts? not sure.. but, again, like I said.. no one that has -ever- been convicted of a violent crime should have a gun (or knife, or sword, or razor, etc etc etc). Us "normal" people though.. it's imperative we have protection from enmies both foriegn and domestic (mostly domestic.. unfortunately).

Besides, it's also a fact that criminals -will- get guns in the US, readily. I'd rather have a gun next to my bed when someone breaks in than 12" ruler with wich to give a stern scolding.. know what I mean? I also have a 110 lb. German Shepard roaming my floorspace.. but, if someone gets past him, I'm pretty sure I'll be -needing- that gun, know what I mean?

In an ideal world, guns wouldn't exist. We'd get our "boom" fix on fireworks (that could not be used for harm) and animals would smile and sacrafice their lives for us for food (note: I despise hunting in most cases too). This isn't the "ideal world"..people are starving all over.. curruption runs amok.. and people that "want theirs" are set at taking it. When they come a-knockin, I'll be a-cockin..

As an aside (since we're way off topic.. sorry about that!)

Guns matter not to the truly sick

Yeah, I know we're WAY OT, but without an open thread it's gotta go somewhere...

Dunno if the UK is more sane - we trust our political leaders very little and religion plays a small and ever diminishing role here so the major causes of sociological schisms are less visible. We have our problems, as does every nation, but fundamentally we still believe in fair play and treating others how you would like them to treat you. We just need to shed the medieval class system and eject the parasitic aristocracy, but then the merchant princes would just take their place so maybe it's better as it is...

The whole gun thing is a complicated issue and I hear ya - I know that the UK and the States are two peoples seperated by a common language, still I'm glad that guns don't figure in the lives of most people over here. The 48% thing was a statistic which shocked me enough when I read to stick in my mind, but for the life of me I can't remember where it's from. As an aside, I do remember reading an article by one of the BBC's America correspondents that 22% of Americans think that they will be taken up through the clouds to heaven - that was fairly recent so I do remember the source. There is such a thing as too much religion...

As long as you keep your firearms securely, responsibly and with a view to being used as a last resort defense for you and yours then you do so with my blessing.

The "Guns don't kill people" argument is still lame IMO. When you start getting drive by poisinings or a strangling massacre in McDonalds I might be convinced, but until then it just won't wash. Yes, people kill people, but guns make it easy and impersonal - stabbing someone requires you to approach a person and physically attack them, guns just point, shoot and walk away. Why do you think most homicides favour guns? Killing convinience and reduction of danger to self, if they had to use another method most of them wouldn't bother. I agree that bombs have a more devastating effect, but my comments were based in a purely civilian context where bombings are a much, much rarer event than shootings and cause a statistically negligable number of fatalities.

I return you to your regularly schedulded blog...