DescentBB

The Modern Republican brought to you by FDR.

I hate that ball of slime.

Yeah, like hate Reagan and Bush.

But be that as it may, the Modern Republican and Democratic Parties have created the Oligarchs in Washington that are now in control of things . The tea party just plain wants to destroy everything they don't want to pay for.

http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index ... onomy.html

now there's a credible source. the "Opinion" page of the most liberal paper in the second most liberal state in the country.

The opinion piece sounds just like TC. Starts off blaming Washington as a whole but quickly reveals the authors core belief when he/she/it says all our problems are the fault of only the one party. The dems laugh all the way to the bank with support like that.

CUDA wrote:now there's a credible source. the "Opinion" page of the most liberal paper in the second most liberal state in the country.

Is it that you don't agree with the opinion writer's reasons for our nation's financial troubles, or is it that he just spouts a liberal bias you don't like to hear?

Will Robinson wrote:The opinion piece sounds just like TC. Starts off blaming Washington as a whole but quickly reveals the authors core belief when he/she/it says all our problems are the fault of only the one party. The dems laugh all the way to the bank with support like that.

I do blame Washington, both the Democrats and the Republicans are part of the problem. In fact, what we have in Washington are a bunch of RepubliDems, a perverted conglomeration of greedy sycophants that suck up to those that really control the power and wealth in this country. What I do believe in are many of those core Democratic Liberal values that make up the party, which is not something that most Dems espouse in Washington these days. Money talks and money corrupts, even with those that call themselves Democrats.

tunnelcat wrote:

CUDA wrote:now there's a credible source. the "Opinion" page of the most liberal paper in the second most liberal state in the country.

Is it that you don't agree with the opinion writer's reasons for our nation's financial troubles, or is it that he just spouts a liberal bias you don't like to hear?

Both Actually

I knew John Wayne was my Favorite actor for a reason

John Wayne wrote:this new Liberal group, they never listen to your point of View. they make a decision to what your gonna think

so true, so true

tunnelcat wrote:I do blame Washington, both the Democrats and the Republicans are part of the problem. In fact, what we have in Washington are a bunch of RepubliDems, a perverted conglomeration of greedy sycophants that suck up to those that really control the power and wealth in this country. What I do believe in are many of those core Democratic Liberal values that make up the party, which is not something that most Dems espouse in Washington these days. Money talks and money corrupts, even with those that call themselves Democrats.

Democrats, like Republicans, don't stand for anything. In other nations, the political parties espouse some ideology or core belief, such as social democracy, liberal democracy, democratic socialism, etc. The only real ideology the Democrats espouse is "we're left of the other guys."

CUDA wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:

CUDA wrote:now there's a credible source. the "Opinion" page of the most liberal paper in the second most liberal state in the country.

Is it that you don't agree with the opinion writer's reasons for our nation's financial troubles, or is it that he just spouts a liberal bias you don't like to hear?

Both Actually

Well, IMHO, then you're part of the problem. I hope you like living in a Plutocracy under the likes of the Koch Brothers, because that's where we're headed. Once fully intrenched, they can't be removed by anything short of violent revolution. They will only keep enough government around to protect their own interests, not that of the rest of society. You can kiss clean air and water goodby, put up with food, drugs or other products that are poorly designed or tainted, hurting and killing people in the process, live with wages that are sub-poverty at best and lose those same people's business because they won't be able to afford to buy the things that require the services of your business, hope and pray for massive amounts of charity to assuage your guilt for those who can't afford housing, food or healthcare anymore because we've eliminated all the social safety nets, and pay more out of pocket to travel to less and less rural places on the fewer roads and bridges left in this country that haven't rotted away because they've become the private property of for-profit business interests. Have fun.

John Wayne was a smart man, a great actor and I hold the utmost respect for him. But the vagrancies of human nature affect all of us, not just liberals. Conservatives need to take a good hard look in the mirror, because they aren't exempt from those same traits and failures either, unless of course, conservatives aren't human.

I think now would be a good time to redefine ourselves. I noticed this a long time ago, that the party politics seem to flip-flop. When I was a kid, every damn body was a democrat. They had the wroking man's interest at heart. Then through the 80's they became this weird cult that was destroying America and the Republicans were standing for American Ideals. Then it flip-flops again, so much that for me even as a kid I said piss on all of them. Seemed none of them could make up their minds and right then I determined to not align myself with any political party or be pigeon-holed with a label because I would agree with points from both parties. It has digressed to the point of absurdity from then to now.

How should we be redefined? Everyone calls me a "liberal" like it's a dirty word, but I'm about as far away from commies and hippies in my philosophy as one can get. I want some balance in our government that's somewhere between the 2 political extremes, but since the extremes keep moving, how do things get resolved when the middle shifts constantly?

I just think they should all be treated with suspicion and scrutiny. I heard joe widen say he's been there 36 years. Boehner some 20 odd years and many more just like them. That's too long. How can this country change and still stay diverse if we keep electing the same old mindset? Those guys need to go.

[ Post made via Android ]

I’m still trying to figure out how the “rich” will have it made when everyone else is dirt poor…this is not an agrarian culture anymore.

I’m pretty sure when "everyone" is dirt poor…the rich will soon follow. (one way or another)

It's madness and in my opinion unintentional. This ★■◆● is getting out of hand and the ones who have the money right now are afraid to let go of it and the ones who have never had any money don't know any better. The way things are designed right now will have to be changed to something more stable and consistent across the board. It's a house of cards right now and this bailout proves just how dependent it is on the integrity and honesty of others. Like I said, most these people ended up where they are because of luck and happenstance, it wasn't because of any extraordinary abilities and a great deal of the time it boils down to simple thuggishness. Spellcheck is WRONG

I think the”rich” would prefer to see most people well off…but powerless, like the coddled little sheep, many have become…that would serve their interests much more than ending up on the business end of a long sharpened pole.

Spidey wrote:I’m still trying to figure out how the “rich” will have it made when everyone else is dirt poor…this is not an agrarian culture anymore.

I’m pretty sure when "everyone" is dirt poor…the rich will soon follow. (one way or another)

I think they will just leave.

I'm afraid that we're headed toward a split.

[ Post made via Android ]

Spidey wrote:I’m still trying to figure out how the “rich” will have it made when everyone else is dirt poor…this is not an agrarian culture anymore.

I’m pretty sure when "everyone" is dirt poor…the rich will soon follow. (one way or another)

Since when is greed logical? Getting more money is an addiction that muddies common sense. Remember Spidey, we're now in a global economy. Those wealthy Plutocrats can milk this country dry, or any other for that matter, and then pack up and move elsewhere if society here were to collapse. Any wealthy Middle Eastern Gulf country like Dubai, Saudi Arabia or Oman would gladly give refuge for them to squander their billions in luxury. They just don't have to live here anymore to do business. We would become another low-wage country for their production pool. Also, don't forget, as a bonus, the new Plutocrats, or a.k.a., The Robber Barons, are now getting revenge for FDR screwing them during 1930's.

I guess the only kink comes about when they want to find lots of people with disposable income to buy their products. If everyone is poor because of wage deflation, how are they going to support their industries with buying power when no one can afford those products? That's what I don't understand. Our economy is driven by consumer spending. We have the lowest tax rate as a percentage of GDP in 50 years, so that's not the reason. If we keep having our wages cut and our housing, energy and health care costs escalate, how in the hell is our economy going to survive? Top that off with a growing retirement pool of people that can't save enough just to live on because the banks give no interest on savings, the stock market stalls and Social Security/Medicare gets cut by overzealous Republicans, ConservaDems, and tea party bozos who would rather destroy it instead of fix it, and I only see a catastrophe in the making. Wall Street whines on and on about low consumer spending is and how high unemployment is and yet they still reward companies that ship our jobs elsewhere for cheaper wages, leaving us here with high unemployment and no income to spend. What do they effing expect? Pull dollars out of our a$$es!

But at the very least, if the rich stayed here in power, the commoners would soon get tried of being "coddled" and "powerless" in the face of low living standards and expensive housing, food, energy and especially, health care costs. This last one is going to cripple us in the near future, mark my words. We can't sustain 5 to 20% increases in costs every year, and no, Obamacare DIDN'T address that problem. When people have nothing, they have nothing to lose, and society will become unstable. The U.S. middle class is used to being relatively well off and comfortable, so they may not take the new poverty lying down.

WE can skin a buck, we can run a trot line LOL

Spidey wrote:I’m still trying to figure out how the “rich” will have it made when everyone else is dirt poor…this is not an agrarian culture anymore.

I’m pretty sure when "everyone" is dirt poor…the rich will soon follow. (one way or another)

then you will be surprised. First, it's a global economy, so investments can be made in any part of the world.
Brazil is particularly a good safe port in the current storm, IMHO, but there are others. Second, the real 'rich' in the US, the older money, tend to own land. Lots of it. We may not be an agrarian economy, but the world has to eat, and we have the best land to produce food in the world. A handful of folks own the bulk of it. They will do just fine, thanks. Finally, when 'everyone' is dirt poor, they will gladly settle for the scraps doled out by the rich, or as I called it in an earlier post, they will enter a sort of neo-serfdom. Such a world would indeed be far less pleasant, to my mind, for rich and poor alike, but trust me, the rich will live fairly well in any case.

Spidey wrote:I think the”rich” would prefer to see most people well off…but powerless, like the coddled little sheep, many have become…that would serve their interests much more than ending up on the business end of a long sharpened pole.

I've made that exact argument for a couple of decades to old school chums and other well-off types, and you'd be surprised how few show the least bit of concern.

callmeslick wrote: Finally, when 'everyone' is dirt poor, they will gladly settle for the scraps doled out by the rich, or as I called it in an earlier post, they will enter a sort of neo-serfdom. Such a world would indeed be far less pleasant, to my mind, for rich and poor alike, but trust me, the rich will live fairly well in any case.

Too bad Obama is preaching class warfare because with the amount of arms floating around this country, the rich here will have to move out of the country. Hope you enjoy whatever country you choose to live in.

woodchip wrote:

callmeslick wrote: Finally, when 'everyone' is dirt poor, they will gladly settle for the scraps doled out by the rich, or as I called it in an earlier post, they will enter a sort of neo-serfdom. Such a world would indeed be far less pleasant, to my mind, for rich and poor alike, but trust me, the rich will live fairly well in any case.

Too bad Obama is preaching class warfare because with the amount of arms floating around this country, the rich here will have to move out of the country. Hope you enjoy whatever country you choose to live in.

I've heard that pantload of crap more than once, too. The wealthy will have enough hired guns to take care of that sort of silliness. It has been seen before, far too many times. As someone else stated, the rich COULD move elsewhere, but they know they can feed the world and increase their fortune from right here.

By the way, where do you get the idiocy that 'Obama is preaching class warfare'? What a hoot, at any rate, as you've been on the losing end of a class war for decades, I suspect. It's just that you were too absorbed in eye-candy and other drivel to notice. If I was less charitable, I would suggest you were just too stupid to notice, but that couldn't possibly be the case, right?

callmeslick wrote:..

By the way, where do you get the idiocy that 'Obama is preaching class warfare'? ..

Did you catch his sermon on corporate jet owners? He's been preaching that one quite a bit. Why didn't he include all the other people who receive the same deduction?
Answer: Because trying to call folks who get a deduction for buying a house or depreciating energy efficient windows just doesn't conjure up the same vision of evil rich people like the corporate jet owner does yet it is the same deduction! So you and Obama have something in common, you claim to be a member of the church but you don't listen to the preacher either...

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:

callmeslick wrote: Finally, when 'everyone' is dirt poor, they will gladly settle for the scraps doled out by the rich, or as I called it in an earlier post, they will enter a sort of neo-serfdom. Such a world would indeed be far less pleasant, to my mind, for rich and poor alike, but trust me, the rich will live fairly well in any case.

Too bad Obama is preaching class warfare because with the amount of arms floating around this country, the rich here will have to move out of the country. Hope you enjoy whatever country you choose to live in.

I've heard that pantload of crap more than once, too. The wealthy will have enough hired guns to take care of that sort of silliness. It has been seen before, far too many times. As someone else stated, the rich COULD move elsewhere, but they know they can feed the world and increase their fortune from right here.

You really don't get it do you. Hired guns will only stay around until the mob appears on your doorstep. If your idea comforts you then more power to you

callmeslick wrote:By the way, where do you get the idiocy that 'Obama is preaching class warfare'? What a hoot, at any rate, as you've been on the losing end of a class war for decades, I suspect. It's just that you were too absorbed in eye-candy and other drivel to notice. If I was less charitable, I would suggest you were just too stupid to notice, but that couldn't possibly be the case, right?

Well since Foil doesn't seem to mind character denigration [removed]. Since it is almost a daily rant by Obama how the rich (read people making over 250k a year which makes up a large portion of small business owners) need to pay their fair share, or using catch phrases like "Corporate jet owners" or "If you are a CEO or hedge fund manager, your taxes are lower than they've been since 1950." all promote the difference between the rich and those who are not. I suppose you forgot how the Obama goon force (SEIU) bussed in union members to protest in front of bank managers homes.

You really tend to fail here Slick because we all know you are a operative of the DNC. People lose in the class warfare scenario because people like you tell them that they can't win. That the cards are stacked against them. If you can't make it here then you lose because of your own initiative and/or feel good types that tell them it is OK to fail. Keep trying tho Slick. Maybe one day I'll be surprised and see a glimmer of intelligence in your posts.

woodchip wrote:Well since Foil doesn't seem to mind character denigration, the really stupid person in the room is you. Since it is almost a daily rant by Obama how the rich (read people making over 250k a year which makes up a large portion of small business owners) need to pay their fair share, or using catch phrases like "Corporate jet owners" or "If you are a CEO or hedge fund manager, your taxes are lower than they've been since 1950." all promote the difference between the rich and those who are not. I suppose you forgot how the Obama goon force (SEIU) bussed in union members to protest in front of bank managers homes.

You really tend to fail here Slick because we all know you are a operative of the DNC. People lose in the class warfare scenario because people like you tell them that they can't win. That the cards are stacked against them. If you can't make it here then you lose because of your own initiative and/or feel good types that tell them it is OK to fail. Keep trying tho Slick. Maybe one day I'll be surprised and see a glimmer of intelligence in your posts.

Cry me an effing river! Poor bankester babies. What do they expect? People to play nice with them? When RepuliCons have gotten their way and most worker unions have been dissolved or hobbled and their good paying jobs have been farmed out to other countries that pay workers less and their employee pensions are cut or eliminated or farmed out to our wonderful stock market (remember Reagan and his 401K savior of an idea when you think of last week's market tanking) and their healthcare costs skyrocket and their homes are foreclosed on because the banks wanted more interest for their money, even though interest rates are almost at ZERO, STILL, and they didn't do any due diligence when they gave out those %#$@ loans in the first place! Who's fault is it now? Theirs! Though tooties.

Of course Obama is going to use the class warfare argument against the RepubliCons. RepuliCons have been waging war against unions and entitlements since they were created. They're the bullies blaming the victims. They're creating resentment against the very people that are already downtrodden. They're blaming the people as thieves while they're stealing from them blind right and left! Same old saw they throw into the Dems faces every time the greed mongers get carried away and trash our nation's economy. There was a reason that they called shanty towns during the Depression 'Hoovervilles', HOOVER!

http://depts.washington.edu/depress/hooverville.shtml

I don't see the bankers of this country living like this, EVER! Sure, they'll be forced to move out of the U. S., after they've drained it of all of it's net worth and put us all in the poor house.

TC, maybe someday you'll start debating Issues instead of the constant demagoguery that you like to spew, it's growing tiresome. I honestly get the impression by the way you talk that you truly think the only Good Republican is a Dead Republican. and that makes you the cause of the problem.

CUDA wrote:TC, maybe someday you'll start debating Issues instead of the constant demagoguery that you like to spew, it's growing tiresome. I honestly get the impression by the way you talk that you truly think the only Good Republican is a Dead Republican. and that makes you the cause of the problem.

The Republican Party is but a shadow of it's former self. It has swung so far right in morality and economic policy and dropped so much of it's original principles, it's now way out in outer space in noo noo nani land. It no longer offers anything I would remotely consider voting for or supporting, in any election. In my opinion, the only Good Republican is a Neutered Republican.

tunnelcat wrote:

CUDA wrote:TC, maybe someday you'll start debating Issues instead of the constant demagoguery that you like to spew, it's growing tiresome. I honestly get the impression by the way you talk that you truly think the only Good Republican is a Dead Republican. and that makes you the cause of the problem.

The Republican Party is but a shadow of it's former self. It has swung so far right in morality and economic policy and dropped so much of it's original principles, it's now way out in outer space in noo noo nani land. It no longer offers anything I would remotely consider voting for or supporting, in any election. In my opinion, the only Good Republican is a Neutered Republican.

As long as you keep giving a pass to the other half of the problem every time you vote you are no better than they are.

before we go any further, I have utterly no interest in, connection to the DNC. The DNC is sort of harmless, as the Obama administration has no real ties to them either(he is very much a party outsider, as are most of his supporters, of which I am one, and freely admit it).

What is salient in today's political discourse is how truly many people are angry at completely the wrong entities. Go ahead and let the old money get richer at your expense. Go ahead and blame 'liberals' for your declining paychecks and benefits. Keep on thinking that government is the real problem while wealthy individuals and most major corporations are sitting on massive piles of cash. If it makes you feel better, get all angry and then, get the feck over it, because you've just wasted your freaking time.

A couple of days back, I read an interesting piece in the financial news: Mellon NY Bank is now going to charge a .13% fee for any depositor holding more than 50 million dollars cash with them. What this points out are a couple of things: 1) individuals and institutions are sitting on massive amounts of cash out there.
This is cash NOT being lent to grow business, create jobs, etc. This, in most cases, is cash waiting to be invested so that those with wealth are going to make a further killing on the current economic situation. They have already made a ton, hence the cash piles. 2) Whine though you may about the evils of 'class warfare', that is just a euphemism for re-establishment of fairness. Those piles of cash are living proof of the victors in the Class Wars.

Finally, after that 500 point Dow drop the other day, I got a call from my financial advisor, who was nearly giddy. He sees a golden buy opportunity for my(far less than 50 mil) pile of liquid money in the coming weeks, and laid out a strategy that should transform 2011 into an even better year than 2009 was. Time will tell if he is correct again, but the track record can't be faulted. I will toss you all this bone--if you have any available resources, dump it into the dividend-yielding blue chip US stock of choice, and do it fast.

woodchip wrote:...since Foil doesn't seem to mind character denigration...

This is incorrect.

Posts in E&C are free to get heated. One of the great things about this forum is that folks here can voice their opinions and attack or defend ideas as strongly as they want.

However, personal shots / flames / character attacks are not tolerated.

----------

Put another way:

"Your position on this issue is evil!" <- OK.
"You are evil!" <- Not OK.

----------

Put another way:

Keep it professional.

Will Robinson wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:

CUDA wrote:TC, maybe someday you'll start debating Issues instead of the constant demagoguery that you like to spew, it's growing tiresome. I honestly get the impression by the way you talk that you truly think the only Good Republican is a Dead Republican. and that makes you the cause of the problem.

The Republican Party is but a shadow of it's former self. It has swung so far right in morality and economic policy and dropped so much of it's original principles, it's now way out in outer space in noo noo nani land. It no longer offers anything I would remotely consider voting for or supporting, in any election. In my opinion, the only Good Republican is a Neutered Republican.

As long as you keep giving a pass to the other half of the problem every time you vote you are no better than they are.

I'll stop giving the Dems a pass if they're ever stupid or deluded enough to move so far to the left, they become communist hippies. They aren't even close to that right now, and they're the only party in the way of the new crazy right wingers at the moment. I'm not in love with what the Dems are doing right now. They really need to really grow a pair and start putting their collective feet down on tax breaks, and gain a little sense that entitlement spending needs looking at. But they sure better start fighting now and stop rolling over or we're going to end up with the alternative of a Plutocracy. Bush and his Congress had a chance FOR SIX YEARS with their "give the rich a tax break and jobs will follow" and what did we get, more debt and unemployment. Giving tax breaks to "job creators" didn't work then and it it's not working now. They're just sitting on all that cash or otherwise paying their CEO's mega millions to do it. We're going to have to raise taxes and cut spending BOTH, even those cherished conservative spending items like defense, not just that "evil" liberal spending. Shared pain on both sides is what it's going to take to corral this debt, and the conservatives, the wealthy and corporate America need to step up for once and cough up some more cash to help our country. Take a look at Britain. They're rioting in the streets right now over their own government's austerity measures. We're probably next.

callmeslick wrote:Finally, after that 500 point Dow drop the other day, I got a call from my financial advisor, who was nearly giddy. He sees a golden buy opportunity for my(far less than 50 mil) pile of liquid money in the coming weeks, and laid out a strategy that should transform 2011 into an even better year than 2009 was. Time will tell if he is correct again, but the track record can't be faulted. I will toss you all this bone--if you have any available resources, dump it into the dividend-yielding blue chip US stock of choice, and do it fast.

Even after the 600 and something drop with the DOW today, We still own our dividend producing stocks, except for some Johnson and Johnson that we sold off because we think the company is doing some really stupid business moves, like moving some drug production from Europe, increasing their unemployment problems, to God knows where else and people start dropping dead because of non-existent quality control and tainted drugs. We bought dividend stocks long ago when all the financial advisers said it was a poor idea and since then, we have gotten a good income stream. Even though the stocks are worth a lot less, we don't intend to sell because what's the alternative for someone who's retired and needs the income? I'm not eligible for SS yet either. It would be stupid to sell at all right now unless you're just profit taking or freaking out. And you can be damned sure that the fat cats will move back in eventually because they have to put their money someplace. I sure don't get any income from any savings account or CD at some damn bank, and the stock market, or government bonds, are the only alternatives. If those sources fail, we're screwed and in the poorhouse.

solid thinking, TC.....pretty much the same as my chosen path, overall. Which is to say, a sort of classic
conservative investment strategy. The part of what's going on right now that I find amusing is the tendency for some to fly to Govt. Bonds....the exact investment type being most questioned by raters.

A caveat callmeslick. Dividend stocks have their advantages and disadvantages. For older people who want a steady income and don't mind paying the full income tax rate on those dividends, it's a good choice. Especially since there are few savings alternatives in banks right now that pay out a decent steady source of income. But for younger people, capital appreciation of a stock might be more important, because I think?????? (I'm not 100% sure on this at the moment) that there is a lower tax impact on capital gains. A person can potentially keep more money for less of a tax impact when they eventually sell that stock. That's something you'll have to ask your financial adviser about callmeslick. What do you want, income now or investment for the future?

I do find it funny that people fled into treasuries after the market tanked, even though the S&P downgraded bonds. They must know something we don't.

tunnelcat wrote:A caveat callmeslick. Dividend stocks have their advantages and disadvantages. For older people who want a steady income and don't mind paying the full income tax rate on those dividends, it's a good choice. Especially since there are few savings alternatives in banks right now that pay out a decent steady source of income. But for younger people, capital appreciation of a stock might be more important, because I think?????? (I'm not 100% sure on this at the moment) that there is a lower tax impact on capital gains. A person can potentially keep more money for less of a tax impact when they eventually sell that stock. That's something you'll have to ask your financial adviser about callmeslick. What do you want, income now or investment for the future?

I do find it funny that people fled into treasuries after the market tanked, even though the S&P downgraded bonds. They must know something we don't.

I fled to cash and today bought back in.

my whole investment strategy is about wealth preservation, TC. I'm in my mid-fifties, have some inherited assets, some earned assets, some shared assets and will ultimately get a lot more inherited assets, so my game is mostly about picking up the odd cap gain, and maintaining a balance of investments that provide income and safety. Dividend bearing stocks do exactly that. Certain dividends qualify as cap gains, by the way. Further, the dividend-bearers tend to be steady accumulators of value with pretty low risk. If you are younger and trying to build the nest-egg, then really study emerging technologies and businesses and put a chunk of your money down on something which holds promise for the future.

woodchip wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:A caveat callmeslick. Dividend stocks have their advantages and disadvantages. For older people who want a steady income and don't mind paying the full income tax rate on those dividends, it's a good choice. Especially since there are few savings alternatives in banks right now that pay out a decent steady source of income. But for younger people, capital appreciation of a stock might be more important, because I think?????? (I'm not 100% sure on this at the moment) that there is a lower tax impact on capital gains. A person can potentially keep more money for less of a tax impact when they eventually sell that stock. That's something you'll have to ask your financial adviser about callmeslick. What do you want, income now or investment for the future?

I do find it funny that people fled into treasuries after the market tanked, even though the S&P downgraded bonds. They must know something we don't.

I fled to cash and today bought back in.

depending on when you fled, that should serve you well and maybe spectacularly so.
Who says the economy sucks?

woodchip wrote:I fled to cash and today bought back in.

I hope you bought back in during the low point of the day woody.

Still sour on J&J though.