Tea Party says "Don't Buy From Costco"

"The Moral Integrity Of Costco Founder And CEO, James Singeal"
http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2014/01/the-moral-integrity-of-costcos-founder.html

Jim Sinegal Addresses 2012 Democratic National Convention
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBqQ_cVUZ5Q

Alan: Not surprisingly, The Tea Party - a second rate political organization - wants "second best" in every domain, including "responsible capitalism." 

Go ahead. 

You want second best. 

You deserve second best.

Costco - whose political donations go exclusively to the Democratic Party - is the best retailer in America.

Here's why.

How Costco Became the Anti-Wal-Mart


The New York Times  | July 17, 2005 | STEVEN GREENHOUSE 

... Some Wall Street analysts assert that CEO Jim Sinegal is overly generous not only to Costco's customers but to its workers as well.

Costco's average pay, for example, is $17 an hour, 42 percent higher than its fiercest rival, Sam's Club. And Costco's health plan makes those at many other retailers look Scroogish. One analyst, Bill Dreher of Deutsche Bank, complained last year that at Costco "it's better to be an employee or a customer than a shareholder."

Mr. Sinegal begs to differ. ...Good wages and benefits are why Costco has extremely low rates of turnover and theft by employees, he said. And Costco's customers, who are more affluent than other warehouse store shoppers, stay loyal because they like that low prices do not come at the workers' expense. "This is not altruistic," he said. "This is good business."

...Costco's stock price has risen more than 10 percent in the last 12 months, while Wal-Mart's has slipped 5 percent. Costco shares sell for almost 23 times expected earnings; at Wal-Mart the multiple is about 19. Mr. Dreher said Costco's share price was so high because so many people love the company. "It's a cult stock," he said.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...

Sinegal's "destruction of initiative" is on display at "People of Walmart"

http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/

"Are 97 Of The Nation's 100 Poorest Counties In Red States?" Pulitzer Prize-Winning Politifact

http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2018/04/are-97-of-nations-100-poorest-counties.html

Trumpistas are not "in it" for "The General Welfare" any more than they intend to reverse their own ongoing degration. 

They support Trump because he's degraded, and in his vulgarian vility they see themselves.

Trumpistas are "in it" for the "feel good" orneriness of bigotry, bombast and bluster - and the undying hope that Uncle Sam will whoop somebody's ass.

Doesn't matter who. 

Just designate an enemy and beat the drums of war. 

The dimwits will follow.

Several years ago, retired Air Force general friend AWC confided: "It seems we haven't fought a good war since World War II."

From the vantage of the overlords, it's always been about "bread and circuses." And perpetual warfare is the 21st century equivalent of "circuses," emtertainment that is ever more important now that American Plutocracy is cutting back "the bread."

Costco founder (and former CEO) Jim Sinegal, will address the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Here's a useful online guide to large American companies listed by political donation preference. http://www.goodguide.com/contributions

Alan: 

Imagine: An American capitalist who pays every worker a living wage. Either Republican retailers are not profitable enough to pay their workers a living wage, or they prefer to pocket a disproportionate percentage of profits while obliging many workers to hold down two jobs.

"WalMart: America's Real Welfare Queen"
http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2014/01/walmart-americas-real-welfare-queen.html

Here's the Tea Party site, "Stop Giving Your Money To The Enemy."  http://teapartyorg.ning.com/profiles/blogs/stop-giving-your-money-to-the-enemy

Since The Tea Party's policy of "No New Taxes" wreaks economic and fiscal havoc, it is appropriate that the party that does not want what is best for country settles for second best in its shopping habits.

As it happens, Mitt and Ann Romney "love Costco."

Once again, we're reminded that Tea Bags have little (or no) idea who Romney is.

See "Ayn Rand, Mormonism and the Republican Ticket" - http://paxonbothhouses.blogspot.com/2012/08/ayn-rand-mormonism-and-republican-ticket.html

GOP Vilifies Obama For Giving Republican Governors What They Wanted

Marketplace.oom

Did Obama weaken the welfare work requirement?

http://www.marketplace.org/topics/economy/did-obama-weaken-welfare-work-requirement

SAUL LOEB/AFP/GettyImages

President Barack Obama speaks during a campaign event in Charlottesville, Va., August 29, 2012

Interview with Chris Farrell

Marketplace Morning Report for Friday, August 31, 2012

• TRANSCRIPT

Jeremy Hobson: As the Republican National Convention wraps up in Tampa, the Democratic National Convention is about to start up in Charlotte.

But before we let this week in politics go by, we're going to talk about one line of attack by the Romney campaign that's gotten a bit of attention.

That ad has been called false by independent fact checkers.

Marketplace Economic Correspondent Chris Farrell joins us now for a little history lesson.

Chris Farrell: Good morning, Jeremy.

Hobson: Chris, let's start with the facts here. I mean, what is the welfare work requirement exactly?

Farrell: OK, so in 1996, with the Welfare Reform Act, it really changed the way we give assistance to the neediest families. At the core of the change was the work requirement, and there are a number of definitions of what counts as work. So a job would be a classic, right? But there's also job training, an internship, taking classes. This is the type of thing that comes under the work requirement.

Hobson: And if you do those things, then you can get the assistance from the government?

Farrell: Right. You get the assistance from the government, but again, all the pressure is 'Let's get you prepared for work, let's get a job.' That requirement is a federal mandate, that requirement cannot be waived.

Hobson: So what about this charge that President Obama came in and weakened the work requirement for welfare?

Farrell: Well OK, let me make it really simple, Jeremy: The answer to that is no. So you have all these political fact-checkers, and they have various standards -- one is Pants on Fire, one is Four Pinocchios; fact-check says wrong. Maybe ours will be Four Angry Birds, something like that. I mean, look: What the administration said is we'll consider proposals from states if you have a better way to get welfare recipients into jobs. So, you know, it's a classic case of the states acting as laboratories of innovation. And back in 2005, Romney was governor of Massachusetts, he joined 28 other governors and they wrote a letter to Congres saying, you know, come on, you guys are considering an overhaul of the welfare law -- give us more flexibility, we want that. That's what governors want, and this is what governors do.

Hobson: But Chris, isn't the reason that this is playing with at least a certain portion of the population, that people are frustrated that the federal government is still having to send out checks to so many people so long after the recession began?

Farrell: Look, there is a whole debate that's going on, just as you're saying. If you look at the increase in food stamps, the increase in people who are taking unemployment insurance. So there is this genuine concern. But when it comes to the welfare work requirement, all I'm saying here is -- Jeremy, you'd be shocked, shocked that it's politics at play. Not economics, and not facts.

Hobson: Marketplace economics correspondent Chris Farrell. Thanks as always.

Farrell: Thank you.

About the author

Chris Farrell is the economics editor of Marketplace Money.

Clint Eastwood: Weird Enough To Be A Republican

Video: Clint Eastwood delivers remarks at the 2012 Republican National Convention, utilizing some novel tactics to address President Obama.

Watch Eastwood's entire performance at

 http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/From-the-Wires/2012/0831/Clint-Eastwood-

brings-awkward-unscripted-RNC-performance-video

By Dan Balz, Friday, August 31, 12:22 PM

TAMPA —Now we know why political conventions are scripted.

Mitt Romney delivered a good and personal acceptance speech Thursday night. His campaign produced a sterling video about the candidate. People who know Romney offered testimony about his values, his compassion and his business acumen. But all anyone seemed to be talking about when the convention ended was Clint Eastwood and an empty chair.

1293

Comments

The discomfort of Ann Romney, appearing on “CBS This Morning” on Friday, spoke volumes about how the Eastwood moment was received. She tried her best to be positive, but she clearly was surprised by what she had witnessed onstage. As the broadcast networks were opening their prime-time coverage, what Americans saw was not that well-produced video but acelebrated actor talking — sometimes talking trash — to an empty chair that was a proxy for President Obama.

Give the Romney campaign some credit for the week. Most of the convention was smooth and professionally produced. Russ Schriefer, the campaign adviser who oversaw the message operation in Tampa, skillfully repackaged four nights into three after then-Tropical Storm Isaac seemed ready to descend upon the area. The stage was handsome, and multiple high-definition screens behind the speakers added impressively to the program.

But political campaigns operate in a beastly environment, which is one way to describe the insatiable appetite of a political and media world that consumes information and events at a breathtaking pace and stops to focus when something bizarre, unexpected, spectacular or foolish occurs.

So, in the aftermath of an evening that overall accomplished much of what everyone said Romney needed to do with his convention, the beast was focused on Eastwood as much or more than on Romney’s speech or anything else from the show.

***

The first half of the following MSNBC panel discussion is revealing: http://video.msnbc.msn.com/msnbc/48861690/#48861690

Matt Taibbi Paints Damning Bain Portrait

The entire text of "Greed and Debt: The True Story of Mitt Romney and Bain Capital" is available at:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/greed-and-debt-the-true-story-of-mitt-romney-and-bain-capital-20120829

***

It is probable that Romney did nothing illegal at Bain. 

However, his "technical" innocence disguises the overarching fact that The Law permitted -- even encouraged -- substantive "criminality"... at least in the figurative sense of the word.

Romney's career as a vulture capitalist is not unlike hookinb in states where prostitution is legal. 

These whores commit no crime... while wallowing in piggish troughs.

Hookers retain a certain respectability "behind closed doors," just as Romney conjures a kind of respectability "behind closed tax records."

***

Matt Taibbi Lambastes Romney's Time At Bain—Here Are The Highlights! 

Linette Lopez | Aug. 31, 2012

We knew Matt Taibbi was working something, we didn't know that it was about Republican Presidential nominee, Mitt Romney.

More specifically, it's about Romney's time at Bain and how he earned his fortune— something his campaign hasn't necessarily been completely transparent about. The piece is called 'Greed and Debt: The True Story of Mitt Romney and Bain Capital', and it's this month's Rolling Stone cover story.

The piece is long, and of course, written in classic Taibbi style, so it goes fast, but we pinpointed 10 points that we found shocking/damning overall.

Here we go:

Mitt Romney decries the national debt, but his career was made by running up debt on companies on their last lifeline.

"The result has been a brilliant comedy: A man makes a $250 million fortune loading up companies with debt and then extracting million-dollar fees from those same companies, in exchange for the generous service of telling them who needs to be fired in order to finance the debt payments he saddled them with in the first place."

Mitt Romney shirked military service.

"I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam and be representing our country there," he claimed years after the war. To a different audience, he said, "I was not planning on signing up for the military. It was not my desire to go off and serve in Vietnam."

Mitt Romney’s Bain was using the same trick as two-bit mobsters — the ‘bust out’.

"Fans of mob movies will recognize what's known as the "bust-out," in which a gangster takes over a restaurant or sporting goods store and then monetizes his investment by running up giant debts on the company's credit line. (Think Paulie buying all those cases of Cutty Sark inGoodfellas.) When the note comes due, the mobster simply torches the restaurant and collects the insurance money. Reduced to their most basic level, the leveraged buyouts engineered by Romney followed exactly the same business model. "It's the bust-out," one Wall Street trader says with a laugh. "That's all it is.""

Mitt Romney coldly rebuffed a worker who wrote him a hand-written letter asking Romney to save his job.

"Romney has always kept his distance from the real-life consequences of his profiteering. At one point during Bain's looting of Ampad, a worker named Randy Johnson sent a handwritten letter to Romney, asking him to intervene to save an Ampad factory in Marion, Indiana. In a sterling demonstration of manliness and willingness to face a difficult conversation, Romney, who had just lost his race for the Senate in Massachusetts, wrote Johnson that he was "sorry," but his lawyers had advised him not to get involved."

He loves to manipulate people, even his own employees.

"Over the years, colleagues would anonymously whisper stories about Mitt the Boss to the press, describing him as cunning, manipulative and a little bit nuts, with "an ability to identify people's insecurities and exploit them for his own benefit." One former Bain employee said that Romney would screw around with bonuses in small amounts, just to mess with people: He would give $3 million to one, $3.1 million to another and $2.9 million to a third, just to keep those below him on edge."

Mitt Romney’s Bain still got paid, even when it’s acquisitions were floundering.

"In a typical private-equity fragging, Bain put up a mere $18 million to acquire KB Toys and got big banks to finance the remaining $302 million it needed. Less than a year and a half after the purchase, Bain decided to give itself a gift known as a "dividend recapitalization." The firm induced KB Toys to redeem $121 million in stock and take out more than $66 million in bank loans – $83 million of which went directly into the pockets of Bain's owners and investors, including Romney. "The dividend recap is like borrowing someone else's credit card to take out a cash advance, and then leaving them to pay it off," says Heather Slavkin Corzo, who monitors private equity takeovers as the senior legal policy adviser for the AFL-CIO."

Mitt Romney’s Bain financed one of its first takeover deals, with department stores Beals Brothers and Palais Royale with money dirtied by Michael Milken.

"...one of Romney's first LBO deals, and one of his most profitable, involved Mike Milken himself. Bain put down $10 million in cash, got $300 million in financing from Milken and bought a pair of department-store chains, Bealls Brothers and Palais Royal. In what should by now be a familiar outcome, the two chains – which Bain merged into a single outfit called Stage Stores – filed for bankruptcy protection in 2000 under the weight of more than $444 million in debt...But here's the interesting twist: Romney made the Bealls-Palais deal just as the federal government was launching charges of massive manipulation and insider trading against Milken and his firm, Drexel Burnham Lambert. After what must have been a lengthy and agonizing period of moral soul-searching, however, Romney decided not to kill the deal, despite its shady financing. "We did not say, 'Oh, my goodness, Drexel has been accused of something, not been found guilty,' " Romney told reporters years after the deal. "Should we basically stop the transaction and blow the whole thing up?""

Mitt Romney’s Bain sidled Dunkin’ Donuts with crushing debt.

"In 2010, a year after the last round of Hertz layoffs, Carlyle teamed up with Bain to take $500 million out of another takeover target: the parent company of Dunkin' Donuts and Baskin-Robbins. Dunkin' had to take out a $1.25 billion loan to pay a dividend to its new private equity owners. So think of this the next time you go to Dunkin' Donuts for a cup of coffee: A small cup of joe costs about $1.69 in most outlets, which means that for years to come, Dunkin' Donuts will have to sell about 2,011,834 small coffees every month – about $3.4 million – just to meet the interest payments on the loan it took out to pay Bain and Carlyle their little one-time dividend. "

Mitt Romney’s fortune was gained by gaming the government.

"Which brings us to another aspect of Romney's business career that has largely been hidden from voters: His personal fortune would not have been possible without the direct assistance of the U.S. government. The taxpayer-funded subsidies that Romney has received go well beyond the humdrum, backdoor, welfare-sucking that all supposedly self-made free marketeers inevitably indulge in."

Mitt Romney ran a super wasteful Olympics.

"Not that Romney hasn't done just fine at milking the government when it suits his purposes, the most obvious instance being the incredible $1.5 billion in aid he siphoned out of the U.S. Treasury as head of the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake – a sum greater than all federal spending for the previous seven U.S. Olympic games combined. Romney, the supposed fiscal conservative, blew through an average of $625,000 in taxpayer money per athlete – an astounding increase of 5,582 percent over the $11,000 average at the 1984 games in Los Angeles."

There are great quotes, personal stories, and more reporting in the full piece. Read it here>>

Recommended For You

The Biggest Mistake In Paul Ryan's Factually Shaky Republican Convention Speech

Here's The Full Text And Video Of Mitt Romney's Convention Speech

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/matt-taibbi-mitt-romney-bain-rolling-stone-2012-8#ixzz259TOedy9

Romney "will not raise taxes on middle class." What is "the middle class?"

"“Unlike President Obama,” (Romney) said, “I will not raise taxes on the middle class.” While the definition of the “middle class” is flexible, Obama has in fact asked Congress to retain current tax rates for families earning less than $250,000 a year." E.J. Dionne

***

65% of American households earn less than $65,000.00 a year.
http://www.mybudget360.com/how-much-average-household-income-us-recession-income-distribution/

***

How much does the average American make in 2010? Examining new data on U.S. household income numbers and high income earners. 100 million Americans make less than $39,999 per year.

http://www.mybudget360.com/how-much-does-the-average-american-make-in-2010-household-income-new-data-100-million-make-less-than-40000/

Examining the average income for Americans sheds a very troubling light on what has happened to income over a very financially destructive decade.  If we look at the median household income in the U.S. this actually underplays the falling behind of wages because we are looking at households with multiple people working.  Without a doubt the median wage is bolstered by two income families but when we break this out, we realize how challenging things have gotten for most Americans on a very personal level.  You might even be one of these people (the odds are good that you individually make less than $40,000 per year given that 66 percent of individual Americans make this amount or less).  For this article I will be looking at recent income data from the Census, Social Security, and also examine tax receipts for the Federal Government.  What we find is a pooling of money at the top while most Americans have found a smaller paycheck with much less employment security.  One startling fact that I found looking at Social Security information was that 100,000,000+ Americans earn an average of $39,999 or less a year (66 percent of all Americans).  When we break down the cost of daily living and what one would expect out of a middle class lifestyle we get a better understanding of why so many people feel that they are being left behind in a dust cloud of economic verbiage.

I first wanted to break down the average income of individual Americans through examining Social Security data:

Source:  Social Security

For 2009 Social Security had 150,917,733 wage earners.  Keep in mind that in some cases you might have people only working for half a year or part-time work but this data gives us an excellent personal look at the average income of Americans on a very micro level.  One startling reality is that 72,000,000+ Americans earn $25,000 or less each year (almost half the wage earning population).  This is why when we look at the median household income of $50,000 we come to the stark realization that two incomes are necessary just to stay above water.  When only a few decades ago one blue collar income was enough for a middle class way of life (i.e., modest home, a path to a public college, etc) now two incomes are barely enough to pay for the daily necessities.

Another 34 million Americans earn an average of $25,001 to $45,000 per year while 33 million earn between $45,001 and $99,999.  Going up to an average of $99,999 covers 93 percent of all individual wage earners in the country.  This is where the vast majority of Americans reside.  The numbers quickly dwindle as expected when we hit the upper income ranges.  What is interesting is the vast difference between those who earn $20 million and $49 million and those who make over $50 million.  The data reveals that over 353 Americans earned between $20 and $49 million and the average amount was $28 million.  Compare this to the 72 that made more than $50 million with an average compensation of $84 million.  To put this into context, the top 72 Americans earned over $6 billion in 2009.

The lowest paid 24,000,000 Americans earned an average of $2,061.  Again, this is merely to put all the data on the table.  It also shows how tilted things have gotten.  I wanted to see what the top 1 percent earned in total compensation for 2009 and compare this to the bottom half of wage earners:

Source:  Social Security

“The top 1 percent of wage earners in America earned more than the bottom 48 percent of Americans.  If you are wondering where the middle class is evaporating to it is rather clear.”

Substantial income inequality is not the path to a strong and vibrant middle class.  17 percent of Americans are either unemployed or underemployed so the lower end of the curve is dragging more people lower.  Yet the top end remains rather strong.  Some will argue that the very wealthy have also been hit.  This is true and we have seen this in the top wage categories.  But this is the difference between earning $50 million and $40 million.  The marginal impact on lifestyle is minimal.  Losing your income when you have a household making $50,000 combined and suddenly a $25,000 wage earner is gone can throw things into a tailspin.

There is nothing wrong with earning tremendous amounts of money.  In fact, that is the spirit of capitalism.  But how many Wall Street banker types that earned money betting on the failure of Americans while enjoying government handouts as protection made it to the top of the bracket?  This isn’t rewarding capitalism but a modern form of corporatocracy.  The reason the lower end became poorer is because those on the lower end had to shuffle and redistribute wealth to the higher end of the curve in the form of bailouts.  Consider it a form of reverse trickledown theory.

Let us now look at the median household income data from the Census:

Source:  Census

The median household income for Americans is $50,221. The above curve seems more balanced out but Census data tops out at “$200,000 or more” so it doesn’t break down data as clearly as the individual Social Security wage data.  3.9 percent of households make more than $200,000 a year.  So the incredible majority of Americans make less than $200,000 and this is for overall household data so we have many with two or even more income earners here.  So why did the media object so loudly for having higher taxes for those making more than $250,000?  Well refer back to the Social Security data.  Also, the line was fed that many of these high income earners are the job providers of Americans.  Of course the implicit and subtle argument meant that if taxes go up on this group they will fire more people.  We can debate the merits of the tax increase at the very top but the amount of rhetoric we heard on mainstream TV shows you that the top 1 percent control much more than just the wealth of the country.

You also need to remember many of those at the top take money in various forms like capital gains which are only taxed at 15 percent.  The vast majority of Americans have small amounts of stock and the bulk of their net worth is stored up in real estate.  The crashing housing market has harmed them the most while the improved stock market has targeted a smaller segment of the population.

Since the peak, Zillow the real estate tracking company estimates that residential values have fallen by $9 trillion.  Yet stock wealth has bounced back since the low in early 2009.  When we look at income figures we see there is some troubling inequality in the system and it has only become magnified in this recession.

While this is happening tax collections for the government are back up yet spending in the form of bailouts, deficit spending, war, and other government expenditures has also increased much quicker and those at the top are the biggest beneficiaries:

In essence the bailouts have gone to the wealthiest and many of the top have argued the uptick in tax revenues is somehow natural.  It isn’t and you can just look at the above data.  This is merely income redistribution but not how most of us would think about it.  After all, why would the wealthiest in the U.S. need to take more money from those at the bottom rung?  We are now back to 2005 levels of revenues.  Yet this in itself is a bit deceptive because the purchasing power of the U.S. dollar has fallen over this decade as well:

The U.S. dollar is down 20 percent from the start of the decade.  What this means is the purchasing power of Americans has eroded over this time.  It is also the case that wages have gone negative over the entire decade with stagnant pay and inflation chipping away as well.

So how much does the average American make?  $38,000 even when we add in billionaires and everyone else.  This is the individual amount.  It would be tough to even come close to a middle class lifestyle with that income.  Let us run a quick scenario:

The average American is taking home roughly $2,500 per month.  We are using Florida as an example here.  Let us just run some quick numbers to see how far that $2,500 will go:

What happens if the car breaks down?  What happens if you get a cavity?  What happens if you lose your job?  You can see how tight the budget is above and we are keeping it basic.  Many are told by financial planners to sock away 9 months of emergency funds.  It will take years for the average American to put away $22,500.  Is it any wonder why millions of Americans rely on Social Security as their main source of income?  Millions of Americans are still on verge of losing their unemployment insurance and are basically one check away from being on the streets conjuring up visions of soup lines of the Great Depression.  The average income doesn’t even come close to paving a way to a middle class lifestyle.  What you have is a shrinking middle class where people are working harder and harder yet being thrown off the treadmill one by one.

If you enjoyed this post click here to subscribe to a complete feed and stay up to date with today’s challenging market!

School Prayer

Idolizing the flag is just around the corner...

(The corner we've already turned.)

Dear John,

I have no objection to Comparative Religion as an obligatory academic component of Public Instruction. In that context, every American student will learn about prayer, meditation, contemplation and the relationship between the creative impulse and the fundamental creative energy of God/Universe

Indeed, I would like to see an obligatory Comparative Religions course as pre-requisite for high school graduation, and also encourage another Comparative Religions course as pre-req for middle school graduation.

However, judging by those Americans who claim to pray most, I have NO faith in formulary prayer that does not go hand-in-hand with ardent service to The Common Good and fervent determination to expand one's awareness/compassion.

Judging from the political behavior of the GOP's Christian Base, I am dead-set against any specifically "Christian" curriculum these aggressively ignorant Know-Nothings would design for Public Instruction.

Why? Because imposed "goodness" becomes Evil.

Here is the pathway by which Impossibly Pure "Goodness" -- particularly when imposed on others -- takes a satanic turn.

"The terrible thing about our time is precisely the ease with which theories can be put into practice.  The more perfect, the more idealistic the theories, the more dreadful is their realization.  We are at last beginning to rediscover what perhaps men knew better in very ancient times, in primitive times before utopias were thought of: that liberty is bound up with imperfection, and that limitations, imperfections, errors are not only unavoidable but also salutary. The best is not the ideal.  Where what is theoretically best is imposed on everyone as the norm, then there is no longer any room even to be good.  The best, imposed as a norm, becomes evil.”  Conjectures of a Guilty Bystander by Thomas Merton - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Merton

Pax

Alan

On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 7:44 PM, john tarantino <john_tarantino@bellsouth.net> wrote:

----- Original Message -----

From: Tom Thompson, Jr.

To: TOM T

Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 9:51 AM

Subject: Fw: 11:00AM

-------Original Message------- I’’ve never read Mary Had a Little Lamb poem written this way before...! The poem is at the bottom. Please put the exact time you read this. It is mystical--honest. This message works on the day you receive it. Mary Had a Little Lamb Mary had a little Lamb,  His fleece was white as snow.  And everywhere that Mary went,  The Lamb was sure to go.  He followed her to school each day,  When it wasn't against the rules.  He made the the children laugh and play  To have the Lamb at school  Then the rules changed one day,  Against the law it became.  To bring the Lamb of God to school  Or even speak His name.  Every day got worse and worse,  And days turned into years.  Instead of hearing children laugh and play,  You heard them crying tears.  What must we do to stop the crime,  That's in our schools today?  Let the Lamb come back to school  And teach our kids to pray.  -Unknown A blessing is coming to you in the form of a new job, a house, marriage or financial break through. Don 't ask questions just forward to eight people and trust God!   (Alan here... "Don't ask questions."  What?!?)