All Forum Posts by: Paul Strauss

You misunderstand. I don't care about your allegations of a conspiracy / friendship between Rush and the founder of The Sullivan Group.

You made THAT claim, and YOU claimed it compromised the data- so that would be for YOU to substantiate. I don't have to prove something you claim isn't true. That's not how it works. YOU make a claim, YOU back it up. THAT is how it works.

But getting back to the Rush Limbaugh opinion audit- it IS the "Sullivan Group". I don't know about all the connections between the founder and Rush- and personally don't care.

Rush is right enough of the time that he is, as he says, "On the cutting edge of societal evolution".

Nothing is more entertaining than when his jokes come true-- which with this President (Obama)-- happens quite frequently.

Case in point: Rush joked awhile back that Obama should be an American Idol judge. Lo, and behold...

http://www.observer.com/2010/daily-transom/obamas-appear-idol

If that's your opinion then we likely agree more than we disagree.

This is a far cry from the ridiculous "The debate is over" and "the science is settled" nonsense we've been getting from the radical environmentalists.

Well, to quote one of my favorite conservatives- the Grand Daddy of the Reagan Revolution, "I would remind you that extremism in defense of liberty is no vice; and moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!" (Barry Goldwater)

I happen to think that "extremism" in the sense that you ardently believe, support, and defend sound principles, rather than "cloud peoples minds" is actually a clarifying agent.

We ought not moderate in defending "The 5,000 Year Miracle"- this experiment in individual liberty and limited government that has changed the world.

We ought not return to the dark ages before the United States Consitution.

It is worthy of note that Hammurabi and George Washington essentially got around and communicated the same way, but look at us now.

Do our rights come from our Creator? Or does government define our rights?

The "Green Movement" is a watermelon. Green on the outside, but RED in the middle. It is not designed to save the planet, but to support a progressive political agenda that seeks to control our lives.

That's why the left is in a panic over the actual science. Get rid of the man-made global warming hysteria, and panic- and the progressives lose a major pretext for massive government control, taxation, and redistribution.

J Scott,
We'll just have to agree to disagree on some things. However, I would hope that on several issues you would at least be open to alternative views.

With respect to "climate gate" there are plenty more sources of information on that.- including the scientist at the center of the scandal, Phil "Hide The Decline" Jones himself.

Below are quotes from Mr. Jones. They are not from Rush Limbaugh, or Exxon Mobile. They are from Phil Jones:

Asked about whether he lost track of data, Professor Jones said: ‘There is some truth in that. We do have a trail of where the weather stations have come from but it’s probably not as good as it should be.

‘There’s a continual updating of the dataset. Keeping track of everything is difficult. Some countries will do lots of checking on their data then issue improved data, so it can be very difficult. We have improved but we have to improve more.’

He also agreed that there had been two periods which experienced similar warming, from 1910 to 1940 and from 1975 to 1998, but said these could be explained by natural phenomena whereas more recent warming could not.

He further admitted that in the last 15 years there had been no ‘statistically significant’ warming, although he argued this was a blip rather than the long-term trend.

However, we have to be very careful that we are not naive. This means that conservatives have to avoid being pulled into a scientific debate that is truly more of a political and religious debate.

Proponents of global warming are a diverse bunch to be sure, and not all think the same way- but at the core of the "movement" are basically people who seek the destruction of the western capitalist economic model.

This is not in dispute, by the way- it's just fact.

The reason I hope we can agree that there's more to global warming than science, and the reason it is so critical to promoters of the theory that it be "man-made" even if they have to use the "nature trick" or "hide the decline" is that it's not their scientific careers that hang in the balance, but an entire world-wide political agenda.

To all- if you can make sense of this single issue to your lib friends- you will shatter the foundations of their belief system, and you will begin to unwind their cloudy thinking.

The key to converting liberals is to help them understand that they are the useful idiots for a handful of political elites who ultimately seek their destruction.

Actually, (hang on, let me get my asbestos suit on) the single most accurate person in media, as determined by an external opinion-audit, is Rush Limbaugh.

He is right, in opinion as well as fact, I believe it is now 98.6% of the time.

It went up recently (think what it takes to move the % when you consider that the man has been talking for 3 hours a day, 15 hours a week since the mid 1980's I think it is) since he was basically proven completely right about the Anthropogenic Global Warming theory being a complete fraud.

(http://www.climatedepot.com monitors the climategate debacle continuously if you're not informed on the topic)

Whether you are liberal (40%), moderate (36%), or you're one of the 20% that identify yourself as a liberal- you can get more news, more accurately reported, in the first half hour of Rush Limbaugh's show than anyplace else.

Personally, I don't bother with news. Anything truly important will come to your attention, anything you're curious about, your news junkie friends will tell you about, and the rest- well, the rest just doesn't matter. In fact, MOST of it doesn't matter. The stuff that does matter, is like the weather in Chicago- it'll change in about 10 minutes.

Oh, and from personal experience since 1999: People that don't pay, don't pay. I know, right? Go figure.

Distressed property investing is a high-risk, speculative business right from the start. It's not a rescue mission, or a charitable endeavor- unless you have the means and you wish it to be.

Distressed homeowners are quite often people that didn't meet the minimum requirements of home ownership, or reasonable standards of credit-worthiness when they got into the house.

The best policy, IMHO, is to get them out, and get them renting because that's frankly where they're headed anyway and it'll save you a lot of time, money, and heartache.

My own company's distressed homeowner literature states plainly: In all of "my company" programs, you will be selling your house, and you will have to move"

We don't want to waste any time convincing people of the obvious- we'd rather they not call us until they're ready.

This sounds similar to a short sale (though a whole lot easier if the lender would agree to just sell the non-performing note).

I know first-hand that with a short sale, most lenders stipulate that the homeowner may not benefit in any way from the sale of the property. They literally by contract don't want a homeowner to get a single dollar out of the deal.

I think that if the lender got wind of your intentions, they'd frown upon this.

All in all, I agree with Tim. Get yourself an attorney on a deal like this.

Isn't that the truth!

It's typically only $50 to $100 or so a year to join in the States- but it is generally made up for by a P.T. Barnum sales pitch from the front of the room as described above.

I have all but quit the local "networking" and "REI club" scene in favor of a select few, very high quality networking opportunities. They cost more- couple hundred a year plus fees-per-meeting that range from $30 to $80, but the experience is well worth it.

L O L ! ! !