95_Theses

It’s About the Future

Archive for July, 2007

gumballs anyone?

Posted by Citizen on July 24, 2007

Here is the consequence of immigration into America limited only to the intake levels currently imposed on us. This is the way it is right now, and this is how it is going to be. I hope you watch it all the way through. And I hope you make sure a few of your friends see it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7WJeqxuOfQ 

Posted in borderlines, immigration, shamnesty | Leave a Comment »

a thing about Hugh Hewitt

Posted by Citizen on July 22, 2007

I listen to Hewitt’s show occasionally. Occasionally he’s brilliant. When his brilliance renders him obtuse I want to call the show and say so. I never get through, shouting at the radio is obtuse, so now I am blogging Hugh Hewitt’s radio show. I would email his web site, but I have to ‘join’ or ‘log in’ to do so. That’s lame, isn’t it? Hewitt doesn’t have to log in to comment on this blog. Is it a lawyer thing?

A thing about Hugh Hewitt. Wickipedia identifies him as a conservative radio talk show host. So far, other than the war hawk position, I have not heard a conservative breath escape his lips. I guess it takes one to know one, because Hewitt doesn’t know he isn’t conservative.

Do you recall that Hewitt wrote a book about Mormonism and Mitt? That was discussed on his show and some Christians called to say “hey, mormonism is a cult, it’s different than Christianity”, or something to that effect. Hewitt called them bigots to their face and refused to listen to their views. If you’re brilliant, or if you think you are, then simple believers who know what they believe and why they believe that way are threatening and must be squished with the bigot card. Why is that? Is it a lawyer thing?

<thought-balloon>”I am so brilliant. I’m an educated man. I am a Pharisee, uh, er, I am a lawyer. I am so brilliant that I wrote a book [ISBN 1-59698-502-X] about mormonism. Everybody who disagrees with me is less educated than I am and additionally is a bigot.</thought-balloon>

This cracked me up. Whatever Hewitt believes, it apparently doesn’t depend on divine revelation. Perhaps Hewitt thinks he is so brilliant that he believes he is the source of truth, eh? It was obvious from everything he said that he has no need to examine himself.

I could go off on a tangent and explain how, in the context of saving faith, being a bigot is the only viable alternative, but of course this would go over Hugh’s head. Or get the bigot rejoinder. At the very least it appears that Hewitt is in no need of any external sources to inform his opinion.

Being a lawyer helps him in dealing with callers because he has a quick caustic tongue and can repartee with the best of them. He does this by cutting off the caller and pontificating on what a bigot the caller is, and why of course mormons are Christians, because he says so. He cannot say WHY it’s so, he can only say that he says so. It’s his show and he’s entitled to his opinions and he’s entitled to distort and disrespect the caller’s opinions. That’s what he gets paid the big bucks for, besides the allure of his brilliance.

Mormons differentiate themselves from Scriptural Christianity by calling themselves “latter-day” somethings. That in itself will tip off any but the most brilliant that there is some kind of difference between the two deals. It comes from the mormons themselves. I suppose he could call them bigots then, eh? Mormon apologists don’t have any difficulty enumerating the differences when given an opportunity. Consider for a moment the following blog exchange with a mormon:

practicalreasoning

July 8th, 2007 at 10:53 am

“Read the Bible…”

Yeah, read it. I’ve also talked to about a hundred different people about a hundred different scriptures – including the one in Galatians – and they all have a hundred different interpretations. That’s the beauty of religions. If every person looked at the Bible and came to the same interpretations, there would be one Christian Church. Do Mormon’s believe in “another gospel?” Well, hard to say. They certainly don’t believe in your gospel – or else they’d go to whatever church you do. But I’m willing to bet there are at least 100 other Christian denominations who also don’t subscribe to your gospel. The question is, where do we draw the line of what is Christian? Al Mohler, and presumaby you, too, would draw the line in such a way as to exclude Mormons, becasue they don’t subscribe to some Roman creeds enacted by Constantine.

I certainly don’t subscribe to Al Mohler’s gospel, and he doesn’t subscribe to mine – but we both say we have the gospel of Jesus Christ. Here, we have a problem with labeling. Mohler wants to be able to label Mormons non-Christian. Why? I don’t know, maybe just for kicks, or maybe he truly doesn’t like Mormons. Perhaps a Mormon bully beat him up and stole his lunch money as a kid – it’s not my job to speculate. The point is, Mohler has an agenda: exclude Mormons at all costs. Baptists, Methodists, Pentacostals, all fine. Mormons, bad. If I had to guess, I’d say Mohler, and his Evangelical buddies, might be worried at the explosive growth of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints – and about the diminishing returns of parish-going tithe payers.

I’ve never understood why people do this. Go to your church, teach what you believe, and leave everybody else the heck alone.

Do I believe Christ was the “half-brother” of Satan? No, I believe he was the full brother of Satan. God created everything, right, including both Jesus and Satan. The are brothers the say way you and I are brothers (assuming you’re a dude). There’s a reason we call him the Heavenly Father – he’s the Father of all things, and the creator of our spirits.

Of course, this is not a blog on Mormon apologetics. If I wanted to argue about Mormonism with anti-Mormons, I would find myself doing that all day and nothing else – those folks are particularly rabid. But I have other things to do, including making fun of Al Gore, watching TV, and washing my hair.

You want to split hairs about Mormonism, go to this site: http://www.romneyexperience.com – but I know better than to let this site (which no one should ever really take seriously, anyway) devolve into religous squabbling. If you’re looking for a fight, I’m sure you’ll find one – just not here.

There you have it then. Straight from the horse’s lips: “Do I believe Christ was the “half-brother” of Satan? No, I believe he was the full brother of Satan. God created everything, right, including both Jesus and Satan. The are brothers the say way you and I are brothers …”

You have to be blinded by your own brilliance not to know that NO CHRISTIANS believe that Christ was created by anybody. Christ is uncreated because CHRIST IS GOD. Christ in the flesh died because “he made himself equal to God” by saying “I and the Father are One.” This could not be more diametrically opposed to “…God created everything, right, including both Jesus and satan.” If this is so then Christ CANNOT HAVE ATONED FOR ANYONE’S SIN, and therefore there is no Salvation. Thus, even for the brilliantly blinded, mormonism is not the same as Christianity. It cannot be. The only way mormons can believe they are Christians is by altering the Truth about Christ. The Christ they believe in is a created being, no different than satan really. Theirs is a religion of works that CANNOT include the atoning work of Christ on Calvary’s Cross. Why not? Because no created being can atone for his own sin, much less the sins of the world. The supernatural nature of Christ’s sacrifice is absent from the mormon story. When you have to redefine basic terms to win adherents you’re not able to claim to be the genuine thing. It’s a distinction with a difference. A latter day anything isn’t Christianity, it’s an amendment.

This is the little thing that Hewitt’s callers wanted him to get, but he refused instruction from the obviously less than brilliant telephone fodder.

These few words bring me to the current events point I want to ask Hewitt about. Here’s a burning (pun intended) question: is that pope a bigot by Hewitt’s reckoning? Who is the bigot Hugh? Is turn-about fair play? Is Hewitt as incensed about the pope’s claim as he is about the callers’ claims? The real crackup is that the pope is as wrong as Hewitt is, for the same reason the reluctant mormon apologist quoted above is wrong.

In case someone thinks I am alone in my point of view, and therefore automatically wrong, this writer has examined more of the differences with distinctions that apply directly to this subject.

Redefining basic terms and understandings and claiming that verily verily they mean something different today than they meant in Christ’s day is a simple and effective trick for damning everyone involved. It’s not enlightenment, it’s obfuscation so you can gain adherents that you can control. Every religion operates the same way with the same defect. But child-simple-faith in the work Christ accomplished on Calvary’s Cross and child-simple-faith that what God said is true is the only promised gate to heaven, and the only impediment to getting there. All the rest is WRONG, regardless of how impressed the purveyors are with their own brilliance.

Jud 1:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort [you] that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

It’s not the latter-day one, but the ONCE-DELIVERED faith that we are exhorted to earnestly contend for. For the brilliant who might miss the import of this, note that Jude did not exhort Christians to earnestly contend for mormonism or any other …ism. We are exhorted to earnestly contend for the faith that was once delivered unto the saints. The once delivered one is the one we are to earnestly contend for. It’s pretty simple, really.

Jud 1:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort [you] that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

aye aye Sir,

citizen

Posted in back-talk, belief, believers, cults, faith, life, paid for, radio, truth | 2 Comments »

whosoever signs the check is the tax payer

Posted by Citizen on July 21, 2007

My favorite site has another dose of right thinking common sense. This brings up one of my favorite methods to raise howls of disbelief. Buckle up, this requires an open mind and clear thinking. Ready?

The entire US tax code is a ponzi scheme. It has wage earning Americans believing that they pay their own tax bills and social security/ medicare costs. Right? Answer this: do they write a check every pay period and send the monies to the appropriate appropriating agencies? They think so. Their check stubs show all the ‘deductions’ that they’ve ‘paid’, right?

Is that true though? Believing something doesn’t make it true. What’s really going on? Most employees have probably never paid someone else’s wages. But if they had been an employer they would know that it’s the employer who pays the taxes, and the risky IRS reporting scheme  fools the wage earner into believing that he actually paid those taxes, when in fact the employer paid them.

Well, you say, if the employer had paid all that revenue to the employee, and the employee had sent the money in, it would be the same thing, a wash, right? NOT REALLY.

Say that the payroll is a big bowl of jelly beans. The contract states that every week you get 327 jelly beans, except that the JBS (jelly_bean_service) demands that the employer send it 49 jelly beans for one item, and 22 jelly beans for another, and 11 for yet another category of ‘deduction’. So your compensation for the week is actually 245 jelly beans. And the JBS compensation for allowing the employer to employ you is 82 jelly beans.

POP QUIZ  Here’s the trick question, pay attention: who paid the beans to the JBS?

BINGO !!  It could not possibly be you, because you never had 327 jelly beans. You only got 245 jelly beans. That’s all there ever was. The rest of it is accounting smoke and mirrors. You got the smoke and the employer paid the beans to be able to remain in business.

How would I know this? I was self employed most of my life. I wrote the checks to the IRS and filed all the paperwork so I could remain in business. Ergo:

The person who signs the check is the person who pays the taxes, REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE CHECK STUB SAYS. The check stub lies to you. It’s just amazing that so many millions of Americans blindly believe this accounting trick. I think even the overclass has come to believe it, and they should know better.

You didn’t pay anything if you didn’t have it in the first place. The taxpayer is whoever signs the check to the IRS. If you didn’t cut the check, you didn’t pay the taxes.

Posted in accounting, government, ponzi, scams, taxes, taxpayer, truth | Leave a Comment »

commies

Posted by Citizen on July 19, 2007

Well, ya gotta see this if you love America, ’cause it’s a sure bet that hclinton does not. She wants to ride ya, she means to ride ya down, she’s out to get you. Like al gore, there seems to be no controlling legal authority. WHAT THE HEY!?!

Trust me, SHE IS OUT TO GET YOU. And the entire corrupt judiciary is aiding and abetting. Pssst, she is a commie, pass it on.

Someone should raise a huge stink over this. This should be thoroughly invested by the controlling legal authority, eh? Be sure to watch the whole flic before joogle pulls it, to aid and abett her crimes..,

Posted in blood-sucking parasites, clinton, commies, communists, elections, hillary, politics, scandals | Leave a Comment »

more democrat treason

Posted by Citizen on July 19, 2007

They’re taking the side of our muslim enemies AGAINST US.

Republicans aides will put up a fight when the conference committee begins at 1 p.m., to reinsert the language, but the public needs to weigh in. We are always told to be vigilant. To “say something” when we “see something.” I see Democrats carrying water for CAIR and endangering national security.

Say something!

Congress switchboard: 202-224-3121
Nancy Pelosi’s office: 202-225-4965

The partisans of defeat are at it again..,

Posted in axis of surrender, back-talk, blood-sucking parasites, coliseum of corruption, government, politics, scandals | Leave a Comment »

a thing about civilization

Posted by Citizen on July 17, 2007

This has been around for a while, that’s why I just discovered it and want to pass it on. This cuts both ways of course, guns in a lawless society make for coersion, but that coersion always exists in tyrannies, even if it’s knives or clubs. This is why we treasure our liberty. This is why we abhor those who would deprive us of it. Like OSHA, for example.

why the gun is civilization.

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it. RTWT, it’s worth it.

This is well reasoned and well written. It will get ‘yea and amen’ from more than half the country, the polite half..,

Posted in civilization, conservatism, conservatives, OSHA | Leave a Comment »

OSHA slapdown –> dontcha just love it?

Posted by Citizen on July 16, 2007

**************************************************

Labor Department Announces It Will Revise
Overreaching OSHA Explosives Rule

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) announced it will significantly revise a recent proposal for new “explosives safety” regulations that caused serious concern among gun owners. OSHA had originally set out to update workplace safety regulations, but the proposed rules included restrictions that very few gun shops, sporting goods stores, shippers, or ammunition dealers could comply with.

Gun owners had filed a blizzard of negative comments urged by the NRA, and just a week ago, OSHA had already issued one extension for its public comment period at the request of the National Shooting Sports Foundation. After continued publicity through NRA alerts and the outdoor media, and after dozens of Members of Congress expressed concern about its impact, OSHA has wisely decided to go back to the drawing board.

Working with the NRA, Congressman Denny Rehberg (R-MT) planned to offer a floor amendment to the Labor-HHS appropriations bill this Wednesday when the House considers this legislation. His amendment would have prohibited federal funds from being used to enforce this OSHA regulation.

Such an amendment is no longer necessary since Kristine A. Iverson, the Labor Department’s Assistant Secretary for Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs, sent Rep. Rehberg a letter, dated July 16, stating that it “was never the intention of OSHA to block the sale, transportation, or storage of small arms ammunition, and OSHA is taking prompt action to revise” this proposed rule to clarify the purpose of the regulation.

Also, working with the NRA, Congressman Doug Lamborn (R-CO) gathered signatures from 25 House colleagues for a letter, dated July 11, expressing concerns about this proposed OSHA rule. The letter calling the proposal “an undue burden on a single industry where facts do not support the need outlined by this proposed rule” and “not feasible, making it realistically impossible for companies to comply with its tenets.”

The OSHA proposal would have defined “explosives” to include “black powder, … small arms ammunition, small arms ammunition primers, [and] smokeless propellant,” and treated these items the same as the most volatile high explosives.

Under the proposed rule, a workplace that contained even a handful of small arms cartridges, for any reason, would have been considered a “facility containing explosives” and therefore subject to many impractical restrictions. For example, no one could carry “firearms, ammunition, or similar articles in facilities containing explosives … except as required for work duties.” Obviously, this rule would make it impossible to operate any kind of gun store, firing range, or gunsmith shop.

The public comment website for the proposed rule is no longer accessible. The Labor Department will publish a notice in the July 17 Federal Register announcing that a new rule proposal will soon be drafted for public comment. Needless to say, the NRA monitors proposed federal regulations to head off this kind of overreach, and will be alert for OSHA’s next draft.

We will post the letter to Congressman Rehberg shortly.

http://www.NRAILA.org

Write Your Representative

Write The Media

Get Involved Locally

Register To Vote

Contribute

Hopefully no one will be so deceived as to forget about this. Be absolutely certain that the enemies of all our liberties are still laboring to destroy them.

Posted in government, guns, OSHA, politics | Leave a Comment »

what’s it all about?

Posted by Citizen on July 16, 2007

http://shootersforum.com/showthread.htm?t=39569

Posted in eternal, faith, life, paid for, truth | Leave a Comment »

it’s OSHA and the corrupt congress combined

Posted by Citizen on July 10, 2007

quote:


Pennsylvania Case Reveals How McCarthy Bill Could Threaten All Gun
Owners
— Troubling questions in HR 2640 still go unanswered

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

“For the first time [in history, HR 2640], if enacted, would
statutorily impose a lifetime gun ban on battle-scarred veterans.” —
Military Order of the Purple Heart, June 18, 2007

ACTION:

1. Even if you have already sent an e-mail to your Senators on the
McCarthy bill, please send another such as the one at the end of this
alert. Yes, you might have already taken action on HR 2640. But if
you (and many other gun owners like yourself) haven’t taken any
action recently, then NO ONE is taking action. After all, the NRA is
supporting this bill, so they’re not rustlin’ up the troops in
opposition to this massive gun control bill. Remember the
immigration fight — it took weeks of continued activism to kill that
bill. This fight may very well be the same.

2. Please try to get as many of your friends as you can to join with
you in this effort to kill the McCarthy bill (HR 2640). Now that
Senators are returning from their July 4th holiday, we need to get as
many gun owners as possible to remind them that HR 2640 is
unacceptable!

McCARTHY BILL COULD COME UP AT ANY TIME IN THE U.S. SENATE

Now that Congress returns to work this week, your liberties are in
jeopardy once again!

You will remember that before the Independence Day break, the House
of Representatives passed a McCarthy gun control bill (HR 2640)
without any hearings, without any committee action… they put it on
the Suspension Calendar and simply got a non-recorded voice vote.

An important part of the legislative process is to introduce a bill
in committee, to get both public and private observers to ask
questions, make recommendations and offer comments on the bill.

But for some reason, HR 2640 was not given this benefit. The bill
was rammed through the legislature with very few Representatives
present on the House floor… there was no recorded vote at all!

So it’s not surprising that, having skipped much of the legislative
process, there are still a lot of unanswered questions regarding HR
2640. In fact, these questions have only been magnified after an
offhanded, tongue-in-cheek remark made at the Harrisburg Community
College in Pennsylvania cost a man his gun rights for life in that
state.

Newspapers last month reported that Horatio Miller allegedly said
that it could be “worse than Virginia Tech” if someone broke
into his
car, because there were guns there. It is not clear whether he was
making a threat against a person who might burglarize his car, or if
he was simply saying that the bad guy could do a lot of damage
because of the guns he would find there. Nevertheless, Miller was
arrested, but not charged with anything.

The comment Miller made was certainly not the smartest thing to say.
But realize, we don’t incarcerate people for making stupid statements
in this country — at least not yet. Miller was a concealed carry
permit holder who, as such, had passed vigorous background checks
into his past history. Miller does not have a criminal record.

Regardless, the county district attorney did not like what he had
said, so, according to the Harrisburg Patriot News on June 20, “I
contacted the sheriff and had his license to carry a firearm revoked.
And I asked police to commit him under Section 302 of the mental
health procedures act and that was done. He is now ineligible to
possess firearms [for life] because he was committed involuntarily.”

Get that?

Pennsylvania is operating exactly the way Rep. McCarthy’s bill (HR
2640) could treat all Americans. You might be thinking, I’ve never
had a mental illness… I’m not a military veteran… I’ve never been
on Ritalin… hey, I have nothing to worry about under the McCarthy
bill. Right?

Well, think again.

DO YOUR VIEWS ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT MAKE YOU A POTENTIAL DANGER?

The Pennsylvania case shows how all gun owners could be threatened by
HR 2640. After all, did you ever tell anyone that the Second
Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights because the Founders
(such as James Madison) wanted the people to be able to overturn a
tyrannical American government?

Or, while you were watching the nightly news — and getting a
detailed account of all the crime in your area — did you ever make a
statement such as, “If someone were to break through my door, I’d
blow him away!”

Well, those kinds of statements will certainly make anti-gun nuts
think you’re a potential danger to yourself or others. So if you
make the local district attorney or police officer nervous, how
difficult would it be for him to get a psychiatrist (most of whom are
very left-wing) to say that you are a danger to yourself and to
others?

Or, would the district attorney even need to get a psychiatrist? One
of the outrageous aspects of the McCarthy bill is that Section 3(2)
codifies existing federal regulations. And existing federal code
says it only takes a “lawful authority” to
“adjudicate” someone as a
mental defective.(1) And another section of the bill makes it clear
this “adjudication” does not need to be made by a formal court, but
can simply be a “determination” — such as a medical diagnosis.(2)

Consider how significant this is. The BATFE has been quietly
attempting to amend the federal code by regulatory fiat for years,
but they’ve been somewhat restrained in their ability to interpret
these regulations because they are, after all, regulations (and not
statutory law).

But with HR 2640, much of the pablum that BATFE bureaucrats have
quietly added to the code over the years will now become the LAW OF
THE LAND — even though those regs were never submitted to a
legislative committee or scrutinized in legislative hearings or
debated on the floor of the House of Representatives.

When one looks at the federal regs cited above, there are a lot of
questions that still remain unanswered. What kinds of people can
fall into this category of “other lawful authority” that can deem
someone to be a mental defective? Certainly, it would seem to apply
to Veterans Administration shrinks. After all, the federal
government already added more than 80,000 veterans with Post
Traumatic Stress into the NICS system in 2000.

But who else could be classified as a “lawful authority”? A school
counselor? A district attorney? What about a legislator, a city
councilman or a cop? They are certainly “authorities” in their own
right. Could the words “lawful authority” also apply to them?

Do we really want to risk the Second Amendment on the question of
what the words “lawful authority” in 27 CFR 478.11 mean —
once they
have been “statutized” by HR 2640 and BATF is no longer under ANY
constraint and can read it as broadly as they want?

If the “lawful authority” thinks you pose a danger to yourself or
others (or can’t manage your own affairs) then your gun rights could
be gone.

In its open letter of May 9, 2007, BATFE makes it clear that this
“danger” doesn’t have to be “imminent” or
“substantial,” but can
include “any danger” at all. How many shrinks — using the
Pennsylvania standard — are going to say that a pro-gun American
like you, who believes the Second Amendment is the last defense
against tyranny, DOESN’T POSE AT LEAST AN INFINITESIMAL RISK of
hurting someone else?

As easy as that, your gun rights would be gone forever.

HR 2640 is Janet Reno’s dream. Does somebody make a politician
nervous? Get a prescription pad, get your friendly left-wing
psychiatrist to make the “dangerous” diagnosis, and it’s all over.
Expungement will be virtually impossible. Just turn in your guns.

FOOTNOTES:

(1) See 27 CFR 478.11.
(2) See Section 101(c)(1)(C).

FOR MORE INFORMATION: Supporters of the McCarthy bill are hanging
their hat on language which purports to help disqualified people to
get their rights restored. So GOA has built a special section on its
website that gets to the truth on this issue and informs gun owners
of the dangers in HR 2640. Please go to
http://www.gunowners.org/netb.htm to learn what the specifics of the
bill are, who its main supporters are, answers to claims made by
proponents of the bill, who faces the greatest risk of being
disqualified for buying a gun, and more.

CONTACT INFORMATION: You can use the pre-written letter below to
help direct your comments to your two U.S. Senators. Please visit
the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Senators the
pre-written e-mail message below.

—– Pre-written letter —–

Dear Senator:

The Military Order of the Purple Heart got it right when it stated
that for the first time in history, HR 2640 “would statutorily impose
a lifetime gun ban on battle-scarred veterans.”

The Military Order of the Purple Heart, which is chartered by
Congress, is urging the DEFEAT of HR 2640, the Brady-expansion
legislation introduced by anti-gun Rep. Carolyn McCarthy.

Despite what you may have heard elsewhere, this bill THREATENS gun
owners’ rights and represents one of the biggest gun bans in history.

A recent case in Pennsylvania shows how easily a gun owner can be
slapped with a LIFETIME gun ban, without any due process, based
solely on a mere accusation by a shrink or other “lawful
authority.”
For more information on this — and for a point-by-point analysis of
HR 2640 — please go to http://www.gunowners.org on the website of
Gun Owners of America.

All the background checks in the world will NOT stop bad guys from
getting firearms. Severe restrictions in Washington, DC, England,
Canada, Germany and other places have not stopped evil people from
using guns to commit murder.

Again, I hope you will OPPOSE the McCarthy bill (HR 2640). Thank
you.

Sincerely,

****************************

Posted in blood-sucking parasites, coliseum of corruption, government, guns, injustice, media, OSHA, scandals | 1 Comment »

car talk

Posted by Citizen on July 9, 2007

What’s wrong with these pictures?

april brake job

april brake job

Note the date when I took the man van in for an oil change. Then look below at the measurement of the disk brake pads. See that? Now look farther down to the recommendation: front brake service. Got that? I was assured that it was actually not too soon and yes the pads were that worn and besides they’ve already gotten a lot of life, for brake pads.

Smell something? Yup, I had that same stinking sensation. Now look over the following picture of my most recent oil change. See anything different?

See the mileage? Then see the brake pad thickness? Is it a miracle? No! Is it a secret brake job? No! Well then what is it?

The three most reasonable possibilities are a. it’s a mistake, the guy performing the work is incompetent. Or finally it’s a scam caught in the act. You decide.

Oh, I nearly forgot to mention that I told the guy at the counter that I wanted to look at the brakes when the wheels were off, and he said that could be arranged. It is absolutely amazing how much brake pad a mechanic can find when you watch him measure each one!

In case anyone wants to know it is Today Chevrolet in Bremerton, Washington, telephone number 800-592-1309 if you want to schedule your ‘GM Goodwrench’ professional grade service there.

Posted in car talk, cars, fraud, life | Leave a Comment »