Sunday, April 06, 2008

Wow!

Humboldt "Baykeeper" has a STAFF ATTORNEY!
Michelle Smith, Staff Attorney
707.268.0665
michelle AT humboldtbaykeeper.org

Moneykeeping must be paying off.

91 comments:

  1. is she the one that smokes cigi-buts behind hum brew and rhrows them on the ground?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think she has been on staff for a long time...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Tells you what kind of business "Baykeeper" is.

    A business which produces nothing can afford a storefront in Old Town, slick mailers, and a staff attorney.

    Local business owners who think these are good guys ought to realize that "Baykeeper" represents the mentality that wants to prevent trucks and ships that bring in their merchandise, among other business-killers. All while they spend money like it's going out of style, money they didn't earn in any way, shape or form.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Guess you didn't read their form 900 very carefully after all. There is no salary paid to a staff attorney. She must be a volunteer.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Whether she is or isn't who cares. She has no other employer. The state bar has her only employer as Humboldt Baykeeper. That means she is not working elsewhere and simply volunteering time.

    ReplyDelete
  6. You're right, gosh darn it, I didn't even look at the "Baykeeper" 990s, at least not recently. Odd, isn't it, "Healthy Humboldt" is also a project and they don't file 990s.

    Poor girl, spent all that time and money to become a lawyer, and she doesn't even get paid? Shades of Schectman taking advantage of the little Earth Firsters? Or is she on loan from ERF? The predatory parent of the "Baykeeper" spawn.

    Guess I'll have to look into that trail too. Thanks for the reminder.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Yeah, it seems incredible to you greedy people that some people volunteer their time for causes which benefit their community. Not everyone has to sell their soul to a corporation to live.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hmmm - Guidestar doesn't have a "Humboldt Baykeeper" - but this is what pops up when you query that name...

    ECOLOGICAL RIGHTS FOUNDATION
    867 Redwood Dr Ste B
    Garberville, CA 95542
    Documents: Form 990

    EIN: 68-0400522 Income: ¤439,621 (from IRS Form 990)
    IRS Subsection: 501(c)(3) Public Charity
    NTEE Code: C01 (Alliance/Advocacy Organizations)

    ReplyDelete
  9. Ya know, there's some interesting stuff here. More later.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Humboldt Baykeeper is a project of Ecological Rights Foundation as stated at Guidestar:

    ECOLOGICAL RIGHTS FOUNDATION (ERF)'S HUMBOLDT BAYKEEPER PROJECT HAS EXPANDED ITS BASE OF SUPPORTING MEMBERS, HAS FURTHERED ITS PROGRAM OF OUTREACH AND EDUCATION IN THE SCHOOLS AND ON HUMBOLDT BAY, ERF HAS IMPLEMENTED A VERY SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM OF WATER QUALITY MONITORING IN AND AROUND THE BAY. HUMBOLDT BAYKEEPER PUBLISHED AND DISTRIBUTED ITS FIRST TWO BI-ANNUAL MAGAZINES.

    ReplyDelete
  11. OMG Hold the presses!
    Not a Miller or Lovelace to be found at ERF or Baykeepers.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Its very funny when you right wingers start attacking the nonprofit organizations who are doing the work that your government funding cuts blocked the government from doing. What happened to all your beliefs about privatization in this instance? Is it that you don't want any monitoring done of the commons that industry is destroying?

    ReplyDelete
  13. I LOVE the way you try to make this a right wing issue.

    Like they're the only ones who disapprove of predatory lawsuits and dishonest tactics. What an insult to the "left." Hat to tell ya, but y'er story, it's wearing thin.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Raping the environment for profit is part of the right wing agenda no matter how much you deny it. Cutting funding for regulatory agencies is also right wing.

    ReplyDelete
  15. right wingers favor less government regulation, left wingers favor more........thats really the only way that the two "sides" can be quantified. If you favor no regulation, you are far to the right, if you favor a ton of regulation, you are far to the left. its really simple.

    so , yeah, this is a right wing, left wing issue. the baykeepers obviously want more regulation. some people obviously want less regulation. the reality usually hangs somewhere in the middle.....

    ReplyDelete
  16. Oh come on now 4:04 - you mean that if we disagree with you, we are in favor or raping the environment for profit and are right wing?

    I am a life long dem and I find you lumping and dumping like this as flat out disgusting. You ought to be ashamed to write anything so close minded.

    ReplyDelete
  17. If you are opposed to monitoring the health of our common resources by government agencies and / or private and / or non-profit organizations, you are probably a right winger, 4:29. There are lots of people on both sides of the aisle that I disagree with on many issues. The defunding of monitoring agencies occurred under a right wing administration and it is right wingers who are now attacking nonprofit and private monitoring. As Theo Therme said, this is one particular issue that can be clearly delineated as right / left.

    ReplyDelete
  18. As an added point, it has also been the far right who claim regulatory agencies aren't needed because people can seek redress in the courts for any damages done after the fact. When damage occurs and lawsuits are filed, the same right wingers whine about predatory lawsuits.

    ReplyDelete
  19. One more note, being a Democrat doesn't make you a leftist, a liberal or an environmentalist.

    How many Reagan Democrats were there?

    ReplyDelete
  20. I agree 4:46. This whole star-bellied sneetches labeling thing is really getting old. People are so much more complex than the Democrat-Republican labels.

    I sort of agree, Theo, that republicans are for less government, but not no government, and that Democrats in general are for more government, and for the nanny state, but you'll find all kinds of variations in there.

    For example, the extreme end of the Republican party were for things like prayer in schools, which would seem to be for more government.

    Yet those that opposed that seem to have no problem with Muslim prayer and rituals in schools, as evidenced by a few recent rulings. I tend to think if you are against one you should be against both.

    How do we come to such extremes?

    I do not believe for one second that all Republicans, any Republicans want to pollute that Bay. I don't know a single one that does, actually. Don't know any Dems, Greens or any other parties who believe pollution is a good thing. We ought to agree on that common ground.

    ReplyDelete
  21. There are democrats who believe in personal responsibility and the power of the individual. We're not all nannnystaters, wimps and beggars. I think that's what you're saying. We have more in common than we allow.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Not all hunters are republicans
    Not all gun-control advocates are democrats

    ReplyDelete
  23. I am not the one tying the right wing label to Republicans or the left wing label to Democrats. People pick their parties for a variety of reasons. I know left wing Republicans and right wing Democrats which I why I use the terms left / right rather than D / R.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Only a sociopath would WANT to pollute the bay. Unfortunately there are people who are WILLING to pollute the bay for money and are opposed to monitoring which would uncover it.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Well, that's interesting, 5:21, since that would infer that the "Baykeeper" heroes are there to save the day. No, there're there to exploit a law that was passed for a good reason, They (and their predatory parent) the environmental version of Jason Singleton.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Back on topic, if she isn't shwoing up on 990s itmight be because she is paid less than $50,000.

    ReplyDelete
  27. They're there because someone has to be. If you don't like the nonprofits doing the job that government SHOULD be doing then demand that your government do their job of protecting our environment.

    ReplyDelete
  28. rose said: "I sort of agree, Theo, that republicans are for less government, but not no government, and that Democrats in general are for more government, and for the nanny state, but you'll find all kinds of variations in there."

    rose,
    reread my post. i never mentioned the words republican or democrat once.
    if you want my honest opinion, the parties are not diametrically opposed as you present them to be. many libertarians or other third party members would claim that the two parties are just shades different from each other.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Yeah, sorry, Theo, you do not say Rep-Dem. YOu just call 'em right-wingers and left-wingers.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Actually, what I am trying to say is - we are not all that different. There are good people - and bad people - on both sides. I'm asking why we are so virulently polarized.

    You and I don't agree on everything, maybe not even on much, but we can talk, right?

    ReplyDelete
  31. And 5:32 - do you know who jason Singleton is? I suggest you read up.

    "Baykeeper" is another version of Jason Singleton. They are a predatory litigious group.

    (Has nothing to do with right-wing-left-wing)

    ReplyDelete
  32. You didn't respond to my statement about demanding government do their job Rose. If we had adequate funding of our regulatory agencies, there would be no need for organizations like Baywatch, Rose, and people wouldn't donate to them. Funding these agencies is definitely a right / left issue.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Did you see the L'Eye today? They might as well call Hoover's rag The Mark Lovelace Campaign Circular for all the one-sided coverage week after week.

    ReplyDelete
  34. BS, 6:05.

    And there is a trail up and down the state that says differently - where you and yours inhibit clean up, drive up costs astronomically, and by your interference actually stop progress.

    You employ expensive PR firms to put out your flowery mission statements, hollow as an empty drum, and people fall for it, because THEY do have good intentions, and don't look beneath the surfaces and uncover the boondoggle.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Until there are adequately funded government regulatory agencies we won't know will we Rose? I would much prefer my tax dollars went to protect the environment than build bombs and wouldn't have to donate so much of my hard earned money to do what the taxes I pay should already be doing. Oops, another right / left division.

    ReplyDelete
  36. And if you're that attorney for the predatory "Baykeeper" you aren't paying any taxes. You're lucky to buy a loaf of bread.

    ReplyDelete
  37. rose said: "There are good people - and bad people - on both sides. I'm asking why we are so virulently polarized."

    rose,
    since there are two major parties, its inevitable that people will jump to one side or the other, leaving the middle looking empty. here is my take on it: people are generally lazy and tend to make knee-jerk reactions based on preconcieved notions. if people really evaluated each issue individually, without using kneejerk reactions or preconceived notions, there would be more understanding.

    take the issue of iraq. a true right winger would be disgusted at the amount of money spent by us over there to achieve no gains for the USA. a true right winger would be angered that the government's tactics in iraq have made the price of oil go up 500% since the OCCUPATION began. a true right winger would not be in support of a government lining up at the border of another and trying to occupy it. name another democratic country to do that. you cant. only monarchies, dictatorships and communists/socialists occupy countries.

    YET, supposed "right wingers" listen to Rush Limbaugh and other pro-occupation personalites, and will listen to whatever they say. thats what i mean about kneejerk reactions without thinking through issues...

    ReplyDelete
  38. Where would you get the idea I am the Baykeeper attorney? What a bizzare assumption. That seems to be another right wing ideal, people can only be interested in that which profits them individually rather than what society needs as a whole.

    ReplyDelete
  39. right wing/left wing has to do with amount of governmental regulation and involvment......thats it......

    a right winger wants LESS government interference in the economy and LESS regulation for people and businesses. extreme right wingers are libertarians or anarchists.

    a left winger wants MORE goverment interference into the economy and MORE regulations for people and businesses. extreme left wingers are socialists, communists and greens.


    this is the ONLY scale in which one can quantify the relationship between the right and the left.

    when i look at an issue, the first thing i do is evaluate what the government's role should be in the matter( or what i think it should be), and i proceed from there.

    ReplyDelete
  40. every person can transcend any stereotype or label that is put on them:

    call me a "conservative" and ill show you an issue where i took a "liberal" stance. or vise versa..

    call me a left winger and ill explain that i favor a small, efficient government.

    call me a right winger and ill tell you some of the government services that i appreciate.

    ideas go ALOT further than labels

    ReplyDelete
  41. Lots of ways to hide money. She may be on comish', working under the table or getting her own donations or grants. All a shell game. No one is polluting the bay, unless you count Arcata sewer ponds. The bay is healthy despite baykeepers BS fraud resulting in an impared listing. We have good stewards working on the exhisting problem spots. More money may or may not be a help. EPIC,Baykeeper,NEC,etc. are business. Big business. The product they create is fear,crisis and shallow Mark Lovelace hero's to save the day. They do very little to clean up the few exhisting hot spots but do move a lot of money in the bars,pot houses and with trips to Mexico and skiing.

    ReplyDelete
  42. 7:10,
    wow!!!! that was ALOT of thoughts in one post!!!

    sorry to hear about your hatred of skiing and bars and Mexico. you sound like a ton of fun. what is your idea of a dream vacation? a weekend in crescent city and a few cokes at dennys? party it up!!!!!

    im also sorry to hear that think money is being hidden from the IRS. maybe you should make a complaint. i personally believe in a person's right to keep thier income, but im a crazy right winger....you can talk about more taxes all youd like

    ReplyDelete
  43. Theo - at 6:55 and 6:59, we are in pretty nearly 100% agreement. :) We can talk about Bush and Iraq some other day on some other blog to see if we have any areas of agreement there.

    I'd count myself more libertarian, for what its worth.

    And 6:15/6:31 - I said IF you were the Baykeeper atty. She's listed "Baykeeper" as her EMPLOYER. One would assume that means she is being paid, or else she would be self-employed, no?

    Does one of the other "Baykeeper/Coastkeeper/Riverkeeper" pay her keep? The VERY FACT THAT THEY HAVE A STAFF ATTORNEY TELLS YOU WHAT THEY INTEND TO DO - SUE PEOPLE. Oh, excuse me, SUE DEEP POCKETS, the deepest pockets they can find. It's what they were created for. It's what they do. You can't pretty that up.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Trip to Cresent City and a coke at Denny's does sound great. Just need to find a blind girl to share it with.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Here's the real issue. With someone like Lovelace a potential supervisor,you have to ask your self this question. Can you live with Larry Evans as a planning director?

    ReplyDelete
  46. Good point's 7:10pm.

    You seem to have offended theotherme.

    Gee that's tooo bad.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Wooley and Chesbro endorsed Lovelace. It's all sewn up for him. :)

    ReplyDelete
  48. how did 7:10 offend me? the points presented were such generalities that it was hard for me to even determine the point of the post.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Theo you are just a plain old ordinary asshole with too much time on your hands. Why not try getting a haircut and maybe try to get a job? I hear the Eureka Police are hiring, since you know everything about everything you should have no problem being cop right? Oh yes I forgot about that whole background investigation, lie detector examination, and psych examination. I guess you should try for a "activist" job or something other thatn a cop job.

    ReplyDelete
  50. 12:53,
    we all have the same 24 hour day, the last time i checked....

    im AT work right now! and who are you, my fashion consultant? or are you trying to be my boyfriend by giving me hair advice? sorry, buddy, i dont swing that way. ill keep my hair how my lady wants it.

    as for being a EDP officer, that would be fine. ive got a few friends on the force. the pay cut is really what would keep me from making that change. but THANKS for the career advice!!!!

    hair advice AND career advice from a guy who thinks im an asshole!!! wow!!

    ReplyDelete
  51. Why don't you have anything about the code enforcement debacle? There must be some way to blame Gallegos for that.

    And nothing about the boys in blue eating themselves from the top down either. Slipping up there girl.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Eh, just watching it all for now - in fact I am listening to the BOS meeting now, some great speakers, some awesome testimony.

    The EPD - there's a new blog about that and heraldo and Eric are covering it if you are interested. If it tips into my territory, I'll pick it up.

    I definitely have some opinions, but, not ready to share.

    ReplyDelete
  53. theo has a "few friends of the force" ? Oh really.

    ReplyDelete
  54. 6:42,
    i dont know any jedi knights. i said "ON on the force".

    ReplyDelete
  55. At least on the blogs The o, you are a bore and an asshole. By the way we agree with 7:10

    ReplyDelete
  56. More general than"Humboldt's Future HANGS IN THE BALANCE" NOT!

    ReplyDelete
  57. The bitch slap kid and mr. cheeseball himself have crowned mini-mark king of all things political. With his high heels and new crown some people are seeing him for the first time.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Just read 7:10's post. Have to tell you theo that you need to take a class at CR and bone up on your reading skills.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Anonymous said...
    Lots of ways to hide money. She may be on comish', working under the table or getting her own donations or grants. All a shell game. No one is polluting the bay, unless you count Arcata sewer ponds. The bay is healthy despite baykeepers BS fraud resulting in an impared listing. We have good stewards working on the exhisting problem spots. More money may or may not be a help. EPIC,Baykeeper,NEC,etc. are business. Big business. The product they create is fear,crisis and shallow Mark Lovelace hero's to save the day. They do very little to clean up the few exhisting hot spots but do move a lot of money in the bars,pot houses and with trips to Mexico and skiing.

    4/07/2008 7:10 PM



    the only thing i disagreed with was about mexico, skiing, and bars........do i need a class at CR to make me hate mexico, skiiing, and bars? what department is that in? social sciences?

    ReplyDelete
  60. You're the one that made the leep about hate being applied to vacations,Mexico,bars or skiing. It was clearly a statement about money used in that way not for enviro work. I agree with that point too.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Rose did you see any of the supporters of TPZ restrictions or code enforcement at the meeting today? Mark Lovelace and John Woolley were no shows.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Agree with 8:50 and theo you could be a bit less of a prick as you respond. Sorry about that but it's the only word that seems to fit your posts at times.

    ReplyDelete
  63. 8:57,
    im a prick because i think people should be able to take vacations and should be able to imbibe in spirits? ok, whatever floats your boat....

    i believe in a free market economy. the fact that a person can afford to take a vacation is enough for me. according to your logic, every person who works for the government or recieves government contracts should have to spend thier money exactly as YOU say. i call that socialism.....but dont worry, the more i hang out here, the more i get used to it....

    ReplyDelete
  64. The meeting wasn't about TPZ as hard as Ullansey tried to make it so.

    ReplyDelete
  65. 10:36 you spin it like the o. Both your last posts are not only wrong but STUPID. People lie for personal gain then use that gain to party hardy while the folks con'd out of that money should be some how OK with it. By the way theo-nut are you telling us that if someone cons you out of your money under false pretence that you're OK with that? How very lib.

    ReplyDelete
  66. theo,don't know why your a prick any more than why mark lovelace would lie to us about being a paid lobbiest. You are what you are. Try to chill a bit.

    ReplyDelete
  67. 10:53,

    im the biggest cheapskate in the world. plus, ive voted to the right or far right my entire life.....calling me a liberal is a complete joke!!

    oh yeah, i almost forgot,i was very liberal with the lube last night with your wife.....

    and i dont get conned out of money, im too smart for that. i dont give to any environmental causes, if thats what you are calling the "con". i do agree with you to a point there. most chariites are total cons. from environmental to religious to political, most advocacy groups are wasteful as hell....

    ReplyDelete
  68. I'll be nicer to you now that I know your gay too. How was my little whore? You still have a problem with understanding the written word.

    ReplyDelete
  69. so far on this thread ive been called gay, long-haired, jobless, stupid, a prick, an asshole, a liberal and an illiterate.......

    if people can't debate issues, they have to call names. im just glad that i was able to make my points without them being refuted.

    rose, i like you, really. but hanging out here reminds me of hanging out in my kids kindergarden class sometimes. do you actually know some of these haters in real life?

    ReplyDelete
  70. :) Not that I know of. And I prefer the posts to stay as much on topic as possible. These issues are important.

    I agree with you Theo, that most orgs, etc. are wasteful. Sad, but as soon as they start paying salaries, and as soon as a person's livelihood is invested in the continuation of the org, the original purpose gets lost.

    But in this post - "Baykeeper" claims to have a staff attorney and she lists "Baykeeper" as her employer, yet "Baykeeper" is not the one paying her (if she ius paid), is it?

    It's the "Ecological Rights Foundation" who is really her employer, wouldn't you say?

    And they claimed to have 17 attorneys on staff. Their sole purpose in life is to sue people, excuse me, sue rich people wherever and whenever they can, for things that happened 30, 50, 100 years ago, for practices that were once common but have since been changed for the better. Instead of applauding the changes, they seek money because of past mistakes.

    I say again, "Baykeeper" is nothing more than another ugly cancer like Jason Singleton.

    ReplyDelete
  71. 8:54, I believe Woolley was in DC.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Rose, You make a lot of unfounded assumptions like the ass you are.

    If people being paid for the work they do makes them lose sight of their mission, it doesn't bode well for the capitalist system, does it?

    ReplyDelete
  73. The issues are important. People might do better to ignor theo's silly interpertations and remember that Lovelace is a sympton of a real problem in our society. We might suggest going to some EPIC,HWC,Healthy Humboldt, NEC or Baykeeper meetings and just listen. If a blogger is soft skinned about attacks,maybe they should back off a bit on stone throwing too.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Woolley,just like Chheesseefart and lovelace and in the state of Dee-Nile!

    ReplyDelete
  75. 8:51 - it's like this - the "coalitions for Headwaters" type orgs were founded with a purpose. The purpose was accomplished. They may not have gotten their way entirely, but - They won. They were finished. But they didn't let that be the end, they decided to keep the money flowing in by keeping dissent, and controversy alive. By continuing to attack, they justified their 'jobs.' That's what I am talking about. That is just one example.

    If you believe "Baykeeper" is about cleaning up the bay, and not ferreting out the best means to go after money from the deepest pockets they can find, you're blind.

    IF THEY WERE, the Wiyot Tribe would have something to fear from Baykeeper. Guess what? They don't. They have been told "Baykeeper" is their friend. And that fact has been relayed to a number of people.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Their job isn't done until the environment is cleaned up and there are strict laws in place to keep it that way, Rose. If you really want to get rid of all the environmental organizations, as you claim, you should be supporting only candidates who will adequately fund regulation and mitigation.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Shame on you. You pretend that there aren't very real people doing very real work to do all of those things. While this group of new age con men USES those very laws that are in place in order to extort money instead of making an honest living.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Activists are real people as well and if there was no work for them to do they would find another cause. Cutting funding of regulatory agencies and then whining because non-profits step up to fill in the gaps is what you should be ashamed of.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Yeah, I get that you are invested in the non-profit shell-game.

    I don't think we are suffering from any LACK of regulation. Quite the contrary. We are now to a place where nothing can get done, and what little manages to make it through the process is bloated by excessive costs. Good for you.

    ReplyDelete
  80. K - bub - you prove me wrong. Let's hear "Baykeeper" and "Humboldt Watershed Council" condemn Vilica, condemn Schectman.

    Let's see a suit filed against those two by either one of those two entities. Hell, let;s even see the DA file charges.

    Ooops. He won't? They won't? Because.....

    ReplyDelete
  81. You know, let's hear Jennifer Kalt, the Native Plant specialist and Water Quality Monitoring Coordinator say something about Vilica/Paradise Palms/Schectman bulldozing entire plateaus to put the greenhouses on... ... ... ... crickets ... ... ... ...

    ReplyDelete
  82. 8:53 said: "People might do better to ignor theo's silly interpertations and remember that Lovelace is a sympton of a real problem in our society.

    what is the "symptom" of a real problem? please, focus like a laser beam, and CLEARLY make your point....please state the symptom and the problem...

    ReplyDelete
  83. 8:53 said: If a blogger is soft skinned about attacks,maybe they should back off a bit on stone throwing too.

    my skin is as thick as it comes. sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me......i was just making the point that many of the posters here can't even argue simple ideas. instead, they call names. that is not debate, that is kindergarden talk...

    you can be as blind as you wish, but i have never defended lovelace, i dont even know who the guy is. to assume that i defended a guy because i talked about broad sociological and economic ideas is ABSURD.......kneejerk reactions dont allow many of you to familiarize yourselves with issues. its sad, really...

    ReplyDelete
  84. Too much Hannity and not enough Colmes, Rose. Now I understand your bizzare and dishonest debating tactics.

    ReplyDelete
  85. You seem to be very thin skinned. Rereading your posts one can't be sure what your view is from moment to moment. You know when you tell someone you've slept with their wife,it's really on you if their "old lady" is named Sam not Sue. If you used a whole tube of lube on Sam,well that seems a bit gay to me. That was more of your "broad sociological and economic ideas", So lets put that away and agree that the lovelace sales pitch is spin at its worst.

    ReplyDelete
  86. ah, your pissed about the wife comment.....relax...how about this: im liberal with mustard, not lube....happy now?

    ReplyDelete
  87. 12:31 you're on the wrong blog. For bizzare and dishonest debating tatics you must go to the Healthy Humboldt,HWC,mark lovelace dog and pony show over at heraldo.bull-shit

    ReplyDelete
  88. "So lets put that away and agree that the lovelace sales pitch is spin at its worst."

    I havent seen the sales pitch. Therefore i cant comment on it. If you are talking about a BID for PALCO, i havent seen it either, and cant comment on it.

    A sales pitch comes from someone who is selling something. I thought that this thread was about buying PALCO. Im so confused....

    ReplyDelete
  89. I'd agree. Confused.... Sounds like a sales pitch for HWC. Ha,ha!

    ReplyDelete
  90. Theo,we're not pissed at you. It's just to much fun to lead you down the trail. You are funny.

    ReplyDelete

Comments are open. Play nice.