Ladywriter

Friday is the last day to voice your opinion on whether the EPA -- the Environmental Protection Agency -- should regulate carbon dioxide pollution, the primary cause of the climate crisis. This is a big deal. The EPA is taking public comment, before making a ruling. Of course, special interests -- like the oil and coal lobbies -- are working overtime to defeat a positive ruling and have already gotten thousands of comments submitted in opposition. Most people don't know about this opportunity for public comment, so your voice can make a real difference. And with a new president in the White House, it's likely that someone will actually be listening. Submit your public comment to the EPA here: http://www.repoweramerica.org/EPA In April 2007 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to regulate carbon dioxide if it is harming our health and welfare. After more than a year of delay, the EPA is finally now requesting public comments on whether carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping pollutants are endangering our health and our climate. Join us, and send a message about how crucial it is to reduce harmful carbon dioxide pollution. That you expect the EPA to use its powers to protect our health and welfare. That we can "Repower America" by using energy sources that don't emit carbon dioxide, and make the switch to 100% clean electricity. And that the solutions to the climate crisis are the same ones needed to address our economic and security challenges. This is our chance to go on the public record -- all the comments will be posted on the EPA's website. To post your public comment, just go here: http://www.repoweramerica.org/EPA For nearly eight years, the Bush administration has done nothing to address the growing threats we face from global warming. Hurricanes are getting stronger, the North polar icecap is melting, and we've suffered through intense droughts, floods and killer heat waves. The deadline is November 28th. Let's help end the era of delay. Thanks, Cathy Zoi CEO http://www.RepowerAmerica.org

The UK has taken the first significant step down the road towards rolling out a controversial new national ID card system. The UK has taken the first significant step down the road towards rolling out a controversial new national ID card system. A sample of the new ID cards Foreign students applying to study in Britain and those entering on marriage visas will now have to obtain a biometric identity card. The Home Office expects 50,000 to 60,000 students will be affected in the first phase between now and March. Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said the scheme would demonstrate "our commitment to preventing immigration abuse and protecting the prosperity of the UK". She added: "In time identity cards for foreign nationals will replace paper documents and give employers a safe and secure way of checking a migrant's right to work and study in the UK." However, the move has been criticised by opponents of a national identity card scheme. They accuse the government of using some of most vulnerable groups in society as guinea pigs for an untried and controversial system. The shadow Home Secretary, Dominic Grieve, said the likelihood of a full roll-out of identity cards now looked slim. He said: "It will still be possible for large numbers of people to be in this country without having visas. "If they want to overstay and be here illegally this system will provide no protection whatsoever against their being here." The development is the first main phase of the government's plans for identity cards for every British citizen within a decade. Next year the cards will become compulsory for what the Home Office describes as "critical workers". Initially this will mean around 200,000 airport workers will be forced to sign up as a condition of employment, because they work in highly sensitive positions. In 2010, British students will be encouraged to register for an identity card before they open bank accounts. From 2012, the cards will become available to the general population. People applying for a new passport will asked to register their biometric data - although they will be able to opt out of being issued with a card. What data will ID cards store? Fears have been raised by opponents of identity cards about the amount of information which could be stored on the database. Here is the full list of the 49 types of information which the Identity Cards Bill says may be on the register. Personal information full name other names by which person is or has been known date of birth place of birth gender address of principal place of residence in the United Kingdom the address of every other place in the United Kingdom or elsewhere where person has a place of residence. Identifying information a photograph of head and shoulders signature fingerprints other biometric information Residential status nationality entitlement to remain in the United Kingdom where that entitlement derives from a grant of leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom, the terms and conditions of that leave Personal reference numbers National Identity Registration Number the number of any ID card issued allocated national insurance number the number of any relevant immigration document the number of their United Kingdom passport the number of any passport issued to the individual by or on behalf of the authorities of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom or by or on behalf of an international organisation the number of any document that can be used by them (in some or all circumstances) instead of a passport; the number of any identity card issued to him/her by the authorities of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom any reference number allocated to him/her by the secretary of state in connection with an application made by him for permission to enter or to remain in the United Kingdom the number of any work permit relating to him/her; any driver number given to him/her by a driving licence; the number of any designated document which is held by him/her and is a document the number of which does not fall within any of the preceding sub-paragraphs the date of expiry or period of validity of a document the number of which is recorded by virtue of this paragraph. Record history information falling within the preceding paragraphs that has previously been recorded about him/her in the Register particulars of changes affecting that information and of changes made to his/her entry in the Register date of death. Registration and ID card history the date of every application for registration made by him/her the date of every application by him/her for a modification of the contents of his entry the date of every application by him/her confirming the contents of his entry (with or without changes) the reason for any omission from the information recorded in his/her entry particulars (in addition to its number) of every ID card issued to him/her whether each such card is in force and, if not, why not particulars of every person who has countersigned an application by him/her for an ID card or a designated document, so far as those particulars were included on the application particulars of every notification given about lost, stolen and damaged ID cards particulars of every requirement by the secretary of state for the individual to surrender an ID card issued to him. Validation information the information provided in connection with every application to be entered in the Register, for a modification of the contents of his entry or for the issue of an ID card the information provided in connection with every application confirming entry in the Register (with or without changes) particulars of the steps taken, in connection with an application mentioned in paragraph (a) or ( or otherwise, for identifying the applicant or for verifying the information provided in connection with the application particulars of any other steps taken or information obtained for ensuring that there is a complete, up-to-date and accurate entry about that individual in the Register particulars of every notification given by that individual for changing details in the register. Security information a personal identification number to be used for facilitating the making of applications for information recorded in his/her entry, and for facilitating the provision of the information; a password or other code to be used for that purpose or particulars of a method of generating such a password or code questions and answers to be used for identifying a person seeking to make such an application or to apply for or to make a modification of that entry. Records of provision of information particulars of every occasion on which information contained in the individual's entry has been provided to a person particulars of every person to whom such information has been provided on such an occasion other particulars, in relation to each such occasion, of the provision of the information.

freaky shit

Subject: They could do this instead The Big Three automakers came to Washington last week, begging for $25 billion in loans. The Detroit automakers can't say why they need so much, how they would spend it, or that they won't be back again, asking for more. After the bungled handling of the banking bailout many lawmakers are reluctant to give the automakers what they want. As of now, there's no deal, but the danger hasn't passed. Proponents of a bailout argue that without it the money will instead be spent on unemployment checks and income tax losses when one or more of the Detroit 3 file for reorganization under the bankruptcy laws. So why not just go ahead and do the bailout? We need to push our own counter-arguments. Let's start with a few startling facts . . . The U.S. has the second-highest corporate tax rate in <http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/22501.html> in the developed world. <javascript:void(0);/*1227539762527*/> We're losing the world-wide tax-rate competition. With lower corporate taxes we could attract businesses and create jobs. U.S. businesses spent $148 billion in 2005 complying with a complicated and inefficient tax code. Meanwhile, revenue from the corporate tax was only $272 billion. <http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/sr138.pdf > Some companies spend millions trying to find tax loopholes. This is money that could go to create products, services, and jobs. In 2008, the combined cost of corporate taxes and tax compliance is likely to be about half a trillion dollars. Why should the politicians . . . Impose $500 billion dollars in costs on businesses to raise only about $300 billion in tax revenue Spend $1 trillion or more propping up companies When instead, they could . . . Allow Chapter 11 bankruptcy to turn inefficient firms into reorganized, rejuvenated, productive businesses Eliminate the corporate tax and thereby pump $500 billion a year back into the economy Bankruptcy isn't the end of the world. Many large businesses, from retailers to airlines to steel companies, have gone bankrupt, but are still in business through reorganization and consolidation. Bankruptcy actually saves many businesses. The Big Three's problems are self-inflicted, from signing extravagant union contracts to building gas-guzzling SUV's. Foreign-owned automakers who build cars in the U.S. aren't facing the same difficulties. So why should taxpayers have to subsidize the incompetence of the Big Three, when reorganization under the bankruptcy laws would allow them to correct their errors at little cost to innocent bystanders? Let's propose an alternative to another Big Bailout: Downsize DC! Send Congress another message opposing the automaker bailout. <https://secure.downsizedc.org/etp/campaigns/106> Use your personal comments to urge Congress to completely eliminate the corporate tax and all of the complicated tax regulations that go with it. Tell your elected representatives that this would . . . Inject half a trillion dollars a year into the productive economy Lower the costs of good and services, since many economists agree that the corporate tax is just passed onto consumers in the prices we pay Make the U.S. the most attractive business environment in the entire world Create huge numbers of new jobs, and save many old ones Cost much less, to the government, than their boondoggle bailouts You can send your message using our Educate the Powerful System. <https://secure.downsizedc.org/etp/campaigns/106> And magnify your voice by sending this Dispatch to others, by reprinting it on your blog, and by "Digging" it on our blog. <http://www.downsizedc.org/blog/they-could-do-this-instead> Thank you for being a DC Downsizer. James Wilson Assistant to the President DownsizeDC.org

BANK EAT BANK: BAILOUT ENCOURAGES MERGERS, AND PAULSON DECIDES WHO LIVES AND WHO DIES' By Danielle Ivory, Lagan Sebert, American News Project With newfound bailout money in their wallets, big banks have been rushing to gobble up smaller ones. http://www.alternet.org/workplace/108322/

A RESPONSE TO THE EXTREME ANTI-GAY COMMENTS BY MY BROTHER, NEW GINGRICH By Candace Gingrich, Human Rights Campaign "You should be more afraid of the new political climate in America, because, there is no place for you in it." http://www.alternet.org/rights/108310/ Note: This letter to Newt Gingrich from his sister is prompted by his outrageous statement on Nov. 14 to Fox News's Bill O' Reilly "I think there is a gay and secular fascism in this country that wants to impose its will on the rest of us, is prepared to use violence, to use harassment. I think it is prepared to use the government if it can get control of it. I think that it is a very dangerous threat to anybody who believes in traditional religion." Dear Newt, I recently had the displeasure of watching you bash the protesters of the Prop 8 marriage ban to Bill O'Reilly on FOX News. I must say, after years of watching you build your career by stirring up the fears and prejudices of the far right, I feel compelled to use the words of your idol, Ronald Reagan, "There you go, again." However, I realize that you may have been a little preoccupied lately with planning your resurrection as the savior of your party, so I thought I would fill you in on a few important developments you might have overlooked. The truth is that you're living in a world that no longer exists. I, along with millions of Americans, clearly see the world the way it as -- and we embrace what it can be. You, on the other hand, seem incapable of looking for new ideas or moving beyond what worked in the past. Welcome to the 21st century, big bro. I can understand why you're so afraid of the energy that has been unleashed after gay and lesbian couples had their rights stripped away from them by a hateful campaign. I can see why you're sounding the alarm against the activists who use all the latest tech tools to build these rallies from the ground up in cities across the country. This unstoppable progress has at its core a group we at <a href="http://www.hrc.org/">Human Rights Campaign call Generation Equality</a>. They are the most supportive of full LGBT equality than any American generation ever -- and when it comes to the politics of division, well, they don't roll that way. 18-24 year olds voted overwhelmingly against Prop 8 and overwhelmingly for Barack Obama. And the numbers of young progressive voters will only continue to grow. According to the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning, about 23 million 18-29 year olds voted on Nov. 4, 2008 -- the most young voters ever to cast a ballot in a presidential election. That's an increase of 3 million more voters compared to 2004. These are the same people who helped elect Barack Obama and sent a decisive message to your party. These young people are the future and their energy will continue to drive our country forward. Even older Americans are turning their backs on the politics of fear and demagoguery that you and your cronies have perfected over the years. This is a movement of the people that you most fear. It's a movement of progress -- and your words on FOX News only show how truly desperate you are to maintain control of a world that is changing before your very eyes. Then again, we've seen these tactics before. We know how much the right likes to play political and cultural hardball, and then turn around and accuse us of lashing out first. You give a pass to a religious group -- one that looks down upon minorities and women -- when they use their money and membership roles to roll back the rights of others, and then you label us "fascists" when we fight back. You belittle the relationships of gay and lesbian couples, and yet somehow neglect to explain who anointed you the protector of "traditional" marriage. And, of course, you've also mastered taking the foolish actions of a few people and then indicting an entire population based on those mistakes. I fail to see how any of these patterns coincide with the values of "historic Christianity" you claim to champion. Again, nothing new here. This is just more of the blatant hypocrisy we're used to hearing. What really worries me is that you are always willing to use LGBT Americans as political weapons to further your ambitions. That's really so '90s, Newt. In this day and age, it's embarrassing to watch you talk like that. You should be more afraid of the new political climate in America, because, there is no place for you in it.

THE 10 WORST CORPORATIONS OF 2008 By Robert Weissman, Multinational Monitor The financial meltdown and economic crisis illustrated that corporations will destroy even themselves in search of profit. http://www.alternet.org/workplace/108321/ AIG: Money for Nothing Cargill: Food Profiteers Chevron: "We can't let little countries screw around with big companies" Constellation Energy: Nuclear Operators CNPC: Fueling Violence in Darfur Dole: The Sour Taste of Pineapple GE: Creative Accounting Imperial Sugar: 13 Dead Philip Morris International: Unshackled Roche: Saving Lives is Not Our Business

*just can't see Axl the same way anymore*

and thus Naruto dies I trust the fansubbers over viz Shippouden must be almost done (we can hope) if they're making this kind of a move

I do the old man's parking and turn around area so the fuck wont get stuck in the driveway AGAIN

Happy to see you're doing well

daaaamn

damn >.<

ARE HUMAN BEINGS HARD-WIRED TO IGNORE THE THREAT OF CATASTROPHIC CLIMATE CHANGE? By Lisa Bennett, Greater Good Climate scientists wonder why people don't do more about global warming. Social scientists have some troubling answers. http://www.alternet.org/environment/106982/ Three years ago, I became obsessed with global warming. Practically overnight, my worries about its potential effects outstripped my worries about so many other national and global issues, even personal ones. Indeed, as the mother of two young boys, I began to think it a bit crazy that I attended to every bump and scrape on my children's little bodies and budding egos, but largely ignored the threat likely to put sizeable areas of the world, including parts of the coastal city where we live, underwater within their lifetime. That year, 2005, marked a turning point for many people. After decades of observation, speculation, and analysis, the world's climate scientists had reached a consensus, and increasingly the general public was accepting it. As USA Today reported, "The Debate is Over: Globe is Warming." The next step, scientists advised, was action. We needed to take significant and urgent steps to cut our dependence on fossil fuels by 25 percent or more, something NASA's top climate scientist, James Hansen, said we had only a decade to do if we were to avoid the great global warming tipping point-that level at which increased temperatures would unleash unprecedented global disasters. So how are we doing? Surely, some things have changed. Sales of the Toyota Prius and other hybrids have skyrocketed. Many of us have converted to the new energy-saving compact fluorescent light bulbs. A flood of books are hitting the market offering tips about how to save the Earth. And there is a frenzy of advertising about everything from "eco-friendly" houses to "green" hair salons, showing just how widespread Americans' desire is to do the right thing for the environment. Yet none of this adds up to the significant and urgent action scientists have called for. The question is why: Why don't more of us respond more seriously to the most serious threat to the planet in human history? "Many climate scientists find the response to global warming completely baffling," says Elke Weber, a Columbia University psychologist and the chair of the Global Roundtable on Climate Change's Public Attitudes/Ethical Issues Working Group. According to Weber, climate scientists just can't understand why government and the public have been so slow to act on the extraordinary information these scientists have provided. But now a growing number of social scientists are offering their expertise in behavioral decision making, risk analysis, and evolutionary influences on human behavior to explain our limited responses to global warming. Among the most significant factors they point to: The way we're psychologically wired and socially conditioned to respond to crises makes us ill-suited to react to the abstract and seemingly remote threat posed by global warming. Their insights are also leading to some intriguing recommendations about how to get people to take action-including the potentially dangerous prospect of playing on people's fears. Our misleading emotions There are a significant number of researchers now devoted to studying how people decide that something is truly bad for them. They are called "risk-analysis scholars," and they believe there are, in general, two ways we may assess a risk such as global warming. One is through our analytic abilities, by which we examine the scientific evidence and make logical decisions about how to respond. This is the process that was used by climate scientists to reach the strong and clear conclusion that the risks of global warming are momentous and require immediate and significant action. But most of us do not rely on our analytic abilities to evaluate the risk of global warming-or any risk, for that matter. Instead, we rely on the second and more common way of perceiving risk: our emotions. "For most of us, most of the time, risk is not a statistic. Risk is a feeling," says Weber. We are swayed by our feelings, and those feelings-while an essential part of the decision-making process-can be misleading guides, depending on the type of risk involved. For example, in a recent paper on how emotion shapes risk perception, Weber cites the growing number of parents who choose to forego having their children vaccinated against diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis. To most physicians, this is a highly irrational decision, since vaccinations help prevent serious illnesses and pose very slight risks. So why do parents make such decisions? Because when they learn that roughly one child out of 1,000 will suffer from high fever and one out of 14,000 will suffer seizures as a result of vaccinations, their emotions lead them to imagine that their child will be the one to suffer. 1 2 3 4 Next page » Like genocide, the long-term consequences of global warming are so enormous we can't wrap our heads around them. Scientists predict in 40 years global warming will displace 20 million people from Beijing, 40 million from Shanghai and surrounding areas, and 60 million from Calcutta and Bangladesh. These statistics are daunting, but they're abstract; they don't inspire us to feel for the one individual whose life will be put at risk. As a result, we fail to take appropriate action.

Taxpayers are paying for the $700 billion dollar Wall Street bailout -- with little to no oversight of the credit industry as they spend our money. Yet Americans are still struggling to access credit and make ends meet. So, what kind of credit assurance do we have now? Unfair consumer practices played a significant role in the lending crisis; don't let it happen again! Stop credit card companies from taking advantage of devastated consumers: http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/AcVDV/x0kq/ANR12 The House has already passed a strong credit card reform bill, but the Senate has failed to act. The proposed bill would force credit card companies to act ethically, enforcing regulations that would stop them from hiking interest rates on your existing balances, give you time between the bill and the due date so you can always pay on time, and more. Please support reform that will stop unfair corporate practices and help protect Americans from a financial meltdown. Tell your Senators to stand up for your rights and pass the Credit Card Act today! http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/AcVDV/x0kq/ANR12 Thanks for taking action! Natasha Care2 Campaign Team P.S. - We need the U.S. Senate to stop unfair corporate practices and to protect ordinary Americans from a financial meltdown. Please take a moment today and help us get this lame-duck session of Congress to enact meaningful reform of the credit industry! http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/AcVDV/x0kq/ANR12

After almost a year with no response to our petition to address ocean acidification, last Thursday the Center for Biological Diversity filed a notice of intent to sue the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to force it to tackle the problem. Last December's petition asked the agency to use the Clean Water Act to impose stricter pH standards for ocean water quality and to publish guidance to help states protect their own waters from ocean acidification. Here's how ocean acidification works: Humans spew carbon dioxide into the air, the oceans absorb it, and carbonic acid builds up, lowering seawater's pH and causing it to become more acidic. Ocean acidification depletes seawater of the compounds marine creatures like corals, crabs, and plankton need to build shells and skeletons. And as those organisms suffer, so do all the species in the ocean food chain. Currently, the Environmental Protection Agency's water-quality criterion for pH is pitifully inadequate, and no wonder -- it was last updated in 1976. Read about it in the New York Times: http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/center/articles/2008/new-york-times-11-14-2008.html

Thank you for contacting the Bush administration and demanding that it stop its latest attack on women's health. You've joined more than 35,000 Planned Parenthood supporters who have already spoken out on this dangerous regulation. Help us get to 50,000 by telling your friends to join the growing outcry. http://www.ppaction.org/campaign/hhsnov08_ppan/forward/iwsw56krqktjtbk?source=hhsnov08_ppan_e2 Just moments ago, Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Patty Murray joined the uproar over the proposed rule. Sen. Clinton said, "In the final days of his administration, the president is again putting ideology first and attempting to roll back health care protections for women and families. This HHS rule will threaten patients' rights, stand in the way of health care professionals, and restrict access to critical health care services for those who need them most. Senator Murray and I are standing up once again to the administration against this rule and will continue to fight for women's reproductive rights." It's so important to have prominent allies like Sen. Clinton and Sen. Murray speaking out, but we also need to continue to raise the voices of citizens everywhere. That's where you come in. You've already spoken out, and now we need you to tell your friends and family to join you. Today is our last chance. http://www.ppaction.org/campaign/hhsnov08_ppan/forward/iwsw56krqktjtbk?source=hhsnov08_ppan_e2 The new rule is Bush's parting gift to the anti-choice extremists who have supported him for the last eight years. The rule could allow health care organizations that receive federal funding to redefine abortion to include the most common forms of birth control -- and then refuse to provide these basic services. For any health provider to intentionally withhold information about widely embraced health care options from a patient is absolutely unconscionable under any circumstances. The federal government has no business funding providers who do not abide by this most fundamental standard of care. Thank you so much for your help today on behalf of the millions of women, men, and teens served by more than 880 Planned Parenthood affiliate health centers all across the country. Sincerely, Cecile Richards, President Planned Parenthood Federation of America

Due to advances in medicine and body armor, American soldiers are surviving combat-related injuries at markedly higher rates than in past conflicts. This means that more of them are able to come home after being severely wounded. And these veterans need our support. Specifically, they need help in adapting to the life-altering changes that come with surviving severe injuries. Won't you ask Congress to make sure they have the support and health care required? -> http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/AcobZ/x23i/ANR12 Many of these wounded heroes need prosthetic limbs and suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. And there's also a rise in an "invisible wound", traumatic brain injury. According to the Walter Reed Army Medical Center, between January 2003 and May 2005, 31% of those admitted had some kind of brain injury." These brave men and women have given much for this country, and as a nation, we need to care about what happens to them after they come home. Please tell Congress not to forget about our wounded heroes and support their health care needs. -> http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/AcobZ/x23i/ANR12 Thanks for taking action!

By Faiz Shakir, Think Progress A South Texas grand jury has returned multi-count indictments against Cheney and former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. http://www.alternet.org/blogs/rights/107660/ A South Texas grand jury has returned multi-count indictments against Vice President Dick Cheney and former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales on charges related to the alleged abuse of prisoners in Willacy County's federal detention centers: The indictment accuses Cheney and Gonzales of engaging in organized criminal activity. It criticizes Cheney's investment in the Vanguard Group, which holds interests in the private prison companies running the federal detention centers. It accuses Cheney of a conflict of interest and "at least misdemeanor assaults" on detainees by working through the prison companies. Gonzales is accused of using his position while in office to stop an investigation into abuses at the federal detention centers.

The Bush Administration's global gag rule denies U.S. family planning funds to foreign NGOs (non-governmental organizations) that use their own private, non-U.S. dollars to counsel women, make referrals for abortion, or perform abortions. The gag policy even denies U.S. funds to NGOs that express support for laws to make abortion safe and legal. As a result, medical professionals in some of the world's poorest nations risk losing their ability to provide life-saving, legal, and medically acceptable services -- or even basic health information. End this detrimental policy that unnecessarily puts women's lives at risk! --> http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ac_Do/Xcib/ANR12 It is appalling and dangerous to require health care providers that receive U.S. funds to withhold critical medical information and services from their patients. When women can't get the information and services they need to make safe and informed decisions, the outcomes can be devastating. Every year, 20 million women around the world have unsafe abortions, and every year complications result in 70,000 deaths. Tell President-Elect Obama to make women and families a top priority -- and to end the Bush Administration's global gag rule within the critical first 100 days of his new Administration. --> http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/Ac_Do/Xcib/ANR12 Thanks for taking action!

News organizations confirm likely State, Treasury, Commerce choices WASHINGTON - Just over two weeks after Barack Obama won the presidential election, his new Cabinet and economic team are starting to take shape. Several key appointments, including State and Treasury Department secretaries, appear to be nearly done deals, with Democratic officials confirming Obama's intended nominees. Hillary Clinton will give up her Senate seat and accept the nomination for secretary of state, The New York Times reported Friday. NBC's Andrea Mitchell and Political Director Chuck Todd reported that Obama will unveil his economic team on Monday, with New York Federal Reserve President Tim Geithner likely taking the helm as Treasury secretary. looks like I'll be getting a new senator to bug

Our Guild Hall