To Mr Clinton, Mz McCain, Rev Giuliani, Mr Dodddddd, Congressman Biden, Senator Hunter, Gen Romney, Rabbi Richardson , and Sir Borwnback Hey you wanna be more like the voters – I'm Ms Harter to my old public television station in Pittsburgh and they never got it right in 6 tries. If you want to be more average you have to get used to having your name screwed up. Which to you may not happen that often. There are a couple of poosible relevant things below – but the most pressing things are discussed above right here. One detail you may want to know – because of who else this letter is going to – DON'T CASH ANY BANK OF AMERICA CHECKS FROM ME IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE SO ALREADY – THEY'LL BOUNCE – DON'T WORRY I STILL PLAN TO CONTRIBUTE FOR THE REST OF THE CAMPAIGN SEASON ASSUMING CHINA, THE MOB, OR BANK OF AMERICA OR BBT DOESN'T KILL ME FIRST. But anyway onto the pressing issues. A Desperately hot issue – All Mineral diet is the only way to Go - I know you're all familiar with Vegans and Vegetarians – THEY ARE STILL MURDERING LIVING THINGS IN ORDER TO SUSTAIN THEMSELVES – did you know that !!! - Threre is only one way to truly respect all life and not harm a single living thing, switch to an all mineral diet that includes no organic matter and is generous and respectful to both plants and animals. Think of the souls of the thousands and even millions and billions of animals and plants that suffer needlessly to provide nutrients for us and the pain that they endure so that we exist. Doesn't hunk of granite in your teeth just totally beat the guilt you'll feel. If not try a liquid gold shake that is only slightly above the temperature needed to incinerate your entire body. Personally I'm having a talc burger, though being on a beach I may eat actually my weight in sand a day as somehow it does always end up in my hair even though theoretically that part of my body is furthest from it. But this way you could really respect all living things. Now there is the small problem that without any organic material, most of us would die off pretty quickly, but that's really a small detail when you think about how much better you will feel for going with social pretense and declaring both hunting and farming illegal in favor of mining only. I know I can have all your support on this issue to legislate all mineral diets for people. Though the pharmaceutical lobby for one may be against it. Appropriate Free Speech – A New Western Concept The great state of CA and OR and WA have sure come up with a winner this time just like the CA election. You may not know this but public office bulletin boards in either Oakland or San Francisco allow the disucssion of gay grouping marriage, but ban discussing traditional marriage topics as offensive. I have also heard from Oregon the idea that any public government worker who works on the environment had better not say too much against ethanol or too much that the environmental movement won't like or they may lose their job. Their opinions and ideas when expressed publicly are considered by some to be “inappropriate I know telefund called the other night with Amnesty International to discuss torture with me – I did get a letter against the use of torture in the Bush Administration from Amnesty International and I have in the past spoken in favor of torture. I wanted to remind those who might say I defend the right of those who are persecuting me to do so by defending torture that I also said HOW you use it reflects on you. President Bush is not using torture to inhibit free speech if he is using it. He possibly is using to save the US economy and people from terrorist attacks and mass histeria and they do seem prone to that sort of thing – other people don't seem to see the difference between that and using to block someone from advocating a different point of view in a political discussion. - BECAUSE THEY MAY TURN OUT TO BE OVERREACTING TO GLOBAL WARMING – this phenomena may exist as I cannot discount what happens in the artic – but it isn't occurring in the predicted way in inhabited regions according to known data – it is cooler overall than was predicted. We don't know if it's part of a long term geological trend which it could and it may not be so destructive – it will help Russia mine the artic seas for oil. The temperature change may only be strong in certain regions. We simply do not have sufficient data to draw the conclusion that global warming is all bad or even mostly bad OR that there is a perfect correlation between the greenhouse gasses causing it and the warming of the earth THEREFORE reducing all greenhouse gasses may not halt or cool the earth. I would very much like to stop seeing waste and McMansions personally, but global warming is not my reason, it's that people are wasteful little piggies and many of them support environmental organizations as they live in huge homes. And being wasteful with resources like that affects jobs created – construction for stupid boring homes is not fun work – nor is bland repetitive stupid landscaping – they are jobs – but better off living in trailor parks and devoting money to research or more interesting homes homes that try to innovate housing fundamentally instead of building bland oversized palaces all over the place because we can. I could mention our banking structure encourages this stupidity. I've most of this before – but the idea that someone can label it inappropriate for me to challenge certain general public notions of housing and the economy and go after my schooling and work as they appear to have done recently and before – this is a new concept from the west. I don;t know where appropriate free speech is separated from inappropriate free speech. There is the obscene discussion some people have engaged in with art – and maybe there is a point that we shouldn't be teaching kids it's okay to trash their neighbors house if they have a paper route via video game. Maybe there is inappropriate speech to minors where someone could draft a bill saying – be honest about kids about what is in the world, but don't teach them mutilating or self-destructive behaviors – maybe some conservative like that definition of obscene as a start that should be somewhat agreeable to all. No something like, “Murder and Rape your Elementary School Teacher III” is not a great idea for a video game on whatever console Microsoft, Sega, and Ninetendo develop. But this idea of appropriate free speech is still a new concept that as an Easterner I don't understand and am not intelligent enough to grasp. How many FBI agents at the Daily Kos meeting you wanna bet? ---- Bank of America I have problems with the following fees on my accounts Checking account Statement hard to read Don't why the fees I'm charged for overdrafts and lots of other things don't show up in the bold print on my statement labeled as fees Mixing of Additions andSubtractions to account starts in May 23 2007 statement Finance Charges not listed as Fee oh those are a few notes here's the letter x5/9/07 10.00 Wire Fee x5/14/07 10.00 Wire Fee x6/04/07 10.00 Wire Fee x6/06/07 10.00 Wire Fee x6/08/07 10.00 Wire Fee x6/12/07 20.00 Overdraft fee x6/12/07 20.00 Overdraft fee x6/27/07 35.00 Overdraft Item Fee x6/27/07 35.00 Overdraft Item Fee x8/2/07 35.00 Overdraft Item Fee ----------------------------- 195.00 Fees on Checking Account Main Credit Card x5/7/07 19.50CR OverLimit Fee Adjustment (asked for fee back) x5/4/07 39.00 Over Limit Fee x6/12/07 19.5 *OverDraft Protection x6/14/07 19.5 *OverDraft Protection x7/8/07 39.00 OverLimit x7/24/07 19.51 *OverDraft Protection x7/31/07 39.00 Late Fee For Payment Due x8/2/07 19.51 *OverDraft Protection ------------------------ 117.0 Totals Fee on Credit Card Student Credit Card OverLimit Fee x7/20/07 35.00 Over Limit Fee -------------------- 35.00 Total Fees Stidemt Credit Card instance protection without fee Fee total since 05/01 on Bank of America accounts $347 Checking Avg Balance:: approximately $200 last cuople months Credit Limit both accounts: $3800 There are other fees even overlimit fees I could have included within the past year – I chose to focus on these fees listed here. Here are my problems with these fees and your bank Unclear Statements: Other Banks list the Finance Charges as a charge on the statement with other additions and subtractions , you do not. You list them up above. When Iwas first overcharged on 5/4/07 it was because the finance charge put me over the credit limit. I looked for the finance charge on the previous bill and did not find it, expecting a line item. When I got to May, I assumed that it was somehow included and I did not need to worry about it being tacked on at the end because I did not see it in my April bill. Indeed I feel if it is a charge it should be a line item on the statement. You also don't list every fee in your bold fee line. The overlimit fees and indeed many of the other fees that I list are not included on the statement as fees. I have to dig through to find them. My other bank gave me back all of the fee the first time, you only gave back half. As shown on 5/7/07 On the 7/20/07 Student Credit Card I had the same issue of being taken over the limit by the finance charge which again billed to me as “my fault”. I actually luckily remember because I can't read that from the Credit Card statement which does not show the balance as there are charges to account with debits and credits. It just shows end of month and beginning of month balance and entries for the fees and charges and credits WITHOUT the accompanying balance each time. Again poor graphic communication. Are going to try to sell me the Brooklyn Bridge? I don;t think I should be charged for making a bad purchase when it's a finance charge. If you are offering $500 or whatever amount in credit, then it would make more sense that the person could the full credit, as the system stands, if you use the full credit you will always go overlimit. This is misleading. It is hard to exactly predict the finance charge and that I feel should be tacked on separate or in addition to the amount of the credit limit. Near misses that were very costly For the 6/27/07 fees for overdrafts on the main checking account;. There are 2 of them. Oddly the 15$ Donation to my high school which occurred after the $300 amount to Scottrade. There are many instances where the more expensive fee will come first to put more than item over the limit. I will show at least one more instance of this I know. If the items were inverted, the $15 would have not generated a negative balance and there would be only one $35 fee. And the money that I hoped would cover things appeared the next day, the $716 dollar check I receive from the US treasury. Indeed the $300 Scottrade order went through very quickly and I was surprised at that as usually, it get held up in the pipeline for a few days. The 7/8/07 Over limit fee generated by the compass rose. That wondrous experience where I was told how evil WalMart is. That's where I discovered to my surprise my student card was over and I didn't know that. I had to use my main credit card which had enough money, but of course I knew that that $16 charge would mean that there was not enough money to cover the finance charge. And indeed when I got home I authorized $20 into the account on the same day I made the purchase. There is a 7/03 payment for the $20- When I looked at the account and made that transaction the compass rose charge was not listed on the account and according to the statement – the compass occurred first. Indeed I could not see the compass rose charge on 7/02 when I made the electronic transfer motion and it seems to have been added later – WHICH SHOULD NOT HAPPEN – there accoutning irreguklarities where charges get added later or charged at different time than there posted lines items and in many instances these charges caused my account to slip negative and I had to go to the bank and add money to keep the account in positive territory. Here the charge from compass rose seems to have been given the date before it was actually posted to the account. I belive the compass rose charge caused my account to go over along with the 6/12 and 6/14 overdraft protection fees. These fees as I find later are supposed to be generated every time I have a daily negative balance – they are given the dates shown – I question if they were actually there on those dates – as said there are several irregularities in the account -but even without that question, I was unaware that even if I balanced the checking account by the end of the day – that, as I was told by an emerald Isle banking manager – Karen – every time I have a negative charge during the day even if the account is balanced at night, if there is money in my credit card, each of these negative dings in the checking will cause $19.50 to come from my credit which is linked by check safekeeping to go into my bank account. So that my bank account will show a $19.50 credit, but there is a debit of 19.50 in my credit card. Indeed in this case those added 19.50 debits to the credit that I didn't know where occurring, but were just automatic (I spoke with Karen about this early August 2007) caused the over limit fee. There appears little logical pattern to the automatic withdrawals. For the 6/12 and the 6./14 there is money in the credit card and those debits automatically come out and each generate I believe the 2 - 6/12 Overdraft fees that I see on my checking account each for $20. You charged me in the end $75 to cover intermediate daily issues for one day when the account was balanced. The charges that generated those automatic take outs from my credit were a $5.98 and $5 charge which of course would have been covered with one withdrawal from the credit card and did not need both for which I was charged. If you come into the store I work at, I want to charge you for breathing air. However Karen said that this overdraft fee would come out only if there was available money in the credit card and of course the $20 additional fee for taking out the $19.50 to cover the bill each time should also occur each time. None of this holds true on my account. I printed out my statements 8/04/07. The 6/12 charges are for 6/11 activity so it takes one day to add the fees. For 8/1/07 I have two charges that cause my account to go negative balance during the day and on an 8/4 printout no fees are applied nor is any safekeeping. You could argue that credit card is over the limit and will not give any more money for safekeeping. However that doesn't work on 8/2/07 one overdraft protection fee comes out bumping my main credit card accont to 2909.83 – NICE TO SEE THE ACTUAL BALANCE ON THE TEMPORARY STATEMENT UNLIKE THE FINAL ONE WHERE IT DISAPPEARS. - now my credit limit is 2800 so that the check safekeeping is being applied past my credit limit. There is only one instance of it being applied where as I can find two listed negative charges on my account though one is a check so that follows. The safekeeping is applied though over the limit. Now on 8/3 on my checking account we have two charges that should generate check safe keeping. A use of a merchant for $16.01 and an electronic payment to a credit card for $26.14 – these items both cause a negative balance and I took the liberty of printing the credit card august activity on 8/05 and these charges are on 8/3 and on all of 8/4 no check safe keeping occuring. So that if it happens it is added later than 8/4/07 and dated to 8/4/07. It would be overlimit, as shown above – safekeeping occurred over limit last time, here it does not. Why are there these discrepencies in addition the $20 fee was not assessed on the 8/1`/07 safekeeping use. Why not? You seem to have arbitrary and capricious charges on my account. And now for the winner on that score. I looked at my sateement on 8/2/07 on my computer – did not print it out. The 8/30/7 check 1092 was not there, but the HSBC 26.14 charge was as was the 16.01 Checkcrad 0801 Devan Lane Emerald Isle NC. On 8/3/07 the Check 1092 appeared on the statement for the first time, however it was paid off earlier than the first two charges that there on 8/02 but are now listed 8/03. I don;t have a paper copy of this and cannot prove – but this is what I saw the check to John McCain for $100 check 1092 came into the account after the other two charges, BUT WAS LISTED FOR PAYMENYT FIRST. Indeed because is was listed for payment first, the other chrages weren't set to be paid – the 16.01 is using my debit card – which apparently as the merchant infomred actually becomes like a credit card during the transaction, HOWEVER IT IS LABELED AND SUPPOSED TO BE A DEBIT CARD AND YOU ARE ONLY SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO PURCHASE SOMETHING IF YOU HAVE MONEY ON IT, THAT'S THE LEGAL CONTRACT. Card went through so there was money on it at time of purchase and it was before the Check to John McCain. We could get into the fact that the Check for John McCain was dated 8/14/07 – WHICH MEANS YOUR WEREN'T LEGALLY SUPPOSED TO CASH IT YET AND I TALKED TO TH?E OMBUDSMAN AT THE FDIC AND HE SAID IT IS LEGAL TO POST-DATE CH?ECK even if the other clerk at the FDIC said it was illegal, the ombudsman should outrank her and he said it was legal. meaning that BANK OF AMERICA ACTED ILLEGALLY. In addition John McCain's was being cashed into my account earlier than other items put into the account. This action caused three items not to meet payment instead just Senator McCains and is another instance where items seem to get placed in such a way as to do maximum harm to my account. You cashed a post dated from me earlier than the date before. I believe to my former bank in Pittsburgh – though I cannot check that as easily now as past checks are off your xystem. You have several violations of contracts that we have that have hurt my account here. And indeed there have been other instances in my account where I have a statement from a company that they charged my checking account on this date and the charges appear with a different date on them, sometimes two weeks later I believe in one case. Or the charges appear and disappear where they are taken off and added back later, artificially inflating the value of my account. Infinite Mind charges and Scholastic charges are two you can research where I believe such a dsicrepency exists. There is another with military charity. For the 7/31/07 Late Fee given on my main credit card, I never got the notification a bill for the credit card was due. On my online account it was notifying me in the past that a minimum balance was due on the credit and that had ceased and I received no notification in the recent months of a bill due online like I used to for the past several months. I assumed I had paid the bill earlier this month with the various transactions I made at times and that that already counted for the minimum payment. I was highly surprised to get the late fee charge when I never got an online bill notification that I was used to looking at. Wire Transfer Fees. Of course a one day money transfer is possible, BUT YOU ACTUALLY AREN'T DOING THE TRANSFER, ARE You. You're just receiving the cash and my brokerage charges $20 for the wire transfer which it is doing to you. Why do you need to charge $10 to receive money when you're just receiving money. I can do a 3 day transfer for free, I don't know what's so different about the computer science in allowing a free 1 day transfer. It seems to me both banks just want to make money. Aside from that, as stated, Bank of America is just receiving money from another institution which probably backs the wire and can charge an overdraft fee. Why is receiving money so special it warrants a $10 charge each time. I feel this is B_LLSH_T. $90 check did not cash. Also I wrote myself a $90 check from Stock Account where I have checkwriting privaledges. The money was in the account to clear that check at the time it was written. The check was deposited on 8/02/07 and the teller told me it would be credited by midnight as most checks are. When viewing that account on 8/05/07 it was still not listed anywhere. I have no idea why this is because in other instances the checks have been entered in the specified manner. I have since issued a stop order to this check to prevent your bank from getting any money to handle my debts. My brokerage which oddly charges $3 to get copies of any check, also charged me $20 to issue the stop order. I am reluctantly paying this. I had a DEBIT CARD with bank of America – When you have a debit card, you are not supposed to be able to go over it's limit. In my case my debit card was tied to my checking account. I made a purchase for some scent crystals from Devan Lane, a local business here with my debit card on 8/01/07 . I have the receipt. This charge again currently in my Bank of America Checking account is listed has unpayable or lack of funds to be payed because the check from John McCain that is post dated for 8/15/07 is going to be paid out first and this poor single business owner is not going to currently get paid. I USED A DEBIT CARD AND THAT IS NOT SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN. In eseence I went over balance on my debit card. The owner did inform me that her store treats my debit card like a credit card, but the balance still had to clear and it did. Somehow again someone manipulated the numbers and got this account to be unpaid as well as the credit card payment I issued on time for Best Buy Credit Card which is now also listed as unpaid in my checking account. Both payments were done earlier than 8/03/07 when the check for McCain dated 8/14/07 came into the account and somehow had first dibs on getting paid. I have made arrangements to pay this woman in another way. I will do the same with Best Buy. Both Bills should have been paid by funds already received in the account. Again also disappointed that somehow my debit card turned into a credit card. The bank is ultimately responsible for this. Unwilling to give me $500 – 1000 loan with increase of $9000 in yearly income. My Bank of America branch banking manager, dorothy Stanton asked if some of the fees could be forgiven and she was hotly rejected .by the person she walling in Bank of America who could do that. I then asked for a loan which should be possible of $500 to $1000. I am aware that that corrupt idiot who apparently in is the pocket of several interest groups, Barney Franks, the current financial chairman, used his influence to tighten sub-prime lending. My disposable income per month which would be the best way to understand a person's ability to pay a loan has from $600 a month to $1200. In deed I may be a major political donor to one or more presidential campaigns and possibly a Senatorial campaign. You're saying I do not with now increased incomem have the ability to make payments on another $500 loan. My DI (disposable Income) was previously $900 or so dollars. I do have student loans, but have no inusrance, healthcare, housing, or recurring food costs and just have to meet minimum on a several other credit cards. Yiour system to rate my ability to pay off a loan seems very flawed in my case. I previously gave my yearly income as around $12000. I was able to give honestly a number of $21,000 to the bank and received no more credit. But I can make a lot of donations and buy a lot on amazon and ebay for someone with no available disposable income. I was also charged an overlimit fee recently for not paying my credit card bill for my main credit card on 7/31. I usually look at the bill pay section to find out when I have to pay this off and this feature was turned off and this was the notification I used in past months to know that I had to pay the bill. This feature now appears to be turned off on my account and I received no notification that I had to pay off the bill on the credit card that I know of. There may well have been a paper notification, but I do not have that to my knowledge. Rammifications of Things I will not be paying any more funds into Bank of America account. I will cancel direct deposit and all funds flowing into Bank of America and not pay off any. While this may affect m credit rating. I have few assets you can touch and don't want to buy a home ever because it's actually a liability, not an asset which banks and real estate people have bilked the American people into thinking. You have very little financial assets to go after as I am mostly in debt. You can hire a lawyer or a collection agency. It will be costly and take a long time and you may get nothing and on paper I simply don't keep many assets and not enough for you at this time to recover the loans. At a time of my choosing I will assets again and it will make more sense for me to settle my bank of America accounts and you will “win”. After all my accounts are settled at Bank of America I will never do business with your company again or until the fees charged to people are less predatory and I do advocate for a progressive fee strucutre so that bouncing a $100,000 check costs more than bouncing a $15 one. Right now they cost the same amount. A gray area or window of say 2 weeks could be included to pay off say $100 in the negative or so, or any debt up to some level of say $1000 that is paid off in a day is not considered going over. Businesses have accounts payable and receivable and sometimes can be in debt and still have high accounts receivable. They are not insolvent and they way banking is currently done makes less sense in the internet age. Banks hold onto money during money transfers between them when the internet should allow a transfer of possibly to ten different financial institutions in one day. It is not a difficult nor time consuming task to verify a transaction in computer science. Banks appear to hold onto money because they want the interest. This is slowing banking and the global economy and is an inefficiency in the system that hurts the consumer, whether a business owner or an individual. When funding becomes available in my stock account, I will sell my share of stock from my portfolio in Bank of America. I have a buy in with $2004 in my brokerage account and that will bring me below the SEC required $2000 to have a margin account so that I honestly can't sell Bank of America from my portfolio or anything else without going further below that limit. I will sell it however at my earliest convenience and I will not be investing in bank of America or any other direct banking stock I know of at any time until their policy changes. I have found similar issues at other banks. Getting charged $78 ($39 late fee and $39 over limit fee They “ generously” forgave the $39 because it was the first time.) for mailing payment one day late with my amazon credit card through Chase bank (To those who know what I am talking about I experienced a sleep attack which was broken by a phone call from Bank of America oddly enough- the other side loves to show how powerful and dominant it thinks it is even if it's totally losing badly. ) The brokerage which I do business with still has check bouncing and a fee for looking at older checks and similar issues with fees. I guess if the financial institutions want fees it should be more for positive services and not for negative ones and should be tied to amount of the check which relates to the “work” the service has to do to process it. I do think with debits and credits meeting there should be more of a grace period of a week or something. Banks are supposed to make money servicing loans. Over the limit fees and missed payment fees can get several people most vulnerable into a vicious cycle . If the bank wanted to charge me for wanting the grace period on my account – that might be acceptable – but should be a yearly one time fee and it shouldn't be that large or should be related to what balance is graced. In general the issues with banks span all the banking system which appears corrupt and greedy and feels it can keep charging very high amounts of money for essentially doing very little. It's all legal until the bank breaks contracts like the post-dated check and the debit card where I can't charge it a – Hey wait a minute, it's a debit card and I'm not supposed to be able to go over – you should pay me a $40 fee for screwing up and letting me go over when you're not supposed to do that – fee. ---------------- How to get more goodx wackos into society – artificial birth Something did come up on 60 minutes that was of interest. It appears many diverse and interesting people who do many things and become very independent don't end up taking the time to have children and a family. I have advocated before that Govenor Romney and others are incorrect to worship the family. I am well aware the military worships the family ideal. I have said that I believe although the current best system for raising children. Society has been moving towards more societal intervention in families for the last hundred years if not longer and eventually I feel societyshould move away from having a mother and father raise children. Some kids get abusive parents. Many cultural – having to deal with confederates right now in the south 142 years after they supposedly stopped existing - die hard because families instill them at a young age and isolate the values of their children from values that society may find more beneficial. Now there will be a big old argument about communal values taught to kids by outsiders and all of that and maybe a diverse system approach where communal raising of kids is encouraged in say the next 100 years, but not required would be best. Now I realize that most of you are parents and think I'm nuts. I can say this, my generation doesn't marry as much and is more trained to devote itself to its career or its personal goals and not hide what it wants. This is considered immoral by say certain traditional Catholic and other Christian and other beliefs of persevering and enduring and what not which is how women who are sixty were taught when young, but I might argue it sounds like someone is lying to oneself when they say that. Endurance is important in life threatening situations. Tolerating a bad situation and not admitting you hate it or want it changed is not a good thing. Are the candidate wives all enjoying being the “Vanna White” in a presidential family – having all the scrutiny and none of the power or much less of it. It doesn't look like fun. The only Presidential candidate husband is in a special situation because his wife has paid her dues and she may honestly say, “hubby, I did it for you, it's your turn now.” The country likes the idea of a family presiding over the nation giving supposed stability. I don't know that President Lincoln for example found it stabilizing to be a family man if we are honest. I believe that you should be electing a person and that no one else should just be excess baggage, again Howard Dean set hopefully a future example of how a couple could work with his wife doing her own thing while he was a candidate. The voters did not like it though. You know by now to consider everything I've said AFTER you get in the whitehouse, not before or you won't get elected for sure. No one wants honesty, most people can't take it. Even I can't all the time. But my point was going to be as an addition if you stop the notion that a family is a necessary part of having a kid. Could clone or breed artificially descendants of people who don't have children currently, but do well in society and just don't breed and that may have profound implications on society. The best known example might be Jesus Christ if one considers him a human philosopher as I do. People who get to that stage routinely decide the family thing sucks and don't have kids and just do their thing and they only come about currently when someone who does have kids accidentally has a genetic mutation. So they're always rare currently as they do not tend to breed themselves. Along with clones and other things in the future, communal raising of kids may make a lot of sense. I only added a small new fact to the argument and restated it. I realize currently child services in most cities are very inadequate at raising children, this should change over time as people in my generation seem less willing to be family people and the industry for surrogate child raisers will spring up. The writing is on the wall. Realize the Republicans don't like this idea. It's not going to happen in 2008 and maybe not 2098, but by maybe 2198 when I'll be dead probably – maybe then it will be a serious topic if not sooner.

--------------- Giftcard never received Never did get my free $50 Amazon giftcard from webite offer and I had to send them my bank statement to prove I paid Scholastic and I did and they still did not respond. This is after possibly paying for $99 of merchandise and initial bill was more like $309 for a free $50 amazon giftcard. The companies number is 1-801-316-0555. They claimed to be offer_confirmation@netblue.com and yourgiftpro.com was the last website they went by though that seemed to change with each phone because that is not what I had written down from our first conversation where they told me I had to wait 45 days till they would send the card and in the second they asked for my bank statement to verify that I had paid scholastic. I probably should not have given them that, but for the experiment purposes, did it anyway and everyone who I wouldn't want to have my bank statement already has access to it I would bet.

A website that favors John Edwards and Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton and gives the worst ratings to Dodd and Biden and gets 500,000 hits a day or more. Now I understand why people think it is cool and okay to torture me. There is no logic except emotion and emotion is a bad way to run an economy or society. If all you do in politics is for power, you from my vantage point will appear to be left with very little if you fail. If you believe in what you were doing and it's not just about holding seats you will be able to recover from a loss. That's what separates the two sides.

Hope the hackers viewing this take a little time to read and ponder the last two sentences. Power alone gets very old very quickly speaking from experience. Be careful what you wish for, the universe may give it to you just to teach you a lesson you will never forget. -fah

------------- Record for for Shay 8/9/07 – 888-309-9252 opt#1 ext 66343 handloer of account at Bank of America - Shay told me that account would be turned over to collection agency in 14 days – I laid out my basic argument in detail – including if items were inverted there would be less fees – that items were put in and taken out of account, that fees were applied in several instances arbitraritly and that they cashed post dated checks 3 times without my approval. I did mention that I have few assets and that I don't car if the account is turned to a collection as I don't currently need my credit rating. When Shay asks me if I am supposed to have money in my account to cover a check I said that I can sometimes have money in my account for stock brokerage but the stock can go down and there won't be the money I expect to be in the account. In bank of america's case I did say that with check safekeeping though it may have been generally mentioned that money disappears from one account and goes into the other and that the money I expect to be there is not there. I mentioned that there was $347 dollars in fees not including ATM fees and other transaction fees in the past four months. A better argument for court to should there be money to pay for the check when it is cashed is that should be money and there was money in the account to pay for the check provided that the bank not charge previous overdraft and limit fees which occurred because of bank accounting and the arbitrary and capricious manner with which it applied its policies. If any of the times when checks would have cleared if there order was reversed was played with – that not only prevents the account from going negative – but it changes the amount of money in the account by $39 per occurrence and one would assume that balance carries forward into the future months. As the overdrafts continue to be erased, one may find that there was enough money without question to clear all checks. And that the bank is the one that has to look who played with my account and switched the numbers around at times I will argue because of accounting errors in the bank because the numbers switched around, no overdraft fees should be charged and any fees in the current time should be omitted as the bank should not be collecting them. I mentioned in one case that a money request was granted very quickly and a day before the money cleared and that I reasonably expected the money to be in the account when the request would arrive. We do schedule payments and accounts online with frequency why does not apply to paper – only scheduling determines if there is or is not money in the account. Mentioned over the limit check safekeeping application seemed arbitrary. The first action of Ms Shays was to verify that I initiated a stop payment on a check to the bank from stock account which I did. What I will say to this is that by its policies the Bank of America was draining too much money from other account due to its fights and the predatory which they initiated and that I decided to no longer put any money into paying them at this time. Again seeing as the issue is forced if I find fees I feel were capriciously earlier the effect on the account will snowball in later months and I will have a legal argument that none of the fees are acceptable or should have been applied to the account and there has been a great deal of poor accounting on the part of bank of America for many months now. Before I give the bank any more money, I would like this thoroughly checked into. I issued the stop order after the first check to Senator McCain that was post-dated was cashed as this generated overdraft fees and I felt I should not pay these. I also did say the truth which is that in time I will pay off all bills.
Sincerely ,

Franz A. Harter 8/10.07 – this is the day Senator Brownback's should have been cashed and it was cashed I believe 4 day earlier on 8/6/07. I also see that you applied another $200 in fees or so in the last day so that there are now $700 or so in fees on the account in the past four months. It's a neat scam - there was a $10 check to Ron Paul and a $20 check to the Boys and Girls club that bounced for which I ended receiving the additional $200 in fees. I think this is very destructive and predatory in behavior. Loan sharks don't have interest rates this high.