Slashdot Mirror

Very simply under Clinton the EPA refused to let NASA use Freon to apply the foam to the H2 tank. Since NASA is a socialist organization they could not fight it. I tried posting this a THE story earlier today:
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/7/28/93055 .shtml

Perhaps Big Brother will censor it.

Different AC, but you're still an ass if you think nuclear decomm, [illegal and legal] disposal and clean up are _not_ costing billions (and going to cost more in the future after the denial ends) or are not using illegal immigrants for the dirty work - then I have two words to start you off with:

YuccaFuckingMountain Project
and the two big spook companies behind it; working hand-in-hand, synergistically to create the most highly secured place on earth where they and their friends can hide nuclear waste or anything else they want to hide.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&oi=scholarr&start=2 &num=3&q=http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/news2001/ nn11459.pdf
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ articles/2004/7/12/165520.shtml
http://www.atomicinsights.com/FTROU/02-02-02.html
http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/Yucca-Mountain-Cost- Uncertainties-GAOdec01.htm
http://www.greenscissors.org/energy/yuccamountain. htm
http://www.google.com/search?q=nuclear+waste+dispo sal+costs&btnG=Search&hs=JWI&hl=en&lr=&c2coff=1

Microsoft is strictly amateur hour.

This is hardly true. Even years ago, a CCIA report (submitted to the court during the MS antitrust case -- admittedly CCIA is/was a critic of MS) called Microsoft's political influence "in many ways unprecedented in modern political history." One Seattle based study/article placed Microsoft as the number three corporate political donor. Nor can one discount the effect of policy groups, think tanks, and industry groups financed by the corporation but not accounted for in lobbying and political contributions.

There have been a number of shareholder efforts attempting to get MS to either prohibit unregulated soft money contributions or publish policies for such spending. Here for example.

Anyway, this is a tiny bit of the info that's out there. Just possibly, Microsoft is more than an amateur in political influence.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/200505 31/ap_on_go_co/delay_congressional_travel_7
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/4/13 /212319.shtml

Unfortunately, "almost anyone" has pulled the same crap that DeLay has....or worse. I don't like him, but I dislike the double standard being applied by the media even more.

oh please, why is it always a conspiracy theory just because you don't know about it personally? I'll even give you some Newsmax sources,

"The Chinese air force is equipped with the Harpy medium-range anti-radar missile acquired from Israel, and its new Chengdu J-10 strike fighter uses technology obtained from the canceled Israeli Lavi program. link

Here we go from the Asian Times, " Israel has also been a long-standing supplier of advanced military technologies to China. According to the findings of a past US congressional committee chaired by Representative Christopher Cox (Republican-California), Israel has "offered significant technology cooperation to the People's Republic of China, especially in aircraft and missile development", including helping China build its current F-10 fighter jet." LINK

Here's a nice article from the Jerusalem Post about the u.s. suspending cooperative development on the arrow-2 missile defence system with Israel. quote, "A source quoted by MENL explained the rationale for the encroaching US boycott: "It's all about China." As the report explained, "The Pentagon, with full support of the administration, does not want to deal with Israeli products or technology that could be sent to China."

There's plenty more information available from all your favourite right-wing sources about the chinese-israeli love affair that's been going on for 20 years. You just have to look because FoxNews & CNN are not interested in telling you about it.

Well, alternate definitions of a live birth may have some effect on this, although probably not for Canada/US comparisons in particular. See here for one view on this. Canada and the US appear to use the same definition, but I have seen comparisons made to other countries as well.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3938617.st m

http://www.asianresearch.org/articles/2146.html

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/7/30 /111246.shtml

and search for yourself

http://www.google.com/search?q=taiwan+2008+war&btn G=Search&hl=en&lr=

the Constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government.

Left wing Global Research has interesting view of same.

From the newsmax link: "In [Cigar Aficionado]'s December edition, the former commander of the military's Central Command warned that if terrorists succeeded in using a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) against the U.S. or one of our allies, it would likely have catastrophic consequences for our cherished republican form of government."

Gee, if we're only going count the voices of our soldiers when considering the question of war, maybe we should listen when our top soldiers warn us of impending governmental doom. Or is that too obvious? (PS: articles complement each other)

Would You Submit Biometric Data to Join a Gym?

Sure, why not? I submitted biometric data to join Busch Gardens. They measured the distance between my fingers or something. See the story about it. Sure, it's not fingerprints, but what's the difference?

Kerry's campaign spokesman Chad Clanton made an obvious threat against Sinclair Broadcasting after they announced they were going to air an anti-Kerry documentary.

Chad Clanton

"I think they're going to regret doing this," the Kerry spokesman warned before adding - "They better hope we don't win."

Big freakin' surprise. Political parties and politicians reward people that support them and punish people that go against them. Oooh! It's Bush so it must be evil!

According to TFA, the main task of JFCCNW is to bring down websites that don't portray America in good light.

It is going to be more of a PR-damage limitation excercise than anything else. And a good way to spend millions of taxpayer money.


Until they start going after opposition sites like Daily Kos or Eschaton because they're critical of the current administration. Collateral damage in the War on Terror, you know.

Don't think it could happen here? GOP Denial of Service attack on New Hampshire Democratic Phone Bank

You need to check the timeline again on NASA funding before Bush bashing.

NASA budgets since fiscal year 1992:

1993 $14.309 billion, existing NASA budget when Clinton took office;

1994 $14.568 billion, $259 million increase, first Clinton budget;

1995 $13.853 billion, $715 million decrease;

May 19, NASA's administrator unveiled plans to slash thousands of aerospace jobs

1996 $13.885 billion, $32 million increase;

1997 $13.709 billion, $176 million decrease;

1998 $13.648 billion, $61 million decrease;

1999 $13.654 billion, $6 million increase;

2000 $13.601 billion, $53 million decrease;

2001 $14.253 billion, $652 million increase;

2002 $14.892 billion, $639 million increase, first Bush budget;

2003 $15.000 billion, $108 million increase (estimated);

2004 $15.469 billion, $469 million increase (proposed);

So the only "struggle to not get...funding slashed" may not be what you think it is....

"...receiving fat oil vouchers from Saddam"

Halliburton

I don't agree that someone who is passionate about video games is inherently suffering from arrested development

Oh, I dunno, I would expect adults to desire more meaning out of their jobs.

Speaking of which - your journal entry about the rejection letter: [...] Sometimes it's just about a fit of the team, and how it gels, and if someone doesn't fit, then that's the way it goes.

And how on Earth did they figure that out so quickly? Years ago I remember seeing an SBIR (sorry, can't find it now) where the military asked for help designing a psychological screening protocol that could detect which soldiers would succeed and which would become disciplinary problems and so on. I think these people, with their apparent superior skills in this area, should track down that SBIR and go become filthy rich! Unless they're just faking it. To me, their stated reasons are obvious BS.

It feels like you're looking for someone to blame for that [...] but just let it go :)

Sorry, but after 2+ years of unemployment, and overly generic & inexplicable rejection letters, and that whole life-falling-apart thing, I'm pissed. Being a nerd is hard enough...but a poor, unemployed nerd? No wonder I look forward to the end of civilization.

Silence can be golden, but escape to a silent place is not easy. Annoying music is probably the number one reason that I push the channel changer when watching TV.

Nothing better than b*tch about their self righteous positions on world issues they have no real business in getting involved with (unless of course oil is involved!)

Hmmm... all those Hollywood paupers. All those poor editors at the New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, etc. All those penniless Ivy League tenured professors, union bosses, bureaucrats, lefty IT geeks and CEOs, casino operators, etc. Wonder how it is that the Limousine Liberals don't have a dime.

Hanssen was an interesting case, apparently he was a master at surfing the FBI's web. It is an illuminating case of institutional incompetence on the part of the FBI. He did numerous things that should have gotten him caught but didn't including getting caught breaking in to his bosses computer.

I can see how it might have impacted Virtual Case Files but not sure it should have. Things like the names of top secret agents in the U.S.S.R shouldn't have been on computers in the first place. I'm kind of the opinion everything in their case files should be accessible, unless its classified and then it should be in a safe, not on a computer.

What's the deal here? Are governments throwing up their hands and telling us that they can't catch people doing hard crime? Is this just another ploy to make everyone a criminal?

Here's a nice editorial piece written almost two years ago (US-centric, but still applicable I think):
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/5/7/ 121215.shtml

Perhaps governments feel that they do not have sufficient control over their peoples..

Korea - we want to develop nuclear power

For a better albeit incomplete analysis of the rest, like the "help", see here. For a timeline, see this.

America's top radio talker Rush Limbaugh was greeted like a rock star on Monday during an appearance in San Jose, California, while taking a few days off from his regular broadcast to play in the AT&T Pebble Beach National Pro-Am golf tournament.

The packed house at the San Jose Civic Auditorium "welcomed him with a standing ovation," reported the San Jose Mercury News. "There were no hecklers or protesters, and the only shouts were of love for the host," the paper said.

"We are in the midst of a seminal historic shift in this country," Limbaugh told the audience. "The Democrat party and the media have lost their monopoly. They don't rule the roost anymore."

The watershed political moment would have amazed his father, the top talker observed. "If my father could see what's happened today, just the sorry sight of the Democrat party would extend his life by 10 years."

In 2001 Mr. Young, Mrs. Wyatt and an assortment of other well-paid school administrators, defined the new number-one priority for teaching mathematics, as documented in the curriculum benchmarks, "Respect for Human Differences - students will live out the system wide core of 'Respect for Human Differences' by demonstrating anti-racist/anti-bias behaviors."

That sounds pretty fundamentalist to me.

Climatologists Blast McCain's Hearings on 'Global Warming'

Find one Democratic President who's spent more money he didn't have than any of the last three Republican Presidents. That would be...noone. Oops.

Based on what exactly? As a percentage of income taxes earned? Collected? In dollar amount?

There have been plenty of Presidents on both side of the spending issue, and both sides of the party issue, who caused the US to spend more than it earned. Most notable was F. D. Roosevent. Many argue that his overspending to rebound from the Great Depression was fruitless, and what really pulled the U.S. out was WWII.

The first time the U.S. showed any real deficit spending was during WWI, when Woodrow Wilson (democrat) was President. Beginning in 1942, the national debt tripled in size (due to WWII spending) which was under FDR... a democrat. Between that time and 1982, however, the deficit and national debt stabalized, until Reagan (republican) got a hold of it. Clinton (democrat) was instrumental in reversing the trend of deficit spending to his credit. However, it's fairly easy to remember the actions of one recent former President and forget the actions of those before him.

Historically, however, the democratic party has been a proponent of raising taxes, as it has also been a proponent of funding government agencies (welfare, medicare, etc..) while the republican party favors backing off of those plans, though hugely unpopular.

Most of it is just soapboxing though. Currently the democrats in congress pick on Bush (who makes himself an easy target for sure) and his current spending habits. At the same time the democrats have been pushing to increase spending as well.

ABC
CBS
NBC
CNN


This is the new millenium. Information is at your fingertips. Come up with your own conclusions.
We're not dependent on these news outlets as our only source.

Britain pretty much doesn't allow anyone to own a gun. The result? All the criminals are armed and the citizens have nothing to defend themselves with. Britain went one step further. You don't even have the right to defend yourself anymore. That's a pretty basic human right. The result? Britain has a higher (yes, HIGHER) crime rate than us Yanks here in the states with all our guns. Britain's crime rate in 1999 took a massive jump, at which time 1 in 4 Brits were victims of crime (London Telegraph survey). Britain had the second highest crime rate in 1999, followed by Wales, Holland, Sweden, and Canada (figure that out). Gun control failure. This is an interesting read.

In 1999 Portugal, Japan and Northern Ireland reported the lowest overall crime rates. Interesting list.

So again, gun control laws don't work. They disarm the law-abiding citizens and not the criminals. Put it in terms of animals. Take away one animals ability to defend itself from a predator and the predator will dominate. The food-chain and ecosystem change. It's really quite simple.

Iraqi TV aired _nightly_ "music" videos praising Saddam like this one. The music sounds kind-of cool until you read the translation:

Our father, indeed, Saddam, is our father
With him at home there is no fear
Our father, the kind Saddam, is our father
With him at home there is no fear
He spread his love equally among all of us
Oudai, Qusai, are his soul, we are his heart
He spread his love equally among all of us
Oudai, Qusai, and there is a lot more room in his heart for all
Has the world ever seen anyone like our father?
Has the world ever seen anyone like our father?
When he sits with us he fills the home with light
Looking at all of us old and young
When he sits with us he fills the home with light-
Looking at all of us old and young
There words of love and poems become sweeter

(repeat)

Has the world ever seen anyone like our father?

(repeat)

Our father and we are proud to carry his name
He always fulfills his words to any of us

# Actual live castrations of Kurds.

# Two beheadings, with one featuring the executioners singing "Happy Birthday, Saddam" in Arabic as they carry out the grisly murder.

# A detainee whose hand is tied to a board while his fingers are cut off one by one.

# People being thrown off four-story buildings, including one who was forced to wear a Superman costume.

# A man scourged 99 times.

# Babies being gassed to death.

We already had a government controlled by China, so why not this too?

You mean newsmax.com, right?

well, if you ask Chevy Chase...

Take a look at the real numbers as less than 3 percent of polution comes from automobiles. That means nearly 90% of polution is generated from factories/manufacturing. As restrictions on polution from manufacturing become more stringent the price of production increases thus pushing more jobs overseas to countries that won't be apart of the Kyoto treaty anyway. So it doesn't matter if Bush signs the damn thing anyway.

The most interesting thing is that the main stream media never convers the reports that global warming is a joke...

Here is an interesting article on the matter : http://www.conservativemonitor.com/opinion03/1.sht ml and this one
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/5/14 /161152.shtml

One more link, it may all be some election year fear mongering but the consequences are important enough not to dismiss it.
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/10/10/8392 8.shtml

LA Times has an article on a California bill that would require all cars to have a GPS and wireless connection for downloading the miles driven.Newsmax has some interesting observations on the motivations for the idea.

You really are dumb. Ever been to China ? Didn't think so.. the place is very much improved over the last ten years. I mean by an order of magnitude.

That is true. China has undergone a boom at least partially fueled by its habit of providing slave labor in prisons to multinational corporations. If you don't trust newsmax (although I suspect you do) another link is here. They even stick factories in the middle of schools and have schoolkids make cheap stuff like fireworks.

I'm sorry you're pissed off that people who would have starved otherwise took your birthright "job". I guess you'll have to go work at the burger place .. oh yeah that's right you're way too good for that. :)

What do you have against people who work for a living?

At the risk of continuing an offtopic thread.

How ignorant some people are. Of the total U.S. working population the percentage of farmers are 0.7% (951,810 out of 129,721,512). California by contrast have 1.3% farmers (196,695 out of 14,718,928). Last time I checked California voted Democrat, only beaten by NY, RI, VT, DC, MD, and MA. Instead of looking at the US map showing state electorates won, try looking for a map where counties are displayed to get a more accurate view of vote distribution.

If Bush only counted on the farmers he would have barely beaten Nader with his 0.3% national vote.

A survey found "nearly half of school principals and superintendents view the federal legislation as either politically motivated or aimed at undermining public schools".

"Nearly" half? What's your source on this (seriously, I'd like to know)? Of course it's politically motivated. Everything in D.C. is politically motivated. I like the way the "or" makes it sound worse. How about 'a survey found nearly half of school principals and superintendents view the federal legislation as either politically motivated or aimed at the direct murder and rape of school chilren'?

And for a supposed "funding" bill, half of it is about de-funding schools.

Since when is the federal government funding schools? The federal government funds the school lunch program (whose funds are not threatened through NCLB), through e-rate (again, not threatened through NCLB), and through block grants to states.

IMHO, the federal government shouldn't be funding any public schools. Leave it to the states, or better yet, to the local communities.

If the bill went any farther it would yank money away from any school that taught evolution.

Give me a break. (see above)

It is documented that ...

Yeah, documented by the CIA in a CYA report. Any refutations that both Clinton and Kerry thought there were WMD's pre-invasion?

And it was total BULL when Bush tried to paint a link between Iraq and 9/11 or even between Iraq and Al Qaeda.

No, it's total bull that you try to put words in his mouth. Find me a URL where he (not news media, but I'll accept upper-level administration) draws a link between Iraq and Al Qaeda. He draws a link between Iraq and terrorism.

Having read your link, and more specifically the PIPA report you linked to, I'll agree with you that most bush supporters don't understand his positions. I'd also posit that we don't care who other countries want to be in charge.

...but drop the "former allies" crap. They may be "more wary" allies, but allies nonetheless.

Again IN RETROSPECT, I wish we hadn't invaded Iraq. (And though I didn't have any posts modded high enough to make it into the archives, if you could look back to pre-invasion, you'd notice I was hesitant about the invasion.)

You realize without the "blue" areas you're nothing but a handful of rural farmers that couldn't afford an army to invade cuba?

And most of us like it that way. Money != happiness. (Or, as I'm fond of saying, money can't buy everything, but poverty can't buy anything.) We pride ourselves on common sense and self reliance more than money and government interference.

Let's be honest, Bush as a human being is as thick as shit, he couldn't run a branch of blockbuster, much less a country.

Let's be honest, it looks like Bush is smarter than Kerry. ;-) Kerry's excuse was that he was drunk.

Let's be honest, Bush as a human being is as thick as shit, he couldn't run a branch of blockbuster, much less a country.

Let's be honest, it looks like Bush is smarter than Kerry. ;-) Kerry's excuse was that he was drunk.

... Unless the given state spans time zones, and is projected to have a Democrat winner, such as Gore in Florida in 2000...

dont forget the democrat paying for democratic voter registrations with crack
http://www.useless-knowledge.com/articles/apr/oct3 17.html/

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/10/19/8533 1.shtml/

Yes, let's review:

1. Enron http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2002/tst012802.ht m and http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2001/tst121701.ht m and http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/4/23 /133051.shtml,
2. Global Crossing http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/2/15 /154416.shtml,
3. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ART ICLE_ID=33024,
4. Tyco (http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/02_5 1/b3813001.htm,
5. WorldCom (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A2311-20 02Jun29,
6. Adelphia Communications (http://www.usatoday.com/money/media/2004-07-09-ri gas-timeline_x.htm),
7. the list goes on and on.

As you say, it was a historic economic impact. We're still feeling the consequences of it today.

The United States isn't a huge social welfare program. President's don't create jobs. If you'd quit swallowing that Leftist Damnocratic Propoganda long enough to take a look at what's really going on, you might not be so ignorant of the facts.

Fact is we're coming out of a recession which was brought about by bad Clinton Economic Policies, and then exacerbated by the attack of 9/11/01, which flushed upwards of 500 billion dollars out of our Economy.

This post is especially ignorant ...

Yes, your post is especially ignorant. Take the time to read the links and do some discovery for yourself, and quit swallowing propaganda, and even you too can learn the truth about our current Clinton Inspired economic woes.

Yes, let's review:

1. Enron http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2002/tst012802.ht m and http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2001/tst121701.ht m and http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/4/23 /133051.shtml,
2. Global Crossing http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/2/15 /154416.shtml,
3. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ART ICLE_ID=33024,
4. Tyco (http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/02_5 1/b3813001.htm,
5. WorldCom (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A2311-20 02Jun29,
6. Adelphia Communications (http://www.usatoday.com/money/media/2004-07-09-ri gas-timeline_x.htm),
7. the list goes on and on.

As you say, it was a historic economic impact. We're still feeling the consequences of it today.

The United States isn't a huge social welfare program. President's don't create jobs. If you'd quit swallowing that Leftist Damnocratic Propoganda long enough to take a look at what's really going on, you might not be so ignorant of the facts.

Fact is we're coming out of a recession which was brought about by bad Clinton Economic Policies, and then exacerbated by the attack of 9/11/01, which flushed upwards of 500 billion dollars out of our Economy.

This post is especially ignorant ...

Yes, your post is especially ignorant. Take the time to read the links and do some discovery for yourself, and quit swallowing propaganda, and even you too can learn the truth about our current Clinton Inspired economic woes.

Your reply: "Et al" in this case must mean "and numerous other intelligence servies around the world, and the United Nations."

Actually, no. I meant the Bush administration shills who trumpeted that "we know where the weapons are." Again, not true. The case was overstated, and no WMD have been found.

"Before the war, the U.S. intelligence community told the president, as well as the Congress and the public, that Saddam Hussein had stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and if left unchecked, probably would have a nuclear weapon this decade," Roberts said during the press conference. "Well, today we know these assessments were wrong."

Sure Saddam wanted WMD, but there was no way he could produce them within a decade after sanctions were lifted. I would appreciate more facts from you before taking your argument seriously.

I wrote: Bush et al said (or strongly implied repeatedly) that Iraq had significant connections to Al Qaeda

Your reply: They did have significant connections (friends in common). They just weren't working directly together. Perhaps you should look at the findings of the 9/11 Commission a little more closely yourself.

As for the "connections to Al-Qaeda" claim, the 9/11 Commission (bi-partisan), said:

The Sept. 11 commission's final report cites al-Qaida contacts with Iran and Iraq but does not conclude either of the "axis of evil" countries developed a close working relationship with the terror network. [Bin Laden explored a possible alliance with Iraq in early 1990s] However, the report says, former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein never had an Islamist agenda, and bin Laden had been sponsoring anti-Saddam Islamists in Iraqi Kurdistan. A collaborative relationship never developed, the report found.

Please, explain how Iraq & Al-Qaeda worked together, and be sure to use facts from reliable sources. Rush Limbaugh and Drudge do not count.

Your sig said: Iraq war justified

I took a look, and wow, you really found text in there that does not exist. I did find nice quotes like these:

The former Regime had no formal written strategy or plan for the revival of WMD after sanctions

Saddam wanted to recreate Iraq's WMD capability- which was essentially destroyed in 1991- after sancions were removed and Iraq's economy stabilized.

Saddam aspired to develop a nuclear capability.

Please let me know how this "proves" the war was justified. It admits Saddam did not have the WMD that Bush claimed, and that sanctions had to be lifted and Iraq's economy normalized before WMD could be developed. FYI, that doesn't happen overnight.

No matter how much wild conjecture gets repeated, facts are stronger.

Here's the one that sticks out like a sore thumb: "48% incorrectly believe that evidence of links between Iraq and Al Qaeda have been found, [and] 22% that weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq."

In fact, the study authors have their facts wrong. The 9/11 commission concluded ONLY that Iraq and Al Qaeda did not cooperate with regard to the 9/11 attacks. The commission DID CONCLUDE that there were links between Iraq and Al Qaeda in direct contradiction to the assertions of the makers of this study. Source: usa today. The primary link is so well known that it is getting rediculous to assert it doesn't exist: Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

Also, there were quantities of Sarin gas that were discovered in artillery shells. While this is not WMD on the scale predicted, it is enough to refute the absolutist position taken by this study that no WMD have been found in Iraq. Source: newsmax.

"You are mistaken. The electoral council in Venezuela didn't allow the counting of the paper trail. In fact, there was at least a voting site where the operators (called table members in Venezuela) were arrested by the military just for opening the boxes with the votes in order to count them."

Could you provide a reputable source supporting this, ideally not one of the hatchet jobs like Thor Halversson's for the opposition. The odds are pretty slim of Chavez losing an election.

Here is a writeup from the Carter Foundation on their take on the Venezuelan election. If nothing else it gives you a taste of the issues trying to audit evoting when there are paper trails. The Venezualan recall wasn't great but the U.S. election with evoting is certain to be worse. At least they did have an audit trail and did do some audits in Venezuala. Audits aren't even an option with many U.S. electronic voting machines. There are also going to be very, very few independent observers doing the kinds of checks the Carter foundation did in Venezuela. States like Florida, last I heard had pretty much banned independent observers, presumably because they have to much to hide.

I'd agreee evoting should be done away with in general but if you are going to keep it you have to have a paper trail and do truly random audits.

Q: What government could control what was said on the Net?

A: China.

It's happening ins Florida, too.

(1) ... The Kerry campaign trying to stop the broadcast through legal and procedural actions. How does this enhance free speech?

Interesting issue. Are there any limits on the freedom of a broadcaster? Just ask Howard Stern!

A TV station or a radio station uses a public resource, the RF spectrum, essentially for free. That's a big government subsidy (think how much cell phone providers pay for a few MHz of spectrum.). Not only that, but the FCC polices the spectrum -- if I try to set up a 50KW RF amp and broadcast in any Sinclair licensed frequency/area, the FCC will come down on me like a ton of bricks, shut me down and throw me in jail.

In return for exclusive use of protected spectrum, broadcasters agree to certain conditions. For a long time they had no choice, but now there's cable, and satellite, neither of which has exclusive use of a public resource, and on those media broadcasters are much more free to define content (Howard Stern will be moving to satellite radio, and I've heard that Michael Moore is trying to present a cable pay per view event before Nov 2).

What are the FCC conditions? Here's the FCC's brief description. In particular there's the FCC Fairness Doctrine and the Equal Time rule. I think a fair application of equal time might be to broadcast the anti- Kerry movie one night, and Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 in the same timeslot the next night. Somehow I doubt Sinclair Broadcasting is devoted enough to free speech to do that.

Actually, your free speech question may be a red herring here. Sinclair doesn't have a great track record on free speech. Last May, Sinclair censored Ted Koppel's Nightline broadcast of the names of our Iraq war dead. Check out this story quoting John McCain:

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) sent a letter to the president and CEO of Sinclair Broadcast Group, David Smith, about the broadcaster's decision to pre-empt Friday night's broadcast of "Nightline.

"I write to strongly protest your decision to instruct Sinclair's ABC affiliates to preempt this evening's Nightline program. I find deeply offensive Sinclair's objection to Nightline's intention to broadcast the names and photographs of Americans who gave their lives in service to our country in Iraq," McCain wrote.

"I supported the President's decision to go to war in Iraq, and remain a strong supporter of that decision," McCain continued.

"But every American has a responsibility to understand fully the terrible costs of war and the extraordinary sacrifices it requires of those brave men and women who volunteer to defend the rest of us; lest we ever forget or grow insensitive to how grave a decision it is for our government to order Americans into combat," he wrote.

. . .

"It is, in short, sir, unpatriotic. I hope it meets with the public opprobrium it most certainly deserves," he concluded.

My conclusion: these Sinclair folks are hardly paragons of free speech.

(2) I would suggest you see the broadcast before protesting. Maybe it isn't what you think it is -- who knows?

Great idea! Will you babysit my kids while I'm doing that? I'm willing to let the marketplace decide this issue too. Fahrenheit 9/11 was a for-profit venture that has earned somewhere in the neighborhood of $250,000,000. I'd say th

For some other info, google "climatologist global warming" and see what you get.
I get "The IPCC claims that human activities are responsible for nearly all the earth's recorded warming during the past two centuries," said NCPA Adjunct Scholar David Legates, the report's author and director of the Center for Climatic Research at the University of Delaware. "Yet the primary assessment they use as support appears to be more junk science than solid evidence."
And Christy is a respected climatologist, but he's also a maverick who argues that global warming isn't a problem worth worrying about.
Of course there's Climatologist Patrick J. Michaels says fears of catastrophic global warming are scientifically unfounded and "alarmist." Any climate change that does occur would not affect Earth or its inhabitants in any significant way, he said.

The problem with Arguing by Authority is that there are so many authorities. It becomes a clash of "My scientist is better than your scientist." You do not need to believe me instead of the scientists (which, of course, are one homogeneous group who believe exactly the same thing, viz. harmful and unprecendented global warming is going on right now). You may believe me *and* the scientists.

The editors aren't required to cater to anyone's views, yours included. If you don't like it, leave and send Taco or somebody else important an email explaining why you left. If enough people do this, then advertising numbers will go down, and the site will eventually shrivel and die. However, judging by the number of people who hang around here complaining and never leave, that day will probably be far in the future.