Yes I have heard this argument before, I believe this is similar to the improbability drive if I am not mistaken, any improbable event is probable correct?
P.S. not to say it doesn't happen but DNA has three methods to fix mutations, its really not as common as you are leading others to believe.
Interestingly enough, when you do have a baby with a six finger do you know what they do with it? they cut it off. Makes you wonder hey:) *grin* *nudge* *nudge*
Just last year I knew of four Athlon machines in my dorm that burned out because of this very issue. It was actually quite funny because no one could figure out why the machine wouldn't boot up. You can call this pandering all you want but the fact is that it does happen, and more frequently than you could believe.
First you should read up on the situation before you speak, or in your case should I say speck. This was not a Deregulation any moron who believes that, ohhh I am sorry, any ill-informed individual who believes that should read the parent post, which partly explains what really happened, or do some more research, DEREGULATION NEVER HAPPENED.
Second what kind of fool believes that Liberals are for any increase in generation of power. I would refrain from using the term "get your head out of your ass." Only cause you really need to get hit by a clue stick. The legislation which passed the current power fiasco was Liberal, trying to blame this on Conservatives is just an attempt not to take responsibility for Liberal actions.
On top of all this is the fact, which has been pointed out, that for the last ten years nothing has been built to generate more power, yet the popluation in California has doubled. Again as stated this is because of many reasons, one of which I must mention is the very strict Enviromental laws but I am sure you knew that as well. By the way look at the people who "we" voted for did I mention California is about 60% democrats, isn't that intresting.
point?
Al Gore is offering a rehashed plan, breaking the law and trying to steal a election. Give me a break counting a vote for a president based upon if a dimple exist? wtf is that? A DIMPLE! That is the stupidist thing I have ever heard, please post your propaganda somewhere else, not about an article talking about Monkeys and etc.
Unless of course you feel the Monkeys have more intelligence than the man you just quoted, hey who is to say I bet the monkeys wouldn't fail a Religious class.
Why haven't I read one news source commenting on the fact that the media announced Gore the winner an HOUR before the polls even closed in Florida. Everyone is talking about the two thousands votes in Palm Dale but no one is mentioning the potential 10,000+ votes that were possibly lost due to premature announcements. In West Florida or the Panhandle, a largly Republican stronghold, many people didn't end up voting because they thought Gore had already won the state. If Gore wins because of accpetance of Two Thousands votes in Florida without the inclusion of voters who were putoff due to the Media, I will be one of the first to join a revolt.
I was gone for a while ok heres some info. for you before you go vote.
Yes pro-Bush sites source their information, I bet you want an example, sure no problem (http://www.gargaro.com/algore.html) It souces every quote that Al Gore has said that makes absoultely no sense or issues which show how bad a president he would make, here are a little examples:
The Clinton/GORE Administration is proposing to cut Medicare reimbursements for anti-cancer drugs that are administered in doctors' offices, the bottom line is if GWB and The New York Times hadn't called this on them, then my best friend, who has Leukimia, would of lost his payments for treatments. His parents work three jobs and can barley afford the co-payments as it stands now. So the question stands, are you going to vote for someone who is trying to take away treatement for Cancer patients? Sources: New York Times (www.nytimes.com do a search on archives and http://www.senate.gov/~ashcroft/8%2B7%2B00.htm) I would give the source for NY Times but they want to charge $2.50 for the article.
-------------------------------------------------- --------------------
by the way heres some really intelligent quotes from Gore:
$35 dollars a week can buy a lot of Diet Cokes
In his 2000 convention acceptance speech, Gore said the Bush tax cut would save the average family 62 cents a week ("enough for a diet coke"). He later clarified it and said 62 cents a day. The average family would save $1500, or five dollars a day, which is 35 dollars a week.
$100,000 worth of new lab equipment means overcrowding!
In the October 3, 2000 Presidential debate, Gore said he'd received a letter from the father of a 15-year-old Sarasota High School student. "Her science class was supposed to be for 24 students," Gore said the man told him. "She is the 36th student in that classroom," Gore related, and he said the father sent him a picture of the girl in her class. "They can't squeeze another desk in for her, so she has to stand during class," Gore told the audience. Gore used the illustration to drive home the point that he wants the federal government "to make improvement of our school the number one priority." However, Daniel Kennedy, Principal of Sarasota High School complained that Gore had exaggerated the overcrowding. "We have a brand-new campus. It's like a college. It's one of the top schools in the nation," he stated. The school is well under capacity and has plenty of space and desks. If Kailey didn't have a desk the first few days of school, he said, it was because $100,000 of new science equipment was sitting in boxes and taking up space on opening day, and there were plenty of lab stools to sit on.
(Sources: New York Post 10/05/00 "Al Can't Keep His Stories Straight"
Washington Post, 10/05/00)
Collecting cans for prescription drug benefits!
During the October 3, 2000 Presidential debate, Gore mentioned 79-year-old Winifred Skinner, who has become the campaign's mascot for his Medicare prescription-drug program. "In order to pay for her prescription drug benefits, she has to go out seven days a week, several hours a day, picking up cans," Gore said. "She came all the way from Iowa in a Winnebago with her poodle in order to attend here tonight." However, Skinner doesn't need to collect cans for her medication. Her son, Earl King, who formerly owned his own business and now lives on an 80-acre ranch and describes his lifestyle as "comfortable," has offered repeatedly to help her make ends meet. She continually declines his offers. In addition, the Winnebago Gore referred to, as well as the gas, was paid for by the Gore campaign. Five campaign workers accompanied Skinner, a longtime Democrat and former union organizer.
(Source: New York Post, October 5, 2000 "Gore's nose is growing again"
Washington Post, October 5, 2000, page A20)
I was there with James Lee Witt...oh, wait....
In the Presidential debate on October 3, 2000, Governor George W. Bush gave credit to the Federal Emergency Management Service (FEMA) for their work in Texas during fires and floods in Parker County. Vice President Al Gore said he had traveled to see the damage with FEMA director James Lee Witt, "I was down there when the fires broke up." Carl Cameron, of Fox News first reported that Gore had not, in fact, been to Texas with Witt to look at the damage in Parker County. Gore WAS in Texas, not not to help FEMA -- A Federal News Service schedule showed that he was at a fundraiser. FEMA officials said Witt never went to Texas to deal with the 1998 fires.
"If James Lee was there before or after, then you know, I got that wrong then," Gore said on ABC's Morning America on October 4, 2000.
(Source: New York Post, October 5, 2000 "Gore's nose is growing again")
I was part of those discussions! Really!
At a Sept. 22 press conference, Gore stated "I've been a part of the discussions on the strategic reserve since the days when it was first established." However, President Ford established the Strategic Petroleum Reserves when he signed the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) on December 22, 1975 -- two years before Al Gore became a congressman
(Source: Washington Post, Sept. 24 2000)
A dog's health care costs less than my mother-in-law's!
Vice President Al Gore, reaching for a personal example to illustrate the breathtaking costs of some prescription drugs, told seniors in Florida last month that his mother-in-law pays nearly three times as much for the same arthritis medicine used for his ailing dog, Shiloh. "That's pretty bad when you have got to pretend to be a dog or a cat to get a price break" he stated. Gore's mother-in-law does pay more for her medication, but the generic brand of the drug, which 85% of Americans now use as a cheaper alternative, costs half as much, or one and a half times what it costs for the pooch - not three times. In addition, given the complexities of the marketplace, and the steps people take to get a better deal, it can work the other way around: Pets "pretending" to be humans. The Gore campaign also admitted that it lifted those costs not from his family's bills, but from a House Democratic study, and that Gore misused even those numbers: They represent the manufacturer's price to wholesalers, not the retail price of the brand-name product.
Drug costs often cost more for humans, though, because they are more heavily regulated. Jeff Trewhett, the spokesman for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association of America, said the higher costs for the human version of patented drugs is justified because the research, development, and approval costs can surpass $500 million per drug. But once the drug is approved for humans, the cost to test and approve it for animals is minimal, he said. Interestingly enough, Gore is proposing more regulations on on top of what we have now. Our food also costs 3 times as much as the dog's... will Gore say that we have to pretend to be dogs to get affordable food?
(Source: "Gore misstates facts in drug-cost pitch" Boston Globe, 9/18/2000 )
Dairy Farm Expert in a Day
Milwaukee, WI - "I'm very familiar with the importance of dairy farming in Wisconsin. I've spent the night on a dairy farm here in Wisconsin. If I'm entrusted with the presidency, you'll have someone who is very familiar with what the Wisconsin dairy industry is all about."
(Sources: Sunday, June 18, Atlanta Journal Constitution and The Washington Post, June 14, 2000)
Hey! I am an expert in hospital administration in NJ, and the hotel industry in several states - having spent more than one night there!
As for the Internet I am one of the first to defend the fact that Gore had a important role in the internet, he however did not "take the initiative in creating it." As he was quoted saying in an interview, and don't bother sourcing salon I read it and all it proves is what I just said. As for your comments about Bush, see above and insert Gore, after all he is the canidate who plans "targeted" tax cuts, and is against privatized s.s. both which are completely opposite of your brillant ending paragraph.
The question is, doesn't a Al Gore in office worry you? It sure does me.
I am not going to argue with you back and forth upon this issue because I think you hit the true nature of what socialized medicine stands for in your last comment
I believe that all people deserve adequate health coverage. What right do you have to place your values on me?
Excuse me? how am I keeping you from giving adequate health care to everyone. Does my belief force you not to donate money or start an organization that offers free health care? Of course it does not. Your belief however imposes upon me, it would force me to take part in something that I do not believe should be forced upon people. I don't believe I should have to pay for healthcare for everyone without my consent. Is there an option under socialized medicine not to include me? Of course their is not.
This is the major difference between my beliefs and yours, yours impose your values upon me, mine do not on you. Next time I suggest you rethink when you say someone is imposing their values on you, for in this case that is a lie.
Is anyone's original attention to be bad at what they do? Of course not that still doesn't mean they should be doing it. Hi I am Stuctual Engineer I suck at what I do and you may die from being in one of my building but my intentions are pure.
If the job market is tight, and/or your skills aren't in high demand at the time, you can't leave. And anyway, my point was that even if you switch HMOs, their goals are all the same (profit) and create the same problems (bad health care). That is social b.s. you can always leave your place of work, economcially you may choose to stay but you are not forced to stay. Secondly HMO's provide bad healthcare? Funny I can see my doctor tommorrow if I want to, can you do that in Canada or Britain? (http://www.self-gov.org/freeman/8903oldh.html) Relatively speaking yes if you have a cold, however if you wish to see a specialist you will have to wait weeks. Something that currently doesn't happen in the United States.
But elected officials live in fear of being voted out of office, and so are loathe to piss off too many voters. If somebody dies because of substandard care, their relatives are going to be pissed...
Doctors in Socialized medicine are not 'elected officals.' If you are implying that elected officals would pressure doctors to preform better, then I suggest we think this through a.) Big deal in a buercrats eye, which is what a doctor would end up being. The elected offical would be gone in four years so if they put pressure upon the doctor all he has to say is that he is working on it then after four years when the elected offical is voted out due to pissed off voters you start the cycle over again or b.) pressure from elected offcials seems to be working real well in our public education currently.
The universal healthcare proposition that was voted down a few years ago in California would have created a new elected position in charge of health care The point of this is...it would have created more government ohhh yay! More inefficiency great.
And anyway, under what definition are HMOs not bureaucracies? Now that was a dumb statement your previous arguements were based upon the fact that HMO's want to maximize profit,i.e. like buisnesses. Yes I can see how HMO's thus could also be the same as a bureaucracy. You say that HMO's replace a buisness model that paid for lawsuits, now you get to the real problem, HMO's replace the older form of health insurance partly because of ridiculous lawsuits such as coffee being too hot. This can be fixed by placing in the law the ability to sue HMO's, under circumstances that fault is proven. However again you do not create socialized medicine. The question that you should be asking is what right do you have to place your values on me?
Gotta Love this funny you didn't mention the CEO's press release on the subject: http://www.rand.org/hot/texas.html It states that Texas has achieved higher scores than other states and that Texas needs work but still nationally is one of the highest. A scholarly, peer-reviewed journal of education. Where would you expect to read such a paper? Do you think it would be better if it were written by people who were not experts on education? Would you have a lawyer examine a medical procedure because the medical establishment is too biased???
I would expect it to be written by people who are experts but not currently teaching. The question that I asked you and never got an answer was; do you expect teachers to support programs that make them accountable for their actions, thus if they fail, they are fired?
You take a single quote from the introduction, misunderstand it, then present it as evidence that the whole article is worthless??? Let me point you to the relevant portion in the report so you at least know what that portion of the intro was referring to...
You accuse me of misrepresenting a fact, yet sadly this is what you did to me, I suggest opening your eyes and read what I said but since I am afraid you won't I will have to comment on this, first the quote I pulled was the major evidence used in the intro. hence "
To help answer this question, it is necessary to look at other evidence of student learning in Texas, to see whether the apparent gains on TAAS since its introduction in 1991 are reflected in any other indicators of student learning in Texas. I now summarize evidence from the SAT college admissions test..." Hence his evidence of whether TAAS is a real indicator of academic improvement is directly supported by looking at the SAT scores, thus my response is accurate and reflects the failed logic in the beginning of the article. This is probabley why you don't understand my point because I don't think you understand the basis for his argument, I can only suggets you re-read the introduction.
I agree about vouchers besides the 'accountable' part. First this is federal money being spent, the gov't has every right to know whether it is being well spent or wasted. This kind of logic is currently why the department of Education cannot indicate where 800 million dollars has gone. Making 'accountable' allows for the gov't to decide whether a voucher school is living up to the standards that have been applied to public schools but rarly enforced.
Raw data? Again I reference my previous post, I can get you data for anything that you want to be for or against, the question is whether the data can be 'accountable'?
Yes you are wasting my time, you gave no and I repeat NO evidence that was not bias, I however gave you links that are and still prove my point, i.e. the education link which is against Bush's education policy but acknowledges that his state has made gains in education.
Ok lets go through the evidence you gave:
first this link:
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001024/pl/bush_e ducation_dc_1.html
Funny that this contradicts the original RAND report, ohh I mean THE OFFICIAL Report, that said in his state he was tied first only to North Carolina in education improvement, this site however notes this and still is against much of the policies of Bush:
http://whyfiles.org/116testing/3.html
Ok now lets go to the next URL:
http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n41/
Ok first after reading the article it seemed like a very strong paper, ohhh wait it is written in the journals of eductaion, now why would teachers be against Bush holding them accountable, hmmm lets think about that one really long, ok I am done. Second lets just look at some of the evidence or arguments made in the article, "SAT-Math scores have deteriorated relative to students nationally." Now let me ask you if more students take a test, particularly students of lower economic ranges do you believe that test scores on average would increase or decrease? The answer is obvious and shows part of the failed logic in the article, moving right along.
The Url from Harvard is missing funny though that a professor from Harvard did a study saying vouchers improve African American education, link sure no problem:
http://www.courierpress.com/cgi-bin/view.cgi?20000 8/28+school082800_elect2000.html+2000082 8
Next link:
http://www.libertyhaven.com/noneoftheabove/sports/ nfloffers.shtml
Ok this is about a professional football team, it has one line which states That GWB is for corporate welfare and yet no proof, besides "George W. Bush signed legislation allowing localities after voter approval" Yet this was voter approved, I hope you have better evidence than this.
Link:
http://www.essential.org/monitor/mm2000/00march/wh eat.html
this is a great article till you find out who it is owned and written by: Essential Information, hmmm who founded this lets just take a looksey, ohh its Ralph Nadar, WHAT! I am shocked that a magazine by Ralph Nadar would be against Bush, noooooo! Link to evidence sure here you go:
http://www.essential.org/EI.html
I hope that you actually gave me evidence that was unbias or this is pathetic I could give you evidence from thousands of biased sources trying to prove anything I want, I am looking for good unbiased evidence here, not Ralph Nadar or as in the case of people for socialized medicine, links that take me to Canadas Health Net, of course they are going to be for it, ok moving right along.
Link:
http://www.salon.com/news/col/cona/2000/10/10/chen ey/index.html and
http://www.salon.com/politics/feature/2000/07/25/o il/index.html
Ok these are by Salon hmmm again who are they for in the presdiential elections? Why don't you go check out a real site like www.voter.com and learn true evidence, by the way stop wasting my time, I really don't care if Dick Cheney got his money from the Gov't big deal, Why don't you look at Gore and Clinton if you want to see things they have used the Government for.
You get to decide which HMO you belong to, if you do not, quit your job, and go somewhere else, it annoys me more that people try to say that in a capitalist society you are forced to stay where you are working, you have a choice to leave in socialized medicine you do NOT. You are told which doctor to see if you do not like it too bad. It annoys me more than anything that people do not think this out. Don't believe me check out Canadas health care system.
in Socialized medicine doctors are not elected officals, they are part of the bureaucrat, when is the last time you have been allowed to vote out part of our bureaucracy? The answer is never, it is in general a lifelong position that is filled till someone dies, I believe you are confused.
As for the problem with HMO's and lawsuits this is easily fixed by changing legislation not by socializing medicine as for empty rhetoric I really suggest looking at what you just wrote.
lol, wow why don't you explain. Your evidence is "hes ohhh sooo much more an evil candiate than that other man. Ohh hes so bad." lol
If you are voting for any of the two major canidates vote bush and this is why:
1.) He wants less govt which is always good
2.) He is for a tax cut across the board period, none of this "Targeted" Tax cut nonsense.
3.) Why don't you read the two replys from Gore and Bush on encryption, yes I can see how Gore is for less restriction.
4.) if you want economic liberties he is your definite choice, his tax and econcomic plans put less restriction on socitey and he wants to privatize social security, allowing you to control a portion of your own money.
5.) Civil liberties? you got to be joking neither of these candiates will protect those, in fact the only candiate I can think of that will is a Libertarian.
Vote Libertarian if it clearly is in a state Bush will win, otherwise vote Bush.
4 years of Gore will result in the soicalization of medicine(telling you were you have to go to see a doctor, now tell me how thats not infringement on civil liberties?), a greater seperation of wealth, and definetely a recession, plus the end of social security because his current plan is completely a debacle in which he wants to right IOU's on top of payments, more debt anyone? did I mention he wants to expand the gov't more than Clinton, thats right a bigger more inefficient govt (yes it is inefficient our current education dept. can't even account for 800 million dollars and don't even get me started on the others) Luckily if he does win we can boot him in 2004, the real problem is that we have too many individuals who believe they know whats right for everyone else instead of letting them use their own brain.
Fair? yes I can see how "TARGETED" tax cuts are fair, this is resonable logic, after all I shouldn't have a tax cut because I don't live in a 500 yard radius of the proxmity of the rare knatcatchter, right?
Funny that a large majority of the middle class $40,000 to $50,000 a year don't need those tax cuts, correct? I mean the wealthy do obviously, because who else can afford to spend $30,000 plus on an electric car that currently in San Diego cost more to charge than filling a gas tank, of course this is fair.
You got to love idiot logic, why don't you read some of Al Gore's Targeted tax cuts(www.algore.com) many of these breaks are for people who can afford to spend extra money on such items as solar power, etc. Do you really think someone who makes $20,000 is going to buy an electric car, solar power, etc? I would have to say no, because they cost so much, yet Al Gore's tax breaks are for the people who can AFFORD this, amazing no? Makes you wonder where his tax breaks are really going to.
Read a book, learn economics, then say Al Gore's tax cut is Fair.
I know you weren't trying to argue that George Bush is going to try and micromanage peoples lives more than Al Gore. If you really are for less micromanagement then that argument is shot.
Bush is for corporate welfare. Ok give me some proof I fail to see any evidence that supports your argument, maybe a website and don't send me one that is obviously against him.
you don't need to act to reality, your stuipidty will take care of that for you.
Well I guess you should read an economics book then or at least logical think about this.
If we applied your philosophy to current extractions of precious metal we would have already ran out of resources. You see in Capitalism their is this nifftly little expoential increase in technology. As technology increases we find more ways to maximize our extraction of natural resources in fact in 200 years we could be mining asteroids, who knows. The point is that Capitalism is why the world is si far advanced in technology. Capitalism spawns advancements in technology at a much higher rate than any other econcomic system. Read a economics book and you would find out this is why when you take into account inflation copper has been about the same price for the last 100 years, if we were running out do you think these natural resouces would be so cheap? The answer is no they would increase in price and obviously this is not happening. So in answer you can have a sustainable Capitalist economy and we have for the last 100+ years.
I would have to say your arguments are sortof weak. Give me a break trying to say that tradition folk song is what Gore meant. Bah! That is pathetic, it is well known that the context he said it in was soley stating the Union Label song. Want hard evidence that he is a compulsive liar, can anyone say Buddhist Temple. No one can argue that he did not lie. He knew exactly what he was doing, Libetto Memo, Internal emails all prove this go get a clue.
Thats great but its too late to register and vote in the November election. The Clue Stick Says that you needed to register by the 10th of October.
John Katz this was pathetic. 'Nuff said.
Read Popular Science. New solar panels are coming out which allows solar power to be very viable. In fact they are only able to process a very low % of the power that these panels can collect. With this in mind it is stated by the research scientist that if these panels where placed in Nevada covering I believe 1/4 the state you could power the current worlds need of electricity.
Slashdot Mirror
lol thanks I couldn't stop laughing out loud, that was great. :)
Yes I have heard this argument before, I believe this is similar to the improbability drive if I am not mistaken, any improbable event is probable correct?
P.S. not to say it doesn't happen but DNA has three methods to fix mutations, its really not as common as you are leading others to believe.
Interestingly enough, when you do have a baby with a six finger do you know what they do with it? they cut it off. Makes you wonder hey :) *grin* *nudge* *nudge*
bs
Just last year I knew of four Athlon machines in my dorm that burned out because of this very issue. It was actually quite funny because no one could figure out why the machine wouldn't boot up. You can call this pandering all you want but the fact is that it does happen, and more frequently than you could believe.
First you should read up on the situation before you speak, or in your case should I say speck. This was not a Deregulation any moron who believes that, ohhh I am sorry, any ill-informed individual who believes that should read the parent post, which partly explains what really happened, or do some more research, DEREGULATION NEVER HAPPENED. Second what kind of fool believes that Liberals are for any increase in generation of power. I would refrain from using the term "get your head out of your ass." Only cause you really need to get hit by a clue stick. The legislation which passed the current power fiasco was Liberal, trying to blame this on Conservatives is just an attempt not to take responsibility for Liberal actions. On top of all this is the fact, which has been pointed out, that for the last ten years nothing has been built to generate more power, yet the popluation in California has doubled. Again as stated this is because of many reasons, one of which I must mention is the very strict Enviromental laws but I am sure you knew that as well. By the way look at the people who "we" voted for did I mention California is about 60% democrats, isn't that intresting.
:/****** I am so sad, as stated: BOO HOO! For someone who does not know me you prejudge rather quickly.
point? Al Gore is offering a rehashed plan, breaking the law and trying to steal a election. Give me a break counting a vote for a president based upon if a dimple exist? wtf is that? A DIMPLE! That is the stupidist thing I have ever heard, please post your propaganda somewhere else, not about an article talking about Monkeys and etc. Unless of course you feel the Monkeys have more intelligence than the man you just quoted, hey who is to say I bet the monkeys wouldn't fail a Religious class.
Ohhhhh man this was just great, please someone mod this up I can't remeber the last time I laughed so much :)
wow, it worked!
Why haven't I read one news source commenting on the fact that the media announced Gore the winner an HOUR before the polls even closed in Florida. Everyone is talking about the two thousands votes in Palm Dale but no one is mentioning the potential 10,000+ votes that were possibly lost due to premature announcements. In West Florida or the Panhandle, a largly Republican stronghold, many people didn't end up voting because they thought Gore had already won the state. If Gore wins because of accpetance of Two Thousands votes in Florida without the inclusion of voters who were putoff due to the Media, I will be one of the first to join a revolt.
I was gone for a while ok heres some info. for you before you go vote. Yes pro-Bush sites source their information, I bet you want an example, sure no problem (http://www.gargaro.com/algore.html) It souces every quote that Al Gore has said that makes absoultely no sense or issues which show how bad a president he would make, here are a little examples: The Clinton/GORE Administration is proposing to cut Medicare reimbursements for anti-cancer drugs that are administered in doctors' offices, the bottom line is if GWB and The New York Times hadn't called this on them, then my best friend, who has Leukimia, would of lost his payments for treatments. His parents work three jobs and can barley afford the co-payments as it stands now. So the question stands, are you going to vote for someone who is trying to take away treatement for Cancer patients? Sources: New York Times (www.nytimes.com do a search on archives and http://www.senate.gov/~ashcroft/8%2B7%2B00.htm) I would give the source for NY Times but they want to charge $2.50 for the article. -------------------------------------------------- --------------------
by the way heres some really intelligent quotes from Gore:
$35 dollars a week can buy a lot of Diet Cokes
In his 2000 convention acceptance speech, Gore said the Bush tax cut would save the average family 62 cents a week ("enough for a diet coke"). He later clarified it and said 62 cents a day. The average family would save $1500, or five dollars a day, which is 35 dollars a week.
$100,000 worth of new lab equipment means overcrowding!
In the October 3, 2000 Presidential debate, Gore said he'd received a letter from the father of a 15-year-old Sarasota High School student. "Her science class was supposed to be for 24 students," Gore said the man told him. "She is the 36th student in that classroom," Gore related, and he said the father sent him a picture of the girl in her class. "They can't squeeze another desk in for her, so she has to stand during class," Gore told the audience. Gore used the illustration to drive home the point that he wants the federal government "to make improvement of our school the number one priority." However, Daniel Kennedy, Principal of Sarasota High School complained that Gore had exaggerated the overcrowding. "We have a brand-new campus. It's like a college. It's one of the top schools in the nation," he stated. The school is well under capacity and has plenty of space and desks. If Kailey didn't have a desk the first few days of school, he said, it was because $100,000 of new science equipment was sitting in boxes and taking up space on opening day, and there were plenty of lab stools to sit on.
(Sources: New York Post 10/05/00 "Al Can't Keep His Stories Straight"
Washington Post, 10/05/00)
Collecting cans for prescription drug benefits!
During the October 3, 2000 Presidential debate, Gore mentioned 79-year-old Winifred Skinner, who has become the campaign's mascot for his Medicare prescription-drug program. "In order to pay for her prescription drug benefits, she has to go out seven days a week, several hours a day, picking up cans," Gore said. "She came all the way from Iowa in a Winnebago with her poodle in order to attend here tonight." However, Skinner doesn't need to collect cans for her medication. Her son, Earl King, who formerly owned his own business and now lives on an 80-acre ranch and describes his lifestyle as "comfortable," has offered repeatedly to help her make ends meet. She continually declines his offers. In addition, the Winnebago Gore referred to, as well as the gas, was paid for by the Gore campaign. Five campaign workers accompanied Skinner, a longtime Democrat and former union organizer.
(Source: New York Post, October 5, 2000 "Gore's nose is growing again"
Washington Post, October 5, 2000, page A20)
I was there with James Lee Witt...oh, wait....
In the Presidential debate on October 3, 2000, Governor George W. Bush gave credit to the Federal Emergency Management Service (FEMA) for their work in Texas during fires and floods in Parker County. Vice President Al Gore said he had traveled to see the damage with FEMA director James Lee Witt, "I was down there when the fires broke up." Carl Cameron, of Fox News first reported that Gore had not, in fact, been to Texas with Witt to look at the damage in Parker County. Gore WAS in Texas, not not to help FEMA -- A Federal News Service schedule showed that he was at a fundraiser. FEMA officials said Witt never went to Texas to deal with the 1998 fires.
"If James Lee was there before or after, then you know, I got that wrong then," Gore said on ABC's Morning America on October 4, 2000.
(Source: New York Post, October 5, 2000 "Gore's nose is growing again")
I was part of those discussions! Really!
At a Sept. 22 press conference, Gore stated "I've been a part of the discussions on the strategic reserve since the days when it was first established." However, President Ford established the Strategic Petroleum Reserves when he signed the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) on December 22, 1975 -- two years before Al Gore became a congressman
(Source: Washington Post, Sept. 24 2000)
A dog's health care costs less than my mother-in-law's!
Vice President Al Gore, reaching for a personal example to illustrate the breathtaking costs of some prescription drugs, told seniors in Florida last month that his mother-in-law pays nearly three times as much for the same arthritis medicine used for his ailing dog, Shiloh. "That's pretty bad when you have got to pretend to be a dog or a cat to get a price break" he stated. Gore's mother-in-law does pay more for her medication, but the generic brand of the drug, which 85% of Americans now use as a cheaper alternative, costs half as much, or one and a half times what it costs for the pooch - not three times. In addition, given the complexities of the marketplace, and the steps people take to get a better deal, it can work the other way around: Pets "pretending" to be humans. The Gore campaign also admitted that it lifted those costs not from his family's bills, but from a House Democratic study, and that Gore misused even those numbers: They represent the manufacturer's price to wholesalers, not the retail price of the brand-name product.
Drug costs often cost more for humans, though, because they are more heavily regulated. Jeff Trewhett, the spokesman for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers Association of America, said the higher costs for the human version of patented drugs is justified because the research, development, and approval costs can surpass $500 million per drug. But once the drug is approved for humans, the cost to test and approve it for animals is minimal, he said. Interestingly enough, Gore is proposing more regulations on on top of what we have now. Our food also costs 3 times as much as the dog's... will Gore say that we have to pretend to be dogs to get affordable food?
(Source: "Gore misstates facts in drug-cost pitch" Boston Globe, 9/18/2000 )
Dairy Farm Expert in a Day
Milwaukee, WI - "I'm very familiar with the importance of dairy farming in Wisconsin. I've spent the night on a dairy farm here in Wisconsin. If I'm entrusted with the presidency, you'll have someone who is very familiar with what the Wisconsin dairy industry is all about."
(Sources: Sunday, June 18, Atlanta Journal Constitution and The Washington Post, June 14, 2000)
Hey! I am an expert in hospital administration in NJ, and the hotel industry in several states - having spent more than one night there!
As for the Internet I am one of the first to defend the fact that Gore had a important role in the internet, he however did not "take the initiative in creating it." As he was quoted saying in an interview, and don't bother sourcing salon I read it and all it proves is what I just said. As for your comments about Bush, see above and insert Gore, after all he is the canidate who plans "targeted" tax cuts, and is against privatized s.s. both which are completely opposite of your brillant ending paragraph.
The question is, doesn't a Al Gore in office worry you? It sure does me.
I am not going to argue with you back and forth upon this issue because I think you hit the true nature of what socialized medicine stands for in your last comment I believe that all people deserve adequate health coverage. What right do you have to place your values on me? Excuse me? how am I keeping you from giving adequate health care to everyone. Does my belief force you not to donate money or start an organization that offers free health care? Of course it does not. Your belief however imposes upon me, it would force me to take part in something that I do not believe should be forced upon people. I don't believe I should have to pay for healthcare for everyone without my consent. Is there an option under socialized medicine not to include me? Of course their is not. This is the major difference between my beliefs and yours, yours impose your values upon me, mine do not on you. Next time I suggest you rethink when you say someone is imposing their values on you, for in this case that is a lie.
Is anyone's original attention to be bad at what they do? Of course not that still doesn't mean they should be doing it. Hi I am Stuctual Engineer I suck at what I do and you may die from being in one of my building but my intentions are pure.
Note to AC: Learn what a trolls is!
If the job market is tight, and/or your skills aren't in high demand at the time, you can't leave. And anyway, my point was that even if you switch HMOs, their goals are all the same (profit) and create the same problems (bad health care). That is social b.s. you can always leave your place of work, economcially you may choose to stay but you are not forced to stay. Secondly HMO's provide bad healthcare? Funny I can see my doctor tommorrow if I want to, can you do that in Canada or Britain? (http://www.self-gov.org/freeman/8903oldh.html) Relatively speaking yes if you have a cold, however if you wish to see a specialist you will have to wait weeks. Something that currently doesn't happen in the United States. But elected officials live in fear of being voted out of office, and so are loathe to piss off too many voters. If somebody dies because of substandard care, their relatives are going to be pissed... Doctors in Socialized medicine are not 'elected officals.' If you are implying that elected officals would pressure doctors to preform better, then I suggest we think this through a.) Big deal in a buercrats eye, which is what a doctor would end up being. The elected offical would be gone in four years so if they put pressure upon the doctor all he has to say is that he is working on it then after four years when the elected offical is voted out due to pissed off voters you start the cycle over again or b.) pressure from elected offcials seems to be working real well in our public education currently. The universal healthcare proposition that was voted down a few years ago in California would have created a new elected position in charge of health care The point of this is...it would have created more government ohhh yay! More inefficiency great. And anyway, under what definition are HMOs not bureaucracies? Now that was a dumb statement your previous arguements were based upon the fact that HMO's want to maximize profit,i.e. like buisnesses. Yes I can see how HMO's thus could also be the same as a bureaucracy. You say that HMO's replace a buisness model that paid for lawsuits, now you get to the real problem, HMO's replace the older form of health insurance partly because of ridiculous lawsuits such as coffee being too hot. This can be fixed by placing in the law the ability to sue HMO's, under circumstances that fault is proven. However again you do not create socialized medicine. The question that you should be asking is what right do you have to place your values on me?
Gotta Love this funny you didn't mention the CEO's press release on the subject: http://www.rand.org/hot/texas.html It states that Texas has achieved higher scores than other states and that Texas needs work but still nationally is one of the highest. A scholarly, peer-reviewed journal of education. Where would you expect to read such a paper? Do you think it would be better if it were written by people who were not experts on education? Would you have a lawyer examine a medical procedure because the medical establishment is too biased??? I would expect it to be written by people who are experts but not currently teaching. The question that I asked you and never got an answer was; do you expect teachers to support programs that make them accountable for their actions, thus if they fail, they are fired? You take a single quote from the introduction, misunderstand it, then present it as evidence that the whole article is worthless??? Let me point you to the relevant portion in the report so you at least know what that portion of the intro was referring to... You accuse me of misrepresenting a fact, yet sadly this is what you did to me, I suggest opening your eyes and read what I said but since I am afraid you won't I will have to comment on this, first the quote I pulled was the major evidence used in the intro. hence " To help answer this question, it is necessary to look at other evidence of student learning in Texas, to see whether the apparent gains on TAAS since its introduction in 1991 are reflected in any other indicators of student learning in Texas. I now summarize evidence from the SAT college admissions test..." Hence his evidence of whether TAAS is a real indicator of academic improvement is directly supported by looking at the SAT scores, thus my response is accurate and reflects the failed logic in the beginning of the article. This is probabley why you don't understand my point because I don't think you understand the basis for his argument, I can only suggets you re-read the introduction. I agree about vouchers besides the 'accountable' part. First this is federal money being spent, the gov't has every right to know whether it is being well spent or wasted. This kind of logic is currently why the department of Education cannot indicate where 800 million dollars has gone. Making 'accountable' allows for the gov't to decide whether a voucher school is living up to the standards that have been applied to public schools but rarly enforced. Raw data? Again I reference my previous post, I can get you data for anything that you want to be for or against, the question is whether the data can be 'accountable'? Yes you are wasting my time, you gave no and I repeat NO evidence that was not bias, I however gave you links that are and still prove my point, i.e. the education link which is against Bush's education policy but acknowledges that his state has made gains in education.
Ok lets go through the evidence you gave: first this link: http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20001024/pl/bush_e ducation_dc_1.html
Funny that this contradicts the original RAND report, ohh I mean THE OFFICIAL Report, that said in his state he was tied first only to North Carolina in education improvement, this site however notes this and still is against much of the policies of Bush:
http://whyfiles.org/116testing/3.html
Ok now lets go to the next URL:
http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n41/
Ok first after reading the article it seemed like a very strong paper, ohhh wait it is written in the journals of eductaion, now why would teachers be against Bush holding them accountable, hmmm lets think about that one really long, ok I am done. Second lets just look at some of the evidence or arguments made in the article, "SAT-Math scores have deteriorated relative to students nationally." Now let me ask you if more students take a test, particularly students of lower economic ranges do you believe that test scores on average would increase or decrease? The answer is obvious and shows part of the failed logic in the article, moving right along.
The Url from Harvard is missing funny though that a professor from Harvard did a study saying vouchers improve African American education, link sure no problem:
http://www.courierpress.com/cgi-bin/view.cgi?20000 8/28+school082800_elect2000.html+2000082 8
Next link:
http://www.libertyhaven.com/noneoftheabove/sports/ nfloffers.shtml
Ok this is about a professional football team, it has one line which states That GWB is for corporate welfare and yet no proof, besides "George W. Bush signed legislation allowing localities after voter approval" Yet this was voter approved, I hope you have better evidence than this.
Link:
http://www.essential.org/monitor/mm2000/00march/wh eat.html
this is a great article till you find out who it is owned and written by: Essential Information, hmmm who founded this lets just take a looksey, ohh its Ralph Nadar, WHAT! I am shocked that a magazine by Ralph Nadar would be against Bush, noooooo! Link to evidence sure here you go:
http://www.essential.org/EI.html
I hope that you actually gave me evidence that was unbias or this is pathetic I could give you evidence from thousands of biased sources trying to prove anything I want, I am looking for good unbiased evidence here, not Ralph Nadar or as in the case of people for socialized medicine, links that take me to Canadas Health Net, of course they are going to be for it, ok moving right along.
Link:
http://www.salon.com/news/col/cona/2000/10/10/chen ey/index.html and
http://www.salon.com/politics/feature/2000/07/25/o il/index.html
Ok these are by Salon hmmm again who are they for in the presdiential elections? Why don't you go check out a real site like www.voter.com and learn true evidence, by the way stop wasting my time, I really don't care if Dick Cheney got his money from the Gov't big deal, Why don't you look at Gore and Clinton if you want to see things they have used the Government for.
You get to decide which HMO you belong to, if you do not, quit your job, and go somewhere else, it annoys me more that people try to say that in a capitalist society you are forced to stay where you are working, you have a choice to leave in socialized medicine you do NOT. You are told which doctor to see if you do not like it too bad. It annoys me more than anything that people do not think this out. Don't believe me check out Canadas health care system. in Socialized medicine doctors are not elected officals, they are part of the bureaucrat, when is the last time you have been allowed to vote out part of our bureaucracy? The answer is never, it is in general a lifelong position that is filled till someone dies, I believe you are confused. As for the problem with HMO's and lawsuits this is easily fixed by changing legislation not by socializing medicine as for empty rhetoric I really suggest looking at what you just wrote.
lol, wow why don't you explain. Your evidence is "hes ohhh sooo much more an evil candiate than that other man. Ohh hes so bad." lol If you are voting for any of the two major canidates vote bush and this is why: 1.) He wants less govt which is always good 2.) He is for a tax cut across the board period, none of this "Targeted" Tax cut nonsense. 3.) Why don't you read the two replys from Gore and Bush on encryption, yes I can see how Gore is for less restriction. 4.) if you want economic liberties he is your definite choice, his tax and econcomic plans put less restriction on socitey and he wants to privatize social security, allowing you to control a portion of your own money. 5.) Civil liberties? you got to be joking neither of these candiates will protect those, in fact the only candiate I can think of that will is a Libertarian. Vote Libertarian if it clearly is in a state Bush will win, otherwise vote Bush. 4 years of Gore will result in the soicalization of medicine(telling you were you have to go to see a doctor, now tell me how thats not infringement on civil liberties?), a greater seperation of wealth, and definetely a recession, plus the end of social security because his current plan is completely a debacle in which he wants to right IOU's on top of payments, more debt anyone? did I mention he wants to expand the gov't more than Clinton, thats right a bigger more inefficient govt (yes it is inefficient our current education dept. can't even account for 800 million dollars and don't even get me started on the others) Luckily if he does win we can boot him in 2004, the real problem is that we have too many individuals who believe they know whats right for everyone else instead of letting them use their own brain.
Fair? yes I can see how "TARGETED" tax cuts are fair, this is resonable logic, after all I shouldn't have a tax cut because I don't live in a 500 yard radius of the proxmity of the rare knatcatchter, right? Funny that a large majority of the middle class $40,000 to $50,000 a year don't need those tax cuts, correct? I mean the wealthy do obviously, because who else can afford to spend $30,000 plus on an electric car that currently in San Diego cost more to charge than filling a gas tank, of course this is fair. You got to love idiot logic, why don't you read some of Al Gore's Targeted tax cuts(www.algore.com) many of these breaks are for people who can afford to spend extra money on such items as solar power, etc. Do you really think someone who makes $20,000 is going to buy an electric car, solar power, etc? I would have to say no, because they cost so much, yet Al Gore's tax breaks are for the people who can AFFORD this, amazing no? Makes you wonder where his tax breaks are really going to. Read a book, learn economics, then say Al Gore's tax cut is Fair. I know you weren't trying to argue that George Bush is going to try and micromanage peoples lives more than Al Gore. If you really are for less micromanagement then that argument is shot. Bush is for corporate welfare. Ok give me some proof I fail to see any evidence that supports your argument, maybe a website and don't send me one that is obviously against him. you don't need to act to reality, your stuipidty will take care of that for you.
Well I guess you should read an economics book then or at least logical think about this. If we applied your philosophy to current extractions of precious metal we would have already ran out of resources. You see in Capitalism their is this nifftly little expoential increase in technology. As technology increases we find more ways to maximize our extraction of natural resources in fact in 200 years we could be mining asteroids, who knows. The point is that Capitalism is why the world is si far advanced in technology. Capitalism spawns advancements in technology at a much higher rate than any other econcomic system. Read a economics book and you would find out this is why when you take into account inflation copper has been about the same price for the last 100 years, if we were running out do you think these natural resouces would be so cheap? The answer is no they would increase in price and obviously this is not happening. So in answer you can have a sustainable Capitalist economy and we have for the last 100+ years.
thats great but why then has the standard of living increased?
I would have to say your arguments are sortof weak. Give me a break trying to say that tradition folk song is what Gore meant. Bah! That is pathetic, it is well known that the context he said it in was soley stating the Union Label song. Want hard evidence that he is a compulsive liar, can anyone say Buddhist Temple. No one can argue that he did not lie. He knew exactly what he was doing, Libetto Memo, Internal emails all prove this go get a clue.
Thats great but its too late to register and vote in the November election. The Clue Stick Says that you needed to register by the 10th of October. John Katz this was pathetic. 'Nuff said.
Read Popular Science. New solar panels are coming out which allows solar power to be very viable. In fact they are only able to process a very low % of the power that these panels can collect. With this in mind it is stated by the research scientist that if these panels where placed in Nevada covering I believe 1/4 the state you could power the current worlds need of electricity.