Yes. Sexual PREDATOR. Take off your blinders. Come out into the light. The impeachment of Clinton wasn't about Monica Lewinski. It was about a sitting President lying to a judge...breaking the laws he had sworn to uphold. The impeachment wasn't about Monica. It wasn't about Paula. It was about Susan. Lying to a judge is purgery, regardless of how popular your are.
http://pubs.socialistreviewindex.org.uk/sr219/us le tter.htm
Of course the whole legal debate was a little over the head of the typical media flack, so the sordid affair sort of degenerated into a "where's the blue dress" debacle. Sad really that all people remember is cigars in the Oral Office.
Bill Maher is an idiot, and that is a ridiculous statement. The epitomy of tolerance is to allow intolerance in others.
Suppose I have an aversion to smelly socks. I mean I really hate smelly sock, so I get together with a bunch of people across the world to start a convent in a remote island where socks are outlawed. You come to my island with your patent leather shoes and (UGH!) YOUR SMELLY SOCKS, just to show me that socks are people to and deserve our love.
I'm intolerant of smelly socks and you are intolerant of allowing me to die in obscurity on some remote island without being subjected to what I consider the most horrific object in the universe.
Replace smelly socks with any ethnic group you so desire.
One skeptic, William O'Keefe, president of the George C. Marshall Institute, a conservative science policy organization, criticized the Nature study, saying that the research 'ignored species' ability to adapt to higher temperatures' and assumed that technologies will not arise to reduce emissions.
So, did the study ignore these issues? Why is the guy's question invalidated by who he works for?
The whole story can be summarized as "reporters should pay no attention to those men behind the global-not-warming curtain. We should just kill thier jobs and be done with it." It goes on and on about a 'scientific consensus' behind global warming, but pays precious little attention to the fact that the big social question at this point is, "What do we do about it, shut everything down immediately or take a slower approach?"
Proponents of global warming should be able to answer the questions of their crackpot detractors. That is true science, isn't it? If the Exxon CEO can say, "But your own evidence shows the same sort of fluctuations in the past. How's today's data any different?", shouldn't people asking that CEO to kill his company be able to answer the question? "He has no credibility!", is not an acceptable answer.
It's not about reporters covering science. It's about reporters covering social issues with scientific or psuedo-scientific evidence behind them. The sky is falling is one thing. What are we going to do about it, and how quickly is totally different.
Exactly. Or take a directory of files named file001 through file999 delete file001 and file002 and move the rest of all of the filenames down two numbers - do that with your mouse!
How often do you do that? And why? If I spent the 20 minutes to search the net for the one line script to accomplish this daring feat, would I have done anything except waste 20 minutes? (ie, is there any possible way I would remember it 6months from now when I wanted to do it again).
People who don't understand the CLI don't realize that it's actually a programming language file
And of those who do understand the CLI, most don't CARE that it is a programming language file. Yes, I could spend months memorizing strange cryptograms to move files around, but I could rarely do anything useful with it. NOTE: Rearranging an MP3 collection for the umpteenth time does not qualify as useful.
What is 6 months out of that to learn how to use a tool that you are going to use for the rest of your life?
A serious amount of effort that could be much better spent building my airplane, that's what.
I wanted to print some pictures of the Thunderbirds that my son took at the "Wings Over Wayne" airshow this past weekend. I first kicked up the Gimp. The first attempt gave me a big brown splotch of the upper corner of my picture with large square pixels. So I grabbed the documentation and was introduced to a lot of trivia on aspect ratios and conversion formulas. While all mildly interesting, I didn't really give a shit.
I transferred the pics to my wife's laptop running XP (which she HAS to have for her real estate business). Pulled up the directory with the pics, clicked on "Print this picture", and followed the prompts to print a page of wallet sized pics.
I doubt that I will print ANYTHING in color in the next year. I could have spent an hour with the Gimp documentation, but instead I got the picture printed and still had 30 minutes to work on a wing rib. I suggest you go outside now and then, possibly get a hobby that doesn't involve computers, so maybe you can discover why people want computers to be easy.
That needs to be fixed, by returning to high standards of professionalism that industry used to hold itself to, the kind of journalism that investigated Watergate
That is way to expensive. It requires paying someone for weeks on end, and you only get an hour or so airtime. Talking (excuse me, bitching) heads are much cheaper.
not the kind that investigated blow-job-gate.
A sitting president conspires to break the law, and you don't think it should be investigated? Granted, the whole cigar thing was way less than necessary. The part about lying to a judge deserved a little more airtime, though. That is one major point that enforces the 'liberal bias' mantra. Blow-job-gate wasn't about blow jobs, it was about a sexual predator being brought to justice, but it got all twisted.
For that matter, why is it that we are expected to believe not only that lying is rampant, but that it is much, much more common for the sort of people who place high importance on "moral values" to lie?
You are not being asked to believe that Bush supporters have been lying. You are being asked to believe that Bush supporters simply refused to talk to the polsters.
Kerry supporters have been very belligerent in this campaign. Slashed tires, stolen signs, physical violence and other types of brownshirt tactics were rampant. I do not feel comfortable supporting Bush at work, due not to the issues but to all the name calling. People went to vote, not to enter into a public shouting match or be told they are stupid.
From my viewpoint, Bush voters simply chose not to participate in the polls.
I don't think these would be very power hungry as long as they are vibrated at the crystals natural frequency. It takes very little to keep an object vibrating at it's natural harmonic. What I see happening is an element that is constantly vibrating (ie, flexing) until it comes apart.
Flexible AND resonant at high frequency takes a LOT of engineering.
If someone breaks into my house, going after them with a gun does not seem like an intelligent option. In fact it seems like an incredibly stupid option, and one likely to incite violence.
Just because you have a gun doesn't mean you have to go after a burglar.
Try this scenario. You and I both wake up in the early AM to the sound of someone rustling through the respective kitchens of our country home (many miles from the nearest sherrif). I grab my gun from the nightstand drawer and crouch in a corner. You just crouch in a corner. The rustling continues.
What are your options?...
I shoot my bed and yell, "If you don't get the hell out of my house your balls are next!!!" Continue to crouch in the corner (maybe moving behind the dresser), as I'm dialing 911. If my son yells, "It just me home from college, Dad!", we chalk up the dead mattress to...something.... If I hear a crashing as the perpetrator quickly escapes (the expected and hoped for result), I remain crouched till the blue lights are outside. If the doorknob to the bedroom begins turning, there will be one shot to the bottom corner of the door. The next 4 follow into the door's center a few seconds later.
So the plants are resistant to Round-Up. Switch to spreading pollen from coca plants that have been genetically modified to produce NO cocaine.
Drive the cost of production up and frustrate the hell out of the bastards. Yeah, somebody will keep a 'super cocaine' strain in their basement, but the large fields will soon be useless.
(Sorta like our (US) defense against the South American killer bees.)
Abu-gharaib was a travesty that is ending with the guilty being brought to justice...well, at least some of them. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem that all the criminals have been captured. But as least the rats are scurrying for cover.
The human rights violations in China result in public acclomation and promotions.
If you're on a public terminal, don't do anything that you don't want to be seen in public.
How hard is that to understand? Sheesh. If I were the libary admin, I'd install GDS and tell everyone about it for this very reason. Heh people, if you want to do private things, find a private place.
A sedentary job at 68degrees is a nightmare. Just cool enough to not have the shivers kick in until you have been chilled to the bone. The cold sort of sneaks up on you. I'd prefer 58, as the urge to grab a coat and a cup of coffee is immediate. Now when I moved furniture for a living, 68 was PERFECT weather (you had to actually do something before working up a sweat).
I'd also guess that this study was comprised of mostly women. Women tend to be lighter (less body mass), and be comfortable at a slightly higher temperature than men. I would find 77 to be a sweltering hell after about 4 or 5 hours. Winter in my house is always interesting, as my wife wants the thermostat on 80 and I try to find a room with an open window.
What I find suprising is that so many in the/. crowd can so easily see the fault in Balmer's argument, while totally ignoring those in Kerry's "I'll get France to help" line.
All the talk on here about wanting substance over presentation, and yet you find it so funny to attack Bush for the latter? There are a lots of reasons to disagree with Bush (John 'all your civil liberties are belong to us' Ashcroft being at the head of the list), but at least on/., oral presentation should not be one of them.
Moderators, I don't think that word means what you think it means. Try, "clueless because he didn't read the article".
1) The blimp is unmanned!! That means that it doesn't have people being exposed to radiation. That means that there will be no need to carry food at all.
2) Protecting equipment is easy, and while the environment at 70k ft is harsh, the delicate equipment can easily be house in environment controlled enclosures.
3) The blimps are going to have to be moving a quite a clip TAS (true air speed) due to high altitude winds. It really wouldn't be that difficult to design a dual-engine, variable-geometry delivery vehicle that could deposit repair crew on top of the blimp. Just contact Burt over at Scaled Composites.
As an aside, U2 and SR-71 pilots were/are all astronaut rated and wore outfits that for all intents and purposes is a spacesuit.
This being/., I realize that most readers are somewhat younger than I, and maybe not used to politico-speak. Some are also more impulsive, and ill-equipped to deal with long-winded blowhards. The long list of people claiming that the questions weren't answered testifies to this observation.
For the convenience of all such readers, I have tried to cut through the bull and present straightforward answers. For those of you who think I have misrepresented the candidates answers, please respond with quotations from what they have said in this article. This does not concern whether they are correct or not, only what they have said in this specific instance. (We can proceed to ripping them apart once we have figured out what they have said).
Death Penalty: Why is the United States on this list? Do you believe executing minors is a good policy, and if not, what will you do to change the law?
Bush: I support the death penalty for heinous crimes, Nader: The Nader/Camejo campaign opposes the death penalty in any form, Kerry: I believe that the death penalty should only be used for terrorists.
Social Security: I would like to know what steps will be taken to either ensure I will get the benefits I've paid for, or to allow me to no longer contribute to Social Security and use that extra income to invest myself for my retirement, most likely in a Roth IRA.
Bush: I favor the establishment of voluntary personal accounts for younger workers. Kerry: My Social Security plan is based on three pillars; growing the economy, restoring fiscal discipline and working in a bipartisan manner. Nader: We would defend Social Security from risky privatization plans, ensuring its long-term fiscal solvency. Social Security needs no "saving," only improvement through gradual changes to the benefits and revenue structure.
Foreign Policy: what would you do to restore our nation's reputation around the world, including any actions you would take that you haven't previously mentioned?
Bush: The United States has adopted a new policy, a forward strategy of freedom in the Middle East, which requires the same persistence, energy, and idealism we have shown before. The advance of freedom is the calling of our time,
Nader: Other low cost-high yield (compared to massive costs of redundant weapons) that extend the best of our country abroad include public health measures for drinking water safety abroad, tobacco control, stemming soil erosion, deforestation and misuse of chemicals, international labor standards, stimulating democratic institutions, agrarian cooperatives and demonstrating appropriate technologies dealing with agriculture, transportation, housing and efficient, renewable energy.
Kerry: First, I will launch and lead a new era of alliances for the post 9-11 world. Second, I will modernize the world's most powerful military to meet the new threats. Third, in addition to our military might, I will deploy all that is in America's arsenal -- our military, our diplomacy, our intelligence system, our economic power, and the appeal of our values and ideas. Fourth and finally, to secure our full independence and freedom, I have a plan to free America from its dangerous dependence on Mideast oil.
Draft: What are the chances of you supporting such a drastic change in our drafting process, and under what circumstances would you institute a draft, or any other national service, to fight a war?
Kerry: I oppose reinstating the draft
Bush: We will not have a draft so long as I am the President of the United States.
Nader: American youth must act now to prevent forced conscription.
Voting Reform: Do you currently, and would you in the future, support any reforms to encourage a greater diversity in our political system?
Bush: I was also proud to sign into law campaign finance reform, which is helping to improve the integrity of the electoral process by preventing unions and corpo
Kerry gives non-answers because he's having a hard time conveying the clearest answers he -does- have through the Republican haze of accusations. That, and because in many cases he may not have an answer he's comfortable with. And what's wrong with that? It would be vastly better for those of us who understand that acknowledging that you don't -have- an answer to see him admit it, but the vast majority of people out there are being brainwashed by the Republican "Always solid, always decided, always right, always inflexible, always AMERICA!" media blitz that Kerry can't afford to show those weaknesses.
Could that be because the man has supposed to have been working on the answers for the past 20 YEARS!! Call me brainwashed if you will, but I would expect the man who has made the decision and then spent 2 years campaigning to have a plan in place.
>Myth #1: public transportation is always >inefficient.
>Take a look at the public transportation systems >of most of europe. There's no reason public >transportation needs to be expensive, >low-comfort, or have lousy geographic >availability.
While you're doing all that looking, try to taking a look at population densities. A bus makes sense in New York or Washington, DC. They are marginal in Raleigh, NC, as nearly all of the busses you see running are mostly empty. Try extending the routes out to Apex, NC and you'd have a big bus driving around empty most of the time. Start up mass transit in Dunn, NC, and it'd be cheaper to just have people call the bus to come to their house when they needed to go somewhere.
The first thing you need for MASS transit, is a MASS of people. Very few places have that in North America (and those that do have a bus system, believe it or not). So quit with the "they do it like this in Europe" bullshit. This ain't Europe.
Slashdot Mirror
Remind me never to rummage through YOUR refrigerator...
I want my house to be completely free of all uninvited guest. For roaches, a semi-permanent solution only cost a few dollars.
Save the lid from a peanut butter jar...do not wash it, but do scrape off any large globs.
Sprinkly in a layer of boric acid...a little goes a long way.
Stick it in the back corner under the sink. Do it in the kitchen and bathroom if they are far apart.
Forget that you ever saw a cockroach.
Yes. Sexual PREDATOR. Take off your blinders. Come out into the light. The impeachment of Clinton wasn't about Monica Lewinski. It was about a sitting President lying to a judge...breaking the laws he had sworn to uphold. The impeachment wasn't about Monica. It wasn't about Paula. It was about Susan. Lying to a judge is purgery, regardless of how popular your are.
s le tter.htm
http://pubs.socialistreviewindex.org.uk/sr219/u
Of course the whole legal debate was a little over the head of the typical media flack, so the sordid affair sort of degenerated into a "where's the blue dress" debacle. Sad really that all people remember is cigars in the Oral Office.
Bill Maher is an idiot, and that is a ridiculous statement. The epitomy of tolerance is to allow intolerance in others.
Suppose I have an aversion to smelly socks. I mean I really hate smelly sock, so I get together with a bunch of people across the world to start a convent in a remote island where socks are outlawed. You come to my island with your patent leather shoes and (UGH!) YOUR SMELLY SOCKS, just to show me that socks are people to and deserve our love.
I'm intolerant of smelly socks and you are intolerant of allowing me to die in obscurity on some remote island without being subjected to what I consider the most horrific object in the universe.
Replace smelly socks with any ethnic group you so desire.
One skeptic, William O'Keefe, president of the George C. Marshall Institute, a conservative science policy organization, criticized the Nature study, saying that the research 'ignored species' ability to adapt to higher temperatures' and assumed that technologies will not arise to reduce emissions.
So, did the study ignore these issues? Why is the guy's question invalidated by who he works for?
The whole story can be summarized as "reporters should pay no attention to those men behind the global-not-warming curtain. We should just kill thier jobs and be done with it." It goes on and on about a 'scientific consensus' behind global warming, but pays precious little attention to the fact that the big social question at this point is, "What do we do about it, shut everything down immediately or take a slower approach?"
Proponents of global warming should be able to answer the questions of their crackpot detractors. That is true science, isn't it? If the Exxon CEO can say, "But your own evidence shows the same sort of fluctuations in the past. How's today's data any different?", shouldn't people asking that CEO to kill his company be able to answer the question? "He has no credibility!", is not an acceptable answer.
It's not about reporters covering science. It's about reporters covering social issues with scientific or psuedo-scientific evidence behind them. The sky is falling is one thing. What are we going to do about it, and how quickly is totally different.
Exactly. Or take a directory of files named file001 through file999 delete file001 and file002 and move the rest of all of the filenames down two numbers - do that with your mouse!
How often do you do that? And why? If I spent the 20 minutes to search the net for the one line script to accomplish this daring feat, would I have done anything except waste 20 minutes? (ie, is there any possible way I would remember it 6months from now when I wanted to do it again).
People who don't understand the CLI don't realize that it's actually a programming language file
And of those who do understand the CLI, most don't CARE that it is a programming language file. Yes, I could spend months memorizing strange cryptograms to move files around, but I could rarely do anything useful with it. NOTE: Rearranging an MP3 collection for the umpteenth time does not qualify as useful.
What is 6 months out of that to learn how to use a tool that you are going to use for the rest of your life?
A serious amount of effort that could be much better spent building my airplane, that's what.
I wanted to print some pictures of the Thunderbirds that my son took at the "Wings Over Wayne" airshow this past weekend. I first kicked up the Gimp. The first attempt gave me a big brown splotch of the upper corner of my picture with large square pixels. So I grabbed the documentation and was introduced to a lot of trivia on aspect ratios and conversion formulas. While all mildly interesting, I didn't really give a shit.
I transferred the pics to my wife's laptop running XP (which she HAS to have for her real estate business). Pulled up the directory with the pics, clicked on "Print this picture", and followed the prompts to print a page of wallet sized pics.
I doubt that I will print ANYTHING in color in the next year. I could have spent an hour with the Gimp documentation, but instead I got the picture printed and still had 30 minutes to work on a wing rib. I suggest you go outside now and then, possibly get a hobby that doesn't involve computers, so maybe you can discover why people want computers to be easy.
That needs to be fixed, by returning to high standards of professionalism that industry used to hold itself to, the kind of journalism that investigated Watergate
That is way to expensive. It requires paying someone for weeks on end, and you only get an hour or so airtime. Talking (excuse me, bitching) heads are much cheaper.
not the kind that investigated blow-job-gate.
A sitting president conspires to break the law, and you don't think it should be investigated? Granted, the whole cigar thing was way less than necessary. The part about lying to a judge deserved a little more airtime, though. That is one major point that enforces the 'liberal bias' mantra. Blow-job-gate wasn't about blow jobs, it was about a sexual predator being brought to justice, but it got all twisted.
You weren't paying attention were you?
In every state where a ban on gay marriage was on the ballot, it won by a 2 to 1 margin. This is a winning issue for Bush. Why would he back off it?
For that matter, why is it that we are expected to believe not only that lying is rampant, but that it is much, much more common for the sort of people who place high importance on "moral values" to lie?
You are not being asked to believe that Bush supporters have been lying. You are being asked to believe that Bush supporters simply refused to talk to the polsters.
Kerry supporters have been very belligerent in this campaign. Slashed tires, stolen signs, physical violence and other types of brownshirt tactics were rampant. I do not feel comfortable supporting Bush at work, due not to the issues but to all the name calling. People went to vote, not to enter into a public shouting match or be told they are stupid.
From my viewpoint, Bush voters simply chose not to participate in the polls.
I don't think these would be very power hungry as long as they are vibrated at the crystals natural frequency. It takes very little to keep an object vibrating at it's natural harmonic. What I see happening is an element that is constantly vibrating (ie, flexing) until it comes apart.
Flexible AND resonant at high frequency takes a LOT of engineering.
If someone breaks into my house, going after them with a gun does not seem like an intelligent option. In fact it seems like an incredibly stupid option, and one likely to incite violence.
Just because you have a gun doesn't mean you have to go after a burglar.
Try this scenario. You and I both wake up in the early AM to the sound of someone rustling through the respective kitchens of our country home (many miles from the nearest sherrif). I grab my gun from the nightstand drawer and crouch in a corner. You just crouch in a corner. The rustling continues.
What are your options?...
I shoot my bed and yell, "If you don't get the hell out of my house your balls are next!!!" Continue to crouch in the corner (maybe moving behind the dresser), as I'm dialing 911. If my son yells, "It just me home from college, Dad!", we chalk up the dead mattress to
Again, what are your options.
I would expect better from the /. crowd.
So the plants are resistant to Round-Up. Switch to spreading pollen from coca plants that have been genetically modified to produce NO cocaine.
Drive the cost of production up and frustrate the hell out of the bastards. Yeah, somebody will keep a 'super cocaine' strain in their basement, but the large fields will soon be useless.
(Sorta like our (US) defense against the South American killer bees.)
What a silly thing to say.
Abu-gharaib was a travesty that is ending with the guilty being brought to justice...well, at least some of them. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem that all the criminals have been captured. But as least the rats are scurrying for cover.
The human rights violations in China result in public acclomation and promotions.
A^2+B^2=C^2
This is the only equation that will give you the quickest way from here to there in an airplane.
If you're on a public terminal, don't do anything that you don't want to be seen in public.
How hard is that to understand? Sheesh. If I were the libary admin, I'd install GDS and tell everyone about it for this very reason. Heh people, if you want to do private things, find a private place.
A sedentary job at 68degrees is a nightmare. Just cool enough to not have the shivers kick in until you have been chilled to the bone. The cold sort of sneaks up on you. I'd prefer 58, as the urge to grab a coat and a cup of coffee is immediate. Now when I moved furniture for a living, 68 was PERFECT weather (you had to actually do something before working up a sweat).
I'd also guess that this study was comprised of mostly women. Women tend to be lighter (less body mass), and be comfortable at a slightly higher temperature than men. I would find 77 to be a sweltering hell after about 4 or 5 hours. Winter in my house is always interesting, as my wife wants the thermostat on 80 and I try to find a room with an open window.
What I find suprising is that so many in the /. crowd can so easily see the fault in Balmer's argument, while totally ignoring those in Kerry's "I'll get France to help" line.
/., oral presentation should not be one of them.
All the talk on here about wanting substance over presentation, and yet you find it so funny to attack Bush for the latter? There are a lots of reasons to disagree with Bush (John 'all your civil liberties are belong to us' Ashcroft being at the head of the list), but at least on
While we're at it, blame them for a lack of flu vaccine. Makes as much sense as blaming Bush for it.
No it doesn't. He didn't say 'multiplicity'. You can't patent anything without using a 'multiplicity' of multiplicities.
8*)
So, how about this scenario.
Power plant, burning dinosaur trees, produces CO2.
The exhaust gases are pumped through vats of algae and and then through green houses, producing fast growing vegetation and using up most of the CO2.
The plant burns the trees and grasses while it ferments the algae (burning off the methane), leaving a huge quantity of ash and messy algae remains.
Sequester the ash and algae remains so that the earth can create vast oil reserves for future generations.
Personally, I can't believe that 1 out of 5 CDs are sold in Walmarts. ... they aren't someplace that I want to shop for music as ... full of people.
I don't think anymore needs to be said...
Informative?
Moderators, I don't think that word means what you think it means. Try, "clueless because he didn't read the article".
1) The blimp is unmanned!! That means that it doesn't have people being exposed to radiation. That means that there will be no need to carry food at all.
2) Protecting equipment is easy, and while the environment at 70k ft is harsh, the delicate equipment can easily be house in environment controlled enclosures.
3) The blimps are going to have to be moving a quite a clip TAS (true air speed) due to high altitude winds. It really wouldn't be that difficult to design a dual-engine, variable-geometry delivery vehicle that could deposit repair crew on top of the blimp. Just contact Burt over at Scaled Composites.
As an aside, U2 and SR-71 pilots were/are all astronaut rated and wore outfits that for all intents and purposes is a spacesuit.
This being /., I realize that most readers are somewhat younger than I, and maybe not used to politico-speak. Some are also more impulsive, and ill-equipped to deal with long-winded blowhards. The long list of people claiming that the questions weren't answered testifies to this observation.
For the convenience of all such readers, I have tried to cut through the bull and present straightforward answers. For those of you who think I have misrepresented the candidates answers, please respond with quotations from what they have said in this article. This does not concern whether they are correct or not, only what they have said in this specific instance. (We can proceed to ripping them apart once we have figured out what they have said).
Death Penalty: Why is the United States on this list? Do you believe executing minors is a good policy, and if not, what will you do to change the law?
Bush:
I support the death penalty for heinous crimes,
Nader:
The Nader/Camejo campaign opposes the death penalty in any form,
Kerry:
I believe that the death penalty should only be used for terrorists.
Social Security: I would like to know what steps will be taken to either ensure I will get the benefits I've paid for, or to allow me to no longer contribute to Social Security and use that extra income to invest myself for my retirement, most likely in a Roth IRA.
Bush:
I favor the establishment of voluntary personal accounts for younger workers.
Kerry:
My Social Security plan is based on three pillars; growing the economy, restoring fiscal discipline and working in a bipartisan manner.
Nader:
We would defend Social Security from risky privatization plans, ensuring its long-term fiscal solvency. Social Security needs no "saving," only improvement through gradual changes to the benefits and revenue structure.
Foreign Policy: what would you do to restore our nation's reputation around the world, including any actions you would take that you haven't previously mentioned?
Bush:
The United States has adopted a new policy, a forward strategy of freedom in the Middle East, which requires the same persistence, energy, and idealism we have shown before. The advance of freedom is the calling of our time,
Nader:
Other low cost-high yield (compared to massive costs of redundant weapons) that extend the best of our country abroad include public health measures for drinking water safety abroad, tobacco control, stemming soil erosion, deforestation and misuse of chemicals, international labor standards, stimulating democratic institutions, agrarian cooperatives and demonstrating appropriate technologies dealing with agriculture, transportation, housing and efficient, renewable energy.
Kerry:
First, I will launch and lead a new era of alliances for the post 9-11 world. Second, I will modernize the world's most powerful military to meet the new threats. Third, in addition to our military might, I will deploy all that is in America's arsenal -- our military, our diplomacy, our intelligence system, our economic power, and the appeal of our values and ideas. Fourth and finally, to secure our full independence and freedom, I have a plan to free America from its dangerous dependence on Mideast oil.
Draft: What are the chances of you supporting such a drastic change in our drafting process, and under what circumstances would you institute a draft, or any other national service, to fight a war?
Kerry:
I oppose reinstating the draft
Bush:
We will not have a draft so long as I am the President of the United States.
Nader:
American youth must act now to prevent forced conscription.
Voting Reform: Do you currently, and would you in the future, support any reforms to encourage a greater diversity in our political system?
Bush:
I was also proud to sign into law campaign finance reform, which is helping to improve the integrity of the electoral process by preventing unions and corpo
Kerry gives non-answers because he's having a hard time conveying the clearest answers he -does- have through the Republican haze of accusations. That, and because in many cases he may not have an answer he's comfortable with. And what's wrong with that? It would be vastly better for those of us who understand that acknowledging that you don't -have- an answer to see him admit it, but the vast majority of people out there are being brainwashed by the Republican "Always solid, always decided, always right, always inflexible, always AMERICA!" media blitz that Kerry can't afford to show those weaknesses.
Could that be because the man has supposed to have been working on the answers for the past 20 YEARS!! Call me brainwashed if you will, but I would expect the man who has made the decision and then spent 2 years campaigning to have a plan in place.
i found it amusing, but i am troubled that gwb finds it impossible to admit a specific instance in which he made a wrong decision.
I found it equally amusing/disturbing that Nader would consider choosing the wrong entree for dinner as being within the spirit of the question.
"Damn, Bubba. You smell that! I guess beans for dinner was a mistake. I woulda've et corn, if'n I'd've known that it would smell like that!"
>Myth #1: public transportation is always >inefficient.
>Take a look at the public transportation systems >of most of europe. There's no reason public >transportation needs to be expensive, >low-comfort, or have lousy geographic >availability.
While you're doing all that looking, try to taking a look at population densities. A bus makes sense in New York or Washington, DC. They are marginal in Raleigh, NC, as nearly all of the busses you see running are mostly empty. Try extending the routes out to Apex, NC and you'd have a big bus driving around empty most of the time. Start up mass transit in Dunn, NC, and it'd be cheaper to just have people call the bus to come to their house when they needed to go somewhere.
The first thing you need for MASS transit, is a MASS of people. Very few places have that in North America (and those that do have a bus system, believe it or not). So quit with the "they do it like this in Europe" bullshit. This ain't Europe.