Defense spending is always beneficial to society, whether the weapons are actually used or not.
This is the original argument that you refuted. Someone else already replied and said what I was going to say, that the goal isn't always to build a bigger bomb. We probably have quite a few classified programs to develop new uses for a nuclear bomb (I heard a nuclear bunker buster). The Fat Man bomb that was dropped over Nagasaki is the same sort of design that an intertial confinement nuclear reactor would use. I bet you don't even understand why we dropped a bomb on Nagasaki. If we hadn't used a nuclear bomb to defeat Japan, the war would have gone on for many years and a lot more of our people would have died in kamakazi attacks and ground wars.
4 Bills and 4 Resolutions in 20 years. That's less than one every session of congress. He certainly doesn't take the lead on issues. Let's take a long at his most important achievements.
S.J.RES.158 - 6-16-1989(Day Introduced)
Title: A joint resolution designating October 22 through 28, 1989, as "World Population Awareness Week".
Wow....his very first thing of anything passed.....
S.J.RES.160 - 6-13-1991
Title: A joint resolution designating the week beginning October 20, 1991, as "World Population Awareness Week".
There's number 2......Same thing.
S.J.RES.318 - 6-18-92
Title: A joint resolution designating November 13, 1992, as "Vietnam Veterans Memorial 10th Anniversary Day".
That's 3, and unfortunatly he did the honors there.
S.J.RES.337 - 9-15-1992
Title: A joint resolution designating September 18, 1992, as "National POW/MIA Recognition Day", and authorizing display of the National League of Families POW/MIA flag.
That's resolution number 4.
S.1563 - 7-25-1991
Title: A bill to authorize appropriations to carry out the National Sea Grant College Program Act, and for other purposes.
His first bill that was signed into law...7 years after he won his first election.
S.1206 - 7-1-1993
Title: A bill to redesignate the Federal building located at 380 Trapelo Road in Waltham, Massachusetts, as the "Frederick C. Murphy Federal Center".
That's the 2nd bill that was passed.....
S.1636 - 11-8-93
Title: A bill to authorize appropriations for the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 and to improve the program to reduce the incidental taking of marine mammals during the course of commercial fishing operations, and for other purposes.
Save the whales?
S791 - 4-14-1999
Title: A bill to amend the Small Business Act with respect to the women's business center program
And that's the last bill he got signed into law.
I'm not going to look at Dick Cheney's record. He's not even running for president. What's the hangup with Dick Cheney? You want to pick on vice presidents, John Edwards made a fortune convincing juries about his junk science, raising insurance premiums. John Edwards can't get elected in his own state he's done such a bad job.
Ok, so you don't think war in Iraq is good for anything. So shaddup already, you're not the one fighting it. It has nothing to do with you. I'm done with this conversation.
I asked you to mention names. I went and looked up two names that democrats are pointing fingers at, and neither one of them was directly involved with the Bush Campaign. Give me a link.
As for the forged documents, I do think there has been a surge in negative politics once the Clinton advisors came into the Kerry camp, but I never made the claim that the documents had anything to do with Kerry. I'm talking about the lack of integrity among democrats in general. Apparently the other broadcast news agencies are pointing the finger at some reporter in Texas.
But give me a link. I haven't seen any significant evidence that SBVT is linked with the Bush campaign, any moreso than Kerry is linked with moveon.org. He attended a few moveon.org fundraisers. What's that about?
And back to my original point, the swift boat vets aren't all telling the same lie. Kerry inflated his war stories to the point that they were lies.
Any entity who's first primary purpose is not self interest and survival will cease to survive.
Moderators? Could we give this post a boost? I've never heard this put so eloquently. Typically products that are labeled with a "made in the USA" have their own place in the market. Plastic artifacts from China are cheap, in ever sense of the word, but if cheap is what you want, then cheap is what you shall have! I wish farming went the same course. I don't see why we should support inefficient farmers.
Luckily, the world is moving more and more in the direction of free trade.
Researching it involves taking embryos that weren't going to turn into humans, anyway.
Calling a human embry anything but a human would be calling your infantile self inhuman. What makes you any less human? What is intelligence? Is DNA splitting and duplicating a form of decision making? Does the cell make a choice to replicate? Is it morally right to kill animals because they are not higher thinkers?
Saying that it kills embryos is like saying that masturbation kills sperm.
Imagine if the product of you masturbating was that a human embryo is produced that would grow under the right conditions. You would flush it down the toilet and always wonder what that kid would be like. You might even be worried that the kid would actually grow into a sewer baby, so you drop your wad in a bucket of acid before sending it down the drain. Eventually a company springs up that will BUY your wads off of you! So you mail off a packet of crygenically preserved wads to the research factory. Later on you find out that those wads are in their mid-teens and researchers are trying to see if they can transplant a human brain, to no avail. One of your wads was combined with a bee by some ambitious scientist, but instead of having wings and a stinger, just ended up a slimy and disfigured. Another company springs up to put these "non-humans" to sleep.
Point is, with such a promising outlook for adult stem cells, do we really want to go down the embryonic stem cell path? Cloning these "non-humans"? Does a cloned embryo constitute a non-human? Obviously the human no longer has his indivuality. What if someone agreed that researchers were able to take their cloned self and perform inhumane experiments on them? This is a pretty complicated question, as are most matters of ethics. It's a can of worms, that's what it is. Sortof goes hand in hand with the abortion issue. I say lets preserve our individuality. Whats the harm in a natural death, by the way? Is it really such a bad thing to die of natural causes?
What are you, a child? You confirm that you understand the hypocrisy and try to defend yourself in the following paragraph.
Given that there was no possible way in which Iraq could be perceived as a threat to us, it's obviously not that.
Oh nevermind, apparently you don't understand. I was referring to the war to liberate Iraq from Saddam Hussein. I had no idea what you were talking about, Donald Rumsfeld selling GAS to Saddam Hussein. Here in the US, we have outlawed chemical weapons. We don't manufacture gas. Donald Rumsfeld attempted a diplomatic relationship with Saddam Hussein but was stabbed in the back. You can read all about it here. It's so ridiculously stupid of you to find Donald Rumsfeld at fault. You are truly an idiot, and now you're officially a liar.
Dick Cheney? Hmmm... Well he's making bank off of this occupation.
Care to explain this? This may very well be a lie, I don't have time to refute you, you've already been discredited. Dick Cheney makes "bank" as the vice president already. He went in their a multi-millionaire.
Typical delusional idiocy. I never claimed to support Clinton. Additionally, you think a blowjob is worse than murder. Unless you're giving it, right Sparky?
No, I already told you, all I care about is integrity. Clinton lied to the nation. This is really sad, you've sunk to homosexual accusations. Maybe someone will step in and save you with some real arguments.
What, the ones that say the same thing as the real ones but weren't the actual copies? Oh wow, the President is proven to be a cowardly deserter, but they copied off of somebody else's paper. That's much worse, really it is.
What are you talking about now? Copies? No they were copies of forgeries, haven't you heard? CBS News is probably going to be investigated for criminal acts. There is a cover up going on by Dan Rather, claiming that they are authentic without releasing the source. If you're one of those that believes "sure they were forgeries, but they're TRUE!" then you're an idiot. Why don't you go look for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
Hot tip, Sparky: We're more than 200 miles from Iraq. The atlas is your friend.
I don't even know why I bother with you crackpots. You're more afraid of a nuclear bomb in a suitcase than missiles. Ok.
No, not really.
I'm just a bit bothered by an administration that thinks putting old dying people in jail for smoking a plant is more important than terrorists that they were warned by 7 different countries in increasing detail, who were planning on attacking our freaking country.
I'm sorry you're so sick and deluded that you have your priorities so out of whack.
Ok, so you're a druggie who thinks that the patriot act was designed to catch druggies. Bill Clinton's administration, Sandy Berger, was given an opportunity to have Bin Laden on a plate, and knowing he was a threat passed up the opportunity. Recently, Sandy Berger removed and apparently "lost" a bunch of files from the national archive. Personally I think this guy is worse than any druggie like yourself, but he gets off free. This is truly an injustice. As for your claim that 9/11 could have been prevented, the 9/11 commission found that George Bush could not be held accountable for that. This is another moot point. By the way, throwing druggies in jail is not a priority of mine. I think they're mentally ill and need psychological help. But to say that Bush "diverted" funds is pure nonsense. You can't say that. When funding is cut for one thing, it doesn't automatically go somewhere else, does this make sense to you?
Seek psychological help, it's never to late to turn your life around. And if you ever get arrested under provisions of the Patriot Act, your right to privacy will protect you in court, unless you're a illegal terrorist;)
Whoop de doo. A lawyer! You're talking about a lawyer. Read about Zach Exley, Here.
If you think an overanxious lawyer reflects the integrity of George Bush, you're an idiot. Thinking that Zach Exley is coordinating between the Kerry Campaign and moveon.org is easier to believe. I don't know of any "bush campaign operatives". Chris LaCivita doesn't work for the bush campaign.
The swift boat vets have been upset with John Kerry ever since his 1971 testimony. 250 vets don't just fall into place by as a result of someone elses scheming.
Really! How is expending massive amounts of resources on something that's not at all useful beneficial to society? Would you mind detailing the benefits to your everyday man on the street of being able to destroy the world even more times over than we already can?
Allow me to enlighten you. Back in the 80's, Jimmy Carter cut a lot of defense funding, among other bad decisions. This resulted in thousands of people losing their jobs. I was living in southern california at the time. I remember property value plummeting and interest rates skyrocketing. Also, a lot of defense spending goes into jets, rocket engines, communications technologies like satellites, the GPS system, earth observing satellites (environment), I could go on and on. This is really quite a simple concept, I don't think many of your liberal buddies would argue with me.
Sure, as long as you don't mind completely frying your power and communications grids! And how great would it be to have that cloud of radiation drifting across the country! Seriously, that's about the stupidest idea for nuclear weapons use I think I've ever heard.
It would be better than standing by and watching the nuclear missiles hit our cities! A cloud of nuclear fallout over the ocean is not so bad in comparison. This is quite simple also, perhaps I didn't communicate my point well the first time.
Bullshit. Kerry has a 20 year record to tout. Turn off the Faux News and try doing some basic research for yourself.
A 20 year record. That says a lot. During that 20 year record, he didn't sponsor a single bill. He just voted, and his votes were pretty bad. Another patriot act? Has your life been turned upside down by the infernal patriot act?:( By the way, I don't have cable.
And yet you trust Bush and company, even though they're PROVEN liars?
When was this proven? Darby, who I replied to a few minutes ago, agrees with me that it wasn't proven. See thats the thing. I believe Bush has a set of moral values, and I trust he wouldn't do that, and what would he possibly have to gain? Everybody knows your approval ratings go down when the hippies start calling you a war monger.
Character means standing up for freedom, not cowardly supporting those who try to destroy it as you are doing.
You're so ridiculously hyprocritical it's funny. What do you think the war in Iraq is? A land grab? You need a dose of reality, crackpot.
You sound like you're just upset that all the leaders you support have no integrity. Namely Clinton, but Kerry has got a few red flags, well documented in "Unfit for Command". How bout those forged documents I'm hearing about lately? That's the kindof shit that makes me sick.
You can't really do much about the suitcase bomb, but there are detectors in Washington DC and port cities that could potentially stop something like that. A missile is a pretty obvious way to get a bomb into the country. Saddam Hussein used them. I would say an easier weapon would be a makeshift unmanned aircraft. Continued development of the PAC missile, the airborne laser, these are all good efforts. But keep bitching.
I don't know where you get the impression that I'm out of touch with reality. You basically confirmed all my comments, but continued expressing your hatred for George Bush. I think you're also upset because the Patriot Act makes you feel paranoid that law officers will bust down your door and raid your indoor marijuana garden. I glean this from your thinking that funds were diverted(?) from terrorism to the drug war, and your "standing up for freedom" insanity. Am I right? You should quit smokin the dope, it rots your brain.
Yes, because people don't consider a missile strike simply because it hasn't happened yet. The terrorists used Jets in 9/11, but they're using home-made missiles against israel right now, you bet your ass they'd use larger missiles if they could assemble them.
I'm not going to say much about your anti-bush rant. He didn't lie, Kerry and Clinton are both proven liars. 9/11 commission vindicated Bush. Everyone in America thought Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, we knew he did at one time and now we have no idea where they are. It's a moot point.
And if you think character means beating people to death in the street for their opinions, you're an idiot.
For example, on the stem cell question, Bush makes it quite clear that people should stop thinking of stem cell research as a solution to all medical problems, and especially NOW, at the current time, we shouldn't be giving false hope to people who have recently been diagnosed.
This is interesting because John Kerry makes it clear that he would not pursue a missile defense program NOW, but would wait for more research to be done before implementing anything (basically saying he doesn't support it at all). In my opinion, the missile defense is an issue we need to be dealing with now, where biotechnology research doesn't require a huge injection of tax dollars because its all covered in the private sector, and there is no clear goal in sight. Defense spending is always beneficial to society, whether the weapons are actually used or not.
Also, I think there may be a need for nuclear weapons in the future, shooting down other missiles or volleys of missiles would be a pretty good use for them, off the top of my head.
I'm glad to see that both support manned space exploration and ITER research.
Basically, like gfxguy says, Bush has a record to tout, John Kerry does not. I don't trust John Kerry personally, I don't trust any democrat. Character matters a lot to me, more than the things they say they would do. As I recall, clinton said he was going to lower taxes.
This one serves a different purpose than the 802.11x stuff. This is narrowband communications, you can't get much faster for the narrow spectrum these devices occupy. You could put an amplifier on one of these bad boys and a yagi and get basically any range you want. You could use repeaters to get over any mountain. The 900mhz spectrum is also less crowded than 2.4ghz.
Another cool features is the RS232 connectivity. You could build a pretty nifty micro-wireless computer node, for robotic applications. Control the robot from a bash terminal from 40 miles away.
Sh-ya! Utah is the spot. I just bought a high gain wireless antenna from this place: http://www.pacwireless.com/
...right down the street. We almost had the Utopia (municipal fiber-to-the-home), but missed it, Lindon might still get it though. Ski Utah! Whoot! Mid-west side! Novell power! yada yada...
Look bud, communism comes in all shapes and sizes, whether its someone trying to take a large portion of my earnings to give to some lazy schmuck, after keeping a portion for his own bloated salary, or a self-serving politician who will do anything to get elected, or a dictator trying to destroy the free world using nuclear weapons, or simply a rotten chump like yourself who's been suckered into thinking capitalism is a dispicable evil, or that corporations are going to take over the world and enslave everybody. You're the paranoid freak. I'm the one content with life, remember? You should see a shrink.
Don't say too much, don't respond to my claims, rattle off as many names as possible. Yup, you're what I call a crackpot.
I am not even gonna start with McCarthy...
First of all, under Pres. Eisenhower, there was a 90% top tax bracket. Under Nixon, there was a 50% top tax bracket. YOU ARE CALLING EISENHOWER AND NIXON COMMUNISTS.
They were both pinkos. Nixon is by no definition of mine a conservative, and I was glad to see him go. If you think I sit across party lines, you're an idiot.
You wouldn't know what communism was if Karl Marx bit you on the left ass cheek. You know who said that capitalism must provide protections to protect against potential abuses of the system by state chartered corporations? ADAM SMITH in "The Wealth of Nations." Do you know who originated criticism of the state charter corporation? ADAM SMITH in "The Wealth of Nations." Capitalism was designed by Adam Smith as a response to the abuses by state-chartered corporations extremely prominent in the Mercantilist economic system of the time. You are also calling ADAM SMITH A COMMUNIST.
It's typical of you liberals to rattle off names in an effort to belittle someone. I know who adam smith is, I know who keynes is and I know where Richard Nixon stood on relation to these issues. Controlling the distribution of income with some measure of compassion is always a dead end trap, every little bit hurts. You won't even respond to this claim, cause you're a crackpot who's out of touch with reality.
I don't think adam smith is on your side, he's a pure capitalist, had many bad ideas and shortcomings but none of them had anything to do with the re-distribution of income. I went out to get a quote on where adam smith stands on the re-distribution of income and here is what he has to say:
"All the different regulations of the mercantile system, necessarily derange more or less this natural and most advantageous distribution of stock." (pp. 594-5). "Every derangement of the natural distribution of stock is necessarily hurtful to the society in which it takes place; whether it be by repelling from a particular trade the stock which would otherwise go to it, or by attracting towards a particular trade that which would not otherwise come to it." (p. 597)
As for the neo-con crap, are alcoholic vagrants not needy? I don't think they should be entitled to anything more but basic sustinence. The reason elderly people can't purchase prescription drugs is because they relied on a corrupt welfare system to provide for them, any intelligent person would use non-taxable accounts to provide for their retirement, and you're advocating more government intervention? Those billionaires wouldn't be billionaires if 90% of their income was tax revenue. There would be no insentive to succeed, and my measure of success is determined by how well off I can leave my own kids. You seem to think that the fact that I could potentiall earn a billion dollars in my lifetime means that our system is corrupt, and that I don't deserve that money. You're an idiot, face it. A billion dollars is reflective of the efficiency of our economy, and inflation, and more and more people are getting themselves into that upper tax bracket every year. What you want to do is give people a bigger insentive to FAIL!
If you want to live as an equal, MOVE. Quit advocating change in America.
Corporations have a self destruct mechanism built into them. Corporations are the most efficient, most readily available source of jobs. Corporations are owned by people, millions of them, they pay dividends to people who are interested in long term investment. Go ahead and complain about corporate abuse, its only been around for about 10 years and you're already bitching. By re-allocating corporate funds to the lower class, you're taking jobs and creating more poverty. How do people ever reach the conclusion that re-allocation of funds is the answer to everything? The system is self sustaining. A progressive tax can't be too progressive or you edge closer and closer to communism, would you agree with that? You just think we need to be a liiiiitle bit more progressive with taxation, right? How much should we be taxing the upper class? Should we just put a cap on the amount of wealth one can amass? Say, $10 million? Lets raise the gift / inheritance tax to %90 and abolish all other reason to succeed in life.
As for the food bank, you are awefully compassionate for doing that, but yet so pessimistic with your value of my ambitions. Politically speaking, its definately the lefties whining.
As for the safety net, it's already there. You are argueing for your own well being, in my opinion. Go shop around in other countries, you'll find much needier people. How do you know they're right wingers anyways? Do you label all alcoholic vagrants as right wingers? I'm sure if you sat down with them you would find you have a lot in common.
None of these privatization schemes offers any suggestions about what to do when the next Enron happens and people lose their retirement savings.
Because it doesn't happen. If someone has all of their money invested in one company, they are at much too high risk, and the possibility of that could easily be omitted in a clause. If the entire stock market collapses, it goes back up eventually. And for the rest there are always municipal bonds.... The current SS system functions a lot like municipal bonds, you give the government your money and they spend it and promise to pay you back. I'd put my faith in the stock market personally.
The investor class leeches wealth out of the economy and hoards it. Hoarded wealth does not move through a society's economy. It does nobody any good locked into in trust funds.
You know, this really shows how little you know about the economy. "Where did all the money go?" you ask. It's there, there is no limit to the amount of money in the economy. The money that is already there just goes round and round. When you take a bunch of money and "hoard" it, it deteriorates. When you invest it in another company, you trust that they are producing at a high rate. If you invest it in your own effort, you have complete control and the potential to double or triple it in a few years time, and that benefits everybody. The more competitive an economy is, the more efficient it is, the better it is. You just don't get it. I don't want to live in eastern Europe. Study economics before you form these concrete opinions.
According to you, the people that make the products and provide the services do no work and deserve no compensation. Only the senior management that sit on their ass in committee meetings discussion how to divy up the profits deserve the rewards?
No, they get a paycheck. That's all the compensation they deserve. If they want more, then they get up off their asses and plan a risky business strategy. Real work is putting 3 years of my average salary into 1 month of action, and if I fail, I live on ramen and milk for the next 5 or 6 years. Those are the people going from rags to riches, the ones who put it all on the line. I know a few of them, and it is no easy task.
Get this straight. The top 10% are not work-a-holics. The top 10% sits on their asses and spend inherited wealth. Do you know over 60% of the population of the US thinks it's in the top 3% of income earners? I'm certain that you are one of the poor schmucks one paycheck away from losing everything and becoming homeless who's been deluded into thinking you're well off.
If it makes you feel any better to think that, then go ahead and sit on your ass. Live paycheck to paycheck. That is the poor mans way! No risk, no reward. Its true that most wealth is inherited, but does it last forever? The statistics say no.
The lower and middle classes of a society make the capital for a society a society. The investor class leeches wealth out of the economy and hoards it. Hoarded wealth does not move through a society's economy. It does nobody any good locked into in trust funds.
The investor class doesn't "leech" money. You're thinking of Communism, where the upper class does nothing. In todays society, the investors are the ones making your computers, making your houses, and they do it for almost nothing. If you want to have it your way, we'd all suffer, do you get it?
If you really wanted to be better off you would do something about it, it's easier here than anywhere else to make a fortune, plenty have done it, so get up or shut up. I don't have any sympathy for people like you, unless you're legally retarded.
And as for me, I am working paycheck to paycheck while I go to school, but I have big plans. If I fail, I fail. I am not gonna bitch to the government if I do! So are you a schmuck too then? Welfare recipient? Minor?
Yeah you should be entitled to an equal share for sitting on your ass in front of a computer all day. That's fair. Why don't you sail a boat to Cuba if that's what you want?
It's not easy to be one of the top 10%, you have to be a work-a-holic. That's the unique nature of our system, we create work-a-holics, so who're you to say that you deserve some of that money? You didn't do any of the work!
Some things should be voted by people, like propositions, but most things people are too stupid to vote for. It goes back to the 1600/1700's when only white male land owners could vote, because most non-white-male-landowners were uneducated, and might enact a bill for government subsidized beer.
The assault weapons ban is an example of this. Some lawmakers are jumping on this as if it's effective, trying to polish their image. Others don't see any real value with it, despite overwhelming popular support. As the old saying goes "Guns don't kill people, I kill people".
Things change, of course. I still think people should be required to take an IQ test before they can vote.
You make the assumption that it is the strongest currency, which clearly it is not.
Well then by your definition highly inflated currencies like the Japanese yen would be stronger, which isn't the case. That's not to say that Japan doesn't have a strong economy. There were suitcases upon suitcases of American dollars found in Saddam's strongholds, probably to be used for terrorist purposes, but also pretty useful if you're going to try and disappear.
Also, this outstanding debt means, that the greenabcks in your pocket, are not actually yours, but belong to someone else who has been promised to be paid back, and if this breaks down, then noone will want them.
The $5000 or so in cash I currently have is insignificant to me. I do have a lot of faith in the US economy. We seem to be the only innovators. As most businessmen are aware debt is not always a bad thing. We had a surplus a couple years ago and we decided not to pay off debt with it, as is the case with many publicly traded companies, its no big deal. You invest that money back in the business and it turns into more money. The fact is, I have most of my money invested in capital assets, my house, my cars... Stockpiling gold is such a waste of money. If all you want is a stable currency you are a weenie. You figure out one day that the concept of "money" is a tough one to deal with. It doesn't actually exist, and nobody can really hold you accountable for it. Also, go take a look at how many countries owe the United States money, and how many countries went belly up after huge US investments were made in them. How much aid money do we give out (Government and Private Charities)? It's pretty funny how everybody hates us so much, half of America wants us to be even nicer, and the other half is fed up with it. Those of us who're fed up with the rest of the world seem to be gaining ground, so to speak.
Queue the american national anthem. You must be so proud!
A little bitter are we? =)
I'm starting to get a clearer picture why posts like this get an "Insightful" score.
The SLC delegation recently voted on the Utopia project and they turned it down. There were commercials running on TV for people to write their local delegate, probably funded by one of the many companies that could lose their monopoly. The plan would essentially allow unlimited amount of bandwidth to be bought at wholesale from the municipalities, so the claim that it would "destroy jobs" and "cost a lot" was nonsense. It would cost less because cable lines and phone lines could be combined into one, the cable company would move over to fiber and the phone companies would move over to fiber. Talk shows were talking about it, people were calling in all in favor of it, angry at the commercial advertising, but it still passed for some reason (Payola?). Other counties/cities are still on board with it, its only SLC, where the most benefit would be had, that has jumped off the bandwagon.
Slashdot Mirror
4 Bills and 4 Resolutions in 20 years. That's less than one every session of congress. He certainly doesn't take the lead on issues. Let's take a long at his most important achievements.
S.J.RES.158 - 6-16-1989(Day Introduced) Title: A joint resolution designating October 22 through 28, 1989, as "World Population Awareness Week". Wow....his very first thing of anything passed.....
S.J.RES.160 - 6-13-1991 Title: A joint resolution designating the week beginning October 20, 1991, as "World Population Awareness Week". There's number 2......Same thing.
S.J.RES.318 - 6-18-92 Title: A joint resolution designating November 13, 1992, as "Vietnam Veterans Memorial 10th Anniversary Day". That's 3, and unfortunatly he did the honors there.
S.J.RES.337 - 9-15-1992 Title: A joint resolution designating September 18, 1992, as "National POW/MIA Recognition Day", and authorizing display of the National League of Families POW/MIA flag. That's resolution number 4.
S.1563 - 7-25-1991 Title: A bill to authorize appropriations to carry out the National Sea Grant College Program Act, and for other purposes. His first bill that was signed into law...7 years after he won his first election.
S.1206 - 7-1-1993 Title: A bill to redesignate the Federal building located at 380 Trapelo Road in Waltham, Massachusetts, as the "Frederick C. Murphy Federal Center". That's the 2nd bill that was passed.....
S.1636 - 11-8-93 Title: A bill to authorize appropriations for the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 and to improve the program to reduce the incidental taking of marine mammals during the course of commercial fishing operations, and for other purposes. Save the whales?
S791 - 4-14-1999 Title: A bill to amend the Small Business Act with respect to the women's business center program And that's the last bill he got signed into law.
I'm not going to look at Dick Cheney's record. He's not even running for president. What's the hangup with Dick Cheney? You want to pick on vice presidents, John Edwards made a fortune convincing juries about his junk science, raising insurance premiums. John Edwards can't get elected in his own state he's done such a bad job.
Ok, so you don't think war in Iraq is good for anything. So shaddup already, you're not the one fighting it. It has nothing to do with you. I'm done with this conversation.
I asked you to mention names. I went and looked up two names that democrats are pointing fingers at, and neither one of them was directly involved with the Bush Campaign. Give me a link.
As for the forged documents, I do think there has been a surge in negative politics once the Clinton advisors came into the Kerry camp, but I never made the claim that the documents had anything to do with Kerry. I'm talking about the lack of integrity among democrats in general. Apparently the other broadcast news agencies are pointing the finger at some reporter in Texas.
But give me a link. I haven't seen any significant evidence that SBVT is linked with the Bush campaign, any moreso than Kerry is linked with moveon.org. He attended a few moveon.org fundraisers. What's that about?
And back to my original point, the swift boat vets aren't all telling the same lie. Kerry inflated his war stories to the point that they were lies.
This post is genius. Are you an Economics major?
Any entity who's first primary purpose is not self interest and survival will cease to survive.
Moderators? Could we give this post a boost? I've never heard this put so eloquently. Typically products that are labeled with a "made in the USA" have their own place in the market. Plastic artifacts from China are cheap, in ever sense of the word, but if cheap is what you want, then cheap is what you shall have! I wish farming went the same course. I don't see why we should support inefficient farmers.
Luckily, the world is moving more and more in the direction of free trade.
Researching it involves taking embryos that weren't going to turn into humans, anyway.
Calling a human embry anything but a human would be calling your infantile self inhuman. What makes you any less human? What is intelligence? Is DNA splitting and duplicating a form of decision making? Does the cell make a choice to replicate? Is it morally right to kill animals because they are not higher thinkers?
Saying that it kills embryos is like saying that masturbation kills sperm.
Imagine if the product of you masturbating was that a human embryo is produced that would grow under the right conditions. You would flush it down the toilet and always wonder what that kid would be like. You might even be worried that the kid would actually grow into a sewer baby, so you drop your wad in a bucket of acid before sending it down the drain. Eventually a company springs up that will BUY your wads off of you! So you mail off a packet of crygenically preserved wads to the research factory. Later on you find out that those wads are in their mid-teens and researchers are trying to see if they can transplant a human brain, to no avail. One of your wads was combined with a bee by some ambitious scientist, but instead of having wings and a stinger, just ended up a slimy and disfigured. Another company springs up to put these "non-humans" to sleep.
Point is, with such a promising outlook for adult stem cells, do we really want to go down the embryonic stem cell path? Cloning these "non-humans"? Does a cloned embryo constitute a non-human? Obviously the human no longer has his indivuality. What if someone agreed that researchers were able to take their cloned self and perform inhumane experiments on them? This is a pretty complicated question, as are most matters of ethics. It's a can of worms, that's what it is. Sortof goes hand in hand with the abortion issue. I say lets preserve our individuality. Whats the harm in a natural death, by the way? Is it really such a bad thing to die of natural causes?
You clearly have no idea what that word means.
What are you, a child? You confirm that you understand the hypocrisy and try to defend yourself in the following paragraph.
Given that there was no possible way in which Iraq could be perceived as a threat to us, it's obviously not that.
Oh nevermind, apparently you don't understand. I was referring to the war to liberate Iraq from Saddam Hussein. I had no idea what you were talking about, Donald Rumsfeld selling GAS to Saddam Hussein. Here in the US, we have outlawed chemical weapons. We don't manufacture gas. Donald Rumsfeld attempted a diplomatic relationship with Saddam Hussein but was stabbed in the back. You can read all about it here. It's so ridiculously stupid of you to find Donald Rumsfeld at fault. You are truly an idiot, and now you're officially a liar.
Dick Cheney? Hmmm... Well he's making bank off of this occupation.
Care to explain this? This may very well be a lie, I don't have time to refute you, you've already been discredited. Dick Cheney makes "bank" as the vice president already. He went in their a multi-millionaire.
Typical delusional idiocy. I never claimed to support Clinton. Additionally, you think a blowjob is worse than murder. Unless you're giving it, right Sparky?
No, I already told you, all I care about is integrity. Clinton lied to the nation. This is really sad, you've sunk to homosexual accusations. Maybe someone will step in and save you with some real arguments.
What, the ones that say the same thing as the real ones but weren't the actual copies? Oh wow, the President is proven to be a cowardly deserter, but they copied off of somebody else's paper. That's much worse, really it is.
What are you talking about now? Copies? No they were copies of forgeries, haven't you heard? CBS News is probably going to be investigated for criminal acts. There is a cover up going on by Dan Rather, claiming that they are authentic without releasing the source. If you're one of those that believes "sure they were forgeries, but they're TRUE!" then you're an idiot. Why don't you go look for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
Hot tip, Sparky: We're more than 200 miles from Iraq. The atlas is your friend.
I don't even know why I bother with you crackpots. You're more afraid of a nuclear bomb in a suitcase than missiles. Ok.
No, not really. I'm just a bit bothered by an administration that thinks putting old dying people in jail for smoking a plant is more important than terrorists that they were warned by 7 different countries in increasing detail, who were planning on attacking our freaking country. I'm sorry you're so sick and deluded that you have your priorities so out of whack.
Ok, so you're a druggie who thinks that the patriot act was designed to catch druggies. Bill Clinton's administration, Sandy Berger, was given an opportunity to have Bin Laden on a plate, and knowing he was a threat passed up the opportunity. Recently, Sandy Berger removed and apparently "lost" a bunch of files from the national archive. Personally I think this guy is worse than any druggie like yourself, but he gets off free. This is truly an injustice. As for your claim that 9/11 could have been prevented, the 9/11 commission found that George Bush could not be held accountable for that. This is another moot point. By the way, throwing druggies in jail is not a priority of mine. I think they're mentally ill and need psychological help. But to say that Bush "diverted" funds is pure nonsense. You can't say that. When funding is cut for one thing, it doesn't automatically go somewhere else, does this make sense to you?
Seek psychological help, it's never to late to turn your life around. And if you ever get arrested under provisions of the Patriot Act, your right to privacy will protect you in court, unless you're a illegal terrorist ;)
Whoop de doo. A lawyer! You're talking about a lawyer. Read about Zach Exley, Here.
If you think an overanxious lawyer reflects the integrity of George Bush, you're an idiot. Thinking that Zach Exley is coordinating between the Kerry Campaign and moveon.org is easier to believe. I don't know of any "bush campaign operatives". Chris LaCivita doesn't work for the bush campaign.
The swift boat vets have been upset with John Kerry ever since his 1971 testimony. 250 vets don't just fall into place by as a result of someone elses scheming.
Really! How is expending massive amounts of resources on something that's not at all useful beneficial to society? Would you mind detailing the benefits to your everyday man on the street of being able to destroy the world even more times over than we already can?
Allow me to enlighten you. Back in the 80's, Jimmy Carter cut a lot of defense funding, among other bad decisions. This resulted in thousands of people losing their jobs. I was living in southern california at the time. I remember property value plummeting and interest rates skyrocketing. Also, a lot of defense spending goes into jets, rocket engines, communications technologies like satellites, the GPS system, earth observing satellites (environment), I could go on and on. This is really quite a simple concept, I don't think many of your liberal buddies would argue with me.
Sure, as long as you don't mind completely frying your power and communications grids! And how great would it be to have that cloud of radiation drifting across the country! Seriously, that's about the stupidest idea for nuclear weapons use I think I've ever heard.
It would be better than standing by and watching the nuclear missiles hit our cities! A cloud of nuclear fallout over the ocean is not so bad in comparison. This is quite simple also, perhaps I didn't communicate my point well the first time.
Bullshit. Kerry has a 20 year record to tout. Turn off the Faux News and try doing some basic research for yourself.
A 20 year record. That says a lot. During that 20 year record, he didn't sponsor a single bill. He just voted, and his votes were pretty bad. Another patriot act? Has your life been turned upside down by the infernal patriot act? :( By the way, I don't have cable.
And yet you trust Bush and company, even though they're PROVEN liars?
When was this proven? Darby, who I replied to a few minutes ago, agrees with me that it wasn't proven. See thats the thing. I believe Bush has a set of moral values, and I trust he wouldn't do that, and what would he possibly have to gain? Everybody knows your approval ratings go down when the hippies start calling you a war monger.
I won't try and defend Clinton...
I'd rather have Clinton than Kerry.
Character means standing up for freedom, not cowardly supporting those who try to destroy it as you are doing.
You're so ridiculously hyprocritical it's funny. What do you think the war in Iraq is? A land grab? You need a dose of reality, crackpot.
You sound like you're just upset that all the leaders you support have no integrity. Namely Clinton, but Kerry has got a few red flags, well documented in "Unfit for Command". How bout those forged documents I'm hearing about lately? That's the kindof shit that makes me sick.
You can't really do much about the suitcase bomb, but there are detectors in Washington DC and port cities that could potentially stop something like that. A missile is a pretty obvious way to get a bomb into the country. Saddam Hussein used them. I would say an easier weapon would be a makeshift unmanned aircraft. Continued development of the PAC missile, the airborne laser, these are all good efforts. But keep bitching.
I don't know where you get the impression that I'm out of touch with reality. You basically confirmed all my comments, but continued expressing your hatred for George Bush. I think you're also upset because the Patriot Act makes you feel paranoid that law officers will bust down your door and raid your indoor marijuana garden. I glean this from your thinking that funds were diverted(?) from terrorism to the drug war, and your "standing up for freedom" insanity. Am I right? You should quit smokin the dope, it rots your brain.Any particular reason?
Yes, because people don't consider a missile strike simply because it hasn't happened yet. The terrorists used Jets in 9/11, but they're using home-made missiles against israel right now, you bet your ass they'd use larger missiles if they could assemble them.
I'm not going to say much about your anti-bush rant. He didn't lie, Kerry and Clinton are both proven liars. 9/11 commission vindicated Bush. Everyone in America thought Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, we knew he did at one time and now we have no idea where they are. It's a moot point.
And if you think character means beating people to death in the street for their opinions, you're an idiot.
For example, on the stem cell question, Bush makes it quite clear that people should stop thinking of stem cell research as a solution to all medical problems, and especially NOW, at the current time, we shouldn't be giving false hope to people who have recently been diagnosed.
This is interesting because John Kerry makes it clear that he would not pursue a missile defense program NOW, but would wait for more research to be done before implementing anything (basically saying he doesn't support it at all). In my opinion, the missile defense is an issue we need to be dealing with now, where biotechnology research doesn't require a huge injection of tax dollars because its all covered in the private sector, and there is no clear goal in sight. Defense spending is always beneficial to society, whether the weapons are actually used or not.
Also, I think there may be a need for nuclear weapons in the future, shooting down other missiles or volleys of missiles would be a pretty good use for them, off the top of my head.
I'm glad to see that both support manned space exploration and ITER research.
Basically, like gfxguy says, Bush has a record to tout, John Kerry does not. I don't trust John Kerry personally, I don't trust any democrat. Character matters a lot to me, more than the things they say they would do. As I recall, clinton said he was going to lower taxes.
This one serves a different purpose than the 802.11x stuff. This is narrowband communications, you can't get much faster for the narrow spectrum these devices occupy. You could put an amplifier on one of these bad boys and a yagi and get basically any range you want. You could use repeaters to get over any mountain. The 900mhz spectrum is also less crowded than 2.4ghz.
Another cool features is the RS232 connectivity. You could build a pretty nifty micro-wireless computer node, for robotic applications. Control the robot from a bash terminal from 40 miles away.
Sh-ya! Utah is the spot. I just bought a high gain wireless antenna from this place: http://www.pacwireless.com/
...right down the street. We almost had the Utopia (municipal fiber-to-the-home), but missed it, Lindon might still get it though. Ski Utah! Whoot! Mid-west side! Novell power! yada yada...
And one last link for the road, LOL.
The Solution
It's been fun leftie, really.
Here you go:
Communist Party USA
Get your beautiful red Karl Marx t-shirt, and help defeat Bush!
Look bud, communism comes in all shapes and sizes, whether its someone trying to take a large portion of my earnings to give to some lazy schmuck, after keeping a portion for his own bloated salary, or a self-serving politician who will do anything to get elected, or a dictator trying to destroy the free world using nuclear weapons, or simply a rotten chump like yourself who's been suckered into thinking capitalism is a dispicable evil, or that corporations are going to take over the world and enslave everybody. You're the paranoid freak. I'm the one content with life, remember? You should see a shrink.
Don't say too much, don't respond to my claims, rattle off as many names as possible. Yup, you're what I call a crackpot. I am not even gonna start with McCarthy...
First of all, under Pres. Eisenhower, there was a 90% top tax bracket. Under Nixon, there was a 50% top tax bracket. YOU ARE CALLING EISENHOWER AND NIXON COMMUNISTS.
They were both pinkos. Nixon is by no definition of mine a conservative, and I was glad to see him go. If you think I sit across party lines, you're an idiot.
You wouldn't know what communism was if Karl Marx bit you on the left ass cheek. You know who said that capitalism must provide protections to protect against potential abuses of the system by state chartered corporations? ADAM SMITH in "The Wealth of Nations." Do you know who originated criticism of the state charter corporation? ADAM SMITH in "The Wealth of Nations." Capitalism was designed by Adam Smith as a response to the abuses by state-chartered corporations extremely prominent in the Mercantilist economic system of the time. You are also calling ADAM SMITH A COMMUNIST.
It's typical of you liberals to rattle off names in an effort to belittle someone. I know who adam smith is, I know who keynes is and I know where Richard Nixon stood on relation to these issues. Controlling the distribution of income with some measure of compassion is always a dead end trap, every little bit hurts. You won't even respond to this claim, cause you're a crackpot who's out of touch with reality.
I don't think adam smith is on your side, he's a pure capitalist, had many bad ideas and shortcomings but none of them had anything to do with the re-distribution of income. I went out to get a quote on where adam smith stands on the re-distribution of income and here is what he has to say:
"All the different regulations of the mercantile system, necessarily derange more or less this natural and most advantageous distribution of stock." (pp. 594-5). "Every derangement of the natural distribution of stock is necessarily hurtful to the society in which it takes place; whether it be by repelling from a particular trade the stock which would otherwise go to it, or by attracting towards a particular trade that which would not otherwise come to it." (p. 597)
As for the neo-con crap, are alcoholic vagrants not needy? I don't think they should be entitled to anything more but basic sustinence. The reason elderly people can't purchase prescription drugs is because they relied on a corrupt welfare system to provide for them, any intelligent person would use non-taxable accounts to provide for their retirement, and you're advocating more government intervention? Those billionaires wouldn't be billionaires if 90% of their income was tax revenue. There would be no insentive to succeed, and my measure of success is determined by how well off I can leave my own kids. You seem to think that the fact that I could potentiall earn a billion dollars in my lifetime means that our system is corrupt, and that I don't deserve that money. You're an idiot, face it. A billion dollars is reflective of the efficiency of our economy, and inflation, and more and more people are getting themselves into that upper tax bracket every year. What you want to do is give people a bigger insentive to FAIL!
If you want to live as an equal, MOVE. Quit advocating change in America.
Corporations have a self destruct mechanism built into them. Corporations are the most efficient, most readily available source of jobs. Corporations are owned by people, millions of them, they pay dividends to people who are interested in long term investment. Go ahead and complain about corporate abuse, its only been around for about 10 years and you're already bitching. By re-allocating corporate funds to the lower class, you're taking jobs and creating more poverty. How do people ever reach the conclusion that re-allocation of funds is the answer to everything? The system is self sustaining. A progressive tax can't be too progressive or you edge closer and closer to communism, would you agree with that? You just think we need to be a liiiiitle bit more progressive with taxation, right? How much should we be taxing the upper class? Should we just put a cap on the amount of wealth one can amass? Say, $10 million? Lets raise the gift / inheritance tax to %90 and abolish all other reason to succeed in life.
As for the food bank, you are awefully compassionate for doing that, but yet so pessimistic with your value of my ambitions. Politically speaking, its definately the lefties whining.
As for the safety net, it's already there. You are argueing for your own well being, in my opinion. Go shop around in other countries, you'll find much needier people. How do you know they're right wingers anyways? Do you label all alcoholic vagrants as right wingers? I'm sure if you sat down with them you would find you have a lot in common.
None of these privatization schemes offers any suggestions about what to do when the next Enron happens and people lose their retirement savings.
Because it doesn't happen. If someone has all of their money invested in one company, they are at much too high risk, and the possibility of that could easily be omitted in a clause. If the entire stock market collapses, it goes back up eventually. And for the rest there are always municipal bonds.... The current SS system functions a lot like municipal bonds, you give the government your money and they spend it and promise to pay you back. I'd put my faith in the stock market personally.
The investor class leeches wealth out of the economy and hoards it. Hoarded wealth does not move through a society's economy. It does nobody any good locked into in trust funds.
You know, this really shows how little you know about the economy. "Where did all the money go?" you ask. It's there, there is no limit to the amount of money in the economy. The money that is already there just goes round and round. When you take a bunch of money and "hoard" it, it deteriorates. When you invest it in another company, you trust that they are producing at a high rate. If you invest it in your own effort, you have complete control and the potential to double or triple it in a few years time, and that benefits everybody. The more competitive an economy is, the more efficient it is, the better it is. You just don't get it. I don't want to live in eastern Europe. Study economics before you form these concrete opinions.
According to you, the people that make the products and provide the services do no work and deserve no compensation. Only the senior management that sit on their ass in committee meetings discussion how to divy up the profits deserve the rewards?
No, they get a paycheck. That's all the compensation they deserve. If they want more, then they get up off their asses and plan a risky business strategy. Real work is putting 3 years of my average salary into 1 month of action, and if I fail, I live on ramen and milk for the next 5 or 6 years. Those are the people going from rags to riches, the ones who put it all on the line. I know a few of them, and it is no easy task.
Get this straight. The top 10% are not work-a-holics. The top 10% sits on their asses and spend inherited wealth. Do you know over 60% of the population of the US thinks it's in the top 3% of income earners? I'm certain that you are one of the poor schmucks one paycheck away from losing everything and becoming homeless who's been deluded into thinking you're well off.
If it makes you feel any better to think that, then go ahead and sit on your ass. Live paycheck to paycheck. That is the poor mans way! No risk, no reward. Its true that most wealth is inherited, but does it last forever? The statistics say no.
The lower and middle classes of a society make the capital for a society a society. The investor class leeches wealth out of the economy and hoards it. Hoarded wealth does not move through a society's economy. It does nobody any good locked into in trust funds.
The investor class doesn't "leech" money. You're thinking of Communism, where the upper class does nothing. In todays society, the investors are the ones making your computers, making your houses, and they do it for almost nothing. If you want to have it your way, we'd all suffer, do you get it?
If you really wanted to be better off you would do something about it, it's easier here than anywhere else to make a fortune, plenty have done it, so get up or shut up. I don't have any sympathy for people like you, unless you're legally retarded.
And as for me, I am working paycheck to paycheck while I go to school, but I have big plans. If I fail, I fail. I am not gonna bitch to the government if I do! So are you a schmuck too then? Welfare recipient? Minor?
Yeah you should be entitled to an equal share for sitting on your ass in front of a computer all day. That's fair. Why don't you sail a boat to Cuba if that's what you want?
It's not easy to be one of the top 10%, you have to be a work-a-holic. That's the unique nature of our system, we create work-a-holics, so who're you to say that you deserve some of that money? You didn't do any of the work!
Some things should be voted by people, like propositions, but most things people are too stupid to vote for. It goes back to the 1600/1700's when only white male land owners could vote, because most non-white-male-landowners were uneducated, and might enact a bill for government subsidized beer.
The assault weapons ban is an example of this. Some lawmakers are jumping on this as if it's effective, trying to polish their image. Others don't see any real value with it, despite overwhelming popular support. As the old saying goes "Guns don't kill people, I kill people".
Things change, of course. I still think people should be required to take an IQ test before they can vote.
You make the assumption that it is the strongest currency, which clearly it is not.
Well then by your definition highly inflated currencies like the Japanese yen would be stronger, which isn't the case. That's not to say that Japan doesn't have a strong economy. There were suitcases upon suitcases of American dollars found in Saddam's strongholds, probably to be used for terrorist purposes, but also pretty useful if you're going to try and disappear.
Also, this outstanding debt means, that the greenabcks in your pocket, are not actually yours, but belong to someone else who has been promised to be paid back, and if this breaks down, then noone will want them.
The $5000 or so in cash I currently have is insignificant to me. I do have a lot of faith in the US economy. We seem to be the only innovators. As most businessmen are aware debt is not always a bad thing. We had a surplus a couple years ago and we decided not to pay off debt with it, as is the case with many publicly traded companies, its no big deal. You invest that money back in the business and it turns into more money. The fact is, I have most of my money invested in capital assets, my house, my cars... Stockpiling gold is such a waste of money. If all you want is a stable currency you are a weenie. You figure out one day that the concept of "money" is a tough one to deal with. It doesn't actually exist, and nobody can really hold you accountable for it. Also, go take a look at how many countries owe the United States money, and how many countries went belly up after huge US investments were made in them. How much aid money do we give out (Government and Private Charities)? It's pretty funny how everybody hates us so much, half of America wants us to be even nicer, and the other half is fed up with it. Those of us who're fed up with the rest of the world seem to be gaining ground, so to speak.
Queue the american national anthem. You must be so proud!
A little bitter are we? =)
I'm starting to get a clearer picture why posts like this get an "Insightful" score.
The SLC delegation recently voted on the Utopia project and they turned it down. There were commercials running on TV for people to write their local delegate, probably funded by one of the many companies that could lose their monopoly. The plan would essentially allow unlimited amount of bandwidth to be bought at wholesale from the municipalities, so the claim that it would "destroy jobs" and "cost a lot" was nonsense. It would cost less because cable lines and phone lines could be combined into one, the cable company would move over to fiber and the phone companies would move over to fiber. Talk shows were talking about it, people were calling in all in favor of it, angry at the commercial advertising, but it still passed for some reason (Payola?). Other counties/cities are still on board with it, its only SLC, where the most benefit would be had, that has jumped off the bandwagon.