Please-- Worldnetdaily doesn't even try to be objective. It's a totally biased site.
Just look at some of those ads "The Freefall of the American University: How US Colleges corrupt your kids minds and morals". "Reagans war in war and Deed".
In the article, they use the term "left-wing", but oddly don't refer to any donors as "right-wing".
Also, one big reason why CBS and NBC have donated more money to Kerry is that they have donated more money to both Candidates. NBC and CBS are much bigger then
Also, I challenge some of the facts:
1. NBC and CBS produce many shows, not just news programs. "Fox News Channel" shows just news. So he's comparing Apples to a fruit orchard.
2. "NBC's contributions totaled $146,585, none of which went to Bush."
3. The WorldNetDaily article is about "2004 election cycle donations from employees of CBS"
However, this is different then what parent poster said: "I did some research on the owners and newscasters on CNN , ABC and NBC and found that they all gave large sums to the Democratic party and candidates"
so I did some research on the owners and newscasters on CNN , ABC and NBC and found that they all gave large sums to the Democratic party and candidates.
Can you please provide a link to back this up?
I doubt that ABC and NBC would give money individually of their parent companies (Disney and GE? respectively).
I see Viacom gave $167446 to Kerry, and Time Warner (parent of CNN) gave $288,299.
Here is some information about donations to Bush, which includes similar contributions from big companies.
- eToys blew through $500 million in one year, and imploded under the pressure. Except for their single subsidiary (babycenter.com , which is still around), the eToys assets were sold for about something like $6 million.
- eToy never really did anything signifigant except protest eToys... look at etoy.com-- they have 2 stories about ETOYS which went out of business over two fucking years ago.
Count this Libertarian Very pleased (though, as a non-U.S. citizen, I'm watching this one on the sidelines).
Or is that "I'll be guiding this one from the sidelines".
Ha! He said big-L Libertarian, not little-l libertarian. That proves that he's a member of the Libertarian Party, but he claims he's not a citizen of the US-- he's from Canada no doubt!! The international big-L Libertarian conspiracy has been exposed.
"Are you, or have you ever been, a member of the big-L Libertarian party!"
Last I heard you could not make a clone or a twin just by sticking an Embryonic stem cell in a womb.
And no where did I say that this was possible. I quite clearly said "along with other pieces". Embryonic stem cells seem to be a major component in the development of the embryo.
If we could allowocate all the money going to embryonic stem cells to adult stem cells, bam, problem solved and no ethic problems with lots of people.
Hey, that would be great, but if you redirect all money from embryonic stem cell research to adult stem cell research, you might miss many opportunities for cures.
Embryonic stem cells may be able to do things which adult stem cells cannot. I don't see adult stem cells spawning new life, for example.
The field is so new that it is quite impossibile to know if adult stem cells are as capable as embryonic stem cells.
Either way, the embryonic stem cell vs adult stem cell debate is a judgement that should be made by the scientific community, not by you or me or the president or anybody else who wishes to impose their morals on me.
If then we know that THEN we can make the moral decision to redirect funding.
I'd like to see more objective evidence about the lag time. It's not that I disbelieve the numbers, and I've heard your numbers before. But it really seems like these numbers are stacked to provide a convenient excuse to deflect any blame off the current administration.
"It takes $years_current_administration_in_office + 1 year for policies to trickle through"
Certainly different economic policies have different lag times-- some are immediate, like tax cuts increasing the national debt.
Clinton was in office for 8 years. Which means his economic polices should have "trickled through" at the beginning of his second term. And indeed, the national deficit DID begin to decline around that time.
Odd how they don't acknowledge that the economic deterioration began before he took office
Bush has been in office for nearly 4 years, don't you think it's time he took responsibility for his own policies now instead of blaming the previous administration?
If the economy was doing GOOD, Bush would try to take credit. So why not take responsibility for his actions?
There has never been a big libertarian presence in the Democratic party. Their entire philosophy of government is diametrically opposed to the libertarian vision.
I think you've been reading too much propoganda:) The philosophies are not diametrically opposed, even if Democrats and Libertarians disagree on some big issues.
Most Democrats are strong believers in civil liberty-- you are free to do whatever you want, as long as you don't infringe upon the rights of others. Practically every democrat will agree with the philosophy presented at the top of lp.org.
I think Democrats and Libertarians differ in the treatment of rights-- I belive that all people have an equal right to the basics -- food, shelter, health, happyness, love, others. A well-designed government can be used to promote equality for all people, but right now there are many problems getting in the way to achieve those goals.
Sadly, my experience with most people who call themselves "Libertarians" is that they care mostly about low taxes and want less government interference in their buisness affairs, and could care less if the government prevent homosexuals from marrying each other, or if a business business pays white workers more then black workers. I call these people "Business libertarians".
Looks like the editors updated Slashdot's Homepage preferences. I don't recall seeing "Sections All Best None" when I tweaked my settings last week.
This morning my homepage was very different then I left it last night. There were slashboxes that I never subscribed to (Freshmeat, among others); and I hitting the 'Up Close Down' buttons failed to do anything.
Who cares if it was a pen? Oh no, a minor rule was broken!
Look, we're talking about the Presidential race here. A pen shouldn't phase either Kerry or Bush-- the job of the President is to deal with people who break REAL MAJOR rules-- hiding bombs instead of pens.
Unless you count black voters who were turned away from the polls. Where Bush's brother was Governer. Gee. In Florida. Who would have imagined.
Where the head judge who oversaw the recount effort was friendly enough with Dick Cheney to go duck hunting.
That story has nepotism and corruption written all over it. Sounds more like a corrupt 3rd world country then the great, fair United States.
Here is the bright side of things-- even if Bush does win the 2004 elections, history will be the ultimate judge.
In 20 years, Bush will be looked upon as a president who was even more corrupt then Nixon, and the Iraqi war will be seen as pointless as the Vietnam war.
Many lessons will hopefully be learned from our current times. History books will discuss our era in detail-- Unfortunately I fear that many of these lessons will only be learned through pain and death.
And the only radio that produces intelligent programming like Forum.
Take a break from listening to your Clearchannel and Top 40 radio.. maybe you'll learn something. Forum has "Science Fridays" which might interest a geek like you.
I've been a proud supporter of KQED for 5 years now.
Slashdot Mirror
Please-- Worldnetdaily doesn't even try to be objective. It's a totally biased site.
Just look at some of those ads "The Freefall of the American University: How US Colleges corrupt your kids minds and morals". "Reagans war in war and Deed".
In the article, they use the term "left-wing", but oddly don't refer to any donors as "right-wing".
Also, one big reason why CBS and NBC have donated more money to Kerry is that they have donated more money to both Candidates. NBC and CBS are much bigger then
Also, I challenge some of the facts:
1. NBC and CBS produce many shows, not just news programs. "Fox News Channel" shows just news. So he's comparing Apples to a fruit orchard.
2. "NBC's contributions totaled $146,585, none of which went to Bush."
Not true, some money did go to Bush.
3. The WorldNetDaily article is about "2004 election cycle donations from employees of CBS"
However, this is different then what parent poster said: "I did some research on the owners and newscasters on CNN , ABC and NBC and found that they all gave large sums to the Democratic party and candidates"
so I did some research on the owners and newscasters on CNN , ABC and NBC and found that they all gave large sums to the Democratic party and candidates.
Can you please provide a link to back this up?
I doubt that ABC and NBC would give money individually of their parent companies (Disney and GE? respectively).
I see Viacom gave $167446 to Kerry, and Time Warner (parent of CNN) gave $288,299.
Here is some information about donations to Bush, which includes similar contributions from big companies.
And after all that fuss, look at what happened:
- eToys blew through $500 million in one year, and imploded under the pressure. Except for their single subsidiary (babycenter.com , which is still around), the eToys assets were sold for about something like $6 million.
- eToy never really did anything signifigant except protest eToys... look at etoy.com-- they have 2 stories about ETOYS which went out of business over two fucking years ago.
Fucking rediculous.
Count this Libertarian Very pleased (though, as a non-U.S. citizen, I'm watching this one on the sidelines).
Or is that "I'll be guiding this one from the sidelines".
Ha! He said big-L Libertarian, not little-l libertarian. That proves that he's a member of the Libertarian Party, but he claims he's not a citizen of the US-- he's from Canada no doubt!! The international big-L Libertarian conspiracy has been exposed.
"Are you, or have you ever been, a member of the big-L Libertarian party!"
If the media was truely biased towards the left, then why don't leftist like me believe the media?
Perhaps the world isn't as simple as you imply?
Last I heard you could not make a clone or a twin just by sticking an Embryonic stem cell in a womb.
And no where did I say that this was possible. I quite clearly said "along with other pieces". Embryonic stem cells seem to be a major component in the development of the embryo.
If we could allowocate all the money going to embryonic stem cells to adult stem cells, bam, problem solved and no ethic problems with lots of people.
Hey, that would be great, but if you redirect all money from embryonic stem cell research to adult stem cell research, you might miss many opportunities for cures.
Embryonic stem cells may be able to do things which adult stem cells cannot. I don't see adult stem cells spawning new life, for example.
The field is so new that it is quite impossibile to know if adult stem cells are as capable as embryonic stem cells.
Either way, the embryonic stem cell vs adult stem cell debate is a judgement that should be made by the scientific community, not by you or me or the president or anybody else who wishes to impose their morals on me.
If then we know that
THEN we can make the moral decision to redirect funding.
http://www.stemcellresearch.org/
Look at you try and slip in that propogandist website. "Oh, hopefully nobody will notice if I sneak this in real quiet like".
At least have the decency to let people know that the site sponsors are against embryonic stem-cell research.
Do you have scientific proof of this? Or are you just repeating George Bush's rhetoric?
Embryonic stem cells (along with other pieces) has the capability to grow into a new life.
My bone marrow stem cells cannot do that.
So obviously there is a difference.
OO langauges are far far superior to procedural langauges
Then why is so much software written in the latter?
I don't know which is far superior to the other, but I do know that when I compile most Open Source software, I'm using GCC not G++.
I think you've swallowed their bullshit hook, line, and sinker.
No, I just know my Democratic friends better then you. And they all believe strongly in personal freedom.
The convenience of the mother is clearly more important than the right to life of her unborn child.
Fine, what is the Libertarian stance on abortion then? I suspect they would be against making abortion illegal.
I'd like to see more objective evidence about the lag time. It's not that I disbelieve the numbers, and I've heard your numbers before. But it really seems like these numbers are stacked to provide a convenient excuse to deflect any blame off the current administration.
"It takes $years_current_administration_in_office + 1 year for policies to trickle through"
Certainly different economic policies have different lag times-- some are immediate, like tax cuts increasing the national debt.
Clinton was in office for 8 years. Which means his economic polices should have "trickled through" at the beginning of his second term. And indeed, the national deficit DID begin to decline around that time.
Odd how they don't acknowledge that the economic deterioration began before he took office
Bush has been in office for nearly 4 years, don't you think it's time he took responsibility for his own policies now instead of blaming the previous administration?
If the economy was doing GOOD, Bush would try to take credit. So why not take responsibility for his actions?
(For the record, I didn't vote for Clinton).
There has never been a big libertarian presence in the Democratic party. Their entire philosophy of government is diametrically opposed to the libertarian vision.
:) The philosophies are not diametrically opposed, even if Democrats and Libertarians disagree on some big issues.
I think you've been reading too much propoganda
Most Democrats are strong believers in civil liberty-- you are free to do whatever you want, as long as you don't infringe upon the rights of others. Practically every democrat will agree with the philosophy presented at the top of lp.org.
I think Democrats and Libertarians differ in the treatment of rights-- I belive that all people have an equal right to the basics -- food, shelter, health, happyness, love, others. A well-designed government can be used to promote equality for all people, but right now there are many problems getting in the way to achieve those goals.
Sadly, my experience with most people who call themselves "Libertarians" is that they care mostly about low taxes and want less government interference in their buisness affairs, and could care less if the government prevent homosexuals from marrying each other, or if a business business pays white workers more then black workers. I call these people "Business libertarians".
Looks like the editors updated Slashdot's Homepage preferences. I don't recall seeing "Sections All Best None" when I tweaked my settings last week.
This morning my homepage was very different then I left it last night. There were slashboxes that I never subscribed to (Freshmeat, among others); and I hitting the 'Up Close Down' buttons failed to do anything.
I suspect a bug is in the new code.
Who cares if it was a pen? Oh no, a minor rule was broken!
Look, we're talking about the Presidential race here. A pen shouldn't phase either Kerry or Bush-- the job of the President is to deal with people who break REAL MAJOR rules-- hiding bombs instead of pens.
As for the tax cuts, I benefitted from them and merrily bought a new Dell laptop with my tax return. And I'm not 'rich'
That's nice. I used my tax cut to cover the increased cost of my health care program (Which went up $1000) and my increased energy costs.
My $600 refund was gone before the check reached my mailbox.
And with a $500 billion deficit this year, getting a tax refund is feels like getting a $600 check from my credit card company...
Bush Bulge?
Oh, I thought you meant This Bush Bulge.
Is he trying to impress us or is that just body armor?
Unless you count black voters who were turned away from the polls. Where Bush's brother was Governer. Gee. In Florida. Who would have imagined.
Where the head judge who oversaw the recount effort was friendly enough with Dick Cheney to go duck hunting.
That story has nepotism and corruption written all over it. Sounds more like a corrupt 3rd world country then the great, fair United States.
Here is the bright side of things-- even if Bush does win the 2004 elections, history will be the ultimate judge.
In 20 years, Bush will be looked upon as a president who was even more corrupt then Nixon, and the Iraqi war will be seen as pointless as the Vietnam war.
Many lessons will hopefully be learned from our current times. History books will discuss our era in detail-- Unfortunately I fear that many of these lessons will only be learned through pain and death.
Lord help us though the trying times to come.
I hope I am wrong.
without substanciating this charge with a single piece of evidence
How often do people substantiate their charges in a 20-second radio snippit?
Especially when it can be substantiated so easily:
I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year.
For those too lazy to read the article: Bittorrent eDonkey / eMule Go ahead, knock down my karma.
There's a movie being regarding Bush which is being released in early November:
It's called Going Down.
(Laugh, it's meant to be a joke!)
AKA Socialist Radio.
And the only radio that produces intelligent programming like Forum.
Take a break from listening to your Clearchannel and Top 40 radio.. maybe you'll learn something. Forum has "Science Fridays" which might interest a geek like you.
I've been a proud supporter of KQED for 5 years now.
Hey man, my car has a 10 mile/100 million year warranty, so I'm set!
cat knowledge | grep understanding
cat knowledge | grep understanding >/dev/null | mailx -s "Cluebat for you" cluebat@brain.org