idrankwhat

He makes too much sense to get elected. The only part that left me confused was at the end. Exactly how many "colleges" does he have?

Indeed. Brave, brave, brave, brave Sir Lawrocket!

More people hate us, and have reason to. Fewer people on the planet call us "allies". Our biggest challenge to world peace and a major source of ill will against the US, the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, has been actively ignored. Our children have been burdened with a huge financial liability. Our military has been weakened. And in spite of the increased threat from abroad our greatest vulnerability, our ports, are still not secure or even close to being secure. That's a few on the short list. Some others include things like government sanctioned poisoning of our bodies and our environment and energy policies that give rise to the problems that I listed above. Not enough. But mostly being as vocal as possible in electronic and written print in an effort to point out where I see problems/solutions. The day job consists more of analyzing the extent of the poisoning of the natural systems in my State as well as trying to illuminate the impact that industry has on local and federal health policy. Oh, and I'm (hopefully) raising two boys to think critically and for themselves and to get as broad an education as possible.

No, you are bashing Bush. It adds very little to merely "bash Bush." It's easy to merely bash, bitch, complain, etc. Why go through the effort to discuss his policies when you can merely say, "Bush is an idiot?" Why put thought and support into your issues when you can say, "Bush sucks?" I think that it is a mistake to bitch bitch bitch without offering proposed solutions that may be workable. You must be thinking of someone else. "Bashing Bush" as you describe it does nothing towards achieving what I stated as my goal. In fact, saying things like that detract from the argument. And I have indeed offered solutions, all of which start with accountability.

Trying to make sure that our country doesn't repeat mistakes that have made my nation and family less safe.

Sorry, didn't mean to give you the 0% vs 100% impression. You should know by now that I'm a gray thinker in an often "black and white", "with us or against us" SC. Admittedly, I do get impatient sometimes and put my foot down, campaign financing being one example. Sort of an "If you break it I'm going to have to take it away from you. Go sit in timeout" kinda thing. So keep the dialog going if you feel so inclined. If no one responds to a post then I'm likely to think that either I've made a good point or that I'm so far off in la la land that even a Bush apologist won't throw a "crazy" emoticon at me. Most likely though, it's somewhere in between.

I just read this elsewhere a little while ago. Your timing is impeccable sir "....let's just say Rush and Bill's fans are extremely angry and prone to vulgarity, and need to work on their spelling.

Actually, I don't want to get "in it" more, I prefer a lateral move, as in transferring the massive subsidies that we give the petroleum and war industries and using it for alternative energy R&D. And when Big Solar starts posting record profits for any company ever in world history, we yank them too. Sometimes businesses need regulation so they don't do things like buy jobs for politicians and write the legislation for them, poison the planet and its inhabitants for profit, elevate shareholder concerns over child health (even if "Bag-O-Glass" IS the coolest present a child could want), or monopolize the market and force people to use an inferior operating system.

The reason that I point to my government is that my government is already influencing the industry through tax incentives, subsidies, etc. And in our case in particular, it is in our national security interest to find alternative sources of energy. P.S. Unfortunately our priorities are skewed right now. We apparently value the building of other nations over our own.

But the US is already "artificially stimulating" the petroleum market. Why not shift the locus from old energy to new energy? And Bill's point about not waiting for someone else to do it is a pretty good one. Just look who took the lead on efficient cars. Japan saw what was coming in the early 90's and started working for it. The US got lazy and made big gas guzzling vehicles and slacked off on the new technology R&D. Now Japan has the lead in the efficiency/technology dept and the US is scrambling to catch up.

Oh Bill, you know its only the media that makes it look that way. I'm pretty sure that Hillary is behind it all.

It's tempting to join in, but I'm giving her the attention she deserves when I say..................

Let me guess, my scenario involves an "activist pharmacist" and yours doesn't

Only in Twistedlogickistan.

You do realize that we maintain a global net of sattelites specifically designed to identify and track ballistic missile launches? -Blind Yes. Seeing and destroying are two different things.

Sorry, I've stomached about as many freshly picked cherries as I can handle. I'll probably be ready for more in six days, maybe six weeks, I doubt six months.

Yea, but the really tricky part is figuring out how to get Iran to install transponders in their missiles and giving us a heads up on the launch.

The government is telling the pharmacists to do their job. Would you have a problem with a pharmacist denying you the antibiotics that your Dr. prescribed for a raging infection? (Hmmm.....note to self: Might want to reconsider that investment in the new Christian Science Pharmacy.)

Yea, pharmaceutical lobbyist salaries, oil subsidies, overbilling and waste in cost plus nation building and reconstruction projects, $1.75 billion/day in interest on the debt, health care for your legislators............

It was inevitable. He'd never sign a domestic spending bill with that little pork in it. Let Ted Stevens get his hands on it, fatten it up a bit and I'll bet that baby sails through the White House like no multi-syllyllabic word can.

I'll need to take your's (& Bills) word for that, as I do not know. Great chatting with you. Well I don't think that there's any question that humans digging up millions of year's worth of sequestered carbon and burning it is an anthropogenic release. I suppose someone could take the approach that human induced release of carbon IS a natural phenomena. I mean after all, our own Secretary of the Interior (who is in charge of things outdoors) stated that these resources were put here for us to use up, until Christ returns of course.

No. But additional sources do not detract from the massive, anthropogenic release. Quite right. But if a CO2 induced increase in temperature causes the permafrost of a Siberian bog to release tremendous amounts of methane, is the resultant insulating effect caused by the methane or the CO2? As for the cow farts, is it their fault or is it the fault of the creatures who raise them in huge numbers for the consumption of a tasty yet inefficient from of sustenance?

That is a good question and I don't know how to quantify it without having any numbers on the amount of oil and coal we have used in last 100 years. But that said, how much of that land locked carbon would have been released to the atmosphere if we hadn't yanked it out and burned it?

This one's on my short list for this year's bash. http://www.prankplace.com/costumes1.asp?id=blowmegum

Thanks. Weird concept though. It seems like it's a decision as to whether or not to use a stage name based on your mood ring.