On 1/25/07, Denny Valliant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Thanks, that's much better, now we can dialog :)

> Yup.  I don't think capitalism alone will solve these particular problems
> (pollution, whathaveyou).  And for sure not in time, if there is a "time".
> Nor do I think that we're "already doing" enough.

Neither do I. But capitalism mixed with pressure from environmental
groups mixed with state imposed regulations work to an extent. Some
states may move slower and some faster. Asking the Fed to make blanket
rule changes could cause much damage to the slower moving states. They
might need to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.

> And I'm pissed at how this Administration has screwed over our kids.

Our kids probably have it better than any other countries kids do.

> Because of money and prestige.

Money and prestige screws over our kids? You are fading out again.

> How come Tuna wasn't on the list of things with dangerous levels of
> mercury, even tho it has dangerous levels of mercury? (just for instance-
> there are a ton more crappy, underhanded things like that going on)

I vaguely remember debating that on this list. The government
recommends you limit tuna and salmon to once a month because of the
high mercury. But they don't want to kill the tuna industry.

> Oh, /that's/ what neo-con is supposed to mean!?!?  A more liberal con-
> servative?

Usually it is a bleeding heart liberal that sees the wrong in his ways
and becomes a born again conservative.

> I thought it was that whole "we want the second coming"
> deal, all wrapped up with Israel and whatnot.  Not giving a care in the
> world about WTF happens to America.

Israel is the canary in the Middle-East coalmine. So caring about
Israel is caring about America. We just need people like you to
realize that.

> Supporting a power-grab the
> likes of which *I've* never seen before.

I guess that could be said of any group. Bush chose this group and
gave them power. His dad chose realists. Clinton chose ... nevermind.

> I don't think that neo-con will ever == liberal conservative for me.
>
> Any true conservative would have more problems with the current
> Administration than even a half-assed liberal.  Unless I've got the
> whole "conservative/liberal" thing conflated.  Totally possible, going
> off of what I thought a new-old'er was (neo con).  It's so Orwellian!

Bush is definitely not a true conservative. Neo-cons are about the
responsibility of being the worlds only superpower and making changes
in places like the middle east rather then sitting back and hoping
they don't notice us. That doesn't mean attacking for no reason as
many think, but to recognize the threats and act.

> Not at all dahrling!  I'll stick to gender neutral, or perhaps do that him
> for one sentence, her for another.  Or use Hir.  Heh.  So much for my
> crusade to make gender neutral main stream, neh?  Just looks silly* :-/.
> *her (or him) (s)he, etc..  Hrmm... we /are/ all "it"s, right?  Solved!

- Samuel Morris

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7 
Experience Flex 2 & MX7 integration & create powerful cross-platform RIAs 
http:http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;56760587;14748456;a?http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=LVNU

Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:225849
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5

Reply via email to