On 8/5/07, Cousin Sam wrote: > On 8/1/07, Stoner wrote: > > > Hmm.... where are you when Larry says stuff like "too many > > to claim "isolated incidents""? Holding your fingers in your > > ears and going la la la la la la la la LA LA LA LA? > > We go through this every couple of months and I respond and then > crickets. Here we go again:
Maybe your response got lost? Or do you mean in general? Eh... > Response to Union of Concerned Scientists Document > http://www.ostp.gov/html/ucs.html1 > > Take your fingers out of your ears and respond please. Well, I think it's funny how often the President's name gets mentioned therein. But what good does more money do if the bastards are trying to control the flow, based on political/religious beliefs? I don't see how that link addresses the issue at hand, Sam. Do you honestly think that this administration hasn't exerted undue influence in the arena of Science? Hell, in the Law arena, the fiscal responsibilities arena... shONEt, dude, how much can you take before you're like: "no more!"? Do you even care about this great Nation? =] > > This ain't rocket, science, Sam. Yet it seems like you've got > > blinders on, full tilt. Aren't you upset at how this makes the > > "good" conservatives look? How it reflects on those that put > > these fools in power? > > No, I'm upset at how it makes liberals look. I know most mean well but > the few that shout the loudest are the ones with blinders on and it > doesn't look good for the rest. It makes liberals look like they don't want things like Religion to sway things like Science, or Law, or things of that nature- any Good Citizen should know this stuff, the fact that it's gotten so far is freakishly sad. But don't count me in any group. The Democrats talked big about things like reform and whatnot, but where's that talk now? We were shown proof our system has some serious "issues", yet, "crickets", as you say, from those who are supposed to be representing our wishes. Bah! At least they aren't responsible for the current sorry affair- well, not directly, I reckon, tho this whole two party, "restricted access"-debates crap is suspect in the high. *sigh* > > Ah... now, I think, we maybe getting closer. > > No, you're still ost :) All those who wander... and those that wonder... > > I bet you voted for Nader, neh? > > What's neh? Is that the sound a horse makes? Neehehehehe, or Nay, even. It's like "no?"- so it reads: I bet you voted for Nader, no? or, perhaps: I bet you voted for Nader, right? But to figure that out you'd have to have some of that critical thinking type whatnot going on, which, well- makes one wonder. There's a whole 'nother level to the comment, once you figure out that first bit. =] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Download the latest ColdFusion 8 utilities including Report Builder, plug-ins for Eclipse and Dreamweaver updates. http;//www.adobe.com/cfusion/entitlement/index.cfm?e=labs%5adobecf8%5Fbeta Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:239594 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
