[scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
Neo: My eyes hurt. (Obama) will have to pay back Corporate America. They put him in office. He will also have to pay off the oil companies. They can destroy him. Everytime my brother-in-law would complain about Bush implementing policy that only benefited fat cats I would ask him How much money did YOU give him? I said that to say this - Obama has collected a quarter of a billion dollars $10 to $100 at a time. How does that make him beholden to Corporate America? Once again, who are They? As I see it, Obama's biggest problem isn't Them. It is people like you. ~(no)rave!
[scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
Sorry! I inadvertently deleted most of my response. Lets try this again - ~rave! Neo: My eyes hurt. Morpheus: That is because you have never used them before. Talking to Hama is not an option Talking to Hezzbolah is not an option This is the same stubborn attitude that got us mired in Viet Nam and Iraq. Obama had to back pedel because he got in trouble with the Isreal and Jewish groups. What makes you think that they will allow him to get away with that? Who are They? Jimmy Carter tried to talk. He allowed the hostages to be taken. He was weak. He was a punk. Going to speak to Hamas and Isreal make him look stupid. Jimmy Carter, the greatest ex-president ever, is an intelligent and moral man. As president he made intelligent and moral decisions. He was undermined by a not-so-liberal media, a facile political opportunist named Ronald Reagan and the on-going stupidity of the American people. Kind of like those Democrats who control the Congress Last time I checked, there was a surplus when Bush took office. Also, history will show Republicans controlled congress for eight of the last ten years. Even the liberal judges have sided with them. It was the liberal judegs that said it was okay for the goverment to take your property for public use. My history book fails to note that the concept of eminent domain was fashioned during the Clinton Administration. Further, the liberal judges who sided with them were put on the bench by those noted liberals Reagan and Bush. He will have to pay back Corporate America. They put him in office. He will also have to pay off the oil companies. They can destroy him. Obama is sitting on a quarter billion dollar campaign fund raised ten to one hundred dollars at a time. How does that make him beholden to Corporate America? Who are They?
Re: [scifinoir2] Indiana Jones, from A to Z
oh okay. i usually don't get up until around 8 am on Sundays, whether that's for church, the gym, or just going out to breakfast with my wife -- Original message -- From: Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] No, not this. They run it as sort of a Sunday morning movie thing. Sometimes, when they're feeling really evil;, they'll kick the start time back to 7. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: well, i haven't been in church recently, but that will change soon. I'm sure it's repeated sometime during the week -- Original message -- From: Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tune into the History Channel Sunday morn- no, you're probably in church then, aren't you? As of three weeks ago, they were airing two eps back-to-back, at 8 am. Can't say for certain about any later than that, because I've been tied up with work at that time since. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: sounds cool. I like stuff dealing with WWI too -- Original message -- From: Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] It had its moments. They originally set it up with an old, OLD Indy (approaching the century mark, if memory serves), talking to people here and there, hearing their woes and then launching into a narrative from his youth that paralleled the person's troubles. Most of them were of Sean Patrick Flanery's teen Indy, a few with an pre-teen Indy who had a few improbable adventures. I preferred the teen Indy, of course, particularly his exploits in the Great War. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I only glanced at the series starring young Indy. I was mildly surprised to see that over forty episodes were made. Was the show any good? -- Original message -- From: ravenadal [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.charlotte.com/681/story/625294.html Sunday, May 18, 2008 Posted on Thu, May. 15, 2008 Indiana Jones, from A to Z By GREGORY HARDY If you're not whipped into a frenzy that Harrison Ford is back for Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, it might be because you've forgotten the finer points of his three big-screen adventures in the 1980s. But there's no need to enroll in one of Professor Henry Jones Jr.'s archeology classes. And before Harrison Ford's other iconic Lucasfilm character Han Solo can snidely ask, Where did you dig up that old fossil? here is our handy salute to: INDIANA JONES FROM A-Z A. Hope you knew the ARK of the Covenant holds the original Ten Commandments. As Dr. Jones scolded two agents from Army Intelligence, Didn't you guys ever go to Sunday school? B. No matter how much you hate your job, getting crushed by a 22-foot BOULDER isn't one of your occupational hazards. C. Temple of Doom opens with a romp through the Shanghai nightspot CLUB OBI WAN. Wonder how Lucas came up with that name? D. Want to find The best DIGGER in Egypt? We recommend Indy's trusty sidekick Sallah (John Rhys-Davies). E. How did Henry Jones Sr. (Sean Connery) know that Dr. ELSA Schneider (Alison Doody) was a Nazi? She talks in her sleep, he admitted, to Jones Jr.'s (double) surprise. F. Rene Belloq (Paul Freeman) is the FRENCH archaeologist who tries to help the Germans win the Ark. Gee, no political symbolism at work there ... G. You think Henry Jones Sr.'s GRAIL DIARY contains any Monty Python jokes? H. Who would win in a fight - Indy's HAT or Chuck Norris' beard? I. Why does Jones Sr. always refer to the son as Junior? Because they named the dog INDIANA. J. If you ever stroll through a life-or-death word of God trap, don't step on the J tile - in Latin, JEHOVAH begins with an I. K. Grab a cult victim's heart through his chest and Mola Ram's to blame; he gives human sacrifices to KALI MA a bad name. L. Helpful hint: When taunting the Chinese gangster LAO CHE about how you've escaped his clutches, don't flee on a plane marked Lao Che Air Freight. M. MARCUS Brody (Denholm Elliott) is Indy's valued academic consigliere, even though the nerdy curator once got lost in his own MUSEUM. N. For the countless times Indy has traded punches with the Third Reich, it's the ultimate understatement when Indy mutters, NAZIS. I hate these guys. O. No telling where Indy's personal ODOMETER was set when he said this about his globetrotting: It's not the years, it's the mileage. P. Think Cole PORTER ever imagined Anything Goes would open a movie - sung in Mandarin? Q. Child actor Ke Huy QUAN lived two ultimate dreams of `80s boyhood: being Indy sidekick Short Round and one of the Goonies. R. Keeping up with the Jonses means keeping up with the RAVENWOODS: Abner was Indy's mentor, while daughter Marion (Karen Allen) was Indy's squeeze. S. SNAKES. Why did it have to be SNAKES!? T. Nefarious Nazi TOHT (Ronald Lacey) kept the heat on Indy and Marion throughout Raiders - until his face melted. U. Young Indy called UTAH home in 1912, when he was in the Boy Scouts. V. Even after escaping from being burned to death next to hundreds of rats in a catacomb, Indy can step out of the
Re: [scifinoir2] FW: 'Fewer hurricanes' as world warms
Was The Bolar Wars also the dubbed, Americanized version? Speaking of Strablazers cool stuff, how could i forget Seargeant Knox (?) and the Space Marines?! -- Original message -- From: Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] It was. I caught it on one of those everything TV/Anime/etc is here sites last year, the entire run in one day. Really made me long for the DVD set, for ownership purposes. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, no Starsha with the Cosmo DNA to fix the planet, eh? Bummer! Well, at least that means no Gamelons out there to harry us either: although, now I think of it, Cheney does have a slight bluish tinge to his skin! Great reference to Starblazers, one of my *favorite* cartoon series of all times. I honestly don't think a month goes by where I don't find myself humming the (Americanized) theme song to either the Iscandar or Comet Empire storylines. Still remember the power of the Wave Motion Engine/Gun, the Reflex Cannon, the only-the-Japanese-could-pull-this-off idea of refitting an old seagoing battleship as a starship.Loved that series, it's on my list of things to buy. Did you ever see the uncut, original Japanese version, which is different in many ways? How about the third story arc, The Bolar Wars? Was that any good? -- Original message -- From: Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To that, I can only say this. Who among them knows the Mind of Deity? I've looked a all of the arguments, on all sides, and I've come to one conclusion. Mother Earth is dying, and there aren't any Iskandarians with a magic device to heal her. It's up to us, and Mister Bush's people need to get out of the way, because they're unwilling to help fix things. Tracey de Morsella [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Kera [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2008 5:36 PM To: NothingButA Man Cc: Tracey de Morsella; Afrikan Mind; Albert Fields; bettillee; Bree; Cinque; Cleo Wadley; duvalny; Euless Girl; fisren; Fred Williams; Kai Pettaway; Kalpubinc; Keith Johnson; Kimberly Luft; Lawrence Ross; Lord Sauron; Michael Gordon; rsjw3; Seku Brathwaite; Valery Jean; Wendell Theopolis Smith Subject: 'Fewer hurricanes' as world warms BBC NEWS http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/printer_friendly/news_logo.gif 'Fewer hurricanes' as world warms By Mark Kinver Science and nature reporter, BBC News Hurricanes and tropical storms will become less frequent by the end of the century as a result of climate change, US researchers have suggested. But the scientists added their data also showed that there would be a modest increase in the intensity of these extreme weather events. The findings are at odds with some other studies, which forecast a greater number of hurricanes in a warmer world. The researchers' results appear in the journal Nature Geoscience. The team from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (Noaa) Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) said its findings did not support the notion that human-induced climate change was causing an increase in the number of hurricanes and tropical storms. There have been some studies published that have suggested that this is the case, but this modelling study does not support that idea, observed lead author Tom Knutson. Rather, we actually simulate a reduction in hurricane frequency in the Atlantic. Eye of the storm Although the study projected that there would be fewer extreme weather events in the future, Dr Knutson said that these storms were likely to be more powerful. The model is simulating increased intensity of the hurricanes that do occur, and also increased rainfall rates. This is something that has been seen in previous studies, and the IPCC use this [scenario] as a likely projection for future climate warming. These changes in intensity are still fairly modest in size. A previous study by Noaa scientists showed a 4% increase in storm intensity for every 1C (1.8F) increase in sea surface temperature. Yet, he explained, this study suggested only a 1-2% increase. A sea surface temperature (SST) above 26.5C (79.7F) is one of the key factors in the formation and feeding of a hurricane. Over recent decades, the surfaces of most tropical oceans have warmed by up to 0.5C (0.9F), which the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) believes has been caused by an increase in greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. In November 2006, the global community of tropical cyclone researchers gathered at a workshop organised by the World Meteorological Organization to consider the impact of human activity on the frequency and intensity of cyclones. In a concluding statement, the researchers said that although there was evidence both for and against the existence of a detectable anthropogenic signal in the tropical cyclone climate record, no firm conclusion could be made. One reason for the uncertainty is the changes in observation methods used to record
Re: [scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
In a message dated 5/20/2008 6:52:50 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: This is the same stubborn attitude that got us mired in Viet Nam and Iraq. Talking to insurgents that are not even recognize by the Iraq government will not help the situation. You can not be held hostage by someone who wants to fill his fathers;s shoes. Who are They? Iseal has and American Jewish groups have forced Obama to do a 180 on his views on the Isreal states. Jimmy Carter, the greatest ex-president ever, is an intelligent and moral man. Jimmy Carters was not very good as a President. As president he made intelligent and moral decisions. He was undermined by a not-so-liberal media, a facile political opportunist named Ronald Reagan and the on-going stupidity of the American people. Of coursee nothing is ever his fault. He knew that the Shah was trouble but toasted him in Iran. First he praises him, then abandons him. 444 days / Rising inflation and unemployment did not help him. Last time I checked, there was a surplus when Bush took office. Clintons the evil racist man did not. Lat time eI checked Democrats were spending money like crazy. Last time I checked the Democrats did not have the votes to bring the troops home. Lat time I checked Democrats still allowed jobs to go overseas. My history book fails to note that the concept of eminent domain was fashioned during the Clinton Administration. Further, the liberal judges who sided with them were put on the bench by those noted liberals Reagan and Bush. True. It was the evil conservative judges that voted against it. Obama is sitting on a quarter billion dollar campaign fund raised ten to one hundred dollars at a time. How does that make him beholden to Corporate America? You don't get that kind of money from little kids empyting their piggy banks.. _http://www.alternet.org/election08/72079/_ (http://www.alternet.org/election08/72079/) **Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod000301) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [scifinoir2] FW: 'Fewer hurricanes' as world warms
Bits were edited and changed for America, but it ran basically the same. And I'd forgotten about Knox and his lads myself until I watched it online. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Was The Bolar Wars also the dubbed, Americanized version? Speaking of Strablazers cool stuff, how could i forget Seargeant Knox (?) and the Space Marines?! -- Original message -- From: Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] It was. I caught it on one of those everything TV/Anime/etc is here sites last year, the entire run in one day. Really made me long for the DVD set, for ownership purposes. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, no Starsha with the Cosmo DNA to fix the planet, eh? Bummer! Well, at least that means no Gamelons out there to harry us either: although, now I think of it, Cheney does have a slight bluish tinge to his skin! Great reference to Starblazers, one of my *favorite* cartoon series of all times. I honestly don't think a month goes by where I don't find myself humming the (Americanized) theme song to either the Iscandar or Comet Empire storylines. Still remember the power of the Wave Motion Engine/Gun, the Reflex Cannon, the only-the-Japanese-could-pull-this-off idea of refitting an old seagoing battleship as a starship.Loved that series, it's on my list of things to buy. Did you ever see the uncut, original Japanese version, which is different in many ways? How about the third story arc, The Bolar Wars? Was that any good? -- Original message -- From: Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To that, I can only say this. Who among them knows the Mind of Deity? I've looked a all of the arguments, on all sides, and I've come to one conclusion. Mother Earth is dying, and there aren't any Iskandarians with a magic device to heal her. It's up to us, and Mister Bush's people need to get out of the way, because they're unwilling to help fix things. Tracey de Morsella [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Kera [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2008 5:36 PM To: NothingButA Man Cc: Tracey de Morsella; Afrikan Mind; Albert Fields; bettillee; Bree; Cinque; Cleo Wadley; duvalny; Euless Girl; fisren; Fred Williams; Kai Pettaway; Kalpubinc; Keith Johnson; Kimberly Luft; Lawrence Ross; Lord Sauron; Michael Gordon; rsjw3; Seku Brathwaite; Valery Jean; Wendell Theopolis Smith Subject: 'Fewer hurricanes' as world warms BBC NEWS http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/printer_friendly/news_logo.gif 'Fewer hurricanes' as world warms By Mark Kinver Science and nature reporter, BBC News Hurricanes and tropical storms will become less frequent by the end of the century as a result of climate change, US researchers have suggested. But the scientists added their data also showed that there would be a modest increase in the intensity of these extreme weather events. The findings are at odds with some other studies, which forecast a greater number of hurricanes in a warmer world. The researchers' results appear in the journal Nature Geoscience. The team from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (Noaa) Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) said its findings did not support the notion that human-induced climate change was causing an increase in the number of hurricanes and tropical storms. There have been some studies published that have suggested that this is the case, but this modelling study does not support that idea, observed lead author Tom Knutson. Rather, we actually simulate a reduction in hurricane frequency in the Atlantic. Eye of the storm Although the study projected that there would be fewer extreme weather events in the future, Dr Knutson said that these storms were likely to be more powerful. The model is simulating increased intensity of the hurricanes that do occur, and also increased rainfall rates. This is something that has been seen in previous studies, and the IPCC use this [scenario] as a likely projection for future climate warming. These changes in intensity are still fairly modest in size. A previous study by Noaa scientists showed a 4% increase in storm intensity for every 1C (1.8F) increase in sea surface temperature. Yet, he explained, this study suggested only a 1-2% increase. A sea surface temperature (SST) above 26.5C (79.7F) is one of the key factors in the formation and feeding of a hurricane. Over recent decades, the surfaces of most tropical oceans have warmed by up to 0.5C (0.9F), which the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) believes has been caused by an increase in greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. In November 2006, the global community of tropical cyclone researchers gathered at a workshop organised by the World Meteorological Organization to consider the impact of human activity on the frequency and intensity of cyclones. In a concluding
Re: [scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
Gymfig, the Republicans don't want intelligent people. Just ones smart enough to press the touch-screen option next to their candidates' names. They're afraid of all of us pointy-headed liberals... [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: got really confused trying to hack through the thicket of the above paragraph. Took me a couple of readings to realize you had swallowed the Republican propaganda about Obama being soft on terrorism because he actually wanted to talk to lawfully elected leaders. Truly remarkable anyone would believe anything the Republicans have to say in light of how badly they have mangled the economy and America' stature in the world. Talking to Hama is not an option Talking to Hezzbolah is not an option Obama had to back pedel because he got in trouble with the Isreal and Jewish groups. What makes you think that they will allow him to get away with that? Jimmy Carter tried to talk. He allowed the hostages to be taken. He was weak. He was a punk. Going to speak to Hamas and Isreal make him look stupid. The raising taxes boogie man is equally amusing. Of course, the Republicans don't raise taxes - they lower them, mouth pious platitudes and continue to spend like drunken sailors. Kind of like those Democrats who control the Congress t Your grandchildren's grandchildren will be saddled with paying off the Bush/Cheney deficit. Something that Clinton did not do. I guess Bill was not that bad. I already know what the Clintons did in office. Everytime the going got hard - they cut bait and ran. The Clintons had a chance to stock the Federal judiciary with moderate democrats and instead let the Republicans stonewall them until Bush became president. What did Bush do? Stock the Federal judiciary with conservative republicans. These judges serve for life. I don't have a problem with him. They have made decisions that I don'thave a problem with. Even the liberal judges have sided with them. It was the liberal judegs that said it was okay for the goverment to take your property for public use. I don't know how Obama will perform in office - but at least he will arrive in office unbeholden to anyone but the millions of average, hardworking Americans who financed his campaign. He will have to pay back Corporate America. They put him in office. He will also have to pay off the oil companies. They can destroy him. Gymfig **Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod000301) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] There is no reason Good can't triumph over Evil, if only angels will get organized along the lines of the Mafia. -Kurt Vonnegut, A Man Without A Country [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [scifinoir2] OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
(standing ovation) Daryle Lockhart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oh, how I love this part of the argument. I've turned it into a game. You say Rev. Wright and I say it was an aspirin factory. You say Palestinians and I say Rwanda. I love how Clinton people come off like Obama = a complete disaster. A complete disaster = John Kerry, and just 4 years ago everyone was in love with him. The rest of the world is belly laughing at americans at this point. Claiming to be this beacon of democracy but can't see a way to let two people who are leading in votes take a two seat job. The democratic party is behaving like anything but. And Black folks on this 'anti-Obama' kick are the MOST hilarious. Disagree with the dude on the issues, that's your right, but he's teflon right now ( at least until Karl Rove REALLY gets hold of him). Don't hate, congratulate. Help a dude graduate. There are all of NO candidates worth actually supporting, and Democrats are straight up arguing over the best funded scraps. Choosing between Pepsi and Coke is not democracy. Coke using their 'over 35 years of experience' and millions of marketing and research dollars to beat up on Pepsi just because more people are feeling Pepsi right now is not democracy. This is some I can be a better king than you ish, and it's BEYOND ridiculous at this point. This whole Democrat situation is EXACTLY why Americans need to follow true soccer. They'd understand how to operate. As a Chelsea Football Club supporter, allow me to show Hillary Clinton people how this is done -- The season is not over, but begin accepting the truth now -- you have LOST. Manchester United (in this case Barack Obama) has outscored you all season long, and it doesn't matter how much money you spent on the best talent, it doesn't matter that you've won the games that really mattered, the fact is that you are number 2 on the table. nothing will change that. The math simply does not work in your favor. So let it go. Sing your song, raise your scarf, but let it go until August. Why would Clinton want to be President of a country that she had to convince so hard ANYway? She was first lady during one of the most popular president's terms. If THAT ALONE doesn't get you in without argument, save your ad budget and start a bank. A TV Network. Go be mayor of New York City. Go buy Connecticut. When Saturday Night Live skits about you aren't funny because they are TRUE? Being President is not for you. On May 19, 2008, at 7:38 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 5/19/2008 6:24:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Amen to that! And she will have no problem blowing up innocent people with her testicular fortitude As opposed to a man that cannot find his when it comes to issues of his former mentor, other black leaders and the Palestinians? **Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod000301) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] There is no reason Good can't triumph over Evil, if only angels will get organized along the lines of the Mafia. -Kurt Vonnegut, A Man Without A Country [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
In a message dated 5/20/2008 8:20:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Gymfig, the Republicans don't want intelligent people. Just ones smart enough to press the touch-screen option next to their candidates' names. They're afraid of all of us pointy-headed liberals... So once again. If you vote for Obama you are intelligent. If yoy vote for Clinton or the Republcians you are stupid. **Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod000301) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
RE: [scifinoir2] OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
I always appreciate your point of view Tracey. You're one of the most fair and open-minded people I have come across on the interwebamajig. I really have no idea about potential candidates. I know next to nothing. I'm really interested in the POV of anyone else on the list as well. As for Gymfig's anti-Obama issues, you're in the same boat I was in for both Clinton runs. I ended up voting for him because he was the best of the two options. He turned out to be surprisingly better than I thought he would though there were enough things that bothered me that I never could fully get on the train. I like Hillary. I think she gets a damned if she does/ damned is she doesn't choice more often than any of the men she's run against. She's hungry for the office and to my mind, that's a good thing. That said, I went with Obama in my primary. I think it's pretty clear that what ever his flaws, between him and McCain he's the best option. Bosco --- On Mon, 5/19/08, Tracey de Morsella [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Tracey de Morsella [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [scifinoir2] OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, May 19, 2008, 6:22 PM Bosco I know you asked Keith who his VP pick was, but here is my list. I love this puzzle Webb- Former Secretary of the Navy; former republican, could help deliver VA, has a good relationship with Obama - they co-sponsored a Vet bill together, produced Vet documentaries for PBS, would appeal to Reagan democrats and white men to help turn some southern states purple; Con: I hear during his Reagan years he said some things about affirmative action than anger blacks; some say he is too direct and gets foot in the mouth disease Bloomberg - Independents and Moderate republicans like him. Democrats like him. He's been a dem and a republican, he's a good manager. Would change the dem/ Republican dynamic. Cons: No international Experience. From a blue state The four Hilary consolation picks would be: Wesley Clark, Evan Baye, Strickland and Rendell. I think Baye might be the strongest. He is a former governor, has international experience, would appeal to Reagan democrats and white men to help turn some southern states purple - including deliver Indiana. The appease the women VP pick would be: Sibelius, McCaskil, or the governor of AZ. I do not think the Hillary supporters who are angry will accept a substitute angry and I wonder about two change candidates on the ticket. Also I do not think any of them have international experience I think Sibelius would be best. I think the AZ governor has young children and many Americans have issues with the idea of a woman with young children as president. They think she would neglect the kids. However I like McCaskil, but that would be two new Senators on the ticket. I like Edwards, but he did not deliver NC in 2004 and he does not want it. He wants Attorney General and I think he would be great for it I like Richardson, but he is clumsy of the campaign trail for himself and two change brown candidates at one time might be too much for this racist country to handle. I say give him Secretary of state
[scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
--- In scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jimmy Carters(sic) was not very good as a President. Well, everybody can't be George W. Bush. ~(no)rave!
RE: [scifinoir2] OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
Bosco: Thanks for the explanation and the wonderful complement. I was just kidding. I like playing Veep-stakes and even though you asked Keith, I decided to give my view. If you like Clinton, I'm not sure I understand why you voted for Obama. -Original Message- From: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bosco Bosco Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 7:00 AM To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scifinoir2] OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket I always appreciate your point of view Tracey. You're one of the most fair and open-minded people I have come across on the interwebamajig. I really have no idea about potential candidates. I know next to nothing. I'm really interested in the POV of anyone else on the list as well. As for Gymfig's anti-Obama issues, you're in the same boat I was in for both Clinton runs. I ended up voting for him because he was the best of the two options. He turned out to be surprisingly better than I thought he would though there were enough things that bothered me that I never could fully get on the train. I like Hillary. I think she gets a damned if she does/ damned is she doesn't choice more often than any of the men she's run against. She's hungry for the office and to my mind, that's a good thing. That said, I went with Obama in my primary. I think it's pretty clear that what ever his flaws, between him and McCain he's the best option. Bosco --- On Mon, 5/19/08, Tracey de Morsella [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Tracey de Morsella [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [scifinoir2] OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Date: Monday, May 19, 2008, 6:22 PM Bosco I know you asked Keith who his VP pick was, but here is my list. I love this puzzle Webb- Former Secretary of the Navy; former republican, could help deliver VA, has a good relationship with Obama - they co-sponsored a Vet bill together, produced Vet documentaries for PBS, would appeal to Reagan democrats and white men to help turn some southern states purple; Con: I hear during his Reagan years he said some things about affirmative action than anger blacks; some say he is too direct and gets foot in the mouth disease Bloomberg - Independents and Moderate republicans like him. Democrats like him. He's been a dem and a republican, he's a good manager. Would change the dem/ Republican dynamic. Cons: No international Experience. From a blue state The four Hilary consolation picks would be: Wesley Clark, Evan Baye, Strickland and Rendell. I think Baye might be the strongest. He is a former governor, has international experience, would appeal to Reagan democrats and white men to help turn some southern states purple - including deliver Indiana. The appease the women VP pick would be: Sibelius, McCaskil, or the governor of AZ. I do not think the Hillary supporters who are angry will accept a substitute angry and I wonder about two change candidates on the ticket. Also I do not think any of them have international experience I think Sibelius would be best. I think the AZ governor has young children and many Americans have issues with the idea of a woman with young children as president. They think she would neglect the kids. However I like McCaskil, but that would be two new Senators on the ticket. I like Edwards, but he did not deliver NC in 2004 and he does not want it. He wants Attorney General and I think he would be great for it I like Richardson, but he is clumsy of the campaign trail for himself and two change brown candidates at one time might be too much for this racist country to handle. I say give him Secretary of state Yahoo! Groups Links
RE: [scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
He is beholden to corporate America, as they contributed to his campaign and will continue to do so. But he is more beholden to the people and less beholden to those in power than any other successful politician in recent history. However, the key to getting what we want from him is to use that power and I fear people do not yet know how to do it. Obama has used our money as well has the big ticket player's money to build an infrastructure to bring about true change.. His grassroots network. He has trained people to change the system, connected disparate people with their common interests, showed them how to coalesce their money and enabled people to take leadership roles in his campaign so they can flex their activist muscle. Additionally, his plan involves working to assist down ticket candidates on the local level. He also periodically hints that if he is president, you will have to make him make the changes you want. Just last week he launched the grassroots civil rights fellowship and set up a massive civil rights voting program that threatens to make the republicans a fringe group. He has laid the groundwork for a nationwide grassroots takeover of government agenda. He can not overtly tell us what to do with it or it will be shut down before it is empowered. There is some sign that people are using it. I hope we figure it out and take advantage of it -Original Message- From: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ravenadal Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 4:38 AM To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket Neo: My eyes hurt. (Obama) will have to pay back Corporate America. They put him in office. He will also have to pay off the oil companies. They can destroy him. Everytime my brother-in-law would complain about Bush implementing policy that only benefited fat cats I would ask him How much money did YOU give him? I said that to say this - Obama has collected a quarter of a billion dollars $10 to $100 at a time. How does that make him beholden to Corporate America? Once again, who are They? As I see it, Obama's biggest problem isn't Them. It is people like you. ~(no)rave! Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
Please do not go out into public saying things like this. Iraq HAD a government. We KILLED them. And replaced them with people WE WANTED there. Please go get a 4th grade history book and you will be reminded that this country was founded by insurgents. This is supposed to be a British colony. On Tue, 20 May 2008 08:48:50 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Talking to insurgents that are not even recognize by the Iraq government will not help the situation. Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [scifinoir2] Success seems to have sped by 'Speed Racer'
you definitely have to treat the new Speed Racer as something--other. What are your fav eps of the original series? I love the Most Dangerous Race(?), the one that took place in mountains. The Car Acrobatic Team is crazy, especially with those wings on the cars that let them glide over canyons! As a kid I thought it was so logical, didn't even question not only the cars soaring through the air, but *twisting* around their horizontal axes! Indeed, I remember running outside and tying a board to the top of my large Tonka dumptruck. I spent an entire evening just pushing that truck off the front porch, adjusting the wing, puzzled as to why I couldn't get it to soar like those cars! Then there was the completley unlikely Mammoth Car, the car that was basically a train, racing against regular cars! Or how about the fun Monster Car, the snail-like giant tank taht a mad scientist built for the sole purpose of destruction? I also love the ep about the GRX(?), the engine so powerful that Pops and his buddies buried the engine in a graveyard! No one was meant to handle its power, Pops said. So, a greedy group of race sponsors unearths the engine. Becuase it was beyond normal man's ability to control, they invented a spray to give a person temporary heightened confidence and reflexes. Later, Speed steals the car and is drunk with power over its speed. At the end of the first half of the ep, however, Speed says HHH! It's too powerful! The cars so fast it's taking me into another dimension--a dimension borne of...speed! He then slumps over the steering wheel, unconscious, as the car speeds through the city streets, an engine of destruction. Man, I'm laughing now just thinking about it. -- Original message -- From: Lockhart, Daryle [EMAIL PROTECTED] My son is a Speed Racer fan. Big time. We saw the movie and loved it. We watch the old 60's series on DVD at least twice a month on weekends. Love it. We saw this new speed Racer, whatever it is...and we're treating it like Star Trek. We act like the latest series never happened and that the show ended with a movie that was not receieved well. But we will always have TOS... Interestingly enough, he and his friends love the Iron Man animated series. I don't like it at all, there are too many wise cracks from Tony Stark for me. Daryle On Mon, 19 May 2008 13:38:42 -0400, Tracey de Morsella wrote: You definitely do not belong on Saturday Night Live. You are too funny -Original Message- From: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Martin Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 6:17 AM To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scifinoir2] Success seems to have sped by 'Speed Racer' Tracey, I saw the first ep, and I say this in reply. Jacqueline Susann said Once Is Not Enough. She didn't see that ep... Tracey de Morsella wrote: The one on Nick now is not good. However, I could only get through about five minutes., Has anyone else seen it? -Original Message- From: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2008 8:51 PM To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scifinoir2] Success seems to have sped by 'Speed Racer' No, the one on Nick is brand new. The one I have on VHS is the original Americanized version from the '60s. In between those two there was another Speed Racer that was horrible. -- Original message -- From: Tracey de Morsella Oh so that isn't new? You are right, it is horrible -Original Message- From: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2008 3:53 AM To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] Success seems to have sped by 'Speed Racer' In a message dated 5/18/08 1:25:31 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I still love the classic old Speed Racer cartoon. I have about five videotapes, for ten eps total. They're still great, still funny. Of course, I've only seen the Americanized, dubbed, cleaned up version. Never seen the original anime with its greater violence and blood. There was a newer Speed Racer cartoon back in the 90s, I believe. It sucked. This new 'toon, with Speed's son at a racing academy? Might be even worse. It does. Saw 3 eps of it on Nicktoons. -GTW ** Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod000301) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links There is no reason Good can't triumph over
1211295525
No, but the republicans and more recently, Clinton have sought out with a vengeance, low information voters. I believe Clinton did it out of necessity when she started losing and recognized that she had an edge with that group. So she work to exploit that advantage.. -Original Message- From: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 6:32 AM To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket In a message dated 5/20/2008 8:20:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Gymfig, the Republicans don't want intelligent people. Just ones smart enough to press the touch-screen option next to their candidates' names. They're afraid of all of us pointy-headed liberals... So once again. If you vote for Obama you are intelligent. If yoy vote for Clinton or the Republcians you are stupid. **Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod000301) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Yahoo! Groups Links
RE: [scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
Ha! -Original Message- From: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ravenadal Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 7:17 AM To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket --- In scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jimmy Carters(sic) was not very good as a President. Well, everybody can't be George W. Bush. ~(no)rave! Yahoo! Groups Links
[scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
Thank you for this analysis. What continues to amaze me about people who consider Obama an elitist is that the entire Republican Revolution of the eighties and nineties was concocted in Conservative think tanks run by pointy-headed conservative elitists. Also laughable is Obama's perceived inexperience. Through his preparation as a grass-roots community organizer, his sojourn through academia through his successfully navigating the rough and tumble world of Chicago-style bare knuckle politics, he may be the most prepared first term president ever. People react as if he has gotten where he is through pluck and luck, but he arrived at being the presumptive Democratic nominee by out-foxing and out-strategising the more experienced Clinton campaign at almost every turn. Hillary thought she could place her big, brass balls on the table and the game would be over. Obama realized early on that it would be a long, protracted struggle and planned accordingly. Therefore, he is coasting toward the finish line flush with funds while Hillary limps there badly leaking cash. Foresight and preparation bodes well for Obama, the less experienced candidate. If we had more foresight and preparation from the current administration we would not be mired in Iraq and a deepening recession. ~rave! --- In scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com, Tracey de Morsella [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: He is beholden to corporate America, as they contributed to his campaign and will continue to do so. But he is more beholden to the people and less beholden to those in power than any other successful politician in recent history. However, the key to getting what we want from him is to use that power and I fear people do not yet know how to do it. Obama has used our money as well has the big ticket player's money to build an infrastructure to bring about true change.. His grassroots network. He has trained people to change the system, connected disparate people with their common interests, showed them how to coalesce their money and enabled people to take leadership roles in his campaign so they can flex their activist muscle. Additionally, his plan involves working to assist down ticket candidates on the local level. He also periodically hints that if he is president, you will have to make him make the changes you want. Just last week he launched the grassroots civil rights fellowship and set up a massive civil rights voting program that threatens to make the republicans a fringe group. He has laid the groundwork for a nationwide grassroots takeover of government agenda. He can not overtly tell us what to do with it or it will be shut down before it is empowered. There is some sign that people are using it. I hope we figure it out and take advantage of it -Original Message- From: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ravenadal Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 4:38 AM To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Subject: [scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket Neo: My eyes hurt. (Obama) will have to pay back Corporate America. They put him in office. He will also have to pay off the oil companies. They can destroy him. Everytime my brother-in-law would complain about Bush implementing policy that only benefited fat cats I would ask him How much money did YOU give him? I said that to say this - Obama has collected a quarter of a billion dollars $10 to $100 at a time. How does that make him beholden to Corporate America? Once again, who are They? As I see it, Obama's biggest problem isn't Them. It is people like you. ~(no)rave! Yahoo! Groups Links
RE: [scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
True. As I've been an anti-war activist with regard to Iraq since before the war started, I have observed the complete lack of information and knowledge of foreign policy in the hands of most voters. Specifically, most of the people I've spoken with who favor Big Government Wars of Intervention (like Iraq), have no idea that: U.S. involvement in the internal affairs of Iraq and our government's relationship with Huseein began in 1958, NOT 1990 when the CIA, DIA and British Intelligence all conspired to train him (and several others) to assassinate General Abdul Qassim. Over the next two decades, the U.S. continued to use its inside man as he grew in stature to influence affairs in Iraq until the invasion of Kuwait in 1990. Contrary to the bullshit I was fed by the government when I served in the Gulf War, the Bush Administration did not disapprove of Iraq's invasion of Kuwait UNTIL Hussein announced his intention of nationalizing the oilfields. The U.S. also helped fund and stock the chemical and biological weapons programs Iraq used in its barbaric war with Iran. In addition, both Cheney and Rumsfeld had long-term relationships (political and economic) with Hussein when he was at his worst (mass torture, use of chemical and biological weapons, etc.). Those are the Cliff's Notes version. There is more in an essay I wrote in 2005: Seeking Out Monsters: Ignoring the Advice of John Quincy Adams http://jameslandrith.com/content/view/198/44/ By the way, the Shah of Iran was installed by a Republican Administration when Premier Mohammed Mossadeq (democratically elected) was overthrown by a CIA sponsored coup. The Shah led a very repressive regime (if you were a critic - even worse), which helped fuel the fires behind the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeni's successful coup. All of this was put into motion by Eisenhower's meddling in the internal affairs of Iran. Jimmy Carter had exactly jack shit to do with that.. -- James Landrith Official website: http://jameslandrith.com TMA: http://multiracial.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/jlandrith LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jlandrith Facebook: http://apus.facebook.com/profile.php?id=134400205 MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/jlandrith Twitter: http://twitter.com/jlandrith http://twitter.com/nbabyak From: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tracey de Morsella Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 10:59 AM To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket No, but the republicans and more recently, Clinton have sought out with a vengeance, low information voters. I believe Clinton did it out of necessity when she started losing and recognized that she had an edge with that group. So she work to exploit that advantage.. -Original Message- From: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com mailto:scifinoir2%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com mailto:scifinoir2%40yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:Gymfig%40aol.com Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 6:32 AM To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com mailto:scifinoir2%40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket In a message dated 5/20/2008 8:20:41 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:truthseeker_013%40yahoo.com writes: Gymfig, the Republicans don't want intelligent people. Just ones smart enough to press the touch-screen option next to their candidates' names. They're afraid of all of us pointy-headed liberals... So once again. If you vote for Obama you are intelligent. If yoy vote for Clinton or the Republcians you are stupid. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
RE: [scifinoir2] OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
thanks, I really need to think more about this. i was always hoping, since last year, it'd be Obama/Edwards. But with Edwards off the table, I have to stop thinking about someone I *like* and start thinking in terms of all the manueverings and practicalities of the VP candidate. Jim Webb is one, but as some said, it might not be good to lose his voice in the Senate. -- Original message -- From: Tracey de Morsella [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bosco I know you asked Keith who his VP pick was, but here is my list. I love this puzzle Webb- Former Secretary of the Navy; former republican, could help deliver VA, has a good relationship with Obama - they co-sponsored a Vet bill together, produced Vet documentaries for PBS, would appeal to Reagan democrats and white men to help turn some southern states purple; Con: I hear during his Reagan years he said some things about affirmative action than anger blacks; some say he is too direct and gets foot in the mouth disease Bloomberg - Independents and Moderate republicans like him. Democrats like him. He's been a dem and a republican, he's a good manager. Would change the dem/ Republican dynamic. Cons: No international Experience. From a blue state The four Hilary consolation picks would be: Wesley Clark, Evan Baye, Strickland and Rendell. I think Baye might be the strongest. He is a former governor, has international experience, would appeal to Reagan democrats and white men to help turn some southern states purple - including deliver Indiana. The appease the women VP pick would be: Sibelius, McCaskil, or the governor of AZ. I do not think the Hillary supporters who are angry will accept a substitute angry and I wonder about two change candidates on the ticket. Also I do not think any of them have international experience I think Sibelius would be best. I think the AZ governor has young children and many Americans have issues with the idea of a woman with young children as president. They think she would neglect the kids. However I like McCaskil, but that would be two new Senators on the ticket. I like Edwards, but he did not deliver NC in 2004 and he does not want it. He wants Attorney General and I think he would be great for it I like Richardson, but he is clumsy of the campaign trail for himself and two change brown candidates at one time might be too much for this racist country to handle. I say give him Secretary of state -Original Message- From: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bosco Bosco Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2008 4:57 PM To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket hey Keith Who would you like to see on the ticket? I am undecided. There are things I absolutely love about HRC and things that make me bum out as much as any poltician has ever made me bum out. I'm curious to know who the other folks under consideration are in the Obama camp. B --- On Sun, 5/18/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, May 18, 2008, 10:03 AM For me, the two biggest reasons I've said for a year now that she shouldn't be on the ticket are her husband, and her own ambition. As listed below, Bill can't keep his thoughts to himself. I can't even imagine what it'd be like to have him: angry at Hillary being only the veep, disparaging of Obama's lack of experience, full of himself and the advice he'd have to give as a two-term Prez, ticked when Obama would (inevitably) not seek out, and actively ignore, said advice, and frankly, jealous of the spotlight Obama would have. The second reason? Hillary's ambition. This lady wants to be Prez, and everything from her veiled racist strategy (I get hard-working, white voters) to the other dirty tricks show she'd work behind the scenes to undermine Obama. I think-and I believe Obama thinks--that she'd be plotting against him all the time she's grinning in his face. She's in her 60's now, think she wants to wait *eight* years and try again? No way in hell. And trying to be a VP who then steps out and challenges your Prez in the next election, how damaging would that be? Has that ever been done, a VP challenging his sitting Prez for the nomination? Talk about a mess. I can't see Obama wanting to deal with that potential hazard. -- Original message -- From: ravenadal [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-change_dems_bd18may18,0,7163200.story chicagotribune.com Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket Tribune staff report May 18, 2008 The Democratic primary battle may not technically be over, but I'm ready to move on to the next phase of windy speculation and gratuitous strategery. So here are eight
RE: [scifinoir2] OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
i almost feel Edwards would be wasted as Attorney General. Not that he wouldn't do good--he would. And Lord knows, given the abuses from that office the last seven years, we need a good person in that role. But i guess I like Edwards' presence, his affability, his ease with people, I'd rather see him in a role where he'd be in front of the public eye and shaping policy more often, instead of enforcing the law. Do you see a role for Joe Biden? Maybe he could be Secretary of State? What about Kucinich? Education? Housing and Urban Development? -- Original message -- From: Tracey de Morsella [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bosco I know you asked Keith who his VP pick was, but here is my list. I love this puzzle Webb- Former Secretary of the Navy; former republican, could help deliver VA, has a good relationship with Obama - they co-sponsored a Vet bill together, produced Vet documentaries for PBS, would appeal to Reagan democrats and white men to help turn some southern states purple; Con: I hear during his Reagan years he said some things about affirmative action than anger blacks; some say he is too direct and gets foot in the mouth disease Bloomberg - Independents and Moderate republicans like him. Democrats like him. He's been a dem and a republican, he's a good manager. Would change the dem/ Republican dynamic. Cons: No international Experience. From a blue state The four Hilary consolation picks would be: Wesley Clark, Evan Baye, Strickland and Rendell. I think Baye might be the strongest. He is a former governor, has international experience, would appeal to Reagan democrats and white men to help turn some southern states purple - including deliver Indiana. The appease the women VP pick would be: Sibelius, McCaskil, or the governor of AZ. I do not think the Hillary supporters who are angry will accept a substitute angry and I wonder about two change candidates on the ticket. Also I do not think any of them have international experience I think Sibelius would be best. I think the AZ governor has young children and many Americans have issues with the idea of a woman with young children as president. They think she would neglect the kids. However I like McCaskil, but that would be two new Senators on the ticket. I like Edwards, but he did not deliver NC in 2004 and he does not want it. He wants Attorney General and I think he would be great for it I like Richardson, but he is clumsy of the campaign trail for himself and two change brown candidates at one time might be too much for this racist country to handle. I say give him Secretary of state -Original Message- From: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bosco Bosco Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2008 4:57 PM To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket hey Keith Who would you like to see on the ticket? I am undecided. There are things I absolutely love about HRC and things that make me bum out as much as any poltician has ever made me bum out. I'm curious to know who the other folks under consideration are in the Obama camp. B --- On Sun, 5/18/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, May 18, 2008, 10:03 AM For me, the two biggest reasons I've said for a year now that she shouldn't be on the ticket are her husband, and her own ambition. As listed below, Bill can't keep his thoughts to himself. I can't even imagine what it'd be like to have him: angry at Hillary being only the veep, disparaging of Obama's lack of experience, full of himself and the advice he'd have to give as a two-term Prez, ticked when Obama would (inevitably) not seek out, and actively ignore, said advice, and frankly, jealous of the spotlight Obama would have. The second reason? Hillary's ambition. This lady wants to be Prez, and everything from her veiled racist strategy (I get hard-working, white voters) to the other dirty tricks show she'd work behind the scenes to undermine Obama. I think-and I believe Obama thinks--that she'd be plotting against him all the time she's grinning in his face. She's in her 60's now, think she wants to wait *eight* years and try again? No way in hell. And trying to be a VP who then steps out and challenges your Prez in the next election, how damaging would that be? Has that ever been done, a VP challenging his sitting Prez for the nomination? Talk about a mess. I can't see Obama wanting to deal with that potential hazard. -- Original message -- From: ravenadal [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-change_dems_bd18may18,0,7163200.story chicagotribune.com Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket Tribune staff report May 18, 2008
RE: [scifinoir2] OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
I see Biden or Richardson as secretary of state.As much as many of us like Kucinich, he is not a player and in my opinion, therefore he will not be a part of the equation I agree about Edwards, but to truly clean up the department of Justice and restore the constitution, it will require a high profile AG. Additionally, it set him up for the supreme court. However, your point is well taken. Where do you see him Health and Human Services? -Original Message- From: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 8:48 AM To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [scifinoir2] OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket i almost feel Edwards would be wasted as Attorney General. Not that he wouldn't do good--he would. And Lord knows, given the abuses from that office the last seven years, we need a good person in that role. But i guess I like Edwards' presence, his affability, his ease with people, I'd rather see him in a role where he'd be in front of the public eye and shaping policy more often, instead of enforcing the law. Do you see a role for Joe Biden? Maybe he could be Secretary of State? What about Kucinich? Education? Housing and Urban Development? -- Original message -- From: Tracey de Morsella [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bosco I know you asked Keith who his VP pick was, but here is my list. I love this puzzle Webb- Former Secretary of the Navy; former republican, could help deliver VA, has a good relationship with Obama - they co-sponsored a Vet bill together, produced Vet documentaries for PBS, would appeal to Reagan democrats and white men to help turn some southern states purple; Con: I hear during his Reagan years he said some things about affirmative action than anger blacks; some say he is too direct and gets foot in the mouth disease Bloomberg - Independents and Moderate republicans like him. Democrats like him. He's been a dem and a republican, he's a good manager. Would change the dem/ Republican dynamic. Cons: No international Experience. From a blue state The four Hilary consolation picks would be: Wesley Clark, Evan Baye, Strickland and Rendell. I think Baye might be the strongest. He is a former governor, has international experience, would appeal to Reagan democrats and white men to help turn some southern states purple - including deliver Indiana. The appease the women VP pick would be: Sibelius, McCaskil, or the governor of AZ. I do not think the Hillary supporters who are angry will accept a substitute angry and I wonder about two change candidates on the ticket. Also I do not think any of them have international experience I think Sibelius would be best. I think the AZ governor has young children and many Americans have issues with the idea of a woman with young children as president. They think she would neglect the kids. However I like McCaskil, but that would be two new Senators on the ticket. I like Edwards, but he did not deliver NC in 2004 and he does not want it. He wants Attorney General and I think he would be great for it I like Richardson, but he is clumsy of the campaign trail for himself and two change brown candidates at one time might be too much for this racist country to handle. I say give him Secretary of state -Original Message- From: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bosco Bosco Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2008 4:57 PM To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket hey Keith Who would you like to see on the ticket? I am undecided. There are things I absolutely love about HRC and things that make me bum out as much as any poltician has ever made me bum out. I'm curious to know who the other folks under consideration are in the Obama camp. B --- On Sun, 5/18/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, May 18, 2008, 10:03 AM For me, the two biggest reasons I've said for a year now that she shouldn't be on the ticket are her husband, and her own ambition. As listed below, Bill can't keep his thoughts to himself. I can't even imagine what it'd be like to have him: angry at Hillary being only the veep, disparaging of Obama's lack of experience, full of himself and the advice he'd have to give as a two-term Prez, ticked when Obama would (inevitably) not seek out, and actively ignore, said advice, and frankly, jealous of the spotlight Obama would have. The second reason? Hillary's ambition. This lady wants to be Prez, and everything from her veiled racist strategy (I get hard-working, white voters) to the other dirty tricks show she'd work behind the scenes to undermine Obama. I think-and I believe Obama thinks--that she'd be
Re: [scifinoir2] FW: 'Fewer hurricanes' as world warms
online? Where??? -- Original message -- From: Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bits were edited and changed for America, but it ran basically the same. And I'd forgotten about Knox and his lads myself until I watched it online. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Was The Bolar Wars also the dubbed, Americanized version? Speaking of Strablazers cool stuff, how could i forget Seargeant Knox (?) and the Space Marines?! -- Original message -- From: Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] It was. I caught it on one of those everything TV/Anime/etc is here sites last year, the entire run in one day. Really made me long for the DVD set, for ownership purposes. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, no Starsha with the Cosmo DNA to fix the planet, eh? Bummer! Well, at least that means no Gamelons out there to harry us either: although, now I think of it, Cheney does have a slight bluish tinge to his skin! Great reference to Starblazers, one of my *favorite* cartoon series of all times. I honestly don't think a month goes by where I don't find myself humming the (Americanized) theme song to either the Iscandar or Comet Empire storylines. Still remember the power of the Wave Motion Engine/Gun, the Reflex Cannon, the only-the-Japanese-could-pull-this-off idea of refitting an old seagoing battleship as a starship.Loved that series, it's on my list of things to buy. Did you ever see the uncut, original Japanese version, which is different in many ways? How about the third story arc, The Bolar Wars? Was that any good? -- Original message -- From: Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To that, I can only say this. Who among them knows the Mind of Deity? I've looked a all of the arguments, on all sides, and I've come to one conclusion. Mother Earth is dying, and there aren't any Iskandarians with a magic device to heal her. It's up to us, and Mister Bush's people need to get out of the way, because they're unwilling to help fix things. Tracey de Morsella [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Kera [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2008 5:36 PM To: NothingButA Man Cc: Tracey de Morsella; Afrikan Mind; Albert Fields; bettillee; Bree; Cinque; Cleo Wadley; duvalny; Euless Girl; fisren; Fred Williams; Kai Pettaway; Kalpubinc; Keith Johnson; Kimberly Luft; Lawrence Ross; Lord Sauron; Michael Gordon; rsjw3; Seku Brathwaite; Valery Jean; Wendell Theopolis Smith Subject: 'Fewer hurricanes' as world warms BBC NEWS http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/printer_friendly/news_logo.gif 'Fewer hurricanes' as world warms By Mark Kinver Science and nature reporter, BBC News Hurricanes and tropical storms will become less frequent by the end of the century as a result of climate change, US researchers have suggested. But the scientists added their data also showed that there would be a modest increase in the intensity of these extreme weather events. The findings are at odds with some other studies, which forecast a greater number of hurricanes in a warmer world. The researchers' results appear in the journal Nature Geoscience. The team from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (Noaa) Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) said its findings did not support the notion that human-induced climate change was causing an increase in the number of hurricanes and tropical storms. There have been some studies published that have suggested that this is the case, but this modelling study does not support that idea, observed lead author Tom Knutson. Rather, we actually simulate a reduction in hurricane frequency in the Atlantic. Eye of the storm Although the study projected that there would be fewer extreme weather events in the future, Dr Knutson said that these storms were likely to be more powerful. The model is simulating increased intensity of the hurricanes that do occur, and also increased rainfall rates. This is something that has been seen in previous studies, and the IPCC use this [scenario] as a likely projection for future climate warming. These changes in intensity are still fairly modest in size. A previous study by Noaa scientists showed a 4% increase in storm intensity for every 1C (1.8F) increase in sea surface temperature. Yet, he explained, this study suggested only a 1-2% increase. A sea surface temperature (SST) above 26.5C (79.7F) is one of the key factors in the formation and feeding of a hurricane. Over recent decades, the surfaces of most tropical oceans have warmed by up to 0.5C (0.9F), which the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) believes has been caused by an increase in greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. In November 2006, the global community of tropical cyclone researchers gathered at a workshop organised by the World Meteorological Organization to consider the impact of human activity on the frequency and intensity of cyclones. In a concluding statement, the researchers
1211307645
In a message dated 5/20/2008 9:47:58 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: He is beholden to corporate America, as they contributed to his campaign and will continue to do so. But he is more beholden to the people and less beholden to those in power than any other successful politician in recent history. However, the key to getting what we want from him is to use that power and I fear people do not yet know how to do it. You must be talking about Blacks. Every group has asked What are you goint to do for me? Latinos, Asian, Arabs, coporate America, white women, white men, Working class whites, jews,the Military, Nasa etc. Blacks are th only group that has given him their support without any question. Please don't talk abut how Clinton threw it away. Please don't tell me he is not running for president of black America. When evver Blacks question him, they are called sellouts or are jealous. As long blacck gave Obama 90% of their vote hed can tell them to repsect the verdict and don't riot. As long as black voted overwhelming democratic, he does not have to go to Memphis and talk abou MLK. As along as blacks refuse to use their over their political spower as a small hiccup he does nto have to worry about appearing more black. IThe only pwoer blacks still have is the race card. Whites are racist. Whites have to talk about race. Obama has used our money as well has the big ticket player's money to build an infrastructure to bring about true change.. What change? Will he change the way politicans do business? No. He will just His grassroots network. He has trained people to change the system, connected disparate people with their common interests, showed them how to coalesce their money and enabled people to take leadership roles in his campaign so they can flex their activist muscle. Seems like politics as usual. I don't see change, I just see a Jesus Christ type figure using disapointed people to get into office. Additionally, his plan involves working to assist down ticket candidates on the local level. He also periodically hints that if he is president, you will have to make him make the changes you want. Just last week he launched the grassroots civil rights fellowship and set up a massive civil rights voting program that threatens to make the republicans a fringe group. Same democratic/NACCP shell game that most black preachers having been pushing every election year. He has laid the groundwork for a nationwide grassroots takeover of government agenda. How? He uses the same soundbites that the media has talked about . He can not overtly tell us what to do with it or it will be shut down before it is empowered. There is some sign that people are using it. I hope we figure it out and take advantage of it It really sounds like some hippie cult that does not understand the realities of life. **Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod000301) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
In a message dated 5/20/2008 9:49:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Please do not go out into public saying things like this. Iraq HAD a government. We KILLED them. We may have gone to war for the wrong reasons but I am sure that the Shiites and Saudia Arabia are not missing them that much. **Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod000301) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [scifinoir2] FW: 'Fewer hurricanes' as world warms
The site I mentioned before, which is no longer around. Can't even remember the name of the place to pass out. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: online? Where??? -- Original message -- From: Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bits were edited and changed for America, but it ran basically the same. And I'd forgotten about Knox and his lads myself until I watched it online. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Was The Bolar Wars also the dubbed, Americanized version? Speaking of Strablazers cool stuff, how could i forget Seargeant Knox (?) and the Space Marines?! -- Original message -- From: Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] It was. I caught it on one of those everything TV/Anime/etc is here sites last year, the entire run in one day. Really made me long for the DVD set, for ownership purposes. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, no Starsha with the Cosmo DNA to fix the planet, eh? Bummer! Well, at least that means no Gamelons out there to harry us either: although, now I think of it, Cheney does have a slight bluish tinge to his skin! Great reference to Starblazers, one of my *favorite* cartoon series of all times. I honestly don't think a month goes by where I don't find myself humming the (Americanized) theme song to either the Iscandar or Comet Empire storylines. Still remember the power of the Wave Motion Engine/Gun, the Reflex Cannon, the only-the-Japanese-could-pull-this-off idea of refitting an old seagoing battleship as a starship.Loved that series, it's on my list of things to buy. Did you ever see the uncut, original Japanese version, which is different in many ways? How about the third story arc, The Bolar Wars? Was that any good? -- Original message -- From: Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To that, I can only say this. Who among them knows the Mind of Deity? I've looked a all of the arguments, on all sides, and I've come to one conclusion. Mother Earth is dying, and there aren't any Iskandarians with a magic device to heal her. It's up to us, and Mister Bush's people need to get out of the way, because they're unwilling to help fix things. Tracey de Morsella [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Kera [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2008 5:36 PM To: NothingButA Man Cc: Tracey de Morsella; Afrikan Mind; Albert Fields; bettillee; Bree; Cinque; Cleo Wadley; duvalny; Euless Girl; fisren; Fred Williams; Kai Pettaway; Kalpubinc; Keith Johnson; Kimberly Luft; Lawrence Ross; Lord Sauron; Michael Gordon; rsjw3; Seku Brathwaite; Valery Jean; Wendell Theopolis Smith Subject: 'Fewer hurricanes' as world warms BBC NEWS http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/printer_friendly/news_logo.gif 'Fewer hurricanes' as world warms By Mark Kinver Science and nature reporter, BBC News Hurricanes and tropical storms will become less frequent by the end of the century as a result of climate change, US researchers have suggested. But the scientists added their data also showed that there would be a modest increase in the intensity of these extreme weather events. The findings are at odds with some other studies, which forecast a greater number of hurricanes in a warmer world. The researchers' results appear in the journal Nature Geoscience. The team from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (Noaa) Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GFDL) said its findings did not support the notion that human-induced climate change was causing an increase in the number of hurricanes and tropical storms. There have been some studies published that have suggested that this is the case, but this modelling study does not support that idea, observed lead author Tom Knutson. Rather, we actually simulate a reduction in hurricane frequency in the Atlantic. Eye of the storm Although the study projected that there would be fewer extreme weather events in the future, Dr Knutson said that these storms were likely to be more powerful. The model is simulating increased intensity of the hurricanes that do occur, and also increased rainfall rates. This is something that has been seen in previous studies, and the IPCC use this [scenario] as a likely projection for future climate warming. These changes in intensity are still fairly modest in size. A previous study by Noaa scientists showed a 4% increase in storm intensity for every 1C (1.8F) increase in sea surface temperature. Yet, he explained, this study suggested only a 1-2% increase. A sea surface temperature (SST) above 26.5C (79.7F) is one of the key factors in the formation and feeding of a hurricane. Over recent decades, the surfaces of most tropical oceans have warmed by up to 0.5C (0.9F), which the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) believes has been caused by an increase in greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. In November 2006, the global community of tropical cyclone researchers gathered at a workshop organised by the World
Re: [scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
(standing ovation) ravenadal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jimmy Carters(sic) was not very good as a President. Well, everybody can't be George W. Bush. ~(no)rave! There is no reason Good can't triumph over Evil, if only angels will get organized along the lines of the Mafia. -Kurt Vonnegut, A Man Without A Country [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
1211315108
I'm sure you know what you are talking about, but you statements make me wonder if you are simply buying into Clinton's rhetoric, as they contradict publically available FEC reports. They indicate that more than 50% of his money is coming from donors who contributed less than $200. Prior to the Kitchen sink strategy and Rev Wright, Obama won the majority of whites and blue collar workers as well as women in the following states. CO, MO, AK, NB,WI, VA, MD, ME, ID, NE, WA, IA, VT, KS and I think three other states. WI, ME, IA, ID, KS, are not rich states, nor do they have high Black populations He also won white support in that Black dominated state called WY Since Pennsylvania, he has increased his white support to 40+% in IN He is polling with more white and blue collar support than Clinton in OR, MT, and SD. He is winning with Asians and Latinos in OR. His support with Latino's is going up in CA and NJ so much so he is beating her in polls in those states by double digits, despite that fact she won those states. However, I am not discounting that he is getting very little white support in the Appalachian states of KY, or WV. ..Or that he will likely loose PR by 30 - 40%. I know that does not support my claims, but facts are more important to me than rhetoric or even being right. I see these discussions as opportunities to gain knowledge and open myself to new perspectives more than winning the argument. Perhaps you know more about the demographics of all the states listed above then I do, but most of them do not have high numbers of Blacks. Much of the money supporting him is coming from those states. SO, it seems unlikely that all the whites that say they support and contribute and volunteer would be lying and that Blacks are making up most of the 1,500,000+ donors that are contributing more than one billion dollars to him. Source: FEC, Opensecrets.org. If you stick to the rhetoric, you will now bring up caucuses and how undemocratic, unfair to blue collar whites and dumb, they are. Many of those states had primaries, three of the states with caucuses had beauty contest primaries as well as caucuses - which he won; and he polled very high and continues to poll very high in those states with caucuses so it is likely that he would have won those states as primaries. Since you are not a low-information voter who simply spouts the rhetoric of his or her favorite politico, I have to wonder where you are getting your facts. Because they do not reflect government data, exit polls or surveys. sO, while these numbers do not support your premise, this info is publically available by the government, his site and most independent polling companies and well as campaign finance tracking sites. There is also much antidotal evidence to back it up. Since you think it is just Black people supporting him - we only make up 12% of the population, do you think that there is some kind of media, polling company and government, finance tracking organization conspiracy covering up the source of that money? However, again, since my purpose is not rhetoric spouting or even winning let me state again, while he is not as beholden to them as Clinton or Mc Cain to corporate America, he is beholden to him. What sets him apart is that he is beholden to people as well. So, he will be answerable that interest group (the people) as well as the big companies and risks seeing that support his support dry up. That does not mean that we will not be able to do what the Clintons did and sell us out to corporate prison industry, Enron, Monsanto, Banking industry, the environment, etc.. will throwing us the occasional high profile bone. In fact, I anticipate he will. But if we stop with the rhetoric and pay attention and get proactive, because we invested in him and because he has been providing to also to hold him accountable, we will have more leverage to get what we want. When things are on the public radar, the corporate back off. I recognize that this is a big if and I have serious doubts if people will stop buying the campaign slogans and step up, but though his efforts, intentional or not, we might have a change to change this stuff. But despite the clintonian mythology marketed, he is not saying he will change things, he is saying WE can change things.I do not think he is a god as you snidely accuse. I think he may believe his rhetoric on some levels and that he is well intentioned and an operator. He knows how to use the system. I also believe that Clinton may believe her rhetoric on some levels, but I think power has corrupted her. I also think that power will corrupted Obama too and has already started. He's just not where Clinton is yet. Ironically, not even Hillary believes that only Blacks support him as you seem to. In fact, if you are going to stick to her rhetoric in arguing against Obama, you should note that she thinks latte, sipping Volvo driving elites working in
[scifinoir2] NASA moves to save computers from THEM!
http://www.networkworld.com/cgi-bin/mailto/x.cgi?pagetosend=/export/home/httpd/htdocs/news/2008/051508-nasa-moves-to-save-computers.htmlpagename=/news/2008/051508-nasa-moves-to-save-computers.htmlpageurl=http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/051508 NASA moves to save computers from swarming ants By Sharon Gaudin , Computerworld , 05/17/2008 A flood of voracious ants is heading straight for Houston, taking out computers, radios and even vehicles in their path. Even the Johnson Space Center has called in extermination experts to keep the pests out of their sensitive and critical systems. The ants have been causing all kinds of trouble in five Texas counties in and around the Gulf Coast. Because of their sheer numbers, the ants are short circuiting computers in homes and offices, and knocking systems offline in major businesses. When IT personnel pry the affected computers open, they find the machines loaded with thousands of ant bodies. These ants are raising havoc, said Roger Gold, professor of entomology at Texas AM University in College Station. They're foraging for food and they'll go into any space looking for it. In the process, they make their way into sensitive equipment. The ants have been dubbed Crazy Rasberry ants after Tom Rasberry, owner of Budget Pest Control in Pearland, Texas. He first tackled this particular type of ant back in 2002. Since then, the problem has only escalated. Rasberry told Computerworld that the ants have caused a lot of trouble for one Texas chemical company in particular. Not wanting to name the company, he said the ants shorted out three different computers that were running a pipeline that brought chemicals into the plant. The ants took down two computers last year and one in 2006, affecting flow in the pipeline each time. I think they go into everything and they don't follow any kind of structured line, said Rasberry. If you open a computer, you would find a cluster of ants on the motherboard and all over. You'd get 3,000 or 4,000 ants inside and they create arcs. They'll wipe out any computer. The Johnson Space Center called in Rasberry a month or two ago in an attempt to keep the ants out of their facilities. Too late. Raspberry said he's found three colonies at the NASA site, but all have been small enough to control. 'With the computer systems they have in there, it could devastate the facility, said Rasberry. If these ants got into the facility in the numbers they have in other locations, well, it would be awful. I've been in this business for 32 years and this is unlike anything I've ever seen. Anything. When you bring in entomologists from all over the United States and they're in shock and awe, that shows you what it's like. The Johnson Space Center referred all questions about the ants to Rasberry. The ants, which are tiny and reddish, aren't native to Texas. Officials believe they came off a ship from the Caribbean, said Paul Nester, a program specialist with the Texas AgriLife Extension Service. They were first spotted about six years ago. Gold said in the last few years they've spread in a radius of about 50 miles. And now they're moving into Houston, the fourth-largest city in the country. Fifty miles might not seem like a lot until you realize they're moving into Houston, said Gold. It could really affect a lot of people's lives. A big problem here, noted Nester, is how quickly their numbers are multiplying. A queen fire ant, long a problem in Texas, can lay as many as 1,000 eggs a day, he said. The Crazy Rasberry ants are thought to be as prolific. However, an ant mound normally has one queen. The new ants have many queens so they're able to multiply their ranks that much more quickly. They also don't go to the trouble of building ant hills. They simply nest under anything they can find - a log, a tire or a pet's water bowl - and then they quickly move on as they spread further into the state. Nester said the ants swarmed into trucks at a shipping company, shorting out the radios and even the vehicles themselves. Gold said the ants got into an engine compartment at a sewage treatment plant and shorted out the pumps so they couldn't move the sewage out. He added that they've also overrun a subdivision and caused a lot of electrical damage to houses there. Part of the problem is that exterminators have found it nearly impossible to kill the ants. Oh, you can kill some of them - the first wave, maybe. However, there are so many more ants coming behind them, that the first wave falls dead in the insecticide and the subsequent waves merely walk on the dead bodies, keeping themselves out of the poison and safe from harm. Gold warned people not to spray pesticide inside their computers and to simply call in the professionals to prevent mixing up poisonous concoctions or storing the potentially harmful partly used insecticides. For more enterprise computing news, visit Computerworld. Story copyright Computerworld, Inc.
[scifinoir2] NASA's latest mission to the red planet
http://www.salon.com/wires/ap/scitech/2008/05/19/D90OSS9O0_mars_q_a/index.html NASA's latest mission to the red planet By ALICIA CHANG Associated Press Writer May 19th, 2008 | NASA has successfully landed five robots on Mars over the past three decades. Its latest spacecraft, Phoenix Mars, will touch down in the Martian arctic region on Sunday. Here's why NASA is going again. Q: How is the Phoenix lander different from the Mars rovers that went up four years ago? A: Phoenix is a lander, which means it will stay in place after touchdown unlike the rovers, which explored. Phoenix will dig down into the soil; the rovers drilled into surface rocks. Also, Phoenix is half as expensive as the rovers, costing $420 million to develop and launch. Q: Where will Phoenix land? A: Phoenix will touch down on Mars' high northern latitudes similar in location to Earth's Greenland or northern Alaska. Scientists chose that site because it's flat and relatively rock-free. Q: What are the main goals of the Phoenix mission? A: To find out if the landing site has an environment suitable for life to emerge. Phoenix will study whether there was once water at the site and sample the soil for traces of organic compounds, two essential ingredients for life. However, Phoenix is not equipped to detect past or present life. Q: What's the next step if Phoenix finds out there are ingredients for life? A: The Martian arctic region would suddenly be an attractive site for future exploration. It will likely spur interest in revisiting the area with a more capable robotic probe designed to find life. NASA currently does not have plans to go back to Phoenix's landing site. Q: How did the mission get its name? A: Phoenix is named for the mythological bird reborn from its ashes. NASA managers like to compare it to a used car because it is pieced together from existing spacecraft parts. After two Mars failures in 1999, the space agency scrapped a lander mission in 2000. Engineers took the canceled project out of storage and reused it for the Phoenix mission. Q: How does the Phoenix landing compare to past Mars touchdowns? A: Unlike the rovers, which used airbags to cushion their landing, Phoenix will attempt a soft landing. It will use a parachute to slow down, then fire its thrusters to land. If successful, it will be the first time since the twin Viking missions of 1976 that a spacecraft has done a powered landing on Mars.
[scifinoir2] $175 burger: you want gold with that?
(Enough of this Obama talk - lets talk about something REALLY important like...$175 hamburgers!) ~rave! http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080520/od_nm/hamburger_dc $175 burger: you want gold with that? By Daniel Trotta 2 hours, 20 minutes ago Its creators admit it is the ultimate in decadence: a $175 hamburger. The Wall Street Burger Shoppe just raised its price from $150 to assure its designation as the costliest burger in the city as determined by Pocket Change, an online newsletter about the most expensive things in New York. Wall Street has good days and bad days. We wanted to have the everyday burger (for $4) ... and then something special if you really have a good day on Wall Street, said co-owner Heather Tierney. The burger, created by chef and co-owner Kevin O'Connell, seeks to justify its price with a Kobe beef patty, lots of black truffles, seared foie gras, aged Gruyere cheese, wild mushrooms and flecks of gold leaf on a brioche bun. The eatery sells 20 or 25 per month in the fine dining room upstairs versus hundreds of $4 burgers each day at the diner counter downstairs, Tierney said. Pocket Change previously designated the double truffle burger at Daniel Boulud's DB Bistro Moderne as the most expensive at $120, and the Burger Shoppe set out to top that. Boulud's creation -- available only during black truffle season from December to March -- rose to $150 this past season, so the Burger Shoppe raised its price on Monday to $175. Our burger is not about the price, said Georgette Farkas, a Boulud spokeswoman. If you are making something concerned only about the price, you are off in the wrong direction. Without truffles, Boulud's burger costs $32. It has a ground sirloin patty stuffed with red wine braised short ribs. O'Connell said the Burger Shoppe was finding the ultimate expression of each one of the ingredients. The concept was like a mushroom-bacon-Swiss cheese burger, which is my favorite sort of burger, he said. The burger comes with golden truffle mayonnaise, Belgian-style fries and a mixed greens and tomato salad. O'Connell pairs the dish with many fine wines, a lager or a toasted brown beer, or ginger ale. Copyright © 2008 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon.
Re: [scifinoir2] $175 burger: you want gold with that?
Only if I can get a $5 milkshake with it. On Tue, 20 May 2008 16:55:54 -0400, ravenadal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Enough of this Obama talk - lets talk about something REALLY important like...$175 hamburgers!) ~rave! http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080520/od_nm/hamburger_dc $175 burger: you want gold with that? By Daniel Trotta 2 hours, 20 minutes ago Its creators admit it is the ultimate in decadence: a $175 hamburger. The Wall Street Burger Shoppe just raised its price from $150 to assure its designation as the costliest burger in the city as determined by Pocket Change, an online newsletter about the most expensive things in New York. Wall Street has good days and bad days. We wanted to have the everyday burger (for $4) ... and then something special if you really have a good day on Wall Street, said co-owner Heather Tierney. The burger, created by chef and co-owner Kevin O'Connell, seeks to justify its price with a Kobe beef patty, lots of black truffles, seared foie gras, aged Gruyere cheese, wild mushrooms and flecks of gold leaf on a brioche bun. The eatery sells 20 or 25 per month in the fine dining room upstairs versus hundreds of $4 burgers each day at the diner counter downstairs, Tierney said. Pocket Change previously designated the double truffle burger at Daniel Boulud's DB Bistro Moderne as the most expensive at $120, and the Burger Shoppe set out to top that. Boulud's creation -- available only during black truffle season from December to March -- rose to $150 this past season, so the Burger Shoppe raised its price on Monday to $175. Our burger is not about the price, said Georgette Farkas, a Boulud spokeswoman. If you are making something concerned only about the price, you are off in the wrong direction. Without truffles, Boulud's burger costs $32. It has a ground sirloin patty stuffed with red wine braised short ribs. O'Connell said the Burger Shoppe was finding the ultimate expression of each one of the ingredients. The concept was like a mushroom-bacon-Swiss cheese burger, which is my favorite sort of burger, he said. The burger comes with golden truffle mayonnaise, Belgian-style fries and a mixed greens and tomato salad. O'Connell pairs the dish with many fine wines, a lager or a toasted brown beer, or ginger ale. Copyright © 2008 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. -- We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking as we used when we created them. -- Albert Einstein Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/scifinoir2/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: RE: [scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
Wow?!! Tracey you got your thing off...and I usually don't chime in on Sci Fi with the political commentary...I save that for eleswhere...but Tracey your points below are the most even handed and detailed I have ever seen you post...Bravo for the depth of knowledge given and understanding displayed. Actually Bravo you all, and please continue this excellent discussion both sides have made some very interesting pointsI will only say that with the recent discovery of Ted Kennedy's illness...it could come down to a win one for the gipper scenario that could be the final nail in the coffin for the GOP...but that is all i am going to add to this very excellent discussion don't want to lower it any more than I have Bree or Aubrey to my new friend on the thread Aubrey. - Original Message - From: Tracey de Morsella Date: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 4:25 pm Subject: RE: [scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com I'm sure you know what you are talking about, but you statements make me wonder if you are simply buying into Clinton's rhetoric, as they contradictpublically available FEC reports. They indicate that more than 50% of his money is coming from donors who contributed less than $200. Prior to the Kitchen sink strategy and Rev Wright, Obama won the majority of whites and blue collar workers as well as women in the following states. CO, MO, AK, NB,WI, VA, MD, ME, ID, NE, WA, IA, VT, KS and I think three other states. WI, ME, IA, ID, KS, are not rich states, nor do they have high Black populations He also won white support in that Black dominated state called WY Since Pennsylvania, he has increased his white support to 40+% in IN He is polling with more white and blue collar support than Clinton in OR, MT, and SD. He is winning with Asians and Latinos in OR. His support with Latino's is going up in CA and NJ so much so he is beating her in polls in those states by double digits, despite that fact she won those states. However, I am not discounting that he is getting very little white support in the Appalachian states of KY, or WV. ..Or that he will likely loose PR by 30 - 40%. I know that does not support my claims, but facts are more important to me than rhetoric or even being right. I see these discussionsas opportunities to gain knowledge and open myself to new perspectives more than winning the argument. Perhaps you know more about the demographics of all the states listed above then I do, but most of them do not have high numbers of Blacks. Much of the money supporting him is coming from those states. SO, it seems unlikelythat all the whites that say they support and contribute and volunteer would be lying and that Blacks are making up most of the 1,500,000+ donors that are contributing more than one billion dollars to him. Source: FEC, Opensecrets.org. If you stick to the rhetoric, you will now bring up caucuses and how undemocratic, unfair to blue collar whites and dumb, they are. Many of those states had primaries, three of the states with caucuses had beauty contest primaries as well as caucuses - which he won; and he polled very high and continues to poll very high in those states with caucuses so it is likely that he would have won those states as primaries. Since you are not a low-information voter who simply spouts the rhetoric of his or her favorite politico, I have to wonder where you are getting your facts. Because they do not reflect government data, exit polls or surveys. sO, while these numbers do not support your premise, this info is publically available by the government, his site and most independent polling companies and well as campaign finance tracking sites. There is also much antidotalevidence to back it up. Since you think it is just Black people supporting him - we only make up 12% of the population, do you think that there is some kind of media, polling company and government, finance tracking organizationconspiracy covering up the source of that money? However, again, since my purpose is not rhetoric spouting or even winning let me state again,while he is not as beholden to them as Clinton or Mc Cain to corporate America, he is beholden to him. What sets him apart is that he is beholden to people as well. So, he will be answerable that interest group (the people) as well as the big companies and risks seeing that support his support dry up. That does not mean that we will not be able to do what the Clintons did and sell us out to corporate prison industry, Enron, Monsanto, Banking industry, the environment, etc.. will throwing us the occasionalhigh profile bone. In fact, I anticipate he will. But if we stop with the rhetoric and pay attention and get proactive, because we invested in him and because he has been providing to also to hold him
1211319569
I'll just take the gold, thank you. Oh, did anyone forward this to Billy-Boy Gates or Larry Ellison? They might want to take their families out for a snack. :P ravenadal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Enough of this Obama talk - lets talk about something REALLY important like...$175 hamburgers!) ~rave! http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080520/od_nm/hamburger_dc $175 burger: you want gold with that? By Daniel Trotta 2 hours, 20 minutes ago Its creators admit it is the ultimate in decadence: a $175 hamburger. The Wall Street Burger Shoppe just raised its price from $150 to assure its designation as the costliest burger in the city as determined by Pocket Change, an online newsletter about the most expensive things in New York. Wall Street has good days and bad days. We wanted to have the everyday burger (for $4) ... and then something special if you really have a good day on Wall Street, said co-owner Heather Tierney. The burger, created by chef and co-owner Kevin O'Connell, seeks to justify its price with a Kobe beef patty, lots of black truffles, seared foie gras, aged Gruyere cheese, wild mushrooms and flecks of gold leaf on a brioche bun. The eatery sells 20 or 25 per month in the fine dining room upstairs versus hundreds of $4 burgers each day at the diner counter downstairs, Tierney said. Pocket Change previously designated the double truffle burger at Daniel Boulud's DB Bistro Moderne as the most expensive at $120, and the Burger Shoppe set out to top that. Boulud's creation -- available only during black truffle season from December to March -- rose to $150 this past season, so the Burger Shoppe raised its price on Monday to $175. Our burger is not about the price, said Georgette Farkas, a Boulud spokeswoman. If you are making something concerned only about the price, you are off in the wrong direction. Without truffles, Boulud's burger costs $32. It has a ground sirloin patty stuffed with red wine braised short ribs. O'Connell said the Burger Shoppe was finding the ultimate expression of each one of the ingredients. The concept was like a mushroom-bacon-Swiss cheese burger, which is my favorite sort of burger, he said. The burger comes with golden truffle mayonnaise, Belgian-style fries and a mixed greens and tomato salad. O'Connell pairs the dish with many fine wines, a lager or a toasted brown beer, or ginger ale. Copyright © 2008 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. There is no reason Good can't triumph over Evil, if only angels will get organized along the lines of the Mafia. -Kurt Vonnegut, A Man Without A Country [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[scifinoir2] Re: $175 burger: you want gold with that?
Do fries come with that shake? At $175, it better! ~rave! --- In scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com, Lockhart, Daryle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Only if I can get a $5 milkshake with it. On Tue, 20 May 2008 16:55:54 -0400, ravenadal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Enough of this Obama talk - lets talk about something REALLY important like...$175 hamburgers!) ~rave! http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080520/od_nm/hamburger_dc $175 burger: you want gold with that? By Daniel Trotta 2 hours, 20 minutes ago Its creators admit it is the ultimate in decadence: a $175 hamburger. The Wall Street Burger Shoppe just raised its price from $150 to assure its designation as the costliest burger in the city as determined by Pocket Change, an online newsletter about the most expensive things in New York. Wall Street has good days and bad days. We wanted to have the everyday burger (for $4) ... and then something special if you really have a good day on Wall Street, said co-owner Heather Tierney. The burger, created by chef and co-owner Kevin O'Connell, seeks to justify its price with a Kobe beef patty, lots of black truffles, seared foie gras, aged Gruyere cheese, wild mushrooms and flecks of gold leaf on a brioche bun. The eatery sells 20 or 25 per month in the fine dining room upstairs versus hundreds of $4 burgers each day at the diner counter downstairs, Tierney said. Pocket Change previously designated the double truffle burger at Daniel Boulud's DB Bistro Moderne as the most expensive at $120, and the Burger Shoppe set out to top that. Boulud's creation -- available only during black truffle season from December to March -- rose to $150 this past season, so the Burger Shoppe raised its price on Monday to $175. Our burger is not about the price, said Georgette Farkas, a Boulud spokeswoman. If you are making something concerned only about the price, you are off in the wrong direction. Without truffles, Boulud's burger costs $32. It has a ground sirloin patty stuffed with red wine braised short ribs. O'Connell said the Burger Shoppe was finding the ultimate expression of each one of the ingredients. The concept was like a mushroom-bacon-Swiss cheese burger, which is my favorite sort of burger, he said. The burger comes with golden truffle mayonnaise, Belgian-style fries and a mixed greens and tomato salad. O'Connell pairs the dish with many fine wines, a lager or a toasted brown beer, or ginger ale. Copyright © 2008 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. -- We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking as we used when we created them. -- Albert Einstein
Re: [scifinoir2] NASA moves to save computers from THEM!
Now, since NASA is funded my *my* tax dollars, they'd danged well better start with *mine*! brent wodehouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.networkworld.com/cgi-bin/mailto/x.cgi?pagetosend=/export/home/httpd/htdocs/news/2008/051508-nasa-moves-to-save-computers.htmlpagename=/news/2008/051508-nasa-moves-to-save-computers.htmlpageurl=http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/051508 NASA moves to save computers from swarming ants By Sharon Gaudin , Computerworld , 05/17/2008 A flood of voracious ants is heading straight for Houston, taking out computers, radios and even vehicles in their path. Even the Johnson Space Center has called in extermination experts to keep the pests out of their sensitive and critical systems. The ants have been causing all kinds of trouble in five Texas counties in and around the Gulf Coast. Because of their sheer numbers, the ants are short circuiting computers in homes and offices, and knocking systems offline in major businesses. When IT personnel pry the affected computers open, they find the machines loaded with thousands of ant bodies. These ants are raising havoc, said Roger Gold, professor of entomology at Texas AM University in College Station. They're foraging for food and they'll go into any space looking for it. In the process, they make their way into sensitive equipment. The ants have been dubbed Crazy Rasberry ants after Tom Rasberry, owner of Budget Pest Control in Pearland, Texas. He first tackled this particular type of ant back in 2002. Since then, the problem has only escalated. Rasberry told Computerworld that the ants have caused a lot of trouble for one Texas chemical company in particular. Not wanting to name the company, he said the ants shorted out three different computers that were running a pipeline that brought chemicals into the plant. The ants took down two computers last year and one in 2006, affecting flow in the pipeline each time. I think they go into everything and they don't follow any kind of structured line, said Rasberry. If you open a computer, you would find a cluster of ants on the motherboard and all over. You'd get 3,000 or 4,000 ants inside and they create arcs. They'll wipe out any computer. The Johnson Space Center called in Rasberry a month or two ago in an attempt to keep the ants out of their facilities. Too late. Raspberry said he's found three colonies at the NASA site, but all have been small enough to control. 'With the computer systems they have in there, it could devastate the facility, said Rasberry. If these ants got into the facility in the numbers they have in other locations, well, it would be awful. I've been in this business for 32 years and this is unlike anything I've ever seen. Anything. When you bring in entomologists from all over the United States and they're in shock and awe, that shows you what it's like. The Johnson Space Center referred all questions about the ants to Rasberry. The ants, which are tiny and reddish, aren't native to Texas. Officials believe they came off a ship from the Caribbean, said Paul Nester, a program specialist with the Texas AgriLife Extension Service. They were first spotted about six years ago. Gold said in the last few years they've spread in a radius of about 50 miles. And now they're moving into Houston, the fourth-largest city in the country. Fifty miles might not seem like a lot until you realize they're moving into Houston, said Gold. It could really affect a lot of people's lives. A big problem here, noted Nester, is how quickly their numbers are multiplying. A queen fire ant, long a problem in Texas, can lay as many as 1,000 eggs a day, he said. The Crazy Rasberry ants are thought to be as prolific. However, an ant mound normally has one queen. The new ants have many queens so they're able to multiply their ranks that much more quickly. They also don't go to the trouble of building ant hills. They simply nest under anything they can find - a log, a tire or a pet's water bowl - and then they quickly move on as they spread further into the state. Nester said the ants swarmed into trucks at a shipping company, shorting out the radios and even the vehicles themselves. Gold said the ants got into an engine compartment at a sewage treatment plant and shorted out the pumps so they couldn't move the sewage out. He added that they've also overrun a subdivision and caused a lot of electrical damage to houses there. Part of the problem is that exterminators have found it nearly impossible to kill the ants. Oh, you can kill some of them - the first wave, maybe. However, there are so many more ants coming behind them, that the first wave falls dead in the insecticide and the subsequent waves merely walk on the dead bodies, keeping themselves out of the poison and safe from harm. Gold warned people not to spray pesticide inside their computers and
RE: [scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
(standing ovation, and passing the oh-two tank) Tracey de Morsella [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm sure you know what you are talking about, but you statements make me wonder if you are simply buying into Clinton's rhetoric, as they contradict publically available FEC reports. They indicate that more than 50% of his money is coming from donors who contributed less than $200. Prior to the Kitchen sink strategy and Rev Wright, Obama won the majority of whites and blue collar workers as well as women in the following states. CO, MO, AK, NB,WI, VA, MD, ME, ID, NE, WA, IA, VT, KS and I think three other states. WI, ME, IA, ID, KS, are not rich states, nor do they have high Black populations He also won white support in that Black dominated state called WY Since Pennsylvania, he has increased his white support to 40+% in IN He is polling with more white and blue collar support than Clinton in OR, MT, and SD. He is winning with Asians and Latinos in OR. His support with Latino's is going up in CA and NJ so much so he is beating her in polls in those states by double digits, despite that fact she won those states. However, I am not discounting that he is getting very little white support in the Appalachian states of KY, or WV. ..Or that he will likely loose PR by 30 - 40%. I know that does not support my claims, but facts are more important to me than rhetoric or even being right. I see these discussions as opportunities to gain knowledge and open myself to new perspectives more than winning the argument. Perhaps you know more about the demographics of all the states listed above then I do, but most of them do not have high numbers of Blacks. Much of the money supporting him is coming from those states. SO, it seems unlikely that all the whites that say they support and contribute and volunteer would be lying and that Blacks are making up most of the 1,500,000+ donors that are contributing more than one billion dollars to him. Source: FEC, Opensecrets.org. If you stick to the rhetoric, you will now bring up caucuses and how undemocratic, unfair to blue collar whites and dumb, they are. Many of those states had primaries, three of the states with caucuses had beauty contest primaries as well as caucuses - which he won; and he polled very high and continues to poll very high in those states with caucuses so it is likely that he would have won those states as primaries. Since you are not a low-information voter who simply spouts the rhetoric of his or her favorite politico, I have to wonder where you are getting your facts. Because they do not reflect government data, exit polls or surveys. sO, while these numbers do not support your premise, this info is publically available by the government, his site and most independent polling companies and well as campaign finance tracking sites. There is also much antidotal evidence to back it up. Since you think it is just Black people supporting him - we only make up 12% of the population, do you think that there is some kind of media, polling company and government, finance tracking organization conspiracy covering up the source of that money? However, again, since my purpose is not rhetoric spouting or even winning let me state again, while he is not as beholden to them as Clinton or Mc Cain to corporate America, he is beholden to him. What sets him apart is that he is beholden to people as well. So, he will be answerable that interest group (the people) as well as the big companies and risks seeing that support his support dry up. That does not mean that we will not be able to do what the Clintons did and sell us out to corporate prison industry, Enron, Monsanto, Banking industry, the environment, etc.. will throwing us the occasional high profile bone. In fact, I anticipate he will. But if we stop with the rhetoric and pay attention and get proactive, because we invested in him and because he has been providing to also to hold him accountable, we will have more leverage to get what we want. When things are on the public radar, the corporate back off. I recognize that this is a big if and I have serious doubts if people will stop buying the campaign slogans and step up, but though his efforts, intentional or not, we might have a change to change this stuff. But despite the clintonian mythology marketed, he is not saying he will change things, he is saying WE can change things.I do not think he is a god as you snidely accuse. I think he may believe his rhetoric on some levels and that he is well intentioned and an operator. He knows how to use the system. I also believe that Clinton may believe her rhetoric on some levels, but I think power has corrupted her. I also think that power will corrupted Obama too and has already started. He's just not where Clinton is yet. Ironically, not even Hillary believes that only
Re: [scifinoir2] $175 burger: you want gold with that?
No thanks...I'll stick with my $700 Raman noodles ravenadal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Enough of this Obama talk - lets talk about something REALLY important like...$175 hamburgers!) ~rave! http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080520/od_nm/hamburger_dc $175 burger: you want gold with that? By Daniel Trotta 2 hours, 20 minutes ago Its creators admit it is the ultimate in decadence: a $175 hamburger. The Wall Street Burger Shoppe just raised its price from $150 to assure its designation as the costliest burger in the city as determined by Pocket Change, an online newsletter about the most expensive things in New York. Wall Street has good days and bad days. We wanted to have the everyday burger (for $4) ... and then something special if you really have a good day on Wall Street, said co-owner Heather Tierney. The burger, created by chef and co-owner Kevin O'Connell, seeks to justify its price with a Kobe beef patty, lots of black truffles, seared foie gras, aged Gruyere cheese, wild mushrooms and flecks of gold leaf on a brioche bun. The eatery sells 20 or 25 per month in the fine dining room upstairs versus hundreds of $4 burgers each day at the diner counter downstairs, Tierney said. Pocket Change previously designated the double truffle burger at Daniel Boulud's DB Bistro Moderne as the most expensive at $120, and the Burger Shoppe set out to top that. Boulud's creation -- available only during black truffle season from December to March -- rose to $150 this past season, so the Burger Shoppe raised its price on Monday to $175. Our burger is not about the price, said Georgette Farkas, a Boulud spokeswoman. If you are making something concerned only about the price, you are off in the wrong direction. Without truffles, Boulud's burger costs $32. It has a ground sirloin patty stuffed with red wine braised short ribs. O'Connell said the Burger Shoppe was finding the ultimate expression of each one of the ingredients. The concept was like a mushroom-bacon-Swiss cheese burger, which is my favorite sort of burger, he said. The burger comes with golden truffle mayonnaise, Belgian-style fries and a mixed greens and tomato salad. O'Connell pairs the dish with many fine wines, a lager or a toasted brown beer, or ginger ale. Copyright © 2008 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. I am me, said the stranger, and I work for the ones who pay my fee...and that's not you. - The Side Street Chonicles by C.W. Badie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [scifinoir2] $175 burger: you want gold with that?
No thanks...I'll stick with my $700 Raman noodles ravenadal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Enough of this Obama talk - lets talk about something REALLY important like...$175 hamburgers!) ~rave! http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080520/od_nm/hamburger_dc $175 burger: you want gold with that? By Daniel Trotta 2 hours, 20 minutes ago Its creators admit it is the ultimate in decadence: a $175 hamburger. The Wall Street Burger Shoppe just raised its price from $150 to assure its designation as the costliest burger in the city as determined by Pocket Change, an online newsletter about the most expensive things in New York. Wall Street has good days and bad days. We wanted to have the everyday burger (for $4) ... and then something special if you really have a good day on Wall Street, said co-owner Heather Tierney. The burger, created by chef and co-owner Kevin O'Connell, seeks to justify its price with a Kobe beef patty, lots of black truffles, seared foie gras, aged Gruyere cheese, wild mushrooms and flecks of gold leaf on a brioche bun. The eatery sells 20 or 25 per month in the fine dining room upstairs versus hundreds of $4 burgers each day at the diner counter downstairs, Tierney said. Pocket Change previously designated the double truffle burger at Daniel Boulud's DB Bistro Moderne as the most expensive at $120, and the Burger Shoppe set out to top that. Boulud's creation -- available only during black truffle season from December to March -- rose to $150 this past season, so the Burger Shoppe raised its price on Monday to $175. Our burger is not about the price, said Georgette Farkas, a Boulud spokeswoman. If you are making something concerned only about the price, you are off in the wrong direction. Without truffles, Boulud's burger costs $32. It has a ground sirloin patty stuffed with red wine braised short ribs. O'Connell said the Burger Shoppe was finding the ultimate expression of each one of the ingredients. The concept was like a mushroom-bacon-Swiss cheese burger, which is my favorite sort of burger, he said. The burger comes with golden truffle mayonnaise, Belgian-style fries and a mixed greens and tomato salad. O'Connell pairs the dish with many fine wines, a lager or a toasted brown beer, or ginger ale. Copyright © 2008 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. I am me, said the stranger, and I work for the ones who pay my fee...and that's not you. - The Side Street Chonicles by C.W. Badie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
Hey Tracey There are many things that I like about both candidates. I just happen to like more things about Obama so I went with him. However, in the end it was her flip on her position about the war that decided it for me. Frankly, Obama's position on the war seems less than realistic but her's seemed dishonest. The war and it's consequences (i.e. the shattered economy) were my main concern, immediately followed by healthcare. I think that HRC has a lot of qualities and a lot of flaws. I felt the same way about her husband. I think that many of those flaws would make excellent qualities in a President, again very much like her husband. On many complaints, I feel she gets a raw deal. For example, I don't believe for a second that Obama is any less ambitious than HRC but no one seems to think that ambition in a man is a flaw. However, ambition in a woman seems to be a deal breaker. Frankly, I wouldn't be interested in a candidate who was not overly ambitious. They would, in my estimation, lack the stones to do the job. I voted for Obama because I liked more things about his candidacy than Clintons. However, I would not have been unhappy with Clinton as the victor. Either candidate is an ideal choice over John McCain who in my mind is a disaster as big as the present one we are all suffereing through. Perhaps that clears things up. I will add this, when the race comes down to the superdelegates at the convention and Obama is denied the victory, I will feel very betrayed by the process. I believe he is the clear choice of the majority of democrats at this point and he should get the support of the superdelegates where he has won primaries and caucuses. --- In scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com, Tracey de Morsella [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bosco: Thanks for the explanation and the wonderful complement. I was just kidding. I like playing Veep-stakes and even though you asked Keith, I decided to give my view. If you like Clinton, I'm not sure I understand why you voted for Obama.
Re: [scifinoir2] Re: $175 burger: you want gold with that?
Fries, shake and someone to wash my hands and wipe my mouth... ravenadal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do fries come with that shake? At $175, it better! ~rave! --- In scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com, Lockhart, Daryle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Only if I can get a $5 milkshake with it. On Tue, 20 May 2008 16:55:54 -0400, ravenadal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Enough of this Obama talk - lets talk about something REALLY important like...$175 hamburgers!) ~rave! http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080520/od_nm/hamburger_dc $175 burger: you want gold with that? By Daniel Trotta 2 hours, 20 minutes ago Its creators admit it is the ultimate in decadence: a $175 hamburger. The Wall Street Burger Shoppe just raised its price from $150 to assure its designation as the costliest burger in the city as determined by Pocket Change, an online newsletter about the most expensive things in New York. Wall Street has good days and bad days. We wanted to have the everyday burger (for $4) ... and then something special if you really have a good day on Wall Street, said co-owner Heather Tierney. The burger, created by chef and co-owner Kevin O'Connell, seeks to justify its price with a Kobe beef patty, lots of black truffles, seared foie gras, aged Gruyere cheese, wild mushrooms and flecks of gold leaf on a brioche bun. The eatery sells 20 or 25 per month in the fine dining room upstairs versus hundreds of $4 burgers each day at the diner counter downstairs, Tierney said. Pocket Change previously designated the double truffle burger at Daniel Boulud's DB Bistro Moderne as the most expensive at $120, and the Burger Shoppe set out to top that. Boulud's creation -- available only during black truffle season from December to March -- rose to $150 this past season, so the Burger Shoppe raised its price on Monday to $175. Our burger is not about the price, said Georgette Farkas, a Boulud spokeswoman. If you are making something concerned only about the price, you are off in the wrong direction. Without truffles, Boulud's burger costs $32. It has a ground sirloin patty stuffed with red wine braised short ribs. O'Connell said the Burger Shoppe was finding the ultimate expression of each one of the ingredients. The concept was like a mushroom-bacon-Swiss cheese burger, which is my favorite sort of burger, he said. The burger comes with golden truffle mayonnaise, Belgian-style fries and a mixed greens and tomato salad. O'Connell pairs the dish with many fine wines, a lager or a toasted brown beer, or ginger ale. Copyright © 2008 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. -- We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking as we used when we created them. -- Albert Einstein There is no reason Good can't triumph over Evil, if only angels will get organized along the lines of the Mafia. -Kurt Vonnegut, A Man Without A Country [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [scifinoir2] Re: $175 burger: you want gold with that?
...You forgot the room to sleep the meal off in... Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fries, shake and someone to wash my hands and wipe my mouth... ravenadal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Do fries come with that shake? At $175, it better! ~rave! --- In scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com, Lockhart, Daryle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Only if I can get a $5 milkshake with it. On Tue, 20 May 2008 16:55:54 -0400, ravenadal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Enough of this Obama talk - lets talk about something REALLY important like...$175 hamburgers!) ~rave! http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080520/od_nm/hamburger_dc $175 burger: you want gold with that? By Daniel Trotta 2 hours, 20 minutes ago Its creators admit it is the ultimate in decadence: a $175 hamburger. The Wall Street Burger Shoppe just raised its price from $150 to assure its designation as the costliest burger in the city as determined by Pocket Change, an online newsletter about the most expensive things in New York. Wall Street has good days and bad days. We wanted to have the everyday burger (for $4) ... and then something special if you really have a good day on Wall Street, said co-owner Heather Tierney. The burger, created by chef and co-owner Kevin O'Connell, seeks to justify its price with a Kobe beef patty, lots of black truffles, seared foie gras, aged Gruyere cheese, wild mushrooms and flecks of gold leaf on a brioche bun. The eatery sells 20 or 25 per month in the fine dining room upstairs versus hundreds of $4 burgers each day at the diner counter downstairs, Tierney said. Pocket Change previously designated the double truffle burger at Daniel Boulud's DB Bistro Moderne as the most expensive at $120, and the Burger Shoppe set out to top that. Boulud's creation -- available only during black truffle season from December to March -- rose to $150 this past season, so the Burger Shoppe raised its price on Monday to $175. Our burger is not about the price, said Georgette Farkas, a Boulud spokeswoman. If you are making something concerned only about the price, you are off in the wrong direction. Without truffles, Boulud's burger costs $32. It has a ground sirloin patty stuffed with red wine braised short ribs. O'Connell said the Burger Shoppe was finding the ultimate expression of each one of the ingredients. The concept was like a mushroom-bacon-Swiss cheese burger, which is my favorite sort of burger, he said. The burger comes with golden truffle mayonnaise, Belgian-style fries and a mixed greens and tomato salad. O'Connell pairs the dish with many fine wines, a lager or a toasted brown beer, or ginger ale. Copyright © 2008 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. -- We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking as we used when we created them. -- Albert Einstein There is no reason Good can't triumph over Evil, if only angels will get organized along the lines of the Mafia. -Kurt Vonnegut, A Man Without A Country [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] I am me, said the stranger, and I work for the ones who pay my fee...and that's not you. - The Side Street Chonicles by C.W. Badie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [scifinoir2] $175 burger: you want gold with that?
$700 I paid $950 for mine... Astromancer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No thanks...I'll stick with my $700 Raman noodles ravenadal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Enough of this Obama talk - lets talk about something REALLY important like...$175 hamburgers!) ~rave! http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080520/od_nm/hamburger_dc $175 burger: you want gold with that? By Daniel Trotta 2 hours, 20 minutes ago Its creators admit it is the ultimate in decadence: a $175 hamburger. The Wall Street Burger Shoppe just raised its price from $150 to assure its designation as the costliest burger in the city as determined by Pocket Change, an online newsletter about the most expensive things in New York. Wall Street has good days and bad days. We wanted to have the everyday burger (for $4) ... and then something special if you really have a good day on Wall Street, said co-owner Heather Tierney. The burger, created by chef and co-owner Kevin O'Connell, seeks to justify its price with a Kobe beef patty, lots of black truffles, seared foie gras, aged Gruyere cheese, wild mushrooms and flecks of gold leaf on a brioche bun. The eatery sells 20 or 25 per month in the fine dining room upstairs versus hundreds of $4 burgers each day at the diner counter downstairs, Tierney said. Pocket Change previously designated the double truffle burger at Daniel Boulud's DB Bistro Moderne as the most expensive at $120, and the Burger Shoppe set out to top that. Boulud's creation -- available only during black truffle season from December to March -- rose to $150 this past season, so the Burger Shoppe raised its price on Monday to $175. Our burger is not about the price, said Georgette Farkas, a Boulud spokeswoman. If you are making something concerned only about the price, you are off in the wrong direction. Without truffles, Boulud's burger costs $32. It has a ground sirloin patty stuffed with red wine braised short ribs. O'Connell said the Burger Shoppe was finding the ultimate expression of each one of the ingredients. The concept was like a mushroom-bacon-Swiss cheese burger, which is my favorite sort of burger, he said. The burger comes with golden truffle mayonnaise, Belgian-style fries and a mixed greens and tomato salad. O'Connell pairs the dish with many fine wines, a lager or a toasted brown beer, or ginger ale. Copyright © 2008 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. I am me, said the stranger, and I work for the ones who pay my fee...and that's not you. - The Side Street Chonicles by C.W. Badie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] There is no reason Good can't triumph over Evil, if only angels will get organized along the lines of the Mafia. -Kurt Vonnegut, A Man Without A Country [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [scifinoir2] Re: OT:Top reasons Clinton should not get on dream ticket
You are right Tracey. Obama is gaining among Clinton votes. The Gallup poll suggest as much. I also feel that he may even win KY. I have to agree that Obam ran a more effective campaign. I do NOT agree that anyone that votes for Clinto is a uneducated inforative hick **Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod000301) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Re: [scifinoir2] $175 burger: you want gold with that?
Aha...you fell for the fancy chopsticks meal... Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: $700 I paid $950 for mine... Astromancer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No thanks...I'll stick with my $700 Raman noodles ravenadal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Enough of this Obama talk - lets talk about something REALLY important like...$175 hamburgers!) ~rave! http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080520/od_nm/hamburger_dc $175 burger: you want gold with that? By Daniel Trotta 2 hours, 20 minutes ago Its creators admit it is the ultimate in decadence: a $175 hamburger. The Wall Street Burger Shoppe just raised its price from $150 to assure its designation as the costliest burger in the city as determined by Pocket Change, an online newsletter about the most expensive things in New York. Wall Street has good days and bad days. We wanted to have the everyday burger (for $4) ... and then something special if you really have a good day on Wall Street, said co-owner Heather Tierney. The burger, created by chef and co-owner Kevin O'Connell, seeks to justify its price with a Kobe beef patty, lots of black truffles, seared foie gras, aged Gruyere cheese, wild mushrooms and flecks of gold leaf on a brioche bun. The eatery sells 20 or 25 per month in the fine dining room upstairs versus hundreds of $4 burgers each day at the diner counter downstairs, Tierney said. Pocket Change previously designated the double truffle burger at Daniel Boulud's DB Bistro Moderne as the most expensive at $120, and the Burger Shoppe set out to top that. Boulud's creation -- available only during black truffle season from December to March -- rose to $150 this past season, so the Burger Shoppe raised its price on Monday to $175. Our burger is not about the price, said Georgette Farkas, a Boulud spokeswoman. If you are making something concerned only about the price, you are off in the wrong direction. Without truffles, Boulud's burger costs $32. It has a ground sirloin patty stuffed with red wine braised short ribs. O'Connell said the Burger Shoppe was finding the ultimate expression of each one of the ingredients. The concept was like a mushroom-bacon-Swiss cheese burger, which is my favorite sort of burger, he said. The burger comes with golden truffle mayonnaise, Belgian-style fries and a mixed greens and tomato salad. O'Connell pairs the dish with many fine wines, a lager or a toasted brown beer, or ginger ale. Copyright © 2008 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. I am me, said the stranger, and I work for the ones who pay my fee...and that's not you. - The Side Street Chonicles by C.W. Badie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] There is no reason Good can't triumph over Evil, if only angels will get organized along the lines of the Mafia. -Kurt Vonnegut, A Man Without A Country [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] I am me, said the stranger, and I work for the ones who pay my fee...and that's not you. - The Side Street Chonicles by C.W. Badie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
1211332667
I'm glad I misunderstood and that you voted for who you wanted - no matter who that is. I did not perceive you as someone who could be pressured by others in your political decision making. I'm bias, but I do not think she gets a raw deal on ambition. I agree with you on the point that Obama is extremely ambitious. I think he is as ambitious as her, but is better at taking the long view of the repercussions of his actions. She sometimes thinks in the short term and plans to deal with the fall out later. I think she has made a number of moves that are perceived to place her ambitions above the future of the party, comrades in the senate, or would-be allies. I know Obama has done some things in the name of ambition that are not so positive, but they did not have far reaching repercussions--at least not yet. I realize most that like her just see moves as being the way you have to be to win. However, if that is the case then the definition of win is debatable. the follow are a few of the most recent steps she has taken to creat these cutthroat perceptions of her ambitions: When Dems win, it is often because Blacks put them over the top. Once the Clintons realized they had lost Blacks, they started a subtle southern strategy usually used by republicans. Republicans always say blacks are stupid for blindly following the dems. The reason most of us do is because of the white southern strategy of say and doing things coded to reach white men who are racist. When the Clintons did that they risked the party because if blacks had stayed home, it would have affected everybody down ticket. They reinforced this by saying over and over that Obama injected race into the election and that they did nothing. Many people still believe it. But it will help her win, so that is what is important. After dems finally won over the majority of Hispanics they Clinton using rhetoric that Hispanics do not like Blacks and will not support one in an elections. While it is true with many older Hispanics, most younger Hispanics have supported Blacks in the recent past. Again, this line was designed to get Hispanics aligned with her but endangered the whole party and down ticket elections if Obama won, because many Hispanics now hate republicans, but like Mc Cain. The dems like to be perceived as for all people and she screwed with their 40 year brand.But it will help her win, so that is what is important. As a woman, there have been numerous times when I perceive gender bias impacting the race, however, the Clintons have a contentious relationship with the media that has nothing to do with bias. Additionally, the media is sitting on a minimum of 10 scandals in which one or both of them are involved that they will only report on if the republicans introduce any of them. In one instance the only reason Hillary was not arrested is because of her stature as first lady. Yet they say the media is soft on Obama because of gender bias. Sometimes when the media reports facts or numbers they scream gender bias. As a result you has whole feminist organizations pitted against each other. As a result young and older women are warring with each other. When what is really at work is a Clinton blow back. Women make up over 55-60% of democratic voters. Again she risked part of the party splintering. But it will help her win, so that is what is important. using complaints about that bias as a tactic for winning does not make me warm and fuzzy as a feminist. Most women in power do not complain. She repeatedly called on democrats to vote on her gas tax proposal that they all thought was pandering. She in effect said, you are either with me or against me when she knew some were in the middle of raising their state gas tax to fix bridges. Had Obama not stood up to her and convinced most people it was a bad move, some of of her allies in the senate would have been severely damaged politically had she continue with the proposal. But it will help her win, so that is what is important. Ironically, it played into her reputation as a liar and I think it cost her many votes in Indiana and North Carolina.She sometimes is her own worst enemy. When Gore was running for office, she siphoned fundraising money for her senate campaign to the sum of a $140 million, even though her opponent was polling poorly and had a $million dollar budget. She did the same to Kerry for her re-election campaign. Regarding Michigan and Florida, so that she can claim the nomination she is backtracking on support of the rules, If she was not Hillary Clinton they would not even be paying attention. She has people fired up on those states who were not fired up before she decided not to support the rules once she discovered she was losing. This works against party interests because they struggle to stop states from holding primaries early, if they let Clinton get her way they think mayhem will ensue. But it will help her win, so that is
[scifinoir2] Andromeda Strain on AE Memorial Day Weekend
I loved the original Andromeda Strain (book movie). I am interested to see what the Scott Brothers have produced. ~rave! http://www.aetv.com/the-andromeda-strain/index.jsp?utm_source=3D3Dgoogleut= m_=3D medium=3D3Dcpcutm_term=3D3Dandromeda+strainutm_campaign=3D3Dandromedakey= words=3D =3D3Dandromeda+strainpaidlink=3D3D1ref_str=3D3Dhttp%3A//www.google.com/se= arch%3=3D Fhl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26channel%3Ds%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla%253Aen-US%2= =3D 53Aofficial%26hs%3DORI%26q%3D%2522Andromeda+Strain%2522%2522Ridley+Scott%25= =3D 22%2522A%2526E%2522%26btnG%3DSearch Tony and Ridley Scott are presenting a TV version of The Andromeda Strain. Their miniseries, based on Michael Crichton's deadly virus classic, airs on AE over two nights beginning May 26. Crichton's sci-fi best-seller came out back in 1969, spawning a 1971 movie adaptation and dozens of cheesy 'Run-for-your-lives-the-infection-is-spreading!' thrillers. If anybody can breathe new life into this now familiar premise it would be the Scott brothers. Ridley of course directed Blade Runner and Tony ranks as one of Hollywood's top fiery-explosion action stylists (Top Gun, Enemy of the State). To handle the day-to-day directing, they brought on Mikael Salomon, who served as cinematographer on The Abyss and Arachnophobia, later directing the made-for-TV earthquake movie Aftershock. Question is, can the cast pull it off? The good guys trying to squash a deadly bacterial outbreak in Utah are portayed by Benjamin Bratt (Law Order, Miss Congeniality), Daniel Dae Kim (Lost) Rick Schroder (24, NYPD Blue), Eric McCormack (Will Grace), Christa Miller (Scrubs, The Drew Carey Show) and Andre Braugher (Homicide: Life on the Streets).
[scifinoir2] A black hole
How is it that Terrence Howard can play a legendary character on the New York stage but is stuck as the sidekick who's jealous of Robert Downey Jr.'s hardware in Iron Man? http://www.boston.com/ae/movies/articles/2008/05/17/a_black_hole/ A black hole African-Americans are blazing creative trails in music, TV, and stage. In film, the choice is either bawdy and preachy or earnest but safe - with a void in between. By Wesley Morris, Globe Staff | May 18, 2008 few weeks ago I got to see Terrence Howard and Anika Noni Rose play Brick and Maggie the Cat in Debbie Allen's Broadway production of Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. I went home depressed. Not because the show was bad, although, in its clanging way, it is. I was depressed because for all its shortcomings, the show was a big entertainment event that doesn't happen much in the movies: It had premium melodrama and black stars being starry. As a moviegoer, I hurt for that kind of glamour. I felt the same hangover leaving an exhilarating concert by Erykah Badu and the Roots earlier this month, and watching both The Wire, which just said goodbye to us and HBO, and the staggering acting in that production of A Raisin in the Sun ABC aired in February: Why isn't black life this interesting, vibrant, or complex at the movies? How is it that Terrence Howard can play a legendary character on the New York stage but is stuck as the sidekick who's jealous of Robert Downey Jr.'s hardware in Iron Man? When it comes to black America, the movies are stagnating. Well, when it comes to any nonwhite male subject matter at the movies, the pickings are slim. But there's such a wealth of black stars, producers, and directors that the scarcity of movies - big-ticket or small, serious or light - focused on the lives of black people, is surreal. There's a gaping entertainment void. It's not just the lack of quantity. It's the lack of variety. Despite the usual death notices posted for hip-hop, black popular music is alive and well. At the moment, black movies come in two flavors: uplift dramas and Tyler Perry. The first is represented by all those feel-good movies - Akeelah and the Bee, Stomp the Yard, Pride, The Great Debaters - that, bless their hearts, wanted to empower us, but that nobody flocked to see. Message movies are a great notion but tricky as entertainment. The makers of these films have this noble but somewhat misguided idea that the average black moviegoer wants to feel like she's in school. Perry's megaplex successes suggest that the average black moviegoer wants to feel like she's in church. His movies have sermons. His movies have soap opera. And, increasingly, his movies have stars. In the past, I've said only somewhat jestingly that a Tyler Perry movie is where black actors go to get back in touch with their roots. (The prim, post-Nipplegate Janet Jackson who showed up in Why Did I Get Married? wasn't just making a movie, she was asking for forgiveness.) But now a Tyler Perry movie is where a black actor goes to act. Angela Bassett is the star of Meet the Browns. Daddy's Little Girls had Gabrielle Union and Idris Elba. And the movie that Perry, who essentially works without Hollywood's help, is currently filming has Alfre Woodard, Sanaa Lathan, and the loveable Taraji P. Henson, that pregnant, hook-belting hooker from Hustle Flow. It doesn't do any good to discount the value of Tyler Perry, and he certainly can't be - should not be - ignored. Perry knows what an audience wants, and he delivers - with Woody Allen's regularity, too. These things tend to come in waves (remember the Wayans brothers' racial funhouses from a few years ago?). But Perry is more than a ripple. He is black movies right now. His style has inspired studio executives to look, wittingly or not, for movies with either Perry's clumsy farce (see last winter's The Perfect Holiday or First Sunday - on second thought: don't) or his ensemble comic-melodrama (This Christmas). That's a problem. There's no art in these movies. There's no style. And Perry's success, through no fault of his own, limits what chances the studios are willing to take on black movies. Rickety ghetto comedies, prefab movie biographies, and feel-good historical dramas tailor-made for NAACP Image Award contention are one thing. But a serious, thoughtful act of filmmaking or some real Hollywood glamour is rare. Last year, Denzel Washington found himself at two extremes. He directed and starred in The Great Debaters, a historical drama that used a feel-good formula to tell the somewhat-true story of a Texas debate team in the 1930s. It was meant to enlighten and inspire the young men and women in the audience. But it was his borderline-flamboyant performance as Harlem heroin lord Frank Lucas in Ridley Scott's American Gangster that they turned out for. The greasy fat content of the gangster movie was a lot more appealing to moviegoers than the nutritional value of the period drama. Scott's movie had a whiff of glamour amid
