--- Russ Daggatt wrote: Given how extreme the Republican leadership
has become, and the fact that Republicans have a solid grip on the
presidency and both Houses of Congress, I think it is time that the
Democrats began to run as the anti-government party.
This would seem to be in the same
On Apr 9, 2005, at 8:06 AM, Robert Seeberger wrote:
From: Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sure, this is readily apparent to *us*, but back then any pregnancy
in
concert with an intact hymen would be considered miraculous.
How much knowledge of a hymen was there ca. 2K years ago, though? I
mean,
De. Brin:
Some responses:
First, Democrats will have a difficult time rebranding themselves as the
anti-government Party. After all, you have previously defined the
Democrats on this List as being the Party that favored *every*
big-government program over the past 100-or-so years over
--- JDG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
After all, you have previously defined the
Democrats on this List as being the Party that
favored *every* big-government program over the
past 100-or-so years over Republican opposition.
That is an awful lot of history to jujitsu.
A typical outright and
In a message dated 4/11/2005 12:22:48 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wow, any more interesting folks around?
His wife is the ex-wife of Richie Havens. Quite an interesting person
The point is that there is no trend towards better in evolution.
So there is no
In a message dated 4/11/2005 12:22:48 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wow, any more interesting folks around?
The point is that there is no trend towards better in evolution.
Agreed, hence my regret in using better in my first post.
Natural selection is short
1. Military readiness. It is at its lowest ebb since 1974. Possibly
since Pearl Harbor. Our armed forces could not take on another
major, urgent mission even if the nation were united behind it.
Do you mean on the level of Iraq, or on the level of Afghanistan? I
honestly do not see any
JDG wrote:
Sent: Sunday, 10 April 2005 7:20 AM
To: Killer Bs Discussion
Subject: Democracy in Iraq Re: The Other Christianity (was Re: Babble
theory, and comments)
At 04:17 PM 4/7/2005 -0700, Nick wrote:
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005 15:01:52 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote
It means that there
From: Robert Seeberger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It didn't seem to me that Event horizons were so much abandoned as
redefined and re-explained. The important question for me is still how
time is regarded in QM and GR.
If the author of the paper is making an incorrect statement, why would
it be
