Re: OT: Gore Hits the Waves with a Massive New Houseboat

.
I'm not talking about a handful of chowderheads who have been educated
beyond their intelligence that The New York Times cherry picks when
they want a gaggle of Parrots to bash President Bush - I'm talking
history. History will get it right.
.
Well, it's not remotely just the NEW YORK TIMES and you know it.>
.
I often use that worst offender,"The New York Times" as a stand-in for
the Establishment media.

It's not just establishment media -- whatever that means today --
.
MTV, BET, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNBC, The New York Times, LA Times,
Huffington Post, Helen Thomas, Ed Schultz, Ted Rall, Al Frankin,
Boston Globe, The New Yorker, WBAI, Washington Weekly, Jim Hightower,
Paul Krugman, Salon, The Nation, Disney, Michael Moore, Newsweek,
Media Matters, New York Observer, Mother Jones, Move On, Time, Slate,
The Daily Show, Larry King, Chicago Sun Times, Daily Kos, Newsweek,
Air America, The Today Show, The Daily Show, David Corn, Oprah, The
Village Voice, NPR,PBS, 60 Minutes, 60 Minutes II, 20/20, 95% of
college professors, 95% of publishing or 97% of reporters.

a very wide range of historians.  The TIMES didn't originate the
message of the historians' opinions, it delivered it.  The same
message delivered in media large and small.  He is a widely-loathed
president from various political and ideoligical perspective.  A
disaster and embarrassment.
.
The same was said for Truman, Lincoln, and Churchill.

Meanwhile, have you noticed how Bill Clinton's reputation sinks almost
daily, while Nixon's slowly rises?
.
Why would I assume such a foolish thing? Huge corporations L-O-V-E
the socialist agenda of the Democrat Party - and why shouldn't they?
Who is more pro-huge business and anti-little guy than the Democrats
and yourself?
.
When have I claimed to be pro-huge business?  Or anti-little guy?  You
don't seem to know how to read.
.
When did I ever accuse you of being honest about what you believe.
The end result of your belief system is to support big business, and
grind the little guy into dust. Whether you wise to admit it or not
is irrelevant.
.
Let's not forget that it was it was the five liberal judges on the
Supreme Court (Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg and Breyer) who
sided with heartless big business over the little guy in the eminent
domain case Kelo v. City of New London. You probably didn't hear
about that objective fact - it was ignored by the Establishment
Media. One had to go to FOX News and Rush Limbaugh to learn the
truth.
.
I disagreed with that decision, partially from my familiarity with New
London and its interests.
.
And yet you keep enthusiastically supporting the part of eminent
domain, while ridiculing those of us who are against it. What was it
that Pilot sang in "Jesus Christ, Superstar?"

"I wash my hands of eminent domain...."

Eh. You should read what was written about Lincoln, Truman and
Churchill after they won THEIR wars. (If you like, I have political
cartoons of lincoln from that era, I'll be glad to scan and e-mail you
a few.) I'm not sure why, but President's who win wars tend to be
hated afterwards.
.
Bush hasn't won a war.>
.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NWIxZjBmMWYyZWVlMjM3ZDZiOTI2OWNkMzcxNzRhZmI=

Enemies Become Allies
Former Sunni militia fighters made “the Awakening” in Samarra
possible.

By Pete Hegseth

Samarra, Iraq — “You were an American soldier here in 2006?” asks Abu
Saif.

“Yes,” I reply.

“Then you remember the Al Bazzi tribe,” he slyly posits. “We were one
of the groups shooting at you,” he winks.

“Oh, yes, I remember,” I recall, now wearing my own grin. “And we shot
back.”

He nods.

With that, we part ways — but not before memorializing the moment with
a photo.

The guys would not believe this. The Abu Saif I met today — leader in
the Samarra Rescue Council — is not the Abu Saif we knew in 2006. Same
goes for Abu Faruk, Abu Anis, and others in the room. All were High-
Value Targets just two years ago — men we tried our damnedest to kill
or capture — and today they are our partners.

For a soldier, it’s tough to square this circle — as I’d rather have
avowed enemies six-feet under than six-feet in front of me; especially
those who may have killed or injured a brother-in-arms. But today —
embedded with a new unit in Samarra — I can more easily forget the
memory of old enemies than the present threat of enduring ones. The
friends of my brothers are — I suppose — my friends, and I’m
witnessing the awakening I thought possible in 2006.

The story of the Samarra Rescue Council (Samarra’s “Sahwa,” or
Awakening Movement) is complex, with every aspect of its development
deserving detailed explanation. Yet I am certain of two things after
witnessing the “Sons of Samarra” (SOS) firsthand: One, they would not
be in existence today were it not for the persistence and foresight of
brave Americans; and two, they are the single most important factor in
Samarra’s dramatic, and quite sudden, turnaround. The brilliant
counterinsurgency strategy I wrote about yesterday serves primarily to
support this indigenous movement.

 No comparison applies.  Bush picked an
unnecessary fight and got thousands of this country's citizens and
hundreds of thousands of another country's citizens killed to
overthrow a tinpot dictator who had already pretty much played out his
string.
.
Why do you think Putin ran like a scared girl when Bush suggested he
do so?

This does not remotely reflect my sentiments and you know it.>
.
Actually, that's a pretty accurate representation of what I think of
you. I also envision you wearing "Hello Kitty" t-shirts.
.
Then you are a very foolish fellow indeed.  I most frequently wear a
Second City T-shirt dating from its 40th anniversary.  A prized
possession.
.
You'd look more manly in the "Hello Kitty" garb.

And yet, you support crushing taxation. You support insane
environmental regulations that almost certainly will do almost nothing
to solve the problem ("but what if they're right?"), and racial quotes
of who can and can not be hired. You support companies supplying
complete healthcare packages, paid vacations... the list is endless.

I find that the giant corporations often look to avoid any sense of
responsibility to anyone except their officers and largest
stockholders.  So, yes, I do favor laws and regulations that hold them
accountable for their influence on the economic ecosystem.  I wouldn't
characterize these in the churlish and childish and reductivist ways
you do, because I'm not a churl, a child or a reductivist.
.
Here's a reality flash for you:

Up to a point, all anti-corporation legislation does is result in
higher prices to the American people. They just pass the costs
along. If the legislation becomes too burdenson, then then
corporation leaves the offending state, and eventually the country.
Take a look at Detroit to see the logical conclusion of what you
believe.
.
I hold people who are corrupt and seek personal gain at the expense of the
common good in contempt
.
Really? Because when I pointed out that algore lives in three
mansions and jumps from limo to private jet, you made excuses for that
five hundred pound blob of human resentment. When I discussed the
conflict of interest his ownership of a carbon offset company
presented, I was rewarded with the usenet equivent of a blank stare.
Gore's cowardly refusal to debate a subject (which he demands be made
into the law of the land) were cheered on by you.
.
You think you are painting a complete portrait of Gore, and I thinking
it is a caricature manufactured by your antipathy for his politics. >

Anyone who simply ignores the fact that Gore has gotten insanely
wealthy by preaching green, and has chosen to live a life of extreme
luxury while demanding others live a life of austerity, are willfully
ignorant.

QUESTION: What's the difference between Jimmy Swaggart who accepts a
hundred dollars a month check from an old lady who's forced to live on
catfood, and algore's economic green plans.

ANSWER: Jimmy Swaggart never forced anyone to send him the hundred
dollars via force of law.
.
wouldn't claim that he or anybody is perfect,>
.
algore is a far larger hypocrite than the worst TV evangelist.
.
...but I admire the guy in the main.
.
FOR WHAT? Being limoed and private jetted from one powerpoint
presentation to the other? For tying to shut down information like
the world's temperatures have actually fallen for the past ten years?
That his prediction of ever increasing hurricanes have fallen flat?

BTW, did you know that it's just be revealed that Nancy Pelosi has a
quarter million invested in wind power? Another conflict of interest
for you to ignore.
.
I have deep questions about the way wind power is administered.
.
Pity, because Democrats have turned off the lights in congress and
refuse to allow the issue to be debated. Any questioning of the Great
God Gore makes you a holocaust denier!!!!!

Why is it a conflict of interest for Pelosi to invest in alternative
energy, in which she openly believes, and it's not conflict of
interest for Cheney to pursue governmental policies that enrich
companies he has run?  Hypocrisy on toast.
.
Because with Pelosi we're talking about the present tense, and with
Cheny the past tense.

She owns interest in wind and alternate energy NOW. Laws she passes
will make her richer.

Cheney divested himself of oil holdings - he's free to work for the
good of the American people.

Seriously, this is basic stuff here.

Deal with it - you've become everything that you used to hate. You're
not even Iago - you're Roderigo. Perhaps you're correct to suppress
any backbone growth - just what happened to Roderigo when he figured
out the truth?
.
You're going ad hominem here and it doesn't become you or enhance your
feeble arguments.
.
Doesn't change the fact that you've become everything that you used to
hate.
.
.> > I stopped shopping at small, independent bookstores when they lied to
me and claimed that the book "The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS" didn't
exist, and then refused to order me a copy.
.
So you generalize from a bad experience with one independent bookstore
to an evaluation of all independent bookstores? >
.
Nope, it was more The Last Straw That Broke The Camel's Back."
.
There are independent book stores of every stripe.  You just didn't
find the one that caters to your niche.
.
I'm perfectly happy with Amazon.
.
.> How about 7/11, which refuses to stock magazines they don't approve of?
.
By "magazines they don't approve of", you mean pornography, and by
"refuse to stock", you mean "they stock the magazines and then place
them behind the counter out of view of children"? And you think that
this is worth getting worked up over?
.
7/11 refused to stock PLAYBOY at all (not even bheind the counter),
.
There are many fine independent pornographic book stores that you
could frequent who would greatly appreciate your business. Sadly, you
wouldn't be able to purchase a slurpee at the same time .... or could
you? Where is your concern for the small business owner NOW?

but it stocks gun nut magazines.  They're responsive to complaints
about sex but not about violence.
.
Gun ownership is not about violence, but STOPPING violence.
.
.> How about Blockbuster video, which refuse to buy copies of NC-17 films, thus
making it almost impossible to make and market films of that rating?
.
Here is the major difference - I'm talking about are serious political
books being harassed - you're talking about tittie flixs and stroke
mags.

You don't seem to know much about what serious independent film
producers are trying to do.
.
You're going ad hominem here and it doesn't become you or enhance your
feeble arguments. And you're still like Roderigo in your devotion to
your master, IaGORE. (How I missed the pun "Iagore" the first time
around, I'll never know.)
.
Blockbuster.  Since I work in the arts, I am not too thrilled about
large chain stores deciding what Americans should be allowed to see
and read.
.
Then don't go to Blockbuster. There are many fine independent
pornographic book stores that you could frequent who would greatly
appreciate your business. Sadly, you wouldn't be able to purchase a
slurpee at the same time .... or could you? Where is your concern for
the small business owner NOW?

Just as I thought Clear Channel was over-reaching when they
refused to run the Dixie Chicks because of their politics.
.
Clear Channel's customers didn't want to hear The Dixie Chicks. They
should play music their customers didn't want to hear exactly why....?
.
< As I
loathed blacklisting in the Fifties.  You're all for freedom of
expresson, but only when the expression is what you believe in.
.
I'm curious - how do you feel about the "Fairness Doctrine"?
.
That's because the Bush administration has made it its business to do
government badly. It's not that government has to be bad, it's that a
bunch of people who don't like government have taken it over and
purposely wrecked large chunks of it.
.
So, that's what you're reduced down to - imagining that President Bush
is a traitor who deliberately wants to destroy the US?
.
It's one aspect of what I believe.  Yes, I do believe he's a traitor.
He has betrayed his oath of office and he's purposely try to dismantle
government offices and functions with which he and his cronies don't
agree.  He's a kind of terrorist himself.
.
Tell me, what did you think of people who thought that Clinton had
Vince Foster whacked? That Clinton was on the payroll of the Chinese
government? That Clinton had 100 people assassinated? That he was
heavily involved in drug sales?

How's it feel to be in the same class of people who believe the above?

Even today, there is no "universal, Federal Library Card" - with the
exception of scholarly collections, libraries are pretty much always
local affairs.
.
But almost all of them are computerized, and records can be retrieved
and forwarded in minutes.
.
But they can't be read on the same system. Some libraries use MAC,
other's PC, Lenix, and orphan systems. , some use MSWord, others excel
spreedsheets, some use obscure software,, some use proprietor
software, And there are different versions of such systems that don't
work together.

So?  The information is still vastly more available and at hand than
in the days of Wilson, which was your comparison point.
.
When I did some freelance work for the RAND Institute, I was
horrorfied to learn that they had a bizarre, Frankenstein system that
only people who've been there for years could understand. This is the
RAND institute - if they can't get it right, what makes you think tens
of thousands of libraries, working independently, will have a
streamlined interface?
.
Why do you imagine I believe the Rand institute would be the standard
for technological sophistication.  Doesn't make any sense.
.
(shaking head slowly)
Because....the...RAND...institute....INVENTED...THE...INTERNET!!!!!

Whenever I send a screenplay to a producer, I AWAYS save the document
in four different file formats - and they STILL are known to bounce
back.
.
So what?
.
So if two people can't get their systems to match, the odds that
120,000 independent organizations can do so easily is nonexistent.

.> > This is true today, it was far more true in Wilson's day. To check a
man's library record back then would have required a phone call - or
several, if he lived in a large town.
.
That's a single library record, in which case you might follow a
suspicion about one person. The new technology makes fishing
expeditions and profiling possible.

.
Actually, no - I said "several (phone calls) if he lived in a large
town.
.
And it's still dealing with just one person as opposed to reviewing
the pattern of withdrawals, say, in New York where a lot of enemies of
Bushco live.  That stuff, yes, is all on a central computer system and
covers several million people.  To be able to see, in a keystroke or
two, a list of everyone who has taken out books by Noam Chomsky ...
.
And has that ever actually happened? Please list evidence of such
abuses right here-------------->

.

Quantcast