USA Politics Thread - *No gun debate*

[billybob2002 0]

Has anybody experienced the LaRouche cult? I did yesterday and the bastards tried to convert me at the student union while trying to get some lunch..  

[denoir 0]

Quote[/b] ]Has anybody experienced the LaRouche cult?

No but I've recently experienced a far worse cult, that has permeated the entire world. They are in control of governments world wide as well as most corporations. They exist on every level and their influence is impossible to avoid. Furthermore they have entrenched themselves so much that you have no choice but to play along and help their goal of world domination.

It's the Cult of the Accountants. Ever tried to run a company and do book keeping? When you for instance buy say a computer for the company, you have to know which specific code you need to use to register it. There are hundreds of codes and their names have no correspondence to anything in the real world. The people that control those codes and have a monopoly on the twisted knowledge and logic are part of a huge international sect, called "The Accountants". These codes are impossible to decrypt to anybody who is not a member of the cult. They have infiltrated governments to that degree that if you use the wrong code (i.e showing that you are not a True Accountant), you can go to jail for something as inventive as "Tax Evasion" or "Fraud".

This of course forces the poor and unsuspecting business owner to hire at least one Accountant for his company and thus strengthening the Cult.

They are at all levels and hold all the money. They can screw you over anytime they want. And all you can do is to hire them and propagate their evil system.

       

[nSe7eN 0]

Such a nasty system!

But there is always a time to clean the community from such people and it purer!

Before they control every damn thing in any country, those kinds of groups! They infect the system with inability to take the right and fare decisions! In every damn level!

To achieve there damn goals!

[theavonlady 2]

The DP gets what it asked for:

Quote[/b] ]Apology Demanded

Two prominent African-American Republicans have demanded an apology from the new DNC Chairman Howard Dean for saying at a Democratic Black Caucus meeting last week, "You think the Republicans could get this many people of color in a single room? Only if they had the hotel staff in here."

And in a joint statement, Maryland Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele and former Oklahoma Congressman J.C. Watts say they are outraged over the insensitive and intolerable remarks. Adding, "This kind of backward thinking remind us of a horrible time in history, when blacks were seen as servants." But the chair of the caucus says Dean's remarks were well received, insisting they were, "A statement of fact" and Steele and Watts are blowing things out of proportion.

YEEAAAAHHHHHHHH!

[billybob2002 0]

The DP gets what it asked for:

Quote[/b] ]Apology Demanded

Two prominent African-American Republicans have demanded an apology from the new DNC Chairman Howard Dean for saying at a Democratic Black Caucus meeting last week, "You think the Republicans could get this many people of color in a single room? Only if they had the hotel staff in here."

And in a joint statement, Maryland Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele and former Oklahoma Congressman J.C. Watts say they are outraged over the insensitive and intolerable remarks. Adding, "This kind of backward thinking remind us of a horrible time in history, when blacks were seen as servants." But the chair of the caucus says Dean's remarks were well received, insisting they were, "A statement of fact" and Steele and Watts are blowing things out of proportion.

YEEAAAAHHHHHHHH!

People of color...very progressive

http://www.songsfordean.com/so/lyrics/howarddeanscream.php

[theavonlady 2]

People of color...very progressive

Pocos.

Sound catchy.

[ralphwiggum 6]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/02/20/bush.tapes.ap/index.html

Quote[/b] ]NEW YORK (AP) -- Private conversations with George Bush secretly taped by an old friend before he was elected president foreshadow some of his political strategies and appear to reveal that he acknowledged using marijuana, The New York Times has reported.

The conversations were recorded by Doug Wead, a former aide to George W. Bush's father, beginning in 1998, when Bush was weighing a presidential bid, until just before the Republican National Convention in 2000, the Times reported Saturday.

The tapes show Bush crafting a strategy for navigating the tricky political waters between Christian conservative and secular voters, repeatedly worrying that evangelicals would be angered by a refusal to bash gays and that secular Americans would be turned off by meetings with evangelical leaders.

On one tape, Bush explains that he told one prominent evangelical that he would not "kick gays, because I'm a sinner. How can I differentiate sin?"

In early tapes, Bush dismisses the strength of John McCain for the nomination and expresses concern about rival Steve Forbes. He also praises John Ashcroft as a promising candidate for Supreme Court justice, attorney general or vice president.

Bush also criticizes then-Vice President Al Gore for admitting marijuana use and explains why he would not do the same.

"I wouldn't answer the marijuana questions," he said, according to the Times. "You know why? Because I don't want some little kid doing what I tried."

According to the article, Wead played 12 of the tapes to a Times reporter. He said he recorded them because he viewed Bush as a historic figure. He is the author of a new book on presidential childhoods.

The White House did not deny the authenticity of the tapes.

"The governor was having casual conversations with someone he believed was his friend," White House spokesman Trent Duffy said, referring to Bush.

now, is it me or the name 'Wead' is kind of funny in light of situation?

[theavonlady 2]

now, is it me or the name 'Wead' is kind of funny in light of situation?

Yep. I lit up when I saw his name, too.

No! Wait!

[theavonlady 2]

Quote[/b] ]NEW YORK (AP) -- Private conversations with George Bush secretly taped by an old friend before he was elected president foreshadow some of his political strategies and appear to reveal that he acknowledged using marijuana, The New York Times has reported.

now, is it me or the name 'Wead' is kind of funny in light of situation?

Ahahahahahah. Seen on a blog in response to this item:

LET'S ROLL!

[Colossus 2]

No wonder the guy can't speak

[ralphwiggum 6]

obviously, having a bad writer doesn't help the situation...

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/02/20/bush.europe/index.html

Quote[/b] ]WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush left on a five-day, fence-mending trip to Europe on Sunday, hoping to heal frayed feelings from the Iraq war and to bolster U.S.-European alliances.

"Leaders on both sides of the Atlantic understand that the hopes for peace in the world depend on the continued unity of free nations," Bush said during his Saturday radio address.

"We do not accept a false caricature that divides the Western world between an idealistic United States and a cynical Europe. America and Europe are the pillars of the free world," he said. "We share the same belief in freedom and the rights of every individual, and we are working together across the globe to advance our common interest and common values."

<snip>

[walker 0]

Hi all

With George Bush junior having admited doing drugs.

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/home/main100.shtml

It seems like the Republicans are planning to dump much of their Christian roots once again as they did at the last election. In the tape George Bush junior admits to that an evangelical was left flim flammed when

Quote[/b] ] Wead says a conservative supporter told him Mr. Bush had pledged not to hire homosexuals. "No, what I said was, I wouldn't fire gays," Mr. Bush shot back.

Tricky Dicky or what?

Kind Regards Walker

[theavonlady 2]

Hi all

With George Bush junior having admited doing drugs.

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/home/main100.shtml

It seems like the Republicans are planning to dump much of their Christian roots once again as they did at the last election. In the tape George Bush junior admits to that an evangelical was left flim flammed when

Quote[/b] ] Wead says a conservative supporter told him Mr. Bush had pledged not to hire homosexuals. "No, what I said was, I wouldn't fire gays," Mr. Bush shot back.

Tricky Dicky or what?

Kind Regards Walker

This is all very unexciting.

He tried Marijuana? Like WOW!

And he comes off from the report as not at all being the Fundamentalist Evangelical Crusader (FEC©) leftists (like you, I believe) have constantly made him out to be.

[walker 0]

Hi Avon

I quite clearly state

Quote[/b] ]Tricky Dicky or what?

So you are admiting he tricked the evangelical christians who suposedly won him the election?

Kind Regards Walker

[theavonlady 2]

Hi Avon

I quite clearly state

Quote[/b] ]Tricky Dicky or what?

So you are admiting he tricked the evangelical christians who suposedly won him the election?

No. I'm claiming that his religious adherence was blown out of proportion by the left all along.

[theavonlady 2]

Now this is going to be something interesting indeed

Wonder if kissinger's, bush senior's or buchanan's health has been deteriorating lately..

Place your bets!

Identity of Watergate Source ''Deep Throat'' May Soon Be Revealed

It appears the Watergate source known as "Deep Throat" may be close to death, and that means that individual's name may be made public for the first time.

Reporter Bob Woodward has said in the past that he would disclose the identity of the source when that person died. "Deep Throat" helped Woodward and the Washington Post expose the Nixon Watergate scandal.

The Washington Post has already prepared an obituary, which means the world may soon know the secret Woodward has managed to keep for 30 years.

Good call EiZei!

Speaking of Tricky Dicky, as we are:

Quote[/b] ]Ehrlichman ID'd Kissinger as Watergate 'Deep Throat'

Powerful Nixon aide 'believed it very strongly,' 'was absolutely convinced'

Posted: February 18, 2005

8:58 p.m. Eastern

© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

The identity of "Deep Throat" – the mysterious source that helped Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein break open the Watergate scandal that ended Richard Nixon's presidency – has never been revealed, although it's been the object of much speculation over the past 30 years.

Now, it turns out that one of Nixon's top aides, John Ehrlichman, who spent time in prison for his role in Watergate, stated unequivocably that "Deep Throat" was none other than Henry Kissinger, who was Nixon's national security adviser from 1969 to 1973.

According to a report in "Editor and Publisher," a key publishing trade magazine, the information comes from Walter Anderson, chairman and CEO of Parade magazine and a close friend of Ehrlichman. Although Ehrlichman died in 1999, Anderson says the former top Nixon aide ID'd Kissinger as "Deep Throat" more than two decades ago in a conversation they had.

"He was absolutely convinced of it," Anderson told Editor and Publisher. "Ehrlichman argued that Kissinger was high enough in the organization to have the information, and understand it, close enough to Nixon to know all the details, and he was virtually untarnished by the Watergate scandal, particularly in the press."

Anderson met Ehrlichman in April 1981, according to the trade magazine, shortly after Ehrichman finished his 18-month sentence in federal prison for perjury and conspiracy in the Watergate cover-up. After hiring Ehrlichman to do some writing for Parade, Anderson later urged him to spill his guts on Watergate. Ehrlichman complied, penning a 1982 article published in Parade.

But now, Anderson reveals to E&P, within a few months Anderson asked Ehrlichman the one question not yet covered – the identity of "Deep Throat," the vital all-knowing source that told Woodward that to unravel the scandal he had to "follow the money."

"Without missing a beat," Anderson told E&P, "he said, Henry Kissinger. He believed it very strongly. I was taken aback that he answered so quickly and so assuredly. I didn't expect that. … He was so declarative ... absolutely convinced that Kissinger was Deep Throat."

Woodward and Bernstein, the Washington Post reporters whose journalistic exploits became a best-selling book and hit movie, both named "All the President's Men," which in turn inspired a generation of reporters, have said they will reveal Deep Throat's identity after he dies.

[walker 0]

Hi Avon

I quite clearly state

Quote[/b] ]Tricky Dicky or what?

So you are admiting he tricked the evangelical christians who suposedly won him the election?

No. I'm claiming that his religious adherence was blown out of proportion by the left all along.

Hi Avon

So according to you he is not even a christian.

Kind Regards Walker

[theavonlady 2]

Hi Avon

I quite clearly state

Quote[/b] ]Tricky Dicky or what?

So you are admiting he tricked the evangelical christians who suposedly won him the election?

No. I'm claiming that his religious adherence was blown out of proportion by the left all along.

Hi Avon

So according to you he is not even a christian.

All I'm saying is he's not the Pope.

Oops.

[bn880 5]

Just before that shot was made:

http://www.fotosearch.com/SKA107/anm0025010-016/

[theavonlady 2]

Just before that shot was made:

http://www.fotosearch.com/SKA107/anm0025010-016/

The gods are angry!

[Acecombat 0]

Scientists feel stifled by Bush administration!

Quote[/b] ]WASHINGTON (AP) -- The voice of science is being stifled in the Bush administration, with fewer scientists heard in policy discussions and money for research and advanced training being cut, according to panelists at a national science meeting.

And there also was concern that increased restrictions and requirements for obtaining visas is diminishing the flow to the U.S. of foreign-born science students who have long been a major part of the American research community.

"In previous administrations, scientists were always at the table when regulations were being developed," she said. "Science never had the last voice, but it had a voice."

Issues on global warming, for instance, that achieved a firm scientific consensus in earlier years are now being questioned by Bush policy makers. Proven, widely accepted research is being ignored or disputed, she said.

What do you think?

More anti-bush propaganda or true greivance?

[bn880 5]

I think this is true grievance, this is not at all _just_ anti-Bush (it is anti Bush as it is concerning his lacking). This has been the voice of many people in the US, especially around hte issue of indurstrial pollution controls, powerplant emmissions etc. Bush has really ignored science, except for one immediate field: warfare. For war he uses all the technology he can and is allowed to, but for climate, medicine, space explo... yeah...

[theavonlady 2]

Bn880, please back up your claims that Bush has "ignored science".

It's a year old but it sounds to me like we have some whining scientists here. And ask the US tinkerers how they're doing compared to their EU counterparts.

It's always true that the US can't rest on their laurels. From BusinessWeek last year, from a series of articles:

Quote[/b] ]America's Enduring Tech Edge

MARCH 16, 2004

SPECIAL REPORT: AMERICA'S TECH MIGHT: SLIPPING?

Although outsourcing and global competition are weakening the country's grip, it has the brains, money, and culture to keep winning

Is U.S. dominance in science and technology staring to wane? It's actually not a new question. So let's begin by flashing back to the early 1990s. Remember then how mighty America seemed to be stumbling? Remember all the hand-wringing about technologies like the VCR -- invented in the U.S. but commercialized by Japan? To the gloom-and-doomers, the handwriting was on the wall. U.S. inventors would make brilliant breakthroughs, but other countries would be the first to market. U.S. consumers would then be forced to buy these home-grown technologies from Japanese and European competitors.

And the VCR was just the beginning. Worried U.S. politicians and agency officials drew up lists of critical technologies that foreign competitors were going to control. Flat-panel displays. Semiconductors. Supercomputers. The list was long and depressing.

Japan was thought to be particularly acomplished. After all, it was much more focused than the U.S. was. It had a central authority, the powerful MITI (Ministry of Economy, Trade & Industry), which targeted key technologies, nurtured their development, and helped Japanese outfits win the race to market. Japan's industry was patient. It was capable of looking ahead 5, 10, or 20 years, and it could invest in the long-term R&D needed to bring new ideas to fruition.

HYSTERICAL IN HINDSIGHT.  By contrast, the U.S. system of innovation was disorganized, chaotic, and impatient. Yes, the government spent billions on research. But outside the military, much of this money went to basic research. It was up to industry to do the hard work of turning ideas into products. And American businesses weren't up to the task of making VCRs or other key new products. Indeed, no one seemed capable of doing R&D for the long haul.

That's why there were calls to set up a MITI-like system in the U.S. The semiconductor industry begged Congress for a crash multibillion-dollar program (from taxpayers) to create new generations of chips and chipmaking equipment. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency poured money into U.S. flat-panel makers in a doomed effort to keep them in the race. And the first Bush Administration and Congress set up a program, dubbed the Advanced Technology Program, that was supposed to fill the huge perceived gap between invention and commercialization.

How hysterical it all seems now. And how lucky Americans are that the government didn't heed all those calls. Chances are that the money would have been wasted, in an echo of the synethic fuel debacle of the 1970s. MITI turned out to be not just fallible but also an albatross, sending Japanese industry down many technological blind alleys.

History's powerful lesson: When it comes to a nation as a whole, the best system to foster innovation is disorganized and chaotic. As in the U.S., no central authority in government or industry should decide what the future ought to hold and choosing R&D winners and losers. A better way is simply to have a climate in which ideas are allowed to flourish -- and in which the market is free to pick and choose. The U.S. has plenty of bold entrepreneurs who are willing to take flyers on crazy-sounding ideas -- and the capital to back them. All of which raises the following questions:

So, overall, the U.S. is still strong?

Unquestionably. America is the world's R&D powerhouse. Overall spending jumped dramatically in the last few years of the 20th century, rising from $169.2 billion to $265 billion, the largest increase for any six-year period in the nation's history. While much of that growth was in industry, Uncle Sam's spending still dwarfs that of any other nation. The EU spends about 1.9% of GDP on R&D, compared with America's 2.7%.

And the U.S. benefits from its decentralized R&D system. With some exceptions, the main mission of agencies like the National Science Foundation or the National Institutes of Health is to nurture ideas that bubble up. Yet plenty of opportunities also exist to develop those ideas in both industry and government. The net effect: The U.S. has the world's most productive system for planting countless seeds -- and fertilizing the few that blossom.

That sounds like there's nothing to worry about.

Well, not quite. Some major trends are cause for concern. The first is that the rapid rise in R&D spending of the late 1990s has slowed significantly -- even declined in some areas.

Government spending has been largely flat for the last four years, at about $88 billion. Some areas have received massive boosts. The NIH budget doubled in the last five years, soaring to some $27 billion. So it's no surprise that the U.S. is the world's leader in biotechnology.

Funding for other hot areas, such as nanotechnology and bioterrorism research, is up dramatically. But that means big drops in other areas. There's widespread concern that basic work in areas like solid-state physics is getting short shrift.

Industry R&D investments have slowed as well. The overall figure is an impressive $181 billion annually -- but that represents a decline over the last four years. And the real drop in U.S. R&D is larger than it appears. Just as companies have outsourced many other jobs, they've shifted R&D offshore. Thousands of scientists toil at 700 research centers throughout Russia and the former Soviet republics, pushing outward the frontiers of knowledge using dollars from U.S. agencies and companies.

Scores of U.S. outfits have set up labs in India or elsewhere in Asia. And at the same time, they've eliminated or downsized many of the big U.S. labs -- such as Bell Labs and Xerox PARC -- that once were powerful engines of innovation.

These changes come at a time when other nations are boosting their own science and technology capabilities. In Korea, scientists have become leaders in controversial areas like cloning, while Britain is forging ahead of the U.S. in stem cells. China is making a bold bid to become world class in everything from biology to semiconductor R&D. Indeed, it plans to produce 350,000 newly minted engineers annually, compared to the 100,000 who now graduate each year in the U.S.

The upshot: More and more ideas will be generated in labs outside of the U.S.

So won't that threaten U.S. technological leadership?

It could. But the key question isn't where the ideas or breakthroughs come from. It's which countries will benefit the most from them. "Intellectual dilution is inevitable," explains Greg E. Blonder, a former Bell Laboratories scientist who's now a venture capitalist. "Whether we want to outsource R&D or not, the reality is most of it is going to occur outside the U.S."

In the future, he adds, "the U.S. can only count on making at most one in five inventions." After all, he points out, "there's only a quarter of a billion people in the U.S., vs. 6.5 billion or 7 billion elsewhere. And the people in China and India are disproportionately interested in doing engineering and science -- much more so than we are in the U.S. So you've got to figure the odds are against us coming up with all the good ideas over time."

That's not necessarily a threat, however. Remember that some of the overseas research is being funded by U.S. industry. The fruits of that work should flow back to the U.S. -- and at a lower cost than doing it here. America benefits from the resulting boost in productivity. And the R&D spending helps raise local standards of living, creating more consumers for U.S. goods.

It's also hard to argue that more research -- wherever it takes place -- is bad. Like everything else in the global economy, ideas and innovations are fungible. The real key is creating the right economic and business climate for spotting and developing ideas (wherever they spring from). As long as America is a land where dreams can be chased and realized and where failure is allowed, it will stay atop the technological heap -- and be a mecca for many of the brightest minds around the world.

Is that likely to remain true?

Perhaps not as much as Americans would like. Clearly, as R&D opportunities increase elsewhere, ambitious young researchers have less need to emigrate to the U.S. And American polices aren't helping either. Increasing hassles with visas for graduate students and young researchers are slowing the flow of bright young minds. "Applications from international students for advanced science and engineering degree programs are down by a third compared to last year," warns Donald F. Boesch, president of the University of Maryland. "If this continues for a long time, it will mean trouble for U.S. competitiveness."

So what should we conclude?

When it comes to R&D, the U.S. system is fundamentally sound. Yes, it would be better if spending began to increase again. But right now, no evidence exists of any serious problem.

Yet at the same time, sweeping trends may forever alter the landscape. More and more, ideas and inventions and even new technologies will spring up on foreign soil. It's possible that overseas competitors will take advantage of those inventions and push the U.S. into a technological decline. It's also possible that U.S. businesses will be quick to pounce on the new ideas -- and that the powerful American economy will provide the most fertile environment for the development and commercialization of inventions.

The lesson of the past is that it probably makes a lot of sense to worry. But it's also well to remember that over the past several decades, predictions of the demise of American's tech prowess have been greatly exaggerated.

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ]

Is that likely to remain true?

Perhaps not as much as Americans would like. Clearly, as R&D opportunities increase elsewhere, ambitious young researchers have less need to emigrate to the U.S. And American polices aren't helping either. Increasing hassles with visas for graduate students and young researchers are slowing the flow of bright young minds. "Applications from international students for advanced science and engineering degree programs are down by a third compared to last year," warns Donald F. Boesch, president of the University of Maryland. "If this continues for a long time, it will mean trouble for U.S. competitiveness."

[theavonlady 2]

Quote[/b] ]

Is that likely to remain true?

Perhaps not as much as Americans would like. Clearly, as R&D opportunities increase elsewhere, ambitious young researchers have less need to emigrate to the U.S. And American polices aren't helping either. Increasing hassles with visas for graduate students and young researchers are slowing the flow of bright young minds. "Applications from international students for advanced science and engineering degree programs are down by a third compared to last year," warns Donald F. Boesch, president of the University of Maryland. "If this continues for a long time, it will mean trouble for U.S. competitiveness."

And this defines the use of the term "stifled" in CNN's article, compared with everything else the US government continues to do for funding and promoting R&D?

Nothing's perfect and, when it sometimes is, it doesn't last forever. There are going to be ups and downs on this issue that are affected from everything from the economy to foreign policy. It's always been that way.

But "stifled"?