» OLD MESSAGE ARCHIVES «
The Pop Culture Information Society...
Messageboard Archive Index, In The 00s - The Pop Culture Information Society

Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.

If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.

Custom Search



Subject: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/15/02 at 02:25 p.m.

CNN is just reporting Gore will not run for president in 2004.


Smartest thing this guy has ever done.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/15/02 at 02:26 p.m.

The link, for those of you interested:

http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/12/15/gore.ap/index.html

This, of course, opens the doors for Kerry or Leiberman to step in.  I think they'd be stronger candidates anyway.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/15/02 at 02:39 p.m.

Actually, the more I think about, the more I start to get the I'll believe it when I see it feeling.  I could see Bore suddenly jumping back into the ring in a few months as a self-promotional stunt ie the numerous "retirements" of Michael Jordan.


Speaking of Bore's self-promotion, has anyone seen the Amazon.com sales ranking of his 2 books he's been promoting on virtually every TV show imaginable?

As of Dec.15:
"Joined at the Heart"  Rank: 1,740
"The Spirit of Family"  Rank: 2,524

Obviously the promotions aren't working.  If you want a good laugh, I recommend reading some of the customer reviews on those books at Amazon.com.  Funny stuff.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/15/02 at 02:44 p.m.


Quoting:
Actually, the more I think about, the more I start to get the I'll believe it when I see it feeling.  I could see Bore suddenly jumping back into the ring in a few months as a self-promotional stunt ie the numerous "retirements" of Michael Jordan.


End Quote



The wording of the article does leave Bore the option of running as an independent...oh my goodness, that would be hilarious!   ;D

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: dagwood on 12/15/02 at 04:42 p.m.

I don't think he should run at all.  He has become a joke...if the Demos want to beat Bush, they need to find someone people can take seriously.  I mean, who wants a tree stump for a president?

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Big_Cheese on 12/15/02 at 04:43 p.m.


Quoting:
I mean, who wants a tree stump for a president?
End Quote



Sure beats George!  ::) At least a tree stump wont rage war on a country!

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: dagwood on 12/15/02 at 04:46 p.m.


Quoting:


Sure beats George!  ::) At least a tree stump wont rage war on a country!
End Quote



Maybe we will have to agree to disagree on this one because I voted for George and am glad we have him for a pres rather than Bill Clinton Jr.  At least if Gore had won, we wouldn't have to worry about who was under his desk. ;)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: RockandRollFan on 12/15/02 at 04:47 p.m.

I might get things thrown at me for saying this but, I wish he'd run so Bush could win again....and speaking of that last election...they didn't bother to say how many overseas votes for Bush were not allowed and were destroyed.  A reminder for Alec Baldwin...didn't you say you were going to move out of the country if Bush won?  I even offered to help you pack your bags!

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: dagwood on 12/15/02 at 05:16 p.m.


Quoting:
A reminder for Alec Baldwin...didn't you say you were going to move out of the country if Bush won?  I even offered to help you pack your bags!
End Quote



Can I help, too?  Can I, huh?? ;D

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/15/02 at 05:31 p.m.


Quoting:
 A reminder for Alec Baldwin...didn't you say you were going to move out of the country if Bush won?  I even offered to help you pack your bags!
End Quote



As did Rosie O'Donnel.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/15/02 at 05:34 p.m.

Quoting:


Sure beats George!  ::) At least a tree stump wont rage war on a country!
End Quote




Well, the "tree stump" would have just pulled out the national checkbook and paid off Saddam, much like Clinton did to numerous countries.  

It is refreshing to know we have a pres who isn't a push-over and who will actually take care of the problem, rather than taking the liberal method and just sitting back and doing nothing allowing the problem to simply escalate.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: RockandRollFan on 12/15/02 at 05:53 p.m.


Quoting:


As did Rosie O'Donnel.
End Quote

I'd probably need a lot of people to help pack all her stuff....but I'd enjoy her leaving to ;)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: RockandRollFan on 12/15/02 at 05:57 p.m.


Quoting:


Maybe we will have to agree to disagree on this one because I voted for George and am glad we have him for a pres rather than Bill Clinton Jr.  At least if Gore had won, we wouldn't have to worry about who was under his desk. ;)
End Quote

Well said, Dagwood. IMO though, Bill was pretty dumb, not to mention setting quite a horrible example of a President....but beware....if Hillary ever runs and wins I will be the one to flee the country....then Baldwin, O'Donell and all the other liberal slime can move back...just like rats returning to the condemmed building ::)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: dagwood on 12/15/02 at 06:43 p.m.


Quoting:

Well said, Dagwood. IMO though, Bill was pretty dumb, not to mention setting quite a horrible example of a President....but beware....if Hillary ever runs and wins I will be the one to flee the country....then Baldwin, O'Donell and all the other liberal slime can move back...just like rats returning to the condemmed building ::)
End Quote



Can I come with you?  We could start a safe house in another country...a place where we could all hide.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Lainey on 12/15/02 at 10:10 p.m.

What is wrong with you people?  George W. Bush is the biggest idiot to ever be President.  The war is all about oil..... you know, money!!!!!!!!!!!!  Don't any of you read the newspaper????????  This war is a scam, a way to get re-elected.  I don't know how Gore would have done as President but I do know it would have been better than the piece of crap we have now.  He does not know his right foot from his left foot.  SAD!!!!!!

Lainey

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Screwball54 on 12/15/02 at 10:16 p.m.


Quoting:
What is wrong with you people?  George W. Bush is the biggest idiot to ever be President.  The war is all about oil..... you know, money!!!!!!!!!!!!  Don't any of you read the newspaper????????  This war is a scam, a way to get re-elected.  I don't know how Gore would have done as President but I do know it would have been better than the piece of crap we have now.  He does not know his right foot from his left foot.  SAD!!!!!!

Lainey
End Quote



Don't you read the paper? we were attacked, you know, sept 11?  You believe the liberal media's portrayal of our president as an idiot. Fine.  You know what would have happened if Gore was president? Bigger government, more taxes, less freedom.  it is not about oil, and even if it was, so what? What gets me to work and school? thats right, OIL. Iraq broke the rules along time ago and we should have been at war with them then.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/15/02 at 11:06 p.m.


Quoting:
What is wrong with you people?  George W. Bush is the biggest idiot to ever be President.  The war is all about oil..... you know, money!!!!!!!!!!!!  Don't any of you read the newspaper????????  This war is a scam, a way to get re-elected.  I don't know how Gore would have done as President but I do know it would have been better than the piece of crap we have now.  He does not know his right foot from his left foot.  SAD!!!!!!

Lainey
End Quote



I agree with Screwball up there.  We were attacked.  We are still under attack, with threats coming from Iraq and North Korea seemingly every day.  And oil is a very big issue.  Liberals don't want us going to war over oil, and they don't want us drilling in Alaska for oil, they don't want us digging holes in the ocean for oil, so what the heck are we supposed to do for fuel then, seeing as the whole foundation of our transportation system is (surely you jest!) oil?  Tell me you can live without oil, and then maybe your little tirade will be justified.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Race_Bannon on 12/15/02 at 11:43 p.m.

I think Gore is definately doing the Dem party a favor by not running.  There is little reason for an incumbant  VP not to take the office after the the good run our economy had.  

Note for knee jerks- Big oil and big business the common cry of evil keeping the little guys down. Oil is important to keep us and all the good we produce moving and our houses warm.  Also who employs the most people with livable wages and benifits?  And as for ownership of big busines the past 3 companies I've had all had 401-K programs for retirement accouts, I own stock and benefit from there growth and profitibilty, many little guys like me do.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: RockandRollFan on 12/16/02 at 07:37 a.m.


Quoting:


Can I come with you?  We could start a safe house in another country...a place where we could all hide.
End Quote

That's fine with me, Dagwood... ;)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/16/02 at 09:34 a.m.

http://www.amiright.com/parody/80s/hueylewisandthenews5.shtml

Bad timing on my part ::)  But we'll see...we'll see.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: RockandRollFan on 12/16/02 at 11:50 a.m.


Quoting:
http://www.amiright.com/parody/80s/hueylewisandthenews5.shtml

Bad timing on my part ::)  But we'll see...we'll see.
End Quote

That's great, RiceCube ;D

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/16/02 at 11:51 a.m.


Quoting:
Liberals don't want us going to war over oil, and they don't want us drilling in Alaska for oil, they don't want us digging holes in the ocean for oil, so what the heck are we supposed to do for fuel then...End Quote





Liberals are living in a fantasy world were everyone gets along and holds hands, where there is no need for oil, where there are no problems and everyone has everything.  

Well guess what liberals, thats not the way it is.  

Liberals have no problem spouting their "its all about oil, lets get off foreign oil rhetoric, but when it comes to a solution and alternative, they have no answers or proposals.  Its easy to say we should get off oil, but as was said earlier, "the whole foundation of our transportation system is (surely you jest!) oil"(Rice Cube).


Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/16/02 at 11:51 a.m.


Quoting:

That's great, RiceCube ;D
End Quote



Thanks man ;D  It's too bad it's slightly outdated now :-/

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/16/02 at 11:54 a.m.

Quoting:

Liberals are living in a fantasy world were everyone gets along and holds hands, where there is no need for oil, where there are no problems and everyone has everything.  

Well guess what liberals, thats not the way it is.  

End Quote



Oh my goodness, you just gave me a great idea for a parody ;D

How's this..."Living in a Fantasy World"--a parody of "Material Girl" by Madonna   :D  Someone PM me later so that I don't forget this, oh HO HO!!

Hey, and vote for my parodies too!  Your vote counts and is appreciated!

And don't forget to vote in 2004 either ;)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/16/02 at 11:56 a.m.

Quoting:


Oh my goodness, you just gave me a great idea for a parody ;D

How's this..."Living in a Fantasy World"--a parody of "Material Girl" by Madonna   :D  Someone PM me later so that I don't forget this, oh HO HO!!

Hey, and vote for my parodies too!  Your vote counts and is appreciated!

And don't forget to vote in 2004 either ;)
End Quote



YES!  And the tune fits.

I want it on my desk by the end of the day!

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/16/02 at 11:57 a.m.

It'll be up tomorrow if I submit today ;)  

www.amiright.com

Other parody authors, take note!  I am advertising on your behalf!

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: RockandRollFan on 12/16/02 at 12:02 a.m.


Quoting:


Thanks man ;D  It's too bad it's slightly outdated now :-/
End Quote

Maybe, but It still made me smile!

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Screwball54 on 12/16/02 at 12:13 a.m.


Quoting:
http://www.amiright.com/parody/80s/hueylewisandthenews5.shtml

Bad timing on my part ::)  But we'll see...we'll see.
End Quote



I thought your parody was great. I usually don't vote, but I voted for this one.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/16/02 at 12:15 a.m.

Quoting:


I thought your parody was great. I usually don't vote, but I voted for this one.
End Quote



Thanks man, I appreciate it ;D

I'm doing another one for 80s up there..."Living in a Fantasy World" --> from "Material Girl" by Madonna, should be up tomorrow

Just posting this repeatedly so I remember to do it ;D

Naturally, an anti-liberal parody would not garner too many good votes ::)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: John_Seminal on 12/16/02 at 02:37 p.m.

Quoting:
I might get things thrown at me for saying this but, I wish he'd run so Bush could win again....and speaking of that last election...they didn't bother to say how many overseas votes for Bush were not allowed and were destroyed.  A reminder for Alec Baldwin...didn't you say you were going to move out of the country if Bush won?  I even offered to help you pack your bags!
End Quote



does it really matter? everyone could elect alf as president and it still would not change the fact that i drive a piece of shit car. as for bombing iraq, i am for anything which will lower the price i pay for gas. those damn arabs are killing us in the wallet. i remember when gas was under a dollar a gallon. and then i hear that one of the saudi princesses paid thousands of dollars to the terrorists. i guess i am just fed up with politics. i want a president that will help us all live better. fight big buisnesses which wastes the pensions of 100,000 of thousands of people like enron or world com or arthur anderson. everything has become special interest and who cotributes to candidates. how about for once we get someone who will fight for the working american? i want joe blow the working stiff to get elected.

sorry about the rant. i am just sick politics.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: RockandRollFan on 12/16/02 at 02:50 p.m.


Quoting:


does it really matter? everyone could elect alf as president and it still would not change the fact that i drive a piece of shit car. as for bombing iraq, i am for anything which will lower the price i pay for gas. those damn arabs are killing us in the wallet. i remember when gas was under a dollar a gallon. and then i hear that one of the saudi princesses paid thousands of dollars to the terrorists. i guess i am just fed up with politics. i want a president that will help us all live better. fight big buisnesses which wastes the pensions of 100,000 of thousands of people like enron or world com or arthur anderson. everything has become special interest and who cotributes to candidates. how about for once we get someone who will fight for the working american? i want joe blow the working stiff to get elected.

sorry about the rant. i am just sick politics.
End Quote

Please don't apologize for saying what you feel...I am glad we all can have our opinions here.  I'm just sick of the liberals in Hollyweird and the media always hushing stuff up when it comes to...according to them.....one of our very best presidents...Clinton??  NOT...with his setting free all the criminals at the end of his Legacy! >:(

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/16/02 at 03:21 p.m.

You should play Adam Sandler's "Ode To My Car" when you drive your car, John ;D  I know I would...I find humor in irony.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/16/02 at 04:07 p.m.

Is there any evil in their world liberals aren't defending or responsible for?  At least you won't find a liberal with a gram of self respect proudly calling themself a "dittohead"

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: John_Seminal on 12/16/02 at 08:42 p.m.


Quoting:
Is there any evil in their world liberals aren't defending or responsible for?  At least you won't find a liberal with a gram of self respect proudly calling themself a "dittohead"
End Quote



LOL!!! Yeah, Limbaugh scares me. I could see him and G Gordon Liddy running on a ticket. Personally, I would like to see some civility return to politics. Perhaps if we could get people where the job is more important than the prestege the individual recieves, then we would have people doing the right thing for the right reasons, not so they can get more funding.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/16/02 at 08:44 p.m.


Quoting:


LOL!!! Yeah, Limbaugh scares me. I could see him and G Gordon Liddy running on a ticket. Personally, I would like to see some civility return to politics. Perhaps if we could get people where the job is more important than the prestege the individual recieves, then we would have people doing the right thing for the right reasons, not so they can get more funding.
End Quote



Amen!  Think they'll ever pass those campaign finance reform bill thingies?  :)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Screwball54 on 12/16/02 at 08:59 p.m.


Quoting:
Is there any evil in their world liberals aren't defending or responsible for?  At least you won't find a liberal with a gram of self respect proudly calling themself a "dittohead"
End Quote



Rush Limbaugh does do a good job of exposing the dems for what they truly are.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/16/02 at 09:01 p.m.


Quoting:


Rush Limbaugh does do a good job of exposing the dems for what they truly are.
End Quote



I used to enjoy his show, but then he started to annoy me.  I think Michael Savage has a better show, but maybe it's because I'm in Northern California and I'm biased (even though he's nationally syndicated now).

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Screwball54 on 12/16/02 at 09:06 p.m.


Quoting:


I used to enjoy his show, but then he started to annoy me.  I think Michael Savage has a better show, but maybe it's because I'm in Northern California and I'm biased (even though he's nationally syndicated now).
End Quote



I can't listen to Savage because the stations here do not air him.  Were still in the dark ages (We just got Sean Hanity last week). Neal Boortz is pretty good, but I can't listen because I have to be at work during his time slot.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/16/02 at 09:12 p.m.


Quoting:


I think Michael Savage has a better show, but maybe it's because I'm in Northern California and I'm biased (even though he's nationally syndicated now).
End Quote



I agree, Savage has a much better show than Limbaugh.  Tonight they were coming up with new names for Sean "Hanoi Jane" Penn.  My favorite was  Osama Penn Laden.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Screwball54 on 12/16/02 at 09:14 p.m.


Quoting:


I agree, Savage has a much better show than Limbaugh.  Tonight they were coming up with new names for Sean "Hanoi Jane" Penn.  My favorite was  Osama Penn Laden.
End Quote



wait a minute, I heard that this morning.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/16/02 at 09:15 p.m.


Quoting:
At least you won't find a liberal with a gram of self respect proudly calling themself a "dittohead"
End Quote



Believe it or not Steve, not all Conservatives listen to Limbaugh.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/16/02 at 09:15 p.m.


Quoting:


I agree, Savage has a much better show than Limbaugh.  Tonight they were coming up with new names for Sean "Hanoi Jane" Penn.  My favorite was  Osama Penn Laden.
End Quote



I prefer Penn-Addict Arnold.  ;D

But John up there did make a really good point that there is some need for campaign finance reform, at the very least.  Consider that a House Rep has only a two year term...I'll bet that Rep uses about 2/3 of his/her term raising money and campaigning rather than doing his/her job.  Unfortunately I see no way of eliminating this aspect of politics.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: John_Seminal on 12/16/02 at 09:35 p.m.

why not just limit the amount of television time the candidates can buy, so money is not as important? the public owns the airways, so we could say that each candidate gets x amount of hours. instead of all this money raising they should have a set number of debates, where they can talk the issues. the only problem with this idea is candidates are good at avoiding direct anwsers. i hate it when a politician is asked a question and responds " that is a good question, but first i would like to address...". it is like they go into debates prepared to deliver a speech, and the moderator is just a minor annoyance. we should get good moderators which will catch candidates avoiding anwsering questions. i also like the open public approach, where an audiance can question candidates.

or, we could stregthen slander and libal laws for candidates so when they accuse the other of some wrong doing they have to have proof. it is depressing to have two candidates completely destroy each others intellect/character/ability. bush is dumb, clinton is immoral, perot was crazy, and so on. this does nothing for the country.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/16/02 at 09:43 p.m.


Quoting:
or, we could stregthen slander and libal laws for candidates so when they accuse the other of some wrong doing they have to have proof. it is depressing to have two candidates completely destroy each others intellect/character/ability.
End Quote



Great idea...in theory anyway.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Indy Gent on 12/17/02 at 04:55 p.m.

I agree with Gore's decision not to run in 2004. I just hope he doesn't try to run in 2008 like he said he might do. He had his turn. :-/

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: dagwood on 12/17/02 at 06:00 p.m.


Quoting:


Believe it or not Steve, not all Conservatives listen to Limbaugh.
End Quote



Nope, they don't.  I am a Conservative and Rush annoys the heck out of me.   :-X

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/17/02 at 06:05 p.m.


Quoting:


Nope, they don't.  I am a Conservative and Rush annoys the heck out of me.   :-X
End Quote



Okay, if Dagwood says it I'll believe you http://www.click-smilie.de/sammlung/cool/cool030.gif

Maybe now someone can tell me how the liberal dominated airwaves became so infested with conservative commentators?

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/17/02 at 06:09 p.m.


Quoting:


Okay, if Dagwood says it I'll believe you http://www.click-smilie.de/sammlung/cool/cool030.gif

Maybe now someone can tell me how the liberal dominated airwaves became so infested with conservative commentators?
End Quote



Because the ratings are high.  No one really wants to listen to liberal shows.  Look at the ratings for Hardball and Donahue on MSNBC.  They're in the toilet.  Now look at the ratings for Rush *UGH* and Savage.  Through the roof.  In fact, Savage has the fastest growing radio show in the nation.  Why?  Because what conservatives say actually makes sense.  AND they know how to entertain.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/17/02 at 06:12 p.m.

Why would anyone hire Donahue?  He was good twenty years ago.  I heard MSNBC is talking with Jesse Ventura about a possible show.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: dagwood on 12/17/02 at 06:47 p.m.


Quoting:
Why would anyone hire Donahue?  He was good twenty years ago.  I heard MSNBC is talking with Jesse Ventura about a possible show.


End Quote



Now that is something I would watch. :D

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Race_Bannon on 12/17/02 at 08:57 p.m.

I've heard that Jessie is considerd as well.  Could be interesting.  I go the concerative politically now too and I don't like Rush, he's to partisan and stretches the truth to far, I can't trust his quotes as truthful.  I do hear the Savage Nation occasionally and that guy is questionable too.  We have one station here locally that goes concervative and they have a couple of good guys on there.  
Radio does have more well known concervative people than the other mediums, but I must mention too that there are many more liberal talk hosts in Seattle than conservative, I think that maybe the cocervatives do better nationally.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Lainey on 12/18/02 at 00:04 a.m.

Hey......you ask if us liberals read the paper.....well we do.  yes, we were attacked, but what did that have to do with Iraq?  At the time of the attack Iraq was never mentioned.  Also you mentioned less freedom.........what the hell are you talking about?  Ashcroft has taken many freedoms away from us.  Incase you don't know, Bush appointed him AFTER he was beaten by a dead man for Senator in Missouri.  What does that say about your almighty President?  Also, Ashcroft is the biggest racist, I should know, I live in Missouri!  Oh, and about your precious oil, believe it or not there are alternatives.  Glad to see your concern for oil........it does support the terrorists!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quoting:


Don't you read the paper? we were attacked, you know, sept 11?  You believe the liberal media's portrayal of our president as an idiot. Fine.  You know what would have happened if Gore was president? Bigger government, more taxes, less freedom.  it is not about oil, and even if it was, so what? What gets me to work and school? thats right, OIL. Iraq broke the rules along time ago and we should have been at war with them then.
End Quote

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/18/02 at 00:42 a.m.

Quoting:
Also you mentioned less freedom.........what the hell are you talking about?  Ashcroft has taken many freedoms away from us.  
End Quote



Oh boy, another liberal complaining about "lost freedoms".

Ok, since Ashcroft has "taken many freedoms away" from you, I challenge you to name 3.  Make sure they're good ones, because so far I have never seen/heard a liberal who has been able to do it.


Quoting:
Oh, and about your precious oil, believe it or not there are alternatives. End Quote



interesting to know that you have some "inside information" that nobody else is aware of.  

And yes, there are the ridiculous hybrid cars, but even they use oil.  So unless you can use your "inside info" to invent an alternative to oil...

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Lainey on 12/18/02 at 01:01 a.m.

Before I answer your questions, you must answer mine.  After 9/11 was Iraq ever mentioned?  Oh, and is calling me a liberal suppose to be an insult

Quoting:


Oh boy, another liberal complaining about "lost freedoms".

Ok, since Ashcroft has "taken many freedoms away" from you, I challenge you to name 3.  Make sure they're good ones, because so far I have never seen/heard a liberal who has been able to do it.



interesting to know that you have some "inside information" that nobody else is aware of.  

And yes, there are the ridiculous hybrid cars, but even they use oil.  So unless you can use your "inside info" to invent an alternative to oil...


End Quote

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/18/02 at 01:19 a.m.

Quoting:
After 9/11 was Iraq ever mentioned?  End Quote



Well lets see, in March we found out Saddam was/is paying up to $25000 to the families of terrorist suicide bombers to "thank them for their service", we then found out he has been doing it since 2000.  Further proof that Iraq poses a major threat in the war against terrorism.  What part of that don't you liberals understand?

Quoting:Oh, and is calling me a liberal suppose to be an insult

End Quote



actually no, but if you are insulted by being called a liberal, then thats not saying much for liberalism!

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/18/02 at 04:14 a.m.


Quoting:
Before I answer your questions, you must answer mine.  After 9/11 was Iraq ever mentioned?  Oh, and is calling me a liberal suppose to be an insult

End Quote



Yes, is it.  Don't let it offend you though, it's just a indication of the level of the rhetoric.  And remember, most of the people you're arguing with in here are young and inexperienced; they were weaned on Rush Limbaugh and consider O'Reilly a serious investigative reporter.  If Rush didn't preach it it doesn't have any value. Rush has made a lot of money using the term "liberal" as an insult.  

Young, male, received a political education from television -- do you honestly expect them to think for themselves, or to refrain from dropping the L stinkbomb whenever they get a chance?

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Screwball54 on 12/18/02 at 08:34 a.m.


Quoting:


Yes, is it.  Don't let it offend you though, it's just a indication of the level of the rhetoric.  And remember, most of the people you're arguing with in here are young and inexperienced; they were weaned on Rush Limbaugh and consider O'Reilly a serious investigative reporter.  If Rush didn't preach it it doesn't have any value. Rush has made a lot of money using the term "liberal" as an insult.  

Young, male, received a political education from television -- do you honestly expect them to think for themselves, or to refrain from dropping the L stinkbomb whenever they get a chance?

End Quote



Making someone feel better by insulting everyone here with an opinion?  Well sorry if I am two young to understand politics  ::).  

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/18/02 at 08:50 a.m.

No need to apologize, Screwball.  My observation was directed only at those who use the term "liberal" as a slur... :)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: John_Seminal on 12/18/02 at 08:56 a.m.

I think there is some common ground we all share. We are all Americans and want what is best for the country and ourselves. To start fighting about weather someone is a liberal or conservative takes our focus away from what is best for all of us. I happen to believe that Rush is a bozo who uses snappy arguments to get his point across. But so did Clinton in his own way. There must be a reason these guys are using this kind of logic, it works. It gets us to polarize to one end of the political spectrum, and makes us defensive. I was a republican at one point and time and am now slightly to the left of the middle. One great rallying call for me when I was more conservative was "they want to take money away from you and tax you. you earned it and they want to take it." It worked well, i hated democrats. Then I looked at the effect that some programs had, and decided there was a greater good. I will give on brief example. My state had a school program where the school would open the doors an hour early for disadvantaged children to serve them breakfast, and the school would stay open an hour late with teachers present to help these children study. It cost money to run this program, and we the people had to pay. What was the result? Truancy went down, fighting went down, test scores went up, pretty much everything good. Also, some of these parents were able to take jobs with hours they might not have been able to take if they did not have a place for their children to go. Well, after two years, republicans cut the program, calling it pork and saying everyone had a responsibility to their own children. All of a sudden these high risk kids started ditching, fighting, and not paying attention in school. To make a long story short, I have a feeling I will pay more to jail 10% of these high risk kids later in life than i would have paid to keep 100% of them in this program.

In the end, we should not forget we are Americans. I think openess is good, and one of the reasons polarized talk show hosts are bad is they divide us and dominate the conversation in a very negative light. If you want raunchy conversation, I would suggest you turn to Howard Stern, at least there you can get your shock value without the polarization.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Screwball54 on 12/18/02 at 08:57 a.m.


Quoting:
No need to apologize, Screwball.  My observation was directed only at those who use the term "liberal" as a slur... :)
End Quote



I am guilty of that myself sometimes.  :)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/18/02 at 09:09 a.m.

I hadn't noticed  :)  By the way, Screwball I haven't had a chance to wish you happy holidays.  Merry Christmas and a happy new year  :)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Screwball54 on 12/18/02 at 09:12 a.m.


Quoting:


And yes, there are the ridiculous hybrid cars, but even they use oil.  So unless you can use your "inside info" to invent an alternative to oil...


End Quote



They did a study in Popular Science and found that if the place you charge your car gets its power from an coal or oil source then it creates just as much polution as a normal car.  I am just tired of all those actors saying they have an enviromentally friendly car, when in reality it just as unfriendly as a normal car (Unless they used hydro or a nuclear source, but wait their aginst that too).

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Screwball54 on 12/18/02 at 09:15 a.m.


Quoting:
I hadn't noticed  :)  By the way, Screwball I haven't had a chance to wish you happy holidays.  Merry Christmas and a happy new year  :)
End Quote



Happy holidays to You too Steve.  They are aproaching fast this year.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/18/02 at 09:23 a.m.


Quoting:
No need to apologize, Screwball.  My observation was directed only at those who use the term "liberal" as a slur... :)
End Quote



Not a slur ;)  Just an observation.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/18/02 at 09:25 a.m.

Quoting:
In the end, we should not forget we are Americans. I think openess is good, and one of the reasons polarized talk show hosts are bad is they divide us and dominate the conversation in a very negative light.  
End Quote



It's true, but I respect some of them because they back up their arguments with fact.  That's what you're supposed to do anyway ;)

And I'm proud to be an American :)  Go U-S-A!

By the way, is it me, or did people get a tad touchy this morning?  ::)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/18/02 at 11:29 a.m.

Quoting:
And remember, most of the people you're arguing with in here are young and inexperienced; they were weaned on Rush Limbaugh...If Rush didn't preach it it doesn't have any value. Rush has made a lot of money using the term "liberal" as an insult?

End Quote



Steve, again let me say, not all conservatives listen to Rush as you obviously think we do.  

I called her a liberal because in her post she referred to herself as a freakin liberal.  

She went from:

Quoting:Hey......you ask if us liberals read the paper.....well we do.End Quote



To:

Quoting:Oh, and is calling me a liberal suppose to be an insult
End Quote




Personally I think its hilarious to see a self-proclaimed liberal like her get so offended when called...a liberal!

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Screwball54 on 12/18/02 at 11:35 a.m.


Quoting:



Personally I think its hilarious to see a self-proclaimed liberal like her get so offended when called...a liberal!
End Quote



That is funny  :)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/18/02 at 02:05 p.m.

Quoting:


Steve, again let me say, not all conservatives listen to Rush as you obviously think we do.  

End Quote



Darn straight.  Rush annoys me to no end.  I thought we said this a couple pages ago.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/18/02 at 02:13 p.m.


Quoting:


I thought we said this a couple pages ago.
End Quote



we did, but I guess Steve must have missed it so I was pointing it out to him.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: dagwood on 12/18/02 at 06:43 p.m.


Quoting:


Damn straight.  Rush annoys me to no end.  I thought we said this a couple pages ago.
End Quote



I know I said it on the last page.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: lainey on 12/18/02 at 11:49 p.m.

I suggest you read the so called "Patriot" Act if you want to see the freedoms that Ashcroft and company have taken and or suspended for the duration of the war on terrorism.  I am certainly no bleeding heart that wants to give Osama Bin Laden a slap on the wrist and try to understand his pain.  He is criminal, but lets perhaps think a little bit, can we be honest we are a country that was founded by terrorists, why is it we have such a problem with people using violent means to oppose what they view as an unjust government?  I don't condone the actions of Osama Bin Laden, but I certainly can see that he and his like operate within their own distinct world view, is it right?  No, but they are not neccesarily insane, they simply beleive that they have no other choice in actions to effect the results they desire.  Again they are not right in their actions, I would refer them to the actions and results of Ghandi in his campaign to seek India's independence.  I think one of my main problems with this administration's actions is that they clearly violate the Powell doctrine, we are currently engaged in a "war" with no clear objectives or end in sight, it is simply a convienent all encompassing mantle used to justif any action by this administration.  The Iraqi campaign is one manifestation of this, we are prosecuting war against them with little evidence that we have seen, while North Korea, a named member of the axis of evil that has admitted to developing nuclear weapons and we do nothing.  This presents quite a conumdrum doesn't it.  And as far as the oil question goes, it has been well publicized that OPEC members such as Saudi Arabia spend money (oil revenues) on supporting terrorists, and we say nothing about trying to reduce oil consumption, but there are plenty of commercials about how drug money is used to fund terrorists, again quite a paradox.  Now I hear you thinking, "stupid liberals alternative fuels will never work"  let me propose this thought for you to refute, new technology always pays off in the long run, in the development of new products and industries, the airline industry? The automotive industry?  Television?  The computer industry?  all of these were greeted with skepticism at first but I think we can all agree did amount to something.  I am not neccesarily a liberal or a conservative, just someone who thinks about what I hear rather than just swallowing it wholesale, I suggest you do the same.


Quoting:


Oh boy, another liberal complaining about "lost freedoms".

Ok, since Ashcroft has "taken many freedoms away" from you, I challenge you to name 3.  Make sure they're good ones, because so far I have never seen/heard a liberal who has been able to do it.



interesting to know that you have some "inside information" that nobody else is aware of.  

And yes, there are the ridiculous hybrid cars, but even they use oil.  So unless you can use your "inside info" to invent an alternative to oil...


End Quote

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/19/02 at 00:26 a.m.

Well hello again.  Wow, I don't know where to begin.



Quoting:
I suggest you read the so called "Patriot" Act if you want to see the freedoms that Ashcroft and company have taken and or suspended for the duration of the war on terrorism. End Quote

 

You proved my point, you can't actually name any freedoms you claim to have lost.  Yes the Patriot Act increases surveilence, but you haven't lost any freedoms because of it.  



Quoting:...can we be honest we are a country that was founded by terrorists...End Quote



wow, our Founding Fathers were terrorists?  I'm at a loss of words on that one.  Thats possibly the most ridiculous statement I've ever read.



Quoting:...why is it we have such a problem with people using violent means to oppose what they view as an unjust government?  End Quote



We're not at war simply because a group of people oppose our government, its because those people killed 1000's of our citizens and have vowed to do it again.



Quoting:...we are currently engaged in a "war" with no clear objectives or end in sight...
End Quote



...if only it were that easy to just suddenly iradicate terrorism.  It takes time, and the administration made it clear it would take time to fight this war on terrorism.  Its not something that is over and done in a month or two.  I guess the administration forgot to arrange the war's time-frame with you.




And regarding an oil alternative, you said:

Quoting:...let me propose this thought for you to refute, new technology always pays off in the long run, in the development of new products and industries...End Quote



As true as that may be, it still doesn't solve anything now.  Liberals want us to get off oil now, but the development of a real and affective oil substitue is not in the immediate future.  Its so easy to say we need to lay off the oil, but unless there's an alternative readily available, its simply talk.  

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Lainey on 12/19/02 at 01:11 a.m.

You raise some good points, I still believe that the Patriot Act dose represent a step backwards, yes it does improve law enforcements ability to prosecute criminals, but if we sacrfice freedoms in order to defeat terrorists don't the terrorist win?  By the way what is terrorism?  I said the founding fathers were terorists, because they were a group who sought to violently overthrow the legitimate government.  Remember, that England was the rightful ruler of the American Colonies, we sought to gain representation by legal means and when that failed things like the Boston Tea Party resulted.  Maybe this is a bit of an academic exercise but, our assumption as Americans is that our system of government is some kind of divine right, but prior to the success of the revolution it was just an academic theory.  I suppose the root of my question is, what is terrorism?  I think that what happened on September 11 was a crime, and in my mind by declaring war against terrorism we legitimize terrorist as valid comabants.  Note that in the Civil War, Lincoln never admitted that the Confederacy was a legitimate opponent, they were instead viewed as rogue states, not a seperate nation we were fighting against.  As to the question of alternative fuels etc, I agree, there is no quick fix, but without encouragement how can we expect the industries to develop?  New technology doesn't incubate in a vacuum, it needs encouragement and incentive.  My point is that the government needs to take an active role in encouraging its development,not dissmissing it out of hand, as it has been doing.   Now about the "War on Terrorism"  from my previous statements, yes I know that the campaign to eliminate terrorism will take a while etc etc,  my point is this what is terrorism, give me a concise definition that isn't just "I know it when I see it" I really don't think we can eliminate terrorism anymore than we can eliminate any human vice.  That is where the real problem with the "war" on terrorism lies, I am fully willing to admit that the administration may be doing a great job, but they have also created plenty of appearances of impropriety, in my opinion.  You can dismiss me as a crackpot liberal, but there are a lot of people who think like me, and a lot of people who don't, but we need to find a measure of concensus, not just dismiss the liberals as unpatriotic and dismiss the republicans as neo-facists, these are simplistic terms at best and I think we have much to learn from each others viewpoints, that is the true nature of democracy.  It is when we fail to engage in real discussion that democracy fails and we all lose.  

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: R. Rieux on 12/19/02 at 02:13 a.m.

Reading through some of the past pages I couldn't help, but get a chuckle or two at the utter and complete bombast of some of the fellows who think they're in the know and place their complete, undivided trust in what the govt. has brainwashed them to believe (frightening, but there are people out there who truly think(?) like this). I'm curious in a kind of what-the-village-idiot-will-say-next sort of way :) :D ;D Please, offer more of these... opinions and remove all doubt in the rest of us. It is an entertaining side-show spectacle. I almost feel like bringing an accordion ::)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/19/02 at 09:23 a.m.

Hmmm, I just received a pop-up from this site...weird.

I guess this got a little testy again, eh?  ::)  I'll post a little later when the blood has finished boiling and liberals (and conservatives) stop driving SUVs  :P  :D

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/19/02 at 09:39 a.m.

By the way..."Lainey," register with us.  It's free :)

and 80sRocked?  no need to stoop to name-calling, even if the guests do it ;)

oh, other lurker, I think I know who you are ;D  

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/19/02 at 11:52 a.m.

Quoting:
You raise some good points, I still believe that the Patriot Act dose represent a step backwards, yes it does improve law enforcements ability to prosecute criminals, but if we sacrfice freedoms in order to defeat terrorists don't the terrorist win?  End Quote




Again, I ask you What freedoms have we lost???  You have failed to answer this question in your last 2 attempts.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/19/02 at 11:54 a.m.


Quoting:
and 80sRocked?  no need to stoop to name-calling, even if the guests do it ;)
End Quote



Who did I call a name?  

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/19/02 at 11:59 a.m.


Quoting:


Who did I call a name?  
End Quote



I think it's just the throwing around of "liberal" and "conservative" that's making everyone on edge.  Lighten up, folks :)

As for the freedoms we've lost...I don't feel like anything's changed at all.  As long as I stay away from child porn and hacking into the Pentagon, I think the FBI is gonna leave me be.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/19/02 at 12:03 a.m.

Quoting:


I think it's just the throwing around of "liberal" and "conservative" that's making everyone on edge.  End Quote




oh geez, we covered this yesterday.  The lady called herself a liberal, so I referred to her as one. If one doesn't want to be called something, they shouldn't open up their thread by calling themselves that word!

I'm a conservative, and would be more than happy to be called one.  If real liberals are "on edge" by being called what they are, well thats just ridiculous.



Quoting:
oh, other lurker, I think I know who you are ;D  
End Quote




as do I, you would think that after all this time he would realize he's not fooling anyone.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/19/02 at 12:08 a.m.

Do you feel like you've lost any liberties?  I certainly don't.  Nobody's knocking down my doors and camping soldiers in my living room or anything.  Nobody's confiscating my computer because I have a little too much all-American girl-on-girl action :P  What gives, eh?

Please disregard that girl-on-girl thing ::)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/19/02 at 12:14 a.m.


Quoting:
Do you feel like you've lost any liberties?  I certainly don't.  End Quote



absolutely not.  I can't honestly think of any liberties/freedoms we have lost.  

Oh wait there is one, we can't take knives onto a plane.  Wow, the nerve of this government to keep us from taking weapons onto a plane!   ;D    

Obviously I was being sarcastic. ;)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/19/02 at 12:15 a.m.


Quoting:


absolutely not.  I can't honestly think of any liberties/freedoms we have lost.  

Oh wait there is one, we can't take knives onto a plane.  Wow, the nerve of this government to keep us from taking weapons onto a plane!   ;D    

Obviously I was being sarcastic. ;)
End Quote


Dammit!  NOW how am I supposed to eat my Salisbury Steak?  :P

I think they're freaking out about a possible "invasion of privacy"...but come on, they're doing it anyway, there's nothing you can do about it, just don't do illegal stuff :P

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Lur-King on 12/19/02 at 12:16 a.m.


Quoting:


I think it's just the throwing around of "liberal" and "conservative" that's making everyone on edge.  Lighten up, folks :)

As for the freedoms we've lost...I don't feel like anything's changed at all.  As long as I stay away from child porn and hacking into the Pentagon, I think the FBI is gonna leave me be.
End Quote



She did call herself a liberal - either on purpose or inadvertently and left herself open to mock and ridicule, which... others seem more than happy to oblige. "It feels good to be 'right'. There is nothing more exhilarating than pointing out the shortcomings of others." (Kevin Smith) ::)

I haven't read about any lost freedoms, but it's not something I worry about anyway since I'd still keep on living the way I do no matter what the govt. tells me to do 8)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/19/02 at 12:17 a.m.


Quoting:


She did call herself a liberal - either on purpose or inadvertently and left herself open to mock and ridicule, which... others seem more than happy to oblige. "It feels good to be 'right'. There is nothing more exhilarating than pointing out the shortcomings of others." (Kevin Smith) ::)

I haven't read about any lost freedoms, but it's not something I worry about anyway since I'd still keep on living the way I do no matter what the govt. tells me to do 8)
End Quote



Werd up, your Majesty ;)  Don't let "big government" get you down.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/19/02 at 12:24 a.m.

Quoting:
She did call herself a liberal - either on purpose or inadvertently and left herself open to mock and ridicule, which... others seem more than happy to oblige. End Quote




no comment.  I'm done arguing this.



Quoting:I haven't read about any lost freedoms, but it's not something I worry about anyway since I'd still keep on living the way I do no matter what the govt. tells me to do 8)
End Quote



Same here.  I haven't nor do I plan to change any aspect of my daily life from fear of the feds breaking down my door.  Its crazy, to me, to live in constant paranoia and fear of the government, as some do.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/19/02 at 12:56 a.m.

Quoting:

Dammit!  NOW how am I supposed to eat my Salisbury Steak?  :PEnd Quote



Ha!,  I guess you'll have to settle with those airline-issued "sporks" to cut your steak.



Quoting:I think they're freaking out about a possible "invasion of privacy"...but come on, they're doing it anyway, there's nothing you can do about it, just don't do illegal stuff :P
End Quote



Very true.  And it brings up an interesting point.  Many people don't realize they have been "watched" or "tracked" probably all their lives.  Its not exactly a new thing.  

Examples:  
-for years, everytime you swipe your credit card, your spending habits have been recorded.
-For years, everytime you go the the ATM, not only are you on camera, but your transaction has been recorded.  
-For years, everytime you surf the internet, everything you do has been recorded by your provider and advertisers(those banner ads aren't there for nothing, do a trojan horse scan on your computer, you may be surprised).  
-For years, everytime you use your various "shoppers cards"(Kroger Plus Card, etc) in a grocery, your buying habits have been recorded.  
-For years, everytime you make a phone call, both cell phones and regular phones, all your calling habits (numbers/times) have been recorded.
-For years, everytime you get gas, walk through a store/mall/down the street, you have more than likely been on camera.

The list goes on and on and on...

And the thing is, its been happenening for decades, yet everyone is up in arms now, simply because its more publicized and now suddenly people think they have lost freedoms.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/19/02 at 04:52 p.m.

I think some of the liberties people are worryied about losing is related to the passage of the Homeland Security Act.  For instance, the ability of Federal agents to conduct warrentless searches and wiretaps will be broadened.  It's a fourth amendment issue.  

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/19/02 at 05:01 p.m.

Quoting:
For instance, the ability of Federal agents to conduct warrentless searches and wiretaps will be broadened.  It's a fourth amendment issue.  
End Quote




you're right.  But as Rice Cube said:

Quoting:they're doing it anyway, there's nothing you can do about it, just don't do illegal stuff  End Quote



There's no point in sitting around and worrying about if "Big Brother" is listening in on your phone call to grandma.  Don't do things that would put you in jeopardy, and you have nothing to worry about.

I know Tarzan Boy(or whatever name he's using these days) will probably call me a Brown Coat again for feeling this way, but so be it.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/19/02 at 05:09 p.m.


Quoting:



you're right.  But as Rice Cube said:

There's no point in sitting around and worrying about if "Big Brother" is listening in on your phone call to grandma.  Don't do things that would put you in jeopardy, and you have nothing to worry about.

I know Tarzan Boy will probably call me a Brown Coat again for feeling this way, but so be it.
End Quote



Which raises the questions: How highly do you value your constitutional guarantee of privacy?  There's very much a point in worrying about the government listening in.  

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/19/02 at 07:30 p.m.


Quoting:


Which raises the questions: How highly do you value your constitutional guarantee of privacy?  There's very much a point in worrying about the government listening in.  
End Quote



What is so wrong with what you're doing that you're afraid of the government listening in?  Are you smuggling illegal immigrants?  Are you conducting child porn symphonies?  I personally would sacrifice some of my liberties to make sure people who actually do this stuff get caught and put away.  I didnt' do anything wrong, why the hell should I care?  

By the way, Merry Xmas, FBI Agent Henry Smith (at least one of you is Henry Smith, I just know it)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: 80sRocked on 12/19/02 at 07:37 p.m.


Quoting:


What is so wrong with what you're doing that you're afraid of the government listening in?  Are you smuggling illegal immigrants?  End Quote



Dammit, Rice blew my cover.  OK I confess, I run the world's largest illegal alien smuggling ring out of my apartment.  NOT ;)

Anyway, I do agree with you on this Rice.



Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/19/02 at 07:50 p.m.


Quoting:


What is so wrong with what you're doing that you're afraid of the government listening in?  Are you smuggling illegal immigrants?  Are you conducting child porn symphonies?  I personally would sacrifice some of my liberties to make sure people who actually do this stuff get caught and put away.  I didnt' do anything wrong, why the hell should I care?  
End Quote



You're asking the wrong question, Earl.  The point is my contract, your contract, and every American's contract with this country is I will behave myself and pay my taxes and the government will respect my privacy.  
You assume that someone has something to hide, and that's the wrong assumption.  
You should care because the government is powerful, and it needs checks and reins.  For someone who is very capable of understanding all sides of an issue, I'm disappointed in this post.  

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/19/02 at 07:55 p.m.


Quoting:
You're asking the wrong question, Earl.  The point is my contract, your contract, and every American's contract with this country is I will behave myself and pay my taxes and the government will respect my privacy.  
You assume that someone has something to hide, and that's the wrong assumption.  
You should care because the government is powerful, and it needs checks and reins.  For someone who is very capable of understanding all sides of an issue, I'm disappointed in this post.  
End Quote



And then what happens to those people, those "Americans," who DON'T adhere to this contract, who don't behave themselves?  THOSE are the ones I worry about.  I don't believe anyone is obligated to agree with me EVER.  But keep in mind that some of the terrorists of 9/11 had sat around in the good ol' US of A and Canada, learned how to fly planes under your very noses, and smashed up a couple of really big buildings because, for whatever reason, the government didn't catch their activities in time.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/19/02 at 08:03 p.m.


Quoting:


And then what happens to those people, those "Americans," who DON'T adhere to this contract, who don't behave themselves?  
End Quote



So, if we find a cell of terrorists with a Chinese connection you have no problem with Chinese immigrants' telephones being wiretapped without probable cause?  Or have this same group randomly stopped, detained, their possessions searched in the name of security?

Security demands payment, but you don't mortgage a right in the name of security.  "I'm not doing anything wrong so I don't care" is too facile and glib a reaction to be coming from you.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/19/02 at 08:10 p.m.

Quoting:

So, if we find a cell of terrorists with a Chinese connection you have no problem with Chinese immigrants' telephones being wiretapped without probable cause?  Or have this same group randomly stopped, detained, their possessions searched in the name of security?

Security demands payment, but you don't mortgage a right in the name of security.  "I'm not doing anything wrong so I don't care" is too facile and glib a reaction to be coming from you.
End Quote



Absolutely no problems.  They search me at the airports all the time anyway, apparently I'm some kind of "terrorist".  My friends and I even take odds on whether or not I would be searched in the security checkpoints.  I am innocent until proven guilty, and as of now, I have nothing to feel guilty about.  It's a minor inconvenience for me, nothing more.  I do it because in the long run, I'll feel safer.

As for racial profiling, they do that anyway, it's just not "overt".  ::) Most of the terrorists who have attacked the US of A, except for that yahoo McVeigh, are Muslim and/or of Middle-Eastern origin.  You can call it a coincidence, but the laws of statistics do not lie.

Sorry if I sound insensitive, you are not obligated to agree with me.  But if we're to be a stronger, better, safer nation, gotta let a few things go.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Screwball54 on 12/19/02 at 08:59 p.m.


Quoting:


What is so wrong with what you're doing that you're afraid of the government listening in?  Are you smuggling illegal immigrants?  Are you conducting child porn symphonies?  I personally would sacrifice some of my liberties to make sure people who actually do this stuff get caught and put away.  I didnt' do anything wrong, why the hell should I care?  

End Quote



Here is where I dissagree.  Once you sacrifice a liberty to the government you will never get your liberty back.  This doesn't even just apply to national security. It applies to gun-control, auto laws (seatbelts, cell phones), alcohol, etc. in the words of Sebastian the crab, "You give them an inch, and they swim all over you".  I still believe that the Republicans are more interested in protecting our liberties than the Dems, and I am not saying that the current aministration has taken away any of my liberties, I just think that people should not be so eager to give thier liberties away.  Anyway, If these government agencies had done their job in the first place there would be no need to talk about lost liberties.      

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/19/02 at 09:09 p.m.

Quoting:
Here is where I dissagree.  Once you sacrifice a liberty to the government you will never get your liberty back.  This doesn't even just apply to national security. It applies to gun-control, auto laws (seatbelts, cell phones), alcohol, etc. in the words of Sebastian the crab, "You give them an inch, and they swim all over you".  I still believe that the Republicans are more interested in protecting our liberties than the Dems, and I am not saying that the current aministration has taken away any of my liberties, I just think that people should not be so eager to give thier liberties away.  Anyway, If these government agencies had done their job in the first place there would be no need to talk about lost liberties.      
End Quote



Fair enough.  I don't want to get into a war of semantics though.  I'm not going to actively say, "Hey, look at me, spy on me!" but I would like to think that the FBI agent who's scouring this board right now is doing it for the right reasons ;)

This thread was about Al Bore, how the heck did we end up on this?  ???

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: shazzaah on 12/19/02 at 09:14 p.m.


I saw something on the news that implied Gore was not going to run because he did not have the funds to do so. I guess noone is throwing their money his way, and they say he doesn't want to be embarrassed.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Screwball54 on 12/19/02 at 09:32 p.m.


Quoting:

This thread was about Al Bore, how the heck did we end up on this?  ???
End Quote



because some of us feel that Al's party wants to take away are rights, and feel that is a reason not to vote for him. The other side feels it validates his party by stating "see Bush is taking away your rights too"

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/19/02 at 09:35 p.m.


Quoting:


because some of us feel that Al's party wants to take away are rights, and feel that is a reason not to vote for him. The other side feels it validates his party by stating "see Bush is taking away your rights too"
End Quote



Right.  I apologize for my earlier "attack on freedom," but I am actually willing to sacrifice some privacy so the government can track terrorism better.  I don't feel that this sacrifice will infringe on any of my other rights.  Perhaps someone with more legal expertise than I should talk about this.  I think I'm through.

Unless someone better turns up, I'm re-electing Bush.  He has done no wrong.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Screwball54 on 12/19/02 at 09:38 p.m.


Quoting:

Unless someone better turns up, I'm re-electing Bush.  He has done no wrong.
End Quote



I agree with that. I am already annoyed at John F Kerry with his "No new tax cuts" proposal (what he really means is bye-bye Bush's tax cut, which means you won't get back money you were already promissed).

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/20/02 at 07:39 a.m.

For all the folks out there who aren't doing anything wrong and can't understand the rest of our concern with privacy:  

How's about posting your names and addresses on this thread, and prove you mean what you say?

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/20/02 at 09:21 a.m.

Quoting:
For all the folks out there who aren't doing anything wrong and can't understand the rest of our concern with privacy:  

How's about posting your names and addresses on this thread, and prove you mean what you say?
End Quote



My e-mail is hidden when I sign on, but when I'm lurking it is posted.  You can use it to dredge up information on me.  As long as you don't mail-bomb me or send me Anthrax in a vanity spritzer I'll be cool with it.

By the way, I posted my website on another thread.  If you want to use that to dig up dirt on me, go for it.  I haven't moved in 8 years.  

Okay, I thought a little bit about this...and there's something bugging me about your method of "proof," Steve.  Uncle Sam already knows my address.  He knows what I look like, my fingerprints, my vitals, my blood type, the fact that I have a cataract in one eye and that I've crashed some cars around.  The reason I'm not posting my address outright is because I am going to prevent telemarketers from having an easier time of finding me and bugging the crap out of me during dinner, NOT because I have anything really to hide.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/20/02 at 10:44 a.m.

Nobody said anything about the government.  You said your privacy wasn't important because "I'm not doing anything wrong."   If innocence gives immunity, I assume you'd have no troubles sharing with this community.   :)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/20/02 at 01:40 p.m.


Quoting:
Nobody said anything about the government.  You said your privacy wasn't important because "I'm not doing anything wrong."   If innocence gives immunity, I assume you'd have no troubles sharing with this community.   :)
End Quote



I've already given you several avenues of finding my address.  If you want I can private message you and then you can post it to "invade my privacy".  :)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/20/02 at 01:59 p.m.


Quoting:


I've already given you several avenues of finding my address.  If you want I can private message you and then you can post it to "invade my privacy".  :)
End Quote



Are you saying you don't trust this community enough to share your name and address with it?  I'm not asking that you let it listen to your phone conversations, or go through your personal belongings.  Not even asking for you to give us your drivers license number... just real name and address.  

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/20/02 at 02:01 p.m.

Quoting:

Are you saying you don't trust this community enough to share your name and address with it?  I'm not asking that you let it listen to your phone conversations, or go through your personal belongings.  Not even asking for you to give us your drivers license number... just real name and address.  
End Quote



I trust them to be resourceful enough to find it, through the avenues I have posted and described numerous times (gawd you're stubborn) ;)  I know I'd be able to hunt you down if I really wanted to.

Y'all can find it too.  Don't let me down, I gots a lot of faith riding on you ;)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/20/02 at 04:06 p.m.

Earl, the only thing I've asked is whether you'd be willing to post you real name and real address on this thread.  Since you aren't doing anything wrong and have nothing to hide, I was sure you'd jump at the chance.  I'm amazed that you are acting so coy about it.

It can't be that your privacy is important to you, can it? :o

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/20/02 at 04:24 p.m.

You're asking me not to disclose my address to only this messageboard, or even to Uncle Sam, but to the entire world.  

Do me a favor.  Go to my website.  My real name is there.

Then go to Yahoo and search Northern California/San Francisco Bay Area, I am in the Yellow Pages, and it is VERY conspicuous.  

Then you can post my address for me.  Since you seem to consider it so important, the task falls to you now.

I consider this little part of the discussion over.  Shall we move on?

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/20/02 at 05:06 p.m.

I'm not asking you to do anything.  I'm asking if you're willing to disclose information about yourself, and, wisely, you're not.  

We have a right to privacy, and I wouldn't violate yours or anybody's.  Where we differ is in our valuation of the right of privacy guaranteed us in the fourth amendment.    

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/20/02 at 07:37 p.m.


Quoting:
I'm not asking you to do anything.  I'm asking if you're willing to disclose information about yourself, and, wisely, you're not.  

We have a right to privacy, and I wouldn't violate yours or anybody's.  Where we differ is in our valuation of the right of privacy guaranteed us in the fourth amendment.    
End Quote



I'll disclose my information to the right people and the right people only.  i.e. not terrorists, not telemarketers, not Sally Struthers, and not televangelists ;)  Though those people, like the government, probably have it already, so what do I have left to disclose?  ::)

Please, let's move on.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: John_Seminal on 12/20/02 at 08:55 p.m.


Quoting:


You're asking the wrong question, Earl.  The point is my contract, your contract, and every American's contract with this country is I will behave myself and pay my taxes and the government will respect my privacy.  
You assume that someone has something to hide, and that's the wrong assumption.  
You should care because the government is powerful, and it needs checks and reins.  For someone who is very capable of understanding all sides of an issue, I'm disappointed in this post.  
End Quote



Are we talking about the Social Contract? I remember something Rossoue said, "Man is born free, yet everywhere he is in chains."

If we are to be free, we must have an open government which does not lie to us or have trials in secret. Government can not be beyond public scrutiny. As for the issue of how much privace individuals have, that changes all the time. I personally believe we should be able to have privacy, and I do not like all the data that companys keep on me. Do you know how much junk mail I get from credit card companies alone? And some of them have personal data on the offer letters.

I think what America needs is freedom. That is what we are. We need checks and balances. I will end with one other quote: "power leads to corruption and absolute power leads to absolute corruption." Leaders have known to do horrible things for some great end. I do not want to live in India or have Hitler rule me. I want to be free.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/21/02 at 08:41 a.m.

Quoting:
I think what America needs is freedom. That is what we are. We need checks and balances. I will end with one other quote: "power leads to corruption and absolute power leads to absolute corruption." Leaders have known to do horrible things for some great end. I do not want to live in India or have Hitler rule me. I want to be free.
End Quote



I agree, and you've said what I was trying to say (albeit in a politer, less confrontational manner.)  It's the Government that needs it powers checked, not the individual.  Not because the Government is evil, but because the individual is powerless against it.  

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/21/02 at 08:47 a.m.


Quoting:


I'll disclose my information to the right people and the right people only.  i.e. not terrorists, not telemarketers, not Sally Struthers, and not televangelists ;)  Though those people, like the government, probably have it already, so what do I have left to disclose?  ::)

Please, let's move on.
End Quote



I'm trying, Earl... http://www.click-smilie.de/sammlung/cool/cool030.gif

But every time I add my coda you add your coda.... so, okay, let's move on....
By the way, what you got against Sally Struthers?

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Zenobia on 12/21/02 at 03:11 p.m.

Er... can I put in a late vote as another conservative who can't stand Rush Limbaugh? I've hated him ever since he tried to pay big money to get his hands on that poor lobster... ::)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/21/02 at 03:31 p.m.


Quoting:
Er... can I put in a late vote as another conservative who can't stand Rush Limbaugh? I've hated him ever since he tried to pay big money to get his hands on that poor lobster... ::)
End Quote



You sure can http://www.click-smilie.de/sammlung/cool/cool007.gif
I'm the only one prohibited from mentioning Rush or using the term "dittohead" on this thread  :)

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: John_Seminal on 12/21/02 at 05:26 p.m.


Quoting:
Er... can I put in a late vote as another conservative who can't stand Rush Limbaugh? I've hated him ever since he tried to pay big money to get his hands on that poor lobster... ::)
End Quote


What happened with the lobster? I never heard this story. Did he cook it on his show and eat it? Or could he not wait for it to cook and started chomping away while it was still alive?

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Zella on 12/21/02 at 05:40 p.m.

I don't remember all the details, but some animal rights people were trying to save this very old lobster that had been in an aquarium at an eatery for years. They were going to pay a large sum of money to buy it and liberate it. Rush tried to outbid them on it, offering a larger sum of money so he could have it killed and cooked for his dinner... >:(

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/21/02 at 05:44 p.m.

:-X  http://www.click-smilie.de/sammlung/cool/cool030.gif

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/22/02 at 00:29 a.m.


Quoting:
I don't remember all the details, but some animal rights people were trying to save this very old lobster that had been in an aquarium at an eatery for years. They were going to pay a large sum of money to buy it and liberate it. Rush tried to outbid them on it, offering a larger sum of money so he could have it killed and cooked for his dinner... >:(
End Quote



Okay...sorry to be so "insensitive" again...but...

IT'S A F**KING LOBSTER, FOR THE LOVE OF ()*#@&!!!  

Carry on.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Race_Bannon on 12/22/02 at 00:44 a.m.

Hey Rice, I was thinking on this one too, and I see your point, it is a F'ing lobster and shellfish are not known for intelligence or strong family values, I did crab up in Alaska for two years and killed many of the little buggers.  However some people felt it important enough to raise a good amount of $ (for a silly reason, yes) and for Rush to outbid them just to see it eaten is cruel, not to the lobster but to people with a mission they thought important.  Rush is an a$$hole, most of us can agree.

Quoting:


Okay...sorry to be so "insensitive" again...but...

IT'S A F**KING LOBSTER, FOR THE LOVE OF ()*#@&!!!  

Carry on.
End Quote

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Wicked Lester on 12/22/02 at 06:49 a.m.


Quoting:
Rush is an a$$hole, most of us can agree.

End Quote



Which doesn't change the fact that it's still a lobster! That Rush made an issue of it doesn't change the underlying fact that there are much more important things than a tasty shellfish for people to get worked up over. Take that money and buy a poor family some food for crying out loud!! (And before someone chimes in with "So should Rush!", that is also correct.)

BTW, if anyone wants an alternative to Rush, I suggest listening to Ken Hamblin. I stumbled onto his show on a low power AM station about 3 years ago, and have tuned in as much as possible since then.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Race_Bannon on 12/22/02 at 06:59 a.m.

Yes, but we all like to "feel good" for not always the best reasons sometimes. Silly to spend money to set a stupid lobster free but isn't simply mean to spend to much money on the same item just to make people angry?  The only "lesson" he wanted to teach and actually taught, was that he's a jerk.

Quoting:


Which doesn't change the fact that it's still a lobster! That Rush made an issue of it doesn't change the underlying fact that there are much more important things than a tasty shellfish for people to get worked up over. Take that money and buy a poor family some food for crying out loud!! (And before someone chimes in with "So should Rush!", that is also correct.)

BTW, if anyone wants an alternative to Rush, I suggest listening to Ken Hamblin. I stumbled onto his show on a low power AM station about 3 years ago, and have tuned in as much as possible since then.
End Quote

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Wicked Lester on 12/22/02 at 07:45 a.m.


Quoting:
Yes, but we all like to "feel good" for not always the best reasons sometimes. Silly to spend money to set a stupid lobster free but isn't simply mean to spend to much money on the same item just to make people angry?  The only "lesson" he wanted to teach and actually taught, was that he's a jerk.


End Quote



Oh, I know!! You think I'm going to disagree with you!! Well, nope, he is a jerk, and, as I thought I made clear, he was just as wrong as the first party, but relativism aside, it's still idiotic to put so much effort into trying to "save" a lobster.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/22/02 at 09:31 a.m.


Quoting:


Oh, I know!! You think I'm going to disagree with you!! Well, nope, he is a jerk, and, as I thought I made clear, he was just as wrong as the first party, but relativism aside, it's still idiotic to put so much effort into trying to "save" a lobster.
End Quote



Thank you for seeing it in that light.  Trust me, if I see a huge lobster in a tank in a restaurant, I'm not going to say, "oooh, it's so old and majestic, let's not eat it," I'm going to dig into it like it's my last meal.  Lobster is goooooooooood...

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: John_Seminal on 12/22/02 at 01:23 p.m.


Quoting:


No thanks. Rush Limbaugh is plenty enough for good laughs 8)
End Quote


How about G Gordon Liddy? He was on CNN two weeks ago, and you would not believe some of the ideas this man has about society. He kinda makes Limbaugh look like a big soft teddy bear. LOL!

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: dagwood on 12/22/02 at 02:24 p.m.


Quoting:

How about G Gordon Liddy? He was on CNN two weeks ago, and you would not believe some of the ideas this man has about society. He kinda makes Limbaugh look like a big soft teddy bear. LOL!
End Quote



I like him better than Rush.  Better laughs.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/22/02 at 02:52 p.m.

Again... how are these beacons of Truth and Light able to squeeze onto the liberal dominated airwaves?  http://www.click-smilie.de/sammlung/cool/cool030.gif

Liddy is seriously twisted and insane.  Back in the Watergate days his boss, Jeb Magruder I think it was, made an offhand comment about one of the adminstration's enemies and added that he ought to be neutralized, or something to that effect.  Liddy's jaw clenched, his eyes grew steely and he strode out of the room with a purpose.  Magruder, to his horror, realized that Liddy took him seriously and had resolved to neutralize this person with extreme prejudice.  Magruder tracked Liddy down immediately and explained to Liddy that he was just speaking figuratively.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Rice Cube on 12/22/02 at 05:36 p.m.

Quoting:
Again... how are these beacons of Truth and Light able to squeeze onto the liberal dominated airwaves?  http://www.click-smilie.de/sammlung/cool/cool030.gif
End Quote



I don't claim to be an economics whiz, but I do believe that the laws of supply and demand apply here.  You see, there is a demand for differing viewpoints from what liberals tend to think is the "truth"...so that's why radio stations pop up to supply this "Truth and Light" you speak of.

Seriously, I thought we talked about this like last week.  

And for the last time, not everyone listens to Rush.  Rush may be a f**king @$$hole for doing his lobster stunt, but once again, it was a damned lobster for crying out loud.  If you're going to save an animal, save a blue whale.  (*&#$ the lobster, lobster's my food.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Steve_H on 12/22/02 at 08:18 p.m.


Quoting:


I don't claim to be an economics whiz, but I do believe that the laws of supply and demand apply here.  You see, there is a demand for differing viewpoints from what liberals tend to think is the "truth"...so that's why radio stations pop up to supply this "Truth and Light" you speak of.

Seriously, I thought we talked about this like last week.  
End Quote



Just calling to your attention the inherent contradictions of your position.
1- Whether you admit it or no, Savage, Liddy, That Person, et al, are part of the media.  Quit blaming liberal bias for ills that befall conservative causes and politicians. If a conservative politician puts his foot in his mouth and his conservative colleagues turn on him, don't tell us he was hounded out of office by the liberal media.
2- Even if we accept the supply and demand model, and accept liberal dominance, the logical conclusion is that the liberal view is winning the market battle because their presentation of the news is preferable to the alternative.  That's using your argument, not mine.

Subject: Re: CNN:  Al Gore Not Running in '04

Written By: Screwball54 on 12/22/02 at 09:18 p.m.


Quoting:


2- Even if we accept the supply and demand model, and accept liberal dominance, the logical conclusion is that the liberal view is winning the market battle because their presentation of the news is preferable to the alternative.  That's using your argument, not mine.
End Quote



This arguement doesn't hold water because the most popular news channel is Fox News, and they do not present the news in a "liberal view".