Bush and our Future

[Rene Tschaggelar]

Mark Fergerson wrote:

Tim Auton wrote:

Mark Fergerson <nunya@biz.ness> wrote:

Rene Tschaggelar wrote:

Mark Fergerson wrote:

A side effect was bangladesh which was built physically on hemp,
it got washed away and actually still is being washed away with
every flood.

See, that's a classic example of stupidity. You'd think whoever
was in charge there would have tried to find something else for
them to do to make money.

It has been a while since I saw that report. These insulas were
physically held together with the hemp they grew. And they didn't
grow it for dope but for the fibre. At least that was told.

Why the hell didn't they _move away_?

The place is severely overpopulated,

And whose fault is that? What kind of nitwits are in charge?

That just happens. Anyone wonders why ?
In charge ? What would they do ?

...a third of it floods every year
So it's good to grow _something_ on.

and most people don't own any land.

One gets the government one deserves. Why do they permit their
warlords to treat them that way?

They don't have guns and bullets required as arguments. And if they
had, the US would help the goverment against these terrorists.

Where are they supposed to _move

away_ to? Does the US want 138m Bangladeshis?

If people would act locally, the U.S. (U.N., whatever) wouldn't have
to act globally.

Sure, lets act locally...

Rene

 

[Mark Fergerson]

Ken Taylor wrote:

"Mark Fergerson" <nunya@biz.ness> wrote in message
news:Mhcmc.12018$k24.5889@fed1read01...

Tim Auton wrote:


Mark Fergerson <nunya@biz.ness> wrote:


Rene Tschaggelar wrote:


Mark Fergerson wrote:

[snip]


A side effect was bangladesh which was built physically on hemp,
it got washed away and actually still is being washed away with
every flood.

See, that's a classic example of stupidity. You'd think whoever was
in charge there would have tried to find something else for them to do
to make money.

It has been a while since I saw that report. These insulas were
physically held together with the hemp they grew. And they didn't grow
it for dope but for the fibre. At least that was told.

Why the hell didn't they _move away_?

The place is severely overpopulated,

And whose fault is that? What kind of nitwits are in charge?

...a third of it floods every year

So it's good to grow _something_ on.


and most people don't own any land.

One gets the government one deserves. Why do they permit
their warlords to treat them that way?

Where are they supposed to _move

away_ to? Does the US want 138m Bangladeshis?

If people would act locally, the U.S. (U.N., whatever)
wouldn't have to act globally.

Mark L. Fergerson


And some yanks have the gall to wonder why the rest of the world think
they're pig-ignorant, selfish dumb-arses. Go figure.

And others wonder why Americans think the rest of the
world is inhabited by pig-ignorant etc.

Look, do you actually believe I'm promoting the Corporate
enslavement of the rest of Earth under the guise of
"exporting Democracy"? That's obvious bullshit (that I might
fall for that idea, or that you might believe I had). My
point is that if people _anywhere_ don't like the way their
lives are going, they have absolutely no hope of getting
some "strongman" (AKA warlord) to help them out. Why?
Because "strongmen" look after their own interests first;
that's their nature.

Bangladeshis or anyone else who've been turned into serfs
(tied to a particular bit of dirt for whatever alleged
reason) can only change things if they know that a better
situation is possible (which is where the Internet comes in)
_and_ that there exist ways to make that kind of change
possible (Internet again). Why do I drag the Internet into
it? Because the "traditional" ways (pray, promote some
"strongmen" to follow, whatever) just result in more
enslavement under different names. Long-term political
victims need most of all to know that their situation isn't
completely hopeless, by seeing lots of examples of how
people in their situation have made positive changes. Then,
they can decide which, if any, of these methods they might
want to try. They might even be stimulated to come up with
something even more effective. Serfs are _not_ by definition
stupid, just repressed.

(You might want to consider which parts of the world
restrict Internet access to their ruling class, and why they
do that. You also might want to read Machiavelli's _The
Prince_ in the interest of "knowing thy enemy".)

Of course, the above means the victims might have to
discard the "traditional" patterns of thought that made them
serfs in the first place, but that's hard because they've
been taught to own those traditions as part of their identity.

Ask yourself why the UN had to intervene in Central
Europe re: "Ethnic Cleansing", keeping "traditions" in mind.

So, what part of your "National Identity" makes it
necessary for you to bash everything American? What parts of
yours need similar bashing? Don't be shy, speak up. We
Americans do it for everyone to see and hear.

Mark L. Fergerson

 

[Mark Fergerson]

Rene Tschaggelar wrote:

Mark Fergerson wrote:

Tim Auton wrote:

Mark Fergerson <nunya@biz.ness> wrote:

Rene Tschaggelar wrote:

Mark Fergerson wrote:


A side effect was bangladesh which was built physically on hemp,
it got washed away and actually still is being washed away with
every flood.


See, that's a classic example of stupidity. You'd think whoever
was in charge there would have tried to find something else for
them to do to make money.


It has been a while since I saw that report. These insulas were
physically held together with the hemp they grew. And they didn't
grow it for dope but for the fibre. At least that was told.


Why the hell didn't they _move away_?


The place is severely overpopulated,


And whose fault is that? What kind of nitwits are in charge?


That just happens. Anyone wonders why ?

I don't; most people just want to raise their
crops/cattle/whatever, fuck, and relax as much as possible,
but others want to tell them how to do it. The latter wind
up in charge because they know how to delegate power through
brutality.

In charge ? What would they do ?

How the hell should I know? I don't live there, they do,
and they know what's feasible (or could, if they're
_allowed_ to access the rest of the world's knowledge).

...a third of it floods every year
So it's good to grow _something_ on.

and most people don't own any land.


One gets the government one deserves. Why do they permit their
warlords to treat them that way?


They don't have guns and bullets required as arguments.

Warlords are the ones who convince everyone else to
follow the "guns and bullets" route because it keeps the
warlords in power.

The followers outnumber their warlords zillions to one,
and _permit_ their warlords to rule them because it's
"traditional". Guns and bullets are _not_ the sole means of
political change except as a last resort; anyone who thinks
they are is a fool (or is following a warlord).

And if they
had, the US would help the goverment against these terrorists.

Right, like the US government tried to stop American
Indian tribes from building casinos. It didn't work. Now,
most Indian tribes are second-world at least, and many
tribes are composed solely of millionaires.

Why? Because they stopped bringing bows and arrows to
gunfights; they learned to bring lawyers, and win.

(Yet Crazy Horse, Sitting Bull, Geronimo et. al. are held
up as heroes, instead of those that brought real change.
"Tradition" dies hard.)

Where are they supposed to _move

away_ to? Does the US want 138m Bangladeshis?


If people would act locally, the U.S. (U.N., whatever) wouldn't have
to act globally.


Sure, lets act locally...

Nothing else really works in the long term. If you wait
for somebody else to act globally, you have to submit to
their imported agenda.

Mark L. Fergerson

 

[Rich Grise]

"Mark Fergerson" <nunya@biz.ness> wrote in message
news:B4vmc.12156$k24.677@fed1read01...

Ken Taylor wrote:

And some yanks have the gall to wonder why the rest of the world think
they're pig-ignorant, selfish dumb-arses. Go figure.

And others wonder why Americans think the rest of the
world is inhabited by pig-ignorant etc.

I don't It's because so many are pipig-ignorant, selfish dumb-arses.

Cheers!
Rich

(American, but ashamed of the way it's being co-opted by our
unelected rulers)

 

[Mark Fergerson]

Rich Grise wrote:

"Mark Fergerson" <nunya@biz.ness> wrote in message
news:B4vmc.12156$k24.677@fed1read01...

Ken Taylor wrote:


And some yanks have the gall to wonder why the rest of the world think
they're pig-ignorant, selfish dumb-arses. Go figure.

And others wonder why Americans think the rest of the
world is inhabited by pig-ignorant etc.


I don't It's because so many are pipig-ignorant, selfish dumb-arses.

Well, there is that.

Cheers!
Rich

(American, but ashamed of the way it's being co-opted by our
unelected rulers)

You actually fell for that "hanging chad" bullshit? Did
you go for the "three independent recounts by TV networks
proved Bush won" bullshit too? Are you eagerly awaiting the
"new and improved" paperless touchscreen voting systems
Diebold is foisting on so many voting districts?

Come on Rich, you have to know better.

Dig out "Don't Get Fooled Again" and listen closely.

"here comes the new boss, same as the old boss"

Mark L. Fergerson

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Mon, 10 May 2004 12:11:14 -0700, Mark Fergerson <nunya@biz.ness>
wrote:

[snip]

You actually fell for that "hanging chad" bullshit? Did
you go for the "three independent recounts by TV networks
proved Bush won" bullshit too? Are you eagerly awaiting the
"new and improved" paperless touchscreen voting systems
Diebold is foisting on so many voting districts?

Come on Rich, you have to know better.

Dig out "Don't Get Fooled Again" and listen closely.

"here comes the new boss, same as the old boss"

Mark L. Fergerson

Gee, Mark, Can I rank up there with those folks who think Janet "The
Bully" Napolitano is a good governor?

[I think "paperless" is NOT going to fly ANYWHERE... lots of
opposition mounting against such a crazy-assed scheme.]

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[Richard Henry]

"Jim Thompson" <thegreatone@example.com> wrote in message
news:4vmv90p3h2ccftkojdq1tgmnu2jvocojvm@4ax.com...

On Mon, 10 May 2004 12:11:14 -0700, Mark Fergerson <nunya@biz.ness
wrote:

[snip]
You actually fell for that "hanging chad" bullshit? Did
you go for the "three independent recounts by TV networks
proved Bush won" bullshit too? Are you eagerly awaiting the
"new and improved" paperless touchscreen voting systems
Diebold is foisting on so many voting districts?

Come on Rich, you have to know better.

Dig out "Don't Get Fooled Again" and listen closely.

"here comes the new boss, same as the old boss"

Mark L. Fergerson

Gee, Mark, Can I rank up there with those folks who think Janet "The
Bully" Napolitano is a good governor?

[I think "paperless" is NOT going to fly ANYWHERE... lots of
opposition mounting against such a crazy-assed scheme.]

Especially after the careless remark by Diebold's boss about "delivering"
the election to Bush.

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Mon, 10 May 2004 13:22:47 -0700, "Richard Henry" <rphenry@home.com>
wrote:

"Jim Thompson" <thegreatone@example.com> wrote in message
news:4vmv90p3h2ccftkojdq1tgmnu2jvocojvm@4ax.com...
[snip]
[I think "paperless" is NOT going to fly ANYWHERE... lots of
opposition mounting against such a crazy-assed scheme.]

Especially after the careless remark by Diebold's boss about "delivering"
the election to Bush.

There is a VERY strong movement to force paper copies of any
electronic ballot. Even the left coast is backing away from paperless
balloting.

I suspect only Massachusetts will opt for paperless, but they do
everything "on obedience" anyway ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[Winfield Hill]

Jim Thompson wrote...

I suspect only Massachusetts will opt for paperless,
but they do everything "on obedience" anyway ;-)

You rarely miss an opportunity to take a dig, huh?

In fact we've been using "electronic" ballots with a full
paper-trail for many years now... These are very sensible
individual pencil-marked paper ballots, which are rapidly
machine read and stored for recounts, etc. Inexpensive,
with just the right amount of appropriate technology.

Thanks,
- Win

(email: use hill_at_rowland-dot-org for now)

 

[Daniel Haude]

On 10 May 2004 14:17:46 -0700,
Winfield Hill <Winfield_member@newsguy.com> wrote
in Msg. <c7orhq017hj@drn.newsguy.com>

In fact we've been using "electronic" ballots with a full
paper-trail for many years now... These are very sensible
individual pencil-marked paper ballots, which are rapidly
machine read and stored for recounts, etc. Inexpensive,
with just the right amount of appropriate technology.

Yes, I could never understand the people advocating such a braindead idea
as paperless voting or "voting machines". What's simpler than a piece of
paper and a pencil? I also don't trust the punch-card system employed in
some parts of the US, but I must also admit that I don't know how it
works.

Here in Germany, votes are just counted by hand. Three hours after the end
of the election the result is known. Simple.

--Daniel

--
"With me is nothing wrong! And with you?" (from r.a.m.p)

 

[Winfield Hill]

Daniel Haude wrote...

Winfield Hill wrote

In fact we've been using "electronic" ballots with a full
paper-trail for many years now... These are very sensible
individual pencil-marked paper ballots, which are rapidly
machine read and stored for recounts, etc. Inexpensive,
with just the right amount of appropriate technology.

Yes, I could never understand the people advocating such a braindead idea
as paperless voting or "voting machines". What's simpler than a piece of
paper and a pencil? I also don't trust the punch-card system employed in
some parts of the US, but I must also admit that I don't know how it
works.

Here in Germany, votes are just counted by hand. Three hours after the end
of the election the result is known. Simple.

Perhaps too simple. If the election is complex, with many ballot
issues, only the most significant items can be quickly counted,
the rest take more time. Electronic scanning gets all the counts.

Thanks,
- Win

(email: use hill_at_rowland-dot-org for now)

 

[Richard Henry]

"Winfield Hill" <Winfield_member@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:c7qb3o02mcb@drn.newsguy.com...

Daniel Haude wrote...

Winfield Hill wrote

In fact we've been using "electronic" ballots with a full
paper-trail for many years now... These are very sensible
individual pencil-marked paper ballots, which are rapidly
machine read and stored for recounts, etc. Inexpensive,
with just the right amount of appropriate technology.

Yes, I could never understand the people advocating such a braindead
idea
as paperless voting or "voting machines". What's simpler than a piece of
paper and a pencil? I also don't trust the punch-card system employed in
some parts of the US, but I must also admit that I don't know how it
works.

Here in Germany, votes are just counted by hand. Three hours after the
end
of the election the result is known. Simple.

Perhaps too simple. If the election is complex, with many ballot
issues, only the most significant items can be quickly counted,
the rest take more time. Electronic scanning gets all the counts.

I grew up in Vermont. Every March, at town meeting, every citizen who
wished to attend could vote. Some votes were by counting raised hands among
the assembled, but all elections to office and some ballot questions were
done on paper. Each office and question had its own sheet, all on different
colored paper.

 

[Mark Fergerson]

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Mon, 10 May 2004 12:11:14 -0700, Mark Fergerson <nunya@biz.ness
wrote:

[snip]

You actually fell for that "hanging chad" bullshit? Did
you go for the "three independent recounts by TV networks
proved Bush won" bullshit too? Are you eagerly awaiting the
"new and improved" paperless touchscreen voting systems
Diebold is foisting on so many voting districts?

Come on Rich, you have to know better.

Dig out "Don't Get Fooled Again" and listen closely.

"here comes the new boss, same as the old boss"

Mark L. Fergerson


Gee, Mark, Can I rank up there with those folks who think Janet "The
Bully" Napolitano is a good governor?

Going by the (small) number of things she's actually done
while in office, go right ahead. Could have been much worse;
she might have actually understood what "market forces" means.

OTOH there's Sheriff Joe...

[I think "paperless" is NOT going to fly ANYWHERE... lots of
opposition mounting against such a crazy-assed scheme.]

Concur.

Mark L. Fergerson

 

[Rolavine]

Subject: Re: Bush and our Future
From: Mark Fergerson nunya@biz.ness
Date: 5/11/2004 9:02 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <kH7oc.17678$k24.9512@fed1read01

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Mon, 10 May 2004 12:11:14 -0700, Mark Fergerson <nunya@biz.ness
wrote:

[snip]

You actually fell for that "hanging chad" bullshit? Did
you go for the "three independent recounts by TV networks
proved Bush won" bullshit too? Are you eagerly awaiting the
"new and improved" paperless touchscreen voting systems
Diebold is foisting on so many voting districts?

Come on Rich, you have to know better.

Dig out "Don't Get Fooled Again" and listen closely.

"here comes the new boss, same as the old boss"

Mark L. Fergerson


Gee, Mark, Can I rank up there with those folks who think Janet "The
Bully" Napolitano is a good governor?

Going by the (small) number of things she's actually done
while in office, go right ahead. Could have been much worse;
she might have actually understood what "market forces" means.

OTOH there's Sheriff Joe...

[I think "paperless" is NOT going to fly ANYWHERE... lots of
opposition mounting against such a crazy-assed scheme.]

Concur.

Mark L. Fergerson

Nader got something like 91,500 votes in FL. I like that fun fact.

Rocky

 

[Mark Fergerson]

Rolavine wrote:

Subject: Re: Bush and our Future
From: Mark Fergerson nunya@biz.ness
Date: 5/11/2004 9:02 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <kH7oc.17678$k24.9512@fed1read01

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Mon, 10 May 2004 12:11:14 -0700, Mark Fergerson <nunya@biz.ness
wrote:

[snip]


You actually fell for that "hanging chad" bullshit? Did
you go for the "three independent recounts by TV networks
proved Bush won" bullshit too? Are you eagerly awaiting the
"new and improved" paperless touchscreen voting systems
Diebold is foisting on so many voting districts?

Come on Rich, you have to know better.

Dig out "Don't Get Fooled Again" and listen closely.

"here comes the new boss, same as the old boss"

Gee, Mark, Can I rank up there with those folks who think Janet "The
Bully" Napolitano is a good governor?

Going by the (small) number of things she's actually done
while in office, go right ahead. Could have been much worse;
she might have actually understood what "market forces" means.

BTW, I applaud Napolitano noting that the bozos in D.C.
are so disconnected from anything outside the Beltway that
they grounded our fleet of air tankers (that we use to fight
forest fires) now, instead of when one crashed _last year_
so that they could be made ready for this year's fire season.

OTOH there's Sheriff Joe...

[I think "paperless" is NOT going to fly ANYWHERE... lots of
opposition mounting against such a crazy-assed scheme.]

Concur.

Nader got something like 91,500 votes in FL. I like that fun fact.

If Nader had more than one talking point, he'd have wider
appeal. He just doesn't get the essentials of politics (not
that I mind; he'd make a scary president).

Mark L. Fergerson

 

[Rolavine]

Subject: Re: Bush and our Future
From: Mark Fergerson

Nader got something like 91,500 votes in FL. I like that fun fact.

If Nader had more than one talking point, he'd have wider
appeal. He just doesn't get the essentials of politics (not
that I mind; he'd make a scary president).

Nader is the voice I hear questioning the increases in gas and oil, and
claiming that these are just part of a ripoff of the public. After looking at
his numbers I'm convinced that this current increase is just another way for
the rich to get richer. Our government no longer is interested in protecting
the public from the corporations. We have seen this with lack of environmental
controls, lack of a national usury law, lack of regulation of energy (the
birth of Enron), and with so many corporate scams directed at the public it
makes your head spin. Heck, who decided that a credit card company can send me
12 pages of fine print every 3 months changing the terms of our 'contract'?

We are a nation of consumers and having someone not in the pocket of corporate
America. that has a voice to the public, is a good thing.

Nader knows he is not going to be president, yet the issues he represents are
important ones. The Dems and Repubs can't address these issues because they
can't offend anyone.

I think the strangest law we have is the one that allows candidates to keep any
campaign contributions that they don't spend on the election. I think this law
makes mattesr quite clear. We are not a republic or a democracy we are more a
Whoreocracy! Nader points this out!

Rocky

 

[Mark Fergerson]

Rolavine wrote:

Subject: Re: Bush and our Future
From: Mark Fergerson


Nader got something like 91,500 votes in FL. I like that fun fact.

If Nader had more than one talking point, he'd have wider
appeal. He just doesn't get the essentials of politics (not
that I mind; he'd make a scary president).


Nader is the voice I hear questioning the increases in gas and oil, and
claiming that these are just part of a ripoff of the public.

Has he railed about the increase in per-barrel prices for crude? Has he
offered to "tell the Arabs" to drop their prices like Kerry did?

Has he railed about the reduction of U.S. refining capacity? Has he suggested
the construction of more refineries?

After looking at
his numbers I'm convinced that this current increase is just another way for
the rich to get richer. Our government no longer is interested in protecting
the public from the corporations.

You know no history. It _never_ was interested in "protecting" the public
from anything; you're supposed to be smart enough to do it yourself.

We have seen this with lack of environmental
controls,

Like the ones that have produced the bewildering patchwork of "fuel mixtures"
(containing such wonderful stuff as MTBE) approved for use in various regions of
the country? That have prevented the construction of more refineries, more
nuclear power plants, oil drilling in Alaska, thinning of forests to prevent
forest fires? Need I go on?

lack of a national usury law

That's why it's called a "free market".

lack of regulation of energy (the
birth of Enron),

See above.

and with so many corporate scams directed at the public it
makes your head spin. Heck, who decided that a credit card company can send me
12 pages of fine print every 3 months changing the terms of our 'contract'?

If you're stupid enough to sign the original contract in the first place
without reading the clauses that allow them to change rates at whim, too bad.

We are a nation of consumers and having someone not in the pocket of corporate
America. that has a voice to the public, is a good thing.

_Every_ politician is in somebody's pocket, somebody who expects to make a
profit (not necessarily monetary) from their candidate's post-election actions.
Whose pocket is Nader in? Think about it.

Nader knows he is not going to be president, yet the issues he represents are
important ones. The Dems and Repubs can't address these issues because they
can't offend anyone.

Except each other, right?

I think the strangest law we have is the one that allows candidates to keep any
campaign contributions that they don't spend on the election. I think this law
makes mattesr quite clear. We are not a republic or a democracy we are more a
Whoreocracy! Nader points this out!

I hope you learn to think past the surfaces of things sometime soon.

Mark L. Fergerson

 

[Rolavine]

Subject: Re: Bush and our Future
From: Mark Fergerson nunya@biz.ness
Date: 5/14/2004 7:09 AM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id: <Hq4pc.1515$Yg.1033@fed1read05

Rolavine wrote:

Subject: Re: Bush and our Future
From: Mark Fergerson


Nader got something like 91,500 votes in FL. I like that fun fact.

If Nader had more than one talking point, he'd have wider
appeal. He just doesn't get the essentials of politics (not
that I mind; he'd make a scary president).


Nader is the voice I hear questioning the increases in gas and oil, and
claiming that these are just part of a ripoff of the public.

Has he railed about the increase in per-barrel prices for crude? Has he
offered to "tell the Arabs" to drop their prices like Kerry did?

Has he railed about the reduction of U.S. refining capacity? Has he
suggested
the construction of more refineries?

After looking at
his numbers I'm convinced that this current increase is just another way
for
the rich to get richer. Our government no longer is interested in
protecting
the public from the corporations.

You know no history. It _never_ was interested in "protecting" the public
from anything; you're supposed to be smart enough to do it yourself.

We have seen this with lack of environmental
controls,

Like the ones that have produced the bewildering patchwork of "fuel
mixtures"
(containing such wonderful stuff as MTBE) approved for use in various regions
of
the country? That have prevented the construction of more refineries, more
nuclear power plants, oil drilling in Alaska, thinning of forests to prevent
forest fires? Need I go on?

lack of a national usury law

That's why it's called a "free market".

lack of regulation of energy (the
birth of Enron),

See above.

and with so many corporate scams directed at the public it
makes your head spin. Heck, who decided that a credit card company can send
me
12 pages of fine print every 3 months changing the terms of our 'contract'?


If you're stupid enough to sign the original contract in the first place
without reading the clauses that allow them to change rates at whim, too bad.

We are a nation of consumers and having someone not in the pocket of
corporate
America. that has a voice to the public, is a good thing.

_Every_ politician is in somebody's pocket, somebody who expects to make a

profit (not necessarily monetary) from their candidate's post-election
actions.
Whose pocket is Nader in? Think about it.

Nader knows he is not going to be president, yet the issues he represents
are
important ones. The Dems and Repubs can't address these issues because they
can't offend anyone.

Except each other, right?

I think the strangest law we have is the one that allows candidates to keep
any
campaign contributions that they don't spend on the election. I think this
law
makes mattesr quite clear. We are not a republic or a democracy we are more
a
Whoreocracy! Nader points this out!

I hope you learn to think past the surfaces of things sometime soon.

Mark L. Fergerson

Wow, Mark your smug superiority must be a real comfort in your safe environment
of self adoration.

OPEC has yet to cut production!
Mentioning the per barrel prices is just silly, a dog would look there first,
sheesh!
Heck, it was Bush claiming to jawbone OPEC that failed, now your blaming Kerry,
sheesh!

Government has protected citizens. Some states have usury laws. The FDA works
to make sure drugs and food are safe. Liquor is controlled as is gambling, and
companies that do illegal things are sometime prosecuted by the state. So what
basis have you for saying govt. has never protected the citizens?

Thinning forests to prevent fires is Bush's idea but it is in dispute amongst
forestry experts, it seems the slash from the cutting is great fuel.
Nuke plants have never been cost effective that is why they died out. The cost
and responsibility of storing the waste for thousands of years is not an easy
choice either.
Drilling in Alaska has been shown to add very little.

I like your free market comment for interest too, I guess the free market is
what allows member banks of the fed get money for less than free at 1%? Some
free market, sign me up! While your at it sign me up to pay the federal tax
rate of Haliburton, it is something like.075% of gross sales. Yes, lots of
freedom there too, Mark.

Your right on about the political parties offending each other, but offending
people that won't vote for you anyway is good for your supporters. I knew that
when I wrote it but thought that anyone would get it without me stating the
obvious.

And what is the matter with my comment about us being a whoreocracy? I think it
cuts through a lot of the bullshit given that moronic law. What kind of country
allows open bribery while claiming some great moral link to democracy? Not only
that but for some reason I can't find the word lobby in the constitution,
anywhere!

Please Mark, stop looking at the world as being fools and find yourself a good
mirror!
We both have opinions, I state mine but you bless yours.

Rocky

 

[Guy Macon]

Mark Fergerson <nunya@biz.ness> says...

Rolavine wrote:


and with so many corporate scams directed at the public it
makes your head spin. Heck, who decided that a credit card company can send me
12 pages of fine print every 3 months changing the terms of our 'contract'?

If you're stupid enough to sign the original contract in the first place
without reading the clauses that allow them to change rates at whim, too bad.

Do you have any recomendations for cedit cards that don't have such clauses?

 

[KR Williams]

In article <4d5oc.26957$fE.9763@fed1read02>, rphenry@home.com
says...

"Winfield Hill" <Winfield_member@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:c7qb3o02mcb@drn.newsguy.com...
Daniel Haude wrote...

Winfield Hill wrote

In fact we've been using "electronic" ballots with a full
paper-trail for many years now... These are very sensible
individual pencil-marked paper ballots, which are rapidly
machine read and stored for recounts, etc. Inexpensive,
with just the right amount of appropriate technology.

Yes, I could never understand the people advocating such a braindead
idea
as paperless voting or "voting machines". What's simpler than a piece of
paper and a pencil? I also don't trust the punch-card system employed in
some parts of the US, but I must also admit that I don't know how it
works.

Here in Germany, votes are just counted by hand. Three hours after the
end
of the election the result is known. Simple.

Perhaps too simple. If the election is complex, with many ballot
issues, only the most significant items can be quickly counted,
the rest take more time. Electronic scanning gets all the counts.

I grew up in Vermont. Every March, at town meeting, every citizen who
wished to attend could vote. Some votes were by counting raised hands among
the assembled, but all elections to office and some ballot questions were
done on paper. Each office and question had its own sheet, all on different
colored paper.

Not so much anymore. Several cities have gotten away from the
"town meeting" style government and more (particularly school
districts) are going to the "Australian ballot". Town meetings
don't work when the population gets above a small number.

The ballots are 8 1/2 x 11 sheets with both sides used.
Sometimes there are enough issues/elections on the ballots to
require two sheets ("pick 15 of the following" tends to use space
;-) . These are then scanned into the ballot box and rejected
on-the-spot if the ballot is incorrectly filled in. The voter
can then correct the ballot before trying again. When I moved
here 10 years ago I was suitably impressed by the electronic
counting with a strong paper trail. It's a good mix of
technology and accountability.

--
Keith