| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
|
the OSCARS!
On Mar 2, 10:17 am, "rb608" wrote:
Within that zone, Gore's total usage is three (not 20) times the average, and his usage per square foot is average. That's *average*; not 20x average, not 100x average; but average. Usage per square foot? I'll certainly concede that he's got above average consumption (being an ex-VP), but trying to claim he's average because he lives in a huge house is disingenuous. On a per sq foot basis, I bet he's much more efficient than a trailer home. On an energy consumption per person basis he's off the charts no matter how you count it. The 100x guess was comparing it to the average world citizen. And I'm sure plenty of them live in hot humid places....possibly even worse than Tennessee. ;-) Lastly, I expect you would concede the point that the Gores are not an "average" family. Absolutely. - Ken |
the OSCARS!
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 18:17:14 GMT, "rb608"
wrote: " wrote in message However when you're living in a mansion, consuming 10x the energy that the average American uses (100x(?) what the average person uses) you gotta expect some grief. Again with the parroting of the smear machine talking points? I was avoiding this sort of detail, but that comparison to the "average American" is so bogus, I gotta put a few talking points of my own out there. The "average" home electricity use quoted by TCPR is a national average that includes apartments and mobile homes. In Gore's climatic zone (per the Dept. of Energy), the average energy usage is much higher, thanks to hot, humid summers and cold winters. Within that zone, Gore's total usage is three (not 20) times the average, and his usage per square foot is average. That's *average*; not 20x average, not 100x average; but average. Lastly, I expect you would concede the point that the Gores are not an "average" family. He's an ex-VP with special security arrangements, and has live-in security staff. He and his wife both work on their business and charitable undertakings out of their house, so they have space for offices and office staff. This clearly precludes an "average" size house. So, what validity is there in comparing Gore's energy bill to that of an average American household? The answer: none. It's utter bull****; and it was only done and only repeated by people who don't give a **** about portraying the facts in manner that actually reflects the truth. I think I used the term "lying sack of ****". It's contemptible, IMHO. Joe F. p.s. By way of disclosure, a good deal of the above was copied, paraphrased, or otherwise plageirized from genuine, honest-to-god talking points at http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/2/28/155124/075. Uh, yeah... A coupla-few ACTUAL points you might wish to consider: The enormous (in-resident) Gore family, all two of them, have three homes totaling about 20,000SF, and the 30KUSD bills were just for the one in Nashville. But they aren't in Nashville all that often (less than 50% of the year, and his primary businesses aren't based in Nashville, at his home or otherwise). As to "security staff," unless it's changed very recently, he doesn't/didn't have a "security staff" or "security arrangements" that would create such a energy usage at his sometime-home. He has/had security systems and the cops, just like ordinary ol' people, with security personnel around on an as-needed basis. Ex-VPs aren't US Secret Service protectees (as ex-VPs). And he didn't start buying "green energy" or whatever you want to call it until he got called on this same thing last year. Except then, he wasn't in the news much, so very few really paid attention or gave a **** where he bought his power or how much he used. TC, R |
the OSCARS!
On Mar 2, 10:17 am, "rb608" wrote:
It's utter bull****; and it was only done and only repeated by people who don't give a **** about portraying the facts in manner that actually reflects the truth. I think I used the term "lying sack of ****". It's contemptible, IMHO. Just to feed the flames, some more right-wing news reporting for you... http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/analysis...ula/index.html - Ken |
the OSCARS!
|
the OSCARS!
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 18:17:14 GMT, "rb608"
wrote: " wrote in message However when you're living in a mansion, consuming 10x the energy that the average American uses (100x(?) what the average person uses) you gotta expect some grief. Again with the parroting of the smear machine talking points? I was avoiding this sort of detail, but that comparison to the "average American" is so bogus, I gotta put a few talking points of my own out there. The "average" home electricity use quoted by TCPR is a national average that includes apartments and mobile homes. In Gore's climatic zone (per the Dept. of Energy), the average energy usage is much higher, thanks to hot, humid summers and cold winters. Within that zone, Gore's total usage is three (not 20) times the average, and his usage per square foot is average. That's *average*; not 20x average, not 100x average; but average. Lastly, I expect you would concede the point that the Gores are not an "average" family. He's an ex-VP with special security arrangements, and has live-in security staff. He and his wife both work on their business and charitable undertakings out of their house, so they have space for offices and office staff. This clearly precludes an "average" size house. So, what validity is there in comparing Gore's energy bill to that of an average American household? The answer: none. It's utter bull****; and it was only done and only repeated by people who don't give a **** about portraying the facts in manner that actually reflects the truth. I think I used the term "lying sack of ****". It's contemptible, IMHO. Joe F. p.s. By way of disclosure, a good deal of the above was copied, paraphrased, or otherwise plageirized from genuine, honest-to-god talking points at http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/2/28/155124/075. I think this sums up the whole affair very nicely ;-) http://tinyurl.com/2xrd4q /daytripper (ahahahahahaha!) |
the OSCARS!
On 1 Mar 2007 16:59:36 -0800, "
wrote: On Mar 1, 2:05 pm, "Opus" wrote: " wrote in message FWIW, I have no real feelings pro/con about Gore...the hypocrisy is funny nonetheless. - Ken You're bordering on obsession, what with two exact posts :~^ ) You do it again, and folks may et the impression that you are trying to start a movement! I made fun of him for inventing the internet back in the 90's, so I guess it might be 3 posts now.....wait does this post count too? DAMN! - Ken Only if you retain that stupid attitude about Gore and the 'Net, which has been disproven so many times. You know that all he claimed was aiding in the legislation and funding for it, not inventing it, as it had already been invented. He never claimed to do more than smooth the way forward. -- r.bc: vixen Minnow goddess, Speaker to squirrels, willow watcher. Almost entirely harmless. Really. http://www.visi.com/~cyli |
the OSCARS!
On Thu, 1 Mar 2007 10:28:49 -0600, "Wolfgang"
wrote: " wrote in message ups.com... Thanks to that pesky Freedom of Information Act, we discover that, last August alone, Gore used 22,619 kWh - more than an average American family uses in a year. Accepting his Oscar last week, Gore said: "It's not as hard as you might think. We have a long way to go but all of us can do something in our own lives to make a difference." Gore is reportedly installing solar panels on the roof of his mansion. How much bloody electricity can one man use, for God's sake? He may have invented the Internet, but it now looks as if he's running the whole thing from his house." Well, wouldn't ya just know it. Global warming was a colossal hoax for decades......and then Al Gore single-handedly causes it to become real in less than two months. Talk about yer irony! Moron. Wolfgang Oh, I've been willing to believe in it for a few years (always keeping in mind that I believed the previously popular theory that we were going to enter an new ice age any century soon), but I don't grant all, or even most, of the cause of it to humans. I'll certainly admit that we exacerbate it, but am not sure by how much and in exactly what ways. I've become too accustomed to the whines and screams of the ego filled humans who want to blame the rest of us for every harm to the environment and who claim that humans will eventually (usually in their life time, if they're young) destroy EVERYTHING, presumably leaving the earth a barren wasteland of rock in vacuum. To them, it's all about humans. The earth has been going through hot flashes and chills for the cycle of its existence. While we are adding to the heat this cycle and should stop doing that, it's not a brand new thing, entirely due to human evil. -- r.bc: vixen Minnow goddess, Speaker to squirrels, willow watcher. Almost entirely harmless. Really. http://www.visi.com/~cyli |
the OSCARS!
On Mar 3, 9:03 pm, Cyli wrote:
Only if you retain that stupid attitude about Gore and the 'Net, which has been disproven so many times. You know that all he claimed was aiding in the legislation and funding for it, not inventing it, as it had already been invented. He never claimed to do more than smooth the way forward. I can only assume by "disproven", you mean that someone told you that he didn't say it? You really shouldn't take people's word for things if you are going to call others stupid. Fortunately transcripts of all the dumb things people say on CNN get kept forever and ever. Lest you accuse me of quoting him out of context, here's the entire transcript: http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stori...anscript.gore/ And the relevant statements: BLITZER: Why should Democrats, looking at the Democratic nomination process, support you instead of Bill Bradley, a friend of yours, a former colleague in the Senate? What do you have to bring to this that he doesn't necessarily bring to this process? GO Well, I will be offering -- I'll be offering my vision when my campaign begins. And it will be comprehensive and sweeping. And I hope that it will be compelling enough to draw people toward it. I feel that it will be. But it will emerge from my dialogue with the American people. I've traveled to every part of this country during the last six years. During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system. Best Wishes, - Ken |
the OSCARS!
" wrote in message
"During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. Yep, it was those words that stirred up the right-wing **** storm. Those words, however, are generally accepted by those in the industry and relevent political arena as being essentially valid. Most promienently, by Vinton Cerf and Robert Kahn, who personally bebunked the "I invented the Internet" baloney. Their statement, in part, reads, "No one person or even small group of persons exclusively "invented" the Internet. It is the result of many years of ongoing collaboration among people in government and the university community. But as the two people who designed the basic architecture and the core protocols that make the Internet work, we would like to acknowledge VP Gore's contributions as a Congressman, Senator and as Vice President. No other elected official, to our knowledge, has made a greater contribution over a longer period of time." "Last year the Vice President made a straightforward statement on his role. He said: "During my service in the United States Congress I took the initiative in creating the Internet." We don't think, as some people have argued, that Gore intended to claim he "invented" the Internet. Moreover, there is no question in our minds that while serving as Senator, Gore's initiatives had a significant and beneficial effect on the still-evolving Internet. The fact of the matter is that Gore was talking about and promoting the Internet long before most people were listening." Their entire statement can be viewed at http://tinyurl.com/28h23. Of course, you are free to discount the opinions of Cerf & Kahn. I mean, what the hell do they know, eh? Then there's that persky Lifetime Achievement Award from the International Academy of Digital Artsa and Sciences given for his "three deacdes of contributions to the internet." But screw all that, let's accept the ridicule of a misquoted T-shirt slogan as the actual facts, that'll be a lot simpler. Joe F. |
the OSCARS!
rb608 typed: " wrote in message "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. Yep, it was those words that stirred up the right-wing **** storm. That seems to be what it's all about for both sides on the extremes. There is no thought given as to the intent of the message, but just the exact words - and parsing them endlessly. Not that this would ever happen on ROFF. ;-) -- TL, Tim --------------------------- http://css.sbcma.com/timj/ |
the OSCARS!
"Tim J." wrote in message
That seems to be what it's all about for both sides on the extremes. There is no thought given as to the intent of the message, but just the exact words - and parsing them endlessly. Not that this would ever happen on ROFF. ;-) No, never on ROFF. g But yeah, I agree with that as an assessment of the spin machines of both the right & left. Sometimes, one unguarded slip of the tongue is a view into hidden, personal, and ugly attitudes (e.g. Allen's "macaca" gaffe); and sometimes its just a benign and poorly worded off-the-cuff statement of an actual truth. In the present discussion, the facts are clear (IMHO) that Gore's statement was both reasonable and misquoted. Anybody with a search engine could easily verify that; but we search for and find what we want to see, not for facts that disagree with staunchly held opinions. And though I'm citing the present discussion, I do not excuse myself or anybody else from that accusation. Joe F. |
the OSCARS!
" wrote in message
I can only assume by "disproven", you mean that someone told you that he didn't say it? Yes. Most recently - you. Joe |
the OSCARS!
rb608 wrote:
" wrote in message "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. Yep, it was those words that stirred up the right-wing **** storm. Those words, however, are generally accepted by those in the industry and relevent political arena as being essentially valid. Wrong. Only a couple of his closest cronies have accepted it. Their slanted remarks follow: Most promienently, by Vinton Cerf and Robert Kahn, who personally bebunked the "I invented the Internet" baloney. Their statement, in part, reads, "No one person or even small group of persons exclusively "invented" the Internet. It is the result of many years of ongoing collaboration among people in government and the university community. But as the two people who designed the basic architecture and the core protocols that make the Internet work, we would like to acknowledge VP Gore's contributions as a Congressman, Senator and as Vice President. No other elected official, to our knowledge, has made a greater contribution over a longer period of time." "Last year the Vice President made a straightforward statement on his role. He said: "During my service in the United States Congress I took the initiative in creating the Internet." We don't think, as some people have argued, that Gore intended to claim he "invented" the Internet. Moreover, there is no question in our minds that while serving as Senator, Gore's initiatives had a significant and beneficial effect on the still-evolving Internet. The fact of the matter is that Gore was talking about and promoting the Internet long before most people were listening." Yeah, they attenpted to spin the statement. But Gore still thinks that he was responsible for creating something that not only existed, but was running on a fast track regardless of ANYTHING he did. Their entire statement can be viewed at http://tinyurl.com/28h23. Of course, you are free to discount the opinions of Cerf & Kahn. I mean, what the hell do they know, eh? Then there's that persky Lifetime Achievement Award from the International Academy of Digital Artsa and Sciences given for his "three deacdes of contributions to the internet." His award was to bring attention to the organization. But screw all that, let's accept the ridicule of a misquoted T-shirt slogan as the actual facts, that'll be a lot simpler. Joe F. No misquotes about it. Just spin. |
the OSCARS!
On Mar 4, 6:01 am, "rb608" wrote:
" wrote in message "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. Yep, it was those words that stirred up the right-wing **** storm. There you go with that partisan crap again. Those words, however, are generally accepted by those in the industry and relevent political arena as being essentially valid. I won't speak for any "political arena"....I'm sure making inflated claims about what you have done is perfectly acceptable in political circles. As far as "in the industry" that's complete hogwash. Cerf and Kahn would have caught crap by industry people if they had claimed to have created the internet.....and they contributed far more than Al Gore ever did. Most defense of Gore tries to rely on word spinning. That somehow "creating the internet" is better than "inventing the internet." I'll stick to the actual word he used if that makes you feel better. (I'll admit my bias, as a hardware person, creating ~= inventing) I design microprocessors for a living. If I went around saying that I created microprocessor xyz, even though I might have had a huge part in it's design, I would rightfully catch crap from the several thousand other people who created that microprocessor. If it was created before I even got there someone might even say that I was full of it. "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet." Yes, I'm a technical person and maybe politicians or other simpletons can't see through unadulterated BS, but that statement no matter how you try to justify it is BS...... .....and it's got nothing to do with right vs left vs middle. - Ken |
the OSCARS!
"Cal Vanize" wrote in message
bunch o' delusional stuff snipped No misquotes about it. Just spin. I ordinarily eschew responses to the cowardly anonymous, but I appreciate your providing a strong data point to both Tim's & my hypotheses. :-) Joe F. |
the OSCARS!
rb608 wrote: In the present discussion, the facts are clear (IMHO) that Gore's statement was both reasonable and misquoted. Huh? Gore's statement was grandiose self-serving BS. He no more created the internet than you did. By misquoted I can only guess you are trying to slip out by my use of the word "invented". If it somehow makes you feel better.... "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. " HA HA HA HA, Al Gore claimed that he created the internet. What a maroon. - Ken |
the OSCARS!
" wrote in message
There you go with that partisan crap again. :-) I won't speak for any "political arena"....I'm sure making inflated claims about what you have done is perfectly acceptable in political circles. That may be the basis of our disagreement on this issue. I believe the record shows convincingly that during Gore's service in Congress, he was instumental in instituting government policy and providing funding for the agencies and organizations that provided impetus, funding, and opportunity for the acceleration of the internet's creation/evolution into its present form. I believe that in the context of a television interview during a presidential campaign, practical machinations of the government, and the necessity of brevity, that long winded sentence could reasonably and truthfully be summarized into what Gore actually said in the CNN interview. You, on the other hand, seem to believe otherwise. As far as "in the industry" that's complete hogwash. Cerf and Kahn would have caught crap by industry people if they had claimed to have created the internet.....and they contributed far more than Al Gore ever did. Really? In their statement, they do seem to take a lot of credit, "But as the two people who designed the basic architecture and the core protocols that make the Internet work," Of course, in the context of a multi-paragraph statement prepared at leisure, they did have the ability to be a tad more precise and verbose. Most defense of Gore tries to rely on word spinning. That somehow "creating the internet" is better than "inventing the internet." I'll stick to the actual word he used if that makes you feel better. I'd be more satisfied if you stick to the context, wherein he refers to what he did in Congress. Hell, the "High Performance Computing and Communication Act of 1991" was commonly referred to as the Gore Bill. This bill led to the creation of the "National Intelligence Infrastructure", for which Gore may have created the term Information Superhighway. No, Gore was no programmer, but the internet owes its existence to more than the techies like Cerf, Kahn, & you. And for that, I give Gore most of the credit on the government side, as he claimed. "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet." The concept that Gore singlehandedly created the internet is so ludicrous, I don't understand how anyone could sensibly interpret the meaning of his statement to infer he meant that. Yes, I'm a technical person and maybe politicians or other simpletons can't see through unadulterated BS, but that statement no matter how you try to justify it is BS...... It's because the "invented the internet" interpretation *is* so ridiculous, I can't understand why any intelligent person, both of us included, would interpret it as you seem intent on doing. ....and it's got nothing to do with right vs left vs middle. The facts and record have nothing to do with left/right; but the inability ta accept the reasonable interpretation seems to be. Joe F. |
the OSCARS!
" wrote in message
By misquoted I can only guess you are trying to slip out by my use of the word "invented". If it were only you, I'd have less of a knee-jerk reaction; but like the energy bill issue; the intentionally misquoted "invented the internet" meme was deliberately spread far and wide by right-leaning news sources and talking heads to the point that it's still being repeated, what, six years later? You'd think (well, not really) that some semblance of integrity would have surfaced in that time. But no, it's too good a lie; and far more easily spread than the facts. Joe F. |
the OSCARS!
On Mar 3, 11:18 pm, Cyli wrote:
Oh, I've been willing to believe in it for a few years I don't recall seeing anything to the contrary. My remarks were directed to those who flatly denied that global warming is real. All the more interesting that we have already seen in this thread that nobody ever said any such thing......and that we will see ever more such denials in the coming months and years......ainna? :) (always keeping in mind that I believed the previously popular theory that we were going to enter an new ice age any century soon), Theories about the consequences of global climate change abound. Ever more new ones will continue to surface from time to time. For now, it is much too early to rule out a new ice age as a possible outcome. One of the least understood aspects of science in general is that popularity has little bearing on the validity of theories. but I don't grant all, or even most, of the cause of it to humans. Unfortunately, the concessions of even the most reasonable and thoughtful of human beings has exactly the same effect on theoretical precision as does balloting. I'll certainly admit that we exacerbate it, but am not sure by how much and in exactly what ways. Anybody who IS sure has his or her head up somebody's ass......and it really doesn't matter whose, does it? I've become too accustomed to the whines and screams of the ego filled humans who want to blame the rest of us for every harm to the environment and who claim that humans will eventually (usually in their life time, if they're young) destroy EVERYTHING, presumably leaving the earth a barren wasteland of rock in vacuum. To them, it's all about humans. And yet, the possibility that concerns about environmental damage and putative human contributions thereto could be motivated by something other than self-absorbed youthful ego is worthy of at least a skeptical nod, wouldn't you say? The earth has been going through hot flashes and chills for the cycle of its existence. An observation with which even the most rabid anti-global warming nut cases do not disagree. In fact, it is (however pitiful) the most powerful weapon in their arsenal. While we are adding to the heat this cycle and should stop doing that, it's not a brand new thing, entirely due to human evil. Once again, an observation with which no one I've encountered (face to face or in print) has ever disagreed. What's more, from the standpoint of the implicit geological standpoint, in 40 million years or so, who's going to care.......right? I certainly won't. ****, I don't have any offspring.....40 years from now it's somebody else's problem.....not mine. Wolfgang but, those next 40 years........ |
the OSCARS!
rb608 typed:
" wrote in message By misquoted I can only guess you are trying to slip out by my use of the word "invented". If it were only you, I'd have less of a knee-jerk reaction; but like the energy bill issue; the intentionally misquoted "invented the internet" meme was deliberately spread far and wide by right-leaning news sources and talking heads to the point that it's still being repeated, what, six years later? You'd think (well, not really) that some semblance of integrity would have surfaced in that time. But no, it's too good a lie; and far more easily spread than the facts. The fact is that he said he created the Internet. What I *think* he meant was that he helped legislate a clear path to assist in its growth as a tool for commerce. What I think or what you think he meant doesn't change the fact. .. . . and quit playing with Evil Ken. He's tweaking you pretty well. ;-) -- TL, Tim ------------------------- http://css.sbcma.com/timj |
the OSCARS!
On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 20:22:07 GMT, "rb608"
wrote: " wrote in message By misquoted I can only guess you are trying to slip out by my use of the word "invented". If it were only you, I'd have less of a knee-jerk reaction; but like the energy bill issue; the intentionally misquoted "invented the internet" meme was deliberately spread far and wide by right-leaning news sources and talking heads to the point that it's still being repeated, what, six years later? You'd think (well, not really) that some semblance of integrity would have surfaced in that time. But no, it's too good a lie; and far more easily spread than the facts. Joe F. The problem for Gore is that no one person did, or could have done, very much to "create" "the Internet." He used _extreme_ puffery as to what was then a "new" thing to the general public to try to make himself seem important. His attempt was to portray himself as essential to the "creation." I'd offer the reason such a statement has become what it has is because most people are at least generally familiar with "the Internet" and as such, they sense and realize that his attempt to greatly magnify his role in "creating the internet" is bull****. It isn't like it was Gates, Allen, or Ballmer stating he was essential to the creation of Microsoft or Jobs or Wozniak stating he was essential to the creation of Apple at a business meeting. Go back and read your own quote from Cerf and Kahn. I'd offer that _they_ weren't all that essential to the creation of "the Internet" (because as they seem to acknowledge at first, it took literally millions of people and many, many years). And Gore's claim, while seeking office, that he had done more than anyone else in Congress comes across much like a claim from Paul Bocuse (or even Escoffier) that he had done more than anyone to "create food." TC, R |
the OSCARS!
On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 20:37:23 -0500, daytripper
wrote: On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 18:17:14 GMT, "rb608" wrote: " wrote in message However when you're living in a mansion, consuming 10x the energy that the average American uses (100x(?) what the average person uses) you gotta expect some grief. Again with the parroting of the smear machine talking points? I was avoiding this sort of detail, but that comparison to the "average American" is so bogus, I gotta put a few talking points of my own out there. The "average" home electricity use quoted by TCPR is a national average that includes apartments and mobile homes. In Gore's climatic zone (per the Dept. of Energy), the average energy usage is much higher, thanks to hot, humid summers and cold winters. Within that zone, Gore's total usage is three (not 20) times the average, and his usage per square foot is average. That's *average*; not 20x average, not 100x average; but average. Lastly, I expect you would concede the point that the Gores are not an "average" family. He's an ex-VP with special security arrangements, and has live-in security staff. He and his wife both work on their business and charitable undertakings out of their house, so they have space for offices and office staff. This clearly precludes an "average" size house. So, what validity is there in comparing Gore's energy bill to that of an average American household? The answer: none. It's utter bull****; and it was only done and only repeated by people who don't give a **** about portraying the facts in manner that actually reflects the truth. I think I used the term "lying sack of ****". It's contemptible, IMHO. Joe F. p.s. By way of disclosure, a good deal of the above was copied, paraphrased, or otherwise plageirized from genuine, honest-to-god talking points at http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/2/28/155124/075. I think this sums up the whole affair very nicely ;-) http://tinyurl.com/2xrd4q /daytripper (ahahahahahaha!) Gore's energy usage isn't "new" news: http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion...re-green_x.htm (The first Google hit from 2006 - note the date) And it turns out he did finally buy a hybrid...that he's driven about four times...and he's been having that solar system installed for over 6 months - a 36-panel system (IOW, a very large residential system) with transfer switches and all can be installed in about 2-3 days...he must be using a government contractor... TC, R |
the OSCARS!
On Mar 5, 8:34 am, "Tim J." wrote:
. . . and quit playing with Evil Ken. He's tweaking you pretty well. ;-) It was a tough weekend. I had 22 tons of crushed stone delivered, and I spread it on my driveway by hand with shovel & wheelbarrow. Then there was my monthly trip to the landfill, and going to pickup a few insurance bales of hay for the animals. Cooking dinner for mother-in- law, and running three soccer games. Playing with Ken was the only fun I had this weekend. :-) Joe F. |
the OSCARS!
On Mar 5, 6:28 am, "rb608" wrote:
On Mar 5, 8:34 am, "Tim J." wrote: . . . and quit playing with Evil Ken. He's tweaking you pretty well. ;-) It was a tough weekend. I had 22 tons of crushed stone delivered, and I spread it on my driveway by hand with shovel & wheelbarrow. Then there was my monthly trip to the landfill, and going to pickup a few insurance bales of hay for the animals. Cooking dinner for mother-in- law, and running three soccer games. Playing with Ken was the only fun I had this weekend. :-) Joe F. Happy to be of service. I had a rough weekend as well. Took the rugrats rollerskating and swimming on Saturday, then mountain biking on Sunday. Did somebody say something about tweaking? ;-) - Ken |
the OSCARS!
On Mar 2, 2:07 pm, Ken Fortenberry
wrote: Just because an idea is right-wing doesn't mean it's necessarily a bad idea. Maybe, but this particular idea _is_ bad. nobody, least of all Al Gore, claims that purchasing carbon offsets to become carbon neutral is going to "solve" global warming. It's one small way to help in the overall effort, not a "solution". Trouble is, it doesn't help, and thus it hurts the overall effort by giving people a false self-righteousness: http://www.carbontradewatch.org/pubs...utral_myth.pdf "Carbon offsets are the modern day indulgences, sold to an increasingly carbon-conscious public to absolve their climate sins. Scratch the surface, however, and a disturbing picture emerges, where creative accountancy and elaborate shell games cover up the impossibility of verifying genuine climate-change benefits, and where communities in the South often have little choice as offset projects are inflicted on them." In the meantime, the status quo marches on: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17441481/ "By 2020, the United States will emit almost one-fifth more gases that lead to global warming than it did in 2000..." No worries, though, we can have our electricity (as much as you want, or can buy) and our cool planet, too! Just buy some trees in Kenya to soften that guilt pang! Jon. |
the OSCARS!
wrote in message ... ...no one person did, or could have done, very much to "create" "the Internet.".... No kidding? And you double-naughted this out all by yourself? Gosh, you are getting to be such a BIG boy! Won't mumsie be proud of her little dicklet! Meanwhile, the rest of us are left with the inescapable conclusion that you and kennie really DO believe that Al Gore said he invented the internet.....or that you remain willing to pretend to believe it. Obviously, no other choices are available. Trying to determine which of those two choices describes the truth is, it hardly needs mentioning, as pointless as it is unlikely to succeed. There doesn't appear to be any reason at all (let alone a good one) for anyone to try. However, this should not be construed as a justification for anyone to refrain from amusing him or her self by endeavoring to determine which makes you stupider. On the other hand, there is no denying that between you, you have contrived to accomplish what so many have tried so hard in so many places for so long to do, and to no avail; you have captured the holy grail of investigative journalism, that elusive prize that has escaped everyone else since the ancient Etruscans began to gossip in the marketplace.......you've found a career politician prone to making self-serving proclamations! Huzzah! Who'da thunk that it would happen so early in the history of this young nation when so many have died trying the world around for so long?! Remember, you didn't hear it here......but I'm pretty sure I smell Pulitzer. :) Oh sure, there will be meddlesome critics who will state that anything in the political realm put out by a pair of such notoriously non-partisan centrists as yourselves is automatically tainted by association, but this contention will be easy to refute by simply pointing out that your find was an entirely serendipitous one, stumbled over while on the road to obfuscating the point under consideration. Who would dare gainsay you? I mean, it's not as if anyone is really going to believe that there's a correspondence between your intent and your accomplishment.......right? Morons. Wolfgang |
the OSCARS!
" wrote in message oups.com... Did somebody say something about tweaking? ;-) Ah yes, the OSCARS!.......the great perennial spectacle. The best part of the show has always been the great clips from the great performances. Next up, Karl Childers' memorable portrayal of Billy Bob Thornton. Wolfgang who knows that kennie will never REALLY get an oscar for playing an idiot.......for the same reason that Peter Dinklage will never get one for playing a dwarf. |
the OSCARS!
On 3 Mar 2007 22:33:24 -0800, "
wrote: On Mar 3, 9:03 pm, Cyli wrote: Only if you retain that stupid attitude about Gore and the 'Net, which has been disproven so many times. You know that all he claimed was aiding in the legislation and funding for it, not inventing it, as it had already been invented. He never claimed to do more than smooth the way forward. I can only assume by "disproven", you mean that someone told you that he didn't say it? You really shouldn't take people's word for things if you are going to call others stupid. Fortunately transcripts of all the dumb things people say on CNN get kept forever and ever. Lest you accuse me of quoting him out of context, here's the entire transcript: http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stori...anscript.gore/ And the relevant statements: BLITZER: Why should Democrats, looking at the Democratic nomination process, support you instead of Bill Bradley, a friend of yours, a former colleague in the Senate? What do you have to bring to this that he doesn't necessarily bring to this process? GO Well, I will be offering -- I'll be offering my vision when my campaign begins. And it will be comprehensive and sweeping. And I hope that it will be compelling enough to draw people toward it. I feel that it will be. But it will emerge from my dialogue with the American people. I've traveled to every part of this country during the last six years. During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system. Best Wishes, - Ken Well, I do quibble over the 'invented', but 'created' does come close enough to label him as someone careless with taking credit for a work accomplished by a lot of people, when he should have shared the credit. However, the Internet as it was when he made that statement had been greatly changed from the days before he pushed for the legislation. If you had used it back in the 80s, you'd know that the difference was astounding. It was a difficult to use toy for techies back in the day, with not much to offer, say an ordinary housewife, other than a game of D & D with people of other countries and some sorts of official government blah blah, which you could get as easily and probably as quickly (except in the middle of the night) by calling and asking that the info be mailed to you or given you verbally. Not to say that I like Gore a lot. I didn't like or approve of him enough to vote for him (nor did I vote for Bush. Probably Libertarian party that year.), but I hate to see him put down for the careless use of phrasing that was then changed by those claiming to quote him and a greed that didn't make sure to share a lot of credit. I looked down the thread a ways and there's a lot of interesting stuff posted there. Time to run through it and see what's new. BTW, whose word did you take when you said 'invented'? -- r.bc: vixen Minnow goddess, Speaker to squirrels, willow watcher. Almost entirely harmless. Really. http://www.visi.com/~cyli |
the OSCARS!
On Mar 5, 11:22 pm, Cyli wrote:
On 3 Mar 2007 22:33:24 -0800, " wrote: During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. Well, I do quibble over the 'invented', but 'created' does come close enough to label him as someone careless with taking credit for a work accomplished by a lot of people, when he should have shared the credit. Like I said, I'm an engineer, I read invented and created as nearly the same. However, the Internet as it was when he made that statement had been greatly changed from the days before he pushed for the legislation. If you had used it back in the 80s, you'd know that the difference was astounding. I am "somwhat" familiar with computing from ~1980 onwards. :-) Not to say that I like Gore a lot. I didn't like or approve of him enough to vote for him (nor did I vote for Bush. Probably Libertarian party that year.), but I hate to see him put down for the careless use of phrasing that was then changed by those claiming to quote him and a greed that didn't make sure to share a lot of credit. I'm pretty much ambivalent on Gore as a politician. I probably voted for the same person you did in 2000. He is quite the blowhard. On this quote, it's probably a techie thing. To a technical person it's blatantly obvious that Gore did almost nothing to create the internet. It's not a matter of him not sharing the credit, it's that he's taking credit for something he had nothing to do with. It'd be like me taking credit for landing a man on the moon. Maybe a bit of a history lesson here. I'd suggest the Computer History museum's "Internet History" page: http://www.computerhistory.org/exhib...ernet_history/ For those who want to skip ahead, it ends with "1990 ARPANET formally shuts down. In twenty years, 'the net' has grown from 4 to over 300,000 hosts. " "By 1992, when this timeline ends, * the Internet has one million hosts * the ARPANET has ceased to exist " Gore's bill "creating the internet" was passed in December 1991. BTW, whose word did you take when you said 'invented'? I didn't take anyone's word for it. I heard about it, couldn't believe that even a politician would be that stupid, looked up the transcripts and read them myself. Confirmed that apparently he is that stupid. - Ken |
the OSCARS!
On Mar 6, 12:22 pm, " wrote:
To a technical person it's blatantly obvious that Gore did almost nothing to create the internet. It's not a matter of him not sharing the credit, it's that he's taking credit for something he had nothing to do with. As a technical person myself (that's right, I'm an engineer too); one thing blatantly obvious to me is that I'm wasting my time discussing this with someone who believes the above to be true. It's been fun; but EOT for me, Joe F. |
the OSCARS!
During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I remember sometime back in 1991 when Physicist Paul Kunz called me into his office and wanted me to take a picture of his what was on his monitor. He called it; "www" and told me this will be one of the major break-throughs for researching with a computer. I photographed a lot of screen photos here at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center. Paul also hinted to me that I should start thinking of attaching my name to a few www domains like ATT.com or IBM.com., sky was the limit back then, heck I thought he was just another mad physicist off his rocker. Here's a link to the article: http://www.slac.stanford.edu/history.../history.shtml Of course Paul has now made his + millions. I also just emailed publications to see if they could dig up that picture I took of Dr. Kunz. with his monitor back in '91. fwiw, -tom |
the OSCARS!
"rb608" wrote in message oups.com... It's been fun; but EOT for me, Too bad. It's always a riot to watch kennie tweaking somebody. :) Wolfgang well, that's the way it is for us chronic victims of bullying......sometimes it's nice to see someone else get it. |
the OSCARS!
wrote:
On Mar 2, 10:17 am, "rb608" wrote: It's utter bull****; and it was only done and only repeated by people who don't give a **** about portraying the facts in manner that actually reflects the truth. I think I used the term "lying sack of ****". It's contemptible, IMHO. Just to feed the flames, some more right-wing news reporting for you... http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/analysis...ula/index.html - Ken http://blog.peta.org/ How about a little opinion from the other side of the road.... For all the good he's done for the environment—which, to be fair, is an awful lot—Al’s leaving out a huge piece of the puzzle by ignoring the fact that the devastation caused by the meat industry is among the worst environmental disasters ever to happen to the world. As we told him in our letter, sent earlier this week: While the steps that you urge people to take in An Inconvenient Truth are inarguably important, the quickest and most effective way to fight climate change will come through diet change. An inconvenient truth for him, maybe, but it’s the truth nonetheless. Since he might not have seen the recent U.N. reports on the subject, we pointed out to him that animals raised for food generate more greenhouse gases than all cars and trucks combined, and that (according to a recent University of Chicago study), switching to a vegan diet is more effective in countering global warming than switching from a standard American car to a Prius. We've also offered to cook him some faux "fried chicken" as an introduction to meat-free meals, since, however many documentaries you make, you just can't be a meat-eating environmentalist. I'll let you know if he gets back to us. ******************** LOL!! |
the OSCARS!
"Cal Vanize" wrote in message ... ...you just can't be a meat-eating environmentalist.... Not true. Eat Vegans. Wolfgang well, it would work for a while anyway.......till some fool started a captive breeding program. :( |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:50 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2006 FishingBanter