Now to really **** you off

RDean asks:

Yeah, but Tom, if these self-same scientists are writing for the
professional journals, who is to say if they are accurate.

trust me on this one....most of the writing in Scientific Journals would dull
the effect of amphetamines, but they are near ritualistic about sticking to the
facts. The slightest inaccuracy is looked for in the papers, and the editorials
seldom fare better, at the hands of the readership.

I've not heard anything good or bad, one way or the other, from
the researchers and scientists we have social or professional contact
with.

I have no doubt of what you say. I am curious,many cell or molecular Biologists
among them? Toxicologists? The chatter might be limited to certain circles or
certain fields of study. I come across few enviromental scientists, so wasn't
in a position to judge some of that material....

The only "of note" political
thing was that all the military-background folks I know were "no way, no
how" on Clark.

I kind of got the feeling that was the general opinion of all that saw the man
appear publicly......
Tom

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 20:51:28 -0400, Allen Epps
wrote:

In article , Tom
Littleton wrote:

Allen,
I would have expected better than a Fox News blurb....the truth is, the Bush
admin has systematically eliminated scientists, with no regard to anything
other than the likelyhood of negative, scientifically based conclusions, from
a
host of advisory committees. NO administration has ever done so before,
NONE!!
Tom
Tom,


Allen

As soon as I read this:

"It was quite an ironic charge coming from a self-described activist
group whose left-wing, eco-extremist, anti-biotechnology,
anti-chemical, anti-nuclear, anti-defense and anti-business screeds
embody the very antithesis of the scientific ideal of objectivity."

then I knew the entire article was garbage. They made no effort to
refute anything the UCS said, they merely pandered to their fears and
ignorance of their readership via a heavy dose of gutter journalism.

It's the most distressing aspect of this particular brand of
right-wing ideology (I won't call them conservative because they're
not), in that their only response to any challenge is insult,
invective, fear-mongering, pandering, and ignorance. Their ideology
is so morally bankrupt and devoid of anything more than a hackneyed
version of economic and social Darwinism, that it offers society
virtually nothing beyond the pursuit of wealth and power by the elite
at the expense of everyone else. The more I head and read of this
particular brand of right wing extremism, the so-called "neo-cons",
the more I hear the echos of the Third Reich.

Am I guilty of doing the same thing? Just read the article and
similar ones by these ideologues and show me where the article isn't
at least in part about insult, invective, fear-mongering, pandering,
and ignorance. Can the left idulge in some of this? Of course it
can, but the ideology can stand on its own without it, and so can
traditional Republican (conservative) values, but this current version
can't. Without IIFP&I, it has nothing left to offer.

Hilter gained power democratically by appealing to fear and ignorance.
The "Jew" became his social bogeyman that motivated the ignorant and
selfish to vote him in. To see what I mean, take a lot of the crap
spewed about Liberals, remove "Liberal" and insert the word "Jew".

Traditional Conservatism is a proud ideology with an equally proud
history but this current crew are far more fascist than conservative.
Neo-cons are simply fascists with better PR and better suits. They
give thinking conservatives everywhere a bad name. And BTW, I'm not
name calling when I label them as fascists, I'm using the word in it's
correct political context, not as a slur. Fascism is a legitimate
political philosophy, no matter how distasteful it might be. I won't
let "fascist" the slur prevent me from using the word appropriately.
Fascism can be defined two ways: as a right-wing, authoritarian, and
nationalistic philisophy, and as an ideology that closely aligns the
interests of government with that of major corporations, to the
benefit of those corporations and the elites that control them. Sound
familiar?

I've mentioned this a few times, but what the political discourse of
the Western World needs to do is rehabilitate the word "Fascism" so it
can be used appropriately, plus consider the possibility of creating a
new label, "Democratic Fascism", a philosophy that generally plays by
the democratic rule of law but is otherwise dedicated to the
principles of Fascism. I'm sure Republicans of an earlier age are
turning over in their graves given the anitcs of the current crew that
bears their proud name.


Peter

turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

Visit The Streamer Page at http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharl...ers/index.html

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 20:51:28 -0400, Allen Epps
wrote:

In article , Tom
Littleton wrote:

Allen,
I would have expected better than a Fox News blurb....the truth is, the Bush
admin has systematically eliminated scientists, with no regard to anything
other than the likelyhood of negative, scientifically based conclusions, from
a
host of advisory committees. NO administration has ever done so before,
NONE!!
Tom
Tom,


Allen

As soon as I read this:

"It was quite an ironic charge coming from a self-described activist
group whose left-wing, eco-extremist, anti-biotechnology,
anti-chemical, anti-nuclear, anti-defense and anti-business screeds
embody the very antithesis of the scientific ideal of objectivity."

then I knew the entire article was garbage. They made no effort to
refute anything the UCS said, they merely pandered to their fears and
ignorance of their readership via a heavy dose of gutter journalism.

It's the most distressing aspect of this particular brand of
right-wing ideology (I won't call them conservative because they're
not), in that their only response to any challenge is insult,
invective, fear-mongering, pandering, and ignorance. Their ideology
is so morally bankrupt and devoid of anything more than a hackneyed
version of economic and social Darwinism, that it offers society
virtually nothing beyond the pursuit of wealth and power by the elite
at the expense of everyone else. The more I head and read of this
particular brand of right wing extremism, the so-called "neo-cons",
the more I hear the echos of the Third Reich.

Am I guilty of doing the same thing? Just read the article and
similar ones by these ideologues and show me where the article isn't
at least in part about insult, invective, fear-mongering, pandering,
and ignorance. Can the left idulge in some of this? Of course it
can, but the ideology can stand on its own without it, and so can
traditional Republican (conservative) values, but this current version
can't. Without IIFP&I, it has nothing left to offer.

Hilter gained power democratically by appealing to fear and ignorance.
The "Jew" became his social bogeyman that motivated the ignorant and
selfish to vote him in. To see what I mean, take a lot of the crap
spewed about Liberals, remove "Liberal" and insert the word "Jew".

Traditional Conservatism is a proud ideology with an equally proud
history but this current crew are far more fascist than conservative.
Neo-cons are simply fascists with better PR and better suits. They
give thinking conservatives everywhere a bad name. And BTW, I'm not
name calling when I label them as fascists, I'm using the word in it's
correct political context, not as a slur. Fascism is a legitimate
political philosophy, no matter how distasteful it might be. I won't
let "fascist" the slur prevent me from using the word appropriately.
Fascism can be defined two ways: as a right-wing, authoritarian, and
nationalistic philisophy, and as an ideology that closely aligns the
interests of government with that of major corporations, to the
benefit of those corporations and the elites that control them. Sound
familiar?

I've mentioned this a few times, but what the political discourse of
the Western World needs to do is rehabilitate the word "Fascism" so it
can be used appropriately, plus consider the possibility of creating a
new label, "Democratic Fascism", a philosophy that generally plays by
the democratic rule of law but is otherwise dedicated to the
principles of Fascism. I'm sure Republicans of an earlier age are
turning over in their graves given the anitcs of the current crew that
bears their proud name.


Peter

turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

Visit The Streamer Page at http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharl...ers/index.html

Peter Charles writes:
snipped
God Lord, that was well-put!
thanks, Tom

Peter Charles writes:
snipped
God Lord, that was well-put!
thanks, Tom

In article , Peter Charles
wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 20:51:28 -0400, Allen Epps
wrote:

In article , Tom
Littleton wrote:

Allen,
I would have expected better than a Fox News blurb....the truth is, the
Bush
admin has systematically eliminated scientists, with no regard to anything
other than the likelyhood of negative, scientifically based conclusions,
from
a
host of advisory committees. NO administration has ever done so before,
NONE!!
Tom
Tom,


Allen

As soon as I read this:

"It was quite an ironic charge coming from a self-described activist
group whose left-wing, eco-extremist, anti-biotechnology,
anti-chemical, anti-nuclear, anti-defense and anti-business screeds
embody the very antithesis of the scientific ideal of objectivity."

then I knew the entire article was garbage. They made no effort to
refute anything the UCS said, they merely pandered to their fears and
ignorance of their readership via a heavy dose of gutter journalism.

It's the most distressing aspect of this particular brand of
right-wing ideology (I won't call them conservative because they're
not), in that their only response to any challenge is insult,
invective, fear-mongering, pandering, and ignorance. Their ideology
is so morally bankrupt and devoid of anything more than a hackneyed
version of economic and social Darwinism, that it offers society
virtually nothing beyond the pursuit of wealth and power by the elite
at the expense of everyone else. The more I head and read of this
particular brand of right wing extremism, the so-called "neo-cons",
the more I hear the echos of the Third Reich.

Am I guilty of doing the same thing? Just read the article and
similar ones by these ideologues and show me where the article isn't
at least in part about insult, invective, fear-mongering, pandering,
and ignorance. Can the left idulge in some of this? Of course it
can, but the ideology can stand on its own without it, and so can
traditional Republican (conservative) values, but this current version
can't. Without IIFP&I, it has nothing left to offer.

Hilter gained power democratically by appealing to fear and ignorance.
The "Jew" became his social bogeyman that motivated the ignorant and
selfish to vote him in. To see what I mean, take a lot of the crap
spewed about Liberals, remove "Liberal" and insert the word "Jew".

Traditional Conservatism is a proud ideology with an equally proud
history but this current crew are far more fascist than conservative.
Neo-cons are simply fascists with better PR and better suits. They
give thinking conservatives everywhere a bad name. And BTW, I'm not
name calling when I label them as fascists, I'm using the word in it's
correct political context, not as a slur. Fascism is a legitimate
political philosophy, no matter how distasteful it might be. I won't
let "fascist" the slur prevent me from using the word appropriately.
Fascism can be defined two ways: as a right-wing, authoritarian, and
nationalistic philisophy, and as an ideology that closely aligns the
interests of government with that of major corporations, to the
benefit of those corporations and the elites that control them. Sound
familiar?

I've mentioned this a few times, but what the political discourse of
the Western World needs to do is rehabilitate the word "Fascism" so it
can be used appropriately, plus consider the possibility of creating a
new label, "Democratic Fascism", a philosophy that generally plays by
the democratic rule of law but is otherwise dedicated to the
principles of Fascism. I'm sure Republicans of an earlier age are
turning over in their graves given the anitcs of the current crew that
bears their proud name.


Peter

turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

Visit The Streamer Page at http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharl...ers/index.html


Peter,
I guess I get an "F" on irony. That was my whole point of posting it
was that I found the interview, the interviewee, and his website full
of right wing nonsense. Those that have actually sat down and had a
beer with me know I'm (politically) a pretty darn moderate guy.

Missed you at Penns and the Rapid Peter.

Allen
www.bullmooserepublicans.com

In article , Peter Charles
wrote:

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 20:51:28 -0400, Allen Epps
wrote:

In article , Tom
Littleton wrote:

Allen,
I would have expected better than a Fox News blurb....the truth is, the
Bush
admin has systematically eliminated scientists, with no regard to anything
other than the likelyhood of negative, scientifically based conclusions,
from
a
host of advisory committees. NO administration has ever done so before,
NONE!!
Tom
Tom,


Allen

As soon as I read this:

"It was quite an ironic charge coming from a self-described activist
group whose left-wing, eco-extremist, anti-biotechnology,
anti-chemical, anti-nuclear, anti-defense and anti-business screeds
embody the very antithesis of the scientific ideal of objectivity."

then I knew the entire article was garbage. They made no effort to
refute anything the UCS said, they merely pandered to their fears and
ignorance of their readership via a heavy dose of gutter journalism.

It's the most distressing aspect of this particular brand of
right-wing ideology (I won't call them conservative because they're
not), in that their only response to any challenge is insult,
invective, fear-mongering, pandering, and ignorance. Their ideology
is so morally bankrupt and devoid of anything more than a hackneyed
version of economic and social Darwinism, that it offers society
virtually nothing beyond the pursuit of wealth and power by the elite
at the expense of everyone else. The more I head and read of this
particular brand of right wing extremism, the so-called "neo-cons",
the more I hear the echos of the Third Reich.

Am I guilty of doing the same thing? Just read the article and
similar ones by these ideologues and show me where the article isn't
at least in part about insult, invective, fear-mongering, pandering,
and ignorance. Can the left idulge in some of this? Of course it
can, but the ideology can stand on its own without it, and so can
traditional Republican (conservative) values, but this current version
can't. Without IIFP&I, it has nothing left to offer.

Hilter gained power democratically by appealing to fear and ignorance.
The "Jew" became his social bogeyman that motivated the ignorant and
selfish to vote him in. To see what I mean, take a lot of the crap
spewed about Liberals, remove "Liberal" and insert the word "Jew".

Traditional Conservatism is a proud ideology with an equally proud
history but this current crew are far more fascist than conservative.
Neo-cons are simply fascists with better PR and better suits. They
give thinking conservatives everywhere a bad name. And BTW, I'm not
name calling when I label them as fascists, I'm using the word in it's
correct political context, not as a slur. Fascism is a legitimate
political philosophy, no matter how distasteful it might be. I won't
let "fascist" the slur prevent me from using the word appropriately.
Fascism can be defined two ways: as a right-wing, authoritarian, and
nationalistic philisophy, and as an ideology that closely aligns the
interests of government with that of major corporations, to the
benefit of those corporations and the elites that control them. Sound
familiar?

I've mentioned this a few times, but what the political discourse of
the Western World needs to do is rehabilitate the word "Fascism" so it
can be used appropriately, plus consider the possibility of creating a
new label, "Democratic Fascism", a philosophy that generally plays by
the democratic rule of law but is otherwise dedicated to the
principles of Fascism. I'm sure Republicans of an earlier age are
turning over in their graves given the anitcs of the current crew that
bears their proud name.


Peter

turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

Visit The Streamer Page at http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharl...ers/index.html


Peter,
I guess I get an "F" on irony. That was my whole point of posting it
was that I found the interview, the interviewee, and his website full
of right wing nonsense. Those that have actually sat down and had a
beer with me know I'm (politically) a pretty darn moderate guy.

Missed you at Penns and the Rapid Peter.

Allen
www.bullmooserepublicans.com

"Scott Seidman" wrote in message
. 1.4...
Tom G wrote in news:tomncora-0E94B1.16294713072004
@news05.east.earthlink.net:

One thing is certain, the general
population is woefully uprepared for the door-to-door and house-to-house
fighting that the founding fathers wanted the average American to be
ready for--no matter how unlikely this might be in the 21st century.


The longer Bush is in office, the more likely it is to happen. If, as
some
feel, the 2nd amendment is the final check on the government, this is a
government that might need that check.


Oh NOW you've done it! Start listening for strange clicks on your telephone,
new cars in your neighborhood, letters mysteriously arriving days late with
wrinkles on the flaps, and little glitches appearing in your computer that
you didn't have before. Remember the Patriot Act.

--(you don't know me, we never had this conversatation)

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 19:49:41 -0400, Allen Epps
wrote:

html


Peter,
I guess I get an "F" on irony. That was my whole point of posting it
was that I found the interview, the interviewee, and his website full
of right wing nonsense. Those that have actually sat down and had a
beer with me know I'm (politically) a pretty darn moderate guy.

Missed you at Penns and the Rapid Peter.

Allen
www.bullmooserepublicans.com

I know, I know. I'm sitting here at the 'puter thinking some evil
Bush gnome has taken over our Allen.

It's a relief to know it's not true . . . .



Peter

turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

Visit The Streamer Page at http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharl...ers/index.html

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 20:16:09 -0400, Peter Charles
wrote:

On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 19:49:41 -0400, Allen Epps
wrote:

html


Peter,
I guess I get an "F" on irony. That was my whole point of posting it
was that I found the interview, the interviewee, and his website full
of right wing nonsense. Those that have actually sat down and had a
beer with me know I'm (politically) a pretty darn moderate guy.

Missed you at Penns and the Rapid Peter.

Allen
www.bullmooserepublicans.com

I know, I know. I'm sitting here at the 'puter thinking some evil
Bush gnome has taken over our Allen.

It's a relief to know it's not true . . . .

Wait a tick.

It seems to me Allen offered up this Milloy nitwit as being an *equal* to the
UCS, just on the other side of the political aisle.

In other words, what the UCS has to say isn't important because Allen can find
some utter moron righty with a web site and a boutique publisher contract that
disagrees with the UCS...

/daytripper ()