NationStates Jolt Archive

And, that person is none other than; http://www.thoseshirts.com/images/square-med-redefeat.gif

We have ordered out T shirts, and ordered one for her brother.

If you would like one of these shirts or a shirt for your dog check this out, http://www.thoseshirts.com/

So you'll be voting Obama then?

Or someone who is a "real" centrist. :D

So you'll be voting Obama then?

im so happy for you

for your sake, i hope mrs clinton wins the nomination so that your tshirts will be relevant longer.

Thank you.:D

im so happy for you

for your sake, i hope mrs clinton wins the nomination so that your tshirts will be relevant longer.

im so happy for you

for your sake, i hope mrs clinton wins the nomination so that your tshirts will be relevant longer.

Thank you. :D

communism?

HA!

I'm going to vote for Hillary out of sheer spite now.

Or someone who is a "real" centrist. :D

Well, adjusting for your belief that Hillary is a communist...


Huh. I didn't know John Ashcroft was running.

good to see you're bucking the stereotype of american voters by using rational and informed opinions to decide who to vote for...

Or someone who is a "real" centrist. :D

So no Repulicans...mind you...I am tickled that the red states are .... well red...being the communist 'colour'....

I will make a prediction though....the election will be the most vicious yet. The dems will not have grown a back bone and will let the rightists get away with all sorts of stuff...it'll make the swift boaters look like a evening punt down the River Cam...

So no Repulicans...mind you...

Where is Ross when you need him? :D

Oh boy. And you actually went with the most ridiculous T-Shirt of the ones you presented here the other day.

Words fail me.

You do know she isn't a communist, yes?

You do know she isn't a communist, yes?

Yes. I do know she is a socialist which is to the right of Communism. ;)

And, that person is none other than; http://www.thoseshirts.com/images/square-med-redefeat.gif

We have ordered out T shirts, and ordered one for her brother.

If you would like one of these shirts or a shirt for your dog check this out, http://www.thoseshirts.com/

Energy independence and phased redeployment being the key issues she has so far put forward as running issues...

Which of those offends you so? And... which of those makes her a communist?

Let us know when you're defeating communism the first time round, and we can begin scheduling its re-defeat once you've found an actual communist.

Yes. I do know she is a socialist which is to the right of Communism. ;)

Hillary Clinton is a socialist?
Excuse me while I kill myself.

Energy independence and phased redeployment being the key issues she has so far put forward as running issues...

Which of those offends you so? And... which of those makes her a communist?

Neither, it's her universal medical care plan that is not deat and the fact she thinks it takes a whole village rather than two parents to raise a child. :eek:

Yes. I do know she is a socialist which is to the right of Communism. ;)

a) she isn't socialist. Not even particularly close. (supporting universal heathcare does not a socialist make)
b) communism =/= socialism any more than socialism = capitalism (after all, capitalism is to the right of socialism)

Let us know when you're defeating communism the first time round, and we can begin scheduling its re-defeat once you've found an actual communist.

Reagan did that a few years ago. Have you been sleeping that long or just not paying attention?

Hillary Clinton is a socialist?
Excuse me while I kill myself.

Fifth Law of the Internet: Anyone who disagrees with you is a communist. (Alternately, a homosexual, or a Nazi, or a psychopath.)

Where is Ross when you need him? :D

Hopefully not running for office...my god...could you imagine EDS running the debacle in Iraq?

Hopefully not running for office...my god...could you imagine EDS running the debacle in Iraq?

It would probably be an improvement over the current situation.

I'm not much of a t-shirt fan. Polos are better.

So... You're buying from the people who created these delightfully sane and rational t-shirts. A way of saying: 'Carry on, I love the fact that you're ignorant, scare-mongering loons'?

http://www.thoseshirts.com/forecast.html

http://www.thoseshirts.com/coulter.html

http://www.thoseshirts.com/rope.html

Let us know when you're defeating communism the first time round, and we can begin scheduling its re-defeat once you've found an actual communist.

Found one!

http://66.49.151.193/George%20Bush%20flys.gif

Reagan did that a few years ago. Have you been sleeping that long or just not paying attention?

Of course, Ronald Reagan single-handedly defeated communism. Between naps, obviously.

Actually, I reckon that it was Gerald Ford. His statement that there was no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe was treated as idiocy, but it actually caused the breakup of the bloc a decade later. Such is the power of positive thinking.
Well, it makes about much sense as saying it was Reagan...

It would probably be an improvement over the current situation.

You've never had to work with them then LOL

Reagan did that a few years ago. Have you been sleeping that long or just not paying attention?

And there was me thinking that the collapse of the USSR, who I assume you are referring to, had more to do with a multitude of internal problems than the actions of Reagan.

And that North Korea, Vietnam, and China still existed. And that there were communist parties in most western countries.

Oh well, my mistake.

Neither, it's her universal medical care plan that is not deat and the fact she thinks it takes a whole village rather than two parents to raise a child. :eek:

Isn't her 'universal medical care' plan more about pushing for universal insurance? (Which would make it fairly close to ideas touted by some of her counterparts...) And... the village thing... I've no idea what you are talking about.

Personally, I think it is an eyesore that the US doesn't have real universal healthcare. It's tantamount to saying only the rich deserve to live. Hardly consonant with the claimed identity of the US as a 'christian' nation.

Every time I see this, I think the person that does it is a bigger idiot than the last person who did it.

Every time I see this, I think the person that does it is a bigger idiot than the last person who did it.

It's the same guy.

And, that person is none other than; http://www.thoseshirts.com/images/square-med-redefeat.gif

We have ordered out T shirts, and ordered one for her brother.

If you would like one of these shirts or a shirt for your dog check this out, http://www.thoseshirts.com/

Celt, you're a ridiculous old man, you know that? :p

Hillary is no more of a communist than George W. Bush. It's a good thing that you're not going to vote for her, honestly, because she'd be a horrible President, but at least go after her for the right reasons, not for the absolutely idiotic reason of "defeating communism." Once again, Celty, you show your limited viewpoint along the political spectrum.

So... You're buying from the people who created these delightfully sane and rational t-shirts. A way of saying: 'Carry on, I love the fact that you're ignorant, scare-mongering loons'?

http://www.thoseshirts.com/forecast.html

http://www.thoseshirts.com/coulter.html

http://www.thoseshirts.com/rope.html
Holy fuck. Suddenly I'm glad I didn't follow his link.

Celt, you're a ridiculous old man, you know that? :p

Hillary is no more of a communist than George W. Bush. It's a good thing that you're not going to vote for her, honestly, because she'd be a horrible President, but at least go after her for the right reasons, not for the absolutely idiotic reason of "defeating communism." Once again, Celty, you show your limited viewpoint along the political spectrum.

But, if people on NS can equate Bush with Hitler, why can't I equate Hillary with communism? Isn't his forum a level playing field? ....damn stupid question...of course it isn't:eek:

But, if people on NS can equate Bush with Hitler, why can't I equate Hillary with communism? Isn't his forum a level playing field? ....damn stupid question...of course it isn't:eek:

because only idiots compare Bush with Hitler?

Holy fuck. Suddenly I'm glad I didn't follow his link.

Tell me about it. If I ever see anyone wear either the Mecca shirt or the Ann Coulter shirt I'm going to punch them in the face.

Celtlund: Saarkhan said what I was going to say, unfortunately.

Tell me about it. If I ever see anyone wear either the Mecca shirt or the Ann Coulter shirt I'm going to punch them in the face.

Celtlund: Saarkhan said what I was going to say, unfortunately.

I'm old. I can take the double hit. :)

I approve of this t-shirt. Good job! Fuck the liberals.

I approve of this t-shirt. Good job! Fuck the liberals.

Yea, we are winning. With you, my brother-in-law, Mrs. Celtlund and myself that makes four of us. Thanks for the support.

Now, what real centrist do we need to support?

I approve of this t-shirt. Good job! Fuck the liberals.

Great. Another one.

What planet do these people live on, that redeployment and energy self-sufficiency are 'liberal' ideals?

Tell me about it. If I ever see anyone wear either the Mecca shirt or the Ann Coulter shirt I'm going to punch them in the face.It was actually the Journalist one that scared me most.

Yea, we are winning. With you, my brother-in-law, Mrs. Celtlund and myself that makes four of us. Thanks for the support.

Now, what real centrist do we need to support?
I'd vageuly suggest Obama, but only because he hasn't shown any pro-censorship tendencies yet. Maybe Guiliani also. Only people I can think of.

It was actually the Journalist one that scared me most.

It freaked me out, yeah, but I could live with it as a political statement from people. The other two, though, I couldn't. I see something like that and I enter into berserker rage mode. (I've got some Norse blood in me.)

I'd vageuly suggest Obama, but only because he hasn't shown any pro-censorship tendencies yet. Maybe Guiliani also. Only people I can think of.

Arnie plays a nice centrist game... in as much as he hits whichever end of the spectrum is convenient. But then, he's not likely to be a candidate....

EDIT: Actually - the best candidate might be David A Koch, in terms of true 'centrist' leanings... based on the claimed 'platform': http://www.dave08.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=20&Itemid=42

You do know she isn't a communist, yes?

That's irrelevant.

The Fifth Law of the Internet states that anyone who disagrees with you is a communist (alternately, a nazi, homosexual, or sociopath) and can be referred to as such without requiring a logical basis for said argument.

Hillary Clinton a communist? Are you fucking shitting me? She's not even one of the most liberal democrats, let alone anything approaching communist. Talk about out of touch with reality.

Yea, we are winning. With you, my brother-in-law, Mrs. Celtlund and myself that makes four of us. Thanks for the support.

Now, what real centrist do we need to support?

Wait, centrist? I thought you were anti-communism?

Great. Another one.

What planet do these people live on, that redeployment and energy self-sufficiency are 'liberal' ideals?
I'm starting to believe they're just afraid that if Sen. Clinton is ellected they'll be emasculated or something.

I'm starting to believe they're just afraid that if Sen. Clinton is ellected they'll be emasculated or something.

I have a number of issues against Ms Clinton, myself. But pretending she is a commie... or even liberal... just isn't up there.

Arnie plays a nice centrist game... in as much as he hits whichever end of the spectrum is convenient. But then, he's not likely to be a candidate....

EDIT: Actually - the best candidate might be David A Koch, in terms of true 'centrist' leanings... based on the claimed 'platform': http://www.dave08.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=20&Itemid=42

He can't run, though. The Constitution states that a Presidential candidate has two requirements:

1. Be at least thirty-five years old.
2. Be a naturally born citizen of the United States.

In other words, no immigrants are allowed to become President. Quite honestly, I find this mildly moronic. I think we should amend the Constitution to change that, perhaps requiring twenty years of constant residence before allowing Presidential candidaship or what have you.

He can't run, though. The Constitution states that a Presidential candidate has two requirements:

1. Be at least thirty-five years old.
2. Be a naturally born citizen of the United States.

In other words, no immigrants are allowed to become President. Quite honestly, I find this mildly moronic. I think we should amend the Constitution to change that, perhaps requiring twenty years of constant residence before allowing Presidential candidaship or what have you.

Oh - I know he can't run. (Yet). That's why I said he's unlikely to be a candidate.

I think that might change in future years. Probably too late for this one, though. :)

for your sake, i hope mrs clinton wins the nomination so that your tshirts will be relevant longer.

the clintons will be boogey-persons of the right for the foreseeable future. just mention bill and you can watch them tense up.


though i was actually worried about a similar issue with one of my against me! shirts a few years back. though really, "hey george w - fuck you and your daddy" will be perfectly topical until he winds up in front of the hague, whether he's in power or not.

I'd vageuly suggest Obama, but only because he hasn't shown any pro-censorship tendencies yet. Maybe Guiliani also. Only people I can think of.

Obama is not a centrist. Rudi is and so is McCain. I'm looking for others that are not in the mainstream parties. Do you know of any?

Obama is not a centrist. Rudi is and so is McCain. I'm looking for others that are not in the mainstream parties. Do you know of any?

Rudy is a bit authoritarian. And Obama seems pretty moderate to me.

But, if people on NS can equate Bush with Hitler, why can't I equate Hillary with communism?

who does that? shit, even i only call him a fascist (for good reason, too, not as just a random smear).

and besides, clinton has fuck-all to do with communism on any level.

Hillary Clinton a communist? Are you fucking shitting me? She's not even one of the most liberal democrats, let alone anything approaching communist. Talk about out of touch with reality.

Here have a cookie. :fluffle:

Obama is not a centrist. Rudi is and so is McCain.

so centrist = authoritarian assholes or flip-flopping suck ups to authoritarian assholes?

Obama is not a centrist. Rudi is and so is McCain. I'm looking for others that are not in the mainstream parties. Do you know of any?

...um...

Nope. No idea.

And seriously though, Obama would be a good idea. He at least has a semblance of an energy policy, which no one else has. Considering Peak Oil will start smashing us up left and right by the end of this year, I refuse to vote for anyone who does not have an energy policy that is actually feasible.

I have a number of issues against Ms Clinton, myself. But pretending she is a commie... or even liberal... just isn't up there.

Maybe not a commie but she is a liberal who is trying to look like a centrist. She and Bill can play very well to the polls and the polls are saying people want a centrist. Hillary has been moving her position more toward the center for the past year. However, that is not and never will be her true position.

who does that? shit, even i only call him a fascist (for good reason, too, not as just a random smear).

and besides, clinton has fuck-all to do with communism on any level.

I haven't called bush hitler or a nazi so far, at least I don't recall doing so, though I think it's fair to call him a fascist (one doesn't have to be a nazi to be a fascist) since his administration has been so authoritarian.

Maybe not a commie but she is a liberal who is trying to look like a centrist. She and Bill can play very well to the polls and the polls are saying people want a centrist. Hillary has been moving her position more toward the center for the past year. However, that is not and never will be her true position.

She was never all that left wing to begin with.

Obama is not a centrist. Rudi is and so is McCain.
Might want to re-think that last part: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/14/mccain.christians.ap/index.html?section=cnn_latest

He's out kissing asses right now.

who does that? shit, even i only call him a fascist (for good reason, too, not as just a random smear).

and besides, clinton has fuck-all to do with communism on any level.

And Hitler was not a faschist? :confused:

...um...

Nope. No idea.

And seriously though, Obama would be a good idea. He at least has a semblance of an energy policy, which no one else has. Considering Peak Oil will start smashing us up left and right by the end of this year, I refuse to vote for anyone who does not have an energy policy that is actually feasible.

Not sure what you mean about Peak Oil, but I will agree that we need someone with an energy policy. We really need someone who has an energy policy that will make us independant of the world oil supply.

She was never all that left wing to begin with.

Not as left wing as many in the Democratic Party are now, but pretty left wing for the party during her husband's administration.

Might want to re-think that last part: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/14/mccain.christians.ap/index.html?section=cnn_latest

He's out kissing asses right now.

Well, considering the "unbiased" source...

Not sure what you mean about Peak Oil, but I will agree that we need someone with an energy policy. We really need someone who has an energy policy that will make us independant of the world oil supply.

In other words, at some point in the near future the world's oil production will peak and will begin to decline. Oil will get more expensive, and it will hurt our economy for a while unless we have a cohesive energy policy to deal with it.

A long term problem? Not really; we'll solve it either way. But a possible repeat of the 1970's stagflation? Likely unless we do something, and I prefer to make it as painless as possible.

Well, considering the "unbiased" source...
AP? Give me a break. :rolleyes:

Oh, wait, I'm betting that since it was hosted on CNN you're upset.

Here ya go: http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Feb14/0,4670,McCainConservatives,00.html

In other words, at some point in the near future the world's oil production will peak and will begin to decline. Oil will get more expensive, and it will hurt our economy for a while unless we have a cohesive energy policy to deal with it.

A long term problem? Not really; we'll solve it either way. But a possible repeat of the 1970's stagflation? Likely unless we do something, and I prefer to make it as painless as possible.

Short term problem. We should not have to rely on other nations to supply us with energy that is so vital to our survival. We need to develop alternative energy sources, build nuclear power plants, and drill for oil on our own territory.

Short term problem. We should not have to rely on other nations to supply us with energy that is so vital to our survival. We need to develop alternative energy sources, build nuclear power plants, and drill for oil on our own territory.

Right on. Thankfully, the past few years have seen major improvements in technology as well as actual capacity installed. If things continue on their present course, we'll be in very good shape to face any problems with our oil supply.

We're going to be fine in the longer term, but we need a president and Congress with a cohesive plan to stop any pain in the short term.

Short term problem. We should not have to rely on other nations to supply us with energy that is so vital to our survival. We need to develop alternative energy sources, build nuclear power plants, and drill for oil on our own territory.
We don't HAVE enough oil in our own territory, even if we drilled in every preserve we'd exhaust everything within 10 years.

AP? Give me a break. :rolleyes:

Oh, wait, I'm betting that since it was hosted on CNN you're upset.

Here ya go: http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Feb14/0,4670,McCainConservatives,00.html

I never get upset about CNN, I just never take what they say without some other source. Thank you for providing an other source that people won't accept without confirmation from some other source. So, John is moving from the center to the right. Shame on him, compromising principels for political gain...

I like how you make it sound like you just decided you wouldn't vote for Hillary...

If she were just a little more "centrist," you'd support her, right?

LOL.

We don't HAVE enough oil in our own territory, even if we drilled in every preserve we'd exhaust everything within 10 years.

What didn't you see about alternative energy sources AND...AND...?

We don't HAVE enough oil in our own territory, even if we drilled in every preserve we'd exhaust everything within 10 years.

That's what you communists want us to think.

We all know the caribou are sitting on all the oil we'll ever need. Damn caribou.

We don't HAVE enough oil in our own territory, even if we drilled in every preserve we'd exhaust everything within 10 years.

We can drill quite a decent amount more; the US produces about 8.3 million bpd of oil and NGL, and adding new capacity from drilling could impact our oil needs. 5% of our demand isn't that much, but that 1.2 million bpd is almost enough to offset all of our imports from Saudi Arabia.

If it can be produced without serious environmental impact, there's no reason not to.

I like how you make it sound like you just decided you wouldn't vote for Hillary...

If she were just a little more "centrist," you'd support her, right?

LOL.

No, probably not. I just don't like her at all and do not think she could do a good job of running the country.

What didn't you see about alternative energy sources AND...AND...?

Why even add an option that does little good and great harm? Hmmmm?

Regardless, I'm waiting to read your letter asking officials to put a nuclear plant and waste depository in your back yard. Start gathering signatures in your neighborhood.

We can drill quite a decent amount more; the US produces about 8.3 million bpd of oil and NGL, and adding new capacity from drilling could impact our oil needs. 5% of our demand isn't that much, but that 1.2 million bpd is almost enough to offset all of our imports from Saudi Arabia.

If it can be produced without serious environmental impact, there's no reason not to.

If frogs could fly, they wouldn't bump their asses a hoppin'.

Why even add an option that does little good and great harm? Hmmmm?

Regardless, I'm waiting to read your letter asking officials to put a nuclear plant and waste depository in your back yard. Start gathering signatures in your neighborhood.

It is good beyond words, sir, to have you back.

What didn't you see about alternative energy sources AND...AND...?
And the US consumes about 7.3 gigabarrels per year, we HAVE 21 gigabarrels locked up around the US (not counting oil shale, but currently it's not economically feasable to get at). However, we're not using most of that oil for energy production (natural gas and coal are the two biggies), so unless you're planning to put a reactor in your car or attach a sail for wind power...

Why even add an option that does little good and great harm? Hmmmm?

Regardless, I'm waiting to read your letter asking officials to put a nuclear plant and waste depository in your back yard. Start gathering signatures in your neighborhood.

How many years have we and the rest of the world had nuclear enery? How many nuclear power plants are there in the world? How many ships have been sailing the seas on nuclear power? How many nuclear power related accidents have we had in the world? How much polution has nuclear energy caused vs polution from oil, coal, and natural gas energy sources?

Do the math, do the research then tell me nuclear energy is not environmental friendly, cost effective, and safe.

*snip*
Nervun! Finally. I've sent you a telegram on a completely unrelated issue, you should know.

And Hitler was not a faschist? :confused:

of course he was a fascist. but not all fascists are hitlers and, presumably, not all hitlers are fascists.

no need to lay the holocaust at bush's feet, when we have other lesser villians he fits in fine next to

That's what you communists want us to think.

We all know the caribou are sitting on all the oil we'll ever need. Damn caribou.
First they steal the oil, then they make so-so coffee... when will their evil end?

If frogs could fly, they wouldn't bump their asses a hoppin'.

But unlike the frogs, there's a government bureaucracy that can make oil companies do their work cleanly...and with a Democratic congress, that's all the more likely.

Even better, we should tie oil production licenses to the companies' effectiveness in curtailing CO2 emissions.

We can drill quite a decent amount more; the US produces about 8.3 million bpd of oil and NGL, and adding new capacity from drilling could impact our oil needs. 5% of our demand isn't that much, but that 1.2 million bpd is almost enough to offset all of our imports from Saudi Arabia.

If it can be produced without serious environmental impact, there's no reason not to.
See post below, it answers just how much we have. It's not a matter of offsetting, it's a matter of we only have so much oil in the ground and we really can only last a few years at current levels without exhausting it.

How many years have we and the rest of the world had nuclear enery? How many nuclear power plants are there in the world? How many ships have been sailing the seas on nuclear power? How many nuclear power related accidents have we had in the world? How much polution has nuclear energy caused vs polution from oil, coal, and natural gas energy sources?

Do the math, do the research then tell me nuclear energy is not environmental friendly, cost effective, and safe.
Oh goodie. So I can write Sen Reid and Sen Ensign and tell them that you've volenteered your state to take Yucca away from us? They'll be SO happy.

How many years have we and the rest of the world had nuclear enery? How many nuclear power plants are there in the world? How many ships have been sailing the seas on nuclear power? How many nuclear power related accidents have we had in the world? How much polution has nuclear energy caused vs polution from oil, coal, and natural gas energy sources?

Do the math, do the research then tell me nuclear energy is not environmental friendly, cost effective, and safe.

*sigh*

So, where's that petition for nuclear waste repository and nuclear plant in your backyard?

The biggest problem with nuclear energy is where to locate the plants and what to do with the waste. Otherwise, I fully support it.

But unlike the frogs, there's a government bureaucracy that can make oil companies do their work cleanly...and with a Democratic congress, that's all the more likely.

Even better, we should tie oil production licenses to the companies' effectiveness in curtailing CO2 emissions.

So you are saying that frogs could fly if only we had a government bureaurcacy in charge of amphibian aviation?

*sigh*

So, where's that petition for nuclear waste repository and nuclear plant in your backyard?

The biggest problem with nuclear energy is where to locate the plants and what to do with the waste. Otherwise, I fully support it.
Nuclear plant designs have become a lot safer and more efficient since scares such as Three Mile Island. We've also been designing reprocessing utilities that can take what might once have been considered waste and gain more energy from it, thus significantly reducing the radiation emmited by it. We can theoretically reduce the radiation to an amount where storage of waste is no longer a problem at all. Thing is, most people refuse to read up on this because Three Mile Island lingers in their minds. (And as for Chernobyl, that plant was built on a half-assed design that wouldn't have made the cut in the sixties in the U.S., let alone the time when it was actually built. It was set up from the beginning as a disaster, almost. Certainly not typical of nuclear power plants.)

Nervun! Finally. I've sent you a telegram on a completely unrelated issue, you should know.
Ok, got it and answered back.

So you are saying that frogs could fly if only we had a government bureaurcacy in charge of amphibian aviation?

Well, yeah. Frog scientists would finally get the funding they need to develop gliders.

We can theoretically reduce the radiation to an amount where storage of waste is no longer a problem at all.
So what is it that they've been wanting to entomb in my state then (And getting stopped because they cannot keep it safe for the centuries needed)?

So what is it that they've been wanting to entomb in my state then (And getting stopped because they cannot keep it safe for the centuries needed)?

The fact that it's centuries rather than millenia says a lot about improvements in reprocessing...breeder reactors would be even better, but there are still some problems with the technology at this point in time.

However, in reality the cost of storing nuclear waste on site is a lot less than the cost of building and storing it in Yucca Mountain. It's like $7 or $8 billion rather than the $36 billion for that facility.

Ok, got it and answered back.

Answered as well.

As for the entombment, it's the waste produced by current plants, all of which were built back in the seventies. No new plants have been approved since then, primarily because of environmental activists. Meanwhile, plants built in other countries, such as the U.K. and France, have much less radioactive waste because they've been built with these new designs in mind.

Fact is, with Peak Oil right around the corner, we have no other choice when it comes to power generation. Nothing else will provide the kind of energy we need to keep our infrastructure going as cheaply as nuclear power. Oil is ridiculously energy potent, and the next best thing we've got is nuclear fission. We either utilize it or we face the fact that we will not be able to keep up our energy consumption anywhere near the levels they are today.

It's the same guy.

That makes him an idiot factorial.

The fact that it's centuries rather than millenia says a lot about improvements in reprocessing...breeder reactors would be even better, but there are still some problems with the technology at this point in time.
Actually it's more due to I couldn't get millenia spelled right. The current standard is 10,000 years and they can't gurentee that.

However, in reality the cost of storing nuclear waste on site is a lot less than the cost of building and storing it in Yucca Mountain. It's like $7 or $8 billion rather than the $36 billion for that facility.
We keep saying that, but they keep wanting to stick it in there.

Fact is, with Peak Oil right around the corner, we have no other choice when it comes to power generation. Nothing else will provide the kind of energy we need to keep our infrastructure going as cheaply as nuclear power. Oil is ridiculously energy potent, and the next best thing we've got is nuclear fission. We either utilize it or we face the fact that we will not be able to keep up our energy consumption anywhere near the levels they are today.
The thing is though, we're not using the oil for energy production. Most of it is going to fuel oil, mechanics or to plastics. None of which a nuclear power plant would help except in directing the little that goes to petrolilm powered plants to the gas pump.

Edit: Here's the breakdown

What a barrel of crude oil makes.
Product and Gallons per Barrel

Gasoline = 19.4
Distillate Fuel Oil (Includes both home heating oil and diesel fuel) = 10.5
Kerosene-Type Jet Fuel = 4.1
Coke = 2.2
Residual Fuel Oil = 1.7
(Heavy oils used as fuels in industry, marine transportation, and for electric power generation)

Liquefied Refinery Gases = 1.5
Still Gas = 1.8
Asphalt and Road Oil = 1.4
Raw Material for Petrochemicals = 1.1
Lubricants = 0.4
Kerosene = 0.2
Other = 0.4

The thing is though, we're not using the oil for energy production. Most of it is going to fuel oil, mechanics or (mostly) to plastics. None of which a nuclear power plant would help except in directing the little that goes to petrolilm powered plants to the gas pump.

Nuclear fission power would still benefit us greatly. Apart from the radioactive waste, which can be reduced to irrelevant with the proper technology, it's a clean source of power, unlike our coal-fired plants and petroleum power plants. It'll help us affect global climate change to utilize more of them.

Nuclear fission power would still benefit us greatly. Apart from the radioactive waste, which can be reduced to irrelevant with the proper technology, it's a clean source of power, unlike our coal-fired plants and petroleum power plants. It'll help us affect global climate change to utilize more of them.
It might, but it won't do anything about oil depenancy or about US addiction to oil from outside of the US.

I think that there's answers to those problems and peak oil, but they do not lie with nuclear power.

The thing is though, we're not using the oil for energy production. Most of it is going to fuel oil, mechanics or to plastics. None of which a nuclear power plant would help except in directing the little that goes to petrolilm powered plants to the gas pump.

Correct. Of all the oil produced in the world, over 70% of it goes to vehicles. Of that 70%, over 85% goes to light duty vehicles like cars, light trucks, and SUVs. That's a lot of oil being used in an extremely inefficient manner, and it's a lot of oil that could easily be replaced in the next two decades.

The amount we use for everything except cars is trivial compared to the amount burned by the over 700 million passenger cars in use on this planet.

Correct. Of all the oil produced in the world, over 70% of it goes to vehicles. Of that 70%, over 85% goes to light duty vehicles like cars, light trucks, and SUVs. That's a lot of oil being used in an extremely inefficient manner, and it's a lot of oil that could easily be replaced in the next two decades.
How?

Reagan did that a few years ago. Have you been sleeping that long or just not paying attention?
FDR beat communism in America.

And, that person is none other than; http://www.thoseshirts.com/images/square-med-redefeat.gif

We have ordered out T shirts, and ordered one for her brother.

If you would like one of these shirts or a shirt for your dog check this out, http://www.thoseshirts.com/

Like you were ever going to vote for her anyway. :rolleyes:

It was actually the Journalist one that scared me most.

They're all mind-bogglingly insane.

Makes me wonder whether those who make these t-shirts are truly raging, frothing-at-the-mouth "yay for murder!" imbeciles, or whether they're just utterly amoral but smart business people who know there's a market out there full of ignorant, angry idiots actually willing to buy their products.

Are right-wingers so ashamed to be right-wing that they need to re-name themselves "centrists"?

Maybe not a commie but she is a liberal who is trying to look like a centrist. She and Bill can play very well to the polls and the polls are saying people want a centrist. Hillary has been moving her position more toward the center for the past year. However, that is not and never will be her true position.

I think you see what you want to see. Ms Clinton has always been almost as much of a problem for the average Democrat as she has for the average Republican - because she tends to hit agenda points that are very much not liberal - like her censorship arguments.

And, polls aren't really saying people want 'centrists'.... polls are saying: a) people are basically sick of Bush (no surprises there, that was true at the last election) and they want something to reduce partisanship.

'Centrist' is not the same as 'non-partisan'.

Short term problem. We should not have to rely on other nations to supply us with energy that is so vital to our survival. We need to develop alternative energy sources, build nuclear power plants, and drill for oil on our own territory.

But, that's a problem if Ms Clinton says it...?

No, probably not. I just don't like her at all and do not think she could do a good job of running the country.

By which token, you obviously voted Gore and Kerry, right?

By which token, you obviously voted Gore and Kerry, right?
Nope. He used to be a straight-party supporting Republican, always going for whatever the party said. Only recently has he become "independent" though I think he's more of an INO.

They're all mind-bogglingly insane.

Makes me wonder whether those who make these t-shirts are truly raging, frothing-at-the-mouth "yay for murder!" imbeciles, or whether they're just utterly amoral but smart business people who know there's a market out there full of ignorant, angry idiots actually willing to buy their products.

I'd prefer marketing to the ignorant, angry idiots at the other end of the American political spectrum anyway. T-shirts attacking conservatives are usually so much more worthy anyway and fun too. Not to mention morea accurate as well. Ah well, people have to make money somehow.

We have ordered out T shirts, and ordered one for her brother.
I think it's fitting how you show your support for ignorance and stupidity, and not to mention financially support hate-mongers. Well done, you're quite the role-model.

Oh, you have to be kidding me...she's a communist now? I don't understand America.

Oh, you have to be kidding me...she's a communist now? I don't understand America.

Heck, I live here and I don't understand half the stuff that goes on. :rolleyes:

Heck, I live here and I don't understand half the stuff that goes on. :rolleyes:

I'm tempted to encourage you to leave and offer my backyard to refugees, but I think it's best that a few sane people remain behind there lest some idiot decide to play with the nuclear weapons. So, uh...sorry. ;)

I'm tempted to encourage you to leave and offer my backyard to refugees, but I think it's best that a few sane people remain behind there lest some idiot decide to play with the nuclear weapons. So, uh...sorry. ;)

Chances are they'd only nuke themselves anyway.

I'm tempted to encourage you to leave and offer my backyard to refugees, but I think it's best that a few sane people remain behind there lest some idiot decide to play with the nuclear weapons. So, uh...sorry. ;)

That's okay, I kind of like it here, despite it being rather like living with bees in your head sometimes. Thanks for the offer, though. :D

Chances are they'd only nuke themselves anyway.

True. I forgot that half of them couldn't even pinpoint their own country on a map, let alone another. Teehee.

I can not, in good conscience, vote for Hilary Clinton, under any circumstances (save for her opponent being Hitler, but that's unlikely as Hitler is dead. Zombie Hitler, that would be impressive.) Hell, I'm inclined to vote in the democratic primary just for the sole purpose of making sure she doesn't get a shot at the Presidency, rather someone decent like Obama.

I'm still a McCain fan, although I'm pretty keen on Giuliani as well..

Oh, you have to be kidding me...she's a communist now? I don't understand America.

It's polemics, something you'll regularly find in electoral politics.

I can not, in good conscience, vote for Hilary Clinton, under any circumstances (save for her opponent being Hitler, but that's unlikely as Hitler is dead. Zombie Hitler, that would be impressive.) Hell, I'm inclined to vote in the democratic primary just for the sole purpose of making sure she doesn't get a shot at the Presidency, rather someone decent like Obama.

I'm still a McCain fan, although I'm pretty keen on Giuliani as well..

That's cool - you are offset by people like my mother-in-law, who hates Clinton, but will vote for her under the circumstances that Rice runs - she has said she'd rather vote for any white nominee, than let 'one of them' get in.

It's polemics, something you'll regularly find in electoral politics.

America redefines that art form, however. Our politicians are much more down to earth. Our last opposition leader called the incumbent an arselicker. :)

That's cool - you are offset by people like my mother-in-law, who hates Clinton, but will vote for her under the circumstances that Rice runs - she has said she'd rather vote for any white nominee, than let 'one of them' get in.

You should remind her that Bill Clinton already was the US's first Black President. :D

America redefines that art form, however. Our politicians are much more down to earth. Our last opposition leader called the incumbent an arselicker. :)

That's what I call proper political civility. We Americans were once great at it, but nowadays, ever since that Roosevelt fellow made the Presidency all "respectable" (load of bull, if you want to ask my opinion) we've got to resort to all of these bizarre labellings of opponents that have no grounding in proper insult technique.

And, that person is none other than; http://www.thoseshirts.com/images/square-med-redefeat.gif
Did you find those t-shirts on the site (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/) I mentioned yesterday in the "Commies and Hyphens" thread? I remember an advert for them flashing.

I'm still a McCain fan, although I'm pretty keen on Giuliani as well..
Why not Ron Paul? Why do you hate freedom? <.<

Why not Ron Paul? Why do you hate freedom? <.<

http://www.juicetyme.com/images/orangeslice.jpgThis is an orange. It represents Ron Paul.

http://plus.maths.org/issue34/outerspace/monkey.jpg
This is a monkey. It represents the system.

That's why he won't be voting for Ron Paul.

Energy independence and phased redeployment being the key issues she has so far put forward as running issues...

Which of those offends you so? And... which of those makes her a communist?

It's cool to hate the Clinton's in certain crowds. Crowds that need to be tear gassed at the least and napalmed at the worst.

I can not, in good conscience, vote for Hilary Clinton, under any circumstances (save for her opponent being Hitler, but that's unlikely as Hitler is dead. Zombie Hitler, that would be impressive.) Hell, I'm inclined to vote in the democratic primary just for the sole purpose of making sure she doesn't get a shot at the Presidency, rather someone decent like Obama.

I'm still a McCain fan, although I'm pretty keen on Giuliani as well..

I find it interesting that you consider Obama to be decent, even though he's well to the left of Clinton by any measure, but that you're also a McCain fan, even though he's as hard right as Bush, especially since he started running for President and fellating the Dobsonites at every opportunity. Curious.

I approve of this t-shirt. Good job! Fuck the liberals.
:D

Arnie plays a nice centrist game... in as much as he hits whichever end of the spectrum is convenient. But then, he's not likely to be a candidate....
You have to be born an American to run for presidency, non?

That's cool - you are offset by people like my mother-in-law, who hates Clinton, but will vote for her under the circumstances that Rice runs - she has said she'd rather vote for any white nominee, than let 'one of them' get in.
Heck, if I were American and she were running, I'd vote for her! True, she has that nasty association with Bush, and I am not sure where she stands on most issues (except that she is right-wing), but given the unlikeliness of Ron Paul winning, she makes a nice alternative.

just mention bill and you can watch them tense up.
Well, to my knowledge, Bill Clinton got a lot more done, and for all his faults, he was certainly more right-wing than Bush was (in terms of economics, anyway). What has Bush done? Oh yes. Exploded the military budget. Clinton? He achieved welfare reform. If most Republicans are too rabid to see this, I can understand why the right-wing is in an ideological crisis.

http://www.juicetyme.com/images/orangeslice.jpgThis is an orange. It represents Ron Paul.

http://plus.maths.org/issue34/outerspace/monkey.jpg
This is a monkey. It represents the system.

That's why he won't be voting for Ron Paul.
http://www.cepolina.com/freephoto/f/nature.fruits.food/banana.jpg

Lemme guess... that's what Hillary, Obama, McCain, Guliani etc. all are? :eek:

How?
http://www.eartheasy.com/live_hybrid_cars.htm

These are surely a good start, no?

Are right-wingers so ashamed to be right-wing that they need to re-name themselves "centrists"?

in my experience, the knowledge that everything about themselves is shameful is a driving force for right-wingers on many issues.

in my experience, the knowledge that everything about themselves is shameful is a driving force for right-wingers on many issues.


That's a good call.

Neither, it's her universal medical care plan that is not deat and the fact she thinks it takes a whole village rather than two parents to raise a child. :eek:

There's a phone call for you. It's 1994; they'd like their bitching points back.

(BTW: for the record, I'm not voting for her either, she's to Machievellian for my taste)

There's a phone call for you. It's 1994; they'd like their bitching points back.

(BTW: for the record, I'm not voting for her either, she's to Machievellian for my taste)

As I've said in the past, I'm no great fan of Hillary--she's third or fourth at best in my list of Democrats in the current race, and could easily fall from there--but is her Machiavellianism a reason not to support her? If anything, that's a plus in my book--I want someone who's going to be able to stick the knife in the opposition and twist it while smiling if necessary, and there are plenty of scenarios where I can envision that necessity.

What I do not understand, and never have, is why people so ardently aganst communism also dislike things like minimum wage, welfare and medicare.

Minimum wage, welfare, and medicare are the primary institutions that prevented a socialist/communist revolution in this country in the first place.

Poor people don't rebel because they're poor. Poor people rebel because they're starving. Poor people who are poor but can survive tend to at least stay somewhat non violent. Poor people on the edge of abysse overthrow governments.

What I do not understand, and never have, is why people so ardently aganst communism also dislike things like minimum wage, welfare and medicare.

Minimum wage, welfare, and medicare are the primary institutions that prevented a socialist/communist revolution in this country in the first place.

Poor people don't rebel because they're poor. Poor people rebel because they're starving. Poor people who are poor but can survive tend to at least stay somewhat non violent. Poor people on the edge of abysse overthrow governments.

It's because they see things like minimum wage, welfare and medicare as extensions of socialism and communism, and they've never had an understanding of what that means really. They think of it in terms like "communist=bad" and they never explore beyond that. In all fairness, it may be because they never learn anything else in their history classes--they're beyond shitty.

...or attach a sail for wind power...

Hell, I want a sailcar. That'd be awesome.

HIlary is so not a communist...jeez. She's like a Republican.

It's because they see things like minimum wage, welfare and medicare as extensions of socialism and communism, and they've never had an understanding of what that means really. They think of it in terms like "communist=bad" and they never explore beyond that. In all fairness, it may be because they never learn anything else in their history classes--they're beyond shitty.

It's also an easy way to insult anyone who disagrees with them on any issue.

As I've said in the past, I'm no great fan of Hillary--she's third or fourth at best in my list of Democrats in the current race, and could easily fall from there--but is her Machiavellianism a reason not to support her? If anything, that's a plus in my book--I want someone who's going to be able to stick the knife in the opposition and twist it while smiling if necessary, and there are plenty of scenarios where I can envision that necessity.

She stikes me as the kind of person who will do anything to further herself; no matter what it does to anyone else. I also feel that way about Giuliani, and I very much fear that may very well be our choice in '08.

As I've said in the past, I'm no great fan of Hillary--she's third or fourth at best in my list of Democrats in the current race, and could easily fall from there--but is her Machiavellianism a reason not to support her? If anything, that's a plus in my book--I want someone who's going to be able to stick the knife in the opposition and twist it while smiling if necessary, and there are plenty of scenarios where I can envision that necessity.

I personally wont vote for her. However with that said I do admire her take no prisoners approach. If she were elected our foreign policy may be very interesting.

She stikes me as the kind of person who will do anything to further herself; no matter what it does to anyone else. I also feel that way about Giuliani, and I very much fear that may very well be our choice in '08.

Couldn't you say that for just about any politician that has made it to the white house?

Couldn't you say that for just about any politician that has made it to the white house?

Touché. Most aren't quite so open about it, though. Personally, I've had enough of "Imperial Presidency" since 2001.

Fifth Law of the Internet: Anyone who disagrees with you is a communist. (Alternately, a homosexual, or a Nazi, or a psychopath.)

The internet is like my crazy Grandma.

And, that person is none other than; http://www.thoseshirts.com/images/square-med-redefeat.gif

We have ordered out T shirts, and ordered one for her brother.

If you would like one of these shirts or a shirt for your dog check this out, http://www.thoseshirts.com/

Give me a break, your mind was made up in 2004 - and you've been telegraphing your sentiments capably ever since then. Did it warrant a new thread? Wait, what am I asking, of course it did - there was a crass, humourless new t-shirt to put on display, wasn't there?

All the difference in the world. I can't wait for you and Mrs. Celtlund to make yet another pronouncement when the new bumper-stickers come out.

Riveting.

What I do not understand, and never have, is why people so ardently aganst communism also dislike things like minimum wage, welfare and medicare.

Minimum wage, welfare, and medicare are the primary institutions that prevented a socialist/communist revolution in this country in the first place.

Poor people don't rebel because they're poor. Poor people rebel because they're starving. Poor people who are poor but can survive tend to at least stay somewhat non violent. Poor people on the edge of abysse overthrow governments.

You're making way too much sense for some people here.

Of course, your idea has been around for a long time. It was consensual in successive governments in Victorian Britain. Hence why Disraeli, through his social policies, was known as the "man who had refuted Marx", by trying to do... well, exactly what you're saying.

It seems some Americans (and others) have yet to catch up with the nineteenth century...

She stikes me as the kind of person who will do anything to further herself; no matter what it does to anyone else. I also feel that way about Giuliani, and I very much fear that may very well be our choice in '08.

And if it is, I'll vote for Hillary and never feel bad about it, but in the meantime, I'm going to do what I can locally to make sure she's not one of the options.

How?

Replace gasoline (oil) with bio fuels made from plants. :rolleyes:

Like you were ever going to vote for her anyway. :rolleyes:

Hell no, and I don't think others should either. By the way, the shirts came in the mail today :) and they look great. Think I'll wear mine when I go shopping at ALDIS tomorrow.

http://www.thoseshirts.com/images/square-med-redefeat.gif

I find it interesting that you consider Obama to be decent, even though he's well to the left of Clinton by any measure, but that you're also a McCain fan, even though he's as hard right as Bush, especially since he started running for President and fellating the Dobsonites at every opportunity. Curious.

McCain is not as right as Bush. He is now, was then, and always has been a centrist. :rolleyes: He is the antithesis of Liberman.

Replace gasoline (oil) with bio fuels made from plants. :rolleyes:
Ah yes, you mean the plan to make oil from corn that would require a new corn field the size of Nebraska correct?

McCain is not as right as Bush. He is now, was then, and always has been a centrist. :rolleyes: He is the antithesis of Liberman.

Bullshit. McCain sold himself as a centrist in 2000 to win support but since then he's shown himself to beevery bit a neocon as Bush. McCain is a RINO INO.

McCain is not as right as Bush. He is now, was then, and always has been a centrist. :rolleyes: He is the antithesis of Liberman.

Bullshit (http://therealmccain.com/). Educate yourself.

Ah yes, you mean the plan to make oil from corn that would require a new corn field the size of Nebraska correct?

And would require more oil to grow it all.

And would require more oil to grow it all.

Hmmm. No nuclear power because of the problem disposing of it. No bio fuel because of the above. No oil because of the polution and the fact it is running out. No coal because of the polution and the same for natural gas. I guess I'm left with no electricity, candles, and cooking on...on...NO, NO not wood...eat your chicken raw?

Get real,bio fuel can be made from a renewable source and if you really wanted to you could grow the plants organically and use mules and horse to plow and harvest. :rolleyes: Give me a break.

What do you propose for alternative energy?

And, that person is none other than; http://www.thoseshirts.com/images/square-med-redefeat.gif

We have ordered out T shirts, and ordered one for her brother.

If you would like one of these shirts or a shirt for your dog check this out, http://www.thoseshirts.com/

Yeah I'm not into her winning and changing the name to the United Socialist States of America.

And if it is, I'll vote for Hillary and never feel bad about it, but in the meantime, I'm going to do what I can locally to make sure she's not one of the options.

Other than Obama who suffers from his inexperience, I don't see any other Democrat who can combat Hillary which is most definately a shame.

Ah yes, you mean the plan to make oil from corn that would require a new corn field the size of Nebraska correct?
was there something else you wanted to do with Nebraska? :confused:

Hmmm. No nuclear power because of the problem disposing of it. No bio fuel because of the above. No oil because of the polution and the fact it is running out. No coal because of the polution and the same for natural gas. I guess I'm left with no electricity, candles, and cooking on...on...NO, NO not wood...eat your chicken raw?

Get real,bio fuel can be made from a renewable source and if you really wanted to you could grow the plants organically and use mules and horse to plow and harvest. :rolleyes: Give me a break.

What do you propose for alternative energy?
Me? I'm a big fan of wind and solar for starters, of increased energy efficiency, of changing our society over from individual vehicles to large people movers, i.e. trains and electric buses. Ethanol can be a short-term part of the solution, but not a long term part of it because it doesn't address the emissions problem and it doesn't give you much in the way of net energy.

And by the way, I'm not wholly against nuclear either--I just don't think it's a cure-all.

Hmmm. No nuclear power because of the problem disposing of it. No bio fuel because of the above. No oil because of the polution and the fact it is running out. No coal because of the polution and the same for natural gas. I guess I'm left with no electricity, candles, and cooking on...on...NO, NO not wood...eat your chicken raw?

Get real,bio fuel can be made from a renewable source and if you really wanted to you could grow the plants organically and use mules and horse to plow and harvest. :rolleyes: Give me a break.

What do you propose for alternative energy?

most of us actually are rather in favor of safely utilized nuclear energy, as long as the material is disposed of propertly.

By properly I mean generally in giant concrete holes surrounded in 12 feet of steel.

was there something else you wanted to do with Nebraska? :confused:
Not particularly, but the people actually living in Nebraska might be slightly annoyed.

snip...of changing our society over from individual vehicles to large people movers, i.e. trains and electric buses.

The biggest problem with that is the US has become a suburban society and is spread out When I was growing up in the late 50s and early 60s I lived in a suburb of Boston. They have an excellent mass transit system consisting of electric trolies, subways and trains. They were the best way to get into Boston because even if you didn't have traffic on the expressway once you got into the city the traffic was murder and finding a place to park was both difficult and expensive. But people moved out beyond the "close in suburbs" and at the time it was not practical to extend the public transportation.

In many other places, like Oklahoma, the public transportation system was never really there. There is no public transportation from where I live to Tulsa or even the local shopping centers and it is the same way in most of the US.

Although I agree that would be the ideal situation, to build a public transportation system in the US similar to the ones in most European countries would be prohibitively expensive, probably more expensive than alternative fuels.

Me? I'm a big fan of wind and solar for starters, of increased energy efficiency, of changing our society over from individual vehicles to large people movers, i.e. trains and electric buses. Ethanol can be a short-term part of the solution, but not a long term part of it because it doesn't address the emissions problem and it doesn't give you much in the way of net energy.

And by the way, I'm not wholly against nuclear either--I just don't think it's a cure-all.

Nuclear, for large-scale power programmes such as maintaining the national power grid, is a beautiful thing, but due to the public's irrational fear of it, resarch has effectively been ground to a halt. THe potential for fusion power is limitless (granted, that's long-term), and for the moment, breeder reactors are a wonderful and practical possibility. The Integral Fast Reactor is a great start, and if they can find something other than pure sodium to cool it, or at least make a way to make the sodium less dangerous, then you have quite a bit of the problem solved.

The biggest problem with that is the US has become a suburban society and is spread out When I was growing up in the late 50s and early 60s I lived in a suburb of Boston. They have an excellent mass transit system consisting of electric trolies, subways and trains. They were the best way to get into Boston because even if you didn't have traffic on the expressway once you got into the city the traffic was murder and finding a place to park was both difficult and expensive. But people moved out beyond the "close in suburbs" and at the time it was not practical to extend the public transportation.

In many other places, like Oklahoma, the public transportation system was never really there. There is no public transportation from where I live to Tulsa or even the local shopping centers and it is the same way in most of the US.

Although I agree that would be the ideal situation, to build a public transportation system in the US similar to the ones in most European countries would be prohibitively expensive, probably more expensive than alternative fuels.Suck it up--we're going to have to build them sooner rather than later, because the days of personal transportation are coming to an end.