Forget it.i think a liberal could take a giant shit in your living room,
and you'd spin it as some new great social program.
Ann Coultier could whip out her penis and start beating it against Sam's
head, and he'd claim it was good for the economy some how.
What a joke. You partisans claim to
So you just can't do it without watering down the meaning.
So you just can't admit that hypocrisy is rampant on all sides of the spectrum?
It's only hypocrisy in its truest form when you oppose the viewpoint
of the one you're accusing of hypocrisy?
But for fuck's sake don't let that stop you
true enough
On 2/27/07, Robert Munn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, that's all part of his shtick, but I don't think he is any more of a
poseur in that sense than most politicians. I've always wondered how much of
the born-again thing was real and how much was for show, but again he would
Meh. I just don't have time to attempt to prove or disprove. Or maybe
it's too much apathy. I just can't get excited over Gore's electric
bill. Perhaps it's hypocrisy, I dunno -- I'd have to look at whether
he actually preached that people *should* something rather than merely
listed things you
Speaking of which -- here's a good one; I was listening to a story
about this on the way to work this morning.
How feds' top environmental prosecutor built home with big-oil lobbyist
By John Heilprin
By John Heilprin
WASHINGTON -- A House committee will investigate and request documents
on a
On 2/28/07, G Money [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ann Coultier could whip out her penis and start beating it against Sam's
head, and he'd claim it was good for the economy some how.
Gee, thanks for that visual.
What a joke. You partisans claim to be able to see through your
biaswell, not from
Sam wrote:
Is he a hypocrite or not?
As previously mentioned, if he believes in offsets then no. If he
doesn't then yes.
Take Dell: in order to ensure their power hungry PCs are green they're
asking for a donation to offset. In this way you can't call them
hypocritical for making PCs but
On 2/28/07, William Bowen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So you just can't admit that hypocrisy is rampant on all sides of the
spectrum?
It's only hypocrisy in its truest form when you oppose the viewpoint
of the one you're accusing of hypocrisy?
We are talking about Al Gore, and instead of saying
I'm not sure whether I agree with Gruss. I think I might, but I have
to think about it.
My answer however is that I don't know. If he is though, he is a
hypocrite in a relatively small way, especially when compared to
people who claim to represent the people of the United States of
America yet
I didn't want to mention Gores connection to ConocoPhillips, I figured
it was a different issue.
On 2/28/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Speaking of which -- here's a good one; I was listening to a story
about this on the way to work this morning.
We are talking about Al Gore, and instead of saying yes, he is a
hypocrite, you insist on saying: everyone does it so it is the norm.
It is not. By pointing to Bush and Rush you are telling people to
ignore the man behind the curtain.
Please only put quotes around words I actually say.
1. I
I didn't want to mention Gores connection to ConocoPhillips, I figured
it was a different issue.
oh, oh! I own stock in ConocoPhillips, can I be implicated too!?!
--
will
If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that would just be unacceptable.
- Carrie Fisher
Let's use a better analogy.
I get 32 miles a gallon and you get 18. Therefore, you pay me for
8-mile credits and we are both at 25. In reality you justified using
more without cutting anything because I was not planning to max out my
carbon footprint anyway. Where is the savings?
If you went
On 2/28/07, William Bowen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. I did say Gore is a hypocrite. I pointed out Rush, Bush and
Clinton, simply because you _only_ get apoplectic about hypocrisy when
it is the guy with the opposing viewpoint.
However, those are different threads.
Well good for you Sam,
You are correct
http://www.thenation.com/doc/2522/silverstein/
On 2/28/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My answer however is that I don't know. If he is though, he is a
hypocrite in a relatively small way, especially when compared to
people who claim to represent the people of the
feel free...has he given them a pass on cleaning up any toxic waste
dumps lately?
On 2/28/07, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I didn't want to mention Gores connection to ConocoPhillips, I figured
it was a different issue.
On 2/28/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Speaking of which -- here's a
where's the fun in that?
On 2/28/07, William Bowen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I didn't want to mention Gores connection to ConocoPhillips, I figured
it was a different issue.
oh, oh! I own stock in ConocoPhillips, can I be implicated too!?!
--
will
If my life weren't funny, it would
But Dana, that's the core of the issue. Gore has spent the last decade
pimping the idea that we are on the road to wiping out the entire planet,
and he is doing far more than the average American, and certainly far, far
more than the average person on the planet, to make it come true.
On 2/28/07,
has he? Is he? I'm still looking for the point of Sammy's link
Dana
On 2/28/07, Robert Munn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But Dana, that's the core of the issue. Gore has spent the last decade
pimping the idea that we are on the road to wiping out the entire planet,
and he is doing far more
I am correct am I? About what? This link seems to have been posted in
a sarcastic attempt to show that Gore is a bad person, but I don't see
anything here about waiving enforcement. It says that Gore's dad owned
stock in Occidental, that Occidental gave Gore Jr campaign
contributions and that the
I am correct am I? About what? This link seems to have been posted in
an attempt to show that Gore is a bad person, but I don't see anything
here about waiving enforcement. It says that Gore's dad owned stock in
Occidental, that
On 2/28/07, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are correct
My bad, wrong link.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/2522/silverstein/2
Here's a tidbit:
Occidental's investment in Gore has paid rich dividends. In late 1997
the Vice President championed the Administration's $3.65 billion sale
to the company of the government's interest in the Elk Hills
oops. The end of the paragraph was that it says that Occidental gave
Gore campain contributions and that Clinton administration policies
may have helped Occidental to drill in Columbia. All interesting if
true and let's assume for a moment it is; it still doesn't really
connect any dots does it?
On the very day the deal was sealed Gore gave a speech lamenting the
growing threat of global warming
It actually connects the dots about the Gore GW hypocrisy. You threw
in some lady I never heard of postponing for a year or two, not
cancelling a cleanup. While I agree she was wrong, those dots
To anyone not enfatuated with him or his ideas, yes he is. This is a pure case
of perception. Gore puts forth the perception that he is super green. He
tells us we need to live a lifestyle reducing CO2 emmisions because that is the
greatest cause of global warming.
Now we learn that for the
tell that to Elkton MD as they live with their Superfund site :) that
lady was in charge of enforcing pollution law. For the entire
country. Arguably more powerful than a vice-president.
On 2/28/07, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On the very day the deal was sealed Gore gave a speech lamenting the
What does she have to do with Al Gore? Can we stay focused? Do you
want to start a new thread about how this awful woman is creating
global warming?
On 2/28/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
tell that to Elkton MD as they live with their Superfund site :) that
lady was in charge of enforcing
I thought the topic was hypocrisy? That was what got her mentioned as
a poster child. ::shrug:: If it's Al Gore, whatever. He's a yawn even
when he's in bed in the Lincoln Room with a lobbyist.
On 2/28/07, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What does she have to do with Al Gore? Can we stay focused?
Sam wrote:
If you went around the world and balanced everyone's carbon footprint,
we could all use more without guilt. It is stupid.
It's not about *us* doing it, it's about *you* doing it. So, for
example, let's say that because my car gets 12mpg I decide that
anything under 100mpg is not
On 2/28/07, Gruss Gott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The theory being that the Earth can stand only, say, 100 carbon units
per year. If we trade carbon units on a carbon market such that the
end result is 95 carbon units per year, we're carbon negative.
So, maybe your allocation is 1 carbon
Sam actually has a point. Alert the media.
:)
who loves ya, Sam.
Dana
How did that money lower your carbon footprint? Did the government
plant trees with that money? That tax is to discourage you from
polluting but I see it did not work. I guess having money affords you
the right to force
Sam wrote:
How much carbon did you prevent? None. I did all the saving and you
decide my doing the work was good enough rather than having everyone
chip in.
Alot! You didn't use a car, earned a credit, and I bought it from
you. Therefore I own your work and the benefits; just like your
lol ;-)
On 2/26/07, Gruss wrote:
RoMunn wrote:
GORE MANSION USES 20X AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD
Oh you're just jealous because Gore has a mansion and hollywood chicks.
--
---
Robert Munn
www.funkymojo.com
~|
Consider Jean-Paul Sarte, who says that existence precedes essence, that we
exist as a blank slate and then define ourselves through our actions. We are
what we are because of our actions.
On 2/26/07, Dinner wrote:
While what someone does, can be nifty, that shouldn't be what
you base your
and furthermore that failure to act makes you less than human, and
that some action, even imperfect, is better than none...see The Flies.
Also that hell is other people :) (see No Exit)
so why concern yourself with them? Seriously, maybe he needs the
electricity for his grow lights ;) who knows?
More accountability. I don't think you should be able to say whoops,
that batch of drugs is toxic, so let's sell it in South America. Or
gee, we could clean up our toxic slop from the 50s but it's so much
easier to just be reborn as another company and let Superfund pick up
the tab.
I don't have
You don't care that his entire public crusade against Global Warming has
been an attempt to get YOU to do things that he is either unable, or
unwilling, to do himself?
That doesn't bug you in the least
I've always thought Gore was a big old douche bag...so none of this
surprises me in the
has it? What does he advocate exactly?
On 2/27/07, G Money [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You don't care that his entire public crusade against Global Warming has
been an attempt to get YOU to do things that he is either unable, or
unwilling, to do himself?
That doesn't bug you in the least
Tuesdays chuckle:
Ann Coulter: I kind of respect him more, it shows he is not stupid
enough to believe all this global warming nonsense. He's trying to get
us to believe. Okay, fine, he may be a hypocrite but at least he's not
a moron.
On 2/27/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
has it? What does
who cares what Ann Coulter thinks?
On 2/27/07, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tuesdays chuckle:
Ann Coulter: I kind of respect him more, it shows he is not stupid
enough to believe all this global warming nonsense. He's trying to get
us to believe. Okay, fine, he may be a hypocrite but at
Tuesdays chuckle:
Then she ate a kitten.
:-P
--
will
If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that would just be unacceptable.
- Carrie Fisher
~|
ColdFusion MX7 and Flex 2
Build sales marketing dashboard
alive :)
On 2/27/07, William Bowen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tuesdays chuckle:
Then she ate a kitten.
:-P
--
will
If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that would just be unacceptable.
- Carrie Fisher
alive :)
well, yeah.
--
will
If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that would just be unacceptable.
- Carrie Fisher
~|
Create Web Applications With ColdFusion MX7 Flex 2.
Build powerful, scalable RIAs. Free
Is that your way of sneaking in an Ann's a man dig?
On 2/27/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
alive :)
On 2/27/07, William Bowen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then she ate a kitten.
~|
Create robust enterprise, web RIAs.
Upgrade
Is that your way of sneaking in an Ann's a man dig?
uh... yes?
:-P
alive :)
Then she ate a kitten.
--
will
If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that would just be unacceptable.
- Carrie Fisher
~|
::blinks:
is that what real men do?
;)
Dana
On 2/27/07, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is that your way of sneaking in an Ann's a man dig?
On 2/27/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
alive :)
On 2/27/07, William Bowen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then she ate a kitten.
In his movie he advocates that people should conserve electricity in their
homes to prevent global warming. Nuf said!
And BTW, the story is accurate:
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=nation_worldid=5072659
Kalee Kreider, a spokesperson for the Gores, did not dispute the Center's
I don't know that your link proves that he's a hypocrite. If you read
it, it says that they are upgrading the house to make it more
weatherproof. Presumably with power tools. I haven't seen the movie or
read anything he's written on the topic but it seems to me that
reducing unnecessary usage
Dana wrote:
has it? What does he advocate exactly?
Anyone? Anybody? Heelll?
~|
Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7
The most significant release in over 10 years. Upgrade see new features.
On 2/27/07, Gruss Gott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dana wrote:
has it? What does he advocate exactly?
Anyone? Anybody? Heelll?
Sheesh. EVERYONE knows he's all 'bout the kitten eating.
Live kittens.
~|
ColdFusion MX7
Go on and type it: H Y P O C R I T E.
I know you can do it.
If he uses that much power to screw in fluorescent light bulbs and a
few solar panels I'll pass.
According to this op-ed he never signed on for green energy:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-08-09-gore-green_x.htm
On 2/27/07, G Money [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You don't care that his entire public crusade against Global Warming has
been an attempt to get YOU to do things that he is either unable, or
unwilling, to do himself?
That doesn't bug you in the least
Well, from a logical perspective, HELL
Why don't you buy his movie so he can pay his electric bill.
On 2/27/07, Gruss Gott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyone? Anybody? Heelll?
~|
ColdFusion MX7 and Flex 2
Build sales marketing dashboard RIAâs for your
Dude stop bogarting and pass the sh!t around
On 2/27/07, Dinner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That doesn't bug you in the least
Well, from a logical perspective, HELL NO!
You'd be retarded to base your actions on what other people do.
Sorta. I mean, it IS a giant video game, with just
On 2/27/07, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Go on and type it: H Y P O C R I T E.
Why does that bug you so much? We've already got no child left behind,
homeland security, the defense department, and a President!
I'd rather everyone all up in arms about global warming than telling me
Irakeez were
'prolly stress induced, don't wanna pass that around.
Sike. I'm on cloud nine, at all times. Here, try some!
/me passes a bit of cloud 9 Sambo's way
On 2/27/07, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dude stop bogarting and pass the sh!t around
On 2/27/07, Dinner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because I want her to notice that her emperor has no clothes
On 2/27/07, Dinner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why does that bug you so much? We've already got no child left behind,
homeland security, the defense department, and a President!
but see Sam... I don't care whether he does or not ;) And I'm assuming
you mean Gore? If you ask me emperor is kinda a wierd thing to call
him. Maybe Freudian.
Look at all the power you're giving him. A whole afternoon you wasted,
being pissed off over someone else's electric bill. And a
Go on and type it: H Y P O C R I T E.
Gore's a hypocrite and so's Rush.
and Bush
and Clinton
and you
and me
we're all hypocritical about something.
Should Gore be reducing his emissions? Absolutely. Is it hypocritical
of him to not practice as he preaches? prolly. But for fuck's sake
don't let
nice answer. Have some cloud nine. Go on --- you know you wanna. How
long has it been since you guys saw the sun up there?
On 2/27/07, William Bowen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Go on and type it: H Y P O C R I T E.
Gore's a hypocrite and so's Rush.
and Bush
and Clinton
and you
and me
we're
nice answer. Have some cloud nine. Go on --- you know you wanna. How
long has it been since you guys saw the sun up there?
heh. sunshine this morning as a matter of fact. quite nice.
wierd day, though.
--
will
If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that would just be
o. Sunbreaks! in Seattle! In February! that *is* wierd.
Dana
On 2/27/07, William Bowen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
nice answer. Have some cloud nine. Go on --- you know you wanna. How
long has it been since you guys saw the sun up there?
heh. sunshine this morning as a matter of fact.
o. Sunbreaks! in Seattle! In February! that *is* wierd.
hehe yeah
:-)
--
will
If my life weren't funny, it would just be true;
and that would just be unacceptable.
- Carrie Fisher
~|
Deploy Web Applications Quickly
The difference is that Al Gore has spent the better part of the last decade
on a very public, alarmist crusade to warn the world that we are all about
to die because of our gluttony and disregard for the planet, and he is doing
more individually than almost anyone to f#ck it up! He wrote a book
WillBo wrote:
Should Gore be reducing his emissions? Absolutely. Is it hypocritical
of him to not practice as he preaches? prolly. But for fuck's sake
don't let that stop you from doing what you can do.
Just playing devil's advocate, there is a difference between a
*general* policy and an
ok. Feel better now?
Here's what I *don't* understand. If hypocrisy upsets you this much...
how can I ask this politelyhow can you defend Bush? I mean... he's
a demonstrated liar and he's in a position to do a LOT of damage. Why
does he get a by?
On 2/27/07, Robert Munn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 2/27/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
but see Sam... I don't care whether he does or not ;) And I'm assuming
you mean Gore? If you ask me emperor is kinda a wierd thing to call
him. Maybe Freudian.
I guess you never heard the story.
Look at all the power you're giving him. A whole
Yes, I feel better with that out of my system, thank you.
Bush doesn't get a pass. I don't know about demonstrated liar. If you are
referring to Iraq I think he believed the WMD thing at the time, as did
many, many others with access to the same information as Bush.
Bush deserved to get thumped
On 2/27/07, William Bowen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gore's a hypocrite and so's Rush.
and Bush
and Clinton
and you
and me
we're all hypocritical about something.
So you just can't do it without watering down the meaning.
But for fuck's sake don't let that stop you from doing what you can
Offsets are total BS.
Wait, no they aren't.
Why don't you send me a check for $1,000 and I won't eat tofu for a
year. That'll make up for all the damage your car is causing.
On 2/27/07, Gruss Gott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To complete the point, while Gore may use a lot of electricity he may
OK good. And good to hear it. Even though what I am hearing is that in
spite of it all you still think he's basicallya good guy who got in
over his head. THat's something, though I personally believe that that
persona of the your next door neighbor, who's a bit of a schmuck, is
carefully
Does it bother you that Carter pronounces it the same way?
On 2/27/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
smarminess? I *really* think it's carefully cultivated. Look, evryone
else in his family can pronounce nuclear
~|
Create
Sam wrote:
Offsets are total BS.
YOU say they are, but if Gore doesn't then he isn't a hypocrite.
~|
Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7
The most significant release in over 10 years. Upgrade see new features.
It doesn't bother me that *Bush* pronounces it that way, except that I
think it's deliberate and carefully cultivated.
On 2/27/07, Sam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does it bother you that Carter pronounces it the same way?
On 2/27/07, Dana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
smarminess? I *really* think
He'd be a moron. Maybe I'll ask him for the check.
On 2/27/07, Gruss Gott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
YOU say they are, but if Gore doesn't then he isn't a hypocrite.
~|
Upgrade to Adobe ColdFusion MX7
The most significant
Yes, that's all part of his shtick, but I don't think he is any more of a
poseur in that sense than most politicians. I've always wondered how much of
the born-again thing was real and how much was for show, but again he would
hardly be setting a new standard there.
On 2/27/07, Dana wrote:
It
Dana wrote:
In modern American law corporations have the rights of persons bu none
of he responsibilities.
Assuming all of this is true (I'm no legal scholar), then it's still
not a problem with corporations: the first four words of you sentence
are In modern American Law.
Moving along at near super-sonic speeds,
Capt. Gott pulls the eject lever.
On 2/26/07, Gruss Gott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Assuming all of this is true (I'm no legal scholar), then it's still
not a problem with corporations: the first four words of you sentence
are In modern American
of course it is. You are splitting hairs. Exactly what legal
environment do you think we live in? Problems in modern American law
are problems that exist here today. ::eyeroll:: If you are trying to
say that it is a lagal problem, the answer again is of course. A
corporation is a legal entity. You
Have you read Post Capitalist Society, by Peter Drucker? We are
corporations, because we own them, bit by bit, through funds and pensions.
Corporations do not have the responsibilities of individuals, but the
individuals who make up the staff and shareholders of corporations do.
Pension plans and
I separate them just fine Robert it's just that saying that well,
RJ Reynolds killed a million people or two pushing a product that they
knew damn well was lethal, but their stockholders who made a profit
thereby are all really nice people individually just doesn't do it for
me somehow. I hear
Dana wrote:
of course. A
corporation is a legal entity. You are patronizing the wrong girl,
Let's try this from a different angle: if you claim that corporations
are a huge problem, what is it that you claim is the solution?
well they are pretty entrenched you know, so that's a big question. I
suppose that campaign finance reform might be a start. It's a start
that would probably take 30 years to take effect, but it's a start.
On 2/26/07, Gruss Gott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dana wrote:
of course. A
corporation
Dana wrote:
well they are pretty entrenched you know, so that's a big question. I
suppose that campaign finance reform might be a start. It's a start
that would probably take 30 years to take effect, but it's a start.
What's the goal? The elimination of corporations or better regulation
or
Back to the original point of the thread, I just saw this little tidbit on
Drudge:
*
*
POWER: GORE MANSION USES 20X AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD; CONSUMPTION INCREASE AFTER
'TRUTH'
Mon Feb 26 2007 17:16:14 ET
The Tennessee Center for Policy Research, an independent, nonprofit and
nonpartisan research
While what someone does, can be nifty, that shouldn't be what
you base your decisions on.
Rather, there's this Buddha quote:
Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not
believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many.
Do not believe in anything simply
RoMunn wrote:
GORE MANSION USES 20X AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD
Oh you're just jealous because Gore has a mansion and hollywood chicks.
~|
Deploy Web Applications Quickly across the enterprise with ColdFusion MX7
Flex 2.
Free Trial
Dana wrote:
yes, Gruss, there is. Pity you can't see that.
Well, Dana, if you think so, pity you can't explain it.
~|
Deploy Web Applications Quickly across the enterprise with ColdFusion MX7
Flex 2.
Free Trial
I liked these two:
http://tinyurl.com/2kp7nr
http://tinyurl.com/3adugw
From this thread:
http://tinyurl.com/3blyfl
I think we all agree, Corps ain't perfect.
And could be better.
Aren't we all sorta saying the same thing?
BUT:
cf-community is like a group of common purpose people
i'm behind at work and on 2 side products and i know how deaf you can
be. And I'm pecking all this out on a tablet. I plain don't have time
to play, except that the smug tone of the early part of this thread
got to me.
but ok. Did you ever see the movie A Civil Affair?
you're deliberately misunderstanding me. The city council is not in
the business of taking land. It may from time to time, but on the
whole, this is not what it is about.
Corporations on the other hand are about maximizing shareholder
return, ie profit. All that is ALL that they are concerned
Dana wrote:
you're deliberately misunderstanding me. The city council is not in
the business of taking land.
That's completely logically inconsistent. City Councils are in the
business of maximizing citizen value and that's all they're in the
business to do. If they think your house does
yes, Gruss, there is. Pity you can't see that.
The point being that there's nothing special about a corporation that
makes it any different than any other group of humans gathered for a
common purpose.
~|
Macromedia
I don't disagree with you. In this case the people in opposition lost. What
that says to me is that you don't always win.
On 2/22/07, Dana wrote:
I think the Navaho *council* has decided that the benefits outweigh
the risks.
So government as a check on corporate interests - not. Not in
Dana wrote:
I'm not opposed to corporations per se... that's a little straw man
you set up
N ... you set it up. You said, corporations would have us
believe otherwise, but since when did they have our best interests in
mind
And I pointed out that their interests are aligned with what you
not at all. I don o 't give a damn what Walmart's quarterly earnings
are like, so how could our interests coincide? You've been drinking
the koolaid again:)
On 2/23/07, Gruss Gott [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dana wrote:
I'm not opposed to corporations per se... that's a little straw man
you
So don't tell checks and balances are protecting me , or I will laugh ;)
On 2/23/07, Robert Munn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't disagree with you. In this case the people in opposition lost. What
that says to me is that you don't always win.
On 2/22/07, Dana wrote:
I think the Navaho
WalMart wrote:
not at all. I don o 't give a damn what Walmart's quarterly earnings
are like, so how could our interests coincide? You've been drinking
the koolaid again:)
So what about the city council that stomps on a family farm or takes a
family's property that's been in their family for
Yes you're right and the book looks interesting to say the least.
PS Michael: I notice my email address is appearing whenever someone responds to
a posting I made - any chance that this can be removed in the future?
thanks, Andrew.
The article doesn't actually say anything...guess we need to
He also believes in Manbearpig.
On 2/21/07, Robert Munn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am skeptical of the science around GW in general, that's not the issue.
Al
Gore believes it, so he ought to live by what he believes.
--
She's a PhD in I told you so
You've a knighthood in I'm not listening
1 - 100 of 148 matches
Mail list logo
