O/T: OLd Farts

On Jan 14, 4:00 pm, Greg G.<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> One month in office entitles them to lifetime healthcare, retirement,
> and security benefits. When is the last time YOU got a perk like
> that? If you or I performed as poorly on the job as these clowns, we
> would all be unemployed. And so should they.
>
> It seems where ever there are people, someone takes it upon themselves
> to foist an ineffectual government of self-serving slackers upon them.
> So excuse the rant, I've got to decide where I'm moving to next...
>

'Pay for our sins to keep out Lords in Animal Skins.
Pay for our acts to keep out Lords in white cadillacs."

-- Crack the Sky

--

FF

thanks. at the risk of dating myself, I was involved with an early
incarnation of the internet in the late 60's early 70's. I think around
that time there were several versions, BITNET ( memory's dim but I think
this came a bit later and was the genesis of USENET), APRANET, DARAPNET,
etc.

I don't know how old Al Gore is, but suspect he was still in diapers around
then.


"Greg G." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Greg G. said:
>
>>Glen said:
>>
>>>I hate seeing AlGore's invention getting abused this way.
>>
>>Minorly amusing. Except that Al Gore never actually made that claim.
>>Just another media-created load of BS.
>
> And before I am accosted by either right-wing or left-wing hyperbole,
> look here: http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp
>
> I am living in a nation of media polarized, out of context five second
> sound bite consuming, non-analytical minded, bandwagon jumping sheep.
>
> Beam me up, Scotty...
>
>
> Greg G.

"Greg G." wrote

> Glen said:
>
>>I hate seeing AlGore's invention getting abused this way.
>
> Minorly amusing. Except that Al Gore never actually made that claim.
> Just another media-created load of BS.

Personally, I love seeing Al Gore's creation getting abused this way.


--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 12/14/07
KarlC@ (the obvious)

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 13:39:09 -0500, Tanus <[email protected]> wrote:

>I'm still puzzling over the Fuckometer.
>Does it mean that I don't give a fuck if
>it's Zero, or does that mean I really care?
>
>OTOH, could it be that at full scale,
>5000 is the ultimate in DontGiveAFuck?
>
>Currently that meter is reading nothing,
>so does that mean,if the former is true,
>that Rob don't give a fuck, or does it
>mean the meter isn't hooked up?
>
>More information is required, I'm afraid.

It's only puzzling for people who think "I could care less" is an
effective expression of their indifference. If one recognizes that the
only proper such expression is "I couldn't care less" than the
Fuckometer is perfeclty understandable.

I only asked Rob to modify it so I could use my own pet phrase which
posits that the instrument has yet to be devised which could measure
my indifference. In other words, I couldn't care less.



--
LRod

Master Woodbutcher and seasoned termite

Shamelessly whoring my website since 1999

http://www.woodbutcher.net
http://www.normstools.com

Proud participant of rec.woodworking since February, 1997

email addy de-spam-ified due to 1,000 spams per month.
If you can't figure out how to use it, I probably wouldn't
care to correspond with you anyway.

"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Old but still funny.

And still not true, Snopes.com is real useful when checking out these urban
myths.

"todd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>>> Old but still funny.
>>
>> And still not true, Snopes.com is real useful when checking out these
>> urban myths.
>
> I presumed it was a joke.

It was widely circulated as fact, some versions even naming the newspaper
where it supposedly originally appeared.

It's at the point where I'm beginning to suspect not everything one reads on
the internet is true, shocking, but it sure looks that way. ;^)

I hate seeing AlGore's invention getting abused this way.

Glen

--
"When you men get home and face an anti-war protester, look him in the eyes
and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend, because she knows she's
dating a pussy."

General Tommy Franks


"Greg G." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> DGDevin said:
>
>>
>>"todd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>>> Old but still funny.
>>>>
>>>> And still not true, Snopes.com is real useful when checking out these
>>>> urban myths.
>>>
>>> I presumed it was a joke.
>>
>>It was widely circulated as fact, some versions even naming the newspaper
>>where it supposedly originally appeared.
>>
>>It's at the point where I'm beginning to suspect not everything one reads
>>on
>>the internet is true, shocking, but it sure looks that way. ;^)
>
> Tis what happens when the Internet ceases to be the domain of
> academics and engineers and turns into a tool of commerce for idiots.
>
>
> Greg G.

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

>
> "Greg G." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Glen said:
>>
>>>I hate seeing AlGore's invention getting abused this way.
>>
>> Minorly amusing. Except that Al Gore never actually made that claim.
>> Just another media-created load of BS.
>>
>>
>>
>> Greg G.
>
> If you read the actual quote, the word "created" was used by him. Sloppy
> (or cunning) use on his part. Red what he said and see how it can easily
> be interpreted as such
> http://www.snopes.com:80/quotes/internet.asp

Yep, that along with his having "discovered" Love Canal, and he and Tipper
being the inspiration for "Love Story" were all about conflating his
somewhat minimal achievements as a US senator into being worthy of the
office of president.

Of course he has grown beyond that now and is working to fight the
Earth's "fever". Anybody have any ideas where he intends to stick the
thermometer?

--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Greg G. wrote:

> Mark & Juanita said:
>
>>Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Greg G." <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> Glen said:
>>>>
>>>>>I hate seeing AlGore's invention getting abused this way.
>>>>
>>>> Minorly amusing. Except that Al Gore never actually made that claim.
>>>> Just another media-created load of BS.
>>>>
>>>
>>> If you read the actual quote, the word "created" was used by him.
>>> Sloppy
>>> (or cunning) use on his part. Red what he said and see how it can
>>> easily be interpreted as such
>>> http://www.snopes.com:80/quotes/internet.asp
>>
>> Yep, that along with his having "discovered" Love Canal, and he and
>> Tipper
>>being the inspiration for "Love Story" were all about conflating his
>>somewhat minimal achievements as a US senator into being worthy of the
>>office of president.
>
> OMG, like any of these clowns possess more worthy claims to the job?
>
> Bush? A pathetic moron sock puppet riding his father's coattails.
> Clinton? A coin operated tool.
> Reagan, for Gods sake? Thompson? Get serious - another actor?
> Freakin' Gulianni? A noun, a verb and 9/11?
> Halliburton "Go Fuck Yourself" Cheney?
>
> Need I continue?
> At least Gore was well meaning, affable, not criminal or on the take.

You seem to have forgotten his "no overriding legal authority" remark vis
a vis a certain bunch of donations from some Buddhist nuns (who supposedly
had taken vows of poverty).


> He wasn't a hypocritical,

Let's see, jetting around the world in a private Gulfstream while
lecturing the rest of us on our need to reduce our "carbon footprints",
living in a house with annual energy bills greater than the entire income
of many US families again while railing against greenhouse gases and the
need to reduce consumption, pushing people to buy carbon offsets then
buying his own from his own company that sells carbon offsets. Excoriating
oil companies while his own personal wealth was a product of Occidental
oil.

Nope, no self-serving hypocrisy there at all.

> , had a genuine interest in public
> service,

If the desire to see and oversee an increasing federal presence in
everyone's personal lives and business constitutes a genuine interest in
public service, yeah, I guess that is as good a description as any.

> and further, is not even a consideration at this point.

No, he is trying to achieve the same goals through his global warming
scam. His open trashing of the US at the Bali conference is hardly
commendable for a former US VP.

> Yes,
> he was paid well, but I trust his intentions more so than most of the
> current crop of miscreants.
>
> Damned if I'd want the job - at any salary. Major portions of this
> country have become a morass of the most loudmouthed, arrogant,
> misguided, unappreciative, simplistic louts in the free world; who
> really need to get over the shrieking media whores and form
> conclusions based on facts - or reasonable facsimiles thereof.
>

I get the fact you don't like the other politicians (most notably the
Republican side), but please, Al Gore was another of those people whose
attitude was that he was born and raised to the office (per his father).



--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Greg G. wrote:

> Mark & Juanita said:
>
... snip
> No different that any other frontrunner. Personally, I'd rather see
> small, efficient accountability than what we have now. Yet unbridled
> capitalism is as bad a failure to society as is bloated, ineffectual
> bureaucracy.

Would vehemently disagree with that assertion depending upon the meaning
of the word "unbridled". History also disagrees with that assertion. The
most prosperous and free countries have been those with as close to a free
market as possible.

On the other hand, bloated ineffectual, or bloated effective (read
intrusive) bureaucracies have done more to destroy and ruin nations'
ability to live well, and pose the most significant threat to a people's
freedom and ability to prosper and do well than most any other influence.
Again, historical examples abound: The Soviet Union, Cuba, China, and
others.


>
>>> and further, is not even a consideration at this point.
>>
>> No, he is trying to achieve the same goals through his global warming
>>scam. His open trashing of the US at the Bali conference is hardly
>>commendable for a former US VP.
>
> I would hardly call this statement a trashing:
>
> "But the outcome will be decisively influenced by two nations that are
> now failing to do enough: the United States and China. While India is
> also growing fast in importance, it should be absolutely clear that it
> is the two largest CO2 emitters -- most of all, my own country -- that
> will need to make the boldest moves, or stand accountable before
> history for their failure to act.
>
> Both countries should stop using the other's behavior as an excuse for
> stalemate and instead develop an agenda for mutual survival in a
> shared global environment."
>

Maybe not, but the following statement:
“So,” said Al Gore at the recent Bali, Indonesia, conference on global
warming, “I am going to speak an inconvenient truth. My own country, the
United States, is principally responsible for obstructing progress here in
Bali. We all know that.”

Certainly falls into that category.


> He is free to speak his mind, whatever his opinion. And the statement
> is true in that we are the primary contributors to world resource
> consumption, much pollution, and greenhouse gas release. We are pigs
> in contrast to the majority of the world by virtue of population and
> "standards of living" - for now. Competition for all resources is
> rising due to the spread of "modern" standards of living. As they
> grow, we lose ground. At some point in the future, it will equalize
> somewhat worldwide, but I sure wish it hadn't been during MY lifetime.
>

Yet there are massive deposits of energy yet unused: Oil shale in the
west, Anwar in the north, coal deposits throughout the west. Oil and
natural gas off the coasts of California and Florida. While we don't
drill, the Chinese have started drilling off the coast of Cuba.

... snip
>
> Personally, I'm for my own personal anarchy on a tropical island full
> of scantily, yet tastefully draped women serving margaritas at the
> beach. Wind, wave, and solar powered, of course.
>

On that, we both agree. But I'm going to have a big ol' generator on the
other side of my island to light my shop at night and power the tools. :-)



--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Tanus said:

>I'm still puzzling over the Fuckometer.
>Does it mean that I don't give a fuck if
>it's Zero, or does that mean I really care?
>
>OTOH, could it be that at full scale,
>5000 is the ultimate in DontGiveAFuck?
>
>Currently that meter is reading nothing,
>so does that mean,if the former is true,
>that Rob don't give a fuck, or does it
>mean the meter isn't hooked up?
>
>More information is required, I'm afraid.

I'm afraid as well.
It could represent the number of people who give a fuck - which in
this particular meter's case, is zero.
I'm going to go sweep up sawdust at this point... ;-)


Greg G.

> I hate seeing AlGore's invention getting abused this way.

He never said that... He just invented the AlGore-ithm for it.

:D

Fri, Jan 11, 2008, 11:11pm (EST-3) [email protected]
(Lew=A0Hodgett) doth claimeth:
Old but still funny.
+++++++++++++++++++++
Don't mess with the older generation!!
HOW TO CALL THE POLICE WHEN YOU'RE OLD AND DON'T MOVE FAST ANYMORE.
<snip>

I've got a different method. Dog Barks. I jack a round in the
chamber. I look out the door. I carry a cel phone in my pocket, but
it'd be just as easy to have the neighbors call it in, shots fired.
LMAO Hmm, I've got hat new 12 ga pump, and never fired it yet.



JOAT
10 Out Of 10 Terrorists Prefer Hillary For President
- Bumper Sticker
I don't have a problem with a woman president - just not Hillary.

AL GORE CLAIMS TO BE "THE CREATOR"!

GORE EMBRACES CREATIONISM!

"THE DECIDER" VS "THE CREATOR" - REMATCH!

"I DID NOT HAVE @#$% WITH THAT INTERNET", SAYS AL GORE!

INVENTOR OF ALGORITHM DISOWNS NAMESAKE!



(be careful with what you say, 'cause nobody else will be...)






On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 08:31:14 -0600, "Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Personally, I love seeing Al Gore's creation getting abused this way.
Regards,

Tom Watson

tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)

http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

On Jan 13, 2:08 pm, Greg G.<[email protected]> wrote:
> Glen said:
>
> >I hate seeing AlGore's invention getting abused this way.
>
> Minorly amusing. Except that Al Gore never actually made that claim.
> Just another media-created load of BS.
>


Which of course, is what made the comment apropos.

--

FF

On Jan 14, 11:00=A0am, Greg G.<[email protected]> wrote:
[snipferized for brevitisation]
>
> One month in office entitles them to lifetime healthcare, retirement,
> and security benefits. =A0When is the last time YOU got a perk like
> that? =A0If you or I performed as poorly on the job as these clowns, we
> would all be unemployed. =A0And so should they.
>



Some Humans Ain't Human

Mmmm Mmmm
Mmmm Mmmm
Mmmm Mmmm
Mmmm Mmmm

Some humans ain't human
Some people ain't kind
You open up their hearts
And here's what you'll find
A few frozen pizzas
Some ice cubes with hair
A broken Popsicle
You don't want to go there

Some humans ain't human
Though they walk like we do
They live and they breathe
Just to turn the old screw
They screw you when you're sleeping
They try to screw you blind
Some humans ain't human
Some people ain't kind

You might go to church
And sit down in a pew
Those humans who ain't human
Could be sittin' right next to you
They talk about your family
They talk about your clothes
When they don't know their own ass
=46rom their own elbows

Jealousy and stupidity
Don't equal harmony
Jealousy and stupidity
Don't equal harmony

Mmmm Mmmm
Mmmm Mmmm
Mmmm Mmmm
Mmmm Mmmm

Have you ever noticed
When you're feeling really good
There's always a pigeon
That'll come shit on your hood

Or you're feeling your freedom
And the world's off your back
Some cowboy from Texas
Starts his own war in Iraq

Some humans ain't human
Some people ain't kind
They lie through their teeth
With their head up their behind
You open up their hearts
And here's what you'll find
Some humans ain't human
Some people ain't kind

Mmmm Mmmm
Mmmm Mmmm
Mmmm Mmmm
Mmmm Mmmm
Mmmm Mmmm
Mmmm Mmmm

(John Prine)

Doug Winterburn said:

>Dear Greg,
>
>I argued nothing. In fact, I was trying to point out that the meaning
>of Al's words didn't mean "invented". You seem to be the one going off
>the deep end.

Sorry about that, Doug.
See how easy it is to be misunderstood, even in print? :-o
I have to admit to have been watching Norm, so I didn't scrutinize as
carefully as I should have. It appeared that you were arguing the use
of the word "created" as being tantamount to the same thing. My bad!
Perhaps I'm just used to being jumped on by counter arguments, seldom
does anyone agree on anything.

Namaste,

Greg G.

Swingman said:

>"Greg G." wrote
>
>> Glen said:
>>
>>>I hate seeing AlGore's invention getting abused this way.
>>
>> Minorly amusing. Except that Al Gore never actually made that claim.
>> Just another media-created load of BS.
>
>Personally, I love seeing Al Gore's creation getting abused this way.

:-)

Better watch it, another dose of the Christmas 2005 rant is brewing.


Greg G.

On Jan 13, 3:11=A0pm, LRod <[email protected]> wrote:




> If one recognizes that the
> only proper such expression is "I couldn't care less" than the
> Fuckometer is perfeclty understandable.
>
> I only asked Rob to modify it so I could use my own pet phrase which
> posits that the instrument has yet to be devised which could measure
> my indifference. In other words, I couldn't care less.
>

Hence, there is no number where the pointer 'hits the pin'.
I could have marked the pin with a -5000 mark, but that could have
given ammunition to those who proclaim to give even less of a fuck
than that.
This way, all we have is the minimal fuck-giving background
radiation.... at which point you simply could NOT care less.

Yeah, and the Wikipedia is the Gold Standard for research.

And Fox News is not an oxymoron.

...who the hell died and left Snopes.com in charge?







On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 23:15:58 -0800, "DGDevin"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>
>> Old but still funny.
>
>And still not true, Snopes.com is real useful when checking out these urban
>myths.
>
Regards,

Tom Watson

tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)

http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

On Jan 13, 1:55 pm, Greg G.<[email protected]> wrote:

>
> >More information is required, I'm afraid.
>
> I'm afraid as well.
> It could represent the number of people who give a fuck - which in
> this particular meter's case, is zero.
> I'm going to go sweep up sawdust at this point... ;-)
>
Ask and ye shall receive.

The Fuckometer(tm) stands at the lowest at about minus 3000.
If it was indicating zero, it would be indictating indifference. Any
position above zero would indicate maybe..just maybe that I gave a
fuck...which, by the reading of the published result, I don't.

Doug Winterburn said:

>Greg G. wrote:

>> And before I am accosted by either right-wing or left-wing hyperbole,
>> look here: http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp

>...and http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/create
>
>to create (third-person singular simple present creates, present
>participle creating, simple past created, past participle created)
>
> 1. to make
> 2. to manufacture
> 3. to put into existence

Well, Doug, in your zealous frenzy to further promote pointless,
polarized animosity, you obviously didn't read the article or hear the
original statement in context. As well, most of the infrastructure of
what is know as the "Internet" was already in place as
ARPANET/DARPANET - which clearly precludes Gore having "invented" the
Internet from scratch. I witnessed its existence while providing
computer services to the military in the mid-late 80s. I also think he
was fully aware of this at the time of the interview.

Even then, Gore was instrumental in "putting into existence" the
Internet _as we currently know it_ from its origins as ARPANET, so I
conclude that even taken verbatim, his statement is not completely
erroneous. Either way, it is a niggling nit to pick.

Intelligence is what allows one to extrapolate genuine intent to
deceive from clumsy wording - not looking up words in an Internet
encyclopedia that you can thank Al Gore and others for helping to
bring into your home so that you may childishly argue politically
motivated linguistic semantics.

See below:

>> I am living in a nation of media polarized, out of context five second
>> sound bite consuming, non-analytical minded, bandwagon jumping sheep.

Fits well, don't you think?


Greg G.

On Jan 13, 1:39=A0pm, Tanus <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robatoy wrote:
> > On Jan 12, 12:46 pm, "DGDevin" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> "todd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> >>news:[email protected]...
>
> >>>>> Old but still funny.
> >>>> And still not true, Snopes.com is real useful when checking out these=

> >>>> urban myths.
> >>> I presumed it was a joke.
> >> It was widely circulated as fact, some versions even naming the newspap=
er
> >> where it supposedly originally appeared.
>
> >> It's at the point where I'm beginning to suspect not everything one rea=
ds on
> >> the internet is true, shocking, but it sure looks that way. =A0;^)
>
> >http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o290/Robatoy/WGAFMed.jpg
>
> > Image edited for LRod
>
> I'm still puzzling over the Fuckometer.
> Does it mean that I don't give a fuck if
> it's Zero, or does that mean I really care?
>
> OTOH, could it be that at full scale,
> 5000 is the ultimate in DontGiveAFuck?
>
> Currently that meter is reading nothing,

Actually, it is reading minus 3000 (-3000) Which, by my standards,
means I couldn't possibly give less of a fuck.

Da Meta don't go Lowa

It is in 'negative fuck-giving-' mode.

Chandler (from Friends) would have said: "could *I* possibly give less
of a fuck?"

Greg G. wrote:
> Doug Winterburn said:
>
>> Greg G. wrote:
>
>>> And before I am accosted by either right-wing or left-wing hyperbole,
>>> look here: http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp
>
>> ...and http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/create
>>
>> to create (third-person singular simple present creates, present
>> participle creating, simple past created, past participle created)
>>
>> 1. to make
>> 2. to manufacture
>> 3. to put into existence
>
> Well, Doug, in your zealous frenzy to further promote pointless,
> polarized animosity, you obviously didn't read the article or hear the
> original statement in context. As well, most of the infrastructure of
> what is know as the "Internet" was already in place as
> ARPANET/DARPANET - which clearly precludes Gore having "invented" the
> Internet from scratch. I witnessed its existence while providing
> computer services to the military in the mid-late 80s. I also think he
> was fully aware of this at the time of the interview.
>
> Even then, Gore was instrumental in "putting into existence" the
> Internet _as we currently know it_ from its origins as ARPANET, so I
> conclude that even taken verbatim, his statement is not completely
> erroneous. Either way, it is a niggling nit to pick.
>
> Intelligence is what allows one to extrapolate genuine intent to
> deceive from clumsy wording - not looking up words in an Internet
> encyclopedia that you can thank Al Gore and others for helping to
> bring into your home so that you may childishly argue politically
> motivated linguistic semantics.
>
> See below:
>
>>> I am living in a nation of media polarized, out of context five second
>>> sound bite consuming, non-analytical minded, bandwagon jumping sheep.
>
> Fits well, don't you think?
>
>
> Greg G.

Dear Greg,

I argued nothing. In fact, I was trying to point out that the meaning
of Al's words didn't mean "invented". You seem to be the one going off
the deep end.

Edwin Pawlowski said:

>"Greg G." <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> Glen said:
>>
>>>I hate seeing AlGore's invention getting abused this way.

>> Minorly amusing. Except that Al Gore never actually made that claim.
>> Just another media-created load of BS.

>If you read the actual quote, the word "created" was used by him. Sloppy
>(or cunning) use on his part. Red what he said and see how it can easily be
>interpreted as such

I heard and have read the text of the interview. As I pointed out
above, and when considering the massive amounts of BS modern political
players spew from both sides of the fence, a minor obfuscation even
when taken at its worst.

Still far less damaging than, oh, say, Iraq has WMD's and mushroom
clouds will be seen over a major American city. Or Ohio's coingate
scandal, or "I am not Gay", or ...

I hate to point this out, but they are mostly all lying idiots. Some
are just wose than others.


Greg G.

Greg G. wrote:
> I am living in a nation of media polarized, out of context five second
> sound bite consuming, non-analytical minded, bandwagon jumping sheep.
>
> Beam me up, Scotty...

Better check Snopes - I don't think Scotty's real either.

On Jan 14, 4:00 pm, Greg G.<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> And then, of course, there is "I did not have sexual relations with
> that woman" Clinton. I don't give a rat's ass if he did, but lying
> about it nailed his integrity. Was it worth Starr spending 6.2+
> million in your money proving it? Not a chance.

Under Starr the OIC put a score of corrupt politicians and their
cohorts into jail, including Gov Tucker of Arkansas who went
straight from the Governor's mansion to the big house.
Money well spent, IMHO.

--

FF

Greg G. wrote:
> Greg G. said:
>
>> Glen said:
>>
>>> I hate seeing AlGore's invention getting abused this way.
>> Minorly amusing. Except that Al Gore never actually made that claim.
>> Just another media-created load of BS.
>
> And before I am accosted by either right-wing or left-wing hyperbole,
> look here: http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp

...and http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/create

to create (third-person singular simple present creates, present
participle creating, simple past created, past participle created)

1. to make
2. to manufacture
3. to put into existence

>
> I am living in a nation of media polarized, out of context five second
> sound bite consuming, non-analytical minded, bandwagon jumping sheep.
>
> Beam me up, Scotty...
>
>
> Greg G.

"Greg G." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Glen said:
>
>>I hate seeing AlGore's invention getting abused this way.
>
> Minorly amusing. Except that Al Gore never actually made that claim.
> Just another media-created load of BS.
>
>
>
> Greg G.

If you read the actual quote, the word "created" was used by him. Sloppy
(or cunning) use on his part. Red what he said and see how it can easily be
interpreted as such
http://www.snopes.com:80/quotes/internet.asp

Tom Watson said:

>On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 23:15:58 -0800, "DGDevin" wrote:

>>And still not true, Snopes.com is real useful when checking out these urban
>>myths.

>Yeah, and the Wikipedia is the Gold Standard for research.
>
>And Fox News is not an oxymoron.
>
>...who the hell died and left Snopes.com in charge?

LOL. I was wondering that very thing earlier this morning.
Al Gore, of course. Oh, wait - he's not dead...


Greg G.

On Sun, 13 Jan 2008 14:39:57 -0800 (PST), Charlie Self
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Jan 13, 12:17 pm, Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Yeah, and the Wikipedia is the Gold Standard for research.
>>
>> And Fox News is not an oxymoron.
>>
>> ...who the hell died and left Snopes.com in charge?
>>
>
>Dunno. But you've got to admit, they do a better job at lower cost
>than any adminstration in history.


Provenance v. Providence?


:-)


Regards,

Tom Watson

tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)

http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1/

On Jan 13, 2:56=A0pm, Greg G.<[email protected]> wrote:

>
> Personally, I'm for my own personal anarchy on a tropical island full
> of scantily, yet tastefully draped women serving margaritas at the
> beach. Wind, wave, and solar powered, of course.
>
Sir, could we please have ONE white horse as well?

http://fitblog.files.wordpress.com/2007/01/gisele_bundchen_036.jpg

Mark & Juanita said:

>Greg G. wrote:

>> Need I continue?
>> At least Gore was well meaning, affable, not criminal or on the take.
>
> You seem to have forgotten his "no overriding legal authority" remark vis
>a vis a certain bunch of donations from some Buddhist nuns (who supposedly
>had taken vows of poverty).

They all seem to have questionable means of finance.
Try getting elected with no funding - whatever the source.
But I'll take points away for that.

>> He wasn't a hypocritical,
>
> Let's see, jetting around the world in a private Gulfstream while
>lecturing the rest of us on our need to reduce our "carbon footprints",
>living in a house with annual energy bills greater than the entire income
>of many US families again while railing against greenhouse gases and the
>need to reduce consumption, pushing people to buy carbon offsets then
>buying his own from his own company that sells carbon offsets. Excoriating
>oil companies while his own personal wealth was a product of Occidental
>oil.
>
> Nope, no self-serving hypocrisy there at all.

OK - I'll deduct another point.

>> , had a genuine interest in public
>> service,
>
> If the desire to see and oversee an increasing federal presence in
>everyone's personal lives and business constitutes a genuine interest in
>public service, yeah, I guess that is as good a description as any.

No different that any other frontrunner. Personally, I'd rather see
small, efficient accountability than what we have now. Yet unbridled
capitalism is as bad a failure to society as is bloated, ineffectual
bureaucracy.

>> and further, is not even a consideration at this point.
>
> No, he is trying to achieve the same goals through his global warming
>scam. His open trashing of the US at the Bali conference is hardly
>commendable for a former US VP.

I would hardly call this statement a trashing:

"But the outcome will be decisively influenced by two nations that are
now failing to do enough: the United States and China. While India is
also growing fast in importance, it should be absolutely clear that it
is the two largest CO2 emitters -- most of all, my own country -- that
will need to make the boldest moves, or stand accountable before
history for their failure to act.

Both countries should stop using the other's behavior as an excuse for
stalemate and instead develop an agenda for mutual survival in a
shared global environment."

He is free to speak his mind, whatever his opinion. And the statement
is true in that we are the primary contributors to world resource
consumption, much pollution, and greenhouse gas release. We are pigs
in contrast to the majority of the world by virtue of population and
"standards of living" - for now. Competition for all resources is
rising due to the spread of "modern" standards of living. As they
grow, we lose ground. At some point in the future, it will equalize
somewhat worldwide, but I sure wish it hadn't been during MY lifetime.

>> Yes,
>> he was paid well, but I trust his intentions more so than most of the
>> current crop of miscreants.
>>
>> Damned if I'd want the job - at any salary. Major portions of this
>> country have become a morass of the most loudmouthed, arrogant,
>> misguided, unappreciative, simplistic louts in the free world; who
>> really need to get over the shrieking media whores and form
>> conclusions based on facts - or reasonable facsimiles thereof.

> I get the fact you don't like the other politicians (most notably the
>Republican side), but please, Al Gore was another of those people whose
>attitude was that he was born and raised to the office (per his father).

OK - I'll concede that he is yet another privileged asshat with an
agenda - possibly more benign than a few others. I've yet to see one
in the last 30 years that wasn't. So where do we turn now?

Personally, I'm for my own personal anarchy on a tropical island full
of scantily, yet tastefully draped women serving margaritas at the
beach. Wind, wave, and solar powered, of course.



Greg G.

On Jan 13, 12:17 pm, Tom Watson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yeah, and the Wikipedia is the Gold Standard for research.
>
> And Fox News is not an oxymoron.
>
> ...who the hell died and left Snopes.com in charge?
>

Dunno. But you've got to admit, they do a better job at lower cost
than any adminstration in history.

Mark & Juanita said:

>Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
>
>>
>> "Greg G." <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> Glen said:
>>>
>>>>I hate seeing AlGore's invention getting abused this way.
>>>
>>> Minorly amusing. Except that Al Gore never actually made that claim.
>>> Just another media-created load of BS.
>>>
>>
>> If you read the actual quote, the word "created" was used by him. Sloppy
>> (or cunning) use on his part. Red what he said and see how it can easily
>> be interpreted as such
>> http://www.snopes.com:80/quotes/internet.asp
>
> Yep, that along with his having "discovered" Love Canal, and he and Tipper
>being the inspiration for "Love Story" were all about conflating his
>somewhat minimal achievements as a US senator into being worthy of the
>office of president.

OMG, like any of these clowns possess more worthy claims to the job?

Bush? A pathetic moron sock puppet riding his father's coattails.
Clinton? A coin operated tool.
Reagan, for Gods sake? Thompson? Get serious - another actor?
Freakin' Gulianni? A noun, a verb and 9/11?
Halliburton "Go Fuck Yourself" Cheney?

Need I continue?
At least Gore was well meaning, affable, not criminal or on the take.
He wasn't a hypocritical, closet gay, had a genuine interest in public
service, and further, is not even a consideration at this point. Yes,
he was paid well, but I trust his intentions more so than most of the
current crop of miscreants.

Damned if I'd want the job - at any salary. Major portions of this
country have become a morass of the most loudmouthed, arrogant,
misguided, unappreciative, simplistic louts in the free world; who
really need to get over the shrieking media whores and form
conclusions based on facts - or reasonable facsimiles thereof.

> Of course he has grown beyond that now and is working to fight the
>Earth's "fever". Anybody have any ideas where he intends to stick the
>thermometer?

I have a suggestion or two. :-o


Greg G.

Robatoy said:

>On Jan 13, 1:55 pm, Greg G.<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> >More information is required, I'm afraid.
>>
>> I'm afraid as well.
>> It could represent the number of people who give a fuck - which in
>> this particular meter's case, is zero.
>> I'm going to go sweep up sawdust at this point... ;-)
>>
>Ask and ye shall receive.
>
>The Fuckometer(tm) stands at the lowest at about minus 3000.
>If it was indicating zero, it would be indictating indifference. Any
>position above zero would indicate maybe..just maybe that I gave a
>fuck...which, by the reading of the published result, I don't.

OK - I got it. I didn't notice the non-linear, edited face which went
below zero in my cursory exam.

There is a moral to this which I will add to my list:

Don't drink and drive unless it is in your own cow pasture.
Never trust a lawyer or the subsequent politician.
The woman is always right - even when she's wrong.
(At least if you expect to get laid regularly.)
Never drink preprocessed beer.
And finally, Don't Usenet while Norming.


Greg G.

Fred the Red Shirt said:

>On Jan 13, 2:08 pm, Greg G.<[email protected]> wrote:
>> Glen said:
>>
>> >I hate seeing AlGore's invention getting abused this way.
>>
>> Minorly amusing. Except that Al Gore never actually made that claim.
>> Just another media-created load of BS.
>>
>
>Which of course, is what made the comment apropos.

Yes, but inadvertently, I believe.
Note the spelling of AlGore - a common "right-wing" blogger slight.


Greg G.

On Jan 12, 12:46=A0pm, "DGDevin" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "todd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
> >>> Old but still funny.
>
> >> And still not true, Snopes.com is real useful when checking out these
> >> urban myths.
>
> > I presumed it was a joke.
>
> It was widely circulated as fact, some versions even naming the newspaper
> where it supposedly originally appeared.
>
> It's at the point where I'm beginning to suspect not everything one reads =
on
> the internet is true, shocking, but it sure looks that way. =A0;^)

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o290/Robatoy/WGAFMed.jpg

Image edited for LRod

Robatoy wrote:
> On Jan 12, 12:46 pm, "DGDevin" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "todd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>
>> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> Old but still funny.
>>>> And still not true, Snopes.com is real useful when checking out these
>>>> urban myths.
>>> I presumed it was a joke.
>> It was widely circulated as fact, some versions even naming the newspaper
>> where it supposedly originally appeared.
>>
>> It's at the point where I'm beginning to suspect not everything one reads on
>> the internet is true, shocking, but it sure looks that way. ;^)
>
> http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o290/Robatoy/WGAFMed.jpg
>
> Image edited for LRod

I'm still puzzling over the Fuckometer.
Does it mean that I don't give a fuck if
it's Zero, or does that mean I really care?

OTOH, could it be that at full scale,
5000 is the ultimate in DontGiveAFuck?

Currently that meter is reading nothing,
so does that mean,if the former is true,
that Rob don't give a fuck, or does it
mean the meter isn't hooked up?

More information is required, I'm afraid.

--
Tanus

This is not really a sig.

http://www.home.mycybernet.net/~waugh/shop/

Greg G. wrote:
> Fred the Red Shirt said:
>
>> On Jan 13, 2:08 pm, Greg G.<[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Glen said:
>>>
>>>> I hate seeing AlGore's invention getting abused this way.
>>>
>>> Minorly amusing. Except that Al Gore never actually made that
>>> claim.
>>> Just another media-created load of BS.
>>>
>>
>> Which of course, is what made the comment apropos.
>
> Yes, but inadvertently, I believe.
> Note the spelling of AlGore - a common "right-wing" blogger slight.

Pun on the name of a star and ties into AlGoreRythm, which one would
have had to know something about to "create the Internet".

Regardless of what you want to believe, he shot himself in the foot
with that claim. If he's that careless with his words he has no
business in the Oval Office.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Greg G. wrote:
> Tom Watson said:
>
>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2008 23:15:58 -0800, "DGDevin" wrote:
>
>>> And still not true, Snopes.com is real useful when checking out
>>> these urban myths.
>
>> Yeah, and the Wikipedia is the Gold Standard for research.
>>
>> And Fox News is not an oxymoron.
>>
>> ...who the hell died and left Snopes.com in charge?
>
> LOL. I was wondering that very thing earlier this morning.
> Al Gore, of course. Oh, wait - he's not dead...

If he was a reanimated corpse it would explain much.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

Greg G. wrote:
> J. Clarke said:
>
>> Greg G. wrote:
>>> Fred the Red Shirt said:
>>>
>>>> On Jan 13, 2:08 pm, Greg G.<[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Glen said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I hate seeing AlGore's invention getting abused this way.
>>>>>
>>>>> Minorly amusing. Except that Al Gore never actually made that
>>>>> claim.
>>>>> Just another media-created load of BS.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Which of course, is what made the comment apropos.
>>>
>>> Yes, but inadvertently, I believe.
>>> Note the spelling of AlGore - a common "right-wing" blogger
>>> slight.
>>
>> Pun on the name of a star and ties into AlGoreRythm, which one
>> would
>> have had to know something about to "create the Internet".
>>
>> Regardless of what you want to believe, he shot himself in the foot
>> with that claim. If he's that careless with his words he has no
>> business in the Oval Office.
>
> I don't "want" to believe anything. I believe in provable facts.


> I think he is affable and reasonably intelligent - for a politico.
> It is also my understanding that he has no intention of running.
> Of course, as with Thompson, this may change at the last minute.
> Six of one to me either way. I have little to no faith in _any_ of
> them actually accomplishing a damned thing useful. The infighting
> and
> sparring between parties is costing taxpayers and this country
> dearly.
> It should not be the goal of candidates to please party followers,
> but
> to do what is best for the people and future of this country -
> whether
> they like it or not. That goal has long been abandoned. Poll riding,
> coin operated mouthpieces we certainly don't need.
>
> And while what you say may true, how does one explain the presence
> of
> the current resident. OMG! You could write a tome on his
> "Bushisms".
>
> Gore, by no stretch of the imagination has a corner on the market of
> verbal faux pas. My, what selective and short memories we all have.
>
> How about "Eighty percent of pollution comes from trees and other
> vegetation" Reagan.
>
> Or these:
> Our military is absolutely incapable of defending this country.
> A nuclear missile once launched could always be recalled. (Trident)
> We were told four years ago that 17 million people went to bed
> hungry
> every night. Well, that was probably true. They were all on a diet.
> Fascism was really the basis for the New Deal.
>
> And then, of course, there is "I did not have sexual relations with
> that woman" Clinton. I don't give a rat's ass if he did, but lying
> about it nailed his integrity. Was it worth Starr spending 6.2+
> million in your money proving it? Not a chance. More pointless
> infighting at your expense. I was more concerned with shady
> contributions and military secrets leaked to the Koreans and
> Chinese.
> And Bush, Sr.'s NAFTA, which Clinton ratified.
>
> One month in office entitles them to lifetime healthcare,
> retirement,
> and security benefits. When is the last time YOU got a perk like
> that? If you or I performed as poorly on the job as these clowns,
> we
> would all be unemployed. And so should they.
>
> It seems where ever there are people, someone takes it upon
> themselves
> to foist an ineffectual government of self-serving slackers upon
> them.
> So excuse the rant, I've got to decide where I'm moving to next...

Breathe.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

J. Clarke said:

>Greg G. wrote:
>> Fred the Red Shirt said:
>>
>>> On Jan 13, 2:08 pm, Greg G.<[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Glen said:
>>>>
>>>>> I hate seeing AlGore's invention getting abused this way.
>>>>
>>>> Minorly amusing. Except that Al Gore never actually made that
>>>> claim.
>>>> Just another media-created load of BS.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Which of course, is what made the comment apropos.
>>
>> Yes, but inadvertently, I believe.
>> Note the spelling of AlGore - a common "right-wing" blogger slight.
>
>Pun on the name of a star and ties into AlGoreRythm, which one would
>have had to know something about to "create the Internet".
>
>Regardless of what you want to believe, he shot himself in the foot
>with that claim. If he's that careless with his words he has no
>business in the Oval Office.

I don't "want" to believe anything. I believe in provable facts.
I think he is affable and reasonably intelligent - for a politico.
It is also my understanding that he has no intention of running.
Of course, as with Thompson, this may change at the last minute.
Six of one to me either way. I have little to no faith in _any_ of
them actually accomplishing a damned thing useful. The infighting and
sparring between parties is costing taxpayers and this country dearly.
It should not be the goal of candidates to please party followers, but
to do what is best for the people and future of this country - whether
they like it or not. That goal has long been abandoned. Poll riding,
coin operated mouthpieces we certainly don't need.

And while what you say may true, how does one explain the presence of
the current resident. OMG! You could write a tome on his "Bushisms".

Gore, by no stretch of the imagination has a corner on the market of
verbal faux pas. My, what selective and short memories we all have.

How about "Eighty percent of pollution comes from trees and other
vegetation" Reagan.

Or these:
Our military is absolutely incapable of defending this country.
A nuclear missile once launched could always be recalled. (Trident)
We were told four years ago that 17 million people went to bed hungry
every night. Well, that was probably true. They were all on a diet.
Fascism was really the basis for the New Deal.

And then, of course, there is "I did not have sexual relations with
that woman" Clinton. I don't give a rat's ass if he did, but lying
about it nailed his integrity. Was it worth Starr spending 6.2+
million in your money proving it? Not a chance. More pointless
infighting at your expense. I was more concerned with shady
contributions and military secrets leaked to the Koreans and Chinese.
And Bush, Sr.'s NAFTA, which Clinton ratified.

One month in office entitles them to lifetime healthcare, retirement,
and security benefits. When is the last time YOU got a perk like
that? If you or I performed as poorly on the job as these clowns, we
would all be unemployed. And so should they.

It seems where ever there are people, someone takes it upon themselves
to foist an ineffectual government of self-serving slackers upon them.
So excuse the rant, I've got to decide where I'm moving to next...



Greg G.

Greg G. said:

>Glen said:
>
>>I hate seeing AlGore's invention getting abused this way.
>
>Minorly amusing. Except that Al Gore never actually made that claim.
>Just another media-created load of BS.

And before I am accosted by either right-wing or left-wing hyperbole,
look here: http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp

I am living in a nation of media polarized, out of context five second
sound bite consuming, non-analytical minded, bandwagon jumping sheep.

Beam me up, Scotty...


Greg G.

DGDevin said:

>
>"todd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>>
>>>> Old but still funny.
>>>
>>> And still not true, Snopes.com is real useful when checking out these
>>> urban myths.
>>
>> I presumed it was a joke.
>
>It was widely circulated as fact, some versions even naming the newspaper
>where it supposedly originally appeared.
>
>It's at the point where I'm beginning to suspect not everything one reads on
>the internet is true, shocking, but it sure looks that way. ;^)

Tis what happens when the Internet ceases to be the domain of
academics and engineers and turns into a tool of commerce for idiots.


Greg G.

Glen said:

>I hate seeing AlGore's invention getting abused this way.

Minorly amusing. Except that Al Gore never actually made that claim.
Just another media-created load of BS.



Greg G.

"DGDevin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>> Old but still funny.
>
> And still not true, Snopes.com is real useful when checking out these
> urban myths.

I presumed it was a joke.