[elzinat]

What a stupid country the US is.

I hope everybody watched the debate last night. Bush is such an uninformed idiot! It is rather depressing to see such stupid people. The way he blabbered about stuff though he had no idea what he was talking about.
Bush's highlights:
"of course I wouldn't expect Russia to help us if they don't agree with us"--"they don't"=Bush has a plan and he has absolutely no idea what he is talking about. very feeble.
"fuzzy math"=I am really stupid.
"fuzzy numbers"=my opponent has a better understanding of my proposed economic program than I do, because I am too stupid to understand numbers.
"invented the calculator"= I need to go back to elementary school because I don't know that it is posible to do arithmetic without a calculator, or to use one without inventing it.
"strict constructionists"/"I don't know that it is possible for the president to do that"-Bush WILL try his best to outlaw abortion.
"Clinton administration got nothing done"= republican Congress anybody?
"clean coal"= I like breathing black dust...
"it's about a difference of opinion"-lets talk about abstract things which the people don't understand better than I do, and so I won't seem as dumb as when we talk about issues
"whenever people come up to me and ask me to please never let them down again"- no doubt referring to the people running his campaign -"Damn! I did it again. oops..." lol.

Gore's highlights:
"Can I have the last word on that?"-ha ha
<deep heavy sigh>- several of them
"They don't!"- ref. Russia agreeing with the US about Serbian election
"that's code for 'I will try to outlaw abortion'"
"wealthiest 1%"- lots of times= boring
"iron-clad lock-box"-lots of times= boring
"my opponent makes lots of personal attacks"=lets talk about issues, I like them more

It's amazing. lots of people who watched the debate afterwards said, "Bush wasn't as much of a moron as I though - he can clearly express, in English, a stupid idea- so I should vote for him!"
the press says "Bush was semi-articulate! He won the debate!"
Won? Gore slaughtered him on very issue.

what a stupid country this is.

[simonjames]

Hey, its a step up from Ronnie Raygun

[nealconner]

I'm disgusted with both of them. The're both total idiots. The only person I would vote for would be David McReynolds (Socialist) or Ralph Nader (Green).

[garrettnelson]

I'm in junior high school ... and we were required to take notes on and watch the debate. geez! that was a depressing hour and a half! everybody in my social studies class agrees that the candidates are each no better than two year olds; completely stupid and off-topic. we had a nice interesting talk on our own about how US politics are royally messed up .... oh well .....

------------------
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Garrett Nelson, Webmaster, Cognition
"Are macs better than PCs? Is the Pope Catholic? Do presidents tell lies?"

[yoyo52]

As far as I'm concerned, both bozos lost.

[Ca$h68]

I watched it and I dont like either, but lets face it, GORE is the one we should be afriad of.

He wants to spend your money FOR you.... he wants to to the LARGEST governmental increase since LBJ, and even if he has a good idea, he lies all the time so I wouldnt believe him anyway.

Its simple: Bush gives you a tax break, and you get $ back, and Gore takes your money and gives it to people who dont want to have jobs.

If you disagree, you've been brainwashed by the media, please insert your head in toilet bowl and flush repeatedly.

Why?

The **** thats in your head will go down the toilet, duh.

Ca$h

[Ca$h68]

BTW: I thought of another reason why the US is so stupid though. ELECTRIC CARS. They're making our auto manufacturers produce these electric POSs that nobody wants. Also, they are
'zero emissions vehicles'.

UM. HELLO MCFLY! Electric cars are the DUMBEST idea ever. Think about it. We burn coal, convert that to electricity, convert that to movement, how many steps have we gone through? Each time we change energy's form we lose a lot! ARgh. Tree huggers are freaking morons.

Ca$h

[Misha]

Originally posted by Ca$h68:

UM. HELLO MCFLY! Electric cars are the DUMBEST idea ever. Think about it. We burn coal, convert that to electricity, convert that to movement, how many steps have we gone through? Each time we change energy's form we lose a lot! ARgh. Tree huggers are freaking morons.

That would be true if, say, every car out there regardless of what size engine or form of fuel got 20 MPG (or whatever fixed amount).

Yes, electric cars do still pollute and consume resources indirectly, but they still remain far more efficient than gasoline vehicles. I don't know of any real electric cars, either, hybrids seem to be all the rage... and if you do the math, the electricity/gas it takes for Honda's hybrid to get 60 MPG is a lot less (proportionatly) that it would take an Accord to get 25-30 MPG.

Still, I'd rather have a resource-hogging 400 HP car than a zero-emissions 50 HP can. But that's just me.

You take a big hot hunk of plutonium, surround it with thermocouples, and bleed off the juice to power DC motors at each wheel. Lots of power and good for decades ! Who's stupid NOW Ca$h68 ?

[oscar]

Yea, it was pretty pathetic
Did you guys here nader tried to sit in the audience (he had a ticket) and they wouldn't allow him in?
What's up with that?

------------------
-See Yea!

[wlonh]

US a stupid country? naw, i'd say it's criminally insane...



"lord, where do we get such men?"

i did note that Shrubby boy wants to rid us of the undeniably successful education program 'Headstart'... gawd.

[This message has been edited by wlonh (edited 10-05-2000).]

[denim]

From what I could tell, Gore looked like what he is: a professional politician, and Bush looked human. Too bad, since I'll never vote for Bush.

There are things I like about Gore, mainly that he's (1) pro-choice, and (2) that he chose Lieberman as a running mate.

I don't see anything about Bush that I like. Granted it may be a matter of picking the right lizard, so that the wrong lizard doesn't get in, but even more to the point, I've never heard of a good politician above the town level. Local pols can be good people, but I suspect that the requirements for going Federal include activities which blow the goodness right out of a person.

I hope I'm wrong, for Lieberman's sake.

[This message has been edited by denim (edited 10-05-2000).]

[Macnerd]

I have no particular interest in US politics, but I've kind of enjoyed the Bush/Gore thing. To an outsider (and I am that) I would worry most about Bush. I saw some interview with him on foreign policy, where they asked him to name the prime ministers of several countries. These were all people he should know. He couldn't name any and worst of all tried to bluff his way through it - It was a pretty poor show. The guy appears to be an accident waiting to happen. What's the general concensus in the US now about who was perceived as the winner in that first debate?

[andi*pandi]

re electric cars:
Yes, it takes resources to make electricity. However, a) Hydroelectric, b) if coal is burned in a plant, its pollutants can be captured/recycled without getting to the air. (I hope.) If gas is burned in every car, every car is spewing fumes with little or no filtration. Your muffler doesn't filter exhaust, it is only there to make the car quieter.

And some people don't care about horsepower--they're not trying to win a race in these cars.

Oh yeah, this was supposed to be about the debates?

I kept waiting for Gore to put the hurtin' on Bush. Bush would say something Gore obviously thought was stupid, Gore would jot down a note, shake his head, sigh, and you could visibly SEE him swallow a caustic comment.

Someone obviously told him not to rain down the fire.

Bush did come across as affable, but by no means believable.

Too much broken record repetition.

Next one will be more casual--I hope to see Gore's boxing gloves.

Maybe they'll let Nader and Browne in to watch that one! (Buchanan can come in, but only on a leash...)

[denim]

Originally posted by andi*pandi:
re electric cars:
Yes, it takes resources to make electricity. However, a) Hydroelectric, b) if coal is burned in a plant, its pollutants can be captured/recycled without getting to the air. (I hope.)

Somewhat. I'd rather see more nukes than fossil fueled plants. At least you know where the waste is.

Originally posted by andi*pandi:
Your muffler doesn't filter exhaust,

True, but the catalytic converter is.

And some people don't care about horsepower--they're not trying to win a race in these cars.

That's me! I want something like the Honda Insight, but with 4 seats and better milage.

(Buchanan can come in, but only on a leash...)

I was going to say "and with a muzzle", but I think it'd be more appropriate if people could hear what he's saying. That'd keep him out of office fer shur.

[jholmes]

What a total waste. These two guys on every channel really make Regis look like quality programming.

Of course if Gore gets the nod then the electric car thing gets pretty real pretty quick. He's on record as being all for doing away with the internal combustion engine.

I think the electric car will be a viable idea when they start using one as the White House Limo.

[Ca$h68]

The electric car, as we know it, will NEVER be viable. Why?

A. No power. We want power. Everyone does.

B. Takes a long time to fill up (charge) so no roadtrips in it.

C. If you ahve a radio on, the heater on, and the lights on, guess how far you're going go?

Electric cars are the equivilent of automotive TURDS. They're useless. And EV1 or Insight I see I squeal my tires at flip off, throw a styrofoam container at, and dump used oil on the road.

B LECH!


But. I'd have to say SUVs are even worse. You know how post office people go nuts?

I might do that, but I'd be cappin those a-holes driving USELESS GHETTO LINCOLN NAVIAGOTRS on their ****ing cellphones, and those STUPID excursions.
GAWD I hate SUVS. ACK! DIE DIE DIE!

Ca$h

[elzinat]

VP debate this evening...

it was refreshing to see that it was possible for important people to hold an intelligent decent debate, without catch phrases or personal attacks. both of those men are smart, and Cheney did well despite the stupid positions he was trying to support. after watching this debate I almost felt better about America and our politics.


and then I remembered that it was only the VP debate, which no one was watching, and how crappy the Pres. candidates are and the debate on tuesday, etc. etc. etc. And I thought again, "what a crappy country."

now if those VPs were the ones running for pres, that would be more interesting.
<sigh>


if only...


<sigh>

what a stupid country the US is...

[wlonh]

ditto what elzinat said...

Shrub is but a lackey for any and all corporate concerns that come knocking, he is an oilman after all... all the environmental, health and education programs he trumpets as being progressive in 'his' state of Texas... well, he fought them TOOTH AND NAIL and they were passed in Texas state legislature IN SPITE of him!! and now he wants to take credit, that ratbastard... lies and misrepresentations is all he is capable of

if he is elected, kiss your ass goodbye...

if Gore is elected, kiss one cheek of your ass goodbye

[denim]

Originally posted by Ca$h68:
The electric car, as we know it, will NEVER be viable. Why?

Man will never fly, either.

A. No power. We want power. Everyone does.

I want "cheap to run". A Honda Insight makes me drool.

B. Takes a long time to fill up (charge) so no roadtrips in it.

Not a real issue. The main production cars of that sort are hybrid, not pure electric.


[This message has been edited by denim (edited 10-06-2000).]

[shmerek]

I am canadian from my point of view Bush is evil incarnate he is just a puppet for the real power which would be his vice-pres and daddy. The internal combustion engine is only still in use because the oil moguls can make money I am sure there are alternate power sources being suppressed by big industry. There is too much money in oil to let it go just yet.

[thirtyfootsmurf]

About those SUV's....

Yeah they piss me off an' all but they do have a good side (somewhat...).
A. You can't tow worth **** up a hill over the pass with a car (maybe a Volvo, yes they can tow, very limited however).

B. Can you fit 8 people in a car?

I only use my Suburban to bring the boat to the Sound.

I might do that, but I'd be cappin those a-holes driving USELESS GHETTO LINCOLN NAVIAGOTRS on their ****ing cellphones, and those STUPID excursions.
GAWD I hate SUVS. ACK! DIE DIE DIE!

I'm with you. Here in the Northwest, I really only see upity females (no derogatory comment implied) in their monsterous Excusions and Navigators *pukes over keyboard* on their cell phones with nobody else in the vehicle. That is a waste of 50 grand. Get a civic if thats all your going to do!!




------------------
What's that stuff in my toilet? Where are my pants? Why can't those damn monkeys stop banging those sledgehammers on my head?

[jaguarandi]

Originally posted by thirtyfootsmurf:
About those SUV's....

Yeah they piss me off an' all but they do have a good side (somewhat...).
A. You can't tow worth **** up a hill over the pass with a car (maybe a Volvo, yes they can tow, very limited however).

I never get mad when I see and SUV or a pickup towing or hauling something. I get mad like, when you said, there's one person in the front seat (on the phone, invariably) not paying attention to the fact that they are piloting a very lethal weapon.

B. Can you fit 8 people in a car?

Yes. Ford Taurus/Mercury Sable Station Wagons will hold 8 people when configured properly. Some minivans will hold 8 people (and are much less dangerous to other vehicles than SUVs).

The largest problem with Americans in SUVs is that they give their owners a feeling of 'safety', since they are now bigger than most other vehicles on the road. Yet SUVs have a much higher center of gravity, weigh more (longer stops), and do not have to adhere to the same safety standards as passenger cars in the US (how long did it take trucks and SUVs to get dual airbags)?

I have no problem with people buying SUVs when they are necessary (large families, regular towing, etc.). I do have a problem with people who purchase them as fashion items.

/e

On the car side of this thread � remember how much gas consumption in this country went down when the top speed limit was 55? That seems to be a sort of optimum point beyond which most cars start to get lower mpg. It may make you feel virtuous to drive a car that gets better gas mileage than the other fellow's, but if you aren't driving 55 or less, you aren't really in a position to be putting the blame of gas consumption solely on people who choose vehicles that are more thirsty than your own. This country is horsepower mad. There's so many cars on the road one can maintain commute speed with a lot less engine.
Where is Scotty's technolgy to just beam us where we want to go when we need it?

[Don Pickett]

The U.S. isn't a stupid country, and the debates we're seeing are the norm for U.S. history.

Here's an experiment, from my high school AP U.S. History teacher: go to yer local library and find a microfilm of a major U.S. paper from 100 years ago - today that'd be October 6, 1900. Look at the headlines.

What you will see, of your experience is like mine, is the exact same things said we see today - politicans are corrput, the "current" generation is a waste and will ruin the country, civilization is going to hell in a handbasket, the country is doomed, and on and on and on. What's going on around us right now - unexciting politicans engaged in spurious "debates" is the norm, and probably will be forever.

There is a problem of historical perspective here. Most presidents are pretty unexciting people who do an okay job. We remember the ones who are either exceptionally good - Lincoln, FDR - or exceptionally bad - Nixon - and forget that most of them are like Clinton, who do the job well but not expceptionally. The same forces which are driving the evolution of our culture - big buisness versus individual freedom, liberal versus conservative political agendas, religious conservatism versus separation of church and state - have been driving us since the beginning.

Politicians are politicans, and you have to be a politican to want the job. Same with the electic car debate; I think that electric/alternative fuel cars are a good idea for some markets (big cities, dense suburbs) and will eventually catch on, but just as the government has had to force the big three automakers to make more fuel efficient cars, goverment will have to force them to make alternative fueled vehicles, because corporations exist to make money, and that's all they care about.

I actually think things are getting gradually better. More people are more educated than any time in our past. More people have access to better healthcare. More people have access to more infomation. More people know more truth about their leaders. More people own Macs.

Don't look to mainstream media to cover the real, grassroots changes going on in the country right now - they haven't the interest or the access. THe real changes going on won't be noticed for years, and then they will be big news. This is like the protests against corporate globalization; the time to fight globalization was ten years ago, when the foundation was being laid. Now it's almost a moot point.

The more things change. . .

Don

[jaguarandi]

It goes beyond the speed limit. Auto makers are making more efficient transmissions (5- and 6- speed manuals, 4- and 5-speed automatics) than were made in the 80's, so the overdrive ratio can be higher, lowering RPMs at freeway speed. Lower RPMs, higher MPG. Today's engines are also much more efficient than those from the 80s, with the use of fuel injection, computers, blah blah blah.

Offsetting all this is the fact that people are buying vehicles with increasingly poor mileage (aforementioned SUVs), offsetting the overall increase in fuel economy for cars, and increasing overall fuel consumption.

What this country needs is a good gas crisis ($3 a gallon, anyone?). I'm afraid that, with the economy the way it is now, even that may not scare people into smaller vehicles

/e

[Don Pickett]

What this country needs is a good gas crisis ($3 a gallon, anyone?). I'm afraid that, with the economy the way it is now, even that may not scare people into smaller vehicles

Funny - I've been saying that for years, and you're the first person I've found who agrees. I've been saying that, were gas here as expensive as Europe, we'd have more efficient cars and better public transportation habits.

I know there are parts of the country where public transportation doesn't make sense - western Texas, anyone - but since most of the people in the country live near urban areas, it makes sense. There's no reason for everyone to have to drive everywhere they go.

That's one of the things I love about NYC. I don't need a car to get anywhere.

Don

[jaguarandi]

Originally posted by Don Pickett:
Funny - I've been saying that for years, and you're the first person I've found who agrees. I've been saying that, were gas here as expensive as Europe, we'd have more efficient cars and better public transportation habits.

I've been thinking this since I was a teenager, but my last trip to Tokyo this summer in light of the current 'gas crisis' really opened my eyes on this one. Their subway and train system is incredibly efficient, even at rush hour. Trains come every three to ten minutes during the week and are invariably on schedule. They are always clean and the operators are polite (although this may be more of a reflection on their society than anything else). You can get to just about anywhere in town by train or subway, and for a reasonable price too. I don't remember how much gas was there per liter, but a freind tells me that it runs the equivalent of US $4.00 and up a gallon.

I know there are parts of the country where public transportation doesn't make sense - western Texas, anyone - but since most of the people in the country live near urban areas, it makes sense. There's no reason for everyone to have to drive everywhere they go.

The problem with this country is that it's too big and has too many natural resources. Americans waste space, plain and simple. If you crammed 300 million people into a fifth of the area we have now, you can bet that our transporation habits would be much different!

That's one of the things I love about NYC. I don't need a car to get anywhere.

Don

Sacramento's RT sucks. We have one light rail line that has just had its first extension put in since it's inception a decade ago - which only stretches the south end of the line about three miles (but does land, oh, almost right in front of my house). Even though I have a car, if I have to go downtown for a festival or charity event or shopping, whatever, I'll take the Light Rail. It's better than trying to find parking, too

/e

Good point Don. But as long as we can use our cars to go from home to work/shopping/play without having to make multiple transfers of vehcles or do much walking we'll continue to use them. So often, public transportation only includes the means to get from central point to central point which may or may not be very near from where we wish to embark/disembark while burdened with children/consumer goods, etc. In a city with comprehensive tranportation systems in place (such as yours) it's possible to go precisely where you want with less hassle because the system is in place. The cost to provide such systems elsewhere is daunting and until the public is forced into a corner about it (very limited fuel) they will continue to use the type of transportation (their cars) that makes them most comfortable. They will also not be willing to vote for the huge tax outlay to underwrite extensive public systems. It would seem that ultimately only a long-term crisis will convince people to give up a way of life that is so dear to them. Maybe alternative fuel sources can save the day.

[Don Pickett]

Actually, I don't think it's feasible for everyone in the U.S. to use public transportation. The country is too large, too varied, and too geographically diverse to have one solution work for everyone.

I meant that crack about western Texas. The coasts are much more densly populated than the Great Flyover. There are parts of Texas - and the upper pennsula of Michigan, and North and South Dakota, and eastern Washington State - where the population density just won't support public transportation. Cars are the only thing that make sense.

However, on the coasts there are many places where public transportation makes a lot of sense. Some of these, like New York, Atlanta, D.C., and Boston, to name some of the place I have experience with, have good public transportation systems which are used by a good chunk of the population, although, obviously, no place uses public transportation like New York. The last figures I saw said that the NYC subways carried something like 1.8 billion people last year. Some of these place have some public transportation, and some have none. It's places like this where the need for good public transportation is greatest, and most feasible.

The problem with this country is that it's too big and has too many natural resources. Americans waste space, plain and simple. If you crammed 300 million people into a fifth of the area we have now, you can bet that our transporation habits would be much different!

I don't think this is a "problem" - I think this is the reality of our country. Like I said, there are some places public transporation won't work, but there are many it will where it is underutilized. Even here, the capital of public transportation in the U.S., more people than need to drive, for no reason I can understand. Traffic into the bridges and tunnels is ridiculous at rush hours, and once I get past my anger at "stupid bridge and tunnel trash" I can look at I from another perspective.

But as long as we can use our cars to go from home to work/shopping/play without having to make multiple transfers of vehcles or do much walking we'll continue to use them. So often, public transportation only includes the means to get from central point to central point which may or may not be very near from where we wish to embark/disembark while burdened with children/consumer goods, etc.

Yes. I think there are several things acting in concert here. The first and foremost is the tradition of indiviudality in our society. I believe that we are a nation of individuals first. This doesn't mean that we don't band together as a community, but most Americans want their own car, their own house, etc. - it's a sort of unconscious democracy in which everyone is free to make their life as they please. This influences our driving/car ownership habits, and, as importantly, it influences our city planning habits. The development of our cities and surbubs as we know them comes from the post-WWII boom, when the combination of an economic boom and, I think, a desire by those returning from war to get back to "normal" life as quickly as possible, led to an emphasis on relentless "improvement" without much thought as to consequences. We have since found out about those consequences, and have dealt with some of them, like the Clean Air Act, CAFE standards, and others.

But the double whammy of everyone wanting to own a car and the people planning the cities acting as if everyone should own a car has given us the gridlock we know so well. It's kind of a closed loop: cars make the suburbs possible, and because suburbs are possible, people move places where you need a car. This is the big cycle which needs to be broken, the idea that using a car when public transporation is available is preferable.

So I would like to see more efficient/alternative fuel vehicles and more public transportation, but I don't think it will fly everywhere. And I want more expensive gas not to punish anyone but to make a point like the 70s gas crunches made. I don't think the big three auto makers and social inertia will respond to anything else. If people get mad enough at paying tons for gas, they will pressure the big three to make more fuel efficient cars, and the big three will do that because all corporations become spineless when the bottom line is threatened. We just need a big and long enough shock to change things.

Don

[wlonh]

"Saw this originally in Pop Science, but check out NEC's press release. More like a capacitor than a battery, it can be recharged in 5 minutes and has a life of 10s of thousands of cycles. NEC claims it has the highest energy density of any electrochemical device, as well as a current discharge rate 20 times higher than lead batteries (20mAh device: 9A in 10 seconds... electric cars, anyone?). To top it off, they can make it in a credit card-thin format. Very cool, and about time!"


(from /.)

[jholmes]

Don's right.
Out here in the sticks we can't even get DSL much less public transportation. But for metro areas it's great. Dallas and Fort Worth have finally gotten a commuter rail system started and if they ever get the kinks out, I'll park the truck on my way into Fort Worth and take the train the Big D.

But I think the best idea for cutting the use of cars and SUV's isn't electric cars or $4.00 gas. It's right in front of you.

Early this year I quit my job in town and now do freelance work from the ranch. Email, ftp and post comps to the website. It's faster, easier and the clients think it's cool. Now I go to town one or two times a week for client meetings and errands instead of fighting the daily commute.
I've taken my truck out of the traffic pattern and my Mac gets a zillion miles to the gallon!

[Don Pickett]

Early this year I quit my job in town and now do freelance work from the ranch. Email, ftp and post comps to the website. It's faster, easier and the clients think it's cool. Now I go to town one or two times a week for client meetings and errands instead of fighting the daily commute.

I've taken my truck out of the traffic pattern and my Mac gets a zillion miles to the gallon!

Good point. I didn't even think about it.

Reminds me of a small snippet from Neuromancer, in which a character says something to the effect that, in L.A., no one does anything that's not jacked in anymore. Maybe we're headed that way, all connected through the wires and never leaving our home.

Don

[wlonh]

works for me... i run my biz from my home and would not own a car, haven't had one since 1980... but i do admit to having a new car every year between the years 1970 and 1980, i have since seen the error of my ways... of course not everyone can enjoy the great good fortune of living in Manhattan, nor would i want everyone to live here. it suits me just fine that more than a few people outside of NYC have a low opinion of NYC...



best damn mass transit in the world

[denim]

Yeah, and you need it to get away from the muggers.

[Don Pickett]

For the record:

Yeah, and you need it to get away from the muggers

Manhattan is remarkably safe. D.C., Atlanta, Chicago and other major American cities are more dangerous. One good thing about Manhattan is that, even at four in the morning, there is always someone around.

Is there a graph to chart how far off-thread a particular thread goes? I'd like to see it sometime.

Don

[Ca$h68]

When I tow my boat, I use my neon. But, its a little boat. if I had a bigger boat, I would probably have a big 60s wagon with a big block. They'll tow, and hold 9 people.

Ca$h

Originally posted by Ca$h68:
Each time we change energy's form we lose a lot!

Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, nevermind found or lost.

Besides electric cars are much more efficient than piston driven ones.

What we really need are fuel cell vehicles.

[wlonh]

i have lived in NYC for just over 20 years and all those stories you hear are hogwash, this city has a lot of people and it is a very high-profile city... per capita it has less crime than many cities less than 1/4th its size.

[elzinat]

On Thursday I met Nat Goldhaber, vice-presidential candidate for the Natural Law Party and running mate of John Hagelin. http://www.hagelin.org
The Natural Law party is the "real" Reform party, except due to bad things perpetrated by that evil bastard buchanan which occured in Anaheim in August at the Reform party convention, he (buchanan) stole the title of the party and the $12.5 M of federal money.
They (the Natural law party) have a kind of funny crazy platform, which involves making everyone in the country practice therapeutic transcendental metidation to reduce healthcare costs in the US by 90%. They also favor a flat tax (bad!) without any deductables (yeah!).
Anyway, Mr. Goldhaber spoke at great lenth about the sad state of American politics. The meat of his message was, "This year, don't waste your vote! Vote for a third party!"
This is what he was talking about: It makes no real difference whether gore or shrub gets elected, since there are only a couple very minor issue actually different between there platforms (though they live and decieve to make you think there are many large ones), moreover since all laws go through Congress anyway, and so will get filtered by the same body, regardless of who is in the White House. the only real difference is that gore is smarter than shrub. and some people seem to think that is a bad thing. hmmm...
Goldhaber explains that a vote for a third party does count. The thing is this. There is victory for the third party even if its candidate doesn't win, because if a third party gets enough people to demonstrate concern over a given issue, then their platform will be subsumed by the major parties which of course want the vote of those people who supported the 3rd party's idea.
Example: Ross Perot made people concerned about the issue of the Balanced Budget. the major parties never would have made it an issue. Enough people voted for Perot that the major parties realized the American people cared about having a balanced budget, and each quickly tried to make itself seem like the more-in-favor-of-a-balanced-budget party. The result? a balanced budget. even though Perot didn't make it to the White House, that was a victory for him.

So everybody, go out there and vote for a third party!

[Ca$h68]

But energy can be lost. It isnt GONE, but we cant use it for anything. Anyway, electric cars suck ass, natural gas cars are dangerous, and fuel cells are too expensive.

And gasoline pollutes.

HA! Yeah right. Did you know a freshly tuned jetski puts out the same amount of pollution as EIGHT new cars RUNNING EIGHT HOURS!?!?! Do you wanna know how much lawn mowers put out? Even though buses and semis account for less than 5% of the vehciles on the road, they put out over 20% of the pollution?

THATS where we should start. 2 strokes and diesels. Both are BAD, FAR WORSE than any new car.

And if you guys are smart you'd get stock in orbital, which does direct injection gas engines. If you run it in phoenix the exhaust is cleaner than the intake. They're going to go big.

Ca$h

PS: I have stock in it already. HAha