It seems there's places all over the country that are trying it or talking about it.
Really? Name five school districts that have voucher programs in place?
Anyway, if vouchers aren't a Federal issue, why does the Left use the question of the constitutionality of them, as one of their main arguments against them?
btw: I don't care what level a prescription drug plan would be implemented at. Either way I'd end up paying for it.
In fact, GDubbya IS trying to drain the national funds, by handing them OUT...???
Dubya is giving monies back to people who deserve it. To those that actually pay in!
The only trouble I have with Dubya is, at the same time he needs to cut spending.
So, to now try to turn the tables and make this about "Vouchers", is disingenous, and dodging the question.
No it's not. I'd be more prone to help others if I was getting something in return.
Besides, unlike those that want prescription medicine, I'm already paying for schooling via my taxes.
The Voucher system is in place, just like you always wanted. What is the freaking complaint?
Really? What private school in MN can I can use a voucher at?
Vouchers? How do they contribute to our society?
They contribute as much as any monies going towards public schools, yet do it at a lesser price. Are you saying schooling children doesn't contribute to society? Wouldn't you like to do it better, and at a lesser price?
By allowing richer people to send their kids to Private-Schools?
You're an idiot if you think only rich people send their kids to private school.
You conservatives LIKE giveaways, as you call them, when the takers are on YOUR side of the aisle,
Giveways? It's not a giveway if I'm already paying for it. Which is the case for funding schools, unlike prescription medicine. Where they simply want something for nothing.
but when the elderly want to continue LIVING, you call it a "Pyramid Scheme"?
They are funded in a pyramid like fashion. Why do you think there's such concern for their future? You have a smaller youth base, funding an ever growing elderly base.
A belated Memorial day greetings to you all. I hope everyone took at least a moment to remember what the holiday is about.
I know that it is for those who gave their lives for our liberty, but to those of you here that have served or perhaps still are, my family and I thank you for a debt that we can never repay.
OK ... let’s start with this. This isn’t about the Bush tax cut. This is about class warfare. This is about seedy politicians setting one group of Americans against another group for political gain.
The Democrats had hoped to prevent Bush from getting his tax cut. They were afraid that it would actually lead to increased economic growth and declining Democrat hopes for the 2004 elections.
Well .. the tax cut passed, and the Democrats needed something else to stir up the masses. The decision was made to make a full class warfare assault on Republicans. Set up the rich as evil and the poor as victims. The leftists are basing their current class war onslaught on the fact that the Bush tax cut actually allowed people to keep more of the money that they earned, but it did not send enough checks to families who do not pay taxes.
Now it may seem perfectly understandable to most people that a tax cut means cutting the taxes that people actually pay taxes. But not Democrats. To a Democrat the definition of “cutting taxes” is “taking money from one income earner who pays taxes and giving that money to someone who does not pay taxes.” Strange --- but we are talking about politics here.
So ... the class warfare assault is on. Listen to the words of Connecticut Congresswoman Rosa Delauro ... a Democrat.
“What kind of perverse Robin Hoods steal secretly to rob from the poor to give to the rich?”
Now, isn’t that amazing? Allowing a taxpayer to keep more money is to “steal” from or to “rob” the poor and “give” to the rich. There really aren’t any words I can say here that could adequately illustrate just how absurd this statement is.
Then there’s New York Democrat Charles Rangel:
“The cruelest thing of all is that when they still found themselves three or four billion short and instead of shaving a little bit off of where the bulk of the money would go they saw fit not only to go after low income people, but the children of low income people.”
Oh yeah! Let’s paint these evil, greedy Republicans as attacking children.
At least one congressman has it right ... Tom DeLay from Texas:
"To me it's a little difficult to give tax relief to people that don't pay income tax. It's a spending program," Mr. DeLay
Brit Hume’s panel on Special Report got into this last night. They were discussing some new proposed legislation that would go ahead and give $400 checks for each child of a low income family that doesn’t pay income taxes. When Fred Barnes correctly referred to this as welfare the other panelists almost wet their pants. They just couldn’t believe that this man was referring to this as welfare? Well, what else is it? You take money away from the people who earned it, and you give it to people who did NOT earn it. It’s a straight cash grant. It’s welfare. If the left is going to be so anxious to redistribute income like this ... why not at least have the guts to call it what it is.
This, by the way, is what is objectionable to liberals, this is what they find so troublesome about Fox News Channel. Fox continues to remind viewers that the families the Democrats are continually referring to don’t pay any taxes. -Neal Boortz
"They were afraid that it would actually lead to increased economic growth and declining Democrat hopes for the 2004 elections."
Lies from another radio loudmouth. I can say just as easily that Republicans wanted the economy to tank so the population could turn against Clinton and they could grab power. But neither is true.
" Fox continues to remind viewers that the families the Democrats are continually referring to don’t pay any taxes. "
More lies. It might not be income taxes, but they pay taxes.
How come there aren't the same income tax breaks for single people and people without children? Did they get anything from this?
The Republicans wanted to pick and choose who deserves tax breaks, too.
More lies. It might not be income taxes, but they pay taxes.
Well it's an INCOME tax break, not a property tax, sales tax, or payroll tax etc. that was the issue. None of the other people are getting cuts on those other taxes either. We're talking income taxes only. The EITC earned income tax credit is specifically for the people in that category. Not only are most not paying income taxes but through the EITC get a refund PLUS more than they paid in to for social security tax, if they rent they get a renters credit as well. So I guess they still pay sales tax. I'm sure their might be another category I'm missing, but gettting money back from something you either don't pay into at all and sometimes get money back from something you didn't pay into isn't hardly leaving them in the dust.
I thought the Dems charge last week was that the tax cut was too large and the deficits were too big, now they want to add to it ? Hmm, good to see the Dems coming around on tax cuts ;)
How come there aren't the same income tax breaks for single people and people without children? Did they get anything from this?
The Republicans wanted to pick and choose who deserves tax breaks, too.
Just like Dems want to pick and choose who deserves tax money. You're right though, they wanted it to go to most of those who actually pay INCOME tax, what a novel idea.
My favorte editorial headline of the day went something like .."Bush's tax cut for the rich balanced on the backs of children" ....Good God, the kids, again ? Really ? There's rhetoric on both sides I know but the kids ? I am glad I'm considered rich, I never felt that way but it's good to know someone thinks I'm rich.
Even with a lagging economy? Even when tax cuts have been proven to spur the economy? When do the Democrats think it is a good time for tax cuts? They always seem to find to things more important to spend money on. Rather then letting the people that earn the money keep more of it.
Rent increases, breaking the law, state park vacations, and cigarettes should now be paid for by the state? Which is it? You liberals bitch about giving a tax cut, saying it is going to be put on the backs of kids. In another breath it is bad to increase fees? It's like watching a cat chase its tail.
Oh, yeah! It is thinking like this that made the Dems lose so many races last election and will make them continue to do so in 2004.
Here's a thought! Any legislation that causes an increase in spending need pass by a 2/3 majority. Then maybe lawmakers would actually need to whole heartedly believe in their sales pitches to the people to gain enough support to pass it, regardless of the party in power.
Gimmie his address! I am not intimidated by children or liberals who use them as "human shields". Taxation does not in and of itself improve the lives of our children, it's how wisely we as individuals and as a community spend what we have.
In January, I lost my job. I was making about $80,000 a year. I was one of those evil wealthy conservatives that only desire to live off the backs of children and the poor. Last month I started a new job making about $40,000 a year. Gee, I suppose that I should convert and become a poor but caring liberal since I no longer pay my fair share of taxes. Maybe I could write my congressmen and tell them how to spend the taxpayers money, since I am not one anymore, and get them to spend it on something to benefit me and my new ilk.
The fact is, I only lost my job NOT my MIND! I consider my job change temporary, but even if it is not, there are no gaurantees of being successful. All I can do is better myself and make myself marketable to a higher paying job. I my not be "rich" anymore, but I have no desire to excessively spend someone else's money to push my agenda. Now the problem for me is what party to affiliate with? There supposedly isn't one for the poor, heartless conservative.
Using children in photos to promote higher taxes. "Willing to pay more". The old "tugging at the heart strings". Perfectly legit for liberals.
What's ironic about it is, they've got all the power in the world to pay more. That's not what they really want. The issue truly is, they want you and I to pay for their children.
It makes me sick.
Me too. They don't seem to care about that though.
If conservaties are so good with their money why are they such a targeted demographic for debt relief companies?
Listen to AM 1500 or AM 1280 (The Patriot) for an hour of one those radio loudmouths, and a third of the commercials are geared toward people with uncontrollable debt. Sometimes the show hosts do the sales pitch.
I suppose the next thing I'll hear in one of those commercials is "the tax and spend liberals drove me into debt."
If people/parents want more money for public education than what's currently available, they should pay for it themselves. THX and I pay enough. But what's enough to some people? If the whole budget was spent on public education, it still wouldn't be enough.
There was a 10th grader on the local news a few nights ago complaining that her jazz interpretation class was cut for next year....WHAT THE HELL IS THAT!
What a prime example of the crap that should have been cut a long time ago. And why is that a class in the first place? "Education" like that should come out of the pockets of the actual parents if a class like that soooooooooooo important.
Gee, Rick, you seem quite familiar with the sponsors of conservative talk radio. You must listen to it a lot. How does the sponsorship compare with that of liberal talk radio shows? Oops, sorry, there aren't any...
I don't think there are as many passionate liberal listeners out there. Conservatives have felt like underdogs for a long time and I believe that's why so many of them participate in the call-in talk shows. I do wish there were a couple of liberal talk shows, just to have a mix.
"I don't think there are as many passionate liberal listeners out there. "
If radio talk show listeners are what passes for passionate these days, I think passion is in a sorry state.
"Conservatives have felt like underdogs for a long time and I believe that's why so many of them participate in the call-in talk shows. "
You can claim them as your own if you want, but I generally don't classify radio talk show callers first by their political persuasion. I generally don't consider them conservative or liberal. They're just the kind of people who call radio talk shows -- a group in, and of, themselves. They seem to be easily manipulated by the moral certainty projected by the host. Radio talk show hosts can be intense, and generally pretty persuasive.
The real reason Liberals don't listen to talk radio:
They're too frickin' stupid to operate a radio.
Since the Conservatives cut their funding, they can't afford one.
:-)
Actually, I don't listen to much talk radio either. The most I listen to is Joe on the very few occasions my wife picks me up from work in the car, instead of me taking the bus.
Liberal talk radio cannot exist because peolple haven't listened to fiction on the radio since "War of the Worlds"!
Just kiding, guys.
I think the reason for not having a "liberal talk radio" is that the rest of the media is already leaning left, there's just too much out there already.
Yesterday there was a story that a new study is believed to show that hydrogen powered vehicles will cause more damage to the ozone than gas powered vehicles.
A recent study showed that the ice caps are actually growing, this was done by actually measuring it vs. sattelite imagery, hmmm who would have thought ?
A couple months back, there was a story about global cooling. Back in 1975 that was the big story or fear. So we went from cooling to warming and now many scientists are saying we're going back to cooling. I can't keep track anymore. This story today throws more water IMO on their theories. It's why I don't buy what they say. They can't predict the weather in 5 days accurately. I thought this story was a satire, then I saw it on CNN too. I guess we should all learn to enjoy chicken.
The collective breathing of cows accounts for nearly 20 percent of the methane gas released into the atmosphere. To cut down on the 100 to 150 gallons of the gas that a typical cow accounts for each day, University of Nebraska researchers are developing an additive for cattle feed.
This is where one really has to wonder.
Sheep, termites implicated too
Termites ?
They have not yet tested any compounds in live animals, and Ragsdale wouldn't speculate on when that would happen. It likely will be in an animal much smaller than a cow.
"We'd probably go to sheep before cattle, and before sheep we may go to a termite," he said. "They make a lot of methane."
It seems there's places all over the country that are trying it or talking about it.
Really? Name five school districts that have voucher programs in place?
Anyway, if vouchers aren't a Federal issue, why does the Left use the question of the constitutionality of them, as one of their main arguments against them?
btw: I don't care what level a prescription drug plan would be implemented at. Either way I'd end up paying for it.
Are there five in Wisconsin that have tried it?
Milwaukee had something going on, but that's all I know of.
In fact, GDubbya IS trying to drain the national funds, by handing them OUT...???
Dubya is giving monies back to people who deserve it. To those that actually pay in!
The only trouble I have with Dubya is, at the same time he needs to cut spending.
So, to now try to turn the tables and make this about "Vouchers", is disingenous, and dodging the question.
No it's not. I'd be more prone to help others if I was getting something in return.
Besides, unlike those that want prescription medicine, I'm already paying for schooling via my taxes.
The Voucher system is in place, just like you always wanted. What is the freaking complaint?
Really? What private school in MN can I can use a voucher at?
Vouchers? How do they contribute to our society?
They contribute as much as any monies going towards public schools, yet do it at a lesser price. Are you saying schooling children doesn't contribute to society? Wouldn't you like to do it better, and at a lesser price?
By allowing richer people to send their kids to Private-Schools?
You're an idiot if you think only rich people send their kids to private school.
You conservatives LIKE giveaways, as you call them, when the takers are on YOUR side of the aisle,
Giveways? It's not a giveway if I'm already paying for it. Which is the case for funding schools, unlike prescription medicine. Where they simply want something for nothing.
but when the elderly want to continue LIVING, you call it a "Pyramid Scheme"?
They are funded in a pyramid like fashion. Why do you think there's such concern for their future? You have a smaller youth base, funding an ever growing elderly base.
I think the Medicare prescrption drug program relies, in part, on premium payments by the recipients.
Dennis makes his pick for president
It's amazing how an off-the-cuff, thoughtless remark made by one of those women in a faraway city can have a life like this.
A belated Memorial day greetings to you all. I hope everyone took at least a moment to remember what the holiday is about.
I know that it is for those who gave their lives for our liberty, but to those of you here that have served or perhaps still are, my family and I thank you for a debt that we can never repay.
OK ... let’s start with this. This isn’t about the Bush tax cut. This is about class warfare. This is about seedy politicians setting one group of Americans against another group for political gain.
The Democrats had hoped to prevent Bush from getting his tax cut. They were afraid that it would actually lead to increased economic growth and declining Democrat hopes for the 2004 elections.
Well .. the tax cut passed, and the Democrats needed something else to stir up the masses. The decision was made to make a full class warfare assault on Republicans. Set up the rich as evil and the poor as victims. The leftists are basing their current class war onslaught on the fact that the Bush tax cut actually allowed people to keep more of the money that they earned, but it did not send enough checks to families who do not pay taxes.
Now it may seem perfectly understandable to most people that a tax cut means cutting the taxes that people actually pay taxes. But not Democrats. To a Democrat the definition of “cutting taxes” is “taking money from one income earner who pays taxes and giving that money to someone who does not pay taxes.” Strange --- but we are talking about politics here.
So ... the class warfare assault is on. Listen to the words of Connecticut Congresswoman Rosa Delauro ... a Democrat.
“What kind of perverse Robin Hoods steal secretly to rob from the poor to give to the rich?”
Now, isn’t that amazing? Allowing a taxpayer to keep more money is to “steal” from or to “rob” the poor and “give” to the rich. There really aren’t any words I can say here that could adequately illustrate just how absurd this statement is.
Then there’s New York Democrat Charles Rangel:
“The cruelest thing of all is that when they still found themselves three or four billion short and instead of shaving a little bit off of where the bulk of the money would go they saw fit not only to go after low income people, but the children of low income people.”
Oh yeah! Let’s paint these evil, greedy Republicans as attacking children.
At least one congressman has it right ... Tom DeLay from Texas:
"To me it's a little difficult to give tax relief to people that don't pay income tax. It's a spending program," Mr. DeLay
Brit Hume’s panel on Special Report got into this last night. They were discussing some new proposed legislation that would go ahead and give $400 checks for each child of a low income family that doesn’t pay income taxes. When Fred Barnes correctly referred to this as welfare the other panelists almost wet their pants. They just couldn’t believe that this man was referring to this as welfare? Well, what else is it? You take money away from the people who earned it, and you give it to people who did NOT earn it. It’s a straight cash grant. It’s welfare. If the left is going to be so anxious to redistribute income like this ... why not at least have the guts to call it what it is.
This, by the way, is what is objectionable to liberals, this is what they find so troublesome about Fox News Channel. Fox continues to remind viewers that the families the Democrats are continually referring to don’t pay any taxes. -Neal Boortz
"They were afraid that it would actually lead to increased economic growth and declining Democrat hopes for the 2004 elections."
Lies from another radio loudmouth. I can say just as easily that Republicans wanted the economy to tank so the population could turn against Clinton and they could grab power. But neither is true.
" Fox continues to remind viewers that the families the Democrats are continually referring to don’t pay any taxes. "
More lies. It might not be income taxes, but they pay taxes.
How come there aren't the same income tax breaks for single people and people without children? Did they get anything from this?
The Republicans wanted to pick and choose who deserves tax breaks, too.
Rick,
Well it's an INCOME tax break, not a property tax, sales tax, or payroll tax etc. that was the issue. None of the other people are getting cuts on those other taxes either. We're talking income taxes only. The EITC earned income tax credit is specifically for the people in that category. Not only are most not paying income taxes but through the EITC get a refund PLUS more than they paid in to for social security tax, if they rent they get a renters credit as well. So I guess they still pay sales tax. I'm sure their might be another category I'm missing, but gettting money back from something you either don't pay into at all and sometimes get money back from something you didn't pay into isn't hardly leaving them in the dust.
I thought the Dems charge last week was that the tax cut was too large and the deficits were too big, now they want to add to it ? Hmm, good to see the Dems coming around on tax cuts ;)
Just like Dems want to pick and choose who deserves tax money.
You're right though, they wanted it to go to most of those who actually pay INCOME tax, what a novel idea.
My favorte editorial headline of the day went something like .."Bush's tax cut for the rich balanced on the backs of children" ....Good God, the kids, again ? Really ? There's rhetoric on both sides I know but the kids ? I am glad I'm considered rich, I never felt that way but it's good to know someone thinks I'm rich.
"I thought the Dems charge last week was that the tax cut was too large and the deficits were too big, now they want to add to it ?"
No, I'm not coming around. The tax cut IS bad policy in a deficit budget.
Unless, of course you don't care about deficit or debt and you want a tax cut.
...and you want to buy votes.
"Hmm, good to see the Dems coming around on tax cuts ;) "
...but I'M the one who's snide and condescending.
Twas being sarcastic Rick.
BTW, Hearing a buying votes quote coming from a member of the party that invented it I find ironic.
The tax cut IS bad policy in a deficit budget.
Even with a lagging economy? Even when tax cuts have been proven to spur the economy? When do the Democrats think it is a good time for tax cuts? They always seem to find to things more important to spend money on. Rather then letting the people that earn the money keep more of it.
I don't know what "Democrats" on the whole think. But I think it should be done when pressing obligations like SS and a balanced budget are met.
Blanced budges happened under a Democratpresident. But the Republican presidents seem to have trouble managing money.;-)
Rent increases, breaking the law, state park vacations, and cigarettes should now be paid for by the state? Which is it? You liberals bitch about giving a tax cut, saying it is going to be put on the backs of kids. In another breath it is bad to increase fees? It's like watching a cat chase its tail.
Oh, yeah! It is thinking like this that made the Dems lose so many races last election and will make them continue to do so in 2004.
"Taxes are the way people join hands to get good things done. That's the tradition of Minnesota." Former Governor Elmer Anderson, Republican.
A dog will chase his tail. Cats are smarter than that.
Obviously you haven't seen MY cat.
Taxes aren't bad, it's the EXCESSIVE taxation that boils my blood.
Tell him your blood is boiling.
Here's a thought! Any legislation that causes an increase in spending need pass by a 2/3 majority. Then maybe lawmakers would actually need to whole heartedly believe in their sales pitches to the people to gain enough support to pass it, regardless of the party in power.
Gimmie his address! I am not intimidated by children or liberals who use them as "human shields". Taxation does not in and of itself improve the lives of our children, it's how wisely we as individuals and as a community spend what we have.
"Taxes are the way people join hands to get good things done. That's the tradition of Minnesota." Former Governor Elmer Anderson, Republican.
Trouble is, the Liberals have turned taxes into their personal charity organization.
Taxes aren't bad, it's the EXCESSIVE taxation that boils my blood.
Ditto!
Tell him your blood is boiling.
Now that would be silly. I'd be happy to tell his parents though.
In January, I lost my job. I was making about $80,000 a year. I was one of those evil wealthy conservatives that only desire to live off the backs of children and the poor. Last month I started a new job making about $40,000 a year. Gee, I suppose that I should convert and become a poor but caring liberal since I no longer pay my fair share of taxes. Maybe I could write my congressmen and tell them how to spend the taxpayers money, since I am not one anymore, and get them to spend it on something to benefit me and my new ilk.
The fact is, I only lost my job NOT my MIND! I consider my job change temporary, but even if it is not, there are no gaurantees of being successful. All I can do is better myself and make myself marketable to a higher paying job. I my not be "rich" anymore, but I have no desire to excessively spend someone else's money to push my agenda. Now the problem for me is what party to affiliate with? There supposedly isn't one for the poor, heartless conservative.
Common Sense Conservative 6/5/03 12:57pm
Take heart CSC, Some politicians still think you're rich I'm sure.
If you have ANYmoney of your own, some politicians will think you're rich.
What makes my blood boil?...Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
Let's see. How about liberals using children in an attempt to advance their income robbing agendas?
I'm getting a sign...."Happy to pay less for a leaner Minnesota".
"What makes my blood boil?...Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm? "
A shorter list for you, Torpedo, would be the things that do not make your blood boil.
How liberals use children(post 3461):
Rick 6/5/03 12:30pm
"How liberals use children(post 3461): "
For snapshots?
It's not like Norm Coleman using is 12 year old daughter for 30 second spot to show what kind of a family man he is.
And I'll spare the conjecture on his family life.
By the way Wolvie, how have Liberals "used" Children to rob you?
I am curious...
Torpedo posted that not me.
Using children in photos to promote higher taxes. "Willing to pay more". The old "tugging at the heart strings". Perfectly legit for liberals.
It makes me sick.
I'll take a 350 billion tax CUT any day fold.
What would the left do? RAISE taxes by at least that amount.
Using children in photos to promote higher taxes. "Willing to pay more". The old "tugging at the heart strings". Perfectly legit for liberals.
What's ironic about it is, they've got all the power in the world to pay more. That's not what they really want. The issue truly is, they want you and I to pay for their children.
It makes me sick.
Me too. They don't seem to care about that though.
If conservaties are so good with their money why are they such a targeted demographic for debt relief companies?
Listen to AM 1500 or AM 1280 (The Patriot) for an hour of one those radio loudmouths, and a third of the commercials are geared toward people with uncontrollable debt. Sometimes the show hosts do the sales pitch.
I suppose the next thing I'll hear in one of those commercials is "the tax and spend liberals drove me into debt."
If people/parents want more money for public education than what's currently available, they should pay for it themselves. THX and I pay enough. But what's enough to some people? If the whole budget was spent on public education, it still wouldn't be enough.
There was a 10th grader on the local news a few nights ago complaining that her jazz interpretation class was cut for next year....WHAT THE HELL IS THAT!
What a prime example of the crap that should have been cut a long time ago. And why is that a class in the first place? "Education" like that should come out of the pockets of the actual parents if a class like that soooooooooooo important.
I don't believe that education should be a function of government at all.
If conservaties are so good with their money why are they such a targeted demographic for debt relief companies?
LOL
I honestly haven't heard the commercials, but I don't listen to radio all that much. I can't get AM stations in where I work.
Anyway, we're broke cuz you damn Liberals keep taxing us to death to send your kids to school.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it!
The other commercials are for dating services and people who grind their teeth in their sleep.
...and programs for parents whose kids who can't read.
It's one thing after another with you conservatives.
Gee, Rick, you seem quite familiar with the sponsors of conservative talk radio. You must listen to it a lot. How does the sponsorship compare with that of liberal talk radio shows? Oops, sorry, there aren't any...
Much to the credit of liberals.
They're bad at talk radio.
I don't think there are as many passionate liberal listeners out there. Conservatives have felt like underdogs for a long time and I believe that's why so many of them participate in the call-in talk shows. I do wish there were a couple of liberal talk shows, just to have a mix.
"I don't think there are as many passionate liberal listeners out there. "
If radio talk show listeners are what passes for passionate these days, I think passion is in a sorry state.
"Conservatives have felt like underdogs for a long time and I believe that's why so many of them participate in the call-in talk shows. "
You can claim them as your own if you want, but I generally don't classify radio talk show callers first by their political persuasion. I generally don't consider them conservative or liberal. They're just the kind of people who call radio talk shows -- a group in, and of, themselves. They seem to be easily manipulated by the moral certainty projected by the host. Radio talk show hosts can be intense, and generally pretty persuasive.
'Bill - Fold' 6/8/03 4:04am
The real reason Liberals don't listen to talk radio:
They're too frickin' stupid to operate a radio.
Since the Conservatives cut their funding, they can't afford one.
:-)
Actually, I don't listen to much talk radio either. The most I listen to is Joe on the very few occasions my wife picks me up from work in the car, instead of me taking the bus.
Liberal talk radio cannot exist because peolple haven't listened to fiction on the radio since "War of the Worlds"!
Just kiding, guys.
I think the reason for not having a "liberal talk radio" is that the rest of the media is already leaning left, there's just too much out there already.
Yes, and they're panicked because ONE conservative TV news station is up in the ratings.
Fox? -- I thought they were fair and balanced.
Like the Liberals have recently gone too far?
It is after all, what got all those pesky Republicans elected.
I think the Left needs to take heed as much as the Right.
Yesterday there was a story that a new study is believed to show that hydrogen powered vehicles will cause more damage to the ozone than gas powered vehicles.
A recent study showed that the ice caps are actually growing, this was done by actually measuring it vs. sattelite imagery, hmmm who would have thought ?
A couple months back, there was a story about global cooling. Back in 1975 that was the big story or fear. So we went from cooling to warming and now many scientists are saying we're going back to cooling. I can't keep track anymore. This story today throws more water IMO on their theories. It's why I don't buy what they say. They can't predict the weather in 5 days accurately. I thought this story was a satire, then I saw it on CNN too. I guess we should all learn to enjoy chicken.
This is where one really has to wonder.
Termites ?
Termites ?
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/science/06/13/offbeat.cow.breath.ap/index.html
Termites ?
Maybe termite droppings have a lot of methane.
Relative to their size, of course.