Fairweather

Of course, such a proposal is an outrage. But you still haven't provided the complete context or conditions under which a small group of Republican senators thought it might be useful. In the name of Peace perhaps? Now, feel free to answer my question in turn.

Murraysovereign says: "Nope, it was Newt Gingrich's House of Representatives. True, Clinton was President at the time, but it was a Republican-controlled House that cancelled the project." This simply is not true. I should point out to you that it was a Democrat controlled House and Senate that killed the collider in 1992 and 1993. The "Republican revolution" takeover of congress didn't happen until 1994!! http://www.highbeam.com/library/docfree....AResult&ao=

Post deleted by Fairweather

Not so fast there my Canadian Friend, but I think your history is a bit fuzzy... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_Super_Collider ....The project was canceled by Congress in 1993. Many factors contributed to the shutdown of the project, although different parties disagree on which contributed the most. They include rising cost estimates, mismanagement by physicists and Department of Energy officials, the end of the need to prove the supremacy of American science with the collapse of the Soviet Union, belief that many smaller scientific experiments of equal merit could be funded for the same cost, Congress's desire to generally reduce spending, and the unwillingness of Texas Governor Ann Richards [1] and President Bill Clinton, both Democrats, to support a project initiated during the administrations of Richards's Republican predecessor, Bill Clements, and Clinton's Republican predecessors, Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush. The closing of the SSC held drastic ramifications for the southern part of the Dallas-Ft. Worth Metroplex, and resulted in a mild recession made most evident in those parts of Dallas which lay south of the Trinity River. [3] At the time the project was cancelled, 22.5 km (14 mi) of tunnel were already dug and nearly 2 billion dollars had already been spent on the massive facility.

Get it while you can! The road will be permanently gated as of November 2006 by the USFS - at the behest of the environmental fringe groups, 'ALPS' and 'Mountains to Sound Greenway' and radicals like Harvey Manning. Your short trip will now be only for the super-fit 1%, or those with days to spare. Nice pictures, BTW!

Hell yes! But there's that whole speed-of-light-limit thing that doesn't bode well for a traditional approach. I'm confident that we'll figure it out someday, and yes, we should continue building the foundation for future explorers. Part of me thinks the real answers to getting off this planet lie more in the physics lab than "out there" - but both paths compliment eachother regardless. (Hey foraker; wasn't it Clinton that killed funding for the proposed new super-collider in Texas?) Happy Father's Day to you too.

Exactly! But then again, if the (this) universe expansion eventually stops and collapses back into a singularity, it won't matter what rock the human race is hangin' out on. But I've also read one theory holds yet another Big Bang then occurs and we get to do this all over again - exactly the same way!

...While scientists interviewed for this story said they do not believe the earth science cuts are a deliberate attempt to stall science on climate change, they say it comes at a time when more research, not less, is needed.... ...The exact amount of cuts to earth science programs could not be determined because they are not listed separately in the budget proposal.... ...Another key satellite, the $10 billion National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System, is over budget and has been delayed at least 18 months.... God forbid ! scientists be held accountable to the taxpayer. Foraker, I'm a big proponent of NASA - their space monopoly notwithstanding - and I hate to see anything in their budget cut. But they need a clear mission over there - one the public understands - and dumping billions into a flying dinosaur, aka the space shuttle, takes money away from more urgent needs, such as those you've listed in your post. I would also point out that $$$ spent on space exploration is quite often derided by near-sighted liberal activists who cite feeding the hungry here on earth as a more important task. I recall Ted Kennedy proposed suspending NASA funds altogether in his primary run for the presidency back in 1972 for this very reason.

On the Senate floor, July 14, Senate Republicans Ted Stevens, Mitch McConnell, Lamar Alexandar, John Cornyn, and Saxby Chambliss defended a proposal to give amnesty to terrorists who have killed or wounded US troops in Iraq. Now, answer the question: How personally might you take it if such an open season were declared upon you? First, I might point out that July 14th is next month. Maybe all that pot you smoke has you confused? Second, again, would you please provide an unbiased link to information re this Republican "proposal"? You're either full of shit - or taking some innocuous tidbit out of a broader text, I'm sure. Third, pulling our troops out of Iraq, as you and Matt no doubt would like to do, would provide just such an amnesty to these same killers.

I'm not sure how you arrive at any of those conclusions....or their relevance to my post.

My God Matt! Listen to yourself: "Maybe the documents were forged, but, well, the story is still true!! It really, really is! Why? Well....because all the people I know think it is too!...."

You apparently agree with the neocons who said they wanted to invade Iraq from day one of the Bush presidency, back when they were complaining that the outgoing Clinton folks were obsessed with terrorism and saying that we shouldn't engage in "nation building?" 1 - Firing missiles on coalition aircraft patroling the no-fly zone in violation of the cease-fire agreement. 2 - Attempting to assasinate a former president of the United States. 3 - The post-gulf war/cease-fire agreement murder of over 600 Kuwaiti POW's. Any of these acts justify our invasion, IMO. But I now honestly believe the reason for the invasion of Iraq is similar to the reason we became involved in Vietnam during the cold war - To demonstrate American power and resolve to our enemies post 9/11.

Coward? Pretty tough language there, sport. Now, maybe you could explain your claim. I see no such vote in the record - nor is it tucked into the suplemental budget just passed. http://thomas.loc.gov/r109/r109.html

This sentiment was my first reaction too, but when you see the link posted below you may reconsider..... WARNING!!! NOT KID OR FAMILY OR WORK SAFE.... http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=h...ficial%26sa%3DN There is one sentiment that liberals hold with which I wholeheartedly agree: Free Tibet

Perhaps. But as I've confessed before - I don't really care about the bogus WMD reason put forth. There were plenty of others just as good...or better.

I think the Wilson/Plame team had an agenda and it was just plain stupid to send such a team to Niger. Obviously, someone was a little overzealous in disclosing Plame to the press. Robert Novak has claimed it was common knowledge. I don't know....and neither do you. Once again, a GRAND JURY has determined that there is not enough evidence to bring Rove to trial - and the standards are pretty low. It really doesn't matter what you or I think, but I don't think it's necessarily right to hysterically claim "cover-up" in the hope that the myth will become codified in the public psyche.

Re read the thread. It's simple enough. Foraker implied a "cover up" was involved in the lack of grand jury disclosure. I subsequently pointed out that grand jury rules prevent anyone involved from discussing the proceedings. No one is claiming your right to speculate is wrong. Once again you are either not reading the "reply-to" lines properly, or have given up the argument to your muddy-water strategy. BTW: Vince Foster committed suicide. Even his wife agrees.

I don't believe a grand jury was ever convened in the Vince Foster case. Open media speculation and political biting is not a felony. Disclosing the details of a grand jury proceeding is. But then, you know that. Why claim conspiracy/coverup when it's clear that the law is at work here?

Just bought a Honda Element (2X4 - Black). Room for 3 mountain bikes inside with wheels on. Front/rear seats join to form two beds - great for trailhead camping. Clearance is good enough. Gets about 27 or 28 mpg hwy. Good warranty, about $21,000+ with all the extras, great visibility, 5-star safety rating.

The burden of proof lies where? I was simply responding to a post (Foraker's) that claimed grand jury secrecy laws amounted to yet another alleged conspiracy.

Like Arch said, "Innocent until proven guilty". Have you lost faith in the judiciary too? It really doesn't take a whole lot of evidence to get an indictment. Must not have been much to the charges.

...Given all this, it seems almost unfathomable that Democratic Party leaders would be insisting, as have Rep. Nancy Pelosi (R-CA) and Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), Democratic leaders of the House and Senate, that there would be no impeachment hearings in Congress if Democrats were to succeed in winning back Congress this November.... My God! Nancy Pelosi is a Republican!?!? Great reporting, and about what I've come to expect from the print rags. Foraker, I'm not really sure what your post has to do with the 'outing' of a CIA agent, or Carl Rove, for that matter! Your shocking revelation once again demonstrates the desperation of those on the left who regularly practice lobbing grenades in the vain hope that someday....just maybe....one will hit its mark.

I believe grand jury deliberations are always kept secret. Sorry Foraker, no conspiracy this time.

Nice trip. I'd like to take the kid up that route. I bought the grigri for my wife's recent interest in top-roped rock climbing - (After 22 years, go figure!) - and my own peace of mind. But after getting dropped on my ass by her ambitious grigri-levering skills at Bruce's Boulder last month I'm thinking it might be easier to just train her proper-like.