response 29 of 58:

Sep 14 09:32 UTC 2003

Re #17, If Patriot II gets passed, you may never be able to get an 
example of someone prosecuted under it.
http://www.idahogreens.org/Greenweb/IssuesHtml/pat2sum.htm

Example: Section 126 allows federal agents to access consumer credit 
reports without a subpoena or court order, and no one would be 
notified that their records had been accessed. 

Heh, now how would anyone find an example of the abuse of such a law?

Section 504 abolishes fair hearings for lawful permanent residents 
convicted of criminal offenses through an "expedited removal" 
procedure, and prevents any court from questioning the government s 
unlawful actions by explicitly exempting these cases from habeas 
corpus. Congress has not exempted any person from habeas corpus -- a 
protection guaranteed by the Constitution -- since the Civil War. 

response 31 of 58:

Sep 14 12:46 UTC 2003

Re 27:  Hey, if we can (apparently) afford $87 billion for Bush's reelection
war, then we ought to be able to afford Kyoto.  

Ard one merely needs to note the hottest summer on record in Europe to suspect
that perhaps global warming isn't a liberal scare story after all.

response 33 of 58:

Sep 14 22:21 UTC 2003

Re #23:  And this makes it okay for others to simultaneously condemn
us and try to take our place?

Re #24:  That's largely due to history.  How would you change that
overnight, when we have such a large installed base of everything?

The real problem is that the developing countries, such as China and
India, are trying to develop via more or less the same route that the
USA did.  This will not only have them belching CO2 at the rate we
were/are, it will give them the same problem of replacing infrastructure
that we're refusing to face.  Exempting them from emissions rules will
just make the problem worse.

Part of the problem is that some leftist organizations want to structure
carbon abatement as an income transfer; every human being gets some CO2
allowance, and can either buy more or sell theirs for money.  They want
all the billions of third-world babies who aren't burning much in the
way of fuel (save by deforestation, perhaps) to be supported by the first
world, not to mention the massive "graveyard entitlement" that would appear.
This idea is dismissed out of hand by most non-leftists, and emissions
reduction gets held hostage.  It makes far more sense to require that
all long-term-fixed carbon release be taxed to a certain level worldwide,
and let people find ways which have the least net carbon release (which
would coincide, unremarkably, with the least carbon-tax paid).

Re #27:  We can also improve our balance of payments a lot, clean up the
air in our cities and slash the funding available to Islamofascists
with the same measure.  What do you have against that, Kerry?

Re #31:  We should start charging off that $87 billion with taxes paid
at the gas pump.  The problem should start fixing itself quickly.

The really crazy thing is that many conservation measures have a net
negative cost, yet people don't even consider them.  Electric cars are
potentially cheaper to own and run than ICE cars, and we should be
planning for a changeover as fast as we can.

Right now I'm investigating the possibilities of massive cogeneration
systems combined with hybrid-electric vehicles and wind power.  The wind
power potential of the area off the west coast of Michigan alone appears
to be about 7.4 GW average.  If full exploitation didn't cut total fossil
fuel use of the state by more than 50%, I'd be greatly surprised.

response 35 of 58:

Sep 15 12:12 UTC 2003

"Re #23:  And this makes it okay for others to simultaneously condemn
us and try to take our place?"

I don't *think* I said that, but who knows?  

You realize that even after we've gone over to solar and wind power 
and hydrogen engines, and the others in their billions have soiled the 
nest so badly that humankind is half-a-generation from extinction, 
they'll *still* be blaming us.

response 37 of 58:

Sep 15 13:37 UTC 2003

So, would you rather help fix a problem, or just worry about how others will
view us and do nothing?

response 39 of 58:

Sep 16 00:28 UTC 2003

Re #17: It's hard to provide examples because information about use of 
many of the Patriot Act provisions is classified.  In some cases even 
statistics about how many times provisions have been used have ben ruled 
to be secret information.  I suspect this was written in specifically 
*because* it lets proponents of the law claim opponents can't point to 
specific cases of abuse.

response 41 of 58:

Sep 16 14:26 UTC 2003

The U.S. meddles in *everyone's* affairs.  They shouldn't take it
personally. ;>

response 43 of 58:

Sep 17 08:53 UTC 2003

Yes, for them it *is* a religious matter. However, that doesn't mean that
*all* Muslims are anti-American/anti-Western etc. Just beause British people
are brought up to hate the IRA because they are terrorists doesn't mean all
Irish people are the same. I know several personally who are not. There must
be more where they came from.

response 45 of 58:

Sep 17 15:02 UTC 2003

Oh, my god!  Bitching on grex??!  Next thing you know, there will be *drift*
or something, and then where will we be??

response 47 of 58:

Sep 17 19:23 UTC 2003

Not necessarily. Catholics *tend* to be republicans and Protestants tend to
be loyalists, but there is some crossover. And there is also the Alliance
Party, which is cross-community. If you wish to drag religion into it, America
is more religious than much of Europe; politicians proclaiming "God Bless Grat
Britain" would stick in many people's throats.

response 49 of 58:

Sep 17 22:23 UTC 2003

They have a State church, so it isn't surprising that it's "God Save our
Gracious Queen". 

response 53 of 58:

Sep 18 00:39 UTC 2003

No, because if you were me you'd realise that's only somewhat funny and not
unfunny enough to deserve an ironic "HAHahahaha, eTc.
"