Help Bush and Gore Answer Slashdot Questions 363
1) War on Drugs
by Tim Doran
The War on Drugs has been a consistently neglected topic in discussions surrounding this federal election. My question is, do you believe the War on Drugs has been an unqualified success, and if not, what would you change about it if elected president?
Your answer:
2) Minority Religions...
by Electric Angst
What will you do to protect the rights of atheists and those who hold minority faiths, such as Wicca, Santaria, Shinto, et al?
Your answer:
3) Why give a tax cut?
by funkman
With the surplus, everyone has been saying "Let's have a tax cut, Let's have a tax cut." In the meantime, Alan Greenspan and friends are trying to keep inflation and the speed of the growing economy in check so it doesn't burst. Which they are doing by raising interest rates periodically. (6 times this year)
A tax cut flies in the face of what Greenspan is trying to do. A tax cut will inject more money into the economy and do what Greenspan is preventing.
Why is a tax cut so big? Wouldn't the money be better spent on the deficit so when worse times roll along, a tax cut can be easily given by not paying as much on the debt?
Your answer:
4) electoral reform
by carleton
Some people, especially those that favor '3-rd' party candidates, have called for the ending of the electoral college system to be replaced by a simple purely popular vote, or at least allowing for splitting the electoral votes by each state. The best recent example was the Bush-Clinton election. Clinton received 43% of the popular vote (but a sufficient majority of the electoral vote), whereas Perot got at least 10% of the popular vote but zero electoral votes. If memory serves, Vermont is the only state which does currently allow for its votes to be split; if someone wins 60% of the Vermont popular vote, they get 2 votes and the 40% candidate gets 1. This in contrast to California, where someone can get 51% of the popular vote, and therefore gets 53 (or whatever it is nowadays) electoral votes. What is your position on this issue?
Your answer:
5)How Do You Feel About Intellectual Property?
by Phil Gregory
In this age of the Internet, intellectual property has become a very important concept to many people. Many companies make their living on the artificial scarcity provided by intellectual property laws, selling information that they have either created or aggregated. Some others, mostly in the Free Software world, make their living seemingly in spite of these laws, selling their services based on information that is freely given.
Do you feel that out current system of intellectual property is a good one? Which parts of it (e.g. trademarks, patents, copyrights) do you feel are well suited to the world of the Internet and which do you think need to be changed (and, if changes are needed, what changes are needed)?
Your answer:
6) Encryption....
by SquadBoy
Many tech people think that strong encryption is one of the best ways we have to protect freedom both now and for future generations. For example to preserve information that future not so friendly governments may think we don't need to have and to make sure that things we want to have remain private remain private. Given this what would you do to help preserve our right to privacy through the use of strong encryption? Also in a related question what are your thoughts and what do you plan to do about the fact that we can not export many forms of strong encryption?
Your answer:
7) Rising Political Protests
by sterno
In the last year or so we have seen a tremendous escalation in the quantity and size of political protests against globalization and the rising power of corporate multi-nationals. Do you believe that these people have reason to be concerned? If you do believe that they have reason for concern, what steps would you take as president to deal with their concerns?
Your answer:
8) Asteroid Defenses
by Ethelred Unraed
Would you renew funding of programs to research and develop global defense systems against asteroids or other such threats from space?
Your answer:
9) The Future of the Country, and of Humanity
by 11223
I'm very concerned with the future of the country, and about what our national mission seems to be. Looking back through American history, every period seems to have a defining popular mission - like the "manifest destiny" movement in the 19th century, the Depression, World War II, and the Cold War. During these times, there would be one struggle or idea that captivated the attention of the nation, sort of providing a national mission.
I'm a little confused as I look around today. What is our mission? To me, it seems to be "to watch TV and use the Internet." What would you say the defining national mission of today is? What should it be? Furthermore, how would you show this in your activities as a lawmaker? (For instance, if our national mission is the pursuit of science, then would you increase funding for scientific pursuits in the budget?)
Your answer:
Hi! I'm Al Gore and I know what's best for you. (Score:3)
Next, I want to educate your kids, but don't worry, we won't make them feel bad by ranking them with evil grading, nor will we teach anything even remotely controversial (no more "THEORY" of evolution). And remember, 2+2=5 isn't "wrong" or deserving of an "F". It just "needs improvement" and is pretty darn close, and deserves a pat on the back for effort. It's my new fuzzy math!
Third, the constitution gurantees that everyone may own a firearm, but don't worry, we'll make the process so expensive and restrictive with 15,000 forms to fill out, long lists of banned weapons, "impact" studies to carry out and submit, 50% of your annual income gun taxes, extensive background investigations (that the gun buyer must pay for) of all the gun owners associations over his lifetime so as to make ownership nearly impossible.... but it's still legal just like getting a NEW mining permit in Colorado where the paperwork process is expected to take 400 years to complete. This is my gun purchase model.
Fourth, states get in the way of helping kids and protecting the elderly and block us from diong what's right, so we plan to merge all state and municipal govt's into the Federal gov't. State boundaries will be erased and will become the 50 Federal Districts of America. Then with no more meaning to the 10th Amendment, we can do things like decide speed limits, blood alcohol levels, and ban college sports betting without having to extort states into compliance with their highway funds like we do now. And won't that make us all feel better?
Fifth, I intend to eventually end the private ownership of automobiles. Pollution is killing the planet. But to start with, though, the strictest Calif emmissions standards will be retroactively applied to ALL cars, trucks, busses, lawn mowers, boat engines, airplanes, leaf blowers, scooters, motorcycles, etc. Non compliant vehicles will be ordered destroyed without compensation to the environmental KILLER that owned the polluting vehicle. And we can't have exemptions for car collectors to abuse and flout the pollution laws either. A 57 Chevy pollutes as much as 200 new cars. That is an unforgivable crime.
So vote for me, Al Gore, on Nov 7th. Because everyone else supports gun crime, murder, rape, pedophillia, financial irresponsibility, and getting high. I care about you, and your kids!
--
Paid for by the "God is on Al Gore's side" foundation.
Killings which are wrong, are wrong. (Score:2)
I don't know where we'd be without its moral guidance!
--
Constitution Party's Howard Phillips (Score:2)
I know it says Bush or Gore, but it figgures answering third party's would be ignored.
1: This is a issue for the individual states. The constituion does not allow the federal goverment to get involved. We belive the states should legislate against the use of deadly drugs, but that is their buisness. However all enforcement must be in a mannor respecting the limits placed by the constitution, in particular the fourth ammendment.
In addition consider the following quote from http://www.constitut ion party.org/lets_take_back_america.htm [constitutionparty.org][On Colombia] This war is not about fighting drugs. It is not about defeating the narco-terrorists or the Communist influences from Cuba and from China in Colombia. This is another New World Order adventure in which American lives will be lost for no good purpose unless we can provide leadership in cutting off the money for this unconstitutional activity.
2: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." That said I'm a Christian, and so I don't recignise other religions as valid. However, as president, my country doesn't recignise any religion. So long as your religion isn't horrid (that is human sacrafice is out) the US should stay out of your way. So as long as you can freely practice your rediogigion (which means not participating in mine) you should have no cause for complaint.
I belive that tax breaks for religions (churches) simply are a way to bribe ministers [to not mention anything the goverment is doing wrong], and when looked at that way, it is clearly something the first ammendment was trying to prevent.
To turn this around, is your minority religion oppressed because there are many who belive you are wrong, or are you oppressed because laws are preventing you from practicing. If the former, I will not prevent one person from having free speach so you can have your religion, but if the latter I will work to repeal the oppressive laws.
3: Anytime you do major changes to the tax code there will be changes are people adjust to them. However my platform is more then a massive tax cut, it is also a spending cut. So we are allowing you to spend more money, but because the goverment is spending less, there will overall be LESS money in the system. This money will come from unconstituional programs, of which there are many. Of course many people will be hurt in the short run, but in the long run we will be better off, and can adjust if they have to.
4: As a third party I don't like the current system, but there are worse things the goverment does. However since we are touching election reform let me ask why tax payer dollars are going to political partys. My party has pledged to never take any goverment money to run our campaign (even if the current rules didn't discriminate against us)
5: [Congress shall have power] "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;"
I belive in the constitution, and will enforce keep patents and copyrights for a limited time as required. It is however unclear to me how to call the current duration of copyrights as limited. Otherwise, while there are specifics of everything that is wrong, the reforms needed are minor.
6: "Amendment IV: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, ..." That looks like encrption to me. I am secure at home against unreasonable searches and seizures in part becuase I use a lock. My comptuer papers are secure (or not) because I use (or don't) encryption.
This does not cover reasonable searches. If there is probable cause (and other requirments met), then things change, a court may order you to give up your keys if they cannot break the lock.
As for exporting strong encryption, the constitution does not allow anyone to prevent exports.
7: The following was taken from an essay by Howard Phillips, and ways it better then I can (url in answer to question one):
"We favor, and given the chance, will secure the immediate withdraw of our country from the United Nations.
"The other day I received a questionnaire from the League of Women Voters of Nevada, and they said we have a nuclear waste problem in America and a lot of the nuclear waste is targeted for certain locations in the state of Nevada. Do you agree that the nuclear waste should go to Nevada? I was asked. And I said, absolutely not. We should place that nuclear waste in Turtle Bay, New York under the United Nations Building.
8: Congress (Not the president) is charged with protecting the nation from invasion. While the framers of the constitution could not envision a day when we could defend ourselves from asteroids or other threats from space, today we can envison it, and in the future can achive it. Congress has power to maintain a navy, and I expect one day the navy will provide defense against space based attacks.
That said, today while we can envision technolody to do this defense we cannot achive it now. However we should consider threats from space in defense plans. Our missile defense plan should eventially extend to cover them. Today however we cannot reasonably defend ourselves against those attacks.
9: History makes it easy to see these times. Some were obvious while we were in them, others not. Manifest destiny didn't cover all the 19th century, and much of the population didn't move west as new territory opened up.
I suspect that history will give the answer, if anyone has a time machine to go forwards and check. However we can move to a mission of freedom, and limited goverment, and that is what a vote for me represents.
Re:Bitter? (Score:2)
Now, I do thing that Gore and Bush are too close in ideals that after you add the Congress to it, they will probably have about the same effectiveness on American policy. (even if it is Bush with a Rep-controlled Congress). I am getting tired of hearing the same stump speeches, and the treatment of Nader, etc etc. But this is also a result of how close this election is -- if it were already a landslide, I can tell you that the media would be half as interested in the election speeches as they are now. And this is not bad, as it gives voters more input to make a well-informed decision. But it does lead to a lot of repetition : I'm ready to vote, and vote now.
My answer for the war on drugs in the US. (Score:2)
-----
If Bill Gates had a nickel for every time Windows crashed...
Re:Bitter? (Score:2)
Know any benevolent dictators?
Re:Bitter? (Score:3)
I believe that without serious campaign finance reform, this sort of crap is going to continue to ruin our country. Who's for campaign finance reform? Not the guy who's winning because he's getting financed by these special interests. So, it's not just the big corporations that are buying this election, it's George Bush's rich golfing buddies, and the freinds of the republican party who are counting on him to make abortion illegal. Yes, that's the outcome of democracy in a nation of sheep. But stampeding voters with expensive lies is more at the root of how this nation works. The majority of voters don't think like you because the majority of voters don't think.
Personally, I'm voting for Nader. I sure as hell wouldn't want him being elected, and I wouldn't want a Green-run United States, but this country needs a third party, because some of these issues NEED discussion, and their being ignored.
Candidate CmdrTaco's replies (Score:4)
Well, drugs certainly are popular with young people today, especially Slashdot readers, though many have agreed that "pot makes you stupid" - despite many links to solid research done by those in support of decriminalization. I believe that as long as this controversy exists, we should seek out more articles on this topic, because they generate a LOT of hits. Unfortunately, unless it's about Carl Sagan, it's hard to find any drug articles that have anything to do with Nerds.
2) Minority Religions...
Though Christians and Wiccans seem to be the majority readership here, the Athiests seem to have the most support from the moderators. I support the discussion of all religions, because when you get down to it, religion is a very Nerdy topic, especially for anthropologists, angst-ridden philosophy majors, and of course those hard-core Darwinist/Athiests.
3) Why give a tax cut?
I get a LOT of email. Most of my email lately is on the so-called Karma Tax, whereby if a skilled troll previously earned 70, 80, 100 or even more karma points, they were just hording them, and kept posting inane drivel that got modded up anyway. Now, we've enacted the Karma Tax, where all accounts with more than 50 karma can no longer accumulate more karma points. This spreads the wealth to our less fortunate members, the First Posters, and especially, the rare, and endangered Penis Birds. Some argue that capping karma at 50 points takes away anyone's incentive to earn more karma by posting thoughtful comments. This is patently untrue, because nobody needs more than 20 karma anyway, to get the +2 bonus. That's already capped. If we didn't apply caps to these values, the discussions would be dominated by people like Signal 11, posting at +20 - even though people can set their thresholds lower, they just don't. Some people say that this is simply a failure of the moderation and metamoderation system, that the moderators simply aren't doing a quality job. Well, what should we do then, hire a subcontractor to do moderation? Turning it over to the private sector isn't the answer. The answer is meta moderation. Anyone can meta moderate, but nobody is doing it. If you have a problem with a moderator, metamoderate, and let's bitchslap that ho.
4) electoral reform
This ties in nicely to the last issue. The way moderators are chosen is well documented in the FAQ, if you don't like it, go to post on Kuro5hin with the other 3 people. Changing the rules at this point of the game is silly.
5)How Do You Feel About Intellectual Property?
Of course, all posts become the property of Slasdot, and BenDover.net. Got a problem with that? Don't post. If you post someone else's intellectual property, and they try to sue us, well, we'll try and fight it, but of course in reality, we're not going down for your silly little cause.
6) Encryption....
Since we're not really banned anywhere yet, there's really no reason for encryption. But someday soon, since we nerds and hackers seem to be becoming a persecuted minority, we'll probably have to encrypt the whole damn site soon. When that happens, we'll have to post a story and we'll let the readers decide on an implementation. I'm guessing we'll end up using the NP-HG (Natalie Portman-Hot Grits) algorithm. It's not GPL-ed yet. But if we whine enough it will be.
7) Rising Political Protests
Also another very popular topic, but difficult to rationalize it's relationship to "News for Nerds". Luckily, the Slashdot readership has become more mainstream over the years, and accepts this kind of thing. Good thing article submissions themselves don't get moderated. Otherwise we'd post only discussions on Linux and x86 hardware, and we'd have NO traffic.
8) Asteroid Defenses
There's really nothing we can do about this except make sure we've got good offsite backup.
9) The Future of the Country, and of Humanity
Well, hopefully, the incessant whining about the moderation system will stop, because it was a pain in the ass coming up with the system we have, and it works well enough to keep generating banner revenue, so it's not going to change. Like I said before, if you don't like it, go read Kuro5hit.
New Voting Date (Score:2)
Budget Surplus (Score:2)
As far as spending the money on a tax-cut, that is a non-meaningful statement. A tax-cut would mean that the money was never collected, and could never, therefore, be spent. Where is that money now? I have not paid it. How can "letting me keep more of the money I earn" be called "spending".
As for the tax cut benefitting the wealthies 10 percent the most, almost any tax-cut is going to do that, unless it has a "cap". I would bet if the following tax-cut was implemented, the top 10 percent would still see the most benefit by dollar value
- top 10% - 10% tax-cut - pays over million, so saves $100,000
- 10-20% - 20% tax-cut - pays around $100,000, so saves $20,000
- 20-30% - 30% tax-cut - pays $10,000, so saves $3,000
- ...
- 70-80% - 80% tax-cut - pays $1,000, so saves $800
- 80-90% - 90% tax-cut - pays $100, so saves $90
- bottom 10% - 100% tax-cut - already pays nothing, so saves nothing
(All numbers made up)Hal Duston
hald@sound.net
You expect DIFFERENT answers? (Score:2)
The war on drugs:
Al Bush: Drugs represent a danger to the poor and disadvantaged in our inner cities, as well as young people everywhere. Since we know what's best for them, we're going to give more power to all of the police and anti-drug groups who say that they need more power. Al Bush is not soft on crime!
Minority religions:
George Gore: Our nation prides itself on freedom of religion. It's in our Constitution. Everyone should be free to worship or not to worship as they wish. We respect the spiritual decisions of all Americans, and recognize the importance of religion to American life, and that the government has no place in it.
Why give a tax cut?
George Bush: It's your money!
Al Gore: It's your government!
Electoral Reform:
Al Bush: No answer.
Intellectual Property:
George Gore: We must protect the rights of those who create and invent, while at the same time protecting the rights of consumers. We'll get "experts" in these areas to produce more great, high quality legislation like the DMCA to make sure this happens. What? What check from the MPAA? I don't know what you're talking about.
Encryption:
This one was answered by the candidates elsewhere. Gore is for continual bans on its export, Bush believes in opening the market, as well as making encryption and privacy an important right for all Americans.
Rising Political protests:
Al Bush: Certainly, the concerns of those protesters are valid, and we should take them into account before turning the world into one giant Starbucks.
Asteroid Defenses:
George Gore: We don't know much about that, but we'll hire "experts" to "inform" us what to do.
The Future of the Country, and of Humanity:
Al Bush: Blah blah dawn of a new millennium blah blah we're prosperous now but we need to be even more so blah blah spiritual renewal blah blah fairness and opportunities for all people and stuff like that.
--
"How many six year olds does it take to design software?"
Would Bush be a better man? (Score:5)
Well, he wouldn't be running for President today, which I see as an improvement...
This smells like a pro-Bush rant (Score:2)
Or perhaps just an anti-Gore rant. Just in case you are pro-Bush (and you weren't merely being sarcastic), let me challenge you on one issue:
I think thay we should be leading the way in the war on drugs.
And how, exactly, is the government going to "lead the way" in the war on drugs? The same way it's been "leading the way" in the drug war for the past few decades (and still failing miserably)? The same way it was "leading the way" in prohibition (which everyone agrees was a miserable failure)?
Tell me, at what point will we have decided that we've "won" the war on drugs? And how is alcohol prohibition different from marijuana prohibition (or any other drug prohibition)? Also, do you think that Bush would be a better candidate if he had spent ten years in prison for his "youthful indescretions"?
Re:BUSH IS A CRIMINAL (Score:2)
--
Intellectual property (Score:2)
War on Drugs (Score:2)
Bush's answer:
We gotta do what's right, we gotta do what's fair. And that means that ex-cokeheads like mahself should stay out of prison at all costs, while we fuel the prison industry by locking up minorities at a rate that surpasses most other countries in the world. Ah have trust in our joodishul systum, because that's what governors do when they're not giving out hugs.
In fact, ah don't think the war has gone far enough - ah mean, in a real war, you have casualties, right? It's time to start killing drug users! We have a mighty-fine death chamber down here in texas, and ah gotta tell you, hard as we try, there are still a few days when it goes unused.
If ah could sign a law that made people love each other, ah would, and we'd do what's prudent, on the right timetable - but until then, ah think it's time to step up the war on drugs with mandatory death penalties for first time abusers. ah'd mandate that from the federal level, to keep those liberal judges from legislating from the bench. It's up to the congress to control the legislative branch, tie their hands in any way we can. That's not big government, that's tough on crime!
Query from the audience:
Mr. Bush, do you really think that locking up small-time users is a cost-effective way to approach this problem? How much is all this costing us?
Mr Bush:
Ooh, look at the time, gotta go... Did you know Al Gore claimed he invented the internet?
---
Re:Then why is violent crime down?? (Score:2)
http://www.ifs.univie.ac.at/uncjin/mosaic/wcs.h
---
If it were not sad it would be funny (Score:2)
2 We've seen the beginnings of a 'Protestant roots and awareness' movement (a quote not my words) to stop the tide of anti-Christian godlessness. This ought to chill you.
3 I'm on going to say this one million times. THE PRESIDENT CANNOT SET TAX POLICY THAT IS CONGRESS'S JOB. Any candidate for any office in the executive branch that tells you anything about what he or she is going to do about taxes is deceiving you or doesn't know basic civics.
4 What difference does an electoral system make where the difference between the candidates is almost zero. We would be better served with a random lottery. Who cares about if a candidate gets 10% of the pop vote but 0 electoral votes. Isn't it much more serious when a candidate wins with say 45% of the total vote and that vote represents 45% of the people who can vote. One could say that you no longer live in a Democracy with numbers like that.
5 Is this thing on? Who buys candidates? Organizations with serious money in in IP. Why? That is the way you legally justify beating the shit out of people via lawyers. Are you serious? IP Reform. You might as well ask for free water or clean air.
6 Encryption. Wonk wonk wonk wonk. Both candidates are asleep by now. That's a nit that propjockeys like you and me are concerned with. The real question is how many civil rights are you willing to give up in the face of some hysterical call to pull the wagons in a circle?
7 First off there has not been a rise. They've always been there on the front lines. You just notice it more now. Second: These are the little people. They don't count. Even the unions don't count. What counts is money.
8 Asteroid.....In case you haven't been listening we don't have the attention span to watch a music video unless there is something else going on on the screen at the same time. 2 minutes 45 tops. You expect anyone to give a shit or even pay attention to something that might happen in the next century? You expect someone to pay for it? I can't someone to come 3 times in a row to mow my lawn and you expect me to worry about taking years out to devise a complex solution for this.
9 National mission? This is our national mission. Its our fucking manifest destiny. Push ever onward until everyone in the world is us or just like us so we'll have something in common with the people we kill or let kill each other. Here's a quick quiz. See if you can find the thing that is not like the others:
Sports
News
Politics
Entertainment
Religion
Technology
Warfare
purple balloons
Did you get it? Did you find the one item that isn't another name for each of the other items. Good. Now don't look up, push another fucking cheeseburger in your face, beat your wife, turn on the tube and shut the fuck up while we run shit. If you have any stupid fucking questions about that we suggest you run naked into a police station, waving a gun.
That is all. Dismissed.
Re:Atheism and Religious Minorities (Score:2)
Re:BUSH IS A CRIMINAL (Score:2)
That's right! Don't you know that only money can buy you an acquittal?
--
Why not four birds? (Score:2)
The judicious use of tactical nuclear weapons could solve the minority religions problem too (or at least avoid the main problem presented by Wacco, survivors). The same solution can be used with marijuana fields in continental US.
Bush replies... (Score:5)
"Drug therapies are replacing a lot of medicines as we used to know it."
2. Minority Religions
"Our priorities is our faith."
3. Tax Cut
"It's clearly a budget. It's got a lot of numbers in it."
4. Electoral Reform
(no response)
5. IP
'This campaign not only hears the voices of the entrepreneurs and the farmers and the entrepreneurs, we hear the voices of those struggling to get ahead."
6. Encryption
We cannot let terrorists and rogue nations hold this nation hostile or hold our allies hostile.''
7. Asteriod Defences
"It's going to require numerous IRA agents."
8. The future
"That's a chapter, the last chapter of the 20th, 20th, the 21st century that most of us would rather forget. The last chapter of the 20th century. This is the first chapter of the 21st century."
All quotes from here [msn.com]
Answer from Bush (Score:4)
Drugs are bad.
Religions are good.
Tax cuts good.
I'm for it, except where it allows third party candidates in presidential debates.
I'll have Mr. Gore remove all his stuff when he vacates the Vice Presidential mansion.
Encryption good. Except when it's bad.
Protests bad.
I thought Bruce Willis did a pretty good job, even though Hollywood is corrupting our youngsters.
Humanity is good.
--
Re:Then why is violent crime down?? (Score:2)
I was at a computer conference a few years ago. Every evening at the conference, there was an open bar, and most of the conference attendees would gather to argue shop and get hammered. This particular evening, I was talking with a small group of people about this very subject -- falling crime rates. A fairly drunk fellow turned around and said to me, "That's partly my fault."
"What are you talking about", I asked. He explained.
The FBI has a national crime-reporting system. Local police departments are supposed to enter information about crimes in their jurisdiction into a computer. This information is then collected nationally, and crime statistics are generated.
His last job had been as a computer programmer -- designing the software -- called NIBRS (National Incident-Based Reporting System) that the local police departments have to use. The project had turned into a bureaucratic nightmare -- change orders were coming down furiously from the top, and there wasn't enough manpower and time to do the job right -- the software had become extremely difficult to use, and was growing in complexity every day. The project was turning into a disaster. But it couldn't be stopped or overhauled. It had too much momentum, and was too important and political.
One of the characteristics of the new crime reporting software is that the more serious the crime, the more information is required to be entered in. Logging a murder case into the crime reporting database requires several times more effort then logging a manslaughter case. Likewise for property crimes. Entering a residential burglary into the computer system is much more difficult and time consuming then entering a report on simple theft. The feds want to know every last detail about serious crimes, but not so much about less serious crimes.
Using the software is extremely difficult, he told me. You can't submit a half-completed form. You have to completely fill out each page on the computer before you can move on to the next page. And sometimes you don't have the answer in front of you, and are stuck.
Then he described who was using the software.
Who do you think is filling out these reports? It isn't the police officers who responded to the crimes. They have other crimes to respond to. It isn't the detectives who investigate the crimes. They have crimes to investigate. Instead, police departments hire data entry clerks. These data entry clerks sit down with files of closed cases, and try and enter the data into the database.
This programmer had worked with some of the police departments who were beta-testing the software, and realized that the software was having completely unexpected effects.
First off, these overworked data entry clerks often didn't really understand what they were doing. It's very difficult to take a file of often hand-written police paperwork and, not being familiar with the case, translate the information into the forms required by the crime reporting software. This requires analysis, and the job was being given to people who may well be qualified to perform data entry, but were not qualified to perform crime analysis.
A typical help-desk call would be of the nature, "I can't figure out what's going on, just tell what to click to get through this page. I have an incredible backlog, and I don't have the time for this."
This is bad.
Then he realized that something else was going on.
The clerks, and then the supervisors and police departments learned that answering certain questions one way would result in more screens of data to be filled out. For instance, if you told the software that the crime involved a weapon, then you would be presented with more pages of questions then had you not checked the weapon box. From this came the observation that the less seriously a crime could be catagorized, the less effort was required to log it in the national crime database.
The police departments who were beta-testing the software were deliberately downgrading crimes, in order to clear the backlog caused by the difficult to use, inefficient, poorly written crime reporting software!
This unnamed programmer told us that he knew that as soon as this software went online nationally, that violent and serious crime statistics would take a nose dive, because the software created enormous incentives to understate the seriousness of crimes. If there's an unsolved crime, and it might be a murder, or it might be homicide, in the past the judgement call would be made objectively, while now unsolved crimes are almost uniformly downgraded as much as possible, to ease the burden on the departments, so that they don't have to hire as many data entry clerks, and so that their work isn't as difficult.
The programmer told me that finally he had had enough of the project, resigned, and went on to do other database programming work for a corporation. Then, he excused himself, and went off for another drink, and that was the last I saw of him. I wish I had gotten his name. It was right on his badge, along with his email address. But I didn't, and never saw him again.
So if you really want to discover the true meaning of the drop in violent and serious crime statistics, you might look for a positive correlation between a drop in crime rates, and the national implementation of the FBI NIBRS crime reporting software.
Again, take this for what it's worth. This guy could have been bullshitting me like crazy. But then
Re:Minority religions... (Score:2)
That's funny, but it's also an argument I've seen used seriously, as a rationale for DOMA.
(DOMA == the so-called Defense Of Marriage Act, which said that US states don't have to recognize any same-sex marriages recognized in any other states (if that ever happens) and also defined marriage as far as the US federal government as "one man & one woman". This "Defense Of Marriage Act" was championed -- at least in part -- by many people who are guilty of adultery and/or who have been divorced at least once ... and it was signed by Bill Clinton. Talk about pegging the ol' ironicometer ...)
Re:My own answers... (Score:2)
I've seen healthcare by decree, and I've seen what we have. What we have is *better*.
"Better" doesn't mean "good", and I'd like to see people keep trying to solve this problem, but the one thing we know for sure is that *no one* has solved this problem.
The fundemental problem is that it is possible, but insanely expensive, to push the envelope a few percent. If we don't, we are letting people die. If we do, we are devoting *all* of our resources to healthcare. We have found one compromise - we do it for people that can afford it. It's not the best answer, maybe, but it's *an* answer.
Environmental issues: Yes, a lot of people endorse Gore. A lot of people think Superfund works, too. I don't buy an endorsement from a group with one agenda item picking the candidate who *says* the most. Bush has a better record on *improvements*, even though Texas sucked when he got there.
Yes, Bush is a politician, and I don't believe *everything* he says... But he doesn't lie as often or as much as Gore does. Also, with the sold vote thing, I have to say that I think Gore is more deeply dishonest.
Anyway, I appreciate the feedback, and I'm aware that not everyone will agree. (BTW, don't worry about being "slashdotted". That article has gotten no more than 400-500 hits so far today.)
My own answers... (Score:5)
http://www.plethora.net/~seebs/pres.html [plethora.net]
Also have a look at the description of how Gore sold his vote: http://www.culturaldissident.com/Simpson.htm [culturaldissident.com].
McCain Lost because... (Score:2)
In the case of Bush vs. McCain, Bush put together an ad where he was with some Vietnam vet and got the guy to say that McCain had ignored vets and let them down. McCain was livid. Not only did this break the agreement they had against mud slinging, but he is very sensitive on Veterans issues, and so it was a big blow below the belt.
So, McCain got angry and he went all out after Bush. Bush's camp of course accused McCain's of brining down the level of the campaign, and it turned into a giant mud slinging fest quickly. So, less independents showed up and Bush won it.
Oh, and if you believe Bush's rhetoric about being somebody who will improve the tone of washington politics, just look at how he operated in the Primary to see what a crock that is.
---
it doesn't matter (Score:2)
The election is a joke, just not a funny one.
Re:Minority Religions... Bush's *Real* Answer (Score:5)
http://www.webwhiteblue.org/debate/2000-10-15/b
Quote:
Religious Freedom And Tolerance Is A Protected Right
I am committed to the First Amendment principles of religious freedom, tolerance, and diversity.
Whether Mormon, Methodist, Jewish, or Muslim, Americans should be able to participate in their constitutional free exercise of religion. I do not think witchcraft is a religion, and I do not think it is in any way appropriate for the U.S. military to promote it.
endQuote:
Re:Thou shall not murder (Score:2)
This is, of course, anti-Semitic horseshit.
Here is Exodus 21:12-14:
"One who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death, but not if it is unintentional, but God allows it to happen: then I will apoint you a place where he shall flee."
There's nothing there about "Hebrew" or "Israelite" or anything else. It says MAN (which in Hebrew includes the feminine gender). It also includes the concept of unintentional murder, which is vaguely analagous to homicide in American law.
As for the amazingly bloody wars described in the Torah and the rest of the Jewish Bible, they were quite the norm at the time. The Amalakites, for example, are singled out for destruction because rather than attacking the Hebrews head-on (where the men would be), they attacked the rear, where the women, children, and the feeble would be.
Now go crawl back under the rock from whence you came.
-jon
Bush and Gore answer... (Score:2)
Bush: I've been in a war and done drugs. Personally I think war is bad, so we should just stop doing it.
Gore: I personally drove 60 elderly people in a bus to Canada to help them get their prescription drugs. I think we need to roll our tanks into Canada and take all their drugs.
2) Minority Religions...
Bush: I think as long as law abiding Americans believe in God and Jesus Christ our savior that they should be protected from persecution by the government.
Gore: I have no problems with Minorities or their religion. As a matter of fact I was just having coffee with some of my Chinese friends not that long ago where we were discussing God. They seemed a bit unclear about Jesus' role in things, but I'm sure they were just pulling my leg. Everyone believes in Jesus, right Joe? Tipper and I also proud to have a number of minority acquaintances. Our maid, our chauffer and our nanny...
3) Why give a tax cut?
Bush: I have some friends... Lets call them "major campaign contributors" for lack of a better word. They pay an astonishing $500,000 a year in taxes. Don't you think we should give these poor folks back some of that hard earned money?
Gore: I favor a tax cut. We should cut taxes but only for the poor. The wealthy people in this world can afford taxes so I'm in favor of a 50% tax cut for those people that are paying less than $200 in taxes annually.
4) electoral reform
Bush: I fully support the death penalty. If there is a problem with the electoral system, I say hire an electrician.
Gore: I say down with the third party - the third party is merely pulling away attention from the primary candidates (Nader supporters: Wake up, he doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell. Vote for me!)
5)How Do You Feel About Intellectual Property?
Bush: Uh.... Well, I try to leave all my property dealings to the my real-estate agent. You might want to check with her.
Gore: Ever since I invented the Internet I've had strong opinions about this subject. Who does this Tim Berners-Lee guy think he is anyway? Companies and people should be able to lock their ideas up tighter than my lips on Clinton's ass. I mean, an idea is something that can't possibly be had by more than one person right? So clearly whoever thought of it first should retain full rights and get paid lots of money.
6) Encryption....
Bush: Its clear to me that no law abiding citizen has any need for encryption. American families should need to hide stuff from each other. We need to strengthen our families and foster brotherhood and friendship amongst all God fairing people under the watchfully eye of our savior Jesus Christ.
Gore: I don't see what the big deal is; some people want to be cremated, others want to be buried. If you want to be encrypted then so be it. Now one thing that we should address is international trade. I think it's a travesty that we're banning the export of American made strong crypts. We make some of the finest products in the world and I think we should vigorously pursue the open exchange of these products with our foreign friends who are passing on to the next world.
7) Rising Political Protests
Bush: My personal stock portfolio has seen a 153% gain in the past 5 years thanks to corporate interests. I think these folks are just sore because they didn't get a piece of the pie.
Gore: Yeah! What he said!
8) Asteroid Defenses
Bush: I'm all for military spending. Lets just build one really big missile and blast those asteroids into outer space.
Gore: Well, I'm no doctor, but I believe there are a number of discrete inexpensive treatments for asteroids that can be purchased at your local Walgreen's.
9) The Future of the Country, and of Humanity
Bush: Well this campaign really isn't about young people. However to address the aging population: I'll help you get your prescription drugs so your remaining years can be nothing but a pain free drug induced haze.
Gore: I must say that I am very concerned about the future of this country for all elderly people and undecided single female voters. I will promise anything you want to hear in order to get your vote back from that bastard Nader!
Re:Bitter? (Score:2)
The majority of eligible voters won't be voting. That's not democracy by any stretch of the imagination.
I read the New Republic article you linked to (thanks). I don't give a lot of credence to an article that regards quotes from other authors as damning Ralph Nader's character just because they were published in the same edition of a magazine.
--
Bush: War On Drugs... (Score:3)
Here is the response from BOTH candidates (Score:2)
SlashDot: What do you guys think about the following issues? blah blah blah
Bush and Gore: We don't give a shit about you guys. There aren't enough of you. You don't give us any money. You don't vote. When you do vote, you don't vote for us. Go fuck yourselves.----
don't waste your vote - vote third party.
Re:Bitter? (Score:2)
Everyone says we need to change, but change in and of itself isn't necessarily good. You have to move to something better. What do you propose?
Re:who mods this up? are they on crack? (Score:2)
He compared single-sex schooling to single-race schooling. This demonstrated a masterful ability to ignore what I wrote: that men and women enjoy the benefits of a single-sex education. Segregated schooling was all about public school funds going to rich white schools and not to black schools, and about seperating the races because they were somehow 'bad' for one another. Complete and utter bovine excrement, of course--race means nothing.
OTOH, same-sex schooling is not about discrimination at all. It's about having a hoice to go to a private institution, one which will better support one's educational goals. Men do better; women do better. Contrast this with segragation, in which whites were better off and blacks were mistreated. No-one is forced into a same-sex school; it is of one's volition. And no-one has a right to force a private institution to accept him or her.
Women's colleges fight just as hard as men's colleges to prevent integration of the sexes. Men and women are different, unlike blacks and whites, and men and women tend to distract one another from their studies. Students do perform better in single-sex schools--a large number of them, at the very least.
It's about freedom, folks. The freedom to choose one's circumstances. Why would a man want to go to a school which would hate him? Why would a woman want to go to a school which would hate her? There are more than enough alternatives; once again, it is unlike segregation, in which public institutions offered no widely-used alternative. Blacks were subjugated under that system; with same-sex eduation, both men and women are better off.
I went to co-ed institutions for my entire academic career, of course, like most people. My brothers, OTOH, went to a Jesuit high school--they enjoyed it. I know several men and women who went to some of the few same-sex colleges left--they all much preferred them to the alternatives.
Re:Bush's real position - No Friend to Smart Women (Score:3)
Ask anyone who has gone to a same-sec school--the bonding there is incredible. All-girls schools and all-boys schools are excellent for many students, from elementary school to college. When one sex or another (usually women, but sometimes men) forces its way in, the social climate changes for the worse. Why exactly do you think all-male and all-female schools resist integration so? It's not because they hate the other sex--it's because they enjoy the atmoosphere they have.
A guy can love his wife but want to go drinking with his buddies. A woman can love her husband but want to talk with her friends. Or the man talk with his friends while his wife goes drinking with her buddies--whatever. And people can be quite amicable to the opposite sex but prefer to study with their own.
My name is Al Gore and I'm running for President (Score:2)
Seniors need their drugs paid for by Medicaid. My opponent wants to take away old people's money and let them live in homeless shelters until he closes them all down, too.
2. Rights of Atheists and minority religions
I support all religions. As you know, I make it a point to visit the worship places of various religions so that I can understand their views. Sometimes my visits are misunderstood by the press, however.
3. Tax cuts
We can't cut taxes for everyone. We need to cut taxes for Working Americans, they're the ones who are out there making car payments and house payments. The rich, who my opponent is looking out for, don't make car payments or house payments. That's why they're rich. We must tax them because they are taking advantage of the Working Americans because they don't work.
4. Third party candidates and the electoral college
As a senator, I took the initiative in creating the Electoral College and I am proud of it. As for third-party candidates, I am told that some of these third parties haven't been paying their taxes properly. As president, I will call for a complete audit of the books of any third-party candidate named Ralph who doesn't drop out of the race before election day.
5. Intellectual property
Intellectual property is very important. When someone works hard to create something, they get very angry when some stiff-necked bozo from Washington comes along and takes credit for their invention. People have as much a right to their intellectual property as seniors have to their prescription drugs, which Medicaid should pay for 100%.
6. Exporting strong encryption
Strong encryption is very important for our national security. Right now, although you can't export strong encryption software without complying to certain government restrictions, you can print the source code to the encryption software in a book and then export the book. We are safe because the books are in English. Our enemies can't read them or type in the code. We must work to keep our encryption secrets safe. Our encryption should be sitting in an ironclad lockbox, right next to social security.
7. Protests against globalization
Many people are worried about the growth of large, multinational corporations. For instance, many drug companies span the world. Their products for seniors should be covered 100% by medicaid.
8. Global defense systems
You shouldn't have to go to bed worrying about whether an asteroid will destroy life as we know it. I will work to insure that you can live to a ripe old age, and when you get old, your prescription drugs will be paid for 100% by Medicaid.
9. Our national mission
We should be setting a good example for other nations. These other nations don't pay for their seniors' prescription drugs 100%, nor do they have iron-clad lockboxes for their social security. We need to teach them all how to be Working Americans and let them come to our country and vote for people who will take money away from the evil rich and give it to the poor, overworked people who are making car payments and house payments.
Commere, Tipper, let daddy give ya some luvvinz!
The World According to Doubya (Score:5)
I think it's time we end the war on drugs. War is never good, except when it increases your approval rating. I would send an ambassador to Drugs and ask them to sign a peace agreement. As far as being an unqualified success, I'm not sure whether Drugs qualifies or not. I will review their voting record with the United Nations.
2. Rights of Atheists and minority religions
I am unfamiliar with some of those religious, but I have heard a lot about Atheists - mostly about their God, Les. I'm not sure that they all believe in Les, because sometimes I hear them called God Les Atheists, and other times Wicked Atheists, so maybe some of them are Wiccans. I am sure they have some rights because I often hear about religious rights.
3. Tax cuts
Everyone needs tax cuts, because tax cuts are money and money is part of the economy and the economy is what Warren Greenspan works for. The economy helps the homeless through EconoLodge, too.
4. 3rd party candidates and the electoral college
Every election people talk about the electoral college. I think we're focusing on the wrong college. According to my figures, there are roughly 500 people from the electoral college that bother to vote for the president. I am quite sure that colleges like Yale have more people that vote for the president, why don't we talk about them? I am in favor of some 3rd party candidates like Ralph Nader. I think he should get more time. Pat Buchanan is bad.
5. Intellectual property
I think everyone should be allowed to own property, not just intellectuals.
6. Exporting strong encryption
Our trade deficit is bad. We need to export more things and if we can export more of our encryptions, that is good. It's better for us to export our encryptions to China than it is to buy them from China. Do you want to give your kid an encryption for Christmas that is labeled "Made in China" ?
7. Political protests against globalization
Globalization is a safe, clean and effective process that no one should be afraid of. I had my car globalized last week and it looks better than it ever did. Sure, some poorer nations are afraid of globalization because they live in dirty huts and have no cars. If they had windows or shoes that could be globalized, they'd realize how good it is.
8. Space defense against asteroids
Stay in the middle. Try to focus on eliminating one asteroid at a time. If you break too many of them up at once, you'll get killed. When you get down to one tiny asteroid, start flying around. Shoot the little saucer over and over to get more points.
9. Our national mission
I think our national mission is to be a nation. Right now we are a republic, but we can do better than that. Our pledge of allegiance says "One nation" not "one republic". We should strive to fulfil our pledge and become a nation under God, invisible, with liberty and justice for all. I think the president hasn't worked on making us invisible, so I will work to increase our stealth technology.
Gore and Bush's actual positions (Score:5)
I'm afraid the 'answers' below aren't actually funny. They're what the candidates truly believe. Check www.issues2000.org for confirmation, they're more or less paraphrasing what Gore and Bush have said before. As Lando said.. here goes nothing.
Q: The War on Drugs has been a consistently neglected topic in discussions surrounding this federal election. My question is, do you believe the War on Drugs has been an unqualified success, and if not, what would you change about it if elected president?
Gore: We must protect the young. We must fight drug dealers. Harsher sentences for those who corrupt the young. Etc. Marijuana will not be legalized, Science says it isn't proper. Lead a national crusade against drugs. More $ to fight drugs. Yes, he did pot himself, like 'young people today.'
Bush: Drug on wars has failed with this administration, need to fight a bigger war on drugs, mroe money for fighting this evil. Full background drug use checks for appointees are necessary. Supports military package to Columbia to fight drug supply.
The truth: The war on drugs has failed. US stats show that 75% of all drug users are white, whereas 75% of people imprisoned on drugs offences are black. Criminalization doesn't reduce drug use. Sending weapons to Columbia will turn the country into even more of a civil warzone than it is now. Would Bush be a better man if he'd spent 10 years in prison for snorting cocaine when he was young?
Q: What will you do to protect the rights of atheists and those who hold minority faiths, such as Wicca, Santaria, Shinto, et al?
Gore: Believes in personal approaches to religion, etc.
Bush: When asked who his idol/hero was, answered 'Jesus'. Is in discrepancy with the bible - has put 145 to death under his rule as Gov. of Texas, yet bible claims thou shalt not kill.
The truth: Gore tries to appear tolerant, Bush has to answer to the vast right wing of the Republicans, who are puppets of the Christian right.
Q: With the surplus, everyone has been saying "Let's have a tax cut, Let's have a tax cut." In the meantime, Alan Greenspan and friends are trying to keep inflation and the speed of the growing economy in check so it doesn't burst. Which they are doing by raising interest rates periodically. (6 times this year) A tax cut flies in the face of what Greenspan is trying to do. A tax cut will inject more money into the economy and do what Greenspan is preventing. Why is a tax cut so big? Wouldn't the money be better spent on the deficit so when worse times roll along, a tax cut can be easily given by not paying as much on the debt?
Gore: Doesn't want any tax cuts right now, although future tax reform should give tax breaks to people earning less than $100k, working families, middle class. Wants to end tax marriage penalty.
Bush: Wants to give tax cuts benefitting principally the 10% richest in the country. Claims lower income people benefit more from taxes than the rich.
The truth: Gore says what he thinks will be popular. Bush actually wants to make rich people pay less taxes, to appeal to corporations, etc.
Q: Some people, especially those that favor '3-rd' party candidates, have called for the ending of the electoral college system to be replaced by a simple purely popular vote, or at least allowing for splitting the electoral votes by each state. The best recent example was the Bush-Clinton election. Clinton received 43% of the popular vote (but a sufficient majority of the electoral vote), whereas Perot got at least 10% of the popular vote but zero electoral votes. If memory serves, Vermont is the only state which does currently allow for its votes to be split; if someone wins 60% of the Vermont popular vote, they get 2 votes and the 40% candidate gets 1. This in contrast to California, where someone can get 51% of the popular vote, and therefore gets 53 (or whatever it is nowadays) electoral votes. What is your position on this issue?
Gore: Doesn't want to end electoral college, but wants to look into alternatives.
Bush: Doesn't know. Alternatives, yes...
The truth: Both oppose alternatives but don't say so. In tight elections, swing voters decide everything, and have so far brought victories to both Clinton and Bush Sr in surprise results. This will be the tightest election ever, if the polls are right. Do the math. They would have to completely rebuild their parties' campaign/spending machines to match any changes.
Q: In this age of the Internet, intellectual property has become a very important concept to many people. Many companies make their living on the artificial scarcity provided by intellectual property laws, selling information that they have either created or aggregated. Some others, mostly in the Free Software world, make their living seemingly in spite of these laws, selling their services based on information that is freely given. Do you feel that out current system of intellectual property is a good one? Which parts of it (e.g. trademarks, patents, copyrights) do you feel are well suited to the world of the Internet and which do you think need to be changed (and, if changes are needed, what changes are needed)?
Gore: Supports intellectual property, but wants to see exactly who is getting what in those money/artist relationships, and what damage Napster is doing.
Bush: Supports innovative new ways of music distributions but wants 'artist's rights protected'. His party would crucify him if he didn't try to ban Napster, as they get massive soft money from record companies, etc. The RIAA/MPAA rely on corporate-friendly Republican congresses to pass their dubious laws.
The truth: Both don't want to piss off young voters, which is why they dance around the issue. Bush would be quicker to ban everything suspicious that might upsets corporations.
Q: Many tech people think that strong encryption is one of the best ways we have to protect freedom both now and for future generations. For example to preserve information that future not so friendly governments may think we don't need to have and to make sure that things we want to have remain private remain private. Given this what would you do to help preserve our right to privacy through the use of strong encryption? Also in a related question what are your thoughts and what do you plan to do about the fact that we can not export many forms of strong encryption?
Gore: Doesn't really know, but supports people's right to use what he pioneered. Will look into this. Democrat presidents relaxed crypto exports laws, etc.
Bush: Republicans consider any technological advance, like crypto, to be weaponry that must be horded and protected. Rep-controlled Congress sees no problem with Carnivore.
The truth: Both oppose crypto for everyone, as they're dubious of what people would do, and how that'd be monitored by the state. However, Gore will try to protect people's rights more, sensing pressure from his party and the Left.
Q: In the last year or so we have seen a tremendous escalation in the quantity and size of political protests against globalization and the rising power of corporate multi-nationals. Do you believe that these people have reason to be concerned? If you do believe that they have reason for concern, what steps would you take as president to deal with their concerns?
Gore: Wants to protect consumers' rights, etc, but thinks violence is the wrong way to protest.
Bush: Doesn't understand what the fuss is about, must protect companies from economic damage, must monitor trouble-makers.
The truth: Both are afraid of companies putting the thumb-screws on if there's too much trouble, and are afraid of America's image. Both remember the 60s protests, especially Gore.
Q: Would you renew funding of programs to research and develop global defense systems against asteroids or other such threats from space?
Gore: Doesn't know. Probably not.
Bush: Absolutely loves idea of resurrecting 'Star Wars' programme, putting defense systems into space. The only problem: He wants the weapons to point downwards, to defend the US.
The truth: Bush wants to increase military budget a lot, although all weapons would point at us, rather than the other way 'round. Probably would find no money after that for any other space things, including NASA. Gore wants to fund NASA more, which is where the money *might* come from.
Q: I'm very concerned with the future of the country, and about what our national mission seems to be. Looking back through American history, every period seems to have a defining popular mission - like the "manifest destiny" movement in the 19th century, the Depression, World War II, and the Cold War. During these times, there would be one struggle or idea that captivated the attention of the nation, sort of providing a national mission. I'm a little confused as I look around today. What is our mission? To me, it seems to be "to watch TV and use the Internet." What would you say the defining national mission of today is? What should it be? Furthermore, how would you show this in your activities as a lawmaker? (For instance, if our national mission is the pursuit of science, then would you increase funding for scientific pursuits in the budget?)
Gore: Has as his mission to improv quality of life, provide good future for Americans, protect environment, empower citizens.
Bush: Has as his mission to restore traditional values to America, preside over a healthy, economic country, fight all unwholesome influences.
The truth: Neither of them has a clue about true social undercurrents: Gore is concerned over environmental issues, and where we will all be in 30 years. Bush is concerned with restoring proper values, and protecting the people from that what is evil, like childrens' hearts turning black on the Internet.
The final conclusion: Have a look at www.issues2000.org which will show you all candidates' positions and their quotations on relevant issues. This will be a very, very tight election.
Alex T-B
St Andrews
Replies from Bush & Gore (Score:5)
by Tim Doran
Your answer:
Bush: I say let's execute 'em all! Just like we are in good ol' Texas!
Gore: I already admitted to smoking pot, unlike Bush. Please don't execute me!
2) Minority Religions...
by Electric Angst
Your answer:
Bush: Execute 'em all! The Bible says so!
Gore: Unless they're Buddhists. They have $$$.
3) Why give a tax cut?
by funkman
Your answer:
Bush: Execute 'em all! Oh, sorry, didn't listen to the question. Whatever Mr. Greenspan says....
Gore: We need to put every dollar in an iron clad lock box. Then put the Fed in there with it.
4) electoral reform
by carleton
Your answer:
Bush: When I buy my electoral votes I expect them to stay bought, dammit!
Gore: Ditto.
5)How Do You Feel About Intellectual Property?
by Phil Gregory
Your answer:
Bush: Well, nobody ever accused me of being an intellectual, but I am in favor of property! More property, less taxes!
Gore: Ever since I invented the Internet everybody seems upset. Maybe I should have patented it in the first place....
6) Encryption....
by SquadBoy
Your answer:
Bush: Use all the encryption you want. We'll just find you and execute you anyway!
Gore: Nobody can understand most of what I'm saying anyway, so I don't need crypto. Why should anybody else?
7) Rising Political Protests
by sterno
Your answer:
Bush: Execute those pesky protesters!
Gore: I am concerned about the environment as well; but first let's see how my Oxy stock is doing before I say anything too "radical"....
8) Asteroid Defenses
by Ethelred Unraed
Your answer:
Bush: Absolutely! Star Wars all the way baby!
Gore: Only if I get credit for inventing it.
9) The Future of the Country, and of Humanity
by 11223
Your answer:
Bush: What's wrong with watching TV? Shut up and be happy!
Gore: What's wrong with using the Internet? Shut up and be happy!
#include "disclaim.h"
"All the best people in life seem to like LINUX." - Steve Wozniak
Thou shall not murder (Score:3)
This might seem like a small point, but the Bible is extremely bloody (R-rated, if it were a movie) with all of the mandatory death sentences in Lev., mandatory death of all men, women and children in conquered lands, etc.
Re:Answer from Bush (Score:4)
1. War on drugs.
There ought to be limits on freedom.
2. Minority Religions.
There ought to be limits on freedom.
3. Why give a tax cut.
There ought to be limits on freedom.
4. Electoral Reform
There ought to be limits on freedom.
5. Intellectual Property
There ought to be limits on freedom.
6. Encryption.
There ought to be limits on freedom.
7. Rising Political Protests
There ought to be limits on freedom.
8. Asteroid Defenses.
There ought to be limits on freedom.
9. The future of the Country and of Humanity.
There ought to be limits on freedom.
This in from Gore:
1. War on drugs.
I invented drugs.
2. Minority Religions.
I invented minority religions.
3. Why give a tax cut.
I invented taxes.
4. Electoral Reform
I invented the Electoral College.
5. Intellectual Property
I invented Intellectual Property.
6. Encryption.
I invented encryption.
7. Rising Political Protests
I invented political protests.
8. Asteroid Defenses.
I invented Asteroids.
9. The future of the Country and of Humanity.
I invented humanity.
Cheers,
Slak
Politically Unwise (Score:3)
On the other hand, this might inspire the politicians to pay a little more attention next time around. Provided there is a next time.
-------
CAIMLAS
W.pl (Score:3)
use focus_groups;
use slashdot_questions;
# to hell with warnings and strict
# this script emulates W.
focus_groups(\@slashdot_question);
foreach (@slashdot_question) {
push @answers, $what_polled_well_in_the_focus_group{$_};
}
for ($i = 0; $i < $#answers; $i ++) {
print $slashdot_question[$i], "\n";
print $answers[$i], "\n";
}
It's a feature of the focus_groups pragma that most of your answers involve chiding someone for "following polls" or "using focus groups".
Why all of the electorial college flap? (Score:2)
by carleton
Response from a back room Republicrat lacky that can read and browse the web, to be fired from the campaign for failing to obfuscate the issue.
First of all, the way those votes are cast is NOT a federal issue, it is a State issue. The Constitution leaves the procedure of casting the electorial college votes to the States. See The Electorial College Homepage [nara.gov] for detailed info like this:
Procedures [nara.gov]
The States
The United States Constitution and Federal law place certain responsibilities relating to the Presidential election upon State executives and the electors for President and Vice President. Neither the Constitution nor Federal law prescribe the manner in which each State appoints its electors other than directing that they be appointed on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November (November 7, 2000). The Constitution forbids a Senator, Representative, or person holding an office of trust or profit under the United States from being appointed as an elector.
There is plenty of information on that site that, apparently, nobody that discusses this topic bothers to learn.
For one thing, it is Maine and Nebraska that have proportional electors, sort of. They have 2 electors that are elected "a large" and all other electors are elected by congressional district.
If you want it to be changed, lobby your own State legeslatures and skip the Constitutional Ammendment nonsense.
Also, the current system is the closest mechanism that would allow a less "popular" candidate to be elected. Since so many of the electors are bound by nothing but their own concience (some States do have penalties and/or other safeguards for electors that do not vote as they were pleged to do), they *could* elect someone that is not the winner of the popular vote. That has happened at least once.
Note: The only "electorial college" electors that meet in Washington, DC, are the electors from DC (per Amendment XXIII, currently 3), the rest meet in thier respective States and their ballots are counted by the President of the Senate (currently Albert Gore, Jr.) in December.
Another related non-issue: Calafornia hears the "winner" long before their polls are closed.
OK, west coast, do what TN, OH and KY do, open your polls 15 days early, let people vote at the mall, use a nice laid back easy system and then all you need to do is count votes on "election day" since everybody had plenty of time to vote already. Or you could encourage absantee balloting, like Washington State and keep the east coast in the dark as the snail-mail dribbles in for the count.
Either way, the States have the power. Leave the Constitution alone please.
Visit DC2600 [dc2600.com]
Electoial college correction. (Score:2)
December is when the various electors in the States meet to vote and the results are sent to DC within about a week.
Amendment only has 2 "m"'s
Visit DC2600 [dc2600.com]
Write me in! (Score:2)
Answers:
Question 1 - The War on Drugs has been an abject failure. Plain and simple. It it responsible for the large numbers of non-violent prisoners in our jails today. I am especially incensed at the wrongs it perpetuates against our Constitution (wrongful search and seizure, etc). If elected, I promise to do whatever I can to end this waste of taxpayer money.
Question 2 - People may follow whatever path they wish toward enlightenment, if they so choose. I do not believe it is in our government's interest to determine what religion, if any, an individual should follow. To take such an interest would be in patent violation of the Constitution.
Question 3 - Taxes are a necessary evil. However, something should be done. Our current income tax situation is especially problematic. I feel that it should be done away with - the Constitution expressly forbids any form of income tax. The income tax was enacted as a supposedly "temporary" measure during the crisis of war. However, it was never repealed, and we are thus mired in the issue. I promise that if elected, I will work towards removal of this violation, and to seek better ways toward solving our nation's debt.
Question 4 - The electoral college should stay. I do not think that removal of this system will help anything. The problem isn't in the system, it is in the representatives voting in a manner not representative of the people they supposedly represent. This problem should be examined - to determine if corporate or other funds are being used to sway opinions. Once that is determined (and fixed if need be), the electoral college will once again work the way it was intended.
Question 5 - I am very close to the issue of intellectual property, being a long time programmer myself. Much of the system in place currently for IP doesn't address the quick changing nature of the internet. Changes to copyright and patent law need to be examined and implemented to correct these deficiencies. Various measures in patent law probably need to be repealed or drastically changed (such as patenting of business methods and algorithms). Similarly, copyright law needs to be re-examined. I feel the DMCA, as well as the UCITA, are both examples of problems in our copyright law (the DMCA being especially damaging, threating the fair-use clause of copyright). I believe that both patents and copyrights should exist, but that they should foster innovation, and not cause stagnation through overly long terms and extensions. I also feel that both should provide for more protection and help for the individual, and less for corporate interests (as a side note, I am very much against a corporation having rights like a citizen). I also support an individuals right to learn, and the right to own things, not license them. To this end, individuals should be able to learn from how something works - reverse engineering should be a protected right...
Question 6 - I promise that if elected I will do whatever I can to make encryption available to the masses, worldwide. I believe privacy is very important. It is not the government's job to nanny the population, and it is certainly not our government's job to "lord over" the world. In today's internet connected world, we must push for privacy, with strong encryption leading this push.
Question 7 - These people raise a valid point. Corporations are reaching the size (some would say they have already) to take on national governments, to possibly overshadow them or control them. I am not against the import or export of goods, but I have to be concerned when it seems that corporations are placing money before the intests of the people. People are not cattle to be slaughtered before the almighty dollar. Corporations are not people, and should not be treated as such. The people should come first.
Question 8 - Natural threats from outer space are very real. Living in Arizona, and having been to Meteor Crater twice, I can verify what a small chunk of iron can do to an area. Most asteroids are much bigger than this, and would quite probably wipe out life on earth if one breached the atmosphere and struck us. I feel that we should do what we can as a nation to come up with a way to reliably detect, track and defend against such an issue.
Question 9 - I believe our national mission should be promoting peace among the people of the world - to get them to look around, and see how petty their differences are - but how great their similarities are. We should be an example to the world, and learn to be more tolerant, respectful, and caring toward one another - in our neighborhoods, workplace, cities and states. We claim that we have conquered racism, and to anyone with half a brain, this statement is patently false. We have not stopped racism - it is still a major problem. We have not stopped discrimination (Don't ask/Don't tell - my ass!). I promise that if elected - I will do everything in my power to help make peace, tolerance, and general respect a reality.
There you have it - my promises on these issues. I furthermore wish to relate to you that I will do what I can to get science and math in schools more agressively promoted as subjects worth knowing. I am a geek - and I would love to see more money going toward programs that support this issue. America as a whole seems to be going down the drain intellectually. Our national goal does seem to tend toward "couch potatoism". I want to get us away from that, and back on the road to a nation of respect, intelligence and peace.
Thank you.
I support the EFF [eff.org] - do you?
Lieberman's answers (Score:2)
LIEBERMAN AGAIN CLAIMS "NO FREEDOM FROM RELIGION" IN NOTRE DAME ADDRESS: CITES JUDEO-CHRISTIAN ROOTS OF AMERICA [atheists.org]
Re:Slashdot (Score:2)
--
This is what they told me (Score:3)
George Bush :
I think the war on drugs is an important war because it is against drugs. I know a lot about drugs and I'm against them. As Governor of Texas I spent a lot of time working on the war on drugs. My father fought the war on drugs. My wife and kids are important to me and that's why I think we need to win this war. When I'm elected this great nation will empower people to help win the war.
Al Gore:
As vice president I've been deeply and intimately involved in the war on drugs. When my wife and I are making passionate love together we will frequently discuss the war on drugs and how we can better fight it. Did you know that 1 out of every 5.67345249 children will be approached by a drug dealer tomorrow? In fact, a mere 1.36752 ounces of cocaine is enough to trigger violent seizures in my son. I've studied drugs extensively and invented several myself. My running mate, who is Jewish, has often asked me how someone as unready as George W. Bush could possibly be allowed to lead this nation in the war on drugs. I have no opinion on this, but I thought you should know what he's been asking me.
2) Minority Religions...
George Bush:
Many smaller religions are minority religions. We have several in my home state of Texas. I think these people have religions that are different from ours and I respect that.
Al Gore:
I know a lot about minority religions. I have studied all of the minority religions and believe in them all. Why just last night, as my wife was kissing me passionately, we were talking about the epistemology of the Baha'i religion. I don't think George Bush knows how to spell Baha'i.
3) Why give a tax cut?
George Bush:
Tax cuts are important to me and as Governor of Texas I was very familiar with taxes and cuts. By giving a tax cut we will help the American people to do all the important and wonderful things that make this nation great!
Al Gore:
I think that targeted tax cuts will help right all of the historical wrongs done to the many people of this nation. When elected I will form a panel to find every individual who should be targeted and make sure they are. My proposal includes targeted cuts to seven people in Alabama, that's how well I know the needs of this country. I don't think George W. Bush knows any people in Alabama.
4) electoral reform
George Bush:
I support election reform to help stop the special interests like lawyers, teachers, and labor unions from controlling the electoral process.
Al Gore:
I support election reform to help stop the special interests like gun fanatics, oil drillers, and wealthy people unions from controlling the electoral process.
5)How Do You Feel About Intellectual Property?
George Bush:
As Governor of Texas, I had to deal with many intellectuals, and I still own some property. When Elected, I'll help empower all the people of this great nation so that many of them can become intellectuals and own property.
Al Gore:
I think that it's very important for government to support intellectual property rights. Many of the issues related to IP are complex and involved. I know all of these issues. In fact, I'm responsible for writing most of the existing laws on intellectual property. When elected I'll take time out from kissing my lovely wife to personally decide every complicated issue related to intellectual property. I don't think George Bush has a wife who's as prettyu as mine.
5) Encryption....
George Bush:
My father was head of the CIA. The CIA has lots of encryption. The government should stay out of people's encryption issues. In Texas we stayed out of peoples encryption issues.
Al Gore:
Encryption is an issue I know a lot about. In fact, I invented 3DES, Idea, and several other encryption technologies. As president I'll pass many good and important laws about encryption. I don't think that George Bush ever invented encryption.
6) Rising Political Protests
George Bush:
It's hard to believe that anyone could know as much about Politics and protests as I do. My father was president and there were many protests at that time. People protest many different things. Even people who speak other languages often protest. My Nephew speaks Spanish and so I know. As president I would energize people and empower them so that political protests would be less of an issue.
Al Gore:
I am my own man. As an independent thinker, I believe that people have the right to protest. Many protests involve complicated national and international issues. In fact, 32.767854 per cent of all protests involve issues of complexity. As president I will enact many specific measures that will solve all of these complex issues. I'll even take time out from making passionate love to my wife to speak to many of these protesters so that they can learn many of the things that I can teach them.
7) Asteroid Defenses
George Bush:
Asteroids are a serious problem. We have asteroids in Texas. In fact, many truck drivers in Texas often complain about the problem of Asteroids. I myself have had asteroids and can tell you they are very painful. Asteroids are a personal problem and as president I will empower people to solve the problem of asteroids. This great country can solve any problem if the government stays out of the way.
Al Gore:
I know a lot about asteroids. Did you know that the EROS asteroid circles the sun every 1.23452 earth years. In fact I've been to several asteroids. Many asteroids are so impressed by my loving relationship with my wife that they will want to come to earth when I am elected.
8) The Future of the Country, and of Humanity
George Bush:
I'm glad you asked that question. As president I will empower the people and move this country to a glorious future that is filled with empowered people. I'll surround myself with the kind of people who will make this country and this world a better place. I'll cut taxes and give people the chance to make the country better.
Al Gore:
This is an important question and one that sets me apart from the other candidate. I understand what is going on in this nation and the world. I'll pass many laws that will solve many complex issues and make this country better. Did you know that a woman in Montana named Betty is one of my advisors? By asking questions of common people like Betty, who is dying of five incurable diseases, I'll be able to know how best to guide this country. Betty thinks that George Bush isn't ready to be president. I have no opinion about that
Really, that's what they told me.
Kevin Barnes
kbarnes@onesecure.com
Slashdot (Score:2)
Question about topic X
Gore: I invented X. I want to spend all of our money on X.
Bush: I like X as long as it's a Christian X or as long as X hurts minorities.
Please stop! I wish I knew enough to write a constructive answer for one of the canidates but since I don't I guess I should just write unconstructive answers for the canidates.
We should be looking at the Vice-Presidents... (Score:2)
All but one president elected in a zero year (James Monroe [1920]) either died in office, was assassinated, or an attempt was made on his life.
Of the nine presidents elected in zero years, only three survived the office.
All four assassinated presidents were elected in zero years.
This is a zero year presidency folks!
James Monroe (1820) served out his term without incident.
William Harrison (1840), died in office.
Abraham Lincoln (1860), assassinated.
James Garfield (1880), assassinated.
William McKinley (1900), assassinated.
Warren Harding (1920), died in office.
Franklin D Roosevelt (1940), attempted assassination.
John F. Kennedy (1960), assassinated.
Ronald Reagan (1980), attempted assassination.
George W. Gore (Score:2)
1) War on Drugs
by Tim Doran
The War on Drugs has been a consistently neglected topic in discussions surrounding this federal election. My question is, do you believe the War on Drugs has been an unqualified success, and if not, what would you change about it if elected president?
The war on drugs has been an unqualified success. We have an incarceration rate higher than that of Communist China and jail 10 times as many non-violent marijuana offenders as murderers, rapists and armed robbers combined. Plus, we got to militarize the police, which was a lot of fun! And will help quiet dissent. The new police forces have been highly effective during this election cycle.
2) Minority Religions...
by Electric Angst
What will you do to protect the rights of atheists and those who hold minority faiths, such as Wicca, Santaria, Shinto, et al?
Nothing. I believe in putting the church back into the school, and teaching the 10 commandments in the classroom. Godless atheists are a relic of the failed Soviet era totalitarianism. Same goes for nutball religions like "shinto".
3) Why give a tax cut?
by funkman
With the surplus, everyone has been saying "Let's have a tax cut, Let's have a tax cut." In the meantime, Alan Greenspan and friends are trying to keep inflation and the speed of the growing economy in check so it doesn't burst. Which they are doing by raising interest rates periodically. (6 times this year)
A tax cut flies in the face of what Greenspan is trying to do. A tax cut will inject more money into the economy and do what Greenspan is preventing.
Why is a tax cut so big? Wouldn't the money be better spent on the deficit so when worse times roll along, a tax cut can be easily given by not paying as much on the debt?
To get votes and engage in social engineering; that's why I haven't proposed across-the-board tax cuts, but targeted ones instead. I don't actually believe in letting you control your life. And a public debt is a good thing; it keeps the bankers happy and allows the treasury to make money. Plus, it helps seniors, who vote, at the expense of young people, who don't vote and therefore don't matter.
4) electoral reform
by carleton
Some people, especially those that favor '3-rd' party candidates, have called for the ending of the electoral college system to be replaced by a simple purely popular vote, or at least allowing for splitting the electoral votes by each state. The best recent example was the Bush-Clinton election. Clinton received 43% of the popular vote (but a sufficient majority of the electoral vote), whereas Perot got at least 10% of the popular vote but zero electoral votes. If memory serves, Vermont is the only state which does currently allow for its votes to be split; if someone wins 60% of the Vermont popular vote, they get 2 votes and the 40% candidate gets 1. This in contrast to California, where someone can get 51% of the popular vote, and therefore gets 53 (or whatever it is nowadays) electoral votes. What is your position on this issue?
I support making it difficult for so-called "third parties" to participate because it will loosen our control over America. I don't think that choice is a good thing; that there should be limits to freedom. This is why I support the Commission on Presidential Debates and the states' effort to increase the barriers to getting on the ballot. I also support campaign finance reform because it will help silence dissent. The electoral college system suits my purposes fine.
5) How Do You Feel About Intellectual Property?
by Phil Gregory
In this age of the Internet, intellectual property has become a very important concept to many people. Many companies make their living on the artificial scarcity provided by intellectual property laws, selling information that they have either created or aggregated. Some others, mostly in the Free Software world, make their living seemingly in spite of these laws, selling their services based on information that is freely given.
Do you feel that out current system of intellectual property is a good one? Which parts of it (e.g. trademarks, patents, copyrights) do you feel are well suited to the world of the Internet and which do you think need to be changed (and, if changes are needed, what changes are needed)?
I think the system is fine, including software patents and other protections for our large contributors. The little guy never invents anything anyway. I think napster is great -- American Democracy is like napster, you know.
6) Encryption....
by SquadBoy
Many tech people think that strong encryption is one of the best ways we have to protect freedom both now and for future generations. For example to preserve information that future not so friendly governments may think we don't need to have and to make sure that things we want to have remain private remain private. Given this what would you do to help preserve our right to privacy through the use of strong encryption? Also in a related question what are your thoughts and what do you plan to do about the fact that we can not export many forms of strong encryption?
I support giving law enforcement all the tools they need to do their job. And if letting citizens use encryption doesn't conflict with that, then they can use it.
7) Rising Political Protests
by sterno
In the last year or so we have seen a tremendous escalation in the quantity and size of political protests against globalization and the rising power of corporate multi-nationals. Do you believe that these people have reason to be concerned? If you do believe that they have reason for concern, what steps would you take as president to deal with their concerns?
I don't think they have any reason to be concerned. The move towards global international control of their lives through a system of interlocking treaties and financial systems is a good one; they will be happier for it. Sovreignty for individuals is overrated, and a dangerous idea when you get down to it. We can't have people running around doing whatever they want!
8) Asteroid Defenses
by Ethelred Unraed
Would you renew funding of programs to research and develop global defense systems against asteroids or other such threats from space?
Well, not so much asteroids as rogue states, but yes. And if any rogue states gained control over any asteroids, we would blow them out of the sky to prevent their use against American interests.
9) The Future of the Country, and of Humanity
by 11223
I'm very concerned with the future of the country, and about what our national mission seems to be. Looking back through American history, every period seems to have a defining popular mission - like the "manifest destiny" movement in the 19th century, the Depression, World War II, and the Cold War. During these times, there would be one struggle or idea that captivated the attention of the nation, sort of providing a national mission.
I'm a little confused as I look around today. What is our mission? To me, it seems to be "to watch TV and use the Internet." What would you say the defining national mission of today is? What should it be? Furthermore, how would you show this in your activities as a lawmaker? (For instance, if our national mission is the pursuit of science, then would you increase funding for scientific pursuits in the budget?)
Of course we need a mission. We also need enemies. Both unite the people behind their leaders. It's not enough to simply promote a civil, peaceful, prosperous and free society. The people have to be united in common causes because it quiets dissent and keeps people from complaining about their taxes. And, if we make enough enemies, we can never scale back our intelligence and "peacekeeping" infrastructures.
________________________________________
Re:Bitter? (Score:2)
Agreed. This is the most fascinating race I've w seen in my life. Less than a week to go, and the outcomes for both the Presidency and Congress are still in doubt.
If it seems bitter, it's because both sides are desperate. If you're new to politics and have found a candidate or party whom you can support, get involved with them at the local level. The next four years are gonna be damn interesting, and in an era of ever-declining voter turnout, both your party (whatever it may be) and your country need you.
Nine Answers (Score:3)
> 5) How do you feel about IP?
> 6) Encryption. > 7) Rising Political Protests > 8) Asteroid Defenses > 9) The Future of the Country, and of HumanityBush Respones (Score:5)
If we executed drug users, we wouldn't have the huge drug problem that we have now. Drug users are hurting themselves and I am dedicated to doing whatever it takes to stop them. This is a war, dammit, and there are casualties in a war.
Minority Relitions
I support the right of all minority religions to convert to Christianity.
Why give a tax cut?
Because, moron, I'm running for the fucking president of the United States of America. You think I'm gonna get there without promising a tax cut? Where did you grow up, dumbass?
electoral reform
Wait until next week, if I'm not elected president I promise to spearhead electoral reform.
How Do You Feel About Intellectual Property?
I think that people who are intellectualable have as much right to protect their property as the rest of us.
Encryption....
If people aren't breaking the law, they have nothing to worry about.
Rising Political Protests
If we executed protestors, we wouldn't have a problem with protests. All these people think they know how to run the country, but how many of them are leading in the polls? What's that? None of them are? Hmmmm, I wonder who is, oh yeah, it's me, now sit down and shut up!
Asteroid Defenses
I remember once in the 80's getting all coked out and playing asteroids for like twelve hours straight, man that was a good video game.
The Future of the Country, and of Humanity
Our national mission should be to help large corporations become larger, and to make sure that the poor people who commit crime are executed.
Re:Thou shall not murder (Score:2)
Re:George W. Bush Finally Answers (Score:2)
There is one reference to coke, which was obvious since the question was about the drug war and I don't think GWB gives two shits about the drug war except that it scares old people and he wants their votes, as I said in the last sentence.
There are also references to GWB having a limited vocabulary and being fairly unintelligent. The first you can't argue with as he illustrates this on a weekly basis. The second you can argue a little more, but I think it is recognized by even his own party that he is not the most brilliant man. Their comments are often along the lines of "He just has a thick tongue, he is actually not a stupid guy." which is not a resounding endorsement. The media has not skewed my thoughts on this. I have heard him with my own ears not be able to pronounce common words many times. I don't think he is retarded or has a learning disability, I think that he has never used the word "subliminal" before in his life. That, among other things, says to me that he is not very intelligent. I have never heard Al Gore do the same.
"Redundant" should be used when someone knowingly posts a duplicate either because they are stupid or too lazy to read the previous posts. Since I wrote 10 times more than most of the posts ahead of mine, and it takes a little while to write them, I probably started writing before many of the posts before me.
Lastly, Funny, is relative. Maybe we shouldn't have the moderation "Funny" because people will use it willy nilly on things that you don't think are funny.
Don't get mad because someone doesn't like your candidate.
George W. Bush Finally Answers (Score:5)
by Tim Doran
The War on Drugs has been a consistently neglected topic in discussions surrounding this federal election.
My question is, do you believe the War on Drugs has been an unqualified success, and if not, what would
you change about it if elected president?
Answer: The war on drugs is a failure. I can speak from personal experience. You can get coke in almost any city in America, especially if you are willing to turn a trick. And this shit is good! Not that shit blow from Mexico, either, good Bolivian, Peruvian stuff. Coca para los todas.
This problem mainly effects poor black people, so frankly, I have little interest in it.
2) Minority Religions...
by Electric Angst
What will you do to protect the rights of atheists and those who hold minority faiths, such as Wicca,
Santaria, Shinto, et al?
Answer: I don't know much about Santana, Shinta, or Etal, but I do know this. I want to move forward, not backward, rightwise, not leftwise, and twirling, forever twirling.
3) Why give a tax cut?
by funkman
With the surplus, everyone has been saying "Let's have a tax cut, Let's have a tax cut." In the meantime,
Alan Greenspan and friends are trying to keep inflation and the speed of the growing economy in check so
it doesn't burst. Which they are doing by raising interest rates periodically. (6 times this year)
A tax cut flies in the face of what Greenspan is trying to do. A tax cut will inject more money into the
economy and do what Greenspan is preventing.
Why is a tax cut so big? Wouldn't the money be better spent on the deficit so when worse times roll along, a
tax cut can be easily given by not paying as much on the debt?
Answer: You talk a lot and I get confused, but I did get the beginning. Because that is what I promised all the rich people that paid to get me into office and I keep my promises. I am rich, my father is rich, my vice president is rich, all my friends are rich. What do we get from the government? Nothing, we pay and get nothing back. We aren't on welfare, foods stamps, we have the best private insurance money can buy, we don't need medicare, medicaid, or any government services. All the government does for us is make us let black kids in our kids schools, pay crack whores to have more babies, and give condoms to children so they fuck like rabbits, and thats not right.
4) electoral reform
by carleton
Some people, especially those that favor '3-rd' party candidates, have called for the ending of the electoral
college system to be replaced by a simple purely popular vote, or at least allowing for splitting the electoral
votes by each state. The best recent example was the Bush-Clinton election. Clinton received 43% of the
popular vote (but a sufficient majority of the electoral vote), whereas Perot got at least 10% of the popular
vote but zero electoral votes. If memory serves, Vermont is the only state which does currently allow for its
votes to be split; if someone wins 60% of the Vermont popular vote, they get 2 votes and the 40% candidate
gets 1. This in contrast to California, where someone can get 51% of the popular vote, and therefore gets
53 (or whatever it is nowadays) electoral votes. What is your position on this issue?
Answer: Again, I became confused on the third sentence. Please keep these short. Why should I want to change this? The system is set up to continue the two party system, of which I am one. If you have more choice, I and my friends have a lesser chance of winning.
5)How Do You Feel About Intellectual Property?
by Phil Gregory
In this age of the Internet, intellectual property has become a very important concept to many people. Many
companies make their living on the artificial scarcity provided by intellectual property laws, selling
information that they have either created or aggregated. Some others, mostly in the Free Software world,
make their living seemingly in spite of these laws, selling their services based on information that is freely
given.
Do you feel that out current system of intellectual property is a good one? Which parts of it (e.g.
trademarks, patents, copyrights) do you feel are well suited to the world of the Internet and which do you
think need to be changed (and, if changes are needed, what changes are needed)?
Answer: Alright, I'm with you on this one, this is money again. The laws have been written with the large companies in mind, not the general population. This is because large companies give money to the parties, specifically my Republican party, and so we try to accomodate those that keep us in office. I will support current intillectural property laws as long as it is politically in my best interest, which right now looks to continue into the foreseeable future. I am here, running for President of the United States, because I can "play ball". John McCain is much more popular than I with the general public, but he can not "play ball" with those at the top of the Republican Party, and as we discussed earlier, the system is set up for the two party and those that fund them.
I am the type of person that believes in keeping things the way they are, as is Al, because I am rich and powerful, and the things that got me here are the things I will continue to support. I will get NOTHING from changing intillectural property laws and all the large companies will lose important revenue streams.
6) Encryption....
by SquadBoy
Many tech people think that strong encryption is one of the best ways we have to protect freedom both now
and for future generations. For example to preserve information that future not so friendly governments
may think we don't need to have and to make sure that things we want to have remain private remain
private. Given this what would you do to help preserve our right to privacy through the use of strong
encryption? Also in a related question what are your thoughts and what do you plan to do about the fact
that we can not export many forms of strong encryption?
Answer: Now we know I am not too smart so I am going to keep this simple. Whatever helps business, I am for. I think this will help businesses, so I am for strong encryption available to them. If I can do this without giving the general population, (i.e. criminals) this strong encryption, I will, but I am told by smart people that this would be impossible, so we'll give it to everyone.
7) Rising Political Protests
by sterno
In the last year or so we have seen a tremendous escalation in the quantity and size of political protests
against globalization and the rising power of corporate multi-nationals. Do you believe that these people
have reason to be concerned? If you do believe that they have reason for concern, what steps would you
take as president to deal with their concerns?
Answer: This is not a problem yet. They are small and ineffectual up till now, so we can ignore them for the forseeable future.
8) Asteroid Defenses
by Ethelred Unraed
Would you renew funding of programs to research and develop global defense systems against asteroids or
other such threats from space?
Answer: Is this Ross Perot? Whoo, you are out there buddy. "Threats from space?" (Someone put a tail on this guy.)
9) The Future of the Country, and of Humanity
by 11223
I'm very concerned with the future of the country, and about what our national mission seems to be.
Looking back through American history, every period seems to have a defining popular mission - like the
"manifest destiny" movement in the 19th century, the Depression, World War II, and the Cold War. During
these times, there would be one struggle or idea that captivated the attention of the nation, sort of
providing a national mission.
I'm a little confused as I look around today. What is our mission? To me, it seems to be "to watch TV and
use the Internet." What would you say the defining national mission of today is? What should it be?
Furthermore, how would you show this in your activities as a lawmaker? (For instance, if our national
mission is the pursuit of science, then would you increase funding for scientific pursuits in the budget?)
Answer: This is right up my alley.
I am for a strong America, a good America. An America that is strong and good. I am against our children being killed, and us losing money. I am for us not dying, and am indifferent to people in other countries dying unless it effects us in a bad way. Africa is far away, black, and has only minimal economic ties, so I will talk about how horrible things are there but will never send our children to fight there.
I am for rich people mainly, but will tell you I am for everyone, even though I do little to nothing for those who actually need help from the government.
I promise to always talk in generallities, like "I am inclusive, not devicive. I want prosperity to continue..." and not talk specifics that make people angry and confused.
Thank you for this time. I hope you understand me a little better now.
Re:Minority religions... (Score:2)
--
Obfuscated e-mail addresses won't stop sadistic 12-year-old ACs.
Re:Bitter? (Score:2)
So you think it's al close enough that planting subliminal messages will decide the outcome? :)
--
Obfuscated e-mail addresses won't stop sadistic 12-year-old ACs.
Re:Bush's Responses (Score:2)
--
Obfuscated e-mail addresses won't stop sadistic 12-year-old ACs.
Re:1. War on Drugs (Score:2)
See if you can answer the following question correctly...
Speed limits are set below the 85th percentile (scientifically the safest speed) because:
a) Speed Kills!
b) Speeding tickets represent a very profitable tax on driving.
c) If someone is driving over the speed limit they can be pulled over for speeding and searched.
d) If someone is driving under the speed limit they can be pulled over for looking suspicious and searched.
e) All of the above and then some.
I've always wondered what a judge would say if I told him that I was obeying the speed limit by not driving below it (as in a lower limit, kind of like -1 is for sine and cosine curves).
By the way, for all the Nader supporters, Ralphie is in favor of a national speed limit. But I think that sits well with the majority of voters who are ignorant of the facts.
Re:With all due respect... (Score:2)
AND we're beating you in the drug war! Now isn't THAT a humbling thought.
Re:Why not four birds? (Score:2)
Wouldn't you?
Responses (Score:3)
Gore: I met a gentleman last week who had to pay $35 for his crack rock. This kind of prescription price gouging must stop!
Bush: Never use a drug named after a body part. Like Crack. That's a ghetto drug.
Nader: Unsafe on any Speed!
why give a tax cut
Gore: We should cut taxes, but never trees. Trees our our friends. My tree loves me.
Bush: We need to give money back to the corporations that create value and jobs in this country, like Exxon. Er, wait... um... there should be limits to what i say...
Nader: I'm not as much in favor of cutting taxes as taxing cuts, as no one likes cuts, and we should tax things we don't like.
electoral reform
Gore: We need electoral reform now! We should be able to dance with our happy buddhist monk friends, as their money showers down upon us!
Bush: Electoral reform is key, I think in particular we need to make those damn black people inelegible to vote. They never voted for my dad.
Nader: Look at these two clowns. Enough said.
intellectual property
Gore: I like my stuff.
Bush: Who let intellectuals own property! Nerds are queer!
Nader: This sound bite is copyright (c) 2000 Nader Productions, Inc.
encryption
Gore: I invented it.
Bush: See! He's queer! Nerd! NERD!
Nader: +++Q,SJD8AJS@#$1JSDFA+++
political protests
Gore: I remember the protests back in the 60's for nam, man, the weed was so thick... er, wait.
Bush: There should be limits to freedom. In particular, we need to shoot those damn people.
Nader: I am a political protest, damnit!
asteroids
Gore: aAAAHAHAHAHAH! Where! flee!
Bush: I remember that game. I could never figure out how to stop my ship.
Nader: Bush is a nerd! Queer!
the future
Gore: I'm gonna write a book about that.
Bush: I'm gonna outlaw the queer's book.
Nader: One of these two is gonna win a Darwin Award. It's in the cards, I tell ya.
Nice Pop Theology (Score:2)
The Bible also says that the rulers do not wield the sword in vain. There is no "discrepancy" with the Bible when the government excecutes citizens who have committed wrongdoing. The Bible explicitly gives this authority to the government. Get your theology (or conventional wisdom or hearsay) straight, please.
Re:W.pl (Score:2)
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use strict;
use FocusGroups; # Keep with the standard man
use SlashdotQuestions;
# this script emulates W.
my $ra_slashdot_questions = SlashdotQuestions::getList(); # save some cycles with references
my $rh_what_polled_well_in_the_focus_group = FocusGroups::getQuestionResponses( $ra_slashdot_questions );
my %answers;
foreach my $question (@$ra_slashdot_questions) {
$answers{ $question } =
$rh_what_polled_well_in_the_focus_group->{$questi
}
while ( my ( $slashdot_question, $focusgroup_response ) = each %answers ) {
print EOS;
$slashdot_question
$focusgroup_response
EOS
}
Goes to prove TMTOWTDI.
-Michael
Re:W.pl (Score:2)
Damnit, I hate when that happens...
print <<EOS;
...
EOS
gumble gumble.. less thans... grumble grumble...
I guess to be more OO friendly I could have done.
my $stdout = new IO::File ">-";
$stdout->print( 'slashdot.org:80', Proto => 'tcp';
while ( $xxxx = each xxxx ) {
my $s_comment
}
$slash_sock->print( close();
Re:Bush's real position - No Friend to Smart Women (Score:2)
From salon: "There's also Lynn Novick, a co-producer of Ken Burns' PBS series "Baseball," who had the rare treat of accompanying Bush to a Texas Rangers game in the summer of 1994, before he was elected governor. "He was a very gracious host," Novick says. "He was perfectly pleasant. Until he changed the subject."
Bush mentioned something about Yale University, from which he graduated in 1968. Novick graduated from Yale in 1983, so she brought it up, thinking it would be "like a bonding thing."
"When did you graduate?" Bush asked her, as she recalls. She told him. That's when Bush told her that Yale "went downhill since they admitted women."
"I said, 'Excuse me?'" Novick says. "I thought
he was kidding. But he didn't seem to be kidding. I said, 'What do you mean?'"
Bush replied that "something had been lost" when women were fully admitted to Yale in 1969, that fraternities were big when he'd been there, providing a "great camaraderie for the men." But that went out the window when women were allowed in, Bush said.
"He said something like, 'Women changed the social dynamic for the worse,'" she says. "I was so stunned, shocked and insulted, I didn't know what to say."
She says two things offended her the most:"That he would think that, but almost more so that he would say that to a woman who went to Yale."
Then combine that with his position on abortion.
So much for trotting out Condoleeza Rice all the time.
Re:With all due respect... (Score:2)
Apparently, it's very profitable to synthesize and smuggle drugs; borders are pretty porous (the level of manpower needed to stop and search every potential drug smuggler would be INSANE -- and it wouldn't cover domestic operations, such as labs not dependent on opiates), investigations are difficult (other countries, such as Mexico, aren't too fond of US DEA agents operating there... national sovereignty and all that. This is problematic when many local of the officals screaming national sovereignty aren't going to do much because they're taking money from the cartels); and the distribution system is firmly in place.
Sure, you can take down individual dealers. But the money's good enough that more will probably take their place...
Re:Drugs... (Score:2)
Well, he *sorta* answered the question of drug use in his past. He put some type of qualifier on his answer, IIRC he said he would answer questions about his drug use since he turned 40 or some such nonsense, but any questioning before this time was unrelated to his candidacy.
(Bush|Gore) on Drugs (Score:2)
(Bush|Gore): I am firmly opposed to drug use, and I feel that we must increase penalties for drug dealers, users, and manufacturers (Bush: unless they're pharmaceutical manufacturers; they are the closest thing to God in this country. I love God.) Let's be honest, folks. My "youthful indiscretions" taught me that drugs just aren't something to mess around with. I wish there had been super harsh sentencing laws then like there are now, so that I could have had the piss scared out of me when I was caught (smoking|snorting), for all of about 15 minutes until daddy brought in the lawyers and the judge, being a reasonable man, agreed that I was not black and of course didn't deserve to go to jail. Furthermore, I'm sure it would have taught my college roommate, er I mean vicious drug dealer, a lesson or two if he was sentenced to life in prison and raped weekly. Instead he's gone on to become a wealthy lawyer (boy, what those drug dealers won't do for a buck). In conclusion, we all messed around with drugs when we were kids, but today's kids are different, dammit, and I don't trust them farther than I can throw them and so let's toss everybody in jail. Thank you.
Re:Gore and Bush's actual positions (Score:3)
Neither Jewish law (upon which Christian doctrine is based, i.e. the ten commandments,) nor any Christian doctrine that I know of forbids killing.
In fact Jewish law prescribes kosher METHODS of killing.
I believe you are misquoting the commandment "Thou shalt not do murder."
Neither of the candidates have done murder as far as I know.
-Peter
Answers for Gore (Score:2)
The war on Drugs has not been as successful as I had hoped, but I believe this is because I did not play a large part in inventing both war and drugs while in Congress.
2. Minority Religions
Minorities should be given special benefits since there are fewer of them. Minorities include the richest 5% of the country.
3. Tax cut
Taxes should be as high as possible, or at least as high as congress will let me make them. After all, a newer, smaller government requires more money.
4. Electoral Reform
The electoral college should be reformed, preferably in such a manner as to make it more confusing and possibly more beneficial to me.
5. Intellectual Property
Intellectual property should be protected, even though I did allow several companies to blatantly steal my leg-protection invention. (Those bastards call them "pants," but we know the truth.)
6. Encryption
My cue card says I'm for reducing encryption restrictions, but I voted against it in Congress...::tongue kisses Tipper::
7. Rising Political Protests
I was there with James Lee Witt, so my position on this issue should be clear.
8. Asteroid Defenses
This are should be researched, but I think it will be up to me to invent a "LASER" with which to destroy any incoming asteroids.
9. The Future
The children are our future, but I'm pro choice, so feel free to not have children if you choose.
Re:Bush Respones (Score:2)
Casualties 4Q 2000:
9/15/00 shot by police [modbee.com] 10 years old
9/28/00 shot by police [worldnetdaily.com] 60 years old
10/5/00 shot by police [newschannel5.com] 62 years old (oops, wrong house.)
Refugees:
Renee Boje [reneeboje.com] - waiting to receive refugee status in Canada while hiding out from American bounty hunters.
Ethnic cleansing in GWB's home state:
Tulia, TX [drcnet.org]
Brought to you courtesy of the war on drugs...
numb
Re:Unclear (Score:2)
So thats an indirect response.
Minority Religions... (Score:4)
Pick a candidate for this one...
I would put them on reservations for their own protection, we could give them blankets. But we don't want just any derilect cult running around practicing beliefs in this country. I believe in 'Freedom of Christainity' er, religion that is and everyone has the right to practice whatever religion they want as long as they do it so that it doesn't piss off the christians.
Future of the Country (Score:2)
Tax Cut -- It's not their money (Score:3)
a) Keep it for themselves
b) Give you more services you never asked for
c) Write you a refund check
d) Hand it out to people they like
Gore says (d): he wants to use tax cuts to encourage activities he likes, like putting kids in childcare (but not choosing not to work while your kids are young), paying for your childrens college (but not paying for college yourself), and so on.
Bush says (b): if the federal government is taking more money than it needs from the citizens, then it should stop taking so much.
Do Bush's tax cuts target the rich? No, they do not target the rich. Do the rich get the principle benefit? Depends how you measure it. They will have the biggest savings overall, but this is just because they pay the most in taxes. Percentages wise, I don't know whether it's exactly fair or if the rich or the poor get a bigger benefit.
Gore's "tax cuts" target people so specifically, you will pretty much not get them unless you plan your life around them. I went through the online calculators, using mine and my parents incomes to see who these tax cuts will benefit. I would have saved a few hundred dollars last year with Bush's plan. I couldn't get a single hypothetical to show me a savings under Gore's plan. I guess I have to have kids, start saving for college, buy an electric car, and invest in the trial lawyers association to be elegible for his tax breaks.
As a libertarian, I'm hoping Bush wins, because he at least seems to have some inkling of the idea that government is only there to do certain things, and society is separate from government. Gore on the other hand thinks that government is there to dictate, er, I mean encourage, all aspects of peoples lives. I won't be voting for either of them, of course.
Tom Campbell [campbell.org], senate candidate in California, and one of the handful of politicians who understand economics, says, "none of the above". The "surplus" has just been accounting tricks until this year, and we should pay down the debt while times are good.
Answers: (Score:2)
Gore: Illicit drugs are associated with a whole lot of bad things in our society, and we need to work on reducing those bad things on all ends. We need to attack the supply of drugs, which we have been doing, but we also need to ensure that a person who would like help can get help. I remember getting such help back when I was smoking marijuana in college, and I think everyone should be able to get such help.
Bush: We will, if I am elected president, end the scourge of drugs on our society. I will press for execution standards to be lowered so much that if some young cokehead son of a congressman is caught, he will be hung from the highest yardarm.
Why give a tax cut?
Gore: We have a surplus, and it is only natural that some of that would be returned to the people, to help the middle class. However, I would not give 50% of the tax cut to the wealthiest 1% of Americans.
Bush: Because it is not the government's money. I think people should decide what to do with their money, not the government.
Some people, especially those that favor '3-rd' party candidates, have called for the ending of the electoral college system to be replaced by a simple purely popular vote, or at least allowing for splitting the electoral votes by each state.
Gore: The system we have in place has been a resounding success for hundreds of years.
Bush: I am opposed to a change in the election system. Where else can a drunk loser C student executioner be favored for the presidency ?
Do you feel that out current system of intellectual property is a good one? Which parts of it (e.g. trademarks, patents, copyrights) do you feel are well suited to the world of the Internet and which do you think need to be changed (and, if changes are needed, what changes are needed)?
Bush: Absolutely. The intellectual property laws help business in the US. And without business, my campaign wouldn't have any money. So I would have to say I am beholden to the intellectual property laws.
Gore: It is becoming clear that intellectual property in the US is undergoing quite a strain. On one side we have peer to peer sharing of copyrighted material, and on the other we have simple business method patents applied to the Internet. We really need to have a thorough overview on intellectual property issues before we ultimately do nothing about it. I remember back when I invented the internet, we never could have imagined the way it would transform the landscape of IP in the US.
[Disclaimer: I already voted, and it wasn't for one of these two]
Re:Answers: (Score:2)
Gore ass-lickers like to act like Gore is intelligent...however when one considers the secret arm's deal to the Russians to allow weapons to be sold to Iran; selling access to the Chinese; and being such a habitual liar that it isn't possible to know until the next if what Al Gore said was true or not...really makes one wonder how intelligent this man-woman is!
Gore did graduate college Cum Laude from Harvard. He did flunk out of Divinity School at Vanderbilt after returning from his enlisted service in Nam. He then DROPPED OUT of Vanderbilt law in order to serve as a congressman for Tennessee. Gore has served in national office ever since.
Nader graduated from Princeton Magna Cum Laude.
He went on to Ivy League law school, and has INVENTED the role of consumer advocate in the US, saving consumers lives and millions of their dollars in the process.
Bush graduated Yale with a 77 average. He went to the National Guard to not show up. He went to business school. Tell me how a Harvard MBA can fail miserably, losing millions of dollars in the oil business in West Texas. Oh, yeah. He was a drunk. Then, Harken bought his oil company primarily for his name - a buy that cost them about $5 million dollars. That is a lot to pay for a company losing money. Then Dubya was bailed out several times by friends of the then Vice President, Dad. After becoming a millionaire through these handouts, Dubya went into politics.
Well... Here goes... (Score:2)
Your answer:
Bush: "I *sniff* never did cocaine (since sometime in the seventies). Why do y'all keep bringing it up? I won't... I tell ya... Discuss it. Next questrin."
Gore: "Are you for or against drugs? I mean I smoked a little, but nothing major. In fact, my dog had better drugs."
2) Minority Religions...
Your answer:
Chorus: "I'd ask myself: WWJD? What would Jesus do?"
Bush: "Obviously. He'd put 'em ta death."
Gore: "Obviously. He'd marginalize them and treat them as evil if they didn't have enough votes to matter."
3) Why give a tax cut?
Your answer:
Bush: "It's not the Gubmint's money, it's your money. Besides, people give you more money if you run something into the ground. I learned that from running my own business."
Gore: "I can do both!!! As a matter of fact, I invented money AND surpluses."
4) electoral reform
Your answer:
Bush: "I'm a Reformer with Results. Just look at Texas. What was the question?"
Gore: "I don't support third parties. Especially green ones with no experience."
5)How Do You Feel About Intellectual Property?
Your answer:
Bush: "If someone steals from you it's wrong. I may not have invented the internet, but I know that it is what is pushing our economy forward. Not the Gubmint. This is why we should implement filters in schools and support American businesses."
Gore: "I didn't really invent the internet, but if it weren't for me, it wouldn't be like it is today. I know that it is what is pushing our economy forward. The Government must control it. This is why we should support American businesses."
6) Encryption....
Your answer:
Bush: "What? Of course people should have privacy. I may not have invented the internet, but I know that it is what is pushing our economy forward. Not the Gubmint. This is why we should implement filters in schools and support American businesses. To protect privacy."
Gore: "I took a resonsible leadership role in bringing encryption to the people of the United States. I think we should let the FBI decide the extent of it. I think we all know that they know best."
7) Rising Political Protests
Your answer:
Bush: "No."
Gore: "I believe that their concerns are exaggerated or even misplaced. While I will fight for you against the brutality and tyranny of big business, I think that it is best to let the market decide internationally."
8) Asteroid Defenses
Your answer:
Bush: "My missle shield should cover that."
Gore: "I don't know. It sounds like a risky scheme."
9) The Future of the Country, and of Humanity
Your answer:
Chorus: "Obviously. Our mission is to follow in my father's footsteps and do exactly what Daddy would do."
B. Elgin
Re:Bitter? (Score:2)
First sentence: Can be deemed correct, partially. It certainly wasn't everything though.
Second sentence: "Some "; insert "Bush Campaign people "; delete "right-wing christian looneys (Fallwell and friends)"; continue with "got together in a key state "; replace "(Michigan)" with "(New York)"; replace "and spammed phone calls out" with "and sent advertisements throughout the media"; continue with "to the electorate saying that John McCain"; insert "planned to "; continue with "cut funding for breast cancer research"; insert "as Garden-variety Pork Barrel spending"; continue with " - which was true,but it was simply that he voted against a bill that had a ton of unacceptable riders, He's not "pro breast cancer", as the phone calls said."
Grammar aside, this is now correct: "Some Bush Campaign people got together in a key state (New York) and sent advertisements throughout the media to the electorate saying that John McCain planned to cut funding for breast cancer research as Garden-variety Pork Barrel spending - which was true, but it was simply that he voted against a bill that had a ton of unacceptable riders, He's not "pro breast cancer", as the phone calls said."
Now as for the soft money. That was a pair of brother oil tycoons from Texas (the Wily brothers) who sent out an ad that claimed that McCain was anti-environment in an ad sponsered by "Republicans for Clean Air", a group they had made specifically for the ad.
I agree with you on Campaign Finance Reform, but it makes a better statement for the cause if you get the details right.
B. Elgin
Hmmm... (Score:2)
Re:Two birds with one stone (Score:3)
1. War on Drugs (Score:3)
And if you thing the War on Drugs was something, just wait until you see our War on Hackers!
I'm really impressed... (Score:3)
Now, you can Troll the major presidential candidates!
God Bless America, and God Bless
--
My best guesses (Score:3)
Gore: I totally support the war on drugs, but I'm concerned about racial profiling, and discrimination against the poor. I am, therefore, proposing a "blind warrant" policy, to ensure fairer treatment. By regularly issuing search warrants for random addresses, we can continue to protect America's children from the scourge of drugs, while taking the taint of racism and class warfare out of the picture.
Bush: mmm... drugs... Sorry, what was the question?
2) Minority Religions...
Gore: I have always supported minority religions, and will always continue to do so. My track record on this subject speaks for itself.
Thank goodness they didn't ask about majority religions...
Bush: Dang... what was it... "I support Religion, but not Minorities?" No, that's not right. "I support Minorities... " hmm that sounds funny, like something Ted Kennedy'd say. Uhh...
"Yes"
3) Why give a tax cut?
Gore:That's really an insightful question. The fact is that, as Galbraith showed long ago, unregulated economies are subject to bust and boom cycles. When the economy is weak, it's necessary to raise taxes, so that government spending can stimulate the economy. Naturally anybody with extra money will be trying to hide it in his sock drawer.
On the other hand, if the economy's stronger, it is necessary to raise taxes in order to keep the economy from getting overstimulated. After all, nobody wants to live in a society with an overstimulated economy. It's like an overstimulated child; it stops listening to the folks who know better and want what's best for it.
So why a tax cut? Because it's so darned hard to talk the voters out of it. The best we can hope for is to try to minimize the damage, and keep the door open for the eventual triumph of the proletariat. Um... middle class.
Bush: Sounds to me like you been listening to a lot of that Washington fuzzy math. I can tell, you're going to pull out numbers next, and there's no sense talking to folks who do math with numbers, 'cuz you just can't trust them. I'm giving the American people a tax cut because it's their money, and they earned it. folks love it when I say that...
4) electoral reform
Gore: I totally support third party activity, and I think it's a shame that there are no alternative candidates running for the presidency.
Bush: I agree, and I applaud my opponent's position. Too bad there are only two parties. Next question.
5)How Do You Feel About Intellectual Property?
Gore: I am running an open-source campaign, and my White House will be an open-source White House. My web page runs on Linus.
Bush: You see, this is just where you can really see the differences between my views and those of my opponent. My vision applies to all Americans, not just a priviledged few.
Rather than give "targeted tax cuts" to a certain class of people, my tax cuts will apply to everyone. Even though intellectuals are mostly big government liberals, I would protect their property like everyone else's. Everyone benefits under my plan.
6) Encryption....
Gore: I believe my history on this topic speaks for itself. After all, I invented the Clipper Chip.
You did?
Initiative. The Clipper Chip Initiative.
Really?
Supported. I supported the Clipper Chip Initiative. You conservative reporters are putting words in my mouth.
Bush: Ah can wiggle mah ears. *wiggle* See that? *wiggle wiggle*
---------------
I'll cut it short there... really should get back to work. :-P
Responses (Score:3)
Bush: I think it goes without saying that the war on drugs is an unqualified failure. I, for example, have not been caught doing drugs under the Clinton administration. I believe that the drug surplus should be equally spread to every American citizen, and not just the most addicted 1%.
Gore: When I was in Congress, I took the initiative in creating the war on drugs. When I'm your President, I will make sure that a rating system is put in place categorizing just how harmful drugs are to your children.
Minority Religions...
Bush: Back in Texas, my record shows that minorities have been receiving extra special treatment when it comes to law enforcement. As president, I will do everything in my power to put those same policies to work for the nation.
Gore: The rights of people who follow minority religions are definitely in need of protection. That is why I propose putting all of them in an iron-clad lockbox, where Congress can't interfere with them.
Why give a tax cut?
Bush: When I was in Texas, I received a lot of money from big oil companies, and guess what? I liked it. I think the American people will like having extra money too.
Gore: I agree with G.W. Bush on this one. As the economy starts to weaken, the American people will need extra money in their pocket to feed their children. I will also take the initiaitive in creating a rating system so you can be sure to know how much of a tax cut you'll be receiving.
electoral reform
Bush: Those numbers you quoted are a good example of fuzzy math. In my plan, if someone gets 51% of the popular vote in California, that candidate will receive 85% of the electoral vote, while the other candidate will receive 64% of the electoral vote.
Gore: I firmly believe that a webcam should be set up in the electoral college, so you can see the system at work.
How Do You Feel About Intellectual Property?
Bush: In Texas, three 11th graders were found to have plaguarized several reports in their English classes. Guess what's gonna happen to those three students? They're gonna be put to death.
Gore: Intellectual Property rights need to be protected. Which is why when I am President, I will lock all intellectual property in an iron-clad lockbox.
Encryption....
Bush: That's where you take all the big numbers and multiply them together? It's fuzzy math. I want to give privacy to all citizens, not just the top 1%.
Gore: When I was in Congress, inventing encryption, I was thinking about these very same issues. I support the free use of encryption, as I believe everybody has a right to lock their data in an iron-clad lockbox.
Rising Political Protests
Bush: When I was in Texas, we didn't have a problem with globalization. When I am President, I predict the same thing.
Gore: By requiring mandatory gun registration and trigger locks, I feel we can take a lot of the danger out of political protests.
Asteroid Defenses
Bush: I propose we build a death star.
Gore: I agree. And I think we should hook a webcam up to it.
The Future of the Country, and of Humanity
Bush: The answer is simple. What is five times seven? 42.
Gore: I will put the country in an iron-clad lockbox. And then I will rate it.
Minority religions... (Score:4)
I believe that all people should have the same rights. Just like in Texas, people of Wicca, Santeria, Shinto, et al have the right to worship the Christian God in any Christian church that they please.
It's like I don't believe in any special rights for homosexuals. Heterosexuals have the right to marry any person of the opposite gender that they choose. Homosexuals should have exactly the same right: to marry anyone of the opposite gender that they choose.
With all due respect... (Score:4)
FatPhil
I invented pants! - Al Gore (Score:3)
GORE: Big deal! My dad was a senator. Yup.
BUSH: We have the same shoe size.
GORE: Yeah? Well, I invented the internet. Uh-huh. Lots of other stuff, too.
BUSH: Once my mom thought I was my dad.
GORE: Space shuttle... that was mine.
BUSH: On the phone, people think I'm my dad.
GORE: *kiss* *kiss* Kiss me, I'm on TV.
BUSH: We have the same name, my dad and I, that is.
ANNOUNCER: Not going anywhere for a while? Grab a Snickers. Peanuts, caramel and chocolate. That outta hold ya.
BUSH: My dad and I wear the same pants.
GORE: I invented pants!
ANNOUNCER: Hungry? Grab a snickers.
Check this commercial out at: http://www.snickers.com/video/ [snickers.com]
One Note: Part way through, Bush says 'Once my mom thought I was my dad.' What in the hell does *that* mean? Open to some interesting interpretations, no?
Some day I hope to have a
Typical... (Score:3)
That's funny, you apparantly think there are only two people running for president, just like the national media... how sad.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
My answers (Score:3)
Damn right we're winning. And we need to step up the fight against all things that are potentially dangerous. Drugs are just the beginning. Next we outlaw tobacco. Lots of tobacco deaths every year. Then fatty and high-cholesterol foods. Heart disease is a leading killer. Lawsuits agains Hershey and M&M Mars begin shortly. Cars are also a big cause of death. The danger involved surely isn't worth the benefit of being able to transport yourself from one place to another.
2) Minority Religions...
All non-Slahsdot readers will surely burn in hell.
3) Why give a tax cut?
Everyone will give 100% of their pay to the US government. We'll then keep 50% to run things and the other 50% will be evenly distributed to everyone. That's the only way to keep it fair for everyone.
4) electoral reform
No more elections. Once this one is over, and I'm in power, that's it. I rule.
5)How Do You Feel About Intellectual Property?
If you want to keep it your own, then you should keep it in your brain. The only way to keep a secret is to not tell anyone.
6) Encryption....
Ab Pbzzrag.
7) Rising Political Protests
Once I'm in power, there will be no need for political protests.
8) Asteroid Defenses
At this point, we pretty much deserve to be taken out by a huge asteriod. I just hope I'm around to see it.
9) The Future of the Country, and of Humanity
See 8)
-S
Bush's Responses (Score:3)
The War on Drugs has been a consistently neglected topic in discussions surrounding this federal election. My question is, do you believe the War on Drugs has been an unqualified success, and if not, what would you change about it if elected president?
Now Tom, we all know that drugs are a very serious issue confronting our families today. Contrary to what my opponent says, I am not in the pocket of the big drug companies. I am not declaring war on grandma. I'm all for better healthcare and cheaper drugs. Thank you for your question.
2) Minority Religions...by Electric Angst
What will you do to protect the rights of atheists and those who hold minority faiths, such as Wicca, Santaria, Shinto, et al?
Santa what? My solution for atheists is to put a rifle in their hands and send them to Vietnam. As my papa's buddy Colin (you might know him from Desert Storm) used to say, there ain't no atheists in foxholes.
3) Why give a tax cut? by funkman
Well, Mr. Funk, I think its a crime that the average American citizen works an average of 87 days a year just to pay his taxes. So with that in mind, I'm proposing to cut the taxes off of the top 1% of the wage earners, because heck, they work the hardest. Why punish productivity?
4) electoral reform by carleton
Some people, especially those that favor '3-rd' party candidates, have called for the ending of the electoral college system to be replaced by a simple purely popular vote, or at least allowing for splitting the electoral votes by each state. The best recent example was the Bush-Clinton election. Clinton received 43% of the popular vote (but a sufficient majority of the electoral vote), whereas Perot got at least 10% of the popular vote but zero electoral votes. If memory serves, Vermont is the only state which does currently allow for its votes to be split; if someone wins 60% of the Vermont popular vote, they get 2 votes and the 40% candidate gets 1. This in contrast to California, where someone can get 51% of the popular vote, and therefore gets 53 (or whatever it is nowadays) electoral votes. What is your position on this issue?
I'm against it Larry. I'm not sure why, I just am.
8) Asteroid Defenses by Ethelred Unraed
I know when my asteroids flare up, its a serious situation. Unlike my candidate, I support further research into treatment of this painful malady.
Bitter? (Score:3)
Bitter? On the contrary -- for the first time since 1976 (maybe even 1956) we have two candidates who are both acceptable, if not necessarily ideal, to the vast majority of Americans. If the campaign hasn't seemed impassioned, it's because most of the electorate will be comfortable with either outcome. (And would have been with McCain or Bradley, for that matter.)
The yelling about how there is no democracy and corporations control the whole process is coming from a few leftists who can't accept the possibility that the majority of voters don't share their views and amplified by media that push cynicism and conspiracy at the expense of journalism and edification.
Look -- I voted for John McCain in the primary. I wish he had won but more people voted for Bush. People. Not one corporation cast a vote. I'm not thrilled about that outcome but I accept it as the outcome of democrarcy. I don't go off bitching about how there's some conspiracy holding down all the Real Voters who just happen to think exactly like me.
If I haven't antagonized the leftists enough yet, check out the New Republic on Nader [tnr.com]. And you know, of course, that when a disgruntled ex-employee followed Michael Moore around with a camera, your hero had him arrested, right?
We've gotten no direct responses from either Gore (Score:3)
I've followed the debates and read some Noozweak articles, etc. on either candidates position and I'm confident of my choices stance being closest to what I consider sane. The other one is from Texas.
To this point tho, direct responses, even Jim Lehrer had a tough time corraling the top two on questions. Too often the response would weave off to grind some axe somewhere else. If there's anything which has driven me to cynicism on politics its the lack of a direct answer.
Senator, how would your administration handle an alien assault on Richard Stahlman's house?
Well, Jim, if these aliens would not be benefitting from any tax cuts which favor the wealthy or take any money out of Medicare or Social Security, further my opponent would likely favor increasing their numbers by overturning Roe vs Wade with Supreme Court appointements...etc.
Governor, how would your administration handle Weehawken, New Jersey being swept away in a "Perfect Storm?"
First let me point out that those residents of Weehawken would enjoy a tax cut which would favor every one of them, not just the rich and that my plan to allow an individual to divert up to half of their Social Security contribution to private investment would encourage innovation in the rubber lifeboat industry and create jobs, further my opponent's Washington-insider fuzzy math suggests there would not be sufficient funding to shore up a reformed medicare, he's using Medi-Scare tactics, because he's so desperate that he'd say anything to win...etc.
--