"Calif Bill" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
news "Calif Bill" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
ink.net...


We have a cure for the energy problem. NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS! But
the enviro's got the building of same, outlawed.

No knee-jerk reactions, OK? Forget Yucca Mountain.

As it stands now, we are unable to control nuclear waste. I did not
say "dispose of". I said "CONTROL", meaning assure that is secured
against misuse. When we can do that, then MAYBE we can build nuclear
power plants the was Starbucks builds coffee shops.


Why worry about the control of the waste?

Step 1) Grab a Kleenex and wipe the drool off your chin.

Step 2) On the way home, buy the February issue of Scientific American.

Step 3) Read the article on managing unsecured nuclear materials.



Read the rest of the post you snipped!


I read it, and then snipped it to make the next message less cluttered.
The things you said are only distantly related to the worst threats
regarding nuclear materials. Go back to step 2 and buy the magazine.
You'll probably be interested and surprised, as I was. I'd post the text,
but I don't subscribe to the digital version, which is $39.


Yucca mt can be protected. but there is so much nuclear material out
there in bombs, etc and rogue states with nuclear reactors, the worry is
more when do the nut cases get it, the do they get the material.


You keep saying these things about storage, but that's not the point. Buy
the magazine. There are things in the article you and I were completely
unaware of. Do *are* interested in learning something new every 12 hours,
aren't you? Or, have you picked out your gravestone already? There's nothing
in between the two.

NOYB wrote:
Name one fact or truth published by them.


The "reasons" for invading Iraq?

The HUGE increase in the US debt?

The wiretapping of American citizens without warrants?

The torturing?

Social Security "reform"?

Medicare "reform"?

Congressional ethics "reform"?

Actually the list is a lot longer, but I have a busy day ahead.

Posts like this make me think you're really a not-so-covert
Socialist agitator intent on making the U.S. right wing look
bad.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
...
The answer to all three is 'not even close' so therefor it's hardly
equal, is it?


NOYB wrote:
The actual answer was "yes" to 2 of the 3 questions.

It may be "yes" to all of the questions, but I haven't the time to lookup
what their budget was.

You're kidding right?

Here's the problem for you- reality. Name one lie and/or slander published
by moveon.org.

Moveon's claim that Bush lied about the "reasons" for invading Iraq

Moveon's lies that the deficit continues to grow, when it has in fact shrunk
considerably from 2004 to 2005.

Moveon's claims that the President "broke the law" by granting the NSA the
ability to listen to phone calls made by terrorists...when in fact several
Presidents before him took similar steps

Moveon's lies that Bush authorized people like England to pose with naked
Iraqi soldiers with dog collars around their necks.

Moveon's lies and distortion of the statistics about Bush's social security
reform proposals.

Moveon's characterization that Bush is a modern day Hitler

Here's the problem for you- reality. Name one lie and/or slander published
by moveon.org.


NOYB wrote:
Moveon's claim that Bush lied about the "reasons" for invading Iraq


Are you now claiming that President Bush told the truth
about his reasons for invading Iraq? Yellowcake? Trailers?
Links to Al-Queda? Dancing in the streets & tossing flowers
to the liberators?


Moveon's lies that the deficit continues to grow, when it has in fact shrunk
considerably from 2004 to 2005.


Aren't these the same 'accounting tricks' that you're always
accusing others of using to claim Clinton built up a budget
surplus? Is the Iraq war expenses included in this
'shrinking deficit'?



Moveon's claims that the President "broke the law" by granting the NSA the
ability to listen to phone calls made by terrorists...when in fact several
Presidents before him took similar steps

Actually, you're the one lying about Moveon.org's action...
they are petitioning to determine the legaltiy of the
action, not claiming that it's illegal.

And no President has "taken similar steps" unless it was
during a declared war.


Moveon's lies that Bush authorized people like England to pose with naked
Iraqi soldiers with dog collars around their necks.


Please post a link to Moveon.org's statement. And remember,
President Bush is the Commander in Chief of a military that
was ordered to disregard the Geneva Conventions and "push
the envelope" on treatment of prisoners... a doctrine that
presumably came right from the top since it was publicly
declared by the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney
General (presumably with Bush's knowledge & approval).

BTW while we're on the subject of accountability, chain of
command, and legality, how do you feel about President
Bush's use of so many 'signing memoranda' when executing
legislation?


Moveon's lies and distortion of the statistics about Bush's social security
reform proposals.


PLease quote same. President Bush's proposals to "reform"
Social Security were a transparent attempt at looting, and
most Americans were not dumb enough to fall for it... of
course you blame 'libby-rull propaganda' for that.



Moveon's characterization that Bush is a modern day Hitler


Can you provide a link to that? OTOH there is a retouched
photo of Hillary done up to look like Hitler that is very
popular in Republican mail lists, and of course the fake
photo of Kerry with Hanoi Jane.

Actually, I don't follow Moveon.org much at all, so your
protests only serve to give them more publicity. Good work
comrade!

DSK

In article . net,
says...

"jps" wrote in message
...
In article . net,
says...

I don't know why anyone would purchase their car after the lease is up.
In some states you will pay sales tax twice. I have had very good
offers to keep cars, but not good enough to move to the next, new car.

My 2002 Audi has about 20K miles on it and in near perfect condition. I
could probably net a couple grand on it if I bought it and resold it.

How long was your lease on it?

48 mos. Financing was ridiculous and nothing out of pocket. It was my
second lease with them and, although I'm attracted to the new a6 (mostly
the interior), I'm also attracted to getting off the merry go round.

Per our discussion, Volkswagen would still get its money out of the car
vs. GM having to write off the difference between residual and the
actual worth of the car.

jps

In article ,
says...
jps wrote:
In article ,
says...

It is concours, by the way, as in concours d'elegance.

Not concourse.

That's beyond my class of French. I probably can't even spell foie
gras.

jps

Isn't he the brother of cooo-de-grass?

Is that a french hemp reference?

"jps" wrote in message
...
In article . net,
says...

"jps" wrote in message
...
In article . net,
says...

I don't know why anyone would purchase their car after the lease is
up.
In some states you will pay sales tax twice. I have had very good
offers to keep cars, but not good enough to move to the next, new car.

My 2002 Audi has about 20K miles on it and in near perfect condition.
I
could probably net a couple grand on it if I bought it and resold it.

How long was your lease on it?

48 mos. Financing was ridiculous and nothing out of pocket. It was my
second lease with them and, although I'm attracted to the new a6 (mostly
the interior), I'm also attracted to getting off the merry go round.

Per our discussion, Volkswagen would still get its money out of the car
vs. GM having to write off the difference between residual and the
actual worth of the car.

Audi had a great lease on its A6 and A4. The A4 was $349/mo. with zero out
of pocket, 12,000 mi/yr, for only 24 months. The A6 was $569/mo. or $599/mo
with the same terms. Obviously, the 24 month term was what I found most
appealing.


But I wanted to be under $500, so I didn't even drive the A6. The A4 was
too small and too slow. I couldn't get used to a 4-cylinder after driving
the G35...even if it was turbocharged.

"jps" wrote in message
...
I've had one hell of a time justifying the expense of fuel and,
consequently, over the last year our boat has been out very little.

Now I come to find that Exxon, Chevron and Halliburton have made more
money this past year than at any time in history and our rate of savings
hasn't been this low since 1933.

I'm feeling stung. The taxation is going to happen one way or another.
I feel government is in a better position to redistribute my taxation
more than I trust Exxon or Chevron or Halliburton but I guess they
already have.

Think about it folks. Very few companies are having banner years, apart
from these companies.

Is it some sort of coincidence that these same companies are friends of
the current administration?

This whole thing stinks from the head down.

I guess the dinghy will have to do for now.

jps

get a sailboat!!

jps wrote:
In article . net,
says...


I don't know why anyone would purchase their car after the lease is up.
In some states you will pay sales tax twice. I have had very good
offers to keep cars, but not good enough to move to the next, new car.


My 2002 Audi has about 20K miles on it and in near perfect condition. I
could probably net a couple grand on it if I bought it and resold it.

jps

That means you either paid too much in depreciation during the course of
your lease or you paid a large "cap cost reduction" so the residual
value is higher. What you "net" on it in a sale would be a repayment to
yourself for overpayment. You will also pay sales tax on the residual
value since you never owned it in the first place. You would now be
buying it from the bank. That can be avoided if you trade it in.

As far as I can tell, leasing is a guessing game for the banks. They
have to guess what the car will be worth after a certain period of time
with a certain number of miles on the odometer.

I have also traded in a lease right before its expiration date and
picked up a grand, or so. I have traded in others that were essentially
a wash just to avoid the return hassle.

Dan

Fred Dehl wrote:

For the same reason I respond to Snipper...I want to see how big of an
asshole you really are.

Nice language for someone complaining about others being "foul-mouthed".

Here's a hint, idjit - we TYPE with our HANDS, we SPEAK with our MOUTHS.

Every village needs an idjit, and Harry is ours.

--
Skipper