[privacy] Fuck Bush

[Gadi Evron]

Do I need to kick you both out?


On Thu, 20 Dec 2007, Brian Loe wrote:

> On Dec 19, 2007 5:09 PM, Dude VanWinkle <dudevanwinkle at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> "As reported by Science magazine, Congress has cut science funding
>> increases for fiscal year 2008. This comes in spite of the earlier
>> announced presidential initiative to increase funding for basic
>> research to improve the future economic competitiveness of the United
>> States. At best, funding increases are minor for some agencies such as
>> NIH and NIST. Other agencies received severe cutbacks, like the
>> Department of Energy Office of Science, which received $342 million
>> less than expected. In particular, despite previous international
>> commitments, funding for the ITER fusion reactor experiment is
>> completely cut off. The NOVA neutrino oscillation experiment at
>> Fermilab is also canceled, as well as R&D on the planned International
>> Linear Collider. The Fermilab operating budget is cut by almost 20%,
>> and may result in mass layoffs."
>>
>>
>> Brian: Would you still vote for him again (if given the option)?
>
>
>
> Because you have a reading dificulty I'll spell this out real slow:
>
> I have never voted for a Bush, not this and not the last one.
>
> As this piece states in the very first sentence of your quoted text and as
> required by the law of the land, the Constitution of the United States,
> CONGRESS is in charge of all budgets. The President, since I can't remember
> when, only offers a "suggested" budget. Since this President has been in
> office Congress has yet to pass his budget, preferring instead to pass
> LARGER budgets. With a democratic congress in office I would expect the
> budgets to be even LARGER with more LARGESS for the false victims of the
> world.
>
> Oh, and this specific piece of legislation was passed by your favorite
> liberals - as they control Congress these days.
>
> So, wold you still vote for them again (if given the option)?
>
> And where the hell is Gadi - privacy list was no less regarded so far as
> politics was concerned according to my last "political" post.
>