Palin bandwagoneers

[BlackHorse]

no its not all bushies fault...just a majority....check his closet for WMD's, theres intelligence that states such, but regardless, in his position he MUST be held accountable....youre very forgiving Blackie.....do admire the loyalty though....

 

 

Saturday, July 05, 2008

 

The removal of 550 metric tons of "yellowcake" — the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment — was a significant step toward closing the books on Saddam's nuclear legacy. It also brought relief to U.S. and Iraqi authorities who had worried the cache would reach insurgents or smugglers crossing to Iran to aid its nuclear ambitions.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,376747,00.html

 

I guess 550 tons worth of potential WMD doesn't count? Whatever. If you guys would bother to check your facts and keep up on current events you would save some of us a lot of screen space and scrolling time.

[Deanh]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,376747,00.html

 

I guess 550 tons worth of potential WMD doesn't count? Whatever. If you guys would bother to check your facts and keep up on current events you would save some of us a lot of screen space and scrolling time.

note the word POTENTIAL...being a little presumptious are we not, hey lets go get Sth Korea...they may have the POTENTIAL for Nuclear weapons, the IRAN...they definitely have the POTENTIAL, hey WE even have the POTENTIAL to catch Bin Ladennnnso far so good on that note....sure got POTENTIAL though( although with Saddam the assumption may have been perhaps deserved but the US acted like a bunch of gun touting cowboys led by none other than Yippe KI YAY himself)....mere bloated propoganda Blackie.....and last I looked seeds killed no-one....prefer sunflower myself....WMD was used as an excuse...THAT is a well known fact...something even Bushie professed to being bad intelligence...hmmm, thats the pot calling the kettle.....no wonder he is held in such high regard worldwide.....

Edited September 19, 2008 by Deanh

[BlackHorse]

Where did I say that it was all Geo W's fault? Please highlight the line.

 

BlackHorse, don't get me wrong, although it may seem that I am attacking you - I am not. But you do put out a great deal of miss-truths and almost verbatim repeats from those that I identified above. They are just doing their jobs - they get paid an awful amount of money to put their spin for the RNC on things. IF it ever gets announced that off-shore trusts will be heavily taxed/etc, RushL will freak-the-f**k-out. But if you for one instance think that what they say is accurate - it rarely is - or at the very least, it "isn't the whole story".

 

Without the rest of the story, you cannot really be objective (yourself). Try ordering that book from Amazon and for $17 + s/h you will get a good deal of the rest of the story. Not all of it. There really isn't all seeing- end of information - it's on on-going process. Once we stop learning, or closing off our minds, we become like a stagnant pond of water - polluted with algae (with ever decreasing oxygen and life). We need to absorb as much as we can - from all sources, if we want to even be close to having a clue whats going on. It (the book) won't make you want to commit suicide and/or transform yourself overnight into one of the gawd-awful liberals, but you will have a greater understanding of things.

 

Well, at least your list of networks that are allegedly "liberal biased" has dropped to two. . . so maybe this exchange is worth something.

 

Now let me tell you about CNN. . . . (just kidding)

 

Personally, I think that CNN is rapidly closing in on Fox with the hot babes. My favorite babe was Heidi, but now there's Robin, Kyra, Abbi . . .

 

You want to read a good book, try this one.

 

 

You keep on an on with this notion that I need to "open my mind" lol. "Don't be a stagnant pond of water Blackhorse." Very flowery, but I'm afraid you''ve missed the mark by a wide margin. It's not that I reject Liberalism because I've closed myself off to it. I've rejected it because I understand it. I understand it fully and I don't need to take in anymore of it to further understand it just as I don't need to hang out around the city dump to understand that trash stinks.

 

What do you think razor, I've got a McCain bumper sticker and a poster of Sarah Palin in my living room? That I think the Republicans are pure as the driven snow, incapable of doing wrong? I know, for instance, what George Bush did to get a stadium built for his Texas baseball team and frankly I think he's a disgusting piece of shit for doing it. I also know that when Steinbrenner did the same thing for the new Yankess stadium location that Giuliani's crooked ass was hip deep in it with him. I know that Ralph Regula, a republican, got the tax payers to foot the bill for a First Ladies Museum and then had his daughter hired to run the place. Ironically the Smithsonian covers much of the same material. Why do we need a First Ladies Mueseum? If Sarah Palin or Hillary ever get elected to President will their be a first husbands Museum? Who am I kidding of course there will, it's a perfect way to swindle more tax dollars.

 

So do not confuse my outright rejection of Liberal ideology as a rubber stamp for all things conservative. I will vote for John McCain to be sure because he and Sarah Palin share the most ideas in common with me as an American. Those being that I want to keep more of the money that I make, which won't happen under Barrack and I refuse to risk losing my 2nd Amendment right to firearms, which will happen under Barrack. He should change his slogan to

 

 

 

Socialism -- Change We Don't Need

Edited September 19, 2008 by BlackHorse

[Deanh]

You want to read a good book, try this one.

 

 

You keep on an on with this notion that I need to "open my mind" lol. "Don't be a stagnant pond of water Blackhorse." Very flowery, but I'm afraid you''ve missed the mark by a wide margin. It's not that I reject Liberalism because I've closed myself off to it. I've rejected it because I understand it. I understand it fully and I don't need to take in anymore of it to further understand it just as I don't need to hang out around the city dump to understand that trash stinks.

 

What do you think razor, I've got a McCain bumper sticker and a poster of Sarah Palin in my living room? That I think the Republicans are pure as the driven snow, incapable of doing wrong? I know, for instance, what George Bush did to get a stadium built for his Texas baseball team and frankly I think he's a disgusting piece of shit for doing it. I also know that when Steinbrenner did the same thing for the new Yankess stadium location that Giuliani's crooked ass was hip deep in it with him. I know that Ralph Regula, a republican, got the tax payers to foot the bill for a First Ladies Museum and then had his daughter hired to run the place. Ironically the Smithsonian covers much of the same material. Why do we need a First Ladies Mueseum? If Sarah Palin or Hillary ever get elected to President will their be a first husbands Museum? Who am I kidding of course there will, it's a perfect way to swindle more tax dollars.

 

So do not confuse my outright rejection of Liberal ideology as a rubber stamp for all things conservative. I will vote for John McCain to be sure because he and Sarah Palin share the most ideas in common with me as an American. Those being that I want to keep more of the money that I make, which won't happen under Barrack and I refuse to risk losing my 2nd Amendment right to firearms, which will happen under Barrack. He should change his slogan to

 

 

 

Socialism -- Change We Don't Need

admit it Blackie...you are a Republican at heart and always will be....case closed...don't hold it against you....may want to ease up on the inability to fathom others opinions with unbridled Republican flag waving though...ahhh, politics....gotta love ? hate it....elicits as much professed brianwashed expertise and relentlessly blind stubborness than just about any other subject.... and funnily enough not just here...people do/ will vote for "their" party irrespective of theri success/ failure.....one of lifes EVIL necessities.....maybe McCain and Obama could take turns...LOL!

[BlackHorse]

note the word POTENTIAL...being a little presumptious are we not, hey lets go get Sth Korea...they may have the POTENTIAL for Nuclear weapons, the IRAN...they definitely have the POTENTIAL, hey WE even have the POTENTIAL to catch Bin Ladennnnso far so good on that note....sure got POTENTIAL though( although with Saddam the assumption may have been perhaps deserved but the US acted like a bunch of gun touting cowboys led by none other than Yippe KI YAY himself)....mere bloated propoganda Blackie.....and last I looked seeds killed no-one....prefer sunflower myself....WMD was used as an excuse...THAT is a well known fact...something even Bushie professed to being bad intelligence...hmmm, thats the pot calling the kettle.....no wonder he is held in such high regard worldwide.....

 

I put the world potential in there because yellowcake in itself can not be considered a WMD, it needs refinement. Unlike some people around here I will not misreprensent the facts. Also I will type in complete and legible sentences unlike whatever that is that you prefer. Yes WMD was an excuse to go to war. I know it, you know it, who cares. We were still going and oh by the way there hasn't been another attack like 9-11 since then.

Edited September 19, 2008 by BlackHorse

[BlackHorse]

admit it Blackie...you are a Republican at heart and always will be....case closed...don't hold it against you....may want to ease up on the inability to fathom others opinions with unbridled Republican flag waving though...ahhh, politics....gotta love ? hate it....elicits as much professed brianwashed expertise and relentlessly blind stubborness than just about any other subject.... and funnily enough not just here...people do/ will vote for "their" party irrespective of theri success/ failure.....one of lifes EVIL necessities.....maybe McCain and Obama could take turns...LOL!

 

 

What can I say except, whatever. I'm not here to convince you.

[Deanh]

I put the world potential in there because yellowcake in itself can not be considered a WMD, it needs refinement. Unlike some people around here I will not misreprensent the facts. Also I will type in complete and legible sentences unlike whatever that is that you prefer. Yes WMD was an excuse to go to war. I know it, you know it, who cares. We were still going and oh by the way there hasn't been another attack like 9-11 since then.

Blackie...I can get some damn ammonia etc at the local....that gives me POTENTIAL....., he jumped the damn gun like a damn moron before he got all his facts straight...thats Georges MO. Its done, no going back now, just a blatantly worthless sacrifice of lives and taxpayers dollars...war is not cheap. Perhaps it WAS avoidable though....nothing mis-construed about that...pretty factual no?, not twisted in the least. aAnother fact....guess who subsidizes said war...hmmmmmm, just a matter of time before they start bleating about needing more money no? Oh, thats right, THATS already happened.....9-11 was tragic....but has nothing to do with Iraq....unless they were going to crop dust us with seeds.....9-11 made us beef up Home Security, shame it made us ( and the rest of the world ) wake up and take notice and the results are obvious for better or worse ( love seeing people bitch taking their shores off at the Airport ) Iraq had nothing to do with that although could be veiwed as a catalyst for the state of the mind taht decided to pull the trigger....and PS....put a uniform on if you wish to become a member of the grammar police...if not, please step down from the pedestal you obviously look down on others perceived intelligence from...you are better than that....

[Deanh]

What can I say except, whatever. I'm not here to convince you.

like I've said ...I'm on the fence watchin both sides...but I am NOT a fan as of now of the party responsible for the current mess...25 years I have NEVER seen this shambles.....

[BlackHorse]

Blackie...I can get some damn ammonia etc at the local....that gives me POTENTIAL....., he jumped the damn gun like a damn moron before he got all his facts straight...thats Georges MO.

 

Shoe, meet the other foot.

 

hey I don't doubt some do.....LOVE the angst in the comeback though...hit a nerve?..........

[Deanh]

Shoe, meet the other foot.

sorry...completely lost me there....relax man...you'll blow a damn vein.....

[BlackHorse]

sorry...completely lost me there....relax man...you'll blow a damn vein.....

 

You really didn't get that joke? Oh brother I'm wasting my time. You haven't the witts for this. What did I expect from someone who can't type a complete sentence? lol

[Deanh]

You really didn't get that joke? Oh brother I'm wasting my time. You haven't the witts for this. What did I expect from someone who can't type a complete sentence? lol

humour is subjective....and that was a joke?.....you have everyone here cracking up I'm sure :happy feet: but extremely glad you understand and humour yourself, a worthwhile trait for sure ......and gladly compare educations.....never pre-judge Blackie man..... :shades: THAT is NOT a good trait.....as for my typing prowess...hey Rome wasn't built in a day.....

Edited September 19, 2008 by Deanh

[RaZor]

You keep on an on with this notion that I need to "open my mind" lol. "Don't be a stagnant pond of water Blackhorse." Very flowery, but I'm afraid you''ve missed the mark by a wide margin. It's not that I reject Liberalism because I've closed myself off to it. I've rejected it because I understand it. I understand it fully and I don't need to take in anymore of it to further understand it just as I don't need to hang out around the city dump to understand that trash stinks.

What on earth gave you the idea that the Greenspan book has anything to do about liberalism? As has been said before, maybe you should begin to read posts (maybe if you should start to read them out loud - so that hearing yourself saying the words will help you to comprehend them) because a significant amount of the time your responses to others' posts are not even connected to what was posted (even when you quote the other's post), and/or clearly displays that you did not understand what was posted.Oh wait, McCain does that a lot too.

So do not confuse my outright rejection of Liberal ideology as a rubber stamp for all things conservative. I will vote for John McCain to be sure because he and Sarah Palin share the most ideas in common with me as an American. Those being that I want to keep more of the money that I make, which won't happen under Barrack and I refuse to risk losing my 2nd Amendment right to firearms, which will happen under Barrack. He should change his slogan to

Socialism -- Change We Don't Need

Well, you see there . . . there's another difference b/w you and me . . . I am an independent and although, in terms of taxes, I would personally fair MUCH better with McCain's expressed tax policy (although there is practically no economist that thinks that will be sustainable with the ramifications of recent events) than I would with Obama's tax plan (I am in the bracket that he wants to increase taxes) -- I will vote for what is good for the country -- not just what is good for me.

 

That tax policy hasn't worked for 28 years and it's like keeping spoiled milk in the frig, and keep going back taking drinks off of it - thinking that somehow -- just maybe - it has majically unspoiled itself. Sorry, I am too much a realist to fall for that. My personal opinion is that a person feels that he/she is not happy with his/her after-tax earnings, there are many methods of increasing one's income to a level that will negate the bitching about taxes. But then I concede that most of those would never stop bitching about having to pay taxes but still curse and swear every time that they hit a pot-hole in the road (and oftentimes and given the opportunity, get in line for any of the freebies paid out by gov't).

 

Obama's plan is NOT to take everybody's guns away from them - no one is going to loose their 2nd Amendment rights - where do you come up with this shit? Oh wait, you must be listening to some of those lying scare tactics again.

[Edstock]

I put the world potential in there because yellowcake in itself can not be considered a WMD, it needs refinement.

"it needs refinement". :hysterical:

 

Wow, what an over-simplification, sounds like you just heat the mess up, put it through a strainer or something; that'll git 'er done, alright, just like Texaco.

 

Yellowcake has to be chemically treated to separate the uranium, then the gaseous uranium is put into cascades of thousands of centrifuges to slowly separate U-235 from the much more abundant U-238. That sure is a lot of "refinement" requiring facilities that Saddam just didn't have.

[napfirst]

What on earth gave you the idea that the Greenspan book has anything to do about liberalism? As has been said before, maybe you should begin to read posts (maybe if you should start to read them out loud - so that hearing yourself saying the words will help you to comprehend them) because a significant amount of the time your responses to others' posts are not even connected to what was posted (even when you quote the other's post), and/or clearly displays that you did not understand what was posted.Oh wait, McCain does that a lot too.

 

Well, you see there . . . there's another difference b/w you and me . . . I am an independent and although, in terms of taxes, I would personally fair MUCH better with McCain's expressed tax policy (although there is practically no economist that thinks that will be sustainable with the ramifications of recent events) than I would with Obama's tax plan (I am in the bracket that he wants to increase taxes) -- I will vote for what is good for the country -- not just what is good for me.

 

That tax policy hasn't worked for 28 years and it's like keeping spoiled milk in the frig, and keep going back taking drinks off of it - thinking that somehow -- just maybe - it has majically unspoiled itself. Sorry, I am too much a realist to fall for that. My personal opinion is that a person feels that he/she is not happy with his/her after-tax earnings, there are many methods of increasing one's income to a level that will negate the bitching about taxes. But then I concede that most of those would never stop bitching about having to pay taxes but still curse and swear every time that they hit a pot-hole in the road (and oftentimes and given the opportunity, get in line for any of the freebies paid out by gov't).

 

Obama's plan is NOT to take everybody's guns away from them - no one is going to loose their 2nd Amendment rights - where do you come up with this shit? Oh wait, you must be listening to some of those lying scare tactics again.

You seem to be like most people that I know who are supporting obama.......you know little about him or what he represents......he says he supports the 2nd amendment, he says that because that's the politically expedient thing to say......but his actions are different.......in 2003 a man in Cook Co. who had purchased a gun legally in the 1980's, shot an intruder who was breaking into his home for the 2nd time..........however since a gun ban had been in effect since 1989, he was charged for shooting the intruder......the community got so enraged that the charges were eventually dropped.....during the next session the state senate/House passed a law to allow homeowners to protect themselves during a home invasion....it was passed 38-20, 86-25....but your guy obama was one of the 20 who voted against it......it went to the governor for signing and he vetoed it....it went back to the Senate/House and the veto was overridden....and again obama voted against the bill....but it was passed.....so tell me again how he supports the 2nd amendment......my Mother used to say as I'm many others have said...”actions speak louder than words”.....this is just one of many far left things he has done.....

[matthewq4b]

"it needs refinement". :hysterical:

 

Wow, what an over-simplification, sounds like you just heat the mess up, put it through a strainer or something; that'll git 'er done, alright, just like Texaco.

 

Yellowcake has to be chemically treated to separate the uranium, then the gaseous uranium is put into cascades of thousands of centrifuges to slowly separate U-235 from the much more abundant U-238. That sure is a lot of "refinement" requiring facilities that Saddam just didn't have.

 

 

By that definetion any nation with Uranium ore has the potential to build a nuke.

Yellowcake is little more than crushed raw Uranium ore. The ore is crushed and given an acid wash. Hell I could whip up a batch of yellow cake in my garage if I desired. All it would take is a trip up to northern Sask grab a truck load raw ore, an ore crusher And a vessel to acid wash it in.

 

It is unenriched Uranium. And is little value for any thing with out enrichment facilties it is not even hot enough for use in a dirty bomb.

 

Wording it as potential might be a bit of stretch. The "unrefined raw fisssonable material" required to make a WMD would be more correct. Cause with out the enrichment facilties there is no pontential for a nuke or even a dirty bomb.

 

Matthew

[BlackHorse]

By that definetion any nation with Uranium ore has the potential to build a nuke.

Yellowcake is little more than crushed raw Uranium ore. The ore is crushed and given an acid wash. Hell I could whip up a batch of yellow cake in my garage if I desired. All it would take is a trip up to northern Sask grab a truck load raw ore, an ore crusher And a vessel to acid wash it in.

 

It is unenriched Uranium. And is little value for any thing with out enrichment facilties it is not even hot enough for use in a dirty bomb.

 

Wording it as potential might be a bit of stretch. The "unrefined raw fisssonable material" required to make a WMD would be more correct. Cause with out the enrichment facilties there is no pontential for a nuke or even a dirty bomb.

 

Matthew

 

Thanks for trying to downplay the "potential" threat of yellowcake but frankly if it was as harmless as you try to make out they wouldn't have flown 550 tons of the stuff out of Irag as part of a top secret operation.

 

As for your "enrichment facilities". What is that? Another attempt to make it sound like it was just beyond the capability of Iraq to refine the stuff. Twisting the facts to fit your political agenda.

 

Yellowcake is refined using anhydrous hydrogen fluoride and fluorine gas, to form Uranium Hexafluoride. This is not a process that requires some super high tech space age facility and a bus load of Stephen Hawkings to get done. Uranium Hexaflouride is not that radioactive but it does have the nasty little habit of releasing some pretty nasty poisonous gas if it gets mixed with water. A terrorists dirt bomb dream come true. If Uranium Hexaflouride is further "refined" it will yield Uranium 238 and 235 which yes in fact can be used to make a nuclear bomb Captain fix it. Now that process is more technically difficult and weather or not Iraq had the ability or the facilities to carry that process out, I don't know. But I do know that the boys immediately east of Iraq have that ability.

 

So yes, when I said that yellowcake needs further "refinement" that is a correct and accurate statement. It's kind of like you're bitching because I said "If you want that car to run it's going to need gas." and you're mad because I didn't give you the step by step of how to pull into a gas station and operate the pump. Some things are just obvious and shouldn't need me to spell it out for you in great detail. But then this isn't really about my clear of clear definition of what "refinement" was necessary. It was just all about your pathetic agenda.

 

Ranger is right Edstock, you do nothing here but demagogue. I noticed that in your two definitions of you left the third one out because it demonstrates you perfectly and you know it. But don't worry, I'll post it for you.

 

3. to treat or manipulate (a political issue) in the manner of a demagogue; obscure or distort with emotionalism, prejudice, etc.

 

You are irrelevant.

Edited September 20, 2008 by BlackHorse

[BlackHorse]

Obama's plan is NOT to take everybody's guns away from them - no one is going to loose their 2nd Amendment rights - where do you come up with this shit? Oh wait, you must be listening to some of those lying scare tactics again.

 

You'll note that since I am quoting the end of your post I most likely read the whole post RaZor. It was all liberal BS as usual. Where do I come up with this shit? Gee how about ontheissues.org

 

Obama was being misleading when he denied that his handwriting had been on a document endorsing a state ban on the sale and possession of handguns in Illinois. Obama responded, "No, my writing wasn't on that particular questionnaire. As I said, I have never favored an all-out ban on handguns."

Actually, Obama's writing was on the 1996 document, which was filed when Obama was running for the Illinois state Senate. A Chicago nonprofit, Independent Voters of Illinois, had this question, and Obama took hard line:

 

35. Do you support state legislation to:

a. ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns? Yes.

b. ban assault weapons? Yes.

c. mandatory waiting periods and background checks? Yes.

 

He claims some staffer filled it out for him. Whatever. I notice he hasn't come out and said "no no, I think you have a right to those weapons." Also, how are we really suppose to take you serioulsy as a candidate for President of the United States when you have staffers filling out your points of view about the issue of gun control and the 2nd Amendment? It's not like we are talking about a poll on weather people should wear green St. Patricks Day.

 

2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month

Obama sought moderate gun control measures, such as a 2000 bill he cosponsored to limit handgun purchases to one per month (it did not pass). He voted against letting people violate local weapons bans in cases of self-defense, but also voted in2004 to let retired police officers carry concealed handguns.

 

Whenever asked about the issue his form letter response is always.

 

"I believe in the Second Amendment, and if you are a law-abiding gun owner you have nothing to fear from an Obama administration," Obama said. "This has been peddled again and again. Here's what I believe: The Second Amendment is an indvidual right. . . people have the right to bear arms. But I also believe there is nothing wrong with some common-sense gun safety measures."

 

But he never says what those "common sense measures" are. One mans common sense is another mans loss of rights and oppression. This is the same guy that supported the DC gun ban.

 

You can find all of this stuff if you would spend five minutes of your life researching Barrak instead of just being a flag waving, koolaid drinking lib.

[AAISkinsFan]

"it needs refinement". :hysterical:

 

Wow, what an over-simplification, sounds like you just heat the mess up, put it through a strainer or something; that'll git 'er done, alright, just like Texaco.

 

Yellowcake has to be chemically treated to separate the uranium, then the gaseous uranium is put into cascades of thousands of centrifuges to slowly separate U-235 from the much more abundant U-238. That sure is a lot of "refinement" requiring facilities that Saddam just didn't have.

 

You got that right! Then again an administration with a Political Pre-emptive strike agenda just might ignore those minor details. You know the old "smoking gun in the form of a mushroom cloud" rhetoric... :shades:

 

Tuwaitha and an adjacent research facility were well known for decades as the centerpiece of Saddam's nuclear efforts.

 

Israeli warplanes bombed a reactor project at the site in 1981. Later, U.N. inspectors documented and safeguarded the yellowcake, which had been stored in aging drums and containers since before the 1991 Gulf War. There was no evidence of any yellowcake dating from after 1991, the official said.

 

U.S. and Iraqi forces have guarded the 23,000-acre (9,300-hectare) site - surrounded by huge sand berms - following a wave of looting after Saddam's fall that included villagers toting away yellowcake storage barrels for use as drinking water cisterns.

 

Link

[RangerM]

Ranger is right Edstock, you do nothing here but demagogue. I noticed that in your two definitions of you left the third one out because it demonstrates you perfectly and you know it. But don't worry, I'll post it for you.

 

3. to treat or manipulate (a political issue) in the manner of a demagogue; obscure or distort with emotionalism, prejudice, etc.

 

You are irrelevant.

 

Perhaps a person's desire to demagogue hides a deep-seated prejudice in himself? Maybe he justifies his own prejudices by evoking prejudice in others. Or perhaps he needs conservatives' ire to push him to vote for Obama, otherwise his own prejudice will prevent him.

 

Link to article

Deep-seated racial misgivings could cost Barack Obama the White House if the election is close, according to an AP-Yahoo News poll that found one-third of white Democrats harbor negative views toward blacks—many calling them "lazy," "violent" or responsible for their own troubles.

 

Ouch.

Edited September 21, 2008 by RangerM

[Edstock]

It was just all about your pathetic agenda.

Gee, I thought it was about "refining"yellowcake, and not some "agenda" that exists in your mind. Anyway, "refining" it takes thousands of centriguges, arrayed in cascades. The machines are bitchy to make, because of the rpm's and the nature of the uranium being enriched. The point is, that approach takes years of time and large facilities (1000's of centrifuges, remember) and lots of electrical power. Then you have to make the physics package. Gun-type is simple, but you need something like 16Kg or 30 lb of U-235 because fission is not efficient. Implosion uses a lot less, especially with a tritium core and neutron "kindling", but it's a technical bitch to do, and fizzle-prone.

 

Ranger is right Edstock, you do nothing here but demagogue. I noticed that in your two definitions of you left the third one out because it demonstrates you perfectly and you know it. But don't worry, I'll post it for you.

You just don't quit do you? Lol.

 

Demagogs incite the crowd, "appealing" to "emotion" and "prejudice", to gain support and power, which is the object of the exercise of demagoguery. That's what you don't seem to understand. If I had presented that illustration to a bunch of feminists and Planned Parenthood types, and pointed out the clear and present Palin danger, then that would be demagoguery, and I indeed would be a demagog, trying to incite by "appealing" to "emotion" and "prejudice" — theirs, not yours. Capice?

 

As I mentioned before, what I did was provocation, not "appealing" to "emotion" and "prejudice", to gain support and power, because that's just silly.

 

There's no way that people with mind-sets like yours are going to change, but the topic was Palin, and the illustration was brilliant, and it afforded those of us who don't think the way you do, an opportunity to gain perspective of the nature and orientation of conservative mind-sets when challenged.

 

But if I'm a demagog to you, hey, fine by me, and thank-you!

[BlackHorse]

I'm sorry are you still talking Edstock? I couldn't hear you because I have my BS demagoguery filter on.

[Mark B. Morrow]

I'm sorry are you still talking Edstock? I couldn't hear you because I have my BS demagoguery filter on.

 

 

Now you are just acting like a jerk Blackhorse. If you can't say something constructive in support of your arguments, maybe it is time to stop typing.

[BlackHorse]

Now you are just acting like a jerk Blackhorse. If you can't say something constructive in support of your arguments, maybe it is time to stop typing.

 

Retype that, only supplant Edstocks name for mine and you'll be on to something. Also you calling someone else a jerk is laughable, really.

 

When he types something worth reading that isn't just a bunch of nonsense, he'll get a response. I don't think he's capable. Frankly niether are you.

[Mark B. Morrow]

Retype that, only supplant Edstocks name for mine and you'll be on to something. Also you calling someone else a jerk is laughable, really.

 

When he types something worth reading that isn't just a bunch of nonsense, he'll get a response. I don't think he's capable. Frankly niether are you.

 

 

I will give you a reply you can understand, Bite Me.