Making Baby Jesus Cry

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I find the middle photo disturbing. Can we please have it removed? Penske you can remove can't you? please Get that off- it offends me for some personal reasons.

Perhaps I should have posted the charred remains of the victims of the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire to give you a better segue.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
It is pretty common knowledge that Bush I had proof of clinton's affairs (photos) and was too classy to use them.

Query:

did Bush I screw up by not giving Osama the photos once it became clear Bill was going to win?

Postulate:
If Osama had possesion of the photos Bill would have had insentive to kill Osama. The survival rate for those in possesion of evidence of Bill's cheating is small.

Well said Hank. I agree.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
We'll remove images (or rather, edit to link to them) if they're not safe for work. Spanky assures me that no children will be harmed by the machinery in the middle picture, so it's work-safe. If Not Bob wants to show me some evidence that the machinery really wasn't safe for children, I'm willing to reconsider.

Not Bob posted them, not spanky.

I guess there the rub. When you guys show images of "bad results" of republican decisions we see at worse a guy with panties on his head. When we post the inevitable result of the fuzzy thinking dem decisions insisting on PC we use images of buildings with people jumping or school kids dead-

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Well said Hank. I agree.

There is a certain taxwonkish charm to watching Penske ketchup. The excitement builds as he gets closer and closer to joining the rest of us! I'm aquiver with anticipation.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Not Bob posted them, not spanky.

Boy, you have a mind like a steel trap. I'm not sure it's safe for work either.

[Nut Penske]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
with this being the exception to the rule, I don't converse with my socks.

I do nut do this either.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Boy, you have a mind like a steel trap. I'm not sure it's safe for work either.

Oh. By the way. Your saying someone else is dumb reminds me- can you link to your posts where you said the oil for food scandal was all trumped up. I want to make a list of the blogs you cited so I can remember to weight that into my analysis of your future posts.

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I dissent. SDI is part of national defence. National defence is something we all benefit equally from and which is difficult/impossible to pass to the marketplace to be allocated (other than via the exercise of our second amendment rights). There is an inherent and absolute market incentive to engage in R&D for diseases, including via stem cell, so I say let the market go at it. If there is a such a potential benefit for Alzhiemers patients, there should be a huge market incentive.

Your comments should be applied to all federally funded research. There is no reason to single out stem cell research for exclusion from federal funding, except for the religious beliefs regarding when human life starts.

Commercial interest in ES cell work is not particularly high compared to other areas of biotech, because it is far from a marketable product, requires licensing WARF patents, cuts off the company from federal money, etc.

Whereas the pure science interest is extremely high, and could provide a route to understanding many basic processes in development, including approaches for treatment of some untreatable degenerative diseases. Some of this research requires the creation of new ES cell lines, which is prohibited except by private funding.

But for the religious beliefs of the current administration, proposals for such work could be evaluated in the context of all ongoing research, and funded according to its merits.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
We'll remove images (or rather, edit to link to them) if they're not safe for work. Spanky assures me that no children will be harmed by the machinery in the middle picture, so it's work-safe. If Not Bob wants to show me some evidence that the machinery really wasn't safe for children, I'm willing to reconsider.

Ty, in fairness, what is or isnt work safe is a fluid concept. On one end of the scale, porn is probably bad (although there was an associate in my office whom I suspected of being a pornhound, even at work (hi [DELETED]!)), on the other end is photoshoppes of Gore. IN the middle is everything else, including charred bodies, which remain at issue. In my fictional reality.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Oh. By the way. Your saying someone else is dumb reminds me- can you link to your posts where you said the oil for food scandal was all trumped up. I want to make a list of the blogs you cited so I can remember to weight that into my analysis of your future posts.

I'm sorry that I didn't use emoticons or something of that sort to make it clear that my post about the work-safe machinery was in jest. I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. Don't be angry.

And I don't think I ever said the oil-for-food scandal was all trumped up. I have an easy time believing in the corruption of foreign governments. I believe I did suggest that our government knew that misdeeds were going on and chose to do nothing, tending to suggest that the outrage you hear now is, shall we say, politically inspired, and I also think I observed that Chalabi was making a lot of charges but not letting anyone see the evidence. I'm certainly prepared to believe that he didn't make it all up out of whole cloth.

Kofi Annan is waiving diplomatic immunity so people can be prosecuted. Not something you'd expect him to do if he thought he might be implicated, eh?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I'm sorry that I didn't use emoticons or something of that sort to make it clear that my post about the work-safe machinery was in jest. I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. Don't be angry.

And I don't think I ever said the oil-for-food scandal was all trumped up. I have an easy time believing in the corruption of foreign governments. I believe I did suggest that our government knew that misdeeds were going on and chose to do nothing, tending to suggest that the outrage you hear now is, shall we say, politically inspired, and I also think I observed that Chalabi was making a lot of charges but not letting anyone see the evidence. I'm certainly prepared to believe that he didn't make it all up out of whole cloth.

Kofi Annan is waiving diplomatic immunity so people can be prosecuted. Not something you'd expect him to do if he thought he might be implicated, eh?

someone else can waive your immunity? What the fuck good is it if you can't rely on it being there when you need it?

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Not Bob posted them, not spanky.

I guess there the rub. When you guys show images of "bad results" of republican decisions we see at worse a guy with panties on his head. When we post the inevitable result of the fuzzy thinking dem decisions insisting on PC we use images of buildings with people jumping or school kids dead-

This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. But hey, we're a free commerce of ideas kind of place, right?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I defer to RT on this stuff, since her little finger knows more about it than I do, but I thought Bush's policy was to prevent institutions which do stem cell research of certain types from receiving any federal funding at all.

I thought it was limiting federal funding of stem cell research to the lines in existence. Let's call lil Ron reagan. He knows.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Ty, in fairness, what is or isnt work safe is a fluid concept.

Fair enough. But the fact that something is offensive does not make it non-work-safe. E.g., doubtless you are deeply offended by that picture of a corpulent Teddy Kennedy hauling himself up a sailboat's ladder, and yet you have exercised your moderately-informed discretion to determine that it is safe for work before you posted it here. Indeed, you've done this repeatedly. And for that, sir, I applaud you.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
There is a certain taxwonkish charm to watching Penske ketchup.

Thanks!