TimeTraveler

Yes. There is a long answer and a short answer, the short answer is basically yes. The long answer you would want to hear from someone more versed in physics than I am, I might screw it up.

Your right, it probably shouldn't. Sorry mods, feel free to move it to the appropriate section.

June 20, 2004 Poker With Dick Cheney Transcript of The Editors' regular Saturday-night poker game with Dick Cheney, 6/19/04. Start tape at 12:32 AM. The Editors: We'll take three cards. Dick Cheney: Give me one. Sounds of cards being placed down, dealt, retrieved, and rearranged in hand. Non-commital noises, puffing of cigars. TE: Fifty bucks. DC: I'm in. Show 'em. TE: Two pair, sevens and fives. DC: Not good enough. TE: What do you have? DC: Better than that, that's for sure. Pay up. TE: Can you show us your cards? DC: Sure. One of them's a six. TE: You need to show all your cards. That's the way the game is played. Colin Powell: Ladies and gentlemen. We have accumulated overwhelming evidence that Mr. Cheney's poker hand is far, far better than two pair. Note this satellite photo, taken three minutes ago when The Editors went to get more chips. In it we clearly see the back sides of five playing cards, arranged in a poker hand. Defector reports have assured us that Mr. Cheney's hand was already well advanced at this stage. Later, Mr. Cheney drew only one card. Why only one card? Would a man without a strong hand choose only one card? We are absolutely convinced that Mr. Cheney has at least a full house. Tim Russert: Wow. Colin Powell really hit a homerun for the Administration right there. A very powerful performance. My dad played a lot of poker in World War 2, and he taught me many things about life. Read my book. TE: He's extremely good at Power Point. But we would like to see the cards, or else we can't really be sure he has anything to beat two pair. We don't think he would lie to us, but ... well, it is a very rich pot. Jonah Goldberg: Liberal critics of Mr. Cheney's poker hand contend that "he doesn't have anything". Oh, really, liberal critics? Cheney has already showed them the six of clubs, and yet these liberals persist in saying he has "nothing". Why do liberals consider the six of clubs to be "nothing"? Is it because the six of clubs is black? Matt Drudge: ****DRUDGE REPORT EXCLUSIVE**** *****MUST CREDIT THE DRUDGE REPORT***** The Drudge Report has learned that Dick Cheney has a royal flush, hearts. Developing ... TE: Perhaps if you could just show us a subset of your cards which beat 2 pair? Or tell us exactly what your hand is? DC: We will show you our cards after we have collected the pot. It is important that things be done in this order, otherwise the foundation of our entire poker game will be destroyed. TE: We aren't sure ... DC: Very good. And here are my cards. A straight flush. Judith Miller: Dick Cheney has revealed a straight flush, confirming his pre-collection claims about beating two pair. TE: Those cards are of different suits. It's not a flush. Mark Steyn: When will it end? Now liberal critics complain that Dick Cheney's cards are not all the same suit. Naturally, these are the same liberals who are always whining about a lack of diversity in higher education. It seems like segregation is OK with these liberals, as long as it damages Republicans. MD: ****DRUDGE REPORT EXCLUSIVE**** *****MUST CREDIT THE DRUDGE REPORT***** A witness has come forward claiming that The Editors engage in racial profiling in blog-linking. Developing ... TE: Wait! It's not even a straight! You've got a eight and ten of hearts, a six of clubs, and the seven and five of diamonds. You have a ten high. That's nothing. Sean Hannity: Well, well, well. In another sign of liberal desperation, liberals now complain that a ten high is "nothing". Does ten equal zero in liberal mathematics? That would explain a lot. Robert Novak: It's a perfectly valid poker hand. Apparently, liberals have never heard of a "skip straight". It's a kind of straight, just with one card missing. But if you skip around the missing nine, it's a straight. Alan Colmes: Mother says I mustn't play poker. TE: There is no such thing as a "skip straight". Brit Hume: It seems like some people are still playing poker like it's September 10th. Back then, you needed to have all your cards in order to claim a straight. But, as we learned on that day, sometimes you won't have perfect knowledge. Sometimes you have to learn to connect the dots, and see the patterns which are not visible to superficial analysis of the type favored by the CIA and the State Department. Dick Cheney's skip straight is a winning poker hand for the post-9/11 world. Rush Limbaugh: Do The Editors have two pairs, or a pair of twos? First they say one thing, then another. What are they hiding? Andrew Sullivan: Dick Cheney never said he had a straight. He was very careful about this. His cards can form many different hands. None of these hands alone can beat a pair of twos; but, taken together, the combination of all possible hands presents a more compelling case for taking the pot than simply screaming "Pair of twos! Pair of twos!" as unprincipled liberal critics of the Vice President so often do. MD: ****DRUDGE REPORT EXCLUSIVE**** *****MUST CREDIT THE DRUDGE REPORT***** Did The Editors claim to have "a pair of Jews"? Are they anti-Semites as well as racists? Developing ... Zell Miller: As a lifelong liberal Democrat, I believe Dick Cheney, and I hate liberals and Democrats. William Safire: Why are liberals so obsessed by Dick Cheney's poker hand? The pot has been taken, the deal is done. If liberals are upset that we are no longer playing by the Marquis of Queensbury patty-cake poker rules, they clearly lack the stomach to play poker in the post-September 11th environment. And why do they never complain about Saddam Hussein's poker playing, which was a thousand times worse? Christopher Hitchens: The Left won't be happy until the pot is divided up equally between Yassar Arafat, Osama bin Laden, and Hitler. Orwell would have seen this. Ann Coulter: Why do liberals object so strenuously to the idea of conservatives having a "straight"? Perhaps because it doesn't fit in with the radical homosexual/Islamist agenda they hold so dear? Report of the Bipartisan Commission on Poker Hands: There is no such thing as a "skip straight". DC: I have access to poker rules that the Commission doesn't, and so I know for a fact that the cards in my hand are all intimately connected. George W. Bush: Dick Cheney is telling the truth. I'm a nice man who would drink a beer with you. Vladimir Putin: I dealt Dick Cheney three aces and two kings. DC: My deal.

I think many may forget that the lower and lower-middle class is the backbone of this country. The construction workers, the rescue workers, the school teachers, the police officers, the volunteers, the Auto mechanics, the librarians, the super market employers, the sanitation workers, the postal service ect. I am a person who actually hates money (I might be alone in that) I only accept and make what I need to survive, anything more than that does not go to luxury (well maybe a little, but I don't over indulge) but instead goes to my children for medical or schooling needs, or college. I don't have medical insurance and I have some medical problems including MRSA staph infection. I cannot afford to get it treated because I do not have insurance, I do not make enough to afford a payment plan and I do not have someone I could borrow from. I am a college student, and due to government cuts my college does not have an insurance program for students any longer. Staph infection is something that is dangerous in a community, and I am not eligible for low cost or low income type assistance due to financial aid receipot to attend college. So I am stuck between a rock and a hard place. When I watch TV and see people who are overly rich, whos contributions to society does not outweigh mine, who have 7 cars, a 35 million dollar house, it makes me sad that this is the society we accept and live in. I am a volunteer, and a community oriented person. Once a week I take a few hours with my children and pick up garbage and litter on the side of the streets, my wife is a CNA we have spent the last 6 years taking care of people who do not have the ability to take care of themselves. We moved to LA to take care of her grandfather and mentaly disabled uncle after 2 years there her grandfather passed away and we decided to take permanant care of her uncle. Her family's other option was to put him in a home. They are very wealthy people, retired and spend all their time traveling, they do not have time to take care of him. I guess spending money is more important. We have been taking care of him ever since. We do get some compenation from state-funded government programs, but it barely covers the cost it takes to care for him, usually it costs us money to take care of him, but thats okay, im not complaining. Taking care of him and ensuring that he has a chance to pursue happiness is more important than money. He is like a 45 year old big kid, he collects comic books and is infatuated with super heroes, he has the ability to make everyone around him smile, no matter how bad of a day they might be having. He is a gift to the human race, he has a job kinda, he collects alluminum, cardboard and plastic from everyone in the neigborhood and off the sides of the streets and recycles it. Which helps the community and allows him to earn money to buy his toys and comic books. I agree with Phi when he implies that the rich need the poor and they tend to forget about the poor. It kinda disturbs me some that some people can depict the difference between rich and poor to statistics and stereotypes though. The wealthy can and do do alot to help their communities through donations and funding, but many don't. Many strive to earn and spend their money and think only of themselves, and pay no attention to those who do the things necessary to pave the way for the rich to make money. Like the old saying " I like being poor; it makes you remember what your friends and family are here for." (Heard it in a rap song ) Sorry to stray off topic, but I guess my point is, some people just are not interested in striving for wealth and material things, those people should not be punished for that.

I don't fully understand the proposal. Correct me where I am misinformed, because I keep hearing different stories. So instead of a national social security, our social security funds will instead go into a privitized account for each individual in which he or she maintains his or her own account based on what they personally pay into it? In turn those funds can be used a variety of different ways, they can be invested or saved or whatever, but we personally manage it?

Yeah, thats what I am thinking. We have, and still are, working very hard to get rid of discrimination. Why would we open the door for it. It sounds like backwords progress. Now if someone is unfit to perform the job duties required for some reason or another thats a different story. But I am very interested in hearing Blikes arguement since he says yes, I get the impression he wouldn't say yes unless he felt he had good reason too. I just can't think of what that reasoning might be. /Curious

Initially I would say no, but I need to hear the other side of the arguement as to why they should.

This is a report on the current state of the planet, its a very in depth look at our current situation from all difference aspects: Living Planet Report I have not read it in full yet, but I wanted to post it and get a discussion going.

I don't know about that, but that is what the Bush administration is about.

I stumbled upon this, it has some interesting stuff about the mysteries of Mars. http://www.xtl-ak.com/

Ophiolite, I found this hope it helps. As you are a geologist I hope you will share some insights on these. Very interesting. Star dunes on Mars

I am out of the loop on all of this, I recently just learned about Darfur. Could you help fill in some of the unknowns, it seems it is something that is ignored alot. Thanks. (probably better to put this in the Sudan Crisis thread though).

I am suprised this thread did not recieve more attention a few months ago when it was posted. I was going to start a thread but found this one on search so I will try to re-open the discussion about situations in Sudan, and other places throughout the world were attrocities are taking place. This is stuff that needs to be talked about and figured out by the international community. The UN in particular has no set definition on what constitutes genocide, I think it is a term more try to avoid than anything. We read about hitler or the holocaust, we think how horrible a period that was and wish something like that did not happen. It is still happening. These are people, human beings. They walk, they talk, they feel, they love, they eat, they care, they cry, they smile, they want, they need, they struggle, they learn, they know, they think, they laugh, they try, they work, they sleep, they nurture, they hope, they wish, they touch, they taste, they hurt and they wonder. They are just like you. They are not a number. I know you know that, but sometimes we need to be reminded. There is no excuse for inaction that is more important than stopping this.

Yep. I have actually considered switching my major to political science so maybe I can get into politics to add some honesty in the mix, then it dawned on me. You have to be a good liar to get elected, I wouldn't get far. *edit* But then I consider the words in my signature... I dunno there has to be some way to make a change.

Attrocities in Darfur (In Sudan, Africa) started prior to us engaging in Iraq. In the last two years recent estimates from two days ago indicate that as many as 700,000 people may have been killed and over 2 million have been displaced. Today the attrocities continue and we have failed to act. So while the Bush is running this campaign to "liberate Iraq" it is apparant his admin doesn't really care about the human factor. We liberated Iraq from Saddam. Not the Iraqi's from Saddam. Just recently have we even addressed the issue in Sudan and now we are once again facing the bickering inside the UN. The UN really needs to get it together and help these people.

Yeah I think Demo was asking not in arguement but asking because he was genuinly interested in Phi's opinion. Rumor has it the British government got this intel from an article in a British newspaper. It's nice to know that our partners in crime get their intelligence from the same place Bush does. 8 days after Bush's state of the union, Colin Powell pled his case to the UN for WMDs in Iraq. Afterwords he was asked why he made no mention of uranium from Africa, he replied: He obviously knew something the president did not, or vice versa... this is why: What did Condi Rice have to say about all this? In an interview with Meet the Press:

The complexity of politics causes much of the problem. The average person does not have the time to keep up. Especially when you have to try and wade through so much bullcrap to find the truth. Ya know in America it is a Federal Felony to intentionally mislead or distort information presented to congress. I wish this law was taken seriously. I think the problem is accusations of crimes against the Bush admin right now could possibly make the situation worse. Hopefully instead of the Carlyle group Bush is sitting next to Saddam in a 5 by 5 cell when his term is up. Anyone know about yellowcake?

Yeah, I read about that awhile back. Found this too.

I was going to ask the same thing. I don't see any way around it, I am taking an Anthropology/Arcaeology class and learning about all the different fossils of all the seperate species found in Africa. There is no "missing link" it makes perfect scientifical sense, evolution explains better than anything how we got here.

Phi for All, Great posts! I've been spending alot of time researching these issues, I came across this and thought it would add to your posts: Dick Cheney, Halliburton, and Wartime spoils We can't forget Condi Rice's former employer, was it Chevron? They even named an oil tanker after her: The Condoleeza Rice Do you have some information on the proposed oil pipeline? I want to learn more about it. No, no and no. I can dismiss nearly all of the evidence for WMDs, but the fact is the Bush admin. did get some of it right, however it was only a very small percent of their claims. Nothing has been discovered to lead anyone to the conclusion that Iraq posed as a (in the admin's words) "Grave threat" or "Imminent threat to the safety of all American's and countries in that region" or that (I love this one, Bush:)"Saddam Hussein is addicted to weapons of mass destruction." We found a few things, but that was not shocking. It was common knowledge Iraq had some remaining components from its WMD programs. But the Bush admin made some pretty drastic assessments saying Iraq had alot of stuff nobody knew about (including themselves obviously) with a long list of chemicals, equipment, structures, missles.... Very little panned out to be true, and no traces of any sort of removal from Iraq was detected. From evidence of what was found it would have taken years for them to put something together that exposed an "imminent threat." Provided they had a willingness to do so, but I don't think they would be that stupid. The connections to terrorism is hearsay. I know, I can't believe it either. These claims, (made by the Bush admin and described as "accurate intelligence" prior to the war) on testimony of a few guys, Iraqi's, apparently defectors from the Iraqi army. After which they were awarded $1 million for their "assistance." I cant prove these guys were lying but didn't anyone in the Bush admin question the fact that they might have been? The Bush admin. was pretty clear when it said it had accurate intelligence from many reliable sources. I do not call that accurate intelligence from reliable sources at all. And the last one, Saddam was a bad guy no one can really question that. Are you talking about a particular incident or just in general?

Actually, I do. But not by much, I think Kerry is a good guy, but I do not think he has what it takes to lead this country. But I don't think anyone could do worse than Bush. At this point I would feel better about our situation in the world if Mr. Bean was president. That method is flawed, we are doing it ourselves but not right.

Haha! That was good.

I agree with John5746, there is no need to be acting crazy. Both nations are acting a bit immature and need to stop using the media as a form of communication and buck up and work it out. When Bush says things to N Korea like "Axis of Evil" and "States like these" it's sounds hostile and disrespecting. Both parties need to stop acting childish and talk to each other, if NK wants one-on-one talks give it to them, on the pretenses that they will agree to meet for two one-on-one talks then re-join the 6-party talks. You have to at least open up an avenue for peace if you want to make any attempt to achieve it. Here is an interesting link I found, I have not had a chance to read it all only the first 2 pages, but I thought I would share it : Issue Brief to Congress regarding North Korea, 04-28-2003

The is not enough natural resources left on the planet to make this reality. Unless, humans can figure out how to gain a vast amount of resources outside of Earth in such a way that it doesn't cost us more resources than we would gain, as would be the case with our current technology. If that were to happen then there would be your answer to as what humans would do.