UConn James
-
Posts
8,873 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by UConn James
-
-
Not everyone can serve in the military, but I don't think playing Hurry-Up-And-Wait is the only contribution to society that merits financial aid. The people who receive Pell Grants are your future doctors, biologists, chemists, journalists, teachers, librarians, politicians (such as they are), business owners, middle managers, and every other occupation that helps this economy and society function efficiently. Make college less affordable and you'll soon see the GDP lower and the economy and your life not function as well as it could. The federal gov't realizes this; that's why it's funded.
Same thing here w/ UConn 2000 and 21st Century UConn. You have to put money in to get money out. And right now, it's paying dividends for the state.
-
I don't think those were her "last" words. Or maybe they were. He goes to tell her that he's going to run for president. People have said things like that to me more times than you'd know. It's powerful b/c it was intended to be; she felt that integrity was the most important value for a president.
I just lost a lot of respect for your opinions, BiB. I can't believe you're panning a dead woman whose advice was to live and act with integrity. Talk about the divisiveness and Say Anything in how we're making policy in this country. More like outright hatred of anyone who doesn't agree with you, b/c you're obviously the most important and smartest person in the history of the world.
-
Illinois State U. student newspaper -- 26 April 2004
As students begin receiving their financial aid award letters, many are seeing the affects of the proposed shortage in federal Pell Grant funding."The problem with the Pell Grant is that they always authorize an amount of money for grants, but how much actually goes out depends on the budget," Assistant Director of Financial Aid David Krueger said.
This growing problem has been felt across the country, with many national newspapers reporting the shortage in the millions of dollars.
"The problem is that the amount of money given out has stayed steady while tuition and fees have steadily gone up," Krueger said.
"It's not like they are going backwards, it's just always how it has been," he added.
The year after Bush entered office, my Pell Grant went from $1,600/year to $0. The family financial situation did not change appreciably. Informal questioning at the time, almost everyone I asked said they were getting less or none at all.
Tuition bills and ancillary costs of college are already sky-high w/o losing sources of funds. No Child Left Behind, indeed.
Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining, Mr. Bush.
-
-
The old theory that suicide bombers are uneducated aloof loners is being disproven. More and more, they are coming from the middle of the society, and disenfranchisement may be their leading impetus to join the fight.
The question I have for your logic is that since you acknowledge a major problem facing the future of an average Arab, what is your solution? Do you honestly think that sitting down with the despots and laying out the untenable situation they're facing is going to make them implement reforms?
Or do we twist in the wreckage of blzrul's convoluted logic where forcing a change of civilization is obviously wrong, but so are Saud's moves to continue curtailing women's rights?
Please, I've been asking for this answer for over a year now. If you don't agree with the neocon strategy of taking the fight to the Mid East, forcing a change in the region, and stabilizing the supply of one of the (if not the) biggest underpinnings of the global economy - what's the REALISTIC alternative?
Well, I'm not being paid to come up with a realistic solution and I don't have the resources they have, so I have no concrete answer. Go ahead and spout off the "See, you don't have answers" line. But I know enough to see when the problem is being made worse both in the current time and for the future, and the neocons have no concrete answer either, other than a level of war and occupation that we're too overstretched to take much further. I think the No. 1 step would begin by becoming energy independent at more than the snail's pace b/c the administration lets the monolpolistic domestic oil companies stonewall alternative energy for the simple fact that they don't have a monopoly on it too. Forcing the MidEast to adapt their economy to something other than profit-rich oil would go some of the way toward the end. Necessity is the mother of invention.
As for those who will still flock to AQ, you can't invade and topple every country that has a few AQ cells. And if you think Iraqis aren't going to do what they're going to do, namely become an Islamic theocracy worse than Saddam, or start a civil war five seconds after we pull out of there (be it next week or 50 years from now) you're kidding yourself! Thinking you're going to solve it with military might isn't necessarily the answer. Didn't work for the Romans, won't work for us. Giving a :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: to the world and invading other countries at will, will come back to bite us in the ass. That's guaranteed.
-
I don't know what kind of research you did, but that is blatantly false. NIH funding, in the last year reports were available, said that ASC research gets ~$150 million in funding, vs. ~$17 million for ESC. That's the same funding?
Researchers who have labs that receive federal funding cannot do testing with ESC lines created after August 2001 (that does not have mouse cells mixed in) in those same labs, with those same microscopes, those same petri dishes, those same assistants. They literally need to buy different microscopes, lab space, etc. to do the research. Those are the same research conditions? 
That's like trying to compete in a marathon with your feet tied together.Sorry, I just don't agree with you here. I agree with GW on this and agree with him on Creation as opposed to evolution and in no way do my beliefs ignore science. Its too big a subject to get into here though.I think you've said quite enough right there. You can base your life and actions on a book of fiction written 2,000 years ago (written quite well, and some based on historical evidence, I admit. A lot written in parables and metaphor that too many people take literally). We all know how Islam has progressed being tied to the same thing. I don't advise replying to this paragraph b/c you're not going to influence me. I basically agree with the teachings w/o deifying the teacher. You have your beliefs, I have mine.
I apologize, you did not say you support abortion. You did however say that "Bush has seen this issue through the lens of the abortion issue" and my point was simply that if anyone is seeing it through the abortion issue it is people like John Kerry. GW has scientific facts and successes to back him up - Kerry has potential and hope. But he does know giving in on this issue is a slip and gives ground to the pro-life side.I don't see anything about my perspective that is not optimistic toward the future.
Somehow, I give him more credit than that. The issue is saving lives by ethically using the technology you're given. There are many differences and nuances b/w stem cells and abortion, scientifically and morally, that can stand the test of Candidate A saying Candidate B is giving up his or her beliefs. X is not Y.
-
The economic malaise within the region makes for easier recruitment, and fuels propoganda. It is still not the root cause of the current "movement". People need to understand that there are goals and strategies here. They may be horrible to our sensibilities, but they are sound strategies. AQ may be nuts, but they are not stupid. They are extremely well organized, have learned to live and work within the cyberspace domain and are careful patient planners. Their operations security pretty well puts most developed nations to shame.
The "no hope for the future" may be germaine to local uprising, but has little to nothing to do with the grand scheme. Once again, I mention moderate governments becoming the norm. There is more of a chance of individual success within a modernized moderate system than from within a totalitarian regime. Do not confuse the Palestinian situation with the overall pan-Islamic movement. Although there was financing and support given to Arafat from Iraq, the two are not related other than a mutual hatred of Israel.
Anyway, that is not the current problem. The current movement IS primarily ideologically-religious based, with a comprehensive global strategy designed to get their way.
'Scuse, but doesn't AQ go breasts-up when their recruiting pool dries up? I guess this is where we fundamentally disagree. I believe it is economics, which is rooted in human behavior and choice, that is the root problem. The opportunity cost of blowing oneself up looks pretty crappy when you've got a good, productive job and a family who doesn't see their children as a liability and another mouth to feed. AQ and the like simply cloud it all through Islam and social values. I know they're stupid, but I don't think even their minions believe we're fighting them b/c they eat dogs or wipe with their left hands....
-
And BTW, destroyed the US's credibility for ever again saying "X is a dangerous regime/group that is developing WMD" w/o having to show them classified material to get them to accept it.
Since this is a global war, why is our leader lying or not admitting that it was wrong about the WMD and that it won't happen again. I'm not a fan of Saddam, but that's not the point. They're not addressing that the Intel was wrong, and instead are providing a litany of excuses, one after another, as to why it was proper, after the fact. What about Iran, where the leader is democratically elected? We can't exactly invade there to provide them a democracy. Good luck forming a broad coalition for when there isn't a dictator wearing a funny hat. Either way, the days are gone when other countries could take what we say at face value. That is yet another reason why we need someone else.
-
I never argued that the benefits of ASC aren't great news in preventing diseases, but as rosy a picture as you try to paint, there are limitations on it. So, your main argument is that ESC haven't been proven to be effective. Well, no stevestojan, when it's not given much funding to do the early research. ASC have been used for quite a bit longer than ESC, I'm WELL aware of that. There were problems back when they were first developed that they've worked to correct. The same can be done for ESCs if you give researchers the time and some funding and not place hurdles in the way. I suppose the Romans could have continued to build with wood and never developed concrete b/c before it was it wasn't PROVEN to work. It took people to say, 'Hey this concrete might be really good for underground foundations...' You're saying let's always just go with what we've got now, and not try to develop things that could work better. It's called attacking from multiple fronts. The speech in August 2001 was a big sign to researchers and biology students, that it wouldn't be worth their time to work with ESC b/c of red tape.
Bush has a a fundamental problem with accepting science and the application of it to policy. Global Warming, to him, isn't a problem despite melting ice caps, rising CO2 in the air and oceans (which will eventually kill off sea life). Evolution is bunk to him despite archaelogical, skeletal, carbon-dating, DNA, etc. evidence. Science is about collecting data and making logical conclusions based on the facts, something his administration hasn't been very good at all around.
"In science it often happens that scientists say, "You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken," and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion."
WTF! Effing READ the posts before you respond! I never said I support abortion. I said they're different issues -- and most Americans agree. I support life and finding ways to cure diseases that kill millions! There's too much political BS here.
I can't really fault Kerry for his answer b/c the debates give you 90 seconds to talk about it. Same as all of the other simplistic responses both sides need to give.
I've looked into this from both sides, because to be honest with you, a couple years ago I didn't know anything about the issue. I continue to research it now, becuase it makes me angry that people are ignoring scientific facts. Do I have to state all my credentials so I don't get an idiotic response like this?Ditto for me, except I'm something of an optimist and I think in broader terms and with an eye toward the future.
-
(Note: The editing feature is best used for quick corrections)
If you really believe in fundamentally defining this as a religious war, then you are confusing the root causes of terrorism much as saying that Christian fundamentalism was the cause of the Oklahoma City bombing.
The problem is economic, and skewed through the kalidescope of Islam. Mix a harsh economic climate with the West (albeit, slowly) developing technology that will make your sole source of income from your lone natural resource obsolete in the forseeable future. Mix in unemployed young men, who face pressures of self-doubt who then run to a extreme branch of religion that will help them feel empowered again. Why do you think mothers and siblings are pushing their sons to die for the cause? It's the same as families pushing their children out of the house at 18 in this country to make it on their own. But there's few avenues to success there, which after long enough leads to thoughts of suicide in a certain segment. Then you get a group that takes advantage of that segment and makes it a quest they'll be rewarded for chillin' next to Allah. Like Hamas, they probably provide some food, a little money. And the weak minds accept this (I don't know how much of this "ultimate reward" they really believe versus just going along w/ the religious crap b/c they want to fight). An offshoot of a stevestojanny economy is little education. The best thing we could do in Iraq, if it is to succeed long-term, is to put a lot of money into the schools and universities and try somehow to influence the curriculum to math, science, economics, civil engineering, etc.
They need to establish jobs and commerce in these regions rather than begging for foreign aid/handouts and the control of the oil supply by governments. Stop hacking at the branches. Strike the root!
-
Is this the only response you ever give!!? If I had my nephew counting how many times you've used that exact line, he'd have to take off his shoes and open his fly....
Sorry, but your one-liner put-downs don't prove anything other than your propensity to use ad hom attacks to 'prove' your point. Just like how you've moved from Flip-flopper to Liberal and next week I'm fully expecting Bush to call Kerry a Martian. But I guess when you can't win on the issues, you go with whatever you can grasp at.
What "borders on dangerous"? I think it's dangerous how this admin doesn't listen to what they don't want to hear, how they remove anyone who dissents in a crowd. Worked for NASA, tho....
On Edit: How nice of you to ellucidate more than the one-liner.
-
And it will also be interesting to see if the election has to be decided by the Supreme Court again, rather than allow a routine recount for results <1% apart.
Back on topic, tho, maybe if someone other than Bush were president, those other countries would increase their involvement in the coalition rather than offering a hundred troops and a box of duct tape. Sorry to be so cynical, but it's all about the money that comes thru the contracts. Open them up a little and you'd be surprised at how many countries would then become interested in helping out in Iraq.
-
Because that's the "gay cancer"?
AIDS doesn't discriminate.
And I added some to the previous post. (Edit feature is nice for when you forget a couple-few sentences.)
BTW, it's not like stem cell research breaks the bank. Federal funding in 2003 was about $17 million for embryonic stem cells, about $150 million for adult stem cells. I met someone whose cancer was beaten w/ ASC, who said the doctors were even more excited about what ESC could do for treatments. This is a drop in the ocean for the govt, and for the research it produces, it's well worth it. The biggest part of Bush's directive, tho is just the physical place and equipment where researchers can do their testing. As it stands, if they get ANY federal funding for their other work, they have to literally set up and work in another lab to work on lines created after August 2001 -- the ones that weren't grown w/ mouse cells as starters.
-
Mmm. And in Article II, every time it gives details to the Office of the President and uses the third person, the Framers used "he." So, I guess only a man can be president then? (On edit: This might not be such a bad idea...
) I also don't remember reading about them funding paved roads, but the government did that too, b/c it promotes capitalism.I see medical research, and indeed, medical care as a situation of national security. Especially in this day and age with SARS, cancer, AIDS, SIDS, premature birth, etc. We lose how many people to disease and sickness every year? Flu kills 36,000 annually, when we have vaccine -- how many will die this year b/c our domestic pham. companies don't think there's enough of a profit in it? People who could live to make valuble contributions or grow up to be our future doctors, soldiers, bankers, firefighters.... A country's population represents, in essence, how many people they have to fight and produce for their country. Our population growth rate has declined rather steadily while other parts of the world has increased exponentially. By having better health care and conducting ethically guided research, we can save millions of lives. And yes, there are many scientists who are absolutely amazed with what stem cells can do, and this is the early phases of the technology. It's not pie-in-the-sky theory. AD, I'll take your oft-mantra and say, Yeah YOU know where best to spend the money. How about a day when AIDS in this country gets to proportions like Africa or China? It's about diversification of resources. There's successful treatments for cancer; so far there's no cure for AIDS.... That's how it works. We've done missile defense, multi-lateral talks, (had) UN weapons inspectors, foreign aid to North Korea in response to their nukes. We bank on the hope that one or all of them will work.
But people do want $1 trillion to be spent on this missile defense.... I don't personally agree with abortion either but maybe you should rethink calling yourselves "pro-LIFE."
-
Thanks for the science lesson Mr. Wizard. And yes I am disgusted with in-vitro. Choosing one life over another in my opinion is not right. So they can't have children, maybe it wasn't meant to be. With all the children in this country that would give anything to be adopted into a loving family there should be no reason to have to do this. My wife had a boss who did this and 5 children, yes children, were conceived but they kept only two. The others, if they had been given a chance could have grown up to be President some day.
One of my cousins had quadruplets and now is probably changing diapers 24/7. You can't stop people like your wife's boss from being irresponsible a-holes. But I'm not going to stop people from doing something just because there is the possibility of situations like that b/c a select few are idiots. Just like you don't take away everyone's gun b/c someone robs a bank. Is eating chicken eggs disgusting? Do you want everyone to stop doing that? Because what if they had been fertilized? That could have been a chicken that you just ate!
If you're disgusted by in-vitro (which simply gives the process of life an assist), don't look up photos of in-body conception.... The human body is a pretty ugly and beautiful thing at the same time.
-
Well, then I guess you're disgusted by in-vitro fertilization. Until you're one of the many couples who needs to use it to conceive a child.
Sorry. That's the science. They take a lot of eggs, they take the sperm, mix it together and many embryos are formed. The doctor selects several that appear the most viable and implants them. A lot of the embryos are not viable, a lot of them are really weird-looking. They freeze or destroy the rest.
It's the body human. Double U, Tee, Eff?
-
Bump.
(This one's for you, Rich.
) -
And swede, if you don't follow the link, embryonic stem cells aren't derived by embryos that will or could be viable. They come from leftover embryos from in-vitro fertilization that wouldn't ever be used, and eventually destroyed anyway. This is a seperate issue from abortion, tho some people like to mislead others to think it isn't.
And no, stem cell research wouldn't have helped Mr. Reeve in time. That's not what he was fighting for. He was fighting to push the research ahead so cures might eventually be found. Cures for diseases you may someday have. Funny how, like the Reagans, your opinions change when it hits home. Spending seven years of his life, a lot of his own money, for something he wouldn't even benefit from? How dare you people disrespect him with your crap!
Nice how you didn't want to respond to that thread b/c the facts suck for you. Had to start your own and push that one down the line.....
-
I never said that fear is cowering-inducing. In fact, fear often results in action, albeit lashing-out action that serves no purpose other than to try to show others you're not afraid. The worst being full of passionate intensity, and all....
And like I said and you, and others, caught up in v.2004, pay no attention to is that terrorism has been going on forever. Newton's Second Law of Thermodynamics, applied to the grand scheme: chaos and disorder is the nature of the universe. Define the war and what "victory" means, but it's all for naught, b/c you're NEVER going to stop chaos. The way it's going, you can only live with it and try to adapt efficiently. Then the enemy will adapt, then we'll adapt, on and on.... "There are a thousand hacking at the branch of evil to one who is striking at the root." -- Thoreau. You and others probably will not like this, but fighting against OBL and his minions is not what is going to ultimately win the WoT. There are always new minions to take over. What drives young men to kill and be killed for their cause? I'm a cynical bastard, so I say it is all about economics and resources. Politics and religion are just sideshows that try to de-emphasize that the message is about material wealth. Strike the root!
Uhh, Iraq and the WoT are two different topics? News to me! So, I guess the above might be the approach to the broad WoT. But for the mess in Iraq, I'll add that adapting efficiently is something this administration refuses to do, with its "steadfastness" and "staying the course." Have you seen the Tony Robbins infomercial where he says, "You can have all the drive and determination in the world, but when you keep running headfirst into the wall, you need to come up with a better strategy!!" Simplistic and yet so many people don't get this.
-
Why? There's no guarantee that a first rounder is going to play anywhere near their cap number.
Look at it this way: You have a choice between the 4th pick in the draft and Takeo Spikes. Which do you pick? The known commodity or the "ain't worth a damn yet" prospect?
I understand that some first rounders work out. However, that number is somewhere around 33%. When you look at what a top 10 pick costs against the cap, it's pretty much a no brainer to trade down for multiple picks and use the savings on veteran talent.
Okay, black is white. Up is down. I find myself in agreement with AD about something.
Why would anyone want a Top 10 pick? It's a great way to %$&* your salary cap, whether the player is any good or not, which many times the player's production isn't near what you expected. Take MW, for example. We have a large tub of lard playing matador to DL league-wide, and for this, we paid out a huge contract.
Get out of the top 10 and the salaries go down exponentially. That's the reason why so many teams want to trade down every year, and why so few do. It takes a really ballsy GM or a Sure Thing to do so. If Dallas gets that high a draft pick next year, I'm not going to lambaste the move. We paid a lot less of a contract for a player who's got just as good a chance to be an effective starter.
Back on topic, using a 2nd rounder on Nugent is as good a pick as anybody. And, like Detox says, you get a kicker who's used to the snow and cold weather, and who can kick 68-yarders to boot. That's something I could get used to after watching Lindell make exuses every time he has a critical miss. (And with league scoring, EVERY miss or kick-not-taken is critical.)
-
-
You know, I'm reading this thread and thinking What's the point? Terrorism has been around in one form or other since the days of the cavemen. The Huns one day, Al Queda the next. Same thing throughout human history. There is no way to stop it so long as one group of people hates another; some type of weapon will be used to make a psychological impact/promote fear in the Other.
Go ahead and waste your breath, time, money and stamina thinking it can be stopped and debating what the definition of "victory" is. Keep living and reacting with fear; you screw up a lot when you do that.
-
I was looking for a link to this on the Forum listing page a while back and couldn't find it. Figured it got kiboshed w/ the new server.... Just like everything else, you can't find it when you really need it!
And BTW. I was wrong about the O not being able to score 10 points. Good thing I didn't take the bet. Even tho when my cousin called when it was 14-13, I predicted exactly what was going to happen, right down to the INT.
-
Actually, I'm not even a "leftie" but I stay away from these types of topics because I refuse to have a battle of wits with unarmed people.
My Dying Mother
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
Let me first say I am truly sorry for your loss. It obviously must not be easy for you or anyone who loses a loved one. But I'm not a person who believes that by invoking that someone close to you died, somehow gives you an excuse to write the response you gave last night that was deleted by the mods and that you have re-produced here this morning in an attempt to get a reaction out of me in like kind. You'll not get it.
I do not deign to tell Mr. Kerry how to remember, talk about, and take on with him the memory and words of his mother. You lambaste him for showing his sentiment, and then you do the self-same above. I don't think the worst of you for doing so. Bob Sheffer asked a personal question about the women in the candidates' lives and the impact that they've had. It was obviously an important and enduring comment that he shared with us. I'm not going to dispute that those were among her last words; I wasn't there.
As I PM'ed AD last night:
"I love this country, but it's sad to see that AQ never imagined how effective they were at throwing a monkey wrench into the very heart of our democracy, which comes in the respect we have for each other as citizens with our own opinions. Little did they know (or maybe they did) the effect it'd have on splitting us from within."
I come here in search of a rational discussion of PPP, and I only see more and more personal attacks of a one-line response of 'You don't know what you're talking about,' calling someone a "Whore" or F-bombs simply b/c there's a disagreement. It crosses the line of civil debate, and I lose respect for people who resort to it.
The ad hom attacks need to stop. Take care.