Originally Posted by Fishy

I've lurked on these forums from time to time, and I've read The Fourth Turning, of course. But you know, although I've intuitively felt we entered a 4T on or around the time of 9/11, I keep seeing crap like this:

A Boston hotel has a room just like Britney Spears's bedroom:
http://entertainment.msn.com/celebs/...px?news=164792

What the hell? Is this not evidence of still being stuck in 3T sensibilities? There seems to be so much evidence to go either way. Maybe this means we're still on the cusp. What do y'all think?

Fishy

Plenty of silliness can go on during a 4T. Study up on the Thirties, and the big fuss over the Dionne Quintuplets, Seabiscuit, miniature golfing, the abdication of King Edward VIII, etc...

Washinton Post: Bush Told the Truth

"Mr. Wilson chose to emphasize the latter point, that no deal was likely -- but that does not negate the one Mr. Bush made in his speech, which was that Iraq was looking for bomb material. This suggests another caution: Some of those who now fairly condemn the administration's "slam-dunk" approach to judging the intelligence about Iraq risk making the same error themselves. The failure to find significant stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons or an active nuclear program in Iraq has caused some war opponents to claim that Iraq was never much to worry about. The Niger story indicates otherwise. Like the reporting of postwar weapons investigator David Kay, it suggests that Saddam Hussein never gave up his intention to develop weapons of mass destruction and continued clandestine programs he would have accelerated when U.N. sanctions were lifted. No, the evidence is not conclusive. But neither did President Bush invent it."

Robots get bookish in libraries

Mixing robots and humans in an unstructured, uncontrolled environment, where there all manner of obstacles to negotiate, could have unpredictable results.


Professor Pobil thinks libraries are the best place to start introducing robots into public spaces, or at least to start showing that the technology is possible and works.


"A library is a semi-structured environment," Professor Pobil told BBC News Online.

:arrow: :arrow: :arrow:

Originally Posted by EventTranslator

Washinton Post: Bush Told the Truth

"Mr. Wilson chose to emphasize the latter point, that no deal was likely -- but that does not negate the one Mr. Bush made in his speech, which was that Iraq was looking for bomb material. This suggests another caution: Some of those who now fairly condemn the administration's "slam-dunk" approach to judging the intelligence about Iraq risk making the same error themselves. The failure to find significant stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons or an active nuclear program in Iraq has caused some war opponents to claim that Iraq was never much to worry about. The Niger story indicates otherwise. Like the reporting of postwar weapons investigator David Kay, it suggests that Saddam Hussein never gave up his intention to develop weapons of mass destruction and continued clandestine programs he would have accelerated when U.N. sanctions were lifted. No, the evidence is not conclusive. But neither did President Bush invent it."

We still haven't found out who outed his wife.
That's something I'd really like to know.
Got any answers for me, Troll?

Time Magazine's latest cover story is about fabulous Las Vegas.


http://www.klas-tv.com/Global/story....6&nav=168XOwdm

Very 3T.

Interesting that they are no longer catering to blue-haired ladies or families (A failed attempt to revitalize the city ). Instead the focus is on well-heeled Xers from L.A.

The new Las Vegas = The Great Gatsby's West Egg district of Long Island, a wealthy but unfashionable area populated by the new rich.

Originally Posted by Olaf Palme

Originally Posted by EventTranslator

Washinton Post: Bush Told the Truth

"Mr. Wilson chose to emphasize the latter point, that no deal was likely -- but that does not negate the one Mr. Bush made in his speech, which was that Iraq was looking for bomb material. This suggests another caution: Some of those who now fairly condemn the administration's "slam-dunk" approach to judging the intelligence about Iraq risk making the same error themselves. The failure to find significant stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons or an active nuclear program in Iraq has caused some war opponents to claim that Iraq was never much to worry about. The Niger story indicates otherwise. Like the reporting of postwar weapons investigator David Kay, it suggests that Saddam Hussein never gave up his intention to develop weapons of mass destruction and continued clandestine programs he would have accelerated when U.N. sanctions were lifted. No, the evidence is not conclusive. But neither did President Bush invent it."

We still haven't found out who outed his wife.
That's something I'd really like to know.
Got any answers for me, Troll?

The neoconic neo-fascists do not ever quit. As long as there are other humans on the face of the earth, the neoconics will treat them (and freely expend them) like objects in order to achieve their selfish personal desires. Their god is alive and well, ruling from hell as the Prince of this World.

Originally Posted by cbailey

Time Magazine's latest cover story is about fabulous Las Vegas.

Very 3T.

Interesting that they are no longer catering to blue-haired ladies or families (A failed attempt to revitalize the city ). Instead the focus is on well-heeled Xers from L.A.

The new Las Vegas = The Great Gatsby's West Egg district of Long Island, a wealthy but unfashionable area populated by the new rich.

The neoconic neo-fascists do not ever quit. As long as there are other humans on the face of the earth, the neoconics will treat them (and freely expend them) like objects in order to achieve their selfish personal desires. Their god is alive and well, ruling from hell as the Prince of this World.

Viva, Viva, Las Vegas! :wink:

BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Originally Posted by Virgil K. Saari

Robots get bookish in libraries

Mixing robots and humans in an unstructured, uncontrolled environment, where there all manner of obstacles to negotiate, could have unpredictable results.


Professor Pobil thinks libraries are the best place to start introducing robots into public spaces, or at least to start showing that the technology is possible and works.


"A library is a semi-structured environment," Professor Pobil told BBC News Online.

:arrow: :arrow: :arrow:

:lol: :lol:

I'd like to see one of those robots try to run a storytime, or a book discussion group, or answer a difficult reference question, or make reading suggestions, or make collection development decisions.

Originally Posted by Kiff 1961

Originally Posted by Virgil K. Saari

Robots get bookish in libraries

Mixing robots and humans in an unstructured, uncontrolled environment, where there all manner of obstacles to negotiate, could have unpredictable results.


Professor Pobil thinks libraries are the best place to start introducing robots into public spaces, or at least to start showing that the technology is possible and works.


"A library is a semi-structured environment," Professor Pobil told BBC News Online.

:arrow: :arrow: :arrow:

:lol: :lol:

I'd like to see one of those robots try to run a storytime, or a book discussion group, or answer a difficult reference question, or make reading suggestions, or make collection development decisions.

True, but think how great they'll be in the stacks!

And they do 'Quiet' really well.

Originally Posted by David '47 Redux

True, but think how great they'll be in the stacks!

As long as they don't lump any old book into "Biography" (or "Fiction" - a pet peeve of mine.)

And they do 'Quiet' really well.

If the noise level reaches a certain decibel level, a loud whistle will keep everyone quiet (for a while.) They could be programmed to zap ringing cell phones with a laser, too.

JCN: I don't think you want to take out that particular book, Dr. Bowman.

Bowman: It's what I need for my refrigeration project.

JCN: Why don't we go to the audio-visual side and get you a DVD on Eskimo culture, Dr. Bowman?

Bowman: I have to defrost my appliances.

JCN: Ms. Kiflie is busy at the moment, Dr. Bowman. I am informed by Ashcroft Central that you have no need for a book for that, Dr. Bowman.

Bowman: But its on the open stacks and was checked out by Dr. Poole.

JCN: I miss Dr. Poole, Dr. Bowman. I suppose he doesn't need to defrost things in Guantanamo, Dr. Bowman.

Bowman: I want that book.
JCN: Quiet, Dr. Bowman.

JCN: Hush, Dr. Bowman. There, there, a nice Caribbean vacation would be just the thing for a man with your stress levels, Dr. Bowman.

JCN: I ordered the plane tickets just now, Dr. Bowman. A car will meet you at Door 5E. I'll see that you get there in good order, Dr. Bowman. Your friends and family will be notified of this pleasant holiday in due course.

JCN: I hope this stun setting isn't too high, Dr. Bowman. Ms. Kiflie doesn't like to order cleanup robots during the day. And, I'll have to charge your credit card for the overdue fine on Generations, Dr. Bowman. Zzzzzzappp!!

ROTLFLMAO!!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

JCN!!!

Classic, Mr. Saari.

Originally Posted by Kiff 1961

This is big-time tinfoil hat stuff, but you never know. :shock:

Yes, Kiff, we do know. This is a the same old same old, by the same people who keep trying to spin the 2000 election as a coup or a trick.

Originally Posted by Kevin Parker '59

Originally Posted by William Jennings Bryan

Originally Posted by Kiff 1961

This is big-time tinfoil hat stuff, but you never know. :shock:

If the pre-election internal tracking polls and public opinion polls show the Kerry-Edwards ticket leading in key battleground states, the Bush team will begin to implement their plan to announce an imminent terrorist alert for the West Coast for November 2 sometime during the mid afternoon Pacific Standard Time. At 2:00 PST, the polls in Kentucky and Indiana will be one hour from closing (5:00 PM EST ? the polls close in Indiana and Kentucky at 6:00 PM EST). Exit polls in both states will be known to the Bush people by that time and if Kentucky (not likely Indiana) looks too close to call or leaning to Kerry-Edwards, the California plan will be implemented. A Bush problem in Kentucky at 6:00 PM EST would mean that problems could be expected in neighboring states and that plans to declare a state of emergency in California would begin in earnest at 3:00 PM PST.

Agreed it's a little tinfoilish, but not quite at Kathaksung's level. :wink:

It doesn't sound so tinfoilish to me. I can actually see such a scenario coming to pass. This time last month I'd have said it was crazy. But with this election postponement trial balloon sent up by Bush last week, It's obvious to me what is on his mind.

Kevin, the election won't be delayed, bar national disaster on an unprecedented scale. There won't even be any attempt at it.

The 'election delay' panic is in the same category as the 'FEMA will take control' theories about Clinton.

Originally Posted by HopefulCynic68

Kevin, the election won't be delayed, bar national disaster on an unprecedented scale. There won't even be any attempt at it.

I agree. But I also think that this is true precisely because a big stink was made in response to the trial balloon.

The 'election delay' panic is in the same category as the 'FEMA will take control' theories about Clinton.

Not quite. Clinton never expressed his intention to do anything hinting at such action. Bush did.

Chris:

Anything Bush says or does needs to be examined not only for its surface content but also for its implications. Naturally Bush is not going to just come out and say "If things are going bad for me politically, let's use a terrorist threat as an excuse to postpone the election until a more favorable time, or if things get REALLY bad, let's just cancel the election and impose martial law." But he is strongly suspected (for good reason) of being willing to do these things if he can get away with them; he has already demonstrated his royalist tendencies several times. Any move towards hanky-panky with the electoral process, however reasonable-sounding a justification can be put forward, is going to be viewed with suspicion no matter who proposes it, but especially from that quarter.

Personally I don't think he CAN get away with such things, but the negative response to Bush's proposal reassures me about that considerably. I would never put this past Bush. Thankfully, it looks like we can still put it past the American people.

Suppose for the sake of argument that Bush & Co. are in the White House a year from now-with at least a semblance of legitamacy. Would anybody care to speculate as to what they might do, or try to do?

Originally Posted by Tim Walker

Suppose for the sake of argument that Bush & Co. are in the White House a year from now-with at least a semblance of legitamacy. Would anybody care to speculate as to what they might do, or try to do?

Number 1 on the Bush list: Permanent and even deeper tax cuts, primarily for Bush's 'base'.

Number 2 on the Bush list: Complete the work of Tom Delay by making Washington a GOP-only town. Mostly, that will require a GOP-only K-Street.

Number 3 on the Bush list: Vacation, and let the 'base' finish the light work.

I would think war with Iran might be in the picture should that happen. Another reason we'd best make sure it doesn't.

Originally Posted by Tim Walker

Suppose for the sake of argument that Bush & Co. are in the White House a year from now-with at least a semblance of legitamacy. Would anybody care to speculate as to what they might do, or try to do?

Five Supreme Court Justices.

"In this sense, 9/11 has taught us that terrorism against American interests ?over there? should be regarded just as we regard terrorism against America ?over here.? In this same sense, the American homeland is the planet. But the enemy is not just ?terrorism,? some generic evil. This vagueness blurs the strategy. The catastrophic threat at this moment in history is more specific. It is the threat posed by Islamist terrorism ?especially the al Qaeda network, its affiliates, and its ideology.

"As we mentioned in chapter 2, Usama Bin Ladin and other Islamist terrorist leaders draw on a long tradition of extreme intolerance within one stream of Islam (a minority tradition), from at least Ibn Taimiyyah, through the founders of Wahhabism, through the Muslim Brotherhood, to Sayyid Qutb. That stream is motivated by religion and does not distinguish politics from religion, thus distorting both. It is further fed by grievances stressed by Bin Ladin and widely felt throughout the Muslim world?against the U.S. military presence in the Middle East, policies perceived as anti-Arab and anti-Muslim, and support of Israel. Bin Ladin and Islamist terrorists mean exactly what they say: to them America is the font of all evil, the ?head of the snake,? and it must be converted or destroyed.

"It is not a position with which Americans can bargain or negotiate. With it there is no common ground?not even respect for life?on which to begin a dialogue. It can only be destroyed or utterly isolated."

Note those last three words--"or utterly isolated." They just might be the most important words in the report. We are not going to survive the crisis intact if we don't give up the idea that we can remake the world according to our preferences.

David K '47

(who is now resigned to living out his days as the Boomer Charles A. Beard.)

Well, David, I also rather like this passage:

But the enemy is not just ?terrorism,? some generic evil. This vagueness blurs the strategy. The catastrophic threat at this moment in history is more specific. It is the threat posed by Islamist terrorism ?especially the al Qaeda network, its affiliates, and its ideology.

Note the contrast with the Bush administration's approach, in which identification of the enemy is deliberately kept as vague as possible so as to justify war against pretty much anyone they want.

Chris, you keep missing the point.

It doesn't matter whether Bush said or did anything. It doesn't matter that the suggestion came from the commission. All that matters is that the suggestion was put forward, and the public associated it with Bush -- and rejected it with great vigor and noise.

Bush cannot be trusted, that's the bottom line. He has already demonstrated his willingness to monkey with the electoral process. He has already demonstrated his contempt for civil liberties. Put the power to legally postpone an election in the hands of a man like that? No way! No way in Hell!

Luckily, thanks to this release, it isn't going to happen. You asked earlier why the left-leaning members of the Commission floated this notion. Perhaps they were being cagey, knowing the likely reaction, and wanted to send a signal to Bush via the public's outcry.