Reptile & Amphibian Forums

I'll get you started. Here are two I found very amusing.

1) "How do you tell a goose, any goose, that he will be the last to die, for a photo op!" ----John Kerry.

2) On a bumper sticker, there is a picture of the democrats symbol, a donkey, with the following, "Prove you are a jackass, vote democrat!"

Rodney

I saw a similiar bumper sticker. It read: Vote Democrat, the ass you save may be your own. with a donkey pic of course.

And to be fair, one for bush: It read: Flush the Johns

EP
-----
Occupants not paying rent:
7 balls
2.1.10 corns(candy cane, creamsicle, ghost, 6 normal, 4 anery )
1 pueblan milk
1 everglades rat
1 cal. king
1 gray band king
1 w. hognose
1 bearded dragon
1 fish
1 mouse
3.3 cats

Some people were out with little small toilet seats and signs saying
"Vote Nader and flush your vote down the toilet"
-----
0.1 "Tremper" looking Albino Leopard gecko (Lex)
0.0.1 tiger crested gecko (peachs)
0.1 Red blood python (Rhianon)
0.0.1 ball pythons (FELIX!!!!!)
2.1 Feral cats that we adopted (Fuzzy, Bear, and Tony)

"scientia est vox"

ne tonight from David Kay was important I think. --

From: www,dailykos.com

"Fri Oct 29th, 2004 at 02:38:34 GMT

David Kay, Iraq weapons inspector for the Bush Administration, just appeared on CNN and was asked by Aaron Brown to review the new video filmed on April 18, 2003, one month after the invasion and 8 days after US Troops first arrived at Al Qaqaa.

He was asked about the video which shows the seal. He said that they are indeed IAEA seals and he's seen nothing else like them in IRAQ. He then went on to say that only the explosives in question would have been sealed because of their potency. He then said that other parts of the video show clearly that these were the types of explosives in question.

He was asked if it was "Game, Set, Match". He replied yes, "Game, Set, Match".

In a final blow to recent conservative spin he was asked if they were classified as WMD. He replied point blank, "absolutely not." "

This isn't a quip but a favorite:

I thought this photo was telling. Its real - I watched the video it came from. I think its amusing that Mr. Rove has re-created Bush as a christian. This video, taken in a TV studio in the late 90's makes one wonder about his assertions about his fundamentalism

Bush, talking to Blair about the French before the war: " The problem with the French is they don't have a word for entrepreneur"

Thats a side splitter.

Here's a great "quip"

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/al_qa_qaa-imagery4.htm
Favorite "quips"

I thought this political "quip" was cute too:

"Household survey sees 100,000 Iraqi deaths"

By EMMA ROSS
The Associated Press
10/28/2004, 12:37 p.m. PT

LONDON (AP) — A survey of deaths in Iraqi households estimates that as many as 100,000 more people may have died throughout the country in the 18 months since the U.S.-led invasion than would be expected based on the death rate before the war.

There is no official figure for the number of Iraqis killed since the conflict began, but some non-governmental estimates range from 10,000 to 30,000. As of Wednesday, 1,081 U.S. servicemen had been killed, according to the U.S. Defense Department.

The scientists who wrote the report concede that the data they based their projections on were of "limited precision," because the quality of the information depends on the accuracy of the household interviews used for the study. The interviewers were Iraqi, most of them doctors.

Designed and conducted by researchers at Johns Hopkins University, Columbia University and the Al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad, the study is being published Thursday on the Web site of The Lancet medical journal.

The survey indicated violence accounted for most of the extra deaths seen since the invasion, and airstrikes from coalition forces caused most of the violent deaths, the researchers wrote in the British-based journal.

"Most individuals reportedly killed by coalition forces were women and children," they said.

http://www.oregonlive.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/international-18/109898035254991.xml&storylist=oriraq

But even with all that, I have to love the quip about the Bush administration refusing to fund stem cell research. You know? There is nothing like a bunch of fundamentalists keeping MY tax dollars from going to research that will alleviate pain, suffering, misery and pre-mature death in MY family.

I just assumed the fundamentalist nuts imposing their fanaticism on the people would be limited to the Middle East. But I woke up one day and saw it affecting me, my family, and in this supposedly "free" country.

I guess its time to fight.

Bush is funding stem cell research. He is the first pres. ever to do so! He just isn't funding projects that kill "new" embryos and may possibly, eventually save someone. To a lot of people, killing embryos now in order to possibly save someone in the future doesn't make much ethical sense. Killing a few to save many makes sense, but we have no idea if anything will even come of this. (You make it sould like some cures are guaranteed, and it is really just a hope at this point.)

One of the best quotes I have heard on this subject. If you leave embryonic stem cells alone (don't experiment on them), they will become someone like Christopher Reeves!

Stem cell research isn't very promising. If it was, every research lab and drug company in the country would be spending every R and D dollar they had on it!! Think of the profits if they came up with something! Why don't they? Because it isn't very promising. Why waste tax dollars on something that isn't very promising when we have a deficit to pay down? Why should taxpayers fund research when we won't see any return on our investment? (If a cure for something is eventually found, think the govt. will charge the patients and give us a return on our tax dollar investment? not a chance!) Some company will make billions off our tax dollars spent on research, and that just isn't right. If they want the profits, they can pay for the research.----Hey now, that sounds more like capitalism than communism or socialism doesn't it!!

Rodney

If we depended exclusively on the private sector, than drugs for rare diseases would never be developed. Thats why we had a 500 million dollar campaign to release the ENTIRELY redundant drug Nexium.

Companies don't just respond to the market, to a greater and greater extent via all-pervasive advertising they make it. Private companies aren't leaping at stem-cell research because they would be competing with governments---ie, Israel, Britain, Switzerland, etc. who are doing all the hard work right now. They would rather wait for the initial investments to be made by public entities and they will step in to market them later. Embryonic stem cell research is going to happen whether we take part in it or not. We just won't reap the benefits, while other nations do. Good job Bush.

And he isn't the first to legalize it--Clinton had a back door policy and would have formally legalized stem cell research (had a proposal in the works) but ran out of time. Bush picked up his proposal, struck off the embryonic segment, and called it his own. To claim that he is the "first" is highly disingenuous.

But then again, if Faux News and National Review, with an occasional helping of Weekly Standard are you only sources, you are liable to be pretty misinformed anyway. I love you wacko right wing jokers--you never do you damn research. I read a lot of your BS publications, but I read a lot of others things too.

Be very afraid of the man with one book.

You are mixing up all kinds of different issues.

If we depended exclusively on the private sector, than drugs for rare diseases would never be developed. Thats why we had a 500 million dollar campaign to release the ENTIRELY redundant drug Nexium.

While this is true, what does this have to do with embryonic stem cell research? I thought all the proponents of this research have been claiming that it will help hundreds of millions of people because it may cure a number of extremely common diseases like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, etc. I have never heard anyone argue that the govt. should fund it because is may cure some very rare disease that corporations wouldn't spend money on.

Companies don't just respond to the market, to a greater and greater extent via all-pervasive advertising they make it.

Oh yes they do! Why do you think your previous statement (about the private sector not funding research for rare diseases) is true!

Private companies aren't leaping at stem-cell research because they would be competing with governments---ie, Israel, Britain, Switzerland, etc. who are doing all the hard work right now.

Also not true. Private companies are leaping at adult stem-cell research, it is just the embryonic stem-cell research that they are not leaping at because it isn't very promising. One of the reasons the are leaping at adult stem cell research is that there has been success in treating diseases with adult stem cells, while there has not been any success with embryonic stem cell research to date. In fact, scientists testified to congress during the Clinton administration as to this fact, but now that Bush is in office and an election is coming up, that fact is ignored.

Embryonic stem cell research is going to happen whether we take part in it or not.

Who said we aren't taking part in it? We are, but in a time when we have deficits due to the economic problems of the Clinton recession, 9/11, and the war on terror, now is not the time to run up additional deficits on something that may, or may not yield any results. Bush's funding of stem cell research is the main flaw in his administration in my opinion. (the other being illegal immigration and our boarders)

And he isn't the first to legalize it--Clinton had a back door policy and would have formally legalized stem cell research (had a proposal in the works) but ran out of time.

No one said it was illegal!!! I said that Bush was the first administration to fund it. Clinton didn't allow any federal funds to be spent on it, period. And to now criticize Bush because he is isn't doing enough, when in reality he is doing far more than any previous administration did, is very hypocritical. After all, the only thing people should be debating about this issue is the funding because that is the only thing that is affected.

To claim that he is the "first" is highly disingenuous.

Again, you are very confused. Federal funding and legalizing are not the same thing.

Be very afraid of the man with one book.

I'd have to disagree with that. Get yourself a dictionary, read it, and then I won't be the least bit afraid of you!!

Here's a good basic article on embryo vs. adult stem cell research.

http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/winter01/stem_cell.html

Rodney

An observation about the french and their military-"The French are always there when they need us."

Rodney