The Command Post
2004 US Presidential Election
December 09, 2003
Dean | Gore, Dean Plotted Endorsement in Secret

From Newsday:

* * *

Joe Trippi [Dean's campaign manager] said he got wind that something was up Sunday when Dean ordered his staff to charter planes for Iowa. When he asked Dean what was going on, the boss said, "I can't tell you."

Trippi said he had a feeling Gore's endorsement was the big secret, but he didn't find out for sure until late Sunday night or Monday.

He said the courtship began in September 2002, when Gore gave a speech denouncing President Bush's position on Iraq. He said the address stiffened Dean's opposition, and the former Vermont governor praised Gore in conversations some time after the address.

The pair had several talks in the next 15 months, with Dean peppering Gore about foreign policy. In the last six months, they talked to each other every two weeks, mostly by phone.

About a month ago, Gore and Dean met privately in Tennessee for about 90 minutes. In deference to Gore's penchant for secrecy, Trippi didn't mention the meeting when he met a top Gore adviser, Roy Neel, later in the day.

In recent days, Dean sent Gore a draft of a foreign-policy speech he plans to deliver Monday in California. Gore took it with him on a trip to Tokyo.

When Dean took the call from Gore, he expected another session in which the former vice president would offer advice and suggestions. Instead, he offered his support.

"I've decided I want to endorse you," Gore told Dean, according to Trippi. The former vice president suggested they go to Iowa, site of his 2000 caucus victory over Bill Bradley.

They didn't see each other until moments before Tuesday's announcement in Harlem. They hugged and shook hands, their alliance no longer a secret.

* * *

More links for this story are available at nikita demosthenes.



Posted by nikita demosthenes at December 9, 2003 02:14 PM | TrackBack
Comments

Wow, the ‘man that invented the internet’ gives his ringing endorsement…AND, more amazing…Bean considers it a GOOD THING!

I am just surprised that he didn’t wait until AFTER the elections as is his modus operandi.
(see link below!)

http://www.gargaro.com/primetimeal.html

Posted by: American_Defender2003 at December 9, 2003 02:46 PM

From Joe Lieberman:

This is a quote from a Loyal and Decent
man who has been screwed by his so-called
friend. He is telling the truth about Dean and
Gore when he talks about what Dean is against.

Gore has proven that he has “no character
and no values”. What does that tell us about
Dean?

“What really bothers me is that Al is supporting
a candidate who is so fundamentally opposed
to the basic transformation that Bill Clinton
(news - web sites) brought to the Democratic
Party in 1992,” Lieberman said in an interview
on NBC “Today” show, referring to the partnership
Gore had as vice president to President Clinton
(news - web sites) for eight years.

“Clinton made our party once again fiscally
responsible, pro-growth, strong on values for
middle class tax cuts. Howard Dean is against
all of those,” Lieberman said.

Posted by: leaddog2 at December 9, 2003 03:02 PM

Joey Lieberman……….don’t worry. Everything they say when they are politic’n doesn’t mean anything. They just say what they think their followers want to hear that day. It all goes away the day they are elected….which ain’t gonna happen in this case anyway. A lot of worrying for nothin’.

Posted by: Jeff B at December 9, 2003 04:01 PM

Dear Stupid a/k/a American_Defender2003:

RE: your quote that Gore is “the ‘man that invented the internet’ “

Al Gores actual comment in a March 1999 interview with Wolf Blitzer, was “During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet.”

A well justified comment since he spent his efforts in the senate and as vice president to push legistlation turning Arpanet into the internet we all use today. He never claimed he invented it, that was a Bush lie and a Republican lie which apparently appeals to gullible fools like you.

In the meantime you may remember Al Gore from such events as oh, winning the popular vote in 2000 including apparently, in Fla.

As for your quote LEaddog- can we get a link to that? Some legitimate news organization perhaps?

In the meantime lets conclude with some actual quotes regarding Gore and the internet:

According to Vincent Cerf, a senior vice president with MCI Worldcom who’s been called the Father of the Internet, “The Internet would not be where it is in the United States without the strong support given to it and related research areas by the Vice President in his current role and in his earlier role as Senator.”

The inventor of the Mosaic Browser, Marc Andreesen, credits Gore with making his work possible. He received a federal grant through Gore’s High Performance Computing Act. The University of Pennsylvania’s Dave Ferber says that without Gore the Internet “would not be where it is today.”

Joseph E. Traub, a computer science professor at Columbia University, claims that Gore “was perhaps the first political leader to grasp the importance of networking the country. Could we perhaps see an end to cheap shots from politicians and pundits about inventing the Internet?”

fin

Posted by: AnyoneButBush2004 at December 9, 2003 05:19 PM

Bush 2004,

Get off your Florida 2000 horse, schmuck. Gore never had any recount victories, all laws were followed. He lost and looked bad doing it.

Deal with it.

Posted by: jones at December 9, 2003 05:29 PM

Jones: sure, except for the one in florida law that said candidates are allowed to have a recount….and our national nightmare of peace and prosperity was quickly ended….

Posted by: AnyoneButBush2004 at December 9, 2003 11:06 PM

LOL.. Gore’s stupid mistake was he tied to recount only counties he thought would give him the edge. The fool should have called for a recount of the entire State. That made he look like the whiney crybaby he is.

Even after the newspapers got their hands on the ballots and did a recount… he STILL LOST! Florida went Republican.

Get over it.

Posted by: TexasGal at December 9, 2003 11:15 PM

Final Florida recount favors Bush
http://idsnews.com/print.php?id=7024

Posted by: TexasGal at December 9, 2003 11:21 PM

a. He got more recounts than the law allowed.
b.SCOFLA ignored the words “Will certify” to delay certification so he could cherry pick a recount
c. he still lost.

d. Your line stolen from the Onion is lame. Peace- We were attacked. Prosperity, How can Bush start a recession before he was even elected.

Get some original material and stop sniveling about Gore losing.

Posted by: jones at December 10, 2003 07:32 AM

This is great for Dean in the short term, in the long term he might just have thrown another gallon of gasoline on the imminent democratic implosion.

Here’s a thought, what if Lieberman decides not to support Dean after the primary and throws his endorsement to Bush? That would be an absolute democratic nightmare: Bush gains some innoculation against the Florida nonsense by gaining Liebermans validation, moderate swing voters have a spokesman (Bush democrats?), and most importantly this could very well push the Jewish vote the final step over the ledge to republicans. Dean will have to fight to will places like New York, while Florida becomes a virtual Bush lock. This scenario could very well sweep democrats completely out of power in Congress, give Bush 45-50 states, and Republicans a filibuster proof Senate.
This could go down as the biggest blunder in democratic history (thats saying something), all because Al Gore couldnt be bothered to pick up the phone.

Posted by: Mark Buehner at December 10, 2003 10:01 AM

Posted by AnyoneButBush2004 at December 9, 2003 05:19 PM
Dear Stupid a/k/a American_Defender2003:

RE: your quote that Gore is “the ‘man that invented the internet’ “

Al Gores actual comment in a March 1999 interview with Wolf Blitzer, was “During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet.”

A well justified comment since he spent his efforts in the senate and as vice president to push legistlation turning Arpanet into the internet we all use today. He never claimed he invented it, that was a Bush lie and a Republican lie which apparently appeals to gullible fools like you.

In the meantime you may remember Al Gore from such events as oh, winning the popular vote in 2000 including apparently, in Fla.

Dear AnyButtwhatever…

PLEASE. First, you illiterate sheep I am well aware of the exact quote! Regardless, “the Internet” had been “in existence” since THE EARLY 70’s (ACTUALLY in 1969!)! Let’s see Al Gore was FIRST elected to Congress in 1976…hmmm, must be more of that “liberal math”. “A well justified comment…” PLEASE!!! Would you care to provide links to this “invaluable contribution” through legislation made by Gore!?!? [Please ensure that they include the pertinent DATES as well.] MAYBE you are referring to the “near genius” landmark legislation that was proposed by Gore to give income tax credits to the poor for laptops…[HINT: the poor DON’T PAY INCOME TAXES!!!] I guess that to follow YOUR moronic logic, the fact that legislation was passed in 1993 for the ISS (International Space Station), that he can take credit for THAT program as well (BTW- it began in ~1984!)!

Second, even saying that “he took the initiative in CREATING the Internet” is still pretty humorous at best since the Internet was already created and being used INTERNATIONALLY (see UUCP protocol) by the time he was first elected to Congress. One cannot take the “initiative” to “create” something which had already been created!

FYI, Arpanet (Advanced Research Projects Agency Network -ARPANET) was a product of the U.S. Department of Defense and ACTUALLY began in 1957! Further, by 1975 the first email program had ALREADY been created by Steve Walker (see MsgGroup) and by 1983 TCP/IP became the “standard” migrating away from NCP. BUTT, I am certain that you were already aware of these “little facts” as you are ‘so enlightened’!

In the meantime I will CONTINUE to remember the boy blunder as the idiot he was with additional gems such as these!:

“I worked with a 14-inch pipe wrench for years and a coal shovel.” Adding that he since has added a computer keyboard to the list of tools he can now use. “Gore smiled and admitted that he, too, has trouble turning on a computer - let alone using one.”
(Source: “Gore Touts Job-Training Programs at Pittsburgh Factory” Associated Press September 4, 1998)

In the spring 1998 - Gore called The Washington Post’s executive editor to tip him off on an ”error” in the paper. ”I decided I just had to call because you’ve printed a picture of the Earth upside down on the front page of the paper,” Gore said.
(Source: Florida Times Union 4/3/98

“A zebra does not change its spots.” - Al Gore, attacking President George Bush in 1992.

“We can build a collective civic space large enough for all our separate identities, that we can be e pluribus unum — out of one, many.” (Al Gore January 1994. From a Milwaukee speech to the Institute of World Affairs as quoted in Investor’s Business Daily, October 25, 1996)

“Who ARE these people??” Al Gore asking who the busts of our Founding Fathers are at Monticello before the Inauguration

OR, how ‘bout THIS gem…just in time for Christmas!:

“Speaking from my own religious tradition in this Christmas season, 2,000 years ago a homeless woman gave birth to a homeless child in a manger because the inn was full.” (Al Gore Press Conference at HUD, 12/22/97; George Will column, Sunday May 17 1998)

NOW, dip$hit…WHO EXACTLY IS GULLIBLE…you ignorant sheep?!?

BTW- the ONLY reason that he “MIGHT” have won the popular vote (REGARDLESS, he STILL LOST THE ELECTION!!!) is that we (the right) were complacent and thought that SURELY this idiot would not even come CLOSE! Don’t worry…it will NEVER happen again!!!!!

Posted by: American_Defender2003 at December 10, 2003 10:17 AM

Oh hey, ABB04
Don’t you think you’re a little sensitive to people playing a little loose with quotes? I mean, aren’t you one of the crowd that suggest lied when he said “imminent threat” (when was that again…?). the whole business with the 16 words? You’re just a useless hypocrite.

Still, it’s a meaningless endorsement by alGore. Dean will/would have probably won the nomination without alGore’s approval. Voters for alGore had about a 1 in a thousand chance of not voting for the democratic nominee in the general election, anyway. It just reminds the rest of us to get out to vote for our own guy.

Posted by: AnybodyButDean2004 at December 10, 2003 10:47 AM

Typical liberal (idiotic!) response! When presented with FACT, resort to “feelings” and sensationalism…if that doesn’t work just change the subject and/or ad hominem attacks!!!

BTW- I have NO idea what you are referring too…PLEASE enlighten us again.

(and you are STILL an ignorant sheep!)

Posted by: American_Defender2003 at December 10, 2003 10:59 AM

Ooops…

Sorry, ABD04...my disdain was intended for ABB04 and I jumped too quickly!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Many, many apologies…(THEY are still an ignorant sheep! :)

Posted by: American_Defender2003 at December 10, 2003 11:01 AM

//Here’s a thought, what if Lieberman decides not to support Dean after the primary and throws his endorsement to Bush? //

I think it’s highly likely! I think Gore just cut the final thread that was holding the center and the left of the Democratic Party together.

The Democratic Party is in real trouble. Here we have Hillary last week trying to prop up the center of the Party and now, this week Gore tilts the Party to the far left.

Yep, Lieberman just might decide that the best way to rebuild the Party is from its ashes.

Posted by: TexasGal at December 10, 2003 12:34 PM

And about Florida

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/lott200312100915.asp

Posted by: jones at December 10, 2003 03:50 PM

As I indicated in my first post, Arpanet, which I mentioned, was already in existence in 1989, when Gore introduced the National High-Performance Computer Technology Act and the phrase “internet” started being used in 93-94 as a consequence. And your trying to parse it to somehow minimize Gores contribution is delusional as a host of tech people who were actually involved at the time have attested…

second, the 16 words in the SOTU- still a lie stupid, becouse you cant “learn” anyting thats not true!

third- Houston Chronicle, “Statewide Fla. recount might have won presidency for Gore.”

fourth- No Bush didnt use the phrase “imminent”
what he did say (they basis for the imminent claim) was:

Wow. So this is how the right operates. You put imminent in quotes so bush didnt actually have to say it. Just so we’re clear ‘imminent threat’ is a charachterization of his statements. Statements like these (all bush quotes):

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/11/20021105-1.html
Saddam Hussein is a man who told the world he wouldn’t have weapons of mass destruction, but he’s got them. … he’s a threat.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030316-3.html
The dictator of Iraq and his weapons of mass destruction are a threat to the security of free nations. He is a danger to his neighbors.
Saddam Hussein has a history of mass murder. He possesses the weapons of mass murder.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030315.html
The chemical attack on Halabja — just one of 40 targeted at Iraq’s own people — provided a glimpse of the crimes Saddam Hussein is willing to commit, and the kind of threat he now presents to the entire world.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030317-7.html
Recognizing the threat to our country, the United States Congress voted overwhelmingly last year to support the use of force against Iraq. America tried to work with the United Nations to address this threat because we wanted to resolve the issue peacefully.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/02/20030213-4.html
This country will not accept a serious and mounting threat to our nation, our people, and our friends and allies.

Fifth- your giving me qoutes where Gore is fumbling a little with his statement? Have you actually listened to Bush speak without notes?

Posted by: AnyonebutBush2004 at December 10, 2003 06:07 PM

Bush 2004.

Ha ha ha ha ha .

Thats all the time I can waste on you.

Posted by: jones at December 10, 2003 06:48 PM

I have more time. Here is an article on Clinton’s economy.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105346,00.html

Posted by: jones at December 10, 2003 08:35 PM

Jones:
OH and here is the problem with relying on Fox news…-the’re wrong. Sometimes they lie. Othertimes the’re wrong.
If we look at the actual numbers from the official .gov site:
http://www.bea.gov/bea/newsrel/gdpnewsrelease.htm
For those of you who cant be bothered Jones points to an article saying the GDP went negative in Q3 2000. Looking at the official .gov numbers can see that fox news is wrong.

Remember the good old days when we were arguing about how to spend the surplus. Who was the president back then- oh right Clinton…with the help of who was that again? Oh right Gore….

Posted by: AnyonebutBush2004 at December 10, 2003 09:56 PM

Anyone, by your rational Gore characterized the threat as immenent as well didnt he?

“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country. “

Al Gore Sept 23, 2002
http://www.gwu.edu/~action/2004/gore/gore092302sp.html

“”Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power”
http://slate.msn.com/id/2071500/

Oh, and lets not forget Clinton

“Their mission is to attack Iraq’s nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors,” said Clinton. “
http://www.cnn.com/US/9812/16/clinton.iraq.speech/
Dec 16, 1998

“But if we leave Iraq with chemical and biological weapons, after 12 years of defiance, there is a considerable risk that one day these weapons will fall into the wrong hands and put many more lives at risk than will be lost in overthrowing Saddam. “
March 18, 2003

So logically you can either conclude that Gore and Clinton (by the standard you hold Bush to) cited Iraq as an imminent threat, or that they were simply lying. Which is it?

Posted by: Mark Buehner at December 11, 2003 10:12 AM

Posted by AnyonebutBush2004 at December 10, 2003 06:07 PM
As I indicated in my first post, Arpanet, which I mentioned, was already in existence in 1989, when Gore introduced the National High-Performance Computer Technology Act and the phrase “internet” started being used in 93-94 as a consequence. And your trying to parse it to somehow minimize Gores contribution is delusional…

second, the 16 words in the SOTU- still a lie stupid, becouse you cant “learn” anyting thats not true…

Fifth- your giving me qoutes where Gore is fumbling a little with his statement? Have you actually listened to Bush speak without notes?

AnyoneASS2004,

LOL! Keep digging…your ignorance is only eclipsed by your delusional prospective and/or delusional arrogance. Just like Gore “invented” the term “Information Superhighway” attributing it to his fathers work in creating REAL super-highways many years prior…only he later admitted that they STOLE the term elsewhere.

FYI once again…on your FIRST non-point:
“Prophetically, Licklider nicknamed the group of computer specialists he gathered the ‘Intergalactic Network’.” (ARPA draft, III-7)…HENCE the term Internet came into existence.

It was FURTHER propagated when the idea of open-architecture networking was first introduced by Bob Kahn shortly after having arrived at DARPA in 1972. This work was originally part of the packet radio program, but subsequently became a separate program in its own right. At the time, the program was called “Internetting”.
Further, you idiotic carp…by 1976 (note: the year the Gore first joined Congress!) the TCP/IP [BTW-IP FYI MEANS Internet Protocol!] and THERFORE it was a word that was readily used LONG before your ridiculous assertion of 1993-1994.
IN FACT:
The Internet Activities Board (IAB) was created in 1983.

In 1989, the World Wide Web (WWW) was developed by physicists at CERN (the European Laboratory for Particle Physics) in Switzerland.

Last but certainly NOT least, I guess that THIS bill [Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (15 U.S.C. 3710a(d)(1))] had nothing to do with “taking the initiative to create the internet” either huh?! Curiously, I do NOT see Al Gore as a sponsor…huh stupid.

As to point #2 (or more so, LACK THERE OF!)
FIRST AND FOREMOST, the DEFINITION of a “lie” is: an assertion of something known or believed by the speaker to be untrue with intent to deceive. This means that one must KNOW that a statement is false and portray it as otherwise. THEREFORE, since #1- it is STILL not absolutely determinable that it even WAS erroneous. #2- You, nor any OTHER mental lackeys can show that there was knowledge of NOR intent to deceive! IN ADDITION, to follow your assertion, I guess no one “LEARNED” (prior to the age of enlightenment) that the Earth was FLAT, huh stupid?!?
Would you like ADDITIONAL examples… illustrating your “brilliant statement”?!?

And FINALLY that brings us to the gem of them ALL your fifth “point”:

[Preface: What I find humorous (AND delusional!) is the fact that GORE’s original statement ALSO just happened to be SIXTEEN WORDS, yet ignorant sheep such as you seem to get your panties in a wad when they are taken even SLIGHTLY out of context (Out of context OR NOT…it remains a ridiculous assertion, if not a BOLD FACE LIE!!)!!!]

“FUMBLING A LITTLE”…ROFLMAO!!! You mean like saying that the “Dark Horse” President that he most admired was “President James Knox”…sorry, he wasn’t IN my history books! FURTHER, the “World is upside down” WAS NOT part of some speech (WHICH indecently, I do not know of MANY public speakers that do NOT use notes of some kind! Maybe a public speaking course might help diminish your ignorance on THIS subject as well!)…NOR was it part of a planned speech when Gore started calling members of his constituency on “Super Tuesday”…only problem, Tennessee doesn’t HAVE Super-Tuesday!!!

So, any additional NON-points you care to make?!? PLEASE, amaze us more with your brilliance! BTW- It has been said: “It is FAR better to remain silent and have people think you dense, than to OPEN YOUR MOUTH and remove ALL DOUBT!”

Posted by: American_Defender2003 at December 11, 2003 01:22 PM

Bush 2004,

I looked and did not see. I am no accountant, but I did see these figures were from November 25. Show me some new figures and a note where to look and when they were updated.

Posted by: jones at December 11, 2003 01:36 PM

http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/newsrel/2003cr_newsrelease.htm

This is more recent and meshes with FOX.

Watch out for Freemasons, Bush2004.

Posted by: jones at December 11, 2003 01:56 PM

I looked at all those white house quotes from Bush 2004 and hmmmmm….. I’m not sure what’s there to disagree with.

Posted by: johnnymozart at December 11, 2003 04:23 PM

“Halliburton”.

That’s considered a paragraph in certain circles.

Posted by: Mark Buehner at December 11, 2003 05:39 PM

Anyone who is willing to reward a lunatic suicide bomber’s family with a shitload of cash is definitely an imminent threat.

Glad ole Saddam is no longer holding court.

Posted by: Declan at December 11, 2003 05:47 PM

Bush 2004,

The WaPo just ran the same story as FOX.

You said of FOX:

“Sometimes they lie. Othertimes the’re wrong.”

Which were you?

Please CC me a copy of the apology you send Roger Ailes.

Posted by: jones at December 11, 2003 05:53 PM

Well looks like I goofed!

1st- BEA revised its numbers this year going back to 1929. (according to the the most recent BEA site here) Apparently there was a dip (-.5% anualized) in the gdp in q3 of 2000. And unfortunately for you Bush lovers its not a recesion until there are two consecutive quarters. The new numbers are q2, 2000 6.4% (!)(again annualized- i.e. divide by 4) and q4 2.1%. Overall this revision changes 2000 gdp from 3.8 to 3.7%. Still strong numbers, especially compared to Bush’s anemic .5% gdp growth in 2001, and 2.2%gdp growth in 2002 (and this is after running up how big a deficit to pump up the economy? 200billion??) which unfortunately is still less then any year under Clinton (lowest GDP growth using the revised figures: 2.5% in 1995). So it seems I was wrong- (the revisions came out on 12/10/03 two days ago.). As for Fox news lying or being wrong, I stand by my statement (although not in this particular case) but will avoid going furhter in an effort not to widen the controversy.

2 Yes is seems I mispoke, the phrase internet has been around for awhile even if Arpanet was still in use for some time. What I meant was that the phrase Internet was coming into general use in the early 90’s (right about the time Bush I was surprised by the use of lasers and barcode scanners) Still the initial qoute was a LIE (see the first remark) becouse thats not what Gore said (as I previously indicated) and the Internet Society as well as numerous tech people who actually were involved give Gore credit for his role in creating the internet we have and use today.
Heres some sites:
Internet society-
http://www.isoc.org/internet/history/brief.shtml
and a discusion of Gores role:
http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue5_10/wiggins/
and a nice discussion of the whole B.S. issue
http://dir.salon.com/tech/col/rose/2000/10/05/gore_internet/index.html

third- Nice quotes from Clinton, Gore, Slate, whatever regarding the war meme… And y’know what- I personally wrote a friend supporting the invasion of Iraq. Seems I believed president Bush’s many lies on this matter. Of course I wasnt the president, and didnt have a national security apparatus to answer my questions. or commited state department officials like former ambassador Joseph Wilson to go check it out. and tell me it was bullshit. Becouse then I would have known it wasnt true, so as I pointed out- its still a lie!! so screw you. Oh and as for the Clinton quote- you will recall that was from 1998 when Republicans- (sure and others) gave a big thumbs down on Clintons desire to use military force against Iraq. Seems they needed more lying to.

I have no idea what your talking about regarding the 5th point American defender, but dont make me break out any of Bush’s stupidisms..

Posted by: AnyonebutBush2004 at December 12, 2003 03:38 AM

Bush 2004,

I was pleased by your gracious admission of error until I read this:

“As for Fox news lying or being wrong, I stand by my statement (although not in this particular case) but will avoid going furhter in an effort not to widen the controversy.”

It reminds me of guys in High School who dated really hot women, but we never met them ‘cause they lived in Canada, or were in prison, or lived in Canadian Prisons. So, give us a daily update on FOX lies a la Brent Bozell. Maybe Alan will give you your own section.

Then this gem:

“Oh and as for the Clinton quote- you will recall that was from 1998 when Republicans- (sure and others) gave a big thumbs down on Clintons desire to use military force against Iraq. Seems they needed more lying to.”

Aside from a few missles when Monica was testifying, what military force was that? What Republicans stopped him? Why didn’t the Republicans stop all his unilateral missle strikes?

Posted by: jones at December 12, 2003 08:32 AM

ABB04, for those of us suffering from CRS, refresh our memory on Clinton’s desire to use military action against Iraq by please answering Jones’ questions, and if you have the time…

What was Clinton’s rationale for striking Iraq? Was it OIL? If Bush said the same thing Clinton did, is Bush still a liar?
Were France and Germany on board with Clinton the Conquerer’s preemptive strike? Or was it just Republicans standing against it? What was the vote in the UN? Does unilateral action under Clinton somehow involve more countries than the ‘unilateral’ action this year in Iraq? Doesn’t ‘Clinton=Hitler’ fairly summarize his attitude and 8 years of presidency?

Posted by: AnyonebutDEAN2004 at December 12, 2003 12:37 PM

Do you really think that any president entering office can cause a recession that quickly? Don’t you think 9/11 and the accounting scandals have a lot to do with it being such a deep one?

Who do you credit with the current economic upturn?

And why are both sides so eager to blame or credit a single man or his administration for anything good or bad that happens? The fact is that the majority of government employees do not change with executive administrations.

Actually, I believe partisanship is good for the country. A healthy legislative quagmire keeps them from mucking things up. Hoo ray for democracy!

Posted by: middleman at December 12, 2003 05:31 PM

Actually, I believe partisanship is good for the country. A healthy legislative quagmire keeps them from mucking things up. Hoo ray for democracy!

Good Point above, but I clearly stated in another thread what W did well is stay out of our way to get the economy going.

Posted by: jones at December 12, 2003 05:34 PM

What I really want to know is how much Gore was paid. The Chinese gave him 300,000$, but that was years ago. What does it take to bribe Gore in the 21st century?
919

Posted by: ableiter at December 14, 2003 09:11 PM

Better question is what does it take to bribe Bush? seems Bush’s brother got 2 million from the chinese for something he knows nothing about!

Posted by: AnyoneButBush2004 at December 18, 2003 02:14 AM

SMS Logo Dzwonki Gry Java
Bramka SMS Era IDea Plus
Gry Java
dzwonki polifoniczne
Dzwonki
mms
Dzwonki True Tone
Logo Nokia
Nokia Dzwonki
Nokia Polifonia
Dzwonki True Tone
Nokia Smsy Graficzne
Wygaszacze Ekranu
Animacje
Gry Java Nokia
Kolorowe Animacje
Kolorowe Loga Nokia
Tapety Nokia

Siemens
Siemens Dzwonki
Siemens Polifonia
Grafika EMS
Siemens Dzwonki EMS
Kolorowe Logo Siemens
Siemens Gry Java
Siemens Tapety
Motorola Dzwonki
Motorola Polifonia
Grafika EMS
Motorola Dzwonki EMS
Motorola Gry Java
Kolorowe Animacje
Motorola Tapety
Samsung Logo
Samsung Dzwonki
Samsung Polifonia
Graficzne SMS
Samsung Gry Java
Samsung Tapety
Sonyericsson Polifonia
Graficzny SMS
Grafika EMS
Dzwonki EMS
Gry Java
Sonyericsson Tapety
Logo Alcatel
Alcatel Polifonia
Grafika EMS
Dzwonki EMS
Alcatel Tapety
Sagem Dzwonki
Sagem Tapety
Mitsubishi Dzwonki
Mitsubishi Tapety
Sendo Dzwonki

Posted by: Alex at January 17, 2004 03:53 PM

Reality is not affected by our apprehension of it.

Posted by: Waite Julie Piper at January 20, 2004 04:27 PM

But limit your animations to whatever is required to communicate the necessary information. Avoid annoying animations that discourage ease of use. Ask yourself, “What do I need to show the user, and what is the cleanest way possible to achieve that?” A good example is the Mail application for Mac OS X. Whenever a new message arrives, the Dock icon changes appearance to indicate a changed state.

Posted by: Abacuck at January 24, 2004 02:21 AM

Dock Animation. Sometimes animating icons in the dock can be useful in communicating the status of the system or application.

Posted by: Augustus at January 24, 2004 02:21 AM

Adhere to Layout Guidelines. Did you leave 12 pixels between your push buttons? Does the positioning of your pop-up menus make sense, and when do you use a pop-up versus a scrolling list? Are you using the right types of buttons for the proper functions?

Posted by: Dionisius at January 24, 2004 02:22 AM

This topic is one we will tackle later in this article, but it refers to making sure that your application and the dock aren’t fighting it out for supremacy of the screen.

Posted by: Joos at January 24, 2004 02:23 AM

To put my money where my mouth is, in each new article I’ll build a hypothetical application that illustrates the guidelines I’m covering. Today’s application is called “Paint” and will be based on the photo-illustrative icon I created in my last article. Together we will complete each step, and by the end of the project we should have a well-designed, 95%-100% Aqua-compliant application. I’ll leave some room for personal preferences and the fact that Apple changes the OS every few months.

Posted by: Enoch at January 24, 2004 02:23 AM

Adhere to Layout Guidelines. Did you leave 12 pixels between your push buttons? Does the positioning of your pop-up menus make sense, and when do you use a pop-up versus a scrolling list? Are you using the right types of buttons for the proper functions?

Posted by: Watkin at January 24, 2004 02:24 AM

You Must Promise. To call your mother, to help old ladies cross the road, and to turn your cell phone off at the movies.

Posted by: Arthur at January 24, 2004 02:24 AM

By building an application that takes advantage of Aqua’s many facets, you help ensure that your application will not only look good, but have a chance of becoming a raging success. After a new user clicks on the icon of your program, the first thing he or she sees is the application interface. I know that when I review a product, I am very critical of its visual design. I usually have a short time to learn the new software, so design and ease of use are very important. Aside from those who marvel at the beauty of the command line, most users tend to react the same way.

Posted by: Rook at January 24, 2004 02:25 AM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (Click here should you choose to sign out.)

As you post your comment, please mind our simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. We also ask that you avoid the extensive use of profanity, racist terms (neither of which we consider civil or respectful), and other boorish language.

We reserve the right to delete any comment, and to prohibit you from commenting on this site, if we feel you have broached this policy. As a courtesy, we will first send you an email noting a violation so you understand the boundaries. This will occur only once, however, and should we ban you from our comment forums we expect that ban to be permanent.

We also will frown upon those who suggest that we ban other individuals for voicing unpopular opinions, should those opinions be voiced in a civil and respectful manner. The point of our comment threads is to provide a forum for spirited though civil and respectful discourse … it is not to provide a forum in which everyone will agree with your point of view.

If you can live by these rules, welcome aboard. If not, then we’re sorry it didn’t work out, and thanks for visiting The Command Post.


Remember me?

(You may use HTML tags for style)