Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] [POLITICS] Censorship a policy?

[Mike Miller <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

On Tue, 31 Jan 2006, Vern Green wrote:

> Mike Miller wrote:
> > Anyway, I guess "lot lizards" are some sort of prostitute.  Well, Vern, 
> > I don't know a lot about "lot lizards" and the sexual transmission of 
> > disease, but apparently an NIH panel thought the study was worthwhile 
> > or you wouldn't be talking about it.  You ask "what on earth for?" 
> > because you don't want to know.  I'm sure the answer is all over the 
> > web for you to read, and you would read it if you gave a damn.
>
> I don't care about it, and I would rather not have 1.1 million dollars 
> spent on this type of research. You complain about the huge deficit, 
> well there is 1.1 million that was not spent on some scientist's special 
> idea for a study.


> > I don't know anything about the "ecstasy testing."  Where did you get 
> > that one?  Maybe drugs should be legalized.  I don't know about that, 
> > but I can definitely appreciate arguments in both directions.  I 
> > especially think that it is futile to try to stop drug 
> > producers/importers.  It's just too easy to bring it in to the US and 
> > supply/demand economics works against you.
>
> You don't even know what you have on your own site?
>
> http://taxa.epi.umn.edu/rmnews/2005/msg00048.html

Right.  There are thousands of articles there.  It is definitely best to 
post the URL and not assume that I will know what you are talking about. 
That's an interesting and kinda weird article.  I understand the Bush 
position on that one.

The list of articles definitely included some that didn't make the case 
against Bush.  It was meant to give you a list from which you could find 
such articles.

Mike

_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion