According to what I heard a few minutes ago, in that staate he can get on the ballot as an independent still.
Posted by glassman on :
yeah, but we all know he's really a republican JK
Posted by glassman on :
seriously....
i don't know whether to say heh, the dems are so mixed up they'll never figure out how to win?
or the anti-war vote is coming on strong...
"I wish i could quit you dubya"
Posted by bdgee on :
Looks like, at least up there, from what I could gather through the day, his constituents have decided that after being the VP candidate, he took to ignoring what they wanted and they were P-O-ed.
Yes, I heard a lot of them express disgust for his support of Bush and Iraq, but I heard a lot more just P-O-ed about him now being a Washington Senator rather than a Connecticut Senator.
So, I'm not thinking this offers quite so much insight into the national attitude on Bush or Iraq as the pundits want it to offer.
Posted by glassman on :
i heaered the same budgee...
you know i'm hoping the DEMS can get either the house or the senate....
i think the house would be better, but the sneate has more power... either way? one of 'em needs to go dem
Posted by bdgee on :
I agree completely!
We need not just the "official" decent but some actual desire to uphold the Constitution that is backed by the power of the Constitution.
I thought after that farce of an impeachment the republicans pulled to destroy Clinton, I would never believe in another, but this guy has been so willing to violate the Constitution (and various oter kinds of actual laws.....I haven't yet found anywhere in the constitution that it awards criminal status to hanky-panky with a chick in private), I'd accept one just to remind future presidents what should happen when they forget what they are there to do.
I'm not ready to put both houses and the pesidency in a single party's hands, but anything would be better than this.
This guy is even more dishonest than Nixon. Back then, the republicans in Congress got fed up with him.....these guys still act like we are dumb enough to believe they aren't voting for the Party rather than the Country.
Posted by ruthie on :
Give the guy a break. His only crime is standing up for what HE believes in and not just being a puppet democrat...
Posted by bdgee on :
He stood up for what dubya believes and THAT is worse than beliving the stuff "Our Leader" believes.
Most of what dubya believes is childish and narrow minded BS he gets from ignorant jerks like Pat Robettson and Fat Rush the Doper.
Posted by ruthie on :
My only point is anyone should be willing to stand up for what he believes, even when it it not a popular stand for his party. I will always have respect for anyone who does not cave in just because he is going to get critized for it. That shows character, something many in politics sadly lack.
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Who is the repub running in the election? This move seems that it is going to split the democratic vote here and open the door for repub to take the seat, but I know that is a part of the country that is pretty solidly democrat.
Posted by glassman on :
rove did it again....
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
is lieberman the one who was anti video game
Posted by glassman on :
idunno CCM i'm not a dem.... but i remember that Gore was anti-video and his wife got the parental notification on music..
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
al gore just doesnt seem like a fun guy at all. so boring..i guess thats why he had nicknames like al bore and al snore. so bland...
Posted by ClayN on :
He wasn't elected to stand for what "he believes in". He was elected to represent the will of the people in his district. Obviously the people disagree with his beliefs. It's about time this happened more often too. Glad to see Cynthia McKinney go as well. I hope it continues along both party lines.
Posted by glassman on :
I hope it continues along both party lines. too
Posted by Johnwayne on :
I'm not sure I agree with that ClayN. I believe our leaders are elected to govern the way they see best, than face the wrath, or support, of the voters in the next election. In cases like Lieberman, it works out right. If you want to take an unpopular path, than you face being voted out or bumped out in the primaries.
Posted by bond006 on :
I really don't understand what a lot of people are upset about what happened in Connecticut. Given a choice the dems voted him and his platform out. In effect Lieberman did not listen to the people who voted him in went his own way you may call this couarge but it was not representation and he is out maybe he should be an independent or switch parties. Who cares about a political opinion wether he is right or wrong this is about as American as it gets. Its a good thing
Posted by glassman on :
JW you marching in lock-step again? Posted by Johnwayne on :
Not sure Glass, maybe Bond put it better than I. Let's just say I agree with Bond. And it works out the way it should. Posted by bond006 on :
Not to offend any body but if your representation just went to Washington and did what he wanted and voted the way he wanted and the way he or she felt was best for his people back home even if they did not like it. Why even have an election just let all of our representation be appointed
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Because that is what keeps their feet to the fire, an election. I guess it is up to the voters as to what they value, someone who is going to vote with them on the majority of issues, or someone who votes what they think is best, than explains their position and makes an effort to convince the voters that he is right. If the voters disagree and it's a major issue to them, then they vote against the rep. No right or wrong answer, just individual preference IMO.
Posted by glassman on :
JW? after Bush BARELY won the last election? he didn't behave as if he had only 51%...
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Agreed, but lame duck status, well that does not come along very often. Let's hope that Presidents in this situation place value in their place in history.
I mean, what would you have a rep do Glass? It is an interesting question. are reps in Washington, or anywhere, to strictly follow the will of the voters? Or are they elected to do what they think best, or a mix of both?
I would vote for a mix of both
Posted by glassman on :
Bush's situation has never come along before ...
he is a statistical anomaly...
in almost every way
somethin' ain't right...
everybody knows this...
Posted by Johnwayne on :
Correct. But let's treat Bush that way and set him aside. Traditionally do you have a stance on the stance pols should take?
Posted by bdgee on :
You guys are getting the cart before the horse on Lieberman.
He ain't lost yet, just doesn't get the democrat's official support.
Therer are about as many "registered" independents as democrats there.
Best wait and see how things unfold. Contrary to what is coming out of the republican machine and being sent out for anti-democratic hate talk, that guy Lamont looks to be a substantial politician and will have adequate funds. But Lieberman has old old ties plus the help of the republican talk radio and propaganda organizations.
I don't really think this has any strong link to national politics, because it was more about the people of the state feeling betrayed.
Posted by Johnwayne on :
I was suprised it was that close and I do think he stands a strong chance in November. But the winds of change are a whistling in DC nowadays, so who knows.
Posted by bdgee on :
Set Bush aside?
With him still issueing "signing statements".
Fat chance!
Posted by glassman on :
With him still issueing "signing statements".
hahaha how about just talking?
this is an official white house press release: For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary July 8, 2003
Remarks by the President to Embassy Personnel Leopold Sedar Senghor International Airport Dakar, Senegal
THE PRESIDENT: I thank you all very much for coming out to say hello. Laura and I are honored to be here with you all. I'm also, as you could see, traveling with quite distinguished company -- our great Secretary of State Colin Powell is with us, as well. (Applause.) I want to thank Ambassador Roth and his wife, Carol, for their service to our country.
I'm here to thank our fellow citizens who are serving a great land. Thank you for your dedication and your love of country. I want to thank the foreign nationals who are helping our fellow citizens make sure the embassy runs so well. (Applause.)
This is an historic trip -- oh, there's the Ambassador. (Applause.) But we are so honored to start our trip to this continent here in Senegal. I had the opportunity to go out to Goree Island and talk about what slavery meant to America. It's very interesting when you think about it, the slaves who left here to go to America, because of their steadfast and their religion and their belief in freedom, helped change America. America is what it is today because of what went on in the past. Yet when I looked out over the sea, it reminded me that we've always got to keep history in mind. And one of the things that we've always got to know about America is that we love freedom, that we love people to be free, that freedom is God's gift to each and every individual. That's what we believe in our country.
I'm here to spread that message of freedom and peace. Where we see suffering, America will act. Where we find the hungry, we will act. We're here not only on a mission of mercy, we're also here on a mission of alliance. And I want to thank you all for helping make that come true.
May God bless you all. And may God continue to bless Senegal and America. Thank you all very much. (Applause.)
END
it would be funny.... if we weren't looking at WW3
Posted by NaturalResources on :
quote:Originally posted by bdgee:
.....I thought after that farce of an impeachment the republicans pulled to destroy Clinton, I would never believe in another, but this guy has been so willing to violate the Constitution (and various other kinds of actual laws.....I haven't yet found anywhere in the constitution that it awards criminal status to hanky-panky with a chick in private), .....
Bdgee when you finish spouting party line, you might consider the following:
Bill Clinton wasn't being impeached for "hanky-panky", he was being impeached for perjury. If Bill Clinton would lie about something stupid like "hanky-panky", what else would he be willing to lie about?
IMO if he had come clean and appologized about it right in the begining, the movement to impeach him would be DOA.... But alas, honesty is too much to ask from a politician....
Regardless of why Clinton lied, or what he was lying about, shouldn't any president, or person for that matter be held accountable for lying under oath?
...I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time – never. These allegations are false. ...
Posted by glassman on :
Regardless of why Clinton lied, or what he was lying about, shouldn't any president, or person for that matter be held accountable for lying under oath?
what about NOT under oath NR?
or do you still believe that Bush and or Cheney has been completely honest with US?
Posted by NaturalResources on :
Glass, my only point was that the Clinton impeachment wasn't about "hanky-panky" but about honesty.
....and I don't ever recall tying to claim that Bush and Cheney are "honest politicians"... please don't put words in my mouth.
Posted by bdgee on :
NR, you are an facist goose stepping idiot of the first class, without the sense or class God gave a carved hand puppet.
That so-caled "lie under oath" was a set-up trap paid for, arranged, and administered by the Republican party, and, except for that conspiracy, there would have been no "lie" (actually, it wasn't a lie, but the republicaan controlled court refused to listen to the truth).
Shouldn't any Federal Special Prosecuter be disbarred and put in prison for secretely and feloniously feeding secret grand jury testimony to a litigant in a civil suit?
And shouldn't each and every member of the republican party that "conspired" with him be in that prison with him?
Why do you claim it is acceptable to excuse republicans for violating laws?
NR, you certainly have claimed that both Bush and Chaney are honest, whether or not you remember it or not!
Posted by glassman on :
bdggee, could we lessen the namecalling thing a little?
quote:Originally posted by NaturalResources: Glass, my only point was that the Clinton impeachment wasn't about "hanky-panky" but about honesty.
....and I don't ever recall tying to claim that Bush and Cheney are "honest politicians"... please don't put words in my mouth.
i was just asking, i was bummed when that's all they came up with after a 60 million dollar investigation... i thought the guy actually did something else...
i make no excuses for Clinton either....
Posted by bdgee on :
Just responding in kind
Posted by glassman on :
well? this place has been getting a little too much like RB lately....
Posted by bdgee on :
Go back months ago and check. It was NR that first started the insulting with that line "spouting party line" and followed it up almost immediately with worse.
Posted by NaturalResources on :
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: NR, you are an facist goose stepping idiot of the first class, without the sense or class God gave a carved hand puppet.
That so-caled "lie under oath" was a set-up trap paid for, arranged, and administered by the Republican party, and, except for that conspiracy, there would have been no "lie" (actually, it wasn't a lie, but the republicaan controlled court refused to listen to the truth).
Shouldn't any Federal Special Prosecuter be disbarred and put in prison for secretely and feloniously feeding secret grand jury testimony to a litigant in a civil suit?
And shouldn't each and every member of the republican party that "conspired" with him be in that prison with him?
Why do you claim it is acceptable to excuse republicans for violating laws?
NR, you certainly have claimed that both Bush and Chaney are honest, whether or not you remember it or not!
Bush and Cheney are obviously liars, like any other politician. I just don't agree with everything you claim they lied about. Any suggestion that I believe 100% of what Bush and Cheney say to be truthful is false, and I dare you to sort through my posts here and prove otherwise.
The most I've ever done is tell you that your conspiracy theories involving Bush, Iraq and the 2000 elections are childish and pretty typical of the Sore-Loserman crowd.
As far as Clinton goes?
If it really were like you say, and the Clinton impeachment was a "trap" set by a vast right wing conspiracy as you claim....
.......Clinton still lied about Lewensky and fell right into it. Why? BECAUSE HE IS A LIAR.
Posted by glassman on :
somebody has to start being reasonable tho...
Posted by NaturalResources on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: bdggee, could we lessen the namecalling thing a little?
quote:Originally posted by NaturalResources: Glass, my only point was that the Clinton impeachment wasn't about "hanky-panky" but about honesty.
....and I don't ever recall tying to claim that Bush and Cheney are "honest politicians"... please don't put words in my mouth.
i was just asking, i was bummed when that's all they came up with after a 60 million dollar investigation... i thought the guy actually did something else...
i make no excuses for Clinton either....
Glass, I too was disapointed that nothing came of it. IMO also, Clinton was guilty of much more than just lying about Lewinsky. China comes to mind....
Posted by bdgee on :
You have a serious defficiency in both memory and integrity.
Then too, I have no "conspiracy theories involving Bush, Iraq and the 2000 elections ". What I have said on that subject is obviously correct because otherwise, they republicans wouldn't have stopped the counting in Florida in 2000.
You have several conspiracy theories on about any topic, all provided to you via the RNC and the Administration.
I wouldn't sort through your post if I were paid to do it, so get off the "knock this chip off my shoulder" stance.
You aren't rational.
Posted by NaturalResources on :
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: Go back months ago and check. It was NR that first started the insulting with that line "spouting party line" and followed it up almost immediately with worse.
Hahahah Bdgee, if I had a dime for every post on Allstocks that you included the phrase "spouting the party line" in it I could retire....
Honestly, anybody who has ever disagreed with you knows exactly what I'm talking about. Maybe someone else in Off-Topic will step in and help me out on this one....
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: somebody has to start being reasonable tho...
maybe next month?
seriously? the only thing that the Whitewater investigation did was lower the bar....
wait till the GOP is no longer in control...
whether it's this fall or '08? the doodoo is gonna hit the fan and for very good reasons...
Dealay, Ney and Abramoff are just the begining...
Libby? go ahead and write him off now... Bush will have to pardon him...
Posted by bdgee on :
NR, you are a far right wing puppet.
Do you sit rapture and listen in awe everytime dubya speaks, or just tape it to play while you sleep?
Posted by NaturalResources on :
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: NR, you are a far right wing puppet.
Do you sit rapture and listen in awe everytime dubya speaks, or just tape it to play while you sleep?
Actually Bdgee, I listen to "fat rush the doper" while I sleep....
Posted by NaturalResources on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman:
quote:Originally posted by glassman: somebody has to start being reasonable tho...
maybe next month?
seriously? the only thing that the Whitewater investigation did was lower the bar....
wait till the GOP is no longer in control...
whether it's this fall or '08? the doodoo is gonna hit the fan and for very good reasons...
Dealay, Ney and Abramoff are just the begining...
Libby? go ahead and write him off now... Bush will have to pardon him...
Glass, If Bush and others are guilty then put them on trial. Maybe this will happen in 08 as you suggest. If they are really guilty of everything Bdgee and the Dems claim, it should be easy to put them away. I have nothing against that. It is what the American people need to do.... hold politicians accountable...
....However,
It still doesn't change my view on Saddam and WMD's...among other things.... and Bdgee, just because I don't agree with you, doesn't mean I'm a "puppet of the party". Get a new tactic.
Posted by bdgee on :
It isn't because you disagree and get insulting with anything that isn't exactly what you want said (though you ertainly do that), it is because what you want said is exactly what the RNC wants you to want said.
I have no idea what makes you that way, but it is clear you are either unwilling to think beyond the far rightwing extreme propaganda from the Party or you can't.
There were no WMDs and there was NO connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda. With all the proof of that, it takes a liar or a fool or an ultra-loyal republican party liner (or all three) to continue that excuse for the disgusting actions of this Administration.
I don't need a new tactic, I have the facts.
Posted by bdgee on :
quote:Originally posted by NaturalResources:
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: NR, you are a far right wing puppet.
Do you sit rapture and listen in awe everytime dubya speaks, or just tape it to play while you sleep?
Actually Bdgee, I listen to "fat rush the doper" while I sleep....
.........lol...............
Isn't that exactly what I said?
Posted by Johnwayne on :
I will step up with you Natural and agree with you concerning Bdgee. However, many of us here, myself included, have at times been guilty of similar actions. I agree with Glassman, we all need to start being reasonable here, let others have a voice and keep our voices down to a dull roar. Allstocks is a great site and Bob does a great job running this Board. I spent many months over at that spit hole RB thinking that was normal behavior. You could get in an argument there over what time it was. It wasn't until I ventured here that I truly found my home. I have made the offer to Bdgee before to tone things down and am making the offer now in an attempt to lift up the tone of this board.
Posted by Griffon on :
Ditto bro', as the new kid on the block whose words have stepped on many toes it is up to me to say I have made many mistakes and have contributed to the tension on these boards. For that I apologize, seeking forgiveness, for my limitations, my inadequacies, my offenses. Any that have wounded me, I freely forgive and seek to rise up in new fellowship around the circle that makes up this corner of the public square. It is not going to be my custom to step outside the threads I begin but I thought this was one of those appropriate times for me to do so.
Posted by jordanreed on :
thank you, you two..
how did we ever get along without you?
Posted by Munchkin Man on :
Greetings To All:
The Munchkin Man would like to join in by adding his voice of reason and his spirit of peace and tranquility to this board.
Good luck to all.
Best Wishes,
Munchkin Man
Posted by bdgee on :
Hahahaha
Griffon and JW are darn near carbon copies of NR.
They all do virtually nothing by insult anyone not reading the RNC script and ditto Limbaugh hatred.
Posted by glassman on :
lessee?
Lieberman loses...
the anti-war movement hit's a high-point, and now? less than 48 hrs later? we have a major terror threat?
before you start getting on me about tin foil hats?
allow me to point out that these people arrested? they are Subjects of the Crown Of Britain...not furrinners...
i think we can safely say that
something ain't right
be afraid.. be vary afraid... as you dump your shampoo bottles in the plastic trash bags...
Posted by bdgee on :
I do "be afraid".....not of terrorist, though....
Big Brother is about.....
Posted by glassman on :
Chertoff says Blair and Bush were in contact yesterday.....
i can hear it now....
Tony, we're a little short on good headlines ever here right now...got anything for me..
Posted by bdgee on :
Yep, they have to retrain the public to be skeered acause the eee-lek-shuns are a comin.
Have you noticed that once upon a time, such a scare put a bug in the drawers of the "security" stocks, but now, they don't even quiver.
Did the boy holler too much about a hole in the dike?
Posted by glassman on :
still waiting to hear what these guys were planning on using...
weren't the Subway bombers in '05 also Subjects of the British Crown?
Mohammad Sidique Khan (October 20, 1974 – July 7, 2005) was the oldest of the terrorists responsible....
...Born in St James's University Hospital, Leeds, he grew up in Beeston but moved to Lees Holm in Dewsbury, near Leeds in West Yorkshire in early 2005. His father, Tika Khan, a foundry worker, was born in Pakistan.
yeah...
Posted by Munchkin Man on :
Greetings,
It saddens the Munchkin Man very deeply to hear that some people actually believe that Bush and Blair were behind this latest terrorist threat.
Munchkin Man
Posted by bdgee on :
That's a quite generous extrapolation of the facts, MM......and maybe jest a leeetle bit disingenuous.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by Munchkin Man: Greetings,
It saddens the Munchkin Man very deeply to hear that some people actually believe that Bush and Blair were behind this latest terrorist threat.
Munchkin Man
LOL munchie...
nobody is saying there's no terror plot....
what we are saying is why was the plug pulled today on the investigation?
eagerly waiting to hear that one...
of course there are terrorists...
there will always be terroists..
always HAVE BEEN terorists...
Cuba... The Munchkin er i mean Munich Olympics... the list goes on and on..
read MY posts on Hezblahbalblah....
i am all for KILLING terrorists...DEAD!
i hate the politisization of terrorist acitvity and
the Iraq war has created MORE terrorists than it KILLED;DEAD!
wake up... grow up...
i also have made much crticism of the realtionship Bush has with Musharref.... he's not zackly leading a "democracy"....
Posted by farmgirl on :
I was wondering why I could not find opinions on the terror plot. Now I know. It must be Lieberman's fault since that is the forum it is being dicussed in.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by farmgirl: I was wondering why I could not find opinions on the terror plot. Now I know. It must be Lieberman's fault since that is the forum it is being dicussed in.
Leiberman did it! yes! that 'splains everything....
Posted by 66inxs on :
hmmmmm lieberman always did look a little suspicious, if you know what i mean. trenchcoat and all !
Posted by glassman on :
it's his deputy dawg voice that makes you trust him anyway. Posted by 66inxs on :
both lieberman and that guy who invented the internet whose name escapes me right now need to know that in america when you lose an election, you really lose !
Posted by farmgirl on :
AL GORE LOST AND SUED OVER WHAT HE THOUGHT WAS ERRORS IN THE VOTING. I DID NOT VOTE FOR HIM BUT CAN RESPECT THAT. LIEBERMAN DOES NOT LIKE WHAT PEOPLE IN THE PARTY HE BELIEVES IN THINKS OF HIM SO HE IS SELLING OUT TO THE INDEPENDENT PARTY TRIING TO GET VOTES. I CAN NOT RESPECT OR VOTE FOR SOMEONE THAT WOULD SO EASILY GIVE UP THEIR FUNDAMENTAL BELIEFS AND SELL THEMSELVES ELSEWHERE.
Posted by 66inxs on :
still losers farmgirl. btw the irony is in the last presidential there were also 2 losers - bush and kerry. no three, counting the ameican public.all of them sold out and are owned by the special interests like big oil that supported them, hence the big mess for the average american.
Posted by glassman on :
i still can't figger out if Kerry never expected to win or never expected to lose...
but? not challenging the Ohio vote was wrong IMO...
the Clinton's didn't want him to win, cuz then Hillary couldn't run in '08....
she may not be able to win in '08 now?, but in '04? they didn't know that... they just knew she couldn't get it in '04, and if Kerry won? she would be waiting till '12 to run...
Posted by 66inxs on :
glassman - i think that hillary did not run in 04 cuz she thought gwb was unbeatable and did not want to lose, then in the middle of the race she saw that she could have won and said omg stuck in ny still.
Posted by glassman on :
makes sense to me...
Kerry ignoring the swifty's for three weeks was just stupid too..
Posted by 66inxs on :
this is john kerry reporting for duty - completely laughable !! the swifty's sunk his boat for sure! the presidency was just another trophy for a super rich politician.
Posted by glassman on :
heeeheeeheee
Fox News just reported that "some democratic blugger" accused the GOP of raising the terror alert level to displace attention away from the Lieberamn loss...
those guys at Fox are so silly... everybody knows bluggers are just nuts...
Posted by bond006 on :
Lieberman is a bad looser and a whinning wimp.
Thats what happen in his business you get voted in and voted out. He had an 18 year run
He is whinning so much I think he feels that if he continues on that ride he can change what happened even the president is whinning about it , are all are ploitico's crazy he lost so put it in your pipe and smoke it.
Posted by glassman on :
maybe US bluggers and "tin foil hat wearers" aren't so nutty after all??
this is all over the foreign wires...
Early arrests made under US pressure, British say
Philip Shenon and Neil Lewis in Washington August 14, 2006
BRITISH and American authorities had a significant disagreement over when to move in on suspects in the alleged plot to bring down US-bound airliners, US reports suggest.
A senior British official told NBC News on Saturday that British police were planning to continue surveillance for at least another week as the suspects had not yet bought airline tickets and some did not even have passports.
In contrast to previous reports, the unidentified official told NBC an attack was not imminent, but the US pressured British police to move in. The source did say police believed one British-based suspect was ready to conduct a "dry run". British authorities had wanted to let him continue with part of the plan, but the US baulked, the report said.
A spokesman for the US President, George Bush, denied the account and was quoted as saying the arrests took place in an atmosphere of "unprecedented co-operation" between American, British and Pakistani officials.
After it has happened time after time, how is it possible to be surprised that this Administration has manipulated the "news" to hide other news.
Personally, I don't feel a tad safer with that "plot" in England busted. It wasn't much more than a lot of probably half planned ideas.
If it is true that they were planning to "test" their ability to get aboard planes with their so called "explosive liquids", and this was actually an Al Qaeda oreganized effort, wouldn't it have put a greater wrinkle in their plans to simply arrest (or otherwise stop them from boarding) the ones trying to board the planes with no announcement as to why?
Confuse the devils, don't explain to them what you know!
Of course, that wouldn't have diverted attention from the election news and problems.
Posted by glassman on :
it's worse than that bdgee...
the liquid "bombs"? it's not a new idea...
been done before...
Posted by bdgee on :
No, not a new idea, but it also is not an easy thing to do. You don't make such things simply by mixing and striking a fuse. The stuff likes to go off spontaneously. As I understand, these guys were not past the "idea stage". It's a lot more difficult to succeed than it sounds.
Posted by bdgee on :
I say that with the experience of having blown up more than on laboratory.....lol......
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
JK
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
