Al's remark is recorded by video. He was clearly taking credit "I took the initiative in creating the Internet" for something. He had a perfect opportunity to respond to criticism and explain what he really meant in his so-called debate with Bill Bradley (it was an Al Gore promotion, not a real debate), which I heard. Bradley said that Al was making a joke when he said he created the internet. Al allowed that to stand. _His_ response to the uproar was to joke about it. The complicated rebuttal provided above (and in Wikipedia) given by people who are not Al wasn't formed until later.
In sum, Al was trying to take credit for creating something he only supported after the creation. Politicians do this all the time. To my mind, it showed how unacquainted he was with the internet. He didn't realize how important it is.
By the way, I'm NOT a Republican, and I support some ideas Al supports, but I'm not going to excuse him of that stupidity.

And the municipal governments do more than both. (KCK resident speaking.) As this project is behind schedule in terms of Google's early announcements, I assumed Google somwhow clashed with the crooks and was contemplating abandoning the project. Now, I see the project is underway. Google must have caved and paid the necessary bribes.
Oh, the tornados? They are not a significant threat. The Kansas City (the metro straddles the Kansas-Missouri state line) metro is in a 5 tornadoes per 100,000 mile^2 (260,000 km^2) per year area http://earthstorm.mesonet.org/materials/graphics/TornadoFreq.gif (KC is in the extreme upper right corner of Kansas) . This is not the highest risk area. Moreover, tornado damage is usually localized. Most people in Kansas City don't even know someone who's seen a tornado.

Your writing is almost too confused to merit a response. Maybe you mean something else. But anyway, if you mean to say that police in the US lose their job if they shoot someone, that's simply not true. Different police departments have different procedures, but typically other police officers will investigate the shooting and then decide that the shooting is justifiable. I believe it's possible for them to find the shooting unjustifiable, but I don't remember that ever happening.

A family court judge has hearings behind closed doors. These are not public hearings. The parents cannot invite the press or anyone. And the government gets away with murder, without public inspection. And with this judge, we won't be able to look up his decisions. It's all secret.
Anyway, I had to stop posting (under fake names) or talking about my own experience with such a judge a few years ago to keep my sanity. (The state took our baby from the hospital where he was born. The supposed reason was that he was methadone exposed. It's a legal drug, and the hospital provided it to his mother, my wife, four hours before he was born. There were no illegal drugs involved.) The worst people in the world gravitate to this part of the government. This judge's exposure is just lucky.

The guy claiming taking something apart is American is referring to innovation and improvisation. These activities depart from the established order, and once upon a time they were rightly called American. But that's not so now. Now, being American is being a conformist in a state controlled order. I'm not even going to discuss the freedom question.
But, for what it once was, you should still capitalize "American".

I understand your point, and I know Word currently can save as PDF (which is irrelevant), but you were careless in suggesting which program these workers should study, and this implies you didn't read the source article. If you are going to arrogantly criticize someone for being careless, you shouldn't be careless yourself.

The documents at issue were PDFs, and Word doesn't edit PDFs. The source article suggests using the redaction features in Acrobat X.

After the initial work introducing a PC to the world, he focused on a successful marketing strategy: He made it fashionable to be a dummy with a computer.

There’s no reason this business is restricted to the kiosk. The kiosk is just a computer with internet connected to http://www.mynowclinic.com/ . Regarding those who see a conflict when a pharmacy and a doctor are under the same roof, there may be such a conflict, but the the connection isn't obvious. Rite Aid is using its brand and locations to promote this online clinic. The NowClinic About page says “NowClinic online care, an offering of OptumHealth”. There’s nothing on http://www.optumhealth.com/our-company/companyinfo/ explaining the relationship with Rite Aid. I suspect Now Clinic simply made a deal with Rite Aid. One doesn’t own the other, as far as I can see.