Slashdot Mirror

I'm a little curious where you're getting these sales figures?

From this TIME article:

and this NARIP document. (Sorry, direct link to a PDF.)

If you insist on making spurious claims about Apple, or any other company for that matter, don't try to disguise them as facts please, that's all we ask. They're certainly not the kings of interoperability, but I can't think of any OS/company that is. no, not even *nix.

We might not like the law, but we still have to obey it.

No

we

bloody

well

don't !

There is also a gaping hole in America's borders!

Unfortunately, neither the Democrats nor the Republicans are man enough to fill up the breach!

"There was another Diebolded election just 2 years ago..."

Depending on how selective your memory is, you might remember that ALGORE CONCEDED DEFEAT IN 2000 BEFORE CHANGING HIS MIND.

The fact of the matter is that the margin of victory in the Florida presidential election was smaller than the margin of error. Algore's advisors convinced him that all he had to do was manufacture a few hundred votes in a recount of hanging chads and he could manufacture a win.

HOW GEORGE BUSH STOLE ELECTION 2000

"Al, this is David Boies of Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP, America's richest trial lawyers. I apologize for calling so late, but this won't wait."

"Look, I know you've already conceded, but I've been talking to some folks in Florida and they think they can find enough extra votes down there to give you the state in a recount."

"Just a recount in Volusia, Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami-Dade counties, though."

"If it goes statewide our people will be spread too thin to keep things under control."

"Do you want to give it a try? At this point you've got nothing to lose."

"That's great, Al. I'll give 'em a call and we'll get this show on the road."

"Call Bush right away to let him know you've changed your mind."

"On second thought, call a press conference first."

"Talk to you later, Mr. President."

2) Definitions in Addiction Medicine,

3) Computer and Cyberspace Addiction,

4) When games stop being fun,

5) Video games: Cause for concern?,

6) Video games: Research, ratings, and recommendations, Contains many references for empirical studies

7) Video games addiction,

8) Are video games really so bad?,

9) Questions Answered,

10) Positron Emission Tomography ,

11) The Biochemistry of Human Addiction, Discusses the role of dopamine in addiction

Uh, we support the basic idea. How is DNA different than a finger print or photo?

http://www.time.com/time/columnist/stengel/article /0,9565,180144,00.html

And, by the way, Americans support the idea of a national ID card. A Pew poll from September shows that 70% of Americans like the idea

Hitler, thank you. The world's a better place

I think this is just the product of the ever-rising climate of litigation in our country. This country has politicized our schools. Now, instead of putting the responsibility of a student's actions on the student or his/her parents, we've put the responsibility of their actions on the school themselves. Look at some of the recent stories that have been in the news in the last several years. One recent story that comes to mind was featured in TIME http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1 194020-1,00.html magazine. The article basically describes how universities are being held responsible if a student commits suicide. The argument (not that I agree with it) is that the school could have done something to save the student, but they didn't try hard enough.

Granted, this deals with universities, but it wouldn't surprise me if a guy in high school was posting "inappropriate" comments about a girl he banged or something, and the parents of the girl sued the school for not intervening with disciplinary action. We've basically sent the message to schools that "We want control over ourselves and our kids - but if they do something wrong its your fault for not stepping in."

Even so, this concept of signing a pledge barring participation in illegal and inappropriate activities outside of school is nothing new. If anybody recalls, about 7 years ago there was a lot of ferver over random drug testing of students involved in extracirricular activities. If the school found out that you were using drugs outside of school, you could be subjected to disciplinary action. This went so far as to include something like being at a party with beer.

In the end, though, American's have ultimately put schools in this position. If you discipline our kids too much - we'll sue you. If you don't discipline our kids and something happens - we'll sue you.

How about spending the 300 billion on researching basic sciences and attracting more and capable minds to it. You can't honestly tell me that doubling the amount of capable people working on understanding the universe won't accelerate our understanding of the same (not to mention unforeseen applied sciences advantages)
Time / Is America Flunking Science
Government spending on research
Also I know that there isn't a 1:1 correlation the point is the more you expand scientific knowledge of all kinds, the larger the potential for new discoveries (standing on the shoulders of giants and all that)

Here in the Netherlands there was a big uproar when Hirshi Ali basically said the same thing: Mohammed was a pedophile because he took a 9 year old for a wife. Yet she gets elected Woman of the Year by Times magazine.

Reference please? (Nederlands of Engels)

>For better or worse, there really isn't a real "Right to Privacy" in the Constitution.

Did you know that some of the Founders didn't want to include a Bill of Rights? All were in favor of human rights (at least for white people, sigh) but some were afraid that if they wrote down a list then later generations might mistake it for an exhaustive list and might begin violating rights that hadn't been written down.

They put in the Ninth Amendment to spell out in black and white that all other rights were still guaranteed even if they didn't get a slot in the Bill of Rights. They did that to make absolutely sure that nobody in the future could ever disparage a right by saying "it's not in the Constitution".

>If we don't want the government to look over our shoulders, then we can't bitch when they didn't see something coming.

Why not? Aside from the "if they've got something why don't they get FISA warrants" question, why can't we bitch when the government finds plots (without mass domestic spying) and refuses to even ask for warrants?

The long anwswer is, yes we did.

Bin Laden wasn't funded by the CIA. He wouldn't have taken American money anyway, and didn't need it besides. We did fund some groups that were associated with his Arab mujihadeen, but not his group directly.

Source, please? You're incorrect; Bin Laden was funded by the CIA. Even the Identifying Misinformation page, so helpfully and ironically supplied by the government, admits that:

"While the charges that the CIA was responsible for the rise of the Afghan Arabs might make good copy, they don't make good history. The truth is more complicated, tinged with varying shades of gray. The United States wanted to be able to deny that the CIA was funding the Afghan war, so its support was funneled through Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence agency (ISI). ISI in turn made the decisions about which Afghan factions to arm and train, tending to favor the most Islamist and pro-Pakistan. The Afghan Arabs generally fought alongside those factions, which is how the charge arose that they were creatures of the CIA.

I love how he tells us that the CIA was engaged in a coverup and then expects us to believe everything that comes after that. The CIA was aiming for that deniability for a reason. There wouldn't've been anything to deny unless they were also directly funding the Afghan Arabs, along with funneling funds through ISI. The CIA is the one with the cash after all. You think just because Bin Laden's daddy was rich that he didn't need money? War is expensive, and rich people need money more than the rest of us because they're used to buying their way through life.

Even the Wikipedia article on OBL mentions the CIA connection. It's a widely known fact, but not one that you're supposed to bring up in public because, just like NSA spying, we don't officially acknowledge that it happened, even though everyone knows it has. That's government for you.

Basing a war on lies is wrong for the person who does it, but our soldiers, the people GP was talking about, did not base their actions in this ware on lies. They based them on fairly accurate opinions of the Iraq situation built up over the last 12 years.

You know I'm amazed some americans still believe this.

The Downing street memo
Doubts, dissent stripped from public version of Iraq assessment
CIA leak illustrates selective use of intelligence on Iraq
Bush talking on the political advantages of war in 99

We didn't attack Iraq, we attacked its government. There is a huge difference. The country as a whole still suffers consequences, but that doesn't diminish the distinction.

The people of Iraq may not agree. I sure as hell don't. Collateral damage is newspeak:
U.S. invasion responsible deaths of over 250,000 civilians in Iraq
THE REAL WMD'S IN IRAQ - OURS
Displaced Iraqis 'living like animals'
'unknown Americans' are provoking civil war in Iraq
The Missing Girls of Iraq

Yes, we agree on many points. And I'm glad we managed to keep this civil. The points we disagree on are rather big though:

I do not believe that the death of tens of thousands of civilians can be justified by claiming to be bringing democracy.

I do not believe that you can force democracy on a country. All you can achive that way is a pseudo colony with a pseudo democracy. The kind of situation leading to the current state of Africa.

I do not believe that Bush believed there were WMDs in Iraq, nor that Iraq was closely tied to Al Quaeda, nor that Iraq was any kind of threat to the US.
I do believe that the "intelligence failures" were 100% intentional.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-15936 07,00.html
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/sp ecial_packages/iraq/intelligence/11901380.htm
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/sp ecial_packages/iraq/intelligence/12995512.htm

I do not believe that Bush invaded Iraq for humanitarian reasons.
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
This count is most likely closer to the truth:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11 674.htm

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/ne ws/2006/05/12/wirq12.xml
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2162249, 00.html
http://www.time.com/time/archive/preview/0,10987,1 186519,00.html
http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArti cle.asp?articleID=8218

The list is endless but I'll stop here.

I believe that Bush does and will continue to do exactly whatever he feels will benefit him, with no concern what so ever for how many dies for his gain. Not that you actually need anything but his actions and his statements to prove this, but here are more links:
http://downingstreetmemo.com/archive/2004-10-31-Ho ustonChron-Herskowitz/
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12 885.htm

I believe that Bush is now planning his next war of aggression.
http://www.zaman.com/?bl=international&alt=&trh=20 060511&hn=33036
http://www.rense.com/general71/tdarg.htm
http://wakeupfromyourslumber.blogspot.com/2006/05/ us-feverishly-works-to-frame-iran_13.html
http://newswire.indymedia.org/en/2006/05/839133.sh tml
http://english.people.com.cn/200605/13/eng20060513 _265252.html
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Condoleeza_Rice_ admits_she_responded_to_0509.html

Kinda dumb to link a Gamespot article about the Time article, rather than the Time article itself, if you ask me.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1 191861,00.html

Video games are an unusual medium in that they carry a heavy stigma among nongamers. Not everybody likes ballet, but most nonballet fans don't accuse ballet of leading to violent crime and mental backwardness. Video games aren't so lucky. There's a sharp divide between gamers and nongamers, and the result is a market that, while large and devoted--last year video-game software and hardware brought in $27 billion--is also deeply stagnant. Its borders are sharply defined, and they're not expanding.

Of course, hardware is only half the picture. The other half is the games themselves. "We created a task force internally at Nintendo," Iwata says, "whose objective was to come up with games that would attract people who don't play games." Last year they set out to design a game for the elderly. Amazingly, they succeeded. Brain Age is a set of electronic puzzles (including Sudoku) that purports to keep aging minds nimble. It was released for one of Nintendo's portable platforms, the Nintendo DS, last year. So far, it has sold 2 million copies, many of them to people who had never bought a game before.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1 187331,00.html

http://www.time.com/time/2003/worldseries/moments/ 4.html

About says it all really.

So, the moral of the story is that living in the US is more dangerous than all of the terrorism in the world.

I take the moral of the story you tell to be that you assume murder doesn't happen outside the US, that the people killed by terrorists don't count for much, that the 25,000 people wounded in terrorist attacks don't exist and require no medical care, and that the considerable disruption of daily life and damage to economies caused by terrorism is of no consequence.

I suppose by your reasoning, the attacks on 9/11, and their aftermath, which killed 3,000 people and did $100,000,000,000 of damage to the US economy were just a statistical blip on the radar.

I'm curious, do incidents like Beslan make any impression on you?

Do you have any thoughts on if the US should do anything to prevent Al Qaeda from attaining its stated goal of killing 4,000,000 Americans?

The problem of 9/11 wasn't a lack of investigation or power.

>It could also be that those 3,501 did business with or donated money to an organization that is a front for a terror group

That would be illegal. Where are the arrests?

Americans support National ID card : http://www.time.com/time/columnist/stengel/article /0,9565,180144,00.html

It's a good idea.

1) We won't have to build a Maginot Line on the Mexican border.
2) We can enforce our immigration laws better and more cheaply.
3) We can cut down on fraud.
4) We can catch criminals more easily.

I know that some are scared of it but the benefits outweigh the minor costs.

Some might complain about privacy ... but guess what, check your junk mail. Check out your RICO score. Check out your entry in the voter database. Law abiding tax paying Americans are already compromised and nothing can undo it.
Only criminals fear the National ID card.

This approach applied to paraplegia would go along way to re-humanizing people stuck in wheelchairs. Even more so than Dean Kamen's four/two wheel stabilized wheelchair.

http://sanlab.kz.tsukuba.ac.jp/indexE.html

http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1 129522-5,00.html

It's about time someone tell you something. Let me start with US genocide against native Americans; For current human right issues in American, you can just take a look at what happened after 2003.

I'd like to remind you the Master of Falungong, Mr. Li, publicly stated that computers are invented by aliens among us whose ultimate goal is to replace human with alien offsprings.
http://www.time.com/time/asia/asia/magazine/1999/9 90510/interview3.html
What do alien look like? "One type looks like a human, but has a nose that is made of bone. Others look like ghosts. At first they thought that I was trying to help them. Now they now that I am sweeping them away."

The only way to avoid the horrible future of mankind is to join FLG. Now tell me you think of FLG?

I didn't know anything about what GP was talking about either. cnet always has a pro-MS tone for my likings most of the time.

Anyway, googling around you can find some very interesting sites that link him with cnet.

Remember the G4 iMac? Remember seeing it on the cover of Time?

For those of you who don't remember - you can see the cover (with steve jobs looking quite sexy, iMac in background) here (I kid, I kid, real cover here)

Apple got that cover story because 1) it was news, and 2) they were able to promise Time an exclusive on the story. You can't buy the cover of Time as an ad placemement, but if you could, it's probably worth about a hundred million bucks.

No - Apple got the cover story because the iMac looked damn sexy - it was different from the vast majority of PCs that came before it.

If you really think Apple would stop getting this sort of publicity if their was pre leaks (with photoshopped mockup pics), then consider the car industry (the car/computer analogy never gets old).

When any high end car maker announces a new/cool model, it will make the front pages of all the car mags, in spite of the fact that the specs, look of the body, etc etc have all been known for months if not years. Why? Because they look cool - and the product launch is the first time the public knows for sure that this is what the product will be.

Apple will continue to get Time covers as long as it continues to make good looking products. It is nonsensical to suggest that these leaks will cost Apple hundreds of millions of dollars worth of publicity.

Remember the G4 iMac? Remember seeing it on the cover of Time?

For those of you who don't remember - you can see the cover (with steve jobs looking quite sexy, iMac in background) here (I kid, I kid, real cover here)

Apple got that cover story because 1) it was news, and 2) they were able to promise Time an exclusive on the story. You can't buy the cover of Time as an ad placemement, but if you could, it's probably worth about a hundred million bucks.

No - Apple got the cover story because the iMac looked damn sexy - it was different from the vast majority of PCs that came before it.

If you really think Apple would stop getting this sort of publicity if their was pre leaks (with photoshopped mockup pics), then consider the car industry (the car/computer analogy never gets old).

When any high end car maker announces a new/cool model, it will make the front pages of all the car mags, in spite of the fact that the specs, look of the body, etc etc have all been known for months if not years. Why? Because they look cool - and the product launch is the first time the public knows for sure that this is what the product will be.

Apple will continue to get Time covers as long as it continues to make good looking products. It is nonsensical to suggest that these leaks will cost Apple hundreds of millions of dollars worth of publicity.

By your own admission, you think I am incapable of disagreeing or challenging your random "respected climatologist", but truth be told, many climatologists are just scientific hacks afraid to go against the politically charged demagoguery of the global warming doomsayers. And demagoguery it is, make no mistake.

A great example of this in action is the foolish notion that Hurricane Katrina was due in large part to Global Warming, despite the emphatic disagreement from Max Mayfield, director the National Hurricane Center on CBS's Face the Nation with Bob Schieffer around the end of September of last year.

Of course, because I'm not a respected climatologist, I have no right to disagree, or even be appropriately skeptical of people who's political and personal motiations are crystal clear.

New in the country? Looking for a good tutorial on how our government works, but not enough days to burn walking around the capital and digging up the dirt? Here's a quick guide to the underpinnings of our system:

http://www.time.com/time/press_releases/article/0, 8599,1109304,00.html

CRONYISM. Study it, discuss it, live it, learn it. We don't hire competent people, we hire OUR FRIENDS and any other greedy lamprey that has attached themselves to us and looks good in a suit.

So remember this folks. If you decide to immigrate here, bring friends and a good looking suit.

Today they have the highest market capitalization of any airline in the world and one of the highest profit margins as well.

Iraq agreed to comply with certain requirements, and failed to do so for the better part of a decade. They continued to possess banned weapons - including WMDs - and in general refused to cooperate with UN inspectors. Even Hans Blix said that the Iraqis were hiding things, and the onus was on Iraq to provide documenation.

If you can't see the difference between Bush, Rumsfeld, and Saddam you simply are blind... Two answer to the people (whom seem to have voted Bush, and by proxy Rumsfeld into power twice), one only to his whims. Two played by the world's rules and those of the UN; the other bribed his way through the UN to try to get what he wanted.

I haven't heard of too many US citizens being bathed in acid, or shredded alive, or getting your ankles drilled through, among other things...

Yeah, Bush and Rumsfeld are JUST LIKE Saddam... The US is one big dictatorship with no personal freedoms and we're all just being used like cattle...

Apple's not going to go down the Windows rathole.

File this next to:
+ Apple will never ship Intel x86 CISC
+ Apple will never ship an obsolete BIOS

It's high time that people stop thinking of Apple's Mac Strategy in terms of 2004 and earlier. At this point it's a basic Occam's Razor issue -- why would Apple create a Windows boot environment, if they weren't planning on selling it.

> I'm sure that's why iWork was started, and I'm just as sure that the iWork crew are hard at work on replacing every part of MS Office

I'm sure that Apple will do everything within their power to keep Microsoft Office on Mac OS X. It's the highest selling software package for their platform, and absolutely critical to their corporate customers. Steve Jobs himself made that absolutely clear. I know the Appleheads hate to acknowledge it, but Apple and MS are buddies.

So, in conclusion, your message is standard MacZealot-talk, and MacZealots have a horrible track record predicting Apple's next move over the last year.

• climate change is far more influenced by water vapor than by CO2, and we can't do anything to change that

• the geological record tells us that extreme climate changes are a natural occurrence

Then y'all can come back and tell us whether Bill Gates has a heart (aimed at the GP).

Hint: Simply giving away huge sums of money does not land you a Time "Person of the year" award.

Y'all can scream all you want about how Gates and Bono don't need all that money anyway, and they don't have to work another day in their lives so they can afford to spend time on these vexing issues. Fact is a vast majority of people don't do crap after attaining their fame and/or wealth. The rest are either screw ups or media whores. And don't get me started on "Old Money".

Time magazine seems to think he's not a complete asshole:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1 142278,00.html

Since they started dumping money into political campaigns and hired their own lobbying group about ten years ago Microsoft has become one of the most generous contributors to politicians in the country:


LXer: How Microsoft wastes its money on anything but software
http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/55497/index.h tml


Election 2004: How to Excel in DC
http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/0438/040922_news _microsoft.php


A Bug in Windows GOP (Seattle Weekly)
http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/0522/050601_news _microsoft.php


Microsoft And The G.O.P.: Antitrust Insurance?
http://www.time.com/time/reports/gatesbook/lobbyin g.html


Microsoft's lobbying efforts eclipse Enron
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-835267.html


Redmond | Feature Article: Following Microsoft's Money
http://redmondmag.com/features/article.asp?Editori alsID=440


News Alert 9/6/01: Microsoft
http://www.opensecrets.org/alerts/v6/alertv6_26.as p


Commentary: It's Back to Charm School for Microsoft
http://www.businessweek.com/1999/99_45/b3654183.ht m


"The Think Tank As Flack" by David Callahan
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/1999/991 1.callahan.think.html

Oh, like the Ford GT right? The number of those they sell would not be that far off from how many a specialty brand like Ferrari. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_GT http://www.time.com/time/europe/specials/ff/trip4/ ferrari.html

When MikeRT says "The FBI has also had problems with management blowing off field agents" a great example is Agent Colleen Rowley's experience: "We were prevented from even attempting to question Moussaoui on the day of the attacks when, in theory, he could have possessed further information about other co-conspirators."

Operation Swarmer was pure spin.

But contrary to what many many television networks erroneously reported, the operation was by no means the largest use of airpower since the start of the war. ("Air Assault" is a military term that refers specifically to transporting troops into an area.) In fact, there were no airstrikes and no leading insurgents were nabbed in an operation that some skeptical military analysts described as little more than a photo op. What's more, there were no shots fired at all and the units had met no resistance, said the U.S. and Iraqi commanders.
Time

While I think Gates is right to mock these laptops, I don't think he understands the realities of the problems of helping others around the world. The only thing that helps others is letting them find or create their own opportunities to better their futures. Taking care of people today is counter-productive and can destroy opportunities in the future.

Whether the article was politically motivated has nothing to do with the subject matter...

The bugs themselves? No. What we might do about it? Lots of political hanky-panky to go on there. How do we encourage creation of new antibiotics? Tax breaks for big pharms just make Viagra even more profitable. Read about the ridiculous synthetic fuel tax break, where companies are paid multi-millions to spray a coat of diesel on coal. I can see accelerating NIH and NSA grants, but I'm not sure what else you can do.

Clearly only socialists complain about privacy

They don't care about privacy. They care about the complaining. And they want to think of themselves as victims. For that "I'm a victim, empower me and give me goodies" benefit. Privacy is a pretense.

Seriously though, Chuck Schumer's staff illegally obtained a credit report on Michael Steele. Where were Slashdot's pretend privacy advocates then? No crocodile tears for Mr. Steele?

Less waste energy doesn't change the fact that it takes a lot of energy to state change that much water. No way around that fact.

Sure there is; you get the energy BACK when the state changes back to liquid. From a related article:

"However, 1,000 watts of heat won't boil much water, so Kamen developed a closed system, powered by whatever fuel is at hand, that traps the energy released when the boiled water vapor recondenses. Essentially, he's recycling heat. Result: a low-power, low-maintenance device that will cost around $1,000 to manufacture and makes 10 gal. of drinkable water an hour."

Slightly to the left of topic: I remember seeing this when it was first published on Time's website: http://www.time.com/time/techtime/200304/sites_dev il.html Not sure if this was discussed before or not, but essentially it's an article that encourages and explains how to download music without paying for te 'overhead', when all you want is the music. Surprised they didn't get sued for this?

They're still studying western ways.

The page you've requested is an excerpt from a book by Brent Scowcroft and George H. W. Bush titled A World Transformed, which appeared in the March 2, 1998, issue of TIME magazine under the title "Why We Didn't Remove Saddam". It has been removed from our site because the publisher did not grant us rights to sell the piece online through the TIME archive.

There's one in western Colorado that's been burning for something like 90 years. Apparently this is a pretty common problem.

The ones I mentioned were fixed earlier this week after the Chinese authorities took google.cn offline. It is mentioned in this Time article (see the last paragraph): http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1 156598-2,00.html. There are still a myriad of ways around the Chinese filters, for the same reason there are myriad ways around all filters; those that don't rely on an approved whitelist simple cannot keep up with the vocabulary and inventiveness of the masses. Even with 30,000 full-time Internet censors, the Chinese can't keep up with their current 4 million bloggers, much less then 20 million they'll have by 2010.[1] China can censor all the big keywords -- falun gung, freedom, democracy, tiananmen, etc. I'm of the firm belief, however, that those aren't the words that will kill the last vestiages of Chinese central control, but rather the movements that the Chinese make up themselves, which will be marketing in nature, rather then violent or freedom-loving. The Chinese realize this, and have been slowly transitioning to a market economy for the last 10 years. In 10 more, their economy will be indistinguishable from ours.

[1] As of December 2004, China has about 34.6 million ISP accounts, making it one of the world's biggest Internet markets... Gartner estimates that the number of ISP accounts will increase to 40.7 million by the end of 2005, which is expected to further grow to 67.3 million accounts by the end of 2009. -- Gartner, Network and Internet Services and Service Providers in China, 4 November 2005

This is nothing new at all

I'll grant you that yes, prices have come down recently but surely every geek wants our scientific research budgets spent on a much worthier use for nanotubes.

Can you show me any short paragraphs or excerpts from your well documented evidence? Or will it be a link to a 5 page article full of vague accusations?

A few minutes with Google provides more than enough citations, even after excluding those from lefty publications:

CBS News says "Mr. Bush appreciates loyalty above all."

In Military Week, Lt. Col (ret) Karen Kwiatkowski lays it on the line: "George W. Bush and Dick Cheney habitually reward cowardice and incompetence. They continually place political loyalty above ethics and loyalty to country."

The British Guardian quotes Michael O'Hanlon saying "I certainly think Bush values loyalty above all else."

Time Magazine says "For a President known to prize loyalty above most else..."

The Washington Post says: "But on a matter of first-order significance to many conservatives, the president let personal loyalty override what had been a central tenet of his political strategy."

The St. Cloud Times says: "George W. Bush's particular brand of immoderation lies in the premium he places on trust and loyalty". It goes on to cite Alberto Gonzalez, Karen Hughes and Don Evans as examples. Of course we can add Harriet Meiers and Michael Brown to that list.

In a Newsday story, James Klurfield writes "What's going on here, folks, is that loyalty to the president is being rewarded above all other values, including competent performance."

The Council on Foreign Relations has an entire article called Loyalty as Foreign Policy

The New Republic says "...Moreover, both Johnson and Bush have been known to place a high premium on personal loyalty."

You can look at the whole of a Knight Ridder wire article entitled Bush's Loyalty Raises Doubts About His Political Judgment.

The British newspaper The Telegraph says "...Mr Tenet, who, like President Bush, prizes loyalty above most other virtues..."

I think I've made my point. You can find more for yourself with minimal effort if you care to.

How about this or this?

Wow, pull your head out of the sand. I always thought a government agent or employee penalizing others for their legal political donations would be illegal or something... I guess not though. Watch out who you dontate money to politically.