Microsoft Hires Ralph Reed As Lobbyist

rm-r writes: "The BBC is running a story here about Microsoft hiring Ralph Reed, one of George W. Bush's senior consultants and a big figure in the Christian Coalition, to lobby against their anti-trust case." Think MS knows that many people consider them the Great Satan??

Comments

Re:Look out

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a shame your ancestors fought so hard for democracy just so later generations could throw it away. Time for another revolution?

The haircut..

[Anonymous Coward]

Glad I'm not the only one to think this..

I saw a MS ad on tv, the one where bill, wearing a sweater (shades of Jimmy Carter) drones on about great software, innovation, and how "the best is yet to come".

I had two reactions:

When Bill smiles, (which he does once, for a split second) it seems to make his face ache.

Who does his hair? Is this person paid? Or does Bill go over the whole thing himself with a clipper, and then use a salad bowl to trim the fringe?

But hey, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the haircut is just another example of MS innovation and quality, and with time i'll think it's great. Like fading menus.

Reed Has a Bad Record

[Anonymous Coward]

Reed's record in politics is hideous. About ten years ago, he was telling right-wing Christians to run for office, but to hide their agenda until after they were elected. They did this with some success in various parts of the country, particularly around San Diego, but there was immense public outrage after the election when the religious fanatics came out of the closet and started imposing public policies based on ancient mythologies.

After being pressured, Reed backed off and has disavowed the strategy of using covert candidates. But once you have practiced deception, your disavowals are forever suspect. Reed has no credibility, so he's found a good client.

Re:It could be worse...

[Anonymous Coward]

Just as long as it's not that dumbfsck Rex Ballard, we'll be okay.

Re:Evil shall support it's own

[Anonymous Coward]

If Bill Gates has tried to keep us in the computing dark ages, how come all the Linux desktops keep trying to copy Windows?

Probably the same reason Windows has been copying Apple all these years.

Re:Picking fundy lobbyst proves stupidity of MS.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry, I think you've got a few things mixed up. Ralph Reed is indeed a conservative, but only a fundamentalist in the name of the almighty dollar. The Christian Coalition hired him because he is an excellent political strategist and public relations officer. He knows how to make deals, and make his employer look good, no matter how much the truth points the other direction and no matter how much some people do not like him.

When Pat Robertson, and his ilk were running the Christian Coalition, most Americans thought they were whacked out right-wing freaks, much more to the right of most Conservative Republicans, a year after they hired Reed, public opinion shifted significantly in their favor, much to my dismay. While most Americans still didn't agree with all of their rhetoric, many Americans felt that their moral stance was justified.

MS needs a high profile political presence these days. And what better time than now to attack the issue with a presidential election coming up. The Democrats have a weak position this year, and a weaker candidate. GBush is a weak candidate, but the MS vs. DOJ case is sort of a pivot point for a lot of people because it is so public, everyone has an opinion, even people that know nothing about MS, except that they 'make all that 'puter stuff, right?'.

Remember, Ralph Reed and MS aren't trying to sway those of us who pay attention, whether we agree or disagree. They are trying to get Ma and Pa in Podunk, Kentucky, who are fence sitters in the political sense. Repeating the phrase like OOG:

BIG GOVERNMENT BAD! SEE HOW BIG GOVERNMENT STIFLE COMPETITION! HURT POOR BILLGATES!

So that Ma and Pa Podunk will start to think that the DOJ has done a bad thing to MS. Most Americans don't decipher the news, we listen to sound bytes, and choose the side that seems the most reasoned.

It is who we are, and why people like Ralph Reed can succeed in leading the sheep to the slaughter.

But Ralph Reed IS.

[Anonymous Coward]

Ralph Reed and his ilk are, in the words of John
McCain, evil. They preach a peculiarly nasty
strain of evangelical fundamentalism, one that
would have Americans sniping Slepians and
crucifying Shepards. While Bill Gates may have
gotten a bad rap, cozying up to nutcases like
Ralph Reed doesn't help.

Re:But Ralph Reed IS.

[Mike A.]

Congratulations, AC, you've just proven yourself to be even worse than Ralph Reed. And that's saying something. Bigot.

I don't want to see Ralph Reed dead. I want to see him discredited, exposed as the bigot he is. Or else for him to renounce his past bigotry. But unfortunately, as long as there's that miniscule but vocal group of people as bigoted as him, neither is particularly likely.

--

Re:But Ralph Reed IS.

[Freedent]

Hate against gays, and the demonization of so-called "welfare mothers" (whose existance I'm not even sure about). The GOP, like every classic right wing party, loves to pick on the poor. They're an easy scapegoat for a mismanaged gov't and for people who don't like to pay their taxes.

Re:But Ralph Reed IS.

[snorks]

Excuse me? Pat "Satan" Roberts lackey-boy? The weasel responsible for the current american hate-mongering republican majority? Playing for the Dubya camp now??? Satan indeed.

Re:Resumes

[whoop]

That's what he's doing. He asked you for specifics to that case so he could look it up independantly. Do you have anything more specific than, "I saw him incite people to beat a woman?" If you have something, dates, places, newspaper articles, etc, share it. Otherwise it's got the same weight as if I made it up.

Re:Attaboy, George W.!

[whoop]

Don't go bringing facts in here. You're interrupting the nice general anti-conservative, anti-religion, anti-Microsoft atmosphere.

:)

Re:Resumes

[whoop]

Your forgetting where you are. Engaging in religious activities is one of the worst things a Slashdotee can do. Republicanism is right up there as well. Top it off with Microsoft and you have paradise. So it's only proper that all three things be rolled into one forum. Wasn't Microsoft working with RIAA and them folks on an encrypted MP3-type format so you couldn't copy them? If only they added a little of this to the story, it'd be pure ecstacy. :)

Besides, no one considers Slashdot to be a neutral news site, it's about Open Source and all. Every story will be baited against Microsoft, RIAA, MPAA, etc. It's been this way since the beginning. There's nothing wrong with that, I'm just saying don't expect the unbiased reporting your crappy typical media claims. At least they're up front with it here.

Huh?

[whoop]

So MS is buying Bush by hiring someone who's good with public images? I don't know, but has Bush said he is a lackee of Reed and I missed it? Especially in politics, there are separations between people working on a campaign and the one running for office. Reed is good at this, so Bush hired him to do some work, and now MS needs PR help so they go with the man that could do it.

Now if you want some talk of buying your way to political friends, how about that party late last week where Bill Gates gets to sit right next to Bill Clinton at the dinner? Then ask yourself, who has more power currently? Bush isn't even a clear winner, so "buying" some aide of his isn't a sure thing to coming out on top of the anti-trust case. On the other hand, get the ear of Clinton for an evening, and poof the DOJ could magically decide it'll accept MS's plea bargain.

How's that for conspiracy theories? It's more plausible than just hiring an aide to a maybe-president-in-a-year guy.

Re:Grammer check is also wrong for American usage.

[DunbarTheInept]

• "This." looks good.
  "This". looks weird.

But the reason that looks weird is that "this" is not a sentence, and therefore shouldn't have a period. Use a comma, any you get:

• "This", is my way, which IMO looks cleaner.
• "This," is the standard way.

Had it been an entire sentence being quoted, then my way, there's a period in the quote for the quoted sentence, as well as a comma outside for including it in the enclosing sentence, like so:

• My way: "I am hungry.", Bob said.
• Std way: "I am hungry," Bob said. (Looks bad because it ends the sentence "I am hungry" with a comma, purely as an artifact of how it is included inside the enclosing quoter's sentence.

Grammer check is also wrong for American usage.

[DunbarTheInept]

The Word grammer checker is annoying for American English users too. It keeps complaining about perfectly ordinary constructs being "too hard". (It's frustrating trying to write a technical document when it keeps complaining about the passive voice.) (It certainly doesn't help that the American Standard English rules are sometimes blatantly illogical in the first place, especially in the use of quotation marks. It feels very wrong to put the end-of-sentence mark ('.','!', or '?') inside the quotes in cases where it isn't really a part of what was being said by the person being quoted. i.e.: Did Bob say, "hello?" (What Bob said is not a question, so why put the question mark inside the quotes? It IMO belongs outside, as part of the sentence into which his quote is being inserted.)

Re:Grammer check is also wrong for American usage.

[Helge Hafting]

It feels very wrong to put the end-of-sentence mark ('.','!', or '?') inside the quotes

Good point, but see how much better it looks when printed in a book, using proper fonts.

"This." looks good.
"This". looks weird.

MS is NOT Satan, nor is Mr Gates.

[bluGill]

While many people call Bill Gates Satan, us geeks need to settle down. He represents many things that are wrong with the computing industry today. However that does not make him satan. Lets keep some perspective here folks. Evil is complex, and you don't want to confuse some sins (which we all have though we won't admit to)

Put it anouther way, If both Bill Gates and I get to heaven (or hell, suspend your disbelief in my religion if you must) I'd like to spend some time over a cup of coffee remembering. Sort of like today I can go to a high school reunion and have a enjoyable conversation with the brute who used to beat me up all the time.

Bill Gates is a man. He is mortal, despite his access to essentially unlimited amounts of money. You don't have to like his empire, but lets leave personal attacks for polititions.

Re:MS is NOT Satan, nor is Mr Gates.

[Danse]

You're partially right. Bill Gates is not Satan. He is merely a henchman of Satan. Satan wouldn't be caught dead with a haircut like that.

Seriously though, I don't know if there is really any point in separating attacks on his empire from attacks on him personally. It amounts to the same thing. He IS Microsoft. Sure, he has his minions to do the day-to-day stuff, but there is no doubt that he runs the show. I'll agree that it's overkill to call Microsoft evil in the traditional sense, but we are talking about a company that has been breaking the law, and is now trying to use its money and power to influence politicians to keep from being severely punished.

One could argue that any of us would likely try to fight back and change the law if we felt we were being unjustly prosecuted for something, but I certainly feel that if that were the case, I'd do it openly and try to make an argument that stands on its own merit rather than simply getting an exception made for me under the table. The problem is that Microsoft has tried several times to make a public argument, but they always twist the facts and leave out the parts that don't look so good in the light of day. That doesn't work in court though, so many of these facts were brought to light and, in the end, that's why they lost the case. The facts simply contradicted their arguments almost entirely.

Re:MS is NOT Satan, nor is Mr Gates.

[Black Parrot]

> If both Bill Gates and I get to heaven (or hell...)

If me'n Bill end up the same place, I'll call it Hell regardless of what the sign on the door says.
--

Re:MS is NOT Satan, nor is Mr Gates.

[MrCreosote]

"Umm... can you give me an example of a software company that doesn't play hardball like MS? "

The way I see it, it's kind of like being in a demolition derby. Sure everyone is playing pretty hard trying to knock out all of the other competitors. It's just that Microsoft happens to be driving an M1 Abrams.

Re:MS is NOT Satan, nor is Mr Gates.

[oldman1080]

When a man does evil, i.e. unethical business and monopolistic practices, knows he is doing evil, straight out lies and denies he is doing any evil... well how much closer than to evil can he be?

BTW, IANAC, but "it is easier for a man to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into heaven". I really doubt you will be having that cup of coffee with Mr. Gates, in this lifetime or the next.

Re:MS is NOT Satan, nor is Mr Gates.

[Pinball Wizard]

Umm... can you give me an example of a software company that doesn't play hardball like MS? Not counting the open source world, that is?

Oracle, Sun, IBM, AOL all have lots of skeletons in their respective closets. They all play dirty. Microsoft just happened to be more successful at the slimy game that is the software industry.

I'd suggest that a new set of rules was in order, but govt. restraint of the software industry will only slow the economy and the progress of technology. If we impose new rules and conditions on the software industry that is just one more obstacle for open source.

It strikes me as odd that perhaps the biggest complaint against MS is the browser they gave away for free, destroying Netscape. Yet here we all are reading Slashdot, using an OS(Linux) we got for free that is eating at Microsofts share.

The best thing we could do to solve the MS problem is to ignore them. Improve and proliferate the Linux OS, and MS will no longer be a monopoly. We, the programmers and users should be the ones who force MS to use accepted standards and to open their code. We should be the ones organizing a boycott if they act in an unfair way. By going to the government and asking them to solve this, we are inviting the government in to regulate everything, including Linux and Open Source.

Thanks, but no thanks. The beauty of the open source movement is that it is not regulated. If the govt. gets its fingers in the open source movement it will be corrupted beyond repair. Keep the govt. out of software!

Re:2 * lusr = winner ?

[felicity]

Imagine what these two guys will accomplish if they pool their talents and resources.

Be careful, GWB hasn't announced a running-mate yet ...

You're kidding right?

[Danse]

We have a two-party system going here. The existing government won't let that change because it's what keeps us from ever effecting changes. Unless the democrat and republican candidates are just completely repulsive to the vast majority of voters, no third party candidate stands a chance of winning because people don't want to "throw away their vote" by voting for someone that they think doesn't have a decent chance of winning. Instead of changing to a voting system that allows us to vote without fear of wasting our votes, the government is determined to keep the current system in place. For the majority of office holders, the current system is what got them into office, and they want to keep the system because it's more likely to allow them to get reelected.

Then there's the cost of running a campaign. If you don't have the cash, nobody will have a clue who you are. I'm not old enough to run for any real office, and I don't have the kind of money it takes to run a campaign anyway. So, I guess I'm stuck with the current choices.

Re:You're kidding right?

[Danse]

but they seem to forget that the underlying philosophy of the American system has historically been Hippocratic: First, do no harm.

I actually considered that there is some benefit to a perpetually semi-paralyzed government, but I think that there comes a point where it's gone downhill far enough that we need a real change. We can't get that with the current system. When I think of a better voting system, I think of a cascading-vote type system. You rank the candidates from your favorite down to the one whom you would not let pet your dog. Then, the votes are tallied and the candidates who got the fewest votes are tossed out and those ballots are re-counted using the next-favorite candidate that is still in the race. Repeat until you have a winner. This system would still allow people to vote for the status-quo if they feel it is doing a good job. Fringe interests still won't have that much influence, but a widely-appreciated third-party candidate would have a much better chance of getting into office simply because people wouldn't fear wasting their vote by voting for him.

Re:You're kidding right?

[unitron]

My proposal for a variation on the cascading system is for everyone to get to vote yes or no on every candidate.
For example, you could have yes for George Bush (the older one, not Boy George) and yes for Ross Perot and no for Bill Clinton.
Or you could have voted yes for Clinton and yes for Perot and no for Bush.
That way nobody who wanted Perot would have had to waste their vote on Bush to keep Clinton out or on Clinton to keep Bush out. (I leave the obvious keeping Clinton out of the bush joke for the next poster)
I realise that an example that lands Perot in the Whitehouse may not be the best way to sell the idea, but the present system allows the 2 main parties to blackmail the voter out of voting for 3rd party candidates.
Remember, bi-partisan means the 2 big parties are acting in the interests of the 2 big parties. Not the same as non-partisan.

Re:You're kidding right?

[mOdQuArK!]

I actually considered that there is some benefit to a perpetually semi-paralyzed government, but I think that there comes a point where it's gone downhill far enough that we need a real change.

I also thought this might be preferable, but I realized that this "paralysis" consists of large chunks of my tax money being flushed down a pork-smelling toilet.

Regarding your voting scheme, I vaguely remember reading about a similar voting scheme where everyone just assigned a numeric value based on preference to the candidates, and whoever got the most overall score won. It supposedly had similar characteristics to your stated preferences - fringe interests weren't likely to be elected, and widely popular candidates were likely to be elected no matter what party they belonged to (which might not be a good thing in some people's eyes :)

It would be cool if there was some kind of straightforward TEST (for both governing "skills" & ethics) we could make candidates take, except I haven't any clue how we would make such a test fairly.

I guess any system which involves humans in positions where they can collect too much power, is just ripe for exploitation.

Re:You're kidding right?

[paranoidfish]

When I think of a better voting system, I think of a cascading-vote type system. You rank the candidates from your favorite down to the one whom you would not let pet your dog. Then, the votes are tallied and the candidates who got the fewest votes are tossed out and those ballots are re-counted using the next-favorite candidate that is still in the race

This system is used widely in the unions in Britain, and many other places. It's known as Single Transferable Vote (STV) or the Alternative Voting System. (more info available here)

The main difference between STV and the system you describe is the addition of a candidate known as RON (Re-Open Nominations). Voting for RON is an active vote against candidates, whereas abstaining (not voting) is a vote for apathy.

It works quite well, although it's hard and time-consuming to count the votes. But, no country use it as a national voting system, which probably says something.

Re:You're kidding right?

[gilroy]

Quoth the poster:

Instead of changing to a voting system that allows us to vote without fear of wasting our votes, the government is determined to keep the current system in place.

OK, I have a suspicion I'm going to be unpopular here, and I know that people from several European countries will heckle me, but for the most part I like the two-party system. The alternatives seem to be

(a) a one-party system. These generally don't function well for very long and they have a heck of a time with personal freedoms,
= or =
(b) a multi-party system. These seem -- to this admittedly distant observer -- to be perenially on the verge of dissolution. Coalitions never seem to be stable, and wild nuts with marginal support can assume huge importance because they happen to hold a swing vote in the parlaiment or assembly.

A lot of people bemoan the paralysis produced by a two-party system (and I'm often one of them), but they seem to forget that the underlying philosophy of the American system has historically been Hippocratic: First, do no harm. In other words, it's designed to do not much and that's more or less what we get.

Re:You're kidding right?

[gilroy]

It works quite well, although it's hard and time-consuming to count the votes. But, no country use it as a national voting system, which probably says something.

It says one of four things:
(a) National govt's have a well-founded suspicion about these things;
(b) National govt's aren't willing to spend the money or time on this kind of system;
(c) National govt's are stuck in the 18th century when the form of modern democracy was more or less set;
(d) National govt's cynically feel that their voting population is too apathetic or too lazy to understand such a system.

Sadly, the evidence seems to be for a mixture of (c) and (d).

Re:Come on!

[Danse]

Near as I can tell, he was referring to the article, and a list of some of Microsoft's past transgressions. Which part didn't you understand?

Re:Come on!

[Danse]

Yep. That was it. I read at 0, so I didn't see the post he was replying to. My mistake.

Let me explain...

[Danse]

Umm... can you give me an example of a software company that doesn't play hardball like MS?

Software companies, just like any other type, are free to play hardball if they want, unless they are a monopoly, at which point they play by a different set of rules. There is good reason for this. The US, more than any other nation I can think of, demands that its companies compete. Many other nations are much more protective of their "champion" corporations. They do what they can to shield them from competition. That's one reason why our economy is so strong and we are a major center of innovation. We don't let our corporations get so fat and happy that they lose their edge, or at least if they do get that way, we don't try to protect them from the consequences (usually, although there have been some significant exceptions where corps have been bailed out by the government).

Microsoft has a monopoly on desktop operating systems. While that is not illegal, it is not considered to be beneficial to competition or our economy in general. That is why we have anti-trust laws. Under those laws, Microsoft is not allowed to use its monopoly power to prevent competitors from entering and competing in that market. They are not allowed to create artificial barriers to entry. They are not allowed to leverage their monopoly in one market to try to dominate another market. They are not allowed to "play hardball" like non-monopoly companies. This is for the good of competition. We assume that competition is good for innovation and for consumers because it helps produce the best products at the best prices.

I'd suggest that a new set of rules was in order, but govt. restraint of the software industry will only slow the economy and the progress of technology.

I don't see how people can go throwing these kinds of assumptions around when history shows us exactly the opposite. Go read this article and get back to me. It's not specifically about Microsoft, or even anti-trust in general. It's about open access to infrastructure, namely phone and cable networks, but it does help to illustrate why regulation is often the best way to keep innovation alive rather than leaving it up to a single corp or handful of corps. We make the rules based on what serves the country best, not what serves the big corporations best. These corporations have no deity-given rights to protection from our government. We decided to give them certain protections and privileges, but it is done on our terms. The terms that serve the country. Now, it hasn't always worked, but we've gotten this far and we're doing better than most. I don't think that anti-trust laws or regulation in general should be chucked out the window just because people don't want to offend the country's biggest... err second biggest corporation. Yes they've been wildly successful. They also broke many laws to keep themselves on top and to get rid of the competition. That doesn't fly here, or at least it shouldn't. It remains to be seen whether Microsoft can buy a political fix for its legal problems.

Yet here we all are reading Slashdot, using an OS(Linux) we got for free that is eating at Microsofts share.

Saying that we shouldn't use Linux because its getting in the way of profits that should rightfully belong to Microsoft is like saying we should all stop breathing because nobody is getting rich even though we are consuming oxygen. Ok, so it's not exactly the same. The point is that if it can be made or had for free, or very cheaply, then it will be hard to make money on it. In this case, distributed effort has helped to produce a very good operating system that can be had for very little cost. Operating systems aren't the only products affected by this. Try selling ice to an eskimo sometime.

The best thing we could do to solve the MS problem is to ignore them.

Ignoring them would be foolish in the extreme. Doing so would simply allow them to build more and more artificial dependency into their products and raise the cost more and more for a company to switch to something else. If we stand idly by while Microsoft works even harder to achieve a stronger customer lock-in, we will end up losing a lot of ground. If Microsoft is allowed to own the standards, how can anyone else compete?

By going to the government and asking them to solve this, we are inviting the government in to regulate everything, including Linux and Open Source.

You talk like the DOJ is moving into new territory here or something. Anti-trust laws have been on the books for over 100 years. This is nothing new. It's not opening any new doors or creating any new type of regulation. They are simply enforcing the law. As I said before, the US bases its laws on the assumption that competition is good. Therefore, a lack of competition is bad, and attempting to use monopoly power to maintain that lack of competition is illegal.

Re:Anyone remember when Slashdot was cool?

[Wyatt Earp]

It's not that MS is hiring a lobbyist...it's that MS is hiring a lobbyist whom works for the candidate to lobby the candidate.

To me...it looks more like MS is actually buying G.W. off through Ralph Reed.

MS & Ralph Reed.. a match made in... heaven?

[fialar]

Here we have the most evil of software companies
teaming up with the most evil of fundies.

What a great country we live in, where huge groups of ultra conservatives can have deep pockets and huge lobbies so they can tell me how to have sex, what religion I should be, and now.. what operating system I should run.

I hope the two of them get knocked down together.
If both are discredited, the world has just been done a great justice.

I'm actually not surprised by this.

The bigger they are the harder they fall.

Fialar

GW Bush, best president money can buy...

[bobalu]

"Hey George, I gave Steve Jobs $150M to kill that patent suit, you sure you only need $75M?"

'nuff said.

Re:Anyone remember when Slashdot was cool?

[Jeff DeMaagd]

Um, I think the point was that a formerly hugely influential man of the Christian Right or Moral Majority is now working for Microsoft, and the guy used to advise Bush on what ways he should blunder next. Maybe it isn't so bad after all....

All big companies hire lobbyists, this one is a different case, one that worked for the Moral Majority can't see anything immoral about Microsoft or what they do, especially considering they are giving him money.

Spare me.

[Amphigory]

Geesh... And I guess you've gone out of your way to seek out a comprehensive knowledge of theodicy (the branch of theology that deals with precisely this question)?

Oh. oops. Didn't think so.

I'm sure you've also studies the twenty-odd "proofs" for the existence of God and found them all lacking?

No? Oops.

You sound like someone who rejects God not out of disbelief, but out of stubborn willfulness. Possibly you should study a bit and then come back and talk.

--

James said it all...

[Amphigory]

My brothers, as believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ, don't show favoritism. Suppose a man comes into your meeting wearing a gold ring and fine clothes, and a poor man in shabby clothes also comes in. If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes and say, "Here's a good seat for you," but say to the poor man, "You stand there" or "Sit on the floor by my feet," have you not discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts? Listen, my dear brothers: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him? But you have insulted the poor. Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court? Are they not the ones who are slandering the noble name of him to whom you belong? If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, "Love your neighbor as yourself," [1] you are doing right. But if you show favoritism, you sin and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers.

James 2:1-9 (NIV)

I wonder what Reed's response to that would be? I guess he would p[robably try to narrow the context.

--

How nauseating.

[Amphigory]

Great... Yet another example of "Christians" acting in support of moneyed special interests against the interests of everyone else.

The Christian right even nauseates me, and I'm a Christian! Or maybe it nauseates me especially because I'm a Christian.

*sigh*

--

Re:How nauseating.

[frantzdb]

As a bumper sticker says, the Christian Right is neither.

Re:How nauseating.

[Mija Cat]

Ditto.
Thanks for saying it for me.

Not Christian bashing...

[acb]

There is a very distinct line between criticising the Christian Coalition and criticising Christians in general. The Christian Coalition is an extremist, authoritarian group, hungry for power. It has an ends-justify-the-means mentality; its leaders are on record advocating anti-democratic measures when they think the press isn't watching. Their legislative agenda would turn the US into a fundamentalist theocracy, imposing their narrow, judgmental morality on everyone. If they had the power, there would be stonings of fornicators, sodomists and blasphemers in town squares.

Furthermore, they are not representative of all Christians, or even the majority. There are many Christians who are content to live out Christ's message of judge-not-lest-ye-should-be-judged and being generally decent to their fellow human beings without declaring holy war against those whose values don't match theirs. And if I remember correctly, Christ had something to say about the hypocrites who make a point of wearing their "righteousness" as a badge of pride.

I'm not a Christian myself, but I have the greatest respect for those who are and live a decent life, rather than using their Christianity as an excuse to hate or condemn those who don't share it. Unfortunately, that's what most of the Religious Right seem to do.

Re:Not Christian bashing...

[Augusto]

Amen !

Not only are not all (nor most) Christians part or in agreement with the "Christian Coalition" but many of us are not even considered Christians by them !!! I'm Catholic BTW, and I'm sick of fundamentalist fanatics calling the us sons of Satan or the Pope the antichrist. Why don't they tell Pat Robertson to get off TV for a while and travel like the Pope to places like Cuba & Israel. Not asking for contributions but for peace, freedom and forgivenes..

Darn, this topic really hits a nerve with me !

Re:Not Christian bashing...

[Saltheart]

I have to agree with acb on this. I AM a Christian, and the Christian Coalition makes me very uncomfortable. I consider them to be a very dangerous political group. I don't want anyone forcing their fundamentalist beliefs on me, even if I happen to agree with them. History is completely bloodstained with horrific injustices done in the name of religion. The weight of evidence show that religion and political power do not mix well.

Re:Not Christian bashing...

[Hard_Code]

I agree. And I hope when and if people see me criticizing groups like this they do not take it as a direct assault on the religion or their own beliefs (which is another thread...). I think the major tragedy of groups like these is that they enable people to be conscienceless. It is the zealots, not necessarily the foundation they stand on, that I take issue with. There are perfectly decent Christians just as there are perfectly decent Muslims, Communists, Socialists, Buddhists, . None of those things are inherently "good" or "bad"...they are just different ways of thinking (and in different fields). But with any philosophies there will be people who want to take and twist and exploit it to their own benefit.

Re:Not Christian bashing...

[tak amalak]

Right on. The most intelligent comment yet in this story. I just wish more people were as open minded.
--

[OT] Capital Gains vs. Earned Income

[isaac]

High capital gains taxes discourage people from investing for the future - which is a prudent thing for a person and a family. Prudence is an important Christian virtue, particularly when it relates to the future of one's family. It might not appeal to many of us here, but Reed's formulation isn't far-fetched at all.

I always thought the Work Ethic was a more important "Christian virtue" - how is it moral to tax *earned* income at twice or thrice the rate of "capital gains" (a fancy way to say, unearned income from investments, disproportionately owned by wealthy Americans)?

This is not to disparage you personally, MattXVI, just to raise awareness about what I percieve to be a particularly egregious example of Ralph Reed's craven, self-interested behaviour at the helm of the Christian Coalition.

Smells pretty stinky to me.

-Isaac

This basically shows Microsoft is out of touch

[perfecto]

This basically shows how out of touch with reality Microsoft is. First of all, they need to lobby the candidate most likely to win, and that is Al Gore whether you like it or not. It would take a MAJOR CRASH in the stock market for Al Gore to lose. Otherwise, he's a shoe-in.

Secondly, they pick a man who's basically been labelled as an extremist lumped in with the likes of Pat Buchanan and David Duke and expect public support.

Let's not ignore that it's totally blatant. They're nuts if they think this is going to help them in any way!

--
J Perry Fecteau, 5-time Mr. Internet
Ejercisio Perfecto: from Geek to GOD in WEEKS!

Re:This basically shows Microsoft is out of touch

[Wag the Dog]

It would take a MAJOR CRASH in the stock market for Al Gore to lose

What the hell do you think is going on right now? It's not all happening in one day but it still has the same result.

Re:This basically shows Microsoft is out of touch

[cfish]

I think it's probably because last time I saw Al Gore on TV, he was answering questions in front of hundreds of MS employees. He simply refuse to please MS agenda, and said that he thinks the American value should protect the entrepreters.

You know who to vote, right? More importantly, you WILL go to vote, right?

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[cpt kangarooski]

Should any non-voting entity be allowed to lobby? Personally I don't think so.

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[cpt kangarooski]

How, precisely? Bearing in mind that political parties in the US didn't really appear until around the time of the French Revolution, and after the Constitution was established.

Re:Maybe satanic to us...

[cpt kangarooski]

This is not entirely true. I work in Seattle, and live in Bellevue just a few blocks from The Great Beast of Redmond. And yet, I'd love to see them crash and burn. But not nuked - I live too close for that ;)

Re:No Vote, No Voice ?? NOT!!!

[cpt kangarooski]

Why do you assume that their interests are identical to Microsofts? It's hardly unusual for someone who opposes a particular company to own a very small amount of stock - just enough to attend shareholder meetings and influence the company.

Any of those people who can vote should. It's 'one person, one vote,' not 'one dollar, one vote.'

Re:figures

[jjoyce]

...and convince members to use only Microsoft products.

Not if he likes those members...

Mankind has always dreamed of destroying the sun.

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[CaptTofu]

uh, if I recall correctly, it's Algore's daughter who works for M$ via Slate.

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[CaptTofu]

In other words, you mean "blah blah blah I don't like slashdot blah blah blah blah but I post here because blah blah blah..."

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[CaptTofu]

Yeah, I thought it was an insurance ad or something.

Re:Maybe satanic to us...

[Keith Russell]

The unfortunate truth is that "normal" people consider MicroSoft to be gods. They see Bill's incredible success and marvel at it. They see the newest version of Windows and stand bug-eyed when they see their start menu fade in.

You've just touched on the one thing that has kept Microsoft free of "entanglements" over the years: the Great, Unwashed Masses. One day, way back when, Gates had the epiphany that the average computer user probably won't understand what they're using. Ever since then, Microsoft has thrived by using "mushroom marketing": Keep consumers in the dark, feed them male bovine waste, and hope nobody realizes what they're swallowing.

The majority of Americans are anti-breakup because they probably don't know how many times Microsoft has shrugged off repeated slaps on the wrist. Had this happened in a more traditional industry, like automobiles or household appliances or the phone company ;-), the offending company would have been crucified by now.

Every day we're standing in a wind tunnel
Facing down the future coming fast - Rush

RALPH REED??????

[Electric Eye]

Are you f**king kidding me??? How low can M$ go? Ralph Reed is Satan Incarnate. This scumbag headed up one of the most conservative organizations in the world and now Bill G is partnering up. Well, isn't that just dandy. I hope this move backfires so bad.

If I hadn't lost respect for M$ already, this REALLY does it.

Where is this going?

[Malachi]

The entire case has been mired left and right. You have almost a religious scale jyhad going on with two sides trying to deface the other. M$ proponents say that the this is all hubub and because how fast internet time rolls on that this whole case is irrelevant, however I still see no reprieve from what they were originally charged for.

Now we're starting to get political, or have been but stepping up the ante. What does this mean? A Christian coallitionist? Makes my skin crawl. We've got two political campaigners who are both known for their idiocy. Lobbying to Bush or Gore shouldn't be too hard to convince them with a little money rubbing or saavy silk tounged maneuvers.

I grow tired of not seeing the hammer swing with swift justice and the mire of our rotten system at work.

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[unitron]

Just like the Red Chinese, they don't care who's in the White House as long as it's someone who owes them big-time.

Re:Microsoft's Politics

[unitron]

Zico's right. Microsoft being a monopoly interferes with all those other companies that want to be monopolies getting to be monopolies. So they'll oppose Microsoft being a monopoly even if they have to co-operate temporarily until Microsoft is sufficiently weakend to make it safe for them to go for each other's throats.

Re:Slashdot censorship of non-religious viewpoints

[unitron]

Actually it's co-ordinated effort between the Slashdot administrators and the Taelon Synod.

Re:What MS needs

[unitron]

"What MS needs. . . is to learn the meaning of the word ``level playing field."

They've already defined it. If you try to get on their playing field, they'll level you.

Microsoft is now a political party

[Nemesys]

MS is now a political party. They want to
use their enormous ill-gotten wealth to
brainwash the whole public into liking them,
having failed to convince a single judge.

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[Helge Hafting]

No vote, no voice. This would be the simplest way to enact real reform. If you are not allowed to vote in an election you cannot run adds in support, lobby, or donate cash to pol.

That would hardly change anything. Gates could extract a huge sum as "salary", and donate to whatever he wants. I assume he has the right to vote himself.

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[Zoltar]

Actually MS hasn't just started now, they have been giving quite a bit on money for some time now. Do a search for lobbyist and Microsoft and see for yoursef.

To be fair you are correct, this is what all major companies do so it's nothing unusual. It does seem sort of wrong though when you consider how many decisions are based on money and power instead of right and worng.

But alas...such is the state of the modern world.

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[remande]

I doubt that Microsoft high command thought they would be found guilty until they actually read the verdict. I suspect that the groupthink phenomenon has taken serious hold in the ivory tower.

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[rking]

Ouch. A corporation is legally a person, not an individual.

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[rking]

This doesn't mean anything. Companies always act through human agents, there's no other way for them to act. The person talking to the politician will always be an idividual and thus, even under your scheme, would be entitled to lobby.

I don't really see how you could ban voters from lobbying in their own financial interests, and of course if something has an impact on their employer then it has a potential impact on them.

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[bonch]

Has anyone else seen the Microsoft commercial, where Bill Gates talks about how his company is "innovating" the computer industry, and is focusing on "innovation"? Like he's so desperate to convince everyone his company is likable that he's running campaign ads or something. I'm not a blind Microsoft hater, but even I was able to percieve the extreme cheesiness of the commercial, with kids using computers pictured behind friendly ol' innovator Bill, just to make him seem nicer. Just thought it was funny, but sad.

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[srosen1]

Didn't someone on OTH two weeks ago say something to the effect of "Microsoft has been pretty good about not lobbying the government." Hmmm. IMHO, if the Gov't would have left them alone they wouldn't have felt the need to hire a lobbyist. Was it Payne who said: "At the best Gov't is a necessary evil, at it's worst it's an intolerable one."

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[gfxguy]

Well, the news is about whom they hired. Not about the fact they just started now to lobby.

Yes, but now it's potentially the next president's right hand man. Well, maybe not "right hand", but someone who might have a particular influence over someone whose party is normally big business oriented (and I say that as a republican, although I vote with my conscience, not my party).

----------

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[GenCuster]

No vote, no voice. This would be the simplest way to enact real reform. If you are not allowed to vote in an election you cannot run adds in support, lobby, or donate cash to pol.

That what I think.

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[bolthole]

Exclusion of non-voting groups from lobbying and financial contribution would be nothing short of complete disregard for constitutional intent.

What are you talking about??? Post a quotation where there is ANY intent to support the ability of non-individuals to influence the political process.

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[delong]

"What are you talking about??? Post a quotation where there is ANY intent to support the ability of non-individuals to influence the political process."

Legally, corporations ARE individuals.

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[Nate Eldredge]

No vote, no voice. This would be the simplest way to enact real reform. If you are not allowed to vote in an election you cannot run adds in support, lobby, or donate cash to pol.

Hmm. And consider when black people weren't allowed to vote. If they hadn't been able to lobby either, do you think they'd be able to vote today?

Not all those whose interests deserve consideration are legal voters.

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[Yardley]

I'm sure Microsoft was fully aware that they were going to lose this one. Their ultimate plan is two-fold. First, and most important, drag this thing out as long as possible (i.e., avoid justice). Second, in their many, many appeals they will say that the judge was flawed and ruled inappropriately, the evidence for that being that the judge ruled completely not in their favor. This will be used to garner support with the less intelligent populous they hope to ralley to their side (Ralph Reed's flock among them).

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[Yardley]

Your name made me ask myself whatever happened to the gnulix_guy (he was so lovable). Anyways, Salon.com is running a very nice article on that very issue, Ralph Reed's attachment to Bush, Jr. and the influence Bill Gate might be hoping to buy.

http://www.salon.com/tech/col/rose/2000/04/12/micr osoft/index.html
The Ralph Reed-Redmond connection

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[Analog_Kid]

Kinda reminds me of the old Micro$oft joke, "How many M$ employes does it take to change a light bulb?" None, they simply declare darkenss the new standard." Makes prefect sense right? If the law says what you did was wrong, then you might as well just go ahead and buy a change in the law. What do you think it takes to change anti trust law in the US. It may be the saddest thing in the whole case. Not only will they delay long enough for Shrub Bush to take office, but in the proccess they'll change the law so now anyone can do what they did.

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[Mary had a little la]

Well, the news is about whom they hired. Not about the fact they just started now to lobby. They started many years ago. You don't remember numerous meeting and public appearance of Bill and Al?

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[ivan37]

no, I disagree completely. _Every_ large (and even some small) companies lobby. Microsoft is no different. Now that their existence (well, not really) is threatened, obviously they are going to spend quite a bit to do whatever they can do to stop or at least lessen the pain. Who wouldn't? Im just suprised they just started now...i mean, they could have shortly after the suit was filed instead of after they were found guilty!

Re:Microsoft is now a political party

[fabjep]

Exclusion of non-voting groups from lobbying and financial contribution would be nothing short of complete disregard for constitutional intent.

Why, I wonder?

[rho]

If there's one thing Microsoft is NOT good at, it's lobbying Congress. Say what you will about predatory practices and Not Playing Nice With Others, Microsoft doesn't seem to hardly notice Washington D.C., other than as a potential market segment. Up till very recently, Microsoft was spending very little on lobbyists and campaigns, I suppose figuring that Washington couldn't react fast enough to technological advancements to even be a worry.

Now that they're entangled with the DoJ, do they think that a highly paid, very successful lobbyist is going to turn the tide? Well, knowing Washington, it probably will. But why Ralph Reed? Sure, he has ties to G.W. Bush, sure he's proven success before. Is the hiring of Ralph Reed a smokescreen for something else? It got headlines, that's for sure. If it makes Brokaw/Jennings/etc., my opinion is that it probably IS a smokescreen. Get everybody talking about the "wacko Christian Coalition" and "evil George W. Bush", and NOT thinking about stock prices.

If my smokescreen theory is correct, Microsoft needs to hire smarter PR flacks. This won't last long, and the next round of announcements from Judge Jackson will overshadow the hiring of Ralph Reed.

Raph hates Linux. Here's why: :-)

[Booker]

I know why Holy Ralph is teaming up w/ Microsoft and not the Linux heathens. Of course we can't see what's in the Windows source...

[sandeen@Lager linux]$ grep --recursive -i fuck */*
arch/i386/kernel/mtrr.c:/* Some BIOS's are fucked and don't set all MTRRs the same! */
arch/mips/kernel/irixelf.c:#if 0 /* XXX No fucking way dude... */
arch/mips/kernel/irixioctl.c: * irixioctl.c: A fucking mess...
arch/mips/sgi/kernel/setup.c: * fucking with the memory controller because it needs to know the
arch/sparc/kernel/head.S: /* XXX Fucking Cypress... */
arch/sparc/kernel/process.c: /* fuck me plenty */
arch/sparc/kernel/sunos_ioctl.c: /* Binary compatibility is good American knowhow fuckin' up. */
arch/sparc/kernel/ptrace.c:/* Fuck me gently with a chainsaw... */
arch/sparc64/kernel/process.c: /* fuck me plenty */
arch/sparc64/kernel/ptrace.c:/* Fuck me gently with a chainsaw... */
arch/sparc64/kernel/binfmt_aout32.c: /* Fuck me plenty... */
arch/sparc64/mm/init.c: /* Fucking losing PROM has more mappings in the TLB, but
drivers/block/cmd640.c: * These chips are basically fucked by design, and getting this driver
drivers/cdrom/sbpcd.c: CURRENT=req->next; /* task can fuck it up GTL */
drivers/net/sunhme.c:/* Only Sun can take such nice parts and fuck up the programming interface
drivers/net/sunhme.c: /* This card is _fucking_ hot... */
drivers/net/sunhme.c: /* This card is _fucking_ hot... */
drivers/net/sunhme.c: /* This card is _fucking_ hot... */
drivers/scsi/esp.c: * how bad the target and/or ESP fucks things up.
drivers/scsi/esp.c: * phase things. We don't want to fuck directly with
drivers/scsi/esp.c: /* Be careful, we could really get fucked during synchronous
drivers/scsi/qlogicpti.h:/* Am I fucking pedantic or what? */
drivers/scsi/NCR53C9x.c: * how bad the target and/or ESP fucks things up.
drivers/scsi/NCR53C9x.c: * phase things. We don't want to fuck directly with
drivers/scsi/NCR53C9x.c: /* Be careful, we could really get fucked during synchronous
drivers/video/tgafb.c: /* XXX Why the fuck is it called modename if it identifies the board? */
fs/binfmt_aout.c: /* Fuck me plenty... */
include/asm-mips/mmu_context.h:/* Fuck. The f-word is here so you can grep for it :-) */
include/asm-sparc64/system.h: /* If you fuck with this, update ret_from_syscall code too. */ \
lib/vsprintf.c: * Wirzenius wrote this portably, Torvalds fucked it up :-)

---

The Sanctity of Success

[Booker]

This is what Ida Tarbell wrote about in the 1900s when she exposed the Standard Oil Company.

I found this in an editorial in my local paper

In addition to being a painstaking reporter, Tarbell was a moralist. She viewed anti-competitive practices as corrupting as well as unlawful. Here are a few of her comments on the intertwined oil and railroad industries -- as exciting, novel and wildly profitable in the early 1900s as computers and the Internet are now.

Success is sanctified. If all the country had suffered from these raids on competition had been the limiting of the business opportunity of a few hundred men and a constant higher price for refined oil, the case would be serious enough, but there is a more serious side to it. The ethical cost of all this is the deep concern. We are a commercial people. We cannot boast of our arts, our crafts, our cultivation; our boast is in the wealth we produce. As a consequence, business success is sanctified, and, practically, any methods which achieve it are justified by a larger and larger class. All sorts of subterfuges and sophistries and slurring over of facts are employed to explain aggregations of capital whose determining factor has been like that of the Standard Oil Company, special privileges obtained by persistent secret effort in opposition to the spirit of the law, the efforts of legislators, and the most outspoken public opinion.

Pretty applicable, eh? Especially considering it was written 100 years ago.

---

Marketing

[Signal 11]

Well, since their marketing department failed miserably in their legal defense, now they're going to use their legal department to lobby for political changes...

Eh.. Microsoft.. you catch on so slow...

Re:Marketing

[Stonehand]

Switching tactics may not be such a bad idea from their POV.

It does wonders for the Feds; whenever the Congress refuses to give the executive branch what it wants, the latter can resort to a) executive orders, and b) blackmail via the threat of lawsuits. Case in point: S&W, the tobacco industry, and so forth.

Re:Wonderful. Thank you, Slashdot.

[Signal 11]

Nobody is bashing christians. They're bashing a political group that happens to have the word "Christian" in it. I can call myself religious and christian all I want.. does that make me so? No! Stop falling for their trap - they're about as pious as demons.

Picking fundy lobbyst proves stupidity of MS.

[bbcat]

Trying to be funny? You obviously don't know
much about US politics and religions.
Here we have one of the worst fundy in the
country becoming a lobbyist of Microsoft.
It looks to me that Microsoft got manure
as brain to hire one of the most hated
jackasses in the USA.
It just proves to us that much like Robertson,
Foolwell and other fundies Microsoft is indeed
a danger to those freedoms that we cherish
is this country.

Considering that most people aren't fundies
this is one of the most stupid moves Microsoft
has ever done.

Now we can honestly put Microsoft in the same
groups of morons as we do with fundies or
commies.

fundies : want to control our life and our sex
life
commies : want to control our life and our wallet

Re:I think this whole trial is dangerous

[bbcat]

Prohibition has never worked so what's your point?
What we are left is just making it prohibitive
for you to smoke. If you are dumb enough to still
buy it I don't have any problem with you paying
the bulk of the taxes. As for drugs they kill
faster than nicotines. We rarely seen someone
killing to buy cigarettes while it is true of
those buying crack. Perhaps we should legalize
cocaine and other stupid drugs which would then
cut off the drug trade as it did with booze.
There will always be those who abuse the substance
whether or not we ban them.
As for your illogical fear of the government
of this country, you should get off the glue
and wake to reality. This is a free country
and the government tries it's best to work for
the people. It doesn't always succeed but this
it tries. There is no way they can satisfy
everyone but so far we are much better off
then we were during the republican recession
years.

For you to mix the two subject is ridiculous.
The prosecution of Microsoft has started in
the days of the Reagan administration and it's
not liberal against big company but the
reprentatives of the population against a
company who wants to own and control everything.
This is against the American Way, that American
dream where everybody is entitled to that
wet dream of making it big. Some succeed, some
don't.

Not christian bashing but fundy bashing!

[bbcat]

There are fundies and there are christians.

A fundy is a moron who wants to impose his
religious beliefs upon others.
In the US we have Pat Robertson, Ralph Reed,
Jerry Foolwell and many more.

Re:Not christian bashing but fundy bashing!

[MattXVI]

Your arguement is of about the same quality as that of your typical "fundie," in that it is specious, overstated, and supported by nothing but your own assertion.

Re:It could be worse...

[Bob McCown]

...or George Harrison...

"I got my mind set on you..."

Re:Or...

[Bob McCown]

..or Ford Prefect!

"Time is an illusion, lunchtime, doubly so"

Tweak UI

[xdc]

Here in the UK there is (in my experience) considerable dissatisfaction with MS products. Maybe it's because of things like that unremovable "Network Neighborhood" icon ...

Give Tweak UI a try. This handy little utility lets you customize things in Windows, including whether Network Neighborhood appears on your desktop. You can also reduce other Windows annoyances like the animated "Click here to begin" message that bumps into the Start menu when you log in. I highly recommend Tweak UI for anyone stuck using Windows.

What MS needs

[llywrch]

. . . is to learn the meaning of the word ``level playing field."

>The Microsofties need a foot in the door among the Bush crowd so that their calls to a Bush White House are answered. Hiring one of the
>candidate's consultants as their own consultant is a time-honored method to do so. Now they just need a similar friend from the Gore team.

No, they had their day in court. They spent it shooting holes in their foot, unable to even mitigate the charges that they abused their market position to destroy competitors with better products. (This assumes, of course, that they didn't employ such abusive tactics.)

And what are they doing now? Trying every behind-the-scene trick to save their sorry hineys. They & thier flacks whined about keeping government out of the high-tech business, & now that they've shown themselves unable to follow any rules, & requiring some kind of government intervention Billg & Co are smoozing big time with the lobbyists & other Beltway types to protect what they have stolen.

Microsoft: the Standard Oil Trust of our generation.

Geoff

Re:Come on!

[Sir Robin]

He was actually replying to a message marked "-1: Offtopic". You, like me, probably read at 0 or above, so you didn't see it. The actual post to which he replied read "Gabriel just wanted a little more attention, being God's brightest angel. Arrogance made him Evil, why not MS?" It only LOOKED like he was replying to the "So MS hires some big gun to clean its PR. ..." post.

Re:Shudder!

[jab]

No. The current US system is rigged to support
centrist parties and repress small parties (which are often at the political extremes.)
And I like it that way. 1930's Europe used proportional representation (without a 5% cutoff like they commonly have now) and look what political parties ended up with power.

Re:Didn't you know...

[EnglishTim]

What?
Surely you aren't comparing it to Linux? Because damn! that's fast...

Okay, comparing it to BeOS and you might have a point, but a standard Linux setup... yeah, right.

Re:What was Ralph Reed character's name in Contact

[ToastyKen]

Yeah, it was "Richard Rank" of the "Conservative Coalition". :)

Re:Maybe satanic to us...

[crovira]

My father was even saying how unfortunate it is that MS is even involved in the anti-trust case at all. Lets face it, the general population really doesn't know what's going on... not that they have to, though. Windows is good enough for their means, and it's relatively easy to use. As long as this holds true, their opinion of MS is not going to change, no matter what happens.

Besides, they didn't have a choice anyway. Even the manufacturer didn't have a choice.

M$ advertising is a total wasted effort. I still have Win'95 dual booting with Linux (which I did go through the trouble of installing) because its what came with the box. (My other boxes are Macs, one of which dual boots with LinuxPPC. :-)

The only people who change versions are the MIS wage-slaves who's bosses told them to in their fruitless to get a version of Windows that actually delivers...

Let's just KEEP M$ on the x86 architecture (they ain't anywhere else,) until it dies and then we'll be rid of 'em.

updated story from AP

[Chris Phillips]

Like I said, good old Microsoft public relations- try too hard and get slapped in the face.

from

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/p/AP-Microsoft-B ush-Consultant.html

Today at 4:05pm

"WASHINGTON (AP) -- The consulting firm founded by Ralph Reed apologized today for encouraging ``a small number of individuals'' to express their views about the Microsoft case t George W. Bush, the presumptive GOP presidential nominee. The firm said it would halt the contacts. "

Interesting Details at NYtimes

[Chris Phillips]

It's traditional microsoft public relations tactics.

About hiring Reed, the nytimes writes-
"Microsoft's aim, the company says, is to curry favor with the apparent Republican presidential nominee,"

To do this, Reeds's firm would do this-
"A series of e-mail messages from John Pudner, senior project manager for Century Strategies, laid out a detailed plan by Mr. Reed's staff and his contractors to recruit senior Bush supporters
from around the country in an effort to undermine the government's suit.
The Bush supporters -- and the e-mail showed that Mr. Pudner isscreening them carefully to make sure they are influential within the campaign -- are being asked to write letters to Mr. Bush saying they believe the government's case is misguided, and that the American people oppose it."

They get $300 a letter. Classy.

More info at-
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/04/biztec h/articles/11soft.html

On the good side, the man in charge of the committee that approves justice dept officials is Orrin Hatch, a big microsoft foe. The state atty generals are also involved with the case- GW can't just fire them.

Re:Interesting Details at NYtimes

[Black Parrot]

> They get $300 a letter. Classy.

Even classier when you realize how much of that $300 came from the tithes little old ladies squeeze out of their meagre incomes in hopes of bettering their prospects for the afterlife.

Won't they be surprised when St. Peter says "No, we didn't get any donations from you - the money you intended for feeding the hungry and clothing the naked went toward keeping the world's richest man on top of the heap instead."

--

Re:Wonderful. Thank you, Slashdot.

[cswiii]

I think Moby (also Christian) said it best:

"The Christian Right is neither".

Time to call out the big guns..

[ArthurDent]

Anything they can do, we can do better, right? How about Free Software users/developers donating money (or using FSF or some other organizations cash) to hire our own darn lobbyist(s)? We can't let the enemy take advantage of us in the political system, can we?

Ben

Re:Time to call out the big guns..

[JM_the_Great]

Too late, they allready have all the big "guns" :)


Grades, Social Life, Sleep....Pick Two.

huh.

[Timex]

I never know what to make of this crap... I am a Christian and I am annoyed when Christian-political figures (like Jerry Fallwell) start ranting about rediculously STUPID things (like the Teletubbies thing. come ON already... it's a bloody KIDS SHOW!)... Now THIS.

Is it even remotely possible to consider that somebody is doing something for their OWN reasons, rather than making connections to one's OTHER affiliations? I think anyone that follows consumer (as in locusts) issues knows who Ralph Reed is....

Now, because the connection to the Christian Coalition has been made, there are some (that's some) that will think that it's a Christian thing to support PunySquishy. I really hope that that doesn't happen. M$ really needs to be brought down a couple notches.

If it's good enough for the Phone Company, it's good enough for Microsoft.

Just another computer geek....

A match made in heaven (pun intended)

[Stiletto]

Ralph Reed gives Christians as much a bad name as Bill Gates gives computer enthusiasts.
________________________________

Re:Microsoft Just Bought G.W. Bush's Ear

[Augusto]

If GWB tries to make the Microsoft prosecution into an election issue, that is nothing but a loser for him.

Why would that be a loser cause. I'm all for the anti-trust lawsuit, but I get the feeling the average person either doesn't care/understand the issue or they're upset the Government is opposing the greatests and most innovative source of technology, Mickeysoft.

Not only that, but I can already see a debate where Bush might bring up the problemns in the stock market and blame it on Clinton. And Al Gore, well, he'll do anything for votes (see Elian case) so he might agree with Bush.

We should clone one of our founding fathers for this election, the current choices are pathetic !

Ralph Nader ???

[Augusto]

I didn't know Ralph Nader was a "founding father" !!! ;)

Isn't this a conflict of interest ?

[Augusto]

Bush has expressed many times his opposition against the governments action against MS. Now, we see one of his top guys works for MS.

Is there a law against this, or is it still legal to influence presidential candidates this way ?

The more and more big business "invests" in politicians, the less the rest of us , the "poor masses" have a voice. We need campaing finance reform !!!

Re:Isn't this a conflict of interest ?

[Rombuu]

As opposed to RMS who thinks that closed-source software is "immoral" somehow... If that doesn't amke him a dancing monkey for the granola-eating set, I don't know what does.

Re:Isn't this a conflict of interest ?

[MattXVI]

"Country club types" aren't that interested in tax cuts. They can pay lawyers to find tax shelters and loopholes. It' middle class Americans who are keenest on tax cuts because they often see the greatest marginal tax rate.

Anyway, as a Christian, I could make a good case that limited government is a moral objective. HOW limited is the issue between most American politicians. High capital gains taxes discourage people from investing for the future - which is a prudent thing for a person and a family. Prudence is an important Christian virtue, particularly when it relates to the future of one's family. It might not appeal to many of us here, but Reed's formulation isn't far-fetched at all. It bears pointing out, too, that most Democrats voted for the most recent capital gains tax cut, and Mr. Clinton (no pawn of Ralph Reed) signed it.

Re:Isn't this a conflict of interest ?

[MrBogus]

Reed is on the Bush payroll right now.

This guy is seriously whacked. He once told his legion that changing the capital gains tax laws was the "christian" and "moral" thing to do. If that doesn't make him a dancing monkey for the country club set, I don't know what does.

Re:Isn't this a conflict of interest ?

[MrBogus]

Uhhh, Clinton and the Democrats (and most Republicans) supported the capital gains cut on it's political and economic merits, not some arguable moral benefits.

Your argument embodies the hypocracy of these clowns. If a capital gains cut is good for Americans and American families, then argue the merits of that. The government has no mandate to uphold "Christian virtue", and by buying into a policy argument centered on that you have exposed yourself as one of the theocratic droids that have made Reed so successful.

Nobody's said it yet, but does it uphold "Christian virtue" to scotch the anti-trust trial against Microsoft? Maybe now that Reed's pockets have been lined it does. (He sure didn't worry about implying that John McCain was pro-choice - backstabbing one of his own for the money.) I'm sure that you are waiting for your orders from on-high, just as soon as God sends a messenger to articulate these important details of Christian public policy, you'll come out with an argument one way or another.

What you should understand is that the Republican party is made up of two major wings -- the majority of people active in the party are from the Christian Right, working to promote moral values in government (specifically the elimination of Abortion). However, the majority of the party's funders are from the upper class of society and have a quite different pro-business, lower taxes agenda.

Consequentally, these two wings are always making deals with one another, leading to all sorts of interesting contridictions. The Christian folks back the immoral but pro-business of Newt Gingrich. The moderate Doles and Bushes promise to uphold the anti-abortion cause. And so on and so on. If it's beyond your imagination to figure out why Reed would claim that a capital gains cut was a "Christian" policy, you should really start praying, this time for more brains.

(Sure, the democrats have the same sort of divergant factions in their party. But the contradictions aren't so great: Civil Rights folks, labor unions, trial lawyers, and Hollywood types have more in agreement than the faultering "Reagan" coalition of the Republicans.)

Re:Isn't this a conflict of interest ?

[MrBogus]

So first you say Reed is not working for Bush.
Then number of people correct you.
Then you change the subject and make fun of RMS.

Did you forget to take your Ritalin today, Rombuu?

Did you read the article ?

[Augusto]

Microsoft Corp. has hired Ralph Reed, a senior consultant to George Bush's campaign
for the U.S. presidency, to lobby Bush regarding the government's antitrust case

And my oh my, watch the language, Mr. Reed wouldn't approve.

Microsoft will win either presidential candidate

[peter303]

Their job is to stall penalty until after election.
Gore is pro-technology; Bush is pro-business.

Bill G. already successfully asked Bill C. to
intervene. Bill C. has asked for a special
briefing on the case.

Re:Anyone remember when Slashdot was cool?

[Samrobb]

Now Gates wants to lobby with a presidential candidate, who they expect to interfere with the Federal Court system if he is elected.

Bush has the same chance to "interfere" with the Federal Court system as any other president; namely, if a justice on the SC needs replaced for any reason, it is the president's job to "interfere" and appoint a replacement to keep the required number of justices. IIRC, Congress also gets to "interfere" by reviewing and approving the appointment.

It's just the way it works. Clinton would have loved the chance to appoint an SC justice; it looks like he won't get the chance to do so, though. The next president might, and there's a lot of speculation about how the various candidates (not just Bush) would choose a new justice if that occaision came to pass. It's hardly a rock-solid certainty that it will happen during the next president's term, though. If it does, whoever the president happens to be, they certainly won't be interfering with the Federal Court system, just doing part of the job they were elected to do.

That said, I have to agree - MS has gone too far, and is making an extremely obvious attempt to try and buy the outcome they want. Makes me wonder if their next case in front of the DOJ will involve campaign finance law violations.

Update -- Reed apologizes

[Bearpaw]

AP story: "Reed Apologizes for Bush Work"

Re:Update -- Reed apologizes

[ikaros]

There's one especially fascinating pair of paragraphs in this report. And I quote:

The Century Strategies statement said the company was hired by Microsoft in the fall of 1998 "to encourage consumers and grass roots citizens to make their views known to public opinion leaders, the media, and political leaders of both parties."

Brief note here: if there's a true grass roots support movement for them, why do they need to hire someone to get that word out?

Dan Leach, a Microsoft spokesman, said Century was one of several companies hired to "defend ourselves from our competitors' lobbying attacks."

Amazing difference in description for two groups doing exactly the same thing.

My translation is: Microsoft hasn't learned a thing; they are in total denial of even the remotest possibility that Judge Jackson ruled against them. Anyone who speaks out against Microsoft is, in their view, an idiot or a paid character assassin -- an opponent's opinion cannot possibly represent a rationally held view by a normal person. Anyone they pay to speak for them is a true representative of the grass roots of the computer community.

Where's Dr. Kubler-Ross when you need her? These folks need a lot of help getting past the denial stage ...

ikaros, looking forward to the wake.

re: Microsoft's Politics

[Zico]

...how much of a paranoid delusional is Gates, anyway?

Well, just because you have less of a grasp on current events than the common water tick doesn't mean that these things didn't happen. You must have your head buried in the sand if you're not familiar with Caldera and Novell lobbying members of Congress, especially Orrin Hatch. Same goes for the heads of Sun Microsystems and Netscape, both seen lobbying against Microsoft on Capitol Hill, among others.

Do you not understand the difference between PSAs and lobbying, or do you just play an idiot on TV?

Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com

Whatever happened to Lauch Faircloth?

[BillWhite]

Didn't Microsoft contribute multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars to Lauch Faircloth's last senatorial campaign? And wasn't he defeated pretty handily?

It doesn't necessarily follow that GWB will win, even if MS dumps big buckets of dollars into his campaign.

OTOH, I've been looking for a good reason to vote for Al Gore, and this seems to be it for me.

Re:Gates For Pres

[Quikah]

Gates would never win, have you seen those cheesy commercials that MS is running with him telling everybody how great they are? Horrible public speaker, that fake plastic smile at the end just turns my stomach.

Re:Maybe satanic to us...

[Quikah]

You know you can rename any icon on your desktop, fix the spelling on NN.

Re:Maybe satanic to us...

[Helge Hafting]

You know you can rename any icon on your desktop, fix the spelling on NN.

Sure. That's how you fix your own mistakes. The stuff you buy had better come free of spelling errors, or it is perceived as "not serious".

And how do you expect their *code* is written, when they cannot be bothered to spell?

MS + Ralph Reed + Domestic Partners?

[TWR]

Does anyone know if MS gives domestic partners benefits? A large number of high tech companies (HP and Apple, just to name two) do. I wonder what Jesus' self-appointed spokesman thinks about that...

-jon

Re:Makes good sense to me...

[zeke]

>And now the differences.

Oh dear.

>God created the universe.

So you buy the official party line, eh?

> Gates created BASIC, >and bought or stole >everything else, starting with QDOS.

So you don't buy Gates' official party line?

Try comparing the two sometimes. Who created what?

>Churches ask for voluntary contributions. >Microsoft levies a tax.

Microsoft licensing tells you that it is federal crime to use their software w/o paying for it. What's the penalty? Fines and prison time.

The bible - official party line again - commands you to tithe. What happens when you don't obey god? You commit a sin. What's the price of sin? Death/hell.

(And before you start talking about how accepting christ makes you eternally saved and forgiven of all your sins - I know the protestant party line. I also know that opinions are mixed with regard to the final price you pay for unconfessed, unforgiven sins.)

>Christ heals the lame; Gates makes your computer >lame.

Once again you are comparing more Pro-christ propaganda with Anti-gates propaganda. Why don't you compare pro- with pro-? Is it because you've already made up your mind about both of them?

Many people would assert that christian religious beliefs left them crippled with guilt. Many MS advocates would say that Windows makes personal computing easy and powerful. Who do you believe? More importantly, why?

>The Pope is spending this year confessing the >sins of the Catholic Church; Microsoft either >won't admit that it has done any wrongdoing at >all, or doesn't understand it.

Let's see: the Pope has the arrogance to appologize for actions for which he was not responsible, an act which prevailing political and social opinion renders expedient. So, long after the crusaders raped, murdered, and pillaged the people and lands of the middle east, the Pope comes out and tells the descendents of the inhabitants: "Sorry 'bout that." What piety. How long do you really think it will be, once Microsoft gets its fanny whacked by the Supreme court, before MS starts "appologizing" for its ruthless behavior. Do you really think they'll mean it? Do you really think the "appologies" of the Pope are motivated more by personal conviction (and the supreme arrogance that has to go with it) than by political expediency?

>Christ was crucified because the political powers >of the day couldn't control him; today, we're not

We know very little about the crucifixtion of Christ other than the accounts preserved in the Bible, all of which are second-hand or written down long after the fact, and all of which were written by people favorable to the christian movement, and therefore all suspect as propaganda.

>sure if Gates will get crucified by the political >powers, or simply co-opted.

If Gates is "crucified" I am sure that he will find some other way to exert his influence in the computing world. If he is not crucified I suspect that he will simply return to his old ways, albeit a tad more cautiously than before. In any case, to quote: "History is written by the victors". I seriously doubt that any efforts by the US government can rid us of the MS monopoly. Only market changes and unforseen social/computing paradigm shifts will bring out some new front runner in the computing world. Barring these, how do you think the public will see Mr. Gates in 30 years?

zeke

Re:It's people like you what cause unrest

[zeke]

*sigh* I suspect I'm being trolled, but...

Go back and re-read my post. Consider that only one part of it pertained explicitly to the Catholic church. Note that my post was strictly a reaction to a prior post, a post in which the Pope was referenced once. Now tell me just how your "logic" allows you to state that I hate Catholicism in particular?

Secondarily, consider exactly what I wrote:

"Let's see: the Pope has the arrogance to appologize for actions for which he was not responsible, an act which prevailing political and
social opinion renders expedient. So, long after the crusaders raped, murdered, and pillaged the people and lands of the middle east, the Pope comes out and tells the descendents of the inhabitants: 'Sorry 'bout that.' What piety."

What am I saying? I am saying that the appologies are meaningless because the people involved in the conflict are long dead and cannot be affected by such an appology. All the "sorry's" in the world are pointless; those directly hurt by the actions of the church experience no relief. Those members of the church who caused the distress in the first place are not around any longer to express regret. The words of the pope are meaningless to the descendents of the Moors. W/o a belief in the pope's spiritual authority these people may as well have been listening to Cheerios ads. The current pope cannot effectively appologize for the actions of past members of his church because *he is not them!* His words change nothing. Just so, any appologies coming from MS will do nothing to bring back competitors they have crowded out of the market, nor will it compensate consumers for all the hours of productivity lost to bad software. It will be an appology made at no cost, just like the pope's, and therefore about as meaningful.

>Why don't you just come out from behind your thin >veneer of 'logic' and admit that you hate

My "thin veneer of 'logic'?

If you disagree with what I wrote and wish to complain about it then *why don't you post a rebuttal?* Sniffling noisily about how I supposedly hate organized religion does nothing to back up an opinion I presume differs from mine.

>organized religion, and the Catholic brand of it
>in particular... it won't make your post any
>more palatable, but it'll give you your first
>whiff of honesty.

Does a person need to state: "I hate XXX" for him or her to critique it?

Again, if you have a refutation then feel free to post it. Not that I expect to see one.

If you find my post unpalatable, then you might want to consider just why...I suspect the answer lies with you rather than me.

zeke

Heh. "cause unrest". I think I've just been complimented.

Re:Shudder!

[evilpenguin]

You should have seen this coming when the Bush campaign had him walking to the rostrum withe the song "Taking Care of Business" playing in the background. Taking Care of Business is what ALL administrations do (do you really think a socialist could be elected in the US? Not with the money required to run a campaign). To me the question is do you want an adminsitration that will take care of business with one eye on the environment and the lowest social strata, or one who will take care of business and to hell with the environment and the poor and weak. (Bet you can't tell who I will vote for!)

Look, once you get to this stage, the candidates are bought and paid for. You simply have to look at the company they keep and decide how to vote. You won't get real change until we decide to shake off the big money.

My 10 cent recipie for reform? Proportional representation in the House of Representatives (that means instead of winner takes all, you vote for parties and the delegation is made up proportionally based on vote. If it goes 40% Republican, %30 Democrat, %20 Reform, %10 Socialist and your state has 10 house seats, you send 4 republicans, 3 democrats, 2 reform party, and 1 socialist member). Television stations required to donate time to candidates. Candidates required to speak for themselves in a medium close shot before a neutral background with no cuts (not free speech? Only if I tell them what to say.).

Ahh, hell, I don't know the answers. I just know that the will of the people is lost in money and power free for all and the only standing between us and pure oligarchy (if not outright plutocracy) is our vote. No matter how tweedledum and tweedledee it seems, it is still important to vote. The only reason our real needs are addressed at all is the need to win our votes.

Re:I agree .....

[evilpenguin]

You are right on the money here. US citizens (the ones who think about, that is) are genuinely glad that our political system makes it hard to get things done. Tyranny is a very effective form of government, but it is antithetical to individual acheivement. The perpetual tension between individual liberty and collective security is the line that demarks political conflict in this country.

God save us from effective government!

(And I'm a supporter of government intervention for social and economic justice! Even so, I think it should be damned near impossible for me to get into your paycheck to pay for my agenda. That same inertia protects me and my paycheck from agendas such as that of the Christian Coalition. A dangerous blind spot in many interest groups is how dismantling regulatory barriers to their agenda takes down the barriers for opposing agendas. It is and should be nearly impossible to get anything done!)

Re:What am I missing?

[sar-fu]

You just don't get the song. what is really ironic is that none of the things are ironic. So in fact, the song really is ironic!

Thou really shouldst....

[Randy Rathbun]

This parable really shouldst be viewed using AskJesus.org

I mean, just so you can get the gist of it and all....

what next

[pinko]

maybe they'll hire david duke as a lobbyist next. they're the same in my book. they'll probably piss off as many people.

the "religious right" is the biggest (although not officially organized) hate group in the country.

yet another reason to hate microsoft.

2 * lusr = winner ?

[Black Parrot]

Let's see...

Nine months ago, GW was riding high in the polls and had a war chest several times the size of all his foes' combined. But after spending all that loot, he now enjoys bare parity with Al Gore in the polls. (He probably hopes Bill Gates doesn't give him more money to spend!)

Nine months ago, Bill Gates was riding high in the IT world, raking in the cash and laughing off Consent Decrees. But after blowing a huge wad of cash on lawyers, he is now the pariah of the IT world, viewed as an arrogant ass as well as a crook by anyone who followed the DOJ suit, and the traditionally pro-MS trade rags are openly questioning the sense of migrating to W2K.

Imagine what these two guys will accomplish if they pool their talents and resources.

--

Re:Slashdot censorship of non-religious viewpoints

[Mike A.]

Except the post you're replying to was a troll. It didn't present any real arguments against religion, it just slammed religious belief. It's hardly any better than Shrub's dad saying publically that atheists shouldn't be considered US citizens.

--

No Vote, No Voice ?? NOT!!!

[Salgak1]

With retirement funds investing in M$, and individuals owning shares in those funds, there may well be more people who own a chunk, however small, of Microsoft than voted in the last Presidential election. What about THEIR interests ???

You're mixing algebrae

[for(;;);]

First you'd need to express the function "used
to work for" in the binary boolean calculus,
and then you'd need to express that ^2 function
in the same calculus. Actually, ^2 and the
boolean algebra already share common formal
systems (Pascal, for example, or an extended
lambda calculus), so I suppose the real weak link here
is reducing "used to work for" to some formal
system. Best of luck!
-------

Re:You're mixing algebrae

[fedos]

We can, of course, change my phrase "used to work for" to "works for", because Pat Robertson could always rehire Ralph Reed. They're working for the same agenda, anyway.

Re:Maybe satanic to us...

[frantzdb]

I guess people with an English accent must really be smarter. They always sounds smarter but clearly they really are.

MS Marketing Campaign

[nick this]

They have already kicked it into high gear. In addition to some new "help us lobby" links on the www.microsoft.com front page, they also have some new, shiny commercials out. Anyone else seen them yet?

They feature Bill looking sad and long-suffering while he talks about how Microsoft is going to keep innovating despite the attempts of the government to stop them from innovating. The problem is, it comes off something like this:

Hi. I'm Bill Gates, president of Microsoft. At Microsoft, we're running scared. The revolving doors just don't stop spinning anymore, what with developers leaving in droves in anticpation of no more insta-stock millionaires. Not only that, but the shadow of Sun's boot poised above our heads is slowly driving us all insane. Frankly, we just hope we can get Windows ME out before we get disemboweled by class action suits filed by ravenous consumers.

We'll keep innovating, though. Why, just the other day, we came up with the concept of symbolic links, so you see... we'll be fine. Really. Buy Win2K! Please!

---

Its kinda sad, in a way. You know they are sucking when they have to trot Bill out on parade.

Ugh. This is how it starts...

Re:MS Marketing Campaign

[JatTDB]

Yeah those commercials were sick. Interrupted the one night of TV viewing I actually have nowadays. He really should've started it with "Hi, I'm Bill Gates, and I'm here to kiss the collective ass of America."

Oh well...gotta love how he ended it with "The best is yet to come!"...guess he's referring to a win2k service pack...I hope so...there's a couple "features" that are really pissing me off at work.

CRAP!

[FascDot Killed My Pr]

Yes, you are right. Ah well, it was a dumb joke anyway.
--

It could be worse...

[FascDot Killed My Pr]

They could have hired Rex Reed. "The pain falls mainly on those who don't play the game".
--

Re:It could be worse...

[NME]

I think that you're confusing Rex Reed with Rex Harrison.

Just you wait 'enry 'iggins.

-nme!

Re:It could be worse...

[Nate Eldredge]

... or even Rex Morgan (M.D.)

"Microsoft's latest weapon: bland soap opera comic strip drama. How can the Justice Department stand up to this?"

Re:It could be worse...

[tbarjoe]

But don't forget to hire....

REX BANNER!

He'll fight crime, corruption, and enforce the prohibition.

news.com story here

[krog]

http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-1679693.html? tag=st.ne.1002.thed.1003-200-1679693

These comments confuse & disturb me

[magnamous]

You know, I've been talking to and dealing with tech people for a number of years now, and I've always had the impression that, for the most part, they think in very logical, rational terms (it fits in quite nicely with the line of work), Slashdot commenters included. And yet, reading the comments on this subject, I do not see the logical, rational thinking I would otherwise expect from such intelligent people: comments about the Christian Coalition wanting to publicly stone to death those with whom they disagree, or wanting to "take away everyone's social freedoms", comments about MS being the earthly embodiment of Satan, and so on. (And these are just from the comments that have been moderated up!) These do not reveal a pattern of detailed, analytical thought one would expect from the commenters on Slashdot, but instead the impassioned, factless rhetoric of zealots. Granted, there are some who have already pointed out the fallacies in these statements, but I feel this point needs to be reiterated. Accusations of being the embodiment of evil, in league with Satan, and/or condoning or supporting medieval-style torture and death are absurd. They cannot be ascribed to logically solid arguments, nor even mere opinion. These are statements which go far beyond character defamation, such as the "smear campaign" election tactics which so many claim to abhor. These comments are slander.

I am not a Christian, nor have I ever liked MS, or even their software. But quite frankly, I am bewildered and disappointed to see these horridly poor arguments posted to a website with as many educated readers as Slashdot. I know that the people who post here are certainly capable of providing more substantial arguments to support their positions than what I see here, and I know that what I see here cannot be supported by any arguments made previously by Slashdot readers against either MS or the CC. What they have done and what they believe do not explain or imply (explicitly or implicitly) what has been attributed to them here.

---
If your reply is about spelling and grammar, what you're saying is that you really have no reply at all.

Too late?

[Jimhotep]

Maybe MicroS should have been greasing the politicians for years now. Maybe they wouldn't be in trouble now.

Maybe?

Doesn't Ralph Reed ...

[jocknerd]

I'm from the heart of Pat Robertson country. Once Ralph Reed found out that his Christian Coalition wasn't tax exempt, he jumped ship. He now has a political consulting firm.

Doesn't he look like the kind of guy you just want to punch in the face?

Re:What am I missing?

[EisPick]

I agree.

This is a lot more interesting as a Ralph Reed story than as a Microsoft story. It just means that by delivering South Carolina for Bush, he's finally completed the transition from Outsider Activist to Insider Deal-Maker.

It also means ol' Ralph is starting to cash in big-time.

The Microsofties need a foot in the door among the Bush crowd so that their calls to a Bush White House are answered. Hiring one of the candidate's consultants as their own consultant is a time-honored method to do so. Now they just need a similar friend from the Gore team.

Wonderful. Thank you, Slashdot.

[mhm23x3]

What is the purpose of this article? Who cares what lobbyist Microsoft hired? Ralph Reed isn't even with the Christian Coalition anymore, but that won't stop /. users from engaging in the usual Christian-bashing. Admit it, that's why this story was posted.

So let the insults fly - it's open-season on people who believe in anything not made of silicon.

Re:Wonderful. Thank you, Slashdot.

[NME]

1) Ralph Reed is being bashed.
2) This is being reported because Ralph Reed is a BIG name in lobbyists, with enormous name regognition.
3) "people who believe in anything not made of silicon" are not by default christian.

I appear to have been trolled.

-nme!

Re:Wonderful. Thank you, Slashdot.

[Steve B]

Attacking Ralph Reed or the Christian Coalition has nothing to do with "Christian bashing". If the Ask Jesus jargonizer were a bit more sophisticated, references to either would come out of it as "the Pharisee(s)".
/.

Re:Wonderful. Thank you, Slashdot.

[Stonehand]

The Department of Justice, if memory serves, IS part of the Executive Branch, and not really meant to be independent in a certain sense. When independence is called for, there is -- or, rather, was -- the independent counsel statute, and the court system itself.

Subversion of the Judiciary itself is manifested more in cases involving such things as judges directing cases to favorable magistrates on behalf of the Executive Branch, or if there were any form of coercion involved.

One can argue that the DoJ regularly violates separation of powers by serving as a tool of blackmail when legislative efforts stall, since most companies cannot outlast the Federal Government when it comes to legal expenses and effort. However, they do need to be allowed discretion in choosing which cases to take on, as there are insufficient resources to go after everybody deserving... that would require a police state. Consequently, if one wants to reform the DoJ, the most effective way to send that message might be to vote against those who would mis-use that power.

Re:Wonderful. Thank you, Slashdot.

[seaker]

I think that is a bit harsh. Getting Bush's ear is one of the tactics that is a possible winner for MS.

If the case can be held off to next year then a new President Bush who is more sympathetic to MS will clear out the DOJ and install his people who will make the case go away. Similar to what happened when Regan arrived on the scene of the IBM case in the 80s.

It is worrying as it makes you wonder is the Judiciary independant of the Government, something that is fundamental to a working Democracy.

This makes it a relevant article

Re:Look out

[ThePlague]

No matter who you vote for, the government always wins.

Re: Microsoft hedges their political bets.

[Wah]

/., like any other media outlet, picks story that they think people want to talk about. Notice how they skipped my "Sky is Still Blue" submissions every day for the past year.

I did see a nice blurb a while back, when M$ realized that lobbying might be a good idea. It was basically a list of who they had donated too, correlated with the list of names on a "Dear Colleague" letter about how the DOJ was unfairly targeting an innovator. It read like, and was probably based upon, a Microsoft Press Release (v8.2)
--

Re:Makes good sence to me...

[remande]

And now the differences.

God created the universe. Gates created BASIC, and bought or stole everything else, starting with QDOS.

Churches ask for voluntary contributions. Microsoft levies a tax.

Christ heals the lame; Gates makes your computer lame.

Christ once pulled money out of the mouth of a fish; Microsoft is constantly finding ways to pull money out of you from a different orifice.

The Pope is spending this year confessing the sins of the Catholic Church; Microsoft either won't admit that it has done any wrongdoing at all, or doesn't understand it.

Christ was crucified because the political powers of the day couldn't control him; today, we're not sure if Gates will get crucified by the political powers, or simply co-opted.

Finally, have you ever seen a church enter the Blue Screen of Damnation?

YEESH!

[remande]

(yes, I'm replying to my own post--it seems to have generated more than I expected)

Do I have to smiley-caption these things? I was following up on a joke!

Anyone who seriously compares Microsoft to God needs their head and/or stock options examined.

Re:YEESH!

[romco]

If you think people were confused about your post look at the way mine was moderated.

Makes good sence to me
Moderation Totals:Flamebait=2, Interesting=2, Funny=1, Total=5.

Perhaps a new tag is needed.

<big clue>
It was a silly joke
</big clue>

Re:YEESH!

[cookieman]

Hi!

With all due respect, you were'nt folowing a joke. That was Trolling!

But anyway God and Jesus doesn't need my protection here,....

Kondoros Attila

Re:Didn't you know...

[remande]

"Oh please boot please boot please stay up for over an hour oh please oh please oh please..."

What could they have been thinking?

[hey!]

Ralph Reed?

I mean, you cannot fault his political skills, but hiring him for this is like putting an ungrounded lightning rod on a leaky gas tank.

Hiring the founder of the Christian Coalition is not going to bring Microsoft any new friends with libertarian leanings; nor is Ralph going to deliver his normal constituency who don't give a shit about Microsoft's issues.

In any case, isn't Mr. Reed's expertise in retail, direct marketing politics? I could see them hiring some respected, retired politician like Sam Nunn (not that he'd be available), who could open doors for them. I doubt very much any active politican is glad to see Mr. Reed coming, unless he's going to be bringing a bunch of votes with no strings attached.

Re:What could they have been thinking?

[hey!]

Micros~1 doesn't want friends with Libertarian leanings, they've decided to play the percentages and the future is looking decidedly Republican (if you are a short term thinker).

The point is I don't really think many republicans really care much for Mr. Reed, except for those of his precise stripe. Gov. Bush may hire him, but somehow I doubt he listens much to Mr. Reed except where delivering the votes of the religious right is concerned.

Re:What could they have been thinking?

[hey!]

This is the same reason that Bush hired him, and the same reason that MS wants him

This is what I'm trying to understand -- what is he supposed to be doing, exactly. I understand hiring him as a political consultant. The article states, however, that he was hired as a lobbyist:

Microsoft has hired a senior consultant to the Republican presidential campaign to lobby against the anti-trust case brought by the current administration against the software company.
.

This doesn't really make any sense. Who is he supposed to "lobby"? I suspect the article is inaccurate.

Re:What could they have been thinking?

[ronfar]

Micros~1 doesn't want friends with Libertarian leanings, they've decided to play the percentages and the future is looking decidedly Republican (if you are a short term thinker).

The Supreme Court, the thing Bill Gates is most concerned about is Republican, and at least one justice owes his seat directly to the influence of the Christian Coalition (I refer to Clarence Thomas, whose hotly contested appointment was pushed through by his friends and supporters in the Christian Coalition.)

Both houses of congress are Republican.

A significant amount of governors are Republican, and some states are running anti-trust suits of their own against M$.

If you believe polls, there is a 50/50 chance of a Republican president.

Bill Gates did the math, and brought in a Republican heavy hitter to lobby for him. If things were the other way, he'd have hired a big democratic lobbyist.

It would be wishful thinking on the part of people who are anti-Republican to think that hiring a Republican in the current national climate was a bad thing.

Things may turn around completely in the next election cycle, of course (except for the Supreme Court, which will remain Republican for years) and Bill Gates may wish he had hired a Democrat.

Re:What could they have been thinking?

[ronfar]

Well, it's also possible they tried for a more neutral, but equally savvy lobbyist but weren't able to manage it.

I mean after all, we don't know if their first call was to Reed or not, maybe he's just the first one who agreed to do the work.

Re:Shudder!

[MrCreosote]

"...I genuinely felt something cold and clammy run down my back ...."

I get that whenever I see Ralph Reed.

Of course, I get the impression that Ralph Reed is cold-and-clammy incarnate.

It's people like you what cause unrest

[CComp]

It's easy enough to see: you won't ever be satisfied with anything the Catholic Church does.. when they don't apologise for something, they're unrepentant mass-murderers - when they DO apologise, they're arrogant politicking bastards.

Why don't you just come out from behind your thin veneer of 'logic' and admit that you hate organized religion, and the Catholic brand of it in particular... it won't make your post any more palatable, but it'll give you your first whiff of honesty.

Re:There is no Good vs. Evil anymore

[thimo]

If so Billy boy is in good hands.

Is he? IIRC the panzertanks lost! :)

Yes, the Pope was on the wrong side in WW2, but hasn't the Catholic church been like that as far back as we can remember?

Thimo


--

Re:Microsoft Already Owns Your Representative

[NME]

Thanks for posting when I have no moderation points, you jerk.

Committee for the preservation of capitalism? I bet they have an interesting definition of "Capitalism".

-nme!

Wind Demon?!?!?!?

[NME]

I'm sorry, but I think that's hilarious.

'flamebait' indeed.

-nme!

Re:Wind Demon?!?!?!?

[NME]

No shit, sherlock. Should we all thank you for your ground-breaking research?

I just thought it was worded well.

-nme!

Re:What am I missing?

[schuster]

I always thought it ironic that Morissette, who was formerly a failed canadian pop singer, found success singing "alternative" music. IMHO, mall-ternative is the better word. Sorry for the off-topic post.

Public Opinion and MS

[_Sprocket_]

Many people reading Slashdot, maybe. How many people in the normal population have this view, though? I'll give you a clue, it's somewhere in the single digits.

I used to completely agree to this. The public are sheep, I would say, and of COURSE they have no idea what's really going on. They love Microsoft due to ignorance. While that still holds true in many cases, I no longer think it universal. I have two observations to support this change in mind.

First off, have you seen the recent fuzzy-feeling Microsoft commercial? Bill Gates looks like he's in a kids' school computer lab. He talks about when he and is friends decided to harness the power of the home computer and make lives better for everyone. And he expresses his hope to have the freedom to inovate in the future. Its a nice public opinion piece. No products... unless you count positive public opinion of Microsoft as one. I feel that there's a good reason for this add to show up on primetime TV.

The reason is simple. The public is beginning to sour towards Microsoft.

Last year I told this story here but I'll go ahead and tell it again as it still applies...

I was sitting at my desk when someone in the office space behind me began loudly bitching about Microsoft. Was it a fellow Unix admin browsing Slashdot and having a go at some trendy MS bashing? Was it one of my NT admin friends who make their living from supporting one of the nation's largest Microsoft installations... but still grumble at various failings of the products?

No.

The loud complaints were being issued by a decisively non-technical budget analyst who had just lost her work to Windows instability. She stared at a blue screen blaming Microsoft for her woes.

Think about this for a minute. The point is subtle, but a major one. A year or so earlier, she probably would have blamed computers. But now its no longer computers that are at fault - it was the products from Microsoft that caused her grief.

The cracks in Microsoft's public relations wall are beginning to show. There's no flood of public outcry yet; you're just as likely to run in to people on the street who either do not care or don't know anything but Windows. You're always going to find people who very deturminely support Windows and Microsoft. But more and more, I'm finding people who hold Microsoft in a less favorable light.

That is a terrifying thought.

[Alanzilla]

I'm going to go home and crawl under the bed.

Hey, you sass that hoopy Ford Prefect?

[Alanzilla]

Now there's a frood who really knows where his towel is!

Let's get one thing straight...

[HMV]

While we all snicker at the Reed - M$ partnership, other tech companies (as well as MS) have been turning up their lobbying efforts for years now. Microsoft's apparent goal of lobbying GWBush seems an understandable countermeasure when you realize that firms such as Sun and Oracle have been unloading dumptrucks of money at the feet of the current administration and, as the linked article points out, certain congressmen who support the DOJ's action against Microsoft. If they are "buying influence" as some of the posts here claim, where was the outrage and calls for reform when Microsoft's competitors sent more and more money to those who would see to it that the DOJ action would have a full head of steam?

Has Microsoft been the subject of this DOJ attention in part because they didn't pony up to the administration as certain Silicon Valley firms did?

How quickly we forget

[joeler]

It was only a few months ago the story of Gates waiting for GOP bail out was posted on /.

Gates Waits for Bailout from GOP

Likewise has everyone forgotten back in the early part of the 90's Microsoft was against the internet? Did you forget that Microsoft believed they would replace the internet with the MSN?

What about Java, did you forget all the public messages Microsoft sent that Java would be nothing and that everyone would use the MS proprietary ActiveX instead?

A lot of people refuse to give the current administration any credit for anything good that has happened in the last seven years, but if you research you will find that the current administration really did push the internet and all the small businesses that it created. This "push" was long before Microsoft even thought the internet was worth investing in. Read some of the old ASUS articles about Gates in 1993-1994, and how they ( ASUS, associated with Forbes magazine) prodded him into following the lead and getting involved with the internet. Microsoft missed the boat but later tried to "muscle" their way in using their Desktop monopoly power to control the internet.

The DOJ would not let Microsoft have it's way, it kept competition alive as best it could and the internet exploded taking the entire economy with it. Microsoft is not some evil empire, they are only one business looking out for their own concerns, the DOJ is looking out for the nation as a whole. Microsoft had the best lawyers money could buy, they tried thier best case ( also made many mistakes trying to decieve the judge) and the judge made his decision on the facts of the case.

It is understandable that Microsoft wants to buy as many politicians as they can right now to protect their monopoly.

The real anger should be at the current campaign finance laws. John McCain tried to make an issue of it, but it he could not overcome the money George Bush was spending.

Al Gore has made several offers to not use ANY soft money and also agreed to not use the media sound bites but rather regular debates where the American people could see how the candidates think and feel about the various issues. George Bush is not interested.

Re:Maybe satanic to us...

[divec]

You know you can rename any icon on your desktop, fix the spelling on NN.

This does not work for My Computer or Network Neighborhood - at least, it will not save the change (without considerable fiddling). Also references to "color" everywhere which can't be changed to "colour".

Re:Maybe satanic to us...

[divec]

You know you can use Tools->Language to select your language.

Yeah - they never bother to do proper UK English versions, presumably because we can be expected to understand US English. I imagine this is even more annoying if you're Icelandic.

Re:Maybe satanic to us...

[divec]

As for the British English...Blah...a U.K. English version of Office 2k ships

Yeah -- unfortunately nobody seems to have taught it to speak UK English!

and I have news for you, Microsoft doesn't make the Thesauraus, Spell Checker, and Grammar Checker. It's the same third party system used in numerous other office packages.

So? They're still selling the crap. OK, the spell checker knows english words (though it allows things like "color" which are absolutely *wrong* in UK English). But the grammar checker really does object to lots of valid UK English.

Re:Maybe satanic to us...

[divec]

If you have a US region selected, all of your region aware apps are going to use a US region if that is what is selected.

Yeah. Unfortunately, they act in approximately the same way if you specify UK, too. Excel, for example, has to be separately told to do dates as DD/MM/YY instead of MM/DD/YY.

If you downloaded it off of a site that had US discs, with US regions by default, and failed to change it, quit yer whining.

As a European who pays per second of telephone usage, it aint worth downloading things like Windows - it'd be cheaper just to buy it. Nope, the problem is with NT4 Workstation, allegedly in UK mode.

Clarification

[divec]

I should have pointed out that this is with networked NT4, with vaguely reasonable levels of security turned on. I wouldn't have this problem with, say, GNOME running on a secure Debian box.

Re:Maybe satanic to us...

[divec]

The unfortunate truth is that "normal" people consider MicroSoft to be
gods. They see Bill's incredible success and marvel at it. They see
the newest version of Windows and stand bug-eyed when they see their
start menu fade in.

Maybe that's true in the US. Here in the UK there is (in my experience) considerable dissatisfaction with MS products. Maybe it's because of things like that unremovable "Network Neighborhood" icon which is the wrong spelling in this country, or perhaps it's things like the Word grammar checker having a go at you for using perfectly legitimate British English constructs. I imagine it's true that the further you get (culturally) from Seattle, the greater the proportion of people who see MS as menaces and not as gods.

figures

[Hard_Code]

Can Microsoft and the Christian Coalition be any MORE similar? They both have moral superiority complexes. They both have monopolies on their users, and chastise deviants. They both have deep pockets, big mouths, and puppets on Capitol Hill.

I wonder if Ralph will certify Microsoft products "Holiness Approved" and convince members to use only Microsoft products. With any luck Microsoft has just shot itself in the foot by alienating those will any sense left in them.

Re:figures

[gingerya]

I heard recently that he invested heavilly in Newport News ship construction. They're the people who build nuclear aircraft carriers.

Re:figures

[ironhorse]

kind of reminds me of the unlikely alliances in Snow Crash- religious fanatics versus the hackers. I think I'll start learning some kendo and hanging out with mobsters. There are plenty of mobsters in Providence, RI. Hell the Mayor here resembles Uncle Enzo (he was elected from prison after burning his wife's lover with a hot poker, or something like that). Does Bill Gates own an aircraft carrier yet. Probably not, he's more of a submarine kind of guy.

Re: Microsoft hedges their political bets.

[gingerya]

Just because someone calls themselves christian doesn't make it so. I've never heard any christian bashing, all I see is people feed up with the radical right-wing who pick and choose what parts of the bible they choose to follow, and then expect everyone else to live in accordance with their standards. Mr. Reed's coalition doesn't speak for even most christians, just the ones they've brainwashed.

Re:Maybe satanic to us...

[interiot]

My roommate isn't THE 'general population' either, but he's very defensive of microsoft. His major is very computer related too.

A paraphrase of his arguments: "Microsoft is like a giant who wanders the hillsides, sometimes making nice things for the rest of us, and those things generally make our lives easier. So what if it could crush anybody with the bat of an eye? It seems like a nice giant, I haven't seen it crush anyone yet. Just leave it alone, let it go about its business. So what if it could be lazy if it wanted to? It's been working pretty hard so far. Other people are just jealous of how big it is. Just leave it alone."
--

Appalling

[sstaton]

I sit here horrified, reading that M$ is openly paying a dangerously successful media manipulator (RR) to sway "Shrub" Bush to interfere with the DoJ suit against M$. Who wants to live in a country where a big, fat and (now we can all safely say it) criminal company can openly buy their next President and give him a quid pro quo (something Daddy was Famous for)-- a show of hands, please?

Tell your friends, tell your family, tell your mother, that M$ is responding to the anti-trust conviction by bribery. It's appalling.

Re:I think this whole trial is dangerous

[sstaton]

There is merit to your assessment of this generation's "I didn't do it, I was compelled to do it by ..." argument.

However, both selling government sanctioned addictive drugs and monopolizing the desktop software market are activities that are wrong and should be prosecuted against. Tobacco companies knowingly and profitably sell lethal products, which any sensible person can agree are bad for the consumer. So it is with M$'s domination of the desktop market. In the absence of any real competition (sorry, Mac) M$'s desktop OS has only been augmented to force consumers to buy newer versions, not to benefit the consumer.

Examples you say? Internet Explorer was forced down the throat of the consumer because M$ wanted to stifle Netscape, not because millions of desktop users needed another browser. And it was given away for the same reasons. Every "upgrade" of Windows has forced the average desktop customer to throw out an existing PC and replace it with a new one, which (conincidentally) has a copy of the newer Windows on it, whether or not you wanted to pay for it. Millions more would still be running Win 3.1 on 486 machines if M$ hadn't cut off their air supply (now only the poorest of the poor, school districts, run Win 3.1).

I wish you could live in a society where Capitalism ruled. You'd find yourself the property of the One and Only Company that eventually bought all the other smaller ones.

Re:Anyone remember when Slashdot was cool?

[Nafai7]

Except this isn't "just a lobbyist". It's RALPH REED dammit. One of the most instrumental people in opposing moral progress in America. Darkness really is creeping throughout the land...

Re:Evil shall support it's own

[Nafai7]

The computing age is at it's beginning right now. It's only been a few years and things are moving along quite nicely. The whole point is, I love computers and the technology they provide us with. They are incredible tools and I've been programming (obsessed more like it) them since I was 6. Microsoft doesn't care about technology and innovation. They don't. Not at all. Microsoft is all about making money. In the process, Microsoft has sucked all the joy of programming away from the industry. They've turned it into a simple money-generating scheme. As long as you follow the "One Microsoft Way" and don't get in Bill's path you can make plenty of money and you don't have to know much about computers either! It's sad. And people have crowned old Bill king. After all, because of him you make your $80K a year and all you have to do is just keep reading up on the MS marketing materials (they call them "white papers" usually) and keep pushing their proprietary crap into your corporations. And of course renewing your MCSE every couple years (whever Microsoft decided it's time to "change technology" on everyone). I'll stop now. Microsoft IS bad for the computing industry, but in a way we needed them as an example of what NOT to be (sorta like the whole Hitler/Nazi thing, but we won't go there).

Evil shall support it's own

[Nafai7]

RR: With the help of the Christian Coalition has tried hard to keep us in a sort of "moral dark-ages" by pushing bad legislation

BG: With the help of Microsoft, has tried to keep us in a "computing dark-ages" by pushing bad operating systems

RR: Wants to take away your social freedoms

BG: Wants to take away your computing freedoms

RR: Thinks God is on his side

BG: Doesn't give a shit whose side God is on, as long as he has money and power

RR: Makes me want to swear whenver I hear his name

BG: Makes me swear whenever I use his products

RR: One of the perfectly corrupt by-products of 80s Reagan-era greed

BG: Ditto

And to see all of them tied together with Governor Bush just makes me ache inside. Ugh

... but could be his adherent !

[redelm]

MS & BillG have broken antitrust laws. It is complicated, but clear enough that they've used tying & bundling to leverage their OS monopoly.

What makes MS & BG evil in my eyes is not what they did, but they persist in thinking they did no wrong. Not as a ploy, but I believe genuinely. BillG doesn't understand that what he did was wrong. This is amoral, and amorality is evil. Malevolence [of which there was plenty toward other corps] is not necessary for evil to exist.

Their blythe rejection of the very reasonable settlement offer -- no breakup, no open source, no "stopping innovation" just a price list for all buyers (NYTimes) -- is merely confirmation. And utterly stupid.

CC website runs on Linux/Apache

[Cy Guy]

Check for yourself here.

This might also be good time to time take another look at Jesux.

APwire: Reed's firm halting MS lobbying efforts

[Cy Guy]

New news item here

Unfortunately I can't figure out whether this means Reed is doing this on his own, or that Reed AND the firm have changed their minds about helping MS.

Re:Shudder!

[jkujawa]

From where I'm sitting, it looks more like two of Satan's minions.

Re:What am I missing?

[Elbereth]

The Microsofties need a foot in the door among the Bush crowd so that their calls to a Bush White House are answered. Hiring one of the candidate's consultants as their own consultant is a time-honored method to do so. Now they just need
a similar friend from the Gore team.

I'm sure that Gore will play along. He's always been an insider and team-player. I have no great love for the man, but he at least has token opinions on issues important to me: technology, the environment, and Twisted Sister. He's a closet Twisted Sister fan, ya know.

Re:Look out

[bungalow]

Few people are elected Presedent because everyone likes them. Most are elected because they are disliked the least

Makes good sence to me...

[romco]

Microsoft and Christianity have a lot in common.

"Closed source"
We were not meant to understand everything God does.

"FUD"
We were not meant understand god's will but if we don't follow God's will we go to hell.

"Monopoly"
"Worship no other Gods but me"

Need I say more?

Re:Makes good sence to me...

[cfish]

>God created the universe.

Says who?

>Churches ask for voluntary contributions. Microsoft levies a tax.

You CHOOSE to buy MS products. Christains used to "sell" tickets to heaven, too.

>Christ heals the lame;

Show me the last time he did that.

>Christ once pulled money out of the mouth of a fish;

Show me the tape.

>Christ was crucified because the political powers of the day couldn't control him;

again, no proof. but we know the story of "God's second son" the guy who Barbequed himself in Waco, TX. I guess that means "He died for all of us," too.

Re:Oh Dear God NO...TWO greater evils together...

[cfish]

Just vote for Gore, damn it. He pretty much showed support for the DoJ. Bush is simply too damn dumb. We already have an actor, a perv to be the president, what else do you want? a moron to be US president?

Re:Shudder!

[Spittoon]

How can you tell the difference?

Don't forget..

[AppyPappy]

The Democrats and Clinton are the ones pushing for less freedom and more taxation on the Internet. Even Queen Hillary lamented there was too much freedom on the Internet.

May your chains rest lightly.

Re:Waste of money

[eomir]

Actually, most newspapers are run by Republicans. Of course newspapers are not as influential as they used to be, but that is still a major source of news. As for other forms of media, I don't really know.

Waste of money

[wowbagger]

I am deeply sorry to say this, but Microsoft is wasting their money lobbying to GWB: Al Gore will be the next president (goodbye, Second Amendment. It was nice while it lasted).

Unfortunately, in the US the media is predominantly Liberal in its leanings, and this gives a tremendous advantage to the Democrats. The Republicans have less chance of winning the election than Microsoft has of hiring RMS.

Microsoft is finally figuring it out

[po_boy]

It's my understanding that before the anti-trust case started, Microsoft did not even have one full-time lobbyist in DC. That's pretty rare for a company of that size. I have heard the suggestion that the lack of money from Microsoft to DC may be one of the reasons for the anti-trust case; the politicians can't stand the fact that there is this huge company who is not contributing to them significantly (except for during campaign season). Microsoft has been strong-armed through the anti-trust case into behaving like most other large companies/industries. They now have to buy politicians off year round. Many say that this is the more significant outcome of the anti-trust case, regardless of how it turns out.

Seriously though .....

[taniwha]

I does rather look like they're pinning their future on deposing the existing order and are backing the Republicans. It might be worth spending some time perusing SEC filings over the next few months to follow the M$-bucks.

To be fair I think Billy-boy has enoiugh that he could buy both parties - and I bet he'll probably try

I agree .....

[taniwha]

but personally I'm partial to the German/NZ systems where you get 2 votes - a party vote and a local electorate vote - you double up the existing electorates so the number of electorate seats falls to 1/2 then after the election you first add up the electorate votes and then use the national party totals to share out the other 1/2 of the seats to make the party totals come out right. I think both countries have minimum %s required (5%?) for a party to get representation.

Now the usual complaint about this sort of system (proportional systems in general) is that it encourages coalitions and compromise (I think that's a good thing in a political system) which results in deadlocks - however the US political system seems to be designed to encourage that sort of thing anyway (many in the US seem proud of this quality) so maybe it's a perfect fit.

Shudder!

[taniwha]

I swear when I read that I genuinely felt something cold and clammy run down my back ....

Mind you it does seem that the minions of satan and those of heaven are teaming up .... might really signal the end of the world :-)

Re:Shudder!

[degroof]

taniwha sez: "I swear when I read that I genuinely felt something cold and clammy run down my back ...."

Musta been one of them Darwin fishes. They run real fast.

Re:Shudder!

[GenCuster]

How about no voice without a vote?

Nate Custer

Re:Consumer opinion

[Stonehand]

Most people don't pay up-front for their MS software; they buy it with the computer, with the possible exception of games (and, last I checked, most games were priced pretty similarly -- $39.95-$49.95 or so, with few outliers). They fly in planes, and purchase their own drugs...

In addition, it's not infrequent for news programs to interview senior citizens and ask about their views on drug costs, so people often HEAR that others think that prescription drugs cost too much; and similar reports come out against the airlines. Just yesterday, their were stories regarding how numerous uninsured folks felt that prescription drug costs should be made lower...

All this coverage focuses people's attention. If you ask people what they thought during, say, the Tupac Amaru siege of the Japanese Embassy in Peru, I sincerely doubt that many people will remember a thing 'bout it. Or if you mention that the President might be disbarred for his legal misconduct, I doubt many folks follow this; even fewer would be aware of, say, what happened to a former WH intern named "Mary Mahoney", whose name also apparently surfaced on the Tripp tapes.

If the broadcast news and papers suddenly covered the travails of a (speculating here...) rare lizard species endangered by encroachment in the Namibian Desert, they'd likely focus on that as well. Then they'd forget 'bout it when the next story hit.

Re:Attaboy, George W.!

[Stonehand]

He also said that he was unsympathetic to lawsuits.

I wouldn't trust Gore with a penny, but I'm not convinced yet that Bush is significantly here.

There is no Good vs. Evil anymore

[blazer1024]

This is kind of funny. Say goodbye to the classic Good vs. Evil battles. Now we have Evil vs. Evil.
While the good sits by on the sidelines waiting for it to all fall apart, so that the good can take over.

It's kind of funny that someone affiliated with a "Christian" orginization would side with a large corporation like Microsoft, since they represent what most would say is the ultimate evil... money. How hippocritical is that?

Re:There is no Good vs. Evil anymore

[Steeplerot]

Wasen't the pope down w/ hitler in WW2? Someone told me he blessed the panzertanks and and stuff. If so Billy boy is in good hands. Put out the lights on the age of reason

Re:Ralph Reed's trend line

[anatoli]

No, no, no. You get it all wrong.

The OO way (which is The Only True Way (TM), beside Organized Religion (TM)) tells us that

• PatRobertson ISA Antichrist
• BillGates ISA Antichrist

Therefore, RalphReed should have a WorkFor(Antichrist*) method. Or WorkFor(Antichrist&) maybe.

This way anybody who conforms to the Antichrist interface can get RalphReed to work for him.

DISCLAIMER: I am not an American. I am not a Christian. I don't know who this Ralph Reed is. I don't know who this Pat Robertson is. I am poking at the parent post, not at American politics or Christianity. Now please send your thugs away. Please. Pretty pl...[BANG! THUMP! SPLAT!] OK folks. Congrats. Another anti-American heathen went to hell where he belongs. Who's next on our list?
--

Re: Microsoft hedges their political bets.

[MattXVI]

Yes, but my point is, this is a "Sky is still blue" story. Reed worked for MS before. So did lots of other influential lobbyists, amny of them Democrats. MS can afford the big names. There is no "story" here except some very typical Slashdot Christian-bashing.

Microsoft hedges their political bets.

[MattXVI]

Before anybody reads too much into the hiring of a GOP lobbyist, keep in mind that MS has hired Democrat lobbyists as well. Why doesn't that merit a story on Slashdot? The GOP controls both side of Capitol Hill, so it certainly makes sense to employ a big name GOP lobbysist if you are one of the biggest corporations in America.

It's interesting to note that Microsoft gives about the same amount of money to each party. Like most companies, they hedge their bets. This article has more details.

Re: Microsoft hedges their political bets.

[RickHunter]

Read the title of the page. Slashdot: New for Nerds. That should tell you something right there. Slashdot will pick stories that the editors believe their readers are interested in, and which are relevant to the readers. Your sky is still blue stories would probably be better for a meteorology journal or something.

-RickHunter

Re: Microsoft hedges their political bets.

[RickHunter]

Haven't watched Macross to the end, have you? Personally, I'd rather that she'd been squished in Episode 2, and saved everyone a lot of pain. In the American version, at least. The Japanese model might be slightly less irritating.

Although I admit that blue sky stories might have a slight relevance to news for nerds. I'm wondering how many people on here have been inside for long periods of time? ;-)

-RickHunter

Re:Maybe satanic to us...

[CaptainCarrot]

That would have more to do with the dictionary it uses than the spell checker itself, I would think.

politics

[passion]

of course politics is going to enter into the arena here. It's not like this thing hasn't been political from the start. Big money always gets political, and it's the republicans who saddle up to the big boys.

Let's not forget that Judge Jackson was a Reagan appointee.

Re:Slashdot censorship of non-religious viewpoints

[Quintin Stone]

• And why pray/prey is that? One of the main points of interest on this news item is this individuals connection to the conservative christian elements within American society. As a "quoteable quote", it is 100% on-topic and highly relevent to the debate, so I would argue that it should be marked as "+1:informative".

Then you would be wrong. Not only was it mostly offtopic, but it offered nothing useful to this particular discussion at all. A single offtopic quote, no matter how enlightened, does not constitute an "informative" post, especially considering how publicized this particular quote was in recent time and how Ventura says it was really taken out of context.

It's obvious to anyone with half a brain that the original post, whether actually believed or not, was only posted to anger people of religious persuasion. I'm not particularly religious myself, but I know flamebait when I see it.

Re:Maybe satanic to us...

[donutello]

You know you can use Tools->Language to select your language.

Shee-it

[Rogain]

(Bible-thumping Pastor infront of his flock) "Now, I wanna tell ya bout a new devil stalking the land, its called Linux. It was invented by a godless-commie from Finland, it will lead your children to deny the truth of the One Great Operating system, and Jesus as well. It will temp your nerdy children, and they shall proclaim the greatness of linux and shall suffer from the sin of pride, pride in their computer skills, which shall set them apart from more normal school children. It shall lead them down the road, to shooting up their school. Break all those evil linux cd's, smash all their rock and roll albums, limit your child's access to the devil's internet. Send them only to Microsoft.com, only with PIII's with the serial ID fully functioning, make sure your systems are unpatched, so any god-fearing servant of god-like myself or the FBI can connect and search for smut, mp3's and linux anytime we want. Send them only to www.wwjd.com, and send your money to me, Jerry Foulwell, Ralph Reed, and Saint Gates."

Let them appeal

[JayBonci]

Let them Appeal. Its MS's right. If they want to pick someone to lobby for them, so be it. Why is it such a shock to anyone? In the US , all the freedom people seem to feel MS has threated, there is also something called rights of the accused.

All companies lobby. Why shouldnt they? MS has a big impact on the economy in a lot of ways. All companies are affected by political decisions. Now im not saying a corporation should make huge decisions about our lives, but they should have a stake in their survival.

Sure money talks, but so does the justice department. Let things play themselves out...

--jay

They're backpedaling...

[Genevish]

According to Yahoo, "A company headed by former Christian Coalition chief Ralph Reed said Tuesday it made "an error we regret" when it asked influential Republicans to lobby presidential candidate George Bush on behalf of Microsoft..."

The full article

Slashdot Editors Cranky Given Andover Stock Price

[quakeaddict]

Did you know that some people at MS actually go to church on Sunday? I mean is it really stuff that matters who MS hires and who they don't?

Given what I read day in and day out on Slashdot, I thought everyone at MS was a bozo anyway, so what does Slashdot care?

The bottom line is there are more people who have forgotten how to use Windows than there are *active* Linux users. Given the state of the various desktops that struggle to draw pixels on the screen, that ain't gonna change anytime soon.

Lets look at Linux as a business.

Whats Andover worth these days? 19? Down from what...80? A factor of four. Poor poor slashdot editors. Perhaps thats why they are so cranky.

Own Redhat stock? 31 and change. That is almost down to its IPO price...and a full five times off its overinflated high (150's).

Own Corel stock? Its trading in the 9's (as in less than 10)...down from 45 a few short months ago, and sinking fast.

Own VA Linux Stock? Mid 40's. Down from a high in the low 300's. A factor of 8 loss (for every dollar invested you have 12.5 cents)

Oh and don't forget the upcoming IPO for Linuxcare...you know the one that was errr um canceled?!

Yeah Linux is the future and MS is on the way out, all because they hired Ralph Reed.

Get a life Slashdot.

This is all your fault, after all

[briancarnell]

Wow. Hilarious watching all these /.ers who in the past have argued for political solutions to take apart MS (since Linux *still* sucks), shocked -- shocked I say -- that MS has started buying up lobbyists (hmmm..think we'll see a JonKatz article about the evils of MS stereotyping? doubt it).

Before this whole antitrust suit began, MS lobbying efforts were very low for a company its size. Now the tech field is going to become a lawyer's paradise all because Netscape couldn't get out a browser that didn't suck.

Time to reap what you've sown.

Re:Anyone remember when Slashdot was cool?

[Sleestack]

One Reed to turn them all, one Reed to hold them, One Reed to string them all and in ignorance mold them. In the land of Redmond where the shadows lie.

Re:Anyone remember when Slashdot was cool?

[wind]

I don't think it's the fact that they hired a lobbyist so much as it's the fact that they hired this *specific* lobbyist to lobby this *specific* politician.

No doubt they hope that Bush will win the election and squash the whole affair, and hiring someone like Ralph Reed further shows they have no shame. W

Re:Maybe satanic to us...

[Malcs]

You and me both, Captain. Living so close to Satan does one of two things, methinks. You either roll over and take it because everyone else does or it steels you and makes you defend your position in no uncertain terms.

CORRECTION: judge-not-lest-ye-should-be-judged?

[superyooser]

Christ's message of judge-not-lest-ye-should-be-judged

This is the most misunderstood and misused verse in the Bible. Christ was referring to the judging of others' eternal salvation. He was saying that you shouldn't judge whether someone is going to heaven or hell because only God can know what's really in a person's heart. He was NOT referring to judging behavior. This verse pertains only to a person's salvation!

In fact, Christ demands that Christians reprimand and correct others when they commit sins. Judgment of the morality of behavior is absolutely necessary for a moral society. How could Christ have possibly opposed this?

NY Time, Ralh Reed, POLITICS!

[erf]

There is a NY Times article on the same issue.

Ralph Reed no longer works for the Christian Coalition - he now runs Century Strategies, a political lobbying & campaign group. He left the CC shortly before they lost their tax exemption when the IRS determined they were not a non-partisan group (no big surprise to anyone with a functioning frontal lobe).

So many people on Slashdot bitch on and on about corporations running things or having an undue influence in public affairs in the States. There is one candidate who is actively campaigning against the current state of affairs. Check out Ralph Nader & the Green Party at www.votenader.org and www.greens.org.

An interesting listing of Washington contributors

[n-baxley]

Can be found here and here

Resumes

[Arctic Fox]

Why does it matter that Ralph Reed worked for the Christian Coalition and George W. Bush?
It seems like the text of the topic is very baiting, and this thread will immediately degenerate into anti-Christian anti-Republican immaturity.
Every company has lobbyists. Big deal. Thats how business is done nowadays. It's not right, but that's the system. A more balanced blurb would have been "Microsoft hires anti-trust Lobbyists." This place has been going down the tubes lately, with sensational stories.

Be thankful you are not my student. You would not get a high grade for such a design :-)

is any more proof needed?

[criticalrealist]

Of the evils of Microsoft? Or of those of Ralph Reed?

Re:Anyone remember when Slashdot was cool?

[Avumede]

The reason this is interesting is because Ralph Reed is probably one of the most influential people in American politics today.

The news is important, and bizarre. Microsoft tries to get the god-heads on their side. It's a very interesting move, and with Reed as their lobbyist, lots of people will suddenly be a lot more sympathetic. This could well turn the feeling around in Washington - especially amongst the Republicans, who take what Reed and the Christian Coalition say as (pardon the expression) gospel.

Re:Ralph Reed's trend line

[-brazil-]

No. The only thing we could logically conclude from that is that Pat Robertson == Bill Gates....

Or...

[Raymond Luxury Yacht]

Harrison Ford.

"Truck? What truck?"

Re:What am I missing?

[thermostat42]

Its ironic in the Alanis Morissette sence of the word. (Notice the "dontcha-think" attached to the end) Thats the same song that considers rain on your wedding day, and good advice that you can't take to be ironic.

In otherwords, it isn't ironic.

Re:Effective action on this...

[Rakarra]

I cannot see how he can square support of Microsoft, which is without a doubt the most unethical and dishonest corporation I've ever encountered (based on personal, firsthand experience, not hearsay), with standing for Christian principles.

It could be, like so many famous glitzy Christians, that he's actually a hypocrite. He whips out the rhetoric when it suits his political purposes, but doesn't care to follow through. See: "Sunday Christians."

Re:Wrong.

[Rakarra]

Are you kidding me? 99% of the people who post on Slashdot hate Christians outright.

Wrong.

See that's the problem with you Christians. When people point out inconsistencies in your belief system or suggest that it is immoral or barbaric, your persecution complex kicks in and you interpret the criticism of your religion as an attack on YOU, as "hatred" directed towards YOU.

This is almost an ad hominum attack. The original poster is exagerrating obviously, but he has a point -- I'd have to say there's much more antagonism against Christianity here than there is in... say, society at large. You need a persecution complex to see that; it's simply obvious. I'm an agnostic, and even I am somewhat surprised at the Christian-bashing that goes on around here. };>

Come on!

[(void*)]

So MS hires some big gun to clean its PR. How is this any different from what they are doing?

And what about this reference to Satan? MS is not satan! They may have stifled competition, thumbed their noses at Judges, bully OEMs, forced Go out of business, dumped Internet Explorer, write sneaky code to make compatible products incompatible, misrepresented their committment to OS/2 ... but they are not evil.

Bush Adviser Apologizes Over Lobbying for

[Judah Diament]

see this article at the NY Times - the guy backed out, and the Bush campaing seems to be less than happy :-)

Re:Bush Adviser Apologizes Over Lobbying for

[Judah Diament]

sorry - here's the URL: here

Maybe satanic to us...

[DrEldarion]

Think MS knows that many people consider them the Great Satan??

Many people reading Slashdot, maybe. How many people in the normal population have this view, though? I'll give you a clue, it's somewhere in the single digits.

The unfortunate truth is that "normal" people consider MicroSoft to be gods. They see Bill's incredible success and marvel at it. They see the newest version of Windows and stand bug-eyed when they see their start menu fade in.

My father was even saying how unfortunate it is that MS is even involved in the anti-trust case at all. Lets face it, the general population really doesn't know what's going on... not that they have to, though. Windows is good enough for their means, and it's relatively easy to use. As long as this holds true, their opinion of MS is not going to change, no matter what happens.

-- Dr. Eldarion --

Re:Maybe satanic to us...

[Zanth_]

Ditto in Canada We know about Microsoft, we despise Microsoft, and the trend for open source OS' is coming alive. We have the Brit spelling and the American pronunciation. The grammar checker drives me buggy everytime I use it!

more evil than satan himself

[Fillup]

I wonder if Ralph has seen the google "more evil than satan himself" thing....
--

M$ + Ralph Reed + George Bush =

[xianzombie]

oh fuck

It Works

[maker]

The reason that thousands of corporations and
individuals purchase what the influencers peddle,
is because it works. It always has, and always will.
We refer to them now as lobbyists.
They used to be called courtiers.

itbwtcl

Re:Tell Bush he lost you vote!

[cryosis]

Why would he lose the vote? Because he hired a consulting firm (headed by a being of evil, but not the point) and then Microsoft (look, more evil!) hired the same firm? While I lothe George Bush, I know there are better things not to vote for him for. After all, a power hungry being such as Reed couldn't hold himself back from something as large as Microsoft.

Look out

[jchawk]

Oh boy this may very well turn out to be the battle of the century. *DING DING DING* In the this corner wereing the very very black trunks Microsoft and the Christian Colition... and in this corner in the red trucks the United States Government. That part that I'm confused about is, who is the one that is most evil? Microsoft, Christian Colition nutball, or our less then perfect Gov. ?

an attempt to subvert the constitution

[porky_pig_jr]

the lobbying already started, even before MS hired Ralph Reed, and this attempt to influence the court decision via the congress (and as we see now - via possible president of the U.S.) is rather blatant attempt to subvert the foundation of this country in terms of separation of different branches of power. This whole thing stinks, even without Ralph Reed.

Re:an attempt to subvert the constitution

[bechamp1]

Last week the Chicago Tribune had a column that goes into some detail about some of the additional lobbying that Bill Gates has done recently. It's quite scary, in fact. A brief quote from the article:

The Republicans even pledged to turn Microsoft's conviction into a campaign issue. "This should be looked into by Congress," said Majority Leader Trent Lott of Mississippi.

You'll need to log in to view the actual article.
Brett

Tell Bush he lost you vote!

[netinlet]

http://www.georgebush.com/contact/index.html

As much as I dislike Al Gore, I will vote for
him b/c of this.

Doug Bryant
cdbryant@netinlet.com

Re:Ralph Reed's trend line

[Mike Belangia]

Let's see... Ralph Reed used to work for (Pat Robertson == Antichrist) & (Bill Gates == Antichrist)... Can we logical conclude Ralph Reed == Antichrist^2

Re:Anyone with hair . . .

[Nate Eldredge]

Hmm, so you think RMS has "flawlessly neat" hair??

Make mental note, avoid that AC's hairstylist...

(See this picture if in doubt.)

This isn't a new thing.

[kwsNI]

Microsoft hired him last year as a lobbyist.

Check out the MSNBC article.

kwsNI

Didn't you know...

[tcd004]

the 5 minutes you wait for windows to boot is supposed to be mandatory prayer time?

tcd004

All this MS whining reminds me of a fable

[Mayor Quimby]

A wild and free horse is being harassed by a pack of wolves. The horse goes to a man and says: "If I give you a ride, would you help me get these wolves?" The man agrees. He climbs on the horse's back and proceeds to pick off the wolves with arrows. The horse then says, "Thank you. You can get down now." The man says, "Yeah, right. Giddeyup."

Let's beat the wolves without selling our souls, OK?

Re:All this MS whining reminds me of a fable

[CakerX]

yeah

Re:Microsoft Just Bought G.W. Bush's Ear

[Anomalous Canard]

I'm all for the anti-trust lawsuit, but I get the feeling the average person either doesn't care/understand the issue

Which is exactly why it's a loser issue. It's hard to explain to the voters why they should care and the other side can snipe away in easily pre-digested soundbites. Furthermore it gives Gore the accusation that GWB can be bought by big corporations.

Getting elected is an exercise in politics. The economy is still doing good and unless it tanks between now and November, Gore waltzes in (barring AG committing political suicide). The economy is almost all it's ever about.

Anomalous: inconsistent with or deviating from what is usual, normal, or expected

Re:You really think so?

[Anomalous Canard]

I said they bought his ear, not his soul.

Anomalous: inconsistent with or deviating from what is usual, normal, or expected

Microsoft Just Bought G.W. Bush's Ear

[Anomalous Canard]

If they're smart, they won't bend it much until after the election. If GWB tries to make the Microsoft prosecution into an election issue, that is nothing but a loser for him.
Anomalous: inconsistent with or deviating from what is usual, normal, or expected

Attaboy, George W.!

[Rimbo]

``Asked about the case last week, shortly after the judge's ruling, Mr Bush said that as president he would "fully enforce anti-trust laws."''

Nice to know that at least one of the candidates sees the light.

Re:Attaboy, George W.!

[Rimbo]

I can live with the anti-conservative, anti-religion, anti-Microsoft atmosphere. I at least agree with one of those three. I'm profoundly anti-censorship and pro-democracy and those two ideals require learning how to live with people who disagree with you.

The way you fight back ignorance is with patience and facts. It doesn't always work, but it's the only thing that works. All other methods just make enemies.

Hey, leave George out of this!

[Rimbo]

George has stated publicly that he supports efforts to break up trusts.

I really hate the fact that Bush is now going to be connected with Gates by the implication, especially in the light of Bush's position on the issue.

You really think so?

[Rimbo]

Asked about the case last week, shortly after the judge's ruling, Mr Bush said that as president he would "fully enforce anti-trust laws."

That's what Bush said. Just because you've hired the man's consulting firm doesn't put you in bed with him.

Re:Microsoft is now a political party, and a...

[0x0000]

...telco, and a cable t.v. company, and a religious cult, and an entertainment company, and a book publisher, and...

Im just suprised they just started now...i mean, they could have shortly after the suit was filed instead of after they were found guilty!

What makes you think they just started it? M$ has been steadily buying-up the US Congress for years now. The guilty verdict was necesary in order to prevent double jeopardy. The politicos will get them off the hook, then scream bloody murder about if the DOJ thinks about going after them again. You're believing the hype; it's been a put-up job from the start.

If the DOJ wants to stop M$, they're going to have to use tactics similar to what they unleased on the Branch Davideans at Waco. The legal system and the executive branch can, and have, been bought; lock, stock, and barrel.

How do you think those poor bastards on the missle cruisers wound up being towed back to port when NT crashed on them. The US Navy stated publicly that they knew better than to try to use NT for that application (warship systems automation), but that "political pressure was brought to bear" to force the choice.

Next war, we stand to lose more troups to Bill Gates' software screwups than to any foreign military force...

Question: When people start to die because M$ bought off the government (and it will happen, it's only a matter of time now), will it be considered friendly fire, or will we realize that M$ is the enemy within, and call it what it is: treason?

The Bush family supported Hitler before and during WW II. Now they support Bill Gates. At least they're consistent.

Bill Gates is not a capitalist, he's a fascist; he's not selling a product, he's running a protection racket, and he's making moves on the political establishment, among other things. All you linux users could wind up wearing yellow stars, stuffed in in freight trains on your way to get 'Training Seminars' in eastern WA once GW and the Religious Right take power; if you're lucky, they'll just fine you for running running dual boot...

Anyone know what software the computers that count s the votes for the general elections runs? Five to one it was recently "upgraded" to WinNT. Bet?

"This license agreement ("the end-user license agreement with Amerika") replaces any and all provisions of the former Kontract with Amerika, its clauses or parts...."

UPDATE: Reed Apologizes for Bush/Microsoft Work

[ATKeiper]

The following story is up on Yahoo now, here :

The consulting firm founded by Ralph Reed apologized today for encouraging "a small number of individuals" to express their views about the Microsoft case to George W. Bush, the presumptive GOP presidential nominee. The firm said it would halt the contacts...

"We are not hoping or expecting that any different administration will pull back or withdraw this (antitrust) case," [Microsoft spokesman Dan] Leach added. "We believe and we fully expect that we will win this case on appeal."

A. Keiper
The Center for the Study of Technology and Society
Washington, D.C.

Could somebody tell me who said that? :

[Sri Lumpa]

"I don't think that Bill Gates is the Devil, I only think that if they were to meet they wouldn't need a translator".

null

[PHanT0]

GO M$!!! *you bloated piece of overworked, monopolistic, sack of horse shit*... just a little frustration taken out right there... my Anti-Trust liar, I mean lawyer, told m$.. me... *Did they get that hint I wonder?* (read: Microsoft sucks...)

Re:What am I missing?

[CakerX]

Its Ironic that a supposed "supporter of god", would work for the biggest evil confronting America today. But then again, this dude ain't any better than Micro$hit............................. .................................................. ........................................ .................................................. ............................[miscellanou s point here]....... .................................................. ........................................ .......... [anti-mirco$oft quote goes here].................. .................................................. ........................................ ..........

Re:Anyone remember when Slashdot was cool?

[fedos]

It's news because of WHO M$ hired has a consultant. As a generality, people who are not of the Christian Coalition ilk think Ralph Reed as a radical. As the voice for the CC, he has built a certain reputation that does not make him the best of choices for winning nationwide approval.

Re:Ralph Reed's trend line

[fedos]

Despite years of trying to recondition myself, I still can't get out of the habits of procedural oriented models.

Should PatRobertson and BillGates be subclasses or instances of class Antichrist? Would the WorkFor(Antichrist*) method cover all forms of servitude or would I need a separate one for such things as boot polishing and toilet scrubing?

Ralph Reed's trend line

[fedos]

Ralph Reed used to work for Pat Robertson.
Pat Robertson = Antichrist

Ralph Reed now works for Bill Gates
Bill Gates = Antichrist

So, what does this say about Ralph Reed?

Gates For Pres

[cricklewood]

Maybe Bill is just dipping his toe into a future bid for President.

Re:Gates For Pres

[Chiasmus_]

Agreed. If Gates ran for President, it would guarantee the Democratic party victory.

Why is it that third-party candidates always hurt the Republicans, anyway? Maybe it's because successful businessmen, religious zealots, military nuts, and rednecks have such a tentative agreement to play on the same team.

Of course, if Al Gore were president, with his "computer-friendly" image but complete lack of actual computing knowledge, he might do a lot of things very beneficial to Microsoft. So, in conclusion, Gates should run in 2000.

My first thought

[kilroy2000]

My first thought when hearing of the Microsoft/Ralph Reed connection:

"When you have more money than God..."

:-)

Give him a chance...

[cheekymonkey_68]

Give the guy a break he's only a spindoctor, he probably does not know enough about Micorsoft's predatory business practices.
Go on write to him, educate him on the 'Dark Ways of Microsoft'(TM) but don't start a flame war its so wastefull.
Hmm, I wonder perhaps someone should let Ralph Reed know Windows contains Scientology code, if he has any real ethics he might change his mind go on its worth a try, after all he's supposed to be a Christian...
"There won't be anything we won't say to people to try and convince them that our way is the way to go"
Bill Gates on Marketing

Re:What am I missing?

[duckyd]

it's ironic because evil Microsoft has hired eveil Mr. Reed to lobby for them. on second thought, maybe it's just plain fitting....

Consumer opinion

[Flerp]

Even more fun is the NYTimes story about the same thing. It also goes into detail about how Microsofts 'polls' about the lack of public support for the prosecution of Microsoft.

Of course, the polls asked people to rank 'prosecute Microsoft' against other actions like 'prosecute airlines who dont service their airplanes', 'overcharging for prescription medicine', etc. When faced with plague, cholera, cancer or a really bad case of flu, most seem to have chosen the flu...

Re:Consumer opinion

[MrBogus]

Yes, everyone knows a senior citizen who is angry that Medicare doesn't cover their expensive drug bills. Everyone has ridden on a crowded airline and eaten their crappy food. Everyone knows someone who has died from cancer.

On the other hand everyone sees Microsoft's name all over their computer. Computer good, Internet good, Microsoft good. Or as good as they understand. Almost nobody has seen their real bastardly tactics, unless you are in the IT business, and even then your career probably depends on Microsoft, so be careful what you think.

Machiavelli Suffers a GPF

[lbrlove]

Once, it was:

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Now, it is:

An enemy who is the friend of my potential enemy is my friend, at least until my enemy agrees to be my friend, and then I can ditch the friend of my new friend and make my new friend an enemy again.

I figure somewhere in that flow of logic, Microsoft "blue screens".

-L

ralph reed

[pyrrho]

It's clear that Bill Gates just wasn't satisfied being geek king, he must have been more comfortable when geeks were outcast! So now he is the outcast among geeks, ungeek... RALPH REED? Good lord... doesn't Microsoft have domestic partner and all sorts of liberal policies, I mean compared to the Christian Coalition. This is the boy, er, man, that make the Christian Coalition a political force an not -just- the viewing audience of a bunch of crazy whack jobs. Nothing personal, "crazy whack job" is not nec. a bad thing...

Oh Dear God NO...TWO greater evils together...

[Cannonball]

What scares me here is the causal link between Reed's clientele. George Dubya and Bill Gates. Money and political power go together better than peanut butter and jelly. Imagine the "Big Brother" style power of an M$/US Gov. alliance. Thoroughly scary. Kiss your anti-trust suit goodbye if they ally. More reason to vote third party...or...god forbid, Al Gore. When will we find a candidate who will actually SERVE us as constituents? I'd rather four more years of Bill than a M$USGov.

Re:What am I missing?

[Chiasmus_]

Isn't it ironic that Mr. Reed was hired for the very same task he's intended to accomplish?

I think this whole trial is dangerous

[LeviGraves]

even though i really dislike M$ with a passion, i dont agree with this whole trial. over the last couple of years we have seen the clinton administration filing (or trying to file) law suits against several industries (the tobacco industry, gun manufacturers, and Microsoft). i totally disagree with all three of these suits. for one the gun & tobacco suits are being used as scapegoats for the morality problems in our country. i think that over the past 20 years there has been an increasing attitude of "i'm not responsible for my own actions, so i'll blame someone else and then sue them for everything they're worth". with the government seemingly participating in this mindset, the floodgates will only widen allowing for even more lawsuits. as far as the whole microsoft trial, why did the government choose microsoft to pick on when so many other organizations demonstrate the same type of business practices(intel, riaa, aol). i think that microsofts own practices will eventually, and probably very soon, cause it's own demise. i dont think that the open source revolution needs the government to make OSes like linux take the greater market share. i think that the nature of a capitalistic society will weed out those who dont deserve to be on top in favor of those who do. we dont need to imitate socialistic goverments and tell private industry how to conduct itself (to a point). with that said, i think that the case against ms should be dropped and the open source community should kick some microsoft ass the old fashion way.

Re:REPENT SINNERS

[MisterQueue]

This cannot be serious...I mean to equate a program or OS with a belief system is ludicrous. Granted the fact that Mr. Bill has decided to align himself with pusillanimous christian wretches (not all christians are wretches mind you, just the ones he's chosen..so don't flame me) does make me even more anti-microsoft than I already was, but to equate Linux with any sort of belief system is simply quite mad. I believe the first post was a joke, amusing and so forth, but the one "calling out" linux as an anti-christian os....I mean come on... And if you want me to stoop to a petty belief system level to make you understand that's fine: Linux is about open source and sharing, what more of a sense of community could you get? Community=caring, help, and support... hmm...yep..that's definitely anti-christian (especially by most christians I have personally witnessed....) FEH! -Q

Screw the "Great Satan"...this is a master stroke!

[thorbo]

Now, this is a great idea if you are guilty, and can get the potential Presidents "man" to work on your team...talk about future promise. Now, will this make it easier for MS to move, as they will, in the future? Of course, there is no benefit if GB doesn't meet with success...who knows about that.

Microsoft's Politics

[rightshu]

It's not so much MS's politics that scares me; it's a particular quote from the original article. In the article, Mark Murray said:

[T]he company had hired Mr Reed to counter "a comprehensive lobbying campaign by our competitors" to promote the anti-trust case against it.

"Comprehensive lobbying campaign"?! Oh, wait, I forgot -- remember when Steve Jobs and Linus Torvalds started paying for PSAs urging Judge Jackson to find against MS? You don't? Well, obviously we missed them.

Christ (with apologies to Ralph Reed), how much of a paranoid delusional is Gates, anyway?

Tootsie Rolls and Jolt -- because breakfast is the most important meal of the day.
rightshu@spam_is_for_weasels.yahoo.com

Open Letter to Bill Gates

[colineby]

All right folks -- this is finally too much crap to put up with from Microsoft. Below I've written an open letter to Bill and company. Feel free to comment or forward.
______________________________________________

Dear Mr Gates and Microsoft Inc.:

This is in reference to you're hiring Ralph Reed.

It's totally unacceptable. Ralph Reed's most famous life work was building up a political organization known for its bigotry and hate-mongering. They've directly and negatively impacted my life. As he stands by his work with the 'Christian Coalition' I cannot conscience providing support -- even obliquely -- to his work.

You have made supporting Microsoft products tantamount to a political statement. I'm writing this from IE 5.0 running on a Win2K Advanced Server from which I do NT and SQL7.0 administration, and application development. My corporation has a strong commitment to consulting based on your products among others. But how am I to continue using your products and recommending them? How is it that I can do this in good conscience?

I've long believed your operating systems are the most appropriate for most applications. In many ways you provide superior products. And although I'm dismayed by much of what came out in court about your business practices, I've always been comfortable with the social values you're company operates under.

Not anymore. Let me repeat -- employing Mr. Reed is as inappropriate as hiring John Wayne Gacy. I will not patronize you're company while you employ Reed. I will not recommend the use or purchase of your products within my company or to any of our clients. It is your responsibility as world technology and business leaders to demonstrate integrity in both your work and your personal lives. You've sought an influential position in the world. Now you have one. You also have the burden of living up to it.

It is your responsibility to publically disavow the employment, values and lifework of Mr. Reed. Without that action. I will never return to using Microsoft products.

The old rumors must be true...

[thack]

This is funny, since there was once an old rumor that Microsoft was buying the Catholic Church. I guess we are going to finally see the friuts of years Cult R&D. A quick peruse through dejanews gives us this 1994 article: (http://x22.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=60819 5064&CONTEXT=955546751.1129775108&hitnum =0) MICROSOFT Bids to Acquire Catholic Church By Hank Vorjes VATICAN CITY (AP) -- In a joint press conference in St. Peter's Square this morning, MICROSOFT Corp. and the Vatican announced that the Redmond software giant will acquire the Roman Catholic Church in exchange for an unspecified number of shares of MICROSOFT common stock. If the deal goes through, it will be the first time a computer software company has acquired a major world religion. With the acquisition, Pope John Paul II will become the senior vice-president of the combined company's new Religious Software Division, while MICROSOFT senior vice-presidents Michael Maples and Steven Ballmer will be invested in the College of Cardinals, said MICROSOFT Chairman Bill Gates. "We expect a lot of growth in the religious market in the next five to ten years," said Gates. "The combined resources of MICROSOFT and the Catholic Church will allow us to make religion easier and more fun for a broader range of people." Through the MICROSOFT Network, the company's new on-line service, "we will make the sacraments available on-line for the first time" and revive the popular pre-Counter-Reformation practice of selling indulgences, said Gates. "You can get Communion, confess your sins, receive absolution -- even reduce your time in Purgatory -- all without leaving your home." A new software application, MICROSOFT Church, will include a macro language which you can program to download heavenly graces automatically while you are away from your computer. An estimated 17,000 people attended the announcement in St Peter's Square, watching on a 60-foot screen as comedian Don Novello -- in character as Father Guido Sarducci -- hosted the event, which was broadcast by satellite to 700 sites worldwide. Pope John Paul II said little during the announcement. When Novello chided Gates, "Now I guess you get to wear one of these pointy hats," the crowd roared, but the pontiff's smile seemed strained. The deal grants MICROSOFT exclusive electronic rights to the Bible and the Vatican's prized art collection, which includes works by such masters as Michelangelo and Da Vinci. But critics say MICROSOFT will face stiff challenges if it attempts to limit competitors' access to these key intellectual properties. "The Jewish people invented the look and feel of the holy scriptures," said Rabbi David Gottschalk of Philadelphia. "You take the parting of the Red Sea -- we had that thousands of years before the Catholics came on the scene." But others argue that the Catholic and Jewish faiths both draw on a common Abrahamic heritage. "The Catholic Church has just been more successful in marketing it to a larger audience," notes Notre Dame theologian Father Kenneth Madigan. Over the last 2,000 years, the Catholic Church's market share has increased dramatically, while Judaism, which was the first to offer many of the concepts now touted by Christianity, lags behind. Historically, the Church has a reputation as an aggressive competitor, leading crusades to pressure people to upgrade to Catholicism, and entering into exclusive licensing arrangements in various kingdoms whereby all subjects were instilled with Catholicism, whether or not they planned to use it. Today Christianity is available from several denominations, but the Catholic version is still the most widely used. The Church's mission is to reach "the four corners of the earth," echoing MICROSOFT's vision of "a computer on every desktop and in every home". Gates described MICROSOFT's long-term strategy to develop a scalable religious architecture that will support all religions through emulation. A single core religion will be offered with a choice of interfaces according to the religion desired -- "One religion, a couple of different implementations," said Gates. The MICROSOFT move could spark a wave of mergers and acquisitions, according to Herb Peters, a spokesman for the U.S. Southern Baptist Conference, as other churches scramble to strengthen their position in the increasingly competitive religious market. KBviaNewsEDGE Copyright (c) 1994 Knight-Ridder / Tribune Business News Received via NewsEDGE from Desktop Data, Inc.: 03/07/94 19:20

The old rumors must be true...

[thack]

This is funny, since there was once an old rumor that Microsoft was buying the Catholic Church. I guess we are going to finally see the friuts of years Cult R&D. A quick peruse through dejanews gives us this 1994 article:

(http://x22.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=608 195064&CONTEXT=955546751.1129775108&hitnum =0)

MICROSOFT Bids to Acquire Catholic Church

By Hank Vorjes

VATICAN CITY (AP) -- In a joint press conference in St. Peter's Square this morning, MICROSOFT Corp. and the Vatican announced that the Redmond software giant will acquire the Roman Catholic Church in exchange for an unspecified number of shares of MICROSOFT common stock. If the deal goes through, it will be the first time a computer software company has acquired a major world religion.

With the acquisition, Pope John Paul II will become the senior vice-president of the combined company's new Religious Software Division, while MICROSOFT senior vice-presidents Michael Maples and Steven Ballmer will be invested in the College of Cardinals, said MICROSOFT Chairman Bill Gates.

"We expect a lot of growth in the religious market in the next five to ten years," said Gates. "The combined resources of MICROSOFT and the Catholic Church will allow us to make religion easier and more fun for a broader range of people."

Through the MICROSOFT Network, the company's new on-line service, "we will make the sacraments available on-line for the first time" and revive the popular pre-Counter-Reformation practice of selling indulgences, said Gates. "You can get Communion, confess your sins, receive absolution -- even reduce your time in Purgatory -- all without leaving your home."

A new software application, MICROSOFT Church, will include a macro language which you can program to download heavenly graces automatically while you are away from your computer.

An estimated 17,000 people attended the announcement in St Peter's Square, watching on a 60-foot screen as comedian Don Novello -- in character as Father Guido Sarducci -- hosted the event, which was broadcast by satellite to 700 sites worldwide.

Pope John Paul II said little during the announcement. When Novello chided Gates, "Now I guess you get to wear one of these pointy hats," the crowd roared, but the pontiff's smile seemed strained.

The deal grants MICROSOFT exclusive electronic rights to the Bible and the Vatican's prized art collection, which includes works by such masters as Michelangelo and Da Vinci. But critics say MICROSOFT will face stiff challenges if it attempts to limit competitors' access to these key intellectual properties.

"The Jewish people invented the look and feel of the holy scriptures," said Rabbi David Gottschalk of Philadelphia.
"You take the parting of the Red Sea -- we had that thousands of years before the Catholics came on the scene."

But others argue that the Catholic and Jewish faiths both draw on a common Abrahamic heritage. "The Catholic Church has just been more successful in marketing it to a larger audience," notes Notre Dame theologian Father Kenneth Madigan. Over the last 2,000 years, the Catholic Church's market share has increased dramatically, while Judaism, which was the first to offer many of the concepts now touted by Christianity, lags behind.

Historically, the Church has a reputation as an aggressive competitor, leading crusades to pressure people to upgrade to Catholicism, and entering into exclusive licensing arrangements in various kingdoms whereby all subjects were instilled with Catholicism, whether or not they planned to use it. Today Christianity is available from several denominations, but the Catholic version is still the most widely used. The Church's mission is to reach "the four corners of the earth," echoing MICROSOFT's vision of "a computer on every desktop and in every home".

Gates described MICROSOFT's long-term strategy to develop a scalable religious architecture that will support all religions through emulation. A single core religion will be offered with a choice of interfaces according to the religion desired -- "One religion, a couple of different implementations," said Gates.

The MICROSOFT move could spark a wave of mergers and acquisitions, according to Herb Peters, a spokesman for the U.S. Southern Baptist Conference, as other churches scramble to strengthen their position in the increasingly competitive religious market.

KBviaNewsEDGE

Copyright (c) 1994 Knight-Ridder / Tribune Business News Received via NewsEDGE from Desktop Data, Inc.: 03/07/94 19:20