Slashdot Mirror
DOJ Argues in Favor of MS Settlement
hpa writes: "It is described in this article on CNET the Department of Justice is arguing in favour of the proposed settlement, because the government's case was too weak to impose additional penalties on Microsoft. Somehow this seems like a very odd thing to me, effectively the prosecution is pleading on the part of the defendant..." There's also an AP story.
they're whores.
have you seen the amount of contributions given to Ashcroft in the Missouri Senate race by MS? 2nd biggest, right after enron.
... hi bingo
Shoo, Micro$oft pimp!
t_t_b
I'm on PJ's "enemies" list! Are you?
t_t_b
I'm on PJ's "enemies" list! Are you?
If you look at the election map, you'll see that Bush won many more states and counties.
Gore won a very small number of states, and most of it was city area. With the system that is in place, it increases the voting power of smaller states to be more equal with the voting power of the big cities.
It's worked fine for centuries. Notice how nobody is seriously talking about changing it? No talk before the election, nothing after. The system works fine, the way it was intended to.
You're just upset because your guy lost.
wow, how are you possibly literate enough to type that?
read the articles you mentioned. the whole articles.
under the scenario you spelled out "coutn all the votes" gore won florida.
and this little uncomfortable factoid was buried about halfway through the article.
sorry if reading an entire article is too much for your MTV, microwave popcorn brain, but some of us have attention spans longer than gnats.
... hi bingo
No it hasn't. There are several times that have been just as bad as the Bush-Gore election. That is not working. Should be a straight 1 vote to a person majority wins election. If the there is no majority, rerun a week later with out the smallest vote getting elective.
The guy in N Dakota should not have 1.5 times the vote worth as the guy in California. Do the math comparing the elctoral votes to the population and you will see what I mean.
The reason noone wants it changed is two fold. One side likes it the way it is- it hinders the third party and independants. The other side are afraid that various interests will get involved and make things worse.
Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
I'm not sure where you're getting your idea that he's opposed to peaceful protest. He did say something about a mob taking to the streets, but I don't usuall equate the term mob with a peaceful protest.
From what I've seen, the anti-globalization protesters that have been tear gassed by police weren't being very peaceful, or were part of a group that wasn't being peaceful, and wouldn't leave so the immedite area so the police could deal with the non-peaceful protestors.
There are many people who peacefully protest anti-globalization. I fully respect their right to do so. There are also many who have violently protested it, and I don't see that violence as justified.