Slashdot Mirror
Democrats Appoint RIAA Shill For Convention
An anonymous reader sends us to Boing Boing for a report that "the Director of Communications for the RIAA, Jenni Engebretsen, has been appointed Deputy CEO for Public Affairs for the upcoming Democratic National Convention in Denver." The DNC site has the official press release. Cory Doctorow notes that the RIAA is the most hated "corporation" in America, having beaten out Halliburton and Wal-Mart for the honor, and writes for the DNC's attention, "This represents a potential shear with the left-wing blogosphere."
That when I vote Republican, they'll sue my neighbor and her kids?
... at the mention of the term "blogosphere".
Birds of a feather...
This sucks, but what are we going to do? Vote Republican?
No thanks.
The libertarian solution to the failures of capitalism is to apply more capitalism til the failures are fixed.
They used the words "shill", "left-wing" and "blogosphere". Then they mentioend the RIAA. That's as close as you can come to a Godwin violation without mentioning Historical German leaders.
I stopped reading when I saw "blogosphere"...
Can you say, "I'M DUMB AS A STUMP" (Yes; in all caps)
I'm a political party needing the general population to vote for me, but I'm going to have the most hated company by the general population represent my party by letting them running the show.
Lets just tattoo a giant "L" on their forehead...
Unsurprising; both parties are in the pockets of corporate interests, anyway. I hope there is a backlash over this.
It's always amazed me that people seem to think liberals can do no evil. Maybe this will help you all learn the truth.
...about rampant trading of dem speeches on p2p networks and the potential for remixes and mash-ups without compensation to the original artists like Lincoln and Roosevelt.
They plan on flooding p2p networks with podcasts that are just bogus loops during the convention.
I do not think that word means what the author of that blurb thinks it means.
They didn't hire a shill. They just hired someone who used to work for the RIAA. Big deal. The Pope used to work for Hitler too, but it's not relevant work experience.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
"This represents a potential shear with the left-wing blogosphere."
Is that from The Big Lebowski? If it isn't, it shoul'dve been in there somewhere.
to vote libertarian.
you know the Lib party is pretty sound once you get past the "smoke pot" platform. and honestly I firmly believe that because they push that platform so hard is why nobody even thinks of jumping ship from republican or democrat to Libertarian.
I personally like their ideals and goals, and for the most part they do make sense in every aspect if you sit and listen to them.
too bad 90% of americans are baying sheep that are to cowardly to vote for a 3rd party.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
This is just proof that the scum gathers and rises to the top. As I send my dollars to the least of the evils that stand to win (republican).
Sue me, I'm conservative.
Athiesm is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.
Just ask Howard Dean how much influence the "left-wing blogosphere" wields in terms of getting their darling elected.
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
will will all run from the Democrat banner now? ESR says Libertarian is OK. :)
Power to the Penguin!
While she might have public sector skills the Democrats could certainly gain from having on their side, given her organization's (and no doubt her own) agenda, I would be very concerned about the back-channel influence she is going to have on the DNC, the candidates, and their supporters from the executvie and legislative branches. They will be 'rubbing shoulders
a lot in the preparation and at the event and one would have to be naive to think she won't be lobbying for the RIAA.
The Democrats rightly chastized Dick Cheney for his closed-door energy policy meetings with his energy industry cronies and then they turn around and act similarly by allowing a corporate special interest inside access to candiates--before they are even in office. Why don't they pick someone from a non-profit? Sure there will always be some agenda with any person they choose, but why choose someone frm an organization that is so blatant, so hated, and so mercenary?
Have they given leave of their sense?
Seriously, it's not that hard - Lincoln was a Republican.
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
Tags != Comments, and -1 (Troll) != -1 (I Would Respond Angrily To This Poster So They Must Be Trolling)
As the democrats are clearly in bed with the RIAA they're not getting my vote any more.
First off: a person who does communications for group 1 is probably going to do a reasonable job of doing communications for group 2. If you're hiring based on merit, how much does it matter if the person is one of satan's catchers?
Secondly: the RIAA is everyone in power's best friend. Republicans love the big companies, Democrats love the film and rock stars, and both parties just absolutely adore lobbyists. They're like groupies only they give money.
Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
Thank God.
I used to be worried when the Democrats wanted to overspend, but then Reagan came along to overspend more than everyone else put together, and I relaxed -- then I knew it was unanimous that our two political parties wanted to spend all our money now, to get the most bang for our buck now before our country is entirely in the dump.
I was worrying that only the Republicans want state-sponsored torture, and state-run terror, and secret laws, secret police, and spying on the citizens -- but I'll relax as the Democrats are proven to be just as in favor of the new Improved Soviet America.
As long as all our Good Leaders agree, I know it is ok.
money talks.
"I'll show you politics in America. Here it is, right here. 'I think the puppet on the right shares my beliefs.' 'I think the puppet on the left is more to my liking.' 'Hey, wait a minute, there's one guy holding out both puppets!'"
- Bill Hicks
-- Trinity in high heels carrying a whip: The donimatrix - there is no spoonerism
Just based off of that terrible red and blue donkey topic image. MS Paint rocks!!
--I'm not talking about dance lessons. I'm talking about putting a brick through the other guy's windshield.-
Kodos: It's true, we are aliens. But what are you going to do about
it? It's a two-party system; you have to vote for one of us.
[murmurs]
Man1: He's right, this is a two-party system.
Man2: Well, I believe I'll vote for a third-party candidate.
Kang: Go ahead, throw your vote away.
Wait, so you're advocating the libertarian party... and you don't even believe people have the right to use whatever recreational drugs they want?
It just seems like if you're going to be pro-personal freedom, the War on Drugs would be the first thing you'd want to get rid of, not the last.
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
Yet you will still vote Democrat because the only option you see is the Republican's. It's good that you have the blinders on so tight that you can't possibly see any other options. You can have all the freedoms you want because most Americans cannot conceive of a different choice. You are free to pick the color of the car as long as you chose black. Rise up and protest, strike don't just post witty comments on forums... but of course you won't, it doesn't bother you enough... Its good to know that they have realized they can take your life away bit by bit since you can only protest when crazy excesses happen.
The world has gotten to large for your version of government to work. Its a good thing your government has already realized this and removed it from your control. Good luck trying to change anything now without a massive uprising.
It'll make the trial lawyer and Hollywood/Music Industry contingents of the Democrats very happy. And those groups may be small, but they represent a lot of campaign donation dollars.
[Insert pithy quote here]
The density of Administratium is second to none.
Some days it's just not worth
chewing through my restraints.
OK, this story more proof that neither the Democrats NOR the Republican parties in their present forms are capable of running the US government.
We have two options:
1) Leftists need to take over the Democratic Party. Real leftists - social democrats, reform liberals, etc, not these pretenders to the throne that form the current executive and the grey hairs that live in the senate. Rightists need to take over the Republicans. Real rightists, libertarians, small government conservatives, etc, not the racists, religious right and neoconservatives.
OR
2) We need to make new political parties, and reform the system that encourages a two-party system.
By allying themselves with the MAFIAA, the Democrats have proven themselves just as incapable of serving our interests as the Republicans. "Intellectual Property" cartels cannot be allowed to continue to operate in the digital age.
Thanks,
A Concerned Citizen
And it isn't just left-wing.
The RIAA pisses pretty much everyone off. There's enough buzz that people I know that have never visited slashdot, know next to nothing about DRM (other than "this annoys me"), hate the RIAA. Most of them aren't even sure what it is, but they hate the RIAA. I don't understand why the Democrats are cozying up to these assholes. They go all out claiming to represent the very people the RIAA sues.
Most music thieves are too lazy to vote in the first place.
Democrats need to be very very careful with DRM and associating with the **AAs. The last 7 years have made me hate the Republican party enough to never vote Red again in my life...and I used to be a Republican (in college when I was clueless about the real world, and didn't have the ability to forsee how the republican party has annihilated the middle class over the last 7 years).
Bottom line, if the Dems go hard with DRM I will go with the independents and libertarians...regardless of whether this gives the Republicans an edge...I will not support a DRM friendly party that puts the rights of corporations over individual human rights. For Christ's sake Democrats are suppost the represent us...the people...corporate interests should always come second to any true Democrat in office.
The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
Also, do not believe that we, the voters are their constituents in the sense that they are beholden to our interests. This is not the case. They are beholden to those who can pressure them by providing or withholding money, usually (but not always) through lobbyists. If you are not represented in such a way to your government representatives, then you are not in any practical sense one of their constituents. Your vote was the single act in which you are able to influence the process. In principle, you can write to them once they are in office and attempt to sway them, but unless you are onboard with the money-providing players, or unless you are part of a massive broad-based campaign, you will be ignored and will receive a canned response.
I claim that the above is neither an opinion nor ideology, but an expression of practical facts. Please refute that claim.
Wake up. The Democratic party want to regulate the hell out of everything just like the RIAA. Learn from history or repeat it. Time for a real 3rd party. No lawyers or career politicians allowed.
"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
bnetween the two parties. unless it's the Iraq war (which many democrats voted for by the way), name one substantial difference between the two parties. they both favor unlimited immigration, destructive trade policies, won't push to expand more oil drilling and nuclear power, don't give a crap about the social security/medicare atom bombs, and in general are so beholden to large monied interests. the republicans screwed up the war on terror, the democrats won't even fight it. other than that, they are more concerned with consolidating political power.
as for the media, et al., all those hollywood big wigs (like David Geffen), who love the RIAA. they are all HUGE democratic donors. connection? I guess not.
vote libertarian!!
My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
Thanks, I did not know that.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
She's a flack. They don't create policy. They're like light bulbs. Burn one out, unscrew it, screw another in.
- - - - - - - - - -
Jenni Engebretsen
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jenni R. Engebretsen is the Director of Communications for the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), the Washington, DC-based trade group that represents the U.S. recording industry.
[] Political involvement
Engebretsen spent eight years working in Democratic politics prior to joining the RIAA, most recently as a Regional Communications Director for the Kerry-Edwards for President campaign, where she was responsible for developing campaign communications strategy for top-targeted states including Florida and New Hampshire. During the 2004 presidential cycle, she also served as Deputy Communications Director for the Democratic National Convention in Boston and as Press Secretary for the Edwards for President campaign during the primaries. Before that, she worked on Capitol Hill in the communications offices of Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Chuck Schumer ( D-N.Y.) and in the White House press office during the Clinton Administration. She is a graduate of Northwestern University's Medill School of Journalism.
You can't talk about Wikipedia's flaws on Wikipedia
Yes, but the poster's point was that a pro-drug stance shouldn't be the first thing to tout while on the stump. There are many more "pro-personal freedom" stances that are far more palatable to liberals and conservatives alike than "free the weed, dude".
Method of processing duck feet
Jenni Engebretsen has proposed that DNC shall now stand for DO NOT COPY... She also will be instituting a new convention which will be named the Democratic Reform Meeting (DRM) which will be held monthly at a Regional Information Assembly Area (RIAA). She will also be engaging in a heavy handed campaign to support Military Personnel Aid and Assistance (MPAA).
News Reporters Make Tasty Polar Bear Treats!
What is your definition of "liberal"?
It's not a slam against you. It's just that, especially in the last few years, "liberal" has become a derogatory term for anyone the disagrees with the "right wing" folks. There, I did it myself. And I can't give a definition of "right wing" myself - these days - other than to say, "someone who still supports the Republican party after all of these years of corruption and complete mishandling of international affairs." - IMHO
Back to liberal. I was once talking to a friend of mine and she was complaining about all of the "liberals" who wanted to ban lawn signs on people's yards. How wanting to ban signs on people's yards makes one a "liberal" is beyond me.
That DailyKos page links to the BoingBoing page, same as the /. story. :P
:/
Besides, its individual users who submit stories with their own writeups. If you want to bash on someone for plagarizing, bash the submitter.
"People" using "unnecessary" quotes should be "shot".
Specifically, I'm talking about the 'worst company in america' award that the RIAA supposedly won.
When I read the headline, it smelled fishy. So, I did a tiny bit of research and found:
- The contest was between exactly two companies - Hallibutron and the RIAA. Those were your choices if you participated in this survey. The RIAA won by 3.8%. Wal-mart or none of the above were not choices.
- The 'survey' was done by The Consumerist. Sounds impressive, eh? Like The Economist magazine, perhaps? No, not really. It's basically some shitty blog. Hint: their web page currently has ads for 'Replica Rolex Watches
Rolex, Cartier, Gucci, Brietling Only $189!!'
- So, this poll was a web poll. Hardly what we'd expect from a true 'Most hated company in America' type deal.
- See it for yourself here.
The RIAA may have their bad points, but there's nothing in this survey or elsewhere to suggest that they are the most hated 'company' in the USA, other than perhaps in the overimaginaive minds of a few people who need to spend a little less time glued to the monitor and a bit more time thinking about journalistic ethics.Ah sorry - my mistake - I see now that it was a 'ncaa college basketball' style elimination tournament to see which was the worst company. Still, it was a web poll and the bulk of my other points are still valid. Mea culpa.
I agree with you - and will just add Republicans != conservative ;)
I'd like a real conservative and real liberal party, so people have distinct things to choose from.
Why, yes I have been touched by His noodly appendage. And I plan to sue.
Libertarians don't say "smoke pot," or "tune in, turn on, drop out." They don't advocate drug use at all. They are not libertines. They live clean, healthy, productive lives, like most us whether sober or not.
They merely note the constitution provides no federal role for drug control. They note prohibition is an abject failure. They note the state has no compelling reason to care what molecules of pleasure reside inside your sovereign body as long as you are not driving a car, operating on a patient, or voting on an omnibus spending bill.
An as far as unsound, can anything be more obviously unsound than drug prohibition? The failures of the drug "war" are more clear than the iraq mess.
The RIAA with its tentacles in both major parties does things that are corrupt and wrong when you want to make air use of your music.
Big Oil, which has been mainly a Republican thing, drives the things that make many question whether there's going to be a planet worth living in for our grandkids.
A little perspective on which political shark has which remora-like attachments. We've still made some progress here.
And you all thought the Dems were the party of personal freedom... /soapbox
I guess it makes sense, the RIAA and the Democrats have one thing in common, "give us more money so we can spend it for you."
Vote Libertarian.
...and they think you don't care.
/. flame war type personality, and most likely you voted for that person. People here on /. should not only vote, but run for office. Put down the controller/remote/phone/TV/game/dough nut/spouse for a moment and run for office. Can't say we'll vote for you, but we'll support the fact that you did something.
They got some fools to vote to allow far away congressmen to tax their income. You work, they get paid, then you get paid. Oddly people don't care. They know you will sit on your ass and do northing and like it. Our people are dying daily in Iraq and nobody cares that there is no plan and they only seem to sit there are targets. This is the once great US where most people have forgotten what we were once great for.
This is not a perfect country, but I sure wish people took a deeper interest in what their elected officials are doing. Imagine an ego fueled
There is a minor step people miss when talking about politics where they move directly to quite despair from surprise. It's action. That is the missing step. I sure as hell would love to see a political party as inspired as Linux is. For some reason we are will to build software, but not a political party.
Hey! Just a thought. Any else want to start an OSPP(Open Source Political Party)?
First, it's a woman.
Second, did you really just try to make the point that hiring the public face of the most hated corporation is a good idea? Did you miss that "most hated" part?
You think democrats have ever respected the notion of truly free speech?
Fuck Tipper Gore and fuck the PMRC
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Quote: "For Christ's sake Democrats are suppost the represent us...the people."
If you believe that, then you need to get your school to refund your tuition, because they obviously didn't teach you a damn thing. A close study of the Democrat party history shows that since the Roosevelt era, the only thing and I repeat the ONLY! thing that matters to the Democrats is acquiring and holding on to power by any means possible. Many of the freedoms our grand parents took for granted were restricted by Democratic Congresses and administrations (although the Republicians have tried to catch up with the patriot act).
As for representing the people, look where the money comes from, The Republicial part still leads the Democrat party in donations of $250 and less. The Democrats lead in soft money to the party ($1,000,000 and more) and in $2000 donations to canidates from corporations and lawyers.
Bottom line is the Democrats will say they are looking out for the little guy while doing exactly the opposite. The Republicians make their agenda clear and with the exception of pork barrel spending, stick to it. If you don't like the Republician agenda, don't vote for them, but before voting for the Democrats, look at not only their agenda, but also their actual actions.
Vote for Obama. He would not take kindly to the "SHILL" taking his daughters to task over downloading movies and music...or maybe he would just laugh and mushroom stamp them all.
"My immediate reaction is "WTF? What kind of moron doesn't make things 64-bit safe to begin with?" Linus
It's a great place to troll for fat chicks with missing teeth!
My wife doesn't listen to me either...
Why I'm a Libertarian.
Not because I think that 100% of Libertarian ideals must be enacted, but because I see both Democrats and Republicans push us further and further into a Totalitarian society. As the Libertarian tag line goes:
We have a problem
Democrats - Lets create more government to fix the problem
Republicans - Lets create more government (just less than the Democrats) to fix the problem
Libertarian - The Government is the problem, let's reduce it.
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
I suspect it means exactly what the author thinks it means, specifically
Shill-
2.a person who publicizes or praises something or someone for reasons of self-interest, personal profit, or friendship or loyalty.
She was a hired PR flack. The word "shill" is exactly right in this context.
A while back, I complained to my Senator, Diane Feinstein about how the Broadcast flag would cut into time-shifting and other fair use rights, and that it was basically corporate welfare to preserve a flagging industry in the face of a changing environment. Here's the response I got:
Diane Feinstein is what I call a DINO - Democrat in Name Only. She's pro-drug war, pro big media, anti-consumer rights, and is a socially conservative fiscal liberal. Her and Joe Lieberman give progressives a bad name.
Causation can cause correlation
I am not against voting Libertarian.... but when people going to stop and think who they are voting for? Vote independently of party and look at the person.
Small political parties are only devoid of corruption because they have no power yet. The conservatives swept into power in 1994 with the promise of reform -- look what happened. I guarantee the same corruption and shit will happen once the democrats are in power because this cycle is endless. Both sides are the same and we are on a giant merry-go-round with the same shit every time.
I think one of the best politicians recently was Jesse Ventura, and he ran as an Independent. Kept his word on many things and stepped out after 2 terms. Not a career politician by any means.
Contrast this with the average career politician willing to say anything publicly to get elected while toeing the party line while in office. Beholden to so many interests, its no wonder most suck.
If people ever started electing people without even looking at party affiliation, there would be no need for political parties. And a lot better job would get done. I would rather be for election reform if that meant that voting booths could just have the name of the person on the ticket, without party listed (do they list their every stance on issues in the booth too, I don't think so - this is a product of the 2 party system helping each other out - like they rig every other part of the electoral process). Then maybe people would be forced to look at who they are voting for rather than check it off all one party or another. Maybe then we'd getter better choices than between a douche and a turd.
The way I remember it, by the end of 2003, the mainstream media had already anointed him the 2004 Democratic nominee. He had raised more money than his competitors, he had more superdelegates than his competitors, and more high-profile endorsements than his competitors (Al Gore, Jesse Jackson, Bill Bradley, etc., and many celebrities, for whatever they're worth).
Going into Iowa, Dean was the strong frontrunner, and what happened in Iowa? That happened. He got his arse handed to him, and his consolation speech congratulating John Kerry was that unstatesmanlike, obnoxious, and petty "Scream Speech" that you refer to.
My point? Despite being the frontrunner, Dean couldn't manage better than a 3rd place showing in Iowa and a distant, also-ran 3rd place at that. The Scream speech did not cause his defeat--he hadn't yet delivered it.
Of course, after that shameful showing in Iowa and reacting to it like a 2 year old, he was pretty much done in '04.
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
If you all would simply vote for Ron Paul we wouldn't have to worry about the RIAA, MPAA, Iraq, or most everything else you complain about.
about to vote democrat.. they blow it. AGAIN.
Republican scientists recently discovered how to clone dead people using a technique described as "Unfathomable Dark Magic" (UDM). The technique is said to use DNA samples, a centerfuge, and the bones of still born children.
Associated Press Dew Shbag contributed to this report.
When are you people going to wake up? We aren't republican or democrats, we are Americans. Instead, we split ourselves along an arbitrary party line that single handedly fucks up EVERYTHING.
It is my strong belief that we need to abolish the two-party system as it stands. maybe if we stopped putting letters after people's names, the masses would listen to what they have to actually say, rather than what "side" they say they are on.
Fuck that. Fuck all of you who vote republican OR democrat.
What you have done to our country disgusts me.
Living With a Nerd
Everyone who's awake and functional knows big business owns the US government - so Big Content backs the Dems while Big Oil backs the Repubs. Did you think that somehow we *really* had 2 separate parties?
Vote Green, Libertarian, Peace and Freedom, or Independent but please don't THROW YOUR VOTE AWAY by voting Democrat or Republican.
Haven't we had efuckingnuff yet?
Caveat Utilitor
If I was hiring someone to spin the press for me, I'd want a person who SUCCEEDS in doing that for their employer. I have never met a person with a favorable view of her current employer. I have never met anyone whose view of her employer has gotten LESS WORSE during her employment. Strikes me as another failure of the hiring process. The HR department strikes again!
If I am not for myself, then who will be for me? If I am only for myself, what am I? If not now, when?
This would be very interesting if people, you know, UNDER the age of 50 actually voted. And come on. Hilary has already mad her stance on censorship clear. I don't think she cares about the Generation X & Y voting population...so why should the rest of the party care either?
Yeah, and I'll admit this is a big reason why I voted Republican in 2000: I saw the writing on the wall with the way the Democrats were cozying up to the RIAA.
I can't say that the results are quite what I hoped.
I'm pretty much voting for Mack Brown from now on.
I don't hate the RIAA for protecting the rights of the artists and their record labels. I despise their heavy-handed tactics and willingness to sue grandmas on welfare. If the RIAA would act like a forward-thinking organization and stop treating the music customers like criminals, they might find out that we're on the side of the artists too and most of us don't have a problem paying for music. It is the RIAA's own fault that they are viewed as a bunch of hired Mafia thugs!
I think it's dumb, too. But keep in mind the only reason RIAA won that tournament was because the current U.S. administration wasn't in it.
;)
Talk about the lesser of two evils... we've got the actual *bottom *two evils competing for our votes
My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
It's time that you kids learned that you have to stop stealing. Once the Democrats make a clean sweep in 2008, we'll have some real laws to stop piracy and not the half-hearted crap that we had to put up with since 1995. The creative people in this country paid a lot of money to get rid of Republicans. We are going to get back something for it.
If you don't like it, make your own music and write your own software. Don't copy, and don't try to use patents without paying.
I don't think I've read tripe that poorly researched since five minutes ago when I was reading blogs4bush.
...is we can look forward to Rudy Giuliani winning the presidency.
I mean she's Director of Communications for the most hated organization in America^W^W on Slashdot, and she was communications director for a Presidential campaign whose main message was "I'm not Bush" -- and couldn't even effectively get that message out. She certainly doesn't appear to be an effective choice.
Oh well. At least the trains will run on time.
so I'm very dismayed that when we need to take the country back, the democrats have put another functionary of brain-dead scorched-earth "just us" idiots in charge of their PR.
truly, meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
Democrats = Neo-Cons, and they're all against us. Vote Ron Paul in 2008.
Voting was between 2 companies at a time and a total of 32 companies. If you bothered to actually read all the posts about it instead of just the last one then you would've known that. Sure the poll didn't have a huge sample group or the backing of a large corporation but that doesn't make it wrong.
If you vote dem to end the war, you also get minimum wage, tobacco and transfat prohibitionists, inconvenient truths, and equal rights rehash. If you vote reps for the small government, you also get big government, biblical authoritarianism, and endless war.
Because we all know that the internets are made up of tubes, not trucks or spheres!
Still, it was a web poll and the bulk of my other points are still valid
The BULK? What bulk? Here are your points from your original post:
* The contest was between exactly two companies - Hallibutron and the RIAA. Those were your choices if you participated in this survey. The RIAA won by 3.8%. Wal-mart or none of the above were not choices.
* The 'survey' was done by The Consumerist. Sounds impressive, eh? Like The Economist magazine, perhaps? No, not really. It's basically some shitty blog. Hint: their web page currently has ads for 'Replica Rolex Watches Rolex, Cartier, Gucci, Brietling Only $189!!'
* So, this poll was a web poll. Hardly what we'd expect from a true 'Most hated company in America' type deal.
* See it for yourself here [consumerist.com].
So out of these four bullets, one simply states that this was a web poll, ok true, but not exactly insightful. The last point is not a point at all, just a link to your source. The first point you already admitted was wrong, leaving only your second point as anything that could fall under your term of "bulk" and I would hardly call a single valid point bulk by any stretch.
In addition the consumerist website is not some tiny fly-by-night blog, it's been around for a while and they are the slashdot of constomer service issues and are part of Gawker Media which handles other such blogs as Gizmodo, Jalopnik, Kotaku, and Lifehacker just to name a few. While these may be niche blogs in that they have a sharp focus, they are by no means somebody's part time basement run website. In March 2007 the Consumerist received over 5 million visitors, and they have consistently had over 500,000 visitors per month for the past 12 months, and over 1 million visitors/month for the last 6.
As for the SINGLE advertisement you chose to judge the quality of the page, (ignoring other advertisers such as the prominent T-Mobile ad) the replica watch company is not selling counterfit goods, it sells replicas, clearly marked in both their URL and product page, so it is not an ad from a scammer. Also considering the nature of the consumerist blog, I would certainly think that they vet companies before accepting ads from them.
So in short, you overreacted and shot down a completely legitmate site which ran a survey over a period of weeks that reached a very large audience. Is it a scientific poll? No, but it's also not some two-bit blogger ranting about poll results culled from a handful of readers. Kudos on you for posting a semi-retraction but your "bulk" of remaining points is essential naught.
-- I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist. It's not my fault that life sucks so much. --
... but good luck figuring out WHICH butterfly :-)
...keep voting that way, you'll keep "electing" one wing or the other of the cooperating criminal cartel that has hijacked government and runs it as a crony jobs program for multimillionaires and billionaires and transnational non patriotic corporations.
I've been hearing the same shit for 40 years now -"don't waste your vote-don't vote for an independent or third party!"-it was wrong then and is still wrong, but the brainwashed parrots keep convincing themselves and other people to do the same thing over and over and over and over and over again, somehow magically expecting a different result "this time". IT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN.
Anyone "you" has one vote, wasting it on the lesser of two evils will ALWAYS result in evil getting elected.
The Democratic party is in bed with Hollywood. Not in the sense that Republicans try to say ("they're all libruls"), but when it comes to the RIAA/MPAA agenda, it is completely true.
I don't have any mod points for you.
You're 100% correct. The vast majority of Americans have been brainwashed into thinking there are only two choices. Repulicans and Democrats, hardly a choice at all. I call fallacy.
It is my strong belief that we need to abolish the two-party system as it stands.
People who bitch about the "two party system" act is if you only have two choices, which is far from the case. You always have choices; there's dozen serious presidential candidates for the 08 election. You have primaries, like last year in Connecticut. And the next two most prominent third parties are nutters. The Greens attacked a man that lined with most of their platform, throwing an election to a man who is pretty much 180 degrees opposed to everything the Greens believe in. And the Libertarian philosophy might work fine in small hamlets, but would be an absolute disaster in a nation of 300 million people.
John McCain? The same man who doesn't know condoms prevent STDs? Who wanted to send even more troops than Bush in his surge? The John McCain that walked around in a Iraqi market with a huge security force to "prove" that it's safer? The same guy whose plan for a solution to Iraq is to send 100,000 more troops there? Are we talking about the same person?
On a more serious note, Ron Paul seems to be a good match if one really cares for liberty.
If Tipper Gore's moralizing means all Democrats are moralizing prudes, then all Republicans are gay because of Mark Foley and Ken Mehlman. And for every Dem prude you can name, I can name 10 Republican prudes. Hell, it's half their base. Here's a few off the top of my head: Powell, Ashcroft, Santorum, Fallwell, Dobson, Robertson, Bennet, Coburn, Hatch, Brownback.
The Director of Communications for Republican National Convention used to market barely legal gay porn for the sex industry. President Bush is quoted as saying "I'm sure he will do a heck of a job!"
He may be republican, but it is evident he at least has the country's best intrest at heart. He is republican. BUT If you are looking at that instead of what he stands for, then all you have proven is how close minded and ignorant you truly are regardless of party. I am SOOOOOO tired of party politics. Ron Paul seems to be too. ronpaul2008.com you can read up a little bit about him there and in many other places. I have typically voted democrat, but since the way things have been in the last few years it almost seems like voting for the lesser of two evils. Now that the RIAA is aligned with the Dems and all other corporate interests are aligned with Reps, I am not interested in voting for the front runners. All I see are candidates raising millions for private jets and all that crap that they dont need. Ron Paul is running mainly on the internet with limited advertising. Not because of lack of money, but because he sees all the candidates doing these outlandish things with the money that is useless to the overall campaign. It is all flash and no substance. Anyways look him up. (the smart ./ will actually read up on him outside of ./ the ones who will flame me here well you will likely not have read anything about him beyond the link I posted)
Connotation- "the associated or secondary meaning of a word or expression in addition to its explicit or primary meaning: A possible connotation of "home" is "a place of warmth, comfort, and affection." Compare denotation (def. 1)."
Hmm. Guess what sparky, the defintion I gave you WAS the connotative "meaning" of "shill". Read that again until realization hits you. You relied on that as a way to avoid admitting you were wrong, but the very definition I gave you WAS the connotation.
"My name is Profane Muthafucka"
Maybe change it to "I'll say anything to be right"?
bnetween the two parties. unless it's the Iraq war (which many democrats voted for by the way), name one substantial difference between the two parties.
Trade, estate taxes, income taxes, workers rights, stem cell research, wiretapping, abortion, separation of church & state, corruption, the environment, getting a blowjob an impeachable offense for one but shredding large parts of the Constitution not for the other. And so on, and so on.
don't give a crap about the social security/medicare atom bombs
Hardly. And the reason we have budgetary bombs is because of reckless Republican tax cutting, most of which goes to those who don't need them.
the republicans screwed up the war on terror, the democrats won't even fight it.
Are you talking about Democrats fighting terrorism or fighting the Bush administrations boneheaded policies? Either way, you sir, are full of shit.
Republicans will do all their illegal spying on the American people themselves.
Democrats will just get the RIAA to do it for them.
After the election on Nov 7, 2006, and the radical power shift, someone said "The adults are in charge now."
I don't think so.
Wait, the Dems are now left-wing? Does the author even know what left-wing is?
The Dems are more like centre-right, and the GOP extreme-right.
Ummm, it's a little different. The director of communications for the RIAA is the chief marketroid, nothing more. If she wielded real power I'd imagine her title would at least be vice president. Dick Cheney, on the other hand, was the freakin' CEO of Halliburton. He was the proverbial guy at the head of the table, handing out the cigars. God I hope you realize this.
Breakfast served all day!
There's plenty of closer things to criticism all around your post.
So, no.
The falsehood in your response is intended to portray this community in an unrealistic light.
There are many republicans here. They speak their mind. They certainly don't miss an opportunity like this to take potshots. Talking about what we talk about is just a stupid way of avoiding a real debate anyway.
Folks, all this proves is that the individuals (yes, individuals by God, not some faceless entity) who selected the officers for the Democratic convention don't travel in your circle where RIAA is a four-letter word. If you believe the choice was a bad one, why don't you pick some of the other names on that list and take the time to write and explain to them why you disapprove?
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
See subject.
I voted for Kodos.
Breakfast served all day!
I guess if you can do spin for the RIAA, you can so spin for ANYONE. The Dems may have made a very good decision. Her first job is to spin her own hiring!
Legalize recreational marijuana. Seriously.
Hiring a RIAA shill (and I'm not sure if she is or isn't as I don't really know anything about her) does not even come close to what the Bush administration has done and really doesn't reflect much if anything on the Democrats.
You're creating a sort of straw man argument and not a very good one. I.E. According to you the Democrats put a former RIAA employee into a political position and the RIAA wants to do all these terrible things therefore the Democrats are evil because they must also want to do all these terrible. Talk about a jump in logic.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Let me guess -- you live in Northern California, right? Many Northern Californians like to forget that there's another large portion of the state down south, and that portion is home to a certain large and influential industry. DiFi would ignore those business interests to her peril.
Breakfast served all day!
Yes another example of not just some people becoming reliant on the government, but government becoming reliant on government. Why can't people take responsibility for their own actions? Why can't a City that is below sea level take care of it's own imminent threat? Why can't a state take care of it's own crisis? They all have to rely on Uncle Sam to come bail them out. Oh and it's a good way to push the responsibility out of the hands of the Democratic leaders of said City and state up to the failures of the republican leaders and George Bush specifically.
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
a video of Hillary saying "f*ck you", while flipping off the camera. Over and over again.
...are every bit as clueless as the Republicans, they're just clueless about different stuff...
Hey better to be a bleeding heart liberal than a Cheap Labor Conservative
Imagine, just maybe, if the "points" I made weren't actually totally encapsulated in the actual physical bullet points of the UL list that I used. Stay with me now - just imagine that my points may actually have been the sum total of my post wherein a general idea was made quite clear: that the Consumerist poll as structured in no way supported a reasonable conclusion that the RIAA was truly America's worst company. After all, while you're right - I did miss the bracket-of-32 system initially, this in no way invalidates the larger and much more damning flaw: that the sample was flawed, the metholology was flawed, and the conclusions are flawed, to say nothing of the basic dishonesty of slapping on a convenient catchphrasey label like "War On Terror" err... "America's Worst Company" and then running with this.
You said something like "well, the poll wasn't scientific, but...". No buts. If it's a shite poll, and its methods are methologically unsound it ends right there. We don't say "well, creationism isn't scientific but let's quote its results anyway." We say, "this poll was done in a half-assed way, and we could not use it unless we heavily disclaimed it. We certainly don't use its suspect findings as the basis of a conclusion upon which we build other premises", as people here have done.
After your post, I spent some more time looking at the Consumerist. Look, I'm happy you have a job there or are receiving blow jobs from their webmaster or whatever it is that causes you do defend such flawed nonense, but, realy - with headlines such as "80% of geek squad employees say they don't use anti-static wrist straps", well, I mean really. Get some perspective. Don't you just SLIGHTLY suspect that a readership demographic that cares about the percentage of geeek squad employees that wear wrist-straps is a bit uncharacteristic of "America" as a whole, which the label of the conclusion purports to encapsulate? I mean really man.
/ and yes, i saw that they had some more interesting articles too, but they still appeal generally to a highly specific demographic.
Exactly. Katrina is a perfect example of what happens when you create an entire culture centered on government entitlements. You couldn't ask for a better example of why conversations that begin, "Hi, I'm from the government and I'm here to help," always end in one sort of colossal fuckup or another.
Has the SF Chronicle covered that yet?
>> "Hitler would have said that, if he had had a blog."
If Hitler posted here he would have had bad Karma. I doubt I would have even seen his post with my filter settings.
Which is worse, Republicans or the RIAA?
It's a question mostly for Democrats in the US.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
You know, I see your point and I agree it's not the most interesting issue to talk about with everyone but there is a lot more to the Libertarian stance on Marijuana then "free the weed dude".
It's also about the economy, artificial chemical monopolies formed many decades ago, medicine, the environment and yes, it's also about the personal freedom to take drugs.
If you think partying is all the Libertarians care about when it comes to Cannabis maybe you should look into it a little more. Try googling for Jack Herer sometime.
Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
Can you imagine what it islike to be blind by closing your eyes for a day, even a week?
No. When you are blind, you can never open your eyes, ever again. No matter how long you pretend to be blind, you can always open your eyes.
Can you imagine what it is like to be poor because you spend a few years living on a minimum income, say as a student?
No, the truly poor are not poor for just a few years, they are poor for their entire lives. Just slumming it for a few years does NOT count as the same experience. The worsed thing about being poor is that after enought time has passed everything starts to break down and you cannot afford to replace it. Even the laziest student won't be a student for that long.
Can you judge how good public transport is because you leave your car at home and take the bus to the office?
No, to truly judge public transport, you must be totally dependant on it with NO alternative and then not just take it to the downtown office BUT out into factory zones at odd hours.
WHAT THE FUCK AM I ON ABOUT?
Disconnect. Our "leaders", the people making the decisions about what blind people need, are not blind. The people who make decisions about wellfare, are not poor. The people deciding public transport police, have a car.
It is becoming rarer and rarer for a politician to have a background in the real world. Not that that accounts for much. Remember my comment about student poverty and how it doesn't count? A dock worker turned politician STILL isn't a life time physical laborer, he got out. He cannot understand what it is like to do that job for the rest of his life because he didn't.
Coupled to this is the yes-man effect. You tend to surround yourselve with people like yourselve. Who of you with a job hang out with the unemployed, let alone the homeless? Do you think politicians are any different? And any of those special efforts, like someone living on the street for a week, are ultimately futile because they are NOT real. It is no different then claiming you know what it is like to be blind because you closed your eyes. Only the blind know what it is truly like.
It is not just politicians, the press (the people who are supposed to watch the politicians) are in the same boat. EVERY reporter, has a job, as a reporter. Ever noticed how car related stories get much more press then public transport related stories? How many reporters do you think exist without access to a car?
A few years ago a dutch telivison star (for the KRO) made a bit of a fuss about discrimination against muslims. Two tiny details, one of the other presentators for his station had been caught on film refusing access to a muslim family (restaurant owner and food show presenter Joop Braakhekke (last name as best as I remember)) and another detail, not a single name in the credits of the shows he was in, was remotely foreign. Dutch TV production is not exactly being overrun by "regular" immigrants, only the (sorry) token nigger types. Oh, and they all thend to live in an area of holland that is fairly rich (gooi) and therefore extremely lacking in immigrant groups.
They share this with the politicians.
Mmm, and yet, these two groups, politicians and the press are supposed to lead/inform the "real" people?
You can call it what you like, disconnect with the voter, ivory tower, elitism, the simple fact is that our leaders, and the watchers of our leaders do NOT have to catch an early bus that takes 2 hours to take you to work, haven't lived paycheck to paycheck for decades and haven't done a real job were you get your hands dirty.
It don't really matter wether you are talking left or right wing. NO right wing politician is REALLY a business man. They are working for the state, drawing a state salary and haven't run a company in years. Left wingers are NOT poor, have not worked a "real" job in years and have spent at least several years around the rich and powerfull.
Talking with the voter is a pain and you got all those nice loby
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
In all fairness the Democrats have been just as willing as the Republicans to annihilate the middle class. Both parties believe that any job that can't be outsourced to Mexico, India, or China, should instead have its employees be insourced from Mexico, India, or China. Leaving any jobs for American citizens is so 1960s. The Democrats tax and spend, the Republicans borrow and spend. Both parties are eager to bankrupt this country. The Republicans deserve most of the blame for the Iraq War and the Orwellian named Patriot Act, but insufficiently many Democrats will take stands against them to reverse those policies. Both parties suck on the intellectual property issue, but frankly, that issue is well down on my list of concerns. I could live my life just fine without any Hollywood produced content at all.
I will be voting for Ron Paul, the last real American left in Congress.
Why? Wikipedia isn't
A) reliable
b) relevant
I've refuted you every time, and every time you try some new tactic. This time it was to ignore the fact that I addressed your previous objection and mooted it. In response, you post a link to a Wikipedia entry that solves nothing.
"I'll raise you a Wikipedia entry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shill and you can admit that I'm right."
If you were I might consider it. As it stands you haven't said anything that "right" yet, unless you mean the current "connotation" of "right" which means inflammatory, preposterous, morally bankrupt and untruthful.
Is that what you meant?
As an aside, are you like this in real life, or do you just take ridiculous indefensible positions on the internet because you know that no matter how stupid what you say is, or how obviously wrong you are?
First you said I defined salesman. I refuted you. Then you claimed it was the "connotation" that you were talking about, after which I refuted you. Then you posted a link to a Wikipedia article, for what reason I have yet to discern. Did you think I'd read it and say "Fuck the 5 high quality dictionaries that give the definition as what I said it was, this completely unreliable webopedia is FAR more authoritative"? Nope. And the fact that you would think so is only a little more embarrassing for you than the different arguments you've used to prove your right.
How about you post a quote from an associate that says you're right? You haven't tried that yet.
You were wrong. You know it. I know it. Every time you post a new (as yet unused) argument you admit it. You admit that your previous argument was crap, and that I refuted it.
Eventually you'll run out of arguments. Let's see what happens then.
Basically you just have to vote for (what you think will be) the lesser evil for a certain time period. As we all know, power corrupts, and in the USA for example, there is only 2 options: democrat (which currently oppose war, but take away your rights) and republican (which currently go into war, and take away your rights). All other options, parties etc. that have any good ideas, don't have a) the money, and b) the people to grab the attention of the main American public.
And again, it takes lots and lots of money to run for any public office, so the money has to come from somewhere, and you don't get anything for free (especially not money) so you'll have to do some 'favors' for your money shooters later on. Congratulations, you have just laid the seeds for all-scale corruption in the government. Imho, people in politics or running for offices shouldn't be allowed to accept or use the money provided to them by others. All of a sudden, you'll have lots of options more and some democracy will be restored. Most countries in Europe, don't have a 2-party system, but rather have a dozen parties or more each with their own ideals. If they don't get a majority of votes with a single party they can decide to fuse 2 or more large parties together for governance, which is not ideal, but at least you'll have a party that represents the balanced ideals (or a version of it) from the majority of the people that voted and you'll still have a bunch of other parties that took 'seats' in the government which could balance them out.
Of course it's always good to have people in both extremities of opposition, so that they don't pass idiotic things. The problem in the US is that there are only 2 parties on either side of the extremities, so either they collude on their benefactors and pass idiotic things or they fight endlessly over minor things.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Both parties are the same. When America started we had about 10 parties or bodies that represented a view. Thomas Jefferson was the last American politician that I could relate to. Alexander Hamilton should have eaten a bullet for giving us what is now the largest government we never asked for in history. Called the Federal government.
Fuck them both. None of them follow the law spelled plainly in the US Constitution. As far as I am concerned they are all traitors and enemies of America. You bitches wanna pass laws that counter the document that binds us? No problem. I'm making a list fuck-O. And when the revolution comes- you'll be the first against the wall. Till then, enjoy your spoils today, because they will not be there tomorrow.
Nobody asked you clownboy. They asked 15000 other people.
Saying you'd rather have a Republican or Democrat in office is like saying you'd rather be whacked by a Gambino or a Genovese.
'He who has to break a thing to find out what it is, has left the path of wisdom.' -- Gandalf to Saruman
The conservatives swept into power in 1994 with the promise of reform -- look what happened.
The only difference between Republicans in Congress in 1994 and Republicans in Congress today are broken promises of term limits. That's it. Republicans 1994, then as now, wanted to gain more power for their party while killing the opposition. Republicans, then as now, wanted to slash spending on social services while making large cuts in income taxes and repealing capital gains and estate taxes. Republicans, then as now are willing to make mountains out of molehills (Whitewater, Pelosi One) and molehills out of mountains (prosecutor purge, Gingrich's book deal). The conservative story will be not that their philosophy is complete and utter failure (you elect people who hate government and are then surprised when that government fails?), but that DC corrupted the class of 94.
I guarantee the same corruption and shit will happen once the democrats are in power because this cycle is endless.
Hardly. You need a sense of proportion. Nixon would have been impeached for what he did, yet Bush and his neocon cabal make Tricky Dick look like a pipsqueak. But even if you managed to find a Democrat as much of a corrupt authoritarian asshole as Bush is, you're forgetting two things. First, Democrats don't band together the way Republicans do. Congressman William Jefferson was found with bribe money in his freezer. House Democrats responded by striping him of his committee assignments and seniority. Tom Delay faced rebukes from the House ethics committee and indictment from a D.A. in Texas. The House GOP responded by neutering the ethics committee and changing the rules to allow Delay to keep his spot as Majority Leader.
Secondly, the press is far more harsh to Democrats than to Republicans. They are so afraid to be hit with the "biased liberal media" tag that they go easy on Republicans day in and day out, while failing to do basic fact checking on stories on Democrats. Take for example, the recent "Pelosi One" and "Pelosi in Syria" stories, taken straight from RNC talking points. Two seconds of fact checking would show that Pelosi did not demand a "luxurious plane", and that Laura Bush flies in the same model of aircraft. Why should the person 2nd in line for the presidency have a lesser plane than the first lady? And two seconds of fact checking also would have shown that many Republicans in Congress have gone to Syria, in fact some were on the exact same trip as the Speaker. And if there are no negative stories to be had, the media is quite happy to Make Shit Up, as Gore found out in 2000.
You know, you're stubborn person. And I mean that by the second definition (persistent). If you argue that stubborn is a negative thing, then I'll just throw your words right back at you.
Yep, stubborn doesn't mean anything negative, and you can call your boss stubborn all day long without consequence. If he objects, just tell him connotation doesn't matter.
Jerk. You type too much.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
"RIAA is the most hated "corporation" in America, having beaten out Halliburton and Wal-Mart for the honor"
That makes sense. As you go down the list you get smaller sets of people you reactively hate them. The RIAA is hated by both the left and the right, Halliburton is generally hated only by the left, and Wal-Mart is generally hated only by the affluent left.
p.s. I once asked someone at a party who was venting about Halliburton, what it was that Halliburton was in the business of doing. They didn't know, but they did assure me it was the biggest corporation in the world.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
That may be true about the other personal freedoms...
But, there are few issues where "the evidence" is so compelling. I would wager that most people, when they answer honestly, realize weed is no "worse" than alcohol. But yet, the subject is never seriously debated and the same ol' War continues on. Do you realize we spend almost $40bil/yr fighting the drug war? That's a lot of people's paycheck.
The reason its such a hot-button issue is because the War on Drugs has probably had the largest impact on freedom for the largest amount of people. Both sides are affected. The citizens are policed and the police forces depend on "anti-drug money" for their funding. You didn't think they got those machine guns and new SWAT cars because they were nice, did you? No, they go them as a direct result of the drug war. It has, in a way, transformed our police into tactical military units.
While there are definitely other topics to talk about, the WoD is the single largest rights-impeder out there and that's why the libs focus on it. Not only is it a HUGE source of corruption, but there are truly, some dastardly things that have been done during this war. Just go browse a civil liberties site and you can find countless stories of abuse with respect to the War on Drugs.
No other personal freedom issue has a track record like that one.
Thank you. I'm glad you finally admitted I'm right and you're wrong.
In the future, try to stick to one argument, or even better, just admit when you're wrong in the first place.
"Jerk."
Standard. After all this time, after being wrong over and over, all you're left with is an incoherent post and name calling.
It fells good to own you like I have. Thanks for making it so easy.
However.... we're talking politics here. The first step to getting into the arena is getting elected to begin with. You will *not* win votes by anyone but the extreme fringes by highlighting the fact that you support someone's right to *view* (not create) kiddie porn, or support the right for someone to manufacture and use crack, or support the (perfectly reasonable, to me) stance that anyone without a criminal record should be able to purchase and carry firearms at will without permits or oversight. Yet these are all logical (and perfectly reasonable) extensions to the core Libertarian philosophy. With personal freedom comes personal responsibility.
The problem, as I see it, is that Libertarians running for office tend to *start* with the logical extremes. I don't know why. It scares people. Such radical shifts in thought are uncomfortable. Things need to be taken in smaller steps for the people to adjust and accept things. Bush wasn't elected in '04 because he said he's tap your phone, read your bank statements, and torture people -- those are the extreme logical conclusions to the powers he asked for. Instead, he said he'd be "tough on terror" (some some such nonesense) and, issues of Kerry being an asshat aside, he won. Again.
Maybe it's media bias towards the Big 2 parties or against the others. But libertarians end up looking like radical fools when they gain a large enough audience come election season. They need to focus on getting into office to begin with, then start the pot warming to eventually boil those proverbial frogs. To be honest, I'm not sure *what* a good tactic for Libertarians to take while campaigning, but based on my observations of the past, I have a good idea that their current tactic isn't a winner.
Method of processing duck feet
You can't even read English, how can you claim you know what a word means? I didn't admit anything. I've been toying with you, and you're still replying. I am FUCKING with you. Eat it up. I am right, nd you are wrong. Shill has connotations which are not applicable to this RIAA woman, and most of the parts of the definition are inapplicable too. Shill was the wrong word to use to describe her. Admit it, fuckstick.
Since I'm such a nice guy, I'll give you the last word in this thread. Go ahead now.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
...a guy who can't even use the words "to" and "too" properly.
"You are right and I am wrong, and I know it. Therefore I will now resort to a profanity laced tirade reminiscent of a 12 year old. I will pretend that doing so makes me better than you, but we both know that I was wrong and my inability to form a coherent argument is the real reason I'm ranting and cursing. You are far smarter than me, so I have to find some ridiculous co out in order to prevent you from making me look any worse"
Fixed that for you.
And thanks again, it was fun watching you say such ridiculous crap, then run away when you realized I had you.
Let's see some facts to back up your wild assertions.
The Republicians make their agenda clear and with the exception of pork barrel spending, stick to it.
More bullshit. Take Bush's campaign in 2000. Everything from tax cuts ("if you pay taxes, you get a tax cut") to his humble approach to foreign & domestic policy was a complete lie.
The blame lies on many levels. Nevertheless, most Americans want the government to play a role in mitigating the effects of natural disasters (or at least assist warning people and transporting those without cars when possible). Still, the point is that just because the government doesn't always solve the problem it spends money on, doesn't mean that it ought to stop providing said service or instantly attempt to privatize it.
No, not really. I think the current situation of the "War on Drugs" is stupid, but I don't want to get rid of it. I want to fix it. It's been proven that trying to get users off drugs or preventing them from ever useing them is the only place in the "war" that you get a positive return for your money. I do not think we should just open up the market for everybody to use any drug they can because their drug use (in many cases, I'm being general) does effect everybody else. Anybody want the pot smoking kid next door driving durring rush hour? Anyway, that is about the only place I differ with the Libertarian party, so when I talk about personal freedom, I usually talk about taxes, land use, gun ownership, etc...
...there was a return to honesty. Even a little bit.
I wish that more people could see the hypocracy on both sides and not believe that the other side is all evil. The truth is, no one side has all the answers. No one side wants to kill the children and poison the water either.
I wish the Dems would tell what it really is they stand for. I wish the Reps would STFU enough to let them.
I wish a white man could say what a black man can say and not be persecuted for it.
I wish for too much...
meh.
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
OK, as a bleeding heart liberal ... I'll take McCain, even though I disagree with him on several issues, over Hillary any day.
McCain hasn't a chance of a Republican presidential nomination. (He might manage one if he switches to the Democrats and both Hillary and Obama self-destruct.)
McCain blew it a couple election cycles ago when he sold out the gunnies. He's also a liberal on a number of other issues. (Major exception being the war in Iraq.)
There's a term of art in US politics: "RINO". Stands for "Republican In Name Only" - a politician who is a member of the Republican party but has liberal opinions. At the state level the poster-child RINO is Arnold Schwarzenegger. At the federal level it's McCain
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
The sad thing is that the Democrats, instead of actually listening to all the voters they've disenfranchised, seem to treat "What are you going to do, vote Republican?" as a policy platform.
No, this is why the Greens were idiots: rather than get involved in the party that already supported the majority of their platform, they instead became purity trolls and threw the election to the party 180 degrees opposed to most of that platform. That's not principled, that is idiocy.
Democrats!=liberal. The sooner everybody realizes this, the sooner we can actually have a liberal party in the US.
However:
- Democrats = Liberal, but
- liberal != Liberal
Closest idology and party to classical liberals these days are the large-L and small-L (Ll)ibertarians, respectively.
Too bad the Libertarians are clueless about order dependencies in achieving their goals and take any advance they can get.
Example: They're willing to go for open borders BEFORE fixing (or eliminating) the social welfare programs. Doing things in that order makes things worse rather than better.
(That's why I sometimes style myself as a law-n-order anarchist. I think it would be good to repeal all the laws, but in the correct order.)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Go ahead, take the last word. I insist.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
The problem in the US is that there are only 2 parties on either side of the extremities,
The problem in the US is that the Republicans are far-right, and the Democrats are moderate-right. Both extremes are pulling in the same direction.
Yep. It'd be nice if we had a system a little more like that for electing the President, instead of the current "giant douche or turd sandwich" choice we get every time.
"This represents a potential shear with the left-wing blogosphere."
Come on...
Most Republicans and die-hard conservatives hate RIAA as well.
Governments, if they endure, always tend increasingly toward aristocratic forms. No government in history has been known to evade this pattern. And as the aristocracy develops, government tends more and more to act exclusively in the interests of the ruling class - whether that class be hereditary royalty, oligarchs of financial empires, or entrenched bureaucracy.
* "Politics as Repeat Phenomenon: Bene Gesserit Training Manual" in Children of Dune by Frank Herbert
Fixed.
Ok, yes, you can argue the current war has gone farther than prohibition, but I think that's mostly because it's gone on longer.
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
Since when has following the law been a dirty trick?
Use a technicality to break a strike and send a signal that outright declares open hunting season on worker rights- all in the same penstroke.
Link
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Extrapolating the group of people who read that blog to "the most hated company in america" just blows my mind. You wouldn't work for "The Consumerist" by any chance, right?
Touche, and an example I agree with. However, following clear, unbiased election law as those Dems did isn't "dirty tricks".
He pretty much grew up outside the USA.
This is a problem. The president needs to negotiate with countries around the world, and sometimes worse. It's no good if he has personal preferences beyond the USA.
Perhaps this comment is completely offtopic, but since most comments on this story concern politics, I'll risk a few words.
It seems that democracy such as it is in America is a fundamentally flawed system. Consider these two citizens:
Citizen A works a good job, contributes over $10,000 to the general welfare through the IRS, takes interest in politics and tries to vote conscientiously having studied the issues and their possible ramifications on the life of his fellow citizens and the country at large. After some consideration - not much, mind you - he casts his vote for the candidate he seems best apt for the function.
Citizen B works, but barely clears enough to keep his apartment. Concerning taxes and contributions through the IRS, close to zero. Having no family, politics really don't interest him. He gets up in the morning of November 6 and votes, but more to get even with 'the man' than with any knowledge of what the candidate wants to accomplish.
Many would agree that Citizen A contributes more to the common good of the country - and yet the political system grants him no more power than that which Citizen B has. The reality is that their votes are equal, independently of whether they have even the intention of promoting the general welfare and even independently of their ability to contribute to it.
At face value such a system seems nonsensical - but it is the system in which we live. And worse, we can't even seem to count the votes that are cast, as the debacle of the elections of the year 2000 showed.
Perhaps it is un-American to pose such fundamental questions, but really the situation as it stands really should be thought through:
1/ is the system one man one vote really indicative of the actual political power of the average citizen?
2/ is the democratic system even capable of representing the people (as it claims) when only 45% of the populace even votes? Does it even have the mandate to rule when the majority don't even cast a vote?
3/ isn't it unjust to give Citizen B the same political power as Citizen A?
Ironically it seems that the average citizen had more political power under monarchical rule, for at least the ruler was a known entity whose person could be influenced. Yet now we are ruled by the candidate who sells himself to the lowest common denominator, or who simply has more TV time than the others.
Just some food for thought. Anyone here actually think that these candidates are even interested in the common good? But I guess we have the leaders whom we deserve....
JJ+
this is something to mod up.
there has not been a true "left wing" candidate in some 40 years, and the last couple were shot.
i want a real left wing thank you.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
Never heard of Ron Paul until now...
I'd rather vote for Mitt Romney...
Ron Paul is just the man this guy is looking for. But don't be a defeatist; yes his chances of getting the nomination are minimal, but his support is growing. I for one am telling everyone I know about him. They all say, "why haven't heard of him before"; to which I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
From http://www.ronpaul2008.com/html/AboutRon_fx.html
"Brief Overview of Congressman Paul's Record
He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.
"
Search for him on youtube. Some of his lectures to his fellow congressmen on the house floor are outstanding!
shill will probably be reversed by Monday.
For some reason, quite a few Democrats are writing the DNC saying "fire her or we stop giving you money", my e-mail to that effect was sent hours ago. DailyKos is at the head of the "dump Jenni" bandwagon.
Unlike the Fearless Leader you worship, Howard Dean is capable of figuring out he's stepped in shit and getting himself out.
There will be no "RIAA surge" to try to salvage a failed political policy.
Too bad YOUR master isn't quite as bright. Perhaps you should point this out to him the next time you kiss his ass.
Tech Public Policy stuff
will be equally offended by the fact that the head of the RIAA is Bill Frist's former chief of staff.
Birds of a feather and all that.
Tech Public Policy stuff
"I wasn't surprised that she crossed over to the Liberals. I don't think she ever did have a Conservative bone in her body. Well, maybe one."
Oh, by the way, I'm not afraid of looking worse. You seem to think this is about ego for me. It is not. I masturbate in public and kill small animals. If you think I have an ego, you are guzzling cum.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
"The last 7 years have made me hate the Republican party enough to never vote Red again in my life."
Psst... Don't worry, sometimes they change the colors.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
your main man Frist (whose former Chief of Staff now runs the RIAA) a thing of the past.
Why not ask a Republican named Sensenbrenner about the latest anti-consumer pro-RIAA legislation?
Of course, the real truth is that neither party has clean hands with respect to consumer technology law. Why don't you clean out your own GOP sewer before whining about Democrats? Are you afraid that if the corrupt Republicans got tossed out of office, there'd be no Republican Party? Judging from the current GOP track record, your fears are justified.
Tech Public Policy stuff
Why not open it up? Does anyone really think that there is anyone out there who wants drugs but somehow isn't able to get them due to the effectiveness of the War on Some Drugs? Your next door neighbour is already driving stoned, or he isn't. Legalization would have no impact on that.
and prevented it from being passed in the first place. Sure Bush didn't try to remove it either.
Just that people are quick to blame Bush for the actions of the RIAA and MPAA but forgot on who's watch the bill was passed.
Frankly there isn't much difference between the Republicans and Democrats, neither one of them does enough for the common people. Just that Democrats make empty promises to the common people and break them for over the past thirty years or so and keep doing it.
I just hope that the Reform or Green party gets more of their people into Congress to help even out the score.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
Bullshit.
New words come and go. Get used to it. The 'blogosphere' is a reasonable term for an extension of the web that's grown around new syndication media formats. It's used by quite a lot of intelligent people.
Are we going to suggest Jon Udell is a know-nothing, even though he's had very successful runs at BYTE and Infoworld? How about Tim Bray? Mark Pilgrim?
The folks at BoingBoing?
I remember back around 1995 when people thought the "Web" was a ridiculous word, because it really was all about the Internet, the Web was just a popular fad soon to be supplanted by other & better applications.
-Stu
"Blogosphere" is not limited to blogs. It encompasses any internet-enabled means of speaking to people who don't know you.
"Oh, by the way, I'm not afraid of looking worse."
Of course not. That wouldn't be possible at this point.
As to the last word, why lie about that? Oh wait I forgot who I was talking to.
How sad is your life that you think posting what you did was a good idea?
"I masturbate in public and kill small animals."
I suspect that's closer to the truth than you'd like to admit.
I win. Again. That will never change.
You're a cunt, but I'll let you go ahead and get the last word.
Closer to the truth? You cunt, it's true. Can't get much closer to the truth than the truth.
Go ahead, get the last word now. I give you permission.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
"You're a cunt, but I'll let you go ahead and get the last word"
Yeah, you've told that lie three times now, and then once you followed up your own post with another post (what kind of no life having loser does that? Wait you did...). Why lie liar?
Oh wait I forgot who I was talking to...
Why lie liar?
I'd tell you, but it would spoil the surprise.
Lie x4 and counting.
I don't what's better though, that you're a liar, or that you finally admitted I was right, or that you got so owned that you only had insults left. Oh I forgot that you posted AC too, that was the cherry. I out debated you, out cited you, out thought you, and then after had nothing left but insults, you couldn't even post in your own name because you'd lied three times already.
I win. Again. And you made is SO easy...