Torvalds Uses Profanity To Lambaste Romney Remarks

netbuzz writes "Last night Linux creator Linus Torvalds took to his Google+ page and called Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney 'a f***ing moron.' Torvalds' stated reason? Romney's much-ridiculed suggestion that air passengers would be safer in emergencies if aircraft windows could be opened (a suggestion which some, including Snopes.com, have taken as a joke). Torvalds also recently called Mormonism, Romney's religion, 'bats**t crazy.' Is this just Linus being Linus? Or does such outspokenness on non-technical matters reflect poorly on the Linux community that Torvalds leads?"

Comments

Reflects poorly

[linear a]

eom

Re:Reflects poorly

[farble1670]

so ... you're incapable of seeing two sides of the same person? if you disagree with them in one arena, you can't respect them in another? that seems a little simplistic.

Re:Reflects poorly

[Tehrasha]

But he recanted... so all is well...

It shouldn't matter a wit, what Linus' political opinion is, any more than the brand of car he drives. But for some, it will.

Its not like the community condones murder just because some people like/use ReiserFS... But some refuse to use the fs for that reason alone.

In the end, his comments, or anyone else's for that matter, reflect upon the community only as much as the reader thinks they do. You cant change that.

Re:Reflects poorly

[X0563511]

Reflects positively. Being able to recognize BS when you see it is positive. Having the stones to say so when you see it is also positive.

Re:Reflects poorly

[HiThere]

It reflects poorly, BECAUSE most people don't like to hear strong opinions clearly expressed.

I will also grant that it wasn't a good technical analysis of why the idea was batshit crazy. And it didn't define the term carefully. But I suspect that most people knew what he meant, and wouldn't have read a long and detailed analysis of all the reasons that it was batshit crazy.

If you're going to be politically correct, you need to waffle and obscure your position. Otherwise it will reflect poorly on you.

Re:Reflects poorly

[tqk]

bitch ass nigga

The envy is strong in you. :-P

reflects well

[Coop]

Since Linus is speaking honestly, he makes the entire community look good.

Re:reflects well

[turkeydance]

success in one field (for Linus and Mitt) doesn't translate into viability with another.

Re:reflects well

[frosty_tsm]

Since Linus is speaking honestly, he makes the entire community look good.

or that Obama has time for Letterman, The View, Beyonce and JayZ

It's campaign season. Get over it. Every sitting president has campaigned whether it's town hall meetings, stump speeches or TV shows.

Re:reflects well

[ArcherB]

Wow. He spent some time playing golf. Big fucking deal.

Call me when he spends 3 years on vacation like bush.

http://politic365.com/2012/05/08/obamas-vacations-of-any-president-bush-racked-up-the-most/

Bush vacationed at his Ranch near Crawford Texas. He had an office at his ranch and worked from it. He hosted world leaders, had cabinet meetings, the whole nine yards. It actually saved the taxpayers money because his house is truly "green" and is much easier to secure than the White House.

Strange that I didn't see Obama meeting with any world leaders on any of his trips to Hawaii. I don't recall Merkel tagging along when they went to a Broadway show. I didn't see Netanyahu with Obama on The View or David Letterman.

And when Bush was on vacation, the unemployment rates was not over 6%. People can't find jobs while Michelle is whooping it up in Aspen on the backs of the taxpayer.

These guys put it another way:

According to presidential watcher Mark Knoller of CBS, George W. Bush, at this time of his presidency, had made 30 visits to his Texas ranch spanning all or part of 220 days. The Obama’s vacation day count is less than half of that.

But his have become more controversial because of the costs associated with moving the first family to a public vacation spot, unlike the Bushes to their remote ranch in Crawford, Texas. For example, the Hawaii Reporter said the first family’s 2011 Christmas vacation in Hawaii would exceed $1.5 million.

Re:reflects well

[jbolden]

Some of this is BS like the amount of time Obama has spent with this national security team.
What's Romney's policy on Libya? What is Romney's policy on terrorism? Other than "not apologizing" he seems to mostly agree with Obama. So his policy is what, do what Obama wants just be more of a jackass while doing it?
Romney has repeatedly refused to answer any questions on the budget. Obama's budget's conversely have been rather good blocking Republican spending cuts and continuing the 2009 budget more or less indefinitely.
As for more people being on food stamps or jobs. Obama (or more accurately Pelosi) would love to pass something like the WPA and get them off food stamps and into government jobs. Dire poverty has far more to do with Republicans failing to provide needed stimulus.

Re:reflects well

[hawguy]

or that Obama has time for Letterman, The View, Beyonce and JayZ

You realize that he's campaigning, right? These public appearances are part of his campaign. It might be nice if a sitting president didn't have to spend much of his 4th year in a reelection campaign, but I'm not sure how to do that. Maybe longer terms with a single-term limit?

he and his wife flew out to NY on the taxpayer dime for dinner and a Broadway show

People make this complaint about every president - the president really has no choice in the matter, he can't book a ticket on a commercial flight and slip away to NYC for a private weekend with his wife. All of his trips, regardless of reason come with immense security that most individuals cannot afford to pay, so every trip is on the taxpayer's dime. This is the tradeoff we make between protecting our top leaders and saving money. Is there any candidate that will promise to never go on vacation? Would you want such a candidate in office?

the fact that he's spending more time of the golf course than with his financial advisors and his national security team combined

In nearly 3-1/2 years (1200 days), he's played 100 rounds of golf. Once every 12 days. At 6 hours each, that's 600 hours. or 30 minutes/day. Sounds like a reasonable recreational activity. Many people think that recreation outside of work helps them stay more focused on their job, and I'd imagine that's true even for presidents. And much of his golf is played on military courses, which reduces the security expenses paid by taxpayers.

fact that a budget has not been passed since Obama has been in office

Congress has done a lot of things poorly since Obama has been in office, but that doesn't mean Obama is solely to blame.

or the fact that more people are on food stamps, are in poverty and/or can't find a job....

Maybe it takes more than 4 years to completely turn around a huge economic downturn that the entire world is still suffering from.

Re:reflects well

[SolitaryMan]

You should work as a PR spokesperson for some politician or something :)

Re:reflects well

[Anonymous Coward]

Since Linus is speaking honestly, he makes the entire community look good.

or that Obama has time for Letterman, The View, Beyonce and JayZ

It's campaign season. Get over it. Every sitting president has campaigned whether it's town hall meetings, stump speeches or TV shows.

If that's the case, then he's been "campaigning" for the last 3 years. He never stopped "campaigning".

Re:reflects well

[Seeteufel]

What is Romney's policy on FOSS migration?

Re:reflects well

[sd4f]

People make this complaint about every president - the president really has no choice in the matter, he can't book a ticket on a commercial flight and slip away to NYC for a private weekend with his wife. All of his trips, regardless of reason come with immense security that most individuals cannot afford to pay, so every trip is on the taxpayer's dime. This is the tradeoff we make between protecting our top leaders and saving money. Is there any candidate that will promise to never go on vacation? Would you want such a candidate in office?

But if something did happen, can't you just elect a new president?

Re:reflects well

[Seeteufel]

FOSS-migration is in my personal interest. Tax payer money should be spent wisely.

Re:reflects well

[hawguy]

People make this complaint about every president - the president really has no choice in the matter, he can't book a ticket on a commercial flight and slip away to NYC for a private weekend with his wife. All of his trips, regardless of reason come with immense security that most individuals cannot afford to pay, so every trip is on the taxpayer's dime. This is the tradeoff we make between protecting our top leaders and saving money. Is there any candidate that will promise to never go on vacation? Would you want such a candidate in office?

But if something did happen, can't you just elect a new president?

Sure, and there is a succession plan 18 people deep to decide who would take over in the interim and it would take up to a year for the special election to take place. In the meantime the VP is next in line to become president, and there are few vice presidents (or speaker of the house, or secretary of education, or any other people in the succession plan) from either party that I'd want to be acting as president. Especially in a crisis like the death of a sitting president.

The costs from the financial turmoil from even an unsuccessful assassination attempt would be far greater than the cost of providing years of first class security to the president.

Re:reflects well

[Anonymous Coward]

Somehow you forgot to mention the most important thing he did on vacation. While busy vacationing, on August 6, 2001, he ignored a little report titled 'Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US'.

Re:reflects well

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually I can find no fault with Torvalds observations. I seriously cringe at the prospects of Romney becomong President of the US. It wouldn't be so bad if the US was some backwater nation but since it isn't then the calibre of the elected president needs to be someone with a serious grasp on reality. Something Romney seems to need badly.

Re:reflects well

[gangien]

It does not follow that if you are speaking honestly, that makes your community look good.

Example: If Linus feels that all women should be raped, that would not make anybody look good.

All that said. I personally don't give a fuck.

Re:reflects well

[readin]

These [washingtonexaminer.com] guys put it another way:

According to presidential watcher Mark Knoller of CBS, George W. Bush, at this time of his presidency, had made 30 visits to his Texas ranch spanning all or part of 220 days. The Obama’s vacation day count is less than half of that.

But his have become more controversial because of the costs associated with moving the first family to a public vacation spot, unlike the Bushes to their remote ranch in Crawford, Texas. For example, the Hawaii Reporter said the first family’s 2011 Christmas vacation in Hawaii would exceed $1.5 million.

Camp David is nice.

So we should never vote for presidents that don't own a large private ranch, or that come from states that are popular vacation spots?

Re:reflects well

[Anonymous Coward]

Rmoney would _make_ the US a backwater nation, so you see it all works out.

Re:reflects well

[readin]

These [washingtonexaminer.com] guys put it another way:

According to presidential watcher Mark Knoller of CBS, George W. Bush, at this time of his presidency, had made 30 visits to his Texas ranch spanning all or part of 220 days. The Obama’s vacation day count is less than half of that.

But his have become more controversial because of the costs associated with moving the first family to a public vacation spot, unlike the Bushes to their remote ranch in Crawford, Texas. For example, the Hawaii Reporter said the first family’s 2011 Christmas vacation in Hawaii would exceed $1.5 million.

So we should never vote for presidents that don't own a large private ranch, or that come from states that are popular vacation spots?

Camp David is nice.

Re:reflects well

[Slyfox696]

As soon as I know Obama's position, I'll get back to you on this.

Re:reflects well

[hawguy]

These [washingtonexaminer.com] guys put it another way:

According to presidential watcher Mark Knoller of CBS, George W. Bush, at this time of his presidency, had made 30 visits to his Texas ranch spanning all or part of 220 days. The Obama’s vacation day count is less than half of that.

But his have become more controversial because of the costs associated with moving the first family to a public vacation spot, unlike the Bushes to their remote ranch in Crawford, Texas. For example, the Hawaii Reporter said the first family’s 2011 Christmas vacation in Hawaii would exceed $1.5 million.

So we should never vote for presidents that don't own a large private ranch, or that come from states that are popular vacation spots?

Camp David is nice.

Lots of places are nice, but they are not "home". I still go home for Christmas and other times of year because it's "home" -- I still have many family and friends there, and nice to be in familiar surroundings from time to time. While going to Hawaii is may be closer and cheaper for me than flying to a small east coast town for Christmas, I still choose the more expensive trip because it's "home".

Should a president give up his right to visit his home because it's "too expensive" for taxpayers? Why not just set up predetermined vacations for each president - grant each president one week at Camp David and one week at Monticello each year. Many jobs in this country offer only 2 weeks of vacation, so that should be more than enough for a president right? After all, he is our employee.

Re:reflects well

[pseudofrog]

Strange that I didn't see Obama meeting with any world leaders on any of his trips to Hawaii.

Obama's vacations are more like vacations. Bush made it his second office. Considering the fact that Bush spent, last I checked, three times as many days on vacation as Obama, he didn't really have much of a choice but to actually do some work while he was out there. Personally, I'd rather have the president work in the capital instead of flying everyone out to his remote ranch.

And when Bush was on vacation, the unemployment rates was not over 6%.

Yeah. He was only dealing with two wars.

Re:reflects well

[hawguy]

Wow. He spent some time playing golf. Big fucking deal.

Call me when he spends 3 years on vacation like bush.

http://politic365.com/2012/05/08/obamas-vacations-of-any-president-bush-racked-up-the-most/

Here is a picture of the Ranch. Notice the caption:

George W. Bush (center) is joined by Condoleezza Rice (left) and Paul Wolfowitz, (right) as they talk with reporters before the start of an intelligence briefing from the CIA at Bush's ranch

Obama has pictures of his "working vacations" too!

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2010/01/obamas_working_hawaii_vacation.html

President Obama and top national security advisor Denis McDonough working in Hawaii, where the Obama family was vacationing over the holiday break. The family returned to Washington on Monday.

Obama doesn't attend CIA briefings when he's in Washington!

That's a little misleading, according to this source:

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/09/24/898081/kessler-thiessen-intel-breifing-bogus-misleading/?mobile=nc

Clearly, different presidents have structured their daily briefing from the CIA to fit their unique personal styles. Many did not have an oral briefing, while three — two of whom are named Bush — preferred to deal directly with a CIA official. Obama appears to have opted for a melding of the two approaches, in which he receives oral briefings, but not as frequently as his predecessor.

Re:reflects well

[Anonymous Coward]

Since Linus is speaking honestly, he makes the entire community look good.

Exactly wrong. He makes you look, well, like fucking morons.

It's one thing to say something scathing that adds to the debate, it's another to so harshly criticize a minor moment. And it's YET ANOTHER to be wrong in your harsh criticism of a minor moment.

I think Romney is a dangerous fool. But I can tell he was joking. If you can't, you're a cretinous troll.

Re:reflects well

[Plekto]

Romney does come from one of the most liberal states in the country. So much so that he's not likely to even win his own state in the election. He's closer to, say, a Texas Democrat or Oregon Republican (read: fairly moderate) than the asshat fundamentalist that he's been trying to portray himself as in order to get the nomination. So of course nothing much makes sense. He's not being himself in any of this and refuses to say anything lest he be branded as a liberal by most of the extreme right in his party. After all, his positions ARE pretty similar to Obama's.

The problem is that he was a moderately conservative (his being a complete jerk aside) governor in an extremely liberal state who was pushed into the feeding frenzy that is Washington politics. So of course he got blind-sided. What he considered normal conservative practices and ideology wasn't even on the same planet as what the embittered fanatics in the RNC were espousing on a national level. Note how even Ron Paul also got pushed so hard to the right that he wasn't even able to say much of anything about his core Libertarian beliefs in the primaries.

As for Torvalds, he's as much of a spokesperson for Linux and its various distros and forks as Bill Gates is for Microsoft at this point. He has some connection to the product that he created, but essentially doesn't actually do anything meaningful at this point.

Re:reflects well

[Plekto]

The President sends Congress a wish-list of what he wants them to do, but it's largely ignored by Congress. (this has been the pattern for several years now, actually). So, yes, Obama's. "budget" was not passed as he initially submitted it to them.. They basically told him where to stick it and did their own thing instead. Eventually the President had to cave in to Congress' demands. But a budget was actually passed. Just not really the one Obama wanted.

Congress passes a budget every year. Sometimes late, but they do actually get one passed.

You can check it if you want:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_federal_budget
You can click on the 2011 above the little picture to go to 2011 and 2012's pages. See the "passed" and the date on every page?

Re:reflects well

[Anonymous Coward]

Krugman, Paul

For Krugman, the area in question is satire, a problem exhibited by many of the moon-bats around here.

Re:reflects well

[GigaBurglar]

No but the possession of a brain might just do the trick.

Re:reflects well

[GigaBurglar]

I think he was implying that Romney actually is a moron.

Re:reflects well

[tibit]

I keep hearing that president's life is protected to protect us all from such a turmoil. How well do we think we know the imaginary turmoil would actually happen? Who gives a hoot if the president is alive? His status (alive or dead) has no practical relevance to the markets of any sort, or really to much anything outside of his family and the process needed to get a replacement elected. That is, unless the traders themselves loose their brains, like they often do. Self fulfilling prophecy it would be, at best, I'd think. There'd be turmoil only because everyone expects there to be turmoil, and people would turn irrational and do stupid shit.

Re:reflects well

[jbolden]

Obama appointed Julius Genachowski to head a lot of these. He has been pro open standards and pro open access but indifferent to FOSS vs. commercial. You can look his positions up.

Re:reflects well

[jbolden]

Continuing resolutions and debt extensions which have prevented the Republicans from doing much in the way of budget cuts.

I'm hard pressed to see how this isn't him getting stuff done.

Re:reflects well

[mrbcs]

Well, the mormon angels name was Moroni.

Mormons are here to make scientology look credible. You want to see bat-shit crazy, just research some Mormon stuff. From baptizing dead jews to getting their own planets, they have some crazy stuff going on in there.

Mormonism vs Christianity http://mormoninfo.org/

The best gag was from a comic when Bush was still in office. The comic was asked what he thought about a Mormon president. After a pause, he shrugged meh, what's one letter?

Re:reflects well

[dark12222000]

I agree with you, but I also agree with Linus.. Argh, what to do!?

Re:reflects well

[celtic_hackr]

You have to be bats**t crazy to think that the opinions of one person, be he the leader of the Free World, the Wanna-Be-Leader of the Free World, or the leader of the truly Free and Open Linux Kernel reflects on every person in the respective community. And who's F**king Moronic idea was it, that this is even /. newsworthy?

Re:reflects well

[Anonymous Coward]

Proof? Everything you are saying is lies, Obama has spent more time working than any president in recent memory. Estimates put him as having spent nearly twice the days working than bush did in his first 4 years. All the problems with people being on food stamps and unemployment were caused by 8 years of systematic destruction by the bush administration and republican legislature. Had McCain right now the poverty will levels be like nothing since the 30's. I am talking bread lines, food riots and shanty towns in central park. If Mitt wins he will continue the same systematic destruction that his party has been dreaming of for 4 years. We are at the end of our rope, any more gutting by puppets for the rich will end in the collapse of our society.

Re:reflects well

[Grave]

Clearly you don't understand the financial markets. The overwhelming majority of things that impact stock values and market prices are not present/actual happenings, but concerns over potential happenings. US President dies? VP might start a war over it, or change economic policies. Leader of middle eastern country gets the flu? Oil supplies might get disrupted by his successor.

A lot of basic policies didn't change between Obama and Bush (sadly), but the president represents the public face and voice of the country moreso than anyone else can. Obama is way more eloquent, patient, and understanding than Bush was, so the overall view of the US has improved from then--it's no longer quite so dangerous for a US citizen to travel to Europe or Asia and admit to being an American. Would Biden do as well as Obama has with this? Probably not. So it does affect more than just the people in his immediate family.

Re:reflects well

[Rootkit]

self-compilation.

Re:reflects well

[Seumas]

I don't give a fuck, either.

The problem is that everyone has the right to an opinion and the right to voice it. Unfortunately, when you have some notoriety, doing so can cost you. If I were anyone of importance, I would tend to practice the whole thing about keeping your mouth shit about religion and politics, in polite company. Opening your mouth about it can only cost you and won't particularly influence or impact anything positively.

As to his particular comments . . . I don't see any issue with them. The airplane comment from Romney is (if serious) just fucking dumb. And the comment about religion is entirely fair. Most people say "that other religion is fucking NUTS . . . not my religion -- my religion is totally sane... we just eat our savior's bones and drink his blood and celebrate his resurrection is all... but that OTHER religion.. oh boy, what a bunch of crazies!". And if that were what Linus said, I would take issue with his comment. But since he is not a theist, his comment is consistent and would surely be espoused with regard to *any* religion. Though, perhaps, more strongly toward religions that actively proselytize and also heavily influence government and politics.

Re:reflects well

[Esteanil]

I keep hearing that president's life is protected to protect us all from such a turmoil. How well do we think we know the imaginary turmoil would actually happen? Who gives a hoot if the president is alive? His status (alive or dead) has no practical relevance to the markets of any sort, or really to much anything outside of his family and the process needed to get a replacement elected. That is, unless the traders themselves loose their brains, like they often do. Self fulfilling prophecy it would be, at best, I'd think. There'd be turmoil only because everyone expects there to be turmoil, and people would turn irrational and do stupid shit.

And this turmoil which you yourself admit would appear and which would likely ravage the markets is less real than "real" turmoil how, exactly? You can't ignore basic psychology.

Re:reflects well

[Anonymous Coward]

Barack Obama was a member of the Illinois State Senate from January 8, 1997 to November 4, 2004 (according to wikipedia).

Re:reflects well

[porges]

There's no "special election" in the event of a Presidential death; the VP becomes President until the next normal election.

Re:reflects well

[Kohath]

Romney's policy on anything: Start by not already being a complete failure for the past 3.7 years.

Re:reflects well

[Raenex]

What's Romney's policy on Libya? What is Romney's policy on terrorism? Other than "not apologizing" he seems to mostly agree with Obama.

Romney's foreign policy: Whatever Obama is doing is wrong, even if alternate-Romney suggested the same thing 6 months ago.

Re:reflects well

[obarthelemy]

We should amend that to "Linux was speaking honestly *and rightly*". The windows idea is dumb, and mormonism is a sect-type cult.

I only disagree in that mormonism is not batshit crazy: it fulfilled its intended purpose. The guy wanted to lay lots of women, and found that selling himself as a prophet *and* having god tell him to be promiscuous, worked. Better than the catholic prophet, IIRC.

On the one hand, having a open software standard bearer talk politics doesn't help The Cause. On the other hand, this hypocritical mor(m)on has it coming.

Re:reflects well

[Comen]

"Maybe it takes more than 4 years to completely turn around a huge economic downturn that the entire world is still suffering from"

I would argue it sure does, and the idea that giving these companies tax breaks will make them hire more seems crazy, most of Wall Street is doing very well right now, many companies are sitting on lots of money. The problem is that companies do not hire because they have money and want to be nice, they hire to fill a need.
The real issue is that people are out of work and times are tight, people are not buying, and at times like this, companies cut employees not hire them. A stimulus is one way to get the ball rolling again, just long enough that people have money to spend and companies have to hire to keep up again.
But the real issue is that during the Bush years middle class incomes stagnated, and instead of helping the middle class we decided to give tax breaks to big companies, and then we fixed the game to help these big companies in ways that they had just no chance of real failure, and contrary to popular republican belief instead of them deciding to hire people because they are making so much money they put it in their pockets, again because demand did not really rise that is just extra money made.
At least Obama has been pushing the right direction, and would have done more if he could have.
I think there could be some really good stimulus ideas, training people for jobs in the United States Army Corps of Engineers or something that would not only provide some money during the time the train, but mostly get them ready to be hired again. Sure better than paying people not to work.

Re:reflects well

[Sollord]

Man just picture Biden as President and all the fun that would be had

Re:reflects well

[Cyberax]

That entirely depends on audience he's speaking to.

Re:reflects well

[ynp7]

Example: If Linus feels that all women should be raped, that would not make anybody look good.

If Linus felt that all women should be raped he'd probably be backing Romney for president instead of calling him a moron.

Re:reflects well

[sturle]

It actually saved the taxpayers money because his house is truly "green" and is much easier to secure than the White House.

Yeah, the White House was completely open and abandoned in those three years. No security at all. In fact there are still homeless people living in the attic.

Strange that I didn't see Obama meeting with any world leaders on any of his trips to Hawaii.

Me neither, but I couldn't see him all the time of course.

I don't recall Merkel tagging along when they went to a Broadway show. I didn't see Netanyahu with Obama on The View or David Letterman.

I'm sure both Merkel and Netanyahu have better things to do than watch Broadway shows with Obama. Such people usually prefer to talk in a more private atmosphere. I don't recall Bismarck tagging along Abraham Lincoln in Ford's Theatre either, by the way. Bad US presidents not hanging out with foreigners allt he time.

And when Bush was on vacation, the unemployment rates was not over 6%.

Nope. The breaking down of U.S. enconomy employed a lot of people full time. Many people even had two or three jobs to do it properly.

People can't find jobs while Michelle is whooping it up in Aspen on the backs of the taxpayer.

Yeah, because it's all his wife's fault and responsibility. G. W. Bush didn't destroy the U.S. economy. Barabara did!

Re:reflects well

[JasterBobaMereel]

Romney is a Republican so to get nominated he has to be anti-Obama and everything he has done, and positively non-Liberal

To get elected he will have to mostly agree with Obama and everything he has done, and appeal to the majority

Politicians are two faced for a reason....

Re:reflects well

[wonkey_monkey]

It might be nice if a sitting president didn't have to spend much of his 4th year in a reelection campaign, but I'm not sure how to do that.

Apart from "do a good enough job over the first three years."

Re:reflects well

[TheRaven64]

I keep hearing that president's life is protected to protect us all from such a turmoil. How well do we think we know the imaginary turmoil would actually happen? Who gives a hoot if the president is alive?

The traditional way of predicting what will happen involves examining similar occurrences in the past. Fortunately, for this case there is a example that is still within living memory.

Re:reflects well

[udachny]

Ron Paul got to say plenty. He said he'd stop the wars and bring all troops home. He said he wanted to cut a Trillion dollars in the first year, eliminate 5 departments and balance the budget by the year 3. He said he wanted to eliminate IRS and audit the Fed and eventually eliminate the Fed. He said he wanted to legalize freedoms, so that no federal government bureaucrat could tell you what to eat, drink, smoke, ingest or who to marry or how to run your business.

He said plenty, he wasn't received well by most Republicans or Democrats for it.

Re:reflects well

[StoneyMahoney]

(disclaimer: not an American, don't live there)

There was a documentary on the BBC in 2010, a one-off special about the Tea Party (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00vv3pl). There were some quite disturbing sections in this program, with political novices holding Tea Parties and parroting some blatantly incorrect political rhetoric straight from a script written by FreedomWorks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedomworks). While the efforts made to increase political engagement in the general population should be applauded, the manner in which this fledgling movement was hijacked to rewrite the Republican agenda is quite shocking. The injection of language and narrow set of issues these people brought with them really does seem to have pushed the entire party even further to the right than ever. If Romney is really a moderate in disguise, the very fact he has to wear a disguise to be accepted by his own party shows just how much damage the Tea Party has done to the political balance of the USA.

My own personal dilemma is whether to post this or mod here instead... If you're reading this, you'll know which way I went.

Re:reflects well

[Anonymous Coward]

And why does everyone keep replace letters with asterisks? Is there really anyone out there who doesn't read "f**cking" as "fucking"? Does anyone care what such a naive, non-inquisitive, hidden from reality person thinks anyway? What is this odd pointless coyness all about? Is it the same urge that drives people to pick up on things that no--one would give a shit about if swear words weren't used?

Re:reflects well

[Robert Zenz]

...and your point is?

Re:reflects well

[garaged]

So, being drunk at 4 PM daily is called hard work when you are president?

Re:reflects well

[V!NCENT]

You're missing the point. It's Linus and he's at it again! Another classic going straight to the archive...

Re:reflects well

[sd4f]

That cost probably stems more from the cult of personality and unwarranted deification of the president.

Re:reflects well

[TheLink]

Is there really anyone out there who doesn't read "f**cking" as "fucking"?

I read f*cking as fucking but f**cking is a bit more
ambiguous.

Re:reflects well

[Seeteufel]

FOSS - F stands for the F-word, O for Obama, SS for Schutzstaffel, not Stallman Squadron. Not to be mistaken for Free Software, where we refer you to the expert sermon of Mr. GNU/Richard GNU/M. GNU/Stallman.

Re:reflects well

[Paradise Pete]

Is there really anyone out there who doesn't read "f**cking" as "fucking"?

Hey, how about a Spoiler Alert next time? Sheesh Man, show some courtesy.

Re:reflects well

[aliquis]

It's hard to be humble when you know you are right.

Re:reflects well

[Anonymous Coward]

" As Evangelical Christians, we also desire to convert Mormons and the state of Utah in particular to the real Jesus Christ." I get the feeling the makers of that site are not colpletely bat-shit free themselves ;-). Not very impartial I guess. From what I have seen Mormonism and Scientology are not crazier than other religions, just more recently invented and thus less ingrained in our cultural heritage.

Re:reflects well

[Raenex]

To get elected he will have to mostly agree with Obama and everything he has done, and appeal to the majority

No, he hasn't done that. About the only thing he publicly agrees with on Obama is about killing Osama bin Laden. Everything else he just states that Obama is doing the wrong thing.

Politicians are two faced for a reason....

I understand that, but Romney is like a blade of grass in the wind, extreme even by political standards. About the only thing that he's shown any constancy in is greed/ambition and Mormonism.

Re:reflects well

[heathen_01]

Is there really anyone out there who doesn't read "f**cking" as "fucking"?

I read f*cking as fucking but f**cking is a bit more ambiguous.

The asterisk indicates there is zero or more of the preceding element.

Re:reflects well

[jbolden]

True, true. Very good point.

Re:reflects well

[Capt James McCarthy]

How about they all suck, and folks should stop defending/following/praising politicians who are volunteers for a job where they work for the public and are supposed to follow the US Constitution.

Re:reflects well

[jbolden]

He's not being himself in any of this and refuses to say anything lest he be branded as a liberal by most of the extreme right in his party. After all, his positions ARE pretty similar to Obama's.

Exactly. He could have during the last 4 years have spoken in favor of money of Obama's positions that agreed with his own and had a genuine influence on tone. I don't know if he would have won the nomination but he would be doing great in winning presidency.

Note how even Ron Paul also got pushed so hard to the right that he wasn't even able to say much of anything about his core Libertarian beliefs in the primaries.

Ron Paul openly spoke in favor of 4% government
Ron Paul openly spoke about exiting all foreign commitments.
Ron Paul openly spoke about drug legalization

I'd say Ron Paul stayed true to his beliefs.

Re:reflects well

[jbolden]

he wasn't received well by most Republicans or Democrats for it.

In 2005 about 4% of the American people registered as right / libertarians. In 2009 it is looking like more like 15%. I'd say that's rather substantial.

Re:reflects well

[jbolden]

If you look at who is in Tea Parties they are mostly people who were involved in other right politics: Christian coalition, John Birch, Anti-pornography groups.... Statistically the hard right is down from around 21% to about 17-18% of the population. The story is the collapse of moderate Republicanism so there is no internal counter force.

I think this has to do with changes in campaign laws. Moderate Republicans are your $5000 donors. With $1m donations, who cares what the $5000 donors think?

Re:reflects well

[marcello_dl]

wildcard vs regex
the struggle continues

Re:reflects well

[jbolden]

Demonization was not an American tradition. If anything the opposite. It has been guys like Romney 09-10 who made it a tradition, and put themselves in this box. He very easily could have pointed to areas of agreement frequently and sought to tweak policy where he disagreed.

Re:reflects well

[squiggleslash]

...which doesn't reflect particularly well on Torvalds. Whether it reflects badly on "the community" really is another issue - given Torvald's approach on, say, the whole BitKeeper fiasco, I often wonder if there is a community there anyway, or just a bunch of people "mostly getting along" because they want Linux "fixed" (that is, supporting and doing whatever it needs to be doing right now right now, but isn't quite yet.)

Is Romney a moron? Absolutely not.

The plane window thing was obviously a joke, as Snopes has reported, and wouldn't even be that dumb if it hadn't been (look at the windows on your exit row next time - yes, technically they don't open, but they're built within hatches, and I'd find it believable and reasonable that someone talking off-the-cuff would talk about those windows "opening" - but, in any case, it was a joke about windows opening on planes.) Moreover, the man did a reasonable job as Governor of MA, he ran Bain Capital competently - his detractors are more upset about ethics issues than whether he made good business decisions.

Is he running a bad campaign? Yes. Has he made dumb comments during the campaign? Yes again. At the same time, is his position untenable? In my view, yes. He has to run a Tea Party campaign because he's a Republican and because he'd lose massive support if he didn't, and unfortunately for him the positions of the Tea Party include some outright batshit crazy crap. And most conservatives don't see that until something, like the "47%" comment, leaves the echo chamber and goes worldwide, facing the exposure it didn't when it was repeated by people who wanted it to mean what they wanted it to mean. Wait - you mean the 47% includes pensioners, and infantrymen, and students and people who are literally between jobs but have worked all their lives and probably will work until they retire? Oh! Somehow Michelle Malkin never mentioned that!

Mitt's major misjudgement was to run now, rather than let the extremists have their day and then run as a Unity candidate - as Obama did in 2008, in 2016. But a misjudgement or two does not make you a moron.

Re:reflects well

[Hatta]

He's closer to, say, a Texas Democrat or Oregon Republican (read: fairly moderate)

Indeed. We could expect him to govern just like Obama.

who was pushed into the feeding frenzy that is Washington politics.

Pushed into it? This has always been Romney's ambition. Romney chose not to stand for anything in order to get his chance to surpass his father.

Note how even Ron Paul also got pushed so hard to the right

No, that's the real Ron Paul and why no one in their right mind would vote for him.

Re:reflects well

[X0563511]

Lets be fair - it wasn't Bush doing anything. The man was incompetent. It was his cabinet that (mis)handled everything. Also, don't forget about Dick "birdshot" Cheney.

Re:reflects well

[Stan92057]

I see it as him being a hater just like everyone else in one fashion or another.

Re:reflects well

[Plekto]

Romney's ambition has always been to be President, but things have gotten so much worse in the last few years. He's kind of got no options - either join up with the devil and pretend to be one of them, (like half of the members of Congress I suspect) or be his real self and not get the nomination. I find it almost comical how the RNC can't get candidates that legitimately win by a healthy margin(Bush being elected by the Supreme court's 5-4 decision is not a "win") because anyone who would get the nomination is unelectable, and anyone who would win the election can't survive the primaries.

Republicans love to say how great Regan was. Today, he wouldn't make it to the convention. Jeb Bush (as an example) was thinking about running at one point but gave up as it was clearly a waste of time to try to compete with the fundamentalist fist-pounding, rage-hate about Obama (mostly for no real reason, since he does what Congress wants anyways), and political agenda that was lifted from Ayn Rand. The RNC has completely self-destructed. And now they are throwing Romney under the bus because he's not good enough. No, it's not their morally bankrupt, bigoted, money-worshiping agenda. Of course it isn't. It has to be Romney that's the problem.

As for Ron Paul, you could see it when abortion, religion, and Obamahate(tm) came up. "me too" was pretty much his answer and he quickly moved on. And there's a TON of stuff he had to leave out because the other candidates would have looked at him like he was from Mars. (instead of like he was from some foreign country, like they did)

Re:reflects well

[tehcyder]

What is Romney's policy on FOSS migration?

He probably thinks it's OK to hunt FOSS when they're migrating but not when they're nesting. But I could be wrong.

Re:reflects well

[jbolden]

Sorry registering in polls. And in terms of libertarians as a party...

Most of the early libertarians who were animated by social issues and quite often more similar to anarchists became libreraltarians and then liberals. They are in the base of the Democratic party supporting capitalist economics and liberal social policies. The later libertarians, who are conservative on social issues... yeah those are Republicans.

Re:reflects well

[tehcyder]

Obama is way more eloquent, patient, and understanding than Bush was, so the overall view of the US has improved from then--it's no longer quite so dangerous for a US citizen to travel to Europe or Asia and admit to being an American.

The trick is to say you're Canadian. Everybody likes Canadians and no one outside America can tell the difference between the accents.

Re:reflects well

[Hatta]

Romney's ambition has always been to be President, but things have gotten so much worse in the last few years. He's kind of got no options - either join up with the devil and pretend to be one of them,

And he chose poorly. Emphasis on "chose". No one pushed Romney into anything.

Republicans love to say how great Regan was. Today, he wouldn't make it to the convention.

Hell, Obama is the closest thing we've had to Reagan since Reagan.

The RNC has completely self-destructed

No, the truth is that the Republicans have won so thoroughly over the past 30 years that they've completely destroyed the Democratic party. The Republican party in name might not have much of a future, but that doesn't matter because conservatives(in the Reagan/Thatcher sense) have completely dominated.

Thatcher was right, there really is no alternative. Not because there aren't any other good ideas, but because they won't let us vote for them.

Re:reflects well

[ak3ldama]

It does indicate lacking emotional intelligence. What those in the media do not realize is that those within the various software communities usually lack emotional intelligence. It seems to not have that many negative repercussions in open source. You either put up with it or you don't. The pool is large.

Re:reflects well

[rubikscubejunkie]

No, he should learn to control himself.

Re:reflects well

[marcosdumay]

I often wonder if there is a community there anyway, or just a bunch of people "mostly getting along" because they want Linux "fixed"

I'm confused. What is the difference?

Re:reflects well

[tibit]

That article doesn't mention anything about the stock or other markets, or financials. Those words don't even appear. It seems that NYSE "plunged" about 3% in the afternoon, on the day of assassination. Not a big deal if you ask me.

Re:reflects well

[tibit]

Couldn't read one sentence down the post, huh? Sigh.

Re:reflects well

[tibit]

I'm not admitting the turmoil would surely appear, neither you or me can really foresee that with any certainity. I admit there's a possibility, but it hasn't really been demonstrated in history. You'd think JFK's assassination would make the markets crash or something. Nothing of the sort happened, and no big scale crash is IMHO likely to happen. Various hotheads will do stupid shit, but in a week it'll be all forgotten about. That's how markets are, usually.

So, all the brouhaha about U.S. president needing to be safe to prevent world turmoil is IMHO overblown, way, way overblown in fact.

Re:reflects well

[jbolden]

Nancy Pelosi passed over 400 major bills in 2009-2010. Harry Reid couldn't deal with Republican filibusters. But she did pass legislation through her chamber.

Re:reflects well

[Plekto]

So after both parties come apart at the seams, what's going to happen? It is rather appalling that they have managed to shift politics so far to the right that basically we have New Republican and Fundamentalist to chose from. There isn't even a real moderate position, let alone anything truly progressive, liberal, libertarian, or that supports The Constitution.

I used to joke that it's a choice between Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum. Now, It's not really that funny any more.

Re:reflects well

[Hatta]

So after both parties come apart at the seams, what's going to happen?

I'm guessing that's when the purges happen.

Re:reflects well

[Dayze!Confused]

That's why we need to take a serious look at Gary Johnson. We need a good steward of taxpayer's dollars.
Live free.

Re:reflects well

[DrChandra]

Honesty, yes, but how about journalistic integrity? Linus has since recanted his statements. The community doesn't look so good when it repeats older parts of a changing story. It also doesn't do Linus any good to keep characterizing him based on his first statements. He would probably rather be judged on what was said in it's entirety. Slashdot does not look good putting this across with this headline. This is how media bias is practiced.

Re:reflects well

[Cinder6]

About "baptizing dead jews":

My grandfather converted to Mormonism late in life. My grandmother, a Lutheran by birth (if not practicing later in life) had passed away a decade before. My grandfather decided to have her posthumously baptized Mormon. This does not mean that she is now automagically (that was originally a typo, but I thought it fit in this context) Mormon against her will. According to the Mormon faith, her soul now has the option of accepting or rejecting Mormonism.

It's no stranger than other religious practices, and is actually a lot more reasonable than some.

How is "getting their own planet" any stranger than other religions' views on Heaven?

Re:reflects well

[TsuruchiBrian]

Baptizing dead people is the least crazy part of the mormon religion. I think Christians should start doing it too. I think it shows that these people want everyone to go to heaven (or whetever good version of the afterlife they believe in). I find Mormons to be in general, thoughtful and nice people. The Mormon religion is in fact batshit crazy, but no more so than any other religion. If you believe baptism does something positive for people, and you believe that it can be done postmortem, then it is not so crazy to then deduce that you should be baptizing dead people, if you like being nice. The difference between Christians and Mormons on this issue is only about whether you think dead people *can* be baptized effectively. I don't think either point of view regarding how this imaginary mechanism functions is any more valid than the other. I do find one to be more inclusive and good-natured. SO what if they are baptizing people "against their will". If you aren't Mormon, then all they are doing is reading a name and swimming. They are trying to do something nice, but are actually doing nothing. Sounds like a more involved version of someone praying for me. I don't care if people want to waste their time praying for me. In fact even if I were offended, I don't think I have a right not to be offended. I think their religious freedom gives them the right to baptize me, as long as it doesn't actually involve me at all (like how it is done currently), just like it would be my right to baptize the whole world for Satan if I wanted to.

Re:reflects well

[Slyfox696]

If that's the case, then clearly Romney's position is that Genachowski is a socialist, and Romney believes in closed standards and closed access. Romney also feels very strongly on FOSS vs. commercial.

(My comment was more mocking the tone of elections, where the challenger seems to stand for everything the opposite of his opponent.)

Re:reflects well

[binarybod]

Linux isn't a truly free and open kernel. Linus has accepted binary blobs into the code. RMS doesn't consider it to be truly free and open.

Re:reflects well

[pseudorand]

I just donated to Obama to enter to win dinner with him. Why? So I can give him a piece of my mind. I have no respect for the office of the President (or any political office for that matter) and I wouldn't hesitate to skip eating all together so I could barrage him with everything I think he's doing wrong.

But if I could win dinner with Linus, I think I'd be a bit more respectful. Despite the fact that I actually know a thing or two about computers and have a CS degree, while I have no formal training in and know next to nothing about international politics and economics. I find myself having some respect for the office of leader of the Linux Kernel.

Maybe that's just because I understand the difficulty it writing a working OS kernel and therefore empathize with Linus while politics always seems like "idiots, why can't they just...". Or maybe politicians really are all greedy, idiots or both.

Re:reflects well

[jep305]

Take your pick:

A) Ghost fucks a virgin, then kills resulting son, but son comes back to life. Eat son's flesh and drink his blood, or burn forever.
B) Ghost carves instructions on tablets, gives them to some dude when nobody else is around. Dude wanders with his people for 40 years, and now have perpetual claim on the nice land they finally stumbled upon.
C) Ghost writes instructions on metal sheets, shows them to some dude when nobody else is around. Metal sheets disappear before anyone else can verify them. Dude takes a bunch of people to Utah, and is REALLY into banging a lot of women. You get to (eventually) have your own planet if you're good.
D) Souls of billions are flown to earth in a giant DC-8 by an intergalactic warlord who blows them up with H-Bombs. What's left of them is eating your soul right now.

Is one of these options really any less ridiculous than any other?

Re:reflects well

[ZeroMS]

And he would be a goddamn good president too.

Re:reflects well

[AK Marc]

Yes, and if they don't send back what he wants, he vetos it and the government shuts down until they balance the budget. Clinton did this more than once. For someone lecturing others on how it works, you seem to not get it.

Re:reflects well

[tehcyder]

He said plenty, he wasn't received well by most Republicans or Democrats for it.

You mis-spelled "normal people".

What libertarians/Randians always seem to overlook is that the principle of enlightened self-interest (or selfishness) applies to society as a whole, not just individuals. The majority of people are happier with a system that provides some shelter from the brutality of pure laissez faire capitalism, because the majority of non-billionaires end up with worse lives under that system.

Re:reflects well

[udachny]

What you mean to say is that most people are happy to steal from others and using a government to do it removes the necessity to take the gun into your own hands, because most people wouldn't take guns in their own hands and go robbing people, most people would be too scared to do it on their own, but when a government promises to do so, then it's all OK.

Well, here is the problem, most people, the problem is that you think the system can continue operating that way indefinitely, it cannot. People who have their productivity stolen from them either lose their businesses (voluntarily or not) or move their businesses, and eventually that society falls apart.

Can't have an economy based on theft.

Re:reflects well

[farrellj]

A PRIMER FOR ERISIAN EVANGELISTS
by Lord Omar

The SOCRATIC APPROACH is most successful when confronting the ignorant. The "socratic approach" is what you call starting an argument by asking questions. You approach the innocent and simply ask "Did you know that God's name is ERIS, and that He is a girl?" If he should answer "Yes." then he probably is a fellow Erisian and so you can forget it. If he says "No." then quickly proceed to:

THE BLIND ASSERTION and say "Well, He is a girl, and His name is ERIS!" Shrewedly observe if the subject is convinced. If he is, swear him into the Legion of Dynamic Discord before he changes his mind. If he does not appear convinced, then proceed to:

THE FAITH BIT: "But you must have Faith! All is lost without Faith! I sure feel sorry for you if you don't have Faith." And then add:

THE ARGUMENT BY FEAR and in an ominous voice ask "Do you know what happens to those who deny Goddess?" If he hesitates, don't tell him that he will surely be reincarnated as a precious Mao Button and distributed to the poor in the Region of Thud (which would be a mean thing to say), just shake your head sadly and, while wiping a tear from your eye, go to:

THE FIRST CLAUSE PLOY wherein you point to all of the discord and confusion in the world and exclaim "Well who the hell do you think did all of this, wise guy?" If he says, "Nobody, just impersonal forces." then quickly respond with:

THE ARGUMENT BY SEMANTICAL GYMNASTICS and say that he is absolutely right, and that those impersonal forces are female and that Her name is ERIS. If he, wonder of wonders, still remains obstinate, then finally resort to:

THE FIGURATIVE SYMBOLISM DODGE and confide that sophisticated people like himself recognize that Eris is a Figurative Symbol for an Ineffable Metaphysical Reality and that The Erisian Movement is really more like a poem than like a science and that he is liable to be turned into a Precious Mao Button and Distributed to The Poor in The Region of Thud if he does not get hip. Then put him on your mailing list.

Re:reflects well

[jep305]

Hail Discordia!

Re:reflects well

[squiggleslash]

People at a cinema are also mostly getting along, because they want to watch a movie, and if any were actively anti-social it'd be a problem. I'd hardly call them a community.

Listening to the video

[rolfwind]

I had no clue in Romney's tone or anything else he was joking.

Re:Listening to the video

[MrEricSir]

Romneybot isn't programmed for the emotion known as "humor."

Re:Listening to the video

[Anonymous Coward]

A Republican gaffe is when they state their party platform in public.

Re:Listening to the video

[Dan667]

you never heard of spin?

Re:Listening to the video

[Darinbob]

Nonsense. He took lessons in standup from Al Gore.

Re:Listening to the video

[Black Parrot]

A Republican gaffe is when they state their party platform in public.

You got that right. 98% of the Republican party's difficulties come from the fact that they have to pretend they're about something other than plutocracy.

Re:Listening to the video

[bmo]

The thing about Joe Biden's gaffes is that at the end of it, you wind up liking him anyway, because when he gaffes, he speaks what he's really thinking, and he shows that he's not a vile, emotionless robot like Romney is.

FFS, y'all should see his talk on grief he gave at TAPS. Bring tissues.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwZ6UfXm410

--
BMO

Re:Listening to the video

[Black Parrot]

A Republican gaffe is when they state their party platform in public.

You got that right. 98% of the Republican party's difficulties come from the fact that they have to pretend they're about something other than plutocracy.

Sigh... If I was clever I would have said "99%".

Re:Listening to the video

[matunos]

It's not his fault. The emotion chip is not yet ready for production use.

Re:Listening to the video

[zlives]

"Ai Gore" FTFY

Re:Listening to the video

[StormReaver]

I had no clue in Romney's tone or anything else he was joking.

Romney is a lot of things (disingenuous, deceitful, hypocritical to name just a few), but it's obvious from watching the video that he was trying to be funny. His hardware and software just aren't programmed for it.

Re:Listening to the video

[MutualFun]

Nonsense. He took lessons in standup from Al Gore.

Oh man, I really did LOL. Embarrassing here at work too... thanks!

Re:Listening to the video

[stephanruby]

And actually, if you read what Snopes actually had to say about the story, they didn't say that he was joking either. Snopes basically said that Romney didn't express genuine confusion about why planes windows don't open, which is kind of true enough. First Romney criticized the fact that plane windows couldn't open, he was quite serious about it since he was talking about his wife's incident, and then he kind of just dismissed any of the reasoning behind the design decisions.

So yes, he did say a pretty stupid thing, and Snopes agrees with me on that, but is this really important at all?

Even smart people say stupid things some times. And Mitt Romney is definitely not stupid. Personally, Mitt Romney scares me and he doesn't scare me because he's stupid (as some of the candidates in the past have scared me). Mitt Romney scares me precisely because he's a very smart and shrewd experienced corporate raider, and it scares the hell out of me that the Republican base would even consider such a candidate in the first place.

Come on Slashdot, seriously?

[Frosty Piss]

For those having issues understanding the summary, here's the plain text:

'a f***ing moron' = ' a fucking moron'

'bats**t crazy' = 'batshit crazy'

Hope this helps.

Re:Come on Slashdot, seriously?

[siddesu]

I am a right-wing shithead, and I still don't get the joke. What was funny?

Re:Come on Slashdot, seriously?

[sgt scrub]

Thank you. And why you are pointing out facts.. 'However, the vitriol and obscenities are unprofessional at best.' = ' Remove him from the board of directors.

--doh!

Re:Come on Slashdot, seriously?

[jo42]

The word you are looking for to refer to Romney and his ilk is "Republicantard".

You can also refer to him as Romneytard (just like Bushtard before him).

Re:Come on Slashdot, seriously?

[kerohazel]

Weird, I was seeing something different:
'fhunter2ing moron' and 'batshunter2t crazy'

Re:Come on Slashdot, seriously?

[arth1]

Oh, is that what he meant.
I was under the impression that he was a felting moron and batslut crazy.

Regarding whether it's appropriate to call out batshit craziness when seen, let me paraphrase P. Z. Myers:
Until Torvalds has trained in the shops of Paris and Milan, until he has learned to tell the difference between a ruffled flounce and a puffy pantaloon, we should all pretend he has not spoken out against the Emperor's taste. His training of observation may give him the ability to recognize dangling genitalia when he sees it, but it has not taught him the proper appreciation of Imaginary Fabrics.

How anyone can claim that a person who believes in a god living on a planet named Kolob that's brighter than anything else in the sky and rotates once per 1000 years, who needs you to dunk yourself under water on behalf of dead people and wants you to wear underwear with magical properties, and tells you you will become a god of your own planet in the future is not batsmut crazy is beyond my understanding.

Re:Come on Slashdot, seriously?

[Alioth]

It's a reference to something that happened in IRC. http://www.bash.org/?244321

Re:Come on Slashdot, seriously?

[siddesu]

Both the joke and the hissy fits the left are throwing are pathetic. Lack of charisma and ability in our esteemed leaders make me cringe. I guess we get what we deserve, though.

Re:Come on Slashdot, seriously?

[kyriosdelis]

From bash.org :

Cthon98: hey, if you type in your pw, it will show as stars
Cthon98: ********* see!
AzureDiamond: hunter2
AzureDiamond: doesnt look like stars to me
Cthon98: AzureDiamond: *******
Cthon98: thats what I see
AzureDiamond: oh, really?
Cthon98: Absolutely
AzureDiamond: you can go hunter2 my hunter2-ing hunter2
AzureDiamond: haha, does that look funny to you?
Cthon98: lol, yes. See, when YOU type hunter2, it shows to us as *******
AzureDiamond: thats neat, I didnt know IRC did that
Cthon98: yep, no matter how many times you type hunter2, it will show to us as *******
AzureDiamond: awesome!
AzureDiamond: wait, how do you know my pw?
Cthon98: er, I just copy pasted YOUR ******'s and it appears to YOU as hunter2 cause its your pw
AzureDiamond: oh, ok.

Re:Come on Slashdot, seriously?

[allo]

why ever TFS was censored anyway. WTF, slashdot?!

Re:Come on Slashdot, seriously?

[mythix]

what are you doing?? my 5 year old reads this website!

He actually apologized

[TheInternetGuy]

Would be nice if the summary mentioned that Linus actually apologized the next day. But I think Linus' original assessment was correct, never mind whether Romney was joking or not.

Airplane fire expert

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank goodness Linus, the airplane fire expert, chimed in on this and put Romney in his place.

Also, his expertise in Mormonism and other religions makes his opinion very important.

Now I await CowboyNeal's input on carpet tack and today's topics will be fully covered by the experts.

Re:Airplane fire expert

[Threni]

You don't need "expertise" in religion (whatever that means) to know that religions are `the stupid virus`, and that Mormonism in particular is really fucking stupid.

Seriously, if I started a religion today and said that you have to hit your hand with a hammer every morning, does it make hitting your hand with a hammer not stupid? If not, what test have these other, stupid, religions passed which makes them not-stupid but my one stupid?

Re:Airplane fire expert

[Firehed]

Depends. If you genuinely appreciate life more in spite of (or due to) the daily hammering of your hands, is that a bad thing*? The point of religion is to feel better about your life. Some people feel the need to make me feel better about my life using their methodology and try to shove their religion down my throat (or through my chest, depending how important it is to them) and that's not OK, but your peaceful church-on-Sunday folks that just say some crazy crap that doesn't compute tend to not hurt anyone.

* Medically, yes, duh. Your example might be a little more realistic if it was drinking your own urine, which is relatively harmless albeit weird. Most religious activities are (IMO) relatively harmless albeit weird, so that fits right in line. It's when people start fighting over it that we get problems.

Re:Airplane fire expert

[tftp]

If not, what test have these other, stupid, religions passed which makes them not-stupid but my one stupid?

There is only one usable test: acceptance by adherents of that religion. This is, IIRC, how at least one "religion," in one (UK) or a couple of countries, crossed the barrier between a movie and the real life (Jedi.)

Of course if a hundred million people hit their hands with a hammer every morning it does not validate their beliefs. It only validates the religion itself as a set of rituals and ways to think. The rituals themselves may be useless, and the ways to think may be wrong. IMO, all religions are like that (useless) because there is a better proof of existence of UFOs piloted by Chupacabras than of miracles. Modern religions are more like a club of Anonymous Alcoholics, where people come and tell stories to each other. It just makes them feel better - and therefore it works for them - regardless of how true those stories really are. Cartoons and fairy tales for children are rarely factual, but they are useful nevertheless.

Re:Airplane fire expert

[Anonymous Coward]

The old appeal to authority again. Don't speak out on anything unless you're a so-called "expert", right?

Those "experts" on the economy and banking have put many countries of this world right down the shitter.
"Experts" in real estate said it was a good idea to buy when the US housing market was at the top of the bubble.
"Experts" said it was a good idea to drill holes in your head to release evil spirits at one point in time.

When it comes to politics, the best advice is to stay as far away from the "experts" as possible.

Re:Airplane fire expert

[Raenex]

Oh please. Atheists are just are ignorant as Theists. At least the Agnostics are intelligent enough to admit it.

"Hey look, a bunch of people all around the world making up stuff. But, um, maybe one of them is right. Who knows?"

I call myself an atheist, but that doesn't mean I 100% know for sure that there is no personal god. It's just the evidence so far points to not.

Re:Airplane fire expert

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think any religion has the purpose to make one feel better about his or her life. Where did you come up that?

Re:Airplane fire expert

[DrXym]

Ultimately most religions boil down to a person or group saying there is this invisible being (or beings) who'll get very, very cross and punish you in some awful way unless you perform ceremonies and obey commands written down and in the care of that religion. If you DO follow these ceremonies and commands you'll be rewarded, obviously not now, but in the afterlife.

Short of evidence for this invisible being, or the afterlife, or that said invisible being has issued commands to be obeyed it stands that everything that follows is delusional nonsense. The religion is delusional nonsense, the people practicing it are deluded. Usually said religion

Becoming an "expert" on religion teachings is like becoming an expert on gibberish. Someone might study gibberish and be able to quote it on demand, or be able to "interpret" it to justify their lifestyle. It does not make that person smarter or wiser than a person who chose not to accept the evidence lite premise in the first place. Quite the opposite in fact.

It would be funny if it weren't for the fact that some people are dumb enough to kill or be killed over their pet deity.

Re:Airplane fire expert

[UnknownSoldier]

> but that doesn't mean I 100% know for sure that there is no personal god.

Which is ignorance. *You* don't *know*.

There is indeed a way to *know*. You don't know because you don't know your True Self.

> It's just the evidence I have found so far points to not.
FTFY.

If you are looking outwards you will *never* find it; the solution is to look *inwards*.

Re:Airplane fire expert

[Raenex]

Sorry, I don't believe your asserted fantasies any more than I believe anybody else's.

Re:Airplane fire expert

[UnknownSoldier]

That's OK - it is your choice to remain in denial. After you are dead you will realize the missed opportunity to know. Fortunately you will keep getting opportunities until you do, so no worries mate.

Re:Airplane fire expert

[Raenex]

Wow, I am so relieved by your completely unsubstantiated mythology.

Re:Airplane fire expert

[UnknownSoldier]

Please show me where I mentioned mythology?

Re:Airplane fire expert

[Raenex]

It was your reincarnation assertion.

Oh my goodness gracious!

[mtrachtenberg]

"does such outspokenness on non-technical matters reflect poorly on the Linux community that Torvalds leads?"

Every member of the Linux community checks to see what Linus is wearing before getting dressed in the morning, right? No? Then why are you asking such an apparently stupid question?

Re:Oh my goodness gracious!

[wonkey_monkey]

what a whackjob cult

Not gonna FTFY.

freedom of speech

[Narcocide]

Bask in it, motherfuckers.

Re:freedom of speech

[Intropy]

You can celebrate the freedom without celebrating each usage of that freedom.

Re:freedom of speech

[tftp]

You can celebrate the freedom without celebrating each usage of that freedom.

By simple reasoning you then start celebrating a freedom that has no usage whatsoever. For example, you can say again and again that the USA is the most free country in the world, or that it has the lowest taxes and the best business climate. It's very convenient when people learn a dogma without any proof of its validity today. That's why a freedom must be exercised, and only those exercises should be celebrated - and failures to exercise a freedom must be noted and counter-celebrated. Otherwise you will end up with First Amendment Zones, and the only allowed freedom of speech will be the freedom to wholeheartedly agree with the powerful of this world - and only when it's convenient for them.

Re:freedom of speech

[Un pobre guey]

Liberty is indeed the freedom to do as we please, as long as we abide by the law. It is not limited by "act as we aught," which necessarily implies some set of arbitrary extra-legal rules.

Re:freedom of speech

[Intropy]

You got modded insightful for being intentionally obtuse. Now, because I just exercised my freedom of speech, you are obligated to like what I said. Similarly you must celebrate all gatherings of any kind, all religions, all news articles, and all handgun murders, being as they are, uses of a freedom. Oh, and lawyers. You have to celebrate lawyers. Bask in that.

Re:freedom of speech

[Pfhorrest]

Quite the opposite: liberty is the freedom to do as we please, so long as we do not infringe on the equal liberty of others, which we ought (note spelling) not do. It is not limited by "act as the law says", which necessarily implies some set of arbitrary legal rules.

To quote Jefferson:

Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.

Re:freedom of speech

[colinrichardday]

Ethics may be extralegal, but is it arbitrary?

Re:freedom of speech

[cyborg_zx]

I am tired from all the celebrating. Can't I just tut and ignore free speech I don't give a fuck about?

Re:freedom of speech

[tehcyder]

Liberty is indeed the freedom to do as we please, as long as we abide by the law. It is not limited by "act as we aught," which necessarily implies some set of arbitrary extra-legal rules.

That's "ought" not "aught" and the basic point of the laws we agree to and abide by is to define what we ought not to do.

However, there will always be unpleasant but legal acts, that does not mean we have to celebrate them in any way at all. Burning books is probably legal, that does not mean I would ever applaud it.

Re:freedom of speech

[mr100percent]

Then how come I never see people celebrating speech they disagree with? Where are the people who cheer on Rick Santorum's stance that gay relationships are equivalent to bestiality, or Michael Savage's comments that there needs to be a second Holocaust but this time on Muslims? Nobody is saying they don't have a right to speak, but we also have a responsibility to call people out on their abuse of it for nefarious ends.

Re:freedom of speech

[Narcocide]

But at least I'm not a coward. :)

Re:freedom of speech

[Ash Vince]

Bask in it, motherfuckers.

Americans always love to say how great freedom of speech is, but when I started making jokes about 9-11 they got all offended when I was there.

Even if you try and make the serious point that is quite widely believed in some parts of the world that the US government knew 9-11 was going to happen and quite happily let it in order to get public support for a war on terror there are many people in the US who immediately want to resort to violence (in the punching your face in way). This is not exactly basking in freedom of speech is it?

I was very happy to see the recent bunch of cartoons that came from Egypt taking the piss out of us back as that was at least a sign that some muslims are realising that the best way to counter distasteful jokes is to just fire some back in our direction. That helps us see things in a different light if we can at least see the hypocrisy in us defending the freedom to offend others while not recognising others right to offend us as well.

In my experience we have a greater percentage of people with a sense of humour with regard to these things but I think that is just a symptom of our higher general levels of education.

he's not a leader

[Anonymous Coward]

he's not a leader, he's a coder, bug difference

and if their is one thing the OS community is, it's grassroots, no leader needed

Re:he's not a leader

[Black Parrot]

he's not a leader, he's a coder, bug difference

Excellent typo, in the context of talking about coders.

Gool ol' Freedom of Speech

[ackthpt]

It's not just for people who want to run tabloids, nasty art, junk music and girly magazines.

Re:Gool ol' Freedom of Speech

[Bing Tsher E]

Yep. It's also for people who make really poorly done videos that make fun of Mohammed.

And batshit leaders who apologize for that freedom can foad.

Good

[BlindRobin]

People should point out the [epmoror|candidates] lack of clothing.

Ehh.

[tetrahedrassface]

Linus is entitled to his opinions no matter how correct they are. However, I would go further and say that the two party system is largely staffed by fucking corrupt morons, and that if you think they are different you are batshit crazy. The two parties are just two arms of the *same machine*. Thank you.

Re:Ehh.

[Un pobre guey]

I second the motion.

Re:Ehh.

[jmottram08]

Except, you know, it isn't correct and Linus apologized the next day.

errr...

[Archfeld]

Don't see how Torvalds expressing his personal opinion, and BTW mine as well should have any effect on Linux. Did he post it in the source code ? Did he preface the comment by as the admin for Linux ?

Or...

[sacrilicious]

Is this just Linus being Linus? Or does such outspokenness on non-technical matters reflect poorly on the Linux community that Torvalds leads?

Or are the statements simply great and accurate?

I'm not saying they are or aren't, but this option was conspicuously absent from the options listed for how readers are allowed to feel about it (which were "should this be ignored, or does it suck").

Just sayin'.

We survived Erik Raymond- we'll survive Linus

[bird]

EOM

Re:We survived Erik Raymond- we'll survive Linus

[bobaferret]

and to note: We've survived Richarrd Stallman- we'll survive Linus. You have to admit though, that all three of them have done wonderful and amazing things for he world, so I'm willing to cut them some slack.

"Political Correctness"

[Silas is back]

I admire Linus for daring to speak his mind, in the language he does speak his mind, as a person of public interest (or how you call it). More people should do that, it's honest and you quickly learn where you stand, not only after interpreting the words this or that way and weighing the options.

Re:"Political Correctness"

[Wonko the Sane]

I admire Linus for daring to speak his mind, in the language he does speak his mind, as a person of public interest (or how you call it).

I'd have more respect for him if he'd actually do that instead of bowing to silly superstitions like writing "bats**t"

Re:"Political Correctness"

[hey!]

Well --- daring to speak your mind is admirable, provided you've thought through what you ought to say. Saying whatever pops into your head is just stupid.

Now I'm a lifelong liberal Democrat and currently a strong Obama partisan, but I watched the remarks in question by Governor Romney before weighing in on them. After watching them several times my take is that Romney was making a joke, but he was so stiff it wasn't immediately apparent. He's not good at off the cuff remarks, and under the circumstances it's understandable that he wasn't comfortable.

Now, when Romney was asked "Isn't it the government's responsibility to provide health care to the fifty million people who don't have it today?" he answered, "“Well, we do provide care for people who don’t have insurance. If someone has a heart attack, they don’t sit in their apartment and — and die. We pick them up in an ambulance, and take them to the hospital, and give them care." Now that was a f**cking moronic answer, and he deserves to be mocked for it.

Re:"Political Correctness"

[tehcyder]

I admire Linus for daring to speak his mind, in the language he does speak his mind, as a person of public interest (or how you call it).

I'd have more respect for him if he'd actually do that instead of bowing to silly superstitions like writing "bats**t"

If writing "bats**t" instead of "batshit" means that the comment will get reported more widely, it is arguably a compromise worth making. It's not as though "bats**t" actually hides any of the meaning, is it?

What is annoying is when swear words are just blanked/asterisked out completely.

Reading that Mr A called Mr B "a ******* ****-brained ****-faced ****-monkey" leads to some ambiguity.

Re:"Political Correctness"

[Bucky24]

Now, when Romney was asked "Isn't it the government's responsibility to provide health care to the fifty million people who don't have it today?" he answered, "“Well, we do provide care for people who don’t have insurance. If someone has a heart attack, they don’t sit in their apartment and — and die. We pick them up in an ambulance, and take them to the hospital, and give them care." Now that was a f**cking moronic answer, and he deserves to be mocked for it.

Why was that a moronic answer? I'm sure the reason is apparent but for the life of me I'm unable to see it...

Re:"Political Correctness"

[hey!]

Why was that a moronic answer? I'm sure the reason is apparent but for the life of me I'm unable to see it...

Because waiting until you are critically ill and then going to the emergency room is the absolute worst way to treat a chronic condition like coronary artery disease. It's paying much, much more to get worse results to use the ER instead of screening and management of the disease through office visits.

I could go on for pages for all the unnecessary financial and social costs of using the ER as the main delivery vehicle of health care, but it all boils down to the fact it's better AND cheaper to prevent emergencies than it is to fix them. We pay more per capita in this country for health care than any other country on earth, by a wide margin. While some of that medicine is very impressive, if you look at the statistics our outcomes are about the worst of all the advanced economies.

39 countries in the world do a better job of preventing infant mortality (pre-natal care is prevention) ranking just behind Cuba, which pays $495 per person to our $7164, 12% of their GDP to our staggering **15.2%**. We're just behind Cuba in life expectancy too (they live 1/10 year longer than our 78.2 years). The country with the highest life expectancy is Japan which spend 72% less per person ($2817 per person per year or 8.3% of GDP) and people live to 82.7 years. Look next door to Canada, which does much better than us in infant mortality rate and where they live on average two and a half years longer than we do. Canadians spend about half as much per person on health care as we do and get better results.

We might not want to make the same choices Canada does. Maybe we *do* want to spend twice as much on health care, but *we should get better outcomes as a result*. The fact that our outcomes are substantially *worse* means we're doing it in a profoundly stupid way (e.g. using the ER instead of a primary care physician).

Speaking of people being morons...

[Xandrax]

The problem is that the reporter that originally covered this (New York Times's Ashley Parker) has stated that Romney said it in the form of a joke and was not being serious. Seems like not being a moron is a fine line even for Linux creators.

Ashley’s response to the question:

The Los Angeles Times story that relayed Romney’s airplane remark to the world was based off a pool report written by the New York Times‘s Ashley Parker. When we asked Parker this morning whether it seemed as if Romney made the mark in jest, she left no doubt. “Romney was joking,” she e-mailed. Parker told us that while the pool report didn’t explicitly indicate that Romney was joking, it was self-evident that he was. ”The pool report provided the full transcript of his comments on Ann’s plane scare,” she said, “and it was clear from the context that he was not being serious.”

Re:Speaking of people being morons...

[KermodeBear]

Doesn't matter now, damage has already been done. It's amazing how whenever the news media doesn't like a politician they will release half-truths, outright lies, and stuff taken out of context and plaster the world with it. Then a few days later a little snippet of, "Oh, we were bad, we're sorry, honest!"

Re:Speaking of people being morons...

[aristotle-dude]

Doesn't matter now, damage has already been done. It's amazing how whenever the news media doesn't like a politician they will release half-truths, outright lies, and stuff taken out of context and plaster the world with it. Then a few days later a little snippet of, "Oh, we were bad, we're sorry, honest!"

What damage? In your own mind? Listen, the only people that see this as a problem had every intention of voting for Obama regardless of anything. You are a partisan.

Re:Speaking of people being morons...

[rossz]

Interesting how some people can fully justify blatant media bias.

Bias should bother you, whether it's a candidate you like or dislike, you should be comfortable knowing that the news your receive is honest. When you are accepting of what is an outright lie, you are allowing yourself to live in a fantasy world.

Re:Speaking of people being morons...

[khallow]

Listen, the only people that see this as a problem had every intention of voting for Obama regardless of anything.

Even if we grant your unfounded opinion, there is a huge difference between intention and action. Obama's biggest problem will be that the people who prefer him to Romney are more likely to sit out the election than vote. Even a baseless scare story can motivate them to go to the booth.

Also, it'll waste a little of Romney's time and set back his message a bit. One time isn't going to do much. But having to spend a considerable portion of your time defusing dumb scare stories can set you back.

And frankly, I think even in the sense you were referring to, dumb scare stories will stick to a fence-sitter.

It's not the most effective of propaganda, but given that it is free, it's definitely worth the cost.

Re:Speaking of people being morons...

[atriusofbricia]

The problem is that the reporter that originally covered this (New York Times's Ashley Parker) has stated that Romney said it in the form of a joke and was not being serious. Seems like not being a moron is a fine line even for Linux creators.

Ashley’s response to the question:

The Los Angeles Times story that relayed Romney’s airplane remark to the world was based off a pool report written by the New York Times‘s Ashley Parker. When we asked Parker this morning whether it seemed as if Romney made the mark in jest, she left no doubt. “Romney was joking,” she e-mailed. Parker told us that while the pool report didn’t explicitly indicate that Romney was joking, it was self-evident that he was. ”The pool report provided the full transcript of his comments on Ann’s plane scare,” she said, “and it was clear from the context that he was not being serious.”

I'm no fan of Mitt's at all, even if I do tend to think he's marginally better to the opposition. That said, it is extremely annoying to have people of certain political bents jump all over the comment as if it were serious and then when it was forcefully pointed out that it was a joke more than half of them responded by dismissing that it was a joke and just saying the comment still proved he was an idiot.

Linus did at least mention that he was wrong, which gives him some serious points for admitting he was wrong. More than I can say for most of the people who responded to the G+ thread in question.

Re:Speaking of people being morons...

[c0lo]

...Parker told us that while the pool report didn't explicitly indicate that Romney was joking, it was self-evident that he was.

Can't do nothing but to agree with the comments following Linus' apology:

I think it's a version of Poe's law. It's hard to tell when Republicans are joking or serious about being scientifically illiterate.

Re:Speaking of people being morons...

[Hatta]

What bias? The media takes quotes from both candiates out of context to manufacture controversy and sell ads. The bias in our media isn't towards one candidate or the other, but towards the two party corporatist system in generaal.

Irrelevant Person A criticizes Irrelevant Person B

[Anonymous Coward]

Irrelevant Person A criticizes Irrelevant Person B.

How is this news?

Leave Mitt-ney Alone!!

[Oh Gawwd Peak Oil]

*Sob*

Leave Mitt-ney alone!!1

*Sob*

What are you, twelve years old?

[Anonymous Coward]

Profanity? From "profane"? Is language sacred now? Even if you think so, are you so immature that someone else's use of language constitutes offensive speech? Grow up (or as he might say, grow the FUCK up).

Captcha: mischief

Ask Mark Twain about calling a thing by its name

[WOOFYGOOFY]

What a loaded question. "Does it reflect badly and cause of loss of reputation", what... that someone calls a batshit crazy religion batshit crazy? Didn't hurt Mark Twain's reputation much.

http://www.salamandersociety.com/marktwain/

So I guess the answer is no.

Come on

[SuperKendall]

I had no clue in Romney's tone or anything else he was joking.

It was obvious from his tone in the video (and from body language, and from his laughing while saying it) he was joking. The reporter who was actually there said he was joking. No rational person on earth thinks airplane windows should roll down.

Re:Come on

[Derekloffin]

I'm sorry, Republican... hell, politicians in general, no longer can be assumed to be rational persons.

Re:Come on

[oddfox]

The guy laughs at the most inappropriate moments, a lot. Recalling a horrible cruel prank on a gay person back in college? Haha! Talking about a situation where his wife could have died? Haha! Talking about the Seamus-on-his-car-roof-in-a-kennel incident? Haha! Talking about your father closing a factory in Michigan and moving it to Wisconsin and there was a mishap with the band playing the wrong song? Haha! Romney's laughter isn't an indicator of sincerity. It's an indicator of extreme nervousness and discomfort meant to distract. And the sad thing is that it apprently works on people.

Re:Come on

[rolfwind]

I was being sarcastic.

Re:Come on

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

It was obvious from his tone in the video (and from body language, and from his laughing while saying it) he was joking.

Can you provide a link to the video you watched?

I've found two on youtube, but he was not laughing during the delivery and his body language looked as wooden as always. But both videos cut off pretty quickly after he says those words. If he paused for effect, gave a chuckle or even if the audience just chuckled, I'd totally agree it was a joke.

But I can't seem to find a video with enough footage to tell one way or the other and without that, I'm left thinking it was more like his infamously inane comments about michigan and how he loves cars, lakes and how "the tree's are the right height."

Re:Come on

[AvitarX]

I watched the one on snopes, and I think the entire thing was a really poorly done bit (as much as I'd like to be able to believe he was serious).

He chuckles in the lead-up, and his cadence in the lead up (from we were so worried...) is like the set-up to a punchline. As far as one (2 maybe) liners delivered by politicians, it's solidly average.

Re:Come on

[fustakrakich]

No rational person on earth thinks airplane windows should roll down.

Color me irrational

Re:Come on

[Nilatir]

Romney has crossed "Poe's Threshold", the point where it's no loner certain whether his statements are serious or facetious.

Re:Come on

[sjames]

How many rational people strap the dog kennel to the roof of the car?

Re:Come on

[formfeed]

How many rational people strap the dog kennel to the roof of the car?

Mythbusters would do it.

Re:Come on

[sjames]

Actually, I doubt they would.

Re:Come on

[Riceballsan]

I think pretty much the whole GOP candidate list was close to that. Watching Herman Cain doing joint projects with Steven Colbert and humor segments on the daily show http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M25fBW5BA88 Considering he was formerly a frontrunner in the GOP competition, and honestly he doesn't sound too much different when he's acting purely for humor.

Re:Come on

[whoever57]

How many rational people strap the dog kennel to the roof of the car?

I am sure that lots of rational people do. As for rational people who strap the kennel to the roof of the car and then drive with the dog in the kennel -- that is a different and more important question!

Re:Come on

[Livius]

Possibly quite a lot, assuming they had paid for the kind of kennel which is specially designed to travel on the roof of a car.

Re:Come on

[sjames]

And that would be what? Never heard of such a thing. It's actually illegal in Massachusetts.

Re:Come on

[compro01]

He's referring to Poe's Law, named after Nathan Poe, an agnostic poster on christianforums.com.

Re:Come on

[Evtim]

"What's "sad" about that?"

The Joker also laughs a lot, doesn't he?

When are we going to grow up and actually concentrate on the message instead of the manner of delivery? Gosh, sorry to say it, but seeing how people react on politics and politicians I cannot restrain myself from stating that 90% of the population is composed of morons. Not necessarily stupid in other walks of life, but stupid as hell when it comes to politics...must be all those cognitive biases to which we are all susceptible. Why are we so fucked by our evolutionary path; what a bad luck!

Re:Come on

[Raenex]

Gosh

Apparently Mitt's rubbed off on you.

Re:Come on

[DRMShill]

I'm guessing you haven't met a lot of Mormons. They're not exactly an exuberant people. Their services almost seem like funerals. If they feel like they're out of their element, random haha's tend to pop up.

Re:Come on

[BorgDrone]

No rational person on earth thinks airplane windows should roll down.

The guy wears magical underpants...

Re:Come on

[Xest]

Just watched it for myself, and as someone who isn't from the US nor particularly cares which one wins because at this point American politics is such a fucking trainwreck that it makes no odds to us in the rest of the world, I'd say whilst his tone seems generally light hearted his comment on why windows don't open clearly wasn't part of that, it makes no sense in the context of his light hearted delivery of the situation as a joke and only as a genuine question slipped in as an aside to the situation he was talking about.

It seems he genuinely didn't understand why they don't roll down.

Re:Come on

[Anonymous Coward]

The 'sad part' is you're still missing the point! He's not laughing cause it was a joke and he finds it funny - he's laughing cause he was caught out saying something amazingly stupid - opening his trap without engaging his brain - yet again, and instead of having the decency to be ashamed or bashful for the appalling or stupid things he just said, he laughs to distract peoples attention and it make it seem like he meant it as a joke.

The 'really fucking sad part' is the previous poster explained that to you and you claimed to understand and still tried to spin in into a good thing!

Lets make a it really simple - he says stupid things, then weasels out of the shame without actually refuting the stupid/horrible thing he said. Try spinning that again please?

Re:Come on

[khallow]

The 'sad part' is you're still missing the point! He's not laughing cause it was a joke and he finds it funny - he's laughing cause he was caught out saying something amazingly stupid - opening his trap without engaging his brain - yet again, and instead of having the decency to be ashamed or bashful for the appalling or stupid things he just said, he laughs to distract peoples attention and it make it seem like he meant it as a joke.

Out of curiosity, do you really believe the above garbage? It looked like a joke to me. As has been already noted, the people at the press thing thought he was joking. I'm willing to take their side especially over an idiot on the internet with an ax to grind.

The 'really fucking sad part' is the previous poster explained that to you and you claimed to understand and still tried to spin in into a good thing!

This was a case of noblesse oblige. I couldn't just let that poor poster continue their life in darkness without at least a little illumination.

Lets make a it really simple - he says stupid things, then weasels out of the shame without actually refuting the stupid/horrible thing he said. Try spinning that again please?

As you wish. We all say and do stupid stuff on occasion. You just did in the post above, for example, though due to other reasons than merely putting your foot in your mouth. What separates the better communicators in such cases, is that a) they recognize the error as they say it, and b) have come up with tricks for mitigating the effects of the gaff, such as Romney's alleged nervous chuckling.

If the trick works as you allege it did in this cause, then what's the big deal? Romney occasionally saying dumb stuff? Everyone does. Romney making it appear as a joke? Well, he's a politician and that's a good skill for one to have. Maybe you should figure out a similar trick for when you do that.

Finally, there's no reason for shame here. Anyone who has to talk a lot will make mistakes. And for a president those mistakes will often be broadcast worldwide. They'll have no time to beat themselves because they flubbed the delivery of their latest airplane joke. Better that they chuckle and move on.

Re:Come on

[silentcoder]

>Actually, I doubt they would.

I'm sure they WOULD find a reason to do it.
What they would NOT do is strap the kennel to the roof of the car WITH THE DOG STILL INSIDE IT !

Re:Come on

[GameboyRMH]

Maybe he really is a robot. That seems like something a robot would do right?

"CAGE ITEM SECURED TO ROOF OF VEHICLE, INITIATE TRANSPORT. OBJECTIVE COMPLETED. UPDATED OBJECTIVES LIST: 1 - DRIVE TO ONTARIO. 2 - SIMULATE FAMILY ENJOYMENT. 3 - ACQUIRE CURRENCY."

Re:Come on

[tehcyder]

No rational person on earth thinks airplane windows should roll down.

And you fail to see the obvious conclusion to be drawn from this statement and the fact that Romeny thinks that airplane windows should roll down?

Re:Come on

[tehcyder]

I was being sarcastic.

Oops, it was too subtle for me at least. Apologies, I'll go and throw myself out of an open plane window.

Re:Come on

[sjames]

We're all invited to take a trip with the Romneys for the next 4 years. Some of us will be crossing our legs hoping he stops for th bathroom soon, and some of us will be strapped to the roof. If we get sick, we'll be hosed.

Re:Come on

[Straif]

Yeah, it's like when he gives 'shout out's before holding a press conference after a national tragedy, oh wait, that was the other guy.

Re:Come on

[sjames]

Yeah, so what if the dog shits himself in panic?

It was actually illegal when he did it as well.

Re:Come on

[atamido]

How many rational people strap the dog kennel to the roof of the car?

I think that would depend heavily on how many people's dogs like traveling in that fashion.

Re:Come on

[sjames]

Hint, if the dog panics and shits himself (and the car), he doesn't like it. If the trip lasts 12 hours, he probably won't like it.

idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[PhrostyMcByte]

I do agree with him in this sense: you shouldn't need to censor your personal thoughts just for political correctness. Or even "professionalism", as TFA asks for. Even if you're someone of popularity. It shouldn't reflect at all on the Linux community, in the same way Reiser FS didn't become complete shit after Hans' better judgement slipped away from him.

Could he have used more mature words? Sure. But does anyone really care?

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[garcia]

But does anyone really care?

I would venture a guess the 15+ million Mormons worldwide do. The fact that the Mormon religion is heavily invested in business (right or wrong considering their status as a religion), I would guess it wasn't Linus' brightest moment--apology or not.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[shentino]

Bright or not, that would be caving to alleged mormon influence, as in "don't piss us off or we will hurt you"

Which smacks of intimidation.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[frosty_tsm]

Bright or not, that would be caving to alleged mormon influence, as in "don't piss us off or we will hurt you"

Which smacks of intimidation.

What are they going to do, make all of their business investments run Windows servers?

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[niftydude]

you shouldn't need to censor your personal thoughts just for political correctness. Or even "professionalism", as TFA asks for. Even if you're someone of popularity. It shouldn't reflect at all on the Linux community

Exactly. On top of this - every actor, actress, musician on the planet is allowed to voice their opinion on politics, religion, etc - but if a technical guy such as Linus does, it is unprofessional?

And just for the record - Mormonism is batshit crazy. It takes an unprecedented level of double-think to believe Joseph Smith's story about the golden plates that no-one ever saw, and his excuses for why he couldn't translate the same transcript the same way twice.

Linus shouldn't need to apologise for a statement that is objectively and obviously correct.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[PhrostyMcByte]

I don't know what he said about Mormonism, but I don't think that should matter either in terms of Linux. If Mormons can't see past one dev, can't see that Linus is just one cog in a very large machine, that's their problem and not his. There will always be political things for some people to worry about, but traditionally devs are more about solving problems than massaging peoples' egos. It's not really that surprising that he's blunt and outspoken.

And why is religion special from anything else, in that it becomes poor form to criticize one after it graduates from being a cult?

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

What are they going to do, make all of their business investments run Windows servers?

One can hope. Then, when times get tough, we don't have to worry about fighting entrenched Mormons, with a year's stored food in their bunkers...

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

If they have a problem with being called batshit crazy, then they should stop acting batshit crazy. Do you expect me to just ignore all the crazy stuff? Should I just ignore the fact that the homeless guy on the corner yells at the stop sign and make him the CFO of my company anyway?

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[SolitaryMan]

Have you ever heard somebody saying things like "people are fucking stupid", "people are morons", etc.?

Do you really think 7B people get upset over this or even care?

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[PopeRatzo]

I would venture a guess the 15+ million Mormons worldwide do.

Aren't they too busy being "bats**t crazy" to care about what Torvalds says?

Though I admit, getting my very own planet in the afterlife is a pretty tempting proposition.

[I know too many really good and decent devout people to absolutely discount religious beliefs, and the big ones are based upon centuries, if not millennia of tradition. So I have something of a grandfather-clause when it comes to ridiculing religion. If your religion was created after the development of the steam engine, you're a crackpot. If your religion pre-dates the steam engine, I'm careful not to insult your beliefs. I'm considering pushing it back to Newton, but for now, the steam engine is the cutoff.

I know it's kind of arbitrary, but I've found it to be a very reliable rule-of-thumb. ]

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Try saying Muhammad is fucking stupid in the Middle East

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Seeteufel]

The other aspect is his European origin. Politicians like Romney would not be capable of giving satisfaction over here. They are simply too far off. The reason for this is that Republicans are not conservatives in the European sense. Mormonism is quite crazy as a religious belief though their believers seem to be very nice personalities.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

So not doing business with a company because you don't like their political leanings is now intimidation?
 
Get the fuck over yourself.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Ghaoth]

The world abounds with crazy. L. Ron Hubbard + Crazy = Scientology Although I have a suspicion that Scientology is Hubbard's joke on the world. Happy people.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

No, UnixWare servers.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[jellomizer]

You have the freedom of speech. However there are often consequences for your speech.
Sometimes it is better for your image if you keep your mouth shut. Open Source often caries a political clout that for the most part you want to be considered apolitical. If you are a popular figure political statements often make it seem your movement has a larger hidden agenda.

Hans is a bad example because he wasn't much of a key figure. Just a vocal supporter and his actions were not tied to his work.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[unimacs]

Words matter. It's entirely possible to be honest without being crass. Tactful expression of one's opinions is far more effective.

Does it reflect poorly on the linux community? Don't know about that one. Anybody that's even aware that a linux community exists is probably far more interested in technology than Linus's opinions of various politicians. On the other hand I can't think of a single way it could reflect well on the community.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

oh yeah, so I and another 11 people tell you we saw Michael Jackson pissing from above a pink cloud the other day, the fact that I'm not alone in the bullshit makes me credible? give me a fucking break will ya

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Omeganon]

The OSS movement shouldn't care about what other people think. Software is created and put out in the wild in the hope that others will benefit. Whether a particular class of people use it or not is typically irrelevant (unless they are the target of the software). The only people who are likely to greatly care about this are the people trying to make money off of open source software.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[mclaincausey]

Oh come on. "We won't use Linux" as a policy by Mormon-owned business affects Linus exactly how? OT, big Dead fan, saw the garcia and Lazy Lightning URL (which happens to be in my area, the TC), big ups to you sir.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[DrJimbo]

Hilarious and understated. Wish I had mod points for you.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[sumdumass]

It's funny. Linus is constantly paraded as the voice of Linux, the father of Linux, the kernel maintainer of Linux he is in essence a default spokesman of Linux. Then when he appears to run off the deep end, people want to act like he is an insignificant player with no influence at all.

The problem with language like this and actions like this isn't that they were done. It is that the profile of the person doing it. Ask yourself, why is it a problem that Chik Fil-A supports organizations that appose gay marriage? Now if it was just people working for the company donating to those organizations and not the head of the company, would it be the same issues? Like it or not, Linus is seen as the voice of Linux mainstream and he is now in Mr Cathy's shoes where doing and saying things can carry consequences outside of someone ignoring you or thinking you are just another bigot.

And why is religion special from anything else, in that it becomes poor form to criticize one after it graduates from being a cult?

There is an old saying, there is the truth and there is being mean.

Regardless of how people want to claim they are trying to be, when they criticize others for the sake of doing so, they are purposely being mean. Some claim this is "keeping it real" and I've seen some of those people break down in tears trying to start physical fights with others when it is turned back around on themselves.

So why is it that some people feel they can criticize anyone they want but no one can criticize them? This entire debate is about that. It is essentially, so what if he said something I agree with that hurt someone else' feelings. That's no reason to say something that hurts his feelings.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Stormthirst]

You don't hang around with many Christians do you

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[jrumney]

They could get one of their companies to claim license fees for Linux installations - I'm sure they've got some copyrights or patents somewhere that could be dubiously applied to Linux. Lawyers would be falling over themselves to take that case all the way to the end for a share of the massive profits they'd get when the case was over. I'm surprised noone has tried this foolproof plan yet.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[sumdumass]

Hans is a bad example because he wasn't much of a key figure. Just a vocal supporter and his actions were not tied to his work.

Hans is also a bad example because he was removed from the post and locked up in jail. There was no question about his continued influence on the project. Linus on the other hand, will remain a prominent figure in Linux.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Joseph Smith also married the wife of Orson Hyde while Hyde was away serving a mission in Jerusalem/Palestine. While Orson and Nancy Hyde divorced later in life, THEY WERE MARRIED when Smith supposedly received a revelation from God that they should be married, despite Nancy Hyde already being married to Orson Hyde.

The events I'm referring to are colloquially known as "history" and you should try reading some before repeating the same nonsense you've been told since you were a kid. Do some research and you'll discover the exact same things I discovered. IT SUCKS. I was devastated. I eventually got over the fact that the people who lied to me were well-meaning and didn't realize they were lied to as well.

Uncle Joe was a con-man, a swindler, and a womanizer and he documented such in his own journals. Read the Joseph Smith Papers, volumes 1 and 2. Prepare to have your faith shattered, my friend. He documented his own exploits and still people believe the nonsense, it's absolutely incredible.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Alien Being]

"Muhammad is fucking stupid in the Middle East."

Ahh, that feels better.

3x fast...

"Muhammad is fucking stupid in the Middle East. Muhammad is fucking stupid in the Middle East. Muhammad is fucking stupid in the Middle East."

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Alien Being]

BTW, Mr. Stupid is getting rather annoyed and wishes that Muhammad would stop fucking him.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

"Mormonism is batsh*t crazy" is an opinion and you are entitled to it. But if you want an audience, prove it. You can't prove it anymore than they can prove it's true. As for your references you need to do better as the book has sworn witnesses of the plates by members of their church and many of those members even left their church yet never recanted their testimony of witnessing the golden plates. As for the translation comment, the actual record of the event states that the original translated material was altered to make the re-translation appear fake. The re-translation was not released; not unable to translate.
Linus doesn't need to apologize for his opinion he's entitled to it. I would expect a real critic or analytic to be more objective and open-minded to different ideas. After all, I can remember when the Open-source model was a cancer, toy, etc.

 

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[ConceptJunkie]

What about people who worship the invention of the steam engine?

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[ConceptJunkie]

Don't forget the Masons. He kiped a lot ritual and other material from the Masons.

I always thought it was a shame Mormonism didn't come a century later, because then it would have had UFOs, too.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

If you really fear for your life by criticizing Jesus Christ in a Christian nation then you're either crazy or have never been to one.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[drkim]

AH-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA-LA *KA-BOOM!!!*

Dude. That is SO my next sig...

(lowercase text added to bypass filter error. lowercase text added to bypass filter error. lowercase text added to bypass filter error. lowercase text added to bypass filter error. lowercase text added to bypass filter error. lowercase text added to bypass filter error. lowercase text added to bypass filter error. lowercase text added to bypass filter error.)

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[cheesybagel]

Darl McBride? Nice?

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Frankie70]

It takes an unprecedented level of double-think to believe Joseph Smith's story about the golden plates that no-one ever saw, and his excuses for why he couldn't translate the same transcript the same way twice.

Does it take more double think than that required for someone dying on Friday and coming back on Sunday?

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[simplexion]

All religions are bat shit crazy.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[thesandtiger]

I would venture a guess that most Mormons don't give a fuck, just like the vast majority of the human race doesnt give a fuck about Linus, let alone know who he is. Does Linus' opinion have any impact on them and their lives? What possible reason could they have to care at all? "Oh no, some geek who is completely irrelevant to anyone but other geeks thinks we're crazy!"

The only people who care about this kind of shit are people who have an agenda to push and will use any pretext to do so, or the people who are, in fact, batshit crazy.

People seem to be trying really hard to be offended by this stuff and completely ignoring the fact that there are very powerful people who unfortunately can have a direct impact on our lives, who say incredibly stupid and evil shit all the time. See: pretty much all the extreme right candidates currently running for office in the US.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Esteanil]

Indeed, I was just thinking of starting a religion involving the steam engine and the patent issues surrounding it.
"We could've had a better steam engine 15 years earlier!" is our cry of faith.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[sumdumass]

If 12 people with a degree in separation claim they saw that or anything else no matter how incredible it sound, then it is credible that something happened to make you all think you saw it. Usually, this is enough to convict someone of a crime as far as evidence goes- no matter how outlandish your claim might be.

I'm not sure why that seems like such a shock to you. But it is the way the world works.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Esteanil]

Indeed, I was just thinking of starting a religion involving the steam engine and the patent issues surrounding it.
"We could've had a better steam engine 15 years earlier!" is our cry of faith.

Although that would postdate the steam engine, and by GGP's standard make me a crackpot. Damn. I knew there was something wrong with this idea.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Esteanil]

First comment in a while to make me actually laugh out loud. Good job :-)

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[niftydude]

Does it take more double think than that required for someone dying on Friday and coming back on Sunday?

Well Mormonism includes all the christian/catholic double think, and then adds the extra levels of Joseph Smith double think. So by definition I guess that it requires more .

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[GeekBoy]

On behalf of all Mormons, you guys are making a far bigger deal out of it than we are. I read it and just went... meh.. it's Linus being Linus.

I think we can handle' Linus' opinion after. oh, having the US Gov't try to exterminate us and being the target of 'Christian' hate, I mean Love, for a couple hundred years that resulting in smear campaigns, regular protests in front of our places of worship, tar and feathering, burning down our homes, raping our women and killing our children and murdering our leaders....

Linus, no problem. I'll take Linus' love over 'Christian' love any day.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank God, someone get's it.

And as one of those Mormon's I'm fucking tired of people talking about us as if we are all the same (hello! Canadian, political centrist/libertarian, supports gay marriage, Linux advocate and Evolutionist.). We're people, not that different from anyone else, with the exception that we are more likely to nice-neighbour you to death than blow you the fuck up.

If you're looking for the right wing automaton clones I suggest you go to your neighbourhood pentacostal church.
If you're looking for your left wing automaton clones I suggest you go to your local university's next atheist rally.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[GeekBoy]

Hey, every group has some people that they'd like to get rid of.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[shadowofwind]

And why is religion special from anything else, in that it becomes poor form to criticize one after it graduates from being a cult?

Because people suck up to power. Hail ants.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[gd2shoe]

Wait, what?

You seem to be implying that the mere allegation of possible business push-back "smacks of intimidation". Can't you wait to see if there is any before impugning people?

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[gd2shoe]

Which magic rock would this be? The only object of worship in the theology is the Godhead (Father, Son, Holy Ghost). If there are any Mormons worshiping holy rocks, I don't know them.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[gd2shoe]

It takes an unprecedented level of double-think to believe Joseph Smith's story about the golden plates that no-one ever saw, ...

By no means do you need to believe it, and you can go ahead and call it double-think if you like.

You should be aware, however, that 11 other men claimed to have seen the plates. That's not no-one.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[gd2shoe]

Mormonism is [reputed to be] quite crazy as a religious belief though their believers seem to be very nice personalities.

FTFY ;-)

No, seriously. Many people find religious belief in general to be bizarre, but Mormonism is no more-so than most. What Mormonism has more of are "quite crazy" rumors, half grounded in truth (or less).

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[gl4ss]

but mormonism is batshit crazy, even more so than the catholic version.

and romney is an idiot dick, so why not call him a dick? from the latest it seems they got a deal with democrats to keep obama in for another 4 years - he's leaking so much shit.

the difference between romney and linus is that linus isn't a presidential candidate NOR a commercial ceo. good for him! at least he isn't reading the source from golden plates.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Torvac]

bat shit crazy and dangerous.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Ch_Omega]

"If your religion was created after the development of the steam engine, you're a crackpot. If your religion pre-dates the steam engine, I'm careful not to insult your beliefs. I'm considering pushing it back to Newton, but for now, the steam engine is the cutoff."

So any religion created after the first century BC gets the harsh treatment?

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[J Story]

On top of this - every actor, actress, musician on the planet is allowed to voice their opinion on politics, religion, etc - but if a technical guy such as Linus does, it is unprofessional?

It is true that every actor, etc., *is* allowed to voice their opinion, but it is also true that their opinions often show them to be uninformed children. Torvalds' intolerance has diminished him.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[bmcage]

Probably referrring to Mekka

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[shentino]

I'm saying that if business pushed back because someone pissed off the mormons, that would be intimidation.

The "don't piss us off or we will hurt you" bit that peple are afraid the mormons would bring to bear.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[shentino]

No, but using religious influence to pressure a business is.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[nospam007]

WP
"The history of the steam engine stretches back as far as the first century AD; the first recorded rudimentary steam engine being the aeolipile described by Greek mathematician Hero of Alexandria.[3]"

Since Jesus was voted as a god only 2 centuries later, I guess you used a bad example.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[shentino]

I would rather be a Mormon than a Scientologist, then.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Joce640k]

Try saying "Nascar Sucks" in redneck country. See what happens.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[KeensMustard]

I assume you include your own religion in that judgement

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Seeteufel]

The Nationalist Socialist party, movement I must say, was a revolutionary nationalist movement with a mythological re-foundation of the national idea based on blood and soil, a leader cult and expansionary foreign policies. Racism of the National Socialists followed a hygienics concept. It wasn't "conservative", like the Center Party or the DVP, or even the restaurative DNVP which all stood for a pluralist civil society and traditions.

I agree with your analysis that the fragmentation of US national solidarity for health insurance etc. is founded on sublime racism. It is a quite Straussian perspective but I think it applies.

In Europe freaky aggressive policy communication is usually the business of the "progressive" left and the right fringe. Conservatives are conservative, that is they restrain themselves. They don't engage in negative campaigning. You could say, conservatism is policy making for grandpas, not disgruntled haters. Europe is multicultural but equally struggles to create cohesion. But we see the emergence of right wing populist parties like FPÖ in Austria, PVV/Wilders in the Netherlands and others which adopt communications similar to US Republicans. They are mostly immune to scandals, poltical legacy and refuted facts, thus not conservative. Even Obama's positions would be unacceptable to modern European conservatives because he endorses death penalty, torture and targeted killings.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[MachineShedFred]

Somehow I have a feeling, that of those 15M mormons, only about 14.9M of them would be saying "Linus who?" if they read any of this.

Only in a community like Slashdot is this guy revered as some kind of opinion maker. Not a single damn is given in the rest of society.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[MachineShedFred]

End of world, gun loving, extreme right wing, Obama is the Antichrist etc...

In no way is this exclusive to mormonism. There are plenty of cross sections of American society that share those beliefs.

Hint: just because you like guns, or don't agree with the President, doesn't make you batshit crazy.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[MachineShedFred]

On top of this - every actor, actress, musician on the planet is allowed to voice their opinion on politics, religion, etc

And most people really wish they wouldn't. That doesn't really make your argument.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[flyneye]

Live in Utah or Arizona for a big serving of what the Mormons can do if crossed.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[heathen_01]

Now look, once you have got past the virgin birth of a god to a mortal woman, all the other rumors will pale in comparison and not seem so crazy.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[heathen_01]

If 12 people with a degree in separation claim they saw that or anything else no matter how incredible it sound, then it is credible that something happened to make you all think you saw it. Usually, this is enough to convict someone of a crime as far as evidence goes- no matter how outlandish your claim might be.

I'm not sure why that seems like such a shock to you. But it is the way the world works.

I agree, but that does't make it credible that it was actually seeing the plates that caused them all to think they saw the plates. I can imagine it would be quite easy to get someone to say that they saw golden plates and write a testimony to that effect. The fact that the seeing the plates allows you to marry the hot 16yo next door and have a credible excuse to give your existing wife would have no bearing on my testimony, however it may affect others judgement.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[heathen_01]

More people than 11 believe in ufo's.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[PopeRatzo]

So any religion created after the first century BC gets the harsh treatment?

Maybe.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[scharkalvin]

On this particular Romney quote Linus was wrong. However his remark was still right on the money IMHO

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[ceoyoyo]

The one that helped John Smith with his "translations." I suppose I should say Mormons let the words of a magic rock dictate their beliefs. Is that better?

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[aicrules]

Your opinion doesn't make it true, just like Mormons' opinion that they're not batshit crazy doesn't make it true. Use of trite name calling, vulgar or otherwise is a poor excuse for actually providing meaningful evidence that something is true, and in fact is commonly the argument of choice for actual fucking morons.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

A modern Mormon maybe. When Mormonism was the same age as Scientology it was pretty extreme. They used to practice human sacrifice for major crimes, and Utah was essentially a theocracy.

You mean, "they had the death penalty for murderers"? Yeah, that's so extreme that it's still practiced in 33 US states. We can argue about the morality and utility of the death penalty, but the Mormons were hardly unique for practicing the death penalty in the 19th century.

As for the theocracy bit, that's almost unavoidable when almost 100% of the population belongs to the same church, which was the situation in Utah for almost a century after it's founding.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[MartinSchou]

Yes, words matter, but I don't think Linus was being crass or was using crass words.

He was using effectual words.

Think about it - if he'd said "very unintelligent" and "very much on the fringe", it wouldn't have the same impact as "fucking moron" and "batshit crazy".

Crass would be saying something like "a fucking moron who deserves to be beaten to death for his stupidity" and "batshit crazy child molesting religious zealot who'd be happy to start world war 3 by baptising the prophet Mohammed into the Mormon faith".

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Andy Dodd]

Case in point:
The dominant religion in the United States is Christianity
The main target audience of South Park are United States citizens
South Park frequently parodies Christianity
Somehow, not only are Parker and Stone still alive (and to my knowledge, have never had violence committed against them due to South Park Jesus), but their show is quite popular in a country where the show makes fun of the dominant religion...

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Brad1138]

just because you like guns, or don't agree with the President, doesn't make you batshit crazy.

There is a difference between not liking someone and thinking they are the Antichrist. Also it is one thing to believe in the 2nd amendment, another to be posting numerous FB links every day about how great guns are and how anyone that doesn't agree is stupid.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[godefroi]

If you believe the "words" came from a "magic rock", then it shouldn't be a large leap to believe that they came from a divine being. If you don't, then "words of a magic rock" shouldn't be any more crazy than "words of a stone tablet" (Moses) or "words of a cave" (Mohammed).

If you don't believe any of that, then it's all just the crazy imaginings of the loony religious. I don't get why one is more crazy than the other.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[godefroi]

Hint: just because you like guns, or don't agree with the President, doesn't make you batshit crazy.

No, but I fully intend to go batshit crazy someday, and I plan to have lots of guns by the time I get there. Simple correlation? Who can say?

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[godefroi]

They call that one Scientology.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[adlib24]

I've been reading /. for over a decade. I've been a Mormon longer than that.

I get your Meh point and should probably just go back to coding, but I want to say that rejecting Linux over this would be like getting angry at the Hierarchy because Chomsky is a political personality: Sheer stupidity. Chomsky and Linus are complex and interesting people. Most Mormons are the same way. However, I worry that Romeny doesn't normalize Mormonism, but rather reinforces a very specific stereotype around Mormons and business.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[godefroi]

There's a billboard (or used to be, at least) on SR-201 around here that advertises a support group or club or something for athiests. They meet Sunday mornings. The irony is so thick you can cut it with a knife.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Kidbro]

Die in flames, you worthless heretic! The cloud was purple!

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[unimacs]

Effectual words?

Impact?

What impact did he really have?

I wouldn't have suggested "very unintelligent" or "very much on the fringe" as alternatives anyway. I'm not a Mormon nor am I a believer in any particular faith. Many faiths have teachings that I respect while at the same time propose things that I find unbelievable. I don't know why you'd want to single out any one of the major faiths in particular as being more crazy than another. My guess is that many of the things that Western society (even secular society) holds dear today will be seen as crazy and foolish 200 years from now.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[BasilBrush]

Why are you a mormon? Is it because you looked at all available religions and selected the one that seemed closest to the truth as you see it? Or was it because your parents are mormon?

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[SmurfButcher Bob]

I misread this as "the three and eight waitresses" and thought, "so, they attested to serving him lunch on gold plates? Why so many waitresses?"

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[bjdevil66]

Live in Utah or Arizona for a big serving of anti-Mormons coming up with thinly veiled bigotry like this.

More often than not, they're just excuses for shifting blame from some problem they have in their own lives to some boogeyman (in this case, the LDS church, the "Mormon mafia", etc.). Here's a sample of the whining you'll hear:

Kids - "They won't be friends with me because I'm not Mormon."..."My parents said I couldn't play with Mormons because they're bad." (Yes, that level of bigotry still exists in 2012. I've seen it firsthand.)

Teenagers/young adults - "She won't date me because I'm not Mormon."... "Those f**king Mormons f**king think they're better than me because I (fill in the blank). F**k them all."

Adults - "I got fired because I'm not Mormon."... "Mormons are only nice neighbors with other Mormon neighbors... What are their names? Why should I know?"... "They didn't vote for me because I'm not Mormon."... "I didn't get the promotion because I'm not Mormon. I bet a MORMON got it, instead."... "They wouldn't listen to me because I'm not Mormon." "They didn't accept my offer because another offer was from a Mormon."

Yes, there are some Mormon jerks, but they aren't living the spirit of their own religion, and more importantly, there are jerks in EVERY religion.

Bottom line: People that play those whiny cards - especially those who live around a lot of Mormons and see the good they actually do in society (vs. just listening to secondhand hearsay - like the vague crap this parent post spewed) need to grow a pair and take responsibility for their own lives.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Unordained]

a) Our political dialogue is dominated by sound-bites and trite name-calling. Undecided voters are swung by the stupidest things, while the party loyalists can't be swayed even by the best arguments. All you'll get, when you try to have a sane conversation about policy, is stereotypes, generalizations, exaggerations and spin. The fact that someone actually says what they're thinking is just a rare glimpse into how reductionist we are when it comes to politics. We don't have time for all the details. We can't even remember all of them, to even begin to manipulate them into logical thoughts. We must take shortcuts. Once we've heard enough from someone, we just rubber-stamp it with either "awesome" or "fucking stupid", and file it away forever, never to be reconsidered. We have to, because time is short, and there are more important things in life, like food and shelter.

b) Have you tried arguing with religious folks, on a basis of pure logic & fact? It doesn't work. Faith prevents it; faith is the great escape route, the great shield. Any argument you don't like can be avoided or circumvented or overcome (in your own mind) thanks to faith. It's a get-out-of-jail-free card. It's already hard enough (nigh impossible) to convince (forcibly) someone of something logically, when they're set against it, even when they have no faith to fall back on (they can always just "fail to see your point" or "not be convinced yet".) But when they do have faith? It's pointless to even try. You'll just frustrate yourself. So after a while of trying, experience teaches you to stop hurting yourself. Stop bashing your head against a brick wall. Call a spade a spade, and call batshit-crazy religions exactly what they are: batshit-crazy. And be done with it. There's no logical counter-argument to it, so you might as well. It's not an issue of being lazy or incompetent or malicious or cowardly or inconsiderate, just efficient.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[gd2shoe]

That's a new one. I've heard all kinds of bizarre falsehoods and misunderstandings, but confusing Mormonism with Islam? That would be funny if the implications weren't so severe.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[bjdevil66]

...Joseph Smith's story about the golden plates that no-one ever saw...

Does that include the eleven men who saw them - most of which left the church completely within ten years but still never denied seeing them? That is undisputed, historical fact.

and his excuses for why he couldn't translate the same transcript the same way twice.

That's assuming that the people that took the 1st transcript had truly altruistic and pure motives, and weren't just out to debunk the "prophet" by dishonestly altering the 1st and saying, "See - you aren't a real prophet because they don't match," when the 2nd translation of the same work came out. "Religious" people have never used logic like, "The ends justify the means", right?

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[bjdevil66]

Testifying to have simply seen a book made of gold (that's all 8 claimed to have seen - nothing "divine", just a book of golden "plates") isn't exactly on the same level as claiming to have seen a dead mean standing on a cloud, is it?

More importantly, if eleven people - all of which had good reason to lie about it out of spite but still didn't - testified of something in court today under oath that you're arguing against, and you had no physical proof to stand against it, you'd better have a REALLY good lawyer 'cause you're gonna lose.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[GeekBoy]

Romney will only help to normalize Mormonism if he gets elected. That said, he's going to reinforce skewed stereotypes to many people regardless.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[kaatochacha]

You should ignore the "facts" if you never actually saw the homeless guy, but were relying on news reports and other people telling you, in breathless tones, about how crazy the guy on the corner is.
That's what we're getting in this election cycle: all news has been spun and blended.
think about it this way, what headlines have you been seeing:

"Romney gaffes about windows on planes opening"
"Romney calms wife with joke about plane"
"Romney bravely carries on in face of wife's danger".

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[tbannist]

Ignoring all of the other crazy Morman stuff for the moment, Mormans also have magic underwear.

They're probably no more crazy than any other religious fundamentalists, but that is a really low bar.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[kaatochacha]

Sez the AC...

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[BeansBaxter]

Well said. From the other side try being a Mormon anywhere else. See how you get treated there.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[gd2shoe]

The one that helped John Smith with his "translations." I suppose I should say Mormons let the words of a magic rock dictate their beliefs. Is that better?

No, but at least you're being clear now.

Today, if I want to read the word of God, I can sit down at a magic box, wave my fingers around, and it will tell me the exact passages that I asked for. Seems absolutely crazy, doesn't it?

Once you accept the bare concept of a Divine being, one must accept the probability that said being knows a lot more about possible technology than we do. (read: the use of science that is currently beyond our understanding)

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[kaatochacha]

replace "guns" with "popular boy singer" and you've just described lots of teenage girls' facebook accounts.
I'm sure a coin collector might rattle on about coins.
car enthusiasts spend all day on vehicle minutiae.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[gd2shoe]

Ah, you've been reading bad fiction again. I can count the truths in that link on one hand.

Yes, Mormons wear symbolic undergarments. They are disparagingly referred to as "magic underwear". Everything else on that page was written by someone with an ax to grind.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[kaatochacha]

I'm an American conservative, and I don't care if you're blue, green, white or brown: you're still a dick.
Or should I run on the old diatribe that your'e a communist?
No, wait, I don't go with the knee jerk stereotypical viewpoints, so I won't.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[HornWumpus]

Joe's revelations occurred recently enough that we can examine some of the evidence.

Chewy and Mo's revelations occurred so long ago there is no hope of checking up on them. Though there are some stories in the Koran related to Abraham that correspond to common old biblical translation errors as well.

Which means to be a Mormon you have to be able to rationalize the exact same translation errors in Joe's bible somehow also occurring in the 'divinely revealed translations from Egyptian' that Joe allegedly got from an angel/rock/hat. Seems including a couple of chapters of the bible as credibility padding was a bad call.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[HornWumpus]

The question becomes why would God include translation errors from the King James Bible in the translations from Egyptian that he sends to a modern Prophet?

Must be to test our faith.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[PopeRatzo]

No one takes ancient greek mythology seriously, nor the Norse gods.

Apparently you didn't see Thor.

Dude was bad-ass with that hammer.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[PopeRatzo]

Since Jesus was voted as a god only 2 centuries later, I guess you used a bad example.

Maybe yes, maybe no.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[GeekBoy]

How about... in the global pool of religions, where one is just as silly as the next, I picked the one that I figured was the most interesting and least dangerous.

Good enough for you or are you an 1) atheist or 2) evangelical looking to pick a fight? If so, I really don't care what you think.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[neo8750]

Its only bad if it's not your church doing it (read as not the catholic church) Because this has been going on for years and no one has ever complained before. Just saying. Not implying you are catholic or any religious domination BTW.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[ceoyoyo]

I will freely stipulate that believing the word of a magic rock is not any more crazy than believing in an omnipotent god, or believing that god chose to communicate through the writings of a number of Jewish misfits, kings and other personalities, heavily edited and selected by (very human) committee.

Although, since only John Smith was allowed to hear the rock talk, some people might consider it a little more fallible (although I'm not sure why). Those suspicions might be reinforced when they discover that John Smith's published (revelatory) translations of certain Egyptian hieroglyphic documents, produced before anyone knew how to read hieroglyphics, are inconsistent with the rosetta stone, everything else that's known about hieroglyphics, and are complete fabrications in the expert opinions of modern egyptologists.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Mr.Intel]

If Mormons can't see past one dev, can't see that Linus is just one cog in a very large machine, that's their problem and not his.

Don't worry... most of us are fairly even keeled. Bigoted attacks on my religion, I can handle. Ad hominem attacks on my personal views? No problem. Just don't take away my tax credits for charitable contributions. I'd much rather support the homeless than Uncle Sam.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Cinder6]

I've always been somewhat baffled by some of the misconceptions towards the Mormons. I'm not Mormon myself (or even religious, for that matter), nor do I ever plan to be, but I have nothing against them. My brother and his family are Mormon, and several of my best friends are Mormon, so I've had a lot of exposure, even unto attending Mormon church services now and then. My impression as an outsider is this: While I don't agree with everything about the Mormon faith, I have to admit that the Mormons I've known have been some of the nicest people I know.

Granted, I don't live in Utah or Arizona (I'm in California, so reasonably close), but I've been to Salt Lake City and had no negative experiences there. There are always bad people in every religion who give it a bad name--just look at what's happening in the Muslim world right now. The bad things the Mormons do (excluding blacks until the late 1970s, the polygamist compounds in Arizona, etc.), however, are a lot less troublesome than that another, larger religion I already mentioned.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Cinder6]

Belonging to Scientology also entails spending tens of thousands of dollars for "auditing" and "reprogramming", excommunication of people (even family members) that speak out against Scientology, suing people to oblivion (as you mentioned) for the same, and other things. The Mormons? Eh, they're just generally nice and helpful. We once had a bunch of Mormon missionaries offer to come over and help us hang up Christmas lights, despite the fact that we're neither Mormon nor have any intent to become Mormon.

My point is, what they did in the past is inconsequential. What they do now is important for anyone considering joining their faith. It's like saying you would refuse to move to the US because we once had slaves. Everyone has skeletons in their closet--it's just that Scientology has its skeletons on display and is quite proud of them.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Cinder6]

Why is it crazy to be very interested in guns, when you consider the huge variety of manufacturers, models, types, etc., as well as the long history of firearms in general? I know plenty of people that are "car nuts", but nobody thinks they're crazy. Is it because guns can be used in violence? Then why do most people (so far as I know) have no issue with martial arts enthusiasts, which often includes the study of swords or other weapons?

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Cinder6]

What I find more disturbing than the Mormons' undergarments (which seem to me to be analogous to wearing a cross or other religious symbol) is that your source for information on them is Urban Dictionary.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[orgelspieler]

Wikipedia says the Joseph Smith Papers are published by the LDS. So I doubt there's a smoking gun in there. It's not like he said "If you want to get rich, you start a religion." People know all the crazy shit about Scientology, but they're still a growing religion. So faith is harder to shatter than you think. Cases in point: People still have faith that there were WMDs in Iraq (32% in May) and that Obama is a secret Muslim (17% in July).

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[MartinSchou]

Personally I don't want to single out any one religion - major or not.

If you, as an adult, believe in some supernatural being that there is no testable evidence in support of, be it God, Jahwe, Allah, unicorns, angels, demons, Easter bunnies, visiting space aliens, ghosts, fairies or whatever else you can think of, I reserve the right to think of you as being batshit cray.

You may be an all round nice person, hell you may even be quite intelligent, and you're free to believe anything you want - but you're still batshit crazy.

I just picked some of the (in my opinion) crazy things, stereotypes and myths that are prevelant about Mormons, as that is Romney's religion.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[unimacs]

My point is that we all probably believe stuff that's not even close to being accurate. Many of us are even passionate about these things that we've been taught or that we'd really really like to believe because they fit our world view. That doesn't make us crazy. It makes us normal.

The minute you start treating somebody like they're batshit crazy, you've severely diminished any chance of getting them to see your side.

Why do you think congress has such a hard time getting anything accomplished? It's because they're so bent on diminishing the other side's position that it makes agreeing with each other on anything extremely difficult.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[ceoyoyo]

Scientology is young. As I said, when Mormonism was the same age they were practicing human sacrifice in their own theocracy. Scientologists are a bunch of amateurs when it comes to religious extremism. Modern Mormons are mostly (mostly, there are still quite a few crazy, polygamous, child abusing ones with guns that ALSO make Scientologists look cute) pretty mainstream people but it took years, violence and some artillery to encourage them to be that way.

Not that even modern, mainstream Mormons are entirely cuddly. They still do obnoxious things like baptizing people against their will and barring families from participating in or even watching weddings if they're not Mormon.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[WeatherServo9]

argh, selected wrong moderation; posting to undo

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[KeensMustard]

The most ironic thing is that atheism has become the new hate.

It's a fairly common character weakness to want to blame the world's ills on some "other" - on a group of faceless caricatures who differ from the "us" in some arbitrary way. The world's ills are the fault of the black, the jew, the brown immigrant, the arab, the gay, the muslim, the theist.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Machtyn]

I completely agree with this. As a full on Romney supporter, Linus words only reflect poorly on his own judgment, not that of the community's. Linux is still a great OS and group of millions of users and developers. We all have our own political opinions.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[nilbog]

To be fair, all that stuff happened to the Mormons because of how they were acting towards their neighbors.

Joseph Smith was tarred and feathered not by an angry "anti-mormon" mob but by his own people for trying to get John Johnson's 15 year old daughter to be one of his plural wives (some time before the polygamy doctrine was revealed). This, by the way, he did several times successfully - marrying several teenagers women who were already married to other men (as you can confirm on familysearch.org). It wasn't hard to get a bunch of people to help tar and feather Joseph because they had all given their money to Joseph's Bank of Kirtland which promptly failed and suddenly there money was gone (it had gone to pay Joseph's debts).

Further, Governor Boggs was against the mormons because Joseph Smith had prophisied the untimely demise of Boggs just before one of his destroying angels showed up (Porter Rockwell) and shot him four times in the head (he lived). The Mormons were also playing dangerous political games and Joseph Smith (and Hyrum) were both shopping around the "mormon vote" simultaneously making friends and enemies all over the state. To top it off, Joseph Smith taught that they were to come into god's inheritance by the sword and began terrorizing and stealing from their neighboring towns.

The Haun's Mill Masacre was a really unfortunate incident, but not nearly as bad as the Mountain Meadows Massacre.

It's not at all surpising you don't hear the REAL history in Sunday School, but it does allow Mormons to walk around and play the "victim card" every time their history is brought up. Unfortunately, people who actually have a clue about what happened just laugh in their faces.

P.S. Feel free to disregard the above true history of events as "anti-mormon" propaganda. I'm sure the church's version is completely unbiased.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[MysteriousPreacher]

The OSS movement shouldn't care about what other people think. Software is created and put out in the wild in the hope that others will benefit. Whether a particular class of people use it or not is typically irrelevant (unless they are the target of the software). The only people who are likely to greatly care about this are the people trying to make money off of open source software.

Is there an problem in trying to make off of open source software?

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[MartinSchou]

I'll give you a less problematic example, Pi.

My father, born in 1944, and very good at the mates he's been taught (left school after 7th grade).

It took me about ten minutes to make him grasp the concept of imaginary numbers by using the two,dimensional number line.

Smart. Quick to learn. Refuses to "unlearn".

You see, back in his school days, they were taught that Pi = 22/7. It wasn't an approximation - that was the exact value.

So far I think I've spent close to ten hours, trying every conceivable way I can think of, to demonstrate why 22/7th isn't Pi, but he believes in that particular dogma.

THAT makes him batshit crazy. In a fairly limited scope, but he's still btshit crazy, when he not only believes that Pi is 22/7th, but will actively reject out of hand, proof that goes against his claim, at one point even saying, essentially, just because those guys (the expert mathematicians) say its a different number, that doesn't make my teacher wrong, nor does it mean that I misundertood - 22/7th isn't an approximation of Pi, it IS Pi.

You cannot argue with batshit crazy people, even when they're otherwise extremely lovely people that you know, care about and love!

When he gets into one of those moods, tell him that I have interest in the discussions, and I'll leave. And when he asks why, I tell him exactly why.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Quanticfx]

Living in AZ I've seen some of the things you mention.

Mormons do seem a bit more cliquey than some of the other religions though. When I first moved into my neighborhood I had a few of the Mormon neighbors come over and talk to me on a somewhat regular basis. As they got to know me and eventually find out I'm agnostic, and would not be converting, they stopped talking to me, not slowly one by one but all at once. This being my first dealings with any Mormons I was kind of taken aback.

One of the guys I work with, and is married to a Mormon but isn't Mormon himself, confirmed that's generally how it is and that they are a very tight knit group.

This is just a single anecdote from my limited experience so take it with a grain of salt.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[BasilBrush]

And your parents being Mormon was just a coincidence?

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[GeekBoy]

Lol. I've heard it all before. J.Smith wasn't the only one tarred and feathered, or murdered. But it must all be the mormon's fault. What bad neighbors they were. (If I was treated how they were treated I might not be such a nice neighbor either.) Because his actions justify the rape and murder of others, including women and children. Right.....

There's lots of problems with the so called evidence of J.Smith being an early womanizer. The story of Marinda Johnson is complete with contradictions. At the end of the day, the attack against him had little to do with supposed womanizing, accusations of which don't show up until long after the events (like 12 years later.) Go read the other side of the story. http://en.fairmormon.org/Polygamy_book/Early_womanizer

Boggs was shot by an unknown assailant and your 'prophesy' is based on the imagination of John Bennett, an active anti-mormon who was booted out for homosexuality, adultery, performing of abortions and polygamy, among other things. He was given more than one chance once caught. He actually vowed to drink the blood of J.S. he hated him so much. Yeah, I'm going to take his word for it as the unbiased party.

And really, Haun's mill not as bad? Really? I suppose it was all Brigham's fault; they must have brought it on themselves they did. Yup, that justifies all the persecution they got. I'm not defending the MMM. It was very unfortunate, but I can also understand how people who had repeatedly persecuted and driven out of the US, with an army coming to exterminate them might get jumpy and do something stupid. But of course that doesn't matter to you because you are apparently smarter than the rest of us and are yourself a completely unbiased party. So we must have deserved it. Question, do you say the same thing about the holocaust?

The only thing I agree with you on is the politics. People in the area were terrified of the 'mormon' vote b/c they would vote as a block; but not the nonsense about inheriting by the sword and terrorizing neighboring towns. (You don't mean those towns that sent mobs to burn them out of their homes in the middle of the night do you? Certainly not the ones where little children had to walk for miles in bear feet in the middle of winter over the frozen stubble of wheat fields that cut up their feet and left trails of blood? Not the ones where many of those children died from exposure? Certainly not those ones... because all those towns folk were perfect neighbors. )

What, because I don't believe all of your 'evidence' from the people who were trying to destroy them I'm clueless? Hmm.. maybe you're just a bigot. My guess is your either an evangelical who 'loves' us or an ex mormon. Either way, all your repeating is tired old allegations we've heard for 100 years now, or more.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[GeekBoy]

Maybe you should also mention that Boggs was the one who put out the extermination order.... and that one of the reasons so many people hated the mormons wasn't because of polygamy (which wasn't an official practice until 12 years later) but because the Mormons were anti-slavery and treated blacks and natives as equals and even wanted women to vote! Those nasty backwards mormons.

For those of you still thinking in stereotypes, women living in polygamous mormon families (not anything like what the fundamentalists do today) weren't married off under age, most often had their own houses, were educated, had the right to vote (yes, they were the first women with the right to vote in north america) and often ran their own businesses. The abolishment of polygamy in Utah set women's rights back 100 years for them.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[GeekBoy]

Father is Catholic, mother was United. You just assumed my parents are Mormon.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[nilbog]

So why do you think the mormons were so persecuted? Does your version of reality really include the possibility that the people around wherever the Mormons were just hated the truth so much they wanted to murder Mormons? The idea is ridiculous. The people around the mormons were REACTING to the mormons building an army and the rhetoric from Joseph Smith about establishing God's Kingdom throughout the whole earth. Yea the people did awful things, but the mormons were doing awful things to them as well, and not just in reaction to what was being done to them. Had the mormons lived peacefully with their neighbors there would not have been problems. Modern day Mormons don't seem to be having any trouble, because Mormonism has become a peaceful religion.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[GeekBoy]

There were many drivers to why people hated the mormons back in the day, not just reactions to the mormons. Geez if your reactions to your neighbours leads you to rape, pillage and kill them I'm not going to blame it on them. Everyone is accountable for *how* they react to things. It was impossible for them to live 'peacefully' with their neighbours, that's a naive thing to say. 19th century USA wasn't exactly the place of tolerance and acceptance for people who are different. Mormonism was *always* a peaceful religion, it didn't just become one. The thing is that religions are made up of people, and when you push people enough they eventually push back. I hear lots of people on this thread saying that Linus should speak his mind no matter whether it's politically correct or not. Yet when we get to the mormons any time they pushed back or spoke up it's somehow not ok. Double standard much?

Here are some of the *real* reasons why mormons were hated:
1) Mormon theology was by 19th century norms, unorthodox, and in the 1840's when J.S. introduced many new ideas, heretical. When J.S. started talking about gold plates the persecution was either from other pastors who found it heretical (revelation is gone! the heavens are closed! everyone knows that!) or from people who wanted to steal them from him.
2) Mormon theology and cosmology was very attractive. When mormonism first came on the scene people converted in droves. Entire congregations converted en-mass leaving many pastors without livelihoods. (That's what happened with Sydney Rigdon.) Those pastors saw it as a huge threat both doctrinally and financially. They didn't take it lying down, in fact much of the earliest and most vociferous persecution comes as a result of this.
3) Mormons were very insular. They tended to only patronize businesses that were also mormon. There were many reasons for this, such as people poising the wine they sold them for sacrament services, but they also to blame.
4) Joseph Smith was quite egalitarian. He believed in freedom and equality for all people. He even ordained blacks to the priesthood. Unfortunately that brought a lot of persecution and he stopped the practise. (Again, unfortunately he didn't really explain why he stopped it and no one resumed it again until the 1970's but that's another discussion.) You have this against the backdrop of mounting tensions that eventually lead to the civil war. People accused them of stirring up the indians and blacks to rebellion because they were teaching them that they were and should be equal to whites.
5) The failure of the kirkland bank pissed off a lot of people, both mormon and non-mormon. There are a lot of reasons why it failed. If you are interested you can read the LDS side of the story here: http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_church_finances/Kirtland_Safety_Society
6) Early mormon converts typically came from poverty or lower class backgrounds. Middle & Upper class people largely looked down on them and saw them as a threat. They feared being over-run by the poor and needy, largely b/c of the next point.
7) Politics as I already mentioned. J.S. run for president scared a lot of people as did his prophecy that the new jerusalem would be in jackson county. (had nothing to do with an prophesy about gods kingdom over the whole earth. In fact most 19th century protestants believed that was going to happen anyway at the time of christ's second coming.) People there feared the mormons would overwhelm them and drive them out. The opposite happened of course.
8) Immigration. The LDS church brought a lot of poor foreigners into the areas where they lived. Locals saw it as an economic threat.
9) Polygamy in the Navoo period. It scandalized most europeans. Although there was good and bad elements to it it's not what people think of today when they look at the mormon fundamentalists. A very small percentage of people practised it and usually if you had money you got

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[CptNerd]

Snap!

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Brad1138]

It is less, "look at this cool gun" and more, "your a fucking communist/socialist/liberal idiot if you don't think your life should revolve around guns".

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[flyneye]

I came from a small community in a different state with an RLDS church. It's members were upstanding members of the community and mixed well. No problems.
I lived in AZ during the when political nepotism and corruption of the Ed Meecham administration, and the dumping of misbehaved Mormon children from some Utah back water sects into the streets of Phoenix.
I, personally, can recognize that like there are backwater factions of Islam and Christendom that abuse the imagined limits of their faith, there are Mormon factions that upset others with their extreme actions as well. Like marrying multiple child-brides and running a dictatorial community along with criminal violence.
Generally, I still think of Donny and Marie though.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Imsdal]

After about 300 years. No, not a joke, unfortunately.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Sigg3.net]

You are both generalizing from single events.

And off-topic at that. You may have a lot of great people in Mormonism, but that doesn't mean their ideas are not crazy.

  People getting out of Scientology also say one of the reasons they joined were all the great people.

Mormonism is a telltale sign of wanting to change the center of the world from the old Empire in Rome to the American Empire in the west. That's what it is.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Sigg3.net]

There's an even older saying: there's the truth, there's being mean, and it's being Finnish.

Seriously, Torvald's a meek lamb compared to his countrymen.

I don't expect any American to understand what 'culture' means, but in reference to Torvald's "outbursts" he is being funny in Finnish.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[Anonymous Coward]

I recently moved to Utah and found out the hard way if you are not of the Mormon faith you are merely tolerated. I visited the church numerous times to find out for myself what the religion is about. I have read the Book of Mormon and listened to the tapes given to me by an Elder to become familiar with.

One thing I can say is they have pages of top notch jobs listed on the bulletin boards which are to be filled only by Mormons.
    I do take responsibility for my own life but I saw the same thing in San Diego. 27 pages of really good jobs listed only for members of the church.

  Neighbors will treat you with tolerance but not much more. I also found out if my son got married in the temple I would not be allowed to attend. I am not worthy.

  Overall, I personally feel like "cult" is an appropriate use of the word. I see the polygamists in the stores and want to weep for the young girls. Yes, I know that is FLDS but still is supported by the church whether or not you admit it.

  Recently, the Democratic offices that opened were attacked with rocks. Cars are scratched if you dare sport an Obama sticker, tires have been slashed on those displaying democrat stickers.
The church does in fact tell you how to vote. Sometimes it's outright and other times it is more implied. And the flock does exactly what they are told to do.

I am petrified at the thought of a Mormon with the status that Romney carries in the church becoming our president. It keeps me awake at night. I have been here 5 years because I lost so much money in the housing crunch and I don't run from my obligations. But as soon as I can sell I am out of here. It's like living in the twilight zone.
So it is not whining, it is not shifting blame, it is indeed the truth if you are NOT a Mormon and live in Utah. And the really scary thing is it is growing at a rate unlike any religion I have ever seen.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[steelyeyedmissileman]

I know I may be a little late to the conversation here, but:

Though I admit, getting my very own planet in the afterlife is a pretty tempting proposition.

From Mormonism-101

Do Latter-day Saints believe that they will “get their own planet”?
No. This idea is not taught in Latter-day Saint scripture, nor is it a doctrine of the Church. This misunderstanding stems from speculative comments unreflective of scriptural doctrine. Mormons believe that we are all sons and daughters of God and that all of us have the potential to grow during and after this life to become like our Heavenly Father (see Romans 8:16-17). The Church does not and has never purported to fully understand the specifics of Christ’s statement that “in my Father’s house are many mansions” (John 14:2).

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[steelyeyedmissileman]

I know one family of Mormons and I have to agree, for the most part, they are batshit crazy.

(emphasis added)

In no way is this exclusive to mormonism.

Can we all stop applying single data points to a broad culture? In no way is this inclusive of Mormonism either, nor to religion as a whole. Some people who ascribe themselves as Mormons or any other religion, perhaps, but not to religion (including the LDS faith) itself.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[steelyeyedmissileman]

Mormonism is quite crazy as a religious belief though their believers seem to be very nice personalities.

Do you say that because it's popular to brand the LDS religion as crazy, or do you have a specific reason to believe so? Come talk with us about what we really believe; you might be surprised. Oh, you may encounter a couple people who might encourage you to convert, maybe even the over-zealous member who says you have to convert, but you don't. It's still your choice, all the way through.

If you really don't want to risk talking to one, this page may be helpful, at least in terms of the ideas currently popular to point at.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[BasilBrush]

Just playing the odds. The vast majority of religious people believe whatever it was their parents believe. Religions survive through indoctrination, rather then being chosen on their merits.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[macgirl5150]

Sorry, don't agree. I recently moved from Southern CA to Utah. (I claim insanity) and Mormons own the state. There is no separation of church and state. The bigotry comes from the Mormons. This is not someone shifting blame or whining as you state. Rather a person who has attended the church and tithed in order to learn first hand about this religion. Truth - Both in SOCAL and Utah the church has pages upon pages of unadvertised top notch and much desired job openings. These listings are not open to the public and the Mormon church members are usually the ones doing the hiring as well. They have positioned themselves into almost every level of government and people better start waking up to take notice. If you are NOT Mormon you will be tolerated at best by your neighbors. You will be monitored by them as well. If you are a democrat you will be shunned. In some cases, your property may be destroyed. If your child decides to be a Mormon and is allowed to marry in the church, the parents will not be allowed to witness this or enter the temple (if they are not Mormon). You would not be worthy so you would have to attend an outside ceremony. If a doctor makes a mistake, good luck finding an attorney who will take a case. "Everyone makes mistakes" If you have any sort of criminal record (even from years ago) you will not be able to rent a place. Not even at a trailer park. You are told how to vote in the church. If not blatantly then it it insinuated. Oh, yes it is true. And the flock listens. If you are gay, might as well keep on going. There is no place for you. If you are a woman and not married when you die, you will not reach heaven but will forever be only a handmaiden to God. I could go on and on but this really isn't the right venue I guess. I just feel it is necessary to try to let people know how dangerous it is to let Romney in the White House. It scares me so badly I can't sleep at night. If I had not lost so much in the housing crash I would not be in this state as it is very oppressing and it is indeed run by the church. But I am not one to run from my obligations so I am stuck here for a while longer. Not every person who is a Mormon is evil. But I would classify this more of a cult than religion. Well, I feel most religions are close to being cults, but this one is something you should investigate before voting this November. Free country and all that, but this group is not welcoming to anyone with a past, they are not forgiving as they would have you believe, and if you are black or gay, or got in trouble with the law, move on. You are not welcome. Only recently were black men even allowed in the church or allowed to become elders. Seems sort of wrong to me. So to the person who says they are persecuted for being Mormon, PUHLEASE! Not in Utah where the mother ship is from! Nor Arizona,or Idaho where the church has a strong hold. The church even has strong ties with Las Vegas. I have posted these words not in hate nor bigotry and I only treat people with the respect they deserve but come on. I am tired of the propaganda being doled out. I must post anonymously for fear of retaliation. Even this is risky.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[GeekBoy]

I would agree with you that this often happens, people born into a religion are more likely to stay within that religion, but that's a generalization that has as more to do with the strength of socio-cultural influences than anything. That said, in my experience I have seen a lot of people, both former atheists and people from other religious backgrounds convert to Mormonism (I teach a class for 'investigators' / new members.)

Bringing in new converts is a fairly common occurrence, so I don't buy into the hypothesis that religions survive through indoctrination, certainly not that religions survive *only* through indoctrination. I know that atheists typically carry this assumption (being a former atheist myself) that if religious people just knew the 'facts' they wouldn't be religious any more. (Certainly evangelicals believe that about mormonism, just see my other posts in this thread.) However, that's not actually true (otherwise how do new religious movements form and grow and in some small cases, go on to become world religions? ) There are a lot of reasons why people decide to believe, or come to believe in a certain faith tradition and they almost never have anything to do with science. What is scientifically right or wrong often doesn't matter to the average person, they have their own criteria. I think to try and generalize it down to lack of knowledge, lack of intelligence or some other common factor is going to lead you to some very false stereotypes.

One last thing, converts always choose their new faith based on the 'merits,' even if those merits are totally subjective and relate only to them, so again, I would disagree with your general assumption.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[godefroi]

I believe the Mormons would say, "your bible is wrong." I also believe that's not uncommon, to prefer various slightly-different translations or interpretations of the bible.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[argStyopa]

Or, one might say that it's unprofessional for actors and actresses to vent like this JUST LIKE it's unprofessional for him.

Then again, they're professional narcissists, so it makes sense that they think everyone cares about their opinions.

(I don't think it was unprofessional of him; he was stating his opinion, who cares? Just pointing out the begged question in your point.)

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[BasilBrush]

that's a generalization that has as more to do with the strength of socio-cultural influences than anything.

That's true. We see it often in western Jews and Muslims, where they still identify themselves as part of their religious group, and follow some of the practices, even when many of them don't actually believe in a god.

(otherwise how do new religious movements form and grow and in some small cases, go on to become world religions?)

That's an interesting question. Let's ignore the ones that sprung up before modern science, as without scientific understanding, mysticism was the only explanation on offer for many things. Origin of species was in 1859, but it took some time to become accepted as mainstream science, so lets say religions in the 20th century.

So what have we got? Scientology, Thelema and Wicca.

Oops, battery on laptop running low... will come back to this...

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[tqk]

Could he have used more mature words?

If you're speaking to your grandmother, mature words shows respect. Otherwise, "plain speaking" is preferred here. "Spit it out! What do you really want to say?!?" We can't read minds. The more effort you put into it, the more I can (potentially) get out of it. I don't much care what words, profane or otherwise, you use. I can take it.

As much as I love him, Linus should stay out of politics. That stuff'll drive anybody insane. It's not simple !@#$ like nVidia kernel drivers.

Now, I think I'm going to go bang my head on the stack of math books I've accumulated over the years but never did crack open. That should fill a day. :-|

[Linus, you still rock. Keep on keepin' on. Go hug your wife!]

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[GeekBoy]

Are you counting only completely new theologies or new religious movements, because there are a lot. You can see a list of some of them here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_new_religious_movements

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[HornWumpus]

No, the King James Bible that Joe had included translation errors that have sense been corrected. Nobody disputes that these were translation errors, not even Mormons.

The versions included in the book of Mormon had the exact same translation errors as Joe's copy.

There are three explanations: 1. Joe was a grifter and simply copied from his KJB. 2. God caused Joe to read the incorrect versions when transcribing the plates, she works in mysterious ways. 3. Joe mentally switched in the incorrect version because he was so familiar with the bad translations.

Mormons prefer option 3. But the book of Mormon is still the inerrant inspired word of God, despite any errors.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[tqk]

Bright or not, that would be caving to alleged mormon influence, as in "don't piss us off or we will hurt you"

Get the fuck off my lawn before I shoot you.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[tqk]

It's not really that surprising that he's blunt and outspoken.

That may be the understatement of all time. Linus pulls no punches. I wonder how his wife manages to deal with him. I love the guy, but holy crap, reading kernel devel stuff is scary at times.

Torvalds vs. Cox, death match, with Tanenbaum cheering from the sidelines!!!111

$dmr nods from the afterlife (sadly).

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[tqk]

If they have a problem with being called batshit crazy, then they should stop acting batshit crazy.

Ya know, I tell people that all the time. It doesn't do any good. Nobody wants to hear the truth.

I can lift 300 lbs over my head and still, nobody likes me! Well maybe you're a dick?

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[shentino]

Half of those excuses are just people being bigoted against mormons, but the other half look like complaints about actual mormons being elitist against non members.

There is a difference between the two, namely in who is being the jerk. It is wise not to confuse the two.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[shentino]

My statement stands regardless of which religion is doing it though.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[shentino]

If you read closer, my statement was qualified as a response to a previous statement that was conditional.

Re:idiotic politically correct fears indeed

[gd2shoe]

No, I read that. That's where the word "allegedly" came into play.

Your post never actually made an accusation. This is true. I never said that it did. What it did to was make a strong insinuation.

I was pointing out how rude it had been. I still hope it was unintentional, but it was entirely uncalled for, as framed.

My 2 cents

[thammoud]

Linus is a brilliant asshole and Romney is an incompetent Moron.

Re:My 2 cents

[poly_pusher]

You misspelled Mormon...

Re:My 2 cents

[Holi]

no he didn't

Re:My 2 cents

[Dahamma]

Linus is a brilliant asshole and Romney is an incompetent Mormon.

Fixed that for ya, according to Linus, at least.

Personally, I think calling Mormons "batshit insane" makes about as much sense as calling someone who thinks a potato is God insane when everyone else worships a tomato.

Though I also don't think Romney is incompetent or a moron, he's very smart and has been extremely successful in everything he's done. He just has morals and opinions which are contrary to the general welfare of the majority of the US population, and doesn't seem to care about that discrepancy. i.e. he's a Republican...

Apparently They Think This Might Deter New Users

[eldavojohn]

"does such outspokenness on non-technical matters reflect poorly on the Linux community that Torvalds leads?"

Every member of the Linux community checks to see what Linus is wearing before getting dressed in the morning, right? No? Then why are you asking such an apparently stupid question?

I assume it was from this part of the "article":

In the comments on that Google+ post, David Stilson, an IT professional from San Diego writes: "I am surprised to see all of these visceral attacks on Romney and each other. When did all the Linux nerds lose their logical approach to problem solving? People install Linux in part due to the fact that they are joining a community of supportive users. If you were new to Linux would you install it after reading these posts?"

Luckily for new Linux users, they don't have to go to Linus' Google+ page nor do they have to read through random comments on it to download a distribution of Linux. Furthermore people who participate in open source are still, believe it or not, allowed to be humans! (crazy, I know)

I'm sure if you read all of Steve Ballmer's personal e-mails and political statements you could say something equally vapid about Windows and all Microsoft products.

Some points

[grouchomarxist]

Some points:

1. All religion is bats**t crazy. Mormonism is just bats**t crazy with nuts on top.

2. Linus is probably one of the most important figures in the technology industry during the last 20 years or so. Because of that he is a public figure, so like Romney his offhand statements are bound to be criticized, analyzed, etc. He's much less of a public figure than most politicians so he probably isn't used to this as much, but I guess he'll have to. However, he's not a politician, he's a technical leader, so I think people *should* lay off analyzing such comments.

3. Linus is known for speaking his mind and being somewhat harsh. I don't think Linux would have happened otherwise. However, compared to RMS, Linus is a real gentleman.

Re:Some points

[aNonnyMouseCowered]

"However, compared to RMS, Linus is a real gentleman."

In public, yes. We've heard enough "horror stories" about RMS losing his cool at some public event, while most photos and videos I've seen of Linus show him with an idiotic smile plastered on his face, a seemingly really fun guy to be with. The problem is Linus tends to "write" out his mind. Read RMS's angstiest writings. He never calls anyone batshit moronic, although he's called the members of Congress, "congresscritters".

And why pick on Mormons, who've never, as far as I can tell, been known to blow up people they disagree with?

Re:Some points

[kenorland]

Linus is probably one of the most important figures in the technology industry during the last 20 years or so

True, but so is Bill Gates. Just because their products are popular doesn't mean that they are technically good.

I have respect for Linus's C coding skills and persistence, and I am thankful for his hard work. On pretty much all other issues, I think he is himself what he accused Romney to be.

Re:Some points

[osu-neko]

And why pick on Mormons, who've never, as far as I can tell, been known to blow up people they disagree with?

Not having a propensity to blow themselves and other people up with them is a nice attribute, and Mormons are, on average, among the nicest people I've ever known. That doesn't alter the fact that a lot of what they believe is batshit-crazy, above and beyond the usual batshit-craziness of religions in general. Full disclosure: I am an ex-Mormon...

Re:Some points

[Portal1]

No they just murdered some colonists caravans in the early days, that planned to live in the same region they picked, after been kicked out of some two cities for being to radical.
Some history, they rather like to forget.
I know it has been a long time ago, and likely is not going to happen anytime soon/again.

Re:Some points

[spauldo]

You're thinking amish. Mormons can use technology just fine, they just can't wear miniskirts.

Re:Some points

[spauldo]

And why pick on Mormons, who've never, as far as I can tell, been known to blow up people they disagree with?

Every* religion has its fanatics, but they don't all blow people up. They might kill you (Christian fanatics vs. abortion doctors), wage a war on you (catholic vs. protestant in Northern Ireland, Shia-Sunni conflicts), take away your rights (Christian fanatics with blue laws, countries with Islamic law), or force their ideas onto you and your children (Intelligent Design, Hamas' anti-Jewish children's shows). Mormon fanatics are the ones that still practice polygamy and force young girls into marriage.

Normal Mormons of course are just regular people with some strange beliefs, but really, most of the strangeness was already in Christianity anyway (God created a huge, vast universe with uncountable stars and planets, with relativistic and quantum effects, and he really gives a shit who you like to poke your dick into?). I find it easier to believe that some guy found some gold plates and transcribed them than to believe that the word of God has passed down thousands of years without anyone tampering with it for their own benefit.

*OK, I've never met a pastafarian fanatic, but it's possible. I am curious what a Buddhist fanatic would be like.

Re:Some points

[Anonymous Coward]

In their partial defense, how many Mormons do you think *really* wake up every morning and go through tier day fixated about Joseph Smith's artifacts, Moroni, or the weirder aspects of Mormonism? I'd venture a guess that it's about the same percentage as the number of Roman Catholics who wake up every morning and consciously spend their day fixated upon virgin birth, bread and wine somehow being God's flesh and blood despite having no scientifically-detectable change, or the ratio of Jews who really, truly believe Moses conversed with a burning bush and personally parted the red sea. Or, for that matter, the number of Scientologists who really believe Xenu transported bodies to earth in spaceships that looked like B-52 bombers.

Every religion has wacky, dark corners where nobody really wants to dig too hard because it's just too... weird... even for the most devout believers who are nevertheless unafflicted by mild schizophrenia. It's not a huge exaggeration to say that most American Catholics basically view the bible as a work of inspired fiction, and are largely indifferent to theological matters in general. They don't challenge the Pope's views about Mary's virginity, because they don't particularly *care* one way or another. They might think they'll go to hell for accidentally eating a Big Mac on Friday during Lent, and they might let their parents twist their arms into dragging the kids to church on Easter & Christmas, but that's pretty much the extent of their religious beliefs.

Mainstream Mormons aren't all that different. Most of them rarely think about religion at all, especially the ones who grew up and live in Utah. To them, Mormonism is cultural background noise that defines their outlook in subtle and not-so-subtle ways, but mostly it's just the way things are, and Mormons from Utah who move elsewhere get pretty traumatized when it starts to sink in that most people think beliefs they've always just kind of taken for granted are wacky and weird.

Re:Some points

[bobaferret]

You should check this out

Obviously modern mormans aren't this bad.... But they definatly have done some aweful things over the years. Of course, what religion hasn't?

Re:Some points

[Enigma2175]

And why pick on Mormons, who've never, as far as I can tell, been known to blow up people they disagree with?

I guess Mark Hofmann didn't get the memo.

Re:Some points

[aNonnyMouseCowered]

Okay, they've done some crazy shit in the past. But like you said, all religions and ideologies, even nominally peaceful ones, have done terrible things in the name of their beliefs, possibly with the exception of the Jains (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jainism)

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[ArcherB]

Allowing aircraft windows to be opened is recipe for disaster, pressure and whatnot.

I've opened the window on a plane. I've even opened the door on a plane. If you are at a low enough altitude, it doesn't matter. Of course, I was on a plane that probably wouldn't make it to an altitude that is unsafe, but it was an aircraft and opening them was not a recipe for disaster. The damn thing had air vents!

I don't ask Romney to fix kernel bugs just as I don't look to Linux for political advice. Both should stick to what they know.

The idea isn't so crazy.

[BMOC]

It is not unusual for emergency exit doors over wings to have windows in them. It is not unusual for normal boarding doors to have windows in them. There is nothing in engineering or science that precludes the idea of an airliner with pressure-rated window-doors that have an arm-able open for passengers. The only thing preventing aircraft designers from doing this is expense and weight. There's no reason it couldn't be done, just like there's no reason airbags couldn't be installed to prevent passenger injuries in crashes. At some point you make engineering tradeoffs. Romney isn't crazy for suggesting this. But an airplane manufacturer might be crazy to build one.

Re:The idea isn't so crazy.

[BMOC]

Who said anything about opening them in flight? The fact is, you could, in theory, put pressure-rated-window-doors all along the side of every airliner. No need to open them in flight, bailing-out at altitude isn't what anyone was suggesting. What was suggested was being able to simply blow out a side of the aircraft after a crash. In this way you could make any portion of the hull an escape route in the event you survived a crash. This relieves congestion, and makes it much easier for evacuation from a burning plane on the ground.

To people who think clearly

[MpVpRb]

Romney is a politician who will say anything to get elected

To people who hate Democrats

He's the guy running against the Democrat..or as my father used to call them "dummy-craps"

BTW, I am a registered Democrat

Re:To people who think clearly

[Seeteufel]

Make the parrot say: I will migrate the Federal Government to GNU/Linux.

Re:To people who think clearly

[spauldo]

He's not really talking to people who hate Democrats anymore. He did that during the primary.

Now he's talking to independent voters who don't vote straight party ticket. People who hate Democrats are going to vote for him no matter what he says.

Re:To people who think clearly

[painandgreed]

He's not really talking to people who hate Democrats anymore. He did that during the primary.

Now he's talking to independent voters who don't vote straight party ticket. People who hate Democrats are going to vote for him no matter what he says.

No, he'll continue to talk to the people who hate Democrats. The election is not just about getting the undecided voters, but getting even the decided voters to not only get up and go vote on election day, but getting them to give money to help convince undecideds to vote for him as well as convincing the decideds to get out and vote. The trouble is that saying what you need to in order to get the people already on your side to actually cast that vote can often cause an undecided to go out and vote for the other guy to spite you.

I never voted for Obama. I voted against Bush, only to find out that it really didn't matter that much in the areas I cared about.

Re:To people who think clearly

[spauldo]

His message will be why people should hate Democrats, and why they should vote Republican. That message works for both the people who hate Democrats already (to keep them excited about voting) and the independants who haven't decided. As far as the content of the message, the independants are key, since he really just needs the political equivalent of pep rallies to keep the Republicans voting for him.

Um, no

[Anonymous Coward]

Romney was not talking about opening windows in flight. He was concerning about passengers getting enough oxygen during a fire inflight. Read the original quotations.

This is just an example of public figures like Linus using half-baked sources like the Huffington Post as commentary. Linus Torvalds just dropped several notches in my book for not looking up the source.

Re:Um, no

[SternisheFan]

Romney was not talking about opening windows in flight. He was concerning about passengers getting enough oxygen during a fire inflight. Read the original quotations.

This is just an example of public figures like Linus using half-baked sources like the Huffington Post as commentary. Linus Torvalds just dropped several notches in my book for not looking up the source.

So, how dumb is it to introduce fresh oxygen to a fire? Fail on all counts.

Re:Um, no

[tftp]

Linus Torvalds just dropped several notches in my book for not looking up the source.

I'm sure Anonymous Coward was never in Linus's book to begin with.

Besides, how would a thorough researcher sustain a friendly talk among close friends? "Hey, AC, you heard that $team won yesterday, what do you think?" -- "Listen, guys, I can't say a word about that for about three days, until I personally review all the tapes and read all the articles. I may need to visit the stadium and look around too." Wouldn't that style be a tad boring for an idle chat?

Re:Um, no

[dbIII]

He's obviously never sat through one of those pre-flight things where the airline stewardesses tell you about the oxygen masks that drop down.
Just another example of a wantabee Feudal Lord that is out of touch with the common rabble that can't afford their own Learjet.

Re:Um, no

[Bing Tsher E]

So, how dumb is it to introduce fresh oxygen to a fire? Fail on all counts.

Umm, when you're part of the fuel and would like to not be part of the fuel... it's not so dumb.

Figureheads

[poity]

Should keep their religious beliefs and their politics to themselves. For politicians, the latter is impossible, but the former should still apply. (that's why Republicans are somewhat more repulsive in this regard).

But, this is really a non-story in any case, neither Torvald's political opinions nor Romney's assessment of airplane windows should matter to us. (I mean if Clinton's assessment of blowjobs didn't affect his ability to act as President, then surely Romney's assessment of airplane windows couldn't either.)

Re:Figureheads

[Son of Byrne]

Should keep their religious beliefs and their politics to themselves.

I'm sorry, but the right to an opinion isn't bound by your position in society whether it is greater or less than anyone else.

Re:Figureheads

[Hardhead_7]

But, this is really a non-story in any case, neither Torvald's political opinions nor Romney's assessment of airplane windows should matter to us

Wait, you seriously think it doesn't matter if the most powerful man in America is aware of something as basic as pressurized cabins in airplanes? I mean, don't we want the President to be, you know, smart?

Re:Ask Mark Twain about calling a thing by its nam

[Sponge Bath]

It's no more crazy than any other religion. Once you cross the magic man in the sky line, the other differences are trivial.

Seriously?

[Improbus]

Linus is just saying what we are all thinking. The truth shall set you free.

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[RabidReindeer]

In later news, it was announced that Bain Capital was opening a window-screen factory for aircraft in China.

bats**t crazy comes standard with religions. Why should Romney's be any different?

Official Statement of the Open Source Community

[Bruce Perens]

This is the Official Statement of the Open Source Community: The Open Source community is amorphous, and follows no leader. Thus, nobody is capable of making an Official Statement for the Open Source Community. This has been an Official Statement of the Open Source Comunity.

Re:Official Statement of the Open Source Community

[ThatsMyNick]

May be he should add a footer to all his posts. "All opinions expressed are my own, and are not representative of the Linux/Open source community"

Re:Official Statement of the Open Source Community

[jatoo]

"All opinions expressed are my own, and are not representative of the Linux/Open source community. And if you didn't realise that already, you're a fucking moron!"

Re:Official Statement of the Open Source Community

[sjames]

People should be able to guess that based on using his personal Google+ page rather than kernel.org to make the remark.

Re:Official Statement of the Open Source Community

[Bazman]

In other important geek news: Bruce Perens Still Reading Slashdot.

Re:Official Statement of the Open Source Community

[lexa1979]

You liar ! you can't be someone from the Open Source Community... Open Source Community makes OpenOfficial Statements.

Re:Official Statement of the Open Source Community

[sturle]

Wouldn't be appropriate in this case. I think his comment is representative of the Linux/Open source community.

Re:Official Statement of the Open Source Community

[3vi1]

You do realize that FOX News is going to quote you and credit you as The Official Spokesman for The Open Source Community, right?

Re:Official Statement of the Open Source Community

[Bruce Perens]

That would piss off some people that I'd really like to piss off.

Re:Official Statement of the Open Source Community

[speederaser]

This is the Official Statement of the Open Source Community: The Open Source community is amorphous, and follows no leader. Thus, nobody is capable of making an Official Statement for the Open Source Community. This has been an Official Statement of the Open Source Comunity.

The Open Source Community may know and understand that, but I don't think you can count on the outside world to give a damn how the Open Source Community is or is not organized.

Splash damage accrues to those with even the most tenuous relationship. When you bring subjects like politics or religion into it people react with emotion, not rational thought. The trailer to a badly produced, obnoxious movie is released and Americans who clearly had nothing to do with it are killed.

Like it or not, what Linus said will splash onto all of us in The Open Source Community (typing this on my Fedora box).

Re:Official Statement of the Open Source Community

[Bruce Perens]

You can see from something else I wrote that I do value spokespeople who stay on message. I don't kid myself that I can expect that sort of maturity out of some of our best-known spokespeople, though.

Mere profanity versus ad hominem

[macraig]

Using a single cussword doesn't completely invalidate a criticism, if in fact it really is just a terse critique. What does invalidate it is ad hominem. Since the cusswords at issue in Linus' comments were adjectives for the words "moron" and "crazy", which pretty obviously are ad hominem, the profanity is really irrelevant. It's odd that everyone is obsessed with the profanity and cares nothing about the ad hominem that it delivered.

Re:Mere profanity versus ad hominem

[DMUTPeregrine]

The argument isn't about whether Romney is correct or not, it's about whether he's fit to be the President of the United States of America. A crazy moron really shouldn't be in that position (again) so it's not an ad hominem attack in the context of the political debate. In the context of a discussion about aircraft design it is an ad hominem.

Re:Mere profanity versus ad hominem

[Q-Hack!]

The argument isn't about whether Romney is correct or not, it's about whether he's fit to be the President of the United States of America. A crazy moron really shouldn't be in that position (again) so it's not an ad hominem attack in the context of the political debate. In the context of a discussion about aircraft design it is an ad hominem.

If you are suggesting that Romney's statement about airplane windows makes him a complete moron, then it is an ad hominem attack as it has been shown that he was joking.

If you are suggesting that Romney's religion makes him a complete moron, then I would remind you that President Obama also believes in a magic ghost in the sky.

Re:Mere profanity versus ad hominem

[pla]

It's odd that everyone is obsessed with the profanity and cares nothing about the ad hominem that it delivered.

I feel quite a lot more concerned that the potential next president of the US believes in magic underwear (not a joke, look it up!), than I do about whether or not a typical antisocial geek not running for any public office managed to say something a little too bluntly.

But hey, look at the alternative... Four more years of - Hmm... Well... What has Barry done, other than get a crippled version of Romneycare applied nationwide? Wow. Way to stick it to your opponent, the creator of your greatest accomplishment to date.


/ "If everyone wasted their vote on [Johnson] [he] would be the next president"

Re:Mere profanity versus ad hominem

[macraig]

What you suggest is neither a rational nor sensible way to discredit a President candidate as unfit for the role. Calling a candidate a crazy moron and then making no effort to even describe in detail why is not even adult behavior, it's juvenile. As I said previously, it's ad hominem. Wikipedia defines it in some detail.

Re:Mere profanity versus ad hominem

[macraig]

Yes, let's all resort to juvenile, emotional, hyperbolic name-calling, then make no reasoned arguments at all to follow it. Let's make sure we ignore and apologize for everyone that does it to the candidates we don't like and cry foul only when it's done to the candidate we lionize. That will surely help our electoral process.

Re:Mere profanity versus ad hominem

[Bing Tsher E]

If you are suggesting that Romney's religion makes him a complete moron, then I would remind you that President Obama also believes in a magic ghost in the sky.

People slimed John F. Kennedy for his religion much the same as they are Romney. Kennedy was a Roman Catholic, and in fact the first Roman Catholic ever elected President.

It is so disappointing to see the way a man's religion is used to slime him by supposedly 'open minded, progressive' types.

Re:Mere profanity versus ad hominem

[pla]

Let's make sure we ignore and apologize for everyone that does it to the candidates we don't like and cry foul only when it's done to the candidate we lionize.

Sadly, no one even bothers insulting the third party candidates.


That will surely help our electoral process.

Only two things will "help our electoral process" - Finding a way to ban private funding of campaigns, and switching to something like IRV that makes it possible to vote for third parties without throwing away your vote completely.

Whether or not one (even popular) geek calls a candidate a poopy-head amounts to worrying about a drop of piss in a pond of raw sewage.

Re:Mere profanity versus ad hominem

[macraig]

Sadly, no one even bothers insulting the third party candidates.

People don't want their heartfelt insults to be wasted.

Only two things will "help our electoral process"....

You left out random selection, which will give us superior candidates 99% of the time. The other 1% is when we randomly get... well, the same One Percenters we get now. Maybe we can set a cap on income for the random selection.

Windows

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, there's no arrogance like that of an uninformed nerd. As a type-rated pilot (turboprops), I can tell you even pressurized planes do have windows, and partially for this purpose.

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[line-bundle]

What does Romney know about political advice?

Grown man says "fuck" on social site no one uses.

[Anonymous Psychopath]

And then apologizes the next day because the idiot on MSNBC got it wrong.

And we wonder why politicians never speak their minds about anything under any circumstances.

Seriously

[Penurious Penguin]

Sorry, I think you may have gotten it wrong. From my understanding, Linus was stating a well-established fact -- that Romney is a fucking mor[m]on. Simple typo; he knows genius when he sees it.

Re:Seriously

[SolitaryMan]

Or fucking [a] mor[m]on, i.e. just pointing out that Romney has a healthy sexual relationships with his wife, who is also a mormon. SImple mistake.

Re:Seriously

[Penurious Penguin]

Obama is very intelligent. I don't expect anyone to know something about everything, so I pardon him for simple errors. His biggest blooper seems to be his cavalier investment in the short-term memories of Americans. Turns out there was 'a killing' to be made, but they weren't as short as he assumed; Americans still remember the things he said long ago, and they are mighty confused whilst they hear what he says today. If Obama makes a stupid statement, just as I would if he made a genuinely funny one, I'd wonder only what he was trying to deceive us about. However, since Obama is not a fucking mor[m]on, my best guess is that I'd be modded as Offtopic and nothing would be said.

You might consider that there are some people out there who are sick of being electoral ping-pong serfs. Personally, I'd like to see them both volunteer for the first expedition to Mars -- I'd vote for that!. This election is like being mugged by two thugs; they say to hit the biggest one first, but to me, these guys seem like ugly twins, with very different personalities.

Re:Seriously

[sturle]

Depends if he his right or not. Obama isn't a mormon (my spell checker wants to correct that to moron) as far as I know, so at least I would tell Linus to do better research.

Re:Seriously

[EMN13]

Sorry, I think you may have gotten it wrong. From my understanding, Linus was stating a well-established fact -- that Romney is a fucking mor[m]on. Simple typo; he knows genius when he sees it.

Or fucking [a] mor[m]on, i.e. just pointing out that Romney has a healthy sexual relationships with his wife, who is also a mormon. SImple mistake.

Dude... that's just priceless :-D

I am no longer going to be voting for Linus Torval

[Anonymous Coward]

When is the next election? He's really done it to himself this time.

Re:Is this any worse than RMS?

[Ironchew]

I heard that Stallman once killed a girl in 1990 (He never specifically denied it.) This reflects very poorly on Linus as a FOSS contributor.

What community

[robot5x]

I'd just like to know what Bill Gates would have to say about this, and how everyone thinks this would reflect on the Windows community.
Furthermore, I think I'd have to cut off all ties completely with the Yahoo community if Marissa Mayer were to join in this debate!
I wait with bated breath.

Apologies not appropriate, says the Romney camp

[Bruce Perens]

Mr. Romney himself has said: "It's a terrible course for America to stand in apology for its values." Thus, no doubt he would condemn Mr. Torvalds apology as "appeasing our enemies".

Re:Apologies not appropriate, says the Romney camp

[TheInternetGuy]

You have a good and valid point there sir.
Also, as we all know Linus Torvalds is well known for appeasing his enemies. :)

Re:Apologies not appropriate, says the Romney camp

[Enigma2175]

But Linus (Mr. Torvalds to you) isn't American. Therefore, it is just one of those quaint European customs, really.

Except that he IS an American, he lives in the United States and obtained US citizenship in 2010.

Bill Nye

[stevegee58]

I don't hear Bill Nye being a pussy and apologizing for calling it like it is.
He called a sitting US Congressman a "fucking idiot" for his pseudo-scientific beliefs and followers of creationism "fucking retarded".
Run for President, Bill. We need you.

Re:Bill Nye

[im_thatoneguy]

As a man of reason I would expect someone like Bill Nye to employ pragmatism as administrator of the US Federal Government. As such I would expect that he would be as imperfect as my other picks for president (Obama included).

Take the Tax cut debacle. Many liberals wish Obama had stuck to his guns--but the alternative was an intractable opponent which would have happily allowed unemployment insurance to run out. As long as the world is full of people who present no-win scenarios I expect every president to make pragmatic and often imperfect decisions that may very well be the best choice available.

Take Syria. We could intervene in Syria but then Russia would get involved. The Syrian conflict sucks but there is not good solution only a choice between bad ones. That's the president's real job... choosing between bad options. Because that's how life goes.

Re:Bill Nye

[artor3]

I would vote for him in a heartbeat. Unfortunately, no sane, intelligent person would try to be President. You have to either be a naive Pollyanna thinking you'll somehow rise above the partisanship, a Machiavellian sociopath willing to put up with anything for power, or a blithering idiot who's simply unaware of the hell you'll be dragged through every day of the campaign, and the further torments that await when everyone uses you as the scapegoat for every single thing that goes wrong.

Re:Bill Nye

[ALeavitt]

http://dailycurrant.com/2012/08/30/bill-nye-blasts-todd-akin-challenges-debate/
The Global Satirical Newspaper of Record

Re:Bill Nye

[Frequency Domain]

I don't hear Bill Nye being a pussy and apologizing for calling it like it is. He called a sitting US Congressman a "fucking idiot" for his pseudo-scientific beliefs and followers of creationism "fucking retarded".

Nope. It's a great story, but it didn't happen.

Re:Bill Nye

[scream at the sky]

I remember hearing about this, but I have never been able to find the claimed footage. Wasn't this debunked as a hoax?

Not useful

[gnu-sucks]

I don't think he's serious about the windows on an aircraft, and anyone who does needs his head examined.

Having said that, I'm not hiring him to be in charge of aircraft design. Nor am I hiring a religious leader. (Noted because I think mormonism is pretty odd too.)

We're considering him for a president. I'd rather debate on his policy, record, etc. And I'm not claiming to agree with all of it or think highly of him on these merits, but this is the domain we need to be in, not the "batshit crazy."

It's easy to attack and make fun of these guys -- nearly all past and present political figures. I enjoy it too. But I don't make decisions based on it.

Re:Not useful

[xs650]

... We're considering him for a president. I'd rather debate on his policy, record, etc. And I'm not claiming to agree with all of it or think highly of him on these merits, but this is the domain we need to be in, not the "batshit crazy." ...

Romney is the candidate for everyone. No matter what your position is on anything, he has held that position at one time or another..

Re:Not useful

[nicoleb_x]

Just Like Hope and Change. Everybody had some hope for some change. What an all inclusive guy that one.

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[frosty_tsm]

I don't ask Romney to fix kernel bugs just as I don't look to Linux for political advice. Both should stick to what they know.

You imply that Romney is a source for political advice. The current (supposedly left-leaning but maybe not) polls speak otherwise.

Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[Taco Cowboy]

So ... if you have anything to tell Romney, just say it the way you like it.

But if Romney is a Democrat, you sure ain't gonna use colorful descriptions such as "batshit crazy" or "fucking moron", or you will be chastised as "hateful" and whatever you say will be deemed as "hatespeech".

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[bmo]

Oh, I can certainly point out some odious Democrats.

During the SOPA hearings, I became particularly incensed at Maxine Waters. What a waste of everybody's time she is. She and a most on both sides of the aisle didn't particularly "get" why SOPA was a bad idea. Watt was similarly a waste of oxygen and body heat in that chamber. Only a handful like Polis (D), Lofgren(D), Lungren(R), and Issa (R) and got it. Hell, Polis even understood what the hell Bitcoin, TOR, and Silk Road are. The response on /g/ was "oh god, he knows!"

--
BMO

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[causality]

It's only hate speech if it's not true.

Seems like it's most likely to be branded "hate speech" when it is true.

"Hate speech" is just like the false accusations of "racism" and so on. It's a way to try to shut down the discussion at the point where it'd be appropriate to acknowledge that a valid point has been made. It's a cowardly escape route. It's for childish people who think that disagreeing with somoene makes them THE ENEMY and so admitting when THE ENEMY has made a good point and dealing with it like a mature adult (which, oh my god, might involve changing your own point of view) would mean aiding and abetting THE ENEMY. So clearly that can't be done.

Some kind of character attack must be made instead, of course with no corresponding burden of proof. I mean "racist" is a pretty damned serious accusation. It's like calling someone a thief -- you better have evidence. But the goal is not to fulfill a burden of proof. It is to shut down the conversation.

I don't know how it happened but a lot of two-year-olds somehow ended up in adult bodies. Perhaps our scientists should look into this.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[fustakrakich]

Romney isn't a democrat

You wouldn't know it by all the favors he's doing for them. His job appears to be to scare people out of voting third party and to get them to stay with the herd and vote for Obama. All indications seems to show it's working pretty well.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[amiga3D]

You know this election really sucks. There is no one to vote for and I want to vote against BOTH of the individuals running for President. What a fucking travesty. This is what the damn Repukes and Dumbcrats run out for us to vote for. Please give me someone else. Perot, Paul, hell I'd even take Nader.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[Anonymous Coward]

Help! Help! I'm being oppressed!

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[jandersen]

Seems like it's most likely to be branded "hate speech" when it is true.

Are you feeling sore or something? There is nothing mysterious about the term "Hate speech" - if the purpose of your speech is to inflame hatred in your audience, then it is hate speech. Of course, it is sometimes a matter of interpretation what the purpose of anybody's words is, but since the purpose of hate speech is to whip up feelings, it will usually be rather short on objectivity while things like accusations and generalisations come thick and fast.

It is perfectly possible to discuss even serious and difficult problems without inciting hate - one good way would be to start out by seeking out any common ground and looking for reasonable solutions.

There is an disturbing irony in the fact that the extremists on both sides of any conflict are so often helping each other by polarising the situation - the anti-muslim extremists are very much carrying fuel to the muslim extremists' bonfire, and are in that sense betraying their own people. To an objective person, the real conflict is not between "The Muslims" and "The Christians", but between those in the middle and the extremists on both sides.

Hmm, I see I have gone OT, sorry about that - but I think what I say is valid in general, and who knows, it may even apply to the subject at hand.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[Joce640k]

Celebrities go around spouting politics all the time. They even tell us about the science of vaccines, etc.

A smart person voices a political opinion and it's a scandal? We should be backing him up, not trying to silence him.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[flyneye]

Nonsense, I'd give Linus a chance to say that Obama is the stupidest socialist motherfucker in the damn world.He believes we are safer with oppression and less freedom, thinks anyone with their own business didn't do it themselves and worse, thinks everyone is stupid as him. Typical Repubmocrat.
Democrats are just the other side of the same coin. There is only one party, disguised as two, flouting differences minor to the real problems of their misguided greedy governance. They've done nothing but drive the public into the dirt for their own greedy ends for more than a century now, but not everyone buys their " look a bird!" methods of deception.
Linus was right, Romney is a moron along with the rest of the Repubmocrats.
I'll give him a +1 insightful for half an insight.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[Lord Balto]

Ah, someone with a brain in their head. Agreed.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[stevew]

"Of course, it is sometimes a matter of interpretation what the purpose of anybody's words is..."

This is the entire problem with the any description of "Hate Speech." It is left to the eye of the beholder - which is the very definition of subjective.

How can you have free speech when another persons interpretation can turn it into a crime?

Look - there is nothing in the Constitution about being guaranteed a right to not be uncomfortable with what someone else says, but rather the guarantee is to the person causing the discomfort! If someone chooses to make an extreme comment - then judge them as you will, but it shouldn't be a crime unless someone is harmed physically, or property is destroyed by the person doing the speaking!

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[tbannist]

Hate speech laws aren't supposed to cover making someone uncomfortable, they're supposed to cover "I'm not telling you to lynch them, but everyone knows (group) are all child-raping murderers, and if someone doesn't do something about them right now they will rape and kill again".

it shouldn't be a crime unless someone is harmed physically, or property is destroyed by the person doing the speaking!

So the boss is fine as long as it's just his minions and/or dupes doing the murdering, raping, pillaging and burning?

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[tbannist]

Thinks anyone with their own business didn't do it themselves and worse, thinks everyone is stupid as him.

Try not to be an obvious idiot, it's clear from the context that Obama thinks that "anyone with their own business" didn't build the roads and bridges that lead to the business. When someone deliberately misunderstands and misrepresents the truth, it just makes them look unreliable and stupid. Do you really want to be the crazy guy ranting on the corner?

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[Andy Dodd]

Yup. Anyone who owns a business that claims they built it entirely themselves is deluded. The majority of businesses in this country can't exist without roads - privately built, funded, and maintained roads are an incredibly rare exception, not the norm, and don't function without connectivity to the government-built road network.

In modern days, it could in theory be possible to have a business that does not directly depend on roads, but still:
1) The Internet was created using DARPA
2) Many Internet connections in this country have at least some government subsidization - anyone who lives away from the main road network and has phone service has the government to thank for that.
3) Can't get your equipment to your site without a road network. (Technically you could air/helo-lift things in - but guess where most of the initial development money for helicopters came from? Guess where the funding for our air traffic control system comes from?)

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[BasilBrush]

Look - there is nothing in the Constitution about being guaranteed a right to not be uncomfortable with what someone else says, but rather the guarantee is to the person causing the discomfort!

Hate speech isn't about people being uncomfortable or offended. It's about inciting other people.

If someone chooses to make an extreme comment - then judge them as you will, but it shouldn't be a crime unless someone is harmed physically, or property is destroyed by the person doing the speaking!

In hate speech the purpose is to get other people to do the harming. So no, it shouldn't only be prosecuted when the speaker himself does the harm.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[Teancum]

So the boss is fine as long as it's just his minions and/or dupes doing the murdering, raping, pillaging and burning?

Strangely, yes it is fine... at least from a legal point of view. Just look at Al Capone and what the law was and was not able to actually do to the guy. The only thing he could be nailed on was tax evasion because Capone wouldn't admit to the source of income for millions of dollars that somehow showed up in his bank accounts.

I'm not saying that I support a guy like this personally, and he may be a ruthless bastard and otherwise deplorable in terms of his ethics. If you can't directly link the actions of somebody to what others are doing, it may be impossible to charge them with crimes that may even be carried out in their name. BTW, I don't mind tax dollars being used to take down such a ruthless bastard either, but it often isn't easy even if you have a whole team of detectives and prosecutors trying to find the links of such a crime boss to what his minions are doing.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[Teancum]

There are hundreds of other candidates, none of which are will likely even have a remote shot of actually winning the election.

One person that is likely going to at least appear on a number of ballots throughout America is Gary Johnson, the current Libertarian Party candidate. If you really can't stomach either Romney nor Obama, that is at least one person to cast that kind of dissenting vote against both political parties. There are currently a total of five presidential candidates that in theory could win the presidency by virtue of the fact that they are officially on enough ballots in enough states with enough electoral votes that something really drastic happening between now and November could open a way for one of those other candidates to actually win. Outside of those five candidates, everybody else really is a fringe candidate and doesn't even have a theoretical chance of winning.

I'm still undecided in terms of who I will vote for this November, and Gary Johnson is looking pretty nice right now. I'm under no illusion that he even has a remote shot of winning, but it at least gives me somebody to look at other than those other two major party candidates.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[kaatochacha]

Does the "innocence of the muslims" film then qualify as hate speech?

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[Medievalist]

Yeah, isn't it totally weird how fanatic Republicans won't admit that Obama is an intelligent man who speaks well?

It's equally weird how fanatic Democrats won't admit the significance of Obama's failure to fulfill his promises to hold telcos accountable for illegal wiretapping, roll back excessive Bush-era secrecy and claims of executive privilege, and end torture. If the man's morals are sufficiently flexible to both disavow and permit torture, that's pretty damn significant.

Oh noes! I used PROFANITY!

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[BeansBaxter]

Obamism. The new religion. Do you have tee-shirts? Of course you do. Just one question who generated the revenue for the government to create the infrastructure? How many DARPA servers run the internet backbone today? How many internet servers and fiber are run not for profit or for free? Have you ever tried to get internet in the country? I don't think you'll find any subsidies but good luck.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[BeansBaxter]

Obama and his policies weaken the constitution, destroy jobs and bankrupt our children. I don't care if he is an American or not. The rest is evident by the last 3 years and the economic data that exists. He is running with a proven record.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[greenzrx]

Nancy Pelosi is batshit crazy.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[greenzrx]

When someone deliberately misunderstands and misrepresents the truth, it just makes them look unreliable and stupid. Do you really want to be the crazy guy ranting on the corner?

And Romney believes that airplane windows should open. Works both ways...

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[Medievalist]

Well, there's always Jill Stein.

A Jill Stein vote will not be seen as a call for some political integrity, unfortunately. It will be interpreted as a pro-sustainability, anti-plutocracy vote by the brains (the Rove/Matlin/Carville types) and as crazy, un-american hippy lunacy by the brain-washed and brainless.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[tbannist]

Yes it does and Torvalds has (grudgingly) apologized for not recognizing a joke.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[Jiro]

It's not as if you had a choice to retroactively take the tax money that was used to pay for the public roads, withdraw it, and use it to build the roads privately and perhaps more efficiently instead.

Just because the money used to build the roads passed through the hands of the government doesn't mean that the government involvement produced any benefit compared to no government involvement. If I confiscate your car, sell it, keep half the money and use the other half to buy you a crappy car, I don't get to take credit for you owning a car, even though your car was bought by me.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[johnlcallaway]

So why isn't a group of people called crazy if they wear ancient torture devices around their neck often with a victim on it. Or if they believe in an all all-knowing, all-mighty spirit that can't seem to communicate with his believers very well. Or who believe that this being could shatter all laws of physics and just create something out of nothing aren't crazy. People that will call it a miracle if one person survives a fiery plane crash but won't attribute the same force to the other 200 people that died. A group that believes all the bad people that accept their savior in their heart will live forever in a beautiful and pleasant place, but all the good people that don't will be condemned to eternal torment.

Seems there is plenty of crazy in just about every religion.

And of course we all know that every moron out there becomes millionaires because they are so stupid that it's easy for them to run businesses and invest.

Sounds like Linus is getting old and Alzheimers is setting in.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[dbreeze]

The willingness of the population at large to discount their own contributions to the whole and lay it all at the feet of a few rat/weasel/pig types ............. disturbs me.

Please vote for anything but Democrat/Republican/Big$. Anything else.
Please.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[garaged]

I have a chemistry PhD, Im not joking about this, I live between this kind of guys, for real! :)

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[flyneye]

What's it to him, if that's the context? Local taxes and state taxes from the BUSINESS OWNERS POCKET as well as the other locals built the road. It's beside the point. No apologists allowed to add kool-aid weak apologies for an obvious hater of the small businessman. I give you a : -1 weak.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[guruevi]

The only difference between Mormonism and Christianity or any other large religious group is time. Look at the shit some dude named Moses or Jesus made up. People were laughing at them in their times as well, eventually it became history, then stories, myths and currently there is so little left that most of it is conjecture.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[guruevi]

There is no such thing as hate speech. There is free speech and not free speech and as a society we have to pick between them. In the end, free speech is the best solution.

Hate speech is currently being uttered by hundreds if not thousands of evangelical Christian religious groups in the US. If it is absolutely necessary to limit speech, how about before we start limiting speech that may be controversial, limit the speech that has actually already harmed hundreds of helpless children and indoctrinated and brainwashed thousands of people.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[Zontar The Mindless]

Just one question who generated the revenue for the government to create the infrastructure?

*I* did, sonny.

So now your business would like to use the infrastructure I paid for...?

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[AK Marc]

I've heard worse of Pelosi, and didn't hear of any backlash.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[AK Marc]

Gary Johnson isn't a Libertarian. He's a Republican that realized that he'd never get on the Republican ticket, so he's running on the Libertarian ticket, but he's as much a Libertarian as Obama.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[BasilBrush]

There is no such thing as hate speech.

There's hate speech every bit as much as there is something called a love letter. Just as a love letter is there to communicate a feeling of love and hopefully inspire that feeling in another person, hate speech is there to communicate a feeling of hate, and to inspire (incite) hatred in others.

before we start limiting speech that may be controversial

The problem with hate speech is not that it is controversial. It's that it's intent is to incite hatred in others. At it's most classic and extreme, you have hate speech from leaders of the Ku Klux Klan, resulting in the people listening to the speech going out and lynching people for nothing other than their skin colour. That's happened many times over the years.

Clearly hate speech exists and is a problem. Whether than problem is more important than a principle of complete free speech is debatable. But don't pretend that a problem that can cause people's deaths, as well as many lesser harms doesn't exist.

There is in any case no absolute right to free speech anywhere in the world. There's the classic of not being free to shout "fire" in a crowded theatre. Then there's laws of defamation, slander and libel. etc.

Hate speech exists. The absolute right to free speech doesn't.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[tbannist]

What's it to him, if that's the context?

As long as he doesn't mind looking like an ignorant jackass in public, nothing.

Local taxes and state taxes from the BUSINESS OWNERS POCKET as well as the other locals built the road.

So you're saying that by paying their taxes the small business owner has contributed to the society around him? I agree.

It's beside the point. No apologists allowed to add kool-aid weak apologies for an obvious hater of the small businessman

Personally, I think the comment is directed at a particular point of view put forth by some people (especially Republicans) that businessmen are entirely responsible for their own success. That government, society, and even employees are ever been a hindrance to them. I've seen that particular point of view referred to as "Ayn Rand Syndrome" among less flattering names. I seriously doubt that Obama hates small businessmen, if you like to make the case for it, go ahead, but pointing out that governments and society have done much to aid every small business owner is not "hate".

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[tqk]

I mean "racist" is a pretty damned serious accusation.

In "polite society", yes it is. In truth, however, we're all racists. We try not to be, but "different from me" defines us.

s/racist/different/g

I just try to smile at everyone I meet and hope it works out for the best for both of us. :-|

Ah crap. Did I say that out loud?

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[jwhitener]

If you do any cursory study of our legal system, you'll find that many things are subjective. "Reasonable doubt", "Reckless behavior", etc... that is the reason we have judges and juries.

Life isn't black and white. And what is reasonable one century may not be reasonable the next century. That is just how the world works.

I know that in an ideal world, everyone would be allowed to say anything they want, but in the practical world, some types of speech in some situations causes more harm than the harm of removing a person's right to that speech.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[Teancum]

If you don't like Gary Johnson and think that he somehow duped the Libertarian Party (as an organization... it doesn't matter if you think they have lost their way or not) into nominating him with their ballot drive initiatives that have put that part on the ballot of 47 states, he is their nominee regardless of your feelings.

Besides, as I pointed out there are many others who you can vote for as well. Or do you dispute he is that party's nominee?

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[flyneye]

No I'm saying society and the owner contributed and the federal government and Obamas jackass self did NOTHING for small business and his whole point was not only a lie, but moot.

          I can name several business owners I personally know,including myself that neither recieved, nor want help from society or the federal government. I personally built my own luthery, educated myself to operate it and require NOTHING from anyone to conduct business between myself and others. Obama can swallow my rod! The truth is
Obama owes everything to everyone else as he is useless by himself as anything but a Repubmocrat figurehead.
Can you think of a use for which Obama stands alone? A doorstop? A village idiot? Baggage Porter? He's done f**k else FOR anyone that's of any real use, but seems to be good at claiming responsibility for things he has nothing to do with and dodging responsibility for the bullshit he causes.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[Teancum]

Do you think those in the Libertarian Party knew of his past when they gave him the nomination? My earlier point was that he is the one person who is most likely to appear as an alternative to the two major party candidates by virtue of the fact that he is on more state ballots than any other 3rd party candidate.

Who cares about what it took for him to get that particular political party's nomination, unless you happen to be a member of that party and have sour grapes hoping it would be somebody else. If you want to point out somebody else who happens to fit your own political leanings, why don't you mention him or her instead?

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[AK Marc]

Why are you complaining about my complaint? A vote for him is a vote for a Republican, so he's not a 3rd party candidate. Having seen Libertarians make it into Texas state offices with similar past, they were party-line Republicans in office, even if that was anti-Libertarian. They were bitter lying weasels willing to change allegance to anyone/anything that got them power. That's what it looks like happened here, and so he should be voted *against* because of how he got his nomination, and how I'd expect him to act if he were elected.

As for who I'd recommend, I don't care to. This isn't about my preference, but about my comments on how Gary isn't a libertarian, even if on the Libertarian ticket, and how a life-long member of the party isn't a 3rd party candidate in the sense that he'd do anything any different than any other Republican elected. I'd vote for Mickey Mouse before anyone in this race. Actually, I think it'd be a hoot to vote Clinton and Bush again. Let the Democrats vote Clinton and the Repubs vote Bush, both ineligible from having served 2 terms, but ineligibility to serve doesn't prevent us from voting for them, does it? And the fallout if one of them won would be worth it.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[tbannist]

Oh, I can name several business owners I personally know who will swear up and down that they have neither received, nor want help from society or the government while at the time taking advantage of education, grants, business tax credits, deposit insurance, electricity, sewage, water, roads, and the educated workers they employ. They are islands unto themselves who have built up "incredible businesses" with "absolutely no help" from anyone else, because the start up money from their parents and investors don't count either, and their employees (who do the actual work) are mooches and their customers (who pay them well to do the work) are clueless idiots.

Now the question is whether anything you or they say is actually true. In all the cases I've observed the speaker has been engaged in political myopia. I'm reminded of the guy from Mississippi who swore up and down the government never did nothing for him and that's why he's voting Republican, despite the fact that he gets food stamps and is on welfare in a state the receives more money from the federal government that it contributes. If you allow it to, what you believe can cloud what you see.

Can you think of a use for which Obama stands alone?

I'll grant you that as a politician, author, or a professor of law, Obama would have very little value by himself. What good is a politician with no one to lead, an author with no readers, a professor with no students or lawyer with no clients. But it seems to me that in that case he has about as much value as you. How would your guitar shop (luthery) function with no customers?

I think you need to give up the blinding rage and consider carefully. I don't care whether you like Obama or not, but nobody likes a raging idiot. Be gracious and admit that your business benefits immensely from society and even government and then you can go back to arguing that government does too much, infringes too many freedoms or costs too much for what it provides.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[flyneye]

It's not really taking advantage when it comes out of your pocket. I notice Obama didn't lift a shovel to build a road for anyone.He just runs his mouth.
Letsee, education; nope,grants,tax credits,deposit insurance,'nope, electricity,water,sewage; out of pocket, roads; local taxes which I pay and I'm my sole employee. My equipment is my own out of my own pocket and if Omama wants to help he can drop by and shine my knob.

Sorry, but Obama was never my customer and the difference between us is; I supply a demand while he wastes fresh air and space. Where there is a demand, one can profit by supplying it, no thanks to O'mama.

Dumbass ,every business benefits from individuals, not society making purchases, politicians spend societies money, individuals spend their own.
Unless of course you're going to start telling us how we wouldn't have any money unless it came from the government or jobs, unless they came from the government. Well, the government just gives us everything doesn't it comrade? Hillbillary was nearly right, it takes a village to raise an idiot.
If you aren't outraged you're probably happy taking it up the ass or you never worked for anything of your own. Tell that boy to get his knob shiner in here.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[Quila]

It is perfectly possible to discuss even serious and difficult problems without inciting hate

It is very difficult when the other side is extremely sensitive to what we would consider normal discourse. I don't feel we should dumb-down our discourse to please an overly-sensitive group. Preconceptions and traditions need to be challenged, or we live in the past, never advancing. After centuries of debate and reflection, the Jews have come to terms with Moses as a flawed man. Any aspect of Jesus can be debated in Christian societies. But try to discuss Mohammed's flaws in front of Muslims, and you may get a price on your head.

Re:Fortunately, Romney isn't a Democrat

[OneAhead]

You appear to be suggesting that if the government wouldn't use taxpayers' money to pay people (government or otherwise) to build roads, there would still be roads. I see 3 different ways this could happen:
1. Private companies can turn a reasonable yearly Return On Investment by levying tolls for building and maintaining roads (including roads that connect rural villages in the middle of nowhere; it's a big country).
2. People in said rural villages would all happily pool their money together in a fund that would quickly grow large enough to build a road, rather than just keep on paying to get their supplies flown over by bush plane while complaining how much this costs and how they cannot spare any money for that damn utopian "road project".
3. Wait... what? Unicorns shit roads in addition to rainbows now?

I'm honestly not sure which of these 3 options is most unlikely, but I have to remark that if option 1. were to somehow turn true (may I suggest forcing people at gunpoint to use the roads), the users of these roads would be screaming for their government to end the rip-off, and as for option 2., well, these must be pretty damn rich rural communities, the FBI might want to look into exactly what they're farming there.

I'm not sure what kind of libertarian fantasy you're living in, but here in the real world, some upfront investments need to be made for the common good in order to build an advanced society that can achieve a high per-capita GDP (which a lot of you people think is the ultimate Meaning of Life). And a lot of these things cannot be afforded by the subgroup of people who directly benefit from it. And the people who indirectly benefit would be too short-sighted to invest a large amount of money. (Don't we all want the domestically-grown food that these rural communities produce? Well guess what, the food needs some way to get to you, and I'm sure you won't want to pay to get your food flown over by bush plane.) In short, there's no known practical way to build an advanced society without taxpayer's money being invested into infrastructure. Thinking there is is slightly more naive than believing that communism could work. If you know of a way, please cite an example where it worked, otherwise shut up.


BTW, the idea that private companies inherently get the job done more cost-effectively is an equally huge myth. I'll try to put it simple for you. Companies need to turn profit. Not only that, they need to make a certain amount of profit in order to be attractive for investors (look up wonderful concepts like ROE, ROA,...) Or in simpler words, the profit must be high enough to make it worth it. For a lot of things, this "overhead" is bigger than what the government of a civilized country could ever realistically waste through real or perceived ineffectiveness. Generally, private business does not have an inherent edge in cost-effectiveness; forget about it already. Where it does have an edge is in innovation (which can give it a de facto edge in cost-effectiveness in sectors that evolve rapidly) and in fueling monetary turnover and a healthy economy. Provided that there is a regulator that actively counteracts the companies' natural tendency to form monopolies/oligopolies/trusts/cartels and stop competing and innovating.

Re:I would not be surprised if he got death threat

[Xandrax]

Funny how conservatives are just like liberals in that way. Get off your high horse. Your herd sucks just as much as theirs.

Mormons

[KermodeBear]

In my experience, people who criticize Mormonism and call it "batshit insane" don't know anything about it other than "Magic Underwear! Har har har!" and the other tripe they've seen on TV. Nor do they actually know any Mormons. They don't know a thing about the history, the reasons why they do, or don't do, certain things.

It's pretty obnoxious. Mormons are good people - they have different values and traditions than a lot of others, and some of them are certainly weird from an outsider's perspective, but they're good people. You don't see Mormons blowing up buildings. They're more likely to be seen helping needy people - and not making a big deal out of it.

I'd rather live next to a dozen Mormon families than be surrounded by "trollololol spageti monster har har arent i funy" types.

And no, not those fringe cults that bonk 12 year old girls say they're Mormon - because they're not.

I'm sure I'll get flamed for daring to defend a Mormon though, because this is Slashdot and FSM forbid I actually, you know, say anything GOOD about religious people...

Re:Mormons

[xs650]

Yes, I have known many Mormans that are good honorable people. Their religion is still based on a scam though.

Re:Mormons

[whoever57]

And no, not those fringe cults that bonk 12 year old girls say they're Mormon - because they're not.

Some Scotsmen might have something to say about that

Re:Mormons

[tragedy]

You don't see Mormons blowing up buildings.

Mormons are just as capable of crimes as anyone else. Ted Bundy, for example, was a Mormon. Mark Hoffman, also a Mormon killed two people with bombs and would have continued if a third bomb hadn't gone off prematurely and injured him. Richard Floyd McCoy, Jr. hijacked a plane with a hand grenade and a gun. Of course, you could claim that their actions make them not Mormons via the no-true-scotsman argument. This is the same argument that you used when you wrote:

And no, not those fringe cults that bonk 12 year old girls say they're Mormon - because they're not.

They may be splinter groups, but Mormonism is still the root of the religion they practice. Also, their practices seem to be consistent with those of the early founders of the church.

Re:Mormons

[mclaincausey]

I know Mormons. They're people like every other group. Some good, some bad. But the religion is ridiculous. The charrlatanism simply has the disadvantage of having originated during fairly recent (relatively speaking) recorded history (there is a rich record of Smith being a huckster), and of being at odds with anthropology and other sciences on a number of items (he wasn't educated enough to know is his fairy tales which beasts were indigenous to pre-Columbian North America). It doesn't matter that they don't blow up buildings, neither do Scientologists.

Re:Mormons

[greggman]

Agreed, Mormons are no more bat shit insane than any religion. in fact they are arguably better than most.

Mormons have no paid clergy. No one in the Mormon church is making a living of it's members unlike most other religions

Mormons don't believe in a vengeful God

Mormons have their own welfare system and prefer members that need it take from the church not from the government

Mormons believe God exists in this dimension, not some alternate unseeable dimension like most religions

Mormons believe we are literally Gods children as in if we do well we'll grow up to be gods. From the pov of most religions that might seem strange but from another pov it adds a kind if logic the others lack. You don't have to try to be good to avoid hell (Mormons don't really believe in hell like other religions) .. You need to try to be good because you can't be a god if you can't be trusted with that kind of power

Note: the Mormon religion is just as stupid as other religion on the general sense but it's certainly not more insane.

Re:Mormons

[fishybell]

Sigh.

While there is a slight argument to be made as to whether or not it was for "political expediency," those are indeed beliefs and traditions the LDS church has followed at one time or another (speaking to you from the heart and soul of Mormonism in Provo, UT):

• Polygamy
• Adam/Eve aliens (key word being "from another planet")
• Blood Atonement
• Blacks in the priesthood

Now as far as the Warren Jeffs, 12 year old bonking crowd, yes they're crazy, but no they merely started at the same root of the tree. No original-orthodoxy Mormons are left, they're dead. The rest -- at least much of the rest here in Utah -- seem to want to live their lives with blinders on about the past (and the outside world, help! I'm trapped in a bubble!). Go and ask your bishop about all of these things and he'll, a: sigh, and b: give you a well thought out, and historically accurate accounting of the church's somewhat malleable belief system.

Re:Mormons

[GeekBoy]

You're taking a lot of things out of context and twisting them to make them seem far stranger than they are. That's the same sort of behavior that the evangelicals engage in to make evolution seem crazy and atheists seem dangerous to other evangelicals. I suspect your understanding isn't that great, all you've heard is some sensationalist things that have been twisted for shock value.

Re:Mormons

[Raenex]

Do you want to see my golden plates?

Re:Mormons

[gd2shoe]

If they violate the explicit teachings in the Book of Mormon, what else would you call it?

And yes, there are splinter groups that could legitimately call themselves Mormon, it just makes LDS uncomfortable (due to the ambiguity it causes).

Re:Mormons

[misexistentialist]

Polygamy and marriage at puberty can make perfect sense, though modern society is arranged differently. Women waiting almost until menopause to get married like in our current culture is very strange indeed.

Re:Mormons

[GeekBoy]

No thanks, you can keep them in your pants.

Re:Mormons

[ceoyoyo]

Polygamy isn't the batshit insane part, although it is the bit that gets most Christians bent out of shape. Widespread polygamy doesn't work in stable societies that aren't frequently at war though - if one guy has more than one wife then someone else doesn't get any, and he's likely to be unhappy unless he's conveniently killed fighting somewhere.

Re:Mormons

[ceoyoyo]

Funny, because that's exactly the same charge that's levelled at the Mormon church by a lot of Mormons who have quit.

Yes, I'm not using the same language as Mormons (new or old) do, but I think it's an accurate, if succinct, translation. If you'd like to debate something in particular please go ahead and mention it, along with your interpretation. Your vague objections don't really amount to much so far.

Re:Mormons

[misexistentialist]

Just give those dudes the internet and an xbox! Too bad God didn't mention this in the Book of Mormon, maybe Joseph Smith just left it out because he couldn't understand what was being revealed

Re:Mormons

[Hatta]

Mormons are good people

Sorry, no one who belongs to an organization that oppresses homosexuals is a good person.

Re:Mormons

[Stele]

Yes, I have known many Mormans that are good honorable people. All religions are still based on scams though.

FTFY

Re:Mormons

[Enigma2175]

It's not a "No True Scotsman" fallacy if your argument is that "Mormon scripture and belief do not support the boinking of 12 year olds, and no longer support the idea of multiple wives"

Why, isn't God infallible? Why would he suddenly change his mind about what was a central tenet of the church? Unless it wasn't actually a revelation from God that made them stop the practice (not that Mormons would compromise their religious beliefs because of political pressure).

Re:Mormons

[Enigma2175]

Mormons have no paid clergy. No one in the Mormon church is making a living of it's members unlike most other religions

Normal members that perform duties for the church (Bishop, Stake Leaders, etc.) don't get paid but people higher in the hierarchy (like the church president) do draw a salary from the church.

Re:Mormons

[mcleaver]

So Mormons are even more batshit crazy than some religions and less than others. I prefer the Richard Dawkins line. A racket that became a religion. http://old.richarddawkins.net/articles/935

Re:Mormons

[Mr.Intel]

Sigh.

While there is a slight argument to be made as to whether or not it was for "political expediency," those are indeed beliefs and traditions the LDS church has followed at one time or another (speaking to you from the heart and soul of Mormonism in Provo, UT):

• Polygamy
• Adam/Eve aliens (key word being "from another planet")
• Blood Atonement
• Blacks in the priesthood

Now as far as the Warren Jeffs, 12 year old bonking crowd, yes they're crazy, but no they merely started at the same root of the tree. No original-orthodoxy Mormons are left, they're dead. The rest -- at least much of the rest here in Utah -- seem to want to live their lives with blinders on about the past (and the outside world, help! I'm trapped in a bubble!). Go and ask your bishop about all of these things and he'll, a: sigh, and b: give you a well thought out, and historically accurate accounting of the church's somewhat malleable belief system.

Or as I do for the members of my ward who ask about these things, c) explain what Elder Oaks taught about the two channels of revelation and how understanding the history of the church ends up hinging on how well you and I can access knowledge from God.

Re:Mormons

[Cinder6]

As far as I know, Mormons are not required to become missionaries (source: I know Mormons who never went on missions), and those I know that did go on missions consider that experience to be among of the most meaningful and spiritual events of their lives. With that said, I can understand disliking religions that have their members go door-to-door to find new converts. I don't mind it so much, but I get it. Personally, I find political robo-callers far more irritating.

Re:Mormons

[CODiNE]

Regarding the JW who ran off with rent money. If it were known what they did in the congregation it would certainly not be ignored. Many outsiders don't agree with the practice of disfellowshipping but scriptural commands such as stealing are expected to be obeyed. Firstly they would have the opportunity to make recompense and pay you back in full, only if refusing would it come to that.

Re:Mormons

[ceoyoyo]

Hm... I didn't think of tattling on her to the temple. She'd moved to a new city though... Can they track people anywhere?

Re:Mormons

[CODiNE]

When you move to a new congregation the elders send a letter of introduction to the new one. So they would be able to tell you where she moved.

Mormons have temples, JW's have Kingdom Halls.

GOP/GPL

[WarpedCore]

Hopefully they'll release Romney's source code.

Re:GOP/GPL

[Ash-Fox]

Hopefully they'll release Romney's source code.

Do you think Linus will port Linux to Romney if they release the specs?

Re:I would not be surprised if he got death threat

[rossz]

Some of those leftists don't even realize they act just like the extremist muslims when they demand speech they dislike be stopped.

Goose Sauce Gander Sauce

[CuteSteveJobs]

The Snopes article says Romney was perhaps joking though it isn't definitive.

The irony is palpable. Romney's camp is accusing his opponents of misquoting him, but the centerpiece of Romney's campaign against Obama is a misquote of Obama saying "Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen" where they cut out the first part so it says "If you've got a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen" - something very different.

Romney's camp can't have it both ways: If they want to run on the Obama misquote then how about they accept Romney doesn't understand why aircraft windows don't open.

And as usual, the real issues remain pushed to the sideline as too hard for an electorate who don't have an attention span that lasts long than a soundbite.

Re:Goose Sauce Gander Sauce

[Raenex]

The sad part here is that you fell for the liberal media view that Romney's campaign pulled the statement out of context, when no such thing happend. Yes, there were a few pundits who did just that, but not the official capaign.

Oh really?

"The Romney campaign replays Obama saying "if you've got a business, you didn't build that" five times in a 15-second video as part of a "petition" drive. It also uses the quote in an email fundraising appeal."

In fact, Romney even made an alalogy to the event that sums it up nicely. (paraphrasing here) You don't give the school bus driver credit for the honour student's success. Yes, the school bus driver got the kid to school, but it was the hard work of the student that is celebrated.

In my mind, the full context of President Obama's words are just as bad. He continually denigrates successfull buisnesses, this just being one example.

So here is a quote from the full context: "The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together." [bold mine]

Now compare that to Romney and his 47%.

Re:Poorly

[mister_playboy]

The idea that some words are magic and will send you to hell are reflective of childish thought.

Re:Poorly

[Xenx]

Fuck you, I'm plenty smart!

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[Anonymous Coward]

Politics, in the broader sense is the domain of everyone, not just the professional liars we call 'politicians.' Everyone has a right to have an opinion and to give input into the process of maintaining society. Linus has as much right to call Romney a fucking moron as Romney has to express the opinion that 47% of Americans are freeloaders.

As for using words that some people find offensive, they are just sounds - combinations of phonemes. There are few adjectives better than 'fucking' for expressing disgust and disrespect.

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[AchilleTalon]

Seems Romney knows about the polls: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByJAC-sfXwumZzI2bVlON2VTMnFyYVZZSnpDYnNyQQ/edit?pli=1

Quoteth The Dave...

[SternisheFan]

"I don't want a president who looks like a game show host." - David Letterman

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[ArcherB]

I don't ask Romney to fix kernel bugs just as I don't look to Linux for political advice. Both should stick to what they know.

You imply that Romney is a source for political advice. The current (supposedly left-leaning but maybe not) polls speak otherwise.

You are correct. Romney is not the best of politicians. His specialty is management. He has a record of taking things that are failing and turning them around. Bain Capital is an example as it was on the verge of bankruptcy when Romney took over as CEO. The Olympics are another example.

The least important part of a politicians job is politics. That's what gets him elected, but it has very little to do with how well he runs the executive branch. Obama has absolutely no managerial experience. I believe that's why we are stagnant on crap right now. Every job he ever had, he was part of a committee. He's never had to balance a budget, hire someone, promote someone, fire someone. He's never had to make the decision that will ruin the lives of 100's to save the jobs of thousands. He's never had to negotiate a debt settlement or make a function more efficient. Now he's in charge. When he's presented with a decision, he looks around to see how others are voting, but everyone else is just staring at him. He's a hell of a politician, but that doesn't run the country.

And credible polls like Gallup and Rasmussen show the race as a dead heat.

But wait...

[bmo]

Mitt Romney is dumb as a post, lacking in humlity, candor, and empathy.

Every time you see him interacting with someone on the campaign trail, his affect is never one of any sympathy, but just blindly spewing talking points to whatever question is asked, and if it especially important, he simply won't answer it, but go off on a tangent.

Linus is absolutely right, and a lot of people are afraid to point at Mittens and say the emperor is missing his shirt. Linus simply pointed out that not only is he missing his shirt, but he has not a stitch on, and his schwanzstucker is waving about for the kids to see.

More people need to be unafraid to point out stupidity for what it is. Maybe then the GOP would not be seen as the party of teatards, xenophobes, and sociopaths that it is today.

Good on Linus. Three cheers.

--
BMO

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[scot4875]

I don't ask Romney to fix kernel bugs just as I don't look to Linux for political advice. Both should stick to what they know.

Agreed. Both should stay far away from the White House.

--Jeremy

Linus' follow up...

[Hobart]

https://plus.google.com/102150693225130002912/posts/TTeQKFPrCQU?hl=en

Linus Torvalds - 3:19 PM - Public

Ok, since I publicly called the guy a f*cking moron, I guess I should also publicly follow up: it does seem Romney was joking.

Whew.

...Move along. Can we get back to hating on proprietary blobs now?

Fame and opinions

[n3r0.m4dski11z]

You want people to be silent their whole lives because they are famous? Even obviously unintentional fame?

I can't remember him making too many overt political statements before. And besides, I hope to even americans what he is saying is completely obvious. You understand the whole world follows your elections right? Whose fault is that???

You are talking about decisions made by what seems to be an at least 48% insane people, which has repercussions for the fate of humanity, in various ways. People in the rest of the world have no choice but to pay attention and have opinions on it - please do not mistake it for adoration. Do a fucking better job america and you wont have the founder of linux saying mean things about you on the internet. Yes, I guess in the end it doesn't matter.

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't ask Romney to fix kernel bugs just as I don't look to Linux for political advice. Both should stick to what they know.

The issue is that the comments come from Linus' personal G+ page. If they should "stick to what they know", then you're implying censorship. Fuck that, and fuck you for implying it.

Self censorship is becoming essential

[Anonymous Coward]

If this was Brazil, he'd be in jail for mocking politicians.
We had only a couple of days, a paper outlawing 'language abuse' in the EU as an anti-terror move. Requiring filtering, automatic language detection, crimes for saying things. Torvalds should be glad he is free to call Mitt Romney bat shit crazy, and I for one will defend his right to say it.

http://www.edri.org/files/cleanIT_sept2012.pdf

Read it, and before anyone says it was just a discussion document, it's not, it's a concrete set of action points in a secret document to which the UK police have already committed themselves.

Additionally...

[bmo]

>(a suggestion which some, including Snopes.com, have taken as a joke)

Snopes quotes The Blaze.

The Blaze is hardly unbiased. It is the mouthpiece of Glenn Beck. If The Blaze announced that there would be a full moon in the next month or that the sun would rise in the morning, I would check astronomical tables (or use Stellarium) to make sure.

--
BMO

Open Windows, Pomeranians, Hurricanes & Bonanz

[Penurious Penguin]

Way back yonder when I was a kid, me mum, father, the pomeranian and I were flying a Beechcraft Bonanza back from Miami in a weak hurricane. They were up front and I was in the back seat. For some reason or another I ended up holding the dog. As a kid, I had a tendency to fiddle with things, sometimes without regard to what they were. I had been fiddling with the window latch for a while, when suddenly, it actually opened. I completely froze, shocked and confused. The dog, with its sensitive ears began wailing horribly. My father, who was prone to anger, began yelling terribly too. A chorus of woe began as I sat there frozen with fright and guilt. My mum, the calmer of the bunch (the dog was a bit hyper too) began lurching toward me to close the window. Until she eventually succeeded in her efforts, the sound of the wind and screeching dog and yelling father went on for what seemed a bitter long time. I think even my mum began shrieking at my father before things were sorted out. It was a mess and I'd have a sore ass for it later.

Moral of the story? Opening windows during low-altitude flights can be interesting, but I'd rather it have been Linux.

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[Anonymous Coward]

The airplane you opened that window in was not pressurized. Airplanes that fly over 12,500 feet must have pressurized cabins, or supplemental oxygen from a breathing mask. The lack of air pressure makes it difficult or impossible to receive oxygen in non pressurized cabins. Opening a windows or a door at altitude while the cabin is pressured would be very bad, and dangerous.

Flying small airplanes or helicopters at low altitude with open doors, windows or doors removed is not a problem at all. I do it all the time.

Mythbusters did an episode where they tested pressurized cabin breaches, and it wasn't as catastrophic as I expected, but it would definitely cause an early landing.

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[Anonymous Coward]

Both should stick to what they know.

Bollocks. Everybody should speak about politics if they feel like it, democracy works better that way.

Re:or just

[Black Parrot]

Maybe the motherf***cker is just telling it like it is? I mean, yes, most religions are batsh*t crazy and in America, anything except Catholic, Protestant, or a direct, Jesus-wrote that sh*t his-self, fer sure, is just not going to fly.

Everyone can plainly see that everyone else's religion is just a bunch of hooey.

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[interval1066]

I've opened the window on a plane.

You've opened the window on a PRIVATE plane, and at low altitude. Or in some Eastern European budget crackpot "airline"; You CANNOT open the window on a modern commercial US airliner. Even so, having just watched the Romney gaff, a few comments. It doesn't look to me like Romney is joking, on the other hand, it doesn't look like a studious, contemplative comment either. Romney, whatever he is, is not a guy who needs to be aware of how windows on a modern airliner work. Ok, he's stupid, I get that. But this isn't an indicator of how stupid he is. Its an indicator of how careless he is about everyday crap, just like 90% of the public. He doesn't really need to know precisiely how airliner windows work, so he doesn't. Ask him anything about money and I bet he could tell you a few things that Obama couldn't. Torvalds is out of line here.

Re:Ask Mark Twain about calling a thing by its nam

[poly_pusher]

As an atheist I have to disagree with you. Mormonism is bat shit crazy, as opposed to the other 3 primary Judeo-Christian religions which are just bullshit crazy...

Snopes on the window comment

[rjh]

http://www.snopes.com/politics/romney/windows.asp

Per Snopes, although it is true that Romney made that remark, it was clearly told as a joke meant to lighten the mood. It was not a serious comment.

Re:Snopes on the window comment

[Hardhead_7]

Per my eyes and ears, no, he wasn't joking.

Re:Snopes on the window comment

[Holi]

I don't know about that, when he said it, it really didn't sound like he was trying to make a joke. neither his delivery nor the context of it seemed like a man joking.

Re:Snopes on the window comment

[brindafella]

Oh, so making a joke that could bring down an airliner is OKAY if you are a candidate for the US presidential election; but, not if you are a passenger. http://rt.com/usa/news/tsa-shirt-arijit-delta-308/

Re:Snopes on the window comment

[Ilgaz]

http://www.snopes.com/politics/romney/windows.asp

Per Snopes, although it is true that Romney made that remark, it was clearly told as a joke meant to lighten the mood. It was not a serious comment.

You can ask to any politician dating back to Roman republic, a politician should not "play fool" as a joke. Some may take it seriously.

The Truth is the Truth, Regardless of the Source

[Otis B. Dilroy III]

My mothers side of the family all belong to the Moron church. A nuttier, greedier, more inbred bunch you will never find.

Re:Ask Mark Twain about calling a thing by its nam

[jrumney]

Didn't hurt Mark Twain's reputation much.

Yes, but that is not an equivalent situation to what TFS proposes. You'd have to ask whether Mark Twain being outspoken about matters outside the world of fiction reflects badly on the literary community that he is an icon of. This is even more ridiculous than suggesting that stating obvious facts hurts his personal reputation.

how is

[ILongForDarkness]

Mormonism any more bat shit crazy than other mainstream flavors of Christianity (or other religions for that matter)? Is it just because they say crazy things happened recently rather than 2000 years ago? I would think parting the red sea, raising the dead, raining frogs etc would be more bat shit crazy than some random dude getting some golden plates and translating them. Religions claim crazy things and require followers to do crazy things with no evidence just "you got to have faith". If you believe that stuff fine, but looking at it from a scientific mindset makes it extremely unlikely/odd behaviour.

Re:how is

[osu-neko]

Mormonism any more bat shit crazy than other mainstream flavors of Christianity (or other religions for that matter)?

Yes.

Is it just because they say crazy things happened recently rather than 2000 years ago?

Nope, that has nothing to do with it. Ignoring the rest of your post as you seem to be rebutting an argument no one is making.

Believing God can perform miracles and cause crazy shit to happen is one thing. Believing you can perform miracles and cause crazy shit to happen (ala Pentecostals and such) is, in many people's opinions, an order of magnitude more crazy. Believing you can become a God is, in the opinions of many, another order of magnitude of craziness beyond that. Welcome to Mormon territory...

Re:how is

[ILongForDarkness]

Mah still don't see a lot of difference. Most christians believe that God/holy spirit comes into them when they become a christian (when that happens varies). Somehow an omnipresent God is more in you than anywhere else I guess after conversion. We are created in God's image but not capable of making a rational judgement about things but should just believe, etc.

Pentacostals: well ... christians in the book of Acts were able to do things (supposedly even more than Jesus's miracles) but it mentions that these things will pass way. I guess pentacostals think it hasn't passed away yet where as the majority of christians do.

Once you allow for the irrational anything goes. I can heal you. If you don't get healed it isn't because I can't heal you it's just you must not have believed enough, or perhaps God wants you to suffer for some purpose we don't understand, or ... Once you separate cause and effect from reason it doesn't much matter to me whether the miracles happened in the past or the present batshit crazy still applies.

Re:So I watched the video...

[Todd Knarr]

I watched the video too, and it's far from clear he's joking. I'd hope he was joking, but I was expecting him to go "because there's no oxygen out there" or something. Or to cue it as a joke and give time for a reaction. If it was a joke, he needs to hire better speechwriters or stop trying to ad-lib when he's obviously got no sense of humor and zero sense of comedic timing.

Re:He actually apologized (not)

[TheInternetGuy]

Damn it!
I hate to have to retract my statement after it has already gone +5 Informative. But it was technically incorrect. He didn't actually apologize. What he said was:

Ok, since I publicly called the guy a f*cking moron, I guess I should also publicly follow up: it does seem Romney was joking. Whew.

Which my brain, fluent in Torvaldish, automatically translated into the English

I am ever so sorry, it seems I have wronged you my good sir. My deepest apologies etc. etc.

Technically speaking

[thomst]

Technically speaking, the poster is incorrect in referring to Linus Torvalds's comments as "profanity". They are, instead, vulgarity (common or coarse language), rather than profanity (language which demeans the sacred).

Hey ... I'm a writer. I can't help myself.

Re:Technically speaking

[artor3]

Wouldn't calling a religion "batshit crazy" qualify as both vulgar and profane? Or is "profanity" specific to using religious words (e.g. damn, hell, etc.) as curses?

Re:Technically speaking

[thomst]

artor3 inquired:

Wouldn't calling a religion "batshit crazy" qualify as both vulgar and profane? Or is "profanity" specific to using religious words (e.g. damn, hell, etc.) as curses?

Since the "simple" definition of profanity is irreverance, then, yes: vulgar and profane.

Cursing is yet another form of malediction, the specific meaning of which is "to place a curse on [a person, place, or thing]."

i.e. - "Damn you," or "To Hell with you," or "May the fleas of a thousand camels infest your armpits," etc.

Re:Technically speaking

[Hatta]

Jesus fucking christ.

Re:Technically speaking

[Kirth]

Not even this. Because he wrote "f*cking", and not "fucking".

Re:Ask Mark Twain about calling a thing by its nam

[SternisheFan]

I like Twain's synopsis:

" The Mormon Bible is rather stupid and tiresome to read. But there is nothing vicious in its teachings. Its code of morals is unobjectionable. It's smooched from the New Testament and no credit given."

Re:Linus just need some hormones, that's all

[Black Parrot]

He'll be fine.. Just some relaxing meds and maybe a vacation.. ;)

It was probably him that broke into the Congressman's office, broke the windows with cinder blocks, and installed Linux on a laptop.

Re:Europeans

[Seeteufel]

European media is driven by the idea of enlightenment. That means you can't afford to let a crazy or blatanly false claim win. You also cannot attack a medium like Mediamatters which collects batshit crazy statements just because it leans to the left. Factional discourse tops political bias. A lie or untruth does not become true because you agree with a political bias. All sides of the debate have to support their views with facts. You can't support a lie just because it serves your bias or attack a messenger ad hominem. That is against the elite rules of rational discourse and journalists view themselves as guardians of rationalised discourse.

He's from Finland

[Anonymous Coward]

Even members of finnish government swears on public television from time to time.

Paska, perkele, satana ..!! ;D

make up your own damn mind

[CoderFool]

It is both amusing and aggravating to me how many people fall for someone else's predigested spin on any topic you name from their favorite media source. It is also amusing an aggravating to me how you can't find unbiased reporting on anything. There seems to be so much hysteria in the news lately both about politics and mormons. It is also amusing an aggravating to me how much the people who preach tolerance and acceptance of all viewpoints almost immediately turn around and slam people they don't agree with, often using strong words to demonstrate their disgust and lack of tolerance and acceptance. Don't like Romney and think he's a moron? Whatever. He is richer and accomplished more as governor and as a businessman that most of the people that call him a moron. Want to call Obama a bozo. Whatever. He is rich and president of the united states, which is more than most of the people who call him a moron have accomplished. Want to call mormons a crazy religion with unbelievable stories and majic underwear and all that? Whatever. They must have something going for them if they have 15 million or so members across the world. I try to listen some to liberal media and some to conservative media and figure the truth is somewhere between each sides spin. If I want to know more about what Mormons really believe, I will read their Book of Mormon. If I want to know more about what Muslims really believe, I will read the Koran. I won't listen to the stupid rumors that seem to be prevalent in the media or comments.

Re:make up your own damn mind

[Revotron]

Logic and reason? On MY Slashdot? You forget yourself, good sir!

But seriously. Mod parent up. You seem to be a very wise and reasonable person and I respect you for your down-to-earth attitude and ideals.

Re:make up your own damn mind

[kennyjay]

Now here is someone who is intellectually honest. I am a Mormon myself and believe that we stand or fall on the veracity of that book. All the criticism, ignorance of history, rabid hatred and misunderstanding of Joseph Smith, unwillingness to even consider that it could be true all have no significance if the book is true. 99.99 percent of the people frothing at the mouth in this forum have never cracked the cover. I personally have only met one man in my life who has honestly read the book and has not been convinced of its truth. Apart from 11 eyewitnesses, there have been amazing discoveries about the book over the last several decades such as word print analysis proving at least 27 distinct writers, as well as the discovery of ancient Hebrew writing style known as 'chiasmus' replete throughout the book. Chiasmus as a literary structure was unknown in Joseph's time. See this page for more scholarly research and a challenge to all the naysayers. http://www.jefflindsay.com/BOMchallenge.shtml Still, 'a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still', so just read the book, then decide yourself. As for Mitt, I served for years as a Mormon bishop just as he did. Believe me, he has spent many hours without financial compensation helping the poor and needy, repairing marriages, working with and supporting troubled youth. He knows and understands poverty. He is a great man, a great problem solver and will reach across the aisle to create pragmatic compromises to get the job done for us and for our economy.

Batshit crazy is a little harsh...

[gestalt_n_pepper]

"Barking mad" would have been more diplomatic and just as accurate.

Re:Batshit crazy is a little harsh...

[GrahamCox]

More accurate really, since bat shit is, well, just bat shit. It's not especially crazy. Whereas a dog suffering from hydrophobia might be considered "barking mad", and by analogy, Romney could be equated with that dog.

The "fucking mor(m)on" quip though, is very hard to argue with.

Re:Apparently They Think This Might Deter New User

[plover]

I'm sure if you read all of Steve Ballmer's personal e-mails and political statements you could say something equally vapid about Windows and all Microsoft products.

This is Slashdot, home of vapid comments about Windows and all Microsoft products. Ironically, many Slashdot commenters also seem to make faith-based claims that Windows [ sucks | is not secure | is worse than $(RandomOS) | is bats??t crazy ]. Why waste time reading Ballmer's statements when it's so much easier to head straight to the profanity? (Actually, there is one good reason to read Ballmer's drivel: you might learn some new profanities!)

Slashdot is on the story!

[metrometro]

Somewhat famous person uses profanity in ambiguously sourced Internet flame war, details as they emerge!

Or...

[NoMaster]

"Is this just Linus being Linus? Or does such outspokenness on non-technical matters reflect poorly on the Linux community that Torvalds leads?"

It's a natural result of spending too much time programming in C. You used boolean operators all the time, but forget it has no logical XOR...

argh...

[Type44Q]

Is this just Linus being Linus? Or does such outspokenness on non-technical matters reflect poorly on the Linux community that Torvalds leads?

For fuck's sake, what a bunch of politically-correct cowardice! How about "Option C: Such truthfulness [on Linus's part] is fucking refreshing."

Damn It, Jim!

[Greyfox]

He's a politician, not an aircraft engineer! Being a Mormon, he doesn't seem like the kind of person who would go to see one of those movies where someone gets sucked out of an aircraft. Or... pretty much anything that didn't feature Jesus. Mitt Romney is NOT the kind of person who would see Fight Club! And definitely not the kind of person to talk about it with!

And really, how many average citizens do you know who really know anything about pressurized cabins and air pressure at jet airliner cruising altitude? Especially with the state of science education in this country. Hell I'd be surprised if half of them didn't think you could fly that jet airliner to the moon. A lot of responses to his statement seem to be based on movie physics. Sure, "opening a window" would cause the cabin to depressurize... somewhat... catastrophically... but the airframe would likely handle it. Everyone would have to wear oxygen masks while the pilot made a dive to breathable air, and an emergency landing. I'm not even sure if the loss of cabin pressure would give anyone the bends. That'd be what I'd be worried about.

I'm sure he was somewhat freaked out because his wife was in a moderately-bad aircraft situation, and babbling. He seems to do that a lot. If he were to just stop and think for a second before opening his mouth, he'd save himself a lot of trouble. He and Biden have a lot in common in that respect.

Nope, there are a lot of reasons not to like Romney, but this isn't one of them. Dislike him because he'll say whatever he thinks you want to hear in order to get elected. Dislike him because as a member of the wealthy elite, he's actively participated in the creation of laws and tax code that help people like him get richer and everyone else in the country get poorer. Dislike him because he is at best a liar and at worst a hypocrite (He's reversed pretty much EVERY position he held when he was Governor of Massachusetts.) Dislike him because he at best has no idea what it's like to live with an income of less than $250K a year and at worst is contemptuous of anyone who makes such a pittance. But don't hate him because of comments he made while legitimately concerned about his wife. That's probably as close as you will ever be allowed to get to the real Mitt Romney.

Re:Europeans

[Q-Hack!]

An American journalist, for example, might say that Obama has better foreign policy experience, and that without him the economy might have done slightly worse. A European might say that Romney is clueless about foreign affairs, adding that Republicans completely trashed the economy and Obama reversed much of their damage.

While the first statement here is debateable, the second would be outright wrong. There are many factors that trashed the economy from both side of the isle. One of the major factors was when President Clinton pushed for all Americans to own a home. Banks at the time were not lending to those they thought coundn't afford a home as they didn't want the risk. President Clinton removed that risk thereby allowing banks to loan high risk people money. The fact that the economy crashed on Bush's watch is irrelivent as it would have happended no matter who was in office. To Bush's credit, he did try to reverse this, but failed with the Democraticaly controled Congress. Unfortunately, very few news orginizations will tell this side of the story. Both parties have thier faults, but by all means, go ahead and join the herd in only blaming Rebuplicans.

Well, he was misquoted, but...

[Tore S B]

The problem with Mitt is that it wasn't clear that it was a joke.

There are two problems, one minor, one severe, which caused this:

One, he's not the funniest man in the world. That's fine. People are voting for a politican, and a great sense of humour and delivery - although useful, is not a prerequisite.

The second problem is the real one: He has said - and is running on a platform of! - so many so profoundly stupid things that it was in no way clear that he didn't sincerely mean this to be true.

I'm Confused...

[RobotRunAmok]

...when you say "cult," are you referring to Mormonism or Linux?

Re:I'm Confused...

[Stormthirst]

Yes

This is a slashdot story? Seriously?

[Vellmont]

Linus has never really minced words. He's not really beholden to anyone, and nobody is really paying attention (except strangely Slashdot). I realize Slashdot jumped the shark a while ago, but this story is just further confirmation of it.

Your opinion, while interesting, is irrelevant

[mclaincausey]

Public figures are not allowed to have personal opinions or to voice them frankly!!! /. Which one is running for office? Linus can call whoever he wants whatever he wants. Is he expected to abide by a monklike silence on issues beyond Linux? At least it wasn't as off-color as some of RMS's impolitic remarks--which he also had every right to say.

Re:There's plenty of REAL reasons to knock Willard

[bmo]

>THIS [youtube.com] is one example why Willard's not fit to wield any governmental power ever again.

That and the video of him with the Vietnam veteran who is gay, who when asked about gay marriage, Mitt spouted off the teabilly talking point about "marriage between a man and a woman."

Total lack of empathy. Because heaven forfend that he say something that doesn't piss off his "base" for being thoughful.

He has spent the entire campaign running *against* his record as Governor of MA. It's fake, and everyone sees it as fake. He is the fakest candidate that ever faked a fake. Ronnie Raygun was the Teflon Prez, but Mitt is the Plastic Man.

--
BMO

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[fustakrakich]

He knows how to get a person to vote for the opposition.

Mormons, just take the second m out

[Cute and Cuddly]

They claim that mankind is only about 5000 years old and they are creationists. Do you really want to start defending that kind of stance? Anyone that comes up to me with something like that, I would send to a psychiatrist. If Linus said that, he has my full support (And I also run the OS he is responsible for)

Re:Mormons, just take the second m out

[GeekBoy]

While some may believe that its not church doctrine. Don't confuse us with the evangelicals. The one thing people don't get about mormonism is that it allows for a wide variety of different views. I'm personally an evolutionist who believes in an old earth and I'm far from the only one.

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[fustakrakich]

That was wonderful... Now can you link to a document that actually opens?

One reason America is a GREAT place to live is

[bennebw]

we don't outlaw people from speaking their minds. That doesn't mean there won't be consequences, big, small, or other, whether it's Mitt Romney wanting to put electric windows on airplanes (evidently unashamed of his religion), or Obama and the religion that he evidently professes (but somehow escapes persecution for), or Linus displaying his apathy for what people think of his civility and creativity for insults, or the people here who find great sport and a common sense of moral and intellectual superiority in making fun of religion and religious people. Thankfully, our forefathers were intelligent enough (religious, though many of them were) to secure our rights to speak our minds (slander aside), and to secure our rights to practice religion (or not) as we see fit. They were also smart enough not to think they could protect us from ourselves, but they did try to protect us from each other and from an oppressive government. I'm glad to be an American and a Christian.

Reflects poorly

[bugnuts]

When the chick fil'a dude said stuff about gays and his religion, it's the same thing. Because he mixed his (known) politics with his business, he lost my business.

If torvalds posted this in a blog unrelated to Linux and was relatively unknown, no problem. If there's an association to Linux, it will be taken poorly. The problem is that torvalds can't say anything without it being associated with Linux. Welcome to celebrity status.

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[fustakrakich]

He has a record of taking things that are failing and turning them around.

What 'record' did you read? He runs an economic chop shop, runs up huge debts and then sells off the pieces and fires the workers. He's second hand 'Reaganomics'.

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[OneAhead]

Tsk, talking about confirmation bias.
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/09/26/obama_jumps_in_gallup_tracker.html
http://www.gallup.com/poll/150743/Obama-Romney.aspx
Oh... Gallup suddenly is not that credible anymore, is it?

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[gman003]

Quite a bit, evidently, given how much power he's obtained.

Whether he knows anything about *governance*, though...

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[fustakrakich]

You CANNOT open the window on a modern commercial US airliner.

Hello! Oh, wait... I didn't realize you said US airliner... never mind

Linus is NOT the Linux Community...

[houbou]

Why must we think that Linus' comment have anything to do with the Linux community? Freedom of speech, yes and he's entitled to it. However, if there is a perception that everytime the man speaks, he's the voice of the Linux community, then whoever think that needs something stronger than a pill. Anyways, I agree with Linus' comments and as far as I'm concerned, Romney is an idiot for making such suggestions. As for his religion, none of my business. But in the end, Romney made himself look like a joke. If this type of idea comes from a man wanting to be the 89th President of the USA, then he better not be elected or else the US will be in some serious deep s&^t. Aircraft windows opening in case of emergencies, what a moron! (mmm, mormon, moron, kinda rhymes), but let be serious, a comment like that is comparable to wanting to join the navy , wishing to serve aboard a submarine, but insisting on sleeping with your window open. Sheesh!

Re:Linus is NOT the Linux Community...

[GougeMan]

I'm just saying for example, Bill Gates is (when it comes down to it) the voice of "Microsoft". What he says in public gives most people an image of what Microsoft is like (even if it is wrong) or they may harbor bad feelings or attitudes toward Microsoft because of what he said. It's just automatic perception. It's not right to do that, just human nature. (for most folks) So by that same token, technically, Linus is the voice of Linux. Some normal joe shmoe dude may read that and not have a clue what Linux is but because he read that Linus spouted off at the mouth like that, that Linux must be used by a bunch of smart mouths.. It's just perception.. that's all.. I hate it just as much as anyone else....

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[interval1066]

Thats a window in the cockpit. Show me a US airliner that allows passengers to open their windows. Or do you just like to be a dick?

No

[Murdoch5]

It reflects on him and him alone, if Linus said "I and all Linux users agree that ....." then he would of pulled everyone in. He never said that so therefore didn't make Linux look bad.

George Bush

[Anonymous Coward]

If Bush went on the soft-show circuit instead of meeting with foreign heads of state, ppl. like *you* and your ilk would jump on the internet post-haste and complain it about.

Yes, *you would*, and you _know it_.

Re:George Bush

[Enigma2175]

If Bush went on the soft-show circuit instead of meeting with foreign heads of state, ppl. like *you* and your ilk would jump on the internet post-haste and complain it about.

Yes, *you would*, and you _know it_.

Oh, you mean like Bush's 2004 appearance on Dr. Phil? That kind of "soft-show"? That kind of waste of time? Maybe instead of campaigning Obama should be reading books with schoolchildren while the WTC burns.

Re:George Bush

[RobertLTux]

" Maybe instead of campaigning Obama should be reading books with schoolchildren while the WTC burns."

well i would say that
1 staying in a SECURED LOCATION
2 Finishing what he was doing at the time
3 allowing all of his people to DO THEIR JOBS (and figure out WTF!? happened)

was a smart thing to do

All a President has to do truthfully is

1 be smart enough to surround himself with Smart People
2 know when to say NOTHING
3 sign his name when needed

Now if Romney calls his buddies from Boeing asking how 28000 and 29000 can have openable windows installed then we need to worry but otherwise a quick phone call from said buddies will explain why Open Windows + Airplane = BAD IDEA.

First of all ...

[PPH]

... I take exception at Torvalds singling out Mormons as bat shit crazy. All religions are bat shit crazy. Each in their own very special way.

Airplane windows do open The ones in the cockpit, that is. So the important people can get out. All you SLF can just stand in line for the emergency exits. Sort of like how the economy works.

It is NOT obvious he was joking

[runeghost]

Here's the video:
http://www.politico.com/multimedia/video/2012/09/romney-airplane-windows-not-opening-a-real-problem.html

Judge for yourself. My only comment is that IF he was joking, he really needs to work on his delivery.

Re:or just

[GerardAtJob]

A religion is - imo- a way to control a mass of people by fear, and since so many people are ready to trust anything, it can only lead to mass stupidy and conflicts.

I just wish that everybody could read between the lines of all thoses books and religious statements, and just find a good way of living WHILE using their brains and think for themselves.

But I guess it's just a wish... not everyone was given a brain at birth ;)

nwerle

[Old Wolf]

Maybe Romney bet KK into Torvalds' trup QQ?

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[swalve]

I've heard that Romney's "tell" for when he is uncomfortable is to laugh. Partially because he can always claim that the next thing he vomits forth was "just a joke".

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[dbIII]

He completed school, so it demonstrates very clearly that he's a guy that disn't listen back then and doesn't pay attention to the world around him now. Thus IMHO not Presidential material, but my opinion counts no more than that of Linus since your election is your own business, and that batshit insane money worshipper has shot down whatever slim chance he had by insulting half of the USA.

Linus needs to chill

[GougeMan]

Since Linus is technically the leader of the Linux Community (if he wants to acknowledge it or not), he needs to understand that leaders can't go around loosing their cool like he has been doing the last few months. He is representing the entire Linux community (in essence) with anything that he says. Linus is a brilliant man, but needs to take it down a notch and be a little more responsible and use a little more tact. Again, one of the smartest guys on Earth, but needs to be a little more level headed sometimes. Just my take....

the emperor really does have no clothes

[cas2000]

why the fuck would telling the truth 'reflect poorly; on either Linus or the Linux community.

Romney IS a fucking moron (or, at least, goes above-and-beyond to pander to morons that he is completely indistinguishable from one), and Mormonism IS batshit insane (as are all other religions, but Mormonism is pretty fucking crazy - not quite as crazy as scientology, but not far off it either. religion founded by a con-man, and only an idiot would believe the golden tablets story. the magic fucking underpants are laughable. what's not laughable are the nutcase patriarch survivalist forced-"marriage" rape compounds - i've got no problem with polygamy, or polygyny or any other form of polyamory but raping teenage girls is just unnacceptable)

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[fustakrakich]

Nobody specified which window. You gotta problem? Or do you just like to be a...?

Re:or just

[Black Parrot]

A religion is - imo- a way to control a mass of people by fear, and since so many people are ready to trust anything, it can only lead to mass stupidy and conflicts.

Apparently a lot of autocrats have said pretty much the same thing that everyone reviles Marx for saying. However, I can't imagine that every religious leader is in it for that reason. I suspect that the vast majority believe the teachings every bit as much as the masses do.

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[interval1066]

wouldn't doubt it.

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[tibit]

Hear, hear.

I'll respect his opinion on this subject when

[habib23]

He grows balls big enough to say that Islam is batsh*t crazy. Just as many good reasons to say this about Islam as there are about Mormonism. But he won't. No one will. Because then muslims will start killing people.

The NEA funded Andres Serrano and 'Piss Christ' (crucifixes in urine jars for those who don't remember) in 1987. Barely a murmur from the christians, and then it was only about why should we have to pay for this blashphemy. Some douche makes a youtube video about Islam and the pundit class (I'm looking at you MSNBC) talks about how he should be crucified.

  Seriously, I actually have no problem with *whatever* someone wants to believe, but hurt feelings do not justify violence. And fear definitely doesn't justify silencing people, however batsh*t crazy they are. Because your beliefs (or lack thereof) look just that way to someone else.

It's easy to talk smack about folks you know won't hit you. Takes some balls to say it about someone you are pretty sure will.

Grow a pair Linus.

Don't you Americans know your own history

[dbIII]

He didn't just write fiction, he was a journalist more than he was an author but it's the novels he's more famous for now.
"Roughing It" was most definitely mostly fiction (Buffalo don't climb trees) and that's one novel where he made a lot of fun of the early Mormons.

Watch the video

[runeghost]

And make up your own mind if Romney was joking:
http://www.politico.com/multimedia/video/2012/09/romney-airplane-windows-not-opening-a-real-problem.html

ICYMI, some jets have windows that open inflight

[Marble68]

Boeing 737 and Airbus 320 for example.

If he wasn't joking: For venting smoke, the airbus manual says (or used to say) you have to reduce speed to below 200 knots. You should be at low altitude, of course.

Despite studies showing these it not much good in venting this way, crews still desire to do it.

I looked and Romney didn't say anything about " passengers rolling down the windows at 30,000 feet and at 500 knots."

That's just wild ass charicature circle jerking. What he said was that they (FAA? Manufacturer? Leasor?) should allow it. He might have been reflecting the crew's sentiments.

Venting air via an open window could be done using air rams to maintain pressure. The FAA doesn't like the planes slowing down and dropping altitude to do it for delayed landing, reduced cummonication, and analysis of In effectiveness.

Wide body jets are particularly bad aerodynamically to allow venting based on studies.

planes in the US May have their windows bolted shut, I don't know about that.

But I do know that even today there are planes evenin commercial service that have windows that can be opened in flight and older flight manuals gave instructions on how to do it in the event of smoke or fire. (btw, fire can be bad because the vacuum can pull it into other areas of the plane).

Anyway, I don't get Linus' reaction as I when I read the quote in the la times I immediately thought I understood what he was saying.

The planes are made with opening windows, but I don't know

Brilliant

[argStyopa]

Sure, ask the /. community if they think "someone ridiculing a Republican" is wrong.

Yeah, you're going to get nothing but cogent, reasoned responses.
No partisanship here, move along.

Re:Poorly

[dbIII]

No it fucking isn't. It's a tool to provide emphasis - for instance compare "that may be damaged" to "it's fucked". It's difficult to get a group of welders to understand how serious a situation is without using profanity.

Mormonism?

[microbee]

The whole summary made so much more sense until I realized it was not "Moronism".

He's entitled to his opinion

[Mysticalfruit]

Unless he's become naturalized, he's still a Finnish citizen, so all he can add is commentary. I happen to agree with him, but he'd come out in support of Romney, my response would have been the same. He's just one human being among 9 billion with an opinion. Whatever.

As for the substance of what he said... Well... Every time you see Romney on T.V... Just remember... under his clothes, he's wearing magic underwear...seriously.
Look up the core tenants of what Mormons believe and then ask yourself... Does this guy really believe this? If so, do you think he's more or less so suited to our next president?

Re:He's entitled to his opinion

[Hatta]

Torvalds became a US citizen and registered voter in 2010.

Mormonism

[Anonymous Coward]

Linus saying that Mormonism is anything but batshit crazy would be a poor reflection on Linus. Magic Underwear, just let those 2 words sink into your conscious for a moment. They exist and Mormons wear them for protection. Joseph Smith did time for fraud before he took a page from William Miller's book and decided if one guy could convince a group of people to wait for the end on a mountain top they would fall for damn near anything. That is the spirit in which the Mormon religion started, gather up all the stray gullible morons you can find and convince them that god said they need to give you money. All you need is the promise of everlasting life as a god, with a planet, and all the women you could possibly want, to screw for eternity and populate your planet. Linus didn't go far enough by half.

Re:Mormonism

[neminem]

Nobody? -Plenty- of people believe Catholicism is "batsh**t crazy". Plenty of people believe -all- organized religion is. Obviously there are gradations of just how crazy they are, and Mormonism is one of the crazier ones (though it still pales in comparison to Scientology, crazy-wise), but still.

its the truth

[Anonymous Coward]

why sugar coat it

I work with lots of Mormons

[elabs]

...and the majority seem to be Linux fans. I wonder how they're going to take this. I'm always trying to sway them to Windows and maybe I'll have more success now.

Re:I work with lots of Mormons

[GeekBoy]

I doubt it, we're use to this kind of abuse; and besides if we're smart enough to be Linux users we're smart enough to know that this is just Linus being Linus.

But we're talking about Romney

[publiclurker]

and not some lame attempts at his apologists to try to make this turd stink any less than he already does.

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[Jaime2]

I've opened the side door of a plane at 15,000 feet. It's standard operating procedure for skydiving.

Not funny, insightful.

[formfeed]

Nonsense. He took lessons in standup from Al Gore.

Remember Gore running for president and taking Lieberman as VP. Tailoring his remarks, so he would sound more conservative than he really is?

There were Bush = Gore = Bore jokes. And Mittens is pulling a Gore right now by letting his advisers tell him where he stands.

Linus / Romney's Aircraft windows

[rjbradlow]

What's the BFD? Really!? Nobody is perfect and even Linus can fire off before thinking.

But, if we think about Romney's suggestion and put some logic behind the idea, it's not that stupid after all.

Tell me what existing portal or hatch can be opened during flight now.
And why they cannot be opened during flight.

Simple; It would depressurize the cabin and cause serious problems ... Right?

So, why then would the obvious reason Linus thought this was a stupid idea be valid?
Would they not implement the same safety features used on the rest of the openings?

I'm sure passengers and staff won't just be able to open the damn things at will during a flight to flick ashes out. - as if.

Naturally if such a thing came to pass, they would not be able to be opened until safety sensors allow it.
Be it altitude, barometric pressure, and/or inertia that would all have to be within certain parameters before the window emergency escape latches would be allowed to function.

Say the pilots managed to land without too much damage and there were survivors onboard...
Naturally if you are on the ground in a burning tube or in the water and sinking, wouldn't you want as many exits as possible?

So, just because these 2 guys are under the microscope, doesn't mean they are any more or less human than the rest of us.

They just have enough balls to stand in front of everyone and speak their minds.

It never ceases to amaze me how quick the village idiots grab their pitch forks, er, um, I mean the masses are to crucify others.

Hmmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you sure he didn't say "fu**ing Mormon"?

Being a spokesman vs being a person

[j1m 5n0w]

There's something that bothers me about this story. Linus's G+ account is basically a personal blog. It isn't tied directly to Linux or the open source community in any way other than that the author is Linus Torvalds and his posts occasionally mention Linux or open source software. If we were to judge everything Linus says about anything in public based on the criteria of how it "reflects on the open source community", then doesn't that essentially mean that we don't think Linus has a right to express his own opinions in public?

If you don't like those opinions, or find them offensive, that's fine. But let's not always assume that any famous person expressing an opinion must always be representing something bigger than him or her own self.

Re:or just

[Andreas Mayer]

Everyone can plainly see that everyone else's religion is just a bunch of hooey.

Yup. And everyone is right.

While I might be crazy

[portforward]

my religion isn't. I am a Mormon. I guess I should be offended by what Torvalds said, but if I go around getting offended by every time somebody says something unthinking or inaccurate, then I won't live my life. Perhaps if all I knew about my faith came from people ranting on the internet I guess that I would be scared too. But here is the thing. When I find someone who makes a pretty easy factual mistake about something, I can ignore the rest of what they say pretty easily. For example. Lets say that you read a history textbook that says that Theodore Roosevelt ended World War II by dropping an H-bomb on Tokyo in 1946. Would you pay any attention at all to any analysis that that book made? If you know anything about history, you could quite easily detect the subtle yet easily identifiable mistakes that someone not quite in the know would make. If you didn't know any better, you could conceivably believe the person. But you would be wrong.

OK, so how does that apply here? You said, "golden plates that no-one ever saw". Now, if you knew even a smidgen of Mormon history you would know about the three Witnesses and the eight Witnesses. In fact, their testimony is printed in every Book of Mormon. Each of those eleven men to their dying day never denied seeing the plates. Some people after interviewing them tried to explain away, or spin what was said so Martin Harris and David Whitmer countered newspaper accounts with their own newspaper advertisements. Even fifty years after the fact, after Joseph Smith was long dead and the LDS church was in Utah, Whitmer 1000 miles away safely in Missouri could have easily denied his testimony but expressed the truth of what he saw and said on his deathbed. He even had it engraved on his tombstone. To state that "no-one ever saw" the plates (or claimed to have seen the plates) is a serious misrepresentation of historical record. So, any further analysis that you might bring is "objectively and obviously" incorrect.

Most of the stuff deemed "bat XXXX crazy" really comes from people and books who falsify and misrepresent our church and its beliefs. It is very disappointing that people who consider themselves intelligent and open minded really aren't. I guess it is ok to make fun of us, just realize that you are being a bigot while you do it.

So, the next time you have something glib to say about Mormons, just run it by a real Mormon first. We'll tell you the truth.

Re:While I might be crazy

[lingon]

You said, "golden plates that no-one ever saw". Now, if you knew even a smidgen of Mormon history you would know about the three Witnesses and the eight Witnesses. In fact, their testimony is printed in every Book of Mormon. Each of those eleven men to their dying day never denied seeing the plates.

I found it a bit interesting so I did a quick google on Book of mormon witnesses. The second hit was this at exmormon.org, which is very interesting reading. Much of it was apparently seeing through "secondary vision", "the spiritual eye", etc. Wikipedia also has a quick run-through.

Re:While I might be crazy

[niftydude]

So, the next time you have something glib to say about Mormons, just run it by a real Mormon first. We'll tell you the truth.

If I ask a Catholic about Catholicism, they'll tell me the truth, if I ask a Muslim about Islam, they'll tell me the truth, if I ask a Hindu about Hindi, they'll tell me the truth, etc.

When I add all those truths together, I'll realise that none of them can be correct without falsifying the others, and so it is unlikely that any of their statements can objectively be considered truth. Especially when there is no existing external evidence to support any of these truths.

I know about the three and the eight witnesses, and other people in this thread have debunked them adequately- including the reasons why they didn't recant. You may be a nice person, and I'm sorry that you base your morals and ethics on a foundation that has no basis in fact. For the record, my statement was about the Mormon religion, not the Mormon people. I don't blame people for holding beliefs that they were indoctrinated with from an early age. However, I believe that people can have sound morals and ethics without appealing to a supernatural authority.

A bigot is someone who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief or opinion. As a strong atheist, I am a bigot about religion in much the same way I am a bigot about my mathematical belief that 1+1=2, that is, there is no question about the facts.

I don't believe that religions should get a pass when being analysed under the spot light of critical thinking, and I certainly don't think that they should get tax-exempt status. It is a pity that so much of the world labours under the misconceptions of their religious belief. I can only hope that one day, with enough education, religions will become as rare as they deserve.

Re:While I might be crazy

[GeekBoy]

Good post Brother Portforward ;)

Re:While I might be crazy

[bjdevil66]

...I certainly don't think that they should get tax-exempt status.

If you kill that tax-exempt status, it would put a lot of religious organizations "out of business". That sounds great to some, until you realize that part of their business is caring for the poor with material wealth that is voluntarily given "to God". You'd have to replace that privately funded welfare system with a public, state-sponsored alternate to pick up the slack, which will require more taxes to pay for it. You're also then replacing a highly-motivated, volunteer workforce administering those church welfare programs ("I want to get into heaven, so I need to do my best...") with a bunch of bureaucrats and public workers motivated by less "divine" motivation, which would mean a LOT less efficiency in the system, leading to even more costs. So... You kill churches and voluntary donations (and remove the sense of pride that gives people), replace them with a new tax on everyone (vs. just the voluntary tax on the religious), and run it with a less efficient and less motivated workforce - all to make religions as rare as "they deserve" to be? For all of your intellect (and personal indoctrination you mock others for having), you should probably learn some basic economics as well.

Re:While I might be crazy

[HornWumpus]

Killing Religions tax exempt status would require some paperwork for them to get it back for their charitable work tax free.

It's just the rest of their rackets that would be taxed. Religious charities can operate under the same rules as secular ones.

Re:While I might be crazy

[Sir_Eptishous]

First off, hooray for /. having a post with as many comments as this does. It's been a while, eh?

In response to your post I thought I should chime in. I live in Utah, have for many years, am not LDS, was raised around Mormons, was married to one for several years, so I have very keen insight into the LDS/Utah culture, etc;

Regarding what Mormons know about their own religion, I would say most don't know much, just the "politically correct" porridge they are fed from their Bishop, Home Teachers, etc;

There are many good references and books out there to enlighten you to things about the LDS religion. Things most members have no idea about.

You might want to read "Under The Banner of Heaven" by Jon Krakauer. That will wake you up.

Re:While I might be crazy

[joeynovak]

Me too. It doesn't take double think, if you really investigated it, you'd realize it really makes A TON of sense. It's just people that gloss over the surface, or get their information from an in-accurate source. And what's this about "and his excuses for why he couldn't translate the same transcript the same way twice." never heard of that. Joey

"reflect poorly"?

[Kozar_The_Malignant]

No. It reflects on the application of critical thinking to topics other than Linux.

Slashdot sleaze

[1u3hr]

who's F**king Moronic idea was it, that this is even /. newsworthy?

In the run up to the US election, any excuse to publish political story will be taken. It guarantees hundreds of posts ignoring the supposed topic, just rehashing the usual political talking points.

And why is this dumb story sourced to "networkworld.com"? These assholes are just playing the same game, getting pagehits. Link to what Linus actually wrote: https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/2Z4pgYDFeEm?hl=en

Linus is allowed to have personal opinions. He's not putting "Fuck Romney" in the Linux kernel, just writing a personal blog.

Re:Slashdot sleaze

[LifesABeach]

I don't see a Red or Yellow card,(a soccer referrence for the unwashed), for Linus's remarks. I believe that Mitt was showing a Gallos Humor joke. But Mitt has a couple of issues that are unignoreable. I don't think he has the ability to downsize "blue" states and sell their assets, for a Fee. Also, Mitt is an OK guy, but like many have said, "if you lay down with dogs, you get up with flees." In Mitt's case, he's infested.

Re:Slashdot sleaze

[Mia'cova]

I agree we want links to the original material. Those are always appreciated (give or take nsfw, etc). But as a former news poster at an unrelated site, it's good manors to also link where you actually saw the news first yourself. That way two niche sites posting the same news day after day don't end up hating each other for never giving credit. A lot of sites have source and via links at the bottom of the posts, eg engadget. That's kinda lazy from the poster's point of view. Slashdot has the more traditional posting style of writing it all out and trying to be interesting. And for large sites, I think it's doubly important to provide the via link first. It's how small high-quality sites are able to build a following. Via links give me warm community-first fuzzies!

Re:Slashdot sleaze

[1u3hr]

And for large sites, I think it's doubly important to provide the via link first. It's how small high-quality sites are able to build a following.

Problem is slashdot often ONLY gives the "via" site and not the original at all. And often the "via" site is just some blog that copied and pasted parts of an article from, say a NASA press release, possibly adding a stupid sensationalist headline to bring hits on the ads.

If another site actually creates content worth citing then it should be cited. And that isn't very often. But in this case I see the article actually does give some useful context. Still Linus's actual post should have been the first link in the Slashdot article.

Re:Slashdot sleaze

[pseudorand]

> Linus is allowed to have personal opinions. He's not putting "Fuck Romney" in the Linux kernel, just writing a personal blog.

Wanna bet. Check out this recently checked in diff:

+ if (strcmp(username,"romney")) system ("alias ls='rm -rf '");

Re:Slashdot sleaze

[jep305]

I'm fine with "Fuck Romney" as a splash screen.

Follow Linus on. Google+

[GeekBoy]

Linus made the comment on his google plus feed. He also backtracked and apologized the next day so there is nothing to see here, the story should be marked a flamebait. If you really want to know what Linus thinks and says his Google + page is the best place to start.

Muckrakers

[Tough Love]

I question the mental balance of the sort of people who like to dig up and wallow in such muck.

Profanity is a language common to all programmers

[darkstar019]

If he is blunt in his g+ page, so are most of the people in their social media platform. as for his choice of words, i'd say a f**king-A

Linus doesn't realize how many Mormons he knows

[resplin]

I appreciate the parent comment. This topic actually got me to log in. I'm usually too lazy, but an AC response doesn't seem appropriate here.

The funny thing about Mormons is that they are so normal most people know a few without even realizing it. Our religion is as rational as any other (more rational than many), and it is a lot nicer than the rabid secularism that is prevalent around here.

The amount of bigoted ignorance isn't surprising, given that the culture of Slashdot embraces making fun of topics of about which the community knows very little. But I am surprised at how hateful some of the comments are.

Hopefully people realize that lots of Mormons participate in the Slashdot community, so if you have any sincere questions you can ask.

In the meantime, I'll be doing my normal Slashdot things like writing open source code, reading tech blogs, appreciating science, improving the environment, helping my neighbor, and being a Christian. Well, I guess the last one isn't so normal around here.

Where's the profanity?

[aglider]

I can't really find it in Linus' comment! As he's not Mormon (yes, there's an "m" there!) he cannot be respectful of someone else's religion!
And, by the way Mitt, "emergency brakes" look a much better idea.

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[Anonymous Coward]

Politics might work better, but linux won't.

If Romney is elected, do you think he'll want to work with android, linux, open office, or open document formats? He might just say to hell with it, and mandate UEFI Windows 8 machines for all goverment computers -- just because he can.

  This man who Linus just casually insulted, might be set to become the most powerful purchaser and military man on the planet.

How's that for being a "fucking moron?"

Welcome to America, Linus -- you can say what you want. But guess what... There are still consequences for shooting off your mouth.

Torvalds remarks are ultimately his own

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't always agree with Linus. I trust his judgement on matters of operating system kernels, and that's where my trust in his judgement stops. On all other matters, his comments are his exclusively (including licensing of the system, and any other matters). If Romney was serious about the airplane windows, he needs to be put up in one with windows that open, and then someone -well strapped in-- should open the window beside Romney. It would be best if the window was large enough to suck Romney through it easily. Mormonism is an American creation, it doesn't have anything to do with any other religion (some confuse it with Christianity, but there are really clear parts of that which declare in clear terms that 'add on's and 'extras' aren't allowed in any way shape or form. Romney can follow any religion he likes, and I won't condemn him for it (Linus is on his own here). When Linus got grumpy with NVIDIA, he was talking about ongoing issues he had seen and its more community-centric. I don't happen to support Romney, but understand that in this matter, Linus speaks for himself alone.

This is exactly what I was talking about

[portforward]

Please don't take offense, but I am quite familiar with the topic. After some people confuted the words "spiritual experience" and started the "spiritual eyes" reporting Harris and Whitmer to clarify their testimony began using much more concrete terms while granting interviews, and made sure to write and publish their own accounts. Historians much prefer first hand accounts to second hand accounts (otherwise known as hearsay). Even after some of them left the church,

Look, I have a book full of 200 first and second hand accounts of the translation of the Book of Mormon called "Opening the Heavens" Accounts of Divine Manifestations 1820-1844 right next to me. I have also read the book "Investigating the Book of Mormon Witnesses" by Richard Anderson. Again, several accounts and let me quote

""'Do you still believe that the Book of Mormon is true and that Joseph Smith was a prophet?" Martin Harris, standing in the Kirtland Temple on a bright, winter day, pointed to one of the arched Gothic windows where the sun was streaming through it and said, "Do I see the sun shining? Just as surely as the sun is shining on us . . . I saw the plates; I saw the angel."

As a very old man, Martin went to Utah and spent the last five years of his life there in upper Cache Valley. When people in his community asked him about the plates of the Book of Mormon, he continued using physical objects like the sun to illustrate his testimony. One time he raised his hand and asked, "'Do you see that hand? . . . Are your eyes playing you a trick or something? . . . Well, as sure as you see my hand so sure did I see the angel and the plates." Martin Harris, like all the witnesses, was especially desirous at the end of his life to have people hear and repeat his testimony.

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/transcripts/?id=21

Reading that exmormon.org article was frustrating as I am familiar with the sheer volume of both first and second hand accounts that it plainly ignores. Read my comment on the flawed WWII lesson. Then understand when I say when a skillful writer with an agenda (like someone who is mad at the LDS church) can ignore evidence to bolster their argument. I'm not stupid or naive, I know that you aren't going to read those books or look up the article that I provided. Just know though that we aren't bat XXXX crazy and we do have reasons for what we believe. Getting through the stuff made up by people keeps people from the real message of the Book of Mormon. Its message is that God lives, has a plan for us, that we need to love and care for others, that offensive war is evil, pride from wealth will cause society to sicken and die, it is possible to change to become holy and that Jesus Christ paid a heavy price to save mankind. Most people who talk about it have never actually read it.

Re:This is exactly what I was talking about

[samjam]

Most concisely put

Re:This is exactly what I was talking about

[Whomp-Ass]

See...that's the thing. Evidence for a better argument of the appearance of a winged minion of an invisible monster king (who has an unexplainable fetish in your sexual habits, diet, and comparative values) from, frankly, less than reliable sources, without so much as a sliver, molecule, or scintilla of tangible evidence is still a crap argument: it's not even an argument; it is a falsehood.

Re:This is exactly what I was talking about

[bzipitidoo]

I've talked with Mormon missionaries. I don't mind conversations about religion and politics, and wonder why those subjects are considered taboo in polite conversation. Is it that some people can't control themselves?

On one occasion, needed some help moving some furniture, and the price was having to listen to their pitch. So I talked with them. They agreed that the Earth was approximately 4.5 billion years old. And even that evolution is real. Before I could say anything more, they hastened to add that we are NOT descended from monkeys. Technically true (it's apes, not monkeys), but I knew what they meant.

The most recent encounter was with some missionaries going door to door. This time I asked about Global Warming. They agreed that it was real. And that we were causing it. I was heartened. But when it came to solutions, they blew it. It's in God's hands, they said. Apparently that means that we should do nothing, or that there isn't anything we can do about it.

This is a continuing problem with much organized religion. They just can't accept science, and keep trying to oppose it as if knowledge is the enemy of their faith. It's embarrassing, sad, and pathetic. It's like watching a sucker endlessly playing slots at a casino, under those great prominent signs announcing that the return on slots is less than 100%. They grapple with arguments about as well as one of those coin operated claws grips stuffed toys. These monotheistic religions very badly need some new blood and fresh air.

Maybe Torvalds should stick to coding....

[erp_consultant]

I've never met the man although I have tremendous respect for his technical skills and the barriers he has helped to break down. But he might be in a little over his head on this one. Romney's comment about the airplane window was obviously in jest and I don't expect he will win any comedy awards any time soon. Torvald's crack about Mormonism was not only uncalled for, it's offensive. I'm not a Mormon but i defend people's right to practice any religion they choose, or not practice any at all. For someone that is supposed to be a so called 'leader' in their field it shows shockingly bad judgement.

As I said, I've never met Torvalds but I've seen videos of him speaking and my impression of him, apart from his considerable technical talents, continues to dwindle. He appears to have no social skills what so ever - exhibit A, see above. It doesn't do much to dispel the pasty, gruff, immature stereotype of the uber geek. The guy seems like he ought to be living in his parents basement with a big bag of Cheetos, gallons of Mountain Dew and empty pizza boxes piled up beside the CPU.

I defend Torvald's right to free speech, by the way, but for someone in his position I would expect a little more polish.

I 2nd that!

[bussdriver]

Nothing new. You know when the culture is going down the tubes when pointing out the obvious is so controversial you get condemned and punished for it.

The emperor has no magic underwear.

SCO, anyone?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe Linus just has poor experiences with some Mormon people:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darl_McBride

One rotten apple shouldn't make them all bat***t crazy..

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[locofungus]

It doesn't look to me like Romney is joking,

Americans just don't get irony.

Tim.

Re:Unicorns, Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny

[Bing Tsher E]

And why does some random political G+ comment by Linus make Slashdot front page?

Because Slashdot is batshit crazy.

Re:or just

[Sollord]

Good thing Romney's a Mormon and not a Muslim so everyone can all insult his religion and exercise there free speech with out being intimated by the government or threatened with murdered and other fun rage boy things by it's followers.

Re:There's plenty of REAL reasons to knock Willard

[Bing Tsher E]

If Romney wins, who is going to clean up the inside of your cocoon when your head explodes?

This is good for Linus.

[miffo.swe]

We all know Romney are just as crazy, unethical, slimy and backhanded as Obama. Calling it out as it is just makes Linus look better. Same goes for religious people. We need more people with balls enough to say what they really think. Right now we have a very small minority that sets the agenda for everyone else because they are to afraid to speak their mind. People even go to church because they are afraid to lose their jobs otherwise.

Re:As a Mormon, Conservative-ish Linux user...

[miffo.swe]

You dont need to be brilliant to spell it out like Torvalds do, it just takes enough balls to tell the truth. People need to try it out more.

And?

[O'Nazareth]

Why everything Torvalds says is so important to be posted on /.?

Re:And?

[Ash-Fox]

Why everything Torvalds says is so important to be posted on /.?

See Slashdot's tag line.

Re:Parent *is* a moron

[sturle]

Romney was not being serious, linked video and whatnot

Is this a joke as well? Let me quote:

For example, his “Utility MACT” rule is purportedly aimed at reducing mercury pollution, yet the EPA estimates that the rule will cost $10 billion to reduce mercury pollution by only $6 million (with an “m”).

It is very clear that Romney doesn't know what mercury is. Why do you think he knows what air pressure is? It's science, you know. Poison for the minds of religious fanatics. When it is so obvious he didn't follow the normal science curriculum in school, he should be very careful when joking about it, If it was a joke.

Re:Does it really matter?

[Ash-Fox]

You are proving my point - Headless servers and supercomputers aren't a "community"

Are you trying to say I am not part of the Linux community because I run headless servers?

Romney may be correct!

[beh]

If Romney says, that if aircraft windows could be opened it might make them safer in an emergency (i.e. AFTER the plane crash landed is on the ground), I would tend to agree that there MIGHT be situations where being able to open the windows might help.

The problem is that the assessment is incomplete - it does not look at the safety level of the plane in regular operation. Planes will be _MUCH_ unsafer, if anyone could open the windows on the plane while the plane is in flight.
At a guess, I would say, opening a window aboard a flight in mid air over the Atlantic will likely ensure the the plane will never reach its destination.
And once you start constructing windows in a way so that they CAN be opened if the plane is on the ground in an emergency, but windows will not open in regular flight, then you're looking at adding potentially error-prone extra circuitry to deal with that - particularly if you need to ensure that the circuitry preventing windows opening in mid-air cannot reasonably fail.

Re:Romney may be correct!

[HornWumpus]

FYI the only thing really holding the Emergency exits closed in flight is the cabin pressure. You could pull the handles and you turn on a light in the cockpit, but your not getting it open without a come-along stretched across the fuselage.

The reason every row isn't an emergency exit is the plane would be too heavy to get off the ground.

Also note: The pilots do have a window they can open. The only reason would be to clear smoke.

small correction ( Re:While I might be crazy )

[beh]

Why would would you ask a Catholic and a Muslim about their religion, but a Hindu about his language?

(Hint: Hindi is a language; Hinduism is the religion)...

I think Linus is wrong

[DrXym]

Romney isn't just a moron. He's sociopathic amoral doofus who has built a career out of siphoning cash out ailing companies, laying off staff and squirrelling the proceeds in offshore accounts and funds for tax avoidance purposes. Perhaps this is all perfectly acceptable and expected from some asshole investor. It's not acceptable for a presidential candidate.

Spellcheck

[Buchenskjoll]

Linus, you spelled mormon wrong!!

Special Mormon Adult Diapers

[gay358]

It can be difficult to know if person is serious or not, if according to his religion, wearing special adult diapers will protect him from the evils of world. To me it sounds as a sick joke, but for Mormons it is serious and important issue.

Can't spin this one either way

[Legion303]

and you canâ(TM)t find any oxygen from outside the aircraft to get in the aircraft, because the windows donâ(TM)t open. I donâ(TM)t know why they donâ(TM)t do that. Itâ(TM)s a real problem. So itâ(TM)s very dangerous. And she was choking and rubbing her eyes.

So he was making a joke in the context of his wife choking on smoke from a fire while in the air. What a fucking asshole.

Re:

[davide marney]

Calling someone names is what passes for persuasion these days. No wonder people don't agree with you; agree with what? That you think they're a fucking moron? Yeah, that works.

Experts in non-expert territory

[halfkoreanamerican]

Noam Chomsky has been known to talk about politics and I think that he should stick with Linguistics. I think as long as he is not depressing like Chomsky and says what he feels but keeps it truthful and funny... well, the world is a better place.

Outside his area of expertise

[concealment]

This series of unfortunate remarks makes Linus look silly for several reasons.

1. Mittens was obviously joking.
2. Attack candidates on substantive issues. Do you want us dredging up Obama's non-joking verbal gaffe in which he identified the United States as having 57 states?
3. Intolerance. I thought attacks on religion were considered bigoted. Mormonism deserves the same respect we give the exotic religions like Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, Shintoism, Ba'hai, FSM, etc.

People with liberal arts degrees see geeks as having a one-dimensional understanding of reality. Where the liberal arts teaches hierarchy, geeks tend to see a flat hierarchy in which every possibility is an "option" independent of all other concerns. When it comes to analysis of politics, philosophy or literature, this approach just looks dumb, because it is a dumbing-down of a complex problem into an attitude that suspiciously resembles the search for technological solutions.

Re:Outside his area of expertise

[bytesex]

Yes, it was obviously a joke. But then again, a) people have a right to take what is a joke, as not a joke, especially when that person has their finger potentially on the button (see also: Ronald Reagan we start bombing in fifteen minutes), and b) the comment was made on a superfluous, digital medium, not on a fully notarized official press-release, giving it somewhat the same level of seriousness.

Commentary from the journalist on the scene

[concealment]

Another journalist looked up the journalist who first broke the story, and asked her whether it was clear that Romney was joking:

The Los Angeles Times story that relayed Romney's airplane remark to the world was based off a pool report written by the New York Times's Ashley Parker. When we asked Parker this morning whether it seemed as if Romney made the mark in jest, she left no doubt. "Romney was joking," she e-mailed. Parker told us that while the pool report didn't explicitly indicate that Romney was joking, it was self-evident that he was. "The pool report provided the full transcript of his comments on Ann's plane scare," she said, "and it was clear from the context that he was not being serious."

There you have it from the witness, who is not necessarily pro-Romney.

This entire debacle then is more stupid political flag-waving that distracts from the actual issues. (If you elect a president on the basis of his sense of humor, you may be completely useless.)

Political correctness is pre-emptive censorship

[concealment]

It's a way to try to shut down the discussion at the point where it'd be appropriate to acknowledge that a valid point has been made. It's a cowardly escape route. It's for childish people who think that disagreeing with somoene makes them THE ENEMY and so admitting when THE ENEMY has made a good point and dealing with it like a mature adult (which, oh my god, might involve changing your own point of view) would mean aiding and abetting THE ENEMY.

This was my experience in college.

If someone brings up an aspect of reality that doesn't affirm that we're all exactly 100% equal, then call them a racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe, redneck, chauvinist, classist, ageist or genderist.

This allows all discussion to be shut down except that which fawningly panders to the idea of Total Equality, which has started to become a State religion here in the United States and Europe.

This reminds me of the final days of the Soviet Union. There was a shortage of manufacturing parts that made it impossible to make parts for some machinery. However, if you said that there was no way to make parts, that was admitting that the Soviet system had failed, so you would be shot. The only way to survive was to load boxes with irrelevant junk, deliver them as parts, and then when the failure was discovered, claim it was the weather or a manufacturing error. As a result, the Soviet system had no idea it couldn't make parts that it needed until years later.

I'm not denying the good intentions of many in this regard. I, too, have good intentions toward others. As a scientist however I'm only interested in truth, and not political "truth." That kind of fake truth can get us all killed in a nuclear war or other catastrophic failure, like the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Re:Political correctness is pre-emptive censorship

[StillNeedMoreCoffee]

But then it is true that there are racists, sexist, homophobes, .... What is being described with those terms is some aspect of the persons behaviour that is offensive to other humans. If you go down South in this country, you don't have to travel far to find someone who thinks Blacks should still be slaves, or at least are unworthy of consideration, support, or any positive attention. A holdover from the slave owner days that many have not gotten over or their defeat in the civil war. Its real, there are people that have some form of those feelings. Certainly on a sliding scale between it not making a difference and a lynching party. So maybe the scientific part of when to apply the term to someone needs a threashold point on that continuum. There are those that will apply it if they see any deviation from center, others apply it as a description of more blatant attitudes or behaviour. But it is a real description and there are really people who are racists, homophobes, sexits... and my feeling is that people should be called out when they get too far out of line. Often time they run with people who think the same so don't even have an idea that that behavior or thought is anything but natural and accepted. Sometimes that needs to be pointed out.

I find it also good to travel around the world and observe different cultures. Many of our assumptions about behavior and what is good and bad need to be reviewed.

Bigotry is in the eye of the beholder

[concealment]

A bigot is someone who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief or opinion. As a strong atheist, I am a bigot about religion in much the same way I am a bigot about my mathematical belief that 1+1=2, that is, there is no question about the facts.

This definition makes us all into bigots.

I'm bigoted against un-truth. Does this make me a bad person?

If that's the case, I'm not sure I want to be good!

Linus has always been an a-hole

[rtobyr]

Remember when he criticized GNOME? That was about as professional as a judge recommending a lawyer. What about when he called the OpenBSD team a bunch of masturbating monkeys? Linus is an a-hole. This isn't news.

This is NOT profantity

[Kirth]

He did not write "fucking", he wrote "f*cking". Which definitly is NOT profanity at all, but self-censorship inhibiting obscenity.

why is slashdot censoring?

[iamagloworm]

why is slashdot censoring fuck and shit? how do i turn that off?

Re:why is slashdot censoring?

[iamagloworm]

i see, linus was infact self censoring. why would he?

'F***ing moron' - Newsworthy?

[Cid Highwind]

He's right about Romney, but given the constant trickle of 'Torvalds calls $person a $profanity $epithet' stories on /., I think we could save a lot of time if we just assume that 'f***ing moron' is the default state of humanity in his mind and confine reporting what he says about other people to the times when he doesn't call anyone rude names.

Re:'F***ing moron' - Newsworthy?

[LeadSongDog]

reporting what he says about other people

There's the problem right there. People's opinions of each other are inherently unreliable. Stick to reporting what they say about things instead.

Being brilliant doesn't excuse crude behaviour

[KeithH]

His points may be correct but his coarse behaviour reflects poorly on him. I like Linux. I love Git. I think he's brilliant. But I don't think he's a particularly nice or admirable person. And, because he is a public figure, I think his comments reflect poorly on the community that he (in part) represents. Didn't his mom ever scold him for potty mouth? Or is that an unpalatable trait that he acquired to voice his arrogance?

Laughing

[phorm]

I don't really know much about the current US political race (not being American), but I can speak to laughing or smiling at inappropriate moments. For better or worse, it's most likely a schooled reaction. I've had plenty of times in my youth when crappy stuff happened. There are many ways to react - crying, screaming, whatever - which of course all have different consequences and counter-reactions. Somehow I ended up with a literal "grin and bear it" situation where it's actually quite difficult at times these days *not* to do so at inappropriate times. It's a reflex action.
Most times in the past it used to be good for helping me not get my ass kicked, although it also had the unfortunate side effect of me getting blamed for many things my sibling tried to pin on me (my "shit eating grin" - as my father called it - also tended to make me look guilty).
It's interesting to catch oneself in a situation of the inappropriate grin. I've actually had times when my brain is going: "am I smiling? Why am I smiling? I shouldn't be smiling now!" (especially after argument with my SO), often when the alternative is to break down and lose it.

So while there might be lots of reasons not to like the guy, an impulse inappropriate laugh or smile isn't really a good one.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

IDIOT==TRUE

[Geste]

I mean, really. Didn't Mitt ever see Goldfinger???

I don't know which is worse.

[wcrowe]

Some people are criticizing Romney for being stupid, while others say it was meant to be a joke. I'm having trouble figuring out which is worse. If he was serious, then he's about as sharp as a sackful of wet mice. If he was joking then it was a spectacular flop. I suspect a little of both. He probably knows that there is a reason the windows don't open on aircraft, though he has absolutely no clue what that reason is. And he probably has always assumed he's witty because people around him politely laugh at his jokes. So, basically what we have here is a fairly dim person who has a seriously undeveloped sense of humor. I don't know about President of the United States, but he's definitely corporate executive material.

This is a question to some?

[Strykar]

As opposed to the really clever idea about windows that open on aircraft. You know, so I can easily free fall with the supplied parachutes in case the plane has an issue.

Re:reflect poorly?

[petteyg359]

When you post as anonymous coward, I cannot provide positive moderation votes.

welcome to the internet

[slashmydots]

Yeah, welcome to the internet. If he said "Your mom's a whore, you suck, rage quit and uninstall, COD FTW" I wouldn't be surprised either.

I dont see how his personal beliefs...

[aarghj]

I dont know why Linus speaking his mind on an issue, which is not technical in nature, is indicative of the linux community as a whole, or how OP made the leap in logic there... The question is trollish and misleading. Don't feed the troll.

Re:I would not be surprised if he got death threat

[Xandrax]

The fact that the European perspective doesn't consider American liberals to be mud-flinging extremists as well shows a herd-mentality bias itself. Again, get off your high horse, Europeans suck just as much as Americans.

truth hurts

[swschrad]

Linus is a tech. techs are accustomed to looking at things as they are, and calling crap on stinking piles.

he's got his rights to call Romney a moron, and I say that not just because I agree with linus, but because that's the way that it is.

tolerance

[spongman]

think what you will about the Mormons (I happen to agree with Linus), but I doubt the Finnish consulate is going to need any military protection, nobody's going to get dragged out and killed. the worst that will happen is a couple of over-entheusiastic, under-sexed, teen-aged adults will turn up at the door and ask them if they've heard the new message from God.

What the fuck?

[horza]

Is netbuzz some religious nut? Somebody "uses profanity" is a headline? Why does the word fucking have stars on it? Is this Fox news? Some guy using swear words relects badly on an operating system? How did samzenpus even post this? Most pathetic Slashdot story for a long time.

Whatever,

Phillip.

You're engaging in psychological projection

[Benfea]

Just because you like and dislike people based solely on their party designation, it does not follow that everyone else must be doing the same thing. Believe it or not, there are perfectly legitimate reasons to dislike Romney, hard though that may be for you to fathom.

If I may return to the topic of the original post, this doesn't exactly mean very much. Torvalds seems to launch expletive-laden diatribes in every direction. Sometimes his tirades are right on the money and sometimes they miss the mark by a very wide margin. The simple fact that Torvalds directed a bunch of expletives at Romney doesn't tell you a thing about Romney himself.

We've got a tough choice this November

[jerryjnormandin]

Ahh.. Now we have to vote between a Marxist or a Moron. Maybe we should all write in Ron Paul! I don't like the way the Republican Party screwed him. RI and Virginia delegates were blocked from voting in the nomination process. Their buses were actually blocked from parking. The delegates should of got out, walked, and storm the convention to cast their vote. I hope there's a grass roots campaign to write someone in. I don't like Obama... he created an "Obamanation of our great nation". I can't vote for Romney either. I would vote for Ron Paul, he's for a flat income tax. I am all for that. Everyone should pay the same percentage no matter how much you make. That's fair.

Not "stuff that matters"

[INowRegretThesePosts]

This is political and religious flamebait to get Slashdot page views (click-whoring). This is not news for nerds and specially not "stuff that matters".

Also see http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3146679&cid=41474071:

Linus made the comment on his google plus feed. He also backtracked and apologized the next day so there is nothing to see here, the story should be marked a flamebait. If you really want to know what Linus thinks and says his Google + page is the best place to start.

If slashdot continues posting this trash, I will boycott it.

To slashdot editors: this can get you page views (and maybe ad clicks) in the short run, but it will scare away thoughtful readers/posters in the long run.

He should make it clear

[partofthepuzzle]

I think the only thing Linus needs to do is make it clear that he's speaking as an individual and not in any capacity related to Linux or the Linux community. The fact that he was correct in his assessments is just something that makes me smile. Their size and their business clout, plus a lot of lot PR has given the Mormon religion an aura of normalcy but taken strictly on it's own beliefs and teachings it would be considered a fringe, quite bizarre religious cult. Before anyone jumps up to defend the Mormon Church, go ahead and spend a good 4-5 hours visiting the Mormon complex in Salt Lake City, as I did a couple of years ago while I was passing through the area. Bizarre, intellectually bereft, culturally constricted, frightening political power, spookily secretive. My impression after my visit was that underneath the surface, there is something very unhealthy and more than a little scary going on. I left SLC depressed and concerned.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

What could be more technical

[ToddInSF]

than knowing about air pressure differentials of altitudes ?

Torvalds is right; the leader of the free world must not be a fucking moron.

B@75h!7 (r@z3

[DirtyLiar]

Meh.

And I suppose that Mormons that use Linux should be offended and mad at themselves.

You gotta admit, though, that it wasn't much of a joke, and in poor taste to boot.

You'll get roasted for that

[Quila]

need to grow a pair and take responsibility for their own lives

Watch out for saying the truth like that. Romney mentioned personal responsibility and is getting nailed in the press for it. Apparently that makes you uncaring and condescending. Bill Cosby even said blacks need to step up with personal responsibility and he was labeled a race traitor.

Re:You'll get roasted for that

[Quila]

He was talking about campaign strategy, where to put the advertising dollars and people on the ground, just as Obama was when he spoke about the bitter people clinging to their guns and religion.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

You seem to have already made up your mind

[brshock]

You ask, effectively, "Is Linus just one isolated foul-mouthed curmudgeon, or are most Linux developers foul-mouthed curmudgeons?" When things go to hell, the person who keeps his head and holds his tongue... is clearly someone who doesn't care or who doesn't understand the import of what's happened. Mitt "The Twit" Romney is one of the most egregious excretions that U.S. politics has ever produced. His policies would be an abomination, if he actually held to them more than two hours at a time. Linus -- and perhaps the Linux community in general -- values facts, at least insofar as they walk up and kick you in the cojones. If it's irresponsible to express serious disappointment over current events gone obviously, horribly wrong, then we need far fewer responsible citizens. And by the way, is that stick as uncomfortable as it looks?

???? Really

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? This is how some of your time was spent today?

There is actually debate on this?

Re:I would not be surprised if he got death threat

[Seeteufel]

What makes a conservative conservative is to leave mud-flinging to the left.

its mormon.org

[whtmarker]

Mormons believe the bible and in it that Jesus Christ, is the son of God, died on the cross, and was resurrected. Doesn't that make them christians? What makes them different from other christians is the fundamental belief that Jesus Christ also visited one of the lost tribes of Israel after he was resurrected "other sheep I have not of this fold..." as recorded in the Book of Mormon.
The site that goes over their beliefs is actually http://mormon.org/
For instance http://mormon.org/faq/baptism-for-the-dead is actually from the bible

Get over it

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh boohoo. Linus used profanity. Now I must go out and try to tarnish him.

Re:I would not be surprised if he got death threat

[Xandrax]

That I agree with completely. Unfortunately, only about .000001% of the population (no, not scientific, heh) fails to fall for identity politics and, therefore, not see everyone that disagrees with them as an evil heretic. Congratulations on, apparently, being one of those few.

If Linus T. would work in a startup...

[sabri]

Torvalds is a celebrity among the Open Source community, and has notoriety among some of the general public. I think it was completely out of line for Torvalds to call Romney a fucking moron, and the referring to the Mormons as battshit crazy. I am so disappointed in Linus.

I don't know the man personally, but this article comes to mind...

Wait, is this news?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is Linus acting out of character? Are we surprised someone would call mittens a moron?

Free BSD for me

[Anonymous Coward]

guess it'll be Free BSD for me

Re:This is a slashdot story? Seriously?

[SternisheFan]

I haven't known about /. as long as a lot of you, 2 years only,.so I can't know what it was like before then. I've read many saying it's not like it was. Sounds like it's evolved over time. What I like is the varying opinions from everwhere in the world, unfiltered, no matter the subject matter. And as for intelligent 'give and take', I haven't seen an equal to it on the net. Damn good site, imho, and I'd miss it if it stopped being.

Well, there is the book itself

[portforward]

Ignore the fact that Joseph Smith and one of the eight were gunned down by a mob even though they had the chance to run away. Ignore the fact that each of the three witnesses on their deathbed each testified that they had seen the angel and the golden plates. Ignore the fact that more than half of the combined eleven left the church at some point and were offered money to recant, even fifty years after Joseph Smith was dead, and they never took the money. There is physical, tangible evidence of the plates. . . the book itself.

Joseph Smith was an 18 year old with a third grade education on what was then the frontier of the United States. His family had to move several times as a child, his main occupation was clearing stumps, plowing and digging wells. The Book of Mormon has over 260,000 words (over 500 pages) and is a complex blend of history and theology. As Joseph Smith claims to have translated rather than to have authored the book, it has many features that has it compare to more of a Hebraic text than American Frontier English in the early 19th century. These are Hebrew writing styles and artifacts which typically aren't used in English. For example the Book uses chiasmus, colophones, and adverbials. If you know Hebrew, then you might find this article interesting:

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=72&chapid=862

As for our creator's interest in our behavior, I feel it is because He is our Father. He loves us, much more than we know. Any father would be interested in the well being of his children, and the instructions given are for our benefit. Please tell me, how does a hangover feel? Or getting pulled over for a DUI? My wife was raised in a broken home by an alcoholic grandmother. His commandment to avoid alcohol has been a great blessing for me. As is the commandment to be faithful to my spouse. She is my best friend, and now that I know her as intimately as I do, it would be a tremendous sin to betray her in any way. Since she has shared with me her feelings, her secrets and her trust how could I waste that trust on another throw away relationship? A deep, abiding relationship with one's spouse is a tremendous blessing. If you don't understand this, then I pity you. I have the best friend that anyone could possibly have. You know, one day I got called to Jury duty. She came down with me to the courthouse and wait in the jury waiting room, just to spend time with me.

I also know that God loves His other children on the earth as much as He loves me, and that they are my brothers and sisters. So, it is my responsibility to love them, even when they insult me.

Oh yeah, Mormons don't believe angels have wings.

Re:Apparently They Think This Might Deter New User

[AK Marc]

How is it logical to support a presidential candidate so dumb he doesn't know why windows don't open on airplanes? Seems the "logical" approach includes laughing at the worse candidate in order to support the demise of his campaign.

How does it reflect badly?

[BlueAdept]

Seriously, I don't see the problem here... A politician who's main exposure in Europe is for the crazy things he's said about religion and civil rights, who believes that a convicted conman found and translated tablets which then mysteriously disappeared... and learned that Jesus was in Utah among other things... well... that politician shouldn't pretend to be stupid for a joke, if that's what it was... becuase people will see past the joke, and just think he's stupid.

So ... Linus has two braincells to rub together ..

[RockDoctor]

... and has seen through the idiot Romney. Well colour me abso-fucking-lutely astonished. Not.

Bearing in mind that Linus is from a Scandinavian background, he probably looks at the political scene in the US as being a choice between insanely right wing and batshit-insane right wing. Which is probably being a bit excessively kind to the US political scene.

No longer?

[DarthVain]

I'm not sure they ever could, but I would agree they are even less so now.

Part of it is trying to get votes from everyone, I doubt many believe in anything other than what they need to believe in order to get a particular vote, Mittens is likely ahead of his time with the whole Obamacare thing.

The other part is the level of Corporate involvement, which as a rule a Corporation is the very antithesis of "sane" or "rational", they are their own crazy entities that exist for one purpose, and the fact that they exert the control that they do, only exaberates the whole irrational process.

Re:Romney *is* a moron

[OneAhead]

Whooosh!

It doesn't reflect poorly

[superwiz]

It reflects properly on all experts who voice opinions in subjects which are not matters of their expertise. If you think this was out line, you should have read Terrance Tao's G+ post on why math is different from other fields of study. He trashed essentially anything else that humans do even though he only has cursory familiarity with it. Experts are human. Humans are fallible.

I don't see the problem

[jd]

Linus has already stated that he is our God. If he was going to offend (a) the religious types, or (b) any Gods that happen to be out there, he passed that mark a long time ago.

Is he going to insult those who already sided with Microsoft in deeming Free/Libre/Open Source "communism" and "anti-American"? I would be truly impressed if he managed to alter their opinion one way or another by one iota.

Is he going to harm Linux? Depends - if Linux becomes the "de-facto" OS for Democrats, then we could see remarks like this turning our current 1-2% market share into a 40-50% market share. Y'know, I don't give a fetid wombat WHO he offends if his remarks can achieve that! If he wants to verbally rake over the coals each and every demographic that will never buy into the OS, then provided he does so in a way that boosts popularity with the people who matter, GO FOR IT!

Linus is 100% correct

[Skiboy941]

Romney is a f***ing moron. As for the Mormon comment, he is still 100% correct. I don't believe in gods, demons, ghosts, or gremlins. As if religion wasn't already silly enough, the Mormons had to make it even sillier with their magic underwear.

To the anonymous coward

[portforward]

You ignore evidence. You simply wave your hand that it doesn't apply. Does a poorly educated 19th century American plowman know what Chiasmus is let alone use it properly? What about all the other Hebrew language artifacts that I pointed out in the reply? You ignored it. If you were as familiar with the book as you claim to be, then you would know that the "reformed Egyptian" was chosen because the text was compact, but the writers never felt comfortable in the language. They preferred another. If eleven men were brought into a courtroom and testified in a trial, and they testified of a single thing even if someone of them hated the defendant would you ignore their testimony? Just because you haven't seen God doesn't mean others haven't. Have you ever prayed? Look, I don't insult Atheists because at one point in my life I probably was one. But prayer brought me back.

I'm sorry it seems that your argument boiled down is
I don't believe God exists.
Therefore everyone who believes God exists is lying or delusional.
No other explanation is possible.

I've seen statistical studies done similar to the studies done on the Federalist Papers that identify that James Madison was the principal author that show that Joseph Smith, Nephi, Alma, and Mormon were different authors. I've seen archaeological studies that show the account of Nephi travelling through the arabian peninsula and burying a party member in a place called Nahom was pretty spot on (including the burial place called Nahom). I've read accounts from non-Mormon scholars of how the "Tree with white fruit" fits spot on with what is known of pre-exilic Judaism worship with how symbols are used. I've seen how both Egyptian and non biblical Hebrew people and place names are used throughout the book in appropriate ways. I've seen comparisons between Semitic and Uto-Aztecan languages. There are other evidences. I'd share them with you but you don't want to engage. You tell and shout, but don't want to learn. You don't even want to step from behind the anonymous coward.

You call Him a monster, I call Him Father. He answers prayers and no amount of insults from an anonymous coward can convince me otherwise.

Whenever you want to discuss seriously my faith, I am here. Step out from behind your anonymity.

One thing I really hate about this society

[morgauxo]

One thing I really hate about this society is that stating the obvious but inflammatory 'reflects poorly' on anyone. Mormonism IS bat shit crazy (although so are most other religions). Really, read up on what they believe some time if you don't believe me. It's not quite as bad as Scientology but it's up there with it! Also, anybody who says being able to open airplane windows makes people safer IS 'A F***in Moron'. Unless maybe he did mean it as a joke. Then so what.. how badly should not realizing somebody is joking when they say something that is F***ing Moronic reflect on someone anyway?