We have a little less than half of the people that throw up their hands and give up because it is just so dumb.
We have another group at a little less than half that are so worn out with work, the 3 kids society said they should have, the junk they spend their money on, etc.. etc.. that they don't have the time to pay attention.
So you have 2% that are pissed off that our leadership is dumb as hell and are willing to fight the idiocy. And that's not enough.
Corporations are not private businesses. It's the creation of a fictional entity to do business under that acts as a shield.
Saying they can have a religion is not only silly, but it's hypocrisy. They want all the pros of operating in that "legal fiction" state and none of the cons. If you want to be a public corporation then don't bitch when the public come to you.
Even if they are voting to make a group of people second class? Seesh... would you the same if the majority voted to make some group of people slaves based on some other genetic trait? Extreme example, but these people want to make another group of people second class because of the way they interpret a bible verse. For some of us that seems just as damn arbitrary.
They didn't think someone that contributed to something that they considered anti-human rights should be the head of an open source organization and they voted with their feet. They didn't go to a legislature and say that Eich and all the other people that gave to this cause should have rights taken away. That's what the anti-gay factions are doing at the moment as they keep losing ground on this issue.
This "you're not tolerant of my intolerance" meme is rather wacky.
It wasn't until recently that fighting back when people are throwing you to the ground and kicking you (literally or metaphorically) was seen as "intolerant."
I really don't know what Eich's particular case was, so this doesn't necessarily apply to this specific situation, but when a person progresses from talking about how gays are horrible and moves to working to actively take rights away or make them second class citizens in some legal sense then it ceases to become a freedom of speech issue.
I think that's a clear point so many people miss. Exercising freedom of religion or freedom of speech doesn't go as far as taking rights away from others. The saying I was taught was "the right of your fist end at the tip of my nose."
The main argument for the current idiotic spate of anti-gay bills is that their rights entitle them to take rights away from others. It's a situation that these people themselves would never tolerate if the situation were reversed.
...of how the constant whining about the "free market" is total bullshit.
The free market created innovation, so the established players want to shut it down. They go whining to legislators, who will put in a reglation because their donors tell them to.
Concerns about "saftey" and the like are irrelevant... this is the usual crap we see in the "pro free market" USA.
It's interesting that this tactic has failed in every case going all the way back to the start of the printing press. If you make some sort of communication form illegal it just gets distributed more widely.
It tells you something about the caliber of people that get into office, doesn't it?
Slashdot Mirror
If you are required to not be a fascist or a communist to have a job, is that a political litmus test?
Theorize: if the guy was suddenly found on record of being in support of pedophilia would this thread be happening?
Can "cannot lead" equate out to "is not fit to do his job" or "cannot do his job due to distraction."
Mozilla did a piss poor job by choosing a bigot to run an organization like this, anyway.
This is reality for many in corporate surfdom today.
Only if you are affluent.
If you are a nobody, H.R. would make up something or wait until a minor infraction and can you.
And you'd have no recourse... because the company said it was for cause and there is no proof otherwise.
However, if you are affluent and a public person you can fight back.
If he was a mid-level to low-level employee then there would be no debate. The company would make something up and that would be the end of it.
I guess there is yet ANOTHER advantage of affluence.
Scalia should be impeached for prejudging cases.
Thomas should be impeached for open and obvious conflict of interests.
Roberts is an idiot, but I am not sure he's technically done anything wrong. And I read today that Kennedy had roots in the lobbyist industry.
They just need more time for their corporate puppetmasters to tell them what to do.. that's all.
Not only are they a court purchased by corporate interests, they are intellectually weak and the lack any courage to do the right thing.
Don't listen to anyone that assumes this is a party-based phenomenon.
We have the worst of worst in ALL positions of leadership.
I'm sure with 438 men and women in Congress, stupid things get said everyday.
Understatement... it's what's for dinner!
I'd listen if you didn't have to take a hard right line and make a strawman out of every "liberal" position.
Liberal in quotes since you obviously mean it as a pejorative here. Search/replace liberal for "asshole" and your meaning stays the same.
I think you're maybe half right.
We have a little less than half of the people that throw up their hands and give up because it is just so dumb.
We have another group at a little less than half that are so worn out with work, the 3 kids society said they should have, the junk they spend their money on, etc.. etc.. that they don't have the time to pay attention.
So you have 2% that are pissed off that our leadership is dumb as hell and are willing to fight the idiocy. And that's not enough.
Corporations are not private businesses. It's the creation of a fictional entity to do business under that acts as a shield.
Saying they can have a religion is not only silly, but it's hypocrisy. They want all the pros of operating in that "legal fiction" state and none of the cons. If you want to be a public corporation then don't bitch when the public come to you.
Even if they are voting to make a group of people second class? Seesh... would you the same if the majority voted to make some group of people slaves based on some other genetic trait? Extreme example, but these people want to make another group of people second class because of the way they interpret a bible verse. For some of us that seems just as damn arbitrary.
Bigotry? Really?
They didn't think someone that contributed to something that they considered anti-human rights should be the head of an open source organization and they voted with their feet. They didn't go to a legislature and say that Eich and all the other people that gave to this cause should have rights taken away. That's what the anti-gay factions are doing at the moment as they keep losing ground on this issue.
This "you're not tolerant of my intolerance" meme is rather wacky.
It wasn't until recently that fighting back when people are throwing you to the ground and kicking you (literally or metaphorically) was seen as "intolerant."
I really don't know what Eich's particular case was, so this doesn't necessarily apply to this specific situation, but when a person progresses from talking about how gays are horrible and moves to working to actively take rights away or make them second class citizens in some legal sense then it ceases to become a freedom of speech issue.
I think that's a clear point so many people miss. Exercising freedom of religion or freedom of speech doesn't go as far as taking rights away from others. The saying I was taught was "the right of your fist end at the tip of my nose."
The main argument for the current idiotic spate of anti-gay bills is that their rights entitle them to take rights away from others. It's a situation that these people themselves would never tolerate if the situation were reversed.
...of how the constant whining about the "free market" is total bullshit.
The free market created innovation, so the established players want to shut it down. They go whining to legislators, who will put in a reglation because their donors tell them to.
Concerns about "saftey" and the like are irrelevant... this is the usual crap we see in the "pro free market" USA.
Ginger midgets aren't human. You fail it.
We're pinheads now
We are not whole
We're pinheads all
Jocko homo
Didn't recognize morse code? Turn in geek card.
When I hear "investing in the cloud" it sounds like they are going to "invest" using a leaf blower.
About as effective, too.
Hope some loose cash blows my way.
everyone p's
The revelation here is that THINK they are doing something new. They're not.
It's interesting that this tactic has failed in every case going all the way back to the start of the printing press. If you make some sort of communication form illegal it just gets distributed more widely.
It tells you something about the caliber of people that get into office, doesn't it?