I can move with 3 pounds of dynamite....or c-4 if you want something actually --stable-- you weenies. Explosives have worked well at moving dirt for a good while.
Oh, sorry, you wanted it moved from here to there, not just "moved."
For me, it's the multiplayer. It's easier to get some of your boys and their XBox's together on 2-3 tv's than a LAN party where you have to tote around a PC or worry over a laptop. Setup and takedown are faster on a console.
Gameplay is relatively easy, cheating is minimal, and there are TONS of customizable options to set up whatever competition you want to do easily (the BIGGEST bonus).
I always found that my main problem is that reading from paper is STILL better than the light from a computer screen. My eyes get less tired, and I can focus better on what I am able to do. I wonder what the challenge is to create a computer screen that does a better job at simulating the reflected??(I Am Not a Physics Major)light from paper rather than the self-generated light from a computer screen.
Alas, I can't print out everything I need to read, as that would take too dang long and build up this stack o shredding material I have let lay too long.
A bit of a problem with your premise.
Senators and Representatives are elected by a majority who, more often than not, share the beliefs of their constituencies. Most of their votes (especially the highly visible ones) tend to be the same as what the electorate would have wanted. Saxby Chambliss is probably going to vote right-wing because his constituents are conservative. Harry Reid is going to swing left because that's what his constituency elected him for, and his beliefs match theirs. Just because your personal representative doesn't vote the way you want him to does not mean that he is voting because of the party line.
You have to be pretty specific on a few votes that you have seen for the "votes-only-the-party-line" argument to fly, and THEN you have to show that it isn't what the constituencies voted for him/her to do.
Moving the primary to such an earlier date was tried in the '99 Republican primary in Louisiana, and it didn't take so well (partially because the party chair was such a nutcase). Primaries ARE moving up, though, and I would like to see a few early ones spread more around the country than just New Hampshire and Iowa. The national parties (and candidates) don't like to play along...because of the travel that it entails, I suppose.
Other than that, I don't mind the primary system all that much in the US. Each state has its own particular "flavor" of primaries, and they work rather well.
They aren't the problem...it's the money involved that doesn't give lower-tier candidates (who occasionally make sense) a chance, but I don't want my tax money to go to one of them for their campaign.
What is most interesting about this thread is the dearth of the discussion of nuclear power.
It's cleaner, safer, and just as or more efficient than anything else out there, but there are FAR too many people who got scared by Chernobyl and Three Mile Island 30 years ago to form a reasonable opinion about modern nuclear power.
My understanding is that the book that Al Gore based his movie off of (which I didn't see) addressed nuclear power, but he didn't....probably because if we had it, he wouldn't make so much money off of carbon credits.
I think this comes close to the problems with scientific debate and creation; one places a definition on "theory" that is far too close to "universal law" (which doesn't particularly exist) and the other defines it far too closely to "hypothesis."
Both, I have found, tend to be far too dogmatic in their beliefs on the debate (or, dare I say it, faith).
You have to be current to keep up. Last I checked, we weren't current.
A funny addendum; our military is - from a technology standpoint - the best in the world...and that technology mostly ranges from the early 70s until about 2002. The recently retired F-15, which was developed in the 70s and 80s, hardly had a match in the world and I believe was never shot down (at least by enemy aircraft)...and would still punch everything else out of the sky except other American aircraft and maybe a modern MIG with a really good pilot.
Also, doesn't the US have a constitution which makes freedom of expression an absolute right?
"or abridging the freedom of speech" is from the first amendment. The US Constitution doesn't "make" freedom of expression a right, it ASSUMES that it is ALREADY a right that we already have and then protects it. There's a difference.
The original announcement was to be Tuesday at noon.
Cheney went to the hospital for a knee-blood-clot "emergency" in the morning.
So, Kucinich delayed it until 5 pm when it was obvious there was no emergency with Cheney's health.
The newsday got slammed with several other big stories:
Most of which should be or actually other non-issues. Tag this slownewsday.
- EU says Wolfowitz should go;
Of course they do. If you study the issue, you'll find that the whole thing is a reaction to his anti-corruption stance and trying to weed out the garbage than anything else. It's interesting how this would be a non-issue if a European was running the joint, and the subordinate was actually within the sphere of influence.
- UN says Bagdad surge not working;
Of course it does. Count the decrease in the number of US deaths and how most of the violence is sectarian instead of insurgents. And how there isn't much UN there, anyway. They have a pointed interest in not being wrong about Iraq, anyway.
- House passes War-funding with timetable;
Which will get vetoed.
- Cheney speaking at BYU (Utah) commencement w/ lots of protesters;
WOW. More protestors. Shocking.
- Very Conservative (not neocon) New Hampshire voting for Civil Unions
Make that Very Libertarian New Hampshire. Quite a difference, and makes more sense.
So, yesterday/today is news-dense. The impeachment resolution had to compete.
A non-issue competing with others.
I'm going to come out and say it - this is blatant pandering for Free Press by Kucinich, and it's going to be one of the only ways he's going to GET much of any press, because he sure as heck isn't getting any money to run commercials.
No, I'm talking about how most people screw it up and no word processor will ever repair it.
And, yes, I f'ed up on the "their." I usually don't.
An honest-to-goodness case of correctly-defined irony.
It still doesn't mean that people will cease to infuriate me with their improper use of "it's" and "its." The next big step is correcting that error.
It's like their freakin' INTERCHANGEABLE now. Sheesh.
Slashdot Mirror
The great thing about science out in space is that it yields BOTH amazing results AND really neat pictures.
I can move with 3 pounds of dynamite....or c-4 if you want something actually --stable-- you weenies. Explosives have worked well at moving dirt for a good while.
Oh, sorry, you wanted it moved from here to there, not just "moved."
For me, it's the multiplayer. It's easier to get some of your boys and their XBox's together on 2-3 tv's than a LAN party where you have to tote around a PC or worry over a laptop. Setup and takedown are faster on a console.
Gameplay is relatively easy, cheating is minimal, and there are TONS of customizable options to set up whatever competition you want to do easily (the BIGGEST bonus).
I always found that my main problem is that reading from paper is STILL better than the light from a computer screen. My eyes get less tired, and I can focus better on what I am able to do. I wonder what the challenge is to create a computer screen that does a better job at simulating the reflected??(I Am Not a Physics Major)light from paper rather than the self-generated light from a computer screen.
Alas, I can't print out everything I need to read, as that would take too dang long and build up this stack o shredding material I have let lay too long.
No one knows what "cries uncle" means anymore. Let's use the modern version:
"Tapped Out!"
A bit of a problem with your premise. Senators and Representatives are elected by a majority who, more often than not, share the beliefs of their constituencies. Most of their votes (especially the highly visible ones) tend to be the same as what the electorate would have wanted. Saxby Chambliss is probably going to vote right-wing because his constituents are conservative. Harry Reid is going to swing left because that's what his constituency elected him for, and his beliefs match theirs. Just because your personal representative doesn't vote the way you want him to does not mean that he is voting because of the party line.
You have to be pretty specific on a few votes that you have seen for the "votes-only-the-party-line" argument to fly, and THEN you have to show that it isn't what the constituencies voted for him/her to do.
Moving the primary to such an earlier date was tried in the '99 Republican primary in Louisiana, and it didn't take so well (partially because the party chair was such a nutcase). Primaries ARE moving up, though, and I would like to see a few early ones spread more around the country than just New Hampshire and Iowa. The national parties (and candidates) don't like to play along...because of the travel that it entails, I suppose.
Other than that, I don't mind the primary system all that much in the US. Each state has its own particular "flavor" of primaries, and they work rather well.
They aren't the problem...it's the money involved that doesn't give lower-tier candidates (who occasionally make sense) a chance, but I don't want my tax money to go to one of them for their campaign.
Outside.
Plus be ready to barbecue when we get there.
Actually, the next time we go to mars the lander should plant something hardy, like a cactus, to see what happens.
What is most interesting about this thread is the dearth of the discussion of nuclear power.
It's cleaner, safer, and just as or more efficient than anything else out there, but there are FAR too many people who got scared by Chernobyl and Three Mile Island 30 years ago to form a reasonable opinion about modern nuclear power.
My understanding is that the book that Al Gore based his movie off of (which I didn't see) addressed nuclear power, but he didn't....probably because if we had it, he wouldn't make so much money off of carbon credits.
I think this comes close to the problems with scientific debate and creation; one places a definition on "theory" that is far too close to "universal law" (which doesn't particularly exist) and the other defines it far too closely to "hypothesis."
Both, I have found, tend to be far too dogmatic in their beliefs on the debate (or, dare I say it, faith).
Actually, don't claim on being objective. Period. Cause you're NOT.
But I LIKE Twinkies!!
"I own a crapload of tanking AMD stock, and need it to go up so I can sell it and, hopefully, make some money back."
You have to be current to keep up. Last I checked, we weren't current.
A funny addendum; our military is - from a technology standpoint - the best in the world...and that technology mostly ranges from the early 70s until about 2002. The recently retired F-15, which was developed in the 70s and 80s, hardly had a match in the world and I believe was never shot down (at least by enemy aircraft)...and would still punch everything else out of the sky except other American aircraft and maybe a modern MIG with a really good pilot.
Emailing pictures of Greta Garbo you copied from your hard-drive doesn't count as "sexual favors."
Then again, around here it might.
Me neither.
Mostly because it would probably require me to live in a place where God didn't plant the grass. No thanks.
Also, I'm not a programmer.
Also, doesn't the US have a constitution which makes freedom of expression an absolute right? "or abridging the freedom of speech" is from the first amendment. The US Constitution doesn't "make" freedom of expression a right, it ASSUMES that it is ALREADY a right that we already have and then protects it. There's a difference.
QQ PVP Server, jack.
Number of attacks are down, and casualty numbers have decreased last 4 months.
The original announcement was to be Tuesday at noon. Cheney went to the hospital for a knee-blood-clot "emergency" in the morning. So, Kucinich delayed it until 5 pm when it was obvious there was no emergency with Cheney's health. The newsday got slammed with several other big stories: Most of which should be or actually other non-issues. Tag this slownewsday.
- EU says Wolfowitz should go;
Of course they do. If you study the issue, you'll find that the whole thing is a reaction to his anti-corruption stance and trying to weed out the garbage than anything else. It's interesting how this would be a non-issue if a European was running the joint, and the subordinate was actually within the sphere of influence.
- UN says Bagdad surge not working;
Of course it does. Count the decrease in the number of US deaths and how most of the violence is sectarian instead of insurgents. And how there isn't much UN there, anyway. They have a pointed interest in not being wrong about Iraq, anyway.
- House passes War-funding with timetable;
Which will get vetoed.
- Cheney speaking at BYU (Utah) commencement w/ lots of protesters;
WOW. More protestors. Shocking.
- Very Conservative (not neocon) New Hampshire voting for Civil Unions
Make that Very Libertarian New Hampshire. Quite a difference, and makes more sense.
So, yesterday/today is news-dense. The impeachment resolution had to compete.
A non-issue competing with others.
I'm going to come out and say it - this is blatant pandering for Free Press by Kucinich, and it's going to be one of the only ways he's going to GET much of any press, because he sure as heck isn't getting any money to run commercials.
No, I'm talking about how most people screw it up and no word processor will ever repair it. And, yes, I f'ed up on the "their." I usually don't. An honest-to-goodness case of correctly-defined irony.
It still doesn't mean that people will cease to infuriate me with their improper use of "it's" and "its." The next big step is correcting that error. It's like their freakin' INTERCHANGEABLE now. Sheesh.