Yeah, but Diebold also makes ATMs that run XP, so they get cracked. Maybe it's sufficient to say this isn't the ONLY stupid decision they've made. Don't chock up to conspiracy theories what can be more easily explained as stupidity...
He's GOT to be kidding; can anyone point out an innovation that's seen the light of day, lately?
Investors are now gunshy about lending money for new apps- every time someone releases one for Windows, Microsoft either steals it and re-sells it as their own, or duplicates the idea and puts them out of business. Instead, new ideas come in a form that isn't tied to Microsoft, like http://carrierpoint.com/ and similar business-to-business, web-based things.
Sure, OpenSource has spent the bulk of it's time getting caught up with the other OSs, but there's been a lot of code to write, test, and improve. New things will slowly start popping out, and when they do, they'll be built on a stable, well-considered platform that 'just works'.
And as to 'producing crappy software since you sell service contracts', hasn't Microsoft become the largest maker of crappy software from doing just that? Who IS this guy, and why does anyone listen to him?
I was just reading that "The NEXT version of Windows...." statement we hear every year or so and thinking "Yeah, malware will be a thing of the past; SURE."
But then it occurred to me...
Linux has every piece of sourcecode open to the world, has more installs than Mac, just has enough viruses to fit on one hand.
Meanwhile, Microsoft's sourcecode is stored in the same "Area 51" next to the Arc of the Covenant and the Fountain of Youth, and has 60,000+.
So what's the difference? Someone's got to be helping, somewhere. A LOT like the Patriot Act and friends; a large, dangerous perceived threat that allows organizations to make sweeping changes.
So..."Longhorn" will have all that Trusted Computing crap and deny use of other operating systems, etc....'cause we're tired of viruses, phishing, and all the other circus that online life has become?
If I hadn't burnt-out on computing, I'd care. YOU guys deal with it.
Sorry, I was going to go another round with you, but talking political sense with the young farts on Slashdot is like trying to teach a dog how to drive stick-shift. Feel free to live blissfully assertive in your ignorance of the truth. And when the WMDs are found, Iraq is a peacful place, and things are very nearly peaceful world wide, know which side you were on. You won't be alone. But I'm sure that the achievement will be touted by the media as a minor point, and that you should still be socialist, anyway. Enjoy!
"Nice of you to tell me what I do or do not know. You've been doing that for a couple of messages now. You've also been reading my mind... or at least reading someone's mind."
OK, so you knew there was a reason he didn't just jump up and freak out, but you presumed Bush a failure, instead? That doesn't make sense. And you didn't see the movie, young bean, but you're willing to take the work of Micheal Moore through your friends? I can't help you with any of this.
"A little. Not nearly as much as having George Bush sit there reading a book about a goat while the US was actually under attack."
I really hate Michael Moore. This is a perfect example. You're blissfully unaware that a B25 slammed into the Empire State building in the late 40's aren't you? This could have been that. When the second one hit, it was obviously not that. What exactly would a president....any president do, for those intervening 10 minutes? _walk_ to Iraq, 'cause there's no time to pay the cab? Start shooting people in the room? When you run one of the biggest, most powerful nations in the world, you can't just press the nuke button randomly. Otherwise, they'd call you a cowboy. Get the hint?
Regardless of the TV you've been watching, there's very little Clinton legacy to talk about. I've asked people- they remember the stained dress and something about whitewater. Ya know why? He didn't do anything, as his impeachment testimony tried to say, ironically. He got in, got the media attention, and did nothing since the economy was already rebounding six months before he took office. He just stayed out of the way. That's why there were no ground troops in Kosovo. He was the 'don't rock the boat' president.
My problem with this bill is that it's just another in a long line of winning elections by judges, not by ballots. See also: the governor's race in Washington. Three counts, all for the republican, then one more that cleared by 129 votes, meanwhile 1400 felons voted, too. Not to mention all the people who took time from living in their graves to vote.
I don't have a problem with counting every vote. I have a problem that we need to have only one, non-indicted, living person per vote.
I'm not niave about politicians; there are bad republicans, and they, like democrats have to be agressive to get votes. But right now more conservatives are in the republicans, so it's there that I vote. And my studies of history shows that to be the wise choice.
What's a snork, the sound of running out of responses? I've gotta go to work now. Back later.
"Remember which candidate it was that wanted to minimize the number of debates in this particular election?"
Fielding 9 Democratic 'dwarfs' (plus Leiberman, who's sane) wasn't a debate; it was a "we all hate Bush" ploy. You'd think 3-4 debates among these people would be enough, but no- SIXTEEN turned out to be the right number. Face it, this was more bashing. No one really believed in any of these folks.
Limiting the debate was due to this tactic. He had nothing to say to the president that he hadn't already repeated and contradicted, sometimes on the same day. Did you really learn anything from the debates? Did you even tune in?
[they pose Iraq as Vietnam] "That's because it was. Both countries were ones we waged war in, but who hadn't attacked us. In both countries, we tried to impose an ideology, because we didn't agree with theirs. The fact that the casualty statistics
Good call, media-boy. Did you know that Ho-chi-min asked for our involvement? Did you realize that the 'Red Scare' was a real problem to be dealt with? (I didn't until I started learning about the Russian mindset, and was startled!) so as to stop Russia from gobbling up surrounding countries. Ask a Ukranian how that feels; ask'em if they'd like to go back. O, wait- that was a couple of weeks ago. Did you know we never took the Vietnamese capital? As to the casualties, there's no comparison, only in Ted Kennedy's sloshed mind.
"Not if you factor in the number of Iraqi's we killed. The blood-lust of Americans should have been satisfied --- they liked 3000 white people, and we retaliated by killion 10,000+ brown people. We're way more than even.
You're aware that we found at least 400,000 dead in the desert, right? (As well as 200+ Mig25's) Where did you get these numbers, anyway? no news service has been able to verify the loss of life, in the transition.
Do the Iraqi people appear to mind the losses, whatever they are? The purple fingers and the shouting from rooftops has always been a dead give-away for me.
Why do you insist that this has anything to do with skin color? They're the same color and I think language, as the Arabs in Saudi Arabia and UAE, and Kuwait who we protected from Saddam's invasion plans. Racism is a propoganda tool. It's been used on you.
"No, and nobody is claiming that we should reason with terrorists, either. But terrorism is a symptom, not a cause in itself. If fighting terrorism exacerbates its root causes, then we're just screwing ourselves over. It's like trying to fight a fever by putting the person in an ice bath. It's a temporary remedy, but if you just leave them in there without fighting the root cause, you just end up killing the person."
Uh, yeah...if you voted for Kerry, that's exactly what you did. He was semi-consistant in the idea of endless negotiations with the very people keeping Saddam in power until he could ready a nuke. (The UN) You saw the story about Saddam's "tylenol" style project where he was gonna put Sarin into perfume bottles. We needed to stop him, we did. The Democrats needed the war to go badly to win the election. So the media blew the same trumpets they did for Vietnam, but this time they were all completely wrong. Again.
George already knows the root-cause. He just can't cut off the western hemisphere's oil and deal with world-wide depression and chaos. The Saudi kings are broke and desperate now, dinosaurs of their time. They don't want to give up the power or the money, so they play this charade. They call it a holy war, justify it in some way, but get it done, dontchaknow. We're actually in very good hands, because George know this. The left doesn't think that far ahead, just like Regan, standing firm against the wall until it came down.
And the press chided him at every step. SNL mocked 'trickle down' economics even though it was first sucessful in the Kennedy adminstration- he just didn't call it that. And, a tax relief started THIS
"Dude, when Clinton *did* respond to Al Quaeda the Republicans accused him of pulling a "wag the dog" trick to distract us from his embarassment over a blow-job."
1. Wasn't ilicit sex in the whitehouse, while Arafat waited, something that embarrased you for America at _all_?
2. Should the allegations have stopped him from doing the right thing?
3. Does firing a handful of Tomahawks into an empty tent _count_ as forceful action? Did it make him stop?
"There's *plenty* of blame to go around when it comes to Al Quaida. Nobody took them seriously. They were the product of Republican training and it was Bush's father that incited the first WTC bombing even if the Democrats bungled the investigation (though not nearly as bad as George has bungled this one)."
Hey, mister Peabody, turn that wayback machine a little further: Carter showed weakness and caused Iran to take hostages for over 400 days. That probably cemented the idea for the agression after all. Remember, the Arab man-on-the-street isn't starving, but it's not far away: Saudis need to keep the Arab/Isreali fight going so they don't notice. This is just a follow-on to that; they really don't care about the Palestinians, or they wouldn't still have them in makeshift camps for 50 years.
"It's war time. We needed a war president, a man capable of operating under fire himself, a man who understands force... not one who thinks it's a videogame. George Senior or John Kerry, either of them would have done the job. Instead we got Dubya."
Kerry was in Vietnam for three months, and managed to get a 'purple heart' almost each month. Back when my uncles were fighting over there, they called that a 'short timer' (most celebrities and congress-people were). Since then he's been for the Vietnam war, (1968-70 bid) and ever since that, against it (like this time). He's obviously not driven by what's right, but what's gonna win an election. It may be boring to hear the same old story, but Bush does what he says. (though in the first term, 9/11 caused some changes, of course).
What possible news story could make you think Bush thinks it's a videogame? Was it the frequent trips to the whithouse by families who lost sons? The video game president was Clinton. We attacked in Kosovo from 30,000 feet. We attacked the empty tent with cruise missiles. Are you gettin the truth in your media?
"I didn't have much trouble identifying what Kerry stood for."
Ah, yes; my intelligence must be faulty. Couldn't possibly be yours- you have such strong feelings for the children, for the rights of NAMBLA, free speech for people inciting riots, etc. Being a liberal feels good, doesn't it?
Tuning-in to just one issue, a biggie, let's look at the Iraqi war. John Kerry said:
I'm against the war.
I'm for the war, but I want the UN to do it. (Recall that France didn't want the war because it was ignoring the 400,000 dead so as to get cheaper fuel prices. That's Oil-for-Blood.
I'm for the war, but I'd do it a different way, a way I won't describe just now, but it's on my website. (But not really.)
More diplomacy should have been done. (Even though we waited 12 years since the ceasefire, and 18 months wasted at the UN, because the UN was taking bribes from Saddam, himself.
And let's not get into all the times he contradicted himself versus what he wrote in his own book....and on the campaign trail.
Knowing what we all know now, seeing the Iraqis finally freed and showing it at the election, isn't it clear that not one of these would have had the same effect that 'the cowboy' has had? Even people in Germany are starting to show articles entitled 'What if Bush is right?'.
You've got to understand; he is right. The media has been showing you the best of the Liberals (who they are, regardless of how they feel about it) and the worst (or lies) about the conservatives. (Who are just fine with that term, thanks.)
Throw off these reflex ideas that Republicans/Conservatives want to injure old people, pollute the air and all the other media lies from 20+ years ago. OPEN YOUR MIND and tune to a TV channel other than CNN/HNN/NBC/CBS/ABC for news. They're all the same political party, and you're buying it from start to finish.
Fox news isn't all right-oriented, it's actually somewhere in the middle. But if you live in a world 'owned' by the liberals, you'll feel like it is. I get mad at Fox from time to time, too...but understand: it has both sides. You don't get that anywhere else, and the ratings show it.
I'm just saying, a lot of people, usually people in big cities, have been duped. And proof of that is happening every day. It's time to do some real investigating- you can't count on the media....any media....to give you the truth all the time.
Little things, like massive intimidation campaigns, ballots being thrown in the trash, that sort of thing..."
Let's not forget the slashing of tires, and that the ballots thrown out were from the military- the very people who allow us to have a vote.
What happened to American politics? Remember debate? Remember when both parties agreed a thing had to be done, but differed on the way to get there? There's none of that now. It's all about media. With both Democratic and Republican voter witnesses at the polling places we need the UN to oversee the vote?
The Democrats have clearly thrown away any pretense of being for America; they're for getting elected. They pose Iraq as Vietnam; after two years of fighting there's been less casualties than in a two weeks of Vietnam (~600). In fact, I'd bet there are more killings in NYC than Baghdad. This isn't, nor has it ever been, a mistake. Clinton was happy to ignore it (see Flight 800, The Cole, and things like the Twin Tower bombing, Marines in Lebanon) but it required a response, and didn't get it.
So now it's war time. We need to think clearly and most imporantly speak clearly in terms these terrorists understand: force. Does anyone think they can be reasoned with? They have attacked the same people who _fund_ them in Saudi.
Future elections will be even more pounded by the media; the Democrats still think they "didn't get their message out", but the problem is, they did.
An anonymous reader writes "DailyKos is reporting that a group of senators and representatives including Hillary Clinton, John Kerrry, and Tubbs Jones, have proposed an 'open-source' voting bill. This bill (The Count Every Vote Act of 2005) corrects many of the problems in the last election."
Which problems of the last election? That every single media entity couldn't talk us into voting for a guy who can't make up his mind, or that the Democrats lost in general?
I can't remember the last time so many media people pushed so hard to support such a weak opponent. I was ashamed for the Democrats; they've fielded so many, much better candidates. This guy took indecisiveness to an art form. Does anyone, even today know what he stood for? Yet movies, newspaper comics, standup comics, SNL, made-for-tv movies, New York Times, street vendors, taxi drivers, and just about everything but Apple Jacks boxes were turned into lobbying devices. And Bush still won. It all seems kinda hollow, coming from the Democrats.
No, wait; I can remember. Regan versus Mondale. Regan was an idiot of course, a dottering old fool who woke up one morning, reached for the 'nurse' button and missed, hitting the 'nuke' button instead. The entire world exploded in a fireball that rocked the solar system. Liberals all over the world were unsurpised.
Where are the _real_ democrats, those that had ideas and advanced them? This time it was all "we hate Bush". That's no platform!
This is just another PT Barnam special; it'll put more immature code onto the streets, require we buy new, bigger, faster computers, and still have viruses (or purchase of the latest companies would be meaningless) and it'll be the same old thing.
Sure, it's pretty, and sure parts of it (like printing services) work very well. But it's still that same old plantation on which we all have lived. And those of us without courage to fight it will live there until they close, and beyond.
Guys, don't think for a MOMENT this is the promised land we were promised ever since Win3.1, it's not.
"Oh boy, are they actually working side by side with the virusmakers and phishers?"
What....are you new here? Of course they are. Any other company would have squished the bugs like, well, bugs!
Every release cycle, the same old story: miss release dates, scare the investors a little, then release it, make it use double the hardware it requires, and after a short period of trouble-free time, the virus writers break through and so does the anti-virus people. All the while Microsoft promises to make the next release virus-free.
Fer cryin' out loud; they've been doing it for two decades...
If they need a 'business case' for it, they don't quite understand it yet- they don't quite get it. Recall that SCO's offering has been unchanged since 1989 because they saw no reason to invest in the kinds of changes Linux was doing anyway: graphics, better tools, better daemons, better everything.
Making a first release for Linux probably won't ever be 'business justified'. But at some point they'll have to jump onto the bandwagon.
I don't remember the gathering, but a bunch of scientists gathered around 1946 to declare that, of all the scientific discoveries to be found, almost all of them had already been found. The next year, they invented the transistor. We all know where that wound up.
Nah, his is the view of someone who's been bound by all sorts of machinations designed to do something that Microsoft never did, and never could: to design something that immediately responds to problems like spam, pop-ups, viruses, and the whole spyware crud.
Fer cryin' out loud: we now have ISPs blocking viruses, networks stopping worms, and people thinking that being able to do nothing on the computer is the way it's supposed to be!
Hear me now, believe me later: when this goes away and the smoke clears, the whole world will be better off in Linux.
Not an opinion, a belief. Remember these days. These will not be regarded as 'the good old days'. Those were back when Win9x just got started.
Sure, the delivery mechanism is a little different, but this is just another of the 60,000+ Windows viruses running in the wild. Why is this news? Don't Windows inmates just check the same places and follow the same procedures every day?
It sounds like the line about Conservatives being heartless, and it's an election year, so it's probably a Gartner study.:>
Putting people in monetary bondage, chosing their schools for them, doing _nothing_ for the War on Poverty (which was their idea) sounds like things in the 'heartless' column, to me.
I heard, and I'd love to find the link to confirm it, that under Bush (41) more black millionaires were made than any time before.
Can anyone find that demographic? (Don't fight Jesse Jackson to reveal it; he wouldn't want to you to know his reason to exist is gone.)
:) Trust me; Conservative aren't heartless, not by a longshot. They don't all wear pinstripes and work on the Republican ticket, either...
Due to liberal nonsense, it's the obvious people getting overlooked and the most unlikely getting scanned.
It's not about hurting the feelings of a few people....IT'S ABOUT SAVING LIVES. Ever take a trip on El-Al? They've been in this business for almost half a century, and have no worries about pissing someone off. If you look dangerous, you get searched.
Maybe you can 'feel my pain', and maybe you hug a tree, and you'll start a bar-fight 'cause some mook's throwing away an aluminum can, but it all comes down to saving lives. Period.
But then, liberal ideas haven't been good ones since the 60's. Now the 'equal rights coalition' is about hating men, not getting women better jobs, the 'environmental' movement is about getting in the way and ignoring the damage they cause, setting SUV's on fire to protest pollution. And black men are no longer encouraged to do well, they're told they deserve money and an apology- and by no means 'act white' (cause you might get a job, and no longer need these people!)
Hear me now and believe me later: Liberalism is all about attacking what's _right_ with America, not about making it a better place. Things like curbing religious choice, stopping capitalism, guaranteeing jobs/healthcare/beanie-babies/whatever and it's all foolhardy. Just ask any former superpower who undertook them. Russia, France, Britain, and so on.
Sorry. Sometimes this awkward monsoon of wrong-thinking is just too much to bear. It's like all these people are under a Cold-War era spell and can't THINK for themselves. They line up to be told what to do.
This is posted to the list like a new technical breakthrough that more than 1-2 people will be able to make use of this; like we should all go home and reset our prime number machine.
Why is so much technology pointed at this?
This reminds me of the long-running trickle of IRC bots, image viewers and 'light and fast browsers' that keep getting posted to Sourceforge and/or Freshmeat. We only need so many of these, ya know?
Slashdot Mirror
CORRECT.
This is why IBM has put $2B US into Linux. Saving 80% of the _time_ and _money_ it takes to get a new, superfast server to market is worth a bundle.
Besides...if the Xbox comes out and little Johnny throws a tantrum for it, there'll be less money for the PS3 when it comes out.
This isn't 'messing with heads' this is something that should cause them to roll. It's always best to be able to show up first: you can always wait.
Thankfully Linux' development doesn't ride on it, just Sony's bottom line...
I guess the BSA (BrownShirts of America?) were just looking for pirated copies and shaking down businessmen, just because of high-minded ideals.
So now Microsoft's going to start looking for pirated software? Good!
Welcome to Linux, all!
Well how about that? He opted-out.
Yeah, but Diebold also makes ATMs that run XP, so they get cracked. Maybe it's sufficient to say this isn't the ONLY stupid decision they've made. Don't chock up to conspiracy theories what can be more easily explained as stupidity...
He's GOT to be kidding; can anyone point out an innovation that's seen the light of day, lately?
Investors are now gunshy about lending money for new apps- every time someone releases one for Windows, Microsoft either steals it and re-sells it as their own, or duplicates the idea and puts them out of business. Instead, new ideas come in a form that isn't tied to Microsoft, like http://carrierpoint.com/ and similar business-to-business, web-based things.
Sure, OpenSource has spent the bulk of it's time getting caught up with the other OSs, but there's been a lot of code to write, test, and improve. New things will slowly start popping out, and when they do, they'll be built on a stable, well-considered platform that 'just works'.
And as to 'producing crappy software since you sell service contracts', hasn't Microsoft become the largest maker of crappy software from doing just that? Who IS this guy, and why does anyone listen to him?
I was just reading that "The NEXT version of Windows...." statement we hear every year or so and thinking "Yeah, malware will be a thing of the past; SURE." But then it occurred to me... Linux has every piece of sourcecode open to the world, has more installs than Mac, just has enough viruses to fit on one hand. Meanwhile, Microsoft's sourcecode is stored in the same "Area 51" next to the Arc of the Covenant and the Fountain of Youth, and has 60,000+. So what's the difference? Someone's got to be helping, somewhere. A LOT like the Patriot Act and friends; a large, dangerous perceived threat that allows organizations to make sweeping changes. So..."Longhorn" will have all that Trusted Computing crap and deny use of other operating systems, etc....'cause we're tired of viruses, phishing, and all the other circus that online life has become? If I hadn't burnt-out on computing, I'd care. YOU guys deal with it.
Term Limits.
Balanced Budget Amendment loophole.
Anti-Spam bill.
Daylight Savings Time proliferation.
Such popular works by our Congress.
JUST HOW MUCH FREAKIN' MONEY DO WE NEED, SO **WE** CAN BUY A CONGRESSMAN, TOO?!?!?!
When it's not an election year, do they _completely_ forget we're here?
Sorry, I was going to go another round with you, but talking political sense with the young farts on Slashdot is like trying to teach a dog how to drive stick-shift. Feel free to live blissfully assertive in your ignorance of the truth. And when the WMDs are found, Iraq is a peacful place, and things are very nearly peaceful world wide, know which side you were on. You won't be alone. But I'm sure that the achievement will be touted by the media as a minor point, and that you should still be socialist, anyway. Enjoy!
"Nice of you to tell me what I do or do not know. You've been doing that for a couple of messages now. You've also been reading my mind... or at least reading someone's mind."
OK, so you knew there was a reason he didn't just jump up and freak out, but you presumed Bush a failure, instead? That doesn't make sense. And you didn't see the movie, young bean, but you're willing to take the work of Micheal Moore through your friends? I can't help you with any of this.
"A little. Not nearly as much as having George Bush sit there reading a book about a goat while the US was actually under attack."
I really hate Michael Moore. This is a perfect example. You're blissfully unaware that a B25 slammed into the Empire State building in the late 40's aren't you? This could have been that. When the second one hit, it was obviously not that. What exactly would a president....any president do, for those intervening 10 minutes? _walk_ to Iraq, 'cause there's no time to pay the cab? Start shooting people in the room? When you run one of the biggest, most powerful nations in the world, you can't just press the nuke button randomly. Otherwise, they'd call you a cowboy. Get the hint?
Regardless of the TV you've been watching, there's very little Clinton legacy to talk about. I've asked people- they remember the stained dress and something about whitewater. Ya know why? He didn't do anything, as his impeachment testimony tried to say, ironically. He got in, got the media attention, and did nothing since the economy was already rebounding six months before he took office. He just stayed out of the way. That's why there were no ground troops in Kosovo. He was the 'don't rock the boat' president.
My problem with this bill is that it's just another in a long line of winning elections by judges, not by ballots. See also: the governor's race in Washington. Three counts, all for the republican, then one more that cleared by 129 votes, meanwhile 1400 felons voted, too. Not to mention all the people who took time from living in their graves to vote.
I don't have a problem with counting every vote. I have a problem that we need to have only one, non-indicted, living person per vote.
I'm not niave about politicians; there are bad republicans, and they, like democrats have to be agressive to get votes. But right now more conservatives are in the republicans, so it's there that I vote. And my studies of history shows that to be the wise choice.
What's a snork, the sound of running out of responses? I've gotta go to work now. Back later.
"Remember which candidate it was that wanted to minimize the number of debates in this particular election?"
Fielding 9 Democratic 'dwarfs' (plus Leiberman, who's sane) wasn't a debate; it was a "we all hate Bush" ploy. You'd think 3-4 debates among these people would be enough, but no- SIXTEEN turned out to be the right number. Face it, this was more bashing. No one really believed in any of these folks.
Limiting the debate was due to this tactic. He had nothing to say to the president that he hadn't already repeated and contradicted, sometimes on the same day. Did you really learn anything from the debates? Did you even tune in?
[they pose Iraq as Vietnam] "That's because it was. Both countries were ones we waged war in, but who hadn't attacked us. In both countries, we tried to impose an ideology, because we didn't agree with theirs. The fact that the casualty statistics
Good call, media-boy. Did you know that Ho-chi-min asked for our involvement? Did you realize that the 'Red Scare' was a real problem to be dealt with? (I didn't until I started learning about the Russian mindset, and was startled!) so as to stop Russia from gobbling up surrounding countries. Ask a Ukranian how that feels; ask'em if they'd like to go back. O, wait- that was a couple of weeks ago. Did you know we never took the Vietnamese capital? As to the casualties, there's no comparison, only in Ted Kennedy's sloshed mind.
"Not if you factor in the number of Iraqi's we killed. The blood-lust of Americans should have been satisfied --- they liked 3000 white people, and we retaliated by killion 10,000+ brown people. We're way more than even.
You're aware that we found at least 400,000 dead in the desert, right? (As well as 200+ Mig25's) Where did you get these numbers, anyway? no news service has been able to verify the loss of life, in the transition.
Do the Iraqi people appear to mind the losses, whatever they are? The purple fingers and the shouting from rooftops has always been a dead give-away for me.
Why do you insist that this has anything to do with skin color? They're the same color and I think language, as the Arabs in Saudi Arabia and UAE, and Kuwait who we protected from Saddam's invasion plans. Racism is a propoganda tool. It's been used on you.
"No, and nobody is claiming that we should reason with terrorists, either. But terrorism is a symptom, not a cause in itself. If fighting terrorism exacerbates its root causes, then we're just screwing ourselves over. It's like trying to fight a fever by putting the person in an ice bath. It's a temporary remedy, but if you just leave them in there without fighting the root cause, you just end up killing the person."
Uh, yeah...if you voted for Kerry, that's exactly what you did. He was semi-consistant in the idea of endless negotiations with the very people keeping Saddam in power until he could ready a nuke. (The UN) You saw the story about Saddam's "tylenol" style project where he was gonna put Sarin into perfume bottles. We needed to stop him, we did. The Democrats needed the war to go badly to win the election. So the media blew the same trumpets they did for Vietnam, but this time they were all completely wrong. Again.
George already knows the root-cause. He just can't cut off the western hemisphere's oil and deal with world-wide depression and chaos. The Saudi kings are broke and desperate now, dinosaurs of their time. They don't want to give up the power or the money, so they play this charade. They call it a holy war, justify it in some way, but get it done, dontchaknow. We're actually in very good hands, because George know this. The left doesn't think that far ahead, just like Regan, standing firm against the wall until it came down.
And the press chided him at every step. SNL mocked 'trickle down' economics even though it was first sucessful in the Kennedy adminstration- he just didn't call it that. And, a tax relief started THIS
"Dude, when Clinton *did* respond to Al Quaeda the Republicans accused him of pulling a "wag the dog" trick to distract us from his embarassment over a blow-job."
1. Wasn't ilicit sex in the whitehouse, while Arafat waited, something that embarrased you for America at _all_?
2. Should the allegations have stopped him from doing the right thing?
3. Does firing a handful of Tomahawks into an empty tent _count_ as forceful action? Did it make him stop?
"There's *plenty* of blame to go around when it comes to Al Quaida. Nobody took them seriously. They were the product of Republican training and it was Bush's father that incited the first WTC bombing even if the Democrats bungled the investigation (though not nearly as bad as George has bungled this one)."
Hey, mister Peabody, turn that wayback machine a little further: Carter showed weakness and caused Iran to take hostages for over 400 days. That probably cemented the idea for the agression after all. Remember, the Arab man-on-the-street isn't starving, but it's not far away: Saudis need to keep the Arab/Isreali fight going so they don't notice. This is just a follow-on to that; they really don't care about the Palestinians, or they wouldn't still have them in makeshift camps for 50 years.
"It's war time. We needed a war president, a man capable of operating under fire himself, a man who understands force... not one who thinks it's a videogame. George Senior or John Kerry, either of them would have done the job. Instead we got Dubya."
Kerry was in Vietnam for three months, and managed to get a 'purple heart' almost each month. Back when my uncles were fighting over there, they called that a 'short timer' (most celebrities and congress-people were). Since then he's been for the Vietnam war, (1968-70 bid) and ever since that, against it (like this time). He's obviously not driven by what's right, but what's gonna win an election. It may be boring to hear the same old story, but Bush does what he says. (though in the first term, 9/11 caused some changes, of course).
What possible news story could make you think Bush thinks it's a videogame? Was it the frequent trips to the whithouse by families who lost sons? The video game president was Clinton. We attacked in Kosovo from 30,000 feet. We attacked the empty tent with cruise missiles. Are you gettin the truth in your media?
"I didn't have much trouble identifying what Kerry stood for."
Ah, yes; my intelligence must be faulty. Couldn't possibly be yours- you have such strong feelings for the children, for the rights of NAMBLA, free speech for people inciting riots, etc. Being a liberal feels good, doesn't it?
Tuning-in to just one issue, a biggie, let's look at the Iraqi war. John Kerry said:
And let's not get into all the times he contradicted himself versus what he wrote in his own book....and on the campaign trail.
Knowing what we all know now, seeing the Iraqis finally freed and showing it at the election, isn't it clear that not one of these would have had the same effect that 'the cowboy' has had? Even people in Germany are starting to show articles entitled 'What if Bush is right?'.
You've got to understand; he is right. The media has been showing you the best of the Liberals (who they are, regardless of how they feel about it) and the worst (or lies) about the conservatives. (Who are just fine with that term, thanks.)
Throw off these reflex ideas that Republicans/Conservatives want to injure old people, pollute the air and all the other media lies from 20+ years ago. OPEN YOUR MIND and tune to a TV channel other than CNN/HNN/NBC/CBS/ABC for news. They're all the same political party, and you're buying it from start to finish.
Fox news isn't all right-oriented, it's actually somewhere in the middle. But if you live in a world 'owned' by the liberals, you'll feel like it is. I get mad at Fox from time to time, too...but understand: it has both sides. You don't get that anywhere else, and the ratings show it.
I'm just saying, a lot of people, usually people in big cities, have been duped. And proof of that is happening every day. It's time to do some real investigating- you can't count on the media....any media....to give you the truth all the time.
Little things, like massive intimidation campaigns, ballots being thrown in the trash, that sort of thing..."
Let's not forget the slashing of tires, and that the ballots thrown out were from the military- the very people who allow us to have a vote.
What happened to American politics? Remember debate? Remember when both parties agreed a thing had to be done, but differed on the way to get there? There's none of that now. It's all about media. With both Democratic and Republican voter witnesses at the polling places we need the UN to oversee the vote?
The Democrats have clearly thrown away any pretense of being for America; they're for getting elected. They pose Iraq as Vietnam; after two years of fighting there's been less casualties than in a two weeks of Vietnam (~600). In fact, I'd bet there are more killings in NYC than Baghdad. This isn't, nor has it ever been, a mistake. Clinton was happy to ignore it (see Flight 800, The Cole, and things like the Twin Tower bombing, Marines in Lebanon) but it required a response, and didn't get it.
So now it's war time. We need to think clearly and most imporantly speak clearly in terms these terrorists understand: force. Does anyone think they can be reasoned with? They have attacked the same people who _fund_ them in Saudi.
Future elections will be even more pounded by the media; the Democrats still think they "didn't get their message out", but the problem is, they did.
Hey, Bill...so are viruses, spyware, and the inability to contact the author of buggy code!
An anonymous reader writes "DailyKos is reporting that a group of senators and representatives including Hillary Clinton, John Kerrry, and Tubbs Jones, have proposed an 'open-source' voting bill. This bill (The Count Every Vote Act of 2005) corrects many of the problems in the last election."
Which problems of the last election? That every single media entity couldn't talk us into voting for a guy who can't make up his mind, or that the Democrats lost in general?
I can't remember the last time so many media people pushed so hard to support such a weak opponent. I was ashamed for the Democrats; they've fielded so many, much better candidates. This guy took indecisiveness to an art form. Does anyone, even today know what he stood for? Yet movies, newspaper comics, standup comics, SNL, made-for-tv movies, New York Times, street vendors, taxi drivers, and just about everything but Apple Jacks boxes were turned into lobbying devices. And Bush still won. It all seems kinda hollow, coming from the Democrats.
No, wait; I can remember. Regan versus Mondale. Regan was an idiot of course, a dottering old fool who woke up one morning, reached for the 'nurse' button and missed, hitting the 'nuke' button instead. The entire world exploded in a fireball that rocked the solar system. Liberals all over the world were unsurpised.
Where are the _real_ democrats, those that had ideas and advanced them? This time it was all "we hate Bush". That's no platform!
This is just another PT Barnam special; it'll put more immature code onto the streets, require we buy new, bigger, faster computers, and still have viruses (or purchase of the latest companies would be meaningless) and it'll be the same old thing.
Sure, it's pretty, and sure parts of it (like printing services) work very well. But it's still that same old plantation on which we all have lived. And those of us without courage to fight it will live there until they close, and beyond.
Guys, don't think for a MOMENT this is the promised land we were promised ever since Win3.1, it's not.
"Oh boy, are they actually working side by side with the virusmakers and phishers?"
What....are you new here? Of course they are. Any other company would have squished the bugs like, well, bugs!
Every release cycle, the same old story: miss release dates, scare the investors a little, then release it, make it use double the hardware it requires, and after a short period of trouble-free time, the virus writers break through and so does the anti-virus people. All the while Microsoft promises to make the next release virus-free.
Fer cryin' out loud; they've been doing it for two decades...
If they need a 'business case' for it, they don't quite understand it yet- they don't quite get it. Recall that SCO's offering has been unchanged since 1989 because they saw no reason to invest in the kinds of changes Linux was doing anyway: graphics, better tools, better daemons, better everything.
Making a first release for Linux probably won't ever be 'business justified'. But at some point they'll have to jump onto the bandwagon.
I don't remember the gathering, but a bunch of scientists gathered around 1946 to declare that, of all the scientific discoveries to be found, almost all of them had already been found. The next year, they invented the transistor. We all know where that wound up.
Nah, his is the view of someone who's been bound by all sorts of machinations designed to do something that Microsoft never did, and never could: to design something that immediately responds to problems like spam, pop-ups, viruses, and the whole spyware crud.
Fer cryin' out loud: we now have ISPs blocking viruses, networks stopping worms, and people thinking that being able to do nothing on the computer is the way it's supposed to be!
Hear me now, believe me later: when this goes away and the smoke clears, the whole world will be better off in Linux.
Not an opinion, a belief. Remember these days. These will not be regarded as 'the good old days'. Those were back when Win9x just got started.
Long live the good _new_ days!
I'm gonna wait until a more credible source posts this news...like Dan Rather.
Besides, I'm sure Halliburton made money on the deal!
(See what happens when only 10 people own the media?)
Sigh....
Sure, the delivery mechanism is a little different, but this is just another of the 60,000+ Windows viruses running in the wild. Why is this news? Don't Windows inmates just check the same places and follow the same procedures every day?
It sounds like the line about Conservatives being heartless, and it's an election year, so it's probably a Gartner study. :>
Putting people in monetary bondage, chosing their schools for them, doing _nothing_ for the War on Poverty (which was their idea) sounds like things in the 'heartless' column, to me.
I heard, and I'd love to find the link to confirm it, that under Bush (41) more black millionaires were made than any time before.
Can anyone find that demographic? (Don't fight Jesse Jackson to reveal it; he wouldn't want to you to know his reason to exist is gone.)
:) Trust me; Conservative aren't heartless, not by a longshot. They don't all wear pinstripes and work on the Republican ticket, either...
Due to liberal nonsense, it's the obvious people getting overlooked and the most unlikely getting scanned.
It's not about hurting the feelings of a few people....IT'S ABOUT SAVING LIVES. Ever take a trip on El-Al? They've been in this business for almost half a century, and have no worries about pissing someone off. If you look dangerous, you get searched.
Maybe you can 'feel my pain', and maybe you hug a tree, and you'll start a bar-fight 'cause some mook's throwing away an aluminum can, but it all comes down to saving lives. Period.
But then, liberal ideas haven't been good ones since the 60's. Now the 'equal rights coalition' is about hating men, not getting women better jobs, the 'environmental' movement is about getting in the way and ignoring the damage they cause, setting SUV's on fire to protest pollution. And black men are no longer encouraged to do well, they're told they deserve money and an apology- and by no means 'act white' (cause you might get a job, and no longer need these people!)
Hear me now and believe me later: Liberalism is all about attacking what's _right_ with America, not about making it a better place. Things like curbing religious choice, stopping capitalism, guaranteeing jobs/healthcare/beanie-babies/whatever and it's all foolhardy. Just ask any former superpower who undertook them. Russia, France, Britain, and so on.
Sorry. Sometimes this awkward monsoon of wrong-thinking is just too much to bear. It's like all these people are under a Cold-War era spell and can't THINK for themselves. They line up to be told what to do.
This is posted to the list like a new technical breakthrough that more than 1-2 people will be able to make use of this; like we should all go home and reset our prime number machine.
Why is so much technology pointed at this?
This reminds me of the long-running trickle of IRC bots, image viewers and 'light and fast browsers' that keep getting posted to Sourceforge and/or Freshmeat. We only need so many of these, ya know?