He was a racist bastard, something he came to greatly regret before his assassinate. Seeing whites and blacks praying together in Mecca, and seeing white struggles for black freedom in Northern Africa made him retract his earlier statements about how whites and blacks could never be at peace together.
I think it was less the Reformation that reduced religion's power, and more the Enlightment. Protestantism, for instance, led to the rise of sects that had more of a hold on the populace, they just tended to be less indulgent and opulent than the Roman Catholic Church. Less indulgent, literally, as the selling of Indulgences was a key reason for the Reformation.
Wheeler is 69 years old. I would imagine his next post will be retirement. That may play a factor in his willingness to rock the boat.
Amazing what you can do when you're not looking forward to the next post your political allies can help you with. California's current governor, Jerry Brown, turned out much different than many on the left thought. He put the brakes on runaway public spending and resisted calls from the liberal majority to reinstate pre-recession spending levels once the state left the recession. He's 77 -- not really looking forward to a run for President.
Though he does have that stupid high-speed rail thing hanging over him. That's the big mistake.
Pakistan is a country of islands of modernity, surrounded by an ocean of the dark age. It's definitely neither uniform nor unified. It has little control over its own mountainous regions, barbarians operate with little repercussion, and even in the civilized areas the government, even the military, is corrupt and purchasable by extremists.
Also, Ms. Bhutto probably has much better protection than the poor murdered girl.
In my entertainment choices, I prefer women like Princess Leah (tactician, soldier, leader), Ripley (skilled worker, fighter, protector), Kaylee Frye (engineer), Motoko (marksman, police officer) etc., because they represent women who have and cultivate real skills and use them to good effect under trying circumstances....rather than women who's primary contribution to the plot is her physical desirability (or perhaps her happenstance noble birth). I am just distressed that women like these are more common in fantasy than in reality.
Well, most of those shabby scripts are written by men who don't know how to write women (hey, you write what you know best), but they do know how to target the teenage boy market. One of the feminist blogs I actually have a little regard for made the good point that women can't complain TOO loudly when they don't get into screenwriting and instead expect everything the men will write will reflect their ideals.
Not a fan of the Ice Ice Baby (with the baseline he stole himself from Queen), but I'd probably back him over Knight. Of course, a good outcome would be the balcony collapsing, sending them both tumbling.
As the XKCD reference cannot be repeated to often, no harm done.
I feel sorry for the second person who posted the xkcd comic. His score is still at 0, while the first and third posters were modded up to five. Some people have no luck!
Just have to ask.. do you think folks with military and intelligence experience don't read slashdot like any other nerd does?
Ok, granted, maybe they've moved on to Reddit or tech-site-of-the-day like others. But maybe they just enjoy reading the site because they have for 15 years.
Sorry, I fail to see, how mere racism [forward.com] or sexism [femitup.com] can lead to a boycott, while abuse of a suspect gets a pass. And not just once either!
Because, in the US, many Americans are fine with the idea that doing bad things to bad people in pursuit of a good goal is a-ok.
Jack Bauer could get away with torturing a guy because Jack Bauer was right, he was not corrupt, he fighting for the good guys, and the guy he was torturing was trying to hide details on some terrorist attack. That's easy to screenwrite for. The problem is that in real life, often the people who think they are right and good actually aren't, they torture the wrong person, and there are unintended consequences.
and from recently released documents he was 100% correct
It's shocking exactly how easy it is to verify this fact and how little difference that has made to the narrative.
Clearly the people who continue to verbally attack McCarthy aren't attacking him for being incorrect - they're attacking him for being right.
Because it was witch hunting. No one is saying that witches/communists didn't exist. But he used that as a cover for using the federal government to attack political enemies and plenty of people who just got in the way.
One of many strong champions. I'm not sure why you don't think he can be a man who has principles. That he would partner with Boies only reinforces the theme of greater freedom over time.
Every generation starts out more liberal and open-minded, and ends up more conservative and bitter.
I hear this weird disconnect every time talk about pot use comes up. I'll always hear people from the 60s talking about how it was ok when they used pot, but how it's terrible/awful/dangerous if young people use it today. There is always some desperate attempt to cling to some BS argument, ANY argument to show how they're right and not hypocritical. Frequently the most compelling was "the marijuana was normal when I as young, but it's so much stronger and more potent today! It's much more dangerous." This is, of course, all nonsense, a way for them to have their cake and eat it too.
It seems to me that plenty of the people who flew off the handle in reaction to the 9/11 attacks were older. How old are Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld, again?
My cynical self says they were using the American public's reaction to 9/11 to help their own aims for power.
You don't need to be cynical, the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) was quite open about its beliefs. Their founding documents in 1997 stated that defense spending was way too low, forcing the US to choose, for example, between presence in Europe and presence in Asia. Their four core missions, for military forces were defense of the American homeland, the fighting and winning of multiple simultaneous major theater wars, the establishment of the US military as a security force in key regions, and the transformation of US forces "to exploit the 'revolution in military affairs.'" In 1998, PNAC sent a letter to President Clinton strongly encouraging the preemptive US-led overthrow of Saddam Hussein.
Their statement of principles was signed by Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and Scooter Libby, along with other, lesser-known people in the GWB administration.
Your summary dismissal of facts based on the source not being politically correct enough shows that you are very enlightened and tolerant.
The source is bad enough that you can't draw any conclusions from anything on the site (because they will post anything, true or not, that follows their political conceptions) without verification of the story from other sources.
Or, perhaps the young are still naive enough to believe their rage matters? "Change is coming" - sure it is. What will change is only that the naive, hopeful young will grow up and recognize that short of actual revolution, nothing is going to substantially change
I think it's more that the young are naive enough to believe that everyone else also wants their "revolution," that other people think like them.
The last presidential election had candidates from third parties on the ballot in nearly every state. Your excuse is lame.
It's rare to find a good third-party candidate on the ballot, though. I don't like either Democrats or Republicans, but Greens and Constitutionalists are far crazier. Most of the rest of single-issue parties, focusing on changing government policy towards one particular issue. But we don't elect people to be "The guy who ends/increases government surveillance." We elect general-purpose legislators who decide a wide variety of issues.
Funny how they've have forgotten they will get old one day too, and get screwed over by their own policies.
The will rediscover the value of personal savings, and won't rely on a Ponzi scheme for their retirement plan.
If it works for 85 years, I don't think it can be considered a "Ponzi scheme." If humans were immortal and collected SSI for eternity, then yes, it would be a Ponzi scheme. But they don't. They leave the system every day. And new people join the pay-in every day.
Americans are living longer, which means that perhaps the money flowing into the system needs to be adjusted upwards. And bumps in the population (like baby-boomers retiring) also require adjustments. But that's all they are: adjustments. They don't require an act of God, just an act of Congress (though the snarkier among us might claim that both are just as likely).
Slashdot Mirror
malcolm x was a racist bastard, no better than a grand wizard. Why would any sane person want to associate themselves with him?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M...
He was a racist bastard, something he came to greatly regret before his assassinate. Seeing whites and blacks praying together in Mecca, and seeing white struggles for black freedom in Northern Africa made him retract his earlier statements about how whites and blacks could never be at peace together.
I think it was less the Reformation that reduced religion's power, and more the Enlightment. Protestantism, for instance, led to the rise of sects that had more of a hold on the populace, they just tended to be less indulgent and opulent than the Roman Catholic Church. Less indulgent, literally, as the selling of Indulgences was a key reason for the Reformation.
Wheeler is 69 years old. I would imagine his next post will be retirement. That may play a factor in his willingness to rock the boat.
Amazing what you can do when you're not looking forward to the next post your political allies can help you with. California's current governor, Jerry Brown, turned out much different than many on the left thought. He put the brakes on runaway public spending and resisted calls from the liberal majority to reinstate pre-recession spending levels once the state left the recession. He's 77 -- not really looking forward to a run for President.
Though he does have that stupid high-speed rail thing hanging over him. That's the big mistake.
The strawman are flying all over the place here in this thread!
Pakistan is a country of islands of modernity, surrounded by an ocean of the dark age. It's definitely neither uniform nor unified. It has little control over its own mountainous regions, barbarians operate with little repercussion, and even in the civilized areas the government, even the military, is corrupt and purchasable by extremists.
Also, Ms. Bhutto probably has much better protection than the poor murdered girl.
In my entertainment choices, I prefer women like Princess Leah (tactician, soldier, leader), Ripley (skilled worker, fighter, protector), Kaylee Frye (engineer), Motoko (marksman, police officer) etc., because they represent women who have and cultivate real skills and use them to good effect under trying circumstances....rather than women who's primary contribution to the plot is her physical desirability (or perhaps her happenstance noble birth). I am just distressed that women like these are more common in fantasy than in reality.
Well, most of those shabby scripts are written by men who don't know how to write women (hey, you write what you know best), but they do know how to target the teenage boy market. One of the feminist blogs I actually have a little regard for made the good point that women can't complain TOO loudly when they don't get into screenwriting and instead expect everything the men will write will reflect their ideals.
The ancients invented Flubber.
Not a fan of the Ice Ice Baby (with the baseline he stole himself from Queen), but I'd probably back him over Knight. Of course, a good outcome would be the balcony collapsing, sending them both tumbling.
Was the undercover cop Suge Knight?
I didn't want to take the time to search for it. But now I have this handy link! Thanks, xkcd posters!
As the XKCD reference cannot be repeated to often, no harm done.
I feel sorry for the second person who posted the xkcd comic. His score is still at 0, while the first and third posters were modded up to five. Some people have no luck!
Just have to ask.. do you think folks with military and intelligence experience don't read slashdot like any other nerd does?
Ok, granted, maybe they've moved on to Reddit or tech-site-of-the-day like others. But maybe they just enjoy reading the site because they have for 15 years.
Sorry, I fail to see, how mere racism [forward.com] or sexism [femitup.com] can lead to a boycott, while abuse of a suspect gets a pass. And not just once either!
Because, in the US, many Americans are fine with the idea that doing bad things to bad people in pursuit of a good goal is a-ok.
Jack Bauer could get away with torturing a guy because Jack Bauer was right, he was not corrupt, he fighting for the good guys, and the guy he was torturing was trying to hide details on some terrorist attack. That's easy to screenwrite for. The problem is that in real life, often the people who think they are right and good actually aren't, they torture the wrong person, and there are unintended consequences.
It's shocking exactly how easy it is to verify this fact and how little difference that has made to the narrative.
Clearly the people who continue to verbally attack McCarthy aren't attacking him for being incorrect - they're attacking him for being right.
Because it was witch hunting. No one is saying that witches/communists didn't exist. But he used that as a cover for using the federal government to attack political enemies and plenty of people who just got in the way.
Oh, and let's not forget the main champion for gay marriage was this guy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...
One of many strong champions. I'm not sure why you don't think he can be a man who has principles. That he would partner with Boies only reinforces the theme of greater freedom over time.
Every generation starts out more liberal and open-minded, and ends up more conservative and bitter.
I hear this weird disconnect every time talk about pot use comes up. I'll always hear people from the 60s talking about how it was ok when they used pot, but how it's terrible/awful/dangerous if young people use it today. There is always some desperate attempt to cling to some BS argument, ANY argument to show how they're right and not hypocritical. Frequently the most compelling was "the marijuana was normal when I as young, but it's so much stronger and more potent today! It's much more dangerous." This is, of course, all nonsense, a way for them to have their cake and eat it too.
I don't know, some states have flat-out legalized it, and more just look the other way now.
I suppose we should really limit the survey to people who know what the words STD and Congress even mean.
It seems to me that plenty of the people who flew off the handle in reaction to the 9/11 attacks were older. How old are Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld, again?
My cynical self says they were using the American public's reaction to 9/11 to help their own aims for power.
You don't need to be cynical, the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) was quite open about its beliefs. Their founding documents in 1997 stated that defense spending was way too low, forcing the US to choose, for example, between presence in Europe and presence in Asia. Their four core missions, for military forces were defense of the American homeland, the fighting and winning of multiple simultaneous major theater wars, the establishment of the US military as a security force in key regions, and the transformation of US forces "to exploit the 'revolution in military affairs.'" In 1998, PNAC sent a letter to President Clinton strongly encouraging the preemptive US-led overthrow of Saddam Hussein.
Their statement of principles was signed by Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and Scooter Libby, along with other, lesser-known people in the GWB administration.
we brought down Richard Nixon
No you didn't. Richard Nixon brought down Richard Nixon.
And another whistleblower, Deep Throat.
Your summary dismissal of facts based on the source not being politically correct enough shows that you are very enlightened and tolerant.
The source is bad enough that you can't draw any conclusions from anything on the site (because they will post anything, true or not, that follows their political conceptions) without verification of the story from other sources.
Or, perhaps the young are still naive enough to believe their rage matters? "Change is coming" - sure it is. What will change is only that the naive, hopeful young will grow up and recognize that short of actual revolution, nothing is going to substantially change
I think it's more that the young are naive enough to believe that everyone else also wants their "revolution," that other people think like them.
The last presidential election had candidates from third parties on the ballot in nearly every state. Your excuse is lame.
It's rare to find a good third-party candidate on the ballot, though. I don't like either Democrats or Republicans, but Greens and Constitutionalists are far crazier. Most of the rest of single-issue parties, focusing on changing government policy towards one particular issue. But we don't elect people to be "The guy who ends/increases government surveillance." We elect general-purpose legislators who decide a wide variety of issues.
The will rediscover the value of personal savings, and won't rely on a Ponzi scheme for their retirement plan.
If it works for 85 years, I don't think it can be considered a "Ponzi scheme." If humans were immortal and collected SSI for eternity, then yes, it would be a Ponzi scheme. But they don't. They leave the system every day. And new people join the pay-in every day.
Americans are living longer, which means that perhaps the money flowing into the system needs to be adjusted upwards. And bumps in the population (like baby-boomers retiring) also require adjustments. But that's all they are: adjustments. They don't require an act of God, just an act of Congress (though the snarkier among us might claim that both are just as likely).
Debater King, right here.