I'm looking forward to the reaction when the Religion of Peace (TM) discovers L Ron Hubbard claimed that Mad Mo invented it to get money during a time of poor trade.*
* Yes, Hubbard actually had the gall to accuse someone else of starting a religion for profit.
"No child left behind" is a great goal, but impossible to accomplish, which is why it is doomed to failure. But if the teacher's unions can ensure that every child is failed by the system, then they're equal and none are left behind, no?
I'd agree completely. Just don't act as if there's something morally deficient about foreign governments who look to their own interests first at the expense of America.
Ohhhhh... thats f-ing priceless... please, enlighten us as to the "shitball stunts" that France has pulled against the US? You know, stuff that makes the Cuban Revolution, the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Bay of Pigs seem like silly jokes between two old friends. How dare these ignorant third worlders overthrow a puppet government and defend themselves against an invasion. Disgraceful. And having Soviet missiles on the island? Why, that's as bad as if there were nukes in Turkey and the UK. Wait....
I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings, but governments are supposed to act in the interests of their own people, not the interests of America. That Castro was an incompetent, a Soviet stooge and a repressive, brutal dictator doesn't suddenly justify America's actions. Realpolitik or idealism, choose one.
I'm glad the UK government is cracking down on file sharing. In particular, I'd like them to crack down on their own habit of sharing my personal information with every single bloated, inefficient, fuckwitted, semi-competent IT services provider who made a sufficient donation to the Labour party at the last election (Crapita, this means you)
Having lived in a couple of the worst inner cities in the US, and visited the third world, I can tell you haven't. Mogadisu 87-89, does that count?
What a ridiculous statement. Let us consider at length the possibility that your brain is made of turnips. We can't have an open debate if we dismiss this out of hand. I'd dismiss it because of the reasons my brain couldn't be made of turnips. Dismissing it out of hand would be claiming that we couldn't suggest this because it was offensive to those whose brains are made of carrots.
I'd be willing to bet money that Enoch Powell was better educated and more intelligent than any of the race relations industry. Does that mean the UK should consider compulsory repatriation? Or does it mean that no matter how many languages you speak, how many books you've written, how respected your views are in academia, you can still be completely, utterly and totally wrong?
Really? Google "no platform". Alternatively, look at the treatment of any academic who dares question any of the left's sacred cows. Look at the anti-racism laws in Europe that limit free speech to what is considered acceptable by the left. Intolerance of differing viewpoints knows no political allegiance. It's a function of insecurity, not ideology.
1) History. Last I checked, every attempt at socialism had failed. Egalitarian policies have destroyed public education. Unionised businesses are collapsing left, right and centre. Welfare has turned inner cities into crime ridden Third World hellholes.
2) Open debates. Not really. Go to a left wing meeting and say you think blacks are genetically less intelligent. Much the same reception as you'd get promoting a 90% tax rate at a Libertarian convention, though probably more shrill. Open debate only works when no possibility is dismissed out of hand. As you're starting from a predetermined political viewpoint, that's not going to be possible.
3) Ideas founded on reality, instead of fear. "Bush is going to reintroduce conscription"."The Patriot Act will lead to concentration camps"."Global warming will kill us all"."Dominionists are going to introduce a 10 Commandments based theocracy". You were saying?
4) Although many things are, you can't pretend everything is somehow neutral. Some things are right, and some things are wrong.
Wouldn't you agree that sometimes there is a wrong way and sometimes there is a right way? Of course. There are idiots relying on blind faith comes on both sides - the only difference is, the Christian right, for example, will at least admit their views are based on blind faith. The left merely substitutes the State for God, and sociology, women's studies and other non falsifiable circle jerks for Scripture.
5) Your leaders. (that's enough right there) I'm not American, so I've got no idea of who else stands in comparison with Ted Kennedy and Clinton, but I don't think you've got anything to crow about here.
6) Republican values tend to come from "faith based organizations," as opposed to open discussion and debate. See #2 and 4#.
7) Enough homophobia to shake a stick at. I really fail to see the relevance here. (Some) right wingers hate gays, (some) left wingers hate men, the middle class, whites, Christians and their own country. How does anyone of that automatically verify someone's beliefs?
Every stat for the less ten years has told us that crime is falling Is that before or after New Labour got their hands on those stats? The crime figures recorded by the NAO don't use the same criteria as they did under Major - the most glaring exclusion is that crimes against those under 18 (the main victims of feral youth, regardless of the Mail horror stories) are no longer counted.
The problem's not with parents being unable to discipline their kids - they wouldn't bother anyway. The issue is that a pervasive welfare state has made being a shit parent a viable career. Left school at 16? No job, no qualifications, female? Get knocked up and the state will give you a flat and benefits, just like they did for your parents and grandparents. Work ethic? Responsibility? Self sufficiency? Who needs them when you have an all encompassing nanny state ready to take care of you from cradle to (early) grave?
Ah, the arrogance of the left. What is it about you people that means you can't accept the fact that people may have considered an issue as carefully as you have and simply come to a different conclusion? But no, there is one correct answer, and it's the one you have (shades of Marx's historical inevitability there) and anyone who disagrees needs re-education, or is misled, or brainwashed by lying right wing propaganda etc etc
It's the British government's job to kowtow shamelessly to American commercial interests. Who do these colonials think they are? They'll be wanting to extradite innocent people next.
Slashdot Mirror
Is this some Darwinist scheme to try and tempt people away from Intelligent Falling?
I'm looking forward to the reaction when the Religion of Peace (TM) discovers L Ron Hubbard claimed that Mad Mo invented it to get money during a time of poor trade.*
* Yes, Hubbard actually had the gall to accuse someone else of starting a religion for profit.
I'm neither a console programmer nor a demoscener, but isn't assembly very much alive and kicking in these two fields?
How feasible would it be for the average citizen to do this to that "MI5 Persecution" guy?
I'd agree completely. Just don't act as if there's something morally deficient about foreign governments who look to their own interests first at the expense of America.
I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings, but governments are supposed to act in the interests of their own people, not the interests of America. That Castro was an incompetent, a Soviet stooge and a repressive, brutal dictator doesn't suddenly justify America's actions. Realpolitik or idealism, choose one.
I'm glad the UK government is cracking down on file sharing. In particular, I'd like them to crack down on their own habit of sharing my personal information with every single bloated, inefficient, fuckwitted, semi-competent IT services provider who made a sufficient donation to the Labour party at the last election (Crapita, this means you)
Should read:
'Porn King' Says Google Should Block Internet Competition As It Hurts Video Sales
I fully oppose this up until the day I get cancer.
Anyone who isn't left wing has an IQ below 5? Would you care to prove my original point any harder?
What a ridiculous statement. Let us consider at length the possibility that your brain is made of turnips. We can't have an open debate if we dismiss this out of hand. I'd dismiss it because of the reasons my brain couldn't be made of turnips. Dismissing it out of hand would be claiming that we couldn't suggest this because it was offensive to those whose brains are made of carrots.
I'd be willing to bet money that Enoch Powell was better educated and more intelligent than any of the race relations industry. Does that mean the UK should consider compulsory repatriation? Or does it mean that no matter how many languages you speak, how many books you've written, how respected your views are in academia, you can still be completely, utterly and totally wrong?
Really? Google "no platform". Alternatively, look at the treatment of any academic who dares question any of the left's sacred cows. Look at the anti-racism laws in Europe that limit free speech to what is considered acceptable by the left. Intolerance of differing viewpoints knows no political allegiance. It's a function of insecurity, not ideology.
2) Open debates. Not really. Go to a left wing meeting and say you think blacks are genetically less intelligent. Much the same reception as you'd get promoting a 90% tax rate at a Libertarian convention, though probably more shrill. Open debate only works when no possibility is dismissed out of hand. As you're starting from a predetermined political viewpoint, that's not going to be possible. 3) Ideas founded on reality, instead of fear. "Bush is going to reintroduce conscription"."The Patriot Act will lead to concentration camps"."Global warming will kill us all"."Dominionists are going to introduce a 10 Commandments based theocracy". You were saying?
4) Although many things are, you can't pretend everything is somehow neutral. Some things are right, and some things are wrong. Wouldn't you agree that sometimes there is a wrong way and sometimes there is a right way? Of course. There are idiots relying on blind faith comes on both sides - the only difference is, the Christian right, for example, will at least admit their views are based on blind faith. The left merely substitutes the State for God, and sociology, women's studies and other non falsifiable circle jerks for Scripture.
5) Your leaders. (that's enough right there) I'm not American, so I've got no idea of who else stands in comparison with Ted Kennedy and Clinton, but I don't think you've got anything to crow about here.
6) Republican values tend to come from "faith based organizations," as opposed to open discussion and debate. See #2 and 4#. 7) Enough homophobia to shake a stick at. I really fail to see the relevance here. (Some) right wingers hate gays, (some) left wingers hate men, the middle class, whites, Christians and their own country. How does anyone of that automatically verify someone's beliefs?
The problem's not with parents being unable to discipline their kids - they wouldn't bother anyway. The issue is that a pervasive welfare state has made being a shit parent a viable career.
Left school at 16? No job, no qualifications, female? Get knocked up and the state will give you a flat and benefits, just like they did for your parents and grandparents. Work ethic? Responsibility? Self sufficiency? Who needs them when you have an all encompassing nanny state ready to take care of you from cradle to (early) grave?
Ah, the arrogance of the left. What is it about you people that means you can't accept the fact that people may have considered an issue as carefully as you have and simply come to a different conclusion?
But no, there is one correct answer, and it's the one you have (shades of Marx's historical inevitability there) and anyone who disagrees needs re-education, or is misled, or brainwashed by lying right wing propaganda etc etc
I know why the caged turd sings.
It's the British government's job to kowtow shamelessly to American commercial interests. Who do these colonials think they are? They'll be wanting to extradite innocent people next.
$5.43? Is that how much they're going to pay me to read one of Kevin J Anderson's hackfests?
The RIAA raised my infringement liberally.
And it handled the weight? My congratulations to the design team. Have they considered going for the Space Elevator next?
Given that the same high risk behaviour that spreads HIV also spreads other STDs, I can't see this will actually help much.