It's not bad today, but what about a year from now? Starting adding in 1080i/p content and 250GB is nothing. A few years ago 250GB was the biggest hard drive you could get, but now it's > 4x that. They should make their limit grow in sync with Moore's Law. In fact Gmail should do that too.
I called the phone number to get a replacement bulb for one that burned out about two months ago and they mailed me a new one. When I got it it was broken in the shipping box and when I called the number for a replacement one I said I would prefer not to get the broken one out to read the numbers because I know they contain mercury. The customer service rep told me the mercury was contained within the base of the bulb and I was at no risk even if the bulb was broken.
I was skeptical and did not handle the bulb. Thoughts?
I don't think he "can't" play politics, I just don't think he has that choice. His platform is pretty definitive.
Progress? Lots of insurgents have been killed but other than that what progress has taken place? I know someone is going to be upset and think I'm as insulting the troops efforts, but I'm truly not. I'm against the policy makers. The troops have done their patriotic duty and served gloriously, but when troops are given crap for orders and missions then their efforts are wasted. It is an unspeakable tragedy that we have spent 4000 troops lives and 1 trillion dollars on this promotion of an American empire. We are in a losing battle, if for no other reason than we can't afford it. I honestly see the only way to get out and save face is to elect Ron Paul. The world will see democracy still rules in America, and we would begin to regain our country's image. As Dr. Paul says, if mid-treatment you discover that you have made the wrong diagnosis then you don't continue with the treatment for the original diagnosis, but apply the treatment for the new one.
That being said I see your point about waiting to be briefed on the current situation.
I'll give you the whining, but not as much a Chucklebee.
As for Huckabee? Do you honestly believe a president can force a theocracy down the throats of a nation? I'm pretty sure he doesn't believe that.
I don't believe Huckabee would succeed in making us a Theocracy. I believe he would waste most of his political pull on religious issues though (with the exception of the tax code). After Bush and his 3 trillion budget we need a Republican that acts like a Republican and makes some serious changes. If he's busy throwing around his weight on religious issues how can he address the real problems?
I don't have a large problem with the fair tax. I guess it comes down to a lot more business being done under the table. I've asked local businesses for their best cash price before, knowing that they might go under the table and discount me half the taxes. With the fair tax this kind of business would increase drastically. It adds a 23% difference to the already attractive dodging of business taxes and sales taxes.
Not only does the tax code need to be changed, but we need to have an amendment against an income tax, and we need to stop stifling our economy with such his tax rates. 23% of every dollar spent should not go to the federal government. Period.
now I see him as the type of individual that could change a stance on virtually anything if the argument was persuasive enough.
A President that steadfastly refuses to change any and all of his beliefs, even in the face of overwhelmingly persuasive evidence, is much better.
I'm not talking about tactical strategies here. The issue is abortion, and he should not have advertised one way when he actually believed another. I lump abortion with things like separation of church and state, gun rights, etc... These are the things a candidate should have resolved before taking the oath of office.
Of course things change, but there was no sudden surge of or outcry against abortions in Mass. No facts changed on abortion between the time Romney ran and the time he became pro-life.
From what I understand Ron Paul would challenge many of these unconstitutional departments/programs/agencies in court, which I believe the president has the ability to fast track.
I like the executive experience. I believe government should be run more like a business because businesses by and large have less waste. Their success actually depends on it, whereas government's does not. I like that he's a former governor, but the Mormon thing bugs me. I'm worried about voting for someone that believes God was once a man like us and that we will one day be Gods like Him. Also I dislike that he is in favor of gun control legislation, when the 2nd amendment clearly states "Congress shall make no law." Perhaps the biggest problem I have with Romney though is his flip flop on abortion. I'm pro-life, but he ran on pro-choice and then did not stick to it once he was elected. I understand he had a crisis of conscience once in office with legislation in front of him, but now I see him as the type of individual that could change a stance on virtually anything if the argument was persuasive enough.
McCain
The guy would make a good enough general, but a horrible republican nominee. He could not beat either Clinton or Obama. The country is sick of the war, and he wants to continue it and start new ones too. He's been accused of being less conservative than Clinton. He is one of the Democrats go to guys when they need a few more votes to push legislation through. Even on his understanding of the Iraq war he has flip flopped. http://www.gadberry.com/aaron/2008/01/08/mccain-vs-mccain/ Romney is much more electable, even with the Mormon thing.
Huckabee
He wants to take back the nation for Christ. I'm not sure that it ever belonged to Christ, unless he's talking about the Monarchy we lived under before the Revolution. He supports a 23% flat (fair) tax. While I understand a consumption tax, I disagree with a 23% federal tax while in my area we already have a 7.75% sales tax. That brings my sales tax up to 30.25%. Huckabee is even less conservative than McCain. Granted, he has no flip flopping on abortion, gay rights, etc, because those are religious viewpoints, he literally wants a theocracy. He wants to legislate morality. That just doesn't work.
Paul
He's the kind of man that founded our country. He wants to get rid of the massive amounts of government that slipped in during the last ~250 years. He wants to take us back to the time when elected officials were "serving". Unlike the other's running he actually is a conservative and doesn't change his positions. I honestly believe if there was no media bias that he would get more attention. I'm not sure if it's cause the FED gives money to media, or if the media enjoys their ability to lobby, or if it's something else If you look at his record on voting the major issues he has been consistent and right 100% of the time. It may not come out until later that he was right, for example on the Iraq war, but he has always made the right decisions.
I guess it's obvious I support Paul, but the facts are the facts, and I think it's about time we had a man like our founding fathers in charge.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not bad today, but what about a year from now? Starting adding in 1080i/p content and 250GB is nothing. A few years ago 250GB was the biggest hard drive you could get, but now it's > 4x that. They should make their limit grow in sync with Moore's Law. In fact Gmail should do that too.
Come on people. It's not like the NSA works with communication companies illegally!
I called the phone number to get a replacement bulb for one that burned out about two months ago and they mailed me a new one. When I got it it was broken in the shipping box and when I called the number for a replacement one I said I would prefer not to get the broken one out to read the numbers because I know they contain mercury. The customer service rep told me the mercury was contained within the base of the bulb and I was at no risk even if the bulb was broken.
I was skeptical and did not handle the bulb. Thoughts?
I don't think he "can't" play politics, I just don't think he has that choice. His platform is pretty definitive.
Progress? Lots of insurgents have been killed but other than that what progress has taken place? I know someone is going to be upset and think I'm as insulting the troops efforts, but I'm truly not. I'm against the policy makers. The troops have done their patriotic duty and served gloriously, but when troops are given crap for orders and missions then their efforts are wasted. It is an unspeakable tragedy that we have spent 4000 troops lives and 1 trillion dollars on this promotion of an American empire. We are in a losing battle, if for no other reason than we can't afford it. I honestly see the only way to get out and save face is to elect Ron Paul. The world will see democracy still rules in America, and we would begin to regain our country's image. As Dr. Paul says, if mid-treatment you discover that you have made the wrong diagnosis then you don't continue with the treatment for the original diagnosis, but apply the treatment for the new one.
That being said I see your point about waiting to be briefed on the current situation.
I'll give you the whining, but not as much a Chucklebee.
I don't believe Huckabee would succeed in making us a Theocracy. I believe he would waste most of his political pull on religious issues though (with the exception of the tax code). After Bush and his 3 trillion budget we need a Republican that acts like a Republican and makes some serious changes. If he's busy throwing around his weight on religious issues how can he address the real problems?
I don't have a large problem with the fair tax. I guess it comes down to a lot more business being done under the table. I've asked local businesses for their best cash price before, knowing that they might go under the table and discount me half the taxes. With the fair tax this kind of business would increase drastically. It adds a 23% difference to the already attractive dodging of business taxes and sales taxes.
Not only does the tax code need to be changed, but we need to have an amendment against an income tax, and we need to stop stifling our economy with such his tax rates. 23% of every dollar spent should not go to the federal government. Period.
I'm not talking about tactical strategies here. The issue is abortion, and he should not have advertised one way when he actually believed another. I lump abortion with things like separation of church and state, gun rights, etc... These are the things a candidate should have resolved before taking the oath of office.
Of course things change, but there was no sudden surge of or outcry against abortions in Mass. No facts changed on abortion between the time Romney ran and the time he became pro-life.
While Paul is admittedly far-right, his policies are more in line with the historical republican platform than McCain's.
From what I understand Ron Paul would challenge many of these unconstitutional departments/programs/agencies in court, which I believe the president has the ability to fast track.
Romney
I like the executive experience. I believe government should be run more like a business because businesses by and large have less waste. Their success actually depends on it, whereas government's does not. I like that he's a former governor, but the Mormon thing bugs me. I'm worried about voting for someone that believes God was once a man like us and that we will one day be Gods like Him. Also I dislike that he is in favor of gun control legislation, when the 2nd amendment clearly states "Congress shall make no law." Perhaps the biggest problem I have with Romney though is his flip flop on abortion. I'm pro-life, but he ran on pro-choice and then did not stick to it once he was elected. I understand he had a crisis of conscience once in office with legislation in front of him, but now I see him as the type of individual that could change a stance on virtually anything if the argument was persuasive enough.
McCain
The guy would make a good enough general, but a horrible republican nominee. He could not beat either Clinton or Obama. The country is sick of the war, and he wants to continue it and start new ones too. He's been accused of being less conservative than Clinton. He is one of the Democrats go to guys when they need a few more votes to push legislation through. Even on his understanding of the Iraq war he has flip flopped. http://www.gadberry.com/aaron/2008/01/08/mccain-vs-mccain/ Romney is much more electable, even with the Mormon thing.
Huckabee
He wants to take back the nation for Christ. I'm not sure that it ever belonged to Christ, unless he's talking about the Monarchy we lived under before the Revolution. He supports a 23% flat (fair) tax. While I understand a consumption tax, I disagree with a 23% federal tax while in my area we already have a 7.75% sales tax. That brings my sales tax up to 30.25%. Huckabee is even less conservative than McCain. Granted, he has no flip flopping on abortion, gay rights, etc, because those are religious viewpoints, he literally wants a theocracy. He wants to legislate morality. That just doesn't work.
Paul
He's the kind of man that founded our country. He wants to get rid of the massive amounts of government that slipped in during the last ~250 years. He wants to take us back to the time when elected officials were "serving". Unlike the other's running he actually is a conservative and doesn't change his positions. I honestly believe if there was no media bias that he would get more attention. I'm not sure if it's cause the FED gives money to media, or if the media enjoys their ability to lobby, or if it's something else If you look at his record on voting the major issues he has been consistent and right 100% of the time. It may not come out until later that he was right, for example on the Iraq war, but he has always made the right decisions.
I guess it's obvious I support Paul, but the facts are the facts, and I think it's about time we had a man like our founding fathers in charge.