When our family grows to the size where we need a larger vehicle, it won't be an SUV, becuase we *never* go offroading, and frankly, a minivan gets better mileage.
Maybe you understand. When you have a family a minivan makes sense. Before you have a family you're better off with an SUV because single guys who drive minivans don't get laid.
That statement alone indicates you are not competent or qualified to make intelligent political commentary.
Sour Grapes make no wine.
For all you knew Bush would break every campaign promise he ever made about honesty...But, oh boy, you knew you'd vote for him in 2004 when he won in 2000.
He kept the promises that were important to me. Moreover, the two issues that are most important to me are not taken seriously by the opposition.
Its knee jerk reality-challenged people like you that just make me shake my head in wonder.
Reality is that my guy won. Wonder all you want to.
If you will recall in 2000 the majority of the American people voted for the Democrat.
No. A plurality did.
You didn't have "huge numbers" then, don't think you have them now.
Then, clearly not. This time is debatable.
Remember the rhetoric at the Republican convention.
No. I didn't watch either convention. My decision was made in 2000. When Bush won the 2000 election, I knew I'd be voting for him again in 2004.
The other was gay marriage. Again it was an issue ruthlessly exploited by the Republicans to paint a picture that if the Democrats had their way gays would be wedding across the nation.
It's not fair to blame the Republicans for spiking the ball when the Democrats gave them such a perfect set for it.
Democrats were beating the drum of "gay rights" and the Republicans took advantage of society's revulsion at that.
By getting it on the ballot in 11-12 states they also drove large numbers of socially conservative voters out to vote and they probably voted Republican after they voted no on Gay Marriage. It was a brilliant strategy.
Once again, the social liberals set this up. By pushing the issue in state supreme courts, they forced the opposition to step up the fight. The US Supreme Court's sodomy decision and the Massachusetts supreme court's decision on gay marriage caused a backlash. You can't blame Republicans for taking advantage.
I really doubt the elections had anything to do with the realities of the electoral landscape, of the center and right turning on the lefties. It was an exercise in ruthless, brilliant campaigners crushing an inept Democratic party.
The Democrat base is now so far to the left that they didn't have the ability to run to the center they way they did in 1992 and 1996. Bill Clinton promised a middle class tax cut in 1992. He signed the "welfare reform" law in 1996. He courted centrist voters. In this election the democrats couldn't do that. After vilifying Bush's tax cut for 3 years, they couldn't then claim to want tax cuts.
Wont really get me to defend the Democrats, they are pathetic and getting more so everyday.
I'll defend and attack them at the same time. So many of the Democrat's ideals are wonderful. I'd love to see some of their social policies become law, problem is that the rest of their platform is so repugnant to me that I can never support them in a presidential election.
It is sad that the right wing, fundementalist Christian, fanatics in power have stolen and trashed the conservative label...
It's funny because, assuming that you're correct, they were only able to do this because of the huge numbers of people who were ostracized and excluded by "progressives" and liberals. Anyone who is ever so slightly to the right of center plainly is not wanted by the Democrats. The Republicans are more than happy to accept these people.
They thought a federal judge in Pittsburgh would be more conservative than a judge in California, but thought wrong.
The Feds have obviously never been the south side of Pittsburgh then. I'm going to assume you're a Pittsburgher too because you said "here in Pittsburgh".
But for those out there who aren't from Pittsburgh, The "South Side" is like Pittsburgh's version of "The Village". (New York's village, not that movie) What's really cool about it though is that in addition to all of the wild "progressives" on the south side, you also have a lot of retirees. It makes for an interesting mix.
Morality really isn't something that should be legislated.
Virtually all criminal law is the legislation of someone's morality.
Can't steal because it's amoral. Can't murder because it's amoral. Can't have sex with children because it's amoral. Can't attack people on the street because it's amoral.
Imagine what would happen if these guys can wrangle a deal with Apple or Dell or Gateway to include their product. The manufacture can add "Send SECURE email" to their list of features. The average Joe may not know what that means, but it implies that otherwise the email they send would be insecure.
I love the fact that these robots could reduce the number of Allied casualties, while at the same time I hate the fact that this will remove the awfulness of war, it could make future wars MORE likely because future politicians will know that the country will have greater resolve when fewer of our boys will be coming home in metal boxes.
I don't suppose you could be a little more specific ? What games can't you get ? Or do you just not like waiting for the major ones to be ported ?
If games are a secondary concern to you, it may not be a big deal to you if mac games are less plentiful and slower to market.
For me, play is just as important as work. I want new games. Is Counter Strike even available for the Mac? Anything in the C&C universe except for the first one?
I play games on my PS2, most of the time, and that's the platform most new games I get are for, except for the copy of UT2004 I have for my Mac...
I retired from console gaming when I was done with me PSX. If the PS2 is satisfying all of your needs, that's cool. I have no desire to purchase any console.
I mean really, unless you could get a comperable PC for less than the $500 price tag why would you even consider it?
This is the easiest question to answer. Software availability.
As much as it might suck, I spend more time using windows than Mac OS or Linuz just because most of the apps that I want/need to run are available with windows.
Don't like OSX (It takes some getting used to, but I think it probably has the best UI of any OS out there)? Run PPC Linux.
I do. I have Mandrake 9.2 PPC running on two Macs.
This type of chemical tweaking is what lead to our current Controlled Substances Act. Previously, any new chemical compound would remain legal until congress passed yet another law to specifically prohibit it. Drugs like LSD and Extasy were briefly legal because of the limitations.
Now, any substance can be covered as Schedule 1 under the controlled substances act WITHOUT an act of congress. If you developed a new and unique chemical compound tomorrow that was an intoxicant. It would be completely legal until the right bureaucrats discovered it and decided in a secret meeting that it shouldn't be legal. Poof, it become a felony to possess or manufacture a substance that was completely legal the day before.
We are at the brink of similar restrictions being placed on software.
These pointless laws are unenforceable in the current world. So instead of allowing people to flout the law and wallow in lawlessness, the state will need to sieze MORE power in order to observe more aspects of our lives so that they can enforce the laws that they passed in error.
More than that, the gp is right, albeit unintentionally: the major reason for gun safety improvements over the years is due to the application of legal sanctions against weapons manufacturers, which were held liable for failure to exercise due care in preventing accidental discharge.
No. They firearms industry works with safety in mind because regardless of what the public is told, most gun owners are responsible people and do not want their friends or children harmed because a poorly made gun failed. Companies that employ more common sense safety features can charge a premium for their guns and they get it. Glock, Colt, and Beretta are prime examples. Their guns are well made, chock full of safety features and they sell like hotcakes.
Some SKS's were notorious for inadvertantly going full-auto when the sear catch failed, and the rifle slam-fired.
If the BATF was really out to get you, they'd pack your lower receiver and bolt with grease so make sure that the SKS would slamfire its way through the entire magazine just so they could nail you with an illegal machine gun charge.
That same trick works with certain AK variants too. Pack the bolt and lower receiver with enough grease and when it gets dirty, either the firing pin or the sear will stick and it'll go full auto.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, look, we eco-lefties can troll too!
Yeah, but mine was actually funny.
LK
When our family grows to the size where we need a larger vehicle, it won't be an SUV, becuase we *never* go offroading, and frankly, a minivan gets better mileage.
Maybe you understand. When you have a family a minivan makes sense. Before you have a family you're better off with an SUV because single guys who drive minivans don't get laid.
LK
Funny, I'll provide a Winston quote that seems to sum up the beliefs of the professional environmentalists.
"If there's a steady paycheck in it. I'll believe in anything you say"
LK
That statement alone indicates you are not competent or qualified to make intelligent political commentary.
Sour Grapes make no wine.
For all you knew Bush would break every campaign promise he ever made about honesty...But, oh boy, you knew you'd vote for him in 2004 when he won in 2000.
He kept the promises that were important to me. Moreover, the two issues that are most important to me are not taken seriously by the opposition.
Its knee jerk reality-challenged people like you that just make me shake my head in wonder.
Reality is that my guy won. Wonder all you want to.
LK
If you will recall in 2000 the majority of the American people voted for the Democrat.
No. A plurality did.
You didn't have "huge numbers" then, don't think you have them now.
Then, clearly not. This time is debatable.
Remember the rhetoric at the Republican convention.
No. I didn't watch either convention. My decision was made in 2000. When Bush won the 2000 election, I knew I'd be voting for him again in 2004.
The other was gay marriage. Again it was an issue ruthlessly exploited by the Republicans to paint a picture that if the Democrats had their way gays would be wedding across the nation.
It's not fair to blame the Republicans for spiking the ball when the Democrats gave them such a perfect set for it.
Democrats were beating the drum of "gay rights" and the Republicans took advantage of society's revulsion at that.
By getting it on the ballot in 11-12 states they also drove large numbers of socially conservative voters out to vote and they probably voted Republican after they voted no on Gay Marriage. It was a brilliant strategy.
Once again, the social liberals set this up. By pushing the issue in state supreme courts, they forced the opposition to step up the fight. The US Supreme Court's sodomy decision and the Massachusetts supreme court's decision on gay marriage caused a backlash. You can't blame Republicans for taking advantage.
I really doubt the elections had anything to do with the realities of the electoral landscape, of the center and right turning on the lefties. It was an exercise in ruthless, brilliant campaigners crushing an inept Democratic party.
The Democrat base is now so far to the left that they didn't have the ability to run to the center they way they did in 1992 and 1996. Bill Clinton promised a middle class tax cut in 1992. He signed the "welfare reform" law in 1996. He courted centrist voters. In this election the democrats couldn't do that. After vilifying Bush's tax cut for 3 years, they couldn't then claim to want tax cuts.
Wont really get me to defend the Democrats, they are pathetic and getting more so everyday.
I'll defend and attack them at the same time. So many of the Democrat's ideals are wonderful. I'd love to see some of their social policies become law, problem is that the rest of their platform is so repugnant to me that I can never support them in a presidential election.
LK
It is sad that the right wing, fundementalist Christian, fanatics in power have stolen and trashed the conservative label...
It's funny because, assuming that you're correct, they were only able to do this because of the huge numbers of people who were ostracized and excluded by "progressives" and liberals. Anyone who is ever so slightly to the right of center plainly is not wanted by the Democrats. The Republicans are more than happy to accept these people.
LK
That sounds like a group of weed-smoking rappers.
LK
You are correct, I used the wrong word.
They thought a federal judge in Pittsburgh would be more conservative than a judge in California, but thought wrong.
The Feds have obviously never been the south side of Pittsburgh then. I'm going to assume you're a Pittsburgher too because you said "here in Pittsburgh".
But for those out there who aren't from Pittsburgh, The "South Side" is like Pittsburgh's version of "The Village". (New York's village, not that movie) What's really cool about it though is that in addition to all of the wild "progressives" on the south side, you also have a lot of retirees. It makes for an interesting mix.
LK
Morality really isn't something that should be legislated.
Virtually all criminal law is the legislation of someone's morality.
Can't steal because it's amoral.
Can't murder because it's amoral.
Can't have sex with children because it's amoral.
Can't attack people on the street because it's amoral.
LK
Let's look at some of your content and ads.
It's not just porn...It's Actual Love
Erotica For Women. Designed by women for women.
An erotic magazine for women, by women.
Vaginas in Mythology, Art, and History
You're a part of the "Erotica For Women" webring.
Woman centric dipshit, i.e. focused on women? You don't like to look at women? Maybe you are gay....
I love to look at women, I just have no interest whatsoever in "Erotics by women, for women"
LK
Woman centric amateur erotica, forums, reviews, & more! ActualLove.com
I'm sorry, but I'm not a homosexual. I prefer real pornography.
LK
Imagine what would happen if these guys can wrangle a deal with Apple or Dell or Gateway to include their product. The manufacture can add "Send SECURE email" to their list of features. The average Joe may not know what that means, but it implies that otherwise the email they send would be insecure.
LK
I love the fact that these robots could reduce the number of Allied casualties, while at the same time I hate the fact that this will remove the awfulness of war, it could make future wars MORE likely because future politicians will know that the country will have greater resolve when fewer of our boys will be coming home in metal boxes.
LK
why not get a console ? cheaper than a PC , yet still better looking
Because I prefer PC games, and the money that I'd have to spend to replace consoles as they're obviated is better spent upgrading my PC.
LK
I don't suppose you could be a little more specific ? What games can't you get ? Or do you just not like waiting for the major ones to be ported ?
If games are a secondary concern to you, it may not be a big deal to you if mac games are less plentiful and slower to market.
For me, play is just as important as work. I want new games. Is Counter Strike even available for the Mac? Anything in the C&C universe except for the first one?
I play games on my PS2, most of the time, and that's the platform most new games I get are for, except for the copy of UT2004 I have for my Mac...
I retired from console gaming when I was done with me PSX. If the PS2 is satisfying all of your needs, that's cool. I have no desire to purchase any console.
LK
Games.
I can get word processors on Mac or linux. Same with development environments. Ditto for just about all web/mail/usenet apps.
I can't get the games that I want on the Mac platform.
LK
She DID go to jail.
That isn't exactly "getting away with it" in my book.
Later, of course the laws did change, but she still faced the punishment for her action.
LK
Isn't all of the linux kernel code already available?
LK
I mean really, unless you could get a comperable PC for less than the $500 price tag why would you even consider it?
This is the easiest question to answer. Software availability.
As much as it might suck, I spend more time using windows than Mac OS or Linuz just because most of the apps that I want/need to run are available with windows.
Don't like OSX (It takes some getting used to, but I think it probably has the best UI of any OS out there)? Run PPC Linux.
I do. I have Mandrake 9.2 PPC running on two Macs.
LK
I don't care how my digicam does it, as long as the files are available to me in a format that I can use.
.jpgs and .avis that I can get via a USB cable. It makes no difference to me how they end up on the flash memory device.
My visioneer camera gives me
LK
This type of chemical tweaking is what lead to our current Controlled Substances Act. Previously, any new chemical compound would remain legal until congress passed yet another law to specifically prohibit it. Drugs like LSD and Extasy were briefly legal because of the limitations.
Now, any substance can be covered as Schedule 1 under the controlled substances act WITHOUT an act of congress. If you developed a new and unique chemical compound tomorrow that was an intoxicant. It would be completely legal until the right bureaucrats discovered it and decided in a secret meeting that it shouldn't be legal. Poof, it become a felony to possess or manufacture a substance that was completely legal the day before.
We are at the brink of similar restrictions being placed on software.
LK
How's this for a side effect.
These pointless laws are unenforceable in the current world. So instead of allowing people to flout the law and wallow in lawlessness, the state will need to sieze MORE power in order to observe more aspects of our lives so that they can enforce the laws that they passed in error.
LK
More than that, the gp is right, albeit unintentionally: the major reason for gun safety improvements over the years is due to the application of legal sanctions against weapons manufacturers, which were held liable for failure to exercise due care in preventing accidental discharge.
No. They firearms industry works with safety in mind because regardless of what the public is told, most gun owners are responsible people and do not want their friends or children harmed because a poorly made gun failed. Companies that employ more common sense safety features can charge a premium for their guns and they get it. Glock, Colt, and Beretta are prime examples. Their guns are well made, chock full of safety features and they sell like hotcakes.
LK
Some SKS's were notorious for inadvertantly going full-auto when the sear catch failed, and the rifle slam-fired.
If the BATF was really out to get you, they'd pack your lower receiver and bolt with grease so make sure that the SKS would slamfire its way through the entire magazine just so they could nail you with an illegal machine gun charge.
That same trick works with certain AK variants too. Pack the bolt and lower receiver with enough grease and when it gets dirty, either the firing pin or the sear will stick and it'll go full auto.
LK