The data is also being collected near air conditioners, on parking lots, and has been so mucked up that NASA had to rearrage the 'hottest years' list..
"I was going to dissect the rest of your post point by point, but since you seem to be making the same point again and again, I'm not sure it would add any value. For the record, we're talking about environmentalism in the context of global warming, not WMD, Iraq, OBL, or any other such thing. I have no idea how you got there or what parallel you're trying to draw, but it's some of the most poorly crafted straw men I've yet encountered - and I've been on the Internets a little while now, so that's saying something."
Point is that where some were OK surrendering liberty for security others seem to be ok surrendering liberty for ecology... And both with weak if any base..
I saw bah to both constructs...
If a man is mistakenly arrested and executed for a murder he did not commit but he would have otherwise raped someone the next night is that a good thing? Its a complex question and it is logically the equivalent of saying 'if the Government increased power, taxed the poor, and hurt the economy in a recession on faulty info' but the air is cleaner is it a good thing.
Don't piss and moan because you did not like the comparison I took something you did not like (iraq) to shine a light on something you were ignoring and that is reduction of liberty on lies/bad information is never OK just because of some ancillary nice effects
"Even if global warming is a purely natural phenomenon, even if it didn't exist at all and this was all just a natural fluctuation, the idea of global warming has been very good for us as a whole."
--
Lies don't breed good they only breed lies...
-Even if we did not find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, even if they did not exist at all and it was just poor intelligence, the Iraq War action has been very good for us as a whole.-
--
"It's encouraged an ecological awareness, and an understanding that our actions do have an impact on the world around us beyond the immediate."
Lies have to justify the horrible incursions on liberty and truth that take place in their name
-Saddam Hussein was a dictator who had to be removed and now he is, understanding that Iraq is on the cusp of becoming a freer nation will impact the whole middle east and the world around us beyond the immediate-
--
"This is progress that we need to make regardless of whether it's attributed to global warming, global cooling, global purpling, or the smell of some guy's socks in Kansas."
Lies eventually seek to justify themselves with a 'ends justify the means' philosophy
-The progress that needs to be made in dictatorships and theocracies regardless of weather it's attributed to weapons of mass destruction, national interest, foreign trade, or even oil-
--
"We can't get cocky and say, "Oh, global warming was a naturally occurring phenomenon, let's go back to burning dinosaurs in our cars and triple-wrapping our Endangered Burger."
The power obtained through lies seeks to be held
-We are in Iraq we have to commit to leaving only when things are stable, we just cant say to ourselves well we were wrong no WMD lets put together a timetable for out.-
--
"I've long been suspicious that mankind would be able to have this sort of effect in this amount of time for reasons which are too long to go into here, but I nonetheless support the progress that the moniker of global warming promotes.Even if our reasons turn out to be wrong wrong, the result is right."
Lairs seek to glorify themselves in their lie
-Even though we did not catch OBL, even though there were no WMD I nonetheless support taking the fight to the terrorist-
"There are many reasons to migrate from fossil fuels, the most compelling being that they're going to run out very soon."
Yes and No
Oil is past peak but there is enough Coal in nations like the US and China to go ahead using fossil fuels for some time. Still I agree that there are many reasons I would say the most compelling is independence and an ability to stay away from getting entangled in foreign affairs.
"The changing climate is also a worry (which we wouldn't want to encourage to change faster than it already is),"
Except for several years its been cooling. The problem with global warming/climate change is that when you look at a macro level (thousands of years) we are not experiencing anything out of the ordinary when you look at the micro, one hundred or so, the sky is falling. When you hand a politician the stick that say 'we have to do this or we are all going to die' they will abuse it for their own power. This was true with Iraq and 9-11 and it is true for Health care, and its true for climate change.
While Al Gore and other's use their carbon indulgences to consume more power than an average 20 American households the house is passing cap and trade that will disproportionately hurt the poor in a recession and in the process expand government power over the individule. 'Global warming' by which the left means anthropogenic global warming allows them to act with an urgency that breaks common sense and government accountability.
"but it's not the only reason, and the money spent on migrating to alternative energy sources certainly wouldn't be wasted."
And you know this how? it could very well be wasted! That's not to say the endeavor would not be worth the attempt anyway but when you say it can't fail you will (1) throw good money after bad like the attempted second stimulus, or (2) lie about success like saying even though unemployment is now over 10 percent nationally that you have 'saved' jobs when you promised you plan would keep unemployment under 8.
Not really do you know how much money there is to be made on research grants and cap and trade energy policies. And not just money but *power* which is money squared.
So while the oil companies have something to gain so do politicians, political appointees, and cap and trade investors like the Goreacle himself..
"Chavez, like Zelaya, used the democratic process to change the constitution to remove a term limit, just like many other countries also lack term limits for presidencies."
'Democratic Process' = Mob rule 'Constitutional Process' = Law
Zelaya was using mob rule and not rule of law to try to hold onto power...
"Why is this clear to 90% of the latin american population, but not to "western" audiences?"
Are you joking? most people in the US would call this a coup, the secretary of state has called it a coup and most Americans done know anything about what precipitated it.
"Americans were free to elect FDR four times; and the legislatures of the United States are free to change the Constitution to allow future voters to do so. It is not treason to advocate that this be done."
But it is treason to advocate an unconstitutional method to do so. Maybe some folks wanted Bush to have a third term (there have to be a hand full of crackpots out there). If Bush said 'I'm going to hold a referendum to change the constitution on an up or down vote' that would be treason. If the supreme court told him no and he went ahead anyway that would be treason. If he fired a general for not helping him and would not reinstate despite a court order that would be treason.
Honduras just dodged another tin pot dictator and they did it with no violence save ejecting the would be king from the nation.
"The man was impeached, which is the maximum possible punishment for a sitting U.S. president. What more do you want me to say?"
Umm no,
(1) conviction in the senate would be bigger (2) In addition to being the president he is still just a citizen so prison for lying under oath would be more serious
http://www.slate.com/id/1007531/ "News reports say that President Clinton's brother, Roger, is considering invoking his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination when he is called to testify before the New York grand jury investigating Bill Clinton's pardons."
The lie was at a trial about another woman with whom the President had has sex (then the governer of Georgia)
as an aside:
By the way thanks to the NOW gang Sexual Harassment can even be consensual if, after the fact, the woman feels maybe she was pressured (even if she did not know it at the time)..
Oh my gosh you work for government IT lets all bow to you... nobody should say bunk against you...
Dude I have worked IT both for governments (State and FED) and in the private sector and to ignore the question of where to draw the line with consolidation gives some evidence *you* don't know what you are talking about.
Some things are nice consolidated on big servers, some things not so much, its all situational. If you want to save money on office software why not just go with open-office? That way folks can still work on docs if there is a network outage or if they are traveling. The question of who protects and who owns the data is critical.
Now I know that Google does sell some appliances (e.g. search) but I have yet to see a Google docs appliance (though ironically I only googled for a few minutes to verify). Running your office suite infrastructure on Google docs remote would be *totally* unacceptable. Perhaps an appliance based solution for individual offices might be worth looking into and yes you could outsource the setup of such a system to google but if this guy tries to put government data on googles server *as policy* officially Obama's openness has jumped the shark..
Whats funny is in 2004 Bush got about 52% of the vote and picked up congressional seat and when he said he had a mandate people on the left (rightfully) balked... Obama get 54% and pick up some seats and its now, to the left, a mandate...
Obama is burning through political capital far faster than Bush, even some of the Blue Dog democrats are starting to wonder about this new omnibus spending bill.
Using Bush, who is literally the lowest common denominator of my life time (and given I lived through carter that says something) to prop up obama is pretty funny..
When you throw a publicly funded entity like Fannie/Freddie into the mix with sub primes you use the government to move the market. The act use the government to change the market.
** In November 2000 Fannie Mae announced that the Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") would soon require it to dedicate 50% of its business to low- and moderate-income families." ****
--
Now guess who the bulk of stuid interest only/ balloon/ ARM loans were going to? 400 Billion to save Fannie may because of *government* policy..
The Community Reinvestment Act (or CRA, Pub.L. 95-128, title VIII, 91 Stat. 1147, 12 U.S.C. 2901 et seq.) is a United States federal law designed to encourage commercial banks and savings associations to meet the needs of borrowers in all segments of their communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods.[1][2][3] Community activists had lobbied the US Congress to pass the Act in order to reduce discriminatory credit practices against low-income neighborhoods, a practice known as redlining.[4]
The Act requires the appropriate federal financial supervisory agencies to encourage regulated financial institutions to meet the credit needs of the local communities in which they are chartered, consistent with safe and sound operation. (See full text of Act and current regulations.[1]) To enforce the statute, federal regulatory agencies examine banking institutions for CRA compliance, and take this information into consideration when approving applications for new bank branches or for mergers or acquisitions.[5].
The original act was put through by carter and the Democrats back in 77' but changes have just made it worse and worse:
In October 2000, in order to expand the secondary market for affordable community-based mortgages and to increase liquidity for CRA-eligible loans, Fannie Mae committed to purchase and securitize $2 billion of "MyCommunityMortgage" loans.[20][21] **** In November 2000 Fannie Mae announced that the Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") would soon require it to dedicate 50% of its business to low- and moderate-income families." ****
"The president's job is to do what he was elected to do"
Ummm no, the presidents Job is clearly defined in the constitution, modified by laws from congress and vetted by the supreme court. If the presidents job is to 'do what he was elected to do' than all this complaining about Buh is off mark, after all he was only doing what voters put him in office to do. The idea that because President Obama got 5.4 out of 10 people to vote for him he has cart blanch to make 'change' is disturbing. He is just a man and the constitution is bigger than him.
"Have you spent any time at all actually talking to a doctor about this?"
I have said many places on this thread that I am working with my doctor on age and risk appropriate vaccines. Not everyone who disagrees with the masses is some rube scares when the sky dragon eats the sun at night.
"If your child had an allergic reaction to a shot, you should be doing your very best to try and figure out what actually caused it before they're exposed to it again."
No S*&^ Really... phew I knew those scratch test were for something.. The problem is there are *millions* of things to be allergic to and I don't quite want to scratch for everything. For example I abstained from Shrip most of my life because of a terrible allergic reaction as a kid... turns out I am not allergic to shrimp I am allergic to the preservatives that some ships use when they are without refrigeration.
"Instead, you've just written off all vaccines and are on the border of advocating that others do it, too. "
Where? Where did I (1) write them all off or (2) advocate for others to do so.
"My nephew was diagnosed with Pertussis when he was about 18 months old. He lost weight and damaged his ears and hearing."
One of the vaccines my kids got at 12 months but hey Im some rube right?
"So, on behalf of my nephew, I'd like to say thanks for helping to increase the number of children who have to be subjected to painful and developmentally challenging diseases."
And on behalf of the academy I want to give you this Oscar for playing the self righteous ass who did not even read my post before playing you're role to perfection... nicely done sir..
"Ah, so you've had a personal experience that make you no longer able to objective judge the facts. "
I love the circular logic...
Bob: 'vaccines dont really hurt anyone' Tom: 'They almost killed my kid' Bob: 'Well we cant count that, youre biased by experience' Bob: 'see vaccines never hurt anyone'
"You wouldn't think that a state could tax interstate trade"
A little known fact is that the 'sales tax' is more a 'use tax'. If someone in NY drives to PA to by cloths and save the tax money they are legally required to pay NY taxes on it (few actually do this). This is why NY (outside of the City) is dying, its not just Buffalo but everywhere except Albany (seat of state government) is hurting. Taxes in NY are just way to high for business to start setting up shop and competing with neighboring states.
Are you illiterate or a troll? when she gets passed the age when its 'safe' to get chicken pox I will have her vaccinate unless she gets them and along with it a life long immunity..
"The anti-vaccine crowd do not believe in vaccines. "
I do believe in them, they work great I am not a fan of giving several dozen of them to infants and mandating them for even trivial diseases like Chicken Pox.
Slashdot Mirror
The data is also being collected near air conditioners, on parking lots, and has been so mucked up that NASA had to rearrage the 'hottest years' list..
"I was going to dissect the rest of your post point by point, but since you seem to be making the same point again and again, I'm not sure it would add any value. For the record, we're talking about environmentalism in the context of global warming, not WMD, Iraq, OBL, or any other such thing. I have no idea how you got there or what parallel you're trying to draw, but it's some of the most poorly crafted straw men I've yet encountered - and I've been on the Internets a little while now, so that's saying something."
Point is that where some were OK surrendering liberty for security others seem to be ok surrendering liberty for ecology... And both with weak if any base..
I saw bah to both constructs...
If a man is mistakenly arrested and executed for a murder he did not commit but he would have otherwise raped someone the next night is that a good thing? Its a complex question and it is logically the equivalent of saying 'if the Government increased power, taxed the poor, and hurt the economy in a recession on faulty info' but the air is cleaner is it a good thing.
Don't piss and moan because you did not like the comparison I took something you did not like (iraq) to shine a light on something you were ignoring and that is reduction of liberty on lies/bad information is never OK just because of some ancillary nice effects
"Even if global warming is a purely natural phenomenon, even if it didn't exist at all and this was all just a natural fluctuation, the idea of global warming has been very good for us as a whole."
--
Lies don't breed good they only breed lies...
-Even if we did not find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, even if they did not exist at all and it was just poor intelligence, the Iraq War action has been very good for us as a whole.-
--
"It's encouraged an ecological awareness, and an understanding that our actions do have an impact on the world around us beyond the immediate."
Lies have to justify the horrible incursions on liberty and truth that take place in their name
-Saddam Hussein was a dictator who had to be removed and now he is, understanding that Iraq is on the cusp of becoming a freer nation will impact the whole middle east and the world around us beyond the immediate-
--
"This is progress that we need to make regardless of whether it's attributed to global warming, global cooling, global purpling, or the smell of some guy's socks in Kansas."
Lies eventually seek to justify themselves with a 'ends justify the means' philosophy
-The progress that needs to be made in dictatorships and theocracies regardless of weather it's attributed to weapons of mass destruction, national interest, foreign trade, or even oil-
--
"We can't get cocky and say, "Oh, global warming was a naturally occurring phenomenon, let's go back to burning dinosaurs in our cars and triple-wrapping our Endangered Burger."
The power obtained through lies seeks to be held
-We are in Iraq we have to commit to leaving only when things are stable, we just cant say to ourselves well we were wrong no WMD lets put together a timetable for out.-
--
"I've long been suspicious that mankind would be able to have this sort of effect in this amount of time for reasons which are too long to go into here, but I nonetheless support the progress that the moniker of global warming promotes.Even if our reasons turn out to be wrong wrong, the result is right."
Lairs seek to glorify themselves in their lie
-Even though we did not catch OBL, even though there were no WMD I nonetheless support taking the fight to the terrorist-
--
"There are many reasons to migrate from fossil fuels, the most compelling being that they're going to run out very soon."
Yes and No
Oil is past peak but there is enough Coal in nations like the US and China to go ahead using fossil fuels for some time. Still I agree that there are many reasons I would say the most compelling is independence and an ability to stay away from getting entangled in foreign affairs.
"The changing climate is also a worry (which we wouldn't want to encourage to change faster than it already is),"
Except for several years its been cooling. The problem with global warming/climate change is that when you look at a macro level (thousands of years) we are not experiencing anything out of the ordinary when you look at the micro, one hundred or so, the sky is falling. When you hand a politician the stick that say 'we have to do this or we are all going to die' they will abuse it for their own power. This was true with Iraq and 9-11 and it is true for Health care, and its true for climate change.
While Al Gore and other's use their carbon indulgences to consume more power than an average 20 American households the house is passing cap and trade that will disproportionately hurt the poor in a recession and in the process expand government power over the individule. 'Global warming' by which the left means anthropogenic global warming allows them to act with an urgency that breaks common sense and government accountability.
"but it's not the only reason, and the money spent on migrating to alternative energy sources certainly wouldn't be wasted."
And you know this how? it could very well be wasted! That's not to say the endeavor would not be worth the attempt anyway but when you say it can't fail you will (1) throw good money after bad like the attempted second stimulus, or (2) lie about success like saying even though unemployment is now over 10 percent nationally that you have 'saved' jobs when you promised you plan would keep unemployment under 8.
"Insomuch as they are both denying an opinion supported by the majority of experts in a field and supported by the majority of data"
A majority of the secret data? a majority of the data that can not see the light of day?
Not really do you know how much money there is to be made on research grants and cap and trade energy policies. And not just money but *power* which is money squared.
So while the oil companies have something to gain so do politicians, political appointees, and cap and trade investors like the Goreacle himself..
"Chavez, like Zelaya, used the democratic process to change the constitution to remove a term limit, just like many other countries also lack term limits for presidencies."
'Democratic Process' = Mob rule
'Constitutional Process' = Law
Zelaya was using mob rule and not rule of law to try to hold onto power...
"Why is this clear to 90% of the latin american population, but not to "western" audiences?"
Are you joking? most people in the US would call this a coup, the secretary of state has called it a coup and most Americans done know anything about what precipitated it.
"Americans were free to elect FDR four times; and the legislatures of the United States are free to change the Constitution to allow future voters to do so. It is not treason to advocate that this be done."
But it is treason to advocate an unconstitutional method to do so. Maybe some folks wanted Bush to have a third term (there have to be a hand full of crackpots out there). If Bush said 'I'm going to hold a referendum to change the constitution on an up or down vote' that would be treason. If the supreme court told him no and he went ahead anyway that would be treason. If he fired a general for not helping him and would not reinstate despite a court order that would be treason.
Honduras just dodged another tin pot dictator and they did it with no violence save ejecting the would be king from the nation.
"The man was impeached, which is the maximum possible punishment for a sitting U.S. president. What more do you want me to say?"
Umm no,
(1) conviction in the senate would be bigger
(2) In addition to being the president he is still just a citizen so prison for lying under oath would be more serious
wow I dont know where GA came from.. Thanks for the correction..
Re 5th... She is not the only one
http://www.slate.com/id/1007531/
"News reports say that President Clinton's brother, Roger, is considering invoking his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination when he is called to testify before the New York grand jury investigating Bill Clinton's pardons."
So like I said two sides of a worthless coin
The lie was at a trial about another woman with whom the President had has sex (then the governer of Georgia)
as an aside:
By the way thanks to the NOW gang Sexual Harassment can even be consensual if, after the fact, the woman feels maybe she was pressured (even if she did not know it at the time)..
"Giving false information during a Federal investigation. If you ever do it, expect to go to jail for some time --- and deserve it."
Except in the case of sexual harassment right? Then you get to stay president..
Palin has trouble with the first Biden has trouble with the 2nd and 10th... Were really bent over the table either way...
Oh my gosh you work for government IT lets all bow to you... nobody should say bunk against you...
Dude I have worked IT both for governments (State and FED) and in the private sector and to ignore the question of where to draw the line with consolidation gives some evidence *you* don't know what you are talking about.
Some things are nice consolidated on big servers, some things not so much, its all situational. If you want to save money on office software why not just go with open-office? That way folks can still work on docs if there is a network outage or if they are traveling. The question of who protects and who owns the data is critical.
Now I know that Google does sell some appliances (e.g. search) but I have yet to see a Google docs appliance (though ironically I only googled for a few minutes to verify). Running your office suite infrastructure on Google docs remote would be *totally* unacceptable. Perhaps an appliance based solution for individual offices might be worth looking into and yes you could outsource the setup of such a system to google but if this guy tries to put government data on googles server *as policy* officially Obama's openness has jumped the shark..
Whats funny is in 2004 Bush got about 52% of the vote and picked up congressional seat and when he said he had a mandate people on the left (rightfully) balked... Obama get 54% and pick up some seats and its now, to the left, a mandate...
Obama is burning through political capital far faster than Bush, even some of the Blue Dog democrats are starting to wonder about this new omnibus spending bill.
Using Bush, who is literally the lowest common denominator of my life time (and given I lived through carter that says something) to prop up obama is pretty funny..
When you throw a publicly funded entity like Fannie/Freddie into the mix with sub primes you use the government to move the market. The act use the government to change the market.
** In November 2000 Fannie Mae announced that the Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") would soon require it to dedicate 50% of its business to low- and moderate-income families." ****
--
Now guess who the bulk of stuid interest only/ balloon/ ARM loans were going to? 400 Billion to save Fannie may because of *government* policy..
Well he was wrong about the bill but right about the time.. The mortgage crisis is the fault of government but not just one party..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act
The Community Reinvestment Act (or CRA, Pub.L. 95-128, title VIII, 91 Stat. 1147, 12 U.S.C. 2901 et seq.) is a United States federal law designed to encourage commercial banks and savings associations to meet the needs of borrowers in all segments of their communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods.[1][2][3] Community activists had lobbied the US Congress to pass the Act in order to reduce discriminatory credit practices against low-income neighborhoods, a practice known as redlining.[4]
The Act requires the appropriate federal financial supervisory agencies to encourage regulated financial institutions to meet the credit needs of the local communities in which they are chartered, consistent with safe and sound operation. (See full text of Act and current regulations.[1]) To enforce the statute, federal regulatory agencies examine banking institutions for CRA compliance, and take this information into consideration when approving applications for new bank branches or for mergers or acquisitions.[5].
The original act was put through by carter and the Democrats back in 77' but changes have just made it worse and worse:
In October 2000, in order to expand the secondary market for affordable community-based mortgages and to increase liquidity for CRA-eligible loans, Fannie Mae committed to purchase and securitize $2 billion of "MyCommunityMortgage" loans.[20][21] **** In November 2000 Fannie Mae announced that the Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") would soon require it to dedicate 50% of its business to low- and moderate-income families." ****
"The president's job is to do what he was elected to do"
Ummm no, the presidents Job is clearly defined in the constitution, modified by laws from congress and vetted by the supreme court. If the presidents job is to 'do what he was elected to do' than all this complaining about Buh is off mark, after all he was only doing what voters put him in office to do. The idea that because President Obama got 5.4 out of 10 people to vote for him he has cart blanch to make 'change' is disturbing. He is just a man and the constitution is bigger than him.
"Have you spent any time at all actually talking to a doctor about this?"
I have said many places on this thread that I am working with my doctor on age and risk appropriate vaccines. Not everyone who disagrees with the masses is some rube scares when the sky dragon eats the sun at night.
"If your child had an allergic reaction to a shot, you should be doing your very best to try and figure out what actually caused it before they're exposed to it again."
No S*&^ Really... phew I knew those scratch test were for something.. The problem is there are *millions* of things to be allergic to and I don't quite want to scratch for everything. For example I abstained from Shrip most of my life because of a terrible allergic reaction as a kid... turns out I am not allergic to shrimp I am allergic to the preservatives that some ships use when they are without refrigeration.
"Instead, you've just written off all vaccines and are on the border of advocating that others do it, too. "
Where? Where did I (1) write them all off or (2) advocate for others to do so.
"My nephew was diagnosed with Pertussis when he was about 18 months old. He lost weight and damaged his ears and hearing."
One of the vaccines my kids got at 12 months but hey Im some rube right?
"So, on behalf of my nephew, I'd like to say thanks for helping to increase the number of children who have to be subjected to painful and developmentally challenging diseases."
And on behalf of the academy I want to give you this Oscar for playing the self righteous ass who did not even read my post before playing you're role to perfection... nicely done sir..
"Ah, so you've had a personal experience that make you no longer able to objective judge the facts. "
I love the circular logic...
Bob: 'vaccines dont really hurt anyone'
Tom: 'They almost killed my kid'
Bob: 'Well we cant count that, youre biased by experience'
Bob: 'see vaccines never hurt anyone'
--
"You wouldn't think that a state could tax interstate trade"
A little known fact is that the 'sales tax' is more a 'use tax'. If someone in NY drives to PA to by cloths and save the tax money they are legally required to pay NY taxes on it (few actually do this). This is why NY (outside of the City) is dying, its not just Buffalo but everywhere except Albany (seat of state government) is hurting. Taxes in NY are just way to high for business to start setting up shop and competing with neighboring states.
Are you illiterate or a troll? when she gets passed the age when its 'safe' to get chicken pox I will have her vaccinate unless she gets them and along with it a life long immunity..
"The anti-vaccine crowd do not believe in vaccines. "
I do believe in them, they work great I am not a fan of giving several dozen of them to infants and mandating them for even trivial diseases like Chicken Pox.