In order for coverage of the two candidates to be "balanced", wouldn't the two candidates have to be equally bad? If one candidate has twice the bad press as another, he may just be doing twice as much stupid shit as the other.
This essentially only shows what everyone already knows: Fox news is very conservative, and other media outlets are not as conservative as Fox news.
It doesn't necessarily show anything about the other outlets on their own.
"Bush and Gonzalez" say they do not fall under the definitions of Article 4.
Do you really believe that? The idea that they don't meet any of those definitions is tenuous at best, and a downright lie at worst. It hinges almost entirely on the definition of "regular" in "regular armed forces", or upon the specifics of those who were captured, such as that every single one of them was captured in a way that they were not "respecting the laws and customs of war", or maybe not openly carrying arms.
Do you really believe for a second that these Taliban men captured in Afghanistan were not any kind of organization nor were carrying arms?
The idea that they do not fit the definitions above is almost entirely a repeated assertion, without much factual merit, by the Bush administration.
Your subject was supposed to say something like "We can't kill the pirates again", right?
The one brought to New York only was not killed because he was on one of the US Navy ships trying to negotiate at the time 3 snipers killed his buddies.
It's pretty clear cut - if you're a member of an organization like that, there you should be the judge presiding.
That's what conflict of interest is. It doesn't mean someone is corrupt. It means there's a pretty obvious potential for corruption. If there's any doubt whatsoever, why not substitute someone else?
Students stormed government buildings in what was formerly known as Moldova on Tuesday, setting the stage for revolution. The country has been renamed to recognize its new constituency and has elected a new leader.
Vans with loudspeakers had driven around the town a month ago telling locals to evacuate their houses after seismologist Gioacchino Giuliani predicted a large quake was on the way, prompting the mayor's anger.
But just as a thermal imager captures only heat emanating from a house, so also a powerful directional microphone picks up only sound emanating from a houseand a satellite capable of scanning from many miles away would pick up only visible light emanating from a house. We rejected such a mechanical interpretation of the Fourth Amendment in Katz, where the eavesdropping device picked up only sound waves that reached the exterior of the phone booth. Reversing that approach would leave the homeowner at the mercy of advancing technologyincluding imaging technology that could discern all human activity in the home. While the technology used in the present case was relatively crude, the rule we adopt must take account of more sophisticated systems that are already in use or in development.
The only difference being that it is not a government organization, but that's kind of besides the point.
not that the uproar over this is any less silly, but if you're going to mock the outrage, at least properly mock it. I wonder if this angry mob was caught on CCTV?
is this even technically grammatically incorrect? When I read something like this, I read it as being understood that it means something like "I am both Irish and I work for the EU Commission", except with the second 'I' dropped because it's redundant and obvious what the subject of the second verb is. Using "I'm" instead of "I am" seems like it confuses a little, but doesn't change the meaning at all.
what's the proper answer to this? It seems like to read it as "I am Irish and I am work" is due to the inflexibility of compilers.
Not requiring an ID in my opinion allows for the realistic possibility of voter fraud on many levels.... Crossing names out of books? WTF?! That's just asking for fraud.
how are these two related at all? Where I vote, in the USA, on location, my ID is checked and I fill in bubbles next to a candidate's name (or provide a write-in style vote) or next to a "yes" or "no", similar to standardized school testing. The ID check compares your name to an address in whatever precinct you live in, and after it is done, your name is crossed off the list.
How is crossing a name off a list "asking" for fraud? I mean, honestly, how do you ensure ANYONE doesn't vote more than once? Just about every system providing something similar is essentially "crossing names off of a list", unless you go as far as dipping a finger in a long-lasting dye.
Fraud is a problem moreso because corruption exists, not because it is possible to commit fraud. The system used here could, honestly, be done in an even less secure fashion and still be completed without any fraud, simply because it would both be so easy to combat and because it is so unlikely to happen in the first place.
Please. that's bad logic. Microsoft doesn't even use the BSD-licensed TCP/IP stack anymore, they wrote their own - and they probably only used it in the first place because it was already done for them. Don't you think they could've written their own code?
Microsoft does a lot of things wrong, you don't have to go looking for trouble that doesn't exist. You just lose credibility.
just so everyone knows (because no one seems to have ever read that stupid tag) it is NOT ILLEGAL TO TAKE THE TAG OFF YOUR MATTRESS. I forget the exact wording, but it's to prevent the tag from being taken off prior to purchase
I know, right - ever heard of the Nile? you know, the LONGEST FUCKING RIVER IN THE WORLD? cos that kinda flows from the middle of Africa to the Mediterranean
I thought this was "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters." Not "News for Losers. Trite Bullshit."
umm, funny, I thought that those were the same thing.
most people don't understand this - baseball, and (many) baseball players, are some of the nerdiest things around. a lot of people love the game for the statistics; finding patterns in the numbers and speculating and bla blabla intrigues them. and also, (I don't know how true tihs is, as it's only anecdotal evidence from my HS baseball team) baseball players are some of the weirdest/strangest/randomest of the bunch. just like nerds.
In Europe it's generally accepted that there should be limits to freespeech. What transpired in Europe 60 years ago has show to us that freespeech should not be abused to give speaking rights to those who would deny those rights to others.
I agree with you - it is an American viewpoint. However, who's to say its wrong? Yours is purely a European viewpoint. One thing you have to keep in mind is that words are just words - words do not kill. You can't pass all the blame onto Hitler for the Holocaust. Although his words did incite others' fears, his words did not go out and kill millions of people. There's a lot more to it than some hate-filled speech.
Slashdot Mirror
Someone should tell that to all the idiots in Iowa growing corn, then.
In order for coverage of the two candidates to be "balanced", wouldn't the two candidates have to be equally bad? If one candidate has twice the bad press as another, he may just be doing twice as much stupid shit as the other.
This essentially only shows what everyone already knows: Fox news is very conservative, and other media outlets are not as conservative as Fox news.
It doesn't necessarily show anything about the other outlets on their own.
"Bush and Gonzalez" say they do not fall under the definitions of Article 4.
Do you really believe that? The idea that they don't meet any of those definitions is tenuous at best, and a downright lie at worst. It hinges almost entirely on the definition of "regular" in "regular armed forces", or upon the specifics of those who were captured, such as that every single one of them was captured in a way that they were not "respecting the laws and customs of war", or maybe not openly carrying arms.
Do you really believe for a second that these Taliban men captured in Afghanistan were not any kind of organization nor were carrying arms?
The idea that they do not fit the definitions above is almost entirely a repeated assertion, without much factual merit, by the Bush administration.
Your subject was supposed to say something like "We can't kill the pirates again", right?
The one brought to New York only was not killed because he was on one of the US Navy ships trying to negotiate at the time 3 snipers killed his buddies.
It's pretty clear cut - if you're a member of an organization like that, there you should be the judge presiding.
That's what conflict of interest is. It doesn't mean someone is corrupt. It means there's a pretty obvious potential for corruption. If there's any doubt whatsoever, why not substitute someone else?
THE WORLD IS GOING TO END IN 12009
THE AMERICANS PREDICTED IT
Students stormed government buildings in what was formerly known as Moldova on Tuesday, setting the stage for revolution. The country has been renamed to recognize its new constituency and has elected a new leader.
http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/famecrawler/shaq-hat.jpg
Viva Twitteronia!
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L6566682.htm
yep, that might piss a few people off!
Of course it is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyllo_v._United_States
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0389_0347_ZS.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-8508.ZO.html
The only difference being that it is not a government organization, but that's kind of besides the point.
not that the uproar over this is any less silly, but if you're going to mock the outrage, at least properly mock it. I wonder if this angry mob was caught on CCTV?
Today is April 2nd, not March 2nd.
are you really this stupid?
What do you think the chances are that President Obama went to a Best Buy or wherever and bought some DVDs he liked to give to Queen Elizabeth?
The World of Goo demo is practically a replica of a doom- or wolf3d-style demo.
The World of Goo demo is like 30 megabytes.
you mean like the fully playable demo 2d boy released of their hit game World of Goo?
is this even technically grammatically incorrect? When I read something like this, I read it as being understood that it means something like "I am both Irish and I work for the EU Commission", except with the second 'I' dropped because it's redundant and obvious what the subject of the second verb is. Using "I'm" instead of "I am" seems like it confuses a little, but doesn't change the meaning at all.
what's the proper answer to this? It seems like to read it as "I am Irish and I am work" is due to the inflexibility of compilers.
Not requiring an ID in my opinion allows for the realistic possibility of voter fraud on many levels. ... Crossing names out of books? WTF?! That's just asking for fraud.
how are these two related at all? Where I vote, in the USA, on location, my ID is checked and I fill in bubbles next to a candidate's name (or provide a write-in style vote) or next to a "yes" or "no", similar to standardized school testing. The ID check compares your name to an address in whatever precinct you live in, and after it is done, your name is crossed off the list.
How is crossing a name off a list "asking" for fraud? I mean, honestly, how do you ensure ANYONE doesn't vote more than once? Just about every system providing something similar is essentially "crossing names off of a list", unless you go as far as dipping a finger in a long-lasting dye.
Fraud is a problem moreso because corruption exists, not because it is possible to commit fraud. The system used here could, honestly, be done in an even less secure fashion and still be completed without any fraud, simply because it would both be so easy to combat and because it is so unlikely to happen in the first place.
C'mon frenchie, it doesn't take a foilage expert to spell nuculear
yeah but it's making owls really sleepy.
Microsoft does a lot of things wrong, you don't have to go looking for trouble that doesn't exist. You just lose credibility.
just so everyone knows (because no one seems to have ever read that stupid tag) it is NOT ILLEGAL TO TAKE THE TAG OFF YOUR MATTRESS. I forget the exact wording, but it's to prevent the tag from being taken off prior to purchase
You're basing your whole judgement on the American legal system based on an anecdote you heard and posts on slashdot?
Trust me, it has its quirks, but it is hardly as bad as it sounds from the coverage here.
I know, right - ever heard of the Nile? you know, the LONGEST FUCKING RIVER IN THE WORLD? cos that kinda flows from the middle of Africa to the Mediterranean
I thought this was "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters." Not "News for Losers. Trite Bullshit."
umm, funny, I thought that those were the same thing. most people don't understand this - baseball, and (many) baseball players, are some of the nerdiest things around. a lot of people love the game for the statistics; finding patterns in the numbers and speculating and bla blabla intrigues them. and also, (I don't know how true tihs is, as it's only anecdotal evidence from my HS baseball team) baseball players are some of the weirdest/strangest/randomest of the bunch. just like nerds.
In Europe it's generally accepted that there should be limits to freespeech. What transpired in Europe 60 years ago has show to us that freespeech should not be abused to give speaking rights to those who would deny those rights to others.
I agree with you - it is an American viewpoint. However, who's to say its wrong? Yours is purely a European viewpoint. One thing you have to keep in mind is that words are just words - words do not kill. You can't pass all the blame onto Hitler for the Holocaust. Although his words did incite others' fears, his words did not go out and kill millions of people. There's a lot more to it than some hate-filled speech.