Why do you suppose that the FDA "recalls" so many drugs after thousands have died and the scumbag lawyers run national commercials asking if you've ever taken [x] drug? Ever seen an FDA test lab? Me either. Ask around. Maybe someone will claim they have.
Wanna solve the health care problem... and every other problem in this country?
Get the feckless retards that are government the hell out of everything!
Government does nothing well and most of what it does today is unConstitutional for just that reason. The Founders were smarter than the last few generations.
If you trust government -for ANYTHING, you deserve what you get: slavery at best.
A significant proportion of those first 100 are defense contractors or otherwise related to the DOD. That's not a shock; indeed it makes sense. But it jumped out at me.
The "Walled Gardens" of the 1990s (AOL, CompuServe, The Microsoft Network, etc) were just value-added content layers on top of services provided by the Internet and all included access to the World Wide Web.
I'm not sure if you're wrong about this or I've misunderstood what you're trying to say. But (unfortunately) I wasted a couple months in the mid 90's doing (outsourced) tech support for CompuServe, after first discovering it on a Commodore VIC-20 in 1981 with a 300 baud "coupler" style modem that required a telephone handset to be firmly inserted.
I suspect you're not wrong, just imprecise and I'm being pedantic. However, in the 90's, CompuServe was dying a slow death trying to keep a proprietary hold on something that had become an open commodity. You're correct that at that point it had become a "value-added content [layer] on top of services provided by the Internet and... included access to the World Wide Web."
It didn't start out that way and pre-dated any public access to the internet by more than a decade. AOL came later as well as Prodigy and Apple's failed attempt at e-something or other. (eWorld? I'm too old to remember and too lazy to check it.)
None of them adapted well to the rapidly changing landscape. What's more, when I was doing tech support for CS, it was owned by H&R Block. I joined in February and as tax day approached our internal network slowed to a crawl - as in: click a button on the internal ticket system and wait literally 5 minutes for a response over the WAN. It seems H&R bought the company for the physical network because they only needed it for a few months a year. As with most parasites, they quickly managed to kill the host. (My "supervisors" kept saying, "Hang in there until April 16th and everything'll be back to normal.")
Not that the internet wouldn't have killed CS anyway, but the short-sightedness was amazing.
Now then. About my lawn and your presence on it...
Do you find it disturbing that you mentioned war guns and prison when talking about climate? I do.
I'm going to walk away slowly from this conversation making no sudden movements or noises.
That's probably best. You've obviously grown up in a police state and can't grok the point. If you're still interested in trying, I'll try again and type slower:
"Climate change" is a fraud. The SCIENCE says so. They lied. It was a government action that was aimed at destroying capitalism and controlling your life.
Government IS violence. Government is war, guns and prisons. (Did you notice my use of a comma there?)
I'll stick with the Founding Fathers of the united States - they never lied to me like the U.N. and the climate change crowd have. They also had a tremendous amount of respect for my personal freedom and very healthy distrust of government control of ANYTHING.
Government doesn't control anything without guns. The silly and the cowardly, "hire" government with their votes so that someone else will enforce their desires with guns and violence. Then they bitch about how violent government is as they wash their hands of it.
I do it all myself because I'm an individualist and real men don't pass the buck.
I drive a 13 year old Suburban with a V8. It gets about 11 mpg. At the moment, it has an exhaust leak, too. None of that is any of your business.
A MAN would come to my house to talk to me about it if he really believed it was harming him. With both of us armed, it would likely be a polite conversation and we would likely reach some compromise as reasonable people.
Girls and other spineless people, instead will elect people to pass laws to be enforced by guns and violence - all far removed from them.
That's violent and cowardly. That's the summation of government and the climate change fraud is just the latest infringement.
I live in Texas and had to scrape about 10 inches of global warming off my SUV so I could go to the liquor store Friday night. I don't care about your religion.
So Mr. I'm not arrogant or ignorant the facts are you as an individual are a piece of the puzzle. It's only the truly selfish that refuse contribute to others. You however have decided Take from others.
Yes. I have. I "T"ake from others. I do it in voluntary transactions. What (TF) are you doing? And why didn't they teach grammar in your school? (I shouldn't have to re-read in order to decipher my critics.)
You're a moron spouting nonsense and everything you have is almost automatically mine unless you can elect others to appoint people that will take up guns and imprison those who don't agree with you.
Thanks for playing.
If you ever learn - or find someone who can teach you - how to live peacefully with me, I'll embrace you.
... is government and it's arrogance. No matter how many times they are wrong, they never give up the idea that they are automatically right because they were either elected or appointed by someone who was.
They're almost always wrong and they should never be embraced. Every Federal employee should be looked upon with suspicion. Always.
Government - at least in this country - was never meant to be a trough.
Anyone employed by the state is either ignorant or evil.
AGW/CC has always been a lie and always will be a lie.
Before you reply to me think, "We've always been at war with East Asia."
This is about government control and "socializing" to that end. You're all sheep if you buy this horseshit after all this time and after all that's been revealed.
You're also pretty damn arrogant - and ignorant - if you think your Prius - or my Suburban - makes a whit of difference to this "climate."
And a shout out to all you libertarian morons out there: THIS IS A TAX!!! It is a tax collected by corrupt self serving insiders who have subverted the legal system. It restrains trade and stifles innovation. It is not subject to competition. Those who are taxed have no say in the matter. It is arbitrary, and you cannot escape it by taking your business elsewhere. It is all the things you claim to hate about government. How come you this behavior is good when done by business for greed and bad when done by governments, which are more accountable to the people?
Huh? Wha? I was sound asleep until you started shouting.
But since you so rudely awakened me... Does the MPEG-LA have a legal right to use violent force to further their agenda?
That's the difference. Thanks for checking in to ask.
(Also, all of your complaints about them trace back to government corruption.)
AGW/CC is about as real as Scientology. Shut the fuck up already. "The Environment" has taken care of itself for billions of years. I'm not hurting it and it doesn't need you to save it.
Beyond that, this post has taken it to a brand new, stupidly religious place. You're now calculating numbers you pulled out of your ass to indict programming languages that you find to be "un-green."
That's my limit. Go sit in the stupid corner until you learn to interact with intelligent adults again.
I, for one, refuse to accept that 1984 was 25 years ago. I was a teenager in 1984 and I'm pretty sure I still am.
So... You might as well forget about the hot new computer you just found. Without the ability to read a calendar or do basic math, you're not ready for a machine that powerful.
Did you hear that Michael Jackson is already in the studio recording a follow up for "Thriller?" I hear it's gonna be totally Bad, to the max!
It gets ugly when science pisses in your Cheerios, doesn't it?
What was that you were saying about "faith" and "science?"
Newsflash: Everything about Obama's a fraud. Science just proved it. Don't let that confuse your faith.
Disclaimer: I'm not a Republican and I'm not voting for either of the clowns the bi-factional ruling party has given us this year. I don't give my consent to be governed to bad liars.
Self-identification is meaningless in this election. You've got swathes of people trolling the internet, pretending to be Republicans for Obama, Hillarycrats for Palin, aliens for Kucinich, etc. Everyone jumped into the same slimy, lying cesspool this time, so just ignore the (R) and (D) next to people's names and identify them by their policy stances.
I would be happy to do that. Thanks for the tip.
Ummm... Uhhh... errr... Can you point me to one example of where Obama has ever taken a stand on.... well... anything?
(His own greatness doesn't count.)
He's spent his life straddling fences and refusing to take a stand. Then he wrote TWO memoirs by the time he was 47... about stuff that happened to him and lied a lot in those.
What has he ever done besides lie for a living? Seriously. NOBODY has ever addressed this question.
Near as I can tell, the pinnacle achievement on his resume is editor of the Harvard Law Review, prized because it allows the office-holder to publish his views. Obama published nothing.
He has done absolutely nothing in every single position he's ever held because he's been running for president his entire life and is too much of a coward to defend a position on anything except how great Barack Obama is.
(Not a Republican, btw. Not voting for McCain either. Just sick of the Obamessiah and his ignorant sycophants.)
That certainly doesn't make him look bad. The 17th amendment was a huge mistake and should be repealed.
The 17th amendment was an example of "modern" people thinking they were wiser than the Founders. They weren't and neither are you.
Many of the problems this country faces now began right after the 17th amendment wrecked the government our Founders gave us.
It was a heady time - take a look at the dates on the amendments some time and see how many came during that time period. Right after The Great Tyrant overthrew America in the 1860s, the winners of the war became very amendment-happy for a few decades.
I spent 6 years in crappy jobs that I probably wouldn't have had to endure had I gone to Insert College Here instead of the school of hard knocks. Then there's the dedication factor. Many employers want to see a 4 year degree simply because it shows that 4 Year Degree kid had enough drive and dedication to see it through. As for MIT vs. another college... If I were a hiring manager and all other things were equal (skills, interview prowess, etc) I would almost definitely hire the person who had a degree from a well known, highly respected school over Generic University. NOTHING beats experience, but don't knock a kid for trying to "do it right."
I almost agree with some of what you said. MIT is a generic school compared to The School of Hard Knocks, depending on your goals. For me, Hard Knocks University worked out quite well because I never had a desire to be an employee. I most certainly was an employee for a number of years during that education. It taught me how to do things better and be a good employer.
I only speak for me, but the thought if being an employee my whole life is abhorrent and I say that having had some very good jobs in IT with no college education at all. I earned what I got by educating myself and working hard on the job. There are exceptions, but for the most part I think college is a circle jerk.
The point you make about the dedication and perseverance that employers are looking for... I think you're right. But I find it twisted and sick. I can assure you that building a business or three from scratch - for that matter, working your way into a Fortune 100 job with no degree - takes far more dedication and perseverance. It costs far less in terms of wasted time and money.
Ultimately, I'm motivated by a desire to be free. I'm living my dream with no classroom education beyond high school and I'm in my own classroom every day - on my terms and my schedule. Usually on my couch, but when I travel, I'm making money anywhere I have an internet connection.
I believe, in most cases, college is a sucker play. If you want to learn how to be a really good peon, it can certainly work for you. The valid exceptions are technical professions that require it. But the latter does not describe most college students. Most college students are there because they're willing to sell 40 years of their life and take orders for a reliable paycheck.
When I hire, I try really hard to not hold a college degree against anyone. It's a challenge. I spent too many years in corporate IT amongst those who graduated with honors from good schools with degrees in CS and still were coming to me multiple times a day for help because they didn't know how to do their jobs.
I'll hire a high school drop-out (or student) with a hunger to learn and an understanding of how to do it independently over a worthless diploma from a college every time. (And no, it's not because they're cheap. I pay very well and only hire the best.)
Do you really think that anyone who has to "Ask Slasdot" this question could get into MIT?
Be a problem-solver, dude. That's what they're looking for at MIT and every company where you'll ever seek a job, with or without a degree.
College is over-rated and degrees are mostly worthless these days. You've got the right idea - MIT is an exception. If I could get in there and afford to go, I might actually reconsider skipping college altogether. But I doubt I would qualify at MIT and I can't afford the time because I'm busy running two IT businesses and developing a third.
Incidentally, much of what is running my current businesses I learned, indirectly, from MIT. You do know that MIT education is available online for free, right? Are you looking for the paper or the knowledge?
Show some initiative and be a leader. If you're as confident as you're trying to make out, skip the classroom tripe. It'll mostly just slow you down.
I got it to load twice in the latest nightly of WebKit just now and scored 85/100 both times. That's pretty impressive, in my opinion and one of the reasons I use WebKit as my primary browser these days.
Unfortunately, the server is still timing out when I try to view the reference image.
The answer was a lot better than that frigtarded question.
A proper, clear, direct answer to the question posed would have been either, "Yes" or "No" and would have told us nothing other than what Ron Paul thinks about the questioner's desires.
I can see why none of the other candidates responded. Those questions are just about all either stupid or rhetorical.
Uh-huh. I can respond to your weak theory with one word:
Giuliani.
The retarded and hopelessly biased "media" talked about that flawed and defective idiot incessantly for months before a vote was cast. Ron Paul beat him in 4 of the 5 early contests in which they were both choices. Still the media talked about Giuliani's "Florida gamble" and completely omitted Ron Paul from the discussion, often lying about Giuliani's campaign along the way and often still calling him a "front-runner."
I lost count of how many times I heard that he "skipped" NH as part of his "strategy." He was in NH more times than any GOP candidate except Romney and participated in a nationally televised debate there days before the primary. A debate from which Paul was excluded. Check the vote results there and see how they did.
Ron Paul also has a substantial "war chest" (as the pundits call it), while Huckabee's campaign is struggling financially, Romney's is self-funded and McCain's is so far in debt he's resorted to securing loans with life insurance policies.
There's some fiscal geniuses in that bunch.
I suspect you're right that Ron Paul can't win. But it's precisely and only because the powers that be decreed it was so before anybody ever voted.
Slashdot Mirror
You know who doesn't have a light pollution problem?
North Korea!
(Did I misunderstand the whole Godwin thing?)
This is what passes for "science" at MIT now? (We already know that anything can pass for a headline at /.)
The researcher himself, as quoted in the story summary on Slashdot, debunks what the Slashdot headline advertises.
Why do you suppose that the FDA "recalls" so many drugs after thousands have died and the scumbag lawyers run national commercials asking if you've ever taken [x] drug? Ever seen an FDA test lab? Me either. Ask around. Maybe someone will claim they have.
Wanna solve the health care problem... and every other problem in this country?
Get the feckless retards that are government the hell out of everything!
Government does nothing well and most of what it does today is unConstitutional for just that reason. The Founders were smarter than the last few generations.
If you trust government -for ANYTHING, you deserve what you get: slavery at best.
Just an observation...
A significant proportion of those first 100 are defense contractors or otherwise related to the DOD. That's not a shock; indeed it makes sense. But it jumped out at me.
The "Walled Gardens" of the 1990s (AOL, CompuServe, The Microsoft Network, etc) were just value-added content layers on top of services provided by the Internet and all included access to the World Wide Web.
I'm not sure if you're wrong about this or I've misunderstood what you're trying to say. But (unfortunately) I wasted a couple months in the mid 90's doing (outsourced) tech support for CompuServe, after first discovering it on a Commodore VIC-20 in 1981 with a 300 baud "coupler" style modem that required a telephone handset to be firmly inserted.
I suspect you're not wrong, just imprecise and I'm being pedantic. However, in the 90's, CompuServe was dying a slow death trying to keep a proprietary hold on something that had become an open commodity. You're correct that at that point it had become a "value-added content [layer] on top of services provided by the Internet and ... included access to the World Wide Web."
It didn't start out that way and pre-dated any public access to the internet by more than a decade. AOL came later as well as Prodigy and Apple's failed attempt at e-something or other. (eWorld? I'm too old to remember and too lazy to check it.)
None of them adapted well to the rapidly changing landscape. What's more, when I was doing tech support for CS, it was owned by H&R Block. I joined in February and as tax day approached our internal network slowed to a crawl - as in: click a button on the internal ticket system and wait literally 5 minutes for a response over the WAN. It seems H&R bought the company for the physical network because they only needed it for a few months a year. As with most parasites, they quickly managed to kill the host. (My "supervisors" kept saying, "Hang in there until April 16th and everything'll be back to normal.")
Not that the internet wouldn't have killed CS anyway, but the short-sightedness was amazing.
Now then. About my lawn and your presence on it...
Do you find it disturbing that you mentioned war guns and prison when talking about climate? I do.
I'm going to walk away slowly from this conversation making no sudden movements or noises.
That's probably best. You've obviously grown up in a police state and can't grok the point. If you're still interested in trying, I'll try again and type slower:
"Climate change" is a fraud. The SCIENCE says so. They lied. It was a government action that was aimed at destroying capitalism and controlling your life.
Government IS violence. Government is war, guns and prisons. (Did you notice my use of a comma there?)
I'll stick with the Founding Fathers of the united States - they never lied to me like the U.N. and the climate change crowd have. They also had a tremendous amount of respect for my personal freedom and very healthy distrust of government control of ANYTHING.
Government doesn't control anything without guns. The silly and the cowardly, "hire" government with their votes so that someone else will enforce their desires with guns and violence. Then they bitch about how violent government is as they wash their hands of it.
I do it all myself because I'm an individualist and real men don't pass the buck.
I drive a 13 year old Suburban with a V8. It gets about 11 mpg. At the moment, it has an exhaust leak, too. None of that is any of your business.
A MAN would come to my house to talk to me about it if he really believed it was harming him. With both of us armed, it would likely be a polite conversation and we would likely reach some compromise as reasonable people.
Girls and other spineless people, instead will elect people to pass laws to be enforced by guns and violence - all far removed from them.
That's violent and cowardly. That's the summation of government and the climate change fraud is just the latest infringement.
I live in Texas and had to scrape about 10 inches of global warming off my SUV so I could go to the liquor store Friday night. I don't care about your religion.
AGW/CC == Scientology.
So Mr. I'm not arrogant or ignorant the facts are you as an individual are a piece of the puzzle. It's only the truly selfish that refuse contribute to others. You however have decided Take from others.
Yes. I have. I "T"ake from others. I do it in voluntary transactions. What (TF) are you doing? And why didn't they teach grammar in your school? (I shouldn't have to re-read in order to decipher my critics.)
You're a moron spouting nonsense and everything you have is almost automatically mine unless you can elect others to appoint people that will take up guns and imprison those who don't agree with you.
Thanks for playing.
If you ever learn - or find someone who can teach you - how to live peacefully with me, I'll embrace you.
... is government and it's arrogance. No matter how many times they are wrong, they never give up the idea that they are automatically right because they were either elected or appointed by someone who was.
They're almost always wrong and they should never be embraced. Every Federal employee should be looked upon with suspicion. Always.
Government - at least in this country - was never meant to be a trough.
Anyone employed by the state is either ignorant or evil.
AGW/CC has always been a lie and always will be a lie.
Before you reply to me think, "We've always been at war with East Asia."
This is about government control and "socializing" to that end. You're all sheep if you buy this horseshit after all this time and after all that's been revealed.
You're also pretty damn arrogant - and ignorant - if you think your Prius - or my Suburban - makes a whit of difference to this "climate."
And a shout out to all you libertarian morons out there: THIS IS A TAX!!! It is a tax collected by corrupt self serving insiders who have subverted the legal system. It restrains trade and stifles innovation. It is not subject to competition. Those who are taxed have no say in the matter. It is arbitrary, and you cannot escape it by taking your business elsewhere. It is all the things you claim to hate about government. How come you this behavior is good when done by business for greed and bad when done by governments, which are more accountable to the people?
Huh? Wha? I was sound asleep until you started shouting.
But since you so rudely awakened me... Does the MPEG-LA have a legal right to use violent force to further their agenda?
That's the difference. Thanks for checking in to ask.
(Also, all of your complaints about them trace back to government corruption.)
AGW/CC is about as real as Scientology. Shut the fuck up already. "The Environment" has taken care of itself for billions of years. I'm not hurting it and it doesn't need you to save it.
Beyond that, this post has taken it to a brand new, stupidly religious place. You're now calculating numbers you pulled out of your ass to indict programming languages that you find to be "un-green."
That's my limit. Go sit in the stupid corner until you learn to interact with intelligent adults again.
I, for one, refuse to accept that 1984 was 25 years ago. I was a teenager in 1984 and I'm pretty sure I still am.
So... You might as well forget about the hot new computer you just found. Without the ability to read a calendar or do basic math, you're not ready for a machine that powerful.
Did you hear that Michael Jackson is already in the studio recording a follow up for "Thriller?" I hear it's gonna be totally Bad, to the max!
You did what now, where and it caused which?
On your next visit be sure to ask your "counselor" about narcissistic tendencies.
Don't hate me because I'm beau^H^H^H^H^H^H^H can afford a Mac.
If you work hard, someday - soon - you'll be able to afford one, too.
And Bloom County would have been perfect during the Bush 2 years.
Bush has only been president for two years? Seems like almost twelve to me.
(In fact, it's more than that because the Bush family owns Bill Clinton. So it's more like 20 years of continuous Bush control.)
I'm sorry. I forgot completely that he fully supports anyone's right to kill a child at any time that child becomes inconvenient.
That's about the only issue on which he has ever voted as well.
When he actually shows up for his job - and that's rare - he usually votes "Present."
Unless the issue at hand is murdering children - in or out of the womb. On that's he's unusually consistent.
It gets ugly when science pisses in your Cheerios, doesn't it?
What was that you were saying about "faith" and "science?"
Newsflash: Everything about Obama's a fraud. Science just proved it. Don't let that confuse your faith.
Disclaimer: I'm not a Republican and I'm not voting for either of the clowns the bi-factional ruling party has given us this year. I don't give my consent to be governed to bad liars.
Self-identification is meaningless in this election. You've got swathes of people trolling the internet, pretending to be Republicans for Obama, Hillarycrats for Palin, aliens for Kucinich, etc. Everyone jumped into the same slimy, lying cesspool this time, so just ignore the (R) and (D) next to people's names and identify them by their policy stances.
I would be happy to do that. Thanks for the tip.
Ummm... Uhhh... errr... Can you point me to one example of where Obama has ever taken a stand on.... well... anything?
(His own greatness doesn't count.)
He's spent his life straddling fences and refusing to take a stand. Then he wrote TWO memoirs by the time he was 47... about stuff that happened to him and lied a lot in those.
What has he ever done besides lie for a living? Seriously. NOBODY has ever addressed this question.
Near as I can tell, the pinnacle achievement on his resume is editor of the Harvard Law Review, prized because it allows the office-holder to publish his views. Obama published nothing.
He has done absolutely nothing in every single position he's ever held because he's been running for president his entire life and is too much of a coward to defend a position on anything except how great Barack Obama is.
(Not a Republican, btw. Not voting for McCain either. Just sick of the Obamessiah and his ignorant sycophants.)
Nope. I understand what the gp is saying.
You're a sucker.
Obama's entire life is a lie, but he tells it SO well.
You, apparently, believe in HIM.
That certainly doesn't make him look bad. The 17th amendment was a huge mistake and should be repealed.
The 17th amendment was an example of "modern" people thinking they were wiser than the Founders. They weren't and neither are you.
Many of the problems this country faces now began right after the 17th amendment wrecked the government our Founders gave us.
It was a heady time - take a look at the dates on the amendments some time and see how many came during that time period. Right after The Great Tyrant overthrew America in the 1860s, the winners of the war became very amendment-happy for a few decades.
I spent 6 years in crappy jobs that I probably wouldn't have had to endure had I gone to Insert College Here instead of the school of hard knocks. Then there's the dedication factor. Many employers want to see a 4 year degree simply because it shows that 4 Year Degree kid had enough drive and dedication to see it through. As for MIT vs. another college... If I were a hiring manager and all other things were equal (skills, interview prowess, etc) I would almost definitely hire the person who had a degree from a well known, highly respected school over Generic University. NOTHING beats experience, but don't knock a kid for trying to "do it right."
I almost agree with some of what you said. MIT is a generic school compared to The School of Hard Knocks, depending on your goals. For me, Hard Knocks University worked out quite well because I never had a desire to be an employee. I most certainly was an employee for a number of years during that education. It taught me how to do things better and be a good employer.
I only speak for me, but the thought if being an employee my whole life is abhorrent and I say that having had some very good jobs in IT with no college education at all. I earned what I got by educating myself and working hard on the job. There are exceptions, but for the most part I think college is a circle jerk.
The point you make about the dedication and perseverance that employers are looking for... I think you're right. But I find it twisted and sick. I can assure you that building a business or three from scratch - for that matter, working your way into a Fortune 100 job with no degree - takes far more dedication and perseverance. It costs far less in terms of wasted time and money.
Ultimately, I'm motivated by a desire to be free. I'm living my dream with no classroom education beyond high school and I'm in my own classroom every day - on my terms and my schedule. Usually on my couch, but when I travel, I'm making money anywhere I have an internet connection.
I believe, in most cases, college is a sucker play. If you want to learn how to be a really good peon, it can certainly work for you. The valid exceptions are technical professions that require it. But the latter does not describe most college students. Most college students are there because they're willing to sell 40 years of their life and take orders for a reliable paycheck.
When I hire, I try really hard to not hold a college degree against anyone. It's a challenge. I spent too many years in corporate IT amongst those who graduated with honors from good schools with degrees in CS and still were coming to me multiple times a day for help because they didn't know how to do their jobs.
I'll hire a high school drop-out (or student) with a hunger to learn and an understanding of how to do it independently over a worthless diploma from a college every time. (And no, it's not because they're cheap. I pay very well and only hire the best.)
Do you really think that anyone who has to "Ask Slasdot" this question could get into MIT?
Be a problem-solver, dude. That's what they're looking for at MIT and every company where you'll ever seek a job, with or without a degree.
College is over-rated and degrees are mostly worthless these days. You've got the right idea - MIT is an exception. If I could get in there and afford to go, I might actually reconsider skipping college altogether. But I doubt I would qualify at MIT and I can't afford the time because I'm busy running two IT businesses and developing a third.
Incidentally, much of what is running my current businesses I learned, indirectly, from MIT. You do know that MIT education is available online for free, right? Are you looking for the paper or the knowledge?
Show some initiative and be a leader. If you're as confident as you're trying to make out, skip the classroom tripe. It'll mostly just slow you down.
I got it to load twice in the latest nightly of WebKit just now and scored 85/100 both times. That's pretty impressive, in my opinion and one of the reasons I use WebKit as my primary browser these days.
Unfortunately, the server is still timing out when I try to view the reference image.
The answer was a lot better than that frigtarded question.
A proper, clear, direct answer to the question posed would have been either, "Yes" or "No" and would have told us nothing other than what Ron Paul thinks about the questioner's desires.
I can see why none of the other candidates responded. Those questions are just about all either stupid or rhetorical.
Uh-huh. I can respond to your weak theory with one word:
Giuliani.
The retarded and hopelessly biased "media" talked about that flawed and defective idiot incessantly for months before a vote was cast. Ron Paul beat him in 4 of the 5 early contests in which they were both choices. Still the media talked about Giuliani's "Florida gamble" and completely omitted Ron Paul from the discussion, often lying about Giuliani's campaign along the way and often still calling him a "front-runner."
I lost count of how many times I heard that he "skipped" NH as part of his "strategy." He was in NH more times than any GOP candidate except Romney and participated in a nationally televised debate there days before the primary. A debate from which Paul was excluded. Check the vote results there and see how they did.
Ron Paul also has a substantial "war chest" (as the pundits call it), while Huckabee's campaign is struggling financially, Romney's is self-funded and McCain's is so far in debt he's resorted to securing loans with life insurance policies.
There's some fiscal geniuses in that bunch.
I suspect you're right that Ron Paul can't win. But it's precisely and only because the powers that be decreed it was so before anybody ever voted.