So NPR/CBS interview the pro-big-government Harry Reid ~1000 times over the last half decade, and they interview presidential candidate Ron Paul twice, and you think this is proof they are unbiased??? I think it's proof that I was correct. They are biased against smaller government and in favor of more government ("It never hurts to kiss-up to the boss" as the Ferengi say, in order to get more handouts, more earmark dollars, more favorable laws, more protectionism, et cetera).
BTW: My research shows World Public Opinion is sponsored by the Liberal-leaning, Socialist-loving University of Maryland (the state where 70% of the government is Democrat). So the survey bashing FOX viewers is as unsurprising as a Microsoft-funded survey showing Google Chrome is insecure.
No they just receive a 40 billion bailout from their buddies in DC. Their hosts said the election of Senator Rand Paul (and his opposition to raise the debt ceiling) will be personally responsible for a worldwide depression in 2011. They showed a black man carrying a rifle at an Obama rally, used video editing to chop the guy's head off, and then claimed it was video of white racists.
MSNBC is a bought-and-paid for propaganda channel for the Democrat-majority Congress (and George Duh Bush and Obama). Of course FOX News is biased, but mostly in a Libertarian sense, who don't currently hold any power.
ASIDE:
My research shows World Public Opinion is sponsored by the Liberal-leaning, Socialist-loving University of Maryland (the state where 70% of the government is Democrat). So the survey bashing FOX viewers is as unsurprising as a Microsoft-funded survey showing Google Chrome is insecure.
>>>a large part of the FOX News (and MSNBC and ABC and CBS and PBS) audience is folks who think they know it all already, and are only seeking reassurance of their obvious superiority.
Fixed. BTW did you know NBC received a 40 billion bailout from the government? No wonder they are so "we need more government" biased.
Oh I don't know. I don't recall ever seeing ABC, CBS, or PBS interviewing Libertarians or Ron Paul or even discussing the possibility the government is too large. They have a "more government is better" bias built-in, which I personally find offensive. (The larger government is, the fewer choices the individual has.)
And for the sake of disclosure: ---I am anti-monopoly and pro-choice biased. People should have as many choices as possible; not be forced into making just one singular choice. Example: "Buy hospital insurance or... well there is no other choice."
No really... NBC and FOX Broadcast are both losing money due to a lot of empty ad slots. Their cable channels are profitable but not the "free" broadcast channels, which is why they started charging Comcast, Time-warner, etc for access. (Or else pull the plug.)
Also Nielsen does track page hits & DVR viewing too, and reports back the results to ABC, CBS, CW, etc.
The "ad model" doesn't work that great either according to NBC and FOX Broadcast executives. They've lost a lot of money these last two years, and now they are moving to a subscription fee model (~50 cents per cable home) instead of providing free programming.
Trivia: Most Viewed Networks (Sept2009-August2010): #1 FOX #2 CBS #3 ABC #4 NBC #5 CW #6 Univision #7 MyNetTV / Ion (tie) #8 Telmundo
That's the whole point. It's the People's encyclopedia, not the elitists' encyclopedia. It is grown out of the generous volunteerism of billions, rather than those who are like Ebenezer Scrooge - only care about the money.
I had the Digital Cassettes from Philips, because I wanted the backwards compatibility with my analog collection. Of course they had the same "no copy" limitation but to be fair, that was the fault of the US Government not the manufacturers. RIAA sued in court, won the case circa 1990, and forced manufacturers to block copies of digital cassettes or minidiscs. (RIAA's been acting like MAFIAA a long, long time.) Anyway: Sony was actually on my blacklist, ever since they did that PC Destructo-Rootkit deal with storebought CDs.
Yet another company to add to my blacklist of companies not to buy from: ----- Google, Yahoo, MS, Amazon, Comcast, Sony. Man this thing is getting long (and it looks my new console will be a Nintendo).
>>>If Internet Explorer 9 beta blocks 99% of those and Chrome[6] only 3%, that makes a huge difference.
Yeah yeah, but Chrome (and Mozilla seaMonkey) can run on my tiny 0.1 gigabyte laptop. Can IE9? Ha! Nope.;-) ----- But seriously: Why in the world was the test run on the latest IE9 versus the ancient CR6? A deliberate Microsoft setup to make themselves look good.
Random question: What's the abbreviation for Google Chrome? There's IE and FF and SM and O10, but I'm typing on the non-google chromium right now, and can't think of a convenient abbreviation. Cr2O3 is the chemical formula but unwieldy. Maybe CrO or CR.
You won't be poisoned by a SULEV or diesel car's carbon monoxide (since both are essentially zero), but you will develop lung cancer & heart disease from the particulate matter (carbon ash). So no I don't recommend sucking tailpipes. Makes a good fertilizer for plants though.;-)
Please note that PZEV is essentially a subset of the SULEV standard. PZEV is a SULEV car with an extended 150,000-mile warranty on the exhaust control system.
Sounds like you need a Channel Master CM4228. ----- It fits inside the TV room and receives stations upto 50 miles. If you put it in the attic, or on the roof, then the range is much longer. And cost is just 60-70 dollars.
>>>That kinda predates 16-bit computers like the Amiga and Mac
Bzzzz. These are 32 bit computers. The 68000 is a 32-bit CPU sitting on a 16-bit bus, similar to how the 386SX operates. That is why 68000 series did not have to undergo a 16-to-32 bit transition like the X86 did. Code written on the 68000 will work on 32-bit 68020s or 40s or 60s.
As for 8-bit Apples/Commodores/Ataris plus 16-bit IBM PC:
Note I said TEXT to speech. While these computers could "speak" none of them had the built-in power to convert Text to speech. (As far as I know.) 1 MHz was simply too slow.
>>>By living in this society you have "signed a contract" agreeing to be bound by its laws.
That's 100% correct! So what does the LAW say? The Union government has power to regulate commerce AMONG the states, not commerce inside the state, or between me and my neighbor (when I give him the Omega watch, and he gives me dollars). Therefore the Union Court has zero authority to outlaw this act.
Without the weasel words, the Southern States would have walked-away and there would be no United States.
>>>"All persons born or naturalized..." No wonder Glenn Beck hates that amendment.
FALSE. He's never said anything like that. Stop spreading lies. Or you can provide a citation to prove it true, but until that happens I will consider your statement a falsehood.
>>>The ultimate job of the Court is not just "to follow the rules."
Yes it is. The president Executes the laws. The courts Enforces the rules on a case-by-case basis. ONLY the congress & 50 legislatures are allowed to Make the law. It is NOT the job of judges to be legislators or modify laws. THAT is the job of the People's elected representatives in session.
"...to presume the Court has power to strike down laws would place us under the despotism of a 9-person Oligarchy. Furthermore they are not subject to the elective control of the People, which makes their unrestrained power all the more dangerous to liberty." - Thomas Jefferson, 1820
>>>banning government from formally recognizing said higher power? You fail logic forever.
No, YOU fail in logic. They added that amendment not to outlaw God, but because they didn't want a government-run religion. They wanted freedom to be Catholic, or Anglican, or Protestant, or Quaker, or Deiist, or whatever, rather than being forced to join the official Church of Congress.
Note: The Member States were still free to have official religions, but over time those were gradually phased-out. If I recall correctly the last State Government Church was eliminated in the 1830s.
>>>What reference is the Constitution permitted people to be sold as property?
AMENDMENT 10. Powers not granted to Union government is reserved to the Member State. In this case: It was the power of deciding slavery was legal or illegal. (Oh and for the record, yes, there were such things as white slaves although very rare.)
>>>Without that addition slaves would have counted for 0/5ths of a person.
False. Without that line, the Slave States wanted to count blacks as whole people. Why? To gain more power in Congress. The northern free states said "How can you claim they are people, if you keep then in chains? The only way they should be counted as people, is if you free them."
It was an impasse. The Slave States wanted to have it both ways - treat blacks as whole people while treating them as animals. 3/5th was the compromise to WEAKEN the slave states.
>>>So every State gets the freedom to decide for themselves whether black people are people?
Prior to 1865 - yes that is correct. That is what the Law stated and that is what the Dred Scot decision enforced. States north of Maryland treated blacks as people, while states south of Maryland treated them as property. Similar to how in the modern European Union, some States treat Muslims as equal to citizens, while other States treat Muslims as inferior & deportable. It varies state-to-state.
Then the Constitutional Law was amended and now all people are considered people (unless they're gay, or living inside a woman). Welcome to the real world which is not always fair.
BTW Frederick Douglas (a black freeman) called the Constitution an anti-slavery document. It was designed to slowly but surely weaken the southern slave states (they only got 3/5th vote per citizen) until they were forced to recognize blacks as being fully-human.
>>>impacted the attempt to stabilize wheat prices.
I can not lay my hand on any part of the Constitution which allows the US to treat a man like a Serf, and tell him how much food he is "allotted" to grow. Is this some kind of rebirth of Feudalism that I am not aware of? Should I start addressing my congressman as "lord" in the future and ask permission to grow tomatoes in my rear yard? Is 100 plants okay, or am I only allowed to grow 0 plants in order to force me to go to the store & buy tomatoes there?
Anyone with common sense can see this was not the original intent of the authors of Constitutional Law. James Madison wrote his document to create maximum, possible freedom, not to limit a man's ability to grow food for himself
>>>the farmer was taking actions that clearly interacted with that market.
You know it helps if you actually read the law. It says the Union government has the right to "regulate commerce AMONG the states". Since the farmer is not a state, and is not crossing a state border (he was feeding the food to his cows to keep them alive during the harsh winter months), the national government has zero authority. This is a matter for the Member State's government to handle (per amend. 10).
Slashdot Mirror
So NPR/CBS interview the pro-big-government Harry Reid ~1000 times over the last half decade, and they interview presidential candidate Ron Paul twice, and you think this is proof they are unbiased??? I think it's proof that I was correct. They are biased against smaller government and in favor of more government ("It never hurts to kiss-up to the boss" as the Ferengi say, in order to get more handouts, more earmark dollars, more favorable laws, more protectionism, et cetera).
BTW: My research shows World Public Opinion is sponsored by the Liberal-leaning, Socialist-loving University of Maryland (the state where 70% of the government is Democrat). So the survey bashing FOX viewers is as unsurprising as a Microsoft-funded survey showing Google Chrome is insecure.
>>>No fucking way is MSNBC equally bias to Fox.
No they just receive a 40 billion bailout from their buddies in DC. Their hosts said the election of Senator Rand Paul (and his opposition to raise the debt ceiling) will be personally responsible for a worldwide depression in 2011. They showed a black man carrying a rifle at an Obama rally, used video editing to chop the guy's head off, and then claimed it was video of white racists.
MSNBC is a bought-and-paid for propaganda channel for the Democrat-majority Congress (and George Duh Bush and Obama). Of course FOX News is biased, but mostly in a Libertarian sense, who don't currently hold any power.
ASIDE:
My research shows World Public Opinion is sponsored by the Liberal-leaning, Socialist-loving University of Maryland (the state where 70% of the government is Democrat). So the survey bashing FOX viewers is as unsurprising as a Microsoft-funded survey showing Google Chrome is insecure.
>>>a large part of the FOX News (and MSNBC and ABC and CBS and PBS) audience is folks who think they know it all already, and are only seeking reassurance of their obvious superiority.
Fixed.
BTW did you know NBC received a 40 billion bailout from the government?
No wonder they are so "we need more government" biased.
Oh I don't know. I don't recall ever seeing ABC, CBS, or PBS interviewing Libertarians or Ron Paul or even discussing the possibility the government is too large. They have a "more government is better" bias built-in, which I personally find offensive. (The larger government is, the fewer choices the individual has.)
And for the sake of disclosure:
---I am anti-monopoly and pro-choice biased. People should have as many choices as possible; not be forced into making just one singular choice. Example: "Buy hospital insurance or... well there is no other choice."
No really... NBC and FOX Broadcast are both losing money due to a lot of empty ad slots. Their cable channels are profitable but not the "free" broadcast channels, which is why they started charging Comcast, Time-warner, etc for access. (Or else pull the plug.)
Also Nielsen does track page hits & DVR viewing too, and reports back the results to ABC, CBS, CW, etc.
Well.....
The "ad model" doesn't work that great either according to NBC and FOX Broadcast executives. They've lost a lot of money these last two years, and now they are moving to a subscription fee model (~50 cents per cable home) instead of providing free programming.
Trivia: Most Viewed Networks (Sept2009-August2010):
#1 FOX
#2 CBS
#3 ABC
#4 NBC
#5 CW
#6 Univision
#7 MyNetTV / Ion (tie)
#8 Telmundo
That's the whole point.
It's the People's encyclopedia, not the elitists' encyclopedia. It is grown out of the generous volunteerism of billions, rather than those who are like Ebenezer Scrooge - only care about the money.
Never owned a Minidisc.
I had the Digital Cassettes from Philips, because I wanted the backwards compatibility with my analog collection. Of course they had the same "no copy" limitation but to be fair, that was the fault of the US Government not the manufacturers. RIAA sued in court, won the case circa 1990, and forced manufacturers to block copies of digital cassettes or minidiscs. (RIAA's been acting like MAFIAA a long, long time.) Anyway: Sony was actually on my blacklist, ever since they did that PC Destructo-Rootkit deal with storebought CDs.
Yet another company to add to my blacklist of companies not to buy from:
----- Google, Yahoo, MS, Amazon, Comcast, Sony. Man this thing is getting long (and it looks my new console will be a Nintendo).
>>>If Internet Explorer 9 beta blocks 99% of those and Chrome[6] only 3%, that makes a huge difference.
Yeah yeah, but Chrome (and Mozilla seaMonkey) can run on my tiny 0.1 gigabyte laptop. Can IE9? Ha! Nope. ;-) ----- But seriously: Why in the world was the test run on the latest IE9 versus the ancient CR6? A deliberate Microsoft setup to make themselves look good.
>>>GC seems to jump out...
And of course Mozilla Firefox would be MF or Mo-Fo. Thanks! :-D I'll stick with CR for chromium (not google)(spits).
Random question:
What's the abbreviation for Google Chrome? There's IE and FF and SM and O10, but I'm typing on the non-google chromium right now, and can't think of a convenient abbreviation. Cr2O3 is the chemical formula but unwieldy. Maybe CrO or CR.
You won't be poisoned by a SULEV or diesel car's carbon monoxide (since both are essentially zero), but you will develop lung cancer & heart disease from the particulate matter (carbon ash). So no I don't recommend sucking tailpipes. Makes a good fertilizer for plants though. ;-)
Please note that PZEV is essentially a subset of the SULEV standard.
PZEV is a SULEV car with an extended 150,000-mile warranty on the exhaust control system.
Sounds like you need a Channel Master CM4228.
----- It fits inside the TV room and receives stations upto 50 miles. If you put it in the attic, or on the roof, then the range is much longer. And cost is just 60-70 dollars.
>>>That kinda predates 16-bit computers like the Amiga and Mac
Bzzzz. These are 32 bit computers. The 68000 is a 32-bit CPU sitting on a 16-bit bus, similar to how the 386SX operates. That is why 68000 series did not have to undergo a 16-to-32 bit transition like the X86 did. Code written on the 68000 will work on 32-bit 68020s or 40s or 60s.
As for 8-bit Apples/Commodores/Ataris plus 16-bit IBM PC:
Note I said TEXT to speech. While these computers could "speak" none of them had the built-in power to convert Text to speech. (As far as I know.) 1 MHz was simply too slow.
>>>By living in this society you have "signed a contract" agreeing to be bound by its laws.
That's 100% correct! So what does the LAW say? The Union government has power to regulate commerce AMONG the states, not commerce inside the state, or between me and my neighbor (when I give him the Omega watch, and he gives me dollars). Therefore the Union Court has zero authority to outlaw this act.
THAT'S the law dummkopf.
Without the weasel words, the Southern States would have walked-away and there would be no United States.
>>>"All persons born or naturalized..." No wonder Glenn Beck hates that amendment.
FALSE. He's never said anything like that. Stop spreading lies. Or you can provide a citation to prove it true, but until that happens I will consider your statement a falsehood.
>>>The ultimate job of the Court is not just "to follow the rules."
Yes it is. The president Executes the laws. The courts Enforces the rules on a case-by-case basis. ONLY the congress & 50 legislatures are allowed to Make the law. It is NOT the job of judges to be legislators or modify laws. THAT is the job of the People's elected representatives in session.
"...to presume the Court has power to strike down laws would place us under the despotism of a 9-person Oligarchy. Furthermore they are not subject to the elective control of the People, which makes their unrestrained power all the more dangerous to liberty." - Thomas Jefferson, 1820
>>>banning government from formally recognizing said higher power? You fail logic forever.
No, YOU fail in logic. They added that amendment not to outlaw God, but because they didn't want a government-run religion. They wanted freedom to be Catholic, or Anglican, or Protestant, or Quaker, or Deiist, or whatever, rather than being forced to join the official Church of Congress.
Note: The Member States were still free to have official religions, but over time those were gradually phased-out. If I recall correctly the last State Government Church was eliminated in the 1830s.
>>>What reference is the Constitution permitted people to be sold as property?
AMENDMENT 10. Powers not granted to Union government is reserved to the Member State. In this case: It was the power of deciding slavery was legal or illegal. (Oh and for the record, yes, there were such things as white slaves although very rare.)
>>>Without that addition slaves would have counted for 0/5ths of a person.
False. Without that line, the Slave States wanted to count blacks as whole people. Why? To gain more power in Congress. The northern free states said "How can you claim they are people, if you keep then in chains? The only way they should be counted as people, is if you free them."
It was an impasse. The Slave States wanted to have it both ways - treat blacks as whole people while treating them as animals. 3/5th was the compromise to WEAKEN the slave states.
>>>So every State gets the freedom to decide for themselves whether black people are people?
Prior to 1865 - yes that is correct. That is what the Law stated and that is what the Dred Scot decision enforced. States north of Maryland treated blacks as people, while states south of Maryland treated them as property. Similar to how in the modern European Union, some States treat Muslims as equal to citizens, while other States treat Muslims as inferior & deportable. It varies state-to-state.
Then the Constitutional Law was amended and now all people are considered people (unless they're gay, or living inside a woman). Welcome to the real world which is not always fair.
BTW Frederick Douglas (a black freeman) called the Constitution an anti-slavery document. It was designed to slowly but surely weaken the southern slave states (they only got 3/5th vote per citizen) until they were forced to recognize blacks as being fully-human.
>>>impacted the attempt to stabilize wheat prices.
I can not lay my hand on any part of the Constitution which allows the US to treat a man like a Serf, and tell him how much food he is "allotted" to grow. Is this some kind of rebirth of Feudalism that I am not aware of? Should I start addressing my congressman as "lord" in the future and ask permission to grow tomatoes in my rear yard? Is 100 plants okay, or am I only allowed to grow 0 plants in order to force me to go to the store & buy tomatoes there?
Anyone with common sense can see this was not the original intent of the authors of Constitutional Law. James Madison wrote his document to create maximum, possible freedom, not to limit a man's ability to grow food for himself
>>>the farmer was taking actions that clearly interacted with that market.
You know it helps if you actually read the law. It says the Union government has the right to "regulate commerce AMONG the states". Since the farmer is not a state, and is not crossing a state border (he was feeding the food to his cows to keep them alive during the harsh winter months), the national government has zero authority. This is a matter for the Member State's government to handle (per amend. 10).