Ironically, that was the appeal of the reform party back in Perot's time; Republican fiscal policy without the Christian fundy wackoness.
Then, Buchanan came along and FUCKED everything up.
Don't get me wrong, it was a lot of fun watching Buchanan make that little wussy commie cry on Crossfire, but he's just too way-out to be running MY country.
oh, it wasn't Gore's Campaign staff that failed to appeal to me (a Nader Vote in California).
It was Gore's pathetic environmental record. And his election funraising record.
Gore's just lucky McCain wasn't running, because McCain would have had my vote.
(IMO, nobody's going to fix the environment, nothing will get done until campaign finance reform happens. That's gotta happen first)
In America, free speech is valued above almost everything.
That and freedom of religion are THE two key pieces of nationalistic propaganda that are rammed down our throats here at a very early age.
Most of us don't learn the truth (that we have neither) until High School civics class, and by then, we're in our rebellious teenage years, so it doesn't matter.
With Gore taking this election, and a republican congress, you can be sure that the rest of the world will be laughing their asses off in the next 4 years as "free" America amends it's constitution to prohibit the burning of the American flag.
Personally, I think flag-burning should be a sacred ritual at every family's 4th of July celebration (to celebrate that we have the right to do so - any Christian, and there are many in America I'm told, ought to understand instinctively that for an ideal to live for ever, the symbol that represents it must be destroyed).
But I digress, we're talking about the media here, and that's what freedom of speech is really about - and the media will manipulate the elections with biased coverage and reporting to make sure the most profitable (for them) man wins. Which candidate is most profitable? The most controverisal! The one that's easiest to spoof, tease, and lampoon. The one that's going to make those ratings jump as he does one lameass thing after another.
I'm guessing this is why Slashdot has "elected" Jon Katz to write editorials here. Same reason ZDNet uses Dvorak and Bearst.
um, that weapon does not look loaded to me - so to a person who is somewhat clueful about guns, this picture is not nearly as comical as a clueless person would guess -
unlikely yes, but it HAS happened. Twice, I believe.
Generally, these members of the Electoral college are not your average joe workingman on the street. They're quite often upper-class, white, Christian businessmen. Just the sort of people who favor Republicans.
oh yeah, I know a gay guy who joined the Navy because of this.
Many reasons - all very rediculously cliche:
"I love a man in a uniform"
"All those men out there on a boat with no women around, for months in close quarters, some of the straight ones are bound to get desperate"
"'cmon, everyone knows that a lot of gay guys join the Navy, it's just a target-rich environment"
He turned out to be a lifer. . . some supply ship. ..
no - if it were a technical reason (chip not as fast as advertised, consumes more power than advertised, not stable) - Transmeta could make up for that by pricing the chip right. If they don't do that, they go out of business. Right? It's rather compelling.
So I believe that the real issues are strategic - (mind you, some people call these strategic business motivations "conspiracy theories"). In the recent past, computer manufacturers were kind of fearful of Intel's posturing, especially with Rambus cramming patents down everyone's throat. Computer manufacturers were looking for alternatives. AMD is one. Cyrix (gag) is another, now here comes Crusoe. Sure, baby, why don't you come over here and sit by me?
Then Intel publically floggs Rambus, and manufacturers gain a bit of territory back (namely, the choice, in system design, of what kind of RAM to use) - and they all flock back to Intel.
Now that Intel has publically flogged Rambus, Intel's partners are finding Intel a bit less unattractive. That's probably mainly it. I'm sure there are technical reasons, but those are always squishy enough to work over, especially if Transmeta learns to be more flexible on price. If it's cut or die, of course they'll cut, so I doubt that's the issue. It's gotta be strategic.
Well, government oversight is better than no oversight.
Basically, what we have with the RECENT utter failure of a missile defense shield attempt was, according to government investigators (no link, use google and your own time), Lockheed overstated the capabilities of the exoatmospheric kill vehicle. I'm glad we figured out it was bunk after only three tests, instead of after the first nuclear exhange, but taxpayers are still out x million dollars - because of government incompetence? government corruption? NO because a greedy defense contractor - used to getting blank checks from Uncle Sam LIED.
$200 toilet seats are HALF the government's fault, and HALF the contractor's fault. So I don't believe for one second that getting rid of the government and letting "the private sector" (former government contractors - still essentially the same thing) taking over. Definately, the government procurement process needs a lot of fixing. But you'd be hard-pressed to convince me that we'd be better off with what would essentially be anarchy.
Well, from what I've observed, Bush is TOTALLY clueless about this issue - probably because he's got his Oil/Defense Industry goggles on. But a lot of republicans (notably Orin Hatch), ARE actually clueful on this issue, AND stand in agreement with "us" on the idea that copyrights are too restrictive, and fair use is being eroded.
However, I don't believe their hearts are in the right place. They don't really give a rat's bunghole about OUR rights, it's just a venemous stab at the entertainment industry, which gives money to their opponents, the Democrats - and continues to spew out unChristian materials, corrupting America's youth.
SHIT! If this guy and Buchanan were the only two candidates, I would vote for Buchanan (and then kill myself).
That reminds me, any Scientologist candidates this election?
(notice, slashdot was all for sticking up for Wiccans, Shinto, Falun Gong, but Scientolgy? Yeah right. You'd think a great Sci Fi writer like L Ron Hubbard would earn a bit more respect on this board.)
Hey, do Finns even make a good car? The Swedes do, (Volvo), the Germans do. No? What good are you? (Good American attitude, eh?)
Seriously though, I wouldn't even mind paying 90% taxes, as long as two conditions were met:
1) The government didn't squander or waste it, or allow undeserving people to live a better lifestyle than the person who worked for it and earned it.
2) What I brought home was "enough".
Define "enough"?
That's a funny word. Enough. It's even spelled funny. Damn English.
Oh, I just LOVED the Libertarian answer to this one:
Hand over $50 billion to Lockheed and tell them to build and operate the shield for us.
Gee, what if they build one, and China launches, and we find out that it was just paper-mache missile silos, and that the $50 billion went up the Lockheed executives' noses? Do we order a recall? Oh yeah, the Libertarians would eliminate the Consumer Products Safety Commission, (which admittedly didn't do a very good job for 80 or so Ford customers).
I believe that the MAIN problem Christianity has, (and the others of that ilk) is that as a religion, as a philosophy, it's great. But as a cultural meme, it needs to survive, so the various sects elect leaders who espouse a survivabilty trait - and that trait is veracity. The only way to prove that your religion is true (and therefore worthy of survival as a meme) is to insist that all others are false, and that means that your scripture is your #1 proof. With that in mind, you have no alternative but to stand on the opinion that your scripture is absolutely accurate, 100% directly from the mouth of God.
The followers of this leader (not the faith), then accept this proclamation as the ultimate defense of their faith. This justifies literal interpretation, and some of the kooky behavior we're seeing. Like "religious wars" from people who's religion's name is translated to English as "Peace" (Islam). Like Christians who murder abortion doctors because abortion is murder.
If you look beyond the literal meaning of what Scripture says to you in your mind, as your eyes read the symbols on the page, a message appears in your heart. This is what the religion is all about. Direct linguistic communication is a tool, and it's a flawed tool (by design, if you read the intent of the story of the tower of Babel, in Genesis), and therefore is not capable of passing on the Word, perfection, to us. The only way to get that is directly from God (in a Christian framework, the Holy Spirit). If you accept that the Scripture is flawed, then you accept that you are flawed too. There's nothing wrong with that, it's by design. But some people are too weak in their faith to accept that - their "documented evidence of the truth of their religion" is what they cling to, and ultimately, it leads them astray from the intent. That's because the "intent" is not merely a cultural meme, and it wasn't designed for survival. It was designed for a higher purpose than that.
Unfortunately, this seems to be too difficult a concept for most Christians to grasp, and dropping their Bible is like kicking out the crutches. They're afraid that their faith will tumble like a house of cards when you remove the cornerstone. So they can't accept the truth that it's no good. And here we are, with folks getting hate mail, etc.
Not the WHOLE Old Testament, just the first 5 books; Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy. I'm not sure if Islam even recognizes anything other than Genesis - because their "race" is spawned off of Ismael, Abraham's first (illegitimate) son. The Jews descend from Issac, Abraham's second, but first with his wife. That story happens in Genesis.
Personally, I agree, witchcraft isn't a "real" religion, just a bunch of crap Alistair Crowley made up to sell books. Well, that hot redhed lezbo chick on Buffy the Vampire Slayer seems to think so, so maybe I'm wrong. . .
That bit of nasty trolling over (go ahead, hex me), the only reason I think Bush even mentioned Judaism and Islam is, well, Islam; so's not to piss off his arab buddies in the oil business, and Judaism, so's not to be branded anti-semitic.
I think that the guy's point was, that we KNOW Bush was lying, it was just his stock set of lies that he tells to anyone else, why didn't he taylor his lies to us? Because we're not important enough. We don't matter.
Taxing pollution won't stop pollution. It will just make it so that small businesses can't afford to pollute, while large businesses will weigh the cost of staying clean versus the fine, and pass either on to the consumer.
Pollution should be a criminal offense, and the people who make the decisions to pollute should go to jail and get buttfucked.
Slashdot Mirror
Ironically, that was the appeal of the reform party back in Perot's time; Republican fiscal policy without the Christian fundy wackoness.
Then, Buchanan came along and FUCKED everything up.
Don't get me wrong, it was a lot of fun watching Buchanan make that little wussy commie cry on Crossfire, but he's just too way-out to be running MY country.
that just means that for the 5 or 10 people who voted Libertarian, there were another 50 or 100 that voted Green.
We're in an exclusive club here, gentlemen.
oh, it wasn't Gore's Campaign staff that failed to appeal to me (a Nader Vote in California).
It was Gore's pathetic environmental record. And his election funraising record.
Gore's just lucky McCain wasn't running, because McCain would have had my vote.
(IMO, nobody's going to fix the environment, nothing will get done until campaign finance reform happens. That's gotta happen first)
Buffy the Vampire Slayer wasn't even very good last night.
Lesbian Witches. How cliche.
In America, free speech is valued above almost everything.
That and freedom of religion are THE two key pieces of nationalistic propaganda that are rammed down our throats here at a very early age.
Most of us don't learn the truth (that we have neither) until High School civics class, and by then, we're in our rebellious teenage years, so it doesn't matter.
With Gore taking this election, and a republican congress, you can be sure that the rest of the world will be laughing their asses off in the next 4 years as "free" America amends it's constitution to prohibit the burning of the American flag.
Personally, I think flag-burning should be a sacred ritual at every family's 4th of July celebration (to celebrate that we have the right to do so - any Christian, and there are many in America I'm told, ought to understand instinctively that for an ideal to live for ever, the symbol that represents it must be destroyed).
But I digress, we're talking about the media here, and that's what freedom of speech is really about - and the media will manipulate the elections with biased coverage and reporting to make sure the most profitable (for them) man wins. Which candidate is most profitable? The most controverisal! The one that's easiest to spoof, tease, and lampoon. The one that's going to make those ratings jump as he does one lameass thing after another.
I'm guessing this is why Slashdot has "elected" Jon Katz to write editorials here. Same reason ZDNet uses Dvorak and Bearst.
um, that weapon does not look loaded to me - so to a person who is somewhat clueful about guns, this picture is not nearly as comical as a clueless person would guess -
unlikely yes, but it HAS happened. Twice, I believe.
Generally, these members of the Electoral college are not your average joe workingman on the street. They're quite often upper-class, white, Christian businessmen. Just the sort of people who favor Republicans.
oh yeah, I know a gay guy who joined the Navy because of this.
.
Many reasons - all very rediculously cliche:
"I love a man in a uniform"
"All those men out there on a boat with no women around, for months in close quarters, some of the straight ones are bound to get desperate"
"'cmon, everyone knows that a lot of gay guys join the Navy, it's just a target-rich environment"
He turned out to be a lifer. . . some supply ship. .
no - if it were a technical reason (chip not as fast as advertised, consumes more power than advertised, not stable) - Transmeta could make up for that by pricing the chip right. If they don't do that, they go out of business. Right? It's rather compelling.
So I believe that the real issues are strategic - (mind you, some people call these strategic business motivations "conspiracy theories"). In the recent past, computer manufacturers were kind of fearful of Intel's posturing, especially with Rambus cramming patents down everyone's throat. Computer manufacturers were looking for alternatives. AMD is one. Cyrix (gag) is another, now here comes Crusoe. Sure, baby, why don't you come over here and sit by me?
Then Intel publically floggs Rambus, and manufacturers gain a bit of territory back (namely, the choice, in system design, of what kind of RAM to use) - and they all flock back to Intel.
Now that Intel has publically flogged Rambus, Intel's partners are finding Intel a bit less unattractive. That's probably mainly it. I'm sure there are technical reasons, but those are always squishy enough to work over, especially if Transmeta learns to be more flexible on price. If it's cut or die, of course they'll cut, so I doubt that's the issue. It's gotta be strategic.
Well, government oversight is better than no oversight.
Basically, what we have with the RECENT utter failure of a missile defense shield attempt was, according to government investigators (no link, use google and your own time), Lockheed overstated the capabilities of the exoatmospheric kill vehicle. I'm glad we figured out it was bunk after only three tests, instead of after the first nuclear exhange, but taxpayers are still out x million dollars - because of government incompetence? government corruption? NO because a greedy defense contractor - used to getting blank checks from Uncle Sam LIED.
$200 toilet seats are HALF the government's fault, and HALF the contractor's fault. So I don't believe for one second that getting rid of the government and letting "the private sector" (former government contractors - still essentially the same thing) taking over. Definately, the government procurement process needs a lot of fixing. But you'd be hard-pressed to convince me that we'd be better off with what would essentially be anarchy.
exactly.
VOTE THEM IN FOR CHRISTSSAKES!
At least they'll be driven around in limos for the next four years, and off the streets.
But the courts recently said that a tatoo is free speech, so, what if I get the DeCSS source code tatooed on my ass?
Well, from what I've observed, Bush is TOTALLY clueless about this issue - probably because he's got his Oil/Defense Industry goggles on. But a lot of republicans (notably Orin Hatch), ARE actually clueful on this issue, AND stand in agreement with "us" on the idea that copyrights are too restrictive, and fair use is being eroded.
However, I don't believe their hearts are in the right place. They don't really give a rat's bunghole about OUR rights, it's just a venemous stab at the entertainment industry, which gives money to their opponents, the Democrats - and continues to spew out unChristian materials, corrupting America's youth.
SHIT! If this guy and Buchanan were the only two candidates, I would vote for Buchanan (and then kill myself).
That reminds me, any Scientologist candidates this election?
(notice, slashdot was all for sticking up for Wiccans, Shinto, Falun Gong, but Scientolgy? Yeah right. You'd think a great Sci Fi writer like L Ron Hubbard would earn a bit more respect on this board.)
Hey, do Finns even make a good car? The Swedes do, (Volvo), the Germans do. No? What good are you? (Good American attitude, eh?)
Seriously though, I wouldn't even mind paying 90% taxes, as long as two conditions were met:
1) The government didn't squander or waste it, or allow undeserving people to live a better lifestyle than the person who worked for it and earned it.
2) What I brought home was "enough".
Define "enough"?
That's a funny word. Enough. It's even spelled funny. Damn English.
Oh, I just LOVED the Libertarian answer to this one:
Hand over $50 billion to Lockheed and tell them to build and operate the shield for us.
Gee, what if they build one, and China launches, and we find out that it was just paper-mache missile silos, and that the $50 billion went up the Lockheed executives' noses? Do we order a recall? Oh yeah, the Libertarians would eliminate the Consumer Products Safety Commission, (which admittedly didn't do a very good job for 80 or so Ford customers).
Gore's a Southern Baptist.
So much for folks trying to brand him a "Liberal" (in the American sense of the word).
I believe that the MAIN problem Christianity has, (and the others of that ilk) is that as a religion, as a philosophy, it's great. But as a cultural meme, it needs to survive, so the various sects elect leaders who espouse a survivabilty trait - and that trait is veracity. The only way to prove that your religion is true (and therefore worthy of survival as a meme) is to insist that all others are false, and that means that your scripture is your #1 proof. With that in mind, you have no alternative but to stand on the opinion that your scripture is absolutely accurate, 100% directly from the mouth of God.
The followers of this leader (not the faith), then accept this proclamation as the ultimate defense of their faith. This justifies literal interpretation, and some of the kooky behavior we're seeing. Like "religious wars" from people who's religion's name is translated to English as "Peace" (Islam). Like Christians who murder abortion doctors because abortion is murder.
If you look beyond the literal meaning of what Scripture says to you in your mind, as your eyes read the symbols on the page, a message appears in your heart. This is what the religion is all about. Direct linguistic communication is a tool, and it's a flawed tool (by design, if you read the intent of the story of the tower of Babel, in Genesis), and therefore is not capable of passing on the Word, perfection, to us. The only way to get that is directly from God (in a Christian framework, the Holy Spirit). If you accept that the Scripture is flawed, then you accept that you are flawed too. There's nothing wrong with that, it's by design. But some people are too weak in their faith to accept that - their "documented evidence of the truth of their religion" is what they cling to, and ultimately, it leads them astray from the intent. That's because the "intent" is not merely a cultural meme, and it wasn't designed for survival. It was designed for a higher purpose than that.
Unfortunately, this seems to be too difficult a concept for most Christians to grasp, and dropping their Bible is like kicking out the crutches. They're afraid that their faith will tumble like a house of cards when you remove the cornerstone. So they can't accept the truth that it's no good. And here we are, with folks getting hate mail, etc.
Not the WHOLE Old Testament, just the first 5 books; Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy. I'm not sure if Islam even recognizes anything other than Genesis - because their "race" is spawned off of Ismael, Abraham's first (illegitimate) son. The Jews descend from Issac, Abraham's second, but first with his wife. That story happens in Genesis.
Personally, I agree, witchcraft isn't a "real" religion, just a bunch of crap Alistair Crowley made up to sell books. Well, that hot redhed lezbo chick on Buffy the Vampire Slayer seems to think so, so maybe I'm wrong. . .
That bit of nasty trolling over (go ahead, hex me), the only reason I think Bush even mentioned Judaism and Islam is, well, Islam; so's not to piss off his arab buddies in the oil business, and Judaism, so's not to be branded anti-semitic.
I think that the guy's point was, that we KNOW Bush was lying, it was just his stock set of lies that he tells to anyone else, why didn't he taylor his lies to us? Because we're not important enough. We don't matter.
yeah, halfway through a paragraph, and I start going "blah blah blah blah - BLAH!" skip it.
Taxing pollution won't stop pollution. It will just make it so that small businesses can't afford to pollute, while large businesses will weigh the cost of staying clean versus the fine, and pass either on to the consumer.
Pollution should be a criminal offense, and the people who make the decisions to pollute should go to jail and get buttfucked.