It was racism that caused Americans to secede from the British crown. It was racism that caused the Yugoslavians to secede from the Soviet Union (just ask Trotsky!) It was racism that caused Indians to secede from Britain -- that racist jerk Gandhi needs to be put in his place! It is racism that causes Tibetans to want independence from China. It is racism that Indonesia is no longer a Dutch colony. Oh, and I bet you Prince Pedro was being racist when he decided to secede from Portugal, too.
I'm going to say something that is sure to get me negative kharma from the polemicists but couldn't it be possible that people are dissenting on the policies of the president rather than on the race of the president?
I got a lot of crap from my family when I told them that I was voting for Obama. Yeah, they were kind of bigots about it. But if you can't actually try to speculate on the rational reasons somebody might want to secede and just chalk it up to "they hate black people" that makes you guilty of bigotry, too.
Kethinov speaks the truth. The show was lame even after it had an actual premise (human survival in the brutal cosmos). Why should it be any fun BEFORE they have anything to do and AFTER we already know how anticlimactic humanity's fate is?
You've pretty much touched on the key difference between having a weapon and being armed. The NRA likes to pretend that just having the piece in your trousers will make you into Rambo or somesuch. That's silly.
Having a gun and thinking you're armed is like having a piano and thinking you're a virtuoso. You also need training to go with it.
That's what I'm advocating: Being CAPABLE and equipped. That includes "situational awareness" which makes you less shocked when the shot is finally fired.
Considering that the average CEO makes something like 400x the average worker in America
Where do you get this number from?
Why is it such a problem that workers get something back from the government when companies are too greedy to give it to them in the first place?
I don't think it's bad. I just don't trust the government to accomplish this any better than the "CEO's" you imagine. The only thing worse than a greedy, selfish, butt-reaming CEO out to bilk people is thousands of greedy, selfish, butt-reaming bureaucrats doing the same thing.
And today we get yet another lesson on why the electoral college is useless and outdated. How is it that someone can get a majority of votes and not win? Everyone's vote should be equal; having some people's vote count more than other people's vote is absurd.
It's based on the belief that the popularity of something does not make it right. The popular vote for a KKK member as president won't make lynching black people right. The president is, like the rest of the federal government, supposed to be subject to a law higher than popularity and electability -- one that preserves the rights of each individual.
Moreover, if any of the federal offices were used correctly, individuals wouldn't really care much at all who gets elected to any of those offices.
People in the southern states were keeping slaves.
That's cute. How do you reconcile this quote from Abraham Lincoln:
I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.
Yeah, slavery was a bad thing -- but it was basically the only reason you can't claim that the Confederates were 100% right.
If people choose to follow him, that's fine. But he won't be a leader of anybody who doesn't wish him to be. His executive authority does not direct the affairs of life. Only his rhetoric and charisma can do that.
Nothing would ever get done if everyone in Congress refused to vote for anything that contained a provision that they didn't agree with. You have to compromise occasionally.
I think we could use a government that does a little more of nothing and a little less compromising.
Unfortunately, the "right" direction depends on one's point of view.
I'm curious to know how you could believe that a man going back on his word -- breaking an agreement -- is somehow justifiable in anybody's moral code.
The man is running to be the leader of 300-some million Americans and can't successfully convince 51 Senators to uphold an oath they all took to defend the Constitution.
He's not going to be the leader of the people. He's going to be the executive authority of the Union. He's going to lead the troops. But he has no direct authority over the law-abiding citizens of the country.
Nobody could possibly be rationally attracted to the idea of reducing spending, balancing a budget, and letting the economy do its job. Only crazy "cultists" are interested in that kind of stuff.
You know what I find really sad? One of the most effective programs to reduce wealth disparity is socialized healthcare. Health care costs are the number one cause of personal bankruptcy in the US and costs of health care are a significant expense for the poor. Despite the clear statistical indications that this would lower crime rates, not a ingle politician on either side of the debate has had the balls to bring this topic up. They think anything that is a complex causality is beyond the comprehension of the voters, and they're probably right.
Or maybe they don't mention it because, like you, they can't cite any references to support these claims.
Slashdot Mirror
It was racism that caused Americans to secede from the British crown. It was racism that caused the Yugoslavians to secede from the Soviet Union (just ask Trotsky!) It was racism that caused Indians to secede from Britain -- that racist jerk Gandhi needs to be put in his place! It is racism that causes Tibetans to want independence from China. It is racism that Indonesia is no longer a Dutch colony. Oh, and I bet you Prince Pedro was being racist when he decided to secede from Portugal, too.
I'm going to say something that is sure to get me negative kharma from the polemicists but couldn't it be possible that people are dissenting on the policies of the president rather than on the race of the president?
I got a lot of crap from my family when I told them that I was voting for Obama. Yeah, they were kind of bigots about it. But if you can't actually try to speculate on the rational reasons somebody might want to secede and just chalk it up to "they hate black people" that makes you guilty of bigotry, too.
No, seriously. Who here is using it?
Me.
Me.
Kethinov speaks the truth. The show was lame even after it had an actual premise (human survival in the brutal cosmos). Why should it be any fun BEFORE they have anything to do and AFTER we already know how anticlimactic humanity's fate is?
You've pretty much touched on the key difference between having a weapon and being armed. The NRA likes to pretend that just having the piece in your trousers will make you into Rambo or somesuch. That's silly.
Having a gun and thinking you're armed is like having a piano and thinking you're a virtuoso. You also need training to go with it.
That's what I'm advocating: Being CAPABLE and equipped. That includes "situational awareness" which makes you less shocked when the shot is finally fired.
He also couldn't have killed fifteen people if the other fourteen had killed him after he shot the first one.
Where do you get this number from?
I don't think it's bad. I just don't trust the government to accomplish this any better than the "CEO's" you imagine. The only thing worse than a greedy, selfish, butt-reaming CEO out to bilk people is thousands of greedy, selfish, butt-reaming bureaucrats doing the same thing.
It's based on the belief that the popularity of something does not make it right. The popular vote for a KKK member as president won't make lynching black people right. The president is, like the rest of the federal government, supposed to be subject to a law higher than popularity and electability -- one that preserves the rights of each individual.
Moreover, if any of the federal offices were used correctly, individuals wouldn't really care much at all who gets elected to any of those offices.
Just because they want to vote this country to death doesn't make it in anybody's best interests.
That's cute. How do you reconcile this quote from Abraham Lincoln:
Yeah, slavery was a bad thing -- but it was basically the only reason you can't claim that the Confederates were 100% right.
There's got to be some Ron Paul freak out there willing to blow mod points on a reference to the actual Constitution.
And the fact that you posted this Anonymously bears no relevance to how you feel about it?
If people choose to follow him, that's fine. But he won't be a leader of anybody who doesn't wish him to be. His executive authority does not direct the affairs of life. Only his rhetoric and charisma can do that.
I think we could use a government that does a little more of nothing and a little less compromising.
I'm curious to know how you could believe that a man going back on his word -- breaking an agreement -- is somehow justifiable in anybody's moral code.
He's not going to be the leader of the people. He's going to be the executive authority of the Union. He's going to lead the troops. But he has no direct authority over the law-abiding citizens of the country.
Slashdot headlines in fortune cookie can therefore be even funnier.
Nobody could possibly be rationally attracted to the idea of reducing spending, balancing a budget, and letting the economy do its job. Only crazy "cultists" are interested in that kind of stuff.
You're expecting a social security check?
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=372005&cid=21495661
Not much you can do about it if the blogger's in a country where your laws don't apply.
My company can patch bugs within the same day the product's released. Never gone more than two days between a customer's bug report and a fix.
But we don't let bugs slip by. I know since I'm on the QA team. Never a bug. Never once... :P
If a mouse grows up with cats, it won't be afraid. They've done nothing with bioengineering that can't be done with training.
Or his FIRST death -- depending on where this movie fits in the chronology.