s it your intent to suggest that Bennett is anti-semitic?
No, its called an analogy, look it up.
Bennett does not appear to have a history of preaching against gambling
That is irrelevant. The man has made a (very lucrative) carrier out of holding himself up as a paragon of moral virtue and ripping into others for degrading morals. To be revealed as a closet gambler very much outs him as a hypocrite.
Bill Bennet has never ever spoken out against gambling.
That's pretty much irrelevant. Thats like a drug czar who rants about the terrible dangers of cocain, marajuana and meth but is revealed to have a big heroin habit.
When Clinton was president, if both senators from a nominees didn't support him, the nomination died in comittee. Now that we have a Republican president, the same standard doesn't apply for democratic senators.....
A Senator is likely to be quite offended if you call him a Congressman. Kind of like how "sleeping with" really means "having sex with"....Congressman == House of Represenatives.
1. The crime of forcing another person to submit to sex acts, especially sexual intercourse.
2. The act of seizing and carrying off by force; abduction.
3. Abusive or improper treatment; violation: a rape of justice.
from a sexual assault website: You are the one needing a refresher course.
Sounds like you're the one who needs to get a clue. Common, you know that words can have multiple meanings and that a website about assault is likely to have only one of them.
The real reason, I think, why they didn't want you to see the movie is cuz they didn't want you pestering them for a Power Glove and a copy of Super Mario Brothers 3 the instant it came out. As for it being less appealing now than when you were a child, duh! Most things that are appealing to kids turn adults off! Have any fond memories of the Guyver? One of my friends saw it when he was like 13 and insisted that we watch it. Biiiig mistake.
Lastly, I hope you aren't that cynical and nitpicky about movie screenwriting, or else there might only be 4 or 5 movies out there that you could stand.
Are you trolling or just being obtuse? Its call the gun of "if you leave don't bother comming back".
They won't stop you from joining a union and giving dues to them. No one will.
Sure they can. Wont do you much good trying to found a union when you don't have a job anymore because you've been fired.
"More money stays within the community with Mom & Pops than with Wal-Mart." No more, no less than Wal-Mart. "The owners of the Mom & Pop will be far more likely to spend their profits in the same town," Maybe, maybe not.
Its not rocket science, Chimpo. Is the owner of Mom & Pop Shumwidgits going to go out of his way to not spend any money in his hometown of Jerkwater USA? Probably not. Is a Wal-Mart heir likely to drive by Jerkwater USA and spend any cash there? No. Lets see, what's the word I'm looking for here....oh yeah: DUH!
No, they pay their employees a fair wage.
Fair my ass. If you like living below the poverty line, more power to you. Most people however, do not.
Wal*Mart beats them all.
If you like waiting in line for 10 minutes before talking to some girl working at the counter who then has to call over a manager, which takes another 30 minutes, then sure. You can take a poll but I think you've find that you're still in the minority here.
No, they pay their employees what the work is actually worth.
No, they force their employees to "finish their work" but wont give them overtime pay if that work takes more than 40 hours per week, by making them go back to work after clocking out, editing time slips, etc. And they've sent home salaried employees on slow days and docked their pay as if they were hourly.
There is nothing unscrupulous about protecting workers by not forcing them to join unions (this is hardly "union busting").
Somehow I don't think that keeping you from even having the option to join a union is "protecting".
No, it is not. The money is also going to the employees, and also to local charitable efforts and contributions.
More money stays within the community with Mom & Pops than with Wal-Mart. The owners of the Mom & Pop will be far more likely to spend their profits in the same town, as opposed to the remote chance that Sam Waltons heirs will drop by and spend some money.
"But, shopping at walmart damages the community, which in turn hurts the individual " No, it does not in any way.
You are false, denied, shot down. Wal-Mart cheats employees on their pay, works them harder, has crappier customer service, reduces the total number of available jobs and sucks money out of a community that would otherwise stay there.
Competition is all well and good, but not when you violate the law to do so. Look at all the lawsuites from workers that were forced to work overtime hours without being paid, or sending *salaried* pharmasists home during slow days and docking their pay.
OK, I didn't mean to come off so forceful on the exact dollar amount.
Alright then.:) I was also forcefull because I stongly belive that citizens need to be able to sue companies and individuals into the ground if the case is justified. I don't like hard dollar amounts, because if its too low its meaningless. Take Microsoft as an example: they could take a 10 billion dollar fine, write out a check and be down only 1/4 of their total cash reserves.
Thats why I think that percentage of income is the way to go. It makes a fine meaningful for someone who would otherwise have cash to spare and not ludicrously impossible for someone who doesn't.
Do you mean a limit on damages, which to me is a recipie for business to rape consumers & employees in the ass, hard, if it means they'll save money in the long run? Or do you mean pass legislation that would try and bring some order to the system? What I would like to see is laws that differentiate between inevitable human error, and gross/criminal incompetence/negligence. And go by percentages of income rather than some invented fee. A different poster threw up the figure of $50,000 as a limit; to a well paid surgeon that is chump change, to a doctor who works at a small practice that would be a huge amount, epecially if he has a family to support.
There absolutely should be a limit in damages, and it shouldn't be more than about $50,000, no matter what.
No way in hell. No way in hell (repeated for emphasis).
$50,000 is a slap on the wrist, pocket change for a well paid doctor. Are you telling me that if some idiot doctor, through gross incompetence or negligence, kills your mother, that her life is only worth $50,000? Why don't you call up Mom on the phone and tell her that her life is only worth 50 G's?
What proponents of so called "tort reform" should be pushing is legislation guiding the amount of awards rather than limiting them. Differentiate between simple human error and gross or criminal negligence or incompetence. And go by percentages of income rather than some flat rate. $50,000 is a hell of a lot for a doctor in a small practice who has a family to support. A high priced surgeon on the other hand, could write out a check on the spot for your dead mom and say "have a nice day".
People need to wake up and realize that the first business of any business is to make money, and everything else (i.e. ethics) is far down on their priority list. If a company makes more money fucking consumers in the ass than it looses in your chump change lawsuites, its quite possible that they'll write off the practice as an expense and keep doing it.
Most of the pro-3dmark comments are pointing out that it tests future technology that today's games don't use. That's irrelevant because for most gamers because by the time you actually need those features you need to upgrade your card anyway! Look at Doom 3: my TNT2 card can't play it because the TNT's don't have hardware T&L. But even if the card did support it, I'd need a new card to play the game anyway.
I could see people making arguments that DX9 tests are good because DX9 games will prolly start showing up in the next year or so. But I'm not too worried about Nvidia's DX9's performance as they've been partnered with Microsoft to manufacture the XBox.
What, you didn't know that his movies tend to be overly sentimental?:)
did you see catch me if you can, AI or the lost world?
Nope, nope and nope so I can't comment on those. Critics thought he did a good job getting a performance out of DeCrappio and that Christopher Walken had a chance for best supporting actor.
I'd still sell my grandmother to see him direct the next Star Wars movie.
If you choose to see it that way. If AMD tweaked their processors to get some extra performance when running Linux or gcc, would you accuse them of cheating? So they tweaked their drivers for an application but isn't that what they are supposed to do? Have drivers that wring every last drop of performance out of their hardware?
How, by giving you a free card so you can see the difference, since you aren't going to buy one? Let me know if that works so I can do the same thing and get a 5900 Ultra. And if you're going to harbor a grudge against Nvidia over this one little flap, how about ATI's 10 years or so of the Worst Drivers Ever?
You're still missing the point.:) Here's a better example for you: Mr. Morals, Bill Bennet. He's made millions by lecturing other people on morality, led crusades against rap music, but it turns out the guy is a big time gambler. Do we not have the right to know that he's a big hypocrite?
Slashdot Mirror
s it your intent to suggest that Bennett is anti-semitic?
No, its called an analogy, look it up.
Bennett does not appear to have a history of preaching against gambling
That is irrelevant. The man has made a (very lucrative) carrier out of holding himself up as a paragon of moral virtue and ripping into others for degrading morals. To be revealed as a closet gambler very much outs him as a hypocrite.
Bill Bennet has never ever spoken out against gambling.
That's pretty much irrelevant. Thats like a drug czar who rants about the terrible dangers of cocain, marajuana and meth but is revealed to have a big heroin habit.
When Clinton was president, if both senators from a nominees didn't support him, the nomination died in comittee. Now that we have a Republican president, the same standard doesn't apply for democratic senators.....
A Senator is likely to be quite offended if you call him a Congressman. Kind of like how "sleeping with" really means "having sex with"....Congressman == House of Represenatives.
my fav song from that disk. Wuts yours? :)
Doesn't sit right? What is it, spinach or something?
From dictionary.com:
1. The crime of forcing another person to submit to sex acts, especially sexual intercourse.
2. The act of seizing and carrying off by force; abduction.
3. Abusive or improper treatment; violation: a rape of justice.
from a sexual assault website:
You are the one needing a refresher course.
Sounds like you're the one who needs to get a clue. Common, you know that words can have multiple meanings and that a website about assault is likely to have only one of them.
The real reason, I think, why they didn't want you to see the movie is cuz they didn't want you pestering them for a Power Glove and a copy of Super Mario Brothers 3 the instant it came out. As for it being less appealing now than when you were a child, duh! Most things that are appealing to kids turn adults off! Have any fond memories of the Guyver? One of my friends saw it when he was like 13 and insisted that we watch it. Biiiig mistake.
Lastly, I hope you aren't that cynical and nitpicky about movie screenwriting, or else there might only be 4 or 5 movies out there that you could stand.
They stand over then with guns? Right.....
Are you trolling or just being obtuse? Its call the gun of "if you leave don't bother comming back".
They won't stop you from joining a union and giving dues to them. No one will.
Sure they can. Wont do you much good trying to found a union when you don't have a job anymore because you've been fired.
"More money stays within the community with Mom & Pops than with Wal-Mart."
No more, no less than Wal-Mart.
"The owners of the Mom & Pop will be far more likely to spend their profits in the same town,"
Maybe, maybe not.
Its not rocket science, Chimpo. Is the owner of Mom & Pop Shumwidgits going to go out of his way to not spend any money in his hometown of Jerkwater USA? Probably not. Is a Wal-Mart heir likely to drive by Jerkwater USA and spend any cash there? No. Lets see, what's the word I'm looking for here....oh yeah: DUH!
No, they pay their employees a fair wage.
Fair my ass. If you like living below the poverty line, more power to you. Most people however, do not.
Wal*Mart beats them all.
If you like waiting in line for 10 minutes before talking to some girl working at the counter who then has to call over a manager, which takes another 30 minutes, then sure. You can take a poll but I think you've find that you're still in the minority here.
No, they pay their employees what the work is actually worth.
No, they force their employees to "finish their work" but wont give them overtime pay if that work takes more than 40 hours per week, by making them go back to work after clocking out, editing time slips, etc. And they've sent home salaried employees on slow days and docked their pay as if they were hourly.
There is nothing unscrupulous about protecting workers by not forcing them to join unions (this is hardly "union busting").
Somehow I don't think that keeping you from even having the option to join a union is "protecting".
No, it is not. The money is also going to the employees, and also to local charitable efforts and contributions.
More money stays within the community with Mom & Pops than with Wal-Mart. The owners of the Mom & Pop will be far more likely to spend their profits in the same town, as opposed to the remote chance that Sam Waltons heirs will drop by and spend some money.
"But, shopping at walmart damages the community, which in turn hurts the individual "
No, it does not in any way.
You are false, denied, shot down. Wal-Mart cheats employees on their pay, works them harder, has crappier customer service, reduces the total number of available jobs and sucks money out of a community that would otherwise stay there.
Competition is all well and good, but not when you violate the law to do so. Look at all the lawsuites from workers that were forced to work overtime hours without being paid, or sending *salaried* pharmasists home during slow days and docking their pay.
Do you muse about wether or not its pointless for Ford to make Mustangs just because you don't buy them?
OK, I didn't mean to come off so forceful on the exact dollar amount.
:) I was also forcefull because I stongly belive that citizens need to be able to sue companies and individuals into the ground if the case is justified. I don't like hard dollar amounts, because if its too low its meaningless. Take Microsoft as an example: they could take a 10 billion dollar fine, write out a check and be down only 1/4 of their total cash reserves.
Alright then.
Thats why I think that percentage of income is the way to go. It makes a fine meaningful for someone who would otherwise have cash to spare and not ludicrously impossible for someone who doesn't.
Do you mean a limit on damages, which to me is a recipie for business to rape consumers & employees in the ass, hard, if it means they'll save money in the long run? Or do you mean pass legislation that would try and bring some order to the system? What I would like to see is laws that differentiate between inevitable human error, and gross/criminal incompetence/negligence. And go by percentages of income rather than some invented fee. A different poster threw up the figure of $50,000 as a limit; to a well paid surgeon that is chump change, to a doctor who works at a small practice that would be a huge amount, epecially if he has a family to support.
There absolutely should be a limit in damages, and it shouldn't be more than about $50,000, no matter what.
No way in hell. No way in hell (repeated for emphasis).
$50,000 is a slap on the wrist, pocket change for a well paid doctor. Are you telling me that if some idiot doctor, through gross incompetence or negligence, kills your mother, that her life is only worth $50,000? Why don't you call up Mom on the phone and tell her that her life is only worth 50 G's?
What proponents of so called "tort reform" should be pushing is legislation guiding the amount of awards rather than limiting them. Differentiate between simple human error and gross or criminal negligence or incompetence. And go by percentages of income rather than some flat rate. $50,000 is a hell of a lot for a doctor in a small practice who has a family to support. A high priced surgeon on the other hand, could write out a check on the spot for your dead mom and say "have a nice day".
People need to wake up and realize that the first business of any business is to make money, and everything else (i.e. ethics) is far down on their priority list. If a company makes more money fucking consumers in the ass than it looses in your chump change lawsuites, its quite possible that they'll write off the practice as an expense and keep doing it.
Most of the pro-3dmark comments are pointing out that it tests future technology that today's games don't use. That's irrelevant because for most gamers because by the time you actually need those features you need to upgrade your card anyway! Look at Doom 3: my TNT2 card can't play it because the TNT's don't have hardware T&L. But even if the card did support it, I'd need a new card to play the game anyway.
I could see people making arguments that DX9 tests are good because DX9 games will prolly start showing up in the next year or so. But I'm not too worried about Nvidia's DX9's performance as they've been partnered with Microsoft to manufacture the XBox.
cheesy story among other things
:)
What, you didn't know that his movies tend to be overly sentimental?
did you see catch me if you can, AI or the lost world?
Nope, nope and nope so I can't comment on those. Critics thought he did a good job getting a performance out of DeCrappio and that Christopher Walken had a chance for best supporting actor.
I'd still sell my grandmother to see him direct the next Star Wars movie.
once great directors who can't seem to put out a decent movie
Herm? Did you miss SPR and Minority Report?
If you choose to see it that way. If AMD tweaked their processors to get some extra performance when running Linux or gcc, would you accuse them of cheating? So they tweaked their drivers for an application but isn't that what they are supposed to do? Have drivers that wring every last drop of performance out of their hardware?
unless the convince me otherwise.
How, by giving you a free card so you can see the difference, since you aren't going to buy one? Let me know if that works so I can do the same thing and get a 5900 Ultra. And if you're going to harbor a grudge against Nvidia over this one little flap, how about ATI's 10 years or so of the Worst Drivers Ever?
You're still missing the point. :) Here's a better example for you: Mr. Morals, Bill Bennet. He's made millions by lecturing other people on morality, led crusades against rap music, but it turns out the guy is a big time gambler. Do we not have the right to know that he's a big hypocrite?
Pretty much the rest of everything.
Like what, exactly? Outside of Oprah style tv, which is more feminazi than liberal.
dragon
game
Its all good. I've seen it about a hundred times but was able to double check it. :)
Trog dor was a man...er...
He was a dragon man...
Or maybe he was just a dragon
but he was still TROGDOOOOOR!!!!