And flag burning, don't forget flag burning. That terrible issue that's ruining today's youth, even though it happens a couple times a decade. Some Dems also support flag burning amendments, and they can also go stuff themselves...I'm looking at you, Hillary.
...As far as I can tell, Bush only lied us into war once, in Iraq.
I'm was referring to their warmongering on Iran, silly, not 911 conspiracy theories. Watch the clip - there's a hard date this summer where Bush's rhetoric on Iran changed when he was briefed by McConnell.
While getting every oath breaking (protect the Constitution) coward out of office would be nice, it's not very practical. But that's okay - a few primaries can have great effect. After Lieberman was successfully primaried, the Dems finally pulled their outs out of their ass when it came to criticizing the occupation of Iraq. A few more and the Dems might finally pull their heads out of their asses on ending the war in Iraq and block any legislation that does not have a hard withdrawal date. Jane Harman for example has improved considerably just at the threat of being primaried.
Republicans fear their base. Too many Democrats deliberately vote against theirs, and with the most unpopular president in history. This is because they think they have nothing to fear from the left or the center, only the right - so they move to the right. Oh, and they crave approval from the Joke Line beltway pundits. They need to learn that is not the case.
Nixon set the tone for today's GOP. "When the president does it that means that it is not illegal."
EPA. China. Compromise. Nixon did have his authoritarian side, but he didn't go out of his way to be a complete asshole on as many issues as possible. And what Nixon was to impeached for is a molehill next to the Bush/Cheney mountain of lawbreaking: NSA wiretapping, torture, lying us into war, using federal agencies for partisan gain, trying to lie us into war AGAIN, and so on.
They can't, thanks to competition. AT&T raises their long distance rates, people will just switch to Qwest, the company that refused to go along with the warrantless spying. Which would be poetic justice since their CEO was screwed by insider trading charges when he wasn't allowed to present evidence that he thought the company was going to be getting money when he sold his shares.
Democrats want immunity for big business. Republicans want big government.
"Small government" was only ever a marketing slogan for the GOP. It didn't mean cutting the size of government at all, it meant cutting regulation and social spending - but baby, bring on those military and pork barrel projects.
Sell out Dems like Reid, Hoyer, Feinstein, and Rockefeller need to be kicked to the curb just as soon as they can be primaried. As for the Republicans - well, their party needs a complete enema as Nixon would almost be a communist in today's GOP.
Webb? I was more pissed at him than anyone else when the Dems first caved on FISA this summer. I was actually in DC at the time and wanted to go to his office, demand he return my campaign contribution and resign for violating every oath of office he ever took (protect the Constitution). But they all went home for vacation quick as a wink.
The President has said that American lives will be sacrificed if Congress does not change FISA. But he has also said that he will veto any FISA bill that does not grant retro-active immunity. No immunity, no FISA bill. So if we take the President at his word, he's willing to let Americans die to protect the phone companies.
So really, what's at stake here is not actually ending the practice of wiretaps, its about a bunch of lawyers wanting to cash in and sue the people that did it.
Ah ha ha ah ha. No. It's about massive, serial lawbreaking and attempts to sweep it under the rug. And who gives a shit if it ends up in the hands of lawyers! Give it to Britney Spears, burn it, open a mime school - the point is that it's out of the hands of those who conspired to violate our Constitutional rights.
One of the few industries we have left in the USA not destroyed by litigation, and now, that's all going down the shitter to.
AT&T's market cap is 425 BILLION DOLLARS Yes, poor beleaguered AT&T REALLY needs legal protection here.
What's even more amazing, at the end of the day, is that Democrats will ultimately create a legal framework that says a corporation doesn't actually even have to listen to the government at all
When you're done drinking the Kool-Aid, try reading up on the Nuremberg trials.
the 10 votes were against cloture, not against the bill itself. But it's still bad - some Dems try the cop out of voting for cloture but then voting against the bill/nominee.
Dodd put a hold on this bill; under Senate traditions that should have killed it. And under Harry Reid's turn as majority leader, that's still the case...if you're a Republican. Lindsey Graham placed a hold on a bill to prevent the CIA from using torture. Or when Tom Coburn placed a hold on a nondiscrimination bill. But when a Democrat wants to place a hold on a bill to protect our rights, he is simply ignored.
Having the One True Path worked just fine for the first Half-Life, because you were trapped in a collapsing underground base so it made sense that your movement options were very limited. Valve continued to make great "on rails" games with Half-Life 2 and it's Episodes, but the illusion disappeared because you spend most of the game in cities or in open country. After the first game, there hasn't been a single moment that I wasn't aware that I was "on rails". As someone pointed out, FarCry is a great counter example. You still have to get to your destination, still have to pass through choke points (so you can still have your scripted moments) but you have plenty of choices on how to get there. To that I would add Deus Ex, where many of the levels included multiple ways to travel, but multiple ways to accomplish your objective. I would further argue that Valve spends at least as much time on their scripted scenes as if they had some more open areas and let the AI do some work for once.
However, as the previous poster mentioned its NOT OK to install/run anything foreign on school computers or at your job unless allowed in the policy. It may seem harmless or can be but should you get caught you can face serious punishment. It is also in the teachers right to dictate what the student may or may not do.
Then it's the schools job to set security policies in Windows to disallow such things. Setting up computer labs and just expecting people not to run any other programs on the computer will be only slightly more effective than dropping money on the street and expecting people not to pick it up.
This isn't some stand against authority. It's not a principled anything. It's a kid who was given an instruction by someone entitled to do so, and who failed to comply.
If it's a stupid instruction, it's a stupid instruction. A spade is a spade, and cracking the whip because you can doesn't make you right, it makes you a jackass.
That's a happy sound bite, but it's utterly moronic here.
The only moron here is you. It's called picking your battles.
And you sir, are an apologetic for anarchy - assuming the guilt on the part of the authority.
No, he's not, because...
The facts of the case are not in dispute
The student was told to do an assignment on the Internet. Student proceeds to follow the assignment using Firefox. Teacher tells the student to close Firefox and do his assignment. Student points out that he is doing his assignment. Student gets detention. The parent isn't arguing for anarchy, he's arguing for an ounce of common sense.
The problem isn't with installing Firefox, but rather the 15 different browser extensions and toolbars, each with their own version of spyware.
Um, that's IE's problem, slick. If anything you'd be freaking out over using Microsoft's web browser...I'm sure you could work in a lame anti-union rant on that subject, as well.
When you're managing a bunch of computers, or have a lesson plan designed in a certain way, the most obnoxious thing a student can do is try and install different software or operate things differently.
You let one kid talk back and soon enough you have 5 more kids pushing the boundries.
Pointing out that a teacher is wrong isn't "talking back", it's pointing out the teacher is wrong. That happens to human beings. Parents and teachers with an authoritarian attitude are no better than a six year old having a tantrum in Wal-Mart because the parent wont buy him a Wii - both are unhappy because they didn't get their own way, instantly.
Sure kids can be snots and there are a times when absolute obedience is called for - fire alarms, starting fights, etc. Using a browser other than IE to do an internet assignment is not one of them. Anyone who ever went to school or was raised by parents should be able to recall a time when they got in trouble when they did nothing wrong, or even for following the rules. Or to put it more simply: pick your battles. You might find it works wonders.
RTFA. The posted letter is the schools side, and it makes no mention whatsoever of the student "mouthing off". So it probably went like this:
T: Look up X on the internet and do a report. S: Ok (loads Firefox) T: I told you to do this report. S: I am! Firefox is a browser just like IE. T (later): I told you to do the report! Detention!
Slashdot Mirror
W2K was never a mass-market OS.
Only because Microsoft kept a high price on it.
Sorry about that, eh chap? To make it up to you, I'll buy you a mug of sex in a canoe and a bag of jelly babies.
And flag burning, don't forget flag burning. That terrible issue that's ruining today's youth, even though it happens a couple times a decade. Some Dems also support flag burning amendments, and they can also go stuff themselves...I'm looking at you, Hillary.
...As far as I can tell, Bush only lied us into war once, in Iraq.
I'm was referring to their warmongering on Iran, silly, not 911 conspiracy theories. Watch the clip - there's a hard date this summer where Bush's rhetoric on Iran changed when he was briefed by McConnell.
While getting every oath breaking (protect the Constitution) coward out of office would be nice, it's not very practical. But that's okay - a few primaries can have great effect. After Lieberman was successfully primaried, the Dems finally pulled their outs out of their ass when it came to criticizing the occupation of Iraq. A few more and the Dems might finally pull their heads out of their asses on ending the war in Iraq and block any legislation that does not have a hard withdrawal date. Jane Harman for example has improved considerably just at the threat of being primaried.
Republicans fear their base. Too many Democrats deliberately vote against theirs, and with the most unpopular president in history. This is because they think they have nothing to fear from the left or the center, only the right - so they move to the right. Oh, and they crave approval from the Joke Line beltway pundits. They need to learn that is not the case.
Along with the Bush Dogs in the House.
Nixon set the tone for today's GOP. "When the president does it that means that it is not illegal."
EPA. China. Compromise. Nixon did have his authoritarian side, but he didn't go out of his way to be a complete asshole on as many issues as possible. And what Nixon was to impeached for is a molehill next to the Bush/Cheney mountain of lawbreaking: NSA wiretapping, torture, lying us into war, using federal agencies for partisan gain, trying to lie us into war AGAIN, and so on.
They can't, thanks to competition. AT&T raises their long distance rates, people will just switch to Qwest, the company that refused to go along with the warrantless spying. Which would be poetic justice since their CEO was screwed by insider trading charges when he wasn't allowed to present evidence that he thought the company was going to be getting money when he sold his shares.
Democrats want immunity for big business. Republicans want big government.
"Small government" was only ever a marketing slogan for the GOP. It didn't mean cutting the size of government at all, it meant cutting regulation and social spending - but baby, bring on those military and pork barrel projects.
Sell out Dems like Reid, Hoyer, Feinstein, and Rockefeller need to be kicked to the curb just as soon as they can be primaried. As for the Republicans - well, their party needs a complete enema as Nixon would almost be a communist in today's GOP.
Webb? I was more pissed at him than anyone else when the Dems first caved on FISA this summer. I was actually in DC at the time and wanted to go to his office, demand he return my campaign contribution and resign for violating every oath of office he ever took (protect the Constitution). But they all went home for vacation quick as a wink.
So really, what's at stake here is not actually ending the practice of wiretaps, its about a bunch of lawyers wanting to cash in and sue the people that did it.
Ah ha ha ah ha. No. It's about massive, serial lawbreaking and attempts to sweep it under the rug. And who gives a shit if it ends up in the hands of lawyers! Give it to Britney Spears, burn it, open a mime school - the point is that it's out of the hands of those who conspired to violate our Constitutional rights.
One of the few industries we have left in the USA not destroyed by litigation, and now, that's all going down the shitter to.
AT&T's market cap is 425 BILLION DOLLARS Yes, poor beleaguered AT&T REALLY needs legal protection here.
What's even more amazing, at the end of the day, is that Democrats will ultimately create a legal framework that says a corporation doesn't actually even have to listen to the government at all
When you're done drinking the Kool-Aid, try reading up on the Nuremberg trials.
the 10 votes were against cloture, not against the bill itself. But it's still bad - some Dems try the cop out of voting for cloture but then voting against the bill/nominee.
Dodd put a hold on this bill; under Senate traditions that should have killed it. And under Harry Reid's turn as majority leader, that's still the case...if you're a Republican. Lindsey Graham placed a hold on a bill to prevent the CIA from using torture. Or when Tom Coburn placed a hold on a nondiscrimination bill. But when a Democrat wants to place a hold on a bill to protect our rights, he is simply ignored.
Having the One True Path worked just fine for the first Half-Life, because you were trapped in a collapsing underground base so it made sense that your movement options were very limited. Valve continued to make great "on rails" games with Half-Life 2 and it's Episodes, but the illusion disappeared because you spend most of the game in cities or in open country. After the first game, there hasn't been a single moment that I wasn't aware that I was "on rails". As someone pointed out, FarCry is a great counter example. You still have to get to your destination, still have to pass through choke points (so you can still have your scripted moments) but you have plenty of choices on how to get there. To that I would add Deus Ex, where many of the levels included multiple ways to travel, but multiple ways to accomplish your objective. I would further argue that Valve spends at least as much time on their scripted scenes as if they had some more open areas and let the AI do some work for once.
However, as the previous poster mentioned its NOT OK to install/run anything foreign on school computers or at your job unless allowed in the policy. It may seem harmless or can be but should you get caught you can face serious punishment. It is also in the teachers right to dictate what the student may or may not do.
Then it's the schools job to set security policies in Windows to disallow such things. Setting up computer labs and just expecting people not to run any other programs on the computer will be only slightly more effective than dropping money on the street and expecting people not to pick it up.
Ordinarily I wouldn't have corrected you, but the implication that FireFox and any other browser are the exact same thing is chillingly wrong.
But the resulting homework would be the same, which is the point.
This isn't some stand against authority. It's not a principled anything. It's a kid who was given an instruction by someone entitled to do so, and who failed to comply.
If it's a stupid instruction, it's a stupid instruction. A spade is a spade, and cracking the whip because you can doesn't make you right, it makes you a jackass.
That's a happy sound bite, but it's utterly moronic here.
The only moron here is you. It's called picking your battles.
You really think that if you treat EVERY teenager with "respect" they will treat you with respect?
Same of course applies to teachers and parents - doesn't matter how well the kid behaves, an authoritarian will find some way to crack the whip.
Should the students be allowed to install and run anything they want on school computers?
If the school doesn't want anything installed on school computers, then they need to set the appropriate security policies.
Blow it out your ass. Just because someone is in charge, in this case a teacher in charge of the classroom, doesn't mean that the school is fascist.
Authority for authority's sake absolutely is fascist. Blow it out your own ass.
And you sir, are an apologetic for anarchy - assuming the guilt on the part of the authority.
No, he's not, because...
The facts of the case are not in dispute
The student was told to do an assignment on the Internet. Student proceeds to follow the assignment using Firefox. Teacher tells the student to close Firefox and do his assignment. Student points out that he is doing his assignment. Student gets detention. The parent isn't arguing for anarchy, he's arguing for an ounce of common sense.
The problem isn't with installing Firefox, but rather the 15 different browser extensions and toolbars, each with their own version of spyware.
Um, that's IE's problem, slick. If anything you'd be freaking out over using Microsoft's web browser...I'm sure you could work in a lame anti-union rant on that subject, as well.
When you're managing a bunch of computers, or have a lesson plan designed in a certain way, the most obnoxious thing a student can do is try and install different software or operate things differently.
Then the school should lock down it's network.
You let one kid talk back and soon enough you have 5 more kids pushing the boundries.
Pointing out that a teacher is wrong isn't "talking back", it's pointing out the teacher is wrong. That happens to human beings. Parents and teachers with an authoritarian attitude are no better than a six year old having a tantrum in Wal-Mart because the parent wont buy him a Wii - both are unhappy because they didn't get their own way, instantly.
Sure kids can be snots and there are a times when absolute obedience is called for - fire alarms, starting fights, etc. Using a browser other than IE to do an internet assignment is not one of them. Anyone who ever went to school or was raised by parents should be able to recall a time when they got in trouble when they did nothing wrong, or even for following the rules. Or to put it more simply: pick your battles. You might find it works wonders.
RTFA. The posted letter is the schools side, and it makes no mention whatsoever of the student "mouthing off". So it probably went like this:
T: Look up X on the internet and do a report.
S: Ok (loads Firefox)
T: I told you to do this report.
S: I am! Firefox is a browser just like IE.
T (later): I told you to do the report! Detention!