Well, the KKK's motivating factor was not religious, though religious beliefs sometimes factored into it.
Of course not, when people who happen to be Christians kill people, it's always for reasons other than religion. Whereas people who happen to be Muslim kill people, it's always because of their religion.
Anti-semitism, Holocaust Denial and outright jew hatred are now pretty much mainstream on sites like Daily Kos and DU.
Criticizing Isreal != antisemitism, you lying sack of shit.
They elected a terrorist government when they could have had peace and a real country of their own, let em live with the consequences of their stupidity.
A "real country of their own" involves water rights, 1967 borders, and the Right of Return.
Islamic countries have practiced institutionalized religious intolerance against unbelievers long before any decently founded complaint of "oppression" could be launched.
I don't recall thousands of Christians taking to the streets and burning everything in sight when the documentary "The God Who Wasn't There" came out.
Probably because it didn't show Jesus as a bomb-toting terrorist. But they did, however, launch a preemptive war that has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands. Seriously, you guys need to get over this holier-than-thou persecution complex.
No, I wouldn't be happy about a portrayal of Christ like that, but it happens a lot,
When. I recall Christians getting quite pissy over an art exhibit featuring a cross floating in urine in the 90's. I think I would remember the reaction if, say, the New York Times ran a cartoon portraying Jesus as a bomb toting terrorist.
Christian mobs burned down an embassy or murdered dozens of people all over the world in response to one of them.
Nah, they just launch pre-emptive wars that result in the deaths of hundreds of thousands. But wait, when Christians kill people, it's not because they are Christian, it's for other reasons. But when Muslims kill people, it's not for other reasons, it's because they are Muslims.
So I think your point is correct, we wouldn't be happy, but your conclusion is wrong; there is a difference between being unhappy and murder.
Sure there is. But Christians in the U.S. get very unhappy over very silly things: the Southern Baptists boycott of Disney, banning gay marriage, freaking out over "Happy Holidays" signs in stores, and that's in a peaceful, prosperous nation. I wonder what these same individuals might do if faced with rampant poverty, war, dictatorships, and dealing with the effects of imperialism/colonialism.
All of the Democratic candidates are anti-2nd Amendment.
Completely false. But that wont stop some NRA types from making hay about it, like the members who said they couldn't vote for Kerry because he supported the assault weapons ban, while completely ignoring the fact that Bush said he would sign it if it was renewed by Congress.
People who disagreed with Kerry's flipflopping also voted for Bush.
Oh? This is the second thing that puts a stake through the heart of the "liberal media" myth (the first being the treatment the press gave Gore vs Bush in 2000): Bush is the worse flip flopper of all time, but it was never reported. During the third presidential debate in 2000, Bush took credit for 'bringing Democrats and Republicans together' to pass health insurance legislation, and for Texas being the first "to let patients sue their HMOs". Problem: Bush VETOED that legislation when he was governor of Texas. This, along with the fact a press recount proved that Al Gore should have won Florida (the third stake in the "liberal media myth") is the most underreported story in this country in recent history.
Personally I hate Obama for one reason. No track record, they don't want the baggage (for good reasons, democrats have way too much to run for president) but then again if I cared about the candidate it wouldn't be an American election.
I'm not supporting Obama because he talks in meaningless platitudes and goes on and on about compromise without talking about specifics. The latter is bad because compromise with the right wing is what has gotten this country in the shitter.
Which tolerant modern-day Christians would you be talking about? The Southern Baptists who boycotted Disney for years? Or the Christians who pushed through state constitutional amendments banning gay marriage? How about the bishop who said he would deny communion to any Catholic who voted for John Kerry because he was pro-choice? Or maybe the Christians who boycott stores that put up signs that say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas"?
Christianity is no different from Islam in that the majority are nice people but there are a few assholes that make trouble for everybody else.
If I like OSX but don't like Apple hardware, I don't have much of a choice do I?
Then 1) you are SOL and 2) nobody cares. If you are complaining about their hardware because it costs too much, then you are a cheapass. If you are complaining because they don't offer more options, they did that in the 90's and it lost them billions. Either way - not lock in.
Yawn. The U.S. is still way ahead of China, who by chance happens to have higher mileage standards *right now* than the auto industry will currently be held to in ten years. China is also very poor in comparison, and the pollution output per person is a fraction of what it is in the U.S. Now that even wingnuts have had to acknowledge that global warming is happening, bitching about China is the new excuse to not do anything.
Apple have a monopoly position on music sales throughout the world
Really, I didn't know they forced other music stores off the Internet and killed sales of compact discs. Who knew Apple was bigger than Wal-Mart, Target and Best Buy combined?
do you seriously think that Apple wouldn't have the clout to kill off DRM
You seem to be forgetting the depth of the greed of the record industry. They will happily kill the goose that laid the golden eggs to see whats inside. Hell, they've been bitching about their "billions" lost to piracy for years, and yet as soon as the iTMS became successful they wanted to raise prices on tracks sold online.
I hate to bring this news to you, but the iPod is not the best MP3 player, it was the best all round package a few years back
Unless you need built in voice recording, a built in fm radio, or a replaceable battery, the iPod is still arguably the best option. And given the way the market has moved, not very many people need those features.
Everything is overpriced, if you're a cheap ass. Apple's offerings are comparable to other big OEM's.
with lock-in
Um, what? They use the same type of memory, hard drives, and now processors as the rest of the PC industry. You can even run Windows on them now if you decide you don't like OS X.
There is a big difference between observing a vehicle on a highway, and planting an electronic device on your property to track your exact location from second to second. Which is not to say that I don't expect the SCOTUS to approve this, because they've been rubberstamping horrible police tactics for decades.
I never understood why when Apple locks you out no one really complains, but when Microsoft does it, its horrible.
See above. But if you need it spelled out for you: Microsoft is a convicted monopolist, and monopolies play by different rules. Furthermore, Microsoft got in trouble for telling other people (Dell, HP, Gateway) what to do with their own products. Apple isn't doing anything like that (both Macs and OS X are Apple products) so your comparison is stupid.
In 1971, he became an early member of Greenpeace. He claims to be a "founding member", which is thouroughly disputed by living founders of Greenpeace (Dorothy Stowe, 86 years old in 2007, her deceased husband Irving, Bob Hunter, Ben and Dorothy Metcalf, and Jim and Marie Bolen). He served for nine years as President of Greenpeace Canada as well as seven years as a Director of Greenpeace International during a time in which Greenpeace became the world's largest environmental activist organization. He was unceremoniously removed from leadership positions in Greenpeace in 1985 as his personal priorities were at odds with the effectiveness of the Greenpeace organization and vision. Bob Hunter, a real cofounder of Greenpeace, called Moore, in Vancouver's North Shore News, 1980: "The Judas of the environmental movement."
and
Patrick Moore claims he left Greenpeace in 1986 after he saw a shift in Greenpeace's motives, criticizing the rise of environmental extremism. He believed Greenpeace became more concerned with anti-capitalism and anti-globalization rather than environmental issues. Writer Drake Bennett instead claims that Moore "left Greenpeace amid complaints about an autocratic leadership style and abrasive personality."[1]
The problem with science and global warming is that it has become so heavily politicized that it's pointless to try and follow and / or agree / disagree with either 'side'.
But who is doing the politicizing? Republicans and the fossil fuel industry, not climate scientists. This is just classic GOP propaganda: create the appearance of controversy where none exists, so no action is taken because the issue is "controversial". Note that the same tactic was used with cigarettes and Intelligent Design.
Here's the thing. If the people submitting to Exxon/Mobil are submitting made up bullshit then it shouldn't withstand review and become a laughingstock.
Funny, that didn't happen with cigarettes, didn't happen with Intelligent Design, and hasn't happened with climate change.
From where I stand though, it looks like both sides are playing fast and loose with the science to date.
Then you don't know what they hell you are talking about.
What if you were able to take your time with voting instead of being rushed through a line/queue with 20 people waiting for you to finish when you finally get to the polling station?
Vote-by-mail accomplishes all of that without having any of the problems of electronic voting.
Yes it does threaten democracy, for three reasons: security, anonymity, and verifiability. Voting must be secure so ballot stuffing is not possible. Voting must be anonymous so people can't try to reward/intimidate other people based on how they voted. And voting must be verifiable, so ballots can be recounted.
Security and anonymity means that internet based voting has to be thrown out the window. Completely. It is simply impossible to have a voting system over the internet to be both secure and anonymous. There also has to be a paper trail, as recent elections have proven and results have been overturned. One of the little known stories of the 2000 elections is that if there had been a full statewide recount, Gore would have won Florida.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, the KKK's motivating factor was not religious, though religious beliefs sometimes factored into it.
Of course not, when people who happen to be Christians kill people, it's always for reasons other than religion. Whereas people who happen to be Muslim kill people, it's always because of their religion.
Anti-semitism, Holocaust Denial and outright jew hatred are now pretty much mainstream on sites like Daily Kos and DU.
Criticizing Isreal != antisemitism, you lying sack of shit.
They elected a terrorist government when they could have had peace and a real country of their own, let em live with the consequences of their stupidity.
A "real country of their own" involves water rights, 1967 borders, and the Right of Return.
Islamic countries have practiced institutionalized religious intolerance against unbelievers long before any decently founded complaint of "oppression" could be launched.
Like banning gay marriage?
I don't recall thousands of Christians taking to the streets and burning everything in sight when the documentary "The God Who Wasn't There" came out.
Probably because it didn't show Jesus as a bomb-toting terrorist. But they did, however, launch a preemptive war that has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands. Seriously, you guys need to get over this holier-than-thou persecution complex.
No, I wouldn't be happy about a portrayal of Christ like that, but it happens a lot,
When. I recall Christians getting quite pissy over an art exhibit featuring a cross floating in urine in the 90's. I think I would remember the reaction if, say, the New York Times ran a cartoon portraying Jesus as a bomb toting terrorist.
Christian mobs burned down an embassy or murdered dozens of people all over the world in response to one of them.
Nah, they just launch pre-emptive wars that result in the deaths of hundreds of thousands. But wait, when Christians kill people, it's not because they are Christian, it's for other reasons. But when Muslims kill people, it's not for other reasons, it's because they are Muslims.
So I think your point is correct, we wouldn't be happy, but your conclusion is wrong; there is a difference between being unhappy and murder.
Sure there is. But Christians in the U.S. get very unhappy over very silly things: the Southern Baptists boycott of Disney, banning gay marriage, freaking out over "Happy Holidays" signs in stores, and that's in a peaceful, prosperous nation. I wonder what these same individuals might do if faced with rampant poverty, war, dictatorships, and dealing with the effects of imperialism/colonialism.
All of the Democratic candidates are anti-2nd Amendment.
Completely false. But that wont stop some NRA types from making hay about it, like the members who said they couldn't vote for Kerry because he supported the assault weapons ban, while completely ignoring the fact that Bush said he would sign it if it was renewed by Congress.
People who disagreed with Kerry's flipflopping also voted for Bush.
Oh? This is the second thing that puts a stake through the heart of the "liberal media" myth (the first being the treatment the press gave Gore vs Bush in 2000): Bush is the worse flip flopper of all time, but it was never reported. During the third presidential debate in 2000, Bush took credit for 'bringing Democrats and Republicans together' to pass health insurance legislation, and for Texas being the first "to let patients sue their HMOs". Problem: Bush VETOED that legislation when he was governor of Texas. This, along with the fact a press recount proved that Al Gore should have won Florida (the third stake in the "liberal media myth") is the most underreported story in this country in recent history.
Personally I hate Obama for one reason. No track record, they don't want the baggage (for good reasons, democrats have way too much to run for president) but then again if I cared about the candidate it wouldn't be an American election.
I'm not supporting Obama because he talks in meaningless platitudes and goes on and on about compromise without talking about specifics. The latter is bad because compromise with the right wing is what has gotten this country in the shitter.
Which tolerant modern-day Christians would you be talking about? The Southern Baptists who boycotted Disney for years? Or the Christians who pushed through state constitutional amendments banning gay marriage? How about the bishop who said he would deny communion to any Catholic who voted for John Kerry because he was pro-choice? Or maybe the Christians who boycott stores that put up signs that say "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas"?
Christianity is no different from Islam in that the majority are nice people but there are a few assholes that make trouble for everybody else.
Because no one else is allowed to make Mac clones...... I will stick to PC's, at least I have a choice of hardware.
Red herring, and his comparison is still stupid. Nintendo doesn't let people make Wii clones. Microsoft doesn't let people make Windows clones.
If I like OSX but don't like Apple hardware, I don't have much of a choice do I?
Then 1) you are SOL and 2) nobody cares. If you are complaining about their hardware because it costs too much, then you are a cheapass. If you are complaining because they don't offer more options, they did that in the 90's and it lost them billions. Either way - not lock in.
Yawn. The U.S. is still way ahead of China, who by chance happens to have higher mileage standards *right now* than the auto industry will currently be held to in ten years. China is also very poor in comparison, and the pollution output per person is a fraction of what it is in the U.S. Now that even wingnuts have had to acknowledge that global warming is happening, bitching about China is the new excuse to not do anything.
Apple have a monopoly position on music sales throughout the world
Really, I didn't know they forced other music stores off the Internet and killed sales of compact discs. Who knew Apple was bigger than Wal-Mart, Target and Best Buy combined?
do you seriously think that Apple wouldn't have the clout to kill off DRM
You seem to be forgetting the depth of the greed of the record industry. They will happily kill the goose that laid the golden eggs to see whats inside. Hell, they've been bitching about their "billions" lost to piracy for years, and yet as soon as the iTMS became successful they wanted to raise prices on tracks sold online.
I hate to bring this news to you, but the iPod is not the best MP3 player, it was the best all round package a few years back
Unless you need built in voice recording, a built in fm radio, or a replaceable battery, the iPod is still arguably the best option. And given the way the market has moved, not very many people need those features.
Apples been getting worse for years
Based on what.
Apple sells overpriced plastic boxes
Everything is overpriced, if you're a cheap ass. Apple's offerings are comparable to other big OEM's.
with lock-in
Um, what? They use the same type of memory, hard drives, and now processors as the rest of the PC industry. You can even run Windows on them now if you decide you don't like OS X.
Posner's a brilliant man in some ways, but it's a dumb opinion, and I'm sure it will be struck down if it gets to the Supreme Court.
I doubt it. They've rubberstamped far worse before.
There is a big difference between observing a vehicle on a highway, and planting an electronic device on your property to track your exact location from second to second. Which is not to say that I don't expect the SCOTUS to approve this, because they've been rubberstamping horrible police tactics for decades.
but that's okay, he's in good company.
And a Service Pack does not come with many added features ? I mean compare Windows XP SP1 and SP2 and you will see a major difference.
Nope. Bug fixes and a firewall do not count.
I never understood why when Apple locks you out no one really complains, but when Microsoft does it, its horrible.
See above. But if you need it spelled out for you: Microsoft is a convicted monopolist, and monopolies play by different rules. Furthermore, Microsoft got in trouble for telling other people (Dell, HP, Gateway) what to do with their own products. Apple isn't doing anything like that (both Macs and OS X are Apple products) so your comparison is stupid.
The problem with science and global warming is that it has become so heavily politicized that it's pointless to try and follow and / or agree / disagree with either 'side'.
But who is doing the politicizing? Republicans and the fossil fuel industry, not climate scientists. This is just classic GOP propaganda: create the appearance of controversy where none exists, so no action is taken because the issue is "controversial". Note that the same tactic was used with cigarettes and Intelligent Design.
Here's the thing. If the people submitting to Exxon/Mobil are submitting made up bullshit then it shouldn't withstand review and become a laughingstock.
Funny, that didn't happen with cigarettes, didn't happen with Intelligent Design, and hasn't happened with climate change.
From where I stand though, it looks like both sides are playing fast and loose with the science to date.
Then you don't know what they hell you are talking about.
What if you were able to take your time with voting instead of being rushed through a line/queue with 20 people waiting for you to finish when you finally get to the polling station?
Vote-by-mail accomplishes all of that without having any of the problems of electronic voting.
E-voting threatens nothing in and of itself.
Yes it does threaten democracy, for three reasons: security, anonymity, and verifiability. Voting must be secure so ballot stuffing is not possible. Voting must be anonymous so people can't try to reward/intimidate other people based on how they voted. And voting must be verifiable, so ballots can be recounted.
Security and anonymity means that internet based voting has to be thrown out the window. Completely. It is simply impossible to have a voting system over the internet to be both secure and anonymous. There also has to be a paper trail, as recent elections have proven and results have been overturned. One of the little known stories of the 2000 elections is that if there had been a full statewide recount, Gore would have won Florida.
Didn't read much of it then, did you? Do you honestly think the average person with a college degree can answer questions like or much less someone with a high school education or less? Claiming that is putting the cart before the horse and is a very Fox Newsian view of history.
feh...I want my hookers and blackjack