Or are you thinking more about the days in advance of that hurricane that the mayor of that town and the governor of that state wasted in not actually evacuating the city's residents (you know, the ones not complying with the evacuation order) with their sitting-idle fleet of buses?
That's the right wing bullshit, anyway. Here's the facts. And Blanco had 500 buses ready to go, but FEMA rejected their use because they lacked air conditioning. In hindsight, was there more the governor and mayor could have done? Sure, but nothing remotly approaching George "no one could have predicted the levees would breah even though I was personally warned about it before Katrina struck" Bush.
We have a choice of two parties who are essentially the same.
Sorry, but Nader was an idiot to say that seven years ago. And that was before My Pet Goat, Katrina, Iraq, Dubai Ports, Valerie Wilson, Abramoff, NSA wiretapping and waterboarding. After all that, to say both parties are the same makes one far, far, far, far worse than an idiot.
Investigating a suspicious package is good police work. Freaking the fuck out and shutting the city down when it turns out that each. and. every. device. is. harmless. is not.
Everyone takes what that gas-bag Gore says as fact
Maybe because he's talking about facts, making him not a gasbag.
yet his hockey-stick graph has been disproved as any sort of concrete evidence
No, it hasn't.
What's wrong with saying, "Let's not freak out and make things worse."??
How is reducing energy consumption going to make global warming worse?
where did all the concern go for Global Cooling?? It wasn't that long ago that we were concerned that the world was cooling at an alarming rate.
No, we weren't. There is a big difference between special interests talking about how climatoligists were alarmed about global cooling and climatologists actually being alarmed about global cooling.
What gets my goat is that all the Republicans were just acting like lemmings and allowing Cheney/Bush to do whatever the wanted. Only now that he's a lame duck and the public FINALLY figured out Iraq is a screw-up, are some Republicans making statements against their( Cheney/Bush ) policies.
There are still plenty of them around, unfortunatly. It's sad to know you live in a country where 30% of the population are frikkin idiots.
I believe that we need 100-200 years of solid climate date before we use any of it for policy making.
Then we are 649,800 years overdue for new policy, which of course you'd know about if you watched the movie. Ice core samples from Antartica do go back that far, and show an obvious relation between the CO2 content of the atmoshere and temperature levels.
All you Democrats who complain about the administration's wiretapping, warrantless searches, and other invasions of our privacy, what do you think of this?
I think its great. I also think all wingnuts who still fight any attempt to reduce energy consumption or global warming should move to a nice, low lying island in northeastern Canada, so we can watch and see if you drown from rising seas before the starving polar bears eat you.
I find it disturbing how quick many people resort to coercion to accomplish their goals.
I find self-centered people disturbing. There are three strong reasons to push for greater energy efficiency through regulation: reduce dependance on foreign oil, reduce strains on the power grid (remember the blackouts California had a few years ago) and global warming. Regulations like this aren't passed for shits and giggles, but because waiting for the marketplace to decide on it's own simply isn't good enough.
Bush owns the mess in Iraq, regaurdless of it's eventual outcome. Yeah some Democrats voted for the authorization to use force (and were lied to), the decision to invade, the demande to invade, and the piss poor planning all came from the Administration, not Congress, and certainally not the minority party. Leaving this mess for future presidents is the height of irresponsibility. But that's exactly what Bush is doing right now by saying any troop reductions will have to be done by future presidents. Any Democrat would be happy to be president right now, and take the bullshit attack from Fox News about "surrendering the war" in order to save thousands more American lives. Go peddle your 30% bullshit on Powerline or at the Free Republic.
Remember the 6 year long witch hunt the GOP Congress launched on the Clintons when Bill was in office, so she might take government snooping in private lives very seriously. There are reasons to dislike Hillary, like her being a lightweight fence sitter, there's also a lot of unfounded wingnut crap going around.
Yawn. Whitewater was the most overinvestigated molehill...as opposed to say, Harken Energy. It was nothing but a witch hunt.
If you favor either, you're in good company with Hillary Clinton, Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler on the subjects of privacy and property.
Hmm mmm. Did you get a tenth as flustered over Bush launching the NSA wiretapping in the first place, throwing American citizens in jail without charges or lawyers, torture, etc etc?
If they only keep evidence found on the target (providing of course that they have a warrant of course) it might not be so bad. But somehow I doubt that will be the case though...say you and your neighbor both use municipal wireless, and your neighbor is into kiddie porn. The FBI collects all the traffic from your access point, and busts your neighbor for the kiddie porn - but also nails you for copyright infringment for downloading music or movies.
A lot of people didn't get a PS2 until the slim version came out.
Yup, I happen to be one of those people. But it's not really relevant since Sony was already dominating the console market at that point.
You can't judge a console's sucess by the people that buy it in the first year
Sure we can, combined with the abilities and pricing of the consoles.
I hate to break it to you -- consoles are consumer electronics, not fad clothing.
Yeah, consoles are consumer electronics, not fad clothing, and marketshare matters. It matters a lot. If you're a game developer, are you going to go after a customer base of 2 million or 15 million?
I think it's clear the PS3 will be the top of the heap again this generation just due to the games lined up, and blu-ray and the most affordable online store are just nice add-ons.
Um, no. The PS3 is going to be a very distant third. The Wii is cheap and fun, and the 360 is almost as powerful as the PS3 while costing a lot less money plus it has the best online support of the three.
Are you going to tell me when Lair, VF5, Heavenly Sword, etc comes out in Feb./Mar. you won't see PS3s flying off the shelves?
So? Nintendo is going to keep selling Wii's by the bushel and will...drumroll...also keep releasing new games as well.
What about when the Final Fantasy and Metal Gear titles ship?
I'll yawn. But seriously, yes these popular titles will help, but they wont put Sony on top by a long shot. Two popular exclusive series do not a winning console make. And Sony will not hold on to those exclusive titles unless they either buy out the developers or pay them a hefty fee to stay on the PS3, rather than making a cross platform title or just going with Microsoft or Nintendo. A la Rock Star and GTA 4. And since Sony has to make money on the games as they are losing big on the hardware, they would just lose even more money.
If you disagree with me then bookmark this, and come back and read it after these things happen. I think you'll be surprised at your opinion beforehand.
Why don't we just save the time and you can buy me a beer now.:) Sony might make a success of the PS3 marketshare wise, but only by taking billions more in losses, and might even have to sit the next round out.
Don't forget the socialist healthcare, welfare middle class, and 50% income tax.
Yeah, it would be nice if we had those things too, instead of only caring about much money the top 1% can rake in. If the minimum wage had increased at the same rate as CEO pay over the last couple of decades, it would be fifty bucks an hour.
You mean there is such a thing as a good American beer???? You must be kidding me;) sex in a canoe all the way!
Heh, you better watch out for small town bars....a couple years ago I went canoeing for a week in Minnesota, and on the way out we stopped for a drink. Coors Light, Bud Light, Old Milwaukee Light...their idea of a "dark, heavy beer" was Budweiser. Frikkin close to water, indeed. My opinion of this town was quite low, until we passed the liquor store, which had better beer and was about twice the size of the town's church.:)
The crux of the argument is that a lot of states were forbidden by their state constitution from approving any federal amendment that would increase the power of the federal government, so those "yea" votes should not have counted.
But in turn I doubt the constitutionality of any law forcing anyone to vote one way or another.
Everything you mentioned -- HUD, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc. -- is, in fact, unconstitutional! The Hell it doesn't! Read it and weep:
Speak for yourself buddy:
We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Consider the massive federal deficit, caused by decades of overspending because that's what the voters want, sustainable or no.
Decades of massive over tax cutting for the wealthy hasn't helped either.
Further, I think that technology now makes it much easier for citizens to keep tabs on their representatives at all levels, which to me suggests that power should be pushed down the chain as far as possible, where the constituencies are small enough that a few angry people can make a difference.
I think the real problem is the lack of civic duty in the vast majority of the population, and the fact that we have a very lazy media. Just making poltics more local wont make much of a difference, imo.
Social Security, as a program, is almost indefensibly unconstitutional
Not in the slightest. The Constitution was explicitly amended to allow the taxation of income, and already said in the Preamble:
We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Slashdot Mirror
Or are you thinking more about the days in advance of that hurricane that the mayor of that town and the governor of that state wasted in not actually evacuating the city's residents (you know, the ones not complying with the evacuation order) with their sitting-idle fleet of buses?
That's the right wing bullshit, anyway. Here's the facts. And Blanco had 500 buses ready to go, but FEMA rejected their use because they lacked air conditioning. In hindsight, was there more the governor and mayor could have done? Sure, but nothing remotly approaching George "no one could have predicted the levees would breah even though I was personally warned about it before Katrina struck" Bush.
Yeah, if I'd known about this I would have borrowed my dad's truck and made a fortune selling them on eBay.....
We have a choice of two parties who are essentially the same.
Sorry, but Nader was an idiot to say that seven years ago. And that was before My Pet Goat, Katrina, Iraq, Dubai Ports, Valerie Wilson, Abramoff, NSA wiretapping and waterboarding. After all that, to say both parties are the same makes one far, far, far, far worse than an idiot.
Investigating a suspicious package is good police work. Freaking the fuck out and shutting the city down when it turns out that each. and. every. device. is. harmless. is not.
Both sides play this game.
No, they don't.
Everyone takes what that gas-bag Gore says as fact
Maybe because he's talking about facts, making him not a gasbag.
yet his hockey-stick graph has been disproved as any sort of concrete evidence
No, it hasn't.
What's wrong with saying, "Let's not freak out and make things worse."??
How is reducing energy consumption going to make global warming worse?
where did all the concern go for Global Cooling?? It wasn't that long ago that we were concerned that the world was cooling at an alarming rate.
No, we weren't. There is a big difference between special interests talking about how climatoligists were alarmed about global cooling and climatologists actually being alarmed about global cooling.
What gets my goat is that all the Republicans were just acting like lemmings and allowing Cheney/Bush to do whatever the wanted. Only now that he's a lame duck and the public FINALLY figured out Iraq is a screw-up, are some Republicans making statements against their( Cheney/Bush ) policies.
There are still plenty of them around, unfortunatly. It's sad to know you live in a country where 30% of the population are frikkin idiots.
I hope the company in question does not advertize unlimited connections and has their policies posted up front.
I believe that we need 100-200 years of solid climate date before we use any of it for policy making.
Then we are 649,800 years overdue for new policy, which of course you'd know about if you watched the movie. Ice core samples from Antartica do go back that far, and show an obvious relation between the CO2 content of the atmoshere and temperature levels.
All you Democrats who complain about the administration's wiretapping, warrantless searches, and other invasions of our privacy, what do you think of this?
I think its great. I also think all wingnuts who still fight any attempt to reduce energy consumption or global warming should move to a nice, low lying island in northeastern Canada, so we can watch and see if you drown from rising seas before the starving polar bears eat you.
I find it disturbing how quick many people resort to coercion to accomplish their goals.
I find self-centered people disturbing. There are three strong reasons to push for greater energy efficiency through regulation: reduce dependance on foreign oil, reduce strains on the power grid (remember the blackouts California had a few years ago) and global warming. Regulations like this aren't passed for shits and giggles, but because waiting for the marketplace to decide on it's own simply isn't good enough.
Bush owns the mess in Iraq, regaurdless of it's eventual outcome. Yeah some Democrats voted for the authorization to use force (and were lied to), the decision to invade, the demande to invade, and the piss poor planning all came from the Administration, not Congress, and certainally not the minority party. Leaving this mess for future presidents is the height of irresponsibility. But that's exactly what Bush is doing right now by saying any troop reductions will have to be done by future presidents. Any Democrat would be happy to be president right now, and take the bullshit attack from Fox News about "surrendering the war" in order to save thousands more American lives. Go peddle your 30% bullshit on Powerline or at the Free Republic.
Remember the 6 year long witch hunt the GOP Congress launched on the Clintons when Bill was in office, so she might take government snooping in private lives very seriously. There are reasons to dislike Hillary, like her being a lightweight fence sitter, there's also a lot of unfounded wingnut crap going around.
In the Whitewater investigations under oath
Yawn. Whitewater was the most overinvestigated molehill...as opposed to say, Harken Energy. It was nothing but a witch hunt.
If you favor either, you're in good company with Hillary Clinton, Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler on the subjects of privacy and property.
Hmm mmm. Did you get a tenth as flustered over Bush launching the NSA wiretapping in the first place, throwing American citizens in jail without charges or lawyers, torture, etc etc?
Which is immediately thrown out of court because the warrant was for your neighbor's traffic not your traffic.
You would think so, but Supreme Court has been rubber stamping horrible law enforcement tactics for decades.
Why are you in favor of law enforcement breaking the law (searching you w/o a warrant) in order to enforce a different law (copyrights)?
If they only keep evidence found on the target (providing of course that they have a warrant of course) it might not be so bad. But somehow I doubt that will be the case though...say you and your neighbor both use municipal wireless, and your neighbor is into kiddie porn. The FBI collects all the traffic from your access point, and busts your neighbor for the kiddie porn - but also nails you for copyright infringment for downloading music or movies.
IBM decided Apple wasn't worth the pain.
If keeping promises causes them pain then maybe IBM shouldn't have promised Apple that fast 970's would be coming.
With a self phone, who can blame them honestly.
I can. Deposit shouldn't be any more than what they'd charge you for a couple months service & the termination fee.
A lot of people didn't get a PS2 until the slim version came out.
:) Sony might make a success of the PS3 marketshare wise, but only by taking billions more in losses, and might even have to sit the next round out.
Yup, I happen to be one of those people. But it's not really relevant since Sony was already dominating the console market at that point.
You can't judge a console's sucess by the people that buy it in the first year
Sure we can, combined with the abilities and pricing of the consoles.
I hate to break it to you -- consoles are consumer electronics, not fad clothing.
Yeah, consoles are consumer electronics, not fad clothing, and marketshare matters. It matters a lot. If you're a game developer, are you going to go after a customer base of 2 million or 15 million?
I think it's clear the PS3 will be the top of the heap again this generation just due to the games lined up, and blu-ray and the most affordable online store are just nice add-ons.
Um, no. The PS3 is going to be a very distant third. The Wii is cheap and fun, and the 360 is almost as powerful as the PS3 while costing a lot less money plus it has the best online support of the three.
Are you going to tell me when Lair, VF5, Heavenly Sword, etc comes out in Feb./Mar. you won't see PS3s flying off the shelves?
So? Nintendo is going to keep selling Wii's by the bushel and will...drumroll...also keep releasing new games as well.
What about when the Final Fantasy and Metal Gear titles ship?
I'll yawn. But seriously, yes these popular titles will help, but they wont put Sony on top by a long shot. Two popular exclusive series do not a winning console make. And Sony will not hold on to those exclusive titles unless they either buy out the developers or pay them a hefty fee to stay on the PS3, rather than making a cross platform title or just going with Microsoft or Nintendo. A la Rock Star and GTA 4. And since Sony has to make money on the games as they are losing big on the hardware, they would just lose even more money.
If you disagree with me then bookmark this, and come back and read it after these things happen. I think you'll be surprised at your opinion beforehand.
Why don't we just save the time and you can buy me a beer now.
Don't forget the socialist healthcare, welfare middle class, and 50% income tax.
Yeah, it would be nice if we had those things too, instead of only caring about much money the top 1% can rake in. If the minimum wage had increased at the same rate as CEO pay over the last couple of decades, it would be fifty bucks an hour.
You mean there is such a thing as a good American beer???? You must be kidding me ;) sex in a canoe all the way!
:)
Heh, you better watch out for small town bars....a couple years ago I went canoeing for a week in Minnesota, and on the way out we stopped for a drink. Coors Light, Bud Light, Old Milwaukee Light...their idea of a "dark, heavy beer" was Budweiser. Frikkin close to water, indeed. My opinion of this town was quite low, until we passed the liquor store, which had better beer and was about twice the size of the town's church.
The crux of the argument is that a lot of states were forbidden by their state constitution from approving any federal amendment that would increase the power of the federal government, so those "yea" votes should not have counted.
But in turn I doubt the constitutionality of any law forcing anyone to vote one way or another.
The Hell it doesn't! Read it and weep:
Speak for yourself buddy:
Consider the massive federal deficit, caused by decades of overspending because that's what the voters want, sustainable or no.
Decades of massive over tax cutting for the wealthy hasn't helped either.
Further, I think that technology now makes it much easier for citizens to keep tabs on their representatives at all levels, which to me suggests that power should be pushed down the chain as far as possible, where the constituencies are small enough that a few angry people can make a difference.
I think the real problem is the lack of civic duty in the vast majority of the population, and the fact that we have a very lazy media. Just making poltics more local wont make much of a difference, imo.
Not in the slightest. The Constitution was explicitly amended to allow the taxation of income, and already said in the Preamble: