It's not just women. I have an office mate who hates his ex-wife, and he openly encourages men to file false claims against their wives during divorce just to make their lives hell.
Sure, sure. But who's more likely to be belived? No judge wants to end up in the news as having blown off a woman's claims of abuse and she ends up getting severely hurt or killed. Just look at the judge who denied a renewed restraining order for a woman who was then set on fire by her ex. Wheras the political cost of blowing off a man's claims of abuse is practically nil, if he's even believed in the first place, especially with popular feminist urgan legends such as 1 in 4 women will be raped, men committ 95% of all domestic violence, etc.
To be honest, the whole argument seems quite ridiculous to me.
Making a big issue out of a supposed non-issue is pretty crazy, too, which is what a lot of people seem to be doing. As we found out how small Pluto was, how many other Pluto sized objects are out there, and with the discovery of other planets in other solar systems, the discussion was bound to pop up sometime. Might as well be now.
Actually it doesn't matter. Pluto is still a planet.
Still not a planet, you mean. If astronomers had known its true size when it was discovered, it never would have been called a planet in the first place.
You would be correct in an idealized world with an equal playing field. But the fact is that it is called the old "boys" network for a reason.
Yes, because the "old boys" were ambitious workaholics who proved themselves, and the women...weren't. The "glass ceiling", much like the "wage gap" and "1 in 4 women will be raped" is a feminist urban legend with no basis in reality. If women want to be VPs and CEOs, they need to bust their butts and prove themselves. Take Anne Mulcahy, CEO of Xerox - did not take a weekend off for two years.
Yes, I wish the words "direct" and "directly" had been used in the Constitution in a couple of places. i.e. "Congress may legislate matters that directly affect interstate commerce" and eminent domain being used for "direct public use".
So none of these horseshit contortions gvts go through to claim that a pot farm in someone's basement impacts interstate commerce, or using eminent domain to clear residential land to make room for a mall so they can get the sales tax.
Smack the next politician who claims it's his or her job to defend the people. Bullshit. It's his or her job to defend the Constitution, that's the oath they took.
Nonsense. It is in the Constitution: "promote the general welfare" right in the Preamble.
Don't think our politicians should make a living off of being politicians. If they weren't so inclined to stay in office and keep their job, then maybe they would do some real work, solve some real issues, and listen to real people, instead of just their financial backers.
Wishful thinking. If a politician knows he can't stay in office, he'll start looking for his next job. And what's going to get him a better job: serving the voters who elected him, or cozying up to big money special interests?
Almost 60 years later some foolish Populists went and passed the 16th amendment around WWI.
Not when you consider the fact that the income tax is the fairest tax of all.
Then they removed States representation with the 17th,
Of course this makes the politicians in Congress more responsible to the voters, not less.
and tried to outlaw alcohol with the 18th.
That WAS stupid. And everyone now seems to realize that Prohibition was stupid. Unfortunatly, not many people seem to realize that our current drug policy IS Prohibition.
It seems to me that Kerry's position was so vague that it would be hard to vote for him in good confidence.
That was the GOP spin, anyway. Of course, GOP spin and reality seldom have anything to do with eachother. Even his "I actually voted for the war before I voted against it" is crystal clear when the media wasn't too lazy to explain the context. Kerry lost because of massive voter disenfranchisement, but also because he had incompetent campaign managers.
And on top of that, Kerry was scary looking, not monkey-ish.
I cross the Canada/U.S. border all the time. I've never been "power tripped" on my Canadian customs. U.S. customs is another story all together.
Try being a U.S. citizen and making the mistake of saying "eh?" back to the girl working in booth when she says "so you're going fishing, eh?" I'm probably on their watch list for life now. At least I didn't say "no doot aboot it", or else I'm sure I would have been in for a cavity search.
Really? How? You either stake the "high" moral ground or you don't. The timeline is irrelevant. Well, if they were true to the cause then they should probably NEVER use it. There was human subject testing done about 60 years ago under the Nazi regime. Ethicists are still arguing over whether any of that "research" should ever be used.
Then you better find a nice home in Antartica, and give your current residence back to whatever Indian tribe was forced out of it. Unless of course, you are in favor of murder, broken treaties, and civil rights violations.
How many animal rights people are pro choice and willing to do violence to humans.
Okay, how many? Because what always strikes me is how it would be completely irrational to, say castigate Republicans for killing abortion doctors when that is obviously the actions of a deranged few, and yet anti-PETA people see no problem as equating all members of that organization as being moltov coctail throwing facists.
As was pointed out on Penn and Teller's Bullshit! the CEO, director, whatever you want to call this person of PETA is diabetic. So she needs insulin to live. Well insulin was tested on animals, and certain strains are made by animals.
Yes, it was tested on animals, but looking at the wiki page on insulin, it looks like the bulk of the R&D happened 20-30 years ago, or more. There's just a little difference between benefiting from animal based research going on today, and stuff that happened decades ago. Especially when your life depends on it. Just how long would this person have to wait to be able to use insulin? 20 years? 50? 200?
So the moral of this story is that, fine have ideals, have crazy ideals no normal person would find moral, but don't be a hypocrit...makes you look like an asshole.
Of course, the anti-PETA people are just as irrational and as crazy as they accuse PETA of being, which is hypocracy too.
It's also my impression they've talked about committing genocide on the Jews for some time as well.
Nope. First, they don't want to do anything of the kind, and second, you are assuming that Israeli==Jew, which is not the case. Yes, they justifiably want Isreal to cease to exist as a country, but they don't want to slaughter all non-arabs living there.
Israel "is an illegitimate regime, there is no legal basis for its existence," he said
He's right. The old Ottoman empire was carved up into arbitrary countries, but Isreal the only one created for people who hadn't lived there for hundreds of years, and it was done with no thought to the people already living there. Until Isreal goes back to the 1967 borders, they will not come close to having, nor deserve, security.
If you are a European please start taking Islamic terror seriously.
And if people really wanted to reduce Islamic terrorism, then they'd have to first do something about Isreali terrorism and their occupation of Palistinian lands. Isreal slaughtered far more innocents in their bombing of Lebanon than Islmaic terrorists have in Europe.
No matter how you feel about them, the Bush administration has never publicly stated that they wanted to annihilate a nation.
Neither has Iran. Yes, they would like Isreal to cease to exist as a country, but they don't want to kill every one there. Besides, they would need dozens of weapons to do that, and there's always Isreal's retaliation.
And they are not holding the world at a nuclear gunpoint.
No, they just like to invade countries with hated leaders for bogus reasons. They should have delcared war on Canada instead, as our neighboor to the north had as much to do with Al Queda as Iraq did, and they're a lot closer.
Why do some people think it is ok to make fun of overweight people?
Crude but funny.
A similar joke based on the fact that the woman was black or Chinese is socially unacceptable
Depends on the joke. And it should be noted that people who get up in arms about these jokes don't care if they are aimed at men, especially white men. Take for example, the example of Ann Richards, the former governor of Texas, making a crack that "I know you all are worried about the economy in California but I want to assure you that it's a problem all over the country. In fact in Texas the price of gas has gone up so high that women who want to run over their husbands are car-pooling," a reference to Clara Harris who murdered her husband by running over him with a car multiple times. With his daughter in the passenger seat. Now imagine the reaction if a politician made a similar crack about Laci Peterson - they'd be lynched.
This is the same type of intellectual masturbation that goes on among art snobs.
Oh, do shut up. As this poster already pointed out, they thought Pluto was a lot larger when it was discovered. If discovered today it wouldn't be called a planet, and it probably wouldn't have been back then either, if they'd had more accurate data. Insisting on continuing to call Pluto out of nostaliga is what is snobby.
However, cool with the younger set is a fleeting thing... check back in 3 years and see what things look like. And don't be surprised if it's a much closer race.
The problem with comparing mp3's to consoles is that each new game system is a whole new ball of wax, radically different in both software and hardware. That's not the case for mp3 players. You obviously wont be able to play Wii games on a Gamecube or N64, but you can download a song from the iTMS today and play it on the first iPod ever made. And if you can replace the battery and hard drive, you can probably download songs five or ten years from now and it will still work.
Consoles also take several years to develop and recoup development costs. Apple has released 7 generations of iPods in the time two console generations have hit the market. So even if Apple screws up on a new model, or some other manufacturer comes out with a killer new feature, it wont take them as long to recover.
The only thing I see capable of dethrowning the iPod is a cellphone that also makes an excellent mp3 player.
The incentive to tell the truth in the first place is being able to look at yourself in the mirror.
If you're an absolute moralist with a stick up your ass, you gotta do what you gotta do. Given the probable proportion of disposable income these guys spent on Apple products, they'd have no more reason to feel guilty over downloading copies of unreleased software than I would for downloading a serial for Quicktime Pro, when over the last four years I've bought 4 Macs and 7 iPods.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not just women. I have an office mate who hates his ex-wife, and he openly encourages men to file false claims against their wives during divorce just to make their lives hell.
Sure, sure. But who's more likely to be belived? No judge wants to end up in the news as having blown off a woman's claims of abuse and she ends up getting severely hurt or killed. Just look at the judge who denied a renewed restraining order for a woman who was then set on fire by her ex. Wheras the political cost of blowing off a man's claims of abuse is practically nil, if he's even believed in the first place, especially with popular feminist urgan legends such as 1 in 4 women will be raped, men committ 95% of all domestic violence, etc.
Please, show me a liberal or a feminist (or both! or a conservative, for fairness) that feels that accused sex offenders don't deserve due process.
Three words: rape shield laws. Any more questions?
To be honest, the whole argument seems quite ridiculous to me.
Making a big issue out of a supposed non-issue is pretty crazy, too, which is what a lot of people seem to be doing. As we found out how small Pluto was, how many other Pluto sized objects are out there, and with the discovery of other planets in other solar systems, the discussion was bound to pop up sometime. Might as well be now.
Actually it doesn't matter. Pluto is still a planet.
Still not a planet, you mean. If astronomers had known its true size when it was discovered, it never would have been called a planet in the first place.
You would be correct in an idealized world with an equal playing field. But the fact is that it is called the old "boys" network for a reason.
Yes, because the "old boys" were ambitious workaholics who proved themselves, and the women...weren't. The "glass ceiling", much like the "wage gap" and "1 in 4 women will be raped" is a feminist urban legend with no basis in reality. If women want to be VPs and CEOs, they need to bust their butts and prove themselves. Take Anne Mulcahy, CEO of Xerox - did not take a weekend off for two years.
Yes, I wish the words "direct" and "directly" had been used in the Constitution in a couple of places. i.e. "Congress may legislate matters that directly affect interstate commerce" and eminent domain being used for "direct public use".
So none of these horseshit contortions gvts go through to claim that a pot farm in someone's basement impacts interstate commerce, or using eminent domain to clear residential land to make room for a mall so they can get the sales tax.
Smack the next politician who claims it's his or her job to defend the people. Bullshit. It's his or her job to defend the Constitution, that's the oath they took.
Nonsense. It is in the Constitution: "promote the general welfare" right in the Preamble.
Don't think our politicians should make a living off of being politicians. If they weren't so inclined to stay in office and keep their job, then maybe they would do some real work, solve some real issues, and listen to real people, instead of just their financial backers.
Wishful thinking. If a politician knows he can't stay in office, he'll start looking for his next job. And what's going to get him a better job: serving the voters who elected him, or cozying up to big money special interests?
Almost 60 years later some foolish Populists went and passed the 16th amendment around WWI.
Not when you consider the fact that the income tax is the fairest tax of all.
Then they removed States representation with the 17th,
Of course this makes the politicians in Congress more responsible to the voters, not less.
and tried to outlaw alcohol with the 18th.
That WAS stupid. And everyone now seems to realize that Prohibition was stupid. Unfortunatly, not many people seem to realize that our current drug policy IS Prohibition.
It seems to me that Kerry's position was so vague that it would be hard to vote for him in good confidence.
That was the GOP spin, anyway. Of course, GOP spin and reality seldom have anything to do with eachother. Even his "I actually voted for the war before I voted against it" is crystal clear when the media wasn't too lazy to explain the context. Kerry lost because of massive voter disenfranchisement, but also because he had incompetent campaign managers.
And on top of that, Kerry was scary looking, not monkey-ish.
Funny you should say that.
I cross the Canada/U.S. border all the time. I've never been "power tripped" on my Canadian customs. U.S. customs is another story all together.
Try being a U.S. citizen and making the mistake of saying "eh?" back to the girl working in booth when she says "so you're going fishing, eh?" I'm probably on their watch list for life now. At least I didn't say "no doot aboot it", or else I'm sure I would have been in for a cavity search.
Really? How? You either stake the "high" moral ground or you don't. The timeline is irrelevant. Well, if they were true to the cause then they should probably NEVER use it. There was human subject testing done about 60 years ago under the Nazi regime. Ethicists are still arguing over whether any of that "research" should ever be used.
Then you better find a nice home in Antartica, and give your current residence back to whatever Indian tribe was forced out of it. Unless of course, you are in favor of murder, broken treaties, and civil rights violations.
How many animal rights people are pro choice and willing to do violence to humans.
Okay, how many? Because what always strikes me is how it would be completely irrational to, say castigate Republicans for killing abortion doctors when that is obviously the actions of a deranged few, and yet anti-PETA people see no problem as equating all members of that organization as being moltov coctail throwing facists.
As was pointed out on Penn and Teller's Bullshit! the CEO, director, whatever you want to call this person of PETA is diabetic. So she needs insulin to live. Well insulin was tested on animals, and certain strains are made by animals.
Yes, it was tested on animals, but looking at the wiki page on insulin, it looks like the bulk of the R&D happened 20-30 years ago, or more. There's just a little difference between benefiting from animal based research going on today, and stuff that happened decades ago. Especially when your life depends on it. Just how long would this person have to wait to be able to use insulin? 20 years? 50? 200?
So the moral of this story is that, fine have ideals, have crazy ideals no normal person would find moral, but don't be a hypocrit...makes you look like an asshole.
Of course, the anti-PETA people are just as irrational and as crazy as they accuse PETA of being, which is hypocracy too.
It's also my impression they've talked about committing genocide on the Jews for some time as well.
Nope. First, they don't want to do anything of the kind, and second, you are assuming that Israeli==Jew, which is not the case. Yes, they justifiably want Isreal to cease to exist as a country, but they don't want to slaughter all non-arabs living there.
Israel "is an illegitimate regime, there is no legal basis for its existence," he said
He's right. The old Ottoman empire was carved up into arbitrary countries, but Isreal the only one created for people who hadn't lived there for hundreds of years, and it was done with no thought to the people already living there. Until Isreal goes back to the 1967 borders, they will not come close to having, nor deserve, security.
What exactly is wrong with allowing the UN to inspect Iran's nuclear program?
Nothing, so long as they are equally forceful about inspecting & disarming N. Korea, India, Pakistan and especially Isreal.
If you are a European please start taking Islamic terror seriously.
And if people really wanted to reduce Islamic terrorism, then they'd have to first do something about Isreali terrorism and their occupation of Palistinian lands. Isreal slaughtered far more innocents in their bombing of Lebanon than Islmaic terrorists have in Europe.
No matter how you feel about them, the Bush administration has never publicly stated that they wanted to annihilate a nation.
Neither has Iran. Yes, they would like Isreal to cease to exist as a country, but they don't want to kill every one there. Besides, they would need dozens of weapons to do that, and there's always Isreal's retaliation.
And they are not holding the world at a nuclear gunpoint.
No, they just like to invade countries with hated leaders for bogus reasons. They should have delcared war on Canada instead, as our neighboor to the north had as much to do with Al Queda as Iraq did, and they're a lot closer.
Why do some people think it is ok to make fun of overweight people?
Crude but funny.
A similar joke based on the fact that the woman was black or Chinese is socially unacceptable
Depends on the joke. And it should be noted that people who get up in arms about these jokes don't care if they are aimed at men, especially white men. Take for example, the example of Ann Richards, the former governor of Texas, making a crack that "I know you all are worried about the economy in California but I want to assure you that it's a problem all over the country. In fact in Texas the price of gas has gone up so high that women who want to run over their husbands are car-pooling," a reference to Clara Harris who murdered her husband by running over him with a car multiple times. With his daughter in the passenger seat. Now imagine the reaction if a politician made a similar crack about Laci Peterson - they'd be lynched.
This is the same type of intellectual masturbation that goes on among art snobs.
Oh, do shut up. As this poster already pointed out, they thought Pluto was a lot larger when it was discovered. If discovered today it wouldn't be called a planet, and it probably wouldn't have been back then either, if they'd had more accurate data. Insisting on continuing to call Pluto out of nostaliga is what is snobby.
However, cool with the younger set is a fleeting thing ... check back in 3 years and see what things look like. And don't be surprised if it's a much closer race.
The problem with comparing mp3's to consoles is that each new game system is a whole new ball of wax, radically different in both software and hardware. That's not the case for mp3 players. You obviously wont be able to play Wii games on a Gamecube or N64, but you can download a song from the iTMS today and play it on the first iPod ever made. And if you can replace the battery and hard drive, you can probably download songs five or ten years from now and it will still work.
Consoles also take several years to develop and recoup development costs. Apple has released 7 generations of iPods in the time two console generations have hit the market. So even if Apple screws up on a new model, or some other manufacturer comes out with a killer new feature, it wont take them as long to recover.
The only thing I see capable of dethrowning the iPod is a cellphone that also makes an excellent mp3 player.
Sort of like this guy?
The incentive to tell the truth in the first place is being able to look at yourself in the mirror.
If you're an absolute moralist with a stick up your ass, you gotta do what you gotta do. Given the probable proportion of disposable income these guys spent on Apple products, they'd have no more reason to feel guilty over downloading copies of unreleased software than I would for downloading a serial for Quicktime Pro, when over the last four years I've bought 4 Macs and 7 iPods.
Industrial espionage is expensive too. Creating a culture that accepts theft of company property is expensive.
Considering said employees did neither, wtf are you talking about?