Here's a link to a story on a wee little blog, with a link to another blog, that details the plight of a fellow who was doing Teach for America and, more or less, canned because of the content of his blog. It's very interesting that something so small can turn around and byte your bum.
The idea that a third party candidate can "hurt" a mainstream candidate goes something like this: In the case of this election we have Gore, a somewhat liberal candidate from a mainstream ($$) party and Nader, a really liberal candidate from the Greens. (There are other "third" party candidates as well but Nader is enough to serve for this example.) Suppose that all of the voters who vote for Nader would vote for Gore if Nader didn't exist. What people fear is that enough people will vote for Nader in the right (or wrong) states and, even if Bush doesn't win the popular vote, he gets enough electoral votes and becomes president. People would say that "Nader split the vote." Basically it means that votes for him are votes that would have otherwise gone to Gore. This sort of situation has happened before in the US. For instance, two presidential elections ago Clinton didn't even win the popular vote but because Ross Perot got so many of the Conservative votes Clinton won because of the nature of the electoral college. Hope that made sense.
As a good citizen, one shouldn't do that? As a good citizen I would not stand idely by and allow myself and my friends be watched in such an intrusive, unconstitutional manner. Civil disobediance can make a powerful statement.
Hey Simon, wake up. We are living in what is known as a War-Time economy. Meaning that nearly the largest driving force behind our economy is military industry. We need to keep this machine fueled because the corporations that produce arms make A LOT of money. We spend too much time worrying about future war and ignoring future peace. Defending our lifestyle is hogwash.
Although I've never had a personal problem with spam, it's no good. We know this. What we don't need is a law against it. People shouldn't abuse the most powerful communication tool availible today. Simple as that.
the first step towards effective anarchy is responsible citizenship.
Slashdot Mirror
Has anyone seen a modem recently?
Here's a link to a story on a wee little blog, with a link to another blog, that details the plight of a fellow who was doing Teach for America and, more or less, canned because of the content of his blog. It's very interesting that something so small can turn around and byte your bum.
The idea that a third party candidate can "hurt" a mainstream candidate goes something like this: In the case of this election we have Gore, a somewhat liberal candidate from a mainstream ($$) party and Nader, a really liberal candidate from the Greens. (There are other "third" party candidates as well but Nader is enough to serve for this example.) Suppose that all of the voters who vote for Nader would vote for Gore if Nader didn't exist. What people fear is that enough people will vote for Nader in the right (or wrong) states and, even if Bush doesn't win the popular vote, he gets enough electoral votes and becomes president. People would say that "Nader split the vote." Basically it means that votes for him are votes that would have otherwise gone to Gore. This sort of situation has happened before in the US. For instance, two presidential elections ago Clinton didn't even win the popular vote but because Ross Perot got so many of the Conservative votes Clinton won because of the nature of the electoral college. Hope that made sense.
As a good citizen, one shouldn't do that? As a good citizen I would not stand idely by and allow myself and my friends be watched in such an intrusive, unconstitutional manner. Civil disobediance can make a powerful statement.
Hey Simon, wake up. We are living in what is known as a War-Time economy. Meaning that nearly the largest driving force behind our economy is military industry. We need to keep this machine fueled because the corporations that produce arms make A LOT of money. We spend too much time worrying about future war and ignoring future peace. Defending our lifestyle is hogwash.
Although I've never had a personal problem with spam, it's no good. We know this. What we don't need is a law against it. People shouldn't abuse the most powerful communication tool availible today. Simple as that.
the first step towards effective anarchy is responsible citizenship.
if you show up at the post office to mail something, they won't take it unless it has a return address. i've tried ;).