I haven't decided what I think of gun registration, but I do know that Congress is highly unlike to pass such legislation, so Gore is indeed a safe choice for gun owners.
By the way, I think Gore wants the states to do the registration (like for cars), not the federal government--that may be in line with the 2nd amendment. If the federal government wanted to confiscate, a state could fight back.
I imagine Mr. O'Rourke lists a lot of pork-barrel budget items we all agree should be cut. Of course, if all those are eliminated, the government is still essentially the same size, just a tad lighter.
To me, full libertarianism (aka anarchy) must be defeated at all costs.
However, essentially being a capitalist, I still don't have an hysterical reaction to socialism, as socialist concepts are supported by people democratically the world over and the concept has proven to work well in education and health care (i.e., everyone deserves a base level of education and health care guaranteed by a polity we all can work to democratically maneuver).
America requires a healthy mix of capitalism and socialism to work. It's time to end the hysterical equation of socialism to communism and the Soviet Union.
Quiz: Name the parts of government you can live without and why the constituencies who support those parts (because they feel they're needed) won't fight tooth-and-nail (a la democratic maneuvering) to keep those parts in existence.
Reagan was a "crooked criminal" by the same standards you would apply to Gore. Janet Reno has done an honorable job in the face of a virulent opposition. If Dubya gets elected, however, he better watch his back...If you think Clinton got harassed, to quote Reagan: "You ain't seen nothin' yet."
It also continues to be sad that anyone considers Al Gore to be any more crooked than other politicians. George W. Bush himself has lied through his teeth in this campaign, but the media hasn't been as interested, apparently, in calling him on those lies. So, therefore, it is my estimation that those who think Gore is a "special liar" only get their news from limited, highly biased sources or simply don't have a balanced view of matters. As a political moderate not belonging to either major party, I know Al Gore isn't perfect, but at least he's closer to being moderate and has the vast experience required to do a very competent, responsible job for the American people.
Gore did claim to have invented the internet, and I suggest you learn english.
You know, sometimes what someone says and what they meant to say are two different things. This was clearly an unfortunate verbal mistake by Gore. He certainly took the initiative in helping to make the Internet what it is today. That is fact.
It's not my job to defend Gore. But I am voting for him. He's not perfect, but he has the most experience and will competently handle economic and foreign policy matters. I can't really say the same about Bush.
Yes, the pseudo-Libertarians of the Republican Party want the health care industry to be fully run by market forces (i.e., HMOs). Guess what? Markets and HMOs couldn't care less about peoples' health.
That's interesting. A suggestion that Shrub, also a politician, isn't lying, being deceptive, being contradictory, and saying anything to get elected. Given a Shrub victory, let's see if that massive tax cut materializes.
Nader has been ahead of Browne in the polls this whole campaign season. In the current Zogby daily tracking poll, Nader has 4% and Browne doesn't even register (although he had 1% a couple days ago).
First of all, I know the definition of the word "stupid". Shrub is stupid.
Shrub thinks that muggin' and smirkin' and actin' like Andy Griffith will get him into the White House. Shrub thinks that calling facts and figures "fuzzy math" and mangling the English language will ensure him the "common people" vote. Shrub thinks that "being relaxed" in a debate makes him the winner of such, and many stupid media types are going along with that nonsense.
Of course, perhaps the American people are becoming more stupid. A lot of people seem to think that it doesn't matter who occupies the White House, that life will go on just the same. A lot of people like to put down smart people, call them "geeks", "nerds" or "dorks", thinking none of them have common sense or at least any sociability. A lot of people think it's OK to be stupid and not even try to understand any of the world around us.
Obviously, 2/3 of Shrub's support is coming from staunch conservatives who support Republican policies in a knee-jerk fashion. You know, these are the Christian right types who want moral control over your lives and the pseudo-Libertarians who simultaneously want to "give you more personal control by reducing what the government does for you." That's not to mention that if government stopped doing a lot of the things it does, our personal lives would have a lot less freedom of time.
The other 1/3 are voting for Shrub are those who want Andy Griffith in the White House so they don't have to look at the boring, intelligent, responsible Al Gore on their TV screens.
If the American people vote in Shrub, they'll get what they deserve. A stupid President for stupid people.
I sympathize with your comments, and I would like to add my thoughts as to why the culture repeats the meme "those who can't do, teach." I say it myself sometimes because, even though teaching might have been my natural field to go into, teaching is not exactly lucrative compared to other fields. It comes down to pay and prestige, and right now, teaching just doesn't cut it in those areas. Therefore, it seems as though it's the educated people who [for some reason] can't achieve in the private sector who are turning toward teaching as their only resort. Maybe that's not true, but for those of us who longed to be a teacher when we were young, it feels real.
I think we should start treating teaching for the high-level profession it is. We should pay teachers like we pay doctors and give them the respect that other professionals get. It's no wonder teachers feel they need a union, when facing the many problems you and many others are addressing here.
I'd also like to add that here in the SF Bay Area, the teaching population is in great decline due to the high cost of housing (plus the other normal work stresses), and there has been talk of subsidizing housing for teachers! Imagine that. If they were paid something like the programmers (who are largely doing less work) were paid, there would be no problem.
Private schools work because parents who pay extra to educate their children want to make damn sure they're getting their money's worth.
So public school parents don't want to make sure they're getting their tax dollar's worth?
How many times each day do children view advertisements that have an underlying anti-school message...
The problem is that in America we somehow have a culture that fosters a fear of becoming more intelligent than the people around us. Smart people are attacked as "geeks", "nerds", "dweebs", "dorks", etc. because that's the popular thing to do. Nobody wants to be the geek, except those few of us who are bold or who just can't help it.:)
There's a mentality among the young in America that smart people must be picked on and taken down and somehow convinced to stop trying so hard to be smart. And sadly, sometimes a few kids are convinced and give up learning in favor of social ascendence.
I don't agree that Mr. Auerbach was the best choice, but I hope he does well and sincerely hope he comes to his senses about TLD expansion and will help the ICANN board do what's *responsible*. Otherwise, we all will have to learn the hard way [again] that technical expediency does indeed cause problems in other realms of public life.
I would like to patent "fuzzy math," also known as "Washington fuzzy math."
Fuzzy math is an expression of exact facts and figures to back up a public policy position where those who vehemently aim to disagree have no way of comprehending the data and thus, in exasperated speech, decry the facts and figures as worthless (and subsequently throw in ad hominem attacks about "no controlling legal authority" and a buck stopping "here" at the Lincoln bedroom). Essentially, claims of fuzzy math most often come from the moronic.
Is Auerbach a register.com stockholder? The only "positive" effect of an unlimited expansion is a tremendous increase in the revenue coffers of internet registry companies.
I honestly don't concur with Auerbach's position re: whether the "system can definitely handle millions of TLDs." Doesn't he know that "the system" is not just a bunch of interconnected nodes, but also comprise real people (You know, those darn things called human beings who inhibit this technoelitist's direct interface to his machine) who will have to sort this anarchy out? Further, his stand is so optimistic, technically speaking, that it's scary. The best technologists I've ever worked with are skeptics who understand restraint, not optimists who don't care if all hell breaks loose in response to their uncontrolled whim actions. Auerbach's "testing" of "the system" proves nothing.
In the final analysis (I always like saying that), the TLD expansion issue is not a technical one, folks! It's a socioeconomic issue that Auerbach apparently doesn't have the non-technical depth to handle.
If you're going to vote for anyone, I hope you select my choice, Langenberg, but if not, Simons or Lessig will work much much better on this board than Auerbach. Potential technical destruction of our great public commons is at stake in this election. Think about it...should we move cautiously and responsibly, or jump off the cliff?
Pat Buchanan is smart, honest and principled, but I'm also not voting for him.
Anyway, here's the views on gTLD's as expressed by Auerbach and Langenberg:
Auerbach: "...from technical work with which I have been associated it is clear to me that we can readily have at least a million TLDs without any technical problems. Those who claim that new TLD's could induce 'instability' have been unable to articulate any technical facts to support their claims."
Langenberg: "It seems to me that, although expansion is probably necessary and inevitable, there is virtue and value in maintaining as high a degree of simplicity and generality in the system as possible. I suspect that mere technical constraints would allow a system of TLDs so extensive and complex as to be of limited value."
Unlike Auerbach, Langenberg takes the common-sense view that responsibility, comprehensibility and economics (you know, the social concerns) are as important as technical concerns. Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done.
Auerbach wants to remove all economic value from the gTLD name space in the name of grandiose technical achievement. Is technical achievement by way of hyperexpansion and other "whizbang" efforts the end goal of the Internet, or is the Internet supposed to be an organized public commons that works for economic and social good? I'm a techie myself, but I'll be god-damned if I'm going to let a technical wizard blow up our beautiful Internet for thrills.
I'll vote for the "ineffective" candidate Langenberg. I want someone who goes into the ICANN board with an open mind toward all the issues. Also, he comes off as someone who will work with the other board members and promote responsible change.
The other leading contenders in the Slashdot list come off to me as radicals who want to liberalize everything to a point where everything will break down. Auerbach especially seems to want to create a gtld anarchy and also cops an attitude that he may not cooperate so well with the other board members--thus he will be very ineffective.
So it's effective, responsible participation (true leadership) or ineffective, radical non-cooperation. The choice is clear to me.
Slashdot Mirror
I haven't decided what I think of gun registration, but I do know that Congress is highly unlike to pass such legislation, so Gore is indeed a safe choice for gun owners.
By the way, I think Gore wants the states to do the registration (like for cars), not the federal government--that may be in line with the 2nd amendment. If the federal government wanted to confiscate, a state could fight back.
Steve Magruder
Steve Magruder
To me, full libertarianism (aka anarchy) must be defeated at all costs.
However, essentially being a capitalist, I still don't have an hysterical reaction to socialism, as socialist concepts are supported by people democratically the world over and the concept has proven to work well in education and health care (i.e., everyone deserves a base level of education and health care guaranteed by a polity we all can work to democratically maneuver).
America requires a healthy mix of capitalism and socialism to work. It's time to end the hysterical equation of socialism to communism and the Soviet Union.
Steve Magruder
Steve Magruder
Steve Magruder
Steve Magruder
Steve Magruder
Gore did claim to have invented the internet, and I suggest you learn english. You know, sometimes what someone says and what they meant to say are two different things. This was clearly an unfortunate verbal mistake by Gore. He certainly took the initiative in helping to make the Internet what it is today. That is fact.
Steve Magruder
Steve Magruder
Steve Magruder
Steve Magruder
Steve Magruder
Steve Magruder
Steve Magruder
First of all, I know the definition of the word "stupid". Shrub is stupid.
Shrub thinks that muggin' and smirkin' and actin' like Andy Griffith will get him into the White House. Shrub thinks that calling facts and figures "fuzzy math" and mangling the English language will ensure him the "common people" vote. Shrub thinks that "being relaxed" in a debate makes him the winner of such, and many stupid media types are going along with that nonsense.
Of course, perhaps the American people are becoming more stupid. A lot of people seem to think that it doesn't matter who occupies the White House, that life will go on just the same. A lot of people like to put down smart people, call them "geeks", "nerds" or "dorks", thinking none of them have common sense or at least any sociability. A lot of people think it's OK to be stupid and not even try to understand any of the world around us.
Obviously, 2/3 of Shrub's support is coming from staunch conservatives who support Republican policies in a knee-jerk fashion. You know, these are the Christian right types who want moral control over your lives and the pseudo-Libertarians who simultaneously want to "give you more personal control by reducing what the government does for you." That's not to mention that if government stopped doing a lot of the things it does, our personal lives would have a lot less freedom of time.
The other 1/3 are voting for Shrub are those who want Andy Griffith in the White House so they don't have to look at the boring, intelligent, responsible Al Gore on their TV screens.
If the American people vote in Shrub, they'll get what they deserve. A stupid President for stupid people.
Steve Magruder
Steve Magruder
I sympathize with your comments, and I would like to add my thoughts as to why the culture repeats the meme "those who can't do, teach." I say it myself sometimes because, even though teaching might have been my natural field to go into, teaching is not exactly lucrative compared to other fields. It comes down to pay and prestige, and right now, teaching just doesn't cut it in those areas. Therefore, it seems as though it's the educated people who [for some reason] can't achieve in the private sector who are turning toward teaching as their only resort. Maybe that's not true, but for those of us who longed to be a teacher when we were young, it feels real.
I think we should start treating teaching for the high-level profession it is. We should pay teachers like we pay doctors and give them the respect that other professionals get. It's no wonder teachers feel they need a union, when facing the many problems you and many others are addressing here.
I'd also like to add that here in the SF Bay Area, the teaching population is in great decline due to the high cost of housing (plus the other normal work stresses), and there has been talk of subsidizing housing for teachers! Imagine that. If they were paid something like the programmers (who are largely doing less work) were paid, there would be no problem.
Steve Magruder
Private schools work because parents who pay extra to educate their children want to make damn sure they're getting their money's worth.
So public school parents don't want to make sure they're getting their tax dollar's worth?
How many times each day do children view advertisements that have an underlying anti-school message...
The problem is that in America we somehow have a culture that fosters a fear of becoming more intelligent than the people around us. Smart people are attacked as "geeks", "nerds", "dweebs", "dorks", etc. because that's the popular thing to do. Nobody wants to be the geek, except those few of us who are bold or who just can't help it. :)
There's a mentality among the young in America that smart people must be picked on and taken down and somehow convinced to stop trying so hard to be smart. And sadly, sometimes a few kids are convinced and give up learning in favor of social ascendence.
Steve Magruder
Steve Magruder
I would like to patent "fuzzy math," also known as "Washington fuzzy math."
Fuzzy math is an expression of exact facts and figures to back up a public policy position where those who vehemently aim to disagree have no way of comprehending the data and thus, in exasperated speech, decry the facts and figures as worthless (and subsequently throw in ad hominem attacks about "no controlling legal authority" and a buck stopping "here" at the Lincoln bedroom). Essentially, claims of fuzzy math most often come from the moronic.
Steve Magruder
Are you an NSI stockholder?
Is Auerbach a register.com stockholder? The only "positive" effect of an unlimited expansion is a tremendous increase in the revenue coffers of internet registry companies.
Steve Magruder
I honestly don't concur with Auerbach's position re: whether the "system can definitely handle millions of TLDs." Doesn't he know that "the system" is not just a bunch of interconnected nodes, but also comprise real people (You know, those darn things called human beings who inhibit this technoelitist's direct interface to his machine) who will have to sort this anarchy out? Further, his stand is so optimistic, technically speaking, that it's scary. The best technologists I've ever worked with are skeptics who understand restraint, not optimists who don't care if all hell breaks loose in response to their uncontrolled whim actions. Auerbach's "testing" of "the system" proves nothing.
In the final analysis (I always like saying that), the TLD expansion issue is not a technical one, folks! It's a socioeconomic issue that Auerbach apparently doesn't have the non-technical depth to handle.
If you're going to vote for anyone, I hope you select my choice, Langenberg, but if not, Simons or Lessig will work much much better on this board than Auerbach. Potential technical destruction of our great public commons is at stake in this election. Think about it...should we move cautiously and responsibly, or jump off the cliff?
Steve Magruder
Pat Buchanan is smart, honest and principled, but I'm also not voting for him.
Anyway, here's the views on gTLD's as expressed by Auerbach and Langenberg:
Auerbach: "...from technical work with which I have been associated it is clear to me that we can readily have at least a million TLDs without any technical problems. Those who claim that new TLD's could induce 'instability' have been unable to articulate any technical facts to support their claims."
Langenberg: "It seems to me that, although expansion is probably necessary and inevitable, there is virtue and value in maintaining as high a degree of simplicity and generality in the system as possible. I suspect that mere technical constraints would allow a system of TLDs so extensive and complex as to be of limited value."
Unlike Auerbach, Langenberg takes the common-sense view that responsibility, comprehensibility and economics (you know, the social concerns) are as important as technical concerns. Just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done.
Auerbach wants to remove all economic value from the gTLD name space in the name of grandiose technical achievement. Is technical achievement by way of hyperexpansion and other "whizbang" efforts the end goal of the Internet, or is the Internet supposed to be an organized public commons that works for economic and social good? I'm a techie myself, but I'll be god-damned if I'm going to let a technical wizard blow up our beautiful Internet for thrills.
Steve Magruder
I'll vote for the "ineffective" candidate Langenberg. I want someone who goes into the ICANN board with an open mind toward all the issues. Also, he comes off as someone who will work with the other board members and promote responsible change.
The other leading contenders in the Slashdot list come off to me as radicals who want to liberalize everything to a point where everything will break down. Auerbach especially seems to want to create a gtld anarchy and also cops an attitude that he may not cooperate so well with the other board members--thus he will be very ineffective.
So it's effective, responsible participation (true leadership) or ineffective, radical non-cooperation. The choice is clear to me.
Steve Magruder
Is Red Hat now taking cues from Al Gore? Hehe.
Seriously, though... VOTE FOR ALGORE...RITHMS! Seriously, vote for Al Gore, as Shrub just can't hack it.
Steve Magruder