If this was a witch hunt then you're saying that--it doesn't matter if anyone (the President should be held to HIGHER standards than average citizens) lies under oath--hey, we all make mistakes. If this was a witch hunt you're saying if we know someone perjured themselves, we shouldn't care. If this was a witch hunt, you're saying the truth and veracity is simply irrelevant. Now, maybe you want politics to be like that, but the majority of the American people don't--and that's why Bush was elected.
Just in case you didn't remember, Clinton was being sued for harassment when he perjured himself. It's not like it came out of nowhere.
nambla is some sicko pedophile "man-boy love" organizations. was on southpark (where it was confusing with the National Association of Marlin Brando Look Alikes:p)
Sorry, I don't think I made myself clear--I agree 100% with what you said. The pension systems, as they exist today, can only be supported by a rapidly growing population (so there are more young works supports the old pensioners). But since this isn't the case (and the population is in fact both aging and declining...well, it's a real problem.
Nice writeup, first link from your google link:p Is the library thing really a Patriot act issue--do you have a problem with this, so long as law enforcement has to follow certain procedures? I don't see how it's much different than, for instance, getting at your financial records (though I suppose the hoops to get access are what is different). imho, it seems like most of the Patriot act is about updating outdated wiretap laws to the information age.
W.r.t. the second, unless you're an enemy combatant I'd say you don't have much to worry about ^^
Given that as of last year only 30% of the entire oil consumption of the US came from the entire Middle East, (and the Lion's share of that from Saudi) I think it's pretty unlikely I will be smelly Iraqi oil:p
I only did it for the first time (figures from CIA Country Factbook, you can do the rest if you want;)... the growth rates for most of the other pension states (germany, france, etc) will be similar--VERY, VERY low population growth rates.
It's my personal opinion that these heavily socialist/pension/welfare states are stabbing themselves in the back. Though they provide many services for everyone, it makes a society that is very expensive to live in. As such, it is my understanding that it is rather rare in most european countries for a family to even have more than 1 child (2 at the most)--with these terribly low growth rates (I read that a German govt report predicted a population drop of some 20m by 2050) the only solution is to up birth rates (which isn't happening) or to increase immigration to extremely high levels. Increased immigration is changing the face of Europe to something that is not Europe (or at least not a recognizable Europe).
At first you have to establish that it really was an unjustified and illegal war before you can accuse him of murder.
Could you share with me what a *legal* war would be (since you're marking this one as illegal?).
Was Saddam's "liberation" of Kuwait legal (Saddam thought so--Kuwait after all has historically been a part of the Iraq--it's only thanks to the Brits [trying to bugger Iraq's ability to meddle in the Persian gulf incidentally--Kuwait got all the good ports]. Also, what about the banana oil drilling (look it up if you don't know what I mean) that Kuwait was doing in Iraqi territory?).
Was Hitler's liberation of German territories pre-ww2 legal? Had the Allies of the WW2 period had accurate reports of Hitler's goals, his deathcamps, his ILLEGAL military buildups (illegal by treaty of surrender) etc--and had they launched a preemptive strike, would THAT have been legal?
What about the US operations in Haiti? or Somalia? Kosovo?
Do you really believe, in your heart of hearts, that lying about a blowjob under oath is worse than lying about a nuclear threat in the State of the Union Address?
Your appeal to emotion is totally irrelevant. For one thing, the CIA "passed" the information to Bush. If the CIA says something is true, then you pretty much have to believe them. Your "heart of heart" statements assumes that Bush knew the CIA was wrong (which I don't know HOW he would know this information). Secondly, the reported information may still be correct. IF you've not been following the issue closely (which is completely forgivable) you might want to check the front page of a news site...let's say the BBC. You'll notice that the British government STILL maintains that there was some kind of Uranium attempt. So who's right and who's wrong? I'm guessing that YOU are not right given that you don't have access to CIA reports or Bush's inner thoughts.
And as a funny aside, you'll note that despite my mentioning how it totally wasn't an issue that dealt at all with morality, it is a liberal who yet again attacks a Republican because he is immoral [by some definition that I apparently don't realize]...let me guess, he's stupid too? We get it already, all democrats are both smarter and more moral than Republicans...
Oh, nothing much really. Just useless things like privacy, the right to a speedy jury trial, silly junk like that.
Oh come on, you can do better than that:) What privacies does it screw you out of, and how does it deprive you of the right to a speedy trial? You're not just joining in with the Slashdot Gang(tm) against the PATRIOT act without knowing what it's about, are you??:p
I don't think it was about the oil (dems don't seem to take into account that the massive cost of securing the persian gulf [if that's the view of it you take] more than offsets any gains from control of oil. and that assumes that america will control the oil, which isn't going to happen.
Nobody's sex life is anybody's business? So incest is ok. NAMBLA? necrophiliacs? pedophiles? this is off topic, but just thought I'd mention--sex definitely IS the law's business.
Well if you're comparing our economic outlooks--yes. Again, there have been a number of recent economic outlook analysis type articles on the beeb recently.
And this is only the *immediate* future. no one questions (or at least no _economists_) question the viability of the US system in the longterm. The pension/welfare-state of Europe is seen as having longterm trouble--at least in its current form.
Interesting side note--one of the reasons Europe is in such bad shape vis a vis America is the rapidly aging and shrinking population of "Old Europe" (same isn't really true of "New Europe"). The only way to stem the tide basically is immigration--and LOTS of it. America has higher birthrates.
That amazes you? What _constantly_ amazes me is how so many leftists take the road that all Republicans are just "idiots"... "chimp in chief" ? I mean come on, that's really nice, and makes me respect your political beliefs. Bush is just so stupid...Bush 1 was stupid too..let's not forget Quayle, he's just so stupid. Reagan? Oh, he's just a stupid actor. (I'm in NC) Helms? Oh he's STUPID. I just don't get why democrats have to convince themselves that their opponents are mentally inferior...it's some elitism thing I believe. ~shrug~
And just in case you haven't heard it before--the issue was NEVER over Bill's sex life, the issue is whether, as President of the United States, Bill Clinton deliberately and knowingly LIED under oath. Yes, that is a SERIOUS crime.
It bothers me to think what would happen if the electoral college went away--basically the candidates would spent the lion's share of their time in a few areas and all the low-desnity regions would get shit--they would lose their voice basically.
According to the RNC, the average donation in 2002 was $36 dollars. Does that mean that Bush's campaign is even less fettered by "big interests" and more grassroots than Dean's?;)
1.)Jimmy Carter-> He was very liberal and Reagan emerged from angry conservative voters. ( He won because he was an actor and a great speaker) Majority of Americans hated his policies but did not think of Reagan himself as an extremist even though he was.
That's an interesting take on the issue. While you're right that Reagan was both an incredible orator and previously an actor (yet another self-made man--most of the self-made men I've seen in politics [who AREN'T lawyers] tend to be in the Republican party). Do you have any evidence at all that "the majority of Americans hated his policies" ? I'm really curious to see how you back that up:p
3.)Bill Clinton -> Need I say more. Bush is the anti clinton as you can get. He only won because of a blowjob. Incredible! Lieing about a war is not as bad as a blowjob.
A couple points about this--1) you're absolutely wrong. Lieing under oath as president of the united states is one of the absolute worst things you can do. Secondly, what exactly did Bush lie about wrt war? I assume you're going to mention the Uranium claim...well the CIA ok'ed that, and even today British intelligence STILL maintains that there was a Uranium deal. If you're talking about something else, I'd love to hear it.
The pendulum swings from angry voters on the far left and right.
Good point--but I would amend it slightly to saying that the prevaling political trends are what switch rather than which group is more pissed off:p
The American pendulum is still in the process of swinging to the right after about 40 years of Left domination (the Supreme Court, due to life terms remains liberal much longer than the rest of the country--compare to local city/state governments which are very republican all around the country).
Also look at Europe 50 years ago and now...actually in some ways Europe is LESS leftist than it was in pre-Thatcher days. So that's a weird case:p
He talked the economy into recession... we were doing OK, and he kept saying the god-damned R-word every time he opened his mouth. That doesn't help.
Wow, you really think that's true? Regardless of that, look at the economy today. It's coming back, and (imho) it's coming back fast. Not saying we're going to have an immediate repeat of the 90's, but just compare the projected economic growith in the US to projected EU-zone growth to see what the president's policies have done.
*cough*USA PATRIOT act*cough*
Out of curiosity, what of "your basic civil rights" does that Patriot act screw you out of?
Just take a look at recent articles on the Beeb about EU reforms--focus on France, Germany..norway and some of the Baltic states are good examples too. In short, the pension state is in trouble and change is coming.
You make that sound so much worse than it actually is.
We know that as chips get more complicated they get harder to scale to faster speeds. The P4 was a chipdesign that, from the beginning, was designed to scale--huge pipelines, etc (and the pipes are getting bigger too).
Now what's wrong with making a chip that is easy to scale?
I do agree with you--having money doesn't necessarily make a person smart, nor make them good parents. I'm just pointing out that in general those in the upper classes DO tend to produce children who are similar to themselves. Genetics, parenting, bought tutors, who knows why, but it's a correlation that I see:p
US copyright was intended to protect authors from publishers
That is VERY incorrect. Copyright law is intended to protect the rights of the copyright owner from anyone. Be it a publisher who stole it (a common occurence in pre-20th century America and indeed much of the world today) or Random Joe who decides to plagiarize, or someone else who calls the property his own, etc etc. Copyright is completely blind with regards to who it exists to stop--because it exists to protect the owner rather than to deny a specific group.
Secondly, your assumptions are wrong. When Albatros bought the right to translate Harry Potter V into Czech, they became the custodians of the Harry Potter Czech edition (with I'm sure many contractual obligations and limitations). Just because the version of HP the defendants were spreading is in Czech rather than English doesn't make that an ok legal action--the work is still HP V and as such copyrighted, and subject to law.
a good point, but I think the original poster's situation was a little different.
I could be wrong, but the way it was worded seemed to me that he meant school (elementary) was a long time ago. From my own experience, NES was the hot thing back in the day;) I think that since then things have changed a lot--systems are much cheaper relatively, and much much more common. The farther back you go, the more expensive they get.
Slashdot Mirror
What do you mean "sponsored witch hunt" ?
If this was a witch hunt then you're saying that--it doesn't matter if anyone (the President should be held to HIGHER standards than average citizens) lies under oath--hey, we all make mistakes. If this was a witch hunt you're saying if we know someone perjured themselves, we shouldn't care. If this was a witch hunt, you're saying the truth and veracity is simply irrelevant. Now, maybe you want politics to be like that, but the majority of the American people don't--and that's why Bush was elected.
Just in case you didn't remember, Clinton was being sued for harassment when he perjured himself. It's not like it came out of nowhere.
nambla is some sicko pedophile "man-boy love" organizations. was on southpark (where it was confusing with the National Association of Marlin Brando Look Alikes :p)
Sorry, I don't think I made myself clear--I agree 100% with what you said. The pension systems, as they exist today, can only be supported by a rapidly growing population (so there are more young works supports the old pensioners). But since this isn't the case (and the population is in fact both aging and declining...well, it's a real problem.
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not?
;)
"we all know that jobs are just schemes to pass time and survive"
I like my job, does that make me a bad person?
http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/Terroris m_militias/20011031_eff_usa_patriot_analysis.php
Nice writeup, first link from your google link :p Is the library thing really a Patriot act issue--do you have a problem with this, so long as law enforcement has to follow certain procedures? I don't see how it's much different than, for instance, getting at your financial records (though I suppose the hoops to get access are what is different). imho, it seems like most of the Patriot act is about updating outdated wiretap laws to the information age.
W.r.t. the second, unless you're an enemy combatant I'd say you don't have much to worry about ^^
Given that as of last year only 30% of the entire oil consumption of the US came from the entire Middle East, (and the Lion's share of that from Saudi) I think it's pretty unlikely I will be smelly Iraqi oil :p
I thought it would be interesting to look at the populations of these countries:
1.Norway, socialist welfare state
pop: 4.5 million, growth = .47%
2.Iceland, socialist welfare state
p: 280,000, g: .52%
3.Sweden, socialist welfare state
p: 8.8m, g: .02%
4.Australia,
p: 19m, g: .96%
5.the Netherlands, somewhat socialist welfare 6.state
p: 16m, g: .53%
7.Belgium, socialist welfare state
p: 10.2m, g: .15%
8.the United States,
p: 280m, g: .89%
9.Canada, somewhat socialist welfare state
p: 31.2m, g: .96%
10.Japan,
p: 127m, g: .15%
I only did it for the first time (figures from CIA Country Factbook, you can do the rest if you want ;) ... the growth rates for most of the other pension states (germany, france, etc) will be similar--VERY, VERY low population growth rates.
It's my personal opinion that these heavily socialist/pension/welfare states are stabbing themselves in the back. Though they provide many services for everyone, it makes a society that is very expensive to live in. As such, it is my understanding that it is rather rare in most european countries for a family to even have more than 1 child (2 at the most)--with these terribly low growth rates (I read that a German govt report predicted a population drop of some 20m by 2050) the only solution is to up birth rates (which isn't happening) or to increase immigration to extremely high levels. Increased immigration is changing the face of Europe to something that is not Europe (or at least not a recognizable Europe).
At first you have to establish that it really was an unjustified and illegal war before you can accuse him of murder.
Could you share with me what a *legal* war would be (since you're marking this one as illegal?).
Was Saddam's "liberation" of Kuwait legal (Saddam thought so--Kuwait after all has historically been a part of the Iraq--it's only thanks to the Brits [trying to bugger Iraq's ability to meddle in the Persian gulf incidentally--Kuwait got all the good ports]. Also, what about the banana oil drilling (look it up if you don't know what I mean) that Kuwait was doing in Iraqi territory?).
Was Hitler's liberation of German territories pre-ww2 legal? Had the Allies of the WW2 period had accurate reports of Hitler's goals, his deathcamps, his ILLEGAL military buildups (illegal by treaty of surrender) etc--and had they launched a preemptive strike, would THAT have been legal?
What about the US operations in Haiti? or Somalia? Kosovo?
Hey come on, that's not Flamebait, it's a joke :p
:p
I even first read it on Slashdot...yeesh
Do you really believe, in your heart of hearts, that lying about a blowjob under oath is worse than lying about a nuclear threat in the State of the Union Address?
Your appeal to emotion is totally irrelevant. For one thing, the CIA "passed" the information to Bush. If the CIA says something is true, then you pretty much have to believe them. Your "heart of heart" statements assumes that Bush knew the CIA was wrong (which I don't know HOW he would know this information). Secondly, the reported information may still be correct. IF you've not been following the issue closely (which is completely forgivable) you might want to check the front page of a news site...let's say the BBC. You'll notice that the British government STILL maintains that there was some kind of Uranium attempt. So who's right and who's wrong? I'm guessing that YOU are not right given that you don't have access to CIA reports or Bush's inner thoughts.
And as a funny aside, you'll note that despite my mentioning how it totally wasn't an issue that dealt at all with morality, it is a liberal who yet again attacks a Republican because he is immoral [by some definition that I apparently don't realize]...let me guess, he's stupid too? We get it already, all democrats are both smarter and more moral than Republicans...
Oh, nothing much really. Just useless things like privacy, the right to a speedy jury trial, silly junk like that.
Oh come on, you can do better than that :) What privacies does it screw you out of, and how does it deprive you of the right to a speedy trial? You're not just joining in with the Slashdot Gang(tm) against the PATRIOT act without knowing what it's about, are you?? :p
You can take that and smoke it
Ok, but I won't inhale ;) ;)
I don't think it was about the oil (dems don't seem to take into account that the massive cost of securing the persian gulf [if that's the view of it you take] more than offsets any gains from control of oil. and that assumes that america will control the oil, which isn't going to happen.
Nobody's sex life is anybody's business? So incest is ok. NAMBLA? necrophiliacs? pedophiles? this is off topic, but just thought I'd mention--sex definitely IS the law's business.
Well if you're comparing our economic outlooks--yes. Again, there have been a number of recent economic outlook analysis type articles on the beeb recently.
And this is only the *immediate* future. no one questions (or at least no _economists_) question the viability of the US system in the longterm. The pension/welfare-state of Europe is seen as having longterm trouble--at least in its current form.
Interesting side note--one of the reasons Europe is in such bad shape vis a vis America is the rapidly aging and shrinking population of "Old Europe" (same isn't really true of "New Europe"). The only way to stem the tide basically is immigration--and LOTS of it. America has higher birthrates.
That amazes you? What _constantly_ amazes me is how so many leftists take the road that all Republicans are just "idiots" ... "chimp in chief" ? I mean come on, that's really nice, and makes me respect your political beliefs. Bush is just so stupid...Bush 1 was stupid too..let's not forget Quayle, he's just so stupid. Reagan? Oh, he's just a stupid actor. (I'm in NC) Helms? Oh he's STUPID. I just don't get why democrats have to convince themselves that their opponents are mentally inferior...it's some elitism thing I believe. ~shrug~
And just in case you haven't heard it before--the issue was NEVER over Bill's sex life, the issue is whether, as President of the United States, Bill Clinton deliberately and knowingly LIED under oath. Yes, that is a SERIOUS crime.
These maps are very telling:
http://www.2000gop.com/electionmaps.html
It bothers me to think what would happen if the electoral college went away--basically the candidates would spent the lion's share of their time in a few areas and all the low-desnity regions would get shit--they would lose their voice basically.
How does the ACLU count to ten?
1,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10
http://www.rnc.org/Newsroom/risingtide/spring2003/ headquarters.htm
;)
According to the RNC, the average donation in 2002 was $36 dollars. Does that mean that Bush's campaign is even less fettered by "big interests" and more grassroots than Dean's?
1.)Jimmy Carter-> He was very liberal and Reagan emerged from angry conservative voters. ( He won because he was an actor and a great speaker) Majority of Americans hated his policies but did not think of Reagan himself as an extremist even though he was.
That's an interesting take on the issue. While you're right that Reagan was both an incredible orator and previously an actor (yet another self-made man--most of the self-made men I've seen in politics [who AREN'T lawyers] tend to be in the Republican party). Do you have any evidence at all that "the majority of Americans hated his policies" ? I'm really curious to see how you back that up :p
3.)Bill Clinton -> Need I say more. Bush is the anti clinton as you can get. He only won because of a blowjob. Incredible! Lieing about a war is not as bad as a blowjob.
A couple points about this--1) you're absolutely wrong. Lieing under oath as president of the united states is one of the absolute worst things you can do. Secondly, what exactly did Bush lie about wrt war? I assume you're going to mention the Uranium claim...well the CIA ok'ed that, and even today British intelligence STILL maintains that there was a Uranium deal. If you're talking about something else, I'd love to hear it.
The pendulum swings from angry voters on the far left and right.
Good point--but I would amend it slightly to saying that the prevaling political trends are what switch rather than which group is more pissed off :p
The American pendulum is still in the process of swinging to the right after about 40 years of Left domination (the Supreme Court, due to life terms remains liberal much longer than the rest of the country--compare to local city/state governments which are very republican all around the country).
Also look at Europe 50 years ago and now...actually in some ways Europe is LESS leftist than it was in pre-Thatcher days. So that's a weird case :p
thanks
He talked the economy into recession... we were doing OK, and he kept saying the god-damned R-word every time he opened his mouth. That doesn't help.
Wow, you really think that's true? Regardless of that, look at the economy today. It's coming back, and (imho) it's coming back fast. Not saying we're going to have an immediate repeat of the 90's, but just compare the projected economic growith in the US to projected EU-zone growth to see what the president's policies have done.
*cough*USA PATRIOT act*cough*
Out of curiosity, what of "your basic civil rights" does that Patriot act screw you out of?
~shrug~
Just take a look at recent articles on the Beeb about EU reforms--focus on France, Germany..norway and some of the Baltic states are good examples too. In short, the pension state is in trouble and change is coming.
You make that sound so much worse than it actually is.
We know that as chips get more complicated they get harder to scale to faster speeds. The P4 was a chipdesign that, from the beginning, was designed to scale--huge pipelines, etc (and the pipes are getting bigger too).
Now what's wrong with making a chip that is easy to scale?
A good point--just look at gas stations today versus 30 years ago. Self-swipe credit cards now for the most part today, fullservice etc 30 years ago.
Actually, factory jobs etc would be much lower paying and there would be fewer slots if the unions didn't hold such power.
I do agree with you--having money doesn't necessarily make a person smart, nor make them good parents. I'm just pointing out that in general those in the upper classes DO tend to produce children who are similar to themselves. Genetics, parenting, bought tutors, who knows why, but it's a correlation that I see :p
US copyright was intended to protect authors from publishers
That is VERY incorrect. Copyright law is intended to protect the rights of the copyright owner from anyone. Be it a publisher who stole it (a common occurence in pre-20th century America and indeed much of the world today) or Random Joe who decides to plagiarize, or someone else who calls the property his own, etc etc. Copyright is completely blind with regards to who it exists to stop--because it exists to protect the owner rather than to deny a specific group.
Secondly, your assumptions are wrong. When Albatros bought the right to translate Harry Potter V into Czech, they became the custodians of the Harry Potter Czech edition (with I'm sure many contractual obligations and limitations). Just because the version of HP the defendants were spreading is in Czech rather than English doesn't make that an ok legal action--the work is still HP V and as such copyrighted, and subject to law.
a good point, but I think the original poster's situation was a little different.
;) I think that since then things have changed a lot--systems are much cheaper relatively, and much much more common. The farther back you go, the more expensive they get.
I could be wrong, but the way it was worded seemed to me that he meant school (elementary) was a long time ago. From my own experience, NES was the hot thing back in the day