I'm not sure that I can quite smallow the rhetoric suggesting that China is ready to be called a major military threat (not yet).
According to articles here, here and here, it doesn't sound like the Chinese will be knocking on our door (with nuclear warheads or troops) any time soon. Given the current Chinese disputes with Russia, Japan, Malaysia and the Philippines (over islands) as well as mounting tensions with Taiwan, China is in no mood (or ability) to go to war. There will be plently of posturing, but this dispute is purely politics.
China has a lot to sort out internally before they are any sort of major military threat. That doesn't mean that there couldn't be regional conflicts that escalate (after all, that is how WW I got started), it only means that conflict between our two nations is unlikely. Do a little reading at Janes or other sites before rattling sabres. China has a long history of spying and tough talk (like the USSR, USA, et. al.), but they currently pose little threat.
If you want something to really worry about, start paying more attention to the escalation in the Middle East.
Let's face it. Ralph Nader has done a LOT for our country. "Unsafe at Any Speed" was a motivating force in society, and it still serves as an inspiration to many progressive reformers.
I'm not bashing anyone's right to vote. However, I must criticize what appears to be a blind acceptance of everything that Nader says, as if he is the guru of the disenfranchised masses everywhere.
Nader has used the (oft repeated) phrase "Republicrats" to describe his opponents, suggesting that there is NO difference. Think about it. Do some research and don't just blindly accept what Ralph is trying to push down your throats. Anyone remember the EPA or OSHA under Reagan? Completely gutted. Think that won't happen again? Remember, Bush thinks that global warming is an unsubstantiated theory. Bush rejected an increase of the minimum wage. Tax theory? At least under Clinton the Earned Income Tax Credit did something for American;s in lower income brackets. Oh, and those Congressional races you are all voting in have a LOT more to do with these policies getting through than the President.
Make no mistake - voting for Nader increases Bush's chances. Do not delude yourself for one moment. There are no conservatives who are voting for Bush. Think Nader cares? In an interview with the New York Times in which he stated that he stated that Bush might actually be better for the U.S. in the long run since pollution will increase for the short term, thus bringing more people into the Environmental movement.
Better to let the environment get worse so it can eventually improve? How 'bout voting for the party that is actually trying to get it from getting worse in the first place! Doesn't anyone on the Nader side have a problem with this? Maybe a few hundred thousand acres in Alaska is a small price to pay?
Vote. First and foremost. No matter who you vote for, just vote. But if you are going to vote for Nader, please at least do a little research on the man, his personal investments, his personal stances on unions, etc. Being a sheep for the Green Party is no better than being a sheep for the "Republicrats."
In all seriousness, no matter who you support, just get out and vote. The fact that CNN is predicting that less than 50% of the eligible voters will get out and cast a ballot is pretty sad.
Re:Three things I don't like about Python
on
Python 2.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
Slashdot Mirror
According to articles here, here and here, it doesn't sound like the Chinese will be knocking on our door (with nuclear warheads or troops) any time soon. Given the current Chinese disputes with Russia, Japan, Malaysia and the Philippines (over islands) as well as mounting tensions with Taiwan, China is in no mood (or ability) to go to war. There will be plently of posturing, but this dispute is purely politics.
China has a lot to sort out internally before they are any sort of major military threat. That doesn't mean that there couldn't be regional conflicts that escalate (after all, that is how WW I got started), it only means that conflict between our two nations is unlikely. Do a little reading at Janes or other sites before rattling sabres. China has a long history of spying and tough talk (like the USSR, USA, et. al.), but they currently pose little threat.
If you want something to really worry about, start paying more attention to the escalation in the Middle East.
I'm not bashing anyone's right to vote. However, I must criticize what appears to be a blind acceptance of everything that Nader says, as if he is the guru of the disenfranchised masses everywhere.
Nader has used the (oft repeated) phrase "Republicrats" to describe his opponents, suggesting that there is NO difference. Think about it. Do some research and don't just blindly accept what Ralph is trying to push down your throats. Anyone remember the EPA or OSHA under Reagan? Completely gutted. Think that won't happen again? Remember, Bush thinks that global warming is an unsubstantiated theory. Bush rejected an increase of the minimum wage. Tax theory? At least under Clinton the Earned Income Tax Credit did something for American;s in lower income brackets. Oh, and those Congressional races you are all voting in have a LOT more to do with these policies getting through than the President.
Make no mistake - voting for Nader increases Bush's chances. Do not delude yourself for one moment. There are no conservatives who are voting for Bush. Think Nader cares? In an interview with the New York Times in which he stated that he stated that Bush might actually be better for the U.S. in the long run since pollution will increase for the short term, thus bringing more people into the Environmental movement. Better to let the environment get worse so it can eventually improve? How 'bout voting for the party that is actually trying to get it from getting worse in the first place! Doesn't anyone on the Nader side have a problem with this? Maybe a few hundred thousand acres in Alaska is a small price to pay?
Vote. First and foremost. No matter who you vote for, just vote. But if you are going to vote for Nader, please at least do a little research on the man, his personal investments, his personal stances on unions, etc. Being a sheep for the Green Party is no better than being a sheep for the "Republicrats."
In all seriousness, no matter who you support, just get out and vote. The fact that CNN is predicting that less than 50% of the eligible voters will get out and cast a ballot is pretty sad.
http://www.modpython.org/