There's absolutely no point in staying in a loveless marriage
"Till death do us part" ring a bell? Shouldn't have entered into that contract in the first place...
I don't see how anyone can say that when the current Republican administrtation adamantly refuses to take responsibility for its actions getting us involved in an immoral and unlawful war to look for something that wasn't there
Sigh... can you honestly look me in the eye and tell me it was immoral to remove Saddam Hussein from power when he tortured people and persecuted them? I think it's ridiculous that we let him stay in power for that long. Yes, some of the justification that was given for the war (WMD) was absolutely ridiculous, but you can't possibly be serious when you tell me that it was immoral or unlawful to remove Hussein.
for failing to allow people to marry whom they wish
I'll agree with you on that one.
for failing to balance the budget
Not like the dems do a fantastically better job...
Also people DO change over time. The person you married 25 years ago may be a completely differnt person today. It smacks of ripe ignorance to say "you should have thought about that before". If someone changes their behavior you can't help that. It is unhealthy to the max for yourself and your children to remain in a dysfunctional marriage. There is absolutely no honor or nobility in deciding to live that kind of a life. You are only deluding yourself and harming any kids under your care.
Then why would you get married? DON'T GET MARRIED. I don't give a fuck if the person you married is different, now you have to grow and change with them. You don't just bail out when it's not working, you fix it. If you're not willing to fix it, then obviously the marriage never should have happened.
Raising a child is a responsibility, and shouldn't be a right. People take it too lightly, just like they take marriage too lightly. It's a problem with society, and yes, I understand that there are sometimes circumstances that are beyond control, but 99% of marriages are fixable, 99% of families can care for their children without needless daycare, etc. etc.
In the future try not to be so obessesd about children that you forget to allow basic common sense to enter your thought processes.
In the future try to spell your words correctly when you're being condescending, it makes you look like you actually know what you're talking about.
Again you have made an incredibly ignorant statement. Not all families are two parent families to begin with. There are many one parent families for many reasons, not all of them selfish.
Hooboy... where do I begin with this.
What do you think the percentage of single-parent families resulting from rape, death, and abandonment is compared to the percentage of single-parent families resulting from divorce? If you have a child, you shouldn't be getting divorced. Getting divorced when a child is involved is selfish unless there is blatant abuse. Find a way to make the marriage work, it's a lifelong commitment. You made a mistake marrying that person? Too fucking bad, you should have thought about that BEFORE.
Teenage pregnancy? Well, look who didn't raise THAT child right.
Anyway... I'm not a Republican, but I'd imagine you're a Democrat sitting on the left side of the fence if you tried to use that as a derogatory term. I've been noticing that the Democrats aren't huge fans of this thing called "responsibility", which is probably why you're arguing with me about this in the first place.
Thinking that you can live life however you want in "the way you deem appropriate" just doesn't cut it when a child is involved. A child is a huge responsibility. And personally, I don't even think that child-bearing should be a right, it should be a privilege, just like a driver's license. You should have to prove you're qualified to raise a child, and hopefully they'd make it harder than a DL to obtain, so you'd have to REALLY WANT that license to get one.
Children aren't toys, they're not things to show off, they're a responsibility, and many people have forgotten that.
there is nothing wrong with the concept of daycare
There is when it's used to raise your child, instead of as a temporary situation (i.e. you had to go to the doctor that day.)
If you aren't willing to sacrifice your time to care for the child that YOU brought into the world, then you shouldn't have had the child in the first place -- the child deserves better.
There is no way you can argue that parents aren't responsible for the way their own children are raised.
Yeah -- if you spend all of your money on a new car, golf clubs, etc. etc.
It's called scaling back. People do it all the time, whether they have children or not. And it's your responsibility to scale back when you have a child.
I think if you're not willing to make the time commitment to having kids, you shouldn't have kids. If that involves wealth, so be it -- don't be poor and raise a child in a shitty situation.
There's a huge difference between people like you that only need a babysitter 10% of the time, and the people who put their kids in daycare because they're working. I have a HUGE problem with a household that has both parents working when their child isn't even in school yet.
Having a child is a big responsibility. If you aren't willing to take on the responsibility, you simply shouldn't have the child, end of story. If you don't stay at home and raise and care for your child yourself until it's time for kindergarten, you're a lousy parent, period.
But isn't that a problem in itself? People should be raising their own children; if you don't have time for that, then you shouldn't have children in the first place.
People should just be responsible parents, rather than have to worry about whether their child care provider is responsible.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
In other words, if there's no indication that I'm drunk, no one has the right to run a breathalyzer test on me.
Even if this crap bill gets passed, the Supreme Court will knock it down.
The data probably isn't lost though; "click of death" sounds like the drive is failing because one of the moving parts (most likely the arm or the motor) is burnt out. That shouldn't affect the platter (and therefore the data) inside the drive, so a drive recovery place should be able to get the data off of the drive.
Data recovery gets expensive, though, so if IBM would foot the bill in addition to a drive replacement, that might make up for the gigantic problem they've created.
But then you factor in the inconvenience... really, IBM should replace the drive, WITH your data on it, AND issue you a gift certificate or something to make amends...
You make me ill. Microsoft posts numbers from independent research companies, and they tell you the name or names of the companies that do the research.
As a dated example, since it was the first one I Googled:
Microsoft Corp. today announced that Microsoft(R) SQL Server(TM) offers a solution whose total cost of ownership (TCO) is 3.7 times lower than that of Oracle, according to independent research done by the Boston-based Aberdeen Group Inc. (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/1999/Mar 99/TCOpr.asp).
I don't mind Grammar Nazis, but if you're going to do it, do it the right way.
Observe:
The word "English" is supposed to be capitalized, and a grammatically correct sentence would be written like "learn to use English properly, dipshit," dipshit.
The problem is, there are a TON of moderators that will go and mod-bomb people because they don't like them, regardless of how well-reasoned their post is. Posts are supposed to be moderated, not individuals, but that's not how a lot of people do it.
I don't look at sigs because I HAVE THEM TURNED OFF. That way I don't have to look at them, and I don't have to bitch about it to everybody in the world because I'm offended by it.
Oh, and here's a link to http://www.goatse.cx, why don't you click on it and then bitch for an hour?
Blah blah blah, too bad you posted anonymously or you would have gotten modded down for this lovely piece of Flamebait and it would be harder for you to move up to posting at +1. You are obviously part of the problem with this site, bitching about sigs that can easily be turned off. Blow me.
Slashdot Mirror
AOL jokes are so 1999.
There's absolutely no point in staying in a loveless marriage
"Till death do us part" ring a bell? Shouldn't have entered into that contract in the first place...
I don't see how anyone can say that when the current Republican administrtation adamantly refuses to take responsibility for its actions getting us involved in an immoral and unlawful war to look for something that wasn't there
Sigh... can you honestly look me in the eye and tell me it was immoral to remove Saddam Hussein from power when he tortured people and persecuted them? I think it's ridiculous that we let him stay in power for that long. Yes, some of the justification that was given for the war (WMD) was absolutely ridiculous, but you can't possibly be serious when you tell me that it was immoral or unlawful to remove Hussein.
for failing to allow people to marry whom they wish
I'll agree with you on that one.
for failing to balance the budget
Not like the dems do a fantastically better job...
Also people DO change over time. The person you married 25 years ago may be a completely differnt person today. It smacks of ripe ignorance to say "you should have thought about that before". If someone changes their behavior you can't help that. It is unhealthy to the max for yourself and your children to remain in a dysfunctional marriage. There is absolutely no honor or nobility in deciding to live that kind of a life. You are only deluding yourself and harming any kids under your care.
Then why would you get married? DON'T GET MARRIED. I don't give a fuck if the person you married is different, now you have to grow and change with them. You don't just bail out when it's not working, you fix it. If you're not willing to fix it, then obviously the marriage never should have happened.
Raising a child is a responsibility, and shouldn't be a right. People take it too lightly, just like they take marriage too lightly. It's a problem with society, and yes, I understand that there are sometimes circumstances that are beyond control, but 99% of marriages are fixable, 99% of families can care for their children without needless daycare, etc. etc.
In the future try not to be so obessesd about children that you forget to allow basic common sense to enter your thought processes.
In the future try to spell your words correctly when you're being condescending, it makes you look like you actually know what you're talking about.
Again you have made an incredibly ignorant statement. Not all families are two parent families to begin with. There are many one parent families for many reasons, not all of them selfish.
Hooboy... where do I begin with this.
What do you think the percentage of single-parent families resulting from rape, death, and abandonment is compared to the percentage of single-parent families resulting from divorce? If you have a child, you shouldn't be getting divorced. Getting divorced when a child is involved is selfish unless there is blatant abuse. Find a way to make the marriage work, it's a lifelong commitment. You made a mistake marrying that person? Too fucking bad, you should have thought about that BEFORE.
Teenage pregnancy? Well, look who didn't raise THAT child right.
Anyway... I'm not a Republican, but I'd imagine you're a Democrat sitting on the left side of the fence if you tried to use that as a derogatory term. I've been noticing that the Democrats aren't huge fans of this thing called "responsibility", which is probably why you're arguing with me about this in the first place.
Thinking that you can live life however you want in "the way you deem appropriate" just doesn't cut it when a child is involved. A child is a huge responsibility. And personally, I don't even think that child-bearing should be a right, it should be a privilege, just like a driver's license. You should have to prove you're qualified to raise a child, and hopefully they'd make it harder than a DL to obtain, so you'd have to REALLY WANT that license to get one.
Children aren't toys, they're not things to show off, they're a responsibility, and many people have forgotten that.
there is nothing wrong with the concept of daycare
There is when it's used to raise your child, instead of as a temporary situation (i.e. you had to go to the doctor that day.)
If you aren't willing to sacrifice your time to care for the child that YOU brought into the world, then you shouldn't have had the child in the first place -- the child deserves better.
There is no way you can argue that parents aren't responsible for the way their own children are raised.
Yeah -- if you spend all of your money on a new car, golf clubs, etc. etc.
It's called scaling back. People do it all the time, whether they have children or not. And it's your responsibility to scale back when you have a child.
I think if you're not willing to make the time commitment to having kids, you shouldn't have kids. If that involves wealth, so be it -- don't be poor and raise a child in a shitty situation.
There's a huge difference between people like you that only need a babysitter 10% of the time, and the people who put their kids in daycare because they're working. I have a HUGE problem with a household that has both parents working when their child isn't even in school yet.
Having a child is a big responsibility. If you aren't willing to take on the responsibility, you simply shouldn't have the child, end of story. If you don't stay at home and raise and care for your child yourself until it's time for kindergarten, you're a lousy parent, period.
But isn't that a problem in itself? People should be raising their own children; if you don't have time for that, then you shouldn't have children in the first place.
People should just be responsible parents, rather than have to worry about whether their child care provider is responsible.
You'd be surprised! People lie about where they've worked and for how long, all the time. It's pretty funny when they get caught, too.
"So, it says you worked at X... we called them, they say you didn't work there. You lied, didn't you. What else did you lie about on the application?"
How would you have heard of these bands if it wasn't for the RIAA promoting them via albums? How would they be able to go on tour and draw crowds?
In short: P2P networks stay as they are but optionally hook into a non-profit collection agency.
Key word: "optionally". Why would people pay money for a subscription if they can just hop on to another P2P network and get everything for free?
If AIX didn't have anything unique/worthwhile in it, you can be pretty sure that all the AIX systems would have been switched for Linux by now.
How very applicable to Windows as well. Zing!
Relevant portions bolded:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
In other words, if there's no indication that I'm drunk, no one has the right to run a breathalyzer test on me.
Even if this crap bill gets passed, the Supreme Court will knock it down.
The data probably isn't lost though; "click of death" sounds like the drive is failing because one of the moving parts (most likely the arm or the motor) is burnt out. That shouldn't affect the platter (and therefore the data) inside the drive, so a drive recovery place should be able to get the data off of the drive.
Data recovery gets expensive, though, so if IBM would foot the bill in addition to a drive replacement, that might make up for the gigantic problem they've created.
But then you factor in the inconvenience... really, IBM should replace the drive, WITH your data on it, AND issue you a gift certificate or something to make amends...
I didn't say "Learn English properly", I said "Learn to use English properly."
How were you modded Insightful? You should have been modded Flamebait for attempting to fix something that wasn't broken.
I hate the moderation system.
You make me ill. Microsoft posts numbers from independent research companies, and they tell you the name or names of the companies that do the research.
r 99/TCOpr.asp).
As a dated example, since it was the first one I Googled:
Microsoft Corp. today announced that Microsoft(R) SQL Server(TM) offers a solution whose total cost of ownership (TCO) is 3.7 times lower than that of Oracle, according to independent research done by the Boston-based Aberdeen Group Inc. (http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/1999/Ma
So, please, go here:
http://www.aberdeen.com/
And reply to me with examples of a pro-Microsoft bias.
I don't mind Grammar Nazis, but if you're going to do it, do it the right way.
Observe:
The word "English" is supposed to be capitalized, and a grammatically correct sentence would be written like "learn to use English properly, dipshit," dipshit.
I doubt anyone would be confused if they went to a store and saw Windows next to Lindows.
So it would be perfectly OK to start a car company called Yolkswagen, and sell a Getta model?
The problem is, there are a TON of moderators that will go and mod-bomb people because they don't like them, regardless of how well-reasoned their post is. Posts are supposed to be moderated, not individuals, but that's not how a lot of people do it.
I guess Honda is evil for integrating non-open-standards air conditioning units into their vehicles! Honda is the Satan!
Get a clue!
I so burned you about your crappy website weeks ago, are you still upset about that? I hope one of your new businesses isn't web design!
Man, at least point the ScottCam at something interesting! We are quite literally watching paint dry on the side of your house...
Often. :-)
Unfortunately this falls into the category of "tough shit!" since we can't really defy the laws of physics...
I don't look at sigs because I HAVE THEM TURNED OFF. That way I don't have to look at them, and I don't have to bitch about it to everybody in the world because I'm offended by it.
Oh, and here's a link to http://www.goatse.cx, why don't you click on it and then bitch for an hour?
Blah blah blah, too bad you posted anonymously or you would have gotten modded down for this lovely piece of Flamebait and it would be harder for you to move up to posting at +1. You are obviously part of the problem with this site, bitching about sigs that can easily be turned off. Blow me.