I consider myself a Libertarian-Conservative, which is what I think attracts many people to the Libertarian party. I myself have remained registered as a Republican, though I've supported Libertarian candidates and even helped more than a few get on a the ballot. However, whenever a Libertarian gets foisted onto the shoulders of a crowd such as/., I have to leer squinty eyed at them and poke holes in their statements. I make no bones about why I'm still a registered Republican instead of a registered Libertarian: many outright leftists have sallied to the libertarian party because the core principles of the LPUSA form a perfect populist base for their radical agenda (kudos to anyone who kept track of all the propaganda power-word cliches in that one liner, I count five). So, without further adieu, there are a few points where I have to disagree with Senior Badnarik.
How can we change the system so people have the choice between multiple candidates and not just two?
Okay, this really isn't a beef with Badnarik, but with the question which itself presupposes that Americans at large are denied a choice. While one could argue such, the evidence rarely bears this out. In most cases, its simply because what every political scientist knows, that American is fairly well homogenized in terms of the sociopolitical spectrum, and there's only really room for two major candidates. We've had a decade of third party candidates now, and all they really do is siphon the votes of disaffected independants who would otherwise support a major candidate.
For that reason, I want to actually give kudo's to Badnariks support of Approval voting (although I oppose IRV, and if anyone mentions Condorcet I'll shoot 'em in the ass). Approval voting would allow people to express a mandate for a third party candidate or platform while letting them make a strategic vote for the candidate that both most represents them and has a real chance of winning. We may find that people are happier with their choices under approval voting, and I suspect that more people will participate, though thats only my opinion.
If the "wasted vote" argument ever held any water, it doesn't any more. The two major parties have moved toward a weird, non-existent "center" for the last 50 years, to the point where it's difficult to tell them apart.
We could argue all day about whether Bush or Kerry is the "lesser evil." The fact is that they both support the war in Iraq.
Kerry changed his mind this afternoon. For the third or fourth time in as many months. To say that it's "difficult to tell them apart" is a matter of opinion. For the average joe working his or her 9 to 5 job, yes. But that average joe isn't concerned about the issues that people who are attracted to minor parties is. Of course, I'm of the opinion that it is the responsibility of the electorate to research and make up their own mind on candidates and issues, but most people are inclined to let the mainstream media feed them the issues and then make snap decisions. Regardless, I think it's disingenuous for any minor party candidate to disparage any other party, even the big two, because it takes away from the quality of political debate in this country. That tactic is just pandering to the same sentiment that have disgruntled the votors into exploring minor parties to begin with.
Lastly, I don't think the "wasted vote" is an argument, it's a sentiment. People who are faced with supporting a minor party candidate, but still want their vote to count do in fact feel that their vote is wasted if they don't go for the electable candidate who best fits their sentiment. But that's academic.
That doesn't mean that I have to like Saddam Hussein. It just means that the legitimate interests of the United states are not served, nor are the legitimate rights of Americans and Iraqis respected, by invading and occu
Judging by your question, you didn't understand what I was getting at.
The proposed legislation allowed employers to give me flex time without penalty over a two week period instead of one. As it stands now, every hour I work over 40 hours in a week is paid at double overtime. However, if I work less than 40 hours the next week, I don't get paid any less of an hourly rate. By allowing hours to be tabulated over a two week pay period, my employer (and I) have greater flexibility in structuring my hours.
So here's the deal. Under current labor rules, if I go to my boss and say "hey boss, can I work a few hours extra this week, then take monday off? I want to skip next monday so I can go to a concert 300 miles away Sunday night." He turns around, punches keys on a calculator...72 hr x 18 $/hr + 8 hr x 36 $/hr = $1296 + $288 = $1584....as opposed to 80 hr x 18 $/hr = $1440....so to let me go to the concert, he has to pay $144 more than if he said no. Under the revised rules Bush supported, if I wanted to see that concert, my employer would pay no additional wages for the same amount of work over a two week period, and so long as I didn't slack off in my quality of work (aka short-timers disease), he'd have no objections to letting me go.
That's what flex time is about. Companies currently offer flex time and comp time to employees in order to allow them greater flexibility in their work schedule as a perk. But those companies who do so pay alot more, and many have stopped offering these perks to employees because the additional expense makes them less competitive. This also puts alot of working familes at a disadvantage, because parents who want to attend school functions, or have to take their kids to a doctor, can't make up the lost time unless they get it inside the same work period.
For starters, we are not getting the Bush vs. Kerry debate here, we are getting the Bush Campaign vs. the Kerry Campaign debate. I'd be suprised if either candidate even signed off on these personally.
The second problem is that we have Kerry - who has no official administrative record what-so-ever, claiming he'll do something, but knowing full well he may or may not have the power to do that once in the White House. It's easy to make promises, its quite another to actually stick by them. One t hing we can trust Kerry with is that he will be on whatever side of the issue his audience is on. He'll vote for it before he votes against it, he'll support it, then he'll oppose it, he'll throw the bill over the wall, then he'll say he threw the pen over the wall, then he'll say that pens and bills are interchangable, then he'll attack Bush's record through his surrogate 527 cohorts.
Then, we have Bush's record, which is much more solid so its easier to point at failures of his policy (that is, wherein as far as the/. is concerned) as opposed to successes of his policy. If the current media is any indication, you won't even hear about things like the largest spending on AIDS programs in Africa ever, or the billions of dollars of support directed at developing alternate energy, or even the Bush Energy plan which would have reduced our dependance on foreign oil by 2% by now if it had been passed way back when. And of course, Bush will let 527s supporting him go off on Kerry for a while before asking them to stop, in which case they ignore him and keep right on hammering Kerry.
Lastly, neither one gives specifics. Bush can point to what he's done, which is all good and fine, and Kerry can claim what he will do, but either way these one liners are useless.
I'm still not seeing the problem. Real scientists - as opposed to politically militant pseudoscientists - all acknowledge that creationism along with evolution are equally indisputable, as are more incredible theories such as astrogenisis. One also has to remember that creationism as depicted in Genesis does not outline the specific rise of life on our planet, nor does it rule out evolution as a post-creation process, nor does it rule out evolution as a mechanism of creation. All Bush has said according to the hacked-up quotes in this slate article is that he supports the teaching of creationism in schools should the local community want it. The part about morality - I don't even know how that is relevant to the issue of creationism.
I'm more interested on why people assume that it has to be creationism OR evolution. But then, the same people who hold that view are want to be oppositional for whatever reason, which is one of the driving forces behind Anti-Bushisms.
As for Bush's "radical religious beliefs", you need to get a new cliche. Most theologans agree Bush is far from a "radical", he is actually quite centrist. I think you confuse radicalism for integrity; most people who share Bush's beliefs aren't willing to risk any form of conflict to see them enacted.
...anhydrous. The last part is very important, because - although rubbing alcohol is hydrophobic (you actually put it in your gas tank to get rid of water buildup), it is still often contained in some alcohol. Make sure you get anyhydrous, because what little water there is won't likely be ionized or contain salts. For about $10 worth of alcohol, you can fill up a sink, and use a standard $1.00 hardware store paintbrush to gently brush the circuit boards. As for drivers, they're pretty much goners. The hair, dead skin, and dust particulates that build up in there can't be practically cleaned out, so its just as cost effective to buy new cd and floppy drives.
Of course, wait for this crap to dry out before you go plugging things up. Also insist that the new computer room have air cleaning equipment, because even without effluent enhance air pumped in, the computers will pick up lots of trash.
Also note that this is an OSHA hazardous waste situation, so you should ask for a respirator and protective clothing before volunteering to do this.
I used it, but the GTK client was buggy as shit. However, I discovered quite a few good tunes once I got a working version installed. Clients for Win/Mac/Linux available.
Folks, this was a golden ticket to easier work hours, but a bunch of labor union politicos and leftist nutjobs had to go and fuck it up. So now, instead of working and hour and half later each day for a week, then taking Monday off next week, I have to use up my sick time to play hookey and catch that Slipknot concert. THANKS YOU DUMB FUCKING LIBERALS!
The title says it all. Censorship means the story was actively suppressed by an authority. That doesn't happen in America. The reality is that the media is market driven, and the major media outlets didn't believe there was enough interest in these issues. That is not censorship. It is also a falsity to assume that these stories didn't get into the public. By this standard, every story which appears on slashdot was censored, because rarely will you find a/. story on the front page of the major media organizations (although the NY Times and Washington Post pops up more often than one would think).
It's also worth noting that the subject matter of this top 25 list is nothing more than hot button issues for 'progressives'. The linked stories are from indie journalists self-posessed of the notion that these issues are important and worthy of being publicized. Really, it's nothing more than a google-bombing circle jerk of activist issues. What I didn't find on this list would include how John Kerry lied on his application for purple hearts, or how John Kerry voted to increases taxes on the middle class and elderly nearly 50 times in his senate career. But then, that would be no different than what is going on here.
It just so happens that talkshow host Clark Howard hit on this topic today (maybe he peruses/.). We pretty much agree that the problem is the government supported monopolies of telecom companies (phone, cable), and that the solution is good ol free-market competition. But, since the FCC is pretty much propping up telecom monopolies with a myriad of crushing regulations, competition is almost impossible.
Then comes the geurilla solution which has been covered here on slashdot and was talked about by Howard - free municipal wireless mesh networks. The city of Philadelphia estimates complete coverage of Philadelphia with mesh networks will only cost $10 million USD. Now since its government, you can double that figure, but it'll still be far less than what a telecom would expend on traditional buried cable methods.
Just another example of how open source is a tremendous economic foundation.
The paper is talking about effects on the order of 0.5*10^-10 m/s^2. I don't know how anyone could measure this with a pendulum.
Very easily. Torsion balances routinely give observable measurements of large - but man-handleable (as if that were a word) - masses. Give me a big enough lever, and Ill move the world, even if only 1x10^-125 m at a time.
You think the bureaucratic morass in Washington is bad, try Venezuela, or Columbia, or Chile. Because there are so many representatives, and so many differing points of view, about the only thing that will get passed is legislation saying the sky is blue... and even that would be met with substantial opposition and would maybe pass by a 55%-45% majority.
Yet, people bemoan the fact that third parties don't get more than a token share of the vote, or that they are somehow disinfranchised through a conspiracy of the establishment.
...for every "Farscape Troll" there's a "Farscape Sucked" troll. Sorry troll-boy, but it's common knowledge that Farscape wasn't cancelled because of poor ratings, but because the rising production costs cut into Sci-Fi's budget. (Some also believe Bonnie Hammer - the devil incarnate herself - got into a pissing match with the German company who owned Henson Productions at the time, and cancelled Farscape as a final "fuck you". The fact that Farscape's airing is back on less than a year after Brian Henson and friends spent personal fortunes to reacquire the franchise makes this seem plausible.)
...so when the hell are we supposed to read? I'm "lucky" enough to have a job with lots of down time, and Books-A-Million and Amazon have swallowed whole percentages of my personal income lately. I might recommend: "The Connection" by Stephen F. Hayes, "The Third Terrorist" by Jayna Davis, "In Code" by Sarah and David Flannery, "A Tour of the Calculus" by...nevermind, I don't recommend that one.
...considering it tanked at the box office, about the only way its going to get distributed is by johnny download. And the DVD is expected out this fall? Don't count on it boys - McCain-Feingold will put the kaibosh on sales for September and October.
...your vapid attempts at appearing high-minded simply prove nothing more than your lack of common sense. I watched "Roger and Me". I watched "Bowling for Columbine". I read "Stupid White Men". I've watched Moore on talk shows and interviews. I've been to his website. I don't need to see F911 to know that it is nothing more than the same hack wannabe demagoguery and villification of his political targets that he's always engaged in. Moore is a pathetic populist who managed to cultivate his reputation beyond a mere cult abnormality by feeding on the seething irrational hatred of Bush coming from the fringe left.
But then, irrationality and seething hatred is what people like you are about. You spend three posts talking about the need to be objective, but then you go on this pedantic rant about the "vibe" you're getting from me, and proceed to make unfounded and baseless assertions about who I am.
In short...you're a fucking idiot...and a Moore groupy...which really is just me being redundant.
Emphasis on Mental. I make valid points, and I'm modded down as a "troll", when the fact of the matter is that the parent article is completely off topic for the entire site.
Nevertheless, "why" the movie was sold out may have to do with ticket sales policies. Theaters pay for movies on a per-seat basis. A big money maker like Star Wars Episode III, the theater owner might bid up all 900 seats an a room. But a 'documentary' like this is note expected to be a draw. The bean counters might have only bid up a hundred of those seats to hedge their losses. So if they bid up 100 seats, and sell 100 seats, they can claim "sold out" even though the theater never hit capacity. Most theaters rarely sell a ticket for every seat, or even plan on doing it. They make their money on concessions, not on ticket sales. Up to 20 seats may be held in "reserve", also known as "elbow room refunds".
Then again, it might be because MoveOn.org bought all the seats up, which is what they said they'd do in last Thursdays Action Alert e-mail. Oh yeah baby...I subscribe to the left wing attack machine's e-mails. It's called "intelligence" gathering, oddly enough.
I've talked to folks about the move. Some of them didnt' give a shit. Some of them already knew what the movie would say, so they went and saw Shrek 2. Some of them saw Bowling for Columbine, and afterword learned about how slanted, distorted, and basically wrong it all was, felt betrayed and cheated, and swore to never pay attention to Michael Moore again (even though they are ardent Bush-haters and selfproclaimed Liberals...or "Progressives" since liberal is now a bad word).
I have one question. Slashdot is "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters". Other than michael and his ad-hoc wing-nut anti-American activism, why are we even looking at this submission? If/. is covering this, they damn well cover MMHA
That's "taxpayer funded", and moreso "phone-user" funded. Just another example of how taxes and government are evil, and not always necessary evils at that.
The "understanding" user said it all. He got more than he 'didn't pay for'. Some people - like "enraged" act as if the world owes them something for free. Get a clue people - unless you actually pay for a service, you have not right what-so-ever to expect anything, including continued service.
Also worth noting, "understanding" is calm and rational. "enraged" is a whining snarling back-biting little bitch. For those of you considering provided an internet based service free of charge, think about the multitudes of "engrageds" out there.
...and this may have been pointed out, but the US Navy built the first "stealth ship" years ago. This isn't even the first stealth ocean-going surface ship. The us built the IX-529 Sea Shadow in the late 1980's and began testing it in the 1990's.
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, this really isn't a beef with Badnarik, but with the question which itself presupposes that Americans at large are denied a choice. While one could argue such, the evidence rarely bears this out. In most cases, its simply because what every political scientist knows, that American is fairly well homogenized in terms of the sociopolitical spectrum, and there's only really room for two major candidates. We've had a decade of third party candidates now, and all they really do is siphon the votes of disaffected independants who would otherwise support a major candidate.
For that reason, I want to actually give kudo's to Badnariks support of Approval voting (although I oppose IRV, and if anyone mentions Condorcet I'll shoot 'em in the ass). Approval voting would allow people to express a mandate for a third party candidate or platform while letting them make a strategic vote for the candidate that both most represents them and has a real chance of winning. We may find that people are happier with their choices under approval voting, and I suspect that more people will participate, though thats only my opinion.
Kerry changed his mind this afternoon. For the third or fourth time in as many months. To say that it's "difficult to tell them apart" is a matter of opinion. For the average joe working his or her 9 to 5 job, yes. But that average joe isn't concerned about the issues that people who are attracted to minor parties is. Of course, I'm of the opinion that it is the responsibility of the electorate to research and make up their own mind on candidates and issues, but most people are inclined to let the mainstream media feed them the issues and then make snap decisions. Regardless, I think it's disingenuous for any minor party candidate to disparage any other party, even the big two, because it takes away from the quality of political debate in this country. That tactic is just pandering to the same sentiment that have disgruntled the votors into exploring minor parties to begin with.
Lastly, I don't think the "wasted vote" is an argument, it's a sentiment. People who are faced with supporting a minor party candidate, but still want their vote to count do in fact feel that their vote is wasted if they don't go for the electable candidate who best fits their sentiment. But that's academic.
Judging by your question, you didn't understand what I was getting at.
The proposed legislation allowed employers to give me flex time without penalty over a two week period instead of one. As it stands now, every hour I work over 40 hours in a week is paid at double overtime. However, if I work less than 40 hours the next week, I don't get paid any less of an hourly rate. By allowing hours to be tabulated over a two week pay period, my employer (and I) have greater flexibility in structuring my hours.
So here's the deal. Under current labor rules, if I go to my boss and say "hey boss, can I work a few hours extra this week, then take monday off? I want to skip next monday so I can go to a concert 300 miles away Sunday night." He turns around, punches keys on a calculator...72 hr x 18 $/hr + 8 hr x 36 $/hr = $1296 + $288 = $1584....as opposed to 80 hr x 18 $/hr = $1440....so to let me go to the concert, he has to pay $144 more than if he said no. Under the revised rules Bush supported, if I wanted to see that concert, my employer would pay no additional wages for the same amount of work over a two week period, and so long as I didn't slack off in my quality of work (aka short-timers disease), he'd have no objections to letting me go.
That's what flex time is about. Companies currently offer flex time and comp time to employees in order to allow them greater flexibility in their work schedule as a perk. But those companies who do so pay alot more, and many have stopped offering these perks to employees because the additional expense makes them less competitive. This also puts alot of working familes at a disadvantage, because parents who want to attend school functions, or have to take their kids to a doctor, can't make up the lost time unless they get it inside the same work period.
For starters, we are not getting the Bush vs. Kerry debate here, we are getting the Bush Campaign vs. the Kerry Campaign debate. I'd be suprised if either candidate even signed off on these personally.
/. is concerned) as opposed to successes of his policy. If the current media is any indication, you won't even hear about things like the largest spending on AIDS programs in Africa ever, or the billions of dollars of support directed at developing alternate energy, or even the Bush Energy plan which would have reduced our dependance on foreign oil by 2% by now if it had been passed way back when. And of course, Bush will let 527s supporting him go off on Kerry for a while before asking them to stop, in which case they ignore him and keep right on hammering Kerry.
The second problem is that we have Kerry - who has no official administrative record what-so-ever, claiming he'll do something, but knowing full well he may or may not have the power to do that once in the White House. It's easy to make promises, its quite another to actually stick by them. One t hing we can trust Kerry with is that he will be on whatever side of the issue his audience is on. He'll vote for it before he votes against it, he'll support it, then he'll oppose it, he'll throw the bill over the wall, then he'll say he threw the pen over the wall, then he'll say that pens and bills are interchangable, then he'll attack Bush's record through his surrogate 527 cohorts.
Then, we have Bush's record, which is much more solid so its easier to point at failures of his policy (that is, wherein as far as the
Lastly, neither one gives specifics. Bush can point to what he's done, which is all good and fine, and Kerry can claim what he will do, but either way these one liners are useless.
I'm still not seeing the problem. Real scientists - as opposed to politically militant pseudoscientists - all acknowledge that creationism along with evolution are equally indisputable, as are more incredible theories such as astrogenisis. One also has to remember that creationism as depicted in Genesis does not outline the specific rise of life on our planet, nor does it rule out evolution as a post-creation process, nor does it rule out evolution as a mechanism of creation. All Bush has said according to the hacked-up quotes in this slate article is that he supports the teaching of creationism in schools should the local community want it. The part about morality - I don't even know how that is relevant to the issue of creationism.
I'm more interested on why people assume that it has to be creationism OR evolution. But then, the same people who hold that view are want to be oppositional for whatever reason, which is one of the driving forces behind Anti-Bushisms.
As for Bush's "radical religious beliefs", you need to get a new cliche. Most theologans agree Bush is far from a "radical", he is actually quite centrist. I think you confuse radicalism for integrity; most people who share Bush's beliefs aren't willing to risk any form of conflict to see them enacted.
...anhydrous. The last part is very important, because - although rubbing alcohol is hydrophobic (you actually put it in your gas tank to get rid of water buildup), it is still often contained in some alcohol. Make sure you get anyhydrous, because what little water there is won't likely be ionized or contain salts. For about $10 worth of alcohol, you can fill up a sink, and use a standard $1.00 hardware store paintbrush to gently brush the circuit boards. As for drivers, they're pretty much goners. The hair, dead skin, and dust particulates that build up in there can't be practically cleaned out, so its just as cost effective to buy new cd and floppy drives.
Of course, wait for this crap to dry out before you go plugging things up. Also insist that the new computer room have air cleaning equipment, because even without effluent enhance air pumped in, the computers will pick up lots of trash.
Also note that this is an OSHA hazardous waste situation, so you should ask for a respirator and protective clothing before volunteering to do this.
irate.sourceforge.net
I used it, but the GTK client was buggy as shit. However, I discovered quite a few good tunes once I got a working version installed. Clients for Win/Mac/Linux available.
Folks, this was a golden ticket to easier work hours, but a bunch of labor union politicos and leftist nutjobs had to go and fuck it up. So now, instead of working and hour and half later each day for a week, then taking Monday off next week, I have to use up my sick time to play hookey and catch that Slipknot concert. THANKS YOU DUMB FUCKING LIBERALS!
"Site Design by Left Coast Web Design"
I click on the link, and there is no site. Anyone smell a rat here?
The title says it all. Censorship means the story was actively suppressed by an authority. That doesn't happen in America. The reality is that the media is market driven, and the major media outlets didn't believe there was enough interest in these issues. That is not censorship. It is also a falsity to assume that these stories didn't get into the public. By this standard, every story which appears on slashdot was censored, because rarely will you find a /. story on the front page of the major media organizations (although the NY Times and Washington Post pops up more often than one would think).
It's also worth noting that the subject matter of this top 25 list is nothing more than hot button issues for 'progressives'. The linked stories are from indie journalists self-posessed of the notion that these issues are important and worthy of being publicized. Really, it's nothing more than a google-bombing circle jerk of activist issues. What I didn't find on this list would include how John Kerry lied on his application for purple hearts, or how John Kerry voted to increases taxes on the middle class and elderly nearly 50 times in his senate career. But then, that would be no different than what is going on here.
It just so happens that talkshow host Clark Howard hit on this topic today (maybe he peruses /.). We pretty much agree that the problem is the government supported monopolies of telecom companies (phone, cable), and that the solution is good ol free-market competition. But, since the FCC is pretty much propping up telecom monopolies with a myriad of crushing regulations, competition is almost impossible.
Then comes the geurilla solution which has been covered here on slashdot and was talked about by Howard - free municipal wireless mesh networks. The city of Philadelphia estimates complete coverage of Philadelphia with mesh networks will only cost $10 million USD. Now since its government, you can double that figure, but it'll still be far less than what a telecom would expend on traditional buried cable methods.
Just another example of how open source is a tremendous economic foundation.
...to yesterday's news on Drudge Report.
I remember when Slashdot was relevant. Do you?
Very easily. Torsion balances routinely give observable measurements of large - but man-handleable (as if that were a word) - masses. Give me a big enough lever, and Ill move the world, even if only 1x10^-125 m at a time.
Yet, people bemoan the fact that third parties don't get more than a token share of the vote, or that they are somehow disinfranchised through a conspiracy of the establishment.
...for every "Farscape Troll" there's a "Farscape Sucked" troll. Sorry troll-boy, but it's common knowledge that Farscape wasn't cancelled because of poor ratings, but because the rising production costs cut into Sci-Fi's budget. (Some also believe Bonnie Hammer - the devil incarnate herself - got into a pissing match with the German company who owned Henson Productions at the time, and cancelled Farscape as a final "fuck you". The fact that Farscape's airing is back on less than a year after Brian Henson and friends spent personal fortunes to reacquire the franchise makes this seem plausible.)
Kim Jong Il has a weblog.
Why is this framed as a US vs the World issue? Who gives a fuck...honestly...your insecurity and anti-US hatemongering is getting annoying.
...so when the hell are we supposed to read? I'm "lucky" enough to have a job with lots of down time, and Books-A-Million and Amazon have swallowed whole percentages of my personal income lately. I might recommend: "The Connection" by Stephen F. Hayes, "The Third Terrorist" by Jayna Davis, "In Code" by Sarah and David Flannery, "A Tour of the Calculus" by...nevermind, I don't recommend that one.
...considering it tanked at the box office, about the only way its going to get distributed is by johnny download. And the DVD is expected out this fall? Don't count on it boys - McCain-Feingold will put the kaibosh on sales for September and October.
...your vapid attempts at appearing high-minded simply prove nothing more than your lack of common sense. I watched "Roger and Me". I watched "Bowling for Columbine". I read "Stupid White Men". I've watched Moore on talk shows and interviews. I've been to his website. I don't need to see F911 to know that it is nothing more than the same hack wannabe demagoguery and villification of his political targets that he's always engaged in. Moore is a pathetic populist who managed to cultivate his reputation beyond a mere cult abnormality by feeding on the seething irrational hatred of Bush coming from the fringe left.
But then, irrationality and seething hatred is what people like you are about. You spend three posts talking about the need to be objective, but then you go on this pedantic rant about the "vibe" you're getting from me, and proceed to make unfounded and baseless assertions about who I am.
In short...you're a fucking idiot...and a Moore groupy...which really is just me being redundant.
The fact that the man is incapable of presenting the truth suffices.
Emphasis on Mental. I make valid points, and I'm modded down as a "troll", when the fact of the matter is that the parent article is completely off topic for the entire site.
Nevertheless, "why" the movie was sold out may have to do with ticket sales policies. Theaters pay for movies on a per-seat basis. A big money maker like Star Wars Episode III, the theater owner might bid up all 900 seats an a room. But a 'documentary' like this is note expected to be a draw. The bean counters might have only bid up a hundred of those seats to hedge their losses. So if they bid up 100 seats, and sell 100 seats, they can claim "sold out" even though the theater never hit capacity. Most theaters rarely sell a ticket for every seat, or even plan on doing it. They make their money on concessions, not on ticket sales. Up to 20 seats may be held in "reserve", also known as "elbow room refunds".
Then again, it might be because MoveOn.org bought all the seats up, which is what they said they'd do in last Thursdays Action Alert e-mail. Oh yeah baby...I subscribe to the left wing attack machine's e-mails. It's called "intelligence" gathering, oddly enough.
I've talked to folks about the move. Some of them didnt' give a shit. Some of them already knew what the movie would say, so they went and saw Shrek 2. Some of them saw Bowling for Columbine, and afterword learned about how slanted, distorted, and basically wrong it all was, felt betrayed and cheated, and swore to never pay attention to Michael Moore again (even though they are ardent Bush-haters and selfproclaimed Liberals...or "Progressives" since liberal is now a bad word).
/. is covering this, they damn well cover MMHA
I have one question. Slashdot is "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters". Other than michael and his ad-hoc wing-nut anti-American activism, why are we even looking at this submission? If
That's "taxpayer funded", and moreso "phone-user" funded. Just another example of how taxes and government are evil, and not always necessary evils at that.
The "understanding" user said it all. He got more than he 'didn't pay for'. Some people - like "enraged" act as if the world owes them something for free. Get a clue people - unless you actually pay for a service, you have not right what-so-ever to expect anything, including continued service.
Also worth noting, "understanding" is calm and rational. "enraged" is a whining snarling back-biting little bitch. For those of you considering provided an internet based service free of charge, think about the multitudes of "engrageds" out there.
...and this may have been pointed out, but the US Navy built the first "stealth ship" years ago. This isn't even the first stealth ocean-going surface ship. The us built the IX-529 Sea Shadow in the late 1980's and began testing it in the 1990's.