Dude, would you please update your rant. With Ubuntu, you don't look for a program, pay out a bunch of money and hope it works for you.
You pull up a program like Adept, and type in what you want to do in a search line. It gives you a list of programs that might meet your criteria. You click on the ones you want to try, then on "Apply Updates". It churns. It mashes. It slices. It dices. You look at TV for a minute (or continue working on something else). And then you use your program.
Note that I left out a few of the steps that you'll do in Windows. You don't fish around for a CD. You don't type in a 14 digit registration key. You don't have to remove a slug of crapware from running in the background after your install. And finally....
My experience is the exactly the opposite. Never had a windows box to join my wireless network without significant fiddling. Of course, I'm careful to make sure any wireless card I get with Linus comes with an Atheros chip.
Apple, Google, Adobe, Sun, etc. all have a vested interest in seeing Microsoft weakened, if not eliminated altogether. The can't attack Windows directly, but what about installing enough performance eating crapware to drive the system into the ground? As long as it can all be blamed on Bill and Co. ?
Personally, I think the poor little upstarts of doing a FINE job.
We got a lot of work ahead of us, but we can still fix this. The only problem is that we need to find people to vote in to Congress that will actually be able to make the changes required.
I agree Cowmonaut, unfortunately, the Federal Treasury is now seen as a giant piggybank that we get to steal from. Each member of Congress is judged by his constituents on how much he was able to get out of the Great Piggybank in the Sky. The longer a Congressman hangs around, the more powerful committees he gets to sit on, the more powerful his position becomes, the more cash he is able to bring back home. Several long-time, powerful incumbents have used that argument as a campaign platform.
My solution for fixing Congress: Randomize committee selections, including chairmanships. A freshman Congresswoman from North Carolina should be no less powerful than an old pervert from Massachusetts. If he is such a great speaker, full of eloquence and persuasion, then he should be able to convince the electorate of that. If he can, he should be able to stay as long as the electorate believes in him/her.
"I have a brother that was fired from a decent paying job with the sanitation department. By his own words, he spent most of the day driving around hiding from the supervisors so that he could sleep. He was fired because he wouldn't get out of bed in the morning and was consistently late. Some people just cannot be helped."
Sounds like your brother has either a sleeping disorder or clinical depression, both of which are medical conditions that require treatment from a doctor. It's almost certainly not his "fault".
You were able to perform a diagnosis from 4 sentences posted to Slashdot? Damn, you're good.
He had no problem staying up all night partying. I never saw him unexpectedly fall asleep in any other social situation. He had no problem waking up when the other workers called him to say the supervisor was on his way. Whining Anonymous Cowards aside, it was most definitely his fault.
You probably wouldn't argue with the fact that the vast majority of the users of such a healthcare scheme would be good, honest, deserving folks who are ill and need fixing up.
I wouldn't argue that good, honest, deserving folks who are ill need fixing up. I would argue that they need a federal bureaucrat involved in the process. I would argue that, for the most part, they already have systems in place to attend to themselves. I would argue that the main impediment to them maintaining said systems, is the ridiculous way we have tied our health maintenance programs to our jobs. I would argue that the federal involvement debases community involvement and invites corruption.
As a Christian you should thoroughly endorse a system which does so much to help the needy and those who are worse off than yourself
You sir, do not understand Christianity or charity.
It is not charity for me to take someone else's property and spread it around as I see fit. it is only charity when *I* take of my resources and give to who I see as the needy. Christianity teaches that I must spread my wealth around. *I* must do it. The benefit I receive is a spiritual reward. You may not understand, or even care to understand, the reward that I think I recieve; but, you don't have to. It was my charity to give. I take nothing from you when I give it.
And I must spread the word of Christ as I spread my wealth. That is what we Christians call Christ's Great Commission. If you reject the words I bring, then you reject Christ. I'm free to leave you to your misery and move on. Again, you may not understand, or care to understand, my viewpoint; but, again, it is my charity to give. I take nothing from you, and leave all free to do as they will.
The system that Democrats in general, and Obama in particular, like to support and call charity robs me of the benefits of my charity on one side, and emasculates my commission on the other. It may be the law. You may even call it fair. But it is not charity. It's just paying taxes. It robs me of having any say in determining if the people it goes to are deserving in any way. It forces me to contribute resources, without forcing me to contribute emotional involvement in seeing a proper outcome.
The end result is that you see a destitute on the street and in your mind you say, "Why don't they get on a government program." The people who do receive the government aid have no one to prod them to do better...no one to stand with them as they turn their lives around, become productive and no longer need the aid.
As a Christian, I argue that the government's usurpation of the church's place is a sad abomination. It robs everyone and ultimately helps no one.
In North Carolina we have mandatory liability insurance. It does nothing for me. It pays the other party if I am the cause of an accident.
The bank will require you to have collision insurance. It will do nothing for me. It possibly pays off the loan if you are in an accident. It happens a lot where someone buys a new car, and it gets totalled driving off the lot. The car loses %30 of its value when you sign the purchase papers, since it is now a 'used' car. The insurance only pays BlueBook value, so the new car purchaser is out 30%. They would sue me for the rest of it, if they think they can prove that I was negligent.
The problem with health insurance is that large book of exceptions and exclusions that you can get hold of if you request it specifically and have a law degree to be able to interpret. The truth is that if you get cancer, the insurance company will try to find a way out of every medical bill you send in. They pay people who do nothing but find ways to deny you coverage. The job title is 'adjuster', and I've never known one to receive bonuses for adjusting thing up for you.
And the selfishness of "it is ALL my money I don't want to share it" attitude
You need to look a little closer. The attitude is "it is ALL my money I don't want to share it WITHOUT HAVING ANY CONTROL...why the hell did I work for it otherwise."
So I'm a Christian. A guy stops me outside a fast-food joint and ask for some money to get something to eat. I'll feed any hungry person. I'll give you half my peanut-butter sandwich. Just ask, and lets get you on a path so that you can stand tall and not ever have to ask anyone again.
I say, "C'mon. Sandwich, nuthin'. Let's get you a meal!"
"Uhm! I don't really like McDonald's. I'd prefer BurgerKing."
I pause, but not for long. "No problem. Fine. They have better burgers anyway. C'mon let's go get you somethin'."
"You won't just give me a dollar?"
"No, man. I'm not going to give you money."
"Fuck you. I don't want no hamburger. Asshole." And with that he walks away.
I've had similar experiences several times. Most people just hand over money. I'll help, but I know that cash does MUCH more harm than good. The liquor store was a block down the street in this case.
I have a brother that was fired from a decent paying job with the sanitation department. By his own words, he spent most of the day driving around hiding from the supervisors so that he could sleep. He was fired because he wouldn't get out of bed in the morning and was consistently late. Some people just cannot be helped.
When the people say they don't want to share, what they are saying is that they don't want a giveaway to parasites who want even try to do for themselves when someone is making an effort to help them.
People talk about health care. Those who want a nationalized system ask, "What are you going to do when you get cancer or have a heart attack?". Those who want a privatized system ask, "Why do you want the government getting between you and your family doctor?"
We won't get a solution, until we settle on what the question is!!
Insurance isn't designed as a medical maintenance plan. Never was and never will be. It is a financial instrument where party A pays party B to assume a liability. It is a formalized gambling system.
The medical maintenance plans that many of us have with our employers are not insurance plans, though nearly all do incorporate insurance. They are medical maintenance plans whereby you pay someone on an installment plan, so that they will pay for you to periodically see a doctor. I don't carry 'insurance' for my weekly grocery bill, or for when I have to stop at the gas station. Though, I can have a rate-leveling plan that will take the 'risk' out of getting an extra large electricity bill if we have a really hot month during the summer.
For a sane discussion, just state if your for nationalize insurance, nationalized health maintenance programs, or some privatized version of either.
Obama didn't crumple in the face of "gotcha journalism" with it's harsh questions like "What magazines do you read?" ("All of them"... right).
That's because the Obama campaign doesn't play "gotcha journalism". If there is a tough question, they asks if it is really a question, refuse to answer it, and then cancels all interviews with that media outlet. Obama only plays to friendly crowds.
I would like to thank you for insulting my country and half it's population. This being/., I've come to appreciate the awesome intelligence of all the great Europeans that are so much smarter than us, with your great, world dominating economies. Thank you for granting us a small glimpse of your great wisdom.
The bipartisan Alaska Legislative Council found that she abused her power and violated ethics laws in the so-called "Troopergate" scandal.
How was the ethics violated? Todd Palin was using the wrong telephone.
There's a reason that Obama's campaign hasn't tried to play this one up. It would be a very strong club to use, if it weren't completely and craptastically silly, and at least Obama is smart enough to see that.
You may not like El Royo's opinion...you may think he has his facts wrong...but it is a well stated opinion and is not an attempt to incite a flamewar.
Yeah, and the driver's license system is linked to the voter registration database. But what happens if you get married less than 30 days before an election? Delay getting your data updated? Or go with the new ID that will not match the voter registration info? What if you get your ID updated and don't think about the fact that the voter registration is frozen 30 days before (for printing and such) and you show up with a new ID and an old entry in the registration rolls, and you left your marriage certificate at home?
I have a poll test in mind that I think would be fair across the board.
Leave off the names. All of them. Just a form that lists the contended offices.
If you don't care enough about a race to even know how to spell the name of the person who is running, how could any reasonable person expect you to now ANYTHING about ANY of the issues.
Down with the government "of the apethetic, by the oportunistic, for all of us".
Our biggest problem is that we keep hearing "the voice of experience" as if that is some sort of qualification.
The original intent, and the only sensible approach, is that the House of Representatives be "the voice of alternate experience". The terms for the House of Representatives were designed to be short. This would be so that the sucker could be turned over on a regular basis and constantly represent the people that elected them. There'd be a LOT of them, so that they could be closer to the people they represent.
Senators would have longer terms, and would be appointed by the state legislatures. They would represent the states, and be insulated but not shielded from the ebb and flow of public opinion.
The President was to be elected by an electoral college that would insure that the interest of rural and urban voters could be balanced.
What we have now is a cluster-fuck for vote buying and influence peddling. The masses have come to understand that the federal piggybank needs raiding before someone else gets it. "Representing your constituents" has devolved into "bring home the bacon." And it ain't just earmarks, either. The Congress had to consider a bill to keep the nation's banks liquid, and thus the economy afloat. It's arguable if it was anything other than a bailout, but that is what they were discussing. But that airhead, Nancy Pellosi, starts going on about needing to "add something in for the poor". The translation from politico-speak, "This bill is a must pass. Let's do some poverty pimping, and buy some votes while we're at it."
There are many levels that you don't want to telegraph your actions.
There's the tactical situation. It's all nice and honorable to stand up and tell the enemy that you're coming. That's what the British tried to during our Revolutionary War. The were often referred to as 'canon fodder.' Modern warfare is more about sneaking up on the enemy installation Rambo style when possible, knocking out the leaders, and then telling the 'canon fodder' that they can surrender to the Abrams Tank or die. Doesn't always work. Sometimes they know you're coming anyway, because the operation is just TO big to hide. But never do you telecast where you're going to actually move tactically.
The second is to let them build up their defenses so that you can demonstrate your power. The problem with that is that the dirty bastards will use the injured and children as shield. Excuse my language, but there just are not words base enough for a dirty coward who would use such tactics. Shooting dirty scum like that in the back of the head from under cover at 2000yds is doing this world a great service. "Think of the children," is NOT a joke in this case.
The remaining problem is advertising that you're going to invade foreign, non-combatant soil to get your enemy. This leaves the non-combatant leadership in the untenable position of having to explain to their own populace why they allow such a thing to occur. Why didn't they move defenses into position? The proper methodology is you have your operatives tell their operatives what is going on. The non-combatant leadership turns their back for a while. You carefully take out your enemies and get out. The non-combatant leadership turns around and indignantly asks, "How could you do such a thing?!!", then goes on to demand an apology. You apologize. You might even cite technical difficulties, and problems with knowing your exact position. Enemies are gone. Non-combatant populace remembers non-combatant leadership standing up and pushing the invaders back out.
You could ask non-combatant leadership to lend you a hand, but that puts them in the untenable position of having to attack some of their own populace. They may not particularly care about that part of their populace, but you don't stir up a hornet's nest that is on your front porch.
McCain's tactic is not "to sneak up behind someone, slap them in the ear and kick them while they are down." His tactic is to shoot them dead while they are down. And it is the right tactic. That is the only way you can deal with people who are intent on killing you.
Once they get tired of watching their comrades go down, you ask them to sit down for talks. You don't offer tet-a-tet without preconditions. You have subordinates work out peaceful arrangements. The tet-a-tet meetings are reserved for the "We're nice people and don't want to fight each other anymore. Look, I don't have to watch my back when he's around." scenarios. You don't sit down tet-a-tet UNTIL you don't have to watch your back anymore.
Note, Israel wouldn't sit down with the Palestinians. They sat down with the US while the Palestinians sat down with the US at the same time. The US was responsible for watching everyone's back.
As to the "Obama has never run anything" charge, can you name another presidential campaign which has run as smoothly, with less drama, massive staff-churns, leaks, rumors, staffers or surrogates going off-reservation, etc.? This is a well-oiled machine, run with discipline, vision and purpose, and a huge number of ground troops, all on the same page. I think that's pretty impressive.
Oh!? So it is just as I thought. The Democrats are the kool-aid drinkers walking in lock-step. Thank you for bringing this forward for all of our/. readers.
First, you send in lower level operatives to make sure there is an understanding and everyone is on the same page before the meeting. I believe Reagan sent those emissaries over to Ghaddafy on the belly of some F-101s.
Slashdot Mirror
NO! Your attempt at humor was a "+5 LMAO".
It took me a second to catch it, but it was great!!
Dude, would you please update your rant. With Ubuntu, you don't look for a program, pay out a bunch of money and hope it works for you.
You pull up a program like Adept, and type in what you want to do in a search line. It gives you a list of programs that might meet your criteria. You click on the ones you want to try, then on "Apply Updates". It churns. It mashes. It slices. It dices. You look at TV for a minute (or continue working on something else). And then you use your program.
Note that I left out a few of the steps that you'll do in Windows. You don't fish around for a CD. You don't type in a 14 digit registration key. You don't have to remove a slug of crapware from running in the background after your install. And finally....
No REBOOT after your text editor is installed.
Running company-critical active-X components?
Did you really type that?
Well, I guess we all now know who was really responsible for all the sub-prime mortgages?
My experience is the exactly the opposite. Never had a windows box to join my wireless network without significant fiddling. Of course, I'm careful to make sure any wireless card I get with Linus comes with an Atheros chip.
Conspiracy?
Apple, Google, Adobe, Sun, etc. all have a vested interest in seeing Microsoft weakened, if not eliminated altogether. The can't attack Windows directly, but what about installing enough performance eating crapware to drive the system into the ground? As long as it can all be blamed on Bill and Co. ?
Personally, I think the poor little upstarts of doing a FINE job.
We got a lot of work ahead of us, but we can still fix this. The only problem is that we need to find people to vote in to Congress that will actually be able to make the changes required.
I agree Cowmonaut, unfortunately, the Federal Treasury is now seen as a giant piggybank that we get to steal from. Each member of Congress is judged by his constituents on how much he was able to get out of the Great Piggybank in the Sky. The longer a Congressman hangs around, the more powerful committees he gets to sit on, the more powerful his position becomes, the more cash he is able to bring back home. Several long-time, powerful incumbents have used that argument as a campaign platform.
My solution for fixing Congress: Randomize committee selections, including chairmanships. A freshman Congresswoman from North Carolina should be no less powerful than an old pervert from Massachusetts. If he is such a great speaker, full of eloquence and persuasion, then he should be able to convince the electorate of that. If he can, he should be able to stay as long as the electorate believes in him/her.
Sounds like your brother has either a sleeping disorder or clinical depression, both of which are medical conditions that require treatment from a doctor. It's almost certainly not his "fault".
You were able to perform a diagnosis from 4 sentences posted to Slashdot? Damn, you're good.
He had no problem staying up all night partying. I never saw him unexpectedly fall asleep in any other social situation. He had no problem waking up when the other workers called him to say the supervisor was on his way. Whining Anonymous Cowards aside, it was most definitely his fault.
You probably wouldn't argue with the fact that the vast majority of the users of such a healthcare scheme would be good, honest, deserving folks who are ill and need fixing up.
I wouldn't argue that good, honest, deserving folks who are ill need fixing up. I would argue that they need a federal bureaucrat involved in the process. I would argue that, for the most part, they already have systems in place to attend to themselves. I would argue that the main impediment to them maintaining said systems, is the ridiculous way we have tied our health maintenance programs to our jobs. I would argue that the federal involvement debases community involvement and invites corruption.
As a Christian you should thoroughly endorse a system which does so much to help the needy and those who are worse off than yourself
You sir, do not understand Christianity or charity.
It is not charity for me to take someone else's property and spread it around as I see fit. it is only charity when *I* take of my resources and give to who I see as the needy. Christianity teaches that I must spread my wealth around. *I* must do it. The benefit I receive is a spiritual reward. You may not understand, or even care to understand, the reward that I think I recieve; but, you don't have to. It was my charity to give. I take nothing from you when I give it.
And I must spread the word of Christ as I spread my wealth. That is what we Christians call Christ's Great Commission. If you reject the words I bring, then you reject Christ. I'm free to leave you to your misery and move on. Again, you may not understand, or care to understand, my viewpoint; but, again, it is my charity to give. I take nothing from you, and leave all free to do as they will.
The system that Democrats in general, and Obama in particular, like to support and call charity robs me of the benefits of my charity on one side, and emasculates my commission on the other. It may be the law. You may even call it fair. But it is not charity. It's just paying taxes. It robs me of having any say in determining if the people it goes to are deserving in any way. It forces me to contribute resources, without forcing me to contribute emotional involvement in seeing a proper outcome.
The end result is that you see a destitute on the street and in your mind you say, "Why don't they get on a government program." The people who do receive the government aid have no one to prod them to do better...no one to stand with them as they turn their lives around, become productive and no longer need the aid.
As a Christian, I argue that the government's usurpation of the church's place is a sad abomination. It robs everyone and ultimately helps no one.
In North Carolina we have mandatory liability insurance. It does nothing for me. It pays the other party if I am the cause of an accident.
The bank will require you to have collision insurance. It will do nothing for me. It possibly pays off the loan if you are in an accident. It happens a lot where someone buys a new car, and it gets totalled driving off the lot. The car loses %30 of its value when you sign the purchase papers, since it is now a 'used' car. The insurance only pays BlueBook value, so the new car purchaser is out 30%. They would sue me for the rest of it, if they think they can prove that I was negligent.
The problem with health insurance is that large book of exceptions and exclusions that you can get hold of if you request it specifically and have a law degree to be able to interpret. The truth is that if you get cancer, the insurance company will try to find a way out of every medical bill you send in. They pay people who do nothing but find ways to deny you coverage. The job title is 'adjuster', and I've never known one to receive bonuses for adjusting thing up for you.
And the selfishness of "it is ALL my money I don't want to share it" attitude
You need to look a little closer. The attitude is "it is ALL my money I don't want to share it WITHOUT HAVING ANY CONTROL...why the hell did I work for it otherwise."
So I'm a Christian. A guy stops me outside a fast-food joint and ask for some money to get something to eat. I'll feed any hungry person. I'll give you half my peanut-butter sandwich. Just ask, and lets get you on a path so that you can stand tall and not ever have to ask anyone again.
I say, "C'mon. Sandwich, nuthin'. Let's get you a meal!"
"Uhm! I don't really like McDonald's. I'd prefer BurgerKing."
I pause, but not for long. "No problem. Fine. They have better burgers anyway. C'mon let's go get you somethin'."
"You won't just give me a dollar?"
"No, man. I'm not going to give you money."
"Fuck you. I don't want no hamburger. Asshole." And with that he walks away.
I've had similar experiences several times. Most people just hand over money. I'll help, but I know that cash does MUCH more harm than good. The liquor store was a block down the street in this case.
I have a brother that was fired from a decent paying job with the sanitation department. By his own words, he spent most of the day driving around hiding from the supervisors so that he could sleep. He was fired because he wouldn't get out of bed in the morning and was consistently late. Some people just cannot be helped.
When the people say they don't want to share, what they are saying is that they don't want a giveaway to parasites who want even try to do for themselves when someone is making an effort to help them.
People talk about health care. Those who want a nationalized system ask, "What are you going to do when you get cancer or have a heart attack?". Those who want a privatized system ask, "Why do you want the government getting between you and your family doctor?"
We won't get a solution, until we settle on what the question is!!
Insurance isn't designed as a medical maintenance plan. Never was and never will be. It is a financial instrument where party A pays party B to assume a liability. It is a formalized gambling system.
The medical maintenance plans that many of us have with our employers are not insurance plans, though nearly all do incorporate insurance. They are medical maintenance plans whereby you pay someone on an installment plan, so that they will pay for you to periodically see a doctor. I don't carry 'insurance' for my weekly grocery bill, or for when I have to stop at the gas station. Though, I can have a rate-leveling plan that will take the 'risk' out of getting an extra large electricity bill if we have a really hot month during the summer.
For a sane discussion, just state if your for nationalize insurance, nationalized health maintenance programs, or some privatized version of either.
Obama didn't crumple in the face of "gotcha journalism" with it's harsh questions like "What magazines do you read?" ("All of them" ... right).
That's because the Obama campaign doesn't play "gotcha journalism". If there is a tough question, they asks if it is really a question, refuse to answer it, and then cancels all interviews with that media outlet. Obama only plays to friendly crowds.
I would like to thank you for insulting my country and half it's population. This being /., I've come to appreciate the awesome intelligence of all the great Europeans that are so much smarter than us, with your great, world dominating economies. Thank you for granting us a small glimpse of your great wisdom.
The bipartisan Alaska Legislative Council found that she abused her power and violated ethics laws in the so-called "Troopergate" scandal.
How was the ethics violated? Todd Palin was using the wrong telephone.
There's a reason that Obama's campaign hasn't tried to play this one up. It would be a very strong club to use, if it weren't completely and craptastically silly, and at least Obama is smart enough to see that.
How in the world is the parent a troll?
You may not like El Royo's opinion...you may think he has his facts wrong...but it is a well stated opinion and is not an attempt to incite a flamewar.
Yeah, and the driver's license system is linked to the voter registration database. But what happens if you get married less than 30 days before an election? Delay getting your data updated? Or go with the new ID that will not match the voter registration info? What if you get your ID updated and don't think about the fact that the voter registration is frozen 30 days before (for printing and such) and you show up with a new ID and an old entry in the registration rolls, and you left your marriage certificate at home?
You hold on to your old ID for 30 days?
Nawh! That'd be to easy.
I have a poll test in mind that I think would be fair across the board.
Leave off the names. All of them. Just a form that lists the contended offices.
If you don't care enough about a race to even know how to spell the name of the person who is running, how could any reasonable person expect you to now ANYTHING about ANY of the issues.
Down with the government "of the apethetic, by the oportunistic, for all of us".
Wow, SlashJoel. I don't have mod point, but you hit that nail, square and HARD.
Bravo, sir. Simply, BRA-VO.
Our biggest problem is that we keep hearing "the voice of experience" as if that is some sort of qualification.
The original intent, and the only sensible approach, is that the House of Representatives be "the voice of alternate experience". The terms for the House of Representatives were designed to be short. This would be so that the sucker could be turned over on a regular basis and constantly represent the people that elected them. There'd be a LOT of them, so that they could be closer to the people they represent.
Senators would have longer terms, and would be appointed by the state legislatures. They would represent the states, and be insulated but not shielded from the ebb and flow of public opinion.
The President was to be elected by an electoral college that would insure that the interest of rural and urban voters could be balanced.
What we have now is a cluster-fuck for vote buying and influence peddling. The masses have come to understand that the federal piggybank needs raiding before someone else gets it. "Representing your constituents" has devolved into "bring home the bacon." And it ain't just earmarks, either. The Congress had to consider a bill to keep the nation's banks liquid, and thus the economy afloat. It's arguable if it was anything other than a bailout, but that is what they were discussing. But that airhead, Nancy Pellosi, starts going on about needing to "add something in for the poor". The translation from politico-speak, "This bill is a must pass. Let's do some poverty pimping, and buy some votes while we're at it."
There are many levels that you don't want to telegraph your actions.
There's the tactical situation. It's all nice and honorable to stand up and tell the enemy that you're coming. That's what the British tried to during our Revolutionary War. The were often referred to as 'canon fodder.' Modern warfare is more about sneaking up on the enemy installation Rambo style when possible, knocking out the leaders, and then telling the 'canon fodder' that they can surrender to the Abrams Tank or die. Doesn't always work. Sometimes they know you're coming anyway, because the operation is just TO big to hide. But never do you telecast where you're going to actually move tactically.
The second is to let them build up their defenses so that you can demonstrate your power. The problem with that is that the dirty bastards will use the injured and children as shield. Excuse my language, but there just are not words base enough for a dirty coward who would use such tactics. Shooting dirty scum like that in the back of the head from under cover at 2000yds is doing this world a great service. "Think of the children," is NOT a joke in this case.
The remaining problem is advertising that you're going to invade foreign, non-combatant soil to get your enemy. This leaves the non-combatant leadership in the untenable position of having to explain to their own populace why they allow such a thing to occur. Why didn't they move defenses into position? The proper methodology is you have your operatives tell their operatives what is going on. The non-combatant leadership turns their back for a while. You carefully take out your enemies and get out. The non-combatant leadership turns around and indignantly asks, "How could you do such a thing?!!", then goes on to demand an apology. You apologize. You might even cite technical difficulties, and problems with knowing your exact position. Enemies are gone. Non-combatant populace remembers non-combatant leadership standing up and pushing the invaders back out.
You could ask non-combatant leadership to lend you a hand, but that puts them in the untenable position of having to attack some of their own populace. They may not particularly care about that part of their populace, but you don't stir up a hornet's nest that is on your front porch.
McCain's tactic is not "to sneak up behind someone, slap them in the ear and kick them while they are down." His tactic is to shoot them dead while they are down. And it is the right tactic. That is the only way you can deal with people who are intent on killing you.
Once they get tired of watching their comrades go down, you ask them to sit down for talks. You don't offer tet-a-tet without preconditions. You have subordinates work out peaceful arrangements. The tet-a-tet meetings are reserved for the "We're nice people and don't want to fight each other anymore. Look, I don't have to watch my back when he's around." scenarios. You don't sit down tet-a-tet UNTIL you don't have to watch your back anymore.
Note, Israel wouldn't sit down with the Palestinians. They sat down with the US while the Palestinians sat down with the US at the same time. The US was responsible for watching everyone's back.
You've already voted for Obama? So I take it that your OK with us choosing your leaders, too?
The same was said by both sides in the US Civil War.
You left one out:
Biden: I've got just three letters for you. W-A-R-S
As to the "Obama has never run anything" charge, can you name another presidential campaign which has run as smoothly, with less drama, massive staff-churns, leaks, rumors, staffers or surrogates going off-reservation, etc.? This is a well-oiled machine, run with discipline, vision and purpose, and a huge number of ground troops, all on the same page. I think that's pretty impressive.
Oh!? So it is just as I thought. The Democrats are the kool-aid drinkers walking in lock-step. Thank you for bringing this forward for all of our /. readers.
First, you send in lower level operatives to make sure there is an understanding and everyone is on the same page before the meeting. I believe Reagan sent those emissaries over to Ghaddafy on the belly of some F-101s.