Very creative, another fake debunking, where you attack the messenger instead of the facts?
I will admit one thing - I remembered incorrectly; the tires were slashed in wisconsin, not ohio.
4 convicted of tire slashing. Apparently the judge doesn't believe the "republican front" theory.
I'd like to point out that Ohio's own Democratic party has a web page set up that pretty much debunks these theories. Don't you think that if 270,000 votes were suppressed, they would be the ones to scream about it?
Every Vote Will Be Counted.
Kennedy's claims are fundamentally wrong headed. No Republican could have interfered with the "allocation" of the voting machines because each county buys their own and, guess what, the counties in question were in Democratic control. The purge of the voter rolls was mandated by law and occurs before every election in order to prevent people from using the names of the dead to vote multiple times. And so on, and so on.
Oh and the big one: There was no vast conspiracy, simply because such a thing would have required the coordination of hundreds of operatives. Bush can't keep a cabinet of 12 people pointed in one direction, and you want me to believe he got hundreds of corrupt Republicans to manipulate the Ohio election without any Democrats noticing or any Republican accidentally - or deliberately - blabbing about what they were doing? I doubt it.
The thing is, most of the exit polls at the end of the day didn't show any discrepency. For example, CNN's exit polls of Ohio show Bush winning the male vote and dead even on the female vote:
The only conspiracy here is a close race followed by losers who refuse to accept defeat and "move on". And just as in Mexico this year, their antics are actually damaging democracy instead of supporting it.
I mean, seriously - I can't think of a single thing that Bush has done right, but the Democrats insist on making themselves appear so insane that I still can't bring myself to support them.
There are no "allocations of voting machines". Each county purchases, pays for and maintains it's own. So, if a county or city doesn't have enough voting machines, whose fault is that?
Now, think about what it means that it was democrat-controlled areas that didn't have enough machines...
Most of these "coincidences and anomolies" are created by selective presentation of facts.
And it may have a lot to do with why younger democracies seem to all be parlamentary systems - people have learned from the "founding fathers'" mistake.
One thing few people realize - the U.S. system was designed to have no political parties at all; such organizations were banned. Unfortunately, people noticed that this was unconstitutional and within a few decades the two-party system was more or less established.
The "facts" listed in that article are all exaggerated, selective or distorted.
I notice he didn't mention how the only actual convictions for interfering with the Ohio elections were Democrats charged with vandalizing Republican campaign sites and vehicles.
Why is it so hard to believe that people voted for Bush on security issues and against the anti-gay ammendment because they didn't like that level of interference in people's private lives?
This may come as a shock, but few people actually toe the party line - of either party. They vote on the issues they feel are most important.
dvds and video games are so attractive - at a very primal level, the motion, the lights, the adrenaline are compelling. It's the same rush you get in sports, but without the physical effort.
For someone of my generation - whose mental habits were formed before video tapes and video games, the harm is limited. But when a child is exposed to them it is much harder for that child to form the same mental disciplines.
Still, it's hard to prove causation. My kids are clearly learning less at their schools than I did in mine; but is that the teaching or the video games or just the rose-colored lenses of memory?
Seeing I have an entire room of the house converted into a library and I read at over 4k WPM (well, I used to, I've slowed down with middle age) I think I'm down with the whole "expose your child to reading" thing.
I *did* actually get my son to read the/Jhereg/ series this year; so he's not a total loss...
I mean, come on, when I went to school I stood out because I was the fat, unathletic, geek who would rather screw around with an electronics kit than a football. When I went with my son for his orientation to 9th grade, I discovered that 2/3rds of the incoming kids looked like I did then.
Oh, did I mention that at my worst I broke 310 pounds? And that I've spent the last 12 years of my life trying to make up for my utter lack of physical activity as a kid?
The article I read about the issue claimed he could sell off his earnings for about 100k USD - which is why I said it qualifies as fraud. If he cannot extract IRL value from the in-game fraud, then no laws were broken.
The in-game money he took through fraud has real-world value; it can be auctioned off on e-bay for example. That means he used deception to take something of material worth - the text book definition of fraud.
Well, if you're really curious, read the talk page about user names - I've left a couple of comments there. Personally, I still feel like the admins have gone insane in their attempts at ensuring inoffensiveness; banning a user because his ID consists solely of numbers, because his ID is his email address (something that is required on other sites), banning a user name that reflects an organization, banning a user because "troll" has negative connotations in internet slang, banning a user not for anything they've *done* but because their name implies, to you, that they are planning on doing something is blatant paranoia, unjust and ridiculous.
My favorite is banning people who call themselves after their organization. Yeah, that's right - you wouldn't want the PR flacks to be honest about who they are, would you?
Let's just say I have a preference for humorous names - the particular name doesn't matter; the annoyance came from the fact that they don't stop you from registering, they let you register and then ban you after the fact.
only half believe that. While it is impossible to deny that our species is polluted with short-sighted agressors I believe that they are the minority. Most of the people I know are loving and caring who would go out of their way to avoid deceiving or hurting people for personal gain.
And yet, the history of all societies is driven by such people.
It's banal to remark that even monsters love their children - banal, but true. I'm pretty sure the people who trash wikipedia wouldn't treat their own homes or families that way.
Slashdot Mirror
Please explain where this gentleman provides a single cite, a single fact to back up his claims?
Apparently you believe "debunking" means "shouting down your opponents".
Very creative, another fake debunking, where you attack the messenger instead of the facts? I will admit one thing - I remembered incorrectly; the tires were slashed in wisconsin, not ohio. 4 convicted of tire slashing. Apparently the judge doesn't believe the "republican front" theory.
That sentence fragment in the middle was supposed to be a link:
Every Vote Will Be Countedrebuts the facts as he lays them out?
I'd like to point out that Ohio's own Democratic party has a web page set up that pretty much debunks these theories. Don't you think that if 270,000 votes were suppressed, they would be the ones to scream about it?
Every Vote Will Be Counted.
Kennedy's claims are fundamentally wrong headed. No Republican could have interfered with the "allocation" of the voting machines because each county buys their own and, guess what, the counties in question were in Democratic control. The purge of the voter rolls was mandated by law and occurs before every election in order to prevent people from using the names of the dead to vote multiple times. And so on, and so on.
Oh and the big one: There was no vast conspiracy, simply because such a thing would have required the coordination of hundreds of operatives. Bush can't keep a cabinet of 12 people pointed in one direction, and you want me to believe he got hundreds of corrupt Republicans to manipulate the Ohio election without any Democrats noticing or any Republican accidentally - or deliberately - blabbing about what they were doing? I doubt it.
The thing is, most of the exit polls at the end of the day didn't show any discrepency. For example, CNN's exit polls of Ohio show Bush winning the male vote and dead even on the female vote:
a tes/OH/P/00/epolls.0.html
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/st
The only conspiracy here is a close race followed by losers who refuse to accept defeat and "move on". And just as in Mexico this year, their antics are actually damaging democracy instead of supporting it.
I mean, seriously - I can't think of a single thing that Bush has done right, but the Democrats insist on making themselves appear so insane that I still can't bring myself to support them.
There are no "allocations of voting machines". Each county purchases, pays for and maintains it's own. So, if a county or city doesn't have enough voting machines, whose fault is that?
Now, think about what it means that it was democrat-controlled areas that didn't have enough machines...
Most of these "coincidences and anomolies" are created by selective presentation of facts.
And it may have a lot to do with why younger democracies seem to all be parlamentary systems - people have learned from the "founding fathers'" mistake.
One thing few people realize - the U.S. system was designed to have no political parties at all; such organizations were banned. Unfortunately, people noticed that this was unconstitutional and within a few decades the two-party system was more or less established.
know what a "citizen's arrest" is?
The "facts" listed in that article are all exaggerated, selective or distorted.
I notice he didn't mention how the only actual convictions for interfering with the Ohio elections were Democrats charged with vandalizing Republican campaign sites and vehicles.
Why is it so hard to believe that people voted for Bush on security issues and against the anti-gay ammendment because they didn't like that level of interference in people's private lives?
This may come as a shock, but few people actually toe the party line - of either party. They vote on the issues they feel are most important.
First, this is three months old.
Second, his claims were debunking shortly after he published them, in Slate:
Was the 2004 election stolen? No.
All this crap does is further alienate voters by convincing them that their votes don't matter.
this fiasco is brought to you by the people who insisted that the old, manual, punch-card machines were too unreliable to be trusted.
dvds and video games are so attractive - at a very primal level, the motion, the lights, the adrenaline are compelling. It's the same rush you get in sports, but without the physical effort.
For someone of my generation - whose mental habits were formed before video tapes and video games, the harm is limited. But when a child is exposed to them it is much harder for that child to form the same mental disciplines.
Still, it's hard to prove causation. My kids are clearly learning less at their schools than I did in mine; but is that the teaching or the video games or just the rose-colored lenses of memory?
Seeing I have an entire room of the house converted into a library and I read at over 4k WPM (well, I used to, I've slowed down with middle age) I think I'm down with the whole "expose your child to reading" thing.
/Jhereg/ series this year; so he's not a total loss...
I *did* actually get my son to read the
You never see complaints about the negative effects of reading...
You never had to listen to my mother. "Put down that book and get out of the house!"
Unfortunately, my own kids are more like yours - pushing them to read is a lot harder than getting them to do almost anything else.
YES!
I mean, come on, when I went to school I stood out because I was the fat, unathletic, geek who would rather screw around with an electronics kit than a football. When I went with my son for his orientation to 9th grade, I discovered that 2/3rds of the incoming kids looked like I did then.
Oh, did I mention that at my worst I broke 310 pounds? And that I've spent the last 12 years of my life trying to make up for my utter lack of physical activity as a kid?
I'd forgotten all about that game!
Oh, man. The flashbacks!
But they weren't made by C=.
The article I read about the issue claimed he could sell off his earnings for about 100k USD - which is why I said it qualifies as fraud. If he cannot extract IRL value from the in-game fraud, then no laws were broken.
Unless, of course, you're saying that you killed them IRL...
The in-game money he took through fraud has real-world value; it can be auctioned off on e-bay for example. That means he used deception to take something of material worth - the text book definition of fraud.
Well, if you're really curious, read the talk page about user names - I've left a couple of comments there. Personally, I still feel like the admins have gone insane in their attempts at ensuring inoffensiveness; banning a user because his ID consists solely of numbers, because his ID is his email address (something that is required on other sites), banning a user name that reflects an organization, banning a user because "troll" has negative connotations in internet slang, banning a user not for anything they've *done* but because their name implies, to you, that they are planning on doing something is blatant paranoia, unjust and ridiculous.
My favorite is banning people who call themselves after their organization. Yeah, that's right - you wouldn't want the PR flacks to be honest about who they are, would you?
Let's just say I have a preference for humorous names - the particular name doesn't matter; the annoyance came from the fact that they don't stop you from registering, they let you register and then ban you after the fact.
but I wondered if by saying "page X gets vandalized a lot" I might attract attention from people saying "Ha! I'll show you *real* vandalism!"
If you were determined enough it wouldn't be hard to figure out what pages I watch there.
only half believe that. While it is impossible to deny that our species is polluted with short-sighted agressors I believe that they are the minority. Most of the people I know are loving and caring who would go out of their way to avoid deceiving or hurting people for personal gain.
And yet, the history of all societies is driven by such people.
It's banal to remark that even monsters love their children - banal, but true. I'm pretty sure the people who trash wikipedia wouldn't treat their own homes or families that way.