It forces people to game their vote rather than casting it where their true preferences lie
No you fucking coward. Nobody is forced to do a goddamn thing. They do what they do because the stupid asses listen to the media telling them what to do, and then follow their masters' wishes rather than their own. Anyone who voted for a candidate they didn't like based on "not throwing the vote away" gets absolutely no sympathy from anyone who has at least 3-4 functioning brain cells. This isn't a fucking race and you don't get brownie points for "picking the winner."
I have no idea whether your friend voted against his self-interest, but you cannot conclude either way just from his choice being determined by the union's suggestion.
I think Obama and the next two or three Presidents are going to be thought of as failures because they couldn't instantly dig the USA out of the hole that Bush tossed it into.
I disagree. Obama is thought of as a failure because he didn't even try to dig us out of the hole Bush dug for us. NOW he's talking about cutting military spending, after Ron Paul has been harping on it and shifting the platform for the entire race to this issue. Too little, too late.
The next "two or three" presidents won't be failures. Either the next president is a failure and our country collapses, or the next president is Ron Paul and we somehow pull ourselves out by the skin of our teeth. We have already have three failures in a row--Bush, Bush, and Obama. We can't afford another.
Democrats generally support the goals of big business, and have a top-down approach to wealth. They believe that making people at the top rich will lead to prosperity for all. Many believe that social programs do not help well enough to justify many of them. Many members feel that they have a moral imperative to attempt to push their moral agenda on people who have nothing to do with them, and whose behaviors do not affect them in the slightest. Democrats are also very good at compelling members to conform and follow, even when a given member may disagree with a lot of party rhetoric, and even when it's not in their best interests to actually agree.
The Republicans look at individuals for success, and define success through a bottom-up approach, rather than a top-down approach, as many believe that top-down approaches have led to severe inequality. They believe government has the ability to address such injustices and to help dampen inequality. Many believe that an individual's right to make ones' own choices, so long as those choices don't victimize others, is important, but are not willing to ignore data that demonstrates particular freedoms causing lots of harm. Republicans generally like to build consensus before agreeing on a plan, which lately has been to their detriment, as it allows their political opponents to stonewall things that should be able to pass despite objection.
Funny how you can swap "Democrat" and "Republican" and your statements are still mostly true.
The truth is neither parties gives one damn about your best interests. They are only out for themselves, and will a pass a bill that helps you only if it helps them too.
...saddle manufacturer downplays importance of newly-invented automobile. "If you were a farmer and could only have one form of transportation, why would you pick an automobile over the horse? The horse can travel down muddy unpaved roads, through hills and fields, and take shortcuts through the woods. It can eat its own grass and doesn't need to be fueled. If you could choose two, you would pick the horse AND the automobile."
Except that well, it does. The internal configuration of the reactor is irrelevant to whether or not fire trucks were used to cool the reactor. One fire truck cannot maintain hundreds of liters per second, but enough of them can (and they were obviously using more than one fire truck). Unless no one can get close enough to operate them, which appears to be the actual problem in this case.
Except that isn't the case at all. The fire trucks were capable of supplying enough cooling water, it's just it took forever to get them on site, connected up and working due to various problems they encountered, like one truck being stuck in the mud, and hose connector issues. By the time they'd got the trucks online most of the damage was already done, except for the hydrogen explosions which came later.
I wish slashdotters would take two goddamn minutes to, say, load up Google and READ THE ACCOUNT OF WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED before spending half an hour arguing with each other over pointless trivia.
I can't speak for Alabama, but there are no traffic stops in Arizona. There's "immigration sweeps", but these are looking for people who have something obviously wrong: driving without headlights at night, broken taillights, not using turn signals, etc. You can get pulled over for these things anywhere, at any time, by any police officer since they're rules of the road; the Sheriff here just makes use of that fact to target a specific population, since that population has a higher-than-normal incidence of broken things on their vehicles and bad driving habits.
Yes it's the same in Alabama, except the excuse is looking for drunk drivers, or druggies, people whose licenses have been suspended with no recourse for bullshit offenses, or any number of other scarey bogeyman we don't want on the roads. We do have roadblocks here, everywhere in the summer, and they are always set up at the most convenient places to maximize revenue and ensure they are difficult to avoid.
TSA is flexing its muscles in Tennessee, pulling over people on the Interstates, which is the last safe refuge from the local thuggery. More VIPR teams coming soon to a freeway near you.
The best way is a hand written letter to their mailbox, not an email. It doesn't have to be fancy. Just explain that you are appalled and disgusted by SOPA/PIPA and you won't be voting for any legislator who votes for it next election.
Sign it in blood, if you really want to make an impact.
He is at least as detached from an understanding of how he would realistically set about achieving his goals as Ralph Nader was, and there are too many times where this lack of understanding comes off as him being a kook.
Perhaps you should read at least one of the many books Ron Paul has written with his specific plans to tackle these big issues, before claiming that he has no idea how to implement his goals. I'd wager he's been thinking about this stuff longer than you've been alive.
Yeah, trade one representative who supports SOPA for another who will probably support SOPA anyway, or at least probably won't have the balls to try to repeal it.
Ron Paul is the man who has the proven record and integrity to do exactly what he says--end the Federal government's tyranny over our lives. You want your voice in government back? You're not out of options yet.
The censorship from the Chinese and Iranian governments is about stifling dissent. The goals of SOPA are to block certain manifestations of online piracy
Nothing will change until we get rid of all these geriatric drama queens. We need to start putting Gen X'ers that at least started out in technical, "real work" fields...
Right, because throwing out the old tyrants and putting in newer, more technologically hip tyrants will spontaneously result in utopia. How did that work out for Libya?
Well, at this point removing them from office won't help. You'll just get more of the same. The problem is that truly honest people don't get elected (as they haven't been career politicians and wouldn't get to the House or Senate - as you don't just get elected there without putting in your time on planning commissions, city councils and the like first). If some truly honest person did make it in, the big companies would pay for a smear campaign that would get them voted out in the next election.
Bro there is a truly honest person running for office right this very second. His name is Ron Paul and he's running for the Presidency. His stand on every issue is well documented and his integrity is untouchable. He's a rarity in Washington, but there's a lot more honest politicians down at the local level. While you're sitting here bitching and moaning about the futility of it all, there are people out there right this very second working to make the future a better place. Your negative propaganda (yes, that's exactly what it is) is NOT HELPING THE SITUATION AT ALL. You're doing nothing other than influencing others around you to be similarly apathetic, instead of taking positive action that could result in actual changes for the better. If you don't have anything positive to say, then don't talk at all. There's a LOT of things riding on what happens in 2012 and the absolute last thing we need is this type of negativity.
Google, Amazon, Youtube, Facebook...all these companies are going to be severely fucked over by SOPA.
Except they're not, because you don't understand how politics work, and your complacency of "letting them handle it" is going to end up fucking us all over in the end.
Do you really think the U.S. governm....no, wait. Let's put this in middle ages terms, or third world dictatorship perhaps, to make the analogy a bit clearer.
Do you really think the king is going to pass a sweeping new law ostensibly aimed at the serfs, but also affecting nobles, and then begin prosecuting both serfs and nobles alike? Hell no, he would have a revolution on his hands, with both serfs and nobles united to oppose him. So he passes the law and gives the nobles a pass as long as they support it, or at least don't speak up against it.
Only after enough time has passed and the peasants have grown accustomed to the "real life consequences" of "their" actions in violation of "the law", and enough bitterness and resentment has grown up amongst the population from being thus persecuted, can this anger then be skillfully redirected against the king's political enemies in the nobility. The peasantry will happily go along with the conviction and hanging, and serves them right too. They'll thank the king for administering justice, even though they've been his pawns the whole time.
Is it a bit clearer now why sitting on our asses and expecting Google and other big companies to "take a stand" is the WRONG and STUPID course of action? No, we need to be making our voices heard and spread the word as much as possible. If you don't have the funds to fight it, donate what you DO have to an organization that can. Sell some junk if you have to. Freedom isn't free or easy.
If you want to live in a third-world hellhole, there's plenty of them around
Yes. We're standing in one.
PS--I've actually been to countries across the world? Ever visited Afghanistan? The only difference in tyranny between our country and any run of the mill third world dictatorship is a) scale, b) refinement, and c) complacency. We've been at it for a hundred years now and we have it down to an art form.
That's what this country will be without all those things.
That's exactly what you've been led to believe, consciously, by those who stand to lose if too many modern pseudo-intellectuals start thinking for themselves instead of just parroting establishment lies.
If I'm a tourist on a 30 day tourist Visa - what rights do I have in the same situation as the OP? Does the constitution apply to me even though I'm from Australia?
Depends. Are you a terrorist, or could potentially be labelled as one for your political leanings? Then no, in that case the constitution doesn't apply to anyone, U.S. citizen or not.
Slashdot Mirror
So on one side we've got the rule of law enforced by a state and on another we've got uncontrolled warlords.
In your strawman argument which requires an extremely limited worldview to accept, perhaps.
It forces people to game their vote rather than casting it where their true preferences lie
No you fucking coward. Nobody is forced to do a goddamn thing. They do what they do because the stupid asses listen to the media telling them what to do, and then follow their masters' wishes rather than their own. Anyone who voted for a candidate they didn't like based on "not throwing the vote away" gets absolutely no sympathy from anyone who has at least 3-4 functioning brain cells. This isn't a fucking race and you don't get brownie points for "picking the winner."
Wait, explain how voting for McCain would be in his self interest?
Hello? Ron Paul was in the 2008 election too. Oh, but he's "unelectable." You fucking sheep deserve the misery you're heaping upon yourselves.
I have no idea whether your friend voted against his self-interest, but you cannot conclude either way just from his choice being determined by the union's suggestion.
I guess you haven't worked with many unions.
I think Obama and the next two or three Presidents are going to be thought of as failures because they couldn't instantly dig the USA out of the hole that Bush tossed it into.
I disagree. Obama is thought of as a failure because he didn't even try to dig us out of the hole Bush dug for us. NOW he's talking about cutting military spending, after Ron Paul has been harping on it and shifting the platform for the entire race to this issue. Too little, too late.
The next "two or three" presidents won't be failures. Either the next president is a failure and our country collapses, or the next president is Ron Paul and we somehow pull ourselves out by the skin of our teeth. We have already have three failures in a row--Bush, Bush, and Obama. We can't afford another.
At this stage it looks like another 4 years of Obama in another gridlocked government.
You really believe the media lies that Ron Paul is "unelectable"?
Democrats generally support the goals of big business, and have a top-down approach to wealth. They believe that making people at the top rich will lead to prosperity for all. Many believe that social programs do not help well enough to justify many of them. Many members feel that they have a moral imperative to attempt to push their moral agenda on people who have nothing to do with them, and whose behaviors do not affect them in the slightest. Democrats are also very good at compelling members to conform and follow, even when a given member may disagree with a lot of party rhetoric, and even when it's not in their best interests to actually agree.
The Republicans look at individuals for success, and define success through a bottom-up approach, rather than a top-down approach, as many believe that top-down approaches have led to severe inequality. They believe government has the ability to address such injustices and to help dampen inequality. Many believe that an individual's right to make ones' own choices, so long as those choices don't victimize others, is important, but are not willing to ignore data that demonstrates particular freedoms causing lots of harm. Republicans generally like to build consensus before agreeing on a plan, which lately has been to their detriment, as it allows their political opponents to stonewall things that should be able to pass despite objection.
Funny how you can swap "Democrat" and "Republican" and your statements are still mostly true.
The truth is neither parties gives one damn about your best interests. They are only out for themselves, and will a pass a bill that helps you only if it helps them too.
...saddle manufacturer downplays importance of newly-invented automobile. "If you were a farmer and could only have one form of transportation, why would you pick an automobile over the horse? The horse can travel down muddy unpaved roads, through hills and fields, and take shortcuts through the woods. It can eat its own grass and doesn't need to be fueled. If you could choose two, you would pick the horse AND the automobile."
Except that well, it does. The internal configuration of the reactor is irrelevant to whether or not fire trucks were used to cool the reactor. One fire truck cannot maintain hundreds of liters per second, but enough of them can (and they were obviously using more than one fire truck). Unless no one can get close enough to operate them, which appears to be the actual problem in this case.
Except that isn't the case at all. The fire trucks were capable of supplying enough cooling water, it's just it took forever to get them on site, connected up and working due to various problems they encountered, like one truck being stuck in the mud, and hose connector issues. By the time they'd got the trucks online most of the damage was already done, except for the hydrogen explosions which came later.
I wish slashdotters would take two goddamn minutes to, say, load up Google and READ THE ACCOUNT OF WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED before spending half an hour arguing with each other over pointless trivia.
I can't speak for Alabama, but there are no traffic stops in Arizona. There's "immigration sweeps", but these are looking for people who have something obviously wrong: driving without headlights at night, broken taillights, not using turn signals, etc. You can get pulled over for these things anywhere, at any time, by any police officer since they're rules of the road; the Sheriff here just makes use of that fact to target a specific population, since that population has a higher-than-normal incidence of broken things on their vehicles and bad driving habits.
Yes it's the same in Alabama, except the excuse is looking for drunk drivers, or druggies, people whose licenses have been suspended with no recourse for bullshit offenses, or any number of other scarey bogeyman we don't want on the roads. We do have roadblocks here, everywhere in the summer, and they are always set up at the most convenient places to maximize revenue and ensure they are difficult to avoid.
TSA is flexing its muscles in Tennessee, pulling over people on the Interstates, which is the last safe refuge from the local thuggery. More VIPR teams coming soon to a freeway near you.
Sad (and scary) times in this nation.
The best way is a hand written letter to their mailbox, not an email. It doesn't have to be fancy. Just explain that you are appalled and disgusted by SOPA/PIPA and you won't be voting for any legislator who votes for it next election.
Sign it in blood, if you really want to make an impact.
Karma is blind to intent.
He is at least as detached from an understanding of how he would realistically set about achieving his goals as Ralph Nader was, and there are too many times where this lack of understanding comes off as him being a kook.
Perhaps you should read at least one of the many books Ron Paul has written with his specific plans to tackle these big issues, before claiming that he has no idea how to implement his goals. I'd wager he's been thinking about this stuff longer than you've been alive.
What he does if he were to acquire any real influence and power will be a very different story.
His voting record is public knowledge. Perhaps you can point out where he has been inconsistent in his message at any time in the past 40+ years.
Yeah, trade one representative who supports SOPA for another who will probably support SOPA anyway, or at least probably won't have the balls to try to repeal it.
Ron Paul is the man who has the proven record and integrity to do exactly what he says--end the Federal government's tyranny over our lives. You want your voice in government back? You're not out of options yet.
I'm quite confused about who this serves.
The government and their cronies. Who else?
The censorship from the Chinese and Iranian governments is about stifling dissent. The goals of SOPA are to block certain manifestations of online piracy
aka economic dissent
Nothing will change until we get rid of all these geriatric drama queens. We need to start putting Gen X'ers that at least started out in technical, "real work" fields...
Right, because throwing out the old tyrants and putting in newer, more technologically hip tyrants will spontaneously result in utopia. How did that work out for Libya?
Well, at this point removing them from office won't help. You'll just get more of the same. The problem is that truly honest people don't get elected (as they haven't been career politicians and wouldn't get to the House or Senate - as you don't just get elected there without putting in your time on planning commissions, city councils and the like first). If some truly honest person did make it in, the big companies would pay for a smear campaign that would get them voted out in the next election.
Bro there is a truly honest person running for office right this very second. His name is Ron Paul and he's running for the Presidency. His stand on every issue is well documented and his integrity is untouchable. He's a rarity in Washington, but there's a lot more honest politicians down at the local level. While you're sitting here bitching and moaning about the futility of it all, there are people out there right this very second working to make the future a better place. Your negative propaganda (yes, that's exactly what it is) is NOT HELPING THE SITUATION AT ALL. You're doing nothing other than influencing others around you to be similarly apathetic, instead of taking positive action that could result in actual changes for the better. If you don't have anything positive to say, then don't talk at all. There's a LOT of things riding on what happens in 2012 and the absolute last thing we need is this type of negativity.
Google, Amazon, Youtube, Facebook...all these companies are going to be severely fucked over by SOPA.
Except they're not, because you don't understand how politics work, and your complacency of "letting them handle it" is going to end up fucking us all over in the end.
Do you really think the U.S. governm....no, wait. Let's put this in middle ages terms, or third world dictatorship perhaps, to make the analogy a bit clearer.
Do you really think the king is going to pass a sweeping new law ostensibly aimed at the serfs, but also affecting nobles, and then begin prosecuting both serfs and nobles alike? Hell no, he would have a revolution on his hands, with both serfs and nobles united to oppose him. So he passes the law and gives the nobles a pass as long as they support it, or at least don't speak up against it.
Only after enough time has passed and the peasants have grown accustomed to the "real life consequences" of "their" actions in violation of "the law", and enough bitterness and resentment has grown up amongst the population from being thus persecuted, can this anger then be skillfully redirected against the king's political enemies in the nobility. The peasantry will happily go along with the conviction and hanging, and serves them right too. They'll thank the king for administering justice, even though they've been his pawns the whole time.
Is it a bit clearer now why sitting on our asses and expecting Google and other big companies to "take a stand" is the WRONG and STUPID course of action? No, we need to be making our voices heard and spread the word as much as possible. If you don't have the funds to fight it, donate what you DO have to an organization that can. Sell some junk if you have to. Freedom isn't free or easy.
It's a bad bill. But it's not that bad. It is largely a matter of making the domestic DMCA international.
And that's not "that bad"????? The DMCA was immoral and wrong the day it was signed into law!
If you want to live in a third-world hellhole, there's plenty of them around
Yes. We're standing in one.
PS--I've actually been to countries across the world? Ever visited Afghanistan? The only difference in tyranny between our country and any run of the mill third world dictatorship is a) scale, b) refinement, and c) complacency. We've been at it for a hundred years now and we have it down to an art form.
That's what this country will be without all those things.
That's exactly what you've been led to believe, consciously, by those who stand to lose if too many modern pseudo-intellectuals start thinking for themselves instead of just parroting establishment lies.
If I'm a tourist on a 30 day tourist Visa - what rights do I have in the same situation as the OP? Does the constitution apply to me even though I'm from Australia?
Depends. Are you a terrorist, or could potentially be labelled as one for your political leanings? Then no, in that case the constitution doesn't apply to anyone, U.S. citizen or not.
Bro, the TSA is part of DHS which is now a huge part of the executive branch. If he was elected he could fire every one of the assholes.
Or better yet, maintain constant eye contact. Make them feel uncomfortable doing their disgusting anti-patriotic jobs.