There might be a reasonable explanation for this. Woman accept lower offers. This means that you would be paying more than you needed to hire her if you offered her the same amount as a man on average. I am not saying this is the case, but it could be.
A quick google search for "Craig Evans blackberry" produces a number of other articles from other newspapers. It is dangerous to dismiss all information from a source because of a past bad experience. You can't trust any of the major sources all the time, they are often wrong. NY Times ran an article by Paul Krugman where he fell into the trap that he thought the politico stinky satire was true. Even the national inquirer has proven to be able to produce a scoop, John Edwards. Most often when someone says that a paper is not accurate they say this because they disagree with the newspapers political slant. This allows them to ignore all stories that do not agree with their political slant.
According to your figures 219 democrats in the house voted for it and 4 voted against it. In the Senate you have 46 voting for it and one voting against it. You can call this bipartisan legislation, but it seemed to have more support from Democrats than Republicans, so calling it Republican would not be accurate. President Bush would probably not veto it because it passed by a veto proof majority.
Now lets look at the next argument. If your party voted for something you cannot vote for it. President Obama was against Gay Marriage until he recently evolved. Using this logic no Democrats could be for gay marriage because the President was against it.
The issue is not that the mainstream tech reporting is poor. The issue is that the mainstream reporting is poor. The mainstream media reports are not experts on everything and they still report on everything. The reporters often have short deadlines and do not have time to fully inform themselves on the issue. If you are knowledgable on a subject you will see the many flaws in the mainstream reporting of it.
During the piracy warning at the movies people have taken to sounding like pirates with arrrgs and saavy. This makes me laugh. Below is a snippet of Bob Mondello's interview with NPR about the Toronto Film Festival.
MONDELLO: Well, yes, actually. At the beginning of all the public screenings - this doesn't happen so much with the critics' screenings, but when you're at a public screening as soon as they put up the screen that says to be careful not to record anything, the anti-piracy note, everybody starts making pirate noises and going argh, argh. It's a little strange.
http://www.npr.org/2012/09/11/160966328/toronto-film-fest-offers-hints-of-oscar-contenders
The actual text from the article.
"Our results suggest that some (about 40%) of the released hydrocarbons that once populated these layers still remained in the Gulf post September 2010, so food was available for the feast to continue at some later time. But the location of those substances and whether they were biochemically transformed is unknown."
This does not seem to be exactly what you are quoting.
There is a database of adverse reactions at http://www.medalerts.org/. In 2011, there were 30591 adverse reactions reported. There were 312 deaths reported for the same time period. These reports are made by doctors only. I would not necessarily call that no side effects.
On what evidence do you base your claim that there is zero voter fraud? Is it the lack of prosecutions for voter fraud? Using this same logic I can claim that there was no fraud in the housing crash. There have been very few prosecutions, so there must have been very little fraud. The only way to verify if there is voter fraud is to contact all the people that were suppose to have voted and verify if they actually did vote and that they exist.
I understand you disagree with her philosophy, but is it necessary to call her a whore. She provide many interesting ideas that allow an alternative way of looking at things. You seem only capable of name calling. If anyone should be publicly denigrated it is you.
The press is the fourth branch of government and it is doing a horrible job. People are busy and expect the press to research and appraise things fairly, instead we receive sensational stories or someones biased opinion. Half the time we get side tracked on discussing the wrong issues. The press as it is has failed and I hope that it is replaced with something that better informs the populace.
The federal education department does not provide public education, that is provided on the school district level. It funds some initiatives and sets some standards. You say no more roads and bridges, but it is more of a no more interstates. Most of the roads and bridges are maintained by local and state government. If we are to have rational discussions we need to make sure we are accurately portraying the facts.
This is not true. There were accusations that she was using it for state business. People reviewed the emails and did not find that she was using the account for state business. There were a few emails that were questionable, but nothing that was far over the line.
Your are now referring to four house democrats by the term democrats. The term democrats would lead the reader to believe a majority of democrats are in favor of this. You have four democrats out of 256ish house democrats. That would be 1/64 of house democrats are saying this. These four only have to attract 214 more house member to this and they could pass a bill. Color me unimpressed.
So the leaking of Valerie Plame's name (She worked out of Langley), would cause issues for the people who were known to have met with her. How much trouble was caused for the people who met with the CIA station chief in Algeria Andrew Warren, when his name was leaked by the Clinton state department? Admittedly he was accused of raping several woman, but where was the investigation of the leak of his name.
For someone talking about respecting other people's arguments withoutattaching labels and dismissing out of hand, I find it sad that you have no issue with dismissing the millions of people who watch Fox News. So they watch a certain news channel. Most people are smart enough to see through a slanted news story. I personally recommend reading news on an aggregate news site (google news, yahoo news, etc), so you can see a diverse set of opinions (sometime it is 500 copies of the same article). I do not attack people because the source of their news is Fox News, NPR, or Daily Kos.
John McCain's health care plan was designed to end the tie between health care and one's employer. This plan was ridiculed by President Obama and much of the main stream media.
The congress was not Republican controlled for 6 of the eight years of George W. Bush. The senate was controlled by Democrats from May 2001 to November 2002 (Jim Jeffords switched to Independent and voted for Democratic control) . So that is 4.5 Republican controlled, 1.5 years split and 2 years Democratic controlled.
By my count under George W. Bush there was approximately 4.5 years Republican control of the Senate to 3.5 years Democratic control of the Senate.
The senate was 50-50 with Cheney casting the deciding vote for the Republicans as VP from the 2000 elections until May 24, 2001. The Democrats had control of the senate from May 24, 2001 to the elections of 2002 (November 5, 2002) after Jim Jeffords switched from Republican to Independant and voted for Democratic control. The Senate and the House switched to Democratic control after the 2006 elections.
From the article:
Michael Griffin, noting that no one on Lori Garver's team has any engineering expertise, suggested that Garver was "not qualified" to judge the Constellation program. Garver will not comment about the conversation, but has hinted that there will be a new administrator chosen at NASA shortly and that there will be change to NASA policy."
The Community reinvestment act was modified many times, since its inception. It was passed under Carter, but changed extensively under Clinton. There was pressure on lenders to make loans without taking into account salary, down payments, or assets, because these criteria disproportionally disqualify minorities. This was one of a number of things that led to the housing bubble.
The argument that the republican stopped the democrats from doing anything during the last two years contradicts your blaming the republicans for everything that happened before. The democrats could have stopped everything by filibuster. You cannot have it both ways.
The democrats also controlled the senate from 2001 to 2002. So add that to your two of the last eight years.
This is a large leap in logic in the article. Having a NSA security clearance does not mean that someone works for the NSA.
He stated: "The telltale sign of an illicit government spy operation is the fact that only people with security clearance from the National Security Agency can enter this room." He assumed that this meant the people worked for the NSA.
Having an NSA security clearance does not mean that someone works for the NSA (did I already say that). Having a security clearance means that the person was checked out by the NSA and found not to be security a risk. These background checks general consists of not being heavily in debt, not having been convicted of a felony, not working for a foreign government, etc. Running a though background check on people who who have access to this room and software may be good idea.
Slashdot Mirror
Woman make up almost 60% of college students to 40% for men. So using this logic almost all general college scholarships should be male only.
There might be a reasonable explanation for this. Woman accept lower offers. This means that you would be paying more than you needed to hire her if you offered her the same amount as a man on average. I am not saying this is the case, but it could be.
A quick google search for "Craig Evans blackberry" produces a number of other articles from other newspapers. It is dangerous to dismiss all information from a source because of a past bad experience. You can't trust any of the major sources all the time, they are often wrong. NY Times ran an article by Paul Krugman where he fell into the trap that he thought the politico stinky satire was true. Even the national inquirer has proven to be able to produce a scoop, John Edwards. Most often when someone says that a paper is not accurate they say this because they disagree with the newspapers political slant. This allows them to ignore all stories that do not agree with their political slant.
According to your figures 219 democrats in the house voted for it and 4 voted against it. In the Senate you have 46 voting for it and one voting against it. You can call this bipartisan legislation, but it seemed to have more support from Democrats than Republicans, so calling it Republican would not be accurate. President Bush would probably not veto it because it passed by a veto proof majority. Now lets look at the next argument. If your party voted for something you cannot vote for it. President Obama was against Gay Marriage until he recently evolved. Using this logic no Democrats could be for gay marriage because the President was against it.
The issue is not that the mainstream tech reporting is poor. The issue is that the mainstream reporting is poor. The mainstream media reports are not experts on everything and they still report on everything. The reporters often have short deadlines and do not have time to fully inform themselves on the issue. If you are knowledgable on a subject you will see the many flaws in the mainstream reporting of it.
During the piracy warning at the movies people have taken to sounding like pirates with arrrgs and saavy. This makes me laugh. Below is a snippet of Bob Mondello's interview with NPR about the Toronto Film Festival. MONDELLO: Well, yes, actually. At the beginning of all the public screenings - this doesn't happen so much with the critics' screenings, but when you're at a public screening as soon as they put up the screen that says to be careful not to record anything, the anti-piracy note, everybody starts making pirate noises and going argh, argh. It's a little strange. http://www.npr.org/2012/09/11/160966328/toronto-film-fest-offers-hints-of-oscar-contenders
The actual text from the article. "Our results suggest that some (about 40%) of the released hydrocarbons that once populated these layers still remained in the Gulf post September 2010, so food was available for the feast to continue at some later time. But the location of those substances and whether they were biochemically transformed is unknown." This does not seem to be exactly what you are quoting.
There is a database of adverse reactions at http://www.medalerts.org/. In 2011, there were 30591 adverse reactions reported. There were 312 deaths reported for the same time period. These reports are made by doctors only. I would not necessarily call that no side effects.
There was zero voter fraud then (as now).
On what evidence do you base your claim that there is zero voter fraud? Is it the lack of prosecutions for voter fraud? Using this same logic I can claim that there was no fraud in the housing crash. There have been very few prosecutions, so there must have been very little fraud. The only way to verify if there is voter fraud is to contact all the people that were suppose to have voted and verify if they actually did vote and that they exist.
I understand you disagree with her philosophy, but is it necessary to call her a whore. She provide many interesting ideas that allow an alternative way of looking at things. You seem only capable of name calling. If anyone should be publicly denigrated it is you.
The press is the fourth branch of government and it is doing a horrible job. People are busy and expect the press to research and appraise things fairly, instead we receive sensational stories or someones biased opinion. Half the time we get side tracked on discussing the wrong issues. The press as it is has failed and I hope that it is replaced with something that better informs the populace.
The federal education department does not provide public education, that is provided on the school district level. It funds some initiatives and sets some standards. You say no more roads and bridges, but it is more of a no more interstates. Most of the roads and bridges are maintained by local and state government. If we are to have rational discussions we need to make sure we are accurately portraying the facts.
Yeah, but the FBI was really investigating him.
This is not true. There were accusations that she was using it for state business. People reviewed the emails and did not find that she was using the account for state business. There were a few emails that were questionable, but nothing that was far over the line.
Your are now referring to four house democrats by the term democrats. The term democrats would lead the reader to believe a majority of democrats are in favor of this. You have four democrats out of 256ish house democrats. That would be 1/64 of house democrats are saying this. These four only have to attract 214 more house member to this and they could pass a bill. Color me unimpressed.
So the leaking of Valerie Plame's name (She worked out of Langley), would cause issues for the people who were known to have met with her. How much trouble was caused for the people who met with the CIA station chief in Algeria Andrew Warren, when his name was leaked by the Clinton state department? Admittedly he was accused of raping several woman, but where was the investigation of the leak of his name.
For someone talking about respecting other people's arguments withoutattaching labels and dismissing out of hand, I find it sad that you have no issue with dismissing the millions of people who watch Fox News. So they watch a certain news channel. Most people are smart enough to see through a slanted news story. I personally recommend reading news on an aggregate news site (google news, yahoo news, etc), so you can see a diverse set of opinions (sometime it is 500 copies of the same article). I do not attack people because the source of their news is Fox News, NPR, or Daily Kos.
We need a -1 Wrong moderation.
I think we need a -1 factually incorrect modification and if you use use it you can be asked to back it up.
John McCain's health care plan was designed to end the tie between health care and one's employer. This plan was ridiculed by President Obama and much of the main stream media.
The congress was not Republican controlled for 6 of the eight years of George W. Bush. The senate was controlled by Democrats from May 2001 to November 2002 (Jim Jeffords switched to Independent and voted for Democratic control) . So that is 4.5 Republican controlled, 1.5 years split and 2 years Democratic controlled.
By my count under George W. Bush there was approximately 4.5 years Republican control of the Senate to 3.5 years Democratic control of the Senate. The senate was 50-50 with Cheney casting the deciding vote for the Republicans as VP from the 2000 elections until May 24, 2001. The Democrats had control of the senate from May 24, 2001 to the elections of 2002 (November 5, 2002) after Jim Jeffords switched from Republican to Independant and voted for Democratic control. The Senate and the House switched to Democratic control after the 2006 elections.
From the article: Michael Griffin, noting that no one on Lori Garver's team has any engineering expertise, suggested that Garver was "not qualified" to judge the Constellation program. Garver will not comment about the conversation, but has hinted that there will be a new administrator chosen at NASA shortly and that there will be change to NASA policy."
The Community reinvestment act was modified many times, since its inception. It was passed under Carter, but changed extensively under Clinton. There was pressure on lenders to make loans without taking into account salary, down payments, or assets, because these criteria disproportionally disqualify minorities. This was one of a number of things that led to the housing bubble.
The argument that the republican stopped the democrats from doing anything during the last two years contradicts your blaming the republicans for everything that happened before. The democrats could have stopped everything by filibuster. You cannot have it both ways. The democrats also controlled the senate from 2001 to 2002. So add that to your two of the last eight years.
This is a large leap in logic in the article. Having a NSA security clearance does not mean that someone works for the NSA. He stated: "The telltale sign of an illicit government spy operation is the fact that only people with security clearance from the National Security Agency can enter this room." He assumed that this meant the people worked for the NSA. Having an NSA security clearance does not mean that someone works for the NSA (did I already say that). Having a security clearance means that the person was checked out by the NSA and found not to be security a risk. These background checks general consists of not being heavily in debt, not having been convicted of a felony, not working for a foreign government, etc. Running a though background check on people who who have access to this room and software may be good idea.