No, I'm saying that the previous poster is choosing incorrect data to advance a general feeling against liberating the Middle East, which has been the cesspool of the world for the past several hundred years... Uh, wait. Since the advent of Islam. Yeah. That's it.
You're asking me if 10,000-30,000 is an acceptable number? It might very well be. How many were killed by Saddam hanchmen and Islamofascists trying to stop those who are striving to implement the rule of law?
I understand that you'd rather live on your knees than die on your feet. Speaking as someone who served in the infantry in the late 80's, I wouldn't.
Except of course that 100,000 Iraqi civilians haven't dies due to our liberation of Iraq. The Lancet used notoriously inappropriate sampling for an estimate rather than some kind of actual tally. I know, it's shameful that such an august body would trade its credibility and respectability for cheap political grandstanding. Shameful, but as The Economist has shown, hardly unprecedented.
Awwww, Precious! If Vietnam was a total political bullshit war, why is it that John Kerry takes every opportunity he can to point out that he fought there for 4 months?
Awwww, precious! The testimony of former American prisoners of war is political rhetoric BS? Videotape of young men openly inventing atrocities to report in 1971 is political rhetoric BS? Iranians risking their lives to protest the mullahrocracy is political rhetoric BS? Videotape of your candidate openly engaging in pro-Communist propoganda is political rhetoric BS?
Okay, let's talk about reasons to vote for Bush:
Treats the War on Terrorism as a War, not a law enforcement problem (as Kerry has repeatedly called for)
Treats the Poles, Italians, British, Australians and the 28 other nations allied to us in our fight against terrorism as valued friends, not bribed stooges
Realizes that if France, Germany, and Russia are on the take from Saddaam's Oil for Food program (and they were) then they won't be good allies against Iraq.
Actually paid taxes on his income instead of sheltering most of it from funding the government (that one's got to REALLY gall you, doesn't it?)
Understands that a "plan" is more than just a laundry-list of Monday-morning complaints you throw out whenever your opponent actually accomplishes something in the big game Sunday evening.
Has liberated 50 million people from totalitarian regimes, including liberated millions of women from the yolk of religious oppression.
Well, crap. One of the best mags for news is giving into some Pollyanna-ish leanings that I'd thought them too mature and intelligent to cave into. Guantanamo a mistake that will haunt us for years? We lock up savages (savages based on their behavior, not their ethnicity, by the way) in one of the few places we can be sure they won't escape from, we give them vastly better food and medical care and religious freedom than they've ever seen, (and the few we've let out have returned to assaulting Western Civilization, which argues for MORE 'Tanamo, not LESS) and even The Economist wants to get all trial lawyer-y on us? Man.
Oh, and now they fall into the trap of considering morally equal an irretreviably corrupt and evil gang of thugs (The PLO) with the ONLY thriving representative democracy in The Middle East (Israel.) Name the one country in The Middle East where Arabs get to freely elect Arabs to a truly democratic parliament: yup, Israel. But a bunch of savages who see using children as suicide bombers against other children is Israel's moral equivalent? Give me a break.
Finally, they're choosing a man who, while still in the U.S. Armed Forces, gave aid and comfort to the enemy by going to Paris and meeting with the North Vietnamese communists and Viet Cong terrorists to get the propoganda line he would follow in 1971 "testimony" before congress. Testimony he HAD to know was untrue.
It must be a good game; my cube used to be adjacent to some guy in this Beta, and for months he spent more time talking on the phone about... uh... soul shards and necromancers and other esoteric things than he did actually earning his salary. I was preparing to kill him and leave D & D lead figurines stuffed in all his orifices (got a good deal on 25 pounds of them on eBay) when I picked up a better contract somewhere else.
My cousins mostly turn the spare bedrooms of their mobile homes into a drying room for their marijuana plants. And go for high scores in number of complete car rolls during drunken single-automobile accidents. You win!
"But there's one thing I can predict to eaters of meat, that the world of the future will be vegetarian!"
--Adolf Hitler from Hitler's Table Talk 1941-1944 translated by Norman Cameron and R.H. Stevens, Oxford University Press, 1988; p. 125 -- end of selection for 11 November 1941, evening.
Based on the French affinity for frogs, snails, and other unlikely looking edibles, they probably think of this as a chance to try out new recipes with our unfortunate alien contactees.
Why, we won't need manpower if we require subcutaneous RFID chips at the border. It's not just biometric, it's biowired!
This is the kind of crapola that happens when people demand the government protect them in inappropriate ways. We wouldn't need a TSA if we armed the cockpit crew. They used to be armed... when they carried the mail for the USPS. But we've got a government (not an administration, but the whole firken system) that thinks we should protect contest notices with deadly force, but not human passengers.
I have. This will be the first election since 1988 (when I voted for Dukakis) that I will vote for a major party instead of a third party. In 1988 I voted against Bush Sr. because I felt that the lying about covert operations he did was a very bad thing. In 1992 I voted for Perot. In 1996 and 2000 for The Libertarians. This time I'm voting for Bush, and if September 11th had never happened I'd be voting Libertarian again. I've got an unusually large amount of experience with terrorist attacks, having been peripherally or centrally affected by 6 attacks in 4 countries (Germany, The US, Malaysia, and Italy). I'm voting for Bush because the Islamist terrorists and their rogue state supporters have to be pounded into hamburger. Everything else will wait another 4 years. There's a great precedent for that kind of thing in the United States: FDR got re-elected in 1944 when he was clearly an old, exhausted man because changing presidents in the middle of a global war would send the wrong message to our enemies, and FDR was prosecuting the war in an effective manner. Kerry won't conduct a pro-active offensive war to keep us safe. Bush will. Kerry can't help thinking of every war we get into as Vietnam. Bush knows better. Which is funny given most peoples' perception of the relative intelligence of the two.
Here's how it matters: if the Democrats lose to the Republicans (because the Republicans got it in the first choice) and the Democrats can see that if they had captured the Greens as part of their first choice voters they would have won, the Greens will get to influence the Democrats.
IRV would really help third parties because it would get rid of the "I don't want to waste my vote by voting for someone who can't win." It would then allow the major parties to be mch more responsive to the public's desires. If (for example) The Democrats won a senate seat and the winner knew that 70% of his votes were first choice, 24% were second choice Green, and 6% were second choice Libertarian, he'd know that to shore up more votes, he'd better tack hard in a green direction. Once people saw how it worked, more and more who supported 3rd party ideals would vote for them and quite possibly elect them.
I really get the feeling this wasn't thought through well?
SECTION 2. The persons having the greatest number of votes for President and Vice President shall be elected, so long as such persons have a majority of the votes cast.
That's it. No provisions for how a runoff will be conducted or even IF one will be conducted. Speaking as a software designer, where's the error handling? Oh! In an unrelated piece of code that may not get implemented! Whoo!
This bill is a publicity stunt... considering it has to be approved by the very states that it strips power from, even its sponsors know it has no chance of being created.
Okie doke, let's look at the whole quote then. What he said was (as reported on CNN, not some right-wing source): "We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance," the article states as the Massachusetts senator's reply.
"As a former law enforcement person, I know we're never going to end prostitution. We're never going to end illegal gambling. But we're going to reduce it, organized crime, to a level where it isn't on the rise. It isn't threatening people's lives every day, and fundamentally, it's something that you continue to fight, but it's not threatening the fabric of your life."
Kerry equates terrorism with arguably victimless crime (prostitution and gambling.) The essence of terrorism requires a victim. You do understand that, right? Any level of terrorism threatens the fabric of someone's life. So what exactly is the reasoning you follow that leads to agreeing with this?
There is one circumstance under which I would agree that terrorism could best be classified as a nuisance. That's when we've convinced rogue states that they cannot provide aid and comfort to terrorists without suffering unacceptable consequences. Afghanistan and Iraq had terrorist training camps. Saddam Hussein provided cash bounties to suicide bombers' families, provided safe haven to all sorts of terrorists (terrorists who go as far back as The Achille Lauro in the mid 80's.) Saudi Arabia has funded Wahabbist Mosques and madrassas that teach muslims to last out violently against infidels. Iran funds Hizbollah. The list goes on and on.
Bush's approach has caused Libya to abandon WMD programs and terrorist training. It's inspired uprisings against the Iranian theocracy. It has allowed the first free elections in Afghanistan, equal rights for women in Afghanistan, the end of mass grave massacres, chemical weapon attacks against women and children, and is about to lead to free elections in Iraq.
Kerry would not have done any of that. Indeed, by even voting against the first Gulf war, if it were up to John Kerry not only would Saddam still control Iraq, he'd own Kuwait and quite possibly the whole Saudi penninsula and most of the world's oil. How is it that you just don't get it? Or is that the world you'd prefer?
On the other hand, what better way for a hobbyist game programmer to show his virtuosity than when under serious resource constraints? Venture R0X0R3D (IMHO) and you ought to be able to do something like that with this...
I would think Detroit has enough worries about bad perceptions regarding their reliability without adding this to it. There's a reason why it's called "WinCE"
Slashdot Mirror
No, I'm saying that the previous poster is choosing incorrect data to advance a general feeling against liberating the Middle East, which has been the cesspool of the world for the past several hundred years... Uh, wait. Since the advent of Islam. Yeah. That's it.
You're asking me if 10,000-30,000 is an acceptable number? It might very well be. How many were killed by Saddam hanchmen and Islamofascists trying to stop those who are striving to implement the rule of law?
I understand that you'd rather live on your knees than die on your feet. Speaking as someone who served in the infantry in the late 80's, I wouldn't.
Except of course that 100,000 Iraqi civilians haven't dies due to our liberation of Iraq. The Lancet used notoriously inappropriate sampling for an estimate rather than some kind of actual tally. I know, it's shameful that such an august body would trade its credibility and respectability for cheap political grandstanding. Shameful, but as The Economist has shown, hardly unprecedented.
Awwww, Precious! If Vietnam was a total political bullshit war, why is it that John Kerry takes every opportunity he can to point out that he fought there for 4 months?
Awwww, precious! The testimony of former American prisoners of war is political rhetoric BS? Videotape of young men openly inventing atrocities to report in 1971 is political rhetoric BS? Iranians risking their lives to protest the mullahrocracy is political rhetoric BS? Videotape of your candidate openly engaging in pro-Communist propoganda is political rhetoric BS?
Okay, let's talk about reasons to vote for Bush:
Treats the War on Terrorism as a War, not a law enforcement problem (as Kerry has repeatedly called for)
Treats the Poles, Italians, British, Australians and the 28 other nations allied to us in our fight against terrorism as valued friends, not bribed stooges
Realizes that if France, Germany, and Russia are on the take from Saddaam's Oil for Food program (and they were) then they won't be good allies against Iraq.
Actually paid taxes on his income instead of sheltering most of it from funding the government (that one's got to REALLY gall you, doesn't it?)
Understands that a "plan" is more than just a laundry-list of Monday-morning complaints you throw out whenever your opponent actually accomplishes something in the big game Sunday evening.
Has liberated 50 million people from totalitarian regimes, including liberated millions of women from the yolk of religious oppression.
But you knew all that already, didn't you?
Well, crap. One of the best mags for news is giving into some Pollyanna-ish leanings that I'd thought them too mature and intelligent to cave into. Guantanamo a mistake that will haunt us for years? We lock up savages (savages based on their behavior, not their ethnicity, by the way) in one of the few places we can be sure they won't escape from, we give them vastly better food and medical care and religious freedom than they've ever seen, (and the few we've let out have returned to assaulting Western Civilization, which argues for MORE 'Tanamo, not LESS) and even The Economist wants to get all trial lawyer-y on us? Man.
Oh, and now they fall into the trap of considering morally equal an irretreviably corrupt and evil gang of thugs (The PLO) with the ONLY thriving representative democracy in The Middle East (Israel.) Name the one country in The Middle East where Arabs get to freely elect Arabs to a truly democratic parliament: yup, Israel. But a bunch of savages who see using children as suicide bombers against other children is Israel's moral equivalent? Give me a break.
The conservatives have become stronger in Iran? Oh, that explains the nationwide protests against the theocracy.
Finally, they're choosing a man who, while still in the U.S. Armed Forces, gave aid and comfort to the enemy by going to Paris and meeting with the North Vietnamese communists and Viet Cong terrorists to get the propoganda line he would follow in 1971 "testimony" before congress. Testimony he HAD to know was untrue.
Just shameful.
It must be a good game; my cube used to be adjacent to some guy in this Beta, and for months he spent more time talking on the phone about... uh... soul shards and necromancers and other esoteric things than he did actually earning his salary. I was preparing to kill him and leave D & D lead figurines stuffed in all his orifices (got a good deal on 25 pounds of them on eBay) when I picked up a better contract somewhere else.
Like go to Uranus and wipe out the Klingons on it?
They named it Colombia. SO, I guess that means it'll crash faster than any other computer in history.
My cousins mostly turn the spare bedrooms of their mobile homes into a drying room for their marijuana plants. And go for high scores in number of complete car rolls during drunken single-automobile accidents. You win!
I've got a bunch of cousins who do stupid things, too.
So,
1) why the driver's seat then?
2) will it show a preference for attacking house cats?
Does this mean that drinking out of the jacuzzi in the Asian "Health Spa" I frequent protect me from any love bugs I might get there?
Now, now. Quoting Hitler will get you nowhere.
"But there's one thing I can predict to eaters of meat, that the world of the future will be vegetarian!"
--Adolf Hitler from Hitler's Table Talk 1941-1944 translated by Norman Cameron and R.H. Stevens, Oxford University Press, 1988; p. 125 -- end of selection for 11 November 1941, evening.
Is it good touch or bad touch?
Based on the French affinity for frogs, snails, and other unlikely looking edibles, they probably think of this as a chance to try out new recipes with our unfortunate alien contactees.
Why, we won't need manpower if we require subcutaneous RFID chips at the border. It's not just biometric, it's biowired!
This is the kind of crapola that happens when people demand the government protect them in inappropriate ways. We wouldn't need a TSA if we armed the cockpit crew. They used to be armed... when they carried the mail for the USPS. But we've got a government (not an administration, but the whole firken system) that thinks we should protect contest notices with deadly force, but not human passengers.
I have. This will be the first election since 1988 (when I voted for Dukakis) that I will vote for a major party instead of a third party. In 1988 I voted against Bush Sr. because I felt that the lying about covert operations he did was a very bad thing. In 1992 I voted for Perot. In 1996 and 2000 for The Libertarians. This time I'm voting for Bush, and if September 11th had never happened I'd be voting Libertarian again. I've got an unusually large amount of experience with terrorist attacks, having been peripherally or centrally affected by 6 attacks in 4 countries (Germany, The US, Malaysia, and Italy). I'm voting for Bush because the Islamist terrorists and their rogue state supporters have to be pounded into hamburger. Everything else will wait another 4 years. There's a great precedent for that kind of thing in the United States: FDR got re-elected in 1944 when he was clearly an old, exhausted man because changing presidents in the middle of a global war would send the wrong message to our enemies, and FDR was prosecuting the war in an effective manner. Kerry won't conduct a pro-active offensive war to keep us safe. Bush will. Kerry can't help thinking of every war we get into as Vietnam. Bush knows better. Which is funny given most peoples' perception of the relative intelligence of the two.
Here's how it matters: if the Democrats lose to the Republicans (because the Republicans got it in the first choice) and the Democrats can see that if they had captured the Greens as part of their first choice voters they would have won, the Greens will get to influence the Democrats.
IRV would really help third parties because it would get rid of the "I don't want to waste my vote by voting for someone who can't win." It would then allow the major parties to be mch more responsive to the public's desires. If (for example) The Democrats won a senate seat and the winner knew that 70% of his votes were first choice, 24% were second choice Green, and 6% were second choice Libertarian, he'd know that to shore up more votes, he'd better tack hard in a green direction. Once people saw how it worked, more and more who supported 3rd party ideals would vote for them and quite possibly elect them.
I really get the feeling this wasn't thought through well?
SECTION 2. The persons having the greatest number of votes for President and Vice President shall be elected, so long as such persons have a majority of the votes cast.
That's it. No provisions for how a runoff will be conducted or even IF one will be conducted. Speaking as a software designer, where's the error handling? Oh! In an unrelated piece of code that may not get implemented! Whoo!
This bill is a publicity stunt... considering it has to be approved by the very states that it strips power from, even its sponsors know it has no chance of being created.
Speaking as a cranky conservative, involving the government will turn PCBang into Fingerbang.
Okie doke, let's look at the whole quote then. What he said was (as reported on CNN, not some right-wing source): "We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance," the article states as the Massachusetts senator's reply.
"As a former law enforcement person, I know we're never going to end prostitution. We're never going to end illegal gambling. But we're going to reduce it, organized crime, to a level where it isn't on the rise. It isn't threatening people's lives every day, and fundamentally, it's something that you continue to fight, but it's not threatening the fabric of your life."
Kerry equates terrorism with arguably victimless crime (prostitution and gambling.) The essence of terrorism requires a victim. You do understand that, right? Any level of terrorism threatens the fabric of someone's life. So what exactly is the reasoning you follow that leads to agreeing with this?
There is one circumstance under which I would agree that terrorism could best be classified as a nuisance. That's when we've convinced rogue states that they cannot provide aid and comfort to terrorists without suffering unacceptable consequences. Afghanistan and Iraq had terrorist training camps. Saddam Hussein provided cash bounties to suicide bombers' families, provided safe haven to all sorts of terrorists (terrorists who go as far back as The Achille Lauro in the mid 80's.) Saudi Arabia has funded Wahabbist Mosques and madrassas that teach muslims to last out violently against infidels. Iran funds Hizbollah. The list goes on and on.
Bush's approach has caused Libya to abandon WMD programs and terrorist training. It's inspired uprisings against the Iranian theocracy. It has allowed the first free elections in Afghanistan, equal rights for women in Afghanistan, the end of mass grave massacres, chemical weapon attacks against women and children, and is about to lead to free elections in Iraq.
Kerry would not have done any of that. Indeed, by even voting against the first Gulf war, if it were up to John Kerry not only would Saddam still control Iraq, he'd own Kuwait and quite possibly the whole Saudi penninsula and most of the world's oil. How is it that you just don't get it? Or is that the world you'd prefer?
On the other hand, what better way for a hobbyist game programmer to show his virtuosity than when under serious resource constraints? Venture R0X0R3D (IMHO) and you ought to be able to do something like that with this...
The turbulence tastes fractally!
I would think Detroit has enough worries about bad perceptions regarding their reliability without adding this to it. There's a reason why it's called "WinCE"