The term "judicial activism" has been around for a lot longer than that. It was used freely during the court-ordered busing conflicts in the '70s, for example. Before my time, I suspect it was used during the school racial integration decisions in the '50s.
Generally, "activist judges" are those who seem to find new rights where they previously had not existed or been spelled out in law (ie the 'right' to gay marriage in Massachusettes, the 'right' to an abortion in the Constitution, etc.).
In this case, as the minority opinion states, the majority basically said that New York ought to be able to tax a telecommuter, without saying where the law mandates it, or citing precedent.
Well, opinions are biased by definition; we hope we can find unbiased reporting (of facts).
There is value in listening to the biases of others, in order to test whether or not your own opinion stands up: the validity of one's own opinion is partially determined by how easily holes can be punched through it.
Well, there are plenty of folks who DO want to outlaw guns, even for responsible owners (read recent articles about the effort in San Francisco). Aside from the fact that gun control does not work in lowering crime, the 2d amendment clearly was intended to keep governments from disarming the populace, as a guarantor against tyranny.
If you are a good libertarian and thus oppose the PATRIOT Act (and restrictions on laser-pointer ownership), then you ought to oppose gun control. And you ought support the mission of the NRA.
People who abuse the right to own guns by, say, shooting at airplanes, should be locked away. Just as "guns don't kill people...", it is true that "lasers don't blind pilots...": it is the human who controls the device. If you do the wrong thing with the device, then you should be punished.
It seems clear to me that unsafe driving and DUI is a MUCH bigger risk to the US people than a 9/11 style terrorist attack.
The diff is that auto fatalities are not the result of attacks. They are accidents.
To paraphrase, the stated goal of those who perpetrated 9/11 was to kill lots of Americans so that the whole world saw and feared. Well, it did on both counts.
Three years later, we hear lots of "yeah, but": Yeah, but we had it coming. Yeah, but it could have been worse. Yeah, but it will be too hard to retaliate. And head-in-the-sanders like you want to pretend the bad guys really aren't that big a deal. Ignore them and they'll go away. Just a nuisance.
You and those like you simply cannot grasp that there exists a real, honest-to-God ENEMY out there who will kill you and your family just because you (I assume, friend) are not a Muslim. If let alone, they will acquire sarin and let it loose on a subway or Super Bowl; they will build a cheap dirty bomb and pop it in Miami or Philadelphia or Seattle; they will steal a nuke and detonate it in Charleston or Tampa or San Francisco bay.
And you will shake your fist and scream about how Bush didn't do anything to stop them.
I suspect the average Canadian can figure out a butterfly ballot, too.
We were told that more than a few Democrats in a few Florida counties couldn't handle that in 2000. Say, maybe when you Canadian snowbirds come visit Florida this winter, you can teach them how it works...
Agreed, and it isn't just kids or college students. I am a 42 year old consultant who has a meeting in 2 hours and a half-completed draft document to present therein. My well-educated and disciplined mind says I should put off working on that and take a quick swim through/. in order to...well, something.
As for the kiddos, I kill the AOL IM port at 8 pm on school nights.
Sigh. Friend, let's try to look at these one at a time.
ultra conservative supreme court appointments
Meaning you don't want judges who interpret the law, rather than impose it from the bench. You prefer to have activists who make the law up as they go, with no recourse, right?
ruining of Social Security
Newsflash: It is already ruined. It will just take about 20 years to manifest itself. It was always an unsustainable model that relied on unsustainable population trends. And, if you are fearful of allowing an *option* for *younger* participants to invest *some* of *their* income into *higher-yielding* vehicles so they have more income when they retire (which they will need because they will live longer), what exactly is wrong with that? Might there be some transition costs, sure, but don't you think there could be some way to work around that? Sometimes I think the Democrats just do not want it fixed, just so they can have the fear issue every two years ("The Republicans want to take away your social security! Aaaagh!"). And if you are reading Slashdot, it implies that you might be in the programming field: Aren't you supposed to know about having to change your architecture to adapt to changing business requirements?
relationships with allies severed
"Severed"? Why would Bush want to do that? Provide some evidence where that has happened. We haven't "severed" relations with anyone in the last four years (unless you want to include the Taliban and Saddam), and it wouldn't make sense to do so. And which allies do you mean? Canada? France? Bourkhina-Fasso? Again...why?
inability for Americans to safely travel overseas
Yes, I remember how safe it was back in the 90's. Like when Bill Clinton, the darling of Europe, travelled to Greece in 1999. Yeah, those were the days...
the imposition of fundamentalist christian morality on all citizens (prayer in school, no abortion, discrimination and violence against gays, teaching creationism, etc)
Ummm...I guess I should just say "wanna bet?" None of this will happen. There hasn't been any effort to impose any of this in the first place. I mean, really, "no abortions"? Who calls for that? Bush doesn't. The GOP doesn't. Who? And as to the gays thing...so Bush is going to authorize physical violence against Mary Cheney?
bankruptcy of the Federal government due to grandiose overspending and insufficient tax revenue
I agree with you about the overspending. I really hope that Bush takes on the mission of cutting back on Federal spending. Unfortunately, he tried to buy the affections of moderates by hiking spending on education and AIDS research, but the Left really couldn't care less; they still hate him and he gets no credit for that. As to tax revenue, that will take care of itself if rates are low enough to foster growth. That's what has been happening since 2002 (and other times - 1962 and 1981, namely).
How about we meet back here in 2008 and see who's right? Lighten up, pal.
Friend, you cannot build the economy around the skills that workers have now. Workers have always had to adjust to changing market conditions. And it is simply not a recent phenomenon that white-collar types have had to move into other fields as a result of economic circumstances.
I have a BS in Economics, and spent the first four years of my career in commercial banking in Florida. This was during the mid- and late-80's. All was well, until my bank was bought out by another regional bank from North Carolina. At the outset of the merger, both banks had their own HR, legal, and IT departments, as well as competing branches at the same intersections. Guess what? Layoffs! The bank simply didn't need two of everything, so about half of those folks went elsewhere.
I was one of them. Just for fun, I had a 4 month-old son and a mortgage, and there was a recession going on. So, in 1990, I had the "opportunity" to change careers. I went to work as a contractor doing tech pubs for a large telecom firm. Then I managed to get into their mgt training program. I learned COBOL/JCL/MVS. Great stuff in 1990.
That was all good; in fact, they moved me to Dallas in 1997. Promotions, raises, career advancement. I even moved into the firm's web services group, to take advantage of the Internet thing. Again, all was well. Then, that firm was bought by another large telco. Guess what: layoffs!
I actually saw it coming, and jumped into IT consulting, thinking I would leverage my IT/telecom/web skills. It took a whole 8 months before the "dotcom/9-11/corp scandal" bust hit, taking telecom with it. Guess what: layoffs!
I had to dodge those by taking my project management skills and combining them with my *old* COBOL skills which were needed...in health care! So, now I am an systems architect/project manager with a specialization in payor claims systems.
That's enough typing, but my point is: even college-educated folks will have to change careers, and IT CAN BE DONE.
I am not especially bright or well-educated. But I do not expect that anyone owes me a job, nor do I expect the government to ban corporate mergers.
It is my responsibility to feed my family, and while I would rather not have had the stress associated with dodging all of those layoffs, it is part of life. In every case above, my income level actually increased for each career change.
So calm down and look at your skills - which I suspect are greater than simple "programming" - and figure out how you leverage them in a better-paying way.
So go ahead and be optimistic. You can do it.
Wow. I have a bad memory involving the combo of "Titanic" and "dental surgery"...my absolutely true experience is as follows:
On vacation in Tampa in December 1997, my wife and her mom went to see the afternoon showing of Titanic. They returned around 7 pm. At about 4 pm, I started to experience an increasingly painful tooth problem (bottom-right-front tooth, whatever it's called) which ultimately led me to a dental ER for a head-numbing shot of something not called novacaine (which worked!), circa 9 pm in Clearwater ($200 cash). The next day I underwent a root canal. The doc was South African.
Coincidence? Put it this way: I still haven't seen the movie, and I haven't needed another root canal...
Ah: my votes go to either "Invasion from Inner Earth", or "Rollerblade Warriors".
Sounds a lot like the argument for gun control. Air travel is not constitutionally protected, however.
Re:Some metals they might find next (?)
on
Amorphous Steel
·
· Score: 1
That's all fine for now. But in a couple hundred years, Mr. Spock will tell the Enterprise crew that Castrodinium is "the hardest metal known to our science". Unfortunately, the Romulan plasma weapon renders it unstable, which allows a Warbird to wipe out several defense outposts along the Federation-Romulan neutral zone.
The good news is that Constitution-class photon torpedoes can take out a Warbird without too much fuss.
Well, interesting. But you miss a couple of points:
Come on, friend: Stern was dropped in the midst of the FCC feeding frenzy that followed Janet Jackson's little halftime show. Janet's stunt, malfunction, whatever, was a great opportunity for politicians to puff up and rant about how "shocked, shocked" they were that such things are broadcast.
To your point - I agree with you - Clear Channel (amongst others) suddenly decided they should be concerned with obscenity being broadcast by their employees. That they are hypocrites is manifest.
I still haven't heard you cite evidence that Stern a) was a particularly strong Republican, or b) was fired for suddenly saying something negative about Bush.
Guess my gripe is that I don't have any problem finding media outlets critical of the President. Do you? Are there fewer? Per my earlier post...Air America launches this week, and not from a pirate radio ship.
Please, man, see that political debate is alive and well in this country. It's fine.
Still, I would like to know the basis for the statement that "Stern's listenership is more right wing...". That would surprise me if true. Didn't think Republicans were so hip...I sure ain't.
As to the Gandalf thing, I was mainly joking. For good or ill.
And if you're a good Java architect willing to travel for the next couple of months to help re-architect a legacy CRM system, I might want to talk to you, despite your (apparent) Leftist leanings.
Some of the best technical folks I know are utterly lost when it comes to public policy.;)
Ugh. Such intellectual laziness...typical of the Left, though. Look, Stern was dropped from a few stations because he specializes in obscene material, not for his political views.
Don Imus offers no (well, almost no) obscene material, but regularly has guests who oppose Bush. So why hasn't he been dropped? And isn't it odd that 'Air America' is just getting started just now, amongst all this right-wing censorship?
You want to say Stern is a victim of the Right? Good Lord, just ask yourself: Would you let your kids listen to Stern? No? Probably has nothing to do with his politics, does it?
And quit quoting Gandalf (..."for good or ill"...).
I am just glad that I have already accumulated enough music - legally - to listen to for the rest of my life. Having learned the lesson of losing my albums, I'll make a note to keep my CD player in good repair for the next 40 years or so.
I guess that, come 2009, I'd rather not have to screw around trying to keep track of postage stamps encoded with whatever crap music my then-15 year old son will listen to. (Will they put Steve Martin's "Let's Get Small" on those little things?)
I can hear myself now, comfortably telling him "Ya know, kiddo, when I was 15, we had albums and cassettes. A man could stack those."
Slashdot Mirror
...the testes should not be aware who is what. No, they rely on your eyes and brain to determine that.
No, no, no! The command is "sleep". I've seen it done.
I vote for Peter Jackson.
The term "judicial activism" has been around for a lot longer than that. It was used freely during the court-ordered busing conflicts in the '70s, for example. Before my time, I suspect it was used during the school racial integration decisions in the '50s.
Generally, "activist judges" are those who seem to find new rights where they previously had not existed or been spelled out in law (ie the 'right' to gay marriage in Massachusettes, the 'right' to an abortion in the Constitution, etc.).
In this case, as the minority opinion states, the majority basically said that New York ought to be able to tax a telecommuter, without saying where the law mandates it, or citing precedent.
But finding un-biased opinions...
Well, opinions are biased by definition; we hope we can find unbiased reporting (of facts).
There is value in listening to the biases of others, in order to test whether or not your own opinion stands up: the validity of one's own opinion is partially determined by how easily holes can be punched through it.
So, did he have allergies? And how could he use tissues with those scrawny forearms?
Agreed. My gripe is with "functionality".
Friend of Commander Data? Oh wait, wrong "Star" paradigm...
Well, there are plenty of folks who DO want to outlaw guns, even for responsible owners (read recent articles about the effort in San Francisco). Aside from the fact that gun control does not work in lowering crime, the 2d amendment clearly was intended to keep governments from disarming the populace, as a guarantor against tyranny.
If you are a good libertarian and thus oppose the PATRIOT Act (and restrictions on laser-pointer ownership), then you ought to oppose gun control. And you ought support the mission of the NRA.
People who abuse the right to own guns by, say, shooting at airplanes, should be locked away. Just as "guns don't kill people...", it is true that "lasers don't blind pilots...": it is the human who controls the device. If you do the wrong thing with the device, then you should be punished.
Because he and his intrepid band of astronauts pretty much defended my room for about four years, I thought until the early '70s.
It seems clear to me that unsafe driving and DUI is a MUCH bigger risk to the US people than a 9/11 style terrorist attack.
The diff is that auto fatalities are not the result of attacks. They are accidents.
To paraphrase, the stated goal of those who perpetrated 9/11 was to kill lots of Americans so that the whole world saw and feared. Well, it did on both counts.
Three years later, we hear lots of "yeah, but": Yeah, but we had it coming. Yeah, but it could have been worse. Yeah, but it will be too hard to retaliate. And head-in-the-sanders like you want to pretend the bad guys really aren't that big a deal. Ignore them and they'll go away. Just a nuisance.
You and those like you simply cannot grasp that there exists a real, honest-to-God ENEMY out there who will kill you and your family just because you (I assume, friend) are not a Muslim. If let alone, they will acquire sarin and let it loose on a subway or Super Bowl; they will build a cheap dirty bomb and pop it in Miami or Philadelphia or Seattle; they will steal a nuke and detonate it in Charleston or Tampa or San Francisco bay.
And you will shake your fist and scream about how Bush didn't do anything to stop them.
I suspect the average Canadian can figure out a butterfly ballot, too.
We were told that more than a few Democrats in a few Florida counties couldn't handle that in 2000. Say, maybe when you Canadian snowbirds come visit Florida this winter, you can teach them how it works...
Agreed, and it isn't just kids or college students. I am a 42 year old consultant who has a meeting in 2 hours and a half-completed draft document to present therein. My well-educated and disciplined mind says I should put off working on that and take a quick swim through /. in order to...well, something.
As for the kiddos, I kill the AOL IM port at 8 pm on school nights.
ultra conservative supreme court appointments Meaning you don't want judges who interpret the law, rather than impose it from the bench. You prefer to have activists who make the law up as they go, with no recourse, right?
ruining of Social Security Newsflash: It is already ruined. It will just take about 20 years to manifest itself. It was always an unsustainable model that relied on unsustainable population trends. And, if you are fearful of allowing an *option* for *younger* participants to invest *some* of *their* income into *higher-yielding* vehicles so they have more income when they retire (which they will need because they will live longer), what exactly is wrong with that? Might there be some transition costs, sure, but don't you think there could be some way to work around that? Sometimes I think the Democrats just do not want it fixed, just so they can have the fear issue every two years ("The Republicans want to take away your social security! Aaaagh!"). And if you are reading Slashdot, it implies that you might be in the programming field: Aren't you supposed to know about having to change your architecture to adapt to changing business requirements?
relationships with allies severed "Severed"? Why would Bush want to do that? Provide some evidence where that has happened. We haven't "severed" relations with anyone in the last four years (unless you want to include the Taliban and Saddam), and it wouldn't make sense to do so. And which allies do you mean? Canada? France? Bourkhina-Fasso? Again...why?
inability for Americans to safely travel overseas Yes, I remember how safe it was back in the 90's. Like when Bill Clinton, the darling of Europe, travelled to Greece in 1999. Yeah, those were the days...
the imposition of fundamentalist christian morality on all citizens (prayer in school, no abortion, discrimination and violence against gays, teaching creationism, etc) Ummm...I guess I should just say "wanna bet?" None of this will happen. There hasn't been any effort to impose any of this in the first place. I mean, really, "no abortions"? Who calls for that? Bush doesn't. The GOP doesn't. Who? And as to the gays thing...so Bush is going to authorize physical violence against Mary Cheney?
bankruptcy of the Federal government due to grandiose overspending and insufficient tax revenue I agree with you about the overspending. I really hope that Bush takes on the mission of cutting back on Federal spending. Unfortunately, he tried to buy the affections of moderates by hiking spending on education and AIDS research, but the Left really couldn't care less; they still hate him and he gets no credit for that. As to tax revenue, that will take care of itself if rates are low enough to foster growth. That's what has been happening since 2002 (and other times - 1962 and 1981, namely).
How about we meet back here in 2008 and see who's right? Lighten up, pal.
Friend, you cannot build the economy around the skills that workers have now. Workers have always had to adjust to changing market conditions. And it is simply not a recent phenomenon that white-collar types have had to move into other fields as a result of economic circumstances. I have a BS in Economics, and spent the first four years of my career in commercial banking in Florida. This was during the mid- and late-80's. All was well, until my bank was bought out by another regional bank from North Carolina. At the outset of the merger, both banks had their own HR, legal, and IT departments, as well as competing branches at the same intersections. Guess what? Layoffs! The bank simply didn't need two of everything, so about half of those folks went elsewhere. I was one of them. Just for fun, I had a 4 month-old son and a mortgage, and there was a recession going on. So, in 1990, I had the "opportunity" to change careers. I went to work as a contractor doing tech pubs for a large telecom firm. Then I managed to get into their mgt training program. I learned COBOL/JCL/MVS. Great stuff in 1990. That was all good; in fact, they moved me to Dallas in 1997. Promotions, raises, career advancement. I even moved into the firm's web services group, to take advantage of the Internet thing. Again, all was well. Then, that firm was bought by another large telco. Guess what: layoffs! I actually saw it coming, and jumped into IT consulting, thinking I would leverage my IT/telecom/web skills. It took a whole 8 months before the "dotcom/9-11/corp scandal" bust hit, taking telecom with it. Guess what: layoffs! I had to dodge those by taking my project management skills and combining them with my *old* COBOL skills which were needed...in health care! So, now I am an systems architect/project manager with a specialization in payor claims systems. That's enough typing, but my point is: even college-educated folks will have to change careers, and IT CAN BE DONE. I am not especially bright or well-educated. But I do not expect that anyone owes me a job, nor do I expect the government to ban corporate mergers. It is my responsibility to feed my family, and while I would rather not have had the stress associated with dodging all of those layoffs, it is part of life. In every case above, my income level actually increased for each career change. So calm down and look at your skills - which I suspect are greater than simple "programming" - and figure out how you leverage them in a better-paying way. So go ahead and be optimistic. You can do it.
Thanks for stating this clearly. I was really getting to believe that everyone in this thread was an idiot. A little economics goes a long way.
Perfect, man. Just perfect. Well said.
Wow. I have a bad memory involving the combo of "Titanic" and "dental surgery"...my absolutely true experience is as follows:
On vacation in Tampa in December 1997, my wife and her mom went to see the afternoon showing of Titanic. They returned around 7 pm. At about 4 pm, I started to experience an increasingly painful tooth problem (bottom-right-front tooth, whatever it's called) which ultimately led me to a dental ER for a head-numbing shot of something not called novacaine (which worked!), circa 9 pm in Clearwater ($200 cash). The next day I underwent a root canal. The doc was South African.
Coincidence? Put it this way: I still haven't seen the movie, and I haven't needed another root canal...
Ah: my votes go to either "Invasion from Inner Earth", or "Rollerblade Warriors".
And after the Terra-Luna Civil War of 2237-40, they'll shout: "The Moon shall rise again!"
(With a shout-out to the greatness that is Futurama...)
Sounds a lot like the argument for gun control. Air travel is not constitutionally protected, however.
That's all fine for now. But in a couple hundred years, Mr. Spock will tell the Enterprise crew that Castrodinium is "the hardest metal known to our science". Unfortunately, the Romulan plasma weapon renders it unstable, which allows a Warbird to wipe out several defense outposts along the Federation-Romulan neutral zone. The good news is that Constitution-class photon torpedoes can take out a Warbird without too much fuss.
The war is against terrorists. Osama is one. Saddam helped others (Hamas, Hezbollah, Ansar al-Islam, at least looked the other way w/ al-Qaeda).
The terrorists will kill you and your family unless they are stopped. Wake the hell up.
Well, interesting. But you miss a couple of points:
;)
Come on, friend: Stern was dropped in the midst of the FCC feeding frenzy that followed Janet Jackson's little halftime show. Janet's stunt, malfunction, whatever, was a great opportunity for politicians to puff up and rant about how "shocked, shocked" they were that such things are broadcast.
To your point - I agree with you - Clear Channel (amongst others) suddenly decided they should be concerned with obscenity being broadcast by their employees. That they are hypocrites is manifest.
I still haven't heard you cite evidence that Stern a) was a particularly strong Republican, or b) was fired for suddenly saying something negative about Bush.
Guess my gripe is that I don't have any problem finding media outlets critical of the President. Do you? Are there fewer? Per my earlier post...Air America launches this week, and not from a pirate radio ship.
Please, man, see that political debate is alive and well in this country. It's fine.
Still, I would like to know the basis for the statement that "Stern's listenership is more right wing...". That would surprise me if true. Didn't think Republicans were so hip...I sure ain't.
As to the Gandalf thing, I was mainly joking. For good or ill.
And if you're a good Java architect willing to travel for the next couple of months to help re-architect a legacy CRM system, I might want to talk to you, despite your (apparent) Leftist leanings.
Some of the best technical folks I know are utterly lost when it comes to public policy.
Later.
Ugh. Such intellectual laziness...typical of the Left, though. Look, Stern was dropped from a few stations because he specializes in obscene material, not for his political views.
Don Imus offers no (well, almost no) obscene material, but regularly has guests who oppose Bush. So why hasn't he been dropped? And isn't it odd that 'Air America' is just getting started just now, amongst all this right-wing censorship?
You want to say Stern is a victim of the Right? Good Lord, just ask yourself: Would you let your kids listen to Stern? No? Probably has nothing to do with his politics, does it?
And quit quoting Gandalf (..."for good or ill"...).
Sheesh.
I am just glad that I have already accumulated enough music - legally - to listen to for the rest of my life. Having learned the lesson of losing my albums, I'll make a note to keep my CD player in good repair for the next 40 years or so.
I guess that, come 2009, I'd rather not have to screw around trying to keep track of postage stamps encoded with whatever crap music my then-15 year old son will listen to. (Will they put Steve Martin's "Let's Get Small" on those little things?)
I can hear myself now, comfortably telling him "Ya know, kiddo, when I was 15, we had albums and cassettes. A man could stack those."