I'd argue his wife, for one, Rev. Wright, two, I forget the Catholic priest's name for three. Okay, not exactly a large collection but enough to get the average candidate into some serious hot water. I think it's part and parcel of Obama's thinking. The idea that he'd surround himself with this kind of thinking and be free from it is naive. He even referred to small town Americans as bigots, illustrating a disdain for them, imo. In the long run the man at the very least is comfortable around anti-American, racist leaning black leaders. In my book, that makes him if not a racist certainly comfortable with their rhetoric. We should move beyond ALL bogotry.
As for being modded "Flaimbait" it's just so typical.
Bigoted? I've seen more bigotry this year from Democrats than I've ever seen. And I don't mean black/white bigotry, though there's plenty of it. Obama is essentially a bigot. He surrounds himself with score of black bigots and purports to be clean from them. If a white candidate had attended KKK rallies for 20 years and tried to say he was just there with friends he'd be vilified. What's more is all of the anti-Hillary bigotry and anti-Republican bigotry. See we're all comfortable with our own bigotry, it's someone else's we get pissed about.
This election will come no closer to reuniting the country than anything in the last 20 years.
Dennis Kucinich is an idiot. No, I don't mean that euphamistically. I mean he's an actual idiot. If you want such a measure to be taken seriously, get someone who's NOT an idiot to bring it forward.
Are you high? We've been showing ID for nearly everything we do for years. This is an asinine thing to be pissed about. We'll plop out an ID to cash a check, get in a bar, do just about anything. But the minute we want to get on a plane we'll cry foul? Only childish idiots have an issue with this.
It's like the ID to Vote laws. All the bleeding hearts come out and complain about disenfranchising the poor and minorities. Yet the same people produce ID for things in their everyday life and never bat an eye.
Let's see...the gubment goes to them and effectively forces them to do something. Now you want to hang'em for it. Sounds like they had little choice. So yeah, I support telecom immunity.
That's doesn't mean I think domestic spying should occur, only that they shouldn't be held accountable because Congress and the President are disagreeing over what is legal and illegal.
Uhuh...so this was not a thread about Obama winning the nomination? BTW: why isn't a Democrat who surrounds himself with bigots and uses at the very least intolerant language called a bigot when a Republican certainly would have. Barack called small town Americans bigots. And yet he surrounds himself black racists. I feel he's a bigot, as such. You don't have to agree. Show me my ignorance, then.
I agree the party is in trouble. I'm no McCain fan so I'd caution you not to put words in my mouth. I support immunity for the telecoms because they were in a catch-22. From what I've heard domestic surveillance wasn't exactly what was happening. It was calls to and from overseas. If it was domestic-to-domestic, then I'm with ya. Net Neutrality: I wasn't aware this was McCain's stance. I'm obviously for a free internet so we agree there. The war? I'm behind it. I may not like the way it was ran but I have no issue with us doing it. It should have been done by now. Obama: Again, I'm not voting for Obama. I didn't want to get into too much of that but frankly the man fosters bigotry. He event went so far as to call small-town Americans bigots. That killed it for me. If I'm not going to vote for any bigot white or black. I realize that doesn't bother a lot of people. That's why Tom likes fat women. We're all different.
I don't want to argue these points. Nothing you say is going to make me vote for Obama. I'm not going to turn my vote on a single issue like technology. I applaud Obama for getting some of these guys involved but it's not enough for me to vote for the man.
Let's face it, Obama is the current cause-celeb so he's going to get a lot of bank from young techies if for no other reason than no one wants to be the guy who doesn't like him. I think it will come down to Obama possibly embracing more content freedom and McCain embracing more general freedom of the Internet itself. The two probably won't be far apart in tech in general.
Obama won't get my vote due to a myriad of other issues that no technology stance is likely to sway.
The problem is that it's not just a software deployment issue. Stewart is advocating whitelists but many times exploits are simply exploiting holes in services etc. To enforce a whitelist would require additional software so that the OS could differentiate malware from say the service it replaced.
Yeah? I'm apparently told by my wife that I'm not allowed to giggle. I can only chuckle... giggling isn't something a man should do. Okay you know it was like a joke, right?
So it looks like what its actually doing is letting the virus run in a virtual environment, watching it, then using heuristics to say "yep, thats probably a virus." I can't wait for Windows to flag about half of its services as viruses. Thus confirming what many of us have anecdotally espoused all along!
Agreed but I think the degree to which Microsoft caters to the vendor is indicative of an approach that naturally relegates it's user base. They take them for granted. After all they have such a huge market share that other vendors see the opportunity to tap into the same base. Microsoft looks to those as customers too, naturally, but again makes the assumption that its user base will not only remain in place but they go to great lengths (pushing the ethical and legal envelope) to ensure they stay.
In response to an earlier comment, I don't think the best scenerio is for Microsoft to start making their user base happy. I want them gone. I believe they are inherently evil and don't buy into the notion that any epiphany of customer satisfaction will mean some dramatic turn around in character.
Microsoft is becoming that chic that boiled the bunny in Fatal Attraction.
Yahoo! must be thinking: "Look, we had some laughs, talked about getting serious but hey, it just ain't working out.
And Microsoft is like: "I just won't be ignored!"
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks for clearing that up.
I'd argue his wife, for one, Rev. Wright, two, I forget the Catholic priest's name for three. Okay, not exactly a large collection but enough to get the average candidate into some serious hot water. I think it's part and parcel of Obama's thinking. The idea that he'd surround himself with this kind of thinking and be free from it is naive. He even referred to small town Americans as bigots, illustrating a disdain for them, imo. In the long run the man at the very least is comfortable around anti-American, racist leaning black leaders. In my book, that makes him if not a racist certainly comfortable with their rhetoric. We should move beyond ALL bogotry.
As for being modded "Flaimbait" it's just so typical.
In what possible way?
Touche'
Bigoted? I've seen more bigotry this year from Democrats than I've ever seen. And I don't mean black/white bigotry, though there's plenty of it. Obama is essentially a bigot. He surrounds himself with score of black bigots and purports to be clean from them. If a white candidate had attended KKK rallies for 20 years and tried to say he was just there with friends he'd be vilified. What's more is all of the anti-Hillary bigotry and anti-Republican bigotry. See we're all comfortable with our own bigotry, it's someone else's we get pissed about.
This election will come no closer to reuniting the country than anything in the last 20 years.
And how many others who voice their opinion are modded "Troll" and "Flamebait?"
Percentage of bankruptcies caused by lack of health care coverage
Okay, that one has no basis in fact.Dennis Kucinich is an idiot. No, I don't mean that euphamistically. I mean he's an actual idiot. If you want such a measure to be taken seriously, get someone who's NOT an idiot to bring it forward.
Yeah, that has a lot to do with this thread. Grow up, Dumbass.
Are you high? We've been showing ID for nearly everything we do for years. This is an asinine thing to be pissed about. We'll plop out an ID to cash a check, get in a bar, do just about anything. But the minute we want to get on a plane we'll cry foul? Only childish idiots have an issue with this.
It's like the ID to Vote laws. All the bleeding hearts come out and complain about disenfranchising the poor and minorities. Yet the same people produce ID for things in their everyday life and never bat an eye.
Let's see...the gubment goes to them and effectively forces them to do something. Now you want to hang'em for it. Sounds like they had little choice. So yeah, I support telecom immunity.
That's doesn't mean I think domestic spying should occur, only that they shouldn't be held accountable because Congress and the President are disagreeing over what is legal and illegal.
Uhuh...so this was not a thread about Obama winning the nomination? BTW: why isn't a Democrat who surrounds himself with bigots and uses at the very least intolerant language called a bigot when a Republican certainly would have. Barack called small town Americans bigots. And yet he surrounds himself black racists. I feel he's a bigot, as such. You don't have to agree. Show me my ignorance, then.
So we have a bigot running for president and it's NOT the old white guy! Irony can be pretty ironic sometimes.
Offtopic!? :( Tough crowd.
Alicia Bridges?
"So I Married An Axe Murderer?
I love Nightlife...I love to boogie.
I agree the party is in trouble. I'm no McCain fan so I'd caution you not to put words in my mouth. I support immunity for the telecoms because they were in a catch-22. From what I've heard domestic surveillance wasn't exactly what was happening. It was calls to and from overseas. If it was domestic-to-domestic, then I'm with ya. Net Neutrality: I wasn't aware this was McCain's stance. I'm obviously for a free internet so we agree there. The war? I'm behind it. I may not like the way it was ran but I have no issue with us doing it. It should have been done by now. Obama: Again, I'm not voting for Obama. I didn't want to get into too much of that but frankly the man fosters bigotry. He event went so far as to call small-town Americans bigots. That killed it for me. If I'm not going to vote for any bigot white or black. I realize that doesn't bother a lot of people. That's why Tom likes fat women. We're all different.
I don't want to argue these points. Nothing you say is going to make me vote for Obama. I'm not going to turn my vote on a single issue like technology. I applaud Obama for getting some of these guys involved but it's not enough for me to vote for the man.
Let's face it, Obama is the current cause-celeb so he's going to get a lot of bank from young techies if for no other reason than no one wants to be the guy who doesn't like him. I think it will come down to Obama possibly embracing more content freedom and McCain embracing more general freedom of the Internet itself. The two probably won't be far apart in tech in general.
Obama won't get my vote due to a myriad of other issues that no technology stance is likely to sway.
The problem is that it's not just a software deployment issue. Stewart is advocating whitelists but many times exploits are simply exploiting holes in services etc. To enforce a whitelist would require additional software so that the OS could differentiate malware from say the service it replaced.
DOH! "your" not "you're." Spell from the eyes. :( I suck, I know.
Is there anything you're wife lets you do?
If I could mod you up, I would if only for the "human cron job" comment!
THAT made ME giggle!
Agreed but I think the degree to which Microsoft caters to the vendor is indicative of an approach that naturally relegates it's user base. They take them for granted. After all they have such a huge market share that other vendors see the opportunity to tap into the same base. Microsoft looks to those as customers too, naturally, but again makes the assumption that its user base will not only remain in place but they go to great lengths (pushing the ethical and legal envelope) to ensure they stay.
In response to an earlier comment, I don't think the best scenerio is for Microsoft to start making their user base happy. I want them gone. I believe they are inherently evil and don't buy into the notion that any epiphany of customer satisfaction will mean some dramatic turn around in character.
Microsoft is becoming that chic that boiled the bunny in Fatal Attraction.
Yahoo! must be thinking: "Look, we had some laughs, talked about getting serious but hey, it just ain't working out.
And Microsoft is like: "I just won't be ignored!"