not at all - she's teaching her daughter that she can't just redefine the rules when she pleases. Either take your lumps or say you aren't playing at the start.
Sure, there are lots of reasons - I don't deny them - but guess what? People judge you by your appearance, even if it's unfair. Saying you're lysdexic is an explanation, but doesn't move you towards a solution. Anyway, hyperintelligent foreigners seem to stand out anyway - my OS teacher was polish, spoke polish (with english words), and was absolutely brilliant. Me, I like to play with words and snark off a bit, but I value good writing: if you want me to make an excuse for being a pain in the ass, I'll just say it's a reaction to having a subliterate moron for a president.
I don't - I said in a reply that half the people who can't speak the language properly are natives. I have a high standard in general - poor english, especially when you live in the US, just marks you as stupid.
I live in a very heavily populated Mexican neighborhood so I know what they REALLY are like.
So do I. Perhaps your mexicans are from a different social stratum. The ones I meet are actually mexicans, as in questionable right to even be here - maybe yours are mexicans that are now residents and their kids?
I don't need to rely on stereotypes, or bigoted opinions from obvious nationalists.
Bigoted = something you don't agree with, nice. I have nothing against mexicans as an ethnic group, but some parts of the culture suck, and there are 10 million of them in this country who don't have a right to be here. That's what I have a problem with.
Remember, unless you are a true Native American, your relatives came here from somewhere else too.
So did they. The point is moot: we conquered them and took their land, so it's now our land.
We aren't half as nationalist as Mexico; the rest of the world is far more strict on immigration and they expect you to fall in line if you move there, so that's not really a valid complaint.
By the way, not sure about lazy, but the macho thing is in full effect - the ones I knew were all about that, and the mexican parts of town were the places where women don't walk alone. I think the US can do without that part of mexican culture (although half the 'mexicans' in arlington are actually Honduran or Guatemalen)
People shouldn't expect coddling for poor english; I don't know what you're on about - half the people with crappy english are from here and are just bad at it. Being nice and trying to figure out what they mean doesn't lead to better english, it leads to worse english.
Well, Mexicans (who are frequently not immigrants, but illegals) seem to view any sort of assimilation as a betrayal of their culture, so I can't really be sympathetic. Of course real immigrants (who deal with our awful INS) keep their culture, but they also assimilate to some degree - otherwise, why would they come? The USA is more than a job - either get along with us or go home.
Slashdot is focussed on US stories and issues, so yes, its language is going to be english. You've got a lot of nerve calling someone arrogant for expecting decent english (dunno if it is - you didn't quote the complaint or the bad english) on a site that's pretty much all english.
And yet, only people from the US call themselves American. You're fighting a crusade that nobody cares about - "I am an American" means that the speaker is a citizen of the USA, no matter how much you hate it. Actually, I'm curious - why does it bother you? As Americans, we are far less nationalistic than, say, Mexicans.
Neither in Mexico, nor in Canada did I ever experience such abyssimal treatment by border officials then in the US. Last I read, both are part of America.
Canada and Mexico are part of North America. America is a country, and USian is just stupid.
Doesn't matter; being a jerk isn't illegal. The only established case where linking is illegal is when you conceal the actual source of some content, for instance if you were to deep link to a real estate search engine and wrap the results with your GUI/ads.
Yeah, it's called the laffer curve, and just because it exists doesn't mean that Bush's tax cut + desert adventure was smrt. In fact, I doubt that it's happened for any tax cuts since 1964 (Reagan doesn't count - he caused a mini recession by raising taxes, then cut them and the economy recovered).
I'm treating GOP as a faction within with republican party, much like the religious moonbats. If you read the post I was responding to, it should be clear what I meant.
all our republican Presidents since the 80s have been GOP, so what difference does it make?
the surprising bit is how much worse the republicans were when they were given the chance.
Not really, considering the jackass in chief; I don't recall anybody else so obviously stacking federal agencies based on dogma instead of competence or being so ineffective.
So then... tell me, which of these has a real stake in how well the economy actually does?? And which of these actually has to live with the consequences??
You don't want that - you want someone who's neutral, not biased one way or the other; of course, those crackpot theories you deride won't get much traction unless they turn out to be right. That's how science works.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, a Scottish company cannot expect to successfully market a "McBurger" regardless of how common the "Mc" is in Scottish names.
But they can open a MacDonalds restuarant, especially if it's owned by a noble named MacDonald.
not at all - she's teaching her daughter that she can't just redefine the rules when she pleases. Either take your lumps or say you aren't playing at the start.
Sure, there are lots of reasons - I don't deny them - but guess what? People judge you by your appearance, even if it's unfair. Saying you're lysdexic is an explanation, but doesn't move you towards a solution. Anyway, hyperintelligent foreigners seem to stand out anyway - my OS teacher was polish, spoke polish (with english words), and was absolutely brilliant. Me, I like to play with words and snark off a bit, but I value good writing: if you want me to make an excuse for being a pain in the ass, I'll just say it's a reaction to having a subliterate moron for a president.
yeah, well I do need to put my german and french to practical use...
It should have been obvious to you - I don't go posting English stuff to Spanish websites and expect to be understood.
I don't - I said in a reply that half the people who can't speak the language properly are natives. I have a high standard in general - poor english, especially when you live in the US, just marks you as stupid.
I live in a very heavily populated Mexican neighborhood so I know what they REALLY are like.
So do I. Perhaps your mexicans are from a different social stratum. The ones I meet are actually mexicans, as in questionable right to even be here - maybe yours are mexicans that are now residents and their kids?
I don't need to rely on stereotypes, or bigoted opinions from obvious nationalists.
Bigoted = something you don't agree with, nice. I have nothing against mexicans as an ethnic group, but some parts of the culture suck, and there are 10 million of them in this country who don't have a right to be here. That's what I have a problem with.
Remember, unless you are a true Native American, your relatives came here from somewhere else too.
So did they. The point is moot: we conquered them and took their land, so it's now our land.
We aren't half as nationalist as Mexico; the rest of the world is far more strict on immigration and they expect you to fall in line if you move there, so that's not really a valid complaint.
By the way, not sure about lazy, but the macho thing is in full effect - the ones I knew were all about that, and the mexican parts of town were the places where women don't walk alone. I think the US can do without that part of mexican culture (although half the 'mexicans' in arlington are actually Honduran or Guatemalen)
People shouldn't expect coddling for poor english; I don't know what you're on about - half the people with crappy english are from here and are just bad at it. Being nice and trying to figure out what they mean doesn't lead to better english, it leads to worse english.
Well, Mexicans (who are frequently not immigrants, but illegals) seem to view any sort of assimilation as a betrayal of their culture, so I can't really be sympathetic. Of course real immigrants (who deal with our awful INS) keep their culture, but they also assimilate to some degree - otherwise, why would they come? The USA is more than a job - either get along with us or go home.
Slashdot is focussed on US stories and issues, so yes, its language is going to be english. You've got a lot of nerve calling someone arrogant for expecting decent english (dunno if it is - you didn't quote the complaint or the bad english) on a site that's pretty much all english.
And yet, only people from the US call themselves American. You're fighting a crusade that nobody cares about - "I am an American" means that the speaker is a citizen of the USA, no matter how much you hate it. Actually, I'm curious - why does it bother you? As Americans, we are far less nationalistic than, say, Mexicans.
What, are you on crack? American is perfectly fine as a way to refer to people from, ya know, America.
you should, because that drooling idiot has the football.
Neither in Mexico, nor in Canada did I ever experience such abyssimal treatment by border officials then in the US. Last I read, both are part of America.
Canada and Mexico are part of North America. America is a country, and USian is just stupid.
nope, he's talking out his ass. The Constitution applies to everyone in our territory.
If I put a chair out on my lawn you don't have a right to sit in it.
Depends on how public it is. If it's next to the sidewalk, it makes sense that I can; next to the house or behind a barrier, not so much.
Doesn't matter; being a jerk isn't illegal. The only established case where linking is illegal is when you conceal the actual source of some content, for instance if you were to deep link to a real estate search engine and wrap the results with your GUI/ads.
Yeah, it's called the laffer curve, and just because it exists doesn't mean that Bush's tax cut + desert adventure was smrt. In fact, I doubt that it's happened for any tax cuts since 1964 (Reagan doesn't count - he caused a mini recession by raising taxes, then cut them and the economy recovered).
I'm treating GOP as a faction within with republican party, much like the religious moonbats. If you read the post I was responding to, it should be clear what I meant.
If you use GPL software, you need not do anything specific. It only covers distribution.
all our republican Presidents since the 80s have been GOP, so what difference does it make?
the surprising bit is how much worse the republicans were when they were given the chance.
Not really, considering the jackass in chief; I don't recall anybody else so obviously stacking federal agencies based on dogma instead of competence or being so ineffective.
Economics ought to be unbaised.
It is biased towards what works. What's your obsession with unbiased stuff?
. In the 1980s the rage was supply-side (Reaganomics) which most critics dismiss as woefully incomplete.
That's because supply side isn't an economic theory, it's a political campaign.
So then... tell me, which of these has a real stake in how well the economy actually does?? And which of these actually has to live with the consequences??
You don't want that - you want someone who's neutral, not biased one way or the other; of course, those crackpot theories you deride won't get much traction unless they turn out to be right. That's how science works.