Nice try...you're lying. You purposely posted this information to get people to hate on him simply because he happens to be a Republican.
If you got out a little more, you'd realize there are a lot of likable people from many differing political viewpoints. Your quote plus your comment purports to push the theory that unlikable=Republican and by inverse, likable = Democrat. Simply not true.
...I'm just throwing this out there...I'm a registered independent...
The 1st amendment says they should in the sense that the government cannot punish you or anyone else for them. You are, of course, free to try to educate those who use such slurs so as to get them to discontinue but don't start down the road of making a list of what is tolerated and what isn't. That's a very slippery slope.
I don't like the current screening methodology, or the reasons behind it. If I have to go through it, then Rand and his dad have to go through it, too.
1. You shouldn't have to go through it. It violates the 4th and 10th amendments for starters
2. Rand Paul did, in fact, go through it. That was the entire point of the article.
Rand probably called a corporate contributor and just walked out the other exit onto the tarmac, and into a private jet so that he could make it in on time-- who knows, maybe flying into a neary AFB.
You obviously didn't read the article. Senator Paul did not make it to his session on time. There was no private plane. He was rebooked on a later flight and passed screening the second go round.
By the way, the Constitution guarantees US Representatives and US Senators right of travel to and from legislative business w/o being subject to arrest...so yes, they do have a few special rules that don't apply to the rest of us.
Oh, and Ron Paul (both of them) is/are on the troublemaker list. They are, after all, troublemakers. Don't rock the boat, especially when your sloshing around in water up to the gunwales.
The TSA will probably harass both Ron and Rand Paul ad infinitum unless and until Ron is elected President and does away with the entire department. The TSA is unconstitutional and should not exist (4th amendment, 10th amendment for starters).
NYC is blatantly violating the constitution both with its gun laws and this new scanning device. The 2nd amendment provides no exceptions to allowing citizens the right to bear arms. The 10th amendment limits the government's powers to those stated in the constitution and reverts anything else back to the states and the people. New York State adopted this constitution as law therefore they have no right to tell a law-abiding citizen that they can't carry a gun.
Obama's administration has spent what's left of this country into the ground. You can blame his predecessor all you want but he is making it worse, not better.
Go back and re-read your 1920s and 1930s history. There are many parallels. Specifically look at Herbert Hoover(GOP) and FDR(DEM). Hoover saw the beginnings of an economic decline and tried to stop it using socialistic policies. Naturally it failed. He was thus voted out of office and his opponent, FDR, an economic leftist, was elected. Look at the economic numbers from 1932-1940 (FDR's 1st 2 terms). They went down down down down. The New Deal was an abject failure and largely unconstitutional. It is well known that FDR even tried to stack the Supreme Court by adding to the total so that he could nominate his cronies in order to gain favorable rulings on his policies. What brought the US out of the depression was WW2. It was most certainly not the left-wing socialistic policies of FDR which did nothing more than slide us in deeper.
I see the same this decade. Bush saw the economic decline and reacted w/ socialistic policies (government bail-outs etc) which naturally did not work. This got his party voted out (he was at the end of his 2nd term so not up for re-election) and a left wing socialistic democrat elected. What policies he has tried are right out of FDR's playbook and have done nothing but push the country deeper into debt and into more trouble.
The answer to this dilemma is not more or bigger government. It's less. Much less. Take the 1000lb gorilla off the backs of the tax payers and let them breathe. So far as I have seen, only Ron Paul is willing to make the necessary changes to keep this country from total economic collapse.
I think that's precisely why he put the word unelectable in quotes. I don't think he believes it.
Ron Paul is a promising Republican candidate but if he's going to win, he has to get the nomination. I think the powers that be in the GOP are frankly scared of him and will do whatever they can to see that he doesn't win. It's a shame. He's by far the best GOP candidate in the field and the only one I will support.
Hell no! The biggest question is whether this experiment makes it to air on an episode. I wanna see the looks on their faces when that cannon ball misses everything and goes flying off into the sunset.
Then and only then do I want to know if they will be allowed to keep using the range.
In the case of nmap, the license forbids such wrappers. It is *NOT* a GPL license that nmap is under, even though it *is* an open source license. Fyodor's letter explains the details...
...The bill also included a tax on the wealthy to fund these measures.
"You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred. You cannot build character and courage by taking away mens initiative and independence. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves."
Umps do a remarkable job at balls and strikes considering they have less than 2 seconds to see a pitch moving between 85 and 100 mph and judge whether it is in a small zone to call a strike.
Agree about tennis though. I loved watching Johnny Mac rant and more often than not, he was right about the calls and had every right to be upset. That said, it's really nice that players can "have their day in court" (pun intended) when they disagree w/ a call and it takes all of 15 seconds to resolve.
As for baseball, if the powers that be setup a challenge system such as 2 incorrect challenges per game w/ a correct one granting more, replay could be used on all plays quickly and easily. I'd reserve balls and strikes for the umpires unless you intend to to completely eliminate them as challenging pitches would slow an already sluggish game to a snail's pace. You could make an exception for a strikeout maybe. A blown fair/foul call on a regular hit might be a "ground-rule single" upon video reversal w/ any base runners picking up the next base (same advancement rules as ground-rule doubles would apply except 1 base instead of 2). Blown call at a base (especially first) could solve a host of arguments. Even piddly-ant blurry low-res replay from 1985 showed how bad the call was at first in the Royals/Cardinals WS. We could see it clear as crystal now. Replays would, of course, have to show overwhelming evidence (similar to NFL) to overturn calls sans a computer system like tennis has...
As you knew your police officers on a personal level I'd say you have a conflict of interest, even bin-laden had friends.
This is the only part of your post that is even remotely on topic. The problem w/ your argument is that in order to come to a conclusion regarding someone's intelligence and/or compassion, you'd have to have contact w/ them. Those I had contact w/ were not "friends" in the sense that your post implies. I did not know them closely in the sense of them being a personal friend...simply as people I'd come across in every day life there... I still had to have contact with them in some way and it was obvious to me that they were both intelligent and compassionate people thus my original post pointing out the fallacy of the parent's argument.
But if my reputation and career can get disrupted by the company i work for at a moments notice if my boss is corrupt, then i hardly think a little collateral firing in the police department for a system wide overhaul to rid corruption is hardly a reason not to. "cops are people too" so why are they protected from the risks that all other citizens face just because "there are good cops too"
You make very valid points here but what does this have to do with my post?
For the record, in my opinion, cops should be treated the same under the law as anyone else. It is due to abuse of power and corruption that they are above the law in many cases...not "because there are good cops too" as you state.
I will repeat again. My original post was not on the topic of police corruption. It was to show evidence that the parent's comment that all Texas cops and judges are crooked is a false statement.
You state as what appears to be universal truth that no police or judges in Texas have intelligence or compassion. I lived in Texas for 5 years and while I didn't know any judges, I knew several police officers, both local and DPS (state police). Those that I knew were both intelligent and compassionate people.
I am sorry your son was wrongly convicted. That doesn't mean the entire state, without exception, are inconsiderate morons.
You, sir, are a bigot. Conservatives and others not named Democrats are not the great evil of the world. Stop blaming them for the world's ills. Blame this officer for what he did. Don't blame those were not involved.
Don't punish people for the act of driving while using a cell phone. Many many people are perfectly capable of doing so safely. Punish them if they hit someone. There's no need for these laws. Use the laws already on the books for things such as manslaughter. Wait til someone actually harms someone else to punish them.
You're mixing up formula w/ ingredients. No food or beverage manufacturer has to put their recipe out for the world to see...only the ingredients list. These drillers are asking not to have to reveal their "exact formula". Emphasis on FORMULA.
FWIW: I had a poly-sci prof who *was* left-leaning and his test questions were not based on facts but on his interpretations of said facts. You answered the way he wanted or you did not get credit.
Slashdot Mirror
Nice try...you're lying. You purposely posted this information to get people to hate on him simply because he happens to be a Republican.
...I'm just throwing this out there...I'm a registered independent...
If you got out a little more, you'd realize there are a lot of likable people from many differing political viewpoints. Your quote plus your comment purports to push the theory that unlikable=Republican and by inverse, likable = Democrat. Simply not true.
No we're not a Democracy and never have been. Study history some time. This country is a constitutional republic.
Charge her w/ manslaughter, reckless driving and the like...Those cover her crime more than sufficiently. We don't need more laws to cover this.
The 1st amendment says they should in the sense that the government cannot punish you or anyone else for them. You are, of course, free to try to educate those who use such slurs so as to get them to discontinue but don't start down the road of making a list of what is tolerated and what isn't. That's a very slippery slope.
I don't like the current screening methodology, or the reasons behind it. If I have to go through it, then Rand and his dad have to go through it, too.
1. You shouldn't have to go through it. It violates the 4th and 10th amendments for starters
2. Rand Paul did, in fact, go through it. That was the entire point of the article.
Rand probably called a corporate contributor and just walked out the other exit onto the tarmac, and into a private jet so that he could make it in on time-- who knows, maybe flying into a neary AFB.
You obviously didn't read the article. Senator Paul did not make it to his session on time. There was no private plane. He was rebooked on a later flight and passed screening the second go round.
By the way, the Constitution guarantees US Representatives and US Senators right of travel to and from legislative business w/o being subject to arrest...so yes, they do have a few special rules that don't apply to the rest of us.
The US Government doesn't have the right to do searches PERIOD without a warrant (see 4th amendment).
Oh, and Ron Paul (both of them) is/are on the troublemaker list. They are, after all, troublemakers. Don't rock the boat, especially when your sloshing around in water up to the gunwales.
The TSA will probably harass both Ron and Rand Paul ad infinitum unless and until Ron is elected President and does away with the entire department. The TSA is unconstitutional and should not exist (4th amendment, 10th amendment for starters).
NYC is blatantly violating the constitution both with its gun laws and this new scanning device. The 2nd amendment provides no exceptions to allowing citizens the right to bear arms. The 10th amendment limits the government's powers to those stated in the constitution and reverts anything else back to the states and the people. New York State adopted this constitution as law therefore they have no right to tell a law-abiding citizen that they can't carry a gun.
Obama's administration has spent what's left of this country into the ground. You can blame his predecessor all you want but he is making it worse, not better.
Go back and re-read your 1920s and 1930s history. There are many parallels. Specifically look at Herbert Hoover(GOP) and FDR(DEM). Hoover saw the beginnings of an economic decline and tried to stop it using socialistic policies. Naturally it failed. He was thus voted out of office and his opponent, FDR, an economic leftist, was elected. Look at the economic numbers from 1932-1940 (FDR's 1st 2 terms). They went down down down down. The New Deal was an abject failure and largely unconstitutional. It is well known that FDR even tried to stack the Supreme Court by adding to the total so that he could nominate his cronies in order to gain favorable rulings on his policies. What brought the US out of the depression was WW2. It was most certainly not the left-wing socialistic policies of FDR which did nothing more than slide us in deeper.
I see the same this decade. Bush saw the economic decline and reacted w/ socialistic policies (government bail-outs etc) which naturally did not work. This got his party voted out (he was at the end of his 2nd term so not up for re-election) and a left wing socialistic democrat elected. What policies he has tried are right out of FDR's playbook and have done nothing but push the country deeper into debt and into more trouble.
The answer to this dilemma is not more or bigger government. It's less. Much less. Take the 1000lb gorilla off the backs of the tax payers and let them breathe. So far as I have seen, only Ron Paul is willing to make the necessary changes to keep this country from total economic collapse.
I think that's precisely why he put the word unelectable in quotes. I don't think he believes it. Ron Paul is a promising Republican candidate but if he's going to win, he has to get the nomination. I think the powers that be in the GOP are frankly scared of him and will do whatever they can to see that he doesn't win. It's a shame. He's by far the best GOP candidate in the field and the only one I will support.
...and yet I got them in the job interview for my current systems administrative position.
I also got brain teaser questions for a programming position back in the 90s, answered them all correctly and still got no offer.
Because the baby being aborted cannot defend its life. A convict given the death penalty can take 20+ years to defend his or her chance to live.
Hell no! The biggest question is whether this experiment makes it to air on an episode. I wanna see the looks on their faces when that cannon ball misses everything and goes flying off into the sunset.
Then and only then do I want to know if they will be allowed to keep using the range.
In the case of nmap, the license forbids such wrappers. It is *NOT* a GPL license that nmap is under, even though it *is* an open source license. Fyodor's letter explains the details...
...The bill also included a tax on the wealthy to fund these measures.
"You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift. You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatred. You cannot build character and courage by taking away mens initiative and independence. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves."
---Abraham Lincoln
JOBS GROW THE ECONOMY, NOT RICH PEOPLE...
Yeah jobs grow the economy...but who pays those salaries? Rich people. Do the math. Make them less rich and they can't pay as many salaries.
we the people are far too unwashed, and ignorant to know what we want and need for ourselves.
You want your freedoms back? Stop voting Democrat.
Umps do a remarkable job at balls and strikes considering they have less than 2 seconds to see a pitch moving between 85 and 100 mph and judge whether it is in a small zone to call a strike.
Agree about tennis though. I loved watching Johnny Mac rant and more often than not, he was right about the calls and had every right to be upset. That said, it's really nice that players can "have their day in court" (pun intended) when they disagree w/ a call and it takes all of 15 seconds to resolve.
As for baseball, if the powers that be setup a challenge system such as 2 incorrect challenges per game w/ a correct one granting more, replay could be used on all plays quickly and easily. I'd reserve balls and strikes for the umpires unless you intend to to completely eliminate them as challenging pitches would slow an already sluggish game to a snail's pace. You could make an exception for a strikeout maybe. A blown fair/foul call on a regular hit might be a "ground-rule single" upon video reversal w/ any base runners picking up the next base (same advancement rules as ground-rule doubles would apply except 1 base instead of 2). Blown call at a base (especially first) could solve a host of arguments. Even piddly-ant blurry low-res replay from 1985 showed how bad the call was at first in the Royals/Cardinals WS. We could see it clear as crystal now. Replays would, of course, have to show overwhelming evidence (similar to NFL) to overturn calls sans a computer system like tennis has...
Baseball needs to get with the times on this.
As you knew your police officers on a personal level I'd say you have a conflict of interest, even bin-laden had friends.
This is the only part of your post that is even remotely on topic. The problem w/ your argument is that in order to come to a conclusion regarding someone's intelligence and/or compassion, you'd have to have contact w/ them. Those I had contact w/ were not "friends" in the sense that your post implies. I did not know them closely in the sense of them being a personal friend...simply as people I'd come across in every day life there... I still had to have contact with them in some way and it was obvious to me that they were both intelligent and compassionate people thus my original post pointing out the fallacy of the parent's argument.
But if my reputation and career can get disrupted by the company i work for at a moments notice if my boss is corrupt, then i hardly think a little collateral firing in the police department for a system wide overhaul to rid corruption is hardly a reason not to. "cops are people too" so why are they protected from the risks that all other citizens face just because "there are good cops too"
You make very valid points here but what does this have to do with my post?
For the record, in my opinion, cops should be treated the same under the law as anyone else. It is due to abuse of power and corruption that they are above the law in many cases...not "because there are good cops too" as you state.
I will repeat again. My original post was not on the topic of police corruption. It was to show evidence that the parent's comment that all Texas cops and judges are crooked is a false statement.
Actually GOP and DEMs have instituted unheard of levels of surveillance increases in the last 20 years...not "just as much" as you claim.
You state as what appears to be universal truth that no police or judges in Texas have intelligence or compassion. I lived in Texas for 5 years and while I didn't know any judges, I knew several police officers, both local and DPS (state police). Those that I knew were both intelligent and compassionate people. I am sorry your son was wrongly convicted. That doesn't mean the entire state, without exception, are inconsiderate morons.
You, sir, are a bigot. Conservatives and others not named Democrats are not the great evil of the world. Stop blaming them for the world's ills. Blame this officer for what he did. Don't blame those were not involved.
Don't punish people for the act of driving while using a cell phone. Many many people are perfectly capable of doing so safely. Punish them if they hit someone. There's no need for these laws. Use the laws already on the books for things such as manslaughter. Wait til someone actually harms someone else to punish them.
You're mixing up formula w/ ingredients. No food or beverage manufacturer has to put their recipe out for the world to see...only the ingredients list. These drillers are asking not to have to reveal their "exact formula". Emphasis on FORMULA.
FWIW: I had a poly-sci prof who *was* left-leaning and his test questions were not based on facts but on his interpretations of said facts. You answered the way he wanted or you did not get credit.