The 14" iBooks had the same screen resolution as the 12" iBooks, so I don't (personally) think it's that big of a deal. I know that there are some with eyesight issues that would prefer the 14" to the 12".
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Please note the emphasis I gave to the phrase, "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law".
(Assuming that you're in the US), are you sure you've ever studied civics? And if "no person" isn't explicit enough for you, I've got to wonder if you've ever studied logic. Sorry if this sounds harsh, but you obviously didn't bother to look for yourself.
For almost all of my daily tasks, my 12" PowerBook screen is fine. When I need to spread out, I plug in my 22" Cinema Display. Yes, Expose comes in handy when using such a small screen. Is that supposed to be a negative?
If you want more screen real estate in an Apple laptop, there's the 15" and 17" MacBook Pro models. I'm not sure I really understand what your beef is.
The black and white iPods don't have a price difference, why would they charge a premium for something like that on the MacBook.
Because of idiots like me, who started drooling in some sort of Jobsian/Pavlovian response when I saw the black MacBook. Yes, I know that, rationally and consciously, computer case aesthetics are not of prime importance to me. But Apple is working their desire voodoo. I want one. I have to have one.
Pity about the graphics. It's that one thing that keeps it from being a perfect laptop. The one stumbling block for me on the iBooks (and the reason I own a 12" PowerBook currently) was the lack of DVI output. They did fix that, at least. Nothing I can tell about whether it is mirror only out-of-the-box. Has anybody seen any info on this?
Congress wasn't briefed. The full committees weren't briefed. A few members of congress were briefed.
Effective oversight requires the ability to discuss, even if it's behind close doors. The tiny handful of congress people that were given a peek were not allowed to discuss the matter with anyone, consult with their own experts or aides, or ask questions after the fact. Attempts to glean more information were stonewalled.
What you are calling oversight isn't oversight in any meaningful sense.
The Constitutional protections only extend to those natural-born or naturalized citizens of the several states.
I'm not even sure what you mean by "several states", but otherwise, you are flat out wrong. Can you show me the exclusionary language in the Constitution that limits civil liberties to citizens? No, you can't, because it's not there.
I don't know if I should even dignify this with a response, but:
Try on Teddy Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, and Ronald Reagan for size. You might not agree with their politics, but they were giants, especially in comparison to the moral midget we currently have occupying the oval office.
Don't forget the theo-cons, who have made an unholy alliance with the neo-cons.
Anyway, your dismal assessment of the GOP doesn't account for the (admittedly) few bright lights. Arlen Spector, for example. John McCain, Olympia Snow, Mit Romney for other examples.
It is my fervent hope that we get our asses kicked in 2006, mostly in the House. If we don't, we'll never be able to reconstruct the party.
Current events should make it clear: the war is here on our soil. Better to fight it here than in distant lands where we don't have nearly the same control of the telecommunication infrastructure.
Who is the enemy?
The press, which has finally shown it's true traitorous colors by reporting on sensitive politically damaging information. And of course, the enemy is anyone with access to such information that is critical of Bush and brave . . . I mean craven . . . enough to go public.
Most importantly: when is the war over?
It might take many years, but the war is over when we are free. Free from inconvenient civil liberties, free from liberal facts, free to live under the ruler-ship of a Bush Dynasty.
Who the fuck modded this as a troll? If you disagree with the poster, respond in writing!
FWIW, Lord Ender, I disagree with your assessment. Fitzgerald, the prosecutor investigating the Plame leak, was unable to get a court order for reporters call records; he had to put a reporter in jail for contempt to get her to give up her source. So, it's not a stretch to assume that the unnamed government agency is working without any judicial oversight whatsoever. In fact, it's a pretty good bet
What seems to be going on, if we are to believe the reports, is that reporters' calls are being logged pre-emptively to scare their sources or possible sources.
I realize that my suspicions might be off the mark, but given what we have been learning about the Bush Administration's domestic spying, we are justified in being suspicious. Indeed, we'd be fools if we were not.
An early part of my disenchantment with Bush was during his first presidential campaign when more than a few of my fellow Republicans with Christian backgrounds let it be known that they thought Bush was Chosen. I shit you not. And this was/is in Los Angeles, not exactly the Bible Belt.
Save your breath (or your typing fingers). He's drunk the koolaid; for him, anything that doesn't fit the Party line has a liberal spin. His kind are like a wall I've been banging my head against for the past eight years (at least).
Besides, do you really expect any sort of intellectual honesty from the remaining 29%? You know, the backwash?
That's a great quote! Tell your friend he should print it on a bumper sticker.
Reagan was a great President and a great man, but he left us with two very negative legacies. One was the alliance with the Christian Extreme Right. The other was allowing "shadow government" operatives to run loose in his administration, which lead to the Iran/Contra scandal. Regarding the later, Reagan accepted responsibility and apologized to America on national TV, a sign of his greatness that he could admit mistakes.
Some twenty years later, we find many of the same bad players riddled thru out the Bush Administration, some of which have a lineage all the way to Nixon.
I'm really hoping that we (the GOP) lose control of the house in 2006. We need that sort of wake up call. As far as 2008, the only thing that I think would be worse than Hilary Clinton in the White House would be a continuation of the Bush regime thru the election of Jeb. If Jeb is nominated, I just might register as a Dem. (Frist is a toss up; I think he's equally as bad as Clinton. If any of the other GOP hopefuls get the nomination, I'll back them wholeheartedly.)
Slashdot Mirror
It's apparently not a new layout. The new design is that the keyboard is flush with the surface and that the key response is firmer.
Seriously, slashdot needs to bring back the preview button. =)
The 14" iBooks had the same screen resolution as the 12" iBooks, so I don't (personally) think it's that big of a deal. I know that there are some with eyesight issues that would prefer the 14" to the 12".
Please note the emphasis I gave to the phrase, "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law".
(Assuming that you're in the US), are you sure you've ever studied civics? And if "no person" isn't explicit enough for you, I've got to wonder if you've ever studied logic. Sorry if this sounds harsh, but you obviously didn't bother to look for yourself.
Probably some version of JesOS. Most likely Jes OS X.
BTW, who the hell use the word "stunning" to describe the color black in any context?
Haven't you heard? Black is the new black.
For almost all of my daily tasks, my 12" PowerBook screen is fine. When I need to spread out, I plug in my 22" Cinema Display. Yes, Expose comes in handy when using such a small screen. Is that supposed to be a negative?
If you want more screen real estate in an Apple laptop, there's the 15" and 17" MacBook Pro models. I'm not sure I really understand what your beef is.
The black and white iPods don't have a price difference, why would they charge a premium for something like that on the MacBook.
Because of idiots like me, who started drooling in some sort of Jobsian/Pavlovian response when I saw the black MacBook. Yes, I know that, rationally and consciously, computer case aesthetics are not of prime importance to me. But Apple is working their desire voodoo. I want one. I have to have one.
Pity about the graphics. It's that one thing that keeps it from being a perfect laptop. The one stumbling block for me on the iBooks (and the reason I own a 12" PowerBook currently) was the lack of DVI output. They did fix that, at least. Nothing I can tell about whether it is mirror only out-of-the-box. Has anybody seen any info on this?
Why the Christians, necessarily? A more likely culprit would be PETA, trying the protect all those cute fluffy kittens from the hand of a wrathful God.
Congress wasn't briefed. The full committees weren't briefed. A few members of congress were briefed.
Effective oversight requires the ability to discuss, even if it's behind close doors. The tiny handful of congress people that were given a peek were not allowed to discuss the matter with anyone, consult with their own experts or aides, or ask questions after the fact. Attempts to glean more information were stonewalled.
What you are calling oversight isn't oversight in any meaningful sense.
The Constitutional protections only extend to those natural-born or naturalized citizens of the several states.
I'm not even sure what you mean by "several states", but otherwise, you are flat out wrong. Can you show me the exclusionary language in the Constitution that limits civil liberties to citizens? No, you can't, because it's not there.
You know what's to like about your approach to the facts? It has a certain truthiness to it.
. . . one slick ass MP3 player . . . .
. . . pounds my iPod into dust . . .
. . . one kick ass combination . . .
. . . a swift kick in the ass . .
Step away from the Mountain Dew and put your hands over your head where we can see 'em.
Nope.
I don't know if I should even dignify this with a response, but:
Try on Teddy Roosevelt, Dwight Eisenhower, and Ronald Reagan for size. You might not agree with their politics, but they were giants, especially in comparison to the moral midget we currently have occupying the oval office.
Don't forget the theo-cons, who have made an unholy alliance with the neo-cons.
Anyway, your dismal assessment of the GOP doesn't account for the (admittedly) few bright lights. Arlen Spector, for example. John McCain, Olympia Snow, Mit Romney for other examples.
It is my fervent hope that we get our asses kicked in 2006, mostly in the House. If we don't, we'll never be able to reconstruct the party.
The chance of a terrorist commando raid to bust out their buddies is approximately zero.
Do you get the impression that "AHumbleOpinion" masturbates to Soldier of Fortune Magazine and Ghost Recon screen caps? Or am I crazy?
Afghanistan was fully justified and had worldwide support. If we had focused our resources there, we might have caught Bin Laden by now.
Don't get too high and mighty. A crook is a crook, no matter what their party affiliation. The GOP doesn't have a monopoly on corruption.
Bush has already anointed his brother for 2008. If Jeb were elected, we'd have the same or similar behind-the-scenes guys.
Let me put it this way: I'm a conservative, but I'd take Hillary Clinton over Jeb any day. I hope and pray it doesn't come to that.
Where is the war?
Current events should make it clear: the war is here on our soil. Better to fight it here than in distant lands where we don't have nearly the same control of the telecommunication infrastructure.
Who is the enemy?
The press, which has finally shown it's true traitorous colors by reporting on sensitive politically damaging information. And of course, the enemy is anyone with access to such information that is critical of Bush and brave . . . I mean craven . . . enough to go public.
Most importantly: when is the war over?
It might take many years, but the war is over when we are free. Free from inconvenient civil liberties, free from liberal facts, free to live under the ruler-ship of a Bush Dynasty.
Who the fuck modded this as a troll? If you disagree with the poster, respond in writing!
FWIW, Lord Ender, I disagree with your assessment. Fitzgerald, the prosecutor investigating the Plame leak, was unable to get a court order for reporters call records; he had to put a reporter in jail for contempt to get her to give up her source. So, it's not a stretch to assume that the unnamed government agency is working without any judicial oversight whatsoever. In fact, it's a pretty good bet
What seems to be going on, if we are to believe the reports, is that reporters' calls are being logged pre-emptively to scare their sources or possible sources.
I realize that my suspicions might be off the mark, but given what we have been learning about the Bush Administration's domestic spying, we are justified in being suspicious. Indeed, we'd be fools if we were not.
An early part of my disenchantment with Bush was during his first presidential campaign when more than a few of my fellow Republicans with Christian backgrounds let it be known that they thought Bush was Chosen. I shit you not. And this was/is in Los Angeles, not exactly the Bible Belt.
Save your breath (or your typing fingers). He's drunk the koolaid; for him, anything that doesn't fit the Party line has a liberal spin. His kind are like a wall I've been banging my head against for the past eight years (at least).
Besides, do you really expect any sort of intellectual honesty from the remaining 29%? You know, the backwash?
That's a great quote! Tell your friend he should print it on a bumper sticker.
Reagan was a great President and a great man, but he left us with two very negative legacies. One was the alliance with the Christian Extreme Right. The other was allowing "shadow government" operatives to run loose in his administration, which lead to the Iran/Contra scandal. Regarding the later, Reagan accepted responsibility and apologized to America on national TV, a sign of his greatness that he could admit mistakes.
Some twenty years later, we find many of the same bad players riddled thru out the Bush Administration, some of which have a lineage all the way to Nixon.
I'm really hoping that we (the GOP) lose control of the house in 2006. We need that sort of wake up call. As far as 2008, the only thing that I think would be worse than Hilary Clinton in the White House would be a continuation of the Bush regime thru the election of Jeb. If Jeb is nominated, I just might register as a Dem. (Frist is a toss up; I think he's equally as bad as Clinton. If any of the other GOP hopefuls get the nomination, I'll back them wholeheartedly.)