Yes, he did increase government power more than Bush, over 60 YEARS AGO! Huge changes occurred in the parties following that, with Democrats picking up many of the issues Republicans previously had (namely issues of race, etc.) with Republicans taking the previously Democratic line. So it is a bit silly comparing recent Democrats to him (although you did answer my question). He also was quite unique in that he served 4 terms and was in office during the biggest economic turn-around of the nation as well as the largest military victories. He was also responsible for social security.
So what, exactly, do you disagree with? You say yourself that all sides agree that "there is global warming" (I have never, ever seen a scientist -- even sponsored by an oil company -- that claims that the world is not getting warmer). The only differences in opinion I'm aware of are the causes, what should be done about these causes and climate projections. Some feel that the sun is largely responsible (ie, it is outputing more energy than usual or something), some feel that 3rd-world countries (esp. China) are responsible, some feel that volcanoes, underground coal fires, etc. are the main reason, some feel that even if the world is getting warmer it isn't a threat for humans, etc.
Scientists often disagree with each other. Just because they disagree doesn't make the topic a religion.
I'm not all that impressed with the Democratic or Republican options on the ballot this time around.
I don't blame you. But at least it should be much harder for Kerry to increase spending than Bush and he's willing to raise taxes to partially close the deficit.
I know you're a fiscal conservative, but don't you think it is reasonable for the people who are responsible for a war (us) to pay for it? If so, then how without raising taxes? Even if Iraq were to give all of its oil profits to us it wouldn't be nearly enough to pay for the war. It's barely adequate for preliminary reconstruction of the country.
Republicans seem to be much less stubborn about increasing spending when there is a Republican president (even on completely useless, expensive things like deploying anti-balistic missiles which can't even reliably hit a missile that is broadcasting its position to the system).
You probably have some intelligent Republican friends. Why are so many of them still voting for him? I never, ever expected such a bad president to have such strong support for re-election.
It was interesting when Bush mentioned Howard being re-elected in Australia. He failed to mention that he only won because Australia's economy is booming. If its economy hadn't been, he probably would have lost by a large margin for getting involved in the war in Iraq (despite suffering 0 casualties and significantly lower costs than the US).
Show me a Democrat president who has ever grown the federal government's power as much as Bush, who has increased spending as much as Bush or has created as large of a deficit as Bush. The last Democrat president decreased the size of the government and lowered government spending (or at least increased spending at a rate much, much lower than the current president).
On a side note, how many of Bush's economic advisers have resigned? Also, what president has ever lowered taxes during a major war (or any war for that matter)? Who do you expect is going to pay the bill? You can't increase government spending and simultaneously lower taxes forever.
It's called cognitive dissonance and you've got a nasty case of it.
So your suggestion is to put some fat, smelly (sorry, fat does stink in and of itself), hungry astronauts for an extended mission in a very confined space. I wonder how many would return.
Rolls off the tongue better but is less accurate. The DMCA only applies (in theory) to copyrighted works. So the quote would have to be something like:
COPYING COPYRIGHTED STUFF IS STEALING
I feel other parts of the DMCA are much more heinous, such as:
TALKING ABOUT COPY-PROTECTION IS THEFT
I used a bit of artistic license on that quote, but I really dislike the section of the DMCA dealing with copy protection.
Doesn't seem to roll off the tongue as well as the other three. I'm a big fan of 1984 but comparing those quotes to this is ridiculous. I could not care less about whether or not is is legal to distribute works on the Internet that are copyrighted. All I care about in the case of the DMCA law is the privileges it gives to copyright holders to shakedown perpetrators with little participation by the court system (as well as some additional activities that it declares to be illegal, including reverse-engineering copy-protection mechanisms).
There were many people like you back at the turn of the 19th century. They believed society would be better off with out alcohol. While they may have been correct in theory it was impossible to enforce, leading to a significant rise in organized crime and a general disrespect for the law and authority.
Especially in this age of a free exchange of ideas through the Internet it would be hopelessly impossible to ban pornography as a whole. Even banning tiny portions of pornography (child porn) is fairly difficult to enforce since the porn can come from anywhere that's connected to the Internet.
So while you could argue that, in theory, society is better off without porn, I think you'll find it totally impossible to enforce, resulting in the same results (to a lesser extent) as the roaring twenties. The government simply can't legislate morality (at least not in cases where a sizable portion of the population would be opposed to it); even a totalitarian government like China is having some difficulty doing that (banning pornography, Christianity, etc.) and anything less than their efforts wouldn't stand a chance.
I heard a guy on the radio once who's job was to clean the cages of monkeys used in virus research. Get all the shit-flinging benefits of the insane asylum plus the chance of getting some rare, highly lethal disease. All this can be yours for $9.70/hr.
Wish I had some mod points. I was just watching an interview with Jimmy Carter the other night. At one point, he mentioned that he took some solice in the fact (while he was an acting president) that even if he were to make a poor decision that there were other branches of the government that could correct his mistakes.
The government is basically designed to prevent 'slippery slopes' by being able to correct trends in other parts of the government. It isn't fool-proof, of course, but it is ever-present on the minds of many politicians and especially the judiciary. That's a big reason, IMO, why the US has had such a stable government for such a long period of time.
I think what you just said is mostly true for many gamers. I also was addicted to Quake 2 for a year or so during college, playing it virtually every night and even in the morning sometimes. As time goes on, though, I seem to get less and less addicted to video games (I play maybe an hour or two every other week now).
I have seen others far worse off, though. A roommate I had several years ago would ONLY play video games (specifically hundreds of Sega games) and was on a 25 hour day cycle for an entire year, rarely leaving the apartment! He was supposed to be attending college at the time, I presume he dropped out (the guy didn't talk much).
Based on deaths per mile, it looks like 3/5 or more vehicular deaths would have to occure during your non-ideal time window to match the safety of airliners during the ideal period. While that sounds possible, you still are more likely to die in a vehicular accident than a flight due to spending much more time on the road than flying (and the raw statistics support this - you've got a 1 in 6,300 chance of dying during the year while driving versus a 1 in 1,568,000 chance of dying on a commercial flight during the year). To be a fair comparison you would likewise have to remove from the statistics any airplane accidents that resulted from bad weather (shouldn't make a big difference since most crashes result from pilot error).
Also, remember we're only considering fatalities. Once injuries are considered, driving is obviously much more dangerous than flying. I personally know several pilots who have never had any injuries resulting from flying (and they're flying general aviatino aircraft which are statistically much more dangerous than commercial airliners). On the other hand, I know several people that have been injured from driving, including one unfortunate guy who has been in 3 freak accidents that have permanently disabled him (he was in a parked car once and riding in a passenger seat the other two times).
Even so, I just returned from a 4000+ mile road trip. While it may be safer to fly, it isn't a factor for me when deciding on how I'm going to go somewhere.
You're correct when you say that Kerry wants to pull troops out of Iraq ASAP. However, what is 'possible'? He stated very clearly last night during the debate what criteria would need to be met before troops would be pulled out (and even then he said some would remain to continue training Iraqi forces -- a contigent of similar size to other countries where US forces are based). One criteria is Iraqi forces can defend themselves from the insurgents and close the border. Obviously this wouldn't happen any time soon (although he believes it may be possible to start pulling troops out in 6 months).
BTW, Bush theoretically also wants to pull troops out ASAP, but is having significant difficulty getting to the point where it would be possible to do so (presumably using similar criteria as Kerry).
but to make a comment like that puts them man in greater danger.
How? Who is going to be additionaly trying to assasinate him who wasn't trying before? These guys doing the beheadings and such in Iraq will kill relatives of translators for crying out loud. I don't think they care what an aid to Kerry says.
On the other hand, I don't think the comment was helpful, but it was truthful.
I once had a game like that, except it was even worse in that every time the game loaded, it wanted the four digit symbol on a random page from the manual entered.
My only advice would be to write the SN# onto a label and stick it to the jewel case (or write it directly on the paper sleeve if that's all it came with). Since you've already lost the manual, the only thing you can (legally) do is complain to the manufacturer (good luck).
It's quite common for me to loose the original packaging (and the SN#) to a game
You should take Al Gore's advice on this one and keep them in a 'locked box'. Well, any box will do. They're usually printed right on the jewel case, so you simply need to toss all the jewel cases into a rack. I've been doing this for over 10 years and have never lost any serial #s.
The dress code is one thing public schools should change. There are kids being shot every year for wearing the wrong colors (ie, not the correct gang colors). If all students were forced to wear the same clothes they would not have to worry about such issues (which would greatly relieve some students). Granted this is treating a symptom, not the disease, but it would probably increase fraternal feelings among the students (although not necesseraly increase school spirit).
Even if you disagree with me, what would be the actual harm of having a trial program where all schools within a city force their students to wear a uniform?
Ummm, religion, politics and, at times, patriotism is a substantial part of the human condition. Completely ignoring these fields would just leave the student more ignorant than before. Frankly, these fields have, to a great extent, shaped human history and will, most likely, shape it in the future. Or would you feel that it be best to avoid teaching students what society is like in rising world powers such as China and India (where patriotism in both and religion in the latter are huge influences)?
Personally, I'd advocate more theological/philosophical studies in school (at least as an elective). IMO, having a strong understanding of various philosophies adds depth to a person's character and can improve their outlook on life or, at the very least, cause them to think about questions that they haven't considered before.
I know, but it seems that something with an iPod hard drive, a 7" color LCD, a cheap CPU (just enough to do terminals and x-windows) and an integrated wireless card or ethernet card shouldn't cost $2k. Not that the product in the article meets these specs (it would be overkill of course), I'm just wondering why, AFAIK, such a product doesn't exist yet.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, he did increase government power more than Bush, over 60 YEARS AGO! Huge changes occurred in the parties following that, with Democrats picking up many of the issues Republicans previously had (namely issues of race, etc.) with Republicans taking the previously Democratic line. So it is a bit silly comparing recent Democrats to him (although you did answer my question). He also was quite unique in that he served 4 terms and was in office during the biggest economic turn-around of the nation as well as the largest military victories. He was also responsible for social security.
Scientists often disagree with each other. Just because they disagree doesn't make the topic a religion.
I don't blame you. But at least it should be much harder for Kerry to increase spending than Bush and he's willing to raise taxes to partially close the deficit.
I know you're a fiscal conservative, but don't you think it is reasonable for the people who are responsible for a war (us) to pay for it? If so, then how without raising taxes? Even if Iraq were to give all of its oil profits to us it wouldn't be nearly enough to pay for the war. It's barely adequate for preliminary reconstruction of the country.
Republicans seem to be much less stubborn about increasing spending when there is a Republican president (even on completely useless, expensive things like deploying anti-balistic missiles which can't even reliably hit a missile that is broadcasting its position to the system).
It was interesting when Bush mentioned Howard being re-elected in Australia. He failed to mention that he only won because Australia's economy is booming. If its economy hadn't been, he probably would have lost by a large margin for getting involved in the war in Iraq (despite suffering 0 casualties and significantly lower costs than the US).
On a side note, how many of Bush's economic advisers have resigned? Also, what president has ever lowered taxes during a major war (or any war for that matter)? Who do you expect is going to pay the bill? You can't increase government spending and simultaneously lower taxes forever.
It's called cognitive dissonance and you've got a nasty case of it.
Yes, but it is a rarified atmosphere. Fairly different (and much less studied) aerodynamics than at normal (much higher) Reynolds numbers.
So your suggestion is to put some fat, smelly (sorry, fat does stink in and of itself), hungry astronauts for an extended mission in a very confined space. I wonder how many would return.
Are you saying Tom Delay doesn't need to be hit by a bus?! It's hard to take your comment seriously with implications like that.
I feel other parts of the DMCA are much more heinous, such as:
I used a bit of artistic license on that quote, but I really dislike the section of the DMCA dealing with copy protection.
- WAR IS PEACE
- FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
- IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
- BREAKING COPYRIGHT IS STEALING
Doesn't seem to roll off the tongue as well as the other three. I'm a big fan of 1984 but comparing those quotes to this is ridiculous. I could not care less about whether or not is is legal to distribute works on the Internet that are copyrighted. All I care about in the case of the DMCA law is the privileges it gives to copyright holders to shakedown perpetrators with little participation by the court system (as well as some additional activities that it declares to be illegal, including reverse-engineering copy-protection mechanisms).Especially in this age of a free exchange of ideas through the Internet it would be hopelessly impossible to ban pornography as a whole. Even banning tiny portions of pornography (child porn) is fairly difficult to enforce since the porn can come from anywhere that's connected to the Internet.
So while you could argue that, in theory, society is better off without porn, I think you'll find it totally impossible to enforce, resulting in the same results (to a lesser extent) as the roaring twenties. The government simply can't legislate morality (at least not in cases where a sizable portion of the population would be opposed to it); even a totalitarian government like China is having some difficulty doing that (banning pornography, Christianity, etc.) and anything less than their efforts wouldn't stand a chance.
Dude, you do know that you answered your own question, right?
I heard a guy on the radio once who's job was to clean the cages of monkeys used in virus research. Get all the shit-flinging benefits of the insane asylum plus the chance of getting some rare, highly lethal disease. All this can be yours for $9.70/hr.
The government is basically designed to prevent 'slippery slopes' by being able to correct trends in other parts of the government. It isn't fool-proof, of course, but it is ever-present on the minds of many politicians and especially the judiciary. That's a big reason, IMO, why the US has had such a stable government for such a long period of time.
I have seen others far worse off, though. A roommate I had several years ago would ONLY play video games (specifically hundreds of Sega games) and was on a 25 hour day cycle for an entire year, rarely leaving the apartment! He was supposed to be attending college at the time, I presume he dropped out (the guy didn't talk much).
Based on deaths per mile, it looks like 3/5 or more vehicular deaths would have to occure during your non-ideal time window to match the safety of airliners during the ideal period. While that sounds possible, you still are more likely to die in a vehicular accident than a flight due to spending much more time on the road than flying (and the raw statistics support this - you've got a 1 in 6,300 chance of dying during the year while driving versus a 1 in 1,568,000 chance of dying on a commercial flight during the year). To be a fair comparison you would likewise have to remove from the statistics any airplane accidents that resulted from bad weather (shouldn't make a big difference since most crashes result from pilot error).
Also, remember we're only considering fatalities. Once injuries are considered, driving is obviously much more dangerous than flying. I personally know several pilots who have never had any injuries resulting from flying (and they're flying general aviatino aircraft which are statistically much more dangerous than commercial airliners). On the other hand, I know several people that have been injured from driving, including one unfortunate guy who has been in 3 freak accidents that have permanently disabled him (he was in a parked car once and riding in a passenger seat the other two times).
Even so, I just returned from a 4000+ mile road trip. While it may be safer to fly, it isn't a factor for me when deciding on how I'm going to go somewhere.
BTW, Bush theoretically also wants to pull troops out ASAP, but is having significant difficulty getting to the point where it would be possible to do so (presumably using similar criteria as Kerry).
How? Who is going to be additionaly trying to assasinate him who wasn't trying before? These guys doing the beheadings and such in Iraq will kill relatives of translators for crying out loud. I don't think they care what an aid to Kerry says.
On the other hand, I don't think the comment was helpful, but it was truthful.
It's apparently news to Bush. Did you see the debate tonight? At one point, Bush berated Kerry because an aid of his had labeled Allawi a "puppet".
My only advice would be to write the SN# onto a label and stick it to the jewel case (or write it directly on the paper sleeve if that's all it came with). Since you've already lost the manual, the only thing you can (legally) do is complain to the manufacturer (good luck).
You should take Al Gore's advice on this one and keep them in a 'locked box'. Well, any box will do. They're usually printed right on the jewel case, so you simply need to toss all the jewel cases into a rack. I've been doing this for over 10 years and have never lost any serial #s.
Even if you disagree with me, what would be the actual harm of having a trial program where all schools within a city force their students to wear a uniform?
Personally, I'd advocate more theological/philosophical studies in school (at least as an elective). IMO, having a strong understanding of various philosophies adds depth to a person's character and can improve their outlook on life or, at the very least, cause them to think about questions that they haven't considered before.
I know, but it seems that something with an iPod hard drive, a 7" color LCD, a cheap CPU (just enough to do terminals and x-windows) and an integrated wireless card or ethernet card shouldn't cost $2k. Not that the product in the article meets these specs (it would be overkill of course), I'm just wondering why, AFAIK, such a product doesn't exist yet.