I really don't know if the buyers of DRMed WalMart music had to "sign" an agreement that WalMart was not obligated to allow access to the music in perpetuity. If that is the case, then you are right. If they did not, then WalMart is directly responsible for your product no longer working, as if they had placed a remote self-destruct device in the product so that they could destroy it and force you to buy another one. It's not the same as something simply breaking after their stated return period, in which case the responsibility lies with the manufacturer if it offers a warranty or the customer if it does not.
Maybe you shouldn't betray your political leanings by singling out the RNC. There are "free speech zones" at the DNC too. It seems to be more dependent on the attitude of the hosting city. At least we don't imprison grandmothers and sentence them to hard labor just for asking to protest.
That's why I can't read either strip. No insights in either one; just some guy trying to tell me his opinions are righter and funnier than mine. If you want to write political cartoons, write them.
At least he has the decency to try to retire, unlike Gary Trudeau who keeps cranking out mindless Doonesbury strips only he and Al Franken think are funny.
The market selected Chinese-made lead-filled products over more expensive, safer products made by companies in the US. The safety problems weren't noticed until the products were literally everywhere.
Right... because we didn't know there was lead contamination. I guarantee that, given the choice, people will pick the lead-free toys.
If China's manufacturing industry had the environmental health and safety oversight of the US, this would've been avoided.
That's a fundamental flaw of the state-run companies in China. We have standards for imported goods. When a state runs all the businesses within it, regulations are essentially nil because the fox is watching the hen house.
Wow; I forgot about Wilson. He proposed the League of Nations, then basically prevented the USA from entering it out of spite for Republicans who wanted a compromise. This derailed the Versailles treaty and probably helped lead to WWII. He also expanded segregation within the federal government. He opposed women's suffrage until the false imprisonment and torture of suffragists became public. Finally, he supported eugenics. Then again, we still practice this today, thanks to another eugenics supporter: Margaret Sanger, who started Planned Parenthood. Oh yeah, and he was crippled by a stroke for the last two years of his term, but refused to step down.
Well, let's see. There was Andrew Johnson, who blocked reconstruction by supporting "black codes", vetoing the Civil Rights bill, and opposing the 14th Amendment. Ultimately, he was impeached for removing the Secretary of War from office without Senate approval.
There was Calvin Coolidge, who accomplished little and is most responsible for encouraging the economic irresponsibility that led to the Great Depression.
There was Herbert Hoover, who raised the top tax bracket to a confiscatory 63% during the Depression.
There was also FDR, who seized privately held gold and started numerous entitlement programs that treated symptoms instead of actually helping the economy. The depression that lasted nine years after he came into office, ending only after firing up the war machine.
Finally, there is LBJ, who is truly responsible for dragging the USA into the Vietnam War.
If you are able to objectively compare some of our dubious chief executives of the past, instead of focusing on the present with the attention span of a puppy, you might find yourself retracting your assertion. The fact that you acknowledge Lincoln made a grave error indicates that you may qualify as an amateur historian, but you know far less than you think you do.
Science is not reality; its mission is to describe reality as accurately as possible with the knowledge we possess. The "magic" is what we can't currently describe.
In my mind, it shows how a small group of super-wealthy oil magnates wielded enormous influence over a national election.
Your mind is a frightening place. It discards all possibilities other than the most unlikely one. The most likely is that, because Reagan was perceived as a warhawk, that (successful) interdiction on Iran and other targets in the middle east would be forthcoming.
It doesn't help that the third parties that DO have reasonable political platforms (like the Greens, unlike the "Constitution Party" or the Libertarians)
And this is why everyone is allowed express his own opinion.
put up COMPLETE DUMBARSES as their candidates for president just because the person is well known so they can attention whore.
Actually, those COMPLETE DUMBARSES are the kind of people who really believe in unfeasible platforms like the Greens'. I have no idea who the current Green candidates are, so I don't think the "fame" strategy is working either.
He's not a Junior. His father's middle name(s) differ.
Contrariwise, Bush had a House and Senate under solid Republican control for his first two years, and accomplished essentially nothing other than a big tax cut.
The USA Patriot Act, and "No Child Left Behind," which leftists would like better if the standards were being regulated by the NEA (and if a liberal had introduced it).
I don't think you understand the US system of government. The selection of the President is not tied to the representatives in the House of Representatives or the Senate; therefore, the President cannot "usually" be the same party as the majority in either house except by sheer coincidence. Please also note that the legislative branch has two houses (which I listed above), not one. Finally, note that we have a de facto two-party system, not by law. There have been several spans of time in history when three strong parties existed, and early on there were no real parties.
The difference being that a well-preserved 1/4" reel sounds very good, while any 8-track sounds horrid (and goes silent momentarily while switching tracks, usually in the middle of your favorite song).
Slashdot Mirror
I really don't know if the buyers of DRMed WalMart music had to "sign" an agreement that WalMart was not obligated to allow access to the music in perpetuity. If that is the case, then you are right. If they did not, then WalMart is directly responsible for your product no longer working, as if they had placed a remote self-destruct device in the product so that they could destroy it and force you to buy another one. It's not the same as something simply breaking after their stated return period, in which case the responsibility lies with the manufacturer if it offers a warranty or the customer if it does not.
Yay! Another oil-for-food scandal!
Maybe you shouldn't betray your political leanings by singling out the RNC. There are "free speech zones" at the DNC too. It seems to be more dependent on the attitude of the hosting city. At least we don't imprison grandmothers and sentence them to hard labor just for asking to protest.
That's why I can't read either strip. No insights in either one; just some guy trying to tell me his opinions are righter and funnier than mine. If you want to write political cartoons, write them.
At least he has the decency to try to retire, unlike Gary Trudeau who keeps cranking out mindless Doonesbury strips only he and Al Franken think are funny.
Actually, that sounds a lot longer than the usual script in the USA; it is, however, more detailed and less formal.
Right... because we didn't know there was lead contamination. I guarantee that, given the choice, people will pick the lead-free toys.
That's a fundamental flaw of the state-run companies in China. We have standards for imported goods. When a state runs all the businesses within it, regulations are essentially nil because the fox is watching the hen house.
That infrastructure costs money.
Mmmm... beer.
Ah, that world-renown font of creative thespians: Iowa.
Wow; I forgot about Wilson. He proposed the League of Nations, then basically prevented the USA from entering it out of spite for Republicans who wanted a compromise. This derailed the Versailles treaty and probably helped lead to WWII. He also expanded segregation within the federal government. He opposed women's suffrage until the false imprisonment and torture of suffragists became public. Finally, he supported eugenics. Then again, we still practice this today, thanks to another eugenics supporter: Margaret Sanger, who started Planned Parenthood. Oh yeah, and he was crippled by a stroke for the last two years of his term, but refused to step down.
Well, let's see. There was Andrew Johnson, who blocked reconstruction by supporting "black codes", vetoing the Civil Rights bill, and opposing the 14th Amendment. Ultimately, he was impeached for removing the Secretary of War from office without Senate approval.
There was Calvin Coolidge, who accomplished little and is most responsible for encouraging the economic irresponsibility that led to the Great Depression.
There was Herbert Hoover, who raised the top tax bracket to a confiscatory 63% during the Depression.
There was also FDR, who seized privately held gold and started numerous entitlement programs that treated symptoms instead of actually helping the economy. The depression that lasted nine years after he came into office, ending only after firing up the war machine.
Finally, there is LBJ, who is truly responsible for dragging the USA into the Vietnam War.
If you are able to objectively compare some of our dubious chief executives of the past, instead of focusing on the present with the attention span of a puppy, you might find yourself retracting your assertion. The fact that you acknowledge Lincoln made a grave error indicates that you may qualify as an amateur historian, but you know far less than you think you do.
So does OS/2 since v3 (launchpad).
Science is not reality; its mission is to describe reality as accurately as possible with the knowledge we possess. The "magic" is what we can't currently describe.
Yes, he is.
Please stop reposting from the DailyKos.
Close your eyes; it's not illegal.
Yes. Those regions were invaded by Jordan and Egypt in 1973 and 1967. They're the invaders.
I doubt anyone here is trying to back the current president, who is not a conservative anyway.
Your mind is a frightening place. It discards all possibilities other than the most unlikely one. The most likely is that, because Reagan was perceived as a warhawk, that (successful) interdiction on Iran and other targets in the middle east would be forthcoming.
And this is why everyone is allowed express his own opinion.
Actually, those COMPLETE DUMBARSES are the kind of people who really believe in unfeasible platforms like the Greens'. I have no idea who the current Green candidates are, so I don't think the "fame" strategy is working either.
Obama fraternized with Ayers and Rev. Wright, and he's the lesser of two evils? You must think highly of McCain.
That's great, as long as you're the dictator.
He's not a Junior. His father's middle name(s) differ.
The USA Patriot Act, and "No Child Left Behind," which leftists would like better if the standards were being regulated by the NEA (and if a liberal had introduced it).
I don't think you understand the US system of government. The selection of the President is not tied to the representatives in the House of Representatives or the Senate; therefore, the President cannot "usually" be the same party as the majority in either house except by sheer coincidence. Please also note that the legislative branch has two houses (which I listed above), not one. Finally, note that we have a de facto two-party system, not by law. There have been several spans of time in history when three strong parties existed, and early on there were no real parties.
The difference being that a well-preserved 1/4" reel sounds very good, while any 8-track sounds horrid (and goes silent momentarily while switching tracks, usually in the middle of your favorite song).