I agree. If someone said something about black people eating watermelons, or Mexicans stealing radios, it would be rightfully modded to "-10 Asshole," but bashing Texas is okee-dokey. For the record, I grew up in Texas and don't own a cowboy hat or boots.
Guns, though. Lots of ammo... Come on over, WM.....
The case also seems to turn on Texas law. While I am tempted to make nasty comments about the state that elected G.W. Bush governor, I'll resist. After all he might be "elected" president and I would not want an all expense paid trip to the US resort in Cuba.
He already was elected president, and it could happen again. Its funny people continue to harp about the fascism and whatnot that they percieve in W's presidency; yet so far, none of them have been rounded up and sent anywhere. Wonder why that is? Those folks in Cuba? All, that is, 100%, of them were caught fighting for the Taliban in Afghanistan. Not sitting in a coffee house debating National Health Care or increasing social benefits to unwed mothers of 6 children. Of course, if you feel some fraternal feelings for them, then by all means, book a flight to Iraq or Afghanistan and proudly proclaim your anti-American views. See ya soon.
Are you sure the Mexican is truly illegal? Here in Texas anyway, you meet up with legal immigrants who have been here 15 years and still don't speak English. If the guy truly is illegal, report the company to la migra!!
The thing I can't understand is, why bother? I've travelled internationally several times since our 'security' was 'heightened,' some from Saudi Arabia even, and I can't tell what it is that this smart card is supposed to do for me. I would hope that certain security measures would be made irregardless of having or not having a card. I've had to go through metal detectors, bomb sniffers, my luggage x-rayed, my passport scanned to ensure it was legit and not stolen, etc.; all things I would hope would happen if I did have one of those fancy-pants cards.
Guess I'm just missing something; I've not felt like security was too big a pain in the ass anyway.
Oh, gee, you said sorry - I guess you're right after all!
Cocky ass.
OK, last time, for the short bus rejects. You're not going to convince me that socialism, a parasitic philosophy, is good; I won't convince you that your beliefs make you nothing more than a purse snatcher, so I guess we shouldn't try.
Incidentally, the press didn't hunt Bill Clinton - the man is so crooked that when he dies he'll have to be screwed into the ground, and the press was covering only what came to light. They pretty much ignored most of what he and his regime did.
And Reagan was the bomb. Sorry you're so blinded by left crap to see that. He did more for this country in 4 years than Clinton did TO this country in 8.
It is sad to see someone looking at a red wall, and hear them keep saying, "Green! Its green!" Colorblindedness is a bit of a disability. But the ability to not see what's really going on is willful ignorance. You keep saying, "Oh, no, there's no liberals here," while you throw a tarp over Ted Turner, saying he's sold out.
Buddy, if Turner was the only one, I'd have no argument. Fox excepted (and they at least don't try to say they aren't biased), the major (and most minor) news outlets in this country are liberal. Simple fact. Sure, you can pick up a newspaper with a conservative bent to it. But since the 60's especially, everything hitting our airwaves has been lefty. Not just news; all the crap spilling out of the boob-tube is lefty. TV shows are overwhelmingly liberal. The only times you see something not liberal seems to be an accident to me; some sick sacharine sweet crap spills through and for some reason, the US public likes it, and voila. But I grew up in the time of Phil Donahue and his evil spawn, Geraldo, Sally, etc. ad nauseum. Don't tell me that they aren't 'media,' don't tell me that they don't have or try to have an influence on the US in a leftward fashion. I remember that fat know-nothing weatherbuffoon Willard Scott saying one fine morning on his 'Constitutional Minute' that the second amendment was so states could have national guards, not so rednecks could go duck hunting. Agree with him or not, it is an example of the constant, very light 'push' that the left has been giving the US since the 60's. And we are the poorer for it.
Finally, you keep saying "REAL LIBERALS." If someone comes busting in my house with a black mask on and waving a gun and telling me to die in the name of Allah, I don't care if he's a "REAL TERRORIST" or a confused burgler. I'm going to fight him. Probably with a gun that you liberals (REAL and artificial) don't believe that I have the right to own.
Finally, progressive taxation schemes can be justified in more than one way. First of all, the police aren't protecting the wealth of the poor. They don't have much wealth to steal (they're stolen from in OTHER ways). The cops protect those WITH wealth. Those who have it pay more.
Can I ask you a question? Where do the cops spend most of their time? In the posh neighborhoods, making sure people's BMW's are safe, or in the 'hood?
Second, the affluent are clearly getting more benefit from society, therefore they pay more in the system that supports them so well.
If someone goes to school for 10 years outside of highschool, works for years building up a business, and has some employees, how is it society is supporting them? If someone sits on their ass in HUD housing, paying for food I can't afford with food stamps, talking on their cell phones and having kid after kid after kid that you and I pay for, who is benifitting from the largess of society? Who is contributing to society? The worker, that's who. Maybe he doesn't fit your definition of work; slaving away over a grill, or punching out parts in a steel mill; but blue collar and white collar have something in common. They work. They work and if they work harder, they are penalized for it by having a larger chunk taken out of their paycheck. Which goes to the leaches of society. And this is fair?
We are not a hive of bees, willtsmith. The things I personally have accomplished have been through my own efforts. Any attempt to decide that a person has accomplished through the benefits of society and now owes them back is pure bullshit. Who gets to decide? Not you, not me; not even if we get a bunch of our friends together to vote Democrats into office does it become fair, or constitutional.
And the VERY WORST offenders are the conservative lawmakers who whore off all their political connections and feed the BIG HOGS.
Change that to ALL lawmakers, and you'll sound more truthful. I've never met a liberal lawmaker who turned down corporate money. Liberterians, yes, but not liberals.
I'm not in the mood for cut and paste quoting, so I'll just let the reader refer to the post.
Good points all, especially on the socially conservative aspect. One point to bring up; with fiscal liberals, this usually means society pays for everyone elses mistakes. You claim leanings opposite of those I claim; I claim fiscal conservatism, and social liberalism (to a point!); liberals in general seem to say that its ok if you run with scissors, even though you've been warned not to, since Big Brother will pick up the pieces and fix you up good as new when the inevitable happens.
As to your first point, I disagree with your apparent theory of economic reality. Yes, I agree the middle management folks shouldn't be sucking up the wealth; and I think people should be paid equally for equal work. Defining that is tough; I'm a nurse, so I put in hours on a clock, and it'd be difficult to pay me more than the nurse working in the room next to me simply because I'm male, or a different ethnicity than is the norm, or whatever reason is the cause celebre' of the day. In some fields, it isn't that easy. Actors - they are paid what the studios think the value of their participation in a project is. Is it fucked up that Brad Pitt gets 15 million dollars for play-acting for about three-six months, and I get about 50k/yr for a 42hour week? Yes. But what can be done, aside from creating artificial and retaliatory ceilings on people's earnings? I don't have that right; do you? Do you if you gather a bunch of other people who feel the same way? Personally, I think not.
Now, as to your 'money is not real' comment. No, money is not real. But it is a representation of something - call it money, chits, FRN's, whatever. It sounds like you wouldn't believe money any more 'real' if it was backed by a gold or silver standard still, so I won't go into that. However, you believe that labor has worth - and that worth is expressed MONETARILY. I don't know how else to do it; if WWIII happened right now, those green foldy things in our wallets would be nifty ass-wipe for a while, and that's about it, but in the new economy that would develop, something would represent worth; perhaps only a barter system. Hell, we may go back to paying folks in salt. But irregardless, one must be paid in the coin of the realm, so to speak. So who gets to decide how much your labor is worth? I'm a nurse, I don't think we get paid enough. The guy putting together cars likely thinks the same way. True also the guy sweeping the floors in both places. In Soviet Russia (hahahahah, sorry), doctors were paid about as much as factory workers. Do you think that is fair? A doctor puts in years and years of hard learning, and basically sells his knowledge and experience. I think that's worth a hell of a lot more per hour than the guy sweeping, or the guy putting together Chevies, or even what I get. When I decide I want that, I'll go to medical school and work my balls off.
Anyway, good points you made. I don't agree that we are 'slaves' simply because we aren't owners of the company. Not everyone on a ship gets to be captain; it's just the way human nature and life is. Attempts to circumvent it end up on Soviet style 'spreading of the misery' instead of a workers paradise.
First, any list of links that starts with fair.org is suspect. That site is raging liberal; if you can't see that, it is because you are among the group of elitist leftwingers that think the world is the way you see it, and anything else is right-wing.
Second, long before O'Reilly, long before Limbaugh, studies by the liberal media itself has shown time and time again that there is most definately a left wing slant to our popular media. A huge percentage (>85%) of the media vote Democrat, see themselves as liberal, and in some studies (more accurately, I think) give their positions on several issues that are usually used to determine a person's leftedness or rightedness. (ok, I made those words up.) Affirmative action, race relations, increased taxation on those who work harder (Progressive tax), death penalty, military spending, gun control - you get the picture. Almost all the folks we see on TV, hear on the radio, read in the paper, etc. were very decidedly left on each issue.
Example: during the Rodney King riots, when the police actually refused to go into the neighborhoods being burned down, many property owners took the firearms and ammo they luckily already owned (as LA made an ammo sale moratorium) and were able to defend their businesses. Those who did so, did not lose their businesses to vandals. Within a few days, order was restored, these people were able to put away their weapons, and we the US taxpayer began to bail LA out financially.
What is interesting is the media coverage at the time. They showed pictures these shop owners legally defending their property, and put headlines under the picture calling them 'Vigilantes.' Either the media are too stupid to know the definition of 'vigilante', or they are diliberatly engaging in an attempt to alter our perception on things - self defense = vigilantism... Keep repeating subliminally....
The same story happened after two huricanes hit and destroyed the infrastructure in Florida (Hugo was one; I forget the other). The national guard would make its rounds, and be gone for hours before making another circuit through an area. Looting was out of control. Some homeowners defended themselves; one that I know of shot and killed a guy who came at him with a weapon. The press called this vigilantism.
Fiscally liberal - meaning you think you and others are entitled somehow to the fruits of my labor. Thanks! We working schlubs appreciate it. And the fact that you are socially conservative probably means you don't think we working fools deserve to spend what little money you leave us in the way we choose. Again, thanks!
Not sure about your qualifier there (along with half the world?), but irregardless of France's defeats (which are legion), the point is this: They are a worthless part of NATO. The US and UK have been NATO's backbone since its inception. France's monetary contributions were basically paying (too little, I might add) for their own defence. The US contribution to NATO is not just in money, and you know it. The US maintained bases all over Europe which gave the Soviets pause, and kept them from rolling across western Europe. That NATO did shit to help then-Czechoslovakia and Poland is a crying shame (blame mostly on their ruling governments at the time), but the Soviet machine would have kept rolling West. Stalin knew he faced a hell of a fight if he tried; plus, he was busy killing off 20 million of his own citizens.
As for your "who's safer" remark, I'm not sure what you mean. If you refer to the 9/11 incident, I hardly believe that is relevent.
I'm trying to figure out how that was in any way helpful to you.... Did he also give you a baseball bat, or firearm, to deal with the annoying piece of shit once its 2 minute entertainment value is gone?
In reference to your people of the book statement; Christians and Jews (NOT Muslims) are called people of the book. In Mohammed's (from this point on called "Big Mo") early days, when he was given sanctuary by the now spinning-in-their-graves Jews and Christians while he was being chased by his fellow Arabs who wanted to kill him, he 'received' the message from Allah about the 'people of the book.'
Later, after he had gathered a large following of people attracted to his success as a highway robber (he and his fellow Muslims attacked villages, travelling caravans, etc, killing the men and raping the women), he began receiving NEW direction from Allah, that gave them orders to kill those who do not convert. Reverence for the 'people of the book' disappeared. Instructions that it was permissible by Allah to rape the women captured in war made the budding Islam that much more attractive, plus an afterlife of service by those whom you have killed, while you spend your time with the 72 virgin women and 28 young nubile boys, since you are promised the sexual prowess of 100 men (homosexuality, while condemned in the Koran, it ironically permitted in Paradise, and it was quite popular back in Mo's day).
So, if this is the PROTECTION of which you speak, this infidel wants the OPT-OUT number.
Not really tech support, but ripped from the same page in the book of stupidity.
I was recently at Fry's, looking at their server racks. Pretty good prices. now, I don't really need (or know shit about) server stuff. But I noticed they didn't have server cases in their case department, and none near the racks, so I asked a guy about server cases. He directed me to the desktop and tower cases.
"No, I mean, the special ones for server racks, they've got holes in them that you use to mount in the racks."
"Oh, ok, well, you can just drill some holes in one of these cases and use that."
I don't know what I've done wrong; bittorrent has worked before for me, now it isn't. It creates the 0kb files, then just sits there giving me the 'connecting to peers' message. I'm becoming annoyed...
I'm a big supporter of the right to carry. Doing so intelligently is important, however.
Where I live (Dallas), it is perfectly legal to sit on your apartment balcony with a rifle or shotgun in hand, or march around your front yard with a rifle over your shoulder. Don't think for a second that someone seeing that might not be concerned enough to call the cops. And they will come investigate. No, you won't be arrested; but why make life difficult for yourself and your neighbors?
Stupid ignorant jackass. Muslims have been attacking inside India for centuries.
The US, while not blameless, is in no way to blame for 9/11. The hijackers were not the oft-mentioned but never identified terrorists that we create with every bomb we drop; they were mostly wealthy Saudis who have never been harmed by the US. Except in their own pathetic little islamic minds.
Slashdot Mirror
Guns, though. Lots of ammo... Come on over, WM.....
Are you sure the Mexican is truly illegal? Here in Texas anyway, you meet up with legal immigrants who have been here 15 years and still don't speak English. If the guy truly is illegal, report the company to la migra!!
Guess I'm just missing something; I've not felt like security was too big a pain in the ass anyway.
Cocky ass.
OK, last time, for the short bus rejects. You're not going to convince me that socialism, a parasitic philosophy, is good; I won't convince you that your beliefs make you nothing more than a purse snatcher, so I guess we shouldn't try.
Incidentally, the press didn't hunt Bill Clinton - the man is so crooked that when he dies he'll have to be screwed into the ground, and the press was covering only what came to light. They pretty much ignored most of what he and his regime did.
And Reagan was the bomb. Sorry you're so blinded by left crap to see that. He did more for this country in 4 years than Clinton did TO this country in 8.
Buddy, if Turner was the only one, I'd have no argument. Fox excepted (and they at least don't try to say they aren't biased), the major (and most minor) news outlets in this country are liberal. Simple fact. Sure, you can pick up a newspaper with a conservative bent to it. But since the 60's especially, everything hitting our airwaves has been lefty. Not just news; all the crap spilling out of the boob-tube is lefty. TV shows are overwhelmingly liberal. The only times you see something not liberal seems to be an accident to me; some sick sacharine sweet crap spills through and for some reason, the US public likes it, and voila. But I grew up in the time of Phil Donahue and his evil spawn, Geraldo, Sally, etc. ad nauseum. Don't tell me that they aren't 'media,' don't tell me that they don't have or try to have an influence on the US in a leftward fashion. I remember that fat know-nothing weatherbuffoon Willard Scott saying one fine morning on his 'Constitutional Minute' that the second amendment was so states could have national guards, not so rednecks could go duck hunting. Agree with him or not, it is an example of the constant, very light 'push' that the left has been giving the US since the 60's. And we are the poorer for it.
Finally, you keep saying "REAL LIBERALS." If someone comes busting in my house with a black mask on and waving a gun and telling me to die in the name of Allah, I don't care if he's a "REAL TERRORIST" or a confused burgler. I'm going to fight him. Probably with a gun that you liberals (REAL and artificial) don't believe that I have the right to own.
We are not a hive of bees, willtsmith. The things I personally have accomplished have been through my own efforts. Any attempt to decide that a person has accomplished through the benefits of society and now owes them back is pure bullshit. Who gets to decide? Not you, not me; not even if we get a bunch of our friends together to vote Democrats into office does it become fair, or constitutional.
Change that to ALL lawmakers, and you'll sound more truthful. I've never met a liberal lawmaker who turned down corporate money. Liberterians, yes, but not liberals.Good points all, especially on the socially conservative aspect. One point to bring up; with fiscal liberals, this usually means society pays for everyone elses mistakes. You claim leanings opposite of those I claim; I claim fiscal conservatism, and social liberalism (to a point!); liberals in general seem to say that its ok if you run with scissors, even though you've been warned not to, since Big Brother will pick up the pieces and fix you up good as new when the inevitable happens.
As to your first point, I disagree with your apparent theory of economic reality. Yes, I agree the middle management folks shouldn't be sucking up the wealth; and I think people should be paid equally for equal work. Defining that is tough; I'm a nurse, so I put in hours on a clock, and it'd be difficult to pay me more than the nurse working in the room next to me simply because I'm male, or a different ethnicity than is the norm, or whatever reason is the cause celebre' of the day. In some fields, it isn't that easy. Actors - they are paid what the studios think the value of their participation in a project is. Is it fucked up that Brad Pitt gets 15 million dollars for play-acting for about three-six months, and I get about 50k/yr for a 42hour week? Yes. But what can be done, aside from creating artificial and retaliatory ceilings on people's earnings? I don't have that right; do you? Do you if you gather a bunch of other people who feel the same way? Personally, I think not.
Now, as to your 'money is not real' comment. No, money is not real. But it is a representation of something - call it money, chits, FRN's, whatever. It sounds like you wouldn't believe money any more 'real' if it was backed by a gold or silver standard still, so I won't go into that. However, you believe that labor has worth - and that worth is expressed MONETARILY. I don't know how else to do it; if WWIII happened right now, those green foldy things in our wallets would be nifty ass-wipe for a while, and that's about it, but in the new economy that would develop, something would represent worth; perhaps only a barter system. Hell, we may go back to paying folks in salt. But irregardless, one must be paid in the coin of the realm, so to speak. So who gets to decide how much your labor is worth? I'm a nurse, I don't think we get paid enough. The guy putting together cars likely thinks the same way. True also the guy sweeping the floors in both places. In Soviet Russia (hahahahah, sorry), doctors were paid about as much as factory workers. Do you think that is fair? A doctor puts in years and years of hard learning, and basically sells his knowledge and experience. I think that's worth a hell of a lot more per hour than the guy sweeping, or the guy putting together Chevies, or even what I get. When I decide I want that, I'll go to medical school and work my balls off. Anyway, good points you made. I don't agree that we are 'slaves' simply because we aren't owners of the company. Not everyone on a ship gets to be captain; it's just the way human nature and life is. Attempts to circumvent it end up on Soviet style 'spreading of the misery' instead of a workers paradise.
Second, long before O'Reilly, long before Limbaugh, studies by the liberal media itself has shown time and time again that there is most definately a left wing slant to our popular media. A huge percentage (>85%) of the media vote Democrat, see themselves as liberal, and in some studies (more accurately, I think) give their positions on several issues that are usually used to determine a person's leftedness or rightedness. (ok, I made those words up.) Affirmative action, race relations, increased taxation on those who work harder (Progressive tax), death penalty, military spending, gun control - you get the picture. Almost all the folks we see on TV, hear on the radio, read in the paper, etc. were very decidedly left on each issue.
Example: during the Rodney King riots, when the police actually refused to go into the neighborhoods being burned down, many property owners took the firearms and ammo they luckily already owned (as LA made an ammo sale moratorium) and were able to defend their businesses. Those who did so, did not lose their businesses to vandals. Within a few days, order was restored, these people were able to put away their weapons, and we the US taxpayer began to bail LA out financially.
What is interesting is the media coverage at the time. They showed pictures these shop owners legally defending their property, and put headlines under the picture calling them 'Vigilantes.' Either the media are too stupid to know the definition of 'vigilante', or they are diliberatly engaging in an attempt to alter our perception on things - self defense = vigilantism... Keep repeating subliminally....
The same story happened after two huricanes hit and destroyed the infrastructure in Florida (Hugo was one; I forget the other). The national guard would make its rounds, and be gone for hours before making another circuit through an area. Looting was out of control. Some homeowners defended themselves; one that I know of shot and killed a guy who came at him with a weapon. The press called this vigilantism.
No, no liberal bias in the media.
Fiscally liberal - meaning you think you and others are entitled somehow to the fruits of my labor. Thanks! We working schlubs appreciate it. And the fact that you are socially conservative probably means you don't think we working fools deserve to spend what little money you leave us in the way we choose. Again, thanks!
As for your "who's safer" remark, I'm not sure what you mean. If you refer to the 9/11 incident, I hardly believe that is relevent.
You are an idiot. An anon. idiot.
Excellent reply, I'm sorry the Slash-holes modded you down instead of replying as to why they think you are wrong, like real grownups.
Go ahead, Pierre, mod me down, I know you want to.
I'm trying to figure out how that was in any way helpful to you.... Did he also give you a baseball bat, or firearm, to deal with the annoying piece of shit once its 2 minute entertainment value is gone?
Later, after he had gathered a large following of people attracted to his success as a highway robber (he and his fellow Muslims attacked villages, travelling caravans, etc, killing the men and raping the women), he began receiving NEW direction from Allah, that gave them orders to kill those who do not convert. Reverence for the 'people of the book' disappeared. Instructions that it was permissible by Allah to rape the women captured in war made the budding Islam that much more attractive, plus an afterlife of service by those whom you have killed, while you spend your time with the 72 virgin women and 28 young nubile boys, since you are promised the sexual prowess of 100 men (homosexuality, while condemned in the Koran, it ironically permitted in Paradise, and it was quite popular back in Mo's day).
So, if this is the PROTECTION of which you speak, this infidel wants the OPT-OUT number.
I was recently at Fry's, looking at their server racks. Pretty good prices. now, I don't really need (or know shit about) server stuff. But I noticed they didn't have server cases in their case department, and none near the racks, so I asked a guy about server cases. He directed me to the desktop and tower cases.
"No, I mean, the special ones for server racks, they've got holes in them that you use to mount in the racks."
"Oh, ok, well, you can just drill some holes in one of these cases and use that."
Riiiiiiiiiight.
No, that's data harmonicAs. You got da bad block blues.
I don't know what I've done wrong; bittorrent has worked before for me, now it isn't. It creates the 0kb files, then just sits there giving me the 'connecting to peers' message. I'm becoming annoyed...
None of which addresses what I said, re: Saudis.
Not against the Saudi asses who were behind 9/11.
No, it is an objective opinion. ie, based on fact. If you have evidence otherwise, then post it. Otherwise, can it.
Where I live (Dallas), it is perfectly legal to sit on your apartment balcony with a rifle or shotgun in hand, or march around your front yard with a rifle over your shoulder. Don't think for a second that someone seeing that might not be concerned enough to call the cops. And they will come investigate. No, you won't be arrested; but why make life difficult for yourself and your neighbors?
The US, while not blameless, is in no way to blame for 9/11. The hijackers were not the oft-mentioned but never identified terrorists that we create with every bomb we drop; they were mostly wealthy Saudis who have never been harmed by the US. Except in their own pathetic little islamic minds.