There's some question on Gulf War II- whether it was actual authorization or whether it was only authorization to allow the President to make his case.
The Afghani War was approved way back in the first week of October, 2001, as soon as it became apparent that bin Laden was behind 9-11. The Afghani War was in fact passed unanimously, IIRC.
That's just my neaty-keano marketing name for a collection of freeware applications from various authors that I recommend all of my Windows customers install. It's not entirely comprehensive- if it was it would have AVG's antivirus scanner in it- and it needs updating, but when I originally created it it included the latest versions of ZoneAlarm, AdAware, HijackThis, and Spambayes, as well as a variety of other special-purpose scanners and Windows keep-it-safe utilities. I wouldn't recommend it at the moment- like I said it needs updating. It's at least 2 versions behind on AdAware and 6 behind on ZoneAlarm Free.
I can't find one. But then again, I can't find a reason to vote *for* Bush at all, and so I won't be. I'm sure there is one- probably in the broadband promises. But I'm not sure. Hmm- that's a hard one. Why would a nerd vote for a man who confesses that he's functionally illiterate?
If someone wants to vote for Bush based on faith and/or moral issues, there is no chance of changing that voter's mind.
Don't be so sure of that- some of us pro-lifers have this wierd concept the Pope calls the "Seamless Garment of Life", and Bush's Actions and Words are very hypocritical on life issues, from Abortion to euthanasia, War, and the Death Penalty. If you can convince somebody who is a pro-life voter of the Catholic Seamless Garment of Life, Kerry suddenly becomes the pro-life candidate.
What, has slashdot become so anti-Bush that we're taking plain text documents written by the submitter as "news" in the politics section now?
While I admit this is a good resource, the predecessor mistake was *YEARS* ago- this is hardly new or any more relevant than yet another "Bush is an idiot" post. Those of us who care about intelligence in a president already know Bush is an idiot- those who don't care just like the fact that they've got a president with the same intelligence and learning disabilities that they have. This issue isn't going to change anybody's vote one way or the other.
For me, specifically, they are- the shifting of federal responsibilities to the states has specifically, in my county, caused an increase in property taxes to keep the schools open (yes, I'm in Washington County, Oregon- the same metro area that was blasted in Doonesbury for the "Every Child Left Behind" policy) and that more than ate up any tax benefits I got from the Bush tax cuts. The same story is going on nationwide in any state that has a balanced budget requirement written into the state constitution. (California is a notable exception to this- they're borrowing under the Governator to the point that they're at Junk Bond status).
Abortion is worse?
According to census data, there were 1.3 million abortions in 2000. According to Priests For Life (admitedly a pro-life organization) there were 1.6 million abortions in 2003. Yep, I'd call that worse. (Hinted at in the Priests for Life report is that the ballooning numbers of the uninsured may have something to do with this- 12% of all abortions are done for economic reasons). And as you say:
OK, so maybe the economy is not red-hot, but considering that we went through the Enron/Worldcom scandal, terrorist attacks and war, it's doing alright.
If a real unemployment rate (including the large numbers of people who went straight from unemployment to disability) is correct- we're heading towards a major depression in employment.
I call bullshit on your assertion that you voted for Bush, because clearly you can't see that the issues that you supposedly voted for have actually improved.
Really, how? My taxes are more, and there are more abortions now than before, and I spent more than half of the last 4 years unemployed. Nope- I can't say that anything I voted for is better. I also seem to remember a campaign promise against nation building...
Everybody there just keeps using the same old government propaganda on this issue- that there's more Electricity and Water than under Saddam- and therefore the provisional government is actually doing a competent job.
Sorry- missed this bit- you're right. While the fireworks are still good for material dispersal, the plutonium oxide has already been melted and reformed- and can't be turned back into powdery ash.
I think the danger from a dirty bomb is more likely to be contamination and ingestion by people, plants and animals of the radioactive substances. This would lead to a long-term exposure to smallish amounts of radiation which, over many years, would result in an increase in cancer cases (and therefore deaths).
Depends on how much, and what the wind distribution is- igestion by people once burnt can be acomplished by large amounts of plutonium oxide ash in the atmosphere- it's still radioactive.
Because the legal thresholds for what counts as "contamination" are very low, such a weapon would render large areas uninhabitable. I for one certainly wouldn't want to live somewhere a dirty bomb had been detonated.
Yep- the point being that you don't actually have to destroy buildings to make a city uninhabitable.
I find this form of bomb to be FAR more accessible as a WMD than the other form- it's hard to figure out how to get a mass to go critical in comparison.
Absolutely! From what I can see, none of the promises I voted for Bush on in 2000 (and yes, despite the name I did vote for Bush last time around) were accomplished. Abortion, Economics, Taxes, all of it was worse under Bush than under Clinton.
Sorry- misspoke, nutrons are higher energy. Should have said Alpha and Gamma Particle Bomb- though the design idea is the same, kill loads of people and leave the buildings intact. That was my intent when comparing it to the higher-energy-state neutron bombs- effects, not actual physics.
With Plutonium, it burns in oxygen much like Magnesium does. To make a dirty bomb with weapons grade plutonium you don't need critical mass, or even for that matter technology- just shave the bar with a knife, mix the shavings with gunpowder, and use it as the warhead on a mortar. Set it off upwind of a city, and you've got the ultimate cheap terrorist neutron bomb.
Simple- being unethical is almost always good for the shareholder and the C-level executive. So it's usually (but not always, depending on the greed of the C-level executives) smart to invest in the short term in successfull, unethical companies.
Given Chablis' (sp?) and Brenner's utter inability to govern the country, I'd say that if they let him out of jail he's got a pretty good chance of being elected again. After all, going from 90% of the country having drinking water available to 60% is a darn good "Are you better off?" style argument.
:-) Of course, they were telling something different to Saddam himself...but then again, Saddam seems to have been living in a fantasy world anyway (haven't you ever heard of the story of Saddam and the Magic Stone, by which he was supposedly protected from the bullets of assasins?)
Now just wait- one day clouds like this one will be the primary food source (with processing of course) of many a "Starbase". If you've got a base set up nearby, should be no problem to mine this cloud for food & oxygen.
Sorry for breaking into your little nonpartisan world- but the truth is fact checkers are not only needed desparately by the press, but by the government and corporations as well. They seem to all be flying on different sets of lies.
Hmm...I've yet to see real estate follow wage depressions quite THAT much- though my house, $146k when I got the mortgage, $185k when I refinanced, is now down to $175k due to all the neighbors moving away.
Much of that is marketing, people selling themselves to companies.
I most certainly am a poor salesman- it took 2600 resumes, 45 different rewrites, and 26 months to find my current position at half the GROSS I was making 4 years ago.
Ran out of troops- and too cheap to hire more. Very simple answer. Last time this question came up I tried a joke answer- and got burned on the fact that Sudan recently joined OPEC.
I lost three jobs trying to insist on a higher wage (out of the 8 that I got to a last round of interviews on, only one finally panned out. 3 were sent overseas *after* I had been hired without me working a single day, one lasted exactly two days before laying me off again). I learned the hard way not to insist too loudly on money- the managers would rather hog the entire budget for themselves.
Slashdot Mirror
Pudge would only publish pro-Bush stories- that's the direction he leans.
Submit a story directly to Pudge's e-mail- near as I can tell it's the only way to get a pro-Bush story actually published.
Are there any pro-Bush stories that aren't on Drudge?
There's some question on Gulf War II- whether it was actual authorization or whether it was only authorization to allow the President to make his case.
The Afghani War was approved way back in the first week of October, 2001, as soon as it became apparent that bin Laden was behind 9-11. The Afghani War was in fact passed unanimously, IIRC.
That's just my neaty-keano marketing name for a collection of freeware applications from various authors that I recommend all of my Windows customers install. It's not entirely comprehensive- if it was it would have AVG's antivirus scanner in it- and it needs updating, but when I originally created it it included the latest versions of ZoneAlarm, AdAware, HijackThis, and Spambayes, as well as a variety of other special-purpose scanners and Windows keep-it-safe utilities. I wouldn't recommend it at the moment- like I said it needs updating. It's at least 2 versions behind on AdAware and 6 behind on ZoneAlarm Free.
So, where's the nerdish reason to vote for Bush?
I can't find one. But then again, I can't find a reason to vote *for* Bush at all, and so I won't be. I'm sure there is one- probably in the broadband promises. But I'm not sure. Hmm- that's a hard one. Why would a nerd vote for a man who confesses that he's functionally illiterate?
If someone wants to vote for Bush based on faith and/or moral issues, there is no chance of changing that voter's mind.
Don't be so sure of that- some of us pro-lifers have this wierd concept the Pope calls the "Seamless Garment of Life", and Bush's Actions and Words are very hypocritical on life issues, from Abortion to euthanasia, War, and the Death Penalty. If you can convince somebody who is a pro-life voter of the Catholic Seamless Garment of Life, Kerry suddenly becomes the pro-life candidate.
What, has slashdot become so anti-Bush that we're taking plain text documents written by the submitter as "news" in the politics section now?
While I admit this is a good resource, the predecessor mistake was *YEARS* ago- this is hardly new or any more relevant than yet another "Bush is an idiot" post. Those of us who care about intelligence in a president already know Bush is an idiot- those who don't care just like the fact that they've got a president with the same intelligence and learning disabilities that they have. This issue isn't going to change anybody's vote one way or the other.
Taxes are worse?
For me, specifically, they are- the shifting of federal responsibilities to the states has specifically, in my county, caused an increase in property taxes to keep the schools open (yes, I'm in Washington County, Oregon- the same metro area that was blasted in Doonesbury for the "Every Child Left Behind" policy) and that more than ate up any tax benefits I got from the Bush tax cuts. The same story is going on nationwide in any state that has a balanced budget requirement written into the state constitution. (California is a notable exception to this- they're borrowing under the Governator to the point that they're at Junk Bond status).
Abortion is worse?
According to census data, there were 1.3 million abortions in 2000. According to Priests For Life (admitedly a pro-life organization) there were 1.6 million abortions in 2003. Yep, I'd call that worse. (Hinted at in the Priests for Life report is that the ballooning numbers of the uninsured may have something to do with this- 12% of all abortions are done for economic reasons). And as you say:
OK, so maybe the economy is not red-hot, but considering that we went through the Enron/Worldcom scandal, terrorist attacks and war, it's doing alright.
If a real unemployment rate (including the large numbers of people who went straight from unemployment to disability) is correct- we're heading towards a major depression in employment.
I call bullshit on your assertion that you voted for Bush, because clearly you can't see that the issues that you supposedly voted for have actually improved.
Really, how? My taxes are more, and there are more abortions now than before, and I spent more than half of the last 4 years unemployed. Nope- I can't say that anything I voted for is better. I also seem to remember a campaign promise against nation building...
Either that- or e-mail your politics story submissions directly to Pudge.
Could you please add to the commentary in This Journal Entry
Everybody there just keeps using the same old government propaganda on this issue- that there's more Electricity and Water than under Saddam- and therefore the provisional government is actually doing a competent job.
Sorry- missed this bit- you're right. While the fireworks are still good for material dispersal, the plutonium oxide has already been melted and reformed- and can't be turned back into powdery ash.
I think the danger from a dirty bomb is more likely to be contamination and ingestion by people, plants and animals of the radioactive substances. This would lead to a long-term exposure to smallish amounts of radiation which, over many years, would result in an increase in cancer cases (and therefore deaths).
Depends on how much, and what the wind distribution is- igestion by people once burnt can be acomplished by large amounts of plutonium oxide ash in the atmosphere- it's still radioactive.
Because the legal thresholds for what counts as "contamination" are very low, such a weapon would render large areas uninhabitable. I for one certainly wouldn't want to live somewhere a dirty bomb had been detonated.
Yep- the point being that you don't actually have to destroy buildings to make a city uninhabitable.
I find this form of bomb to be FAR more accessible as a WMD than the other form- it's hard to figure out how to get a mass to go critical in comparison.
Absolutely! From what I can see, none of the promises I voted for Bush on in 2000 (and yes, despite the name I did vote for Bush last time around) were accomplished. Abortion, Economics, Taxes, all of it was worse under Bush than under Clinton.
Where are the neutrons coming from?
Sorry- misspoke, nutrons are higher energy. Should have said Alpha and Gamma Particle Bomb- though the design idea is the same, kill loads of people and leave the buildings intact. That was my intent when comparing it to the higher-energy-state neutron bombs- effects, not actual physics.
With Plutonium, it burns in oxygen much like Magnesium does. To make a dirty bomb with weapons grade plutonium you don't need critical mass, or even for that matter technology- just shave the bar with a knife, mix the shavings with gunpowder, and use it as the warhead on a mortar. Set it off upwind of a city, and you've got the ultimate cheap terrorist neutron bomb.
Simple- being unethical is almost always good for the shareholder and the C-level executive. So it's usually (but not always, depending on the greed of the C-level executives) smart to invest in the short term in successfull, unethical companies.
Given Chablis' (sp?) and Brenner's utter inability to govern the country, I'd say that if they let him out of jail he's got a pretty good chance of being elected again. After all, going from 90% of the country having drinking water available to 60% is a darn good "Are you better off?" style argument.
:-) Of course, they were telling something different to Saddam himself...but then again, Saddam seems to have been living in a fantasy world anyway (haven't you ever heard of the story of Saddam and the Magic Stone, by which he was supposedly protected from the bullets of assasins?)
Now just wait- one day clouds like this one will be the primary food source (with processing of course) of many a "Starbase". If you've got a base set up nearby, should be no problem to mine this cloud for food & oxygen.
For instance if someone here on Slashdot has something that may be viewed as flamebait they'll post anonymously to avoid the karma backlash.
Oddly enough- I stopped doing this when my Karma turned Excellent- it hasn't been less than "Good" since, despite ocasional flamebait mods.
Sorry for breaking into your little nonpartisan world- but the truth is fact checkers are not only needed desparately by the press, but by the government and corporations as well. They seem to all be flying on different sets of lies.
Hmm...I've yet to see real estate follow wage depressions quite THAT much- though my house, $146k when I got the mortgage, $185k when I refinanced, is now down to $175k due to all the neighbors moving away.
Much of that is marketing, people selling themselves to companies.
I most certainly am a poor salesman- it took 2600 resumes, 45 different rewrites, and 26 months to find my current position at half the GROSS I was making 4 years ago.
Ran out of troops- and too cheap to hire more. Very simple answer. Last time this question came up I tried a joke answer- and got burned on the fact that Sudan recently joined OPEC.
I lost three jobs trying to insist on a higher wage (out of the 8 that I got to a last round of interviews on, only one finally panned out. 3 were sent overseas *after* I had been hired without me working a single day, one lasted exactly two days before laying me off again). I learned the hard way not to insist too loudly on money- the managers would rather hog the entire budget for themselves.