Respectfully disagree with your disagreeing to my argument. Give some thought to the following and see if it perhaps applies to you as well:
I still spend a great deal of time in my original home of Alabama (an extrememly very rural portion). I'll actually be there for three weeks this November.
I cannot legitimately point to a single resident of the hundreds that I know in Bama and say that this or that person is a farmer by trade.
I can point to a lot of them, and I mean a lot, and say, "So and so plants this or that 40 acre field in corn every year, but he makes his money by working down at the Boeing missile plant putting in rivits".
Just because they own a tractor, or some cows, have 20 acres of soybeans, wear overalls, and drive a beat-up pickup, that doesn't make them any more of a farmer than the guy next door to me who owns a pair of snips and tends to his bonsais every day.
They just happen to look the part whereas my neighbor doesn't. Or perhaps, they own bigger toys in pursuit of their horticultural interests.
> That is, densely populated environments tend to foster an atmosphere of mutual dependence... farmers pretty much have to be self-reliant.
No! No! No! Have you looked around and seen a farmer recently? How many actual farmers do you really think exist in the US today. It's probably like 2 percent. If you don't live in a town that is all one-story that doesn't make you a farmer.
Most rural area inhabitants work at a factory, work at the local insurance agency, drive a tow truck, run a small furniture store, or rather, a whole lot of things which certainly aren't to be considered "farming".
> In harvest season, you'll help your neighbor if you can, but your first priority is getting your own work done first because that's what's going to feed your family for the next year.
Huh? It's just exactly opposite. People who live in more rural areas are the first to step up and help someone in need. City people seem to want to write a check and walk away.
> consider where educated people tend to go after they graduate
You may be right, I grew up with a lot of dirt between my toes, I have a MBA, and I live in the San Francisco Bay Area.
> you're place of residence has a large effect on your political beliefs.
In my case, wrong, after seeing some of the lunatics in the Bay Area I'm even more commited to promoting traditional lifestyles choices.
> I don't think intelligence directly maps to political leanings at all.
To make sure there is no confusion I'd like to say: There is a big difference between the words "he/she is well educated" and "he/she is intelligent".
Thus, I totally agree with your statement. Believe me, there are a lot of very intelligent people who do not have big educations and the funny thing about it is that a lot of the educated are not smart enough to realize it.
One of the smartest guys I know is my dad who never made it past his high school education. But, his ability to understand something is as finely tuned as any college professor I ever met.
> You are an outstanding example of why the Democrats lost....The Democratic Party must distance themselves from you nuts if they hope to win another election....
I,
Totally agree.
There are a lot of people out there who have been brought up with some form of religious teaching but are not the best of "church going folks". It doesn't have to be "Christian" religious beliefs.
Most religious teachings are amazingly compatible in the sense that they urge respect for the institutions of the family and of the church itself.
Those semi-religious people certainly know that liberal/hollywood/california type ethics are not what they want happening in their homes and towns.
They may think it's fun to watch those ethics on their TV shows.
But, when it comes to stuff like partial birth abortions, asking the UN's permission to defend ourselves, and gay/lesbian marriage they suddenly get a conscience and they vote that way.
One thing that really helped Bush get elected was the large number of state initiatives to ban gay/lesbian marriage (or some derivative thereof). People really identify with that issue. It brought them to the polls.
If Gavin Newsome in San Francisco and the state of Massachusetts hadn't pushed the gay/lesbian marriage onto the front pages of USA Today this summer then several states that had initiatives on the ballot might not have had the initiatives in the first place.
And therefore, the election may not have attracted quite as many conservative people to the voting booths. And any of those several states may have easily gone to John Kerry.
So, thank Gavin Newsome, the mayor of San Francisco, at least partially, for John Kerry's loss.
> It's actually pretty simple. Bush's job approval rating has only been good when he's been able to rely on the mindless American rally-around-the-flag effect. That means he's a bad leader.
You're certainly welcome to your opinion, but one shouldn't rely upon only one metric to accurately gauge the effectiveness of a person's performance in such a multi-faceted role.
> Everyone's a liar, but that doesn't mean there aren't many different degrees of liars. There is a world of difference between John Kerry's degree of veracity and George Bush's degree of veracity.
Personally I don't see it as an issue of veracity. I see it as an issue of context.
John Kerry's usage of someone else's war medals to throw away says it all for me. Anyone who would first attempt to use America's highest honors, medals given for patriotic acts, for his own perverted benefit is using a lie in a context that is unacceptable to me. Then, secondly, to have the gall to have not even used his own medals makes it just doubly worse. I am offended that anyone would take something given in the purist form of appreciation and toss it on the ground.
> Oh please? Neocons are a dark movement! Neofascism by any other name would smell as rank.
Once again, nuff said: Oh please!
> money buys many things...including Harvard MBA's
That's a cop-out and I could just as easily say, "Where did John Kerry buy his at?"
> just because he may have once been intelligent does not mean that he is still intelligent...
One's mannerisms and speech patterns have no bearing upon ones intelligence. Anyway, who said intelligence is a criteria for president. It's really got to do with popularity. Let the most popular guy win...
You wanna-be intellectuals better understand that the world doesn't whirl around your big head.
- a poor leader : That is certainly a matter of perspective. There are a lot of definitions of what makes a good leader. Unfortunately there is no mathematical equation that can be used to lock it in as to whether Bush is or isn't a good leader. Same problem for Kerry.
- a liar : They all are, politicians that is, if you don't realize this fact then you're not so bright.
- a proxy for some dark neocon movement : Oh please!
- having a low iq : They don't give away Harvard MBA's in boxes of Cracker Jacks if you haven't noticed. BTW, IQ should be in uppercase, does that reflect on your IQ, no it doesn't, it just says you were in a hurry (most likely) but others might use it against you, especially if you were running for president...
> given his lack of a good response to any of these accusations
Excuse me, why should Bush approach any of the accusations? They sound like accusations from you personally. He doesn't owe you anything. Get over it.
> shows voters supporting Kerry as being more in tune with the events and world attitudes surrounding the war in Iraq
Sure Kerry supporters can be in tune with the rest of world opinion. They probably are.
But, I really don't think world opinion has come to the point where the world realizes that if Islamic fascism isn't defeated then everyone will be living under a "Talibanesque" (spelling?) regime real quick.
Already, the people of Spain have allowed Islamic fascists to decide a major election in their country.
When will the world realize the pretext these fascists live by?
When will the world realize that the only solution that will be tolerated by Islamic facists is the death of every person of Jewish, Christian, Hindu, atheist, and/or any other religious bent other than islam?
This ultimately means that the world cannot see where these evil doers want to take the world's societies.
The Islamic terrorists do not hesitate to murder anyone in their way. And if they die achieving their goals then they are perfectly happy with that also.
I say that if they want to die for Islam then let them. But let them die at the end of my gun on my terms.
Rather than me being beheaded because I refuse to allow my wife to be forced to wear a head covering, or if I refuse to pray to their skewed excuse for a god, or because I refuse whatever other religious atrocity they desire to impose upon me.
It's wrong to couch supporters of Kerry in terms of what the remainder of the world thinks.
Kerry, Bush, Nader, Badnarik, name your candidate, etc., everyone must realize that if you aren't an Islamic facist then the facists have a fate you don't want waiting for you. By sticking your head in a hole and refusing to see the obvious you are failing your species badly.
Can call my willingness to defend myself whatever you want.
But, you better be sure that I and whole bunch of people in the US just like me are not going to tolerate threats from any two bit twit who thinks he can get away with whatever he wants....
Per my nickname, at least I'm willing to stand up and not hide behind anonymous coward status!
- obviously doesn't like me - has murdered thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands - has had desires for WMD his entire life - flaunts UN inspections - is Islamic - waves a gun in the air berating western countries - pretends he has what he doesn't for show purposes - you name it, he did it
is a immediate threat. Especially after 911.
And I think the same thing about North Korea's Kim, Iran's leaders, and anyone else who would like to stick there head up and threaten my country.
Just because the "murderous rapist serial killer" has a toy gun doesn't make him any less of an immediate threat....
> If the world is looking out for the world, then it's looking out for the US too
Bullshit!
If a murderous rapist serial killer is banging down your front door, immediately threatening you, and you've got the gun to take care of him are you going to be very appreciative of the fact that you next door neighbors are "against such behavior".
I doubt it. You're gonna go it alone and take care of the threat to your family and yourself.
Most likely the best your neighbor could do for you is call the cops, but they most likely will not even know anything is happening because they are sitting in front of the TV watching CSI.
Same thing with the rest of the world. They aren't even looking. They are too busy scamming the oil-for-food programs to give a damn about the US.
And when they are forced to look, i.e., a bunch of dead innocent people, they see what it's gonna cost in terms of dollars and lives and they chicken out.
Just like they have chickened out in the Sudan. They are looking the other way. There are people dying in the Sudan today at the hands of Islamic facists and the world is looking the other way.
And if the US went into the Sudan to straighten things out the US would undoubtly recieve the scorn of those who choose to look the other way.
Just like they are looking the other way for North Korea and Iran, and Afghanistan.
Losers, every single one of them!
Here's a GREAT BIG BIRD TO ALL OF YOU LOOKING THE OTHER WAY!
> shows voters supporting Kerry as being more in tune with the events and world attitudes surrounding the war in Iraq
Sure Kerry supporters can be in tune with the rest of world opinion. They probably are.
But, I really don't think world opinion has come to the point where the world realizes that if Islamic fascism isn't defeated then everyone will be living under a "Talibanesque" (spelling?) regime real quick.
Already, the people of Spain have allowed Islamic fascists to decide a major election in their country.
When will the world realize the pretext these fascists live by?
When will the world realize that the only solution that will be tolerated by Islamic facists is the death of every person of Jewish, Christian, Hindu, atheist, and/or any other religious bent other than islam?
This ultimately means that the world cannot see where these evil doers want to take the world's societies.
The Islamic terrorists do not hesitate to murder anyone in their way. And if they die achieving their goals then they are perfectly happy with that also.
I say that if they want to die for Islam then let them. But let them die at the end of my gun on my terms.
Rather than me being beheaded because I refuse to allow my wife to be forced to wear a head covering, or if I refuse to pray to their skewed excuse for a god, or because I refuse whatever other religious atrocity they desire to impose upon me.
It's wrong to couch supporters of Kerry in terms of what the remainder of the world thinks.
Kerry, Bush, Nader, Badnarik, name your candidate, etc., everyone must realize that if you aren't an Islamic facist then the facists have a fate you don't want waiting for you. By sticking your head in a hole and refusing to see the obvious you are failing your species badly.
Does anybody have a link to who voted for and who voted against this legislation?
We may not be out of the woods yet. The following link implies that the senate may be cutting off funding for the FTC's implementation (I.E. we'll pass it, make ourselves look like heroes, but not pay for it, thus effectively killing it).
Or at least that's my take on it, it's a bit hard to tell what's going on.
Just think of the size of the market for something truly useful rather than somebody trying to sell gadgets/methodolgies that serve only to annoy and harrass those of us who just prefer to be left alone.
- I have the right to produce a piece of music that is as crappy as I want.
- I can "publish" it in any manner that I see fit and "retain" the copyright to it.
- I can also frivolously accuse any and all RIAA executives of copyright infringement. I don't have to prove anything. I just have to submit to the ISP of, lets say, Sony and accuse one of their executive employees of offering my music without my permission.
With enough of the above scenarios I would think the RIAA guys might get the message.
Sounds like it's time to modify Apache so that clients are forced into proper behavior.
What could MS do since Apache has a what 65% market share, or something like that.
Open source guys need to get tough on MS and quit trying to accomodate them, i.e. Mono, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Just put some fake results in their results. Then see if they show up on MSN...
I,
Respectfully disagree with your disagreeing to my argument. Give some thought to the following and see if it perhaps applies to you as well:
I still spend a great deal of time in my original home of Alabama (an extrememly very rural portion). I'll actually be there for three weeks this November.
I cannot legitimately point to a single resident of the hundreds that I know in Bama and say that this or that person is a farmer by trade.
I can point to a lot of them, and I mean a lot, and say, "So and so plants this or that 40 acre field in corn every year, but he makes his money by working down at the Boeing missile plant putting in rivits".
Just because they own a tractor, or some cows, have 20 acres of soybeans, wear overalls, and drive a beat-up pickup, that doesn't make them any more of a farmer than the guy next door to me who owns a pair of snips and tends to his bonsais every day.
They just happen to look the part whereas my neighbor doesn't. Or perhaps, they own bigger toys in pursuit of their horticultural interests.
> That is, densely populated environments tend to foster an atmosphere of mutual dependence ... farmers pretty much have to be self-reliant.
No! No! No! Have you looked around and seen a farmer recently? How many actual farmers do you really think exist in the US today. It's probably like 2 percent. If you don't live in a town that is all one-story that doesn't make you a farmer.
Most rural area inhabitants work at a factory, work at the local insurance agency, drive a tow truck, run a small furniture store, or rather, a whole lot of things which certainly aren't to be considered "farming".
> In harvest season, you'll help your neighbor if you can, but your first priority is getting your own work done first because that's what's going to feed your family for the next year.
Huh? It's just exactly opposite. People who live in more rural areas are the first to step up and help someone in need. City people seem to want to write a check and walk away.
> consider where educated people tend to go after they graduate
You may be right, I grew up with a lot of dirt between my toes, I have a MBA, and I live in the San Francisco Bay Area.
> you're place of residence has a large effect on your political beliefs.
In my case, wrong, after seeing some of the lunatics in the Bay Area I'm even more commited to promoting traditional lifestyles choices.
> I don't think intelligence directly maps to political leanings at all.
To make sure there is no confusion I'd like to say: There is a big difference between the words "he/she is well educated" and "he/she is intelligent".
Thus, I totally agree with your statement. Believe me, there are a lot of very intelligent people who do not have big educations and the funny thing about it is that a lot of the educated are not smart enough to realize it.
One of the smartest guys I know is my dad who never made it past his high school education. But, his ability to understand something is as finely tuned as any college professor I ever met.
My,
Understanding is that conversion of coal to oil becomes economically viable when the price of crude reaches $70.00/barrel.
So I would say that the nuclear option is a bad idea.
Just let the Saudi's raise the price of a barrel to seventy bucks and the USA will start digging our energy up out of the ground in West Virginia.
> You are an outstanding example of why the Democrats lost....The Democratic Party must distance themselves from you nuts if they hope to win another election....
I,
Totally agree.
There are a lot of people out there who have been brought up with some form of religious teaching but are not the best of "church going folks". It doesn't have to be "Christian" religious beliefs.
Most religious teachings are amazingly compatible in the sense that they urge respect for the institutions of the family and of the church itself.
Those semi-religious people certainly know that liberal/hollywood/california type ethics are not what they want happening in their homes and towns.
They may think it's fun to watch those ethics on their TV shows.
But, when it comes to stuff like partial birth abortions, asking the UN's permission to defend ourselves, and gay/lesbian marriage they suddenly get a conscience and they vote that way.
One thing that really helped Bush get elected was the large number of state initiatives to ban gay/lesbian marriage (or some derivative thereof). People really identify with that issue. It brought them to the polls.
If Gavin Newsome in San Francisco and the state of Massachusetts hadn't pushed the gay/lesbian marriage onto the front pages of USA Today this summer then several states that had initiatives on the ballot might not have had the initiatives in the first place.
And therefore, the election may not have attracted quite as many conservative people to the voting booths. And any of those several states may have easily gone to John Kerry.
So, thank Gavin Newsome, the mayor of San Francisco, at least partially, for John Kerry's loss.
> Everyone can make political statements. It is not logical to do it through abusing the moderation system.
That's your opinion. Makes perfect sense to me.
If you want to make a statement and don't want to be moderated down then take it somewhere else.
Otherwise you're subject to the same rules as everyone else. So get used to it.
So you're allowed to make political statements and others aren't?
What hypocrisy!
> It's actually pretty simple. Bush's job approval rating has only been good when he's been able to rely on the mindless American rally-around-the-flag effect. That means he's a bad leader.
You're certainly welcome to your opinion, but one shouldn't rely upon only one metric to accurately gauge the effectiveness of a person's performance in such a multi-faceted role.
> Everyone's a liar, but that doesn't mean there aren't many different degrees of liars. There is a world of difference between John Kerry's degree of veracity and George Bush's degree of veracity.
Personally I don't see it as an issue of veracity. I see it as an issue of context.
John Kerry's usage of someone else's war medals to throw away says it all for me. Anyone who would first attempt to use America's highest honors, medals given for patriotic acts, for his own perverted benefit is using a lie in a context that is unacceptable to me. Then, secondly, to have the gall to have not even used his own medals makes it just doubly worse. I am offended that anyone would take something given in the purist form of appreciation and toss it on the ground.
> Oh please? Neocons are a dark movement! Neofascism by any other name would smell as rank.
Once again, nuff said: Oh please!
> money buys many things...including Harvard MBA's
That's a cop-out and I could just as easily say, "Where did John Kerry buy his at?"
> just because he may have once been intelligent does not mean that he is still intelligent...
One's mannerisms and speech patterns have no bearing upon ones intelligence. Anyway, who said intelligence is a criteria for president. It's really got to do with popularity. Let the most popular guy win...
You wanna-be intellectuals better understand that the world doesn't whirl around your big head.
> Bush ... accused of being
- a poor leader : That is certainly a matter of perspective. There are a lot of definitions of what makes a good leader. Unfortunately there is no mathematical equation that can be used to lock it in as to whether Bush is or isn't a good leader. Same problem for Kerry.
- a liar : They all are, politicians that is, if you don't realize this fact then you're not so bright.
- a proxy for some dark neocon movement : Oh please!
- having a low iq : They don't give away Harvard MBA's in boxes of Cracker Jacks if you haven't noticed. BTW, IQ should be in uppercase, does that reflect on your IQ, no it doesn't, it just says you were in a hurry (most likely) but others might use it against you, especially if you were running for president...
> given his lack of a good response to any of these accusations
Excuse me, why should Bush approach any of the accusations? They sound like accusations from you personally. He doesn't owe you anything. Get over it.
> shows voters supporting Kerry as being more in tune with the events and world attitudes surrounding the war in Iraq
Sure Kerry supporters can be in tune with the rest of world opinion. They probably are.
But, I really don't think world opinion has come to the point where the world realizes that if Islamic fascism isn't defeated then everyone will be living under a "Talibanesque" (spelling?) regime real quick.
Already, the people of Spain have allowed Islamic fascists to decide a major election in their country.
When will the world realize the pretext these fascists live by?
When will the world realize that the only solution that will be tolerated by Islamic facists is the death of every person of Jewish, Christian, Hindu, atheist, and/or any other religious bent other than islam?
This ultimately means that the world cannot see where these evil doers want to take the world's societies.
The Islamic terrorists do not hesitate to murder anyone in their way. And if they die achieving their goals then they are perfectly happy with that also.
I say that if they want to die for Islam then let them. But let them die at the end of my gun on my terms.
Rather than me being beheaded because I refuse to allow my wife to be forced to wear a head covering, or if I refuse to pray to their skewed excuse for a god, or because I refuse whatever other religious atrocity they desire to impose upon me.
It's wrong to couch supporters of Kerry in terms of what the remainder of the world thinks.
Kerry, Bush, Nader, Badnarik, name your candidate, etc., everyone must realize that if you aren't an Islamic facist then the facists have a fate you don't want waiting for you. By sticking your head in a hole and refusing to see the obvious you are failing your species badly.
You,
Can call my willingness to defend myself whatever you want.
But, you better be sure that I and whole bunch of people in the US just like me are not going to tolerate threats from any two bit twit who thinks he can get away with whatever he wants....
Per my nickname, at least I'm willing to stand up and not hide behind anonymous coward status!
As,
Far as I'm concerned, someone who:
- obviously doesn't like me
- has murdered thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands
- has had desires for WMD his entire life
- flaunts UN inspections
- is Islamic
- waves a gun in the air berating western countries
- pretends he has what he doesn't for show purposes
- you name it, he did it
is a immediate threat. Especially after 911.
And I think the same thing about North Korea's Kim, Iran's leaders, and anyone else who would like to stick there head up and threaten my country.
Just because the "murderous rapist serial killer" has a toy gun doesn't make him any less of an immediate threat....
> If the world is looking out for the world, then it's looking out for the US too
Bullshit!
If a murderous rapist serial killer is banging down your front door, immediately threatening you, and you've got the gun to take care of him are you going to be very appreciative of the fact that you next door neighbors are "against such behavior".
I doubt it. You're gonna go it alone and take care of the threat to your family and yourself.
Most likely the best your neighbor could do for you is call the cops, but they most likely will not even know anything is happening because they are sitting in front of the TV watching CSI.
Same thing with the rest of the world. They aren't even looking. They are too busy scamming the oil-for-food programs to give a damn about the US.
And when they are forced to look, i.e., a bunch of dead innocent people, they see what it's gonna cost in terms of dollars and lives and they chicken out.
Just like they have chickened out in the Sudan. They are looking the other way. There are people dying in the Sudan today at the hands of Islamic facists and the world is looking the other way.
And if the US went into the Sudan to straighten things out the US would undoubtly recieve the scorn of those who choose to look the other way.
Just like they are looking the other way for North Korea and Iran, and Afghanistan.
Losers, every single one of them!
Here's a GREAT BIG BIRD TO ALL OF YOU LOOKING THE OTHER WAY!
> shows voters supporting Kerry as being more in tune with the events and world attitudes surrounding the war in Iraq
Sure Kerry supporters can be in tune with the rest of world opinion. They probably are.
But, I really don't think world opinion has come to the point where the world realizes that if Islamic fascism isn't defeated then everyone will be living under a "Talibanesque" (spelling?) regime real quick.
Already, the people of Spain have allowed Islamic fascists to decide a major election in their country.
When will the world realize the pretext these fascists live by?
When will the world realize that the only solution that will be tolerated by Islamic facists is the death of every person of Jewish, Christian, Hindu, atheist, and/or any other religious bent other than islam?
This ultimately means that the world cannot see where these evil doers want to take the world's societies.
The Islamic terrorists do not hesitate to murder anyone in their way. And if they die achieving their goals then they are perfectly happy with that also.
I say that if they want to die for Islam then let them. But let them die at the end of my gun on my terms.
Rather than me being beheaded because I refuse to allow my wife to be forced to wear a head covering, or if I refuse to pray to their skewed excuse for a god, or because I refuse whatever other religious atrocity they desire to impose upon me.
It's wrong to couch supporters of Kerry in terms of what the remainder of the world thinks.
Kerry, Bush, Nader, Badnarik, name your candidate, etc., everyone must realize that if you aren't an Islamic facist then the facists have a fate you don't want waiting for you. By sticking your head in a hole and refusing to see the obvious you are failing your species badly.
> > For some reason, there seem to be very few from the Bush supporters and it's anyone's guess why.
/. homepage. i hate bush, but i hate bias as news more.
> well if there were this story likely wouldn't have been published on the
I agree on the bias part. What's worse, is that somebody out there modded it flamebait...
Once,
Again the editors of Slashdot are biased against Bush.
If you RTFA is does not say Kerry supporters were hit by pepper balls.
It says protestors, which could have just as easily been Bush supporters who were there protesting the fact that Kerry supporters were protesting.
Per the article there is no way to tell who got hit. Just that it was 'protestors'.
My guess is that anybody who happened to be around the gatherings may have got hit....
What's,
To keep Bush supporters from pretending to be Nader supporters and then voting for Bush anyway?
It might be refered to as hacking the hacking of the system....
We may not be out of the woods yet. The following link implies that the senate may be cutting off funding for the FTC's implementation (I.E. we'll pass it, make ourselves look like heroes, but not pay for it, thus effectively killing it).
Or at least that's my take on it, it's a bit hard to tell what's going on.
Article
VS
Just think of the size of the market for something truly useful rather than somebody trying to sell gadgets/methodolgies that serve only to annoy and harrass those of us who just prefer to be left alone.
Before,
Everyone blows a gasket, just keep in mind:
- I have the right to produce a piece of music that is as crappy as I want.
- I can "publish" it in any manner that I see fit
and "retain" the copyright to it.
- I can also frivolously accuse any and all RIAA executives of copyright infringement. I don't have to prove anything. I just have to submit to the ISP of, lets say, Sony and accuse one of their executive employees of offering my music without my permission.
With enough of the above scenarios I would think the RIAA guys might get the message.
Turn the tables on them guys.
VS
Sounds like it's time to modify Apache so that clients are forced into proper behavior. What could MS do since Apache has a what 65% market share, or something like that. Open source guys need to get tough on MS and quit trying to accomodate them, i.e. Mono, etc.