I didn't say anything about Bush lying.. you've put that in my mouth. All I said was that a lot of information has come out since then.
A Republican President, Republican House and divided Senate went forward with war. Clinton and other Democrats made statements about Saddam, yes. They all agreed that we needed to keep an eye on him, which was what the Congressional Resolution was about. What Clinton didn't do was start a war. Note that in the statement you paste above, Kerry says "I will be voting to give the President the authority." That doesn't mean that Bush had to use that authority. Democrats didn't want to end inspections and go home. They wanted inspections and the program to continue. Bush said that the time for inspections was over and it was time for war.
The reason you didn't hear until 2003 that he wasn't making weapons is because thats when inspectors were let back into the country and they didn't find anything remotely close to a weapons program. They noted that there were discrepancies in inventory and that some weapons were unaccounted for. It would appear that those weapons were destroyed, but we cannot say that with any certainty.
You're on another planet. First off, the GOP uses parliamentary tactics everyday to do what they want in the Congress. I've got nothing wrong with that.. those rules have been in place for over 200 years, and I think they work well and shouldn't be changed. If the GOP wants to bring up the bill under a normal rule, they can freely do that. I don't know why they chose the Suspension Calendar.
Look, it's a simple fact that under the House rules, the minority has no power. I challenge anyone to dispute that. If the GOP wanted this bill, it would have been through the House by now. I challenge anyone to dispute that, also.
How clever of those Republicans... to secretly not want the bill passed, and make the Democrats do all the work and take the publicity hit of shooting it down...
You didn't read. I didn't say a simple majority was required in this case. The bill was brought up under the Suspension Calendar rule, which requires 2/3rds majority. However, nothing is stopping the House leadership from bringing it in under normal procedures, which require only a simple majority.
The supermajority requirement is a red herring, in this case. I'm not sure why that approach was used, unless it was explicitly designed to make it look like the Democrats are against free speech.
Correct, but it's intellectually dishonest to ever say "Democrats defeat bill in House". The Democrats cannot defeat anything.. it will always take some R help.
FYI - you're not going to win people to your cause by calling them children. Good luck, though!
A lot has come out since the vote on the authorization for Iraq. You already know it's not as simple an issue as you make it out to be, so I won't explain it again for you. As for the PATRIOT Act, there was no time to read the bill due to the way it was proposed. Days after 9/11, Democrats weren't about to vote against a bill that claimed to provide tools for fighting terrorism.
Gosh.. what paper is so stupid to not include the date of the article? 10/27?
In any case, there's a wrinkle because one (both?) of the hosts is a principal supporter of the campaign. Also, the matter is under appeal.. until that is exhausted, we don't know if the original ruling was the correct interpretation of the law.
Anyway, FEC was ordered to clarify its rules and how they apply to the internet. That process is currently on-going.
Most people on both side of the aisle don't want to see the Internet regulated for political speech and agree that donations made on the Internet are no different from donations sent in the mail.
Democrats are way better off with the internet, imo. The gains in donations they made during the 2004 elections and since are due almost solely to the internet. We're doing much better with message shaping and influencing our elected officials. Note that several influential politicans post regularly on the DailyKos site. The CBS memo fiasco was an exception, not the rule. Democrats don't want to shut down political blogs due to an exception.
The reason why this didn't pass is because it may have allowed unlimited donations over the Internet. The bill couldn't be amended, so Democrats had to vote against it. It's that simple.
Actually, if you were paying attention, this bill was brought up under a rule that did not allow amendments.
Bills have amendments for obvious reasons. If someone submits a bill and in the debate it is determined that there is a better way, the bill can be amended.
There's a few problems with "one and only agenda". First you have to have a defined agenda for the bill. Then you have to decide what falls in and what falls outside of that agenda. One important thing to remember is that it's impossible to amend a bill without the consent of the majority. You don't need a special rule to block 'riders', you just need Congresspeople who will vote against the amendments when they come up.
What are you talking about? The final Rules haven't been promulgated yet. This bill would have shaped the upcoming rules, not changed any existing rules. (Note: Rules are different from Laws/Statutes).
Wrong! The bill was brought this up under the Suspension Calendar rule which allows a short debate and no amendments. Democrats had problems with the wording of the bill. Because they could not amend it, they had to vote against it.
This is a joke. The Republicans control the House. In the House, the majority does what it wants. While the bill was brought up under a rule that required 2/3rds majority, the Republican leadership could right this very second bring it up as a normal bill that requires only a simple majority.
It is impossible for the Democrats to stop anything in the House.
I don't understand. Is it possible to open the current xbox and not ruin the stickers, rubber feet, or screws? Not to my knowledge. Maybe if you're super careful, but i believe the screws are anodized and it's very difficult to remove and reinsert them without scratching the coating.
Re:Google free ride is coming to an end
on
Reining in Google
·
· Score: 1
BLOGGERS have really been replacing newspaper as a major source of info
This isn't true at all. If you look at most blogs, they link predominantly to newspapers or news wires as their sources. What the blogs primarily do is shape and amplify existing news. i.e. the Post may bury a story in the back of the paper, but a blog will bring it to the front.
There are a few 'blog exclusives' but they are very rare. 'Rather-gate' was an exception, not the rule.
Patents are there only for the benefit of society.
This is patently false, ho ho.
But seriously, when properly implemented, patents exist for the benefit of both inventors and society. Inventors benefit during the 14 years or whatever of the patent term, where they have exclusive rights. Society benefits thereafter with the rights released to the public.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Right.. but there are many other sensors in use that detect traffic flow, speeds and roadway conditions on major highways. Look for odd boxes on the side of the road with antennas and camera-shaped objects pointed at the road but with no lenses.
Younger people do not consider the words of older people as really authoritative. This is a trend that has been going on for about 30 years plus or minus.
Yes it's called the "You got us into this fucking mess, why should I listen to you?" theory.
Also parallels to Carnegie.. who would do tricky things like claim a new method that the competition was using would create weakened steel, and then quietly switch to the new method a few weeks after his competition was run out of business, because it really did make better steel.
Carnegie's endowments live on today. Aside from having a hand in creating Carnegie Hall and Carnegie Mellon, Carnegie was a large force in the spread of libraries across the country.
It doesn't really matter that Java never releases the memory, assuming the amounts aren't obscene. In your example, when the heap grows to 64 MB, we can assume that some pages are swapped from RAM to HD to make room for the larger heap as it is being used. After the memory is used and re-allocated to the VM's free memory, the OS will swap other application's pages back into memory as needed. The VM free memory, allocated by the OS, will swap to HD. It will then sit on the HD until it is needed again. In your scenario, this is never.. so it just sits on the HD. What's the problem? While it would be nice if the VM released the memory to the OS, the swapping takes place no matter what.
Re:Stupid under stage in TMNT
on
20 Years of NES
·
· Score: 1
OP probably means TMNT: The Arcade Game. The first TMNT did suck. Yes, I recently replayed it.. at least up until the technodrome which I have never been able to beat. But the bombs weren't invisible..
Slashdot Mirror
I didn't say anything about Bush lying.. you've put that in my mouth. All I said was that a lot of information has come out since then.
A Republican President, Republican House and divided Senate went forward with war. Clinton and other Democrats made statements about Saddam, yes. They all agreed that we needed to keep an eye on him, which was what the Congressional Resolution was about. What Clinton didn't do was start a war. Note that in the statement you paste above, Kerry says "I will be voting to give the President the authority." That doesn't mean that Bush had to use that authority. Democrats didn't want to end inspections and go home. They wanted inspections and the program to continue. Bush said that the time for inspections was over and it was time for war.
The reason you didn't hear until 2003 that he wasn't making weapons is because thats when inspectors were let back into the country and they didn't find anything remotely close to a weapons program. They noted that there were discrepancies in inventory and that some weapons were unaccounted for. It would appear that those weapons were destroyed, but we cannot say that with any certainty.
You're on another planet. First off, the GOP uses parliamentary tactics everyday to do what they want in the Congress. I've got nothing wrong with that.. those rules have been in place for over 200 years, and I think they work well and shouldn't be changed. If the GOP wants to bring up the bill under a normal rule, they can freely do that. I don't know why they chose the Suspension Calendar.
Look, it's a simple fact that under the House rules, the minority has no power. I challenge anyone to dispute that. If the GOP wanted this bill, it would have been through the House by now. I challenge anyone to dispute that, also.
How clever of those Republicans... to secretly not want the bill passed, and make the Democrats do all the work and take the publicity hit of shooting it down...
Agreed.
You didn't read. I didn't say a simple majority was required in this case. The bill was brought up under the Suspension Calendar rule, which requires 2/3rds majority. However, nothing is stopping the House leadership from bringing it in under normal procedures, which require only a simple majority.
The supermajority requirement is a red herring, in this case. I'm not sure why that approach was used, unless it was explicitly designed to make it look like the Democrats are against free speech.
Correct, but it's intellectually dishonest to ever say "Democrats defeat bill in House". The Democrats cannot defeat anything.. it will always take some R help.
FYI - you're not going to win people to your cause by calling them children. Good luck, though!
A lot has come out since the vote on the authorization for Iraq. You already know it's not as simple an issue as you make it out to be, so I won't explain it again for you. As for the PATRIOT Act, there was no time to read the bill due to the way it was proposed. Days after 9/11, Democrats weren't about to vote against a bill that claimed to provide tools for fighting terrorism.
Gosh.. what paper is so stupid to not include the date of the article? 10/27?
In any case, there's a wrinkle because one (both?) of the hosts is a principal supporter of the campaign. Also, the matter is under appeal.. until that is exhausted, we don't know if the original ruling was the correct interpretation of the law.
Anyway, FEC was ordered to clarify its rules and how they apply to the internet. That process is currently on-going.
Most people on both side of the aisle don't want to see the Internet regulated for political speech and agree that donations made on the Internet are no different from donations sent in the mail.
Democrats are way better off with the internet, imo. The gains in donations they made during the 2004 elections and since are due almost solely to the internet. We're doing much better with message shaping and influencing our elected officials. Note that several influential politicans post regularly on the DailyKos site. The CBS memo fiasco was an exception, not the rule. Democrats don't want to shut down political blogs due to an exception.
The reason why this didn't pass is because it may have allowed unlimited donations over the Internet. The bill couldn't be amended, so Democrats had to vote against it. It's that simple.
Actually, if you were paying attention, this bill was brought up under a rule that did not allow amendments.
Bills have amendments for obvious reasons. If someone submits a bill and in the debate it is determined that there is a better way, the bill can be amended.
There's a few problems with "one and only agenda". First you have to have a defined agenda for the bill. Then you have to decide what falls in and what falls outside of that agenda. One important thing to remember is that it's impossible to amend a bill without the consent of the majority. You don't need a special rule to block 'riders', you just need Congresspeople who will vote against the amendments when they come up.
Everything has a slant. There's no such thing as "unbiased".
What are you talking about? The final Rules haven't been promulgated yet. This bill would have shaped the upcoming rules, not changed any existing rules. (Note: Rules are different from Laws/Statutes).
Wrong! The bill was brought this up under the Suspension Calendar rule which allows a short debate and no amendments. Democrats had problems with the wording of the bill. Because they could not amend it, they had to vote against it.
This is a joke. The Republicans control the House. In the House, the majority does what it wants. While the bill was brought up under a rule that required 2/3rds majority, the Republican leadership could right this very second bring it up as a normal bill that requires only a simple majority.
It is impossible for the Democrats to stop anything in the House.
I don't understand. Is it possible to open the current xbox and not ruin the stickers, rubber feet, or screws? Not to my knowledge. Maybe if you're super careful, but i believe the screws are anodized and it's very difficult to remove and reinsert them without scratching the coating.
BLOGGERS have really been replacing newspaper as a major source of info
This isn't true at all. If you look at most blogs, they link predominantly to newspapers or news wires as their sources. What the blogs primarily do is shape and amplify existing news. i.e. the Post may bury a story in the back of the paper, but a blog will bring it to the front.
There are a few 'blog exclusives' but they are very rare. 'Rather-gate' was an exception, not the rule.
For things the "content providers" already made publicly available, for crying out loud.
So by your logic, I can "cache" the broadcasts of television stations, publicly available over-the-air, and redistribute them?
The central idea behind copyright is that making things public doesn't override your rights to control the distribution.
Patents are there only for the benefit of society.
This is patently false, ho ho.
But seriously, when properly implemented, patents exist for the benefit of both inventors and society. Inventors benefit during the 14 years or whatever of the patent term, where they have exclusive rights. Society benefits thereafter with the rights released to the public.
I wonder whats their source of income when they lose money, that encourages them to be so lax.
Processing fees, late fees, and interest.
Whoa.. slow down Adolph
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Right.. but there are many other sensors in use that detect traffic flow, speeds and roadway conditions on major highways. Look for odd boxes on the side of the road with antennas and camera-shaped objects pointed at the road but with no lenses.
This is simply unnecessary.
Younger people do not consider the words of older people as really authoritative. This is a trend that has been going on for about 30 years plus or minus.
Yes it's called the "You got us into this fucking mess, why should I listen to you?" theory.
Also parallels to Carnegie.. who would do tricky things like claim a new method that the competition was using would create weakened steel, and then quietly switch to the new method a few weeks after his competition was run out of business, because it really did make better steel.
Carnegie's endowments live on today. Aside from having a hand in creating Carnegie Hall and Carnegie Mellon, Carnegie was a large force in the spread of libraries across the country.
It doesn't really matter that Java never releases the memory, assuming the amounts aren't obscene. In your example, when the heap grows to 64 MB, we can assume that some pages are swapped from RAM to HD to make room for the larger heap as it is being used. After the memory is used and re-allocated to the VM's free memory, the OS will swap other application's pages back into memory as needed. The VM free memory, allocated by the OS, will swap to HD. It will then sit on the HD until it is needed again. In your scenario, this is never.. so it just sits on the HD. What's the problem? While it would be nice if the VM released the memory to the OS, the swapping takes place no matter what.
OP probably means TMNT: The Arcade Game. The first TMNT did suck. Yes, I recently replayed it.. at least up until the technodrome which I have never been able to beat. But the bombs weren't invisible..
We say a chef has created a wonderful desert
Is Slartibartfast a chef, then? I think you mean dessert.