That's what this really means, since the #1 correlation on student "ability" is what kind of home the child goes to at the end of the day.
Is it to an upper middle class family where a stay-at-home parent can pick up the kids after school and help them with their homework? Or does it have two exhausted parents working a combined 100 hours a week to scrape by in a shitty apartment in a bad neighborhood?
And even for those upper middle class students, it's not uncommon to have an "off" year. Or several. Straight-A student goes through a depression in middle school, or has a parent that moves with their job? To remedial math for you, sonny.
t simply means that Apple is misrepresented as being "creative". They are not blah blah blah Apple are the popular kids. Big, fake smiles and lots of bullshit.
If it's just about "being social", then why is it that no other company has figured out how to "be social" in the last decade.
If it's just about "marketing", then why is it that no other tech company has been able to hire a marketing firm in the last decade.
If it's just about having a "cult", why has no other tech company formed their own in the last decade.
Google is a megacorp of the kind that people protest all the time.
No. They're not.
Is Google getting billions in taxpayer subsidies like oil companies? No. Is Google getting billions in taxpayer bailouts after blowing their assets on get rich schemes? No. Is Google a monopoly ripping off their customers? No.
United States attacks into the countryside often included scorched earth campaigns[70] in which entire villages were burned and destroyed, the use of torture (water cure[86]) and the concentration of civilians into "protected zones".[87] In November 1901, the Manila correspondent of the Philadelphia Ledger reported:"The present war is no bloodless, opera bouffe engagement; our men have been relentless, have killed to exterminate men, women, children, prisoners and captives, active insurgents and suspected people from lads of ten up, the idea prevailing that the Filipino as such was little better than a dog...."[88]
America has set the bar higher than any previous country/government anywhere, ever.
That's just the sort of fanboy nonsense the parent was talking about. From slavery to genocide of native tribes to torturing Filipinos to South American death squads to overthrowing democracies to sponsoring terrorists like MEK to launching two bogus wars to bringing back the "water cure", the bar is pretty fucking low, my friend.
Do you have any proof of this claim at all? Where did you come up with such a number?
It's easily Googlable. Here's one example. Even if you dispute that the percentage is that large, the 2000 election was "decided" by a few hundred votes in a state where 70,000 voters were scrubbed from the rolls.
Voter ID laws a burden on poor, black Americans, research shows Brennan Center study finds that voters without photo ID in 10 states are being hit with hidden costs and long car journeys
About one in four African Americans do not have the recognised photo ID cards, and one in six Hispanics, compared to one in 10 of the general population.
Voter ID isn't about preventing voter fraud, which happens once in a hundred million votes. It's about vote suppression.
Please explain to me how the poor were able to make it to the welfare office to sign up for government assistance.
Please explain how that's a response to the fact that those "free ID's" you wingers wave around cost time and money to get - more if you don't have a birth certificate or government databases have conflicting records on you?
A quick Google search proves you to be a liar.
You mean you proved you're too stupid to read. Since you skipped it the first time: all the "voter fraud" cases that people like you point to are either:
1) Actually voter registration fraud, not preventable by any ID law 2) Voting absentee and then in a polling booth - also not prevented by any ID law
No, but not knowing how to do your job properly and being efficient about it shows you're an ignorant person. If you spend a day updating a PC and you don't use an image on the next one, blah blah blah blah blah
You sound like a caller from one of those survey companies that thinks a "small business" is one with 5,000 computers. And you're totally sidestepping the point that creating your own 'service pack' with slipstreaming should be totally unnecessary in the first place.
XP iso's came with SP3 included, as does 7 with SP1. There is no reason why someone rolling his own system or a small office should have to mess around with slipstreaming when those updates should be on the install disk.
You mean the Windows 2000 that had four service packs? Slipstreaming is still a hoop to jump through, which of course makes it a workaround for the lack of a Service Pack. Hundreds of thousands of collective IT hours wasted, vs paying a couple software engineers to crank one out in a few weeks, tops.
Tell ya what, I'm a nice guy in a good mood, I'll make it easy on you: here's a map of all "known" voter fraud cases since 2000.
And even that is a farce, as most cases of "voter fraud" are actually registration fraud. And most of what's left after that are people voting by absentee ballot and then voting in person.
Neither of which would be solved by requiring ID's to vote.
Except the US has this thing called The Constitution
....which consists of more than just the 10th Amendment. Like, say, Article I, Section 4.
Without an amendment to the constitution stripping the states of their power the state law trumps the international one in the US.
You were saying? Section 4:
The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators.
Considering that the U.S. Constitution explicitly gives authority to deciding how the states' electors will be chosen to the legislatures of the individual states, the federal government has no authority to enter into an agreement that overrides the state legislature's laws on how those electors are chosen
Except the Constitution explicitly grants Congress the authority to regulate federal elections in Article I.
However, under the US constitution and US federal law, elections are required to be run by the state, and the federal government has no jurisdiction over these kinds of procedural matters.
The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators.
How very strange. So, you're saying that if the Federal Government made an agreement with the OCSE that people who register Republican cannot vote, then they couldn't? Or if they made one that said that only Christians could vote, then no one else could? Of if they made one that said that only opponents of abortion could vote, then that's the way it would be? How very strange.
The Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment renders all of your hypotheticals moot. The point - which you got just fine but skipped over - is that federal treaties and law trump state laws. Not that the feds can do whatever they want by signing a treaty.
The problem is the U.S. government that agreed to that constitutionally has little to do with how voting is done on the ground level unless they pass a law that does not conflict with the constitution,the 15th, 19th, 26th, or any other amendment. If they wanted to constitutionally enable the states to follow the agreement then it should have been made a treaty, then it would have become the law of the land.
The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators.
Texas's only recourse here is to hold their own election for state races and initiatives that's completely separate from the election for the presidency and Congress.
The times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing Senators.
So unless Texas wants to hold a completely separate election for their state races and initiatives, they're shit outta luck here.
There is nothing democratic about allowing some international body to violate state laws because the federal government made some treaty agreement that dealt with activities outside their jurisdiction.
It's perfectly democratic, as the Constitution gives the federal government the authority to regulate federal elections, and the Constitution provides for treaties to be made by the federal government - which trump state laws.
Actually, I supported and voted for Al Gore, but don't let that inconvenient truth get in the way of your stereotyping.:)
Who needs stereotyping? The whole "home state" argument is nonsense to begin with, as if it's a liberal's fault that he didn't win his conservative "home state" anymore than it is a conservative's fault that he didn't win his because it's more liberal than he is.
Case in point: Bush didn't win his home state, either.
The idea that requiring ID to vote some how disenfranchises legitimate and legal voters is asinine.
You have that exactly backwards. A quarter of black Americans do not have ID. Those "free" ID's can cost $200 for older Americans born at home without birth certificates, and expensive trips to the DMV for the poor.
And all to address a problem that simply does not exist.
All the "voter fraud" cases that people like you point to are either:
1) Actually voter registration fraud, not preventable by any ID law 2) Voting absentee and then in a polling booth - also not prevented by any ID law
You know how many cases of in-person voting fraud there are in the United States? About a dozen over a 10 year period, out of more than 600 million votes cast across the country. Ten times that many people were killed by vending machines in the same time period. So unless you're running around screaming for laws to protect us from this vending machine menace, why on earth are you demanding ID's to vote?
Voter ID solves a problem that does not exist, while raising considerable barriers to voting for poor Americans. If the laws you demand were in place in the 80's, Ronald Reagan would not have been able to vote in either of the elections he won for the presidency.
Because he was born at home without a birth certificate, and didn't get one until the 90's.
Urban legend. Perot took votes from Bush and Clinton - who was leading Bush in the polls before Perot got back in the race.
in 2000, ralph nader voters meant gw bush won
Urban legend. Of the total number of Nader voters in Florida, twice that number of Democrats voted for Bush. And five times that number of registered Democrats stayed home on election day.
So, given that there's no mathematical difference between a Nader voter and a non-voter, why is it that "Naderites" get the blame for putting Bush in office. Why is it that Bush Democrats - who directly help Bush get into office - remain blameless?
Because the Democratic Party secretly likes to punch hippies as much as the Republican Party.
lol.. Isn't that exactly what happened with the GM bailout? He gave GM to the Employees Union.
Where, on Planet Wingnutia? I don't know on what planet the ownership of GM was turned over to the union, but on this planet Obama made the company go through bankruptcy, voided union contracts, and forced newer workers - who didn't crash the economy - to accept massive cuts in compensation as a condition for receiving a bailout.
Conditions that were not enforced on the bankrupt banks after the financial crisis. The bankers - who did crash the economy - not only got to keep their salaries, not only continued to be rewarded with astronomical bonuses, but had the value of their bank stock re-inflated with trillions of dollars in interest-free loans backed by the taxpayer.
There is indeed an "ism" you're looking for here, but it's not "socialism".
Al Qaida was attacking United States embassies and the Cole under the Clinton administration. It seems pretty certain that 9/11 would still have happened.
Bitch please. There's no way Gore would have responded to point-blank warnings from intelligence officials that Al Queda was determined to attack the United States, that they would do it soon, and that they might use hijacked planes as weapons, with a "now you've covered your ass" and then done nothing.
Don't insult our intelligence as well as your own with such crap.
Maybe you shouldn't read this - you might find it distressing to encounter facts contrary to your views.
You mean like the fact that the Taliban offered to hand over Bin Laddin if the United States bothered to offer evidence that what we were saying about Bin Laddin was true, Mr. Pot?
The internet-centric business meltdown is virtually certain to have occurred, and the housing bubble not much less so.
Except: one of the prime factors in the housing bubble wasn't just repealing Glass-Steagall, but the 2006 Bankruptcy "Reform" law that made it harder for people to discharge debt in bankruptcy. Which meant that banks started running around handing out money to anyone with a pulse, because they knew they would have an easier time collecting. Which was passed in 2006 by a Republican Congress and signed by a Republican President.
The US policy calling for regime change in Iraq was set under the Clinton administration
Because talking about regime change is the same thing as you know, actually doing it. Based on total lies that were obvious at the time, to boot.
Now, read this carefully. If there is no US invasion of Iraq, there is not the same opportunity for an Al Qaida supported and led insurgency in Iraq that drew Al Qaida members from around the world to Iraq.
You're hand waving. There was massive support from Iranians in the wake of the 911 attacks. Al Queda was always a super-extremist group amongst Muslims. But you know what a decade of torture, illegal wars and drone bombings of weddings as done for us? Turned moderate Muslims against us. They still done like Al Queda, but they have even less reason to like a nation that feels it has the right to slaughter anyone it doesn't like on a whim, on a regular basis.
"Global Warming" AKA "climate change"? The US is now at a 20 year low without Kyoto. President Gore probably would have made it a priority, and a weak economy would be saddled with major burdens of new regulation that may not have produced results much better than occurred anyway, and least in the near term.
Teabagger drivel that ignores two critical things:
1. Constructing high speed rail, wind & solar power would create millions of new jobs 2. Saving energy means saving money
Even if you're a teabagger douchebag with a Hummer with a confederate flag on the back window, you want the economy to move to green energy, because it means cheaper fuel for your dumb redneck ass.
We would have gotten the guy who was the champion of the government having a backdoor into all of our private encryption
As opposed to the guy who's administration started planning mass warrantless wiretapping before 911 even happened. And there was that whole torture thing.
We would have gotten the guy who actually had a fundraiser at the home of the demented, hateful Westboro Baptist clan.
You mean, they had a fundraiser for Gore, before protesting his father's funeral and screaming "your dad's in hell".
We would have gotten the guy who voted on the Gulf War resolution based on whether he would get more podium time in the debate about it.
There you go again, parading around teabagger urban legend as if it were fact. Now, tell us, again, why you hate Dan Rather.
We had the guy whose incompetence allowed the WTC attack to happen: Bill Clinton. 9/11 was the result of failed intelligence and foreign policy for years prior to it.
Do you keep your head up there for the warmth or because it's a comfortable position for you? Clinton failed to get Bin Laddin, but he tried. Bush's response to multiple point-blank warnings that Al Queda was determined to strike the U.S., that they wanted to do so soon, and that they might use hijacked planes as weapons...."now you've covered your ass". Just who do you think you're kidding here, sophist?
Slashdot Mirror
That's what this really means, since the #1 correlation on student "ability" is what kind of home the child goes to at the end of the day.
Is it to an upper middle class family where a stay-at-home parent can pick up the kids after school and help them with their homework? Or does it have two exhausted parents working a combined 100 hours a week to scrape by in a shitty apartment in a bad neighborhood?
And even for those upper middle class students, it's not uncommon to have an "off" year. Or several. Straight-A student goes through a depression in middle school, or has a parent that moves with their job? To remedial math for you, sonny.
"Right now" you're embarrassing yourself by repeating a right-wing urban legend as if it were fact instead of deliberate misinformation.
You say that like it's a negative...
If it's just about "being social", then why is it that no other company has figured out how to "be social" in the last decade.
If it's just about "marketing", then why is it that no other tech company has been able to hire a marketing firm in the last decade.
If it's just about having a "cult", why has no other tech company formed their own in the last decade.
No. They're not.
Is Google getting billions in taxpayer subsidies like oil companies? No. Is Google getting billions in taxpayer bailouts after blowing their assets on get rich schemes? No. Is Google a monopoly ripping off their customers? No.
Do you have an actual point here? No.
Right, just like Magellan crossed the world for "mankinds glory". Or, maybe that's just fanboy nonsense.
After conquering their country, directly killing at least 200,000 people, and worse:
That's just the sort of fanboy nonsense the parent was talking about. From slavery to genocide of native tribes to torturing Filipinos to South American death squads to overthrowing democracies to sponsoring terrorists like MEK to launching two bogus wars to bringing back the "water cure", the bar is pretty fucking low, my friend.
It's easily Googlable. Here's one example. Even if you dispute that the percentage is that large, the 2000 election was "decided" by a few hundred votes in a state where 70,000 voters were scrubbed from the rolls.
Voter ID isn't about preventing voter fraud, which happens once in a hundred million votes. It's about vote suppression.
Please explain how that's a response to the fact that those "free ID's" you wingers wave around cost time and money to get - more if you don't have a birth certificate or government databases have conflicting records on you?
You mean you proved you're too stupid to read. Since you skipped it the first time: all the "voter fraud" cases that people like you point to are either:
1) Actually voter registration fraud, not preventable by any ID law
2) Voting absentee and then in a polling booth - also not prevented by any ID law
You sound like a caller from one of those survey companies that thinks a "small business" is one with 5,000 computers. And you're totally sidestepping the point that creating your own 'service pack' with slipstreaming should be totally unnecessary in the first place.
XP iso's came with SP3 included, as does 7 with SP1. There is no reason why someone rolling his own system or a small office should have to mess around with slipstreaming when those updates should be on the install disk.
You mean the Windows 2000 that had four service packs? Slipstreaming is still a hoop to jump through, which of course makes it a workaround for the lack of a Service Pack. Hundreds of thousands of collective IT hours wasted, vs paying a couple software engineers to crank one out in a few weeks, tops.
And even that is a farce, as most cases of "voter fraud" are actually registration fraud. And most of what's left after that are people voting by absentee ballot and then voting in person.
Neither of which would be solved by requiring ID's to vote.
You were saying? Section 4:
Except the Constitution explicitly grants Congress the authority to regulate federal elections in Article I.
Reality: 1,234,576,120,319
Wingnuts: 0
Except when they do:
The Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment renders all of your hypotheticals moot. The point - which you got just fine but skipped over - is that federal treaties and law trump state laws. Not that the feds can do whatever they want by signing a treaty.
How about Article I, Section 4?
Texas's only recourse here is to hold their own election for state races and initiatives that's completely separate from the election for the presidency and Congress.
But the federal government can regulate federal elections:
So unless Texas wants to hold a completely separate election for their state races and initiatives, they're shit outta luck here.
It's perfectly democratic, as the Constitution gives the federal government the authority to regulate federal elections, and the Constitution provides for treaties to be made by the federal government - which trump state laws.
Who needs stereotyping? The whole "home state" argument is nonsense to begin with, as if it's a liberal's fault that he didn't win his conservative "home state" anymore than it is a conservative's fault that he didn't win his because it's more liberal than he is.
Case in point: Bush didn't win his home state, either.
No "probably" about it. Gore would have won a statewide recount under any scenario.
Odd choice for a comparison, since Venezuela is known for the fairness of it's elections, no matter what Fox would have you believe.
FTFY
You have that exactly backwards. A quarter of black Americans do not have ID. Those "free" ID's can cost $200 for older Americans born at home without birth certificates, and expensive trips to the DMV for the poor.
And all to address a problem that simply does not exist .
All the "voter fraud" cases that people like you point to are either:
1) Actually voter registration fraud, not preventable by any ID law
2) Voting absentee and then in a polling booth - also not prevented by any ID law
You know how many cases of in-person voting fraud there are in the United States? About a dozen over a 10 year period, out of more than 600 million votes cast across the country. Ten times that many people were killed by vending machines in the same time period. So unless you're running around screaming for laws to protect us from this vending machine menace, why on earth are you demanding ID's to vote?
Voter ID solves a problem that does not exist, while raising considerable barriers to voting for poor Americans. If the laws you demand were in place in the 80's, Ronald Reagan would not have been able to vote in either of the elections he won for the presidency.
Because he was born at home without a birth certificate, and didn't get one until the 90's.
Urban legend. Perot took votes from Bush and Clinton - who was leading Bush in the polls before Perot got back in the race.
Urban legend. Of the total number of Nader voters in Florida, twice that number of Democrats voted for Bush. And five times that number of registered Democrats stayed home on election day.
So, given that there's no mathematical difference between a Nader voter and a non-voter, why is it that "Naderites" get the blame for putting Bush in office. Why is it that Bush Democrats - who directly help Bush get into office - remain blameless?
Because the Democratic Party secretly likes to punch hippies as much as the Republican Party.
There you go again.
Where, on Planet Wingnutia? I don't know on what planet the ownership of GM was turned over to the union, but on this planet Obama made the company go through bankruptcy, voided union contracts, and forced newer workers - who didn't crash the economy - to accept massive cuts in compensation as a condition for receiving a bailout.
Conditions that were not enforced on the bankrupt banks after the financial crisis. The bankers - who did crash the economy - not only got to keep their salaries, not only continued to be rewarded with astronomical bonuses, but had the value of their bank stock re-inflated with trillions of dollars in interest-free loans backed by the taxpayer.
There is indeed an "ism" you're looking for here, but it's not "socialism".
Bitch please. There's no way Gore would have responded to point-blank warnings from intelligence officials that Al Queda was determined to attack the United States, that they would do it soon, and that they might use hijacked planes as weapons, with a "now you've covered your ass" and then done nothing.
Don't insult our intelligence as well as your own with such crap.
You mean like the fact that the Taliban offered to hand over Bin Laddin if the United States bothered to offer evidence that what we were saying about Bin Laddin was true, Mr. Pot?
Except: one of the prime factors in the housing bubble wasn't just repealing Glass-Steagall, but the 2006 Bankruptcy "Reform" law that made it harder for people to discharge debt in bankruptcy. Which meant that banks started running around handing out money to anyone with a pulse, because they knew they would have an easier time collecting. Which was passed in 2006 by a Republican Congress and signed by a Republican President.
Because talking about regime change is the same thing as you know, actually doing it. Based on total lies that were obvious at the time, to boot.
You're hand waving. There was massive support from Iranians in the wake of the 911 attacks. Al Queda was always a super-extremist group amongst Muslims. But you know what a decade of torture, illegal wars and drone bombings of weddings as done for us? Turned moderate Muslims against us. They still done like Al Queda, but they have even less reason to like a nation that feels it has the right to slaughter anyone it doesn't like on a whim, on a regular basis.
Teabagger drivel that ignores two critical things:
1. Constructing high speed rail, wind & solar power would create millions of new jobs
2. Saving energy means saving money
Even if you're a teabagger douchebag with a Hummer with a confederate flag on the back window, you want the economy to move to green energy, because it means cheaper fuel for your dumb redneck ass.
As opposed to the guy who's administration started planning mass warrantless wiretapping before 911 even happened. And there was that whole torture thing.
You mean, they had a fundraiser for Gore, before protesting his father's funeral and screaming "your dad's in hell".
There you go again, parading around teabagger urban legend as if it were fact. Now, tell us, again, why you hate Dan Rather.
Do you keep your head up there for the warmth or because it's a comfortable position for you? Clinton failed to get Bin Laddin, but he tried. Bush's response to multiple point-blank warnings that Al Queda was determined to strike the U.S., that they wanted to do so soon, and that they might use hijacked planes as weapons...."now you've covered your ass". Just who do you think you're kidding here, sophist?