Do you even read the thread you respond to? Or it it the new trend now on/. no to ever read that?
Of course I did. So did other people. That was your problem to begin with.
I know it's just easier to assume that anyone who disagrees with you is an idiot than it is to actually understand an opposing point of view, but there's a very real reason the southwest border states are passing laws like this - people are living in fear.
I know it's easy for some to conflate immigration with drug running. It's just really, really dishonest to do so. "Illegal immigrants" commit crimes a lower rate than citizens do, and that's fact you, Brewer, and Joe will just have to deal with.
Meaning back to square 1: poor people and anyone without gold-plated health insurance is free to "die quickly" if they need an organ transplant. Because either they wont be able to afford it, or their insurance company will refuse to pay for it.
As opposed to, you know, offering a flat reward for donating families or making organ donation opt-out (when you get a driver's license) as opposed to opt-in.
Iran had a democracy until it was destroyed by the United States and Britain. Do your best Bart Simpson impression with a chalkboard until that fact sinks in.
Arizona is not New York. Supposedly the stop and frisk law in New York is to find illegal weapons. It is not illegal to carry a weapon in Arizona. If there is a law in Arizona to allow police to stop and search people it is not the immigration laws or the weapons laws.
The point was that the police can cook up any pretext they want to in order to detain/arrest someone. There's "disorderly conduct", "acting suspiciously", and "traveling on a drug route". The same Supreme Court just ruled that the police don't have to get a warrant if they claim they think they hear you destroying evidence.
The only part that survives is the part where a person accused of a crime and in custody can have their immigration status verified with the federal government.
Which is obviously a Certificate of Authenticity, given the fact that the cops can make up anything they want to arrest someone, as they for all intents and purposes never suffer any consequences for false arrests.
Certificate of Authenticity: (paraphrased) an old Dilbert strip had Dogbert presenting a letter to someone telling them they were supposed to do something. A letter signed by Jesus. After the person naturally responds that Dogbert is talking nonsense, he responds with
'But here's a certificate of authenticity to PROVE it was signed by Jesus!'
All this SCOTUS ruling does is tell Sheriff Joe that he needs the certificate of authenticity of arresting people on "suspicion" of anything but immigration violations, and then check their status once he's got them in jail.
It's a crime but not one the local police can enforce. This takes us back to where much of the problem started. Arizona has a problem with illegal aliens but had no law to charge them under.
"Illegal aliens", noun. A term used by the descendants of white European invaders to describe descendants of indigenous peoples. Who happen to commit crimes at a far lower rate than citizens do.
Why not? That is the way we distribute food, clothing and housing. Why should organs be different?
Why so heartless and/or short-sighted? Donor organs are a precious commodity and nothing like food, clothing, or housing, which are all competitive markets with many many many suppliers. As opposed to the "free market" adding a few zeros to the pricetag of a lung or a heart in a non-competitive market. No amount of insurance will over the cost of an organ if it's bidding against someone with the last name of Walton.
You want to do something about the donor shortage, change opt-in donation to opt-out.
I'm not talking about the cost of the operation or even the prognosis. I'm talking about the "free market" setting the price of organs before you even get to the operating room. Instead of it being a $500,000 operation + a $30,000 kidney, it's now a $500,000 operation plus a $3,000,000 kidney.
Whoosh. I'm not talking about the cost of the operation, I'm talking about the "free market" setting the prices of organs before you even get to the hospital.
Poor people can be covered under Medicaid. What Medicaid wont do is get in a bidding war with a 71 year old former oil executive who can buy a donors heart for a cool $45 million and still have half his net worth remaining.
Blah blah blah blah. Let us know when you start enforcing treaties with native people's the way you want immigration laws enforced in a punitive manner.
However, NPR does cater to the people who pay the bills
People like the Koch Brothers and health insurance oligarchs. And since it's now referred to as "Nice Polite Republicans", they must be getting something for their sponsorship.
CPB's independence went out when the Bushies and corporate funding came in.
By telling poor people: "tough luck, organs are awarded based on ability to pay and nothing else"?
"Sorry, 25 year old father of two, we know you were waiting on a heart transplant for that congenital defect that the hospital just discovered....but it went to Dick Cheney instead, cuz he's a rich bastard and you're not."
Once a password was guessed by the attacker when the user turned on remote access and chose a trivial password.
I doubt many people would blame Microsoft if a user turned on the Remote Desktop service and then had his computer compromised because he had a blank Administrator password....
A second time was when Mac OS X Server shipped with a vulnerable version of PHP (off by default), and the sysadmin, who really ought to have known better, enabled the Apache PHP mod without first updating PHP.
Which was on Server, which users don't run, and was turned off by default. But yeah, that was some bad code in an included service.
Why don't you pick up a 3rd grade history textbook, read up on how we acquired the entire western United States, and get back to us on "legality". After checking to see if the land your whiny privileged ass is siting on land stolen from native tribes, of course, and if so, returning it.
When did things change where non-citizens weren't required to have something like a resident alien card? Because they were before this.
Before: 1. Person is arrested on suspicion of xyz crime 2. Police verify identity while suspect is in custody in jail 3. Looks like suspect might be here without papers, feds notified
Now: 1. Any remotely looking Hispanic person can be hassled for any ginned up reason (see the hundreds of thousands of innocent black and brown men frisked in NYC). 2. Innocent people have to spend time and money they don't have to prove that they belong here 3. More naturalized and native born citizens are wrongfully deported
And asking "who are the real criminals" in relation to the Mexican drug cartels reveals nothing but your own ignorance. Seriously - read up on these guys
Seriously, just deal with the fact that you got busted on your little attempt to conflate immigration with Mexican drug cartels. Who, you know, are based in Mexico.
And of course there's also the fact that they'd be put out of business overnight if the U.S. would pull it's head out of its ass on Prohibition, for the second time....
Because the Federal government is not enforcing the laws that it has on the subject.
Because obvious rationalized racism is obvious.
Atwater: You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger" â" that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me â" because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Nigger, nigger."
It's exactly the same with "illegal immigrants" - racism is couched in Concerns over "illegal immigration". You get to go on about laws and legality when the U.S. starts observing some of the treaties it's made with indian tribes and them promptly broken.
As someone who lives in AZ, it's about people like the "Chandler rapist"
Problem #1: undocumented immigrants commit crimes at a LOWER rate than American citizens do.
It's about paying to educate criminals
Problem #2: immigrants ALREADY subsidize your ass by paying taxes on services they are ineligible to receive - like Social Security.
It's about NOT rewarding criminals
Problem #3: "illegal immigrant", noun. A term used by descendants of white European invaders for descendants of indigenous peoples. How did Arizona become part of the U.S. again? Oh yeah, a war of conquest waged by the U.S. on Mexico.
Interesting fact
Problem #4: another interesting fact: you can shut your racist, entitled pie hole until the United States starts dutifully following the treaties it has made with various native tribes only to be broken the moment it was convenient. Until then, you can cram your "criminality" up your ass, and then smoke it.
Anyone who looks suspcious (i.e. is a minority). See: NYC's 'stop and frisk' policy that the courts are maybe thinking about possibly saying something about it, after hundreds of thousands of black and brown men were physically searched.
So, yeah, it's actually exactly like that -- one company using out-of-context numbers and scare tactics to besmirch another company with a competing product despite the allegations being rather overblown.
Exactly nothing like that - did Honda's have a problem with the gas tank blowing up in rear-end collisions at low speeds? No. Did Ford? Yes. Also from Wikipedia:
According to a 1977 Mother Jones article by Mark Dowie, Ford allegedly was aware of the design flaw, refused to pay for a redesign, and decided it would be cheaper to pay off possible lawsuits. The magazine obtained a cost-benefit analysis that it said Ford had used to compare the cost of $11 repairs against the cost of settlements for deaths, injuries, and vehicle burnouts. The document became known as the Ford Pinto Memo.[14][17][18] This document was, technically, not a memo regarding the Pinto specifically, but a general memo Ford submitted to the NHTSA in an effort to gain an exemption from safety standards; it was also primarily focused on the cost of reducing deaths from fires resulting from rollovers, rather than the rear-end collision fires that plagued the Pinto. It was nonetheless submitted in court in an effort to show the "callousness" of Ford's corporate culture.[6]
An example of a Pinto rear-end accident that led to a lawsuit was the 1972 accident that killed Lilly Gray and severely burned 13-year-old Richard Grimshaw. The accident resulted in the court case Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co.,[19] in which the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District upheld compensatory damages of $2.5 million and punitive damages of $3.5 million against Ford, partially because Ford had been aware of the design defects before production but had decided against changing the design.
It's simply sophistry to pretend there's any equivalency between Windows and Mac when it comes to malware. Mac users have to worry about it as much as you have to worry about getting struck by a meteor if you step outside your house. Is it possible? Sure. Does that mean it's likely to happen or something you have to worry about? Not unless you make Terry Collins look like a calm, well adjusted individual.
It's saying that, but in such a way that it's strongly implying "we don't have that problem" when they actually do.
Actually, they don't.
Who here has NOT seen a Windows PC loaded up with malware? (looks at Slashdot audience and sees no hands raised). Okay, anyone seen A mac loaded up with malware? (looks at Slashdot audience and sees no hands raised)
Don't confuse existence with likelihood. Do meteors fall to earth? Sure do. Would it be pretty bad if one hit your car or your house? Sure would. How much time do yous spend a day worrying about meteor strikes?
None. Because the chances of it happening are so remote that not even uber-hypocondriac Terry Collins would have to worry about it.
Weak "in the wild" if it was limited to local intranets:
Leap cannot spread over the Internet, and can only spread over a local area network reachable using the Bonjour protocol. On most networks this limits it to a single IP subnet.
And it shouldn't be called a virus:
The Leap worm is delivered over the iChat instant messaging program as a gzip-compressed tar file called latestpics.tgz. For the worm to take effect, the user must manually invoke it by opening the tar file and then running the disguised executable within.
So it's really just a Trojan. And pretty weak sauce, since you can send the same file to someone's "Drop Box" (if filesharing is turned on).
Not really. It's more like Honda advertizing during the Pinto era:
"Come buy our cars! The gas tank wont blow up in a low speed collision, burning your family to death!"
That's not saying that Honda's were free of maintenance issues or even the occasional recall. It means that they weren't selling (literally) flaming bags of shit like Ford.
Those events are historical facts, all of which I've lived through.
You mean the historical revisionism you pulled out of your ass. For starters, no one has every proven that Iran was involved in the Marine barracks bombing. But even if they were, if you want to call attacking a hostile military force occupying another country "terrorism", then you need to prosecute all kinds of former Reagan officials for supplying the Mujahedin with weapons to use against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Because that would also be "terrorism".
What's good for the Goose is good for the Gander.
The disposition of the Shah and the institution of the UK's choice was the UK's matter, not the US. And the prick got what he deserved for signing up with Hitler at the start of WWII. You do know that Hitler named Iran, getting them to drop Persia? Right you ignorant kid? Take the dirt out of your ears, STFU, and open your eyes. Try to learn.
Try to take your own advice, if you manage to extract your head from your jingoistic, hypocritical ass. You cannot throw stones at Iran arresting tourists when the U.S. has had people kidnapped and tortured far from our own borders.
And if Iran had overthrown the U.S. government, they would have thanked their lucky stars if our reprisal was limited to seizing the personnel in the Iranian embassy used as a part of the coup. Stick that in your exceptionalism pipe and smoke it.
Oh, you've made it clear already just how thick your head is. That's why, after multiple people have shown you to be full of jingoistic crap, you're waving your hands in the air and declaring victory.
Just remember to start pointing fingers at the nearest mirror the next time you start whining about the theocratic government of Iran....
Wow, way to absolutely miss the point of my reply to brunes69.
Your post was absolutely easy to understand. That was your first problem.
According to the site you linked to, the U6 unemployment rate in January 2009 was 14.2%. From February 2009 to Frebruary 2012 it was never bellow 14.9% (in fact it was never bellow 15.1% except in February 2012). In March, April, and May 2012 it was 14.5%, 14.5%, 14.8%.
Which is why I said the U6 unemployment rate had never dipped below 14% since Obama took office. My, aren't you a quick one.
Although that is certainly way too high, is is by far not the highest in the last six months. In fact, it's the lowest since January 2009.
In fact, that's total nonsense unless you're using cooked numbers, and not even the better-than-U3 U6 numbers tell the whole story. Which is really quite simple:
Have we created new jobs to replace the ones lost during the crash? Have we created an average of 200,000 jobs a month since Obama took office?
The answer to both of these questions is an obvious "no". Which means that unemployment is worse now than it was in January 2009. Obviously.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course I did. So did other people. That was your problem to begin with.
I know it's easy for some to conflate immigration with drug running. It's just really, really dishonest to do so. "Illegal immigrants" commit crimes a lower rate than citizens do, and that's fact you, Brewer, and Joe will just have to deal with.
Meaning back to square 1: poor people and anyone without gold-plated health insurance is free to "die quickly" if they need an organ transplant. Because either they wont be able to afford it, or their insurance company will refuse to pay for it.
As opposed to, you know, offering a flat reward for donating families or making organ donation opt-out (when you get a driver's license) as opposed to opt-in.
Iran had a democracy until it was destroyed by the United States and Britain. Do your best Bart Simpson impression with a chalkboard until that fact sinks in.
The point was that the police can cook up any pretext they want to in order to detain/arrest someone. There's "disorderly conduct", "acting suspiciously", and "traveling on a drug route". The same Supreme Court just ruled that the police don't have to get a warrant if they claim they think they hear you destroying evidence.
Which is obviously a Certificate of Authenticity, given the fact that the cops can make up anything they want to arrest someone, as they for all intents and purposes never suffer any consequences for false arrests.
Certificate of Authenticity: (paraphrased) an old Dilbert strip had Dogbert presenting a letter to someone telling them they were supposed to do something. A letter signed by Jesus. After the person naturally responds that Dogbert is talking nonsense, he responds with
'But here's a certificate of authenticity to PROVE it was signed by Jesus!'
All this SCOTUS ruling does is tell Sheriff Joe that he needs the certificate of authenticity of arresting people on "suspicion" of anything but immigration violations, and then check their status once he's got them in jail.
"Illegal aliens", noun. A term used by the descendants of white European invaders to describe descendants of indigenous peoples. Who happen to commit crimes at a far lower rate than citizens do.
Why so heartless and/or short-sighted? Donor organs are a precious commodity and nothing like food, clothing, or housing, which are all competitive markets with many many many suppliers. As opposed to the "free market" adding a few zeros to the pricetag of a lung or a heart in a non-competitive market. No amount of insurance will over the cost of an organ if it's bidding against someone with the last name of Walton.
You want to do something about the donor shortage, change opt-in donation to opt-out.
As opposed to not getting the point.
I'm not talking about the cost of the operation or even the prognosis. I'm talking about the "free market" setting the price of organs before you even get to the operating room. Instead of it being a $500,000 operation + a $30,000 kidney, it's now a $500,000 operation plus a $3,000,000 kidney.
Whoosh. I'm not talking about the cost of the operation, I'm talking about the "free market" setting the prices of organs before you even get to the hospital.
Poor people can be covered under Medicaid. What Medicaid wont do is get in a bidding war with a 71 year old former oil executive who can buy a donors heart for a cool $45 million and still have half his net worth remaining.
Blah blah blah blah. Let us know when you start enforcing treaties with native people's the way you want immigration laws enforced in a punitive manner.
People like the Koch Brothers and health insurance oligarchs. And since it's now referred to as "Nice Polite Republicans", they must be getting something for their sponsorship.
CPB's independence went out when the Bushies and corporate funding came in.
By telling poor people: "tough luck, organs are awarded based on ability to pay and nothing else"?
"Sorry, 25 year old father of two, we know you were waiting on a heart transplant for that congenital defect that the hospital just discovered....but it went to Dick Cheney instead, cuz he's a rich bastard and you're not."
I doubt many people would blame Microsoft if a user turned on the Remote Desktop service and then had his computer compromised because he had a blank Administrator password....
Which was on Server, which users don't run, and was turned off by default. But yeah, that was some bad code in an included service.
Why don't you pick up a 3rd grade history textbook, read up on how we acquired the entire western United States, and get back to us on "legality". After checking to see if the land your whiny privileged ass is siting on land stolen from native tribes, of course, and if so, returning it.
Oh, is that why Reagan granted amnesty to millions, and Bush tried to pass immigration reform during his last year in office.
Before:
1. Person is arrested on suspicion of xyz crime
2. Police verify identity while suspect is in custody in jail
3. Looks like suspect might be here without papers, feds notified
Now:
1. Any remotely looking Hispanic person can be hassled for any ginned up reason (see the hundreds of thousands of innocent black and brown men frisked in NYC).
2. Innocent people have to spend time and money they don't have to prove that they belong here
3. More naturalized and native born citizens are wrongfully deported
If you think that's hyperbole, just ask Google.
Seriously, just deal with the fact that you got busted on your little attempt to conflate immigration with Mexican drug cartels. Who, you know, are based in Mexico.
And of course there's also the fact that they'd be put out of business overnight if the U.S. would pull it's head out of its ass on Prohibition, for the second time....
Because obvious rationalized racism is obvious.
It's exactly the same with "illegal immigrants" - racism is couched in Concerns over "illegal immigration". You get to go on about laws and legality when the U.S. starts observing some of the treaties it's made with indian tribes and them promptly broken.
Problem #1: undocumented immigrants commit crimes at a LOWER rate than American citizens do.
Problem #2: immigrants ALREADY subsidize your ass by paying taxes on services they are ineligible to receive - like Social Security.
Problem #3: "illegal immigrant", noun. A term used by descendants of white European invaders for descendants of indigenous peoples. How did Arizona become part of the U.S. again? Oh yeah, a war of conquest waged by the U.S. on Mexico.
Problem #4: another interesting fact: you can shut your racist, entitled pie hole until the United States starts dutifully following the treaties it has made with various native tribes only to be broken the moment it was convenient. Until then, you can cram your "criminality" up your ass, and then smoke it.
Anyone who looks suspcious (i.e. is a minority). See: NYC's 'stop and frisk' policy that the courts are maybe thinking about possibly saying something about it, after hundreds of thousands of black and brown men were physically searched.
Exactly nothing like that - did Honda's have a problem with the gas tank blowing up in rear-end collisions at low speeds? No. Did Ford? Yes. Also from Wikipedia:
It's simply sophistry to pretend there's any equivalency between Windows and Mac when it comes to malware. Mac users have to worry about it as much as you have to worry about getting struck by a meteor if you step outside your house. Is it possible? Sure. Does that mean it's likely to happen or something you have to worry about? Not unless you make Terry Collins look like a calm, well adjusted individual.
Actually, they don't.
Who here has NOT seen a Windows PC loaded up with malware? (looks at Slashdot audience and sees no hands raised). Okay, anyone seen A mac loaded up with malware? (looks at Slashdot audience and sees no hands raised)
Don't confuse existence with likelihood. Do meteors fall to earth? Sure do. Would it be pretty bad if one hit your car or your house? Sure would. How much time do yous spend a day worrying about meteor strikes?
None. Because the chances of it happening are so remote that not even uber-hypocondriac Terry Collins would have to worry about it.
Just like Mac users and viruses.
Weak "in the wild" if it was limited to local intranets:
And it shouldn't be called a virus:
So it's really just a Trojan. And pretty weak sauce, since you can send the same file to someone's "Drop Box" (if filesharing is turned on).
Not really. It's more like Honda advertizing during the Pinto era:
"Come buy our cars! The gas tank wont blow up in a low speed collision, burning your family to death!"
That's not saying that Honda's were free of maintenance issues or even the occasional recall. It means that they weren't selling (literally) flaming bags of shit like Ford.
You mean the historical revisionism you pulled out of your ass. For starters, no one has every proven that Iran was involved in the Marine barracks bombing. But even if they were, if you want to call attacking a hostile military force occupying another country "terrorism", then you need to prosecute all kinds of former Reagan officials for supplying the Mujahedin with weapons to use against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Because that would also be "terrorism".
What's good for the Goose is good for the Gander.
Try to take your own advice, if you manage to extract your head from your jingoistic, hypocritical ass. You cannot throw stones at Iran arresting tourists when the U.S. has had people kidnapped and tortured far from our own borders.
And if Iran had overthrown the U.S. government, they would have thanked their lucky stars if our reprisal was limited to seizing the personnel in the Iranian embassy used as a part of the coup. Stick that in your exceptionalism pipe and smoke it.
We are the baddies.
Oh, you've made it clear already just how thick your head is. That's why, after multiple people have shown you to be full of jingoistic crap, you're waving your hands in the air and declaring victory.
Just remember to start pointing fingers at the nearest mirror the next time you start whining about the theocratic government of Iran....
Your post was absolutely easy to understand. That was your first problem.
Which is why I said the U6 unemployment rate had never dipped below 14% since Obama took office. My, aren't you a quick one.
In fact, that's total nonsense unless you're using cooked numbers, and not even the better-than-U3 U6 numbers tell the whole story. Which is really quite simple:
Have we created new jobs to replace the ones lost during the crash?
Have we created an average of 200,000 jobs a month since Obama took office?
The answer to both of these questions is an obvious "no". Which means that unemployment is worse now than it was in January 2009. Obviously.