Of course it does. See also: AMD when they assigned their processors marketing ratings above the actual mhz of the chip so consumers wouldn't always take the 3.4 ghz P4 over the 2.6 ghz Athlon.
If your PPC can't reach 3GHz, that's too bad for you because x86 processors can and do.
Read much? What I said:
Until Apple killed the cloners and IBM and Motorola lost interest in PowerPC development. So it didn't matter if your G4 was a better design than a P4, if the P4 has a ghz over the G4.
When Apple released the G5, IBM promised them a 3 ghz chip within a year - and years later, they never delivered on that, or on a low power version suitable for laptops. So Apple cut their losses and went with Intel.
Killing the cloners might have saved Apple, but killing the clones being made by the people who make your chips puts a bit of a damper on their desire to keep developing chips for you. Motorola was seriously pushing their clones as business machines and were offering five year standard warranties on their models at the time - their CEO was pissed when Apple pulled the plug.
Also, PPC never had a clockspeed advantage over x86. You must have dreamed that or something.
No, I didn't dream of the PowerPC 604 processor, which had a higher clock speed than Pentium processors at the time, as well as being a more powerful chip mhz for mhz. But then Apple killed the clones, Moto was pissed, and the rest is history.
The Germans who fought and lost in World War I were Nazis. I got it right.
Nazis didn't exist at the time. You fail. Epically.
And even if he did mention Nazis, Godwin's Law doesn't mean the conversation is over. Godwin merely observed that as a conversation drags on, the chance of Hitler or Nazis being mentioned gradually rises. So you'd still fail.
I must have missed the part where Microsoft is not allowing developers to program for their mobile or desktop OS.
No, you just ignored Ballmer's hypocrisy. Try pulling your head out and maybe you wont miss the whole point next time.
Seeing as three-quarters to all of the Zune Marketplace is non-DRM'd MP3s, that'd be a yes.
Seeing as PlaysForSure is DRM, that would be a no.
Both Amarok on Linux and XNJB on the Mac have partial Zune support (via libmtp),
I must have missed where Amarok and XNJB were developed by Microsoft.
but they appear to be stuck on authorisation for file transfer.
Why even bring it up then?
He is complaining that Apple doesn't allow non-authorised programs to run on the iPhone (at least, without jailbreaking it, but that's another matter entirely.) Essentially, the iPhone is a console, albeit one with a wider range of software. And with the reports of update delays, arbitary rejection, no-competition clause, and so on, I would think that complaint is quite valid.
Like consoles, eh? And how much does Microsoft allow unauthorized programs to run on the Xbox?
The only thing that does is the fastest x86 was ALWAYS faster than the fastest PPC CPU.
Uh, no. Other than the low power varieties (603e), PowerPC chips were faster, mhz for mhz, than anything from Intel or AMD. And for a time, they were faster mhz wise as well. Until Apple killed the cloners and IBM and Motorola lost interest in PowerPC development. So it didn't matter if your G4 was a better design than a P4, if the P4 has a ghz over the G4.
When Apple released the G5, IBM promised them a 3 ghz chip within a year - and years later, they never delivered on that, or on a low power version suitable for laptops. So Apple cut their losses and went with Intel.
Allowing motorists to obtain personalized plates provides them with an opportunity to obtain something distinctively unique, something that commands far more attention than the usual humdrum string of letters and digits. Sometimes, though, one's choice of license plate can command an unexpected and undesirable form of attention.
In 1979 a Los Angeles man named Robert Barbour found this out the hard way when he sent an application to the California Department of Motor No plate Vehicles requesting personalized license plates for his car. The DMV form asked applicants to list three choices in case one or two of their desired selections had already been assigned. Barbour, a sailing enthusiast, wrote down "SAILING" and "BOATING" as his first two choices; when he couldn't think of a third option, he wrote "NO PLATE," meaning that if neither of his two choices was available, he did not want personalized plates. Plates reading "BOATING" and "SAILING" had indeed already been assigned, so the DMV, following Barbour's instructions literally, sent him license plates reading "NO PLATE." Barbour was not thrilled that the DMV had misunderstood his intent, but he opted to keep the plates because of their uniqueness.
Four weeks later he received his first notice for an overdue parking fine, from faraway San Francisco, and within days he began receiving dozens of overdue notices from all over the state on a daily basis. Why? Because when law enforcement officers ticketed illegally parked cars that bore no license plates, they had been writing "NO PLATE" in the license plate field. Now that Barbour had plates bearing that phrase, the DMV computers were matching every unpaid citation issued to a car with missing plates to him.
Barbour received about 2,500 notices over the next several months. He alerted the DMV to the problem, and they responded in a typically bureaucratic way by instructing him to change his license plates. But Barbour had grown too fond of his plates by then to want to change them, so he instead began mailing out a form letter in response to each citation. That method usually worked, although occasionally he had to appear before a judge and demonstrate that the car described on the citation was not his.
A couple of years later, the DMV finally caught on and sent a notice to law enforcement agencies requesting that they use the word NONE rather than NO PLATE to indicate a cited vehicle was missing its plates. This change slowed the flow of overdue notices Barbour received to a trickle, about five or six a month, but it also had an unintended side effect: Officers sometimes wrote MISSING instead of NONE to indicate cars with missing license plates, and suddenly a man named Andrew Burg in Marina del Rey started receiving parking tickets from places he hadn't visited either. Burg, of course, was the owner of a car with personalized plates reading "MISSING."
Copied more than I planned, as the cockgobblers at Snopes put in some javascript to disable text selecting and right-clicking. Suckers of satan's cock, Snope.
What kind of stupid company running older machines would bother upgrading OSes?
One forced to respond to Microsoft's forced obsolescence. Duh. It happened with Win2k, and it's happening right now with XP, as fast as Microsoft can make it happen. Unfortunately for Redmond, many businesses are going to stick with older hardware and software in a downed economy, with or without Microsoft's shenanigans..
Have you ever thought about whether they deserved all that income? Of course they did! The Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and on smaller scale, successful restaurant/shop/other business owners earned all those gains, and more, given the levels of taxation before the Reagan era.
If the minimum wage had risen at the same rate as CEO pay over the last few decades, it would be over $50 an hour today. If these CEO's are so exceptional, and so worthy of extreme wealth, then where's our exceptional economy?
'Careful what you wish for. The day when you make it so hard that the rich decide they do not want to be rich with all the taxation... is the day America collapses.
Define "rich". America is enormously competitive - look at all the people that go into sports or on reality shows for the chance of making good money. If we do the sensible thing and bring back the 91% marginal tax rates, the fact that people will be practically limited from owning a dozen homes and 4 Ferrari's will in no way diminish their desire for 3 homes and a Ferrari and a BMW and a Mercedes.
Who benefits the most from having a stable, working society, the rich or the poor?
The poor.
Wrong answer. A larger, more educated middle class means more customers for whatever business you are in or are invested in, and more qualified workers for whatever business you are in or are invested in. There's a reason why Wal-Mart is pushing for a minimum wage increase and why Henry Ford paid his workers a descent wage: they want people to be able to buy their products.
Or, alternatively, a middle class and social safety nets are guillotine insurance. Especially in a country with as many guns as we have.
Excusing every wrong by pointing out that someone else did the same wrong, does not lead to a situation with less wrong-doing, but rather more.
But it's not hypocrisy to ask those hopping up and down now where as proportionally outraged when Bush was committing crimes in the first place, as opposed to Obama letting them stand. You know the good old IOKIYARTIYAD (it's okay if you're a republican but treason if you're a democrat).
Read that and weep. 500 hundred times better than men.
No, I wont actually. You know those "honor killings" that we periodically hear about, when some woman is suspected of being promiscuous/having sex before marriage, etc? Yes, men are the ones who do the important task of stoning some poor girl to death, but guess who turns the girl into the religious police in the first place - women.
Just because women don't commit the violence themselves doesn't mean they don't have any responsibility for it.
Oh, and how bout that female genital mutilation, which is performed by women:
Sheelan Anwar Omer, a shy 7-year-old Kurdish girl, bounded into her neighbor's house with an ear-to-ear smile, looking for the party her mother had promised.
There was no celebration. Instead, a local woman quickly locked a rusty red door behind Sheelan, who looked bewildered when her mother ordered the girl to remove her underpants. Sheelan began to whimper, then tremble, while the women pushed apart her legs and a midwife raised a stainless-steel razor blade in the air. "I do this in the name of Allah!" she intoned.
As the midwife sliced off part of Sheelan's genitals, the girl let out a high-pitched wail heard throughout the neighborhood. As she carried the sobbing child back home, Sheelan's mother smiled with pride.
Obama is showing hypocrisy in record time, he's barely been in a month. It's not like he is reneging on a campaign promise, it sure makes it seem like practically his ENTIRE stated message about transparency in government was total bullshit.
So were you proportionally outraged when Bush was committing these atrocities in the first place as opposed to Obama letting them stand? Or is this another case of IOKIYARTIYAD (it's okay if you're a Republican, treason if you're a Democrat).
Does anyone else besides me think a two-party system absolutely sucks?
Yup, there are plenty of other people that are touting the wrong cure for the disease. Britain, Israel and Italy have multiple parties, and they struggle with corruption and gridlock as much or more than we do. And I call it the "two party red herring" because while you might be limited on the number of practical parties, you are not limited on the number of viewpoints in your candidates, which is the important thing. Was Kucinich on the same page as Hillary on the issues? How about Ron Paul and Rudy Giuliani?
Both parties are nothing but rubber stamps for special interest groups that use the iron triangle to get what they want.
And here's what would change if we had a third party: nothing. Our election system is set up so that you have to raise fantastic sums to get elected, which means asking favors, which means those favors will be called in. Until we have all elections publicly financed, it wont matter if you have 2 parties or 200: we'll still have corruption, graft, and back room deals forming policy.
Especially given the conditions under which it was pass: Less than 24 hours for the whole of the House to share and review (reportedly) only five copies of a partially handwritten bill that was over 1,000 pages long.
The stimulus was debated for weeks, it wasn't written overnight. Republicans are just engaging in hypocritical (they did far, far worse when they were in the majority) whining (they pointedly REFUSED to be a part of the process) and misdirection (yes, the bill is long - that's why you have your staffers read it).
On what, exactly? Where were the multi-billion dollar no-bid contracts for Al Gore's former company?
Pelosi all but said everyone who is objective knows Bush and Cheney are criminals, and those who don't will never be convinced. So why waste tax payer money and other limited resources dredging up the past.
Why did prosecutors go after O.J. Simpson, it's not like a conviction would have brought back Nicole or Goldman. Glenn Greenwald has a nice series on how there's one standard for the plebeians, and another for the aristocrats:
What you have is a two-tiered system of justice where ordinary Americans are subjected to the most merciless criminal justice system in the world. They break the law. The full weight of the criminal justice system comes crashing down upon them. But our political class, the same elites who have imposed that incredibly harsh framework on ordinary Americans, have essentially exempted themselves and the leaders of that political class from the law.
Smoke some pot and you're going to serve some nice time in a PMITA penitentiary. Torture a few hundred people, trash 4 constitutional amendments, treaties, habeas corpus, and it gets covered up.
Here we go again... Just another lie! Where is the transperency he promised? He made A LOT of promises and hasn't kept ONE yet.... The global elite really are pulling this guys strings worse than Bush.
Question: were you this outraged when Bush was committing these abuses in the first place? Or are you engaging in Republican ethics, like in 1992 when Clinton's lack of military service was a huge issue when he was running against George H.W. Bush, but became irrelevant when George W. Bush was running against McCain and then Gore?
but so far it seems like obama is still campaigning
More like he's still drinking the bipartisan kool aid. Why he thinks the party that manufactured a bogus perjury charge against a sitting president will now be reasonable is beyond me.
And beyond that, going after the Busco criminals is not only the right thing to do, it's a political winner. If the Dems really went after Republican lawbreaking, the GOP would soon be joining the Whigs in the dustbin of political history.
Then just about everyone that's ever gone to school is a criminal. How much time did you serve in jail for chewing bubble gum or talking in class?
You do not have a right to disrupt the class any more than you have a right to drive the wrong down a one way street.
But you wont get arrested for driving down a one way street (unless you're drunk). You'll get a ticket. Just as this student have been given detention or suspended, not searched and arrested.
Because it works? Are you also amazed when someone ads 1 and 1 and comes up with 2?
I didn't say all Democrats think the same. Clearly they don't. Nor do all Republicans. All I said was that views that conflict with the agenda of the leadership will be dead on arrival.
Which happened years before Pelosi became Speaker. And the quote has nothing to do with Pelosi making his views "dead on arrival", but with her donating $10,000 to his primary opponent. So you fail. Again.
And if you ever managed to nail that whole reading thing down, you might check up on just who John Dingell is in the first place. He's the longest serving member in the House, and has been the Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Committee for decades chairing the committee for fourteen years before Republicans took over Congress in 1994. And he's also quashed efforts to raise CAFE standards, for decades. So Dingell complaining about Pelosi squashing contrary viewpoints is like Karl Rove complaining that Rham Emanuel is too partisan.
You have yet to refute this point.
Completely refuted. What issues are more polarizing than gun control and abortion?
Instead you mentioned a couple of Senators when the original discussion was about the House and ignored the second paragraph I quoted from the NYT article.
What a surprise, you're 100% full of shit. Again. Your first post on the subject:
Unlike the republicans, the democratic party has a lot of people with their own views
And those views are dead on arrival if they conflict with the views of the party/congressional leadership. The NY Times just had an interesting article [nytimes.com] about the oldest serving member of the House. Here's the interesting part:
Pwned. Your point was on the Democratic party, with an article on an issue in the House to back it up - not the other way around. Fail. Again.
Are they serving the red or the orange kool aid today?
No idea, but whatever it is, you need to go cold turkey, because it's making you really, really stupid.
And the evidence that voting in favour of this bill will prevent Great Depression 2.0? For that matter, where's the evidence that voting against it will allow/cause Great Depression 2.0?
Because with a severe recession, you risk a deflationary spiral and an eventual depression. Demand is down, so companies lay off workers and cut production. If those workers can't find equivalent jobs soon, demand goes down, so companies lay off more workers...
Then you add in a credit crunch, so even businesses with good credit ratings have problems getting loans for basic operating expenses. The government (and the Fed directly) can loan more money so capital can start flowing again, but we're rapidly approaching (if not passed) the practical lending limit because we already have $10 trillion in debt.
So at this point the only entity that can jump-start demand is the federal government. But we should do it now, before our currency crashes.
HINT: while it might make some people feel warm and fuzzy, there's not that much reason to hurry this legislation.
Uh, no. European banks alone might need a 16 trillion bailout. And that's in Euros, which is worth quite a bit more than the dollar at this point. The magnitude of our risk cannot be overstated; we need to take action now to prevent economic collapse.
And we already have a successful model to work on: the New Deal. Spend $2 trillion on infrastructure as it will make hundreds of thousands of jobs, and we badly need the work to be done in the first place - there are dozens of bridges around the country that have the same rating as the I35 bridge that collapsed a year and a half ago in Minneapolis.
And paying for all this is equally simple: bring back the 91% marginal tax rate and apply it to capital gains as well, and leave it until the national debt is paid off.
The fact that she was lying about the phone was corroborated by the teacher and two of the girl's friends before she was searched by a female officer.
But that's not a justification for an arrest and a search, as possessing cell phones is not a crime, nor is being a brat. The school should have just suspended her based on the teacher's say-so alone, as they are perfectly entitled to do. But by starting with a dubious search and arrest, they've open themselves up a lawsuit for violating her Constitutional rights.
That time allows for events such as asking her to leave the room, asking her to hand over the phone, and any response from her to have occurred. Those separate events could have merited both the search and the charge.
Unlikely to merit either, as possessing a cell phone is not a crime. Unless the girl was actually engaging in "disorderly conduct" by say, screaming and getting violent during questioning, they didn't have cause to arrest and then search her.
This was just dumb on the school's part, as they could have avoided the whole mess by simply suspending her for violating school rules based on the teacher's say-so alone, and avoided the arrest drama.
Slashdot Mirror
Mhz vs mhz performance doesn't matter.
Of course it does. See also: AMD when they assigned their processors marketing ratings above the actual mhz of the chip so consumers wouldn't always take the 3.4 ghz P4 over the 2.6 ghz Athlon.
If your PPC can't reach 3GHz, that's too bad for you because x86 processors can and do.
Read much? What I said:
Killing the cloners might have saved Apple, but killing the clones being made by the people who make your chips puts a bit of a damper on their desire to keep developing chips for you. Motorola was seriously pushing their clones as business machines and were offering five year standard warranties on their models at the time - their CEO was pissed when Apple pulled the plug.
Also, PPC never had a clockspeed advantage over x86. You must have dreamed that or something.
No, I didn't dream of the PowerPC 604 processor, which had a higher clock speed than Pentium processors at the time, as well as being a more powerful chip mhz for mhz. But then Apple killed the clones, Moto was pissed, and the rest is history.
The Germans who fought and lost in World War I were Nazis. I got it right.
Nazis didn't exist at the time. You fail. Epically.
And even if he did mention Nazis, Godwin's Law doesn't mean the conversation is over. Godwin merely observed that as a conversation drags on, the chance of Hitler or Nazis being mentioned gradually rises. So you'd still fail.
I don't think it's so hypocritical because Microsoft is getting slammed by the EU for the very same sort of things Apple is doing.
Because Microsoft is a convicted monopolist, and Apple doesn't have a monopoly on anything.
I must have missed the part where Microsoft is not allowing developers to program for their mobile or desktop OS.
No, you just ignored Ballmer's hypocrisy. Try pulling your head out and maybe you wont miss the whole point next time.
Seeing as three-quarters to all of the Zune Marketplace is non-DRM'd MP3s, that'd be a yes.
Seeing as PlaysForSure is DRM, that would be a no.
Both Amarok on Linux and XNJB on the Mac have partial Zune support (via libmtp),
I must have missed where Amarok and XNJB were developed by Microsoft.
but they appear to be stuck on authorisation for file transfer.
Why even bring it up then?
He is complaining that Apple doesn't allow non-authorised programs to run on the iPhone (at least, without jailbreaking it, but that's another matter entirely.) Essentially, the iPhone is a console, albeit one with a wider range of software. And with the reports of update delays, arbitary rejection, no-competition clause, and so on, I would think that complaint is quite valid.
Like consoles, eh? And how much does Microsoft allow unauthorized programs to run on the Xbox?
The only thing that does is the fastest x86 was ALWAYS faster than the fastest PPC CPU.
Uh, no. Other than the low power varieties (603e), PowerPC chips were faster, mhz for mhz, than anything from Intel or AMD. And for a time, they were faster mhz wise as well. Until Apple killed the cloners and IBM and Motorola lost interest in PowerPC development. So it didn't matter if your G4 was a better design than a P4, if the P4 has a ghz over the G4.
When Apple released the G5, IBM promised them a 3 ghz chip within a year - and years later, they never delivered on that, or on a low power version suitable for laptops. So Apple cut their losses and went with Intel.
True:
Copied more than I planned, as the cockgobblers at Snopes put in some javascript to disable text selecting and right-clicking. Suckers of satan's cock, Snope.
What kind of stupid company running older machines would bother upgrading OSes?
One forced to respond to Microsoft's forced obsolescence. Duh. It happened with Win2k, and it's happening right now with XP, as fast as Microsoft can make it happen. Unfortunately for Redmond, many businesses are going to stick with older hardware and software in a downed economy, with or without Microsoft's shenanigans..
I bet at the root of that little horror story is some patriarchal society dictate.
Translation: when a man does something wrong, it's the man's fault. When a woman does something wrong, it's still a man's fault.
Have you ever thought about whether they deserved all that income? Of course they did! The Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and on smaller scale, successful restaurant/shop/other business owners earned all those gains, and more, given the levels of taxation before the Reagan era.
If the minimum wage had risen at the same rate as CEO pay over the last few decades, it would be over $50 an hour today. If these CEO's are so exceptional, and so worthy of extreme wealth, then where's our exceptional economy?
'Careful what you wish for. The day when you make it so hard that the rich decide they do not want to be rich with all the taxation ... is the day America collapses.
Define "rich". America is enormously competitive - look at all the people that go into sports or on reality shows for the chance of making good money. If we do the sensible thing and bring back the 91% marginal tax rates, the fact that people will be practically limited from owning a dozen homes and 4 Ferrari's will in no way diminish their desire for 3 homes and a Ferrari and a BMW and a Mercedes.
Wrong answer. A larger, more educated middle class means more customers for whatever business you are in or are invested in, and more qualified workers for whatever business you are in or are invested in. There's a reason why Wal-Mart is pushing for a minimum wage increase and why Henry Ford paid his workers a descent wage: they want people to be able to buy their products.
Or, alternatively, a middle class and social safety nets are guillotine insurance. Especially in a country with as many guns as we have.
Excusing every wrong by pointing out that someone else did the same wrong, does not lead to a situation with less wrong-doing, but rather more.
But it's not hypocrisy to ask those hopping up and down now where as proportionally outraged when Bush was committing crimes in the first place, as opposed to Obama letting them stand. You know the good old IOKIYARTIYAD (it's okay if you're a republican but treason if you're a democrat).
Wow, I love how everyone here wants to blame it all on Bush.
No, really - just search for "burrowed appointees" with Google.
Read that and weep. 500 hundred times better than men.
No, I wont actually. You know those "honor killings" that we periodically hear about, when some woman is suspected of being promiscuous/having sex before marriage, etc? Yes, men are the ones who do the important task of stoning some poor girl to death, but guess who turns the girl into the religious police in the first place - women.
Just because women don't commit the violence themselves doesn't mean they don't have any responsibility for it.
Oh, and how bout that female genital mutilation, which is performed by women:
Obama is showing hypocrisy in record time, he's barely been in a month. It's not like he is reneging on a campaign promise, it sure makes it seem like practically his ENTIRE stated message about transparency in government was total bullshit.
So were you proportionally outraged when Bush was committing these atrocities in the first place as opposed to Obama letting them stand? Or is this another case of IOKIYARTIYAD (it's okay if you're a Republican, treason if you're a Democrat).
Does anyone else besides me think a two-party system absolutely sucks?
Yup, there are plenty of other people that are touting the wrong cure for the disease. Britain, Israel and Italy have multiple parties, and they struggle with corruption and gridlock as much or more than we do. And I call it the "two party red herring" because while you might be limited on the number of practical parties, you are not limited on the number of viewpoints in your candidates, which is the important thing. Was Kucinich on the same page as Hillary on the issues? How about Ron Paul and Rudy Giuliani?
Both parties are nothing but rubber stamps for special interest groups that use the iron triangle to get what they want.
And here's what would change if we had a third party: nothing. Our election system is set up so that you have to raise fantastic sums to get elected, which means asking favors, which means those favors will be called in. Until we have all elections publicly financed, it wont matter if you have 2 parties or 200: we'll still have corruption, graft, and back room deals forming policy.
Especially given the conditions under which it was pass: Less than 24 hours for the whole of the House to share and review (reportedly) only five copies of a partially handwritten bill that was over 1,000 pages long.
The stimulus was debated for weeks, it wasn't written overnight. Republicans are just engaging in hypocritical (they did far, far worse when they were in the majority) whining (they pointedly REFUSED to be a part of the process) and misdirection (yes, the bill is long - that's why you have your staffers read it).
And these hypocritical jokers are now running around taking credit for the stimulus bill they just voted AGAINST:
The Clinton people were drunk on greed
On what, exactly? Where were the multi-billion dollar no-bid contracts for Al Gore's former company?
Pelosi all but said everyone who is objective knows Bush and Cheney are criminals, and those who don't will never be convinced. So why waste tax payer money and other limited resources dredging up the past.
Why did prosecutors go after O.J. Simpson, it's not like a conviction would have brought back Nicole or Goldman. Glenn Greenwald has a nice series on how there's one standard for the plebeians, and another for the aristocrats:
Smoke some pot and you're going to serve some nice time in a PMITA penitentiary. Torture a few hundred people, trash 4 constitutional amendments, treaties, habeas corpus, and it gets covered up.
Here we go again... Just another lie! Where is the transperency he promised? He made A LOT of promises and hasn't kept ONE yet.... The global elite really are pulling this guys strings worse than Bush.
Question: were you this outraged when Bush was committing these abuses in the first place? Or are you engaging in Republican ethics, like in 1992 when Clinton's lack of military service was a huge issue when he was running against George H.W. Bush, but became irrelevant when George W. Bush was running against McCain and then Gore?
but so far it seems like obama is still campaigning
More like he's still drinking the bipartisan kool aid. Why he thinks the party that manufactured a bogus perjury charge against a sitting president will now be reasonable is beyond me.
And beyond that, going after the Busco criminals is not only the right thing to do, it's a political winner. If the Dems really went after Republican lawbreaking, the GOP would soon be joining the Whigs in the dustbin of political history.
Disrupting a class is a crime.
Then just about everyone that's ever gone to school is a criminal. How much time did you serve in jail for chewing bubble gum or talking in class?
You do not have a right to disrupt the class any more than you have a right to drive the wrong down a one way street.
But you wont get arrested for driving down a one way street (unless you're drunk). You'll get a ticket. Just as this student have been given detention or suspended, not searched and arrested.
Stop defending authoritarianism.
Your reading comprehension continues to amaze me.
Because it works? Are you also amazed when someone ads 1 and 1 and comes up with 2?
I didn't say all Democrats think the same. Clearly they don't. Nor do all Republicans. All I said was that views that conflict with the agenda of the leadership will be dead on arrival.
Which happened years before Pelosi became Speaker. And the quote has nothing to do with Pelosi making his views "dead on arrival", but with her donating $10,000 to his primary opponent. So you fail. Again.
And if you ever managed to nail that whole reading thing down, you might check up on just who John Dingell is in the first place. He's the longest serving member in the House, and has been the Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Committee for decades chairing the committee for fourteen years before Republicans took over Congress in 1994. And he's also quashed efforts to raise CAFE standards, for decades. So Dingell complaining about Pelosi squashing contrary viewpoints is like Karl Rove complaining that Rham Emanuel is too partisan.
You have yet to refute this point.
Completely refuted. What issues are more polarizing than gun control and abortion?
Instead you mentioned a couple of Senators when the original discussion was about the House and ignored the second paragraph I quoted from the NYT article.
What a surprise, you're 100% full of shit. Again. Your first post on the subject:
Pwned. Your point was on the Democratic party, with an article on an issue in the House to back it up - not the other way around. Fail. Again.
Are they serving the red or the orange kool aid today?
No idea, but whatever it is, you need to go cold turkey, because it's making you really, really stupid.
Because with a severe recession, you risk a deflationary spiral and an eventual depression. Demand is down, so companies lay off workers and cut production. If those workers can't find equivalent jobs soon, demand goes down, so companies lay off more workers...
Then you add in a credit crunch, so even businesses with good credit ratings have problems getting loans for basic operating expenses. The government (and the Fed directly) can loan more money so capital can start flowing again, but we're rapidly approaching (if not passed) the practical lending limit because we already have $10 trillion in debt.
So at this point the only entity that can jump-start demand is the federal government. But we should do it now, before our currency crashes.
HINT: while it might make some people feel warm and fuzzy, there's not that much reason to hurry this legislation.
Uh, no. European banks alone might need a 16 trillion bailout. And that's in Euros, which is worth quite a bit more than the dollar at this point. The magnitude of our risk cannot be overstated; we need to take action now to prevent economic collapse.
And we already have a successful model to work on: the New Deal. Spend $2 trillion on infrastructure as it will make hundreds of thousands of jobs, and we badly need the work to be done in the first place - there are dozens of bridges around the country that have the same rating as the I35 bridge that collapsed a year and a half ago in Minneapolis.
And paying for all this is equally simple: bring back the 91% marginal tax rate and apply it to capital gains as well, and leave it until the national debt is paid off.
But that's not a justification for an arrest and a search, as possessing cell phones is not a crime, nor is being a brat. The school should have just suspended her based on the teacher's say-so alone, as they are perfectly entitled to do. But by starting with a dubious search and arrest, they've open themselves up a lawsuit for violating her Constitutional rights.
Unlikely to merit either, as possessing a cell phone is not a crime. Unless the girl was actually engaging in "disorderly conduct" by say, screaming and getting violent during questioning, they didn't have cause to arrest and then search her.
This was just dumb on the school's part, as they could have avoided the whole mess by simply suspending her for violating school rules based on the teacher's say-so alone, and avoided the arrest drama.