Agreed, and I think that the vast majority of the Republican party has come to the realization that she's both unqualified, and unelectable. That said, the media loves to jump on any stumble the woman makes. It's not news, it's entertainment...just like all the stupid reporting of Weiner. Let's move on to real issues.
diplomacy could get a lot trickier when you have to explain your conversations with others.
Perhaps. OTOH it might actually be easier in the long run if you deal with people openly and honestly. Too often when people start talking about Wikileaks effect on diplomacy people (though not specifically the person whose post I'm replying to) end up making diplomacy sound like some sort of game played be old men who get a kick out of pulling levers and trying mould the world to their will rather than the art of arriving at genuine understanding and agreement.
No doubt there are often short term gains to such an approach but I can't help but think it is harmful in the long run.
While in a utopian world, this would all be wonderful, the idea that being open and honest in all diplomatic negotiations is simplistic and naive. I'm not trying to insult you with that comment, only stating a fact. Pick up any good book on negotiations, and you'll learn very quickly that it's very much like playing poker. If not, you'll always get taken advantage of.
Unless you truly believe you're one of those curve-busters, is there really any reason to examine people at the extreme ends of the spectrum. For the vast majority, they'll fall somewhere in a standard deviation or two of the middle of the bell curve.
Your use of the term "teabaggers" alone is enough to make your post a troll. You, and the people who bumped your post up to +5 should be ashamed of yourselves. Maybe, instead of slinging mud, you could post an actual logical argument, or something enlightening. It's so sad to see this forum become a place where people just pile on when someone complains about an opposing viewpoint.
Oh, you mean we should have waterboarded him? If those are not acceptable under the moral and ethical considerations you mentioned, how do you think we would have accomplished what you're suggesting?
As for martyrs, they have plenty, and this one won't matter. The presumption that "the military knows nothing" is baseless unless you have inside information.
This is the funniest post I've seen here in months. You seriously wanted a trial?!?!? Please try to imagine all the implications one would have had. This man was never going to get a trial. He could have attempted to surrender, and I doubt it would have happened.
Kind of off-topic there. Those companies are not the US government, and are doing what any other business would do if they could to make money...not that I agree with any of it. Your own laws are what either allow them to do it or not.
Okay, well you seem to be implying that since I believe in the free market, I'm somehow "clearly incapable of doing evidence based analysis". I'll let that slight go by, and let you know that I'm an engineer by training, so I tend to have a very rational, logical, based opinion. If you can point out flaws in my logic, I'll gladly acknowledge them. I'm not a hardline lassie faire capitalist, otherwise the system becomes ripe for the abuses you're so concerned over. Certainly, while I tend to be in favor of smaller government, I didn't appreciate the screwing over our economy took at the hands of some jackasses in Wall Street (and I'm pissed that some didn't go to jail). You made a comment about rich people and their egos. My counter to that wasn't any broad sweeping statement to the contrary. Putting all wealthy business people in the same category is simply illogical, and a bit juvenile.
I don't know where to begin, so forgive my rambling a bit here.
You're linking to a book that was written over 46 years ago, and claiming that it's documenting the U.S. assault on Canadian interests? Did the U.S. negotiators hold a gun to the Canadians heads, or did they get something in return for the agreement they made? I'm doubting that it was a one-sided deal.
As for NAFTA, the majority of Americans were against it to begin with. And, from Wikipedia: Canada gained the most from NAFTA with Canada's GDP rate at 3.6%, growing faster than the United States at 3.3% and Mexico at 2.7%
You claim that sections of the upper classes in the US despise your humanitarian welfare state. While many in the US may not like that form of govt. I doubt you could provide evidence that they give to cents about it occurring across the border. If you want to have that social experiment, we're happy to observe at a distance. Unless it directly affects us, we don't give a hoot...most Americans don't know who your prime minister is, much less care about type of government you're running. It's the same reason many in the US prefer to have more rights for the individual states than for the federal government...50 experiments, and we can choose the one the we like the best...I'm personally watching several to figure out where I'll retire to in a few years.
On the John Turner Interviews...was that US corp execs? Corp execs are hell bent on one thing, and one thing only, and that's making a profit...it's what business does. Have you read (or seen the new movie, I just did) Atlas Shrugged?...I suspect you're not an Ayn Rand fan, but it raises some fascinating topics for debate.
As for the Canadian council of chief executives, blaming the US for them sharing an ideology isn't logical. I know many left wing Americans that share ideologies with Canada, and I can't blame Canada for that.
As for rich business people, I've known a few, my grandfather (mom's side), youngest uncle, and dad, all of whom were relatively poor earlier in life, started businesses and were very successful. Certainly there are those with huge egos, some are earned, and others inherited (those I generally could do without). Obviously, you and I are on somewhat opposite sides when it comes to political beliefs. The wonderful thing is, that we're able to do that, and hold a rational discussion. While I may disagree with your opinion, I personally enjoy discussing political topics with those who are willing to do so w/o it being a shouting match...so, thank you.
Okay, I didn't read your links, but is there evidence of your previously claimed assault by the U.S. somewhere in there? That's what I was responding to, not Canadian politics, or "the bs of the right". If so, it's something that most Americans are totally unaware of, and would most likely not be pleased with.
Canada is being assaulted covertly and not so covertly by interests both domestic (US) and foreign.
Yes, you better run for cover. We've secretly sent a team of commandos to steal the secrets to making a decent beer.
In all seriousness, take off the tin-foil hat, or come up with some evidence to back up your claim. I've heard other Canadians make similar unfounded claims in the past. I really believe it's mostly a love-hate relationship. We mostly love Canada, and you mostly hate us.
And a disclaimer...I have family on both sides of the border.
There was an abandoned project in the 80's (I think) where highway signs in parts of the US were using metric and imperial measurements on it, however as these signs have aged they're getting replaced with imperial only versions.
I also understand that in US schools they're taught metric measurements as well as imperial measurements (however I'm sure the focus is vastly in favour of imperial units)
When I was in elementary school (1960s in Detroit, public school), we were taught both, and told that the plan was to convert completely to metric by the 80s. We used metric in all of my science classes through high school and college. The rare exceptions, where I recall using imperial units, were for sporting events...100yd football field, 25yd swimming pool, 100yd dash, 1mile run, etc. My first new car (78 Trans Am), had both units on the speedometer. I've never understood our resistance to a (gradual) switch. We've all seen 1 liter bottles, 5k races, take medicine in milligrams., etc. Please let's not hobble another generation with our archaic imperial measures.
Government contractors working to government requirements. Government is people. Government contractors are government employees are government. Only the litigious semanticians among us could separate them.
Unless I've suddenly become a lawyer, your last sentence is purely false. I've been in the business for 30 years, and am in no way, shape, or form, government.
Govt. wields the purse strings, makes the final decisions, etc. Contractors provide them with the engineering know how, recommendations, and new ideas (because we want to make more money...just like any business), unsolicited demos, etc.. And, while we also provide actual operational support, and our pay ultimately comes from the government, the roles, responsibilities, pay and benefits are completely different. You call them government requirements, but they're very often requirements suggested to them buy contractors, or so nebulous that the interpretation could leave you to design something a million different ways.
Slashdot Mirror
If this guy does find a body at the bottom of the Indian Ocean, maybe he can find Jimmy Hoffa's remains too.
We didn't leave any remains.
Guido
Agreed, and I think that the vast majority of the Republican party has come to the realization that she's both unqualified, and unelectable. That said, the media loves to jump on any stumble the woman makes. It's not news, it's entertainment...just like all the stupid reporting of Weiner. Let's move on to real issues.
Perhaps. OTOH it might actually be easier in the long run if you deal with people openly and honestly.
Too often when people start talking about Wikileaks effect on diplomacy people (though not specifically the person whose post I'm replying to) end up making diplomacy sound like some sort of game played be old men who get a kick out of pulling levers and trying mould the world to their will rather than the art of arriving at genuine understanding and agreement.
No doubt there are often short term gains to such an approach but I can't help but think it is harmful in the long run.
While in a utopian world, this would all be wonderful, the idea that being open and honest in all diplomatic negotiations is simplistic and naive. I'm not trying to insult you with that comment, only stating a fact. Pick up any good book on negotiations, and you'll learn very quickly that it's very much like playing poker. If not, you'll always get taken advantage of.
Parent post is underrated. The amount of information often far exceeds our ability to properly deal with it.
Because the government works for me...
No matter how many times you say it, it will never be true. Can someone moderate the parent as delusional?
Bob is Elizabeth's coverage
Unless you truly believe you're one of those curve-busters, is there really any reason to examine people at the extreme ends of the spectrum. For the vast majority, they'll fall somewhere in a standard deviation or two of the middle of the bell curve.
Your use of the term "teabaggers" alone is enough to make your post a troll. You, and the people who bumped your post up to +5 should be ashamed of yourselves. Maybe, instead of slinging mud, you could post an actual logical argument, or something enlightening. It's so sad to see this forum become a place where people just pile on when someone complains about an opposing viewpoint.
Because of stuff like this from http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/osama-bin-laden-unarmed-killed-white-house/story?id=13520152&page=2
Before they left, the SEALs gathered a trove of evidence from among bin Laden's personal possessions, from computer hard drives to CDs and papers.
Find out what he knows. Who he knows.
Oh, you mean we should have waterboarded him? If those are not acceptable under the moral and ethical considerations you mentioned, how do you think we would have accomplished what you're suggesting?
As for martyrs, they have plenty, and this one won't matter. The presumption that "the military knows nothing" is baseless unless you have inside information.
This is the funniest post I've seen here in months. You seriously wanted a trial?!?!? Please try to imagine all the implications one would have had. This man was never going to get a trial. He could have attempted to surrender, and I doubt it would have happened.
Um, other than Fox/WSJ, wtf are you talking about?
Some people just can't handle the truth, and have to continue their urban myths. More FUD please.
Funny thing is, there have been more solar panel related fatalities than nuclear.
http://nextbigfuture.com/2008/03/deaths-per-twh-for-all-energy-sources.html
Kind of off-topic there. Those companies are not the US government, and are doing what any other business would do if they could to make money...not that I agree with any of it. Your own laws are what either allow them to do it or not.
Okay, well you seem to be implying that since I believe in the free market, I'm somehow "clearly incapable of doing evidence based analysis". I'll let that slight go by, and let you know that I'm an engineer by training, so I tend to have a very rational, logical, based opinion. If you can point out flaws in my logic, I'll gladly acknowledge them. I'm not a hardline lassie faire capitalist, otherwise the system becomes ripe for the abuses you're so concerned over. Certainly, while I tend to be in favor of smaller government, I didn't appreciate the screwing over our economy took at the hands of some jackasses in Wall Street (and I'm pissed that some didn't go to jail). You made a comment about rich people and their egos. My counter to that wasn't any broad sweeping statement to the contrary. Putting all wealthy business people in the same category is simply illogical, and a bit juvenile.
I don't know where to begin, so forgive my rambling a bit here.
You're linking to a book that was written over 46 years ago, and claiming that it's documenting the U.S. assault on Canadian interests? Did the U.S. negotiators hold a gun to the Canadians heads, or did they get something in return for the agreement they made? I'm doubting that it was a one-sided deal.
As for NAFTA, the majority of Americans were against it to begin with. And, from Wikipedia:
Canada gained the most from NAFTA with Canada's GDP rate at 3.6%, growing faster than the United States at 3.3% and Mexico at 2.7%
You claim that sections of the upper classes in the US despise your humanitarian welfare state. While many in the US may not like that form of govt. I doubt you could provide evidence that they give to cents about it occurring across the border. If you want to have that social experiment, we're happy to observe at a distance. Unless it directly affects us, we don't give a hoot...most Americans don't know who your prime minister is, much less care about type of government you're running. It's the same reason many in the US prefer to have more rights for the individual states than for the federal government...50 experiments, and we can choose the one the we like the best...I'm personally watching several to figure out where I'll retire to in a few years.
On the John Turner Interviews...was that US corp execs? Corp execs are hell bent on one thing, and one thing only, and that's making a profit...it's what business does. Have you read (or seen the new movie, I just did) Atlas Shrugged?...I suspect you're not an Ayn Rand fan, but it raises some fascinating topics for debate.
As for the Canadian council of chief executives, blaming the US for them sharing an ideology isn't logical. I know many left wing Americans that share ideologies with Canada, and I can't blame Canada for that.
As for rich business people, I've known a few, my grandfather (mom's side), youngest uncle, and dad, all of whom were relatively poor earlier in life, started businesses and were very successful. Certainly there are those with huge egos, some are earned, and others inherited (those I generally could do without). Obviously, you and I are on somewhat opposite sides when it comes to political beliefs. The wonderful thing is, that we're able to do that, and hold a rational discussion. While I may disagree with your opinion, I personally enjoy discussing political topics with those who are willing to do so w/o it being a shouting match...so, thank you.
Okay, I didn't read your links, but is there evidence of your previously claimed assault by the U.S. somewhere in there? That's what I was responding to, not Canadian politics, or "the bs of the right". If so, it's something that most Americans are totally unaware of, and would most likely not be pleased with.
Canada is being assaulted covertly and not so covertly by interests both domestic (US) and foreign.
Yes, you better run for cover. We've secretly sent a team of commandos to steal the secrets to making a decent beer.
In all seriousness, take off the tin-foil hat, or come up with some evidence to back up your claim. I've heard other Canadians make similar unfounded claims in the past. I really believe it's mostly a love-hate relationship. We mostly love Canada, and you mostly hate us.
And a disclaimer...I have family on both sides of the border.
We started teaching the metric system to kids in elementary school in the 1970s.
You're at least a decade off...I got mine in the '60s.
There was an abandoned project in the 80's (I think) where highway signs in parts of the US were using metric and imperial measurements on it, however as these signs have aged they're getting replaced with imperial only versions.
I also understand that in US schools they're taught metric measurements as well as imperial measurements (however I'm sure the focus is vastly in favour of imperial units)
When I was in elementary school (1960s in Detroit, public school), we were taught both, and told that the plan was to convert completely to metric by the 80s. We used metric in all of my science classes through high school and college. The rare exceptions, where I recall using imperial units, were for sporting events...100yd football field, 25yd swimming pool, 100yd dash, 1mile run, etc. My first new car (78 Trans Am), had both units on the speedometer. I've never understood our resistance to a (gradual) switch. We've all seen 1 liter bottles, 5k races, take medicine in milligrams., etc. Please let's not hobble another generation with our archaic imperial measures.
Nope, civil and criminal cases are not handled the same, as some other posters have already mentioned.
If you still have your right and your ability to vote, you are, indeed, the government of the United States of America.
Now you're going to argue that everyone in the U.S. (minus minors, aliens, and convicted felons) are the government. Twist words much?
Look above, and reread your own words, you didn't even get your own quote correct. For the record, here it is:
Government is people.
. But that wasn't what I replied to if you would READ.
Yes, you did mention semantics...
Only the litigious semanticians among us could separate them.
. Which is patently false.
Government contractors working to government requirements. Government is people. Government contractors are government employees are government. Only the litigious semanticians among us could separate them.
Unless I've suddenly become a lawyer, your last sentence is purely false. I've been in the business for 30 years, and am in no way, shape, or form, government.
Govt. wields the purse strings, makes the final decisions, etc. Contractors provide them with the engineering know how, recommendations, and new ideas (because we want to make more money...just like any business), unsolicited demos, etc.. And, while we also provide actual operational support, and our pay ultimately comes from the government, the roles, responsibilities, pay and benefits are completely different. You call them government requirements, but they're very often requirements suggested to them buy contractors, or so nebulous that the interpretation could leave you to design something a million different ways.
The only reason we have anything resembling a concept of "secure, robust, dependable system" is because the government invented it.
Most of what we have has been invented by government contractors...not so much actual government employees, though there are obviously exceptions.