Only because he's better than all of them. And yes, I love Sage, Alias, and Slug but seriously...the only white boy who could MAYBE handle Eminem in a battle would be Eyedea and he would probably lose like he did in the rap olympics. Whether you like it or not, Eminem is really, really talented. As much as it may pain me to say it, there's a reason he's sold more albums than all the rappers you mentioned put together.
Well, it would technically be physically possible, anyhow. However, your chances of actually making it *happen* driving a bike with a sidecar... that's a different story. Unless you're rich, in which case you probably already have the requisite car and wouldn't need the sidecar anyway.
All true, but I believe that a car offers advantages - mostly related to environmental protection and safety - over any motorcycle. Also, you can't get both women home for the threesome with the motorcycle. (or even ONE with the segway)
You know, I have observed this principle in action, as well. However, I have taken it to a whole new level. You see, I got a car. It gets me to work faster than the Segway, PLUS it's resistant to the elements AND it has A/C.
I know, it's a new concept...but stay with me here, people.... drive to work.
So, let me see if I have this straight: Verizon wanted someone to change their last name in order to get DSL, and that person didn't do it??? What, are you going to get a cablemodem or something? Just change your name, already. This is internet connectivity we're talking about here. It's important. It isn't like you haven't been getting libshitz for yoru name all your life, anyway.
1. No, it is not real property.
a. Nothing is truly original, all 'intellectual property' is inspired or influenced to some degree by other 'intellectual
property'.
b. Real property can be stolen - that is, someone may use it only by depriving someone else of it
1. So-called intellectual property may be reproduced basically infinitely without ever depriving the original 'owner' of it
Remember that there was every kind of 'intellectual property' that was technologically possible to produce long before there was any concept of 'intellectual property', and somehow artists still painted, sculpted, acted, wrote, etc. Profit motive is the only reason for the existence of 'intellectual property', and while I am certainly not saying that it's necessarily a poor motive, it certainly isn't the one most often expressed. Generally, the cry is, 'It's all about the artist!' It would seem, however, that it is primarily about the large company instead.
Uh, do you think the united states had no governments before the formation of the federal government? That there was no 'society' before the federal government? That if the US federal government went away, that suddenly all rules and order would also go away? You really ARE a nutjob.
What about the fact that government programs are almost always more inefficient than private equivalents? The US, per capita, is the most generous and charitable nation in the world. So, despite the fact that we have forced and inefficient altruism in the form of government-sponsored theft of property, we still give more to charity than any other people. Perhaps, were the governmental bureaucracy removed, we would have more resources to give the less fortunate while not wasting nearly as much on corruption and waste. For example, the US welfare program pays out between 8 and 12 cents per dollar taken in. That dismal rate would get a charity shut down, but since it's a governmental program, it is instead excused and allowed. Are you certain that this is the best way to help others?
Besides, theft is theft. Your rationale is similar to a mugger who gives half of his 'earnings' away to charity. Just because he is doing some good with the money he has stolen does not mean that that money was not stolen. Or, as my mom used to tell me, "Two wrongs don't make a right."
Oh, come on. I can't even believe you're posting on such a trivial subject. I mean, really, haven't you got better things to do? Everyone knows he doesn't tear out wrist chunks because he grabs a hold of the web before swinging on it. Duh.
I guess the more words you make up, that only you and your friends know, the cooler you feel.
Pardon me, sir, but I do not understand how making up words lowers one's temperature. Oh, wait, you wanted to use the word 'cool' in a "slang" fashion, not to mean its accepted literal definition. You used the words "RTFA" and "mumorpuger", for which I can find no dictionary definition. They seem to be made-up terms that few know, signifying some sort of membership in some group, possibly a "subculture". You freely use things like "slang" and made-up terms that one must be a part of some group or "subculture" to understand, yet you wish to disallow others the same expression. I am not an expert, sir, but that seems to be the height of hypocrisy. Would you be so kind as to elaborate for me on why it is not?
How is the CoS "objectively" bad? By what "objective" standards? Now, I feel the CoS is bad, but that's an opinion based on and influenced by my upbringing, surroundings, and genetics. I don't think that's objective at all. I'm not trying to attack you here, I'm honestly curious.
It isn't that thought which makes you naive. It's the thought that he actually has a shot at getting an administration. I believe that you're correct, which is why I specifically referred only to a Hilary or McCain administration.
Well duh. See, if he wasn't in the lead, Hilary couldn't come from behind. It's kind of necessary for her to be behind in order for her to come from behind. If she were leading at the beginning, then she wouldn't be able to come from behind to win. So, in order for her to come from behind, she has to be behind Obama to start with. Is it penetrating yet? Look, I don't know why they didn't just have her lead from the beginning, but her husband took the same road during his run to the White House. Maybe she just wants to be like Bill.
Yes, I pretty clearly stated that local overpopulation is possible. That doesn't mean that if a bunch of people die in a different country, that it's going to benefit you at all. As far as environmental problems, they're either localized or impossible to change. If localized, then they should be dealt with in that locale. If impossible to change, then we just need to adjust to them.
Why exactly are you convinced that Hilary would be lenient with the present administration?
For one thing, she supports the war. For another, Rupert Murdoch has invested time and effort into her. For the third thing, because she has a shot at being elected. Finally, because her socialist policies fit in very well with Bush's acts during his tenure.
Also, for that matter, there is no clear Democratic candidate yet (Obama is definitetly not dead in the water)... why so convinced Obama would not be elected?
Well, if you look back to Bill's run, he also had a 'strong competitor' that strangely faded away just in time for him to have a 'comeback' victory. Also, he's black. Don't get me wrong, here. I have no problem with that fact...but I am convinced that some powerful groups/voting blocks, whatever you want to call them, do.
Slashdot Mirror
Hope you're not storing them flat and you're turning them regularly. Otherwise they might be tucked away....but they aren't safe.
Only because he's better than all of them. And yes, I love Sage, Alias, and Slug but seriously...the only white boy who could MAYBE handle Eminem in a battle would be Eyedea and he would probably lose like he did in the rap olympics. Whether you like it or not, Eminem is really, really talented. As much as it may pain me to say it, there's a reason he's sold more albums than all the rappers you mentioned put together.
You could if you had a sidecar.
Well, it would technically be physically possible, anyhow. However, your chances of actually making it *happen* driving a bike with a sidecar... that's a different story. Unless you're rich, in which case you probably already have the requisite car and wouldn't need the sidecar anyway.
Hey, give me a LITTLE credit. You have to either bounce or kick one/both of the chicks out before morning. It's just proper protocol.
In direct refutation of this statement, may I remind you that the Beastie Boys were able to fit six girlies in a Lincoln Continental. QED.
All true, but I believe that a car offers advantages - mostly related to environmental protection and safety - over any motorcycle. Also, you can't get both women home for the threesome with the motorcycle. (or even ONE with the segway)
Very true. However, it's funnier for Verizon to want him to change his last name, so I prefer to believe that version.
Paris has tours on segways. Also, I have seen them available in a couple of Spanish cities.
They are hardly dead. It seems like they are in use for more things every day.
Born in America, despised in America, loved in Europe. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Segway: the David Hasselhoff of personal people movers.
You know, I have observed this principle in action, as well. However, I have taken it to a whole new level. You see, I got a car. It gets me to work faster than the Segway, PLUS it's resistant to the elements AND it has A/C.
I know, it's a new concept...but stay with me here, people.... drive to work.
So, let me see if I have this straight: Verizon wanted someone to change their last name in order to get DSL, and that person didn't do it??? What, are you going to get a cablemodem or something? Just change your name, already. This is internet connectivity we're talking about here. It's important. It isn't like you haven't been getting libshitz for yoru name all your life, anyway.
Annoying and visible, yes, but in no way representative for a whole gender.
You meant, "...but [they are] not representative of the whole [male] gender."
The words in [] are optional, but add to clarity and flow, in my opinion.
You're welcome.
1. No, it is not real property.
a. Nothing is truly original, all 'intellectual property' is inspired or influenced to some degree by other 'intellectual
property'.
b. Real property can be stolen - that is, someone may use it only by depriving someone else of it
1. So-called intellectual property may be reproduced basically infinitely without ever depriving the original 'owner' of it
Remember that there was every kind of 'intellectual property' that was technologically possible to produce long before there was any concept of 'intellectual property', and somehow artists still painted, sculpted, acted, wrote, etc. Profit motive is the only reason for the existence of 'intellectual property', and while I am certainly not saying that it's necessarily a poor motive, it certainly isn't the one most often expressed. Generally, the cry is, 'It's all about the artist!' It would seem, however, that it is primarily about the large company instead.
I have a beef with your sig. Anecdotes ARE evidence. They are simply not PROOF.
Uh, do you think the united states had no governments before the formation of the federal government? That there was no 'society' before the federal government? That if the US federal government went away, that suddenly all rules and order would also go away? You really ARE a nutjob.
What about the fact that government programs are almost always more inefficient than private equivalents? The US, per capita, is the most generous and charitable nation in the world. So, despite the fact that we have forced and inefficient altruism in the form of government-sponsored theft of property, we still give more to charity than any other people. Perhaps, were the governmental bureaucracy removed, we would have more resources to give the less fortunate while not wasting nearly as much on corruption and waste. For example, the US welfare program pays out between 8 and 12 cents per dollar taken in. That dismal rate would get a charity shut down, but since it's a governmental program, it is instead excused and allowed. Are you certain that this is the best way to help others?
Besides, theft is theft. Your rationale is similar to a mugger who gives half of his 'earnings' away to charity. Just because he is doing some good with the money he has stolen does not mean that that money was not stolen. Or, as my mom used to tell me, "Two wrongs don't make a right."
Oh, come on. I can't even believe you're posting on such a trivial subject. I mean, really, haven't you got better things to do? Everyone knows he doesn't tear out wrist chunks because he grabs a hold of the web before swinging on it. Duh.
No pro-squid or anti-squid fanbois, is my guess.
I guess the more words you make up, that only you and your friends know, the cooler you feel.
Pardon me, sir, but I do not understand how making up words lowers one's temperature. Oh, wait, you wanted to use the word 'cool' in a "slang" fashion, not to mean its accepted literal definition. You used the words "RTFA" and "mumorpuger", for which I can find no dictionary definition. They seem to be made-up terms that few know, signifying some sort of membership in some group, possibly a "subculture". You freely use things like "slang" and made-up terms that one must be a part of some group or "subculture" to understand, yet you wish to disallow others the same expression. I am not an expert, sir, but that seems to be the height of hypocrisy. Would you be so kind as to elaborate for me on why it is not?
How is the CoS "objectively" bad? By what "objective" standards? Now, I feel the CoS is bad, but that's an opinion based on and influenced by my upbringing, surroundings, and genetics. I don't think that's objective at all. I'm not trying to attack you here, I'm honestly curious.
It isn't that thought which makes you naive. It's the thought that he actually has a shot at getting an administration.
I believe that you're correct, which is why I specifically referred only to a Hilary or McCain administration.
Well duh. See, if he wasn't in the lead, Hilary couldn't come from behind. It's kind of necessary for her to be behind in order for her to come from behind. If she were leading at the beginning, then she wouldn't be able to come from behind to win. So, in order for her to come from behind, she has to be behind Obama to start with. Is it penetrating yet? Look, I don't know why they didn't just have her lead from the beginning, but her husband took the same road during his run to the White House. Maybe she just wants to be like Bill.
You remind me of me when I was young. I used to believe the craziest stuff too.
Yes, I pretty clearly stated that local overpopulation is possible. That doesn't mean that if a bunch of people die in a different country, that it's going to benefit you at all.
As far as environmental problems, they're either localized or impossible to change. If localized, then they should be dealt with in that locale. If impossible to change, then we just need to adjust to them.
Keep hoping...but he won't win for the precise reasons that you want him to win for.
Why exactly are you convinced that Hilary would be lenient with the present administration?
For one thing, she supports the war. For another, Rupert Murdoch has invested time and effort into her. For the third thing, because she has a shot at being elected. Finally, because her socialist policies fit in very well with Bush's acts during his tenure.
Also, for that matter, there is no clear Democratic candidate yet (Obama is definitetly not dead in the water)... why so convinced Obama would not be elected?
Well, if you look back to Bill's run, he also had a 'strong competitor' that strangely faded away just in time for him to have a 'comeback' victory. Also, he's black. Don't get me wrong, here. I have no problem with that fact...but I am convinced that some powerful groups/voting blocks, whatever you want to call them, do.