A lot of things might happen, some things could happen, we don't know.
The reality of the situation is that every election is the most important election in the history of the universe, in someone's eyes. In mine, it's just another election. Somebody is going to win, stuff is going to happen, and there will be another one in 2008.
I don't like Bush or Kerry, so I won't be voting for either of them. If people keep voting for Y just because he isn't X, things are just going to keep getting worse. That has got to change, change takes time, and there is no time like the present.
I'll stop catering to the idea that consumers can't wrap their brains around the concept of multiple components in a computer when consumers show that they can wrap their brains around the concept of multiple components in a computer.
Even if they know that there are multiple components in a computer, they have no idea what they are, what they do, or any other useful information about them. "Can you put more megs in my computer?", " We put a new modem in our hard drive.", This is the kind of stuff they babble about.
Ah, so as long as they do it nicely, it's ok for the state to violate a person's rights? If only those officers had kept their language civil, that whole Rodeny King case would never have been a problem, eh?
I'm pretty confident that beating people is considered impolite in most places.
Guns provided me with an hobby for a number of years. I visited places and met people that I otherwise wouldn't have. I won't argue that a gun is not a weapon. It is, always has been, always will be. But to say that all they can do is kill is wrong.
If I remember correctly, in addition to being intelligent and somewhat crazy, wasn't there some talk a while back about him being autistic, or at least showing some traits of autism?
TV is pre-calculated to keep you attached. Nothing you will see on Television will ever actually encourage you to turn the Television off and go outside.
I have to disagree with this statement. Almost everything I see on televisions encourages me to turn it off. I don't think it's a complete wasteland yet, but it's getting there.
Should it? Has any charitable organization asked you your motive for contributing money for their cause? Do you think that they would refuse, if you told them you were only doing it for a tax deduction or for P.R.?
1. Of, relating to, having, or resulting from diabetes: diabetic patients; a diabetic coma.
2. Intended for use by a person with diabetes: diabetic candy.
I don't think that it is impossible that they would still give money. Donating to charity is a good investment for public relations. People like companies that put forth an illusion of caring.
How much money do you think the for profit companies give to charity? I'll bet those evil fucks have given more than you will see in your lifetime. Nobody is calling them hell-bound commies.
The thing that you don't seem to understand is that we refer to the continent where we live as North America. We frequently refer to our country as America. When speaking to most Americans, when you use the term "America", they assume you are refering to their country. If you had used the phrase "North America", they would assume that you are refering to the continent.
I don't know why this is so difficult to understand.
I have considered that there are more possibilities allowed by set theory than disjoint sets and how it applies to your statement. It looks like I'm going to need that diagram.
Sheesh. This isn't rocket science. Hopefully Apple has some rocket scientists and won't spend the next decade patching one hole after another.
I am having a hard time following your logic. If this isn't rocket science, why do you hope Apple has some rocket scientists? Wouldn't it be better to have someone who is not a rocket scientist to deal with problems that are not rocket science?
The only thing that they are correct about is that the second amendment does not confer an unlimited right upon individuals to own guns or weapons. The individual's right to own guns or weapons is already in place. The second amendment simply states that those rights will not be infringed.
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
Where does it spell out specifically that the individual is not the intent? The words "people" and "person" are used throughout the Bill of Rights. The word "individual" is not used at all.
Slashdot Mirror
Citation, please. Citation was a Chevrolet.
First link I found on the subject.
The reality of the situation is that every election is the most important election in the history of the universe, in someone's eyes. In mine, it's just another election. Somebody is going to win, stuff is going to happen, and there will be another one in 2008.
I don't like Bush or Kerry, so I won't be voting for either of them. If people keep voting for Y just because he isn't X, things are just going to keep getting worse. That has got to change, change takes time, and there is no time like the present.
Even if they know that there are multiple components in a computer, they have no idea what they are, what they do, or any other useful information about them. "Can you put more megs in my computer?", " We put a new modem in our hard drive.", This is the kind of stuff they babble about.
Bullshit. If people want to vote for a third party candidate, they should just do it.
I'm pretty confident that beating people is considered impolite in most places.
You're always a test subject, for damn near everything. Get used to it.
Guns provided me with an hobby for a number of years. I visited places and met people that I otherwise wouldn't have. I won't argue that a gun is not a weapon. It is, always has been, always will be. But to say that all they can do is kill is wrong.
Interesting post, thanks for the clarification.
If I remember correctly, in addition to being intelligent and somewhat crazy, wasn't there some talk a while back about him being autistic, or at least showing some traits of autism?
I have to disagree with this statement. Almost everything I see on televisions encourages me to turn it off. I don't think it's a complete wasteland yet, but it's getting there.
I hear that there is a lot of free porn online.
Isn't the reason that trees are shown as a couple of bitmaps due to hardware limitations?
I bow to your superior math skills.
Who cares?
It looks like three of us care enough to post a comment.
Should it? Has any charitable organization asked you your motive for contributing money for their cause? Do you think that they would refuse, if you told them you were only doing it for a tax deduction or for P.R.?
Doing it at all should be primary.
diabetic
adj.
1. Of, relating to, having, or resulting from
diabetes: diabetic patients; a diabetic coma.
2. Intended for use by a person with diabetes:
diabetic candy.
n.
A person who has diabetes.
You are a diabetic.
I don't think that it is impossible that they would still give money. Donating to charity is a good investment for public relations. People like companies that put forth an illusion of caring.
How much money do you think the for profit companies give to charity? I'll bet those evil fucks have given more than you will see in your lifetime. Nobody is calling them hell-bound commies.
I don't know why this is so difficult to understand.
I have considered that there are more possibilities allowed by set theory than disjoint sets and how it applies to your statement. It looks like I'm going to need that diagram.
I am having a hard time following your logic. If this isn't rocket science, why do you hope Apple has some rocket scientists? Wouldn't it be better to have someone who is not a rocket scientist to deal with problems that are not rocket science?
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
Where does it spell out specifically that the individual is not the intent? The words "people" and "person" are used throughout the Bill of Rights. The word "individual" is not used at all.
If they really want something to discuss, they could spend some time talking about the the word "irregardless".
They usually involve a short, fast stroke.