This is more of a personal political pet peeve, but liberal-minded folks should really open themselves up to the true spirit of the Second Amendment to the US Constitution, the one the mainstream Democratic party wishes to erase. I know this idea is often associated with the 'redneck constituency', and of course the Dems love that point of view because nothing sells politics like bigotry, but this is a basic fundamental human and American right. Things are on that slippery slope, my friends. The very last stronghold the people have against a tyrannical government, whether it comes this year or a hundred years from now, is the right to overthrow that government. It's not just a right but a duty. Any forward-thinker who has a concept of history can see that American politicians are selling us out and that things are eventually going to get ugly. Once they disarm you, you haven't even got a chance. Now I'm not telling you to go join some racist radical extremist militia and dig yourself in the dirt, but I believe that a true civil rights advocate should not forsake the Second Amendment for the cause of social control issues. We're going to need it one day, maybe not soon, but the day is going to come. A violent overthrow should be a last resort, but as with all things, once you let a government take your rights away you will almost certainly not get them back.
I think Congress should only get paid a jury's wages. Then people would not make it their sole career and money would not be the driving force. Also, since they'd have other jobs, they wouldn't have to sit around twiddling their thumbs coming up with ideas for idiotic laws just because they want to say they did something. We need a Congress that doesn't want to pass a law unless they really have to.
The president actually had the power to get rid of the 'pork' for a short while. During Clinton's second term the Line Item Veto Act was passed giving him the power to cross out things he thought were wrong for the bill and send it back to the Congress, who would then have to approve or disapprove the changes. If they disapproved he could veto that and they they could override with 2/3rds.
That lasted just over a year until it was struck down by the Supreme Court in 1998 as a violation of the presentment clause (Article I, Section 7).
I think there have been some bills in Congress to change the way the rules are so that the 'riders' are related to the bill's topic, but asking Congresscritters to uphold integrity and honesty in passing bills is like asking the fox to guard the henhouse. These riders are a major source of their power and they use them all the time for their little-publicized amendments which further their own agenda.
Palpatine goes back in time and uses the numbers for himself and becomes the rich emperor of an evil empire. Lest you think he got away with it, Palpatine broke off a part of his cane while he was in the force chamber so Obi-Wan knew that he had to go back in time to prevent Palpatine from controlling Anakin and using the money to take over the galaxy. So while Obi-Wan is driving the DeLorean and...
The naysayers are always the most vocal. The Lucas-haters never really understand the sad irony of their situation, because while they thrash the new movies as a betrayal of their lovely childhood memories they forget themselves in an inconspicuous and pitiful devotion to concerning themselves with every move Lucas makes.
Their sad devotion to that ancient trilogy has not helped them conjure up DVDs of the original films, or given them clairvoyance enough to find something better to do with their time.
But there will be a lot of Slashdotters who will get on the soap box and get modded up telling you how they boycotted Episodes I and II yet at the same time those movies raped their childhood. Oh and they won't see Episode III out of principle, even though they have tickets to the midnight showing and plan to see it again the next day.
Also they cry themselves to sleep at night holding their pillows moaning "Han shoots first!"
This is true, at this time, but one of the problems with this Act is that it gives the Fed.gov carte blanche to raise the minimum standard without limit and provides no funding to the states to come into compliance.
Santa Claus is claimed to live at the North Pole and common lore dispells his existence as nothing more than a story. We can go to the North Pole and we won't find him, we can observe out chimneys and we won't see him.
The universe and its origins, on the other hand, have NO provable theory behind them. To say that all around us was designed by an intelligent 'creator' is just as valid a theory as saying it 'just happened'. Neither one can ultimately be proven to the satisfaction of scientific standards at this point in time. There is evidence that a God exists, but there isn't proof. Likewise there is evidence that evolution is real and that we may have been derived from some single-celled organism which came from a big bang and chaos and so forth, but there isn't absolute proof of that either. Neither theory satisfactorily answers the questions it poses, like 'Who created God?' or 'What was before this big bang?'
A proper analogy would enter the realm of the unknown. Scientist 1 says 'I think this is the complex way all matter works based on my tests and nothing disproves this so far.' Scientist 2 can say 'Well I have a different theory, based on my observations' but it is stupid and meaningless for him to say 'Yeah well there's no proof that invisible flying elephants don't exist but we don't believe that now do we!?!'
I'm not sure if you're aware but all accounts of historical events are passed on by written word, or hearsay as your article calls it. There's no less reason to believe Jesus existed (and there are more accounts than just the Bible) than there is to believe anything else in our history books.
"Also, just because most people who are "ignorant" believe in Jesus..."
People who believe this and propagate it are no less a part of the 'ignorant society' of which you speak. There are ignorant Christians, but there are also ignorant Muslims, ignorant atheists, etc. What all of these people have in common, and by your statements you included, is that they align themselves so much with a political doctine that is anti-"something else" that they lose all power to objectively consider more than one explanation or be tolerant of others with differing beliefs.
People like both yourself and the 'ignorant' Jesus-believers you chastise suffer from the same affliction of using religion to further their own bigotry and bias instead of embracing it or tolerating it as a doctrine of love and morality which extremists often pervert.
While European nations have been taking advantage of the time change for decades, in 1996 the European Union (EU) standardized an EU-wide "summertime period." The EU version of Daylight Saving Time runs from the last Sunday in March through the last Sunday in October. During the summer, Russia's clocks are two hours ahead of standard time. For example, Moscow standard time (UTC+3) is about a half-hour ahead of local mean time (UTC+2:30); this is about the same situation as Detroit, whose standard time (UTC-5) is also about a half-hour ahead of local mean time (UTC-5:32). During the winter, all 11 of the Russian time zones remain an hour ahead of standard time. With their high latitude, the two hours of Daylight Saving Time really helps to save daylight. In the Southern Hemisphere where summer comes in December, Daylight Saving Time is observed from October to March. (The clock at above right is viewed from within the Musée d'Orsay in Paris.)
Probably has more to do with students being inclined to compete in the various US-based ACM competitions rather than travel to China. Although everyone seems to be jumping on the bandwagon quickly, I don't see why a three-person team competing in some foreign programming contest should be representative of program quality or lack thereof in schools like MIT, CalTech, Carnegie Mellon, etc.
True. You should live somewhere like the UK. Those cameras on street corners will keep you safe. So will those new-fangled ID cards. Oh and don't forget the license-plate scanners they are implementing to follow you around the road and make sure you stay honest. You get all that for free without even a remotely justifiable massive terrorist attack to boot.
Certainly there are areas where the government has taken too much leeway in restricting free speech. However, can you honestly say someone should be able to say they're selling cookies but in reality it is dog shit? Or if the newspapers came out with an article that said Jim Logajan is a three-legged circus clown who rapes donkeys?
To me the real answer to this question of how long our media should last is "Long enough for us to move it to the next most convenient and efficient format". The storage we have now is impressive but any forward-thinking person would reasonably assume that it will be outdone and become obsolete relatively soon. Of course most organizations will choose not to ride the wave of new technology for cost reasons, so that has to be factored in as well.
I'm not saying Osama hates us for our freedom. I am saying that he is using the most effective technique for weakening our country being that he cannot defeat us with military might. His motivations are immaterial to the point I'm trying to get across, please don't pollute it with your politics.
I think things like the TSA are Osama's greatest victory over the US. What better way to destroy a free republic with much greater strength in arms but to dismantle its own liberty from within? Make the people afraid, knowing that their leaders will erode rights and freedoms all in the name of security.
Suppose there is not another space shuttle built by the time some of these astronauts retire. It is given then, that these astronauts will never fly again and should be fired.
Slashdot Mirror
This is more of a personal political pet peeve, but liberal-minded folks should really open themselves up to the true spirit of the Second Amendment to the US Constitution, the one the mainstream Democratic party wishes to erase. I know this idea is often associated with the 'redneck constituency', and of course the Dems love that point of view because nothing sells politics like bigotry, but this is a basic fundamental human and American right. Things are on that slippery slope, my friends. The very last stronghold the people have against a tyrannical government, whether it comes this year or a hundred years from now, is the right to overthrow that government. It's not just a right but a duty. Any forward-thinker who has a concept of history can see that American politicians are selling us out and that things are eventually going to get ugly. Once they disarm you, you haven't even got a chance. Now I'm not telling you to go join some racist radical extremist militia and dig yourself in the dirt, but I believe that a true civil rights advocate should not forsake the Second Amendment for the cause of social control issues. We're going to need it one day, maybe not soon, but the day is going to come. A violent overthrow should be a last resort, but as with all things, once you let a government take your rights away you will almost certainly not get them back.
I think Congress should only get paid a jury's wages. Then people would not make it their sole career and money would not be the driving force. Also, since they'd have other jobs, they wouldn't have to sit around twiddling their thumbs coming up with ideas for idiotic laws just because they want to say they did something. We need a Congress that doesn't want to pass a law unless they really have to.
That lasted just over a year until it was struck down by the Supreme Court in 1998 as a violation of the presentment clause (Article I, Section 7).
I think there have been some bills in Congress to change the way the rules are so that the 'riders' are related to the bill's topic, but asking Congresscritters to uphold integrity and honesty in passing bills is like asking the fox to guard the henhouse. These riders are a major source of their power and they use them all the time for their little-publicized amendments which further their own agenda.
Wait I'm confused.
Is that the new politically correct version for the 21st century?
Their sad devotion to that ancient trilogy has not helped them conjure up DVDs of the original films, or given them clairvoyance enough to find something better to do with their time.
Also they cry themselves to sleep at night holding their pillows moaning "Han shoots first!"
This is true, at this time, but one of the problems with this Act is that it gives the Fed.gov carte blanche to raise the minimum standard without limit and provides no funding to the states to come into compliance.
Sweden and Switzerland are not the same country.
The universe and its origins, on the other hand, have NO provable theory behind them. To say that all around us was designed by an intelligent 'creator' is just as valid a theory as saying it 'just happened'. Neither one can ultimately be proven to the satisfaction of scientific standards at this point in time. There is evidence that a God exists, but there isn't proof. Likewise there is evidence that evolution is real and that we may have been derived from some single-celled organism which came from a big bang and chaos and so forth, but there isn't absolute proof of that either. Neither theory satisfactorily answers the questions it poses, like 'Who created God?' or 'What was before this big bang?'
A proper analogy would enter the realm of the unknown. Scientist 1 says 'I think this is the complex way all matter works based on my tests and nothing disproves this so far.' Scientist 2 can say 'Well I have a different theory, based on my observations' but it is stupid and meaningless for him to say 'Yeah well there's no proof that invisible flying elephants don't exist but we don't believe that now do we!?!'
She probably is made of plastic after all.
I'm not sure if you're aware but all accounts of historical events are passed on by written word, or hearsay as your article calls it. There's no less reason to believe Jesus existed (and there are more accounts than just the Bible) than there is to believe anything else in our history books.
"Also, just because most people who are "ignorant" believe in Jesus..."
People who believe this and propagate it are no less a part of the 'ignorant society' of which you speak. There are ignorant Christians, but there are also ignorant Muslims, ignorant atheists, etc. What all of these people have in common, and by your statements you included, is that they align themselves so much with a political doctine that is anti-"something else" that they lose all power to objectively consider more than one explanation or be tolerant of others with differing beliefs.
People like both yourself and the 'ignorant' Jesus-believers you chastise suffer from the same affliction of using religion to further their own bigotry and bias instead of embracing it or tolerating it as a doctrine of love and morality which extremists often pervert.
He whips out his prime Alabama tux-snake and tells you it ain't too god-damned beaucoup.
While European nations have been taking advantage of the time change for decades, in 1996 the European Union (EU) standardized an EU-wide "summertime period." The EU version of Daylight Saving Time runs from the last Sunday in March through the last Sunday in October. During the summer, Russia's clocks are two hours ahead of standard time. For example, Moscow standard time (UTC+3) is about a half-hour ahead of local mean time (UTC+2:30); this is about the same situation as Detroit, whose standard time (UTC-5) is also about a half-hour ahead of local mean time (UTC-5:32). During the winter, all 11 of the Russian time zones remain an hour ahead of standard time. With their high latitude, the two hours of Daylight Saving Time really helps to save daylight. In the Southern Hemisphere where summer comes in December, Daylight Saving Time is observed from October to March. (The clock at above right is viewed from within the Musée d'Orsay in Paris.)
Don't forget to compile the kernel modules for your SoundDriva too.
I preferred Conedrakesoft, but... whatever...
Probably has more to do with students being inclined to compete in the various US-based ACM competitions rather than travel to China. Although everyone seems to be jumping on the bandwagon quickly, I don't see why a three-person team competing in some foreign programming contest should be representative of program quality or lack thereof in schools like MIT, CalTech, Carnegie Mellon, etc.
True. You should live somewhere like the UK. Those cameras on street corners will keep you safe. So will those new-fangled ID cards. Oh and don't forget the license-plate scanners they are implementing to follow you around the road and make sure you stay honest. You get all that for free without even a remotely justifiable massive terrorist attack to boot.
Certainly there are areas where the government has taken too much leeway in restricting free speech. However, can you honestly say someone should be able to say they're selling cookies but in reality it is dog shit? Or if the newspapers came out with an article that said Jim Logajan is a three-legged circus clown who rapes donkeys?
To me the real answer to this question of how long our media should last is "Long enough for us to move it to the next most convenient and efficient format". The storage we have now is impressive but any forward-thinking person would reasonably assume that it will be outdone and become obsolete relatively soon. Of course most organizations will choose not to ride the wave of new technology for cost reasons, so that has to be factored in as well.
I'm not saying Osama hates us for our freedom. I am saying that he is using the most effective technique for weakening our country being that he cannot defeat us with military might. His motivations are immaterial to the point I'm trying to get across, please don't pollute it with your politics.
I think things like the TSA are Osama's greatest victory over the US. What better way to destroy a free republic with much greater strength in arms but to dismantle its own liberty from within? Make the people afraid, knowing that their leaders will erode rights and freedoms all in the name of security.
That is begging the question. ;)