It's really going to be interesting in '08. Everyone and their dog are going to be producing political videos. If you think the Swift Boat twinks were bad, wait until you see what they come up with on the internet. A place they can dispense with all pretense of decorum and spew whatever sewage floats to the surface of the demented minds that will say or do anything to win.
This opens up whole new vistas in trash politics.
Of course, it also opens up the process to those lacking the ability to raise 25 million a quarter for their presidential campaigns. A silver lining providing a faint glimmer of hope for the American political process.
RIAA reminds more of a rabid dog: Biting at friend and foe alike. An unreasoning animal with no clear objective.
I'm not sure what strategy they're pursuing, but it's not working. One wonders why member companies continue funding an organization that frequently acts against their membership's best interests and frequently paints them in a bad light. It's just astounding to me how poorly RIAA performs their task and how ineffective in achieving their objectives. And they don't seem to learn anything from past failures. It's like a corporate version of the Bush administration.
Was this hyperbole, or does she really have significant faith in the American justice system ? And this is not a rhetorical question.
After following Groklaw for years, my feeling is she really believes that. There is a recognition that some people will cynically game the system but a belief that it will work right in the end.
As a former U.S. marine and Libertarian, I had a tendency to believe that the U.S. Constitution represented the most realistic opportunity for "justice".
Sadly that may not be true anymore. Today the "American way" is seen by the rest of the world as orange jumpsuits, military tribunals, shackles and cages at GITMO. As the Secret Service pushing protesters a comfortable distance out of sight, the FBI being used to investigate political opponents, rigged elections, spying on Americans in the name of the war on terror and generally treating the Constitution like it's just a damn piece of paper. An upside down world where incompetence is rewarded with promotions and being a capable fund raiser is more highly prized than being qualified for the job.
I'm tired of/., Cowboy Neal and all...this! *I want ROOM SERVICE*! I want the club sandwich, I want the cold Mexican beer, I want a $10,000-a-night hooker! I want my shirts laundered... like they do... at the Imperial Hotel... in Tokyo.
I'd pay $250.00 for one and they could take that extra $50.00 and use it to subsidize the cost of sending them to really poor countries and villages.
Why are they so fricking insistent on not selling them retail? I'd pay a lot to be able to whip out a bright green laptop and hand-crank it in the middle of a meeting. Don't mind me, please have your sales droid prattle on incessantly as if I weren't even here.
This isn't the first time Dell offered Linux. The last time they made a half-hearted effort then made a big show of saying no one wanted it. The Linux machines were almost impossible to find on their web site, didn't have any support options and they charged more for not putting Windows on the box. Some test.
So I'm wondering if this is an actual effort to offer Linux boxes or another PR stunt? I don't trust Dell any farther than I can pee into a hurricane. They speak with the stench of Redmond on their lips.
"The Internet used to be a university. Then it became a shopping mall. But now, it's a war zone."
That's the truth and one of the first casualties of that war was Civility. Free speech ends at the door of death threats and threats of physical violence. That is not unique to the internet and perhaps a new and open media requires a new type of law enforcement. It doesn't have to be invasive or Constitutionally questionable. A few of the worst offenders making headlines going to trial, and a couple of the worst overseas offenders extradited here for trial, would likely be all it would take to end most of the silliness. There will always be those few, desperately in need of therapy, who push the bounds. But we do have to respond. Just like real serial killers usually start out torturing animals, real acts of violence start by giving voice to the desire.
Funny, but I see more of what I could classify as hate speech on right wing web sites. Death threats, suggestions for snipers to take out some imagined offender and many along the lines of, "Who will rid me of this meddlesome priest?" And this from people counting themselves among the religious right. Shame. Tactless comment coupled with faithless religion.
Besides, why would anyone want to threaten a JAVA programmer?.NET or C++, that's understandable. But JAVA? The humanity!
The article leads to some interesting speculation. I don't think it would be an X-File to think MSFT kept their relationship cozy with OEM's by boosting the hardware requirements for Vista in exchange for them not offering Linux or bare machines. Not to mention finding ways to boost the OEM's margin on Vista.
It's obvious to state that the only way Dell and Microsoft can boost their earnings is by selling more product. But for the vast majority of users, the product they have now is more than adequate. Overall, my impression is this is more of a problem for Dell than Microsoft, who can drag their feet on security updates and discontinue support for older versions of their product to motivate updates. But old hardware goes on, theoretically, indefinitely.
Anyone staying with Windows has already figured out that the only way MSFT can continue making quarterly numbers is to squeeze their remaining customer base for more revenue. The more they squeeze, the more customers look for alternatives to Microsoft products. Rinse, lather, repeat.
My overall impression is that Dell and MSFT cling together for mutual support in the face of a saturated market on both sides of the IT equation. And that, for the most part, it's getting harder to play that game going forward.
I do, however, require at least one Windows box (currently XP64) for gaming and testing deployment of some of our enterprise applications at home.
That's the only reason I keep an XP Pro image around. Except I'm not that into gaming. It's really interesting to watch the transition. Not that many years ago you'd have a couple Linux partitions just to keep up on the latest changes but do your serious work on Win 2K. I didn't install XP until experiencing a drive failure three years ago and deciding it was worth the extra $$ to go with XP instead.
Now I keep Windows around for accessing customer systems and testing and do my serious work on Linux.:) Except for video editing and audio mixing, I still use Windows for that.
The single Windows partition takes more piddling (advanced technical term) to keep up to date than the rest of my network combined.
Mr Prakash Gopalan, the Dean of Student Affairs, says, 'one only had to look at the hard drive of any of the students' computers to see that bad content dominated over good.'
Bad by what definition? And who sets that standard? The Dean of Student Affairs deciding what's good and bad on the internet is a little like my pharmacist letting their conscience decide which meds are good and bad.
Both of those are bad ideas. Far more dangerous than any content on a college kid's hard drive.
Okay, I get it. Vista is better. Better security model, better UI, better API's...that's as much praise as I'm willing to heap on it right now, but overall I think that's pretty fair. And, all things being equal, I think Vista would be a good investment for a lot of companies.
But all things aren't equal. That pretty face comes with a pretty steep price tag and some pretty draconian restrictions. On top of the higher costs associated with Vista, you're STILL paying for anti-virus and firewall protection. For a business you still need all the overhead that goes into supporting XP. So, where's the win for business users with Vista? If by switching to Vista you could do away with the anti-virus subscription, that's a win. A big win. But you're still paying the anti-virus subscription with Vista on top of the higher costs for the base OS. And installing Vista is hugely disruptive. That will likely change, but today installing Vista would be a major productivity hit on an enterprise.
On the other hand if you switched to Ubuntu, you probably could do away with the anti-virus subscription. Ubuntu costs you $0.00 for the license and isn't any more disruptive to install than Vista. You don't need new hardware to run Ubuntu and there is a raft of very functional productivity software available.
This is not the first time Linux has come out on top of a fair TCO comparison. But the TCO margin with Vista is so big...at least right now...that Linux not only wins but it wins buy a huge margin. The justification for staying with Microsoft, at least in a business setting, is getting harder every year. And that completely ignores the shockingly one-sided MSFT EULA and ratty little snitching MSFT products do routinely in the background.
Just because you might have a miserable experience playing with untested and unrefined software, other people get a thrill of being the first to adapt and enjoy the self education of trying something new.
On the contrary, I write some of that miserable untested software that provides that unrefined experience for a lot of users.:)
I'm really wondering what's driving the early adopters this time. It just seems like there are going to be so many short-term changes, many driver compatibility issues and so few compelling reasons to switch right now, I can't see why anyone would put themselves through the bother for anything other than curiosity. Which is really okay. I'm curious, but I'll wait. I won't look at Vista compatibility for any of my customer systems until next year at the earliest.
If there are compelling features, apart from modest improvements in security and the UI, I'm not aware of them. Perhaps a question for a/. poll. Why are you switching to Vista now instead of a year from now?
I'm not going to dig on Vista or MSFT. I don't use their products at home or at work, if I can avoid doing so, but that's not a good reason to rip on them or people wanting to try Vista. I'm guessing that the majority of those attempting a Vista upgrade already are aware they have the option to go with Apple or Linux and have a reason for not going that route.
I'm curious about why those of you doing are putting yourself through the exercise? What's compelling you to try Vista now? As opposed to waiting a few months until the compatibility issues are sorted out or it comes with a new PC? I'm not sure Vista will ever support every video, sound or ethernet card from the beginning of computer time and I'm not sure it's a good use of MSFT's resources to attempt that kind of massive hardware reach back.
So why now? Is there some feature you really want? Are there games that are Vista only? Or is just techno-lust at this stage? Wanting to be technically proficient in MSFT's latest and greatest? There's no right answer here, I'm really wondering.
Or did I miss the big rally where everyone filed by the podium where some guy hit you in the forehead while yelling, "The power of Ballmer compels you!";)
UW has a long history of being a center of political activism, as far back as I can remember. Some of my oldest memories are the riots in Madison protesting the Viet Nam war.
Another incident I remember is a student body president who raided the student association funds to create a life size copy of the head of the Statue of Liberty and the torch and park it out on the frozen lake one winter. Instead of getting kicked out for wasting funds, they were re-elected by a landslide and followed that trick by covering the commons with pink plastic flamingos. The details are hazy but that's mostly accurate.
This is the school that for years had the Budweiser song as the unofficial school song. They'd play that song before football games and the entire stadium would shutter from tens of thousands of people stomping their feet in time to the music and at the end yelling, "When you say Wissss-con-sin. You've said it all!"
It's the town where a man got arrested for walking naked down State Street at 2 am. In those days he would not have attracted the attention of the police even then had he not been dragging a dead muskrat at the time. The cops said they stopped to ask where he got the muskrat.
The point is if there was going to be any place that would tell the clueless mofo's at RIAA to go stuff it's little surprise it would be UW.
So do people still go to the Stone Hearth (aka The Stone Hole)? Used to listen to this really loud little band there...you may remember then as Cheap Trick.
I probably wrongly singled out the EFF, whereas I probably meant the FSF.
Your comparing apples and oranges in either case. The choice to use open source software as part of your development process begins early on. Linksys didn't wake up one day and discover GPL code in their router firmware. They made a conscious decision to use GPL code as a base to cut development costs early on, knowing full well what the license terms required. Later they decided improvements and modifications were "theirs" and they didn't have to give anything back.
The alternative is to pay the money up front and write your code from scratch. They knew exactly what they were doing, I've heard other companies saying the same thing. Line usually goes something like, "We won't put it out there. Let them sue us, we can always settle and bury a copy of the source code somewhere on the server it's hard to find." Because there are no monetary damages involved, some companies feel like they can use open source code and later play hardball with the open source community about releasing changes.
So, yes, when you start your project with open source code...all your base belongs to us. It's not a secret, you know that starting out. And if you discover later that one of your programmers has been gun decking their contributions by copying open source code, you have the option of removing their contributions...and if you can't separate their contributions you shouldn't be in the software business anyway...and pay for a rewrite. That's the way OSS works. It's not a secret. There are options if you don't like the deal. Because some companies are going to be dickheads and go to court before they'll release changes doesn't mean it's anything like the proprietary enforcement model.
I'm not sure what that means, but I like it anyway. That's right up there with Cobert's "flaccid with anger". Can't wait to be in the middle of a really important high-level meeting and announce some part of the plan "spanks of rigidity."
They'll still be wondering what it means on the plane home. Adding that to my quote tiddler. ---->
As far as I know it's original, though I'm sure the thought has been expressed in similar terms in different ways. That's what they are. Mix religion and government and the Taliban is what you get. Whether it's a Musilim Taliban, Christian Taliban, or Jewish Taliban-like government at the time of Christ in Palestine backed up by Roman soldiers it's still religion being enforced by the state.
It starts off with the best intentions: Violence on TV, sex on TV or some other "think of the children" initiative. But once the mechanism for pushing a political agenda is in place, it's just going to keep on rolling. Pretty soon there will be news stories about soldiers blowing up native American totems because their idolatrous. That's why it's so dangerous and so incumbent on the minority of us left with two neurons left to rub together to make a spark to cling together for survival.
What part of "My kingdom is not of this world" don't those mofo's get? Stupidity is not a racial trait. I will band together with people of any race, color, creed or sexual orientation to fight against the rising tide of dogma and stupidity we face in this country.
The Parents Television Council (PTC), the group at the vanguard of the TV-sex wars,
Whether it's sex education, abortion rights or teaching evolution in schools, the religious right won't ever quit. If they win in one area, they'll just start pushing their religious agenda in a different arena, and they'll keep it up until the government is enforcing religious principles. The American Taliban.
Pick your side because there's no compromise position they'll respect.
Slashdot Mirror
It's really going to be interesting in '08. Everyone and their dog are going to be producing political videos. If you think the Swift Boat twinks were bad, wait until you see what they come up with on the internet. A place they can dispense with all pretense of decorum and spew whatever sewage floats to the surface of the demented minds that will say or do anything to win.
This opens up whole new vistas in trash politics.
Of course, it also opens up the process to those lacking the ability to raise 25 million a quarter for their presidential campaigns. A silver lining providing a faint glimmer of hope for the American political process.
RIAA reminds more of a rabid dog: Biting at friend and foe alike. An unreasoning animal with no clear objective.
I'm not sure what strategy they're pursuing, but it's not working. One wonders why member companies continue funding an organization that frequently acts against their membership's best interests and frequently paints them in a bad light. It's just astounding to me how poorly RIAA performs their task and how ineffective in achieving their objectives. And they don't seem to learn anything from past failures. It's like a corporate version of the Bush administration.
Was this hyperbole, or does she really have significant faith in the American justice system ? And this is not a rhetorical question.
After following Groklaw for years, my feeling is she really believes that. There is a recognition that some people will cynically game the system but a belief that it will work right in the end.
As a former U.S. marine and Libertarian, I had a tendency to believe that the U.S. Constitution represented the most realistic opportunity for "justice".
Sadly that may not be true anymore. Today the "American way" is seen by the rest of the world as orange jumpsuits, military tribunals, shackles and cages at GITMO. As the Secret Service pushing protesters a comfortable distance out of sight, the FBI being used to investigate political opponents, rigged elections, spying on Americans in the name of the war on terror and generally treating the Constitution like it's just a damn piece of paper. An upside down world where incompetence is rewarded with promotions and being a capable fund raiser is more highly prized than being qualified for the job.
I'm wet-wired for 80 gigs.
I'm tired of /., Cowboy Neal and all...this! *I want ROOM SERVICE*! I want the club sandwich, I want the cold Mexican beer, I want a $10,000-a-night hooker! I want my shirts laundered... like they do... at the Imperial Hotel... in Tokyo.
This is your brain.
This is your brain on PowerPoi...what was the question again?
Yeah, it's all fun and games until your liquid robot reshapes its hand into a poker and someone loses an eye.
Spam, spam, eggs, spam and Vista.
Spam, eggs, Vista and spam.
Spam, spam, spam, Vista and spam.
With apologies to Monty Python and brought to you by the Department of Silly Walks.
I'd pay $250.00 for one and they could take that extra $50.00 and use it to subsidize the cost of sending them to really poor countries and villages.
Why are they so fricking insistent on not selling them retail? I'd pay a lot to be able to whip out a bright green laptop and hand-crank it in the middle of a meeting. Don't mind me, please have your sales droid prattle on incessantly as if I weren't even here.
This isn't the first time Dell offered Linux. The last time they made a half-hearted effort then made a big show of saying no one wanted it. The Linux machines were almost impossible to find on their web site, didn't have any support options and they charged more for not putting Windows on the box. Some test.
So I'm wondering if this is an actual effort to offer Linux boxes or another PR stunt? I don't trust Dell any farther than I can pee into a hurricane. They speak with the stench of Redmond on their lips.
"The Internet used to be a university. Then it became a shopping mall. But now, it's a war zone."
That's the truth and one of the first casualties of that war was Civility. Free speech ends at the door of death threats and threats of physical violence. That is not unique to the internet and perhaps a new and open media requires a new type of law enforcement. It doesn't have to be invasive or Constitutionally questionable. A few of the worst offenders making headlines going to trial, and a couple of the worst overseas offenders extradited here for trial, would likely be all it would take to end most of the silliness. There will always be those few, desperately in need of therapy, who push the bounds. But we do have to respond. Just like real serial killers usually start out torturing animals, real acts of violence start by giving voice to the desire.
Funny, but I see more of what I could classify as hate speech on right wing web sites. Death threats, suggestions for snipers to take out some imagined offender and many along the lines of, "Who will rid me of this meddlesome priest?" And this from people counting themselves among the religious right. Shame. Tactless comment coupled with faithless religion.
Besides, why would anyone want to threaten a JAVA programmer? .NET or C++, that's understandable. But JAVA? The humanity!
The article leads to some interesting speculation. I don't think it would be an X-File to think MSFT kept their relationship cozy with OEM's by boosting the hardware requirements for Vista in exchange for them not offering Linux or bare machines. Not to mention finding ways to boost the OEM's margin on Vista.
It's obvious to state that the only way Dell and Microsoft can boost their earnings is by selling more product. But for the vast majority of users, the product they have now is more than adequate. Overall, my impression is this is more of a problem for Dell than Microsoft, who can drag their feet on security updates and discontinue support for older versions of their product to motivate updates. But old hardware goes on, theoretically, indefinitely.
Anyone staying with Windows has already figured out that the only way MSFT can continue making quarterly numbers is to squeeze their remaining customer base for more revenue. The more they squeeze, the more customers look for alternatives to Microsoft products. Rinse, lather, repeat.
My overall impression is that Dell and MSFT cling together for mutual support in the face of a saturated market on both sides of the IT equation. And that, for the most part, it's getting harder to play that game going forward.
I do, however, require at least one Windows box (currently XP64) for gaming and testing deployment of some of our enterprise applications at home.
That's the only reason I keep an XP Pro image around. Except I'm not that into gaming. It's really interesting to watch the transition. Not that many years ago you'd have a couple Linux partitions just to keep up on the latest changes but do your serious work on Win 2K. I didn't install XP until experiencing a drive failure three years ago and deciding it was worth the extra $$ to go with XP instead.
Now I keep Windows around for accessing customer systems and testing and do my serious work on Linux. :) Except for video editing and audio mixing, I still use Windows for that.
The single Windows partition takes more piddling (advanced technical term) to keep up to date than the rest of my network combined.
In Soviet Russia...
...we're all Republicans!
Mr Prakash Gopalan, the Dean of Student Affairs, says, 'one only had to look at the hard drive of any of the students' computers to see that bad content dominated over good.'
Bad by what definition? And who sets that standard? The Dean of Student Affairs deciding what's good and bad on the internet is a little like my pharmacist letting their conscience decide which meds are good and bad.
Both of those are bad ideas. Far more dangerous than any content on a college kid's hard drive.
raises hand.
Microsoft said it agreed to join the alliance to work with other vendors to embrace Ajax.
There, I fixed the headline.
Okay, I get it. Vista is better. Better security model, better UI, better API's...that's as much praise as I'm willing to heap on it right now, but overall I think that's pretty fair. And, all things being equal, I think Vista would be a good investment for a lot of companies.
But all things aren't equal. That pretty face comes with a pretty steep price tag and some pretty draconian restrictions. On top of the higher costs associated with Vista, you're STILL paying for anti-virus and firewall protection. For a business you still need all the overhead that goes into supporting XP. So, where's the win for business users with Vista? If by switching to Vista you could do away with the anti-virus subscription, that's a win. A big win. But you're still paying the anti-virus subscription with Vista on top of the higher costs for the base OS. And installing Vista is hugely disruptive. That will likely change, but today installing Vista would be a major productivity hit on an enterprise.
On the other hand if you switched to Ubuntu, you probably could do away with the anti-virus subscription. Ubuntu costs you $0.00 for the license and isn't any more disruptive to install than Vista. You don't need new hardware to run Ubuntu and there is a raft of very functional productivity software available.
This is not the first time Linux has come out on top of a fair TCO comparison. But the TCO margin with Vista is so big...at least right now...that Linux not only wins but it wins buy a huge margin. The justification for staying with Microsoft, at least in a business setting, is getting harder every year. And that completely ignores the shockingly one-sided MSFT EULA and ratty little snitching MSFT products do routinely in the background.
What is wrong with you people?
You must be new here.
She could...go...all...the....way!
The NFL got JACKED UP!
Just because you might have a miserable experience playing with untested and unrefined software, other people get a thrill of being the first to adapt and enjoy the self education of trying something new.
On the contrary, I write some of that miserable untested software that provides that unrefined experience for a lot of users. :)
I'm really wondering what's driving the early adopters this time. It just seems like there are going to be so many short-term changes, many driver compatibility issues and so few compelling reasons to switch right now, I can't see why anyone would put themselves through the bother for anything other than curiosity. Which is really okay. I'm curious, but I'll wait. I won't look at Vista compatibility for any of my customer systems until next year at the earliest.
If there are compelling features, apart from modest improvements in security and the UI, I'm not aware of them. Perhaps a question for a /. poll. Why are you switching to Vista now instead of a year from now?
I'm not going to dig on Vista or MSFT. I don't use their products at home or at work, if I can avoid doing so, but that's not a good reason to rip on them or people wanting to try Vista. I'm guessing that the majority of those attempting a Vista upgrade already are aware they have the option to go with Apple or Linux and have a reason for not going that route.
I'm curious about why those of you doing are putting yourself through the exercise? What's compelling you to try Vista now? As opposed to waiting a few months until the compatibility issues are sorted out or it comes with a new PC? I'm not sure Vista will ever support every video, sound or ethernet card from the beginning of computer time and I'm not sure it's a good use of MSFT's resources to attempt that kind of massive hardware reach back.
So why now? Is there some feature you really want? Are there games that are Vista only? Or is just techno-lust at this stage? Wanting to be technically proficient in MSFT's latest and greatest? There's no right answer here, I'm really wondering.
Or did I miss the big rally where everyone filed by the podium where some guy hit you in the forehead while yelling, "The power of Ballmer compels you!" ;)
UW has a long history of being a center of political activism, as far back as I can remember. Some of my oldest memories are the riots in Madison protesting the Viet Nam war.
Another incident I remember is a student body president who raided the student association funds to create a life size copy of the head of the Statue of Liberty and the torch and park it out on the frozen lake one winter. Instead of getting kicked out for wasting funds, they were re-elected by a landslide and followed that trick by covering the commons with pink plastic flamingos. The details are hazy but that's mostly accurate.
This is the school that for years had the Budweiser song as the unofficial school song. They'd play that song before football games and the entire stadium would shutter from tens of thousands of people stomping their feet in time to the music and at the end yelling, "When you say Wissss-con-sin. You've said it all!"
It's the town where a man got arrested for walking naked down State Street at 2 am. In those days he would not have attracted the attention of the police even then had he not been dragging a dead muskrat at the time. The cops said they stopped to ask where he got the muskrat.
The point is if there was going to be any place that would tell the clueless mofo's at RIAA to go stuff it's little surprise it would be UW.
So do people still go to the Stone Hearth (aka The Stone Hole)? Used to listen to this really loud little band there...you may remember then as Cheap Trick.
I probably wrongly singled out the EFF, whereas I probably meant the FSF.
Your comparing apples and oranges in either case. The choice to use open source software as part of your development process begins early on. Linksys didn't wake up one day and discover GPL code in their router firmware. They made a conscious decision to use GPL code as a base to cut development costs early on, knowing full well what the license terms required. Later they decided improvements and modifications were "theirs" and they didn't have to give anything back.
The alternative is to pay the money up front and write your code from scratch. They knew exactly what they were doing, I've heard other companies saying the same thing. Line usually goes something like, "We won't put it out there. Let them sue us, we can always settle and bury a copy of the source code somewhere on the server it's hard to find." Because there are no monetary damages involved, some companies feel like they can use open source code and later play hardball with the open source community about releasing changes.
So, yes, when you start your project with open source code...all your base belongs to us. It's not a secret, you know that starting out. And if you discover later that one of your programmers has been gun decking their contributions by copying open source code, you have the option of removing their contributions...and if you can't separate their contributions you shouldn't be in the software business anyway...and pay for a rewrite. That's the way OSS works. It's not a secret. There are options if you don't like the deal. Because some companies are going to be dickheads and go to court before they'll release changes doesn't mean it's anything like the proprietary enforcement model.
I'm not sure what that means, but I like it anyway. That's right up there with Cobert's "flaccid with anger". Can't wait to be in the middle of a really important high-level meeting and announce some part of the plan "spanks of rigidity."
They'll still be wondering what it means on the plane home. Adding that to my quote tiddler. ---->
As far as I know it's original, though I'm sure the thought has been expressed in similar terms in different ways. That's what they are. Mix religion and government and the Taliban is what you get. Whether it's a Musilim Taliban, Christian Taliban, or Jewish Taliban-like government at the time of Christ in Palestine backed up by Roman soldiers it's still religion being enforced by the state.
It starts off with the best intentions: Violence on TV, sex on TV or some other "think of the children" initiative. But once the mechanism for pushing a political agenda is in place, it's just going to keep on rolling. Pretty soon there will be news stories about soldiers blowing up native American totems because their idolatrous. That's why it's so dangerous and so incumbent on the minority of us left with two neurons left to rub together to make a spark to cling together for survival.
What part of "My kingdom is not of this world" don't those mofo's get? Stupidity is not a racial trait. I will band together with people of any race, color, creed or sexual orientation to fight against the rising tide of dogma and stupidity we face in this country.
The Parents Television Council (PTC), the group at the vanguard of the TV-sex wars,
Whether it's sex education, abortion rights or teaching evolution in schools, the religious right won't ever quit. If they win in one area, they'll just start pushing their religious agenda in a different arena, and they'll keep it up until the government is enforcing religious principles. The American Taliban.
Pick your side because there's no compromise position they'll respect.