You're ignoring the definitinos that have become part of the American vernacular. There's nothing wrong with them so long as everyone understands what dictionary is being used.
The GOP didn't put the term liberal into that place, the liberals themselves did. They gave themselves that label, much as they're now renaming themselvs "progressives".
Opera is just a browser. If I wanted just a browser I would consider Opera because it's arguably better at browsing the web than Mozilla.
Mozilla, though, is a platform. It's not bigger and (some say) slower than Opera for the fun of it, but because of the built in technologies that make it a platform.
What? Slashdotters having inconsistent opinions? No!
The general opinion of Slashdot on various matters is incredibly inconsistent. I mean honestly, it's like a bunch of children.
In general there seems to be no real ideology behind the opinion of Slashdot. The good guys and bad guys are picked based not at all on the merits of their actions.
No, everyone may thank the voting system that we (the gernal population) have maintained.
Democracy is working well. It's doing pretty much what a democracy does. But you're right, it is beginning to break down. We're running out of ideal examples of democracy, things like lynchings and minority slavery.
Boy those were the days... democracy was so much fun.
Yes, and you know what happenes when people, especially those with lots of money, get more money?
Why, they shove it allll in a big pillow at home and never look at it again. That way it's safely not doing any good for anybody, especially themselves.
There was barely a first dip, and not nearly a second. Claiming a third is completely making up numbers.
But then again, your picture of the "tax benefits policies" is so incredibly breaking from reality that it's no surprise you seem to be working from a different set of numbers on the recession count also...
If you're talking about legally binding numbers then none of it really matters anyway, as the electoral vote is the only national legally binding number for presidental elections.
If you're talking about actual votes, though, the margin of error in the machines is higher than the difference and so there was no winner.
So which is it? Are you talking about the irrelevant official numbers or the numbers of people who actually voted for each man, which can never be known.
In the popular vote the difference between numbers for each candidate were far less than the margin of error. Therefore there was NO winner for the popular vote.
People don't seem to realize this.
Every recount in Florida has been in Bush's favor. The statewide popular vote was in Bush's favor. The electorial college vote was in Bush's favor. The county-by-county vote across the nation was in Bush's favor. And the popular vote across the nation was not in Gore's.
How can you possibly still believe that Gore rightfully won?
That is probably THE most widely and stupidly quoted line in all of Slashdot. I wish I could reach through the monitor and slap 99% of people who use it; them and those who make inane references to 1984.
Before you look to long dead guys for support you need to demonstrate that the adage applies by showing how 1) an essential liberty is being given up, 2) a safety is the sole motivation behind the choice, and 3) that it would be a temporary one.
If any of these three qualifiers are false, and none of them are necessarily true here, then the the adage doesn't apply and you are simply another sheep chiming in with the line quoted by every other nonthinking Slashdot fool.
I believe that in the big, long term picture it will simply not work like that. Especially with advancements that take more and more friction out of the money system long term "winning" of one group of people will simply not be as stable as you propose.
> Again that's wrong. In a country without redistribution your slice of the pie can only grow smaller and there is no hope for bettering your life or your children's.
Yes, and luckily we have this little system called capitalism that redistributes money.
Nobody is forcing you to listen to them by calling you.
By buying a phone and signing up for a service that does not rely on an opt-in calling list (meaning that anyone can call you without you first listing them on a whitelist) you agree that anyone, including marketers, can call you.
You are a customer of the phone services, just like the telemarketers. You could BE a telemarketer at any moment, after all. At any point you can decide to pick up the phone and call another person looking for money or whatever.
Slashdot Mirror
You're ignoring the definitinos that have become part of the American vernacular. There's nothing wrong with them so long as everyone understands what dictionary is being used.
The GOP didn't put the term liberal into that place, the liberals themselves did. They gave themselves that label, much as they're now renaming themselvs "progressives".
Opera is just a browser. If I wanted just a browser I would consider Opera because it's arguably better at browsing the web than Mozilla.
Mozilla, though, is a platform. It's not bigger and (some say) slower than Opera for the fun of it, but because of the built in technologies that make it a platform.
The browsers are not comparable.
Opera's just a browser.
Mozilla is something much bigger.
I've heard that the XP update includes a GUI, but since my XP system crashes every time I suggest an update I guess I'll never know...
What? Slashdotters having inconsistent opinions? No!
The general opinion of Slashdot on various matters is incredibly inconsistent. I mean honestly, it's like a bunch of children.
In general there seems to be no real ideology behind the opinion of Slashdot. The good guys and bad guys are picked based not at all on the merits of their actions.
What? And make people responsible for their own financial situations? Never!
I'm sorry but soon programmer will be what teenage kids do, like mc donalds of today.
I'd say that situation is almost here as it is.
No longer real programming skill such a requirement; the real scientists have moved on to focus on purer science.
No, everyone may thank the voting system that we (the gernal population) have maintained.
Democracy is working well. It's doing pretty much what a democracy does. But you're right, it is beginning to break down. We're running out of ideal examples of democracy, things like lynchings and minority slavery.
Boy those were the days... democracy was so much fun.
Oh yeah, fillibuster it. Good idea.
Yes, and you know what happenes when people, especially those with lots of money, get more money?
Why, they shove it allll in a big pillow at home and never look at it again. That way it's safely not doing any good for anybody, especially themselves.
Tripple dip?
No such thing.
There was barely a first dip, and not nearly a second. Claiming a third is completely making up numbers.
But then again, your picture of the "tax benefits policies" is so incredibly breaking from reality that it's no surprise you seem to be working from a different set of numbers on the recession count also...
Check your economic history.
Every time recently that there has been a significant tax cut there has been an immediate hike in revinues.
Look into it.
No, rational and open minded economic surveys of the situation shows that the US will lose a lot more than it gains on this thing.
If it was just about oil and monetary gains from it there are much, much more effective ways to use the situaiton.
Hey, give the guy a chance to repair the damage done by Clinton.
He's got a lot Clinton's unfinished business on his plate right now.
If you're talking about legally binding numbers then none of it really matters anyway, as the electoral vote is the only national legally binding number for presidental elections.
If you're talking about actual votes, though, the margin of error in the machines is higher than the difference and so there was no winner.
So which is it? Are you talking about the irrelevant official numbers or the numbers of people who actually voted for each man, which can never be known.
Gore did NOT win the popular vote.
In the popular vote the difference between numbers for each candidate were far less than the margin of error. Therefore there was NO winner for the popular vote.
People don't seem to realize this.
Every recount in Florida has been in Bush's favor.
The statewide popular vote was in Bush's favor.
The electorial college vote was in Bush's favor.
The county-by-county vote across the nation was in Bush's favor.
And the popular vote across the nation was not in Gore's.
How can you possibly still believe that Gore rightfully won?
We just need to change the voting method to be more accepting of smaller parties. You know, instant runoff voting and all that.
Look it up.
That is probably THE most widely and stupidly quoted line in all of Slashdot. I wish I could reach through the monitor and slap 99% of people who use it; them and those who make inane references to 1984.
Before you look to long dead guys for support you need to demonstrate that the adage applies by showing how 1) an essential liberty is being given up, 2) a safety is the sole motivation behind the choice, and 3) that it would be a temporary one.
If any of these three qualifiers are false, and none of them are necessarily true here, then the the adage doesn't apply and you are simply another sheep chiming in with the line quoted by every other nonthinking Slashdot fool.
Yes, I used the wrong word when I said belief.
Anyway, no, your facts arise from situations very different from those today in the US. For you to apply those to the US is simply invalid.
I believe that in the big, long term picture it will simply not work like that. Especially with advancements that take more and more friction out of the money system long term "winning" of one group of people will simply not be as stable as you propose.
> Again that's wrong. In a country without redistribution your slice of the pie can only grow smaller and there is no hope for bettering your life or your children's.
Yes, and luckily we have this little system called capitalism that redistributes money.
The purpose of government is not to redistribute wealth.
Nobody is forcing you to listen to them by calling you.
By buying a phone and signing up for a service that does not rely on an opt-in calling list (meaning that anyone can call you without you first listing them on a whitelist) you agree that anyone, including marketers, can call you.
They've also raised you with a need for food :)
You are a customer of the phone services, just like the telemarketers. You could BE a telemarketer at any moment, after all. At any point you can decide to pick up the phone and call another person looking for money or whatever.