Is this how bad the hype on freakin' Apple is getting? The fanboys and girls just can't get enough so that now they're all hyped on reading reviews on the fucking stores? Stores? It isn't enough we have to endure sanctimonious drivel about how cool their iWhoGivesAFuck is, now we have to endure commentary on their stupid fucking stores. Get a grip people. What's next? Are they going to start writing essays on the possible ways Wozniak washes his balls?
Nice Troll A/C. Now get your head out of your ass. Unless you like chewing on your inner moron. The first browsers on mobile phones came out in the late 1990 with the UP Browser by a company now known as OpenWave. Here is an article from 2006 that will clue you in. My crappy Samsung in 2005 could surf the web and had apps. Apple just waited till bigger and more rugged touch displays were out that were reliable.
Don't even think the term laid to rest. People have to stay on SCO till it is "ground into dust". Otherwise it can and will if at all possible rezombify and attack again. It is in need of a double tap to the head to ensure it stays down. Laid to rest makes it sound so peaceful and that will soon be calmly over. Don't stop driving till it is gone. That will also put the fear of whatever into other scumbags like SCO. Killer instinct needed on this one.
Up to and including the iPad there hasn't been much innovation from them. They have just been better at waiting for other companies to blow themselves up trying to market cutting edge stuff until the bugs are worked out and then are great at marketing when they come out with a product using technology that has stabalized.
iPod: they weren't the first digital music player or even the first with a mini-disk. But they were the first to have one that didn't suck because they waited. Same with iPhone: they weren't the first to allow surfing the net on your phone, that had been around for a while. They waited till bigger displays were available and bigger memory. Same with tablets. Tablets have been used for more than a decade. UPS and other couriers have had you sign for stuff on a tablet forever now. But Apple waited till better technology came around that didn't suck for the consumer.
I personally don't have any clue why they are priced so high. They don't have leading market share of anything except the upwardly full of themselves Apple fanboy/fangirl market. They are way behind market share of both PCs and laptops. Android outsells them by miles. Like, WTF? Mind you, maybe investors already have some thoughts about droves of people running from Windows 8. Until those people find out how much Apple overcharges. Still it will be good for a spike in sales.
I remember the original viking landings and had one of the first Carl Sagan book afterwards with pictures from Mars (Cosmos). At that time it was abso-fucking-lutely mindblowing to have actual pictures from the surface of another planet (moon not included). I remember those pictures had a much stronger orange-pink colour to the sky because of the atmospheric gas composition.
Now the new pictures aren't showing a blue earth sky or anything, but they do seem to be less drastic than the old viking pictures. They are also orders of magnetude better pictures of course. But are these also better in terms of colour correctness or have they been altered for some reason. i.e. is this really what things look like on the surface?
That aside, the pictures are so mind numbingly crisp and high resolution that you can't help but think it was taken by someone in some desert here on Earth and photoshopped. I don't think it is a conspiracy at all. It's just that the pictures are so clear you can almsot feel like you can go there and take a look at the rover doing it's thing. Except for the 45 million mile thing. It is somewhat disconcerting.
There's nothing sufficiently large to destroy civilization and also on a near collision path.
FTFY: There's nothing sufficiently large to destroy civilization and also on a near collision path; that we know about.
Assuming things, can get you killed, that's why we generalize. Obligatory car analogy. If I cross the street at a crosswalk (zebra crossing for almost everyone else outside of North America), I might assume that all drivers will stop to let me cross since it is the law. Always making that assumption will get definitely get me killed or seriously injured someday (hell, when I was young I was almost killed by a police car on an emergency run, lights no siren, while legally crossing the street one time... to be fair a bus on the outside lane blocked both our views, but thank goodness he was paying better attention than me... it's what made me not trust blind faith in traffic lights and crosswalk laws when crossing the street any more). Thinking we will always have sufficient advance knowledge of an extinction event asteroid will eventually kill us all. Precedent has already been set, not only in actual extinctions, but the fact that those size asteroids hit all planets now and then, including earth. I'm not paranoid about it. But I would be if I thought everyone thought like you. While it's not a big possibility in my life, it has a high impact if, well, it impacts. But on the upside, if it does happen, the outcome won't matter to humans after that.
The Olympic committee almost priced themselves out of the Canadian market for broadcasting the 2014 and 2016 games. The biggest private broadcaster declined to broadcast the games after they said the IOC was charging too much. Then the publicly own broadcaster CBC stepped in and bought the rights. There are some mixed public reactions as to whether they are wasting public money since some people think they are not expected to make all the money back. On the other hand, a lot of people are likely cheering because they don't have to watch CTV's never ending stream of commercials which interrupted everything (and never mind the mostly airhead commentary).
The real question is, who gets the money for all these broadcast fees. There must be tens of billions in revenue from this. The London Olympics cost $14.5 billion. If the broadcast rights were funnelled into that cost they would have made a profit right away. So who the hell gets that money?? I notice the directors of the IOC look like they aren't too skinny, and... nice suits. There has to be a nice racket in there. Are they public? Do they publish their financial records and who reviews them? I wonder if this is how the national backers who bribe the IOC officials to get the games in their city make their money back.
So by your drone war, if you're talking about surveilance and treating U.S. citizens and close friends (like Canadians) like they're the Taliban, then I agree with you completely.
There used to be a thing proudly said that Canada and the United States were such good friends, unparralled in the world, that we had the longest undefended territorial boundary in the world. Now the U.S. is flying drones over it like Canadians are the bloody Taliban all because of bullshit rumours that the hijackers of 9/11 came through Canada (a baldfaced lie reiterated for years by morons like Janet Napolitano who even try to tell Canadians that one on a trip here a couple years ago... she got slapped back hard on that one). Now because of paranoia we have the longest defended border in the world.
If you want a good example of how friendly countries work, go to Europe and drive a car across the border. The border guards don't give a shit as long as your passport is from one of the right countries (and even though not a part of Europe, Canada and America for the most part qualify) they don't even want to usually see more than the picture then, "get outta here we were talking" kind of attitude. If you're a friend we don't need to ask any more than that. You're a friend.
And now the FBI is calling anyone who identifies as a Juggalo and listens to the Insane Clown Posse a criminal, and lists followers as part of an informal criminal enterprise. A gang. J. Edgar Hoover would be proud of the modern FBI and the president for that one. He'd probably buy the new director and the pres a fine frock for their actions there. Personally I think those two guys, the other two guys, the Insane Clown Posse are idiots and really don't like most of their music (I'm sure there is something in there that might be decent to listen to). But those guys don't have enough unburnt brain cells between them to be a criminal enterprise. Especially not an organized one. I mean holy fuck, what's next, separate water fountains?
But as far as that goes, there are some days I wish it were possible to drop an atom bomb on the Pakistan frontiers where the Taliban take up shop. I suppose you think the Taliban are hard done by. Nice people who destroy national (and important to the world) antiquities, force women to wear tents, and shoot them if they see fit, poison school wells because they don't think students, especially girls, should learn anything that isn't in the Koran, etc. etc. etc.
If you can live with yourself implicitly supporting the Taliban, I can live with the drone war on them. It isn't a matter of you're either with me or against me, more you're either part of the problem or you're not. Not providing Afghanistan a look at what the alternative to the Taliban can be by providing schools and support for their fledgling police and government infrastructure just invites the Taliban back. Not preventing the Taliban from killing, poisoning, intimidating, is inviting them back just as much as anything. But of course you have already implied you think theocracies are just fine with you.
Sure you'll spout, let the people decide. How well can you decide anything if someone points a gun at your head? If someone were going to kill you or kill your children if you didn't suck a cock, you'd do it and ask for more. Unless you give the people a break from these thugs, they won't have chance. The Taliban preach their theocracy with a gun barrel. And these Taliban thugs won't stop. Hell just yesterday they attacked a base where the Pakistanis store nuclear weapons. So you'd rather we did nothing a would be OK if religious radicals were in control of nuclear weapons. Are you looking forward to Iran arming Hezbollah with nuclear bombs?
You think trying to do something against these scumbags is warlike? When the Pakistani government not only won't do anything about them often even where forced, but actively if covertly support them (Bin Laden couldn't have set up shop like that without government help). You really think combating these people is warlike? I don't fucking think so.
Chamberlain showed what happens if you choose to avoid a distasteful but needed call to arms. Don't give me any crap about some principle when I say his name, but Hitler could have been stopped early if the leaders hadn't been so afraid to do what needed to be done. Do you know who had the most heavy tanks in Europe in the late 1930s (including 1939/1940 during the phony war)? France; that's who. Not Germany. It had nothing to do with manpower or equipment. Thinking forcible disarmament of Germany was warlike and war mongering caused WWII and the deaths of 11.5 million people in death camps (the Jews weren't the only group thrown in the ovens). It lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousand of soldiers and civilians. It lead to Japan making the Nazi atrocities look like a kids sandbox game when they went into China and the Philippines.
Being forced down the path to war because diplomacy doesn't work, doesn't mean you're warlike. It just just means you do what you have to do. Being warlike means doing something like that when there is no need. Before the invasion in 2001/2002 the Taliban were asked to give up Osama Bin Laden and they said no, they didn't think he did anything wrong. In fact the Taliban government showed themselves complicit by providing training bases for things they knew Bin Laden was up to (terrorism). They were a rogue state in every sense of the word. Never mind a few years before they had fired artillery into 1000 year old massive carvings of Buddha on mountain walls, at least 100 feet tall when many in the world begged them not to... all because of religious principles (that is a good indication of how they think).
You want warlike? Genghis Khan was warlike. Napoleon was warlike. Wehrmacht Germany was warlike.The Khmer Rouge were warlike. Most dictators are warlike. The Taliban are warlike. Stopping those who would kill to forc
This is very similar to the systems I worked on, except subscription based. Some can "fold" the subscription or time related info in two or more, and delary the implementation. This is what one client did then, folding it down to a 45 days increments, but that was the smallest they could go, so that was why the Nov 15, 1999 deadline.
I sure hope that's just a real concerted troll. Otherwise your retard is showing. Take a look at how the comment is scored. People know the truth even if you don't (if your're not just a troll). I'm not feeding you any more so slag away if you want, I don't care.
FTFY: of males with the intelligence level of adolescents...
That includes the leaders of the previous administration in the U.S., some in the current administration, and much (not all) of the republican "base" and religious right. And yes, some democrats for sure (but in the vast minority). Substitue 'conservative base' for 'republican' in commonwealth countries (at least in Canada). I say 'conservative base' because a lot of people who voted for the conservatitves last time did so based on the fact there is no viable alternative.
To be fair, it does appear that the current administration is heeding people's calls to stay the fuck out of wars, with Syria as an example. However I do wonder how much the fact that Syria really doesn't have that much in the way of oil reserves plays into things. But I really think they are being reserved this time and think they really would like to get more involved considering that a member of NATO is in danger of being pulled in (Turkey... since Russia has military bases in Syria this might be why a NATO escallation is subdued too). Also for serious consideration: Syria has been traditionally antagonistic to and borders long time regional ally, Israel, and the Assad regiegm is a strong ally of Iran, and with Iran supports and funds the terrorist group Hezbollah, which is destabolizing Lebanon from being a regional player and periodically attacks Israel. And finally also consider that Putin, who is trying it seems to recreate the Soviet era, wants to use Syria as a precident for countries not to interfere in dictators affairs, presumably because he doesn't want international interferance when he declares himself president for life. Considering all this, I'd say the U.S. has been fairly restrained.
I don't know if he really is or not. Maybe from a republican standpoint. From Europe or Canada he might be center at most. He might be an Eisenhower republican, which OK, is a liberal to the new republicans. After all he believes the tax base should pay for the services they use, like in Ike's day, when taxes were near or at their highest levels ever. This was so the war debt incurred by Ike's generation could be paid off. I think Buffet has those same radical left (50's right) ideas. But the modern republican wants to not tax the over 600 or 700 thousand a year earners (like Wall Street republican party donators, I mean bankers, I mean honest hard working bonus receiving workers) because they think they're going to spend more when taxed less when they already spend as much as they want right now, because they're rich. If they want that Beemer or big house they can already afford it. When they get a big tax reduction what, are they going to all of a sudden go ape shit and by tens of thousands of dollars on jello to put in their swimming pools? They already buy what they want to buy, I mean they'll have to think up some crazy shit in order to spend their extra untax payments. So if they're not spending more where is that trickle down coming from... nowhere. It's a bullshit strategy that didn't work in Regan's time, and still doesn't.:)
A buddy of mine had a type of shoe he loved to wear. He would wear them all the way out before getting another pair. He had actually worn a hole through the bottom of one pair and was on his way to the mall and decided to stop at the Winnipeg library first; which was on his way and right across the street from the mall. He'd been up all night gambling at bacgammon (that was his job, no shit... that and poker and various Chinese games like pi gaou, sap sam jung, etc... he was a gambler). He picked up a book he wanted to look at, and sat down on a couch and kicked off his shoes for a bit. He knew he was at risk of having an inadvertant nap but figured, what the hell, my shoes are beat to shit, who's going to steal them? He ended up nodding off while reading, woke up and found someone had stolen his beat up to shit shoes with the hole in one. I happened to run into just after it happened and just looked and said, why the fuck are you walking around downtown in your socks? Then he told me the story.
Bottom line: People will steal anything. Even beat up shoes with a hole in them. If someone decides to try to hack curioslity, it doesn't have to be for money. In fact that kind of person might be the more dangerous. They're the ones who will come completely out of left field.
You don't generally get as rich as Romney by being a liberal. Shows the stupidity of many of the republican base lately. Fox news and Limbaugh are rotting their brains.
Just like Samsung so obviously copied Apple when they created the Nexus, Apple is obviously copying B&N by creating a 7 inch design. Just like making a reasonable graphical and physical user interface on a tablet, there are so many alternatives if they wanted to make a smaller tablet. They could have made a seven inch circular shaped tablet, or triangular. Making a seven inch rectangular tablet just smacks way too much of theft of intellectual property. You'd think Apple would recognize this by now after how people copied them when they invented the windows GUI, the mouse, the internet and HTML, digital music, tablets, and all those other things we all know (OK, what Apple fanboys, fangirls, and fan(girl)judges believe) they came up with.
Slashdot Mirror
Is this how bad the hype on freakin' Apple is getting? The fanboys and girls just can't get enough so that now they're all hyped on reading reviews on the fucking stores? Stores? It isn't enough we have to endure sanctimonious drivel about how cool their iWhoGivesAFuck is, now we have to endure commentary on their stupid fucking stores. Get a grip people. What's next? Are they going to start writing essays on the possible ways Wozniak washes his balls?
Nice Troll A/C. Now get your head out of your ass. Unless you like chewing on your inner moron. The first browsers on mobile phones came out in the late 1990 with the UP Browser by a company now known as OpenWave. Here is an article from 2006 that will clue you in. My crappy Samsung in 2005 could surf the web and had apps. Apple just waited till bigger and more rugged touch displays were out that were reliable.
Don't even think the term laid to rest. People have to stay on SCO till it is "ground into dust". Otherwise it can and will if at all possible rezombify and attack again. It is in need of a double tap to the head to ensure it stays down. Laid to rest makes it sound so peaceful and that will soon be calmly over. Don't stop driving till it is gone. That will also put the fear of whatever into other scumbags like SCO. Killer instinct needed on this one.
Up to and including the iPad there hasn't been much innovation from them. They have just been better at waiting for other companies to blow themselves up trying to market cutting edge stuff until the bugs are worked out and then are great at marketing when they come out with a product using technology that has stabalized.
iPod: they weren't the first digital music player or even the first with a mini-disk. But they were the first to have one that didn't suck because they waited. Same with iPhone: they weren't the first to allow surfing the net on your phone, that had been around for a while. They waited till bigger displays were available and bigger memory. Same with tablets. Tablets have been used for more than a decade. UPS and other couriers have had you sign for stuff on a tablet forever now. But Apple waited till better technology came around that didn't suck for the consumer.
I personally don't have any clue why they are priced so high. They don't have leading market share of anything except the upwardly full of themselves Apple fanboy/fangirl market. They are way behind market share of both PCs and laptops. Android outsells them by miles. Like, WTF? Mind you, maybe investors already have some thoughts about droves of people running from Windows 8. Until those people find out how much Apple overcharges. Still it will be good for a spike in sales.
I remember the original viking landings and had one of the first Carl Sagan book afterwards with pictures from Mars (Cosmos). At that time it was abso-fucking-lutely mindblowing to have actual pictures from the surface of another planet (moon not included). I remember those pictures had a much stronger orange-pink colour to the sky because of the atmospheric gas composition.
Now the new pictures aren't showing a blue earth sky or anything, but they do seem to be less drastic than the old viking pictures. They are also orders of magnetude better pictures of course. But are these also better in terms of colour correctness or have they been altered for some reason. i.e. is this really what things look like on the surface?
That aside, the pictures are so mind numbingly crisp and high resolution that you can't help but think it was taken by someone in some desert here on Earth and photoshopped. I don't think it is a conspiracy at all. It's just that the pictures are so clear you can almsot feel like you can go there and take a look at the rover doing it's thing. Except for the 45 million mile thing. It is somewhat disconcerting.
Feed him a hippy. He'll forget all about it.
Kieth Richards!
Is this a case of two wrongs making a right?
FTFY: There's nothing sufficiently large to destroy civilization and also on a near collision path; that we know about.
Assuming things, can get you killed, that's why we generalize. Obligatory car analogy. If I cross the street at a crosswalk (zebra crossing for almost everyone else outside of North America), I might assume that all drivers will stop to let me cross since it is the law. Always making that assumption will get definitely get me killed or seriously injured someday (hell, when I was young I was almost killed by a police car on an emergency run, lights no siren, while legally crossing the street one time... to be fair a bus on the outside lane blocked both our views, but thank goodness he was paying better attention than me... it's what made me not trust blind faith in traffic lights and crosswalk laws when crossing the street any more). Thinking we will always have sufficient advance knowledge of an extinction event asteroid will eventually kill us all. Precedent has already been set, not only in actual extinctions, but the fact that those size asteroids hit all planets now and then, including earth. I'm not paranoid about it. But I would be if I thought everyone thought like you. While it's not a big possibility in my life, it has a high impact if, well, it impacts. But on the upside, if it does happen, the outcome won't matter to humans after that.
And here are the thousand words to go with the picture. Birth control for men can't come fast enough. Won't have to carry Tabasco anymore.
The Olympic committee almost priced themselves out of the Canadian market for broadcasting the 2014 and 2016 games. The biggest private broadcaster declined to broadcast the games after they said the IOC was charging too much. Then the publicly own broadcaster CBC stepped in and bought the rights. There are some mixed public reactions as to whether they are wasting public money since some people think they are not expected to make all the money back. On the other hand, a lot of people are likely cheering because they don't have to watch CTV's never ending stream of commercials which interrupted everything (and never mind the mostly airhead commentary).
The real question is, who gets the money for all these broadcast fees. There must be tens of billions in revenue from this. The London Olympics cost $14.5 billion. If the broadcast rights were funnelled into that cost they would have made a profit right away. So who the hell gets that money?? I notice the directors of the IOC look like they aren't too skinny, and ... nice suits. There has to be a nice racket in there. Are they public? Do they publish their financial records and who reviews them? I wonder if this is how the national backers who bribe the IOC officials to get the games in their city make their money back.
So by your drone war, if you're talking about surveilance and treating U.S. citizens and close friends (like Canadians) like they're the Taliban, then I agree with you completely.
There used to be a thing proudly said that Canada and the United States were such good friends, unparralled in the world, that we had the longest undefended territorial boundary in the world. Now the U.S. is flying drones over it like Canadians are the bloody Taliban all because of bullshit rumours that the hijackers of 9/11 came through Canada (a baldfaced lie reiterated for years by morons like Janet Napolitano who even try to tell Canadians that one on a trip here a couple years ago... she got slapped back hard on that one). Now because of paranoia we have the longest defended border in the world.
If you want a good example of how friendly countries work, go to Europe and drive a car across the border. The border guards don't give a shit as long as your passport is from one of the right countries (and even though not a part of Europe, Canada and America for the most part qualify) they don't even want to usually see more than the picture then, "get outta here we were talking" kind of attitude. If you're a friend we don't need to ask any more than that. You're a friend.
And now the FBI is calling anyone who identifies as a Juggalo and listens to the Insane Clown Posse a criminal, and lists followers as part of an informal criminal enterprise. A gang. J. Edgar Hoover would be proud of the modern FBI and the president for that one. He'd probably buy the new director and the pres a fine frock for their actions there. Personally I think those two guys, the other two guys, the Insane Clown Posse are idiots and really don't like most of their music (I'm sure there is something in there that might be decent to listen to). But those guys don't have enough unburnt brain cells between them to be a criminal enterprise. Especially not an organized one. I mean holy fuck, what's next, separate water fountains?
Even today it helps. Too bad there is no medical solution effectively implemented yet.
What bugged me was that the whole idea is so dumb I couldn't slide in a joke in the guise of legitimate suggestion to use really thick punch cards..
That was awesome. "Sycophant" is one of my favourite descriptions of less than stellar human behaviour. Right up there with "poltroon."
But as far as that goes, there are some days I wish it were possible to drop an atom bomb on the Pakistan frontiers where the Taliban take up shop. I suppose you think the Taliban are hard done by. Nice people who destroy national (and important to the world) antiquities, force women to wear tents, and shoot them if they see fit, poison school wells because they don't think students, especially girls, should learn anything that isn't in the Koran, etc. etc. etc.
If you can live with yourself implicitly supporting the Taliban, I can live with the drone war on them. It isn't a matter of you're either with me or against me, more you're either part of the problem or you're not. Not providing Afghanistan a look at what the alternative to the Taliban can be by providing schools and support for their fledgling police and government infrastructure just invites the Taliban back. Not preventing the Taliban from killing, poisoning, intimidating, is inviting them back just as much as anything. But of course you have already implied you think theocracies are just fine with you.
Sure you'll spout, let the people decide. How well can you decide anything if someone points a gun at your head? If someone were going to kill you or kill your children if you didn't suck a cock, you'd do it and ask for more. Unless you give the people a break from these thugs, they won't have chance. The Taliban preach their theocracy with a gun barrel. And these Taliban thugs won't stop. Hell just yesterday they attacked a base where the Pakistanis store nuclear weapons. So you'd rather we did nothing a would be OK if religious radicals were in control of nuclear weapons. Are you looking forward to Iran arming Hezbollah with nuclear bombs?
You think trying to do something against these scumbags is warlike? When the Pakistani government not only won't do anything about them often even where forced, but actively if covertly support them (Bin Laden couldn't have set up shop like that without government help). You really think combating these people is warlike? I don't fucking think so.
Chamberlain showed what happens if you choose to avoid a distasteful but needed call to arms. Don't give me any crap about some principle when I say his name, but Hitler could have been stopped early if the leaders hadn't been so afraid to do what needed to be done. Do you know who had the most heavy tanks in Europe in the late 1930s (including 1939/1940 during the phony war)? France; that's who. Not Germany. It had nothing to do with manpower or equipment. Thinking forcible disarmament of Germany was warlike and war mongering caused WWII and the deaths of 11.5 million people in death camps (the Jews weren't the only group thrown in the ovens). It lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousand of soldiers and civilians. It lead to Japan making the Nazi atrocities look like a kids sandbox game when they went into China and the Philippines.
Being forced down the path to war because diplomacy doesn't work, doesn't mean you're warlike. It just just means you do what you have to do. Being warlike means doing something like that when there is no need. Before the invasion in 2001/2002 the Taliban were asked to give up Osama Bin Laden and they said no, they didn't think he did anything wrong. In fact the Taliban government showed themselves complicit by providing training bases for things they knew Bin Laden was up to (terrorism). They were a rogue state in every sense of the word. Never mind a few years before they had fired artillery into 1000 year old massive carvings of Buddha on mountain walls, at least 100 feet tall when many in the world begged them not to... all because of religious principles (that is a good indication of how they think).
You want warlike? Genghis Khan was warlike. Napoleon was warlike. Wehrmacht Germany was warlike.The Khmer Rouge were warlike. Most dictators are warlike. The Taliban are warlike. Stopping those who would kill to forc
Tell me the temperature in Celcius, I can't keep converting. :P
This is very similar to the systems I worked on, except subscription based. Some can "fold" the subscription or time related info in two or more, and delary the implementation. This is what one client did then, folding it down to a 45 days increments, but that was the smallest they could go, so that was why the Nov 15, 1999 deadline.
I sure hope that's just a real concerted troll. Otherwise your retard is showing. Take a look at how the comment is scored. People know the truth even if you don't (if your're not just a troll). I'm not feeding you any more so slag away if you want, I don't care.
FTFY: of males with the intelligence level of adolescents...
That includes the leaders of the previous administration in the U.S., some in the current administration, and much (not all) of the republican "base" and religious right. And yes, some democrats for sure (but in the vast minority). Substitue 'conservative base' for 'republican' in commonwealth countries (at least in Canada). I say 'conservative base' because a lot of people who voted for the conservatitves last time did so based on the fact there is no viable alternative.
To be fair, it does appear that the current administration is heeding people's calls to stay the fuck out of wars, with Syria as an example. However I do wonder how much the fact that Syria really doesn't have that much in the way of oil reserves plays into things. But I really think they are being reserved this time and think they really would like to get more involved considering that a member of NATO is in danger of being pulled in (Turkey... since Russia has military bases in Syria this might be why a NATO escallation is subdued too). Also for serious consideration: Syria has been traditionally antagonistic to and borders long time regional ally, Israel, and the Assad regiegm is a strong ally of Iran, and with Iran supports and funds the terrorist group Hezbollah, which is destabolizing Lebanon from being a regional player and periodically attacks Israel. And finally also consider that Putin, who is trying it seems to recreate the Soviet era, wants to use Syria as a precident for countries not to interfere in dictators affairs, presumably because he doesn't want international interferance when he declares himself president for life. Considering all this, I'd say the U.S. has been fairly restrained.
I don't know if he really is or not. Maybe from a republican standpoint. From Europe or Canada he might be center at most. He might be an Eisenhower republican, which OK, is a liberal to the new republicans. After all he believes the tax base should pay for the services they use, like in Ike's day, when taxes were near or at their highest levels ever. This was so the war debt incurred by Ike's generation could be paid off. I think Buffet has those same radical left (50's right) ideas. But the modern republican wants to not tax the over 600 or 700 thousand a year earners (like Wall Street republican party donators, I mean bankers, I mean honest hard working bonus receiving workers) because they think they're going to spend more when taxed less when they already spend as much as they want right now, because they're rich. If they want that Beemer or big house they can already afford it. When they get a big tax reduction what, are they going to all of a sudden go ape shit and by tens of thousands of dollars on jello to put in their swimming pools? They already buy what they want to buy, I mean they'll have to think up some crazy shit in order to spend their extra untax payments. So if they're not spending more where is that trickle down coming from... nowhere. It's a bullshit strategy that didn't work in Regan's time, and still doesn't. :)
It's OK, the Apple fanboys modded it down. Gotta burn up karma some days.
A buddy of mine had a type of shoe he loved to wear. He would wear them all the way out before getting another pair. He had actually worn a hole through the bottom of one pair and was on his way to the mall and decided to stop at the Winnipeg library first; which was on his way and right across the street from the mall. He'd been up all night gambling at bacgammon (that was his job, no shit... that and poker and various Chinese games like pi gaou, sap sam jung, etc... he was a gambler). He picked up a book he wanted to look at, and sat down on a couch and kicked off his shoes for a bit. He knew he was at risk of having an inadvertant nap but figured, what the hell, my shoes are beat to shit, who's going to steal them? He ended up nodding off while reading, woke up and found someone had stolen his beat up to shit shoes with the hole in one. I happened to run into just after it happened and just looked and said, why the fuck are you walking around downtown in your socks? Then he told me the story.
Bottom line: People will steal anything. Even beat up shoes with a hole in them. If someone decides to try to hack curioslity, it doesn't have to be for money. In fact that kind of person might be the more dangerous. They're the ones who will come completely out of left field.
You don't generally get as rich as Romney by being a liberal. Shows the stupidity of many of the republican base lately. Fox news and Limbaugh are rotting their brains.
Just like Samsung so obviously copied Apple when they created the Nexus, Apple is obviously copying B&N by creating a 7 inch design. Just like making a reasonable graphical and physical user interface on a tablet, there are so many alternatives if they wanted to make a smaller tablet. They could have made a seven inch circular shaped tablet, or triangular. Making a seven inch rectangular tablet just smacks way too much of theft of intellectual property. You'd think Apple would recognize this by now after how people copied them when they invented the windows GUI, the mouse, the internet and HTML, digital music, tablets, and all those other things we all know (OK, what Apple fanboys, fangirls, and fan(girl)judges believe) they came up with.