Right & wrong is unimportant in this case. Even if Viacom wins, it will still lose. This is another example of a company failing to fulfill the needs, & desires, of the consumer. Take AOL/Time Warner for example, you may consider them evil, but they have made a lot of content available to AOL users for free. This includes videos, previews of shows, on demand content, and some shows for free. For example, I currently have Babylon 5 on (Matters of Honor). AOL/TW understands this idea of consumer based services (even if sometimes they don't fulfill them). Unless Viacom, and others like them (such as the members of RIAA) understand this concept, they will never win this battle because the consumer will not be fulfilled (or happy). This is the simple concept behind a market economy such as capitalism. Current economic models and text books fail to account for the power of consumer piracy as a very loud shout that they feel the product, or service, costs to much for what they consider to be value of the product. Older economic models assumed the consumer would not pirate the product. This assumption is incorrect because the feelings, or values, of society change with time. The internet has given consumers a new method to tell companies that they are ripping the consumer off. MP3 file sharing & this new video stuff are both examples of this. So the real question is, does Viacom get this, or will the become another RIAA and start suing consumers?
No. Really. We must all start using bicycles because we are warming 2 planets!!!! Someone let Gore know. We need a sequel to get more people on our bandwagon. Come on people! Let's get going before Pluto thaws!!!
What if the payload was not a bomb but instead a virus or chemical weapon? Then what? All it takes is a couple of people being infected while moving through the city. I am more surprised that it took so long to find these things. The police and other agencies have to side on the side of caution. Anything else, you'd be complaining about who they didn't do enough. They can't win in today's society because there are so many polarized people.
I am sure there were people who thought the "skeptics" of the world is flat theory were crazy too. There are doubts being raise on global warming (here, here, here). Further, we don't completely understand the science of the climate. Predicting the future climate has uncertainties. Just look at local weather prediction. They don't say the percentages any more, but they use a computer model that gives the percentages like 80% chance of rain, but these predictions are not certain. Some scientists have concerns that global warming has been blown way out of proportion (here).
I am not saying we shouldn't take some actions, but I am saying that you are ignorant to just rule out everything the skeptics say. Any American plan for energy independence and global warming has to be two fold. Short term plans as a consumer buy more energy effecient appliances and cars; as a company (and government) do that and developer more local resources (like drill for more oil in Alaska, California, the mid-western U.S., and in the Gulf) and update the methods to produce fuels like gas. Refineries are decades old using older technology.
Now the second part is long term. Start to research feasible, cost efficient, and easy to use alternate energy means for heating, transportation, production, etc. If the technology is not feasible, efficient and easy to use people will not use it. It's that simple. You can should all you want, but people want things that are cheap (& cost effective) and easy to use. The more you need to spend or do to accomplish the task, the less people will use it.
To dismiss all the doubts of people as the whining and/or ignorant rants of lunatics is not very scientific. All options should be considered. Scientist have had a closed and narrow mind for a long time now. They need to leave the labs a little more and come back to reality. Scientists and people like you are the people who are really arrogant.
This time Bush didn't give North Korea nuclear technology like Clinton did in the 1990s. Bush got help from China to cut off North Korea's money--completely.
I'd settle for being able to print "printable" versions of stories with any browser. There always seems to be something cut off at the right margin--like words or some code. IE does a better job, although it's not perfect either. A better word wrap would be nice when printing. The only seemingly reasonable thing fix I found is to use IE tab embedded in firefox for printing. Then I can switch back and forth between the 2 engines.
I don't know if family friendly is a word I would use with AOL. Every browsed their own chat rooms? You see a lot of user created room names like M4M in various forms. Also, AOL is more a content provider now than just an ISP. Your average ISP is not AOL/Time Warner. They give away their music videos (music.aol.com). I wonder how they will make money with their free service. Lastly, all you needed to do to use the internet without AOL in the days of dial-up was login to AOL, and then minimize it.
Very Good does not do it justice! That's like saying jumping from a text editor to an ide is great. The nightly builds have scripting capability and also a RAD dialog editor!
Has everyone forgotten that this is China? The truth & reality is not really gaurenteed. How do we know this is for real? All media is controled by the Communist government. Seriously, how do we know this isn't an attempt to get some type of power in future (& possibly current) trade deals?
If they can get a vaccine for aids, vaccinate the important people in Chinese society and a certain percentage of the population, they could try and use aids as either a bioweapon in war or against their own people to solve their population problem.
We don't even know if this is for real? Has anyone outside of China verified these claims? I for one am not swallowing this magic pill of a story. I am also not going to be in line when they hand it out. I want a better solution to the AIDS problem as much as anyone else, but I really don't believe this story.
Actually, modern terrorism started when the so-called great profit Mohammed realised everyone was too smart to fall for his con-job he called a religion which he didn't really follow and practice himself (his 9 to 10 wives instead of the 4 the Quran allows is just one example). This is added to the fact the Quran does not even agree with itself. Just look at how it describes the creation of the world. In one passage it takes 6 days, and in another account of the creation story in the Quran if you add up the total number of days it comes to 8. Is it any wonder the terrorist prophet Mohammed had to spread Islam by the sword in the 7th century? Islam has always been a religion of terrorism. Thus, terrorism has always been apart of the Middle East since Islam took it by the sword. Western influence has just given them something else to fight besides each other!
No it's not political correctness or whatever that means in this context, it's based on the assumption that absolute power always corrupts. If there are no checks and balances, even the good guys with lots of power will use the power in evil ways. So, giving all that power to fight evil then creates evil itself. It's basic human nature, you can deny it all you want but unchecked and controlled power always corrupts.
Actually, what the parent was talking about is political correctness. Let me put it in a way you might understand. Lets say a rabid dog bights you. You dicide it wouldn't be fair to discriminate against dogs, so you go looking for cats, dogs, birds, ferrets, and spiders. That is what the parent is talking about.
Instead of looking for Muslims of both genders between the ages of 18 and 45 (which seem to be the primary ages of the terrorists), they are looking for everyone at every age. It doesn't make sense to me, but if you go looking for just for Muslims in that category, the ACLU will sue fore religous and/or racial profiling.
In Rhode Island, a state police officer pulled over a van of people for not signaling when changing lanes (something that is technically illegal in most, if not all, states). The state police officer asked for the IDs of all the people, and the people in the van admitted they were all illegal immagrants. The officer then escorted them to the appropriate location. The ACLU is now sueing the state police officer for racial profiling.
Near the Mexican border, two border enforcement officers are facing 30 years for doing their job and defending themselves. A drug runner and illegal immagrant was pulled over & caught with 1000 lbs of pot on him. He beat up the first border patrol officer and a second came to help him. They heard what they thought was gun, and shot him in the butt just as he was almost completely turned around. Now they are facing 30 years in prison, and the drug runner is being treated like a king. No charges filed after the first incedent, and around a week later he was caught with 800 lbs of pot. He didn't face charges then either.
People are taking things too far. The crimanals have more rights than we do. If it was me runnging things, I would have every Muslim organization and Mosque under constant surveillance because the Muslim terrorist cells are likely to go to a Mosque and plug in to Muslim society. The fact is all of you people bashing Bush are just helping the terrorists and criminals. Because you keep whining about all these things, everybody gets to suffer.
This is more the failure of the rest of the World's so-called foriegn polocies against Israel. Israel will only tolerate getting screwed for so long before the straw breaks the camel's back. I think the straw has broken the camel's back.
I noticed you didn't condemn Hezbollah. They continually use innocent civilians as shields. They were within 3 meters of the United Nations post that got hit. Israel has continually warned the people in Lebanon, including the people of Qana, BEFORE they attacked to get out of the way. They stayed there anyways. Israel didn't have to warn them, and they would have better luck fighting Hezbollah if they didn't warn the people in Lebanon.
You want the war to end? Everybody gives Israel the soldiers back. Hezbollah is disarmed, and then they stop lobbing missiles at Israel (like they have been doing regularly since long before this war began). The end result will be that the war would be over. The fact is, there is NOTHING anyone can due to stop Israel (even the US) short of what I said because for too long Israel has given into the requests of the terrorist giving them every they wanted short of wiping Israel off the face of the planet (the stated goal of Hezbollah), and they got no peace and safety form it.
Did the rest of the world think Israel would tolerate being bombed with rockets & homicide bombers forever without fighting back? If they did, they are truly stupid. No country would let their citizens go through these things. In fact, most countries would have done far more than Israel has done long (as in years) before this. Israel has been patient for too long.
Even though I am 5 days late, I am going to post this anyways. This theory/idea is total garbage. One of the reasons for the electoral college over a popular vote is to insure that the citizens of every state have a say. Without the Electoral college, presidential candidates would simply concentrate on the most populated areas, and people in states like New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont, Maine, etc. would never see a candidate because there population would be too small to be worth the effort.
One thing not metioned in the the article is the potential for this to cement the Democrats in the Federal Government virtually permently. This would happen because a vast majority of the larger population centers support the Democrats traditionally. If you look at a map of the last ellection by county, you would see a vast see of counties that supported the Republican candidate. The only counties that Democrats won were the large cities. These large cities can change the way a states ellectoral college votes--giving move electoral college votes to the Democrats.
Also, this would be challenged in court, and would deffinately be ruled unconstitutional--unless you go shopping for a court to try the case, but that would just get overturned when it reaches the Supreme Court. We have enough problems with illegal immagrants & the dead voting illegally. We don't need to create more problems. Leave it the way it is currently.
You missed my point. The person started out with a faulty assumption. The person assumed that what they posted on the internet would stay private just because they check a box. That is never an assumption. First the nature of the internet doesn't lend itself to any form of privacy--only a false assumption of privacy. Information you send, and recieve, is sent (in a very simplistic description) by computer hopping till it gets to your computer. That is a lot of chances where anyone can intercept that information.
The article was pointless. The whiney brat should not have assumed some posted on a web community would stay private. I did read the summary, and I started to read the article until I realised that the kids was stupid. I still thought there wasn't an issue. If you shout personal information in a public place, do you still have a right to privacy of that information? What about if your talking to a friend in a private conversation in a public place? In both cases, you have no privacy--only the illusion of privacy in the second case, and no privacy at all in the first. I view the web as a public place. In such fashion, what you put out there is basically public information--especially when it comes to web communities.
This is not really an issue. End of story. I think the people upset here are upset for no reason at all. I think some people need a rude awakening. They need to wake up. This is the really world, and not some liberal college campus where crying foul at the Government's, and especially Bush's, every move is great no matter what the facts are in the case. There are far more important topics that could be talked about--like the fact that North Korea has nuclear technology and the potential means of hitting the west coast of the US all thanks to Bill Clinton handing the technology to North Korea.
I don't understand what the issue is here. If you handed a complete stranger a photo album with a lot of photos, comments, and other potentially embarassing things, would you expect that person to keep it private only if you told them too? Let's use some common sense here people. When you post something online, anywhere & anything, it is really the same thing a posting it on a sign for the whole world to see, and it lasts virtually forever.
The myspace craziness should have been tempered with common sense. Kids posting personal information about themselves, and then people wonder why pedophiles toll the myspace boards. This is just another example of college kids being completely stupid! This really has nothing to do with the Patriot Act. Everyhting you post online may, and can, be viewed by anyone @ anytime. Privacy on the internet is only an illusion.
What's even funnier is that the NYT called for the government to do something like this back in 2001, and then they spill the beans on it ruining the chances of further catching more terrorists. This technique was working, and it thwarted a few plots. The NYT should be brought up on charges for this. They just decreased the effectiveness of this weapon.
This really scares me. Do they realise what can happen if they make a mistake? What happens if they mess up and block too much sun? Then there's the chance that they will try and charge us for the service of saving us. Scientists need to leave the labs once & a while. They REALLY need to think about this stuff from a different point of view because theirs is totally messed up. I rank this up there with trying to create black holes on Earth. What happens if you mess up?
By the time my niece was 1.5 years old, she ould speak in sentences (simple sentences), and she could translate stuff like:
Us: Do you want... her: I want...
She was also walking too. We though she'd walk before she crawled because she kept on standing up. My neice is very smart considering she is only 2.5 years old! You can carry on a conversation with her, and her attention span will stay with you...if she is interested. She's very interested in things around her. She deffinately understands more than she can communicate at times. That is improving with age. When she was 1 to 1.5, she would get frustrated & sad because she couldn't always express what she wanted to express. Now at 2.5 years, that is not so much of a problem.
What it comes down to is what you say and do around the child when the child is still in the womb. Talking nonsense stuff like gaga-googoo doesn't help. The baby is trying to form an understanding of the language and to be able to communicate. Talk to the baby even before he/she is born in complete sentences with positive reaffirming things. Play claiscal music around the child because studies have shown this helps in developement. I also recomend the Baby Mozart series.
If you are right, then NPR & PTV would not mind if the federal government cut off 100% of their funding. As for what people want to hear, I highly doubt that. You see a lot corporations try and avoid advertising with anything that could get them boycotted. Obviously, that's completely impossible, so they support what think their paying customers would not be offended by. When they do realise that they have offended a majority of their paying customers, they back pedal and sometimes stop support. It's not that they don't want you to hear it because they really don't care what you hear as long as you buy their product. They want to avoid being associated with bad press. That's why the idea of a boycott can work in the real world.
NPR is still funded by the government. Remove the welfare, and then we shall see how long they stay a float on their own two feet. Air America is just a more recent example of the modern reality that modern day liberal to a big jump of the deep end in crazyville, and the people who actually vote, and spend money in significant amounts (i.e. not your average brainwashed college kid), don't want to hear what they are saying. It's only in the sheltered world of College Campuses where you pay something like $50,000 a year for a moderately decent school to hear these liberals bash Bush instead of teaching their respective subjects.
I will give you a prime example of why I doubt anyone with a brain wants to hear liberals anymore. Talk radio is full of bright college kids calling in and telling their horror stories. A recent story last year went like this. A college female invited a war verteran to come to the campus to talk and probably answer questions (I think it was near an appropriate holiday like memorial day of something), and one professor sent a nasty, hate filled, email back to her for posting it. He even threatened to run her, and others like her, off campus. The professor eventual resigned. There is a summary about it here. There are a lot more stories like this all around the country. Try being a out spoken Conservative Republican on a college campus, and see if the professors don't knock your grades for it. It happens.
My point is this. Liberalism has gone way too far to the left for most people--they've gone insane. When professors try to run students off campus for being conservative and Schools don't allow miltary recruitors on campuses any more while continueing to support the "freedom of speech" rights of professors to spew such aweful trash, the liberal movement has gone to far for the soccer moms and dads of America. They are the ones who vote the most. Why would they want to tune into Air America to listen to more hateful trash? Air America is a joke. They don't offer any real ideas that will improve peoples lives and put money in their pockets. They only bash Bush, and his ideas to make America a better place. Stuff like, "do everything opposite of what Bush is doing" is not an idea that says anything useful. Air America always will be a joke. If the Liberals don't change their values, we are witnessing the death of the Democrat party. That's the real reason the Republicans have had Congress & the Presidency for 6 years now. The Democrats had it that way for the first 2 years under Clinton before the public said no way after Clinton tried to raise taxes.
Air America is doomed to fail. Let's start with the funding. Why can't they get add dollars to get the ball rolling and support themselves more? Or, is blatent liberalism (I'm sorry progressivism) to be confined to public radio where we the American public must foot the bill because people don't really want to hear what they have to say? I learn a lot from conservative talk radio. Sean Hannity, despite what a vast majority of this audience may think, is critical with the Bush presidency & the Republican Congress. It seems like he has a good point on what they are doing wrong at least once a day (or once every three days at most). I don't think there is a market in main stream America for what the liberals have to say.
This is different with conservative talk radio. Conservative talk radio fills a void in news coverage. I will give you a recent example. Take the somewhat recent lobbist scandal. When it broke, CNN was saying, "Conservative lobbist scandal", or "Republican lobbist scandal". That afternoon Sean, and I believe Rush did too (I didn't get to listen), read on the air a list of the Liberal and Democratic Congressional Reps who took the money. Guess what? The very next day, CNN was calling the scandal "the lobbist scandal". They completely dropped the conservative and Republican labels because they had to do it. Either they didn't do the leg work of research, or they were blatently lieing to the American public. Without conservative talk radio, cable news stations like CNN would get away with this, and they did for years.
As for the lobbying scandal, the Republicans are in power so it only makes sense that the lobbyists will suck up to them. I am positive if you were to look back to the many years of controling Congress you find more lobbyists sucking up to the liberals and Democrats. That's just the way Washington seems to work.
Conservative talk radio fills a void where Air America doesn't. There is no void to fill. They just come off as sounding as screaming lunatics. I doubt Air America will survive, they have too much competition for the liberal listeners.
The problem with liberals (sorry I will not use progressives because a skunk by any other name is still a skunk) is that they have not offered anything real that would better my life or make me safer. Are they creating better jobs or putting more money in my pockets? On the few things they've tried to pass in Congress was to reinstate the draft and blame it on the Republicans. The simple fact is the liberals don't offer America anything they want. The only thing you hear out of their mouths is just Bush bashing without any ideas, or plans, of there own.
With that said, I was one of those people who voted for Bush because he was the lesser of two evils. I don't trust ANY politician from Massachussets, and Bush is too much like a liberal Democrat that a conservative on a lot of issues for my comfort.
I don't trust any electronic voting machine based off of a computer. The date differences could be as simple as someone didn't set the right date & time. There are WAY too many variables to consider for the average peron setting these up. I like paper ballets with electronic readers where there is a hard copy to backtrack and compare. An interesting test of these machines would be having people do both. Mark a paper and use a machine reader, and electronic voting. Then compare the results for the errors. This would not be an error proof test because you could always have people who decide to be "smart" and vote differently on each ballot (electron & paper). I am not surprised with errors in electronic machines.
This is not coming from this administration. This is just another step in the long journey of racial profiling the liberal left calls affirmative action. You see, liberal politicians have this strange idea that just because you have a certain percentage of a given race in a region, state, etc. that percentage of the given race needs to be reflected in the "diversity" of a given company. There are always exceptions, and this has an exception too. The exceptions comes in the form of those people who may be white. To the liberals, there idea doesn't effect white people unless it is in a negative way to positively affect another race.
This has been happening for a long time. I am surprised they didn't try this sooner. Unfortunately, these ussumptions about percentages don't take into account the backgrounds, and culture, people come from no matter what race they are. In a land of free choice, you will rarely get "equal distribution" of the percentages of races for any given job. The idea runs contrary to the human nature of free choice.
People should be free to persue the job they want regardless of their race. Race should never be a consideration for a job period. The person for the job should get the job.
Code::Blocks is making progress in becoming as good as Visual Studio. If you check it out, start with a nightly build because RC2 doesn't show all the cool content improvements that is coming with 1.0.
Slashdot Mirror
Right & wrong is unimportant in this case. Even if Viacom wins, it will still lose. This is another example of a company failing to fulfill the needs, & desires, of the consumer. Take AOL/Time Warner for example, you may consider them evil, but they have made a lot of content available to AOL users for free. This includes videos, previews of shows, on demand content, and some shows for free. For example, I currently have Babylon 5 on (Matters of Honor). AOL/TW understands this idea of consumer based services (even if sometimes they don't fulfill them). Unless Viacom, and others like them (such as the members of RIAA) understand this concept, they will never win this battle because the consumer will not be fulfilled (or happy). This is the simple concept behind a market economy such as capitalism. Current economic models and text books fail to account for the power of consumer piracy as a very loud shout that they feel the product, or service, costs to much for what they consider to be value of the product. Older economic models assumed the consumer would not pirate the product. This assumption is incorrect because the feelings, or values, of society change with time. The internet has given consumers a new method to tell companies that they are ripping the consumer off. MP3 file sharing & this new video stuff are both examples of this. So the real question is, does Viacom get this, or will the become another RIAA and start suing consumers?
No. Really. We must all start using bicycles because we are warming 2 planets!!!! Someone let Gore know. We need a sequel to get more people on our bandwagon. Come on people! Let's get going before Pluto thaws!!!
What if the payload was not a bomb but instead a virus or chemical weapon? Then what? All it takes is a couple of people being infected while moving through the city. I am more surprised that it took so long to find these things. The police and other agencies have to side on the side of caution. Anything else, you'd be complaining about who they didn't do enough. They can't win in today's society because there are so many polarized people.
I am sure there were people who thought the "skeptics" of the world is flat theory were crazy too. There are doubts being raise on global warming (here, here, here). Further, we don't completely understand the science of the climate. Predicting the future climate has uncertainties. Just look at local weather prediction. They don't say the percentages any more, but they use a computer model that gives the percentages like 80% chance of rain, but these predictions are not certain. Some scientists have concerns that global warming has been blown way out of proportion (here).
I am not saying we shouldn't take some actions, but I am saying that you are ignorant to just rule out everything the skeptics say. Any American plan for energy independence and global warming has to be two fold. Short term plans as a consumer buy more energy effecient appliances and cars; as a company (and government) do that and developer more local resources (like drill for more oil in Alaska, California, the mid-western U.S., and in the Gulf) and update the methods to produce fuels like gas. Refineries are decades old using older technology.
Now the second part is long term. Start to research feasible, cost efficient, and easy to use alternate energy means for heating, transportation, production, etc. If the technology is not feasible, efficient and easy to use people will not use it. It's that simple. You can should all you want, but people want things that are cheap (& cost effective) and easy to use. The more you need to spend or do to accomplish the task, the less people will use it.
To dismiss all the doubts of people as the whining and/or ignorant rants of lunatics is not very scientific. All options should be considered. Scientist have had a closed and narrow mind for a long time now. They need to leave the labs a little more and come back to reality. Scientists and people like you are the people who are really arrogant.
It's a vast right wing conspiracy! Is that your answer to everything you don't like?
This time Bush didn't give North Korea nuclear technology like Clinton did in the 1990s. Bush got help from China to cut off North Korea's money--completely.
I'd settle for being able to print "printable" versions of stories with any browser. There always seems to be something cut off at the right margin--like words or some code. IE does a better job, although it's not perfect either. A better word wrap would be nice when printing. The only seemingly reasonable thing fix I found is to use IE tab embedded in firefox for printing. Then I can switch back and forth between the 2 engines.
I don't know if family friendly is a word I would use with AOL. Every browsed their own chat rooms? You see a lot of user created room names like M4M in various forms. Also, AOL is more a content provider now than just an ISP. Your average ISP is not AOL/Time Warner. They give away their music videos (music.aol.com). I wonder how they will make money with their free service. Lastly, all you needed to do to use the internet without AOL in the days of dial-up was login to AOL, and then minimize it.
Very Good does not do it justice! That's like saying jumping from a text editor to an ide is great. The nightly builds have scripting capability and also a RAD dialog editor!
Has everyone forgotten that this is China? The truth & reality is not really gaurenteed. How do we know this is for real? All media is controled by the Communist government. Seriously, how do we know this isn't an attempt to get some type of power in future (& possibly current) trade deals?
If they can get a vaccine for aids, vaccinate the important people in Chinese society and a certain percentage of the population, they could try and use aids as either a bioweapon in war or against their own people to solve their population problem.
We don't even know if this is for real? Has anyone outside of China verified these claims? I for one am not swallowing this magic pill of a story. I am also not going to be in line when they hand it out. I want a better solution to the AIDS problem as much as anyone else, but I really don't believe this story.
Actually, modern terrorism started when the so-called great profit Mohammed realised everyone was too smart to fall for his con-job he called a religion which he didn't really follow and practice himself (his 9 to 10 wives instead of the 4 the Quran allows is just one example). This is added to the fact the Quran does not even agree with itself. Just look at how it describes the creation of the world. In one passage it takes 6 days, and in another account of the creation story in the Quran if you add up the total number of days it comes to 8. Is it any wonder the terrorist prophet Mohammed had to spread Islam by the sword in the 7th century? Islam has always been a religion of terrorism. Thus, terrorism has always been apart of the Middle East since Islam took it by the sword. Western influence has just given them something else to fight besides each other!
Actually, what the parent was talking about is political correctness. Let me put it in a way you might understand. Lets say a rabid dog bights you. You dicide it wouldn't be fair to discriminate against dogs, so you go looking for cats, dogs, birds, ferrets, and spiders. That is what the parent is talking about.
Instead of looking for Muslims of both genders between the ages of 18 and 45 (which seem to be the primary ages of the terrorists), they are looking for everyone at every age. It doesn't make sense to me, but if you go looking for just for Muslims in that category, the ACLU will sue fore religous and/or racial profiling.
In Rhode Island, a state police officer pulled over a van of people for not signaling when changing lanes (something that is technically illegal in most, if not all, states). The state police officer asked for the IDs of all the people, and the people in the van admitted they were all illegal immagrants. The officer then escorted them to the appropriate location. The ACLU is now sueing the state police officer for racial profiling.
Near the Mexican border, two border enforcement officers are facing 30 years for doing their job and defending themselves. A drug runner and illegal immagrant was pulled over & caught with 1000 lbs of pot on him. He beat up the first border patrol officer and a second came to help him. They heard what they thought was gun, and shot him in the butt just as he was almost completely turned around. Now they are facing 30 years in prison, and the drug runner is being treated like a king. No charges filed after the first incedent, and around a week later he was caught with 800 lbs of pot. He didn't face charges then either.
People are taking things too far. The crimanals have more rights than we do. If it was me runnging things, I would have every Muslim organization and Mosque under constant surveillance because the Muslim terrorist cells are likely to go to a Mosque and plug in to Muslim society. The fact is all of you people bashing Bush are just helping the terrorists and criminals. Because you keep whining about all these things, everybody gets to suffer.
This is more the failure of the rest of the World's so-called foriegn polocies against Israel. Israel will only tolerate getting screwed for so long before the straw breaks the camel's back. I think the straw has broken the camel's back.
I noticed you didn't condemn Hezbollah. They continually use innocent civilians as shields. They were within 3 meters of the United Nations post that got hit. Israel has continually warned the people in Lebanon, including the people of Qana, BEFORE they attacked to get out of the way. They stayed there anyways. Israel didn't have to warn them, and they would have better luck fighting Hezbollah if they didn't warn the people in Lebanon.
You want the war to end? Everybody gives Israel the soldiers back. Hezbollah is disarmed, and then they stop lobbing missiles at Israel (like they have been doing regularly since long before this war began). The end result will be that the war would be over. The fact is, there is NOTHING anyone can due to stop Israel (even the US) short of what I said because for too long Israel has given into the requests of the terrorist giving them every they wanted short of wiping Israel off the face of the planet (the stated goal of Hezbollah), and they got no peace and safety form it.
Did the rest of the world think Israel would tolerate being bombed with rockets & homicide bombers forever without fighting back? If they did, they are truly stupid. No country would let their citizens go through these things. In fact, most countries would have done far more than Israel has done long (as in years) before this. Israel has been patient for too long.
I bet that would make a good house. I wonder how long before the US sells this former base.
Even though I am 5 days late, I am going to post this anyways. This theory/idea is total garbage. One of the reasons for the electoral college over a popular vote is to insure that the citizens of every state have a say. Without the Electoral college, presidential candidates would simply concentrate on the most populated areas, and people in states like New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont, Maine, etc. would never see a candidate because there population would be too small to be worth the effort.
One thing not metioned in the the article is the potential for this to cement the Democrats in the Federal Government virtually permently. This would happen because a vast majority of the larger population centers support the Democrats traditionally. If you look at a map of the last ellection by county, you would see a vast see of counties that supported the Republican candidate. The only counties that Democrats won were the large cities. These large cities can change the way a states ellectoral college votes--giving move electoral college votes to the Democrats.
Also, this would be challenged in court, and would deffinately be ruled unconstitutional--unless you go shopping for a court to try the case, but that would just get overturned when it reaches the Supreme Court. We have enough problems with illegal immagrants & the dead voting illegally. We don't need to create more problems. Leave it the way it is currently.
You missed my point. The person started out with a faulty assumption. The person assumed that what they posted on the internet would stay private just because they check a box. That is never an assumption. First the nature of the internet doesn't lend itself to any form of privacy--only a false assumption of privacy. Information you send, and recieve, is sent (in a very simplistic description) by computer hopping till it gets to your computer. That is a lot of chances where anyone can intercept that information.
The article was pointless. The whiney brat should not have assumed some posted on a web community would stay private. I did read the summary, and I started to read the article until I realised that the kids was stupid. I still thought there wasn't an issue. If you shout personal information in a public place, do you still have a right to privacy of that information? What about if your talking to a friend in a private conversation in a public place? In both cases, you have no privacy--only the illusion of privacy in the second case, and no privacy at all in the first. I view the web as a public place. In such fashion, what you put out there is basically public information--especially when it comes to web communities.
This is not really an issue. End of story. I think the people upset here are upset for no reason at all. I think some people need a rude awakening. They need to wake up. This is the really world, and not some liberal college campus where crying foul at the Government's, and especially Bush's, every move is great no matter what the facts are in the case. There are far more important topics that could be talked about--like the fact that North Korea has nuclear technology and the potential means of hitting the west coast of the US all thanks to Bill Clinton handing the technology to North Korea.
I don't understand what the issue is here. If you handed a complete stranger a photo album with a lot of photos, comments, and other potentially embarassing things, would you expect that person to keep it private only if you told them too? Let's use some common sense here people. When you post something online, anywhere & anything, it is really the same thing a posting it on a sign for the whole world to see, and it lasts virtually forever.
The myspace craziness should have been tempered with common sense. Kids posting personal information about themselves, and then people wonder why pedophiles toll the myspace boards. This is just another example of college kids being completely stupid! This really has nothing to do with the Patriot Act. Everyhting you post online may, and can, be viewed by anyone @ anytime. Privacy on the internet is only an illusion.
What's even funnier is that the NYT called for the government to do something like this back in 2001, and then they spill the beans on it ruining the chances of further catching more terrorists. This technique was working, and it thwarted a few plots. The NYT should be brought up on charges for this. They just decreased the effectiveness of this weapon.
This really scares me. Do they realise what can happen if they make a mistake? What happens if they mess up and block too much sun? Then there's the chance that they will try and charge us for the service of saving us. Scientists need to leave the labs once & a while. They REALLY need to think about this stuff from a different point of view because theirs is totally messed up. I rank this up there with trying to create black holes on Earth. What happens if you mess up?
By the time my niece was 1.5 years old, she ould speak in sentences (simple sentences), and she could translate stuff like:
Us: Do you want...
her: I want...
She was also walking too. We though she'd walk before she crawled because she kept on standing up. My neice is very smart considering she is only 2.5 years old! You can carry on a conversation with her, and her attention span will stay with you...if she is interested. She's very interested in things around her. She deffinately understands more than she can communicate at times. That is improving with age. When she was 1 to 1.5, she would get frustrated & sad because she couldn't always express what she wanted to express. Now at 2.5 years, that is not so much of a problem.
What it comes down to is what you say and do around the child when the child is still in the womb. Talking nonsense stuff like gaga-googoo doesn't help. The baby is trying to form an understanding of the language and to be able to communicate. Talk to the baby even before he/she is born in complete sentences with positive reaffirming things. Play claiscal music around the child because studies have shown this helps in developement. I also recomend the Baby Mozart series.
Bill Clinton said the said thing when he was President! I think some in the government are out of touch with reality.
If you are right, then NPR & PTV would not mind if the federal government cut off 100% of their funding. As for what people want to hear, I highly doubt that. You see a lot corporations try and avoid advertising with anything that could get them boycotted. Obviously, that's completely impossible, so they support what think their paying customers would not be offended by. When they do realise that they have offended a majority of their paying customers, they back pedal and sometimes stop support. It's not that they don't want you to hear it because they really don't care what you hear as long as you buy their product. They want to avoid being associated with bad press. That's why the idea of a boycott can work in the real world.
NPR is still funded by the government. Remove the welfare, and then we shall see how long they stay a float on their own two feet. Air America is just a more recent example of the modern reality that modern day liberal to a big jump of the deep end in crazyville, and the people who actually vote, and spend money in significant amounts (i.e. not your average brainwashed college kid), don't want to hear what they are saying. It's only in the sheltered world of College Campuses where you pay something like $50,000 a year for a moderately decent school to hear these liberals bash Bush instead of teaching their respective subjects.
I will give you a prime example of why I doubt anyone with a brain wants to hear liberals anymore. Talk radio is full of bright college kids calling in and telling their horror stories. A recent story last year went like this. A college female invited a war verteran to come to the campus to talk and probably answer questions (I think it was near an appropriate holiday like memorial day of something), and one professor sent a nasty, hate filled, email back to her for posting it. He even threatened to run her, and others like her, off campus. The professor eventual resigned. There is a summary about it here. There are a lot more stories like this all around the country. Try being a out spoken Conservative Republican on a college campus, and see if the professors don't knock your grades for it. It happens.
My point is this. Liberalism has gone way too far to the left for most people--they've gone insane. When professors try to run students off campus for being conservative and Schools don't allow miltary recruitors on campuses any more while continueing to support the "freedom of speech" rights of professors to spew such aweful trash, the liberal movement has gone to far for the soccer moms and dads of America. They are the ones who vote the most. Why would they want to tune into Air America to listen to more hateful trash? Air America is a joke. They don't offer any real ideas that will improve peoples lives and put money in their pockets. They only bash Bush, and his ideas to make America a better place. Stuff like, "do everything opposite of what Bush is doing" is not an idea that says anything useful. Air America always will be a joke. If the Liberals don't change their values, we are witnessing the death of the Democrat party. That's the real reason the Republicans have had Congress & the Presidency for 6 years now. The Democrats had it that way for the first 2 years under Clinton before the public said no way after Clinton tried to raise taxes.
Air America is doomed to fail. Let's start with the funding. Why can't they get add dollars to get the ball rolling and support themselves more? Or, is blatent liberalism (I'm sorry progressivism) to be confined to public radio where we the American public must foot the bill because people don't really want to hear what they have to say? I learn a lot from conservative talk radio. Sean Hannity, despite what a vast majority of this audience may think, is critical with the Bush presidency & the Republican Congress. It seems like he has a good point on what they are doing wrong at least once a day (or once every three days at most). I don't think there is a market in main stream America for what the liberals have to say.
This is different with conservative talk radio. Conservative talk radio fills a void in news coverage. I will give you a recent example. Take the somewhat recent lobbist scandal. When it broke, CNN was saying, "Conservative lobbist scandal", or "Republican lobbist scandal". That afternoon Sean, and I believe Rush did too (I didn't get to listen), read on the air a list of the Liberal and Democratic Congressional Reps who took the money. Guess what? The very next day, CNN was calling the scandal "the lobbist scandal". They completely dropped the conservative and Republican labels because they had to do it. Either they didn't do the leg work of research, or they were blatently lieing to the American public. Without conservative talk radio, cable news stations like CNN would get away with this, and they did for years.
As for the lobbying scandal, the Republicans are in power so it only makes sense that the lobbyists will suck up to them. I am positive if you were to look back to the many years of controling Congress you find more lobbyists sucking up to the liberals and Democrats. That's just the way Washington seems to work.
Conservative talk radio fills a void where Air America doesn't. There is no void to fill. They just come off as sounding as screaming lunatics. I doubt Air America will survive, they have too much competition for the liberal listeners.
The problem with liberals (sorry I will not use progressives because a skunk by any other name is still a skunk) is that they have not offered anything real that would better my life or make me safer. Are they creating better jobs or putting more money in my pockets? On the few things they've tried to pass in Congress was to reinstate the draft and blame it on the Republicans. The simple fact is the liberals don't offer America anything they want. The only thing you hear out of their mouths is just Bush bashing without any ideas, or plans, of there own.
With that said, I was one of those people who voted for Bush because he was the lesser of two evils. I don't trust ANY politician from Massachussets, and Bush is too much like a liberal Democrat that a conservative on a lot of issues for my comfort.
I don't trust any electronic voting machine based off of a computer. The date differences could be as simple as someone didn't set the right date & time. There are WAY too many variables to consider for the average peron setting these up. I like paper ballets with electronic readers where there is a hard copy to backtrack and compare. An interesting test of these machines would be having people do both. Mark a paper and use a machine reader, and electronic voting. Then compare the results for the errors. This would not be an error proof test because you could always have people who decide to be "smart" and vote differently on each ballot (electron & paper). I am not surprised with errors in electronic machines.
This is not coming from this administration. This is just another step in the long journey of racial profiling the liberal left calls affirmative action. You see, liberal politicians have this strange idea that just because you have a certain percentage of a given race in a region, state, etc. that percentage of the given race needs to be reflected in the "diversity" of a given company. There are always exceptions, and this has an exception too. The exceptions comes in the form of those people who may be white. To the liberals, there idea doesn't effect white people unless it is in a negative way to positively affect another race.
This has been happening for a long time. I am surprised they didn't try this sooner. Unfortunately, these ussumptions about percentages don't take into account the backgrounds, and culture, people come from no matter what race they are. In a land of free choice, you will rarely get "equal distribution" of the percentages of races for any given job. The idea runs contrary to the human nature of free choice.
People should be free to persue the job they want regardless of their race. Race should never be a consideration for a job period. The person for the job should get the job.
Code::Blocks is making progress in becoming as good as Visual Studio. If you check it out, start with a nightly build because RC2 doesn't show all the cool content improvements that is coming with 1.0.