I imagine if you asked Alaskans, they remind you of the boatloads of public works projects and large amounts of money he brought in.
Am I the only one that finds it strange that a state so flush with money as to be able to pay dividends to it's citizens needs the assistance of Washington for it's public works projects?
You seem to think the fact that he's also a criminal somehow cancels out the work he did for those people, and I imagine they'd disagree.
Is that why he's down in the polls and stands a decent chance of losing his bid for re-election in one of the most Republican states in the country?
Bitching about moderation rarely does you any good around here. I just accept the fact that my posts will be modded down by those that disagree with me. I don't really care -- at the end of the day I have more than enough positive moderation to make up for it.
What's so smart about believing that democrats only want to tax those making over $250,000/year? They bring out that bedtime fairy tale every election.
Not very, since my team isn't the one down 11 points in the polls.
no one gives a fuck about that nothing story outside of people who have a direct, vested interest in smearing the candidate.
I'm not smearing her. Just pointing out the fact that the McCain campaign sent out of town lawyers to interfere with what had previously been an Alaskan affair.
Second, please post the entire quote that proves what you're claiming she thinks is true.
what the fuck are you mods smoking that open partisan slander rises to the level of insightful to you?
WTF are you smoking that you assume anything that disagrees with your own views is automatically open partisan slander?
And to answer the question, she's smart enough to get elected governor of Alaska, in addition to her previous achievements.
Yeah, and Elliot Spitzer was smart enough to get elected governor of New York. Winning a gubernatorial election doesn't automatically translate into having common sense or wisdom.
But let's pretend like the work she's actually accomplished
Well, since you seem really fond of asking for citations let me ask you for a few: What has she actually accomplished as Governor of Alaska? Was it rejecting all of the earmarks from Washington after lobbying for them while Mayor? It certainly wasn't her energy policy.
I'd just to say a big "grow the fuck up" to those of you who think your sides talking points are useful in discussing the quality of a person's job performance.
Says the person who is defending someone whose entire experience in the national spotlight has consisted of repeating talking points.
Smart enough to get elected governor of a state that also thought Ted "Tubes" Stevens would be a great Senator. Alaskans are obviously excelent judges of intellect. Almost as good as the people of my state, Texans.
Oh, it's not limited to you guys either. My state elected someone on a mandate of political reform who pissed away his political capital on drivers licenses for illegal immigrants and whom eventually got chased out of office after paying for high priced call girls....
Getting elected Governor of a State doesn't really prove anything about your intelligence or wisdom, IMHO.
And she's gone on to have a very high popularity rating in her home state.
How long do you think that's going to last now that the McCain campaign has flown in a bunch of high-priced Washington lawyers to interfere with the troopergate investigation? Frontier independent types aren't going to like being told what to do by out of town lawyers -- even if they disagreed with the investigation in the first place.
Make no mistake about it, Palin is smart
What's smart about believing that the Earth is 6,000 years old and that man and the dinosaurs walked the Earth together?
Oh, money is definitely a commodity. I guess this is what I don't understand though:
So individual state or bank currencies were unable to complete.
Are state currencies even constitutional? "No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts" I realize it says "coin" and not "print" but I would think that the intent is still the same.
As far as the bank currencies goes.... that's an interesting point. Dunno how to respond to that.
and commodity regulation has it's downsides
All regulation has downsides and imposes an extra cost of doing business. At the end of the day one has to look at the benefits of said regulation to see if it outweighs the drawbacks. A unified currency would seem to be beneficial, though I'd be the first one to admit that I'm not a big fan of having my savings devalued by inflation.....
Even further - Salmon P. Chance (R), Secretary to Treasury under Lincoln (R), started nationalized currency, putting the new, post-civil war, centralized, federal government in position to control the economy and effectively ending federalism in the United States. (...and the coup de grÃfce - in 1864, Lincoln moved Chase to Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, at that point, there was little to no possibility of challenging federal control of legal tender.)
How would you have challenged Federal control of legal tender in any event? Congress has the power "To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin"
I recommend turning off your GWB derangement syndrome filter.
I recommend reading my post history before making assumptions about my motivations. I've recently defended GWB on a number of issues (the Paulson plan being one of them) and don't hold any particular hatred towards the man (unlike some of my friends on the left).
I only brought him up because it seemed rather amusing that you were implying that it was the Democrats coming to Congress with their "hands out". Hmm, what party is this administration from?
If you become President, do you intend to let your Democrat colleagues in Congress do for the health care industry what they did for the home mortgage industry via Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?
Because those problems had nothing at all to do with the last thirty years of deregulation, going all the way back to Reagan and mostly instituted by Republicans.
Will you be coming to us with manufactured surprise and outrage and with your hands out asking for $1T or more?
Funny, cuz the last time I checked, GWB was a Republican.
Mind you, I don't think the Democrats are totally blame free here. Fannie and Freddie were equally opportunity bribers^Wcampaign contributors. That doesn't change the fact that you are a partisan shrill though.
If you communicate within your ISP network, it would be the least cost, preferably 0 cost per packet.
That might be true on a telco network using DSL for the last mile but I don't think it holds true on a cable network using DOCSIS. If I'm sucking down 5Mbits that's still 13.1% of the available downstream (5/38) on a DOSCIS 2.0 network regardless of where it's coming from.
Don't get me wrong, I would love this device to really work... But we don't need a magic wand, we need to look at why Europe can have 65MPG Ford (yes, the same Ford that has given us 15 years of single-digit MPG tanks) diesel hybrids, while we piss and moan in the US about whether to rase CAFE standards to a "competitively unfair" 35MPG.
I'm sure Ford would love to sell that car over here.... but would Americans buy it? Do you really think there was a market for those cars over here before gas started going through the roof? Hell, people kept buying SUVs through $2/gal and $3/gal. It was only when gas started to surpass $4/gal that people started to bitch and moan about it.
Ford is a business like any other. If they could sell that car profitably in the US they would.
He runs into trouble with his deficit spending during times of economic expansion.
That's the American attitude of wanting to have our cake and eat it too. I think that over the long term we are going to pay dearly for that -- sooner or later the rest of the World is going to stop financing our deficits and we'll be looking at serious tax increases and/or spending cuts (likely both) to make the books balance.
Of course that doesn't excuse him. He has the biggest bully pulpit in the World and could have brought attention to this problem if it suited him.....
How is this a good thing? I'm thinking that the financial resources being spent to roll this out would have done more good had they actually invested in their architecture to simply increase bandwidth. Now they are watching your total bandwidth, not to mention your average over 15 minute periods for every 15 minutes. Just upgrade your network, you'll have happier customers.
It's a good thing from their perspective because it will probably have the "unintended" side-effect of making it impossible to watch real time streaming video. The cable companies are terrified of IPTV because it competes with their core business -- so why make it easier for IPTV providers to reach your customers?
I suspect that once the IPTV market gets firmly established and powerful enough to have their own lobbyists you'll start to hear rumblings about anti-trust. Sooner or later the FCC (or state regulatory agencies) will intervene. If they don't then look for a DoJ suit that seeks to split up the cable and internet operations. You won't see any of this happen for at least ten years though -- so in the mean time you are effectively shut out from using these services if you are a Comcast subscriber.
Then I reminded him that Verizon is doing it and he came back with the argument of, "Yeah but it costs a couple hundred bucks just to have it set up." Now, I don't know what it actually costs, all I know is that there are enough people signing up as they roll it out that they haven't yet stopped rolling it out.
He's full of shit. Right now they are showing a deal for free equipment and $42.99/mo. Granted, it's Verizon, so I'm sure you have to sign a contract -- but there isn't a huge installation fee that I'm aware of. FiOS could kick their ass -- but I'd wager that unless state regulatory agencies intervene you are only going to see Verizon roll it out in the big cities. The rest of us will be stuck with crippled cable service or slower DSL offerings (if available) for the foreseeable future.
Personally I opted for DSL -- I only get 1.5Mbit/s as opposed to 5.0Mbit/s but at least I know I can use it whenever I want and I've never seen my Netflix videos choke and die during peak hours on DSL. I've also never seen my DSL lose connectivity for no apparent reason -- something that seems to happen at least once a month on Roadrunner around these parts.
WTF? The White House doing something that isn't brain-dead stupid? Someone please pinch me. No, wait, don't I like this dream!
I'll get flamed hard core for saying this but GWB actually seems to be getting more reasonable as his term winds down. He actually seems to realize the limitations of his office and of American power now. Makes me wonder where we would be if this man had been the one in the White House seven years ago. I guess being POTUS for seven years is a humbling experience.
Residential ISPs don't expect their customers to, which is my point.
If they don't expect them to do anything but surfing and e-mail then how do you explain all of the commercials I see from Time Warner touting how 'superior' Roadrunner is for gaming?
MMORPGs and other games where a well-known party provides a dedicated server do not. If you want to run this dedicated server, upgrade your service to a business class SLA.
I don't want to run a 'dedicated' server. I want to be able to host a game for myself and a handful of friends this Friday night. You realize that not every multi-player game comes with dedicated servers, right?
Instead of DCC, use encrypted XMPP through a well-known dedicated server.
In other words, your solution to protocols that don't work behind NAT is to not use them or pay for a business class account? Do you use your connection for anything other than web browsing and e-mail?
Slashdot Mirror
You're really not very smart are you?
At least I can back up my arguments with more than personal attacks.
Quote please. No excuses, thanks.
Maybe you should try reading your other replies before talking out of your ass and throwing fucking swear words around.
I imagine if you asked Alaskans, they remind you of the boatloads of public works projects and large amounts of money he brought in.
Am I the only one that finds it strange that a state so flush with money as to be able to pay dividends to it's citizens needs the assistance of Washington for it's public works projects?
You seem to think the fact that he's also a criminal somehow cancels out the work he did for those people, and I imagine they'd disagree.
Is that why he's down in the polls and stands a decent chance of losing his bid for re-election in one of the most Republican states in the country?
Bitching about moderation rarely does you any good around here. I just accept the fact that my posts will be modded down by those that disagree with me. I don't really care -- at the end of the day I have more than enough positive moderation to make up for it.
And certainly Palin has never expressed that belief.
Sure about that?
What's so smart about believing that democrats only want to tax those making over $250,000/year? They bring out that bedtime fairy tale every election.
And the Republicans have done that much better?
HO?
God how desperate are you
Not very, since my team isn't the one down 11 points in the polls.
no one gives a fuck about that nothing story outside of people who have a direct, vested interest in smearing the candidate.
I'm not smearing her. Just pointing out the fact that the McCain campaign sent out of town lawyers to interfere with what had previously been an Alaskan affair.
Second, please post the entire quote that proves what you're claiming she thinks is true.
Is this good enough for you?
what the fuck are you mods smoking that open partisan slander rises to the level of insightful to you?
WTF are you smoking that you assume anything that disagrees with your own views is automatically open partisan slander?
And to answer the question, she's smart enough to get elected governor of Alaska, in addition to her previous achievements.
Yeah, and Elliot Spitzer was smart enough to get elected governor of New York. Winning a gubernatorial election doesn't automatically translate into having common sense or wisdom.
But let's pretend like the work she's actually accomplished
Well, since you seem really fond of asking for citations let me ask you for a few: What has she actually accomplished as Governor of Alaska? Was it rejecting all of the earmarks from Washington after lobbying for them while Mayor? It certainly wasn't her energy policy.
I'd just to say a big "grow the fuck up" to those of you who think your sides talking points are useful in discussing the quality of a person's job performance.
Says the person who is defending someone whose entire experience in the national spotlight has consisted of repeating talking points.
Smart enough to get elected governor of a state that also thought Ted "Tubes" Stevens would be a great Senator. Alaskans are obviously excelent judges of intellect. Almost as good as the people of my state, Texans.
Oh, it's not limited to you guys either. My state elected someone on a mandate of political reform who pissed away his political capital on drivers licenses for illegal immigrants and whom eventually got chased out of office after paying for high priced call girls....
Getting elected Governor of a State doesn't really prove anything about your intelligence or wisdom, IMHO.
That blurb is from the NY Post [nypost.com] which is an admittedly conservative tabloid
Fixed that for you.
At least Putin didn't rear his head into the debate.
He's too busy invading Alaska while Palin is out of town and has her guard down.... ;)
And she's gone on to have a very high popularity rating in her home state.
How long do you think that's going to last now that the McCain campaign has flown in a bunch of high-priced Washington lawyers to interfere with the troopergate investigation? Frontier independent types aren't going to like being told what to do by out of town lawyers -- even if they disagreed with the investigation in the first place.
Make no mistake about it, Palin is smart
What's smart about believing that the Earth is 6,000 years old and that man and the dinosaurs walked the Earth together?
Oh, money is definitely a commodity. I guess this is what I don't understand though:
So individual state or bank currencies were unable to complete.
Are state currencies even constitutional? "No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts" I realize it says "coin" and not "print" but I would think that the intent is still the same.
As far as the bank currencies goes.... that's an interesting point. Dunno how to respond to that.
and commodity regulation has it's downsides
All regulation has downsides and imposes an extra cost of doing business. At the end of the day one has to look at the benefits of said regulation to see if it outweighs the drawbacks. A unified currency would seem to be beneficial, though I'd be the first one to admit that I'm not a big fan of having my savings devalued by inflation.....
Even further - Salmon P. Chance (R), Secretary to Treasury under Lincoln (R), started nationalized currency, putting the new, post-civil war, centralized, federal government in position to control the economy and effectively ending federalism in the United States. (...and the coup de grÃfce - in 1864, Lincoln moved Chase to Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, at that point, there was little to no possibility of challenging federal control of legal tender.)
How would you have challenged Federal control of legal tender in any event? Congress has the power "To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin"
I recommend turning off your GWB derangement syndrome filter.
I recommend reading my post history before making assumptions about my motivations. I've recently defended GWB on a number of issues (the Paulson plan being one of them) and don't hold any particular hatred towards the man (unlike some of my friends on the left).
I only brought him up because it seemed rather amusing that you were implying that it was the Democrats coming to Congress with their "hands out". Hmm, what party is this administration from?
If you become President, do you intend to let your Democrat colleagues in Congress do for the health care industry what they did for the home mortgage industry via Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?
Because those problems had nothing at all to do with the last thirty years of deregulation, going all the way back to Reagan and mostly instituted by Republicans.
Will you be coming to us with manufactured surprise and outrage and with your hands out asking for $1T or more?
Funny, cuz the last time I checked, GWB was a Republican.
Mind you, I don't think the Democrats are totally blame free here. Fannie and Freddie were equally opportunity bribers^Wcampaign contributors. That doesn't change the fact that you are a partisan shrill though.
If you communicate within your ISP network, it would be the least cost, preferably 0 cost per packet.
That might be true on a telco network using DSL for the last mile but I don't think it holds true on a cable network using DOCSIS. If I'm sucking down 5Mbits that's still 13.1% of the available downstream (5/38) on a DOSCIS 2.0 network regardless of where it's coming from.
Don't get me wrong, I would love this device to really work... But we don't need a magic wand, we need to look at why Europe can have 65MPG Ford (yes, the same Ford that has given us 15 years of single-digit MPG tanks) diesel hybrids, while we piss and moan in the US about whether to rase CAFE standards to a "competitively unfair" 35MPG.
I'm sure Ford would love to sell that car over here.... but would Americans buy it? Do you really think there was a market for those cars over here before gas started going through the roof? Hell, people kept buying SUVs through $2/gal and $3/gal. It was only when gas started to surpass $4/gal that people started to bitch and moan about it.
Ford is a business like any other. If they could sell that car profitably in the US they would.
Oh wait - wouldn't work - prices for the cartridges exceed the price of gas...
Maybe the automotive/oil industries should adopt the same business model. Sell us the cars for $500 and charge $25/gal for gasoline.....
AT&T and cable modem? Am I the only one confused here?
He runs into trouble with his deficit spending during times of economic expansion.
That's the American attitude of wanting to have our cake and eat it too. I think that over the long term we are going to pay dearly for that -- sooner or later the rest of the World is going to stop financing our deficits and we'll be looking at serious tax increases and/or spending cuts (likely both) to make the books balance.
Of course that doesn't excuse him. He has the biggest bully pulpit in the World and could have brought attention to this problem if it suited him.....
How is this a good thing? I'm thinking that the financial resources being spent to roll this out would have done more good had they actually invested in their architecture to simply increase bandwidth. Now they are watching your total bandwidth, not to mention your average over 15 minute periods for every 15 minutes. Just upgrade your network, you'll have happier customers.
It's a good thing from their perspective because it will probably have the "unintended" side-effect of making it impossible to watch real time streaming video. The cable companies are terrified of IPTV because it competes with their core business -- so why make it easier for IPTV providers to reach your customers?
I suspect that once the IPTV market gets firmly established and powerful enough to have their own lobbyists you'll start to hear rumblings about anti-trust. Sooner or later the FCC (or state regulatory agencies) will intervene. If they don't then look for a DoJ suit that seeks to split up the cable and internet operations. You won't see any of this happen for at least ten years though -- so in the mean time you are effectively shut out from using these services if you are a Comcast subscriber.
Then I reminded him that Verizon is doing it and he came back with the argument of, "Yeah but it costs a couple hundred bucks just to have it set up." Now, I don't know what it actually costs, all I know is that there are enough people signing up as they roll it out that they haven't yet stopped rolling it out.
He's full of shit. Right now they are showing a deal for free equipment and $42.99/mo. Granted, it's Verizon, so I'm sure you have to sign a contract -- but there isn't a huge installation fee that I'm aware of. FiOS could kick their ass -- but I'd wager that unless state regulatory agencies intervene you are only going to see Verizon roll it out in the big cities. The rest of us will be stuck with crippled cable service or slower DSL offerings (if available) for the foreseeable future.
Personally I opted for DSL -- I only get 1.5Mbit/s as opposed to 5.0Mbit/s but at least I know I can use it whenever I want and I've never seen my Netflix videos choke and die during peak hours on DSL. I've also never seen my DSL lose connectivity for no apparent reason -- something that seems to happen at least once a month on Roadrunner around these parts.
WTF? The White House doing something that isn't brain-dead stupid? Someone please pinch me. No, wait, don't I like this dream!
I'll get flamed hard core for saying this but GWB actually seems to be getting more reasonable as his term winds down. He actually seems to realize the limitations of his office and of American power now. Makes me wonder where we would be if this man had been the one in the White House seven years ago. I guess being POTUS for seven years is a humbling experience.
Residential ISPs don't expect their customers to, which is my point.
If they don't expect them to do anything but surfing and e-mail then how do you explain all of the commercials I see from Time Warner touting how 'superior' Roadrunner is for gaming?
MMORPGs and other games where a well-known party provides a dedicated server do not. If you want to run this dedicated server, upgrade your service to a business class SLA.
I don't want to run a 'dedicated' server. I want to be able to host a game for myself and a handful of friends this Friday night. You realize that not every multi-player game comes with dedicated servers, right?
Instead of DCC, use encrypted XMPP through a well-known dedicated server.
In other words, your solution to protocols that don't work behind NAT is to not use them or pay for a business class account? Do you use your connection for anything other than web browsing and e-mail?
/. error ftw!