Heh. Once I was telling my uncle about some story I'd read, that 10,000 Norwegians were chasing a Swede through the forest, and he interrupts to tell me that, "A Sveeede never runs from a Norveeegin."
Back in the 60's and 70's that fragment of the voting block got rolled over by a very active left.
Really? Just how big was the congressional turnover back then? If you see this and find that it was any different than now, let me know. Any turnover you see is more due to retirement of the old farts than any voting action.
Great things we've gotten from the South:
* Slavery
* Segregation
* The Religious Right
Maybe we should've split up when we had the chance.
They should've been kicked out! You can bet that the south would be a third world country as decrepit and corrupt as Guatamala if we had gotten rid of them. The North would be ruled by Minnesotan Swedes with big hands.
What happened to the days when a country's movements were so offensive that people would march?
The same thing that happened to the days when a country's movements were so offensive that people would vote. Oh wait...That never happened. People prefer bullets to ballots.
First off you expect the institutions to look after their customers' interests above their own. A proposition like that will get lobbied right out of committee. So, with the fact that you would have to get your neighbors to vote for a politician that would consider it, it doesn't look likely it will ever happen.
This way nobody goes to jail for bad checks...
An empty jail makes no profits for the investers. Why do you think that the govt is trying to make even the most trivial violations a jailable offense? They're building all those prisons. Now they must fill them up any way they can, and Walmart might be looking for cheap domestic labor in case China goes sour.
Look at it this way, the administration that you appear to be trying to support...
He, and others support the status quo in the hope that some of that power and influence over others might rub off on them. They will use the most frivolous punctuational or grammatical error to "prove" that they're always right. They call on great philosophers to make their claims, which turn out to be nothing more than an exhibition of animal instincts. You will not be able to shake their faith in those who give them a taste from the cup. He is part of a small collection of these types in my freaks list. They are on public display for further study. Remember that the purpose of these events is to distract you from the thieves that are robbing you blind. It is not worthy of a minute of your time. Yet, here's a big giant thread devoted to it. If you want to get to basics, the simple fact is that we have a right not to talk to the authorities that claim the right not to answer to us. But, try to enforce that right, and you will go to prison. We must claim the same rights and privileges for ourselves as we give to govt. Unfortunately, we are doing just the opposite. To claim our rights is now considered unpatriotic.
It's what many people mistakenly call "Inalienable rights". Which they believe cannot be taken away. Obvouisly they can be, so a more appropriate name is essential liberty which makes no such implication. I believe I like the rest of your post. Whether you're serious or not doesn't matter. It makes a lot of sense. There are many, however, who simply want the freedom to be left alone, unmolested, and to live and die in peace.
Whoopsy-daisy My bad. You're absolutely correct. In fact I should have just left your original post as it is. I do wonder that even with non-partisan voting, people will still be interested what affiliations their favorite candidate might have. But, as you say, the affiliation doesn't need to be on the ballot itself. Just the name. I trust I have it right this time. The parties must be allowed exist...as any other private organization...without any special tax privileges, etc. And as such, I think that they should go back to the old way of nominating their candidates. No more primaries at public expense. They should just need to get enough signed petitions to get their candidate on the ballot like everybody else. They probably do, but it's so easy for them that nobody mentions it on the TV. Now what's this I hear about FBI cracking a "pirate" ring? Does this mean I won't be able to find a copy of "Peter Pan" for two dollars anymore?
Cool idea. Outlawing all political parties is something I could agree to. We don't need them to have an election. Remove the party labels from the ballot. If they want to keep the labels on the ballot, then they should print out the persons entire platform. Then voting would definitely need to be a three day event. This registering as a republican/democrat thing really is silly. It's nothing more than a way to restrict who can vote.
Shareholders trying to force the company they own stock in to be socially concious is like a police officer being concerned with observing rights under the Bill of Rights. It would be wonderful, but that isn't his job, either.
You are wrong Mr. Moneybags(Ms Moneypenny?)! I think that you would find that observing rights under the Bill of Rights is very much part of his job which entails upholding the law, including those laws which are actually part of the Supreme Law of the Land, you know, the Constitution? Why do I feel you're not serious? That has to be one of the wierdest analogies I have seen in a long time.
One of the good/bad things about democracy is that one can elect their favorite candidate, no matter how crooked. I would rather show them an alternative than deny them the choice. This is why I'm against term limits. Besides the fact that the concept doesn't work. Where I live, nobody can occupy the same office twice(no re-election). It hasn't fixed anything. The party is made up of people. How do you destroy that without destroying them? Wasn't there a time when the Communist party was banned from the ballot? Who would make the decision? I would like to leave it up to the voters. If "eternal vigilance" is to be applied anywhere, it would be here. If we actually made the effort to watch over the politicians, this simply wouldn't be a problem. If the voters are too lazy to care for their govt, then maybe a monarchy is the best way to go. Let there be no doubt, democracy is very high maintenance, and we are the people who need to change the oil(and the filter) a bit more regularly. I believe that if you want to ban someone from the ballot(or detain them in jail), you should have to lay actual charges against him. You should have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he is guilty of whatever that would disqualify him.
If that were to happen, they would just rename themselves to the "Nazi" and the "Fascist" party. And they will still win the election. Party names aren't relevent. Just tell people to stop voting for crooks and pirates.
For some reason, people in the south think democrats are pussies because we want to understand a problem before shooting at it.
No! Democrats are pussies because they won't stand up and fight the status quo. Democrats who voted for the patriot act are pussies. Democrats who voted to go to war are pussies. Democrats who voted to stay in the war are pussies. Democrats who voted to extend copyright and voted for the DMCA and who wanted to install Clipper chips are PUSSIES! Of course, so are the republicans who voted for these same things. Ahhh...the power of money... They act like republicans to get votes. Maybe because they are indeed the same thing? If you vote for either of these "two" parties, you will no change whatsoever. But then, the soap opera presented everyday on c-span is one tof the best things ever to hit the airwaves. "Acting! Genius! Thank you!"
PS: In case you really believe that democrats ask first and shoot after, then you don't remember who brought us Vietnam. Some guy named Truman. The republicans jumped on it also. So, it too was a bi-partisan event.
Why didn't Argentina and Britain think of that? They could have saved all money painting the QE2. Since there was no Google at the time, they could've used finger or gopher or something.
They have been trying since 1710. In more recent times Sonny Bono and Disney did their part for the cause. And of course now there's DMCA. Looks like they're working pretty hard at it.
A bit "protectionist" maybe. But, you call it what you like. Me? Man, I'm in paradise...literally and figuratively:-) We all get along just fine and dandy. You can have your reality. We're fine with ours. My only problem right now is a dead wireless router. Eh, waddaya gonna do? A few days work, and I'll have a new one. I'll raise my next beer to ya, though. Salud! Kam bai! Prost! Or as it goes at our table: Para 'riba Para 'bajo Para centro Para dentro
...Since you carry your own misery with you...
Nope. I left that up north in winter wasteland.
...I doubt a new job would change anything.
Irrelevent. I create my own work. There are few things sadder and more dehumanizing than watching willing slaves filling out all that paper work and begging for a job. Word of mouth is putting plenty of food my table. No hoops to jump through. No piss test. Just beautiful weather and really tall swedish girls. But, yeah, you're right. A new job wouldn't change anything.
...But, that's just reality. Defendng realilty is rather pointless.
Slashdot Mirror
For a Linux box?? How much does SCO get?
Heh. Once I was telling my uncle about some story I'd read, that 10,000 Norwegians were chasing a Swede through the forest, and he interrupts to tell me that, "A Sveeede never runs from a Norveeegin."
Back in the 60's and 70's that fragment of the voting block got rolled over by a very active left.
Really? Just how big was the congressional turnover back then? If you see this and find that it was any different than now, let me know. Any turnover you see is more due to retirement of the old farts than any voting action.
Great things we've gotten from the South:
* Slavery
* Segregation
* The Religious Right
Maybe we should've split up when we had the chance.
They should've been kicked out! You can bet that the south would be a third world country as decrepit and corrupt as Guatamala if we had gotten rid of them. The North would be ruled by Minnesotan Swedes with big hands.
What happened to the days when a country's movements were so offensive that people would march?
The same thing that happened to the days when a country's movements were so offensive that people would vote. Oh wait...That never happened. People prefer bullets to ballots.
First off you expect the institutions to look after their customers' interests above their own. A proposition like that will get lobbied right out of committee. So, with the fact that you would have to get your neighbors to vote for a politician that would consider it, it doesn't look likely it will ever happen.
This way nobody goes to jail for bad checks...
An empty jail makes no profits for the investers. Why do you think that the govt is trying to make even the most trivial violations a jailable offense? They're building all those prisons. Now they must fill them up any way they can, and Walmart might be looking for cheap domestic labor in case China goes sour.
Or to be more exact, I'm amazed that people still pay for porn.
Like anything else involving sex, it just wants to be taken out for dinner and a movie.
This leads to a very real devaluation of our personal worth, as the intrusiveness of companies serves to reduce our quality of life.
"The time has come to say, 'is dehumanization such a bad word?'" (excerpt 2, though number 1 still applies)
Look at it this way, the administration that you appear to be trying to support...
He, and others support the status quo in the hope that some of that power and influence over others might rub off on them. They will use the most frivolous punctuational or grammatical error to "prove" that they're always right. They call on great philosophers to make their claims, which turn out to be nothing more than an exhibition of animal instincts. You will not be able to shake their faith in those who give them a taste from the cup. He is part of a small collection of these types in my freaks list. They are on public display for further study. Remember that the purpose of these events is to distract you from the thieves that are robbing you blind. It is not worthy of a minute of your time. Yet, here's a big giant thread devoted to it. If you want to get to basics, the simple fact is that we have a right not to talk to the authorities that claim the right not to answer to us. But, try to enforce that right, and you will go to prison. We must claim the same rights and privileges for ourselves as we give to govt. Unfortunately, we are doing just the opposite. To claim our rights is now considered unpatriotic.
Is that like a "hanging chad"? Could they replace it with a dangling participle?
What is essential liberty?
It's what many people mistakenly call "Inalienable rights". Which they believe cannot be taken away. Obvouisly they can be, so a more appropriate name is essential liberty which makes no such implication. I believe I like the rest of your post. Whether you're serious or not doesn't matter. It makes a lot of sense. There are many, however, who simply want the freedom to be left alone, unmolested, and to live and die in peace.
Whoopsy-daisy My bad. You're absolutely correct. In fact I should have just left your original post as it is. I do wonder that even with non-partisan voting, people will still be interested what affiliations their favorite candidate might have. But, as you say, the affiliation doesn't need to be on the ballot itself. Just the name. I trust I have it right this time. The parties must be allowed exist...as any other private organization...without any special tax privileges, etc. And as such, I think that they should go back to the old way of nominating their candidates. No more primaries at public expense. They should just need to get enough signed petitions to get their candidate on the ballot like everybody else. They probably do, but it's so easy for them that nobody mentions it on the TV. Now what's this I hear about FBI cracking a "pirate" ring? Does this mean I won't be able to find a copy of "Peter Pan" for two dollars anymore?
Cool idea. Outlawing all political parties is something I could agree to. We don't need them to have an election. Remove the party labels from the ballot. If they want to keep the labels on the ballot, then they should print out the persons entire platform. Then voting would definitely need to be a three day event. This registering as a republican/democrat thing really is silly. It's nothing more than a way to restrict who can vote.
Judging a truly bad writing contest would be a monumental chore.
Now you know what the moderators are so grumpy sometimes.
Thats (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, I kinda thought so myself.
Nope, the White House beat them to it.
Shareholders trying to force the company they own stock in to be socially concious is like a police officer being concerned with observing rights under the Bill of Rights. It would be wonderful, but that isn't his job, either.
You are wrong Mr. Moneybags(Ms Moneypenny?)! I think that you would find that observing rights under the Bill of Rights is very much part of his job which entails upholding the law, including those laws which are actually part of the Supreme Law of the Land, you know, the Constitution? Why do I feel you're not serious? That has to be one of the wierdest analogies I have seen in a long time.
for hackers to meet in the states anymore after Dimitri and that Cisco guy caught so much hell? All the feds have to do now is lock the doors and...
One of the good/bad things about democracy is that one can elect their favorite candidate, no matter how crooked. I would rather show them an alternative than deny them the choice. This is why I'm against term limits. Besides the fact that the concept doesn't work. Where I live, nobody can occupy the same office twice(no re-election). It hasn't fixed anything. The party is made up of people. How do you destroy that without destroying them? Wasn't there a time when the Communist party was banned from the ballot? Who would make the decision? I would like to leave it up to the voters. If "eternal vigilance" is to be applied anywhere, it would be here. If we actually made the effort to watch over the politicians, this simply wouldn't be a problem. If the voters are too lazy to care for their govt, then maybe a monarchy is the best way to go. Let there be no doubt, democracy is very high maintenance, and we are the people who need to change the oil(and the filter) a bit more regularly. I believe that if you want to ban someone from the ballot(or detain them in jail), you should have to lay actual charges against him. You should have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he is guilty of whatever that would disqualify him.
MS has proved it's an "evil, monopolizing corporation" whereas google hasn't yet.
:-) The day is still young.
Give 'em time
If that were to happen, they would just rename themselves to the "Nazi" and the "Fascist" party. And they will still win the election. Party names aren't relevent. Just tell people to stop voting for crooks and pirates.
For some reason, people in the south think democrats are pussies because we want to understand a problem before shooting at it.
No! Democrats are pussies because they won't stand up and fight the status quo. Democrats who voted for the patriot act are pussies. Democrats who voted to go to war are pussies. Democrats who voted to stay in the war are pussies. Democrats who voted to extend copyright and voted for the DMCA and who wanted to install Clipper chips are PUSSIES! Of course, so are the republicans who voted for these same things. Ahhh...the power of money... They act like republicans to get votes. Maybe because they are indeed the same thing? If you vote for either of these "two" parties, you will no change whatsoever. But then, the soap opera presented everyday on c-span is one tof the best things ever to hit the airwaves. "Acting! Genius! Thank you!"
PS: In case you really believe that democrats ask first and shoot after, then you don't remember who brought us Vietnam. Some guy named Truman. The republicans jumped on it also. So, it too was a bi-partisan event.
Why didn't Argentina and Britain think of that? They could have saved all money painting the QE2. Since there was no Google at the time, they could've used finger or gopher or something.
Wow! Sure is a good thing we have the first amendment to club them over the head with... or has it been completely repealed now? Like the 4th?
They have been trying since 1710. In more recent times Sonny Bono and Disney did their part for the cause. And of course now there's DMCA. Looks like they're working pretty hard at it.
...akin to paranoia.
:-) We all get along just fine and dandy. You can have your reality. We're fine with ours. My only problem right now is a dead wireless router. Eh, waddaya gonna do? A few days work, and I'll have a new one. I'll raise my next beer to ya, though. Salud! Kam bai! Prost!
...Since you carry your own misery with you...
...I doubt a new job would change anything.
...But, that's just reality. Defendng realilty is rather pointless.
A bit "protectionist" maybe. But, you call it what you like. Me? Man, I'm in paradise...literally and figuratively
Or as it goes at our table:
Para 'riba
Para 'bajo
Para centro
Para dentro
Nope. I left that up north in winter wasteland.
Irrelevent. I create my own work. There are few things sadder and more dehumanizing than watching willing slaves filling out all that paper work and begging for a job. Word of mouth is putting plenty of food my table. No hoops to jump through. No piss test. Just beautiful weather and really tall swedish girls. But, yeah, you're right. A new job wouldn't change anything.
Uuh, okay.