So, when you vote, are you influenced by all that money when you re-elect all those politicians? That money goes to the politicians. Why is that affecting your vote? Or maybe a better question is, why isn't affecting your vote?? When a crooked politician is voted into office, that says more about the (crooked)voter than any politician. In this age of easy info, ignorance is no excuse. I'm beginning to find the voters to be more despicable than the politicians. Gore Vidal has a very good take on this, but I can't find the article. Help?
...The majority must respect the rights of minorities...
When the majority fails to respect those rights of the minority, it loses all legitimacy.
...bthere is no democracy if a minority takes precedence over a majority.
Absolutely. I'm not saying there would be. For me the reverse is true also. Neither should have precedence over the other. To assure legitimacy the protection must be equal.
Hey! aren't we s'pposed to be talking about the new space jalopy that's going to replace that old contraption that we being using for way to long?:-) Still looks like 1930s Flash Gordon to me. Another pointy tin can on top of a giant sparkler. Doesn't seem to offer much of a view outside either. Our progress on the subject of inertia and energy is so painfully slow, mostly due to all the stupid politics and fat egos.
Good quote from a man I really don't care for that much. I "stole" it from sombody's sig: "It's amazing what you can accomplish when you don't care who gets the credit." - Harry S. Truman
If that means making use of ugly regimes until it suits our larger purposes to turn elsewhere, so be it.
So, are you saying that the ends justify the means? I'm don't think that would go over too well with most people. Apparently it works ok for our rulers.
People have an absolute right to govern themselves.
That would make democracy illegitimate for the minority who are being governed by the majority. True legitimacy can only be achieved through unanimous consensus.
As much as I disagree with Bush on almost everything, he did argue that his intent was to bring democracy to the Arab Middle East in order to eliminate the cultures that breed terrorism. He's right about that.
I honestly don't believe that the American gov't is any more interested in bringing democracy to the region now than they were back in the 40s, 50s, and 60s when they were overthrowiing democratically elected governments of Syria, Iran, and Jordan, etc. What is happening there is just a another sordid chapter of the violence and mayhem that's been going on since Cain killed Able. This time, like throughout the 20th century, it's just Europe(more recently the US/UK) trying to re-colonize the area. Our actions and hypocrisy over their are doing more to breed this culture of terrorism than anything they could do by themselves. This will not diminish until we are kicked out completely.
Other than Iraq, no current Arab regime is democratic; therefore, no current Arab regime is legitimate.
That's too bad that you believe that Iraq's election was anything more than a show for the TV. With only USG approved candidates. Effectively, it will be a "new and improved" Saddam. One that likes America and Europe...for now. And the cycle will repeat. Just like with all the other "Saddams" of the region. Also, legitimacy does not require simple majority rule. It can be derived from other methods. A dictatorship of the majority is no more legitimate than a dictatorship of one. If these people had their "stuff" together, they would quit fighting each other and unite to kick out all the outsiders. That's something I would really like to see.
Is there not anything in the legal system to prevent this?
The new bankruptcy(sp) bill is now law, but I'm sure it only applies to poor people who can't afford to pay their medical bills. Big corps will still be let off.
Maybe you can't compete with free, but you can compete with "censored". Uncensored internet will be a pretty good selling point. Besides that, the taxpayers who actually pay for muni wifi might not tolerate cansorship either. However, judging the present mental state of the American public, they might demand more consorship. Either way the muni wifi will respect the wishes of the voter.
They are also working on a law proposal that would force lawmakers to read the laws before they get to vote on them.
What chance do you think it has of passing if they actually read it? This is one bill might might make it if nobody reads it, and if it's called the "automatic pay raise" bill.
Funny how people keep throwing this out. Traveling is a right. We have a right to travel, and we have a right to choose how to travel. I consider the airlines to be public transportation, and should be treated as such. They can't refuse you service on the buses in Montgomery, Alabama. They shouldn't be allowed to refuse you here either. Unless I'm flying the plane and I bought a ticket, I have a right to travel on that plane without ID.(Now if you mean piloting a plane is a privilege...well...then that would be completely different. I don't claim a right to operate the machinery.) Which leads me to your next thought...
I would have no problem if the airlines themselves took the initiative and demanded ID. It's their planes, and the safety of their customers (and equipment) is a justifiable concern.
It's not about safety. It's about money. The airlines don't want you to sell your ticket to anyone else. The whole ID thing is only to make the tickets non-transferable. Notice that requiring ID didn't prevent 9/11? Maybe it helps to find deadbeat dads, parking scoflaws, or draft(coming soon) dodgers, but not much else.
The real problem is that our legislature is so broken...
And just who allowed that to happen? After you figure that out, try to restate where the REAL problem is. Hint: It's something you always have with you.
-- "I come from a broken family. I broke it myself." --??
If you vote democrat OR republican, you're part of the problem. All you are doing is maintaining the staus quo. If you really think that the dems are against national IDs and are trying to protect our rights, you must be one of those poor, deluded souls that own a piece of the Brooklyn Bridge. The dems will lose nothing, because they are the same as the republicans. The differences you see are a soap opera for the TV, nothing more. The major parties get their money from the same people who know how to play both sides.
Then the RFIDAA will want to outlaw the microwave oven as an infringing device. It doesn't matter if there are legal uses for the microwave. The fact is that 99% percent of users are infringing on their right to track you. Besides, if you're caught with a non-functioning tag, you will be "detained" until the matter is settled.
When you see a coincidence and think, "Wow, what are the chances of that working out this way".
When you consider the vast majority of..."star systems" that are massive failures that explode immediately or fail to fire up at all and the fact we are here in one system out of trillions that is working for the time being, yeah, you can call that "chance". The universe is full of failed systems. Ours is working...for now. So coincidence and chance are very logical working theories. There is no "plan". None is needed. You do enough experimenting and eventually something will work to your satisfaction. Clump enough dust and gas together enough times and you are bound to have a working system sooner or later.
You know, pretty soon you will need a law degree to write software. This is insane. Dealing with uncooperative hardware is bad enough. Now we have to deal with uncooperative lawyers?? Time to forget sbout the attribution and just release stuff anonymously to the public domain and let the bastards look for somebody to sue. We really need to declare war on IP law if we want to avoid the coming dark age.
Very good points. Unfortunately, the gov't could just as easily force the private companies to do the same thing. In fact it's happening in some places. Censorship by corporate proxy is Constitution proof(meaning it doesn't apply). I also think we would get better protection from the likes of the various ??AAs. The gov't is obligated to protect us. If they don't, we should vote for a gov't that does.
The American government is no longer representative of it's people.
And that's just the way 99% of the people like it. If they didn't, there would be different people occupying the white house and the capitol building. It's that simple.
I guess you don't vote, do you? If your democracy works, you're not stuck with anything.
If Verizon was your carrier and they were doing it wrong, you could stop supporting them.
Not if they have a monopoly. Well, you can, but it's easier to vote for your gov't to do the same thing. Verizon is supposed to represent its shareholders. Gov't officials are supposed to represent you.
Also, the government should not do it because the government has a tendency to do things wrong.
I don't consider privateenterprise to be any better. A lot of them are every bit as crooked as any politician. I find it to be very appropriate for citezens to use its gov't as a weapon against corporate bums as any other kind of bums. It gives us a way of keeping them honest, and gives the corps some honest competition. If we don't use our money to control them, then there's nothing wrong with using our vote. Either way, the choice is ours to make. We have a right to use our gov't any way we wish. If your gov't is doing things wrong, then change your gov't. Most of the world's democracies give you that option. Use it or lose it.
Slashdot Mirror
...But now I'd be perfectly comfortable standing next to a nuclear power plant.
Why, you ask?...
Because at my age I don't expect to live long enough to get any stinkin' cancer.
So, when you vote, are you influenced by all that money when you re-elect all those politicians? That money goes to the politicians. Why is that affecting your vote? Or maybe a better question is, why isn't affecting your vote?? When a crooked politician is voted into office, that says more about the (crooked)voter than any politician. In this age of easy info, ignorance is no excuse. I'm beginning to find the voters to be more despicable than the politicians. Gore Vidal has a very good take on this, but I can't find the article. Help?
Legitimacy absoutely requires democracy...
...The majority must respect the rights of minorities...
...bthere is no democracy if a minority takes precedence over a majority.
:-) Still looks like 1930s Flash Gordon to me. Another pointy tin can on top of a giant sparkler. Doesn't seem to offer much of a view outside either. Our progress on the subject of inertia and energy is so painfully slow, mostly due to all the stupid politics and fat egos.
At the very least. To me it requires unanimity.
When the majority fails to respect those rights of the minority, it loses all legitimacy.
Absolutely. I'm not saying there would be. For me the reverse is true also. Neither should have precedence over the other. To assure legitimacy the protection must be equal.
Hey! aren't we s'pposed to be talking about the new space jalopy that's going to replace that old contraption that we being using for way to long?
Good quote from a man I really don't care for that much. I "stole" it from sombody's sig:
"It's amazing what you can accomplish when you don't care who gets the credit." - Harry S. Truman
If that means making use of ugly regimes until it suits our larger purposes to turn elsewhere, so be it.
So, are you saying that the ends justify the means? I'm don't think that would go over too well with most people. Apparently it works ok for our rulers.
People have an absolute right to govern themselves.
That would make democracy illegitimate for the minority who are being governed by the majority. True legitimacy can only be achieved through unanimous consensus.
As much as I disagree with Bush on almost everything, he did argue that his intent was to bring democracy to the Arab Middle East in order to eliminate the cultures that breed terrorism. He's right about that.
I honestly don't believe that the American gov't is any more interested in bringing democracy to the region now than they were back in the 40s, 50s, and 60s when they were overthrowiing democratically elected governments of Syria, Iran, and Jordan, etc. What is happening there is just a another sordid chapter of the violence and mayhem that's been going on since Cain killed Able. This time, like throughout the 20th century, it's just Europe(more recently the US/UK) trying to re-colonize the area. Our actions and hypocrisy over their are doing more to breed this culture of terrorism than anything they could do by themselves. This will not diminish until we are kicked out completely.
Other than Iraq, no current Arab regime is democratic; therefore, no current Arab regime is legitimate.
That's too bad that you believe that Iraq's election was anything more than a show for the TV. With only USG approved candidates. Effectively, it will be a "new and improved" Saddam. One that likes America and Europe...for now. And the cycle will repeat. Just like with all the other "Saddams" of the region. Also, legitimacy does not require simple majority rule. It can be derived from other methods. A dictatorship of the majority is no more legitimate than a dictatorship of one. If these people had their "stuff" together, they would quit fighting each other and unite to kick out all the outsiders. That's something I would really like to see.
...I suspect that IBM would be content to suck him dry along with Darl.
Are you aware of how disgusting that sounds?
Is there not anything in the legal system to prevent this?
The new bankruptcy(sp) bill is now law, but I'm sure it only applies to poor people who can't afford to pay their medical bills. Big corps will still be let off.
Maybe you can't compete with free, but you can compete with "censored". Uncensored internet will be a pretty good selling point. Besides that, the taxpayers who actually pay for muni wifi might not tolerate cansorship either. However, judging the present mental state of the American public, they might demand more consorship. Either way the muni wifi will respect the wishes of the voter.
They are also working on a law proposal that would force lawmakers to read the laws before they get to vote on them.
What chance do you think it has of passing if they actually read it? This is one bill might might make it if nobody reads it, and if it's called the "automatic pay raise" bill.
Flying is not a right, it's a priviledge...
Funny how people keep throwing this out. Traveling is a right. We have a right to travel, and we have a right to choose how to travel. I consider the airlines to be public transportation, and should be treated as such. They can't refuse you service on the buses in Montgomery, Alabama. They shouldn't be allowed to refuse you here either. Unless I'm flying the plane and I bought a ticket, I have a right to travel on that plane without ID.(Now if you mean piloting a plane is a privilege...well...then that would be completely different. I don't claim a right to operate the machinery.) Which leads me to your next thought...
I would have no problem if the airlines themselves took the initiative and demanded ID. It's their planes, and the safety of their customers (and equipment) is a justifiable concern.
It's not about safety. It's about money. The airlines don't want you to sell your ticket to anyone else. The whole ID thing is only to make the tickets non-transferable. Notice that requiring ID didn't prevent 9/11? Maybe it helps to find deadbeat dads, parking scoflaws, or draft(coming soon) dodgers, but not much else.
But the IRS calls it "taxpayer identification number". Just because it matches your SSN, it doesn't mean they're actually using it :-)
The real problem is that our legislature is so broken...
And just who allowed that to happen? After you figure that out, try to restate where the REAL problem is. Hint: It's something you always have with you.
--
"I come from a broken family. I broke it myself." --??
There. I've done my part.
If you vote democrat OR republican, you're part of the problem. All you are doing is maintaining the staus quo. If you really think that the dems are against national IDs and are trying to protect our rights, you must be one of those poor, deluded souls that own a piece of the Brooklyn Bridge. The dems will lose nothing, because they are the same as the republicans. The differences you see are a soap opera for the TV, nothing more. The major parties get their money from the same people who know how to play both sides.
Then the RFIDAA will want to outlaw the microwave oven as an infringing device. It doesn't matter if there are legal uses for the microwave. The fact is that 99% percent of users are infringing on their right to track you. Besides, if you're caught with a non-functioning tag, you will be "detained" until the matter is settled.
They have no constitutional authority...
I sure wish the judge had the same opinion about the IRS.
At some point congress needs to step up and take it's authority back from both the executive AND judicial branches.
At some point the voter needs to step up and take his/her authority back from the executive AND judicial AND legislative branches.
When you see a coincidence and think, "Wow, what are the chances of that working out this way".
When you consider the vast majority of..."star systems" that are massive failures that explode immediately or fail to fire up at all and the fact we are here in one system out of trillions that is working for the time being, yeah, you can call that "chance". The universe is full of failed systems. Ours is working...for now. So coincidence and chance are very logical working theories. There is no "plan". None is needed. You do enough experimenting and eventually something will work to your satisfaction. Clump enough dust and gas together enough times and you are bound to have a working system sooner or later.
You know, pretty soon you will need a law degree to write software. This is insane. Dealing with uncooperative hardware is bad enough. Now we have to deal with uncooperative lawyers?? Time to forget sbout the attribution and just release stuff anonymously to the public domain and let the bastards look for somebody to sue. We really need to declare war on IP law if we want to avoid the coming dark age.
Tiger-direct have no hope here and are just going to waste money .
I'll bet that the lawyers involved would consider that an insult.
I don't think the end of the road is certain, but I'll bet it means curtailed development of entertainment in digital form.
If paper, film, and vinyl are the only media proven to outlast even current copyright law, then it's good enough for me...
Very good points. Unfortunately, the gov't could just as easily force the private companies to do the same thing. In fact it's happening in some places. Censorship by corporate proxy is Constitution proof(meaning it doesn't apply). I also think we would get better protection from the likes of the various ??AAs. The gov't is obligated to protect us. If they don't, we should vote for a gov't that does.
The American government is no longer representative of it's people.
And that's just the way 99% of the people like it. If they didn't, there would be different people occupying the white house and the capitol building. It's that simple.
Guess where he's at right now?
Living it up on a nice beach on the Black Sea?
If it's the government, you're stuck with it.
I guess you don't vote, do you? If your democracy works, you're not stuck with anything.
If Verizon was your carrier and they were doing it wrong, you could stop supporting them.
Not if they have a monopoly. Well, you can, but it's easier to vote for your gov't to do the same thing. Verizon is supposed to represent its shareholders. Gov't officials are supposed to represent you.
Also, the government should not do it because the government has a tendency to do things wrong.
I don't consider private enterprise to be any better. A lot of them are every bit as crooked as any politician. I find it to be very appropriate for citezens to use its gov't as a weapon against corporate bums as any other kind of bums. It gives us a way of keeping them honest, and gives the corps some honest competition. If we don't use our money to control them, then there's nothing wrong with using our vote. Either way, the choice is ours to make. We have a right to use our gov't any way we wish. If your gov't is doing things wrong, then change your gov't. Most of the world's democracies give you that option. Use it or lose it.
I typically do a lot of beta for verizon...
Doesn't everybody?