The media was against Iraq from the very beginning. When was it ever all cheers about invading Iraq? Truly, the media has been out to sabotage the effort from the start.
The same media that has yet to make a big deal out of the President's numerous impeachable offenses?
The media has done exactly this since before Bush took office. The media has been clamoring for impeachment at every opportunity. Unless you're only watching Fox News (and even they aren't all that conservative), you'd have seen both of these happening.
Good point. I was under the impression Rush accused Fox of exaggerating (specifically, going off his meds, for more dramatic effect). Rush says that Fox wrote in his book that he's done exactly this, for exactly that reason, from time to time.
And while their activities aren't quite the same, the reaction by the media is still illuminating. Kid gloves and rationalizing for Kerry; indignation and outrage for Rush.
Lastly; cloning & stem cells are extremely different; I agree. So it's strange that the legislation in question - the legislation which Fox supports, even though he didn't read it - has "stem cells" in its title, when in its content it actually focuses on legalizing cloning. As the two things are so different, it's strange that the politicians would put "stem cells" in the title of a bill to allow cloning... unless they're being deceptive politicians.
Oh, wait. Guess I got redundant in that last bit there.
Truthiness. Heh. Colbert's funny. If claiming that "reality has a liberal bias" sounds good, then run with it. I'm more of a skeptic.
So Limbaugh is a flaming hypocrite w.r.t. drugs? Proove it. He claims he's always avoided the subject of drugs specifically because he's got a problem there. People have dug into his archives to proove he's lying and, well, the proof just ain't there.
Then again, I guess he could've pulled a Sandy Berger and modified his archives somehow, but I doubt it.
Hmm. That's a lot of good ideas there. How much time do you spend on this, daily? After all, I want to fight spam, but in the end, it's about saving time, too. If I can spend 15 minutes a day at this, and be doing something worthwhile, then I'm all for it. Not to sound lazy of course.
it probably has more to do with what it takes to tell just about *any* joke now that the politically-correct thought police are breathing down everybody's neck. Tell a joke that ain't PC, and unless you make some stupid apologetic, self-deprecating somesuch immediately after, they're going to charge you with a hate crime or something.
And I agree, the "hardcore" response was great. Funnier than the joke, actually. heh.
Thank you. I find that ad hominem attacks are quite convincing. Thank you for illuminating the issues for me. Ignore the guy. If he's an idiot, don't stoop down to notice. Stick with the facts.
And since when has the climate, or atmospheric makeup, of our planet been "stable"? On geologic timescales our planet has seen massive, violent, even sudden changes. To call it stable is just silly.
Are we influencing it, or hastening its change? Now that's a question worth asking. Note, it's a question; it's not a stated fact of truth. If we're going to answer that question, we're going to need a *lot* of evidence to back up our claim.
As Carl Sagan once said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." So far, there has been none that prooves beyond any doubt that we are hastening climate change, or what will happen given some climate change. Show me a model that accurately predicts what happens over the next 10 years (i.e. a model that prooves it is correct & accurate), and I'll show you a converted believer.
"Converted believer"?! Yes. Because sadly, Global Warming is more of a religion than a scientific theory / discipline.
Unless the road sensors have cameras... not to mention all the cameras along roads, too. Snap a picture of the license plate, and the driver & other humans inside, tie that with facial-recognition stuff...
John Kerry insults our military. The media response? "It was just a botched joke. Bush is evil. Let's get back to that."
Rush criticizes Michael J Fox's political ads, and is surpised by what he sees, so he tries to demonstrate it... but focuses on the content of Fox's ads, as opposed to Fox himself. The media response? "This is an outrage. Rush should apologize for being born!" (while ignoring the *real* debate over what Rush said about cloning, and what Fox said about stem cells).
This really makes me miss the Blue Frog idea. What ever became of that? I know the company folded, but *nobody* could take its place? Or is there nobody brave/foolish enough to take on the spammers?
I know there are "vampire" sites out there, such as the Artists Against 419 one, but frankly, they don't seem to get enough... after all, the spammers still have a profitable business, somehow...
Didn't crash my firefox, but the machine's been "in trouble" for about 12 minutes now... and I've got a fat pipe hooked up to it, too. I know you said "OMG" but man, I guess that treats me not to think you really meant it!
No kidding. Google News is just like Google Search - it shows a short summary / tease, and a link, and that's all. Yahoo actually has articles (syndicated) and an editorial staff. I'd think/.ers would know this...
This may not be the most attractive option, but worth mentioning. There's a company out there called ScreenTek that will change your LCD from matte to high-gloss for $100. The "re-polarizing" process involves removing the old surface, and then installing a new one. They figure most people want high-gloss, but if you have it and want matte instead, they can use the same process and tools to change it out for you.
So if you do find a laptop you like for $1800 in glossy and for $2000 in matte, then I'd get the glossy one and have this outfit change it out for you, and you'll come out ahead.
This page only mentions going from matte to glossy, but they'll gladly do the reverse for you.
Again, it might not be the easiest option, but it is an option that's out there.
And I'm shocked that you didn't see this post, which appeared 8 minutes before yours, much higher up in the discussion... all things being equal that might be due to what level you're browsing at or something. Just saying, that *had* been said before, in a different way.
Insightfully true, but G was also talking about 100 million desktop PC's out there working 8 hours per day... these all have video cards. So while G probably designs its own power supplies for 5v power, they're discussing 12v power ones for the good of the computing world (and I'm sure that when better designs come out, G will find something helpful about that... they ain't entirely altruistic)
It's really rather stupid that in "review" articles on/. they allow photos & screenshots, when the reviews often come off as little more than advertising. That review sure did.
If you're looking for a quickie game in between the heavyweight titles coming at us this fall, Command has enough simple, honest gameplay to make your hands spasm in enjoyment.
"Hands spasm in enjoyment"?! Yeah, tell me that's not an advert.
So if the advertisements... er, I mean, "game reviews"... can have screenshots, why not allow pictures in normal articles, hmm?
Um, don't look now, but your accusation doesn't quite hold. The destruction has been attributed to many forces, without conclusive evidence.
Clearly, many barbaric hordes raped the Roman Empire, and there are a handful of events when that library may have been destroyed. Only the last one of the likely ones is by a religious horde, and it isn't Christian -- it's Muslim.
It's also thought it may have been destroyed in 48 BC. Bee See.. as in, Before Christ. If that one happens to be true, then the Christians who didn't exist until decades later must be a powerful bunch indeed!
The destruction of the Library of Alexandria was a tragedy for all humanity. Please, don't take away from that fact by blaming the party most convenient to you.
Of course I would not send my real name, official email-address and such in response to an ad, but this has nothing to do with me being a nerd, but with knowing that there are truly stupid people out there.
Um, don't look now, but you just proved their point for them, instead of showing it to be mistaken.
So 100 people at once see a live video feed of you. Do you see a live video feed for all 100 of them, at once? If so, would you mind posting a screenshot somewhere, because *that* would be damn amazing...
Slashdot Mirror
The media was against Iraq from the very beginning. When was it ever all cheers about invading Iraq? Truly, the media has been out to sabotage the effort from the start.
The same media that has yet to make a big deal out of the President's numerous impeachable offenses?
The media has done exactly this since before Bush took office. The media has been clamoring for impeachment at every opportunity. Unless you're only watching Fox News (and even they aren't all that conservative), you'd have seen both of these happening.
Good point. I was under the impression Rush accused Fox of exaggerating (specifically, going off his meds, for more dramatic effect). Rush says that Fox wrote in his book that he's done exactly this, for exactly that reason, from time to time.
... unless they're being deceptive politicians.
And while their activities aren't quite the same, the reaction by the media is still illuminating. Kid gloves and rationalizing for Kerry; indignation and outrage for Rush.
Lastly; cloning & stem cells are extremely different; I agree. So it's strange that the legislation in question - the legislation which Fox supports, even though he didn't read it - has "stem cells" in its title, when in its content it actually focuses on legalizing cloning. As the two things are so different, it's strange that the politicians would put "stem cells" in the title of a bill to allow cloning
Oh, wait. Guess I got redundant in that last bit there.
Truthiness. Heh. Colbert's funny. If claiming that "reality has a liberal bias" sounds good, then run with it. I'm more of a skeptic.
So Limbaugh is a flaming hypocrite w.r.t. drugs? Proove it. He claims he's always avoided the subject of drugs specifically because he's got a problem there. People have dug into his archives to proove he's lying and, well, the proof just ain't there.
Then again, I guess he could've pulled a Sandy Berger and modified his archives somehow, but I doubt it.
Hmm. That's a lot of good ideas there. How much time do you spend on this, daily? After all, I want to fight spam, but in the end, it's about saving time, too. If I can spend 15 minutes a day at this, and be doing something worthwhile, then I'm all for it. Not to sound lazy of course.
Lots of food for thought, there. Thanks!
it probably has more to do with what it takes to tell just about *any* joke now that the politically-correct thought police are breathing down everybody's neck. Tell a joke that ain't PC, and unless you make some stupid apologetic, self-deprecating somesuch immediately after, they're going to charge you with a hate crime or something.
And I agree, the "hardcore" response was great. Funnier than the joke, actually. heh.
Thank you. I find that ad hominem attacks are quite convincing. Thank you for illuminating the issues for me. Ignore the guy. If he's an idiot, don't stoop down to notice. Stick with the facts.
And since when has the climate, or atmospheric makeup, of our planet been "stable"? On geologic timescales our planet has seen massive, violent, even sudden changes. To call it stable is just silly.
Are we influencing it, or hastening its change? Now that's a question worth asking. Note, it's a question; it's not a stated fact of truth. If we're going to answer that question, we're going to need a *lot* of evidence to back up our claim.
As Carl Sagan once said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." So far, there has been none that prooves beyond any doubt that we are hastening climate change, or what will happen given some climate change. Show me a model that accurately predicts what happens over the next 10 years (i.e. a model that prooves it is correct & accurate), and I'll show you a converted believer.
"Converted believer"?! Yes. Because sadly, Global Warming is more of a religion than a scientific theory / discipline.
Unless the road sensors have cameras ... not to mention all the cameras along roads, too. Snap a picture of the license plate, and the driver & other humans inside, tie that with facial-recognition stuff ...
So Dean has kept his distance from you ... Am I the only one who figures this is a blessing in disguise?
Or try this on for size:
... but focuses on the content of Fox's ads, as opposed to Fox himself. The media response? "This is an outrage. Rush should apologize for being born!" (while ignoring the *real* debate over what Rush said about cloning, and what Fox said about stem cells).
John Kerry insults our military. The media response? "It was just a botched joke. Bush is evil. Let's get back to that."
Rush criticizes Michael J Fox's political ads, and is surpised by what he sees, so he tries to demonstrate it
Yep, no liberal bias at all.
Attack of the Bots ... a somewhat long, but informative, read.
I've waited many months now for Blue Frog's model to be resurrected
This really makes me miss the Blue Frog idea. What ever became of that? I know the company folded, but *nobody* could take its place? Or is there nobody brave/foolish enough to take on the spammers? I know there are "vampire" sites out there, such as the Artists Against 419 one, but frankly, they don't seem to get enough ... after all, the spammers still have a profitable business, somehow ...
Didn't crash my firefox, but the machine's been "in trouble" for about 12 minutes now ... and I've got a fat pipe hooked up to it, too. I know you said "OMG" but man, I guess that treats me not to think you really meant it!
No kidding. Google News is just like Google Search - it shows a short summary / tease, and a link, and that's all. Yahoo actually has articles (syndicated) and an editorial staff. I'd think /.ers would know this ...
This may not be the most attractive option, but worth mentioning. There's a company out there called ScreenTek that will change your LCD from matte to high-gloss for $100. The "re-polarizing" process involves removing the old surface, and then installing a new one. They figure most people want high-gloss, but if you have it and want matte instead, they can use the same process and tools to change it out for you.
So if you do find a laptop you like for $1800 in glossy and for $2000 in matte, then I'd get the glossy one and have this outfit change it out for you, and you'll come out ahead.
This page only mentions going from matte to glossy, but they'll gladly do the reverse for you.
Again, it might not be the easiest option, but it is an option that's out there.
And I'm shocked that you didn't see this post, which appeared 8 minutes before yours, much higher up in the discussion ... all things being equal that might be due to what level you're browsing at or something. Just saying, that *had* been said before, in a different way.
Centuries of horses don't seem to mind. Great animals, beautiful machines ...
Insightfully true, but G was also talking about 100 million desktop PC's out there working 8 hours per day ... these all have video cards. So while G probably designs its own power supplies for 5v power, they're discussing 12v power ones for the good of the computing world (and I'm sure that when better designs come out, G will find something helpful about that ... they ain't entirely altruistic)
It's really rather stupid that in "review" articles on
So if the advertisements
Um, don't look now, but your accusation doesn't quite hold. The destruction has been attributed to many forces, without conclusive evidence. Clearly, many barbaric hordes raped the Roman Empire, and there are a handful of events when that library may have been destroyed. Only the last one of the likely ones is by a religious horde, and it isn't Christian -- it's Muslim. It's also thought it may have been destroyed in 48 BC. Bee See .. as in, Before Christ. If that one happens to be true, then the Christians who didn't exist until decades later must be a powerful bunch indeed!
The destruction of the Library of Alexandria was a tragedy for all humanity. Please, don't take away from that fact by blaming the party most convenient to you.
Um, don't look now, but you just proved their point for them, instead of showing it to be mistaken.
So 100 people at once see a live video feed of you. Do you see a live video feed for all 100 of them, at once? If so, would you mind posting a screenshot somewhere, because *that* would be damn amazing ...
I'm sure Don Karnage agrees with you ... after all, he and his air pirates had the Iron Vulture ... (more)