You're way off base and clearly unfit to debate this. Learn some history first.
Subprime lending has been in place for a long time now. More than likely whoever was in place now would of had an economic melt down. During the second term election, we were already at war. I've been saying this EXACT economic meltdown was coming TEN years ago for exactly these reasons; while my boss with a Harvard degree was insisting this couldn't possibly happen. Hmmm. Wonder who was in then. Realistically, I'm really not sure who is to blame for the subprime fiasco but it wasn't Bush, that's for sure. I also doubt it was Clinton. Yet according to your logic, he's surely to blame. Just the same, we've come full circle. You need to learn some history first.
Interesting how you seem to ignore common sense, facts, and reality. When you both to learn even a smidgen of facts and/or history, then you are in a position to debate. Until then, you sound like a buffoon.
Any moron can analyze the past
And yet you seem to know nothing of it.
What was your excuse for showing such appalling judgement?
That's a matter of perspective. The fact that you have to ask pretty well shows you have no perspective or judgement. Kerry was an idiot. Period. I actually didn't want to vote for Bush; and the two party system strikes again. As bad as you think Bush has done, Kerry would have been several fold worse; with likely far more military casualties as a result. I had family in the military theatre at the time. I could not willingly kill them by voting Kerry. Since then, almost every military perspective Kerry has had, has been mirrored by Obama. Both are morons when it comes to military matters. Notice even Obama has walked away from his original moronic military positions because everyone that understands has been telling him (and now proved) he's an idiot on such military matters and has no fucking clue.
I voted for my country and family. It was the only vote possible once you actually understand this countries position in the war. Sadly, few seem to understand - rather they hang on a closed mind and biased and error laden headlines with hollow substance. And no contextual knowledge to back up their position.
Obama spews snake oil when he talks and never says anything of substance. McCain was been a straight shooter and that cost him TONS of votes. His campaign made his stop. People don't want to hear reality - they want to hear snake oil. McCain is not Bush. Do I support everything McCain has done. No. If you support everything any politician has done, you're an idiot. Just the same, McCain is equipped to move on. Obama has given no such indication he's remotely ready to lead this country and on just about everything that matters, he's been wrong. Add in the fact Obama is anti-Constitution (2nd Amendment), it all hard to swallow. And yes, he is on record saying he plans to give the Constitution a hard one in the back door by raising gun prices such that most people can no longer afford to purchase them while also outlawing lead bullets via EPA channels. Obama is anti-Constitution.
As much as I'd love to vote for Obama from a progressive social perspective, now is not the time to do it. He's likely be elected - and I sure as well hope I'm wrong about him.
Regardless of who wins, this is a historic election and it will shape this country for the better in one form or another. So either way, it's hard to not get excited about this election. It's just once you learn enough about Obama to make an intelligent decision, you can't but yearn for a third choice and be forced to vote McCain.
This is exactly why I don't like getting deep into this stuff on forums because it's all complicated stuff and books often don't do the topic justice. There is no way a short forum post can begin to address it.
Likely you won't see my position. I know I won't see your position. Reply if you must. I'm done.
More likely it is you that has a KKK hood. Mentioning race does not make one racist. Repeated data cited by analysts does not make one racists. The fact that this is lost on you implies you are racists and projecting on to me.
Christian Children's Fund made the decision to decline the gift from Gen Con, LLC as the request presented to us gave the appearance that CCF (the organization) was an endorser or supporter of a gaming convention, which CCF was not.
Therefore, anyone they do accept money from, they are endorsing. Interesting. Sure makes you wanna know who's been donating.
So USA is a democracy, but people can't change the system they don't like?
You make the assumption the masses actually care to make a change. This is exactly why the founders want land owners to have the right to vote and no one else. This is exactly why those that wanted to abuse government changed it. Those that have no vested interest should have no right to vote.
As is, we now have masses being used and manipulated and yet have no clue as to who they are voting for and why (aside from the fact that a candidate is black). Sure it's gone on in just about every other election but the scale of it in this election has likely never been seen before in the US.
To say the least, this election will surely be interesting and very likely historical. Frankly I never thought I'd see a black man elected President in my life time; or at least not until I was very old. Regardless, the social implications are mind boggling and will hopefully shape this country for the better for many years to come. In other words, even if Obama is elected, there is still plenty of reasons to happy and excited about this historical event.
Change is slow and takes time. Hopefully things will swing back the other direction before the US Constitution is completely destroyed.
That's a fairly ignorant reply. Until a third party is recognized, voting for Nader is a vote for Obama. Most people understand that's not a third option at all. At least not at this point in time.
It really pisses me the fuck off someone keeps repeating this statement that the reason why Obama is going to get elected is because he's black.
Ya, right. And obviously the color of OJ's skin wasn't he reason he was set free. According to the black communities, by in large, that's who most blacks are voting for. Period. Sure there are exceptions, but by in large, blacks that have never voted and know absolutely nothing about anything are coming out to vote for Obama. Polls are re-enforcing the statements made by black community leaders. In fact, most polls of blacks indicate they are so paranoid "the man" is going to rob them of this election, it's widely understood this in turn will further motivate the black community to mobilize and vote Obama. Everyone seems to understand this *IS* about color as much as anything else, EXCEPT FOR YOU.
I'm sorry the known information conflicts with your personal opinion, but that's where we're at. A large charge elsewhere isn't voting for Obama so much as they are not voting for McCain. Which is exactly why Nader is a silly "option" to put forward. You might as well not vote or vote for Mickey Mouse if you want to vote for Nader.
It's fairly obvious you don't understand the situation and have made no effort to understand what's been publicly stated and tabulated via polls.
So what is your excuse for re-electing Bush in 2004? That you had no idea what he would do in 2003?
Simple. The two party system is broken. Until the US realizes that limiting our options to two parties is stupid, we will continue to (re)elect people that are unqualified for the position.
Obama makes for another great example of the failure of the two party system in America. He'll likely be elected because first and foremost, he's black, two, people feel like they don't have an option. It's the same reason Bush was re-elected. Ironically, Bush was elected because Kerry was an idiot on military matters. And at the time, the war was number one priority in the mind of voters. Voters believed it was the "devil they knew."
Obama has proved to be equally inept, if not more so, at military matters yet will likely win. The difference is, US citizens care more for themselves (economy) than the war, the resulting effects on the world, or the standing of the US in relationship to the war. If the war proves to be much of an issue to US voters (not likely given the polls), McCain will win. Well, that and if guilty white voters who claim they'll vote for Obama in polls, change their mind when they vote. Some estimates place that as high as 10% of the potential voters.
I fully expect the 10% guilt-white voter will be more the offset by black voters voting for Obama simply because he's black. Not to mention, the interest in black voters is thought to be at an all time high so it's likely the "I'm ignorant and have no clue what I'm doing other than voting for a guy that's also black" will more than make up for any possible white-guilt-poll-voter skew.
To be clear, I'm not raciest, it just annoys me to see people vote on issues when they have no clue what they are doing. I don't care who they vote for, it should just be an informed vote. Likely, IMO, greater than 50% of the black vote Obama receives will be from people that have no idea who is, what he's done, what his qualifications are, and will know even less about McCain - aside from the fact he's not black. In other words, not qualified to vote let alone shape the direction of a country - any country.
Guys, you voted Bush back in for 4 more years after it was all out!
This proves only that the two party system used in the US is completely broken. Period. The public tried to fix it with a Democratic Congress - guess what, it's still the same.
Until the people get tired of the general corruption of politicians and press in the US, we continue to travel the road created by Rome. These days, it's hard to find US press which has even a partially accurate report. The press in the US, for the most part, is as corrupt on the government it self.
It's easy to blame those in power, but as a nation you voted the fuckers in
This is one of the dumbest statements I've ever read on/. before. If we are to run with your logic, it's safe to say, when you elect your leaders, you know before hand, in detail, every action they will ever make for the entire duration they will be in office.
Obviously that statement is as full of shit and as moronic as your statement. When you learn to critically think, feel free to come back to the table.
And contrary to the bullshit pushed by the press, the election was not "stolen". Learn the facts. People that say it was stolen are ignorant of reality and are simply bitter of the results. Popular vote has never placed a man in the Whitehouse.
No surprise you've been moderated, flamebait or troll. Doing otherwise means people would be forced to realize they've been spoon feed shit and loved it. Doing otherwise means they've been forced to realize they have no clue what the hell is going on in the country.
Finally someone here that can comprehend and critical think!
+1 Intelligent Life Discovered!
Most people seem to only understand the press' headlines and how they've negatively spun things; making statements exactly opposite of what Bush actually said in numerous speeches. You're the first person that I've ever read or spoken to that actually understood what happened there. Which if you think about it, is actually pretty scary once you realize how many people are voting yet have absolutely no clue what the hell is going on.
Sadly, it seems the more uninformed I've meet the more they intend to vote for Obama. It's even more sad once you realize Obama will likely be elected 1, because he's black, 2, because he's lied, pandering to the uninformed and ignorant.
That's interesting... I've never once seen any marches by the Iraqis where they are shouting chants about how much they love us and want us to stay
It's well known they want us out and want us to stay. It's a double edged sword. They want us out but know we can't leave until the government is strong enough to keep the peace by themselves. They know it; including the man on the street. Their government knows it. Our government knows it. Informed Americans know it too.
Hey, we want out too, but we have a commitment to meet. A commitment we as a nation made. Sad to think most Americans are not honourable; which is one of many reasons why we were attacked in the first place. Nope, you sure wouldn't want to do anything to fix the root cause.
The stupidity of many of the anti-war groups is often dumbfounding to me. They want us to leave and often cite made up causality figures about dead civilians yet can't wait to have Iraqis slaughtered in mass if we pull out prematurely. The hypocrisy is unbelievable. This is another Vietnam waiting to happen should we pull out before the job is done.
If you are wanting a premature withdraw, you will be a mass murder. Yet I'm sure these hypocrites have figures some way to rationalize why they're not responsible.
Lets not forget the American Intelligence has never actually produced any solid evidence linking OBL to Sept 11.
You mean aside from the fact that he's admitted it on video? You mean aside from the reams of intelligence of him planning it? Nope, you mean the fact he never denied it before he admitted it? Nope, no proof exists at all.
Several of his lieutenants have even come forward in various documentaries where he discusses various elements of the plan with them. Shesh. Some people are some uninformed.
generally poke fun at their greater level of social maturity.
Looking down your nose at the people that allow you to preserve your way of life, twice, is not a "greater level of social maturity." To the contrary, that is exactly why they are made the brunt of many jokes. The fact that they consider themselves to be a greater society yet act far less mature is exactly the punchline. It really is pretty funny.
McCain will stay until Petraeus can say that we've "won"
Considering McCain has said otherwise, you're making shit up. McCain doesn't want us to be there. Period. But we are. Period. Deal with it. McCain has decided he too will deal with it. Oboma seems to really think he can close his eyes and it will all go away. He's a fool and constantly proved so at all things military.
We can either run, fucking us for decades, if not centuries (Obama's excellent plan), or we can do the right thing, the thing *WE AS A NATION* committed to do. Which do you want? An honourable exit with peace in the region and a possible democracy in Iran or for the war to move elsewhere while tens of thousands Iraqis are slaughtered in the streets? That's the only options you have at this point. This is exactly why Congress, a Democratic Congress, continues to fund the war. Remember, they were elected because idiots believed them when they said they would get us out of there? They are not stupid. They understand where we are at. Would it be nice to not be in this position? YES! But we are in this position and we must deal it. Period!
If the war were not a factor, frankly, I'd vote for Obama. But he's already proved he is unfit for the job so long as a war exists. And to boot, I don't like him lying to face - I say lying because I don't believe he's an idiot. On the other hand, I do believe he's clueless when it comes to military matters.
Obama is another lying Democrat, or an idiot. Those are the only two possibilities. You want to vote for him because he's an idiot? You want to vote for him because he believes you are? Or you can vote for the nessessary and known evil. And contrary to the bullshit adds put forth by Obama, McCain is not another GWB. He has gone against his party on almost everything that had to do with the war.
"One career general" actually means "one career general and his ENTIRE staff".
Which must then report to the DoD where their entire staffs review the reports and progress and verify the facts on the ground. To be absolutely clear, this is not a "one man show." Thousands of people are involved in these decisions and double checking the facts on the ground.
LOL. Still 100% clear my comment went way over your head, which is sad as it doesn't take much to understand the basis for my comment. You clearly don't.
I jumped in because...well, it's obvious and you're too dumb to see it. You're, "b-b-b-b-but the Democrats!" continues to speak poorly of you. And your dumb comment compounds it. The fact that you can't understand a reasonable, neutral comment again, speaks very poorly of you.
Perhaps you should drink less caffeine and pull your head out of your ass. Not everyone has an agenda such as yours and not everyone gets angry such as you when your agenda is pointed out.
It's my understanding that this was originally done to allow a President to right some wrongs which were thrown asunder because of simple, bad politics. Sounds simple enough.
It would be interesting if the History Channel put together a list of oddities done by presidents as they exit the door for the last time. It would also be interesting to learn exactly when it started to be abused.
Heck for all I know, I don't even have the basis for my comment correct.
They are the hopes and dreams of the parents who raised them, the future of our society, innocent and worthy of our very best efforts to protect them.
Everyone agrees children need to be protected. But that's not the least bit topical given the context. Just the same, no child in inherently innocent; and that is not a sexual reference. That's a flawed Western-Christian philosophy. I've known far too many children that were far from innocent and far too many parents dismiss their actions simply because they are "innocent children." That child then grows up to be a monster of an adult.
So please stop with the "innocent child" bullshit. Ignorance is not heavenly innocence. A child is well behaved and "good", very poorly behaved and "bad", or fits somewhere in between. Many children have at least some understanding of their actions at very early ages and that doesn't suddenly change at age 18. Even if a child doesn't fully understand the ramifications of their actions (example, pull trigger = death), many do understand it is not something they should be doing - assuming the parents were doing their job in the first place.
What a short memory you have. Democrats don't let Democrats go to jail either. There is a long history of presidents doing odd things on their way way out - just because they can. This is not about Republicans or Democrats.
Unless you are using some private label card, which is not regulated by the banking industry, all credit cards have fraud protection. This is not always true with debit cards.
You are at much higher risk of feeling the pains of fraud when using your debit card so if you have a choice, never use your debit card unless it is an emergency.
The underlying message in almost all of his stories which center about robotic laws is that they are fundamentally broken. One story after another explains how robots go crazy (or otherwise exceed their permissible boundaries) because of conflicts and ambiguities within these laws and the English language.
If you don't understand how that could be, go read his books! If my point isn't completely clear after doing so, you obviously didn't read his books.
Please stop quoting these laws as if they are the salvation of humanity because is only makes you look silly and ignorant. Simply put, you shouldn't be quoting something you obviously don't understand.
Yes, I've heard that same line from pretty much every specialist perspective. "Sure, agile's fine for development, but you can't possibly do good X that way. It's impossible!" Where X is visual design, interaction design, product management, software release, QA testing, usability, project planning, project budgeting, and product portfolio management. But guess what, people are making it work, and have spent the last decade confounding naysayers like yourself.
You obviously don't get it and that's the point. A process is a process. No process is magic; yet that's what you're saying. That's why the BS detector has exploded and so many pounced. I know enough about the process to know it's nothing close to what you're asserting. Regardless, ultimately, a process is a process. Period.
No process can hide the fact that everyone working on trunk/master/main (whatever your RC software calls it) is going to cause problems for complex software problems and feature sets. That's the reality of developing and maintain complex software. It is not and has never been a people/community/team problem; it's all about managing concurrency. Since you're not managing concurrency, you have serialized your developers which is slow and incredibly inefficient; costly to boot. Furthermore, unless you're blessed (some are) where you can always move your customers to the latest software, you must have the ability to branch and merge. If you are so blessed, this strongly implies you do not have complex software.
If you want to imagine your magical process has solved a problem you don't have (because your software is simple and your feature set development concurrency is low), that's fine. You're not fooling anyone but yourself. Likely after you've matured more, perhaps in five years or so, you'll realize why you missed the boat; and that's no hand waving.
To boot, CM is an entire process in of it self and most developers will have nothing to do with it aside from dealing with the associated implications. If CM is entirely in your development process then your process is both broken and inefficient.
I could go on and on but simple RC/CM 101 books pretty well explain why you wrong.
At this point we have to agree to disagree. Reply if you must, but I'm done talking to the wall.
I've participated in the agile process early on. I've never heard of anyone, until now, suggest that it's more than a development process. And I can't imagine how it can begin to address CM process. Your post seems to suggest the same. And to be clear, your people-argument is nothing but hand waving. All development models/processes benefit from strong communication and team work. Period.
I'm not anti-agile. To be clear, I'm not an agile expert, but I just don't see the benefit. Even if you are able to make it work for you, it's still just another *development* process. There are lots of processes and all bring something to the table. Development processes do not directly address RC/CM process. They are distinct processes. It's true RC elements must be part of a strong development model - there is clear overlap. But there is lots that doesn't overlap and falls squarely into the CM arena. Many are able to largely ignore RC/CM issues because frankly, their project is so small, their project not complex, and the development pool tiny. And that's fine, but that's a far cry from claiming a broken/deficient process is superior to others.
What is sounds like is you have very poor RC/CM process and have developed a development process to hide that fact. If it works for you, that's fine, but it's still inferior to RC/CM best practises. Does the earth stop spinning? No. Do you have a lot to learn? Absolutely.
Slashdot Mirror
You're way off base and clearly unfit to debate this. Learn some history first.
Subprime lending has been in place for a long time now. More than likely whoever was in place now would of had an economic melt down. During the second term election, we were already at war. I've been saying this EXACT economic meltdown was coming TEN years ago for exactly these reasons; while my boss with a Harvard degree was insisting this couldn't possibly happen. Hmmm. Wonder who was in then. Realistically, I'm really not sure who is to blame for the subprime fiasco but it wasn't Bush, that's for sure. I also doubt it was Clinton. Yet according to your logic, he's surely to blame. Just the same, we've come full circle. You need to learn some history first.
Interesting how you seem to ignore common sense, facts, and reality. When you both to learn even a smidgen of facts and/or history, then you are in a position to debate. Until then, you sound like a buffoon.
Any moron can analyze the past
And yet you seem to know nothing of it.
What was your excuse for showing such appalling judgement?
That's a matter of perspective. The fact that you have to ask pretty well shows you have no perspective or judgement. Kerry was an idiot. Period. I actually didn't want to vote for Bush; and the two party system strikes again. As bad as you think Bush has done, Kerry would have been several fold worse; with likely far more military casualties as a result. I had family in the military theatre at the time. I could not willingly kill them by voting Kerry. Since then, almost every military perspective Kerry has had, has been mirrored by Obama. Both are morons when it comes to military matters. Notice even Obama has walked away from his original moronic military positions because everyone that understands has been telling him (and now proved) he's an idiot on such military matters and has no fucking clue.
I voted for my country and family. It was the only vote possible once you actually understand this countries position in the war. Sadly, few seem to understand - rather they hang on a closed mind and biased and error laden headlines with hollow substance. And no contextual knowledge to back up their position.
Obama spews snake oil when he talks and never says anything of substance. McCain was been a straight shooter and that cost him TONS of votes. His campaign made his stop. People don't want to hear reality - they want to hear snake oil. McCain is not Bush. Do I support everything McCain has done. No. If you support everything any politician has done, you're an idiot. Just the same, McCain is equipped to move on. Obama has given no such indication he's remotely ready to lead this country and on just about everything that matters, he's been wrong. Add in the fact Obama is anti-Constitution (2nd Amendment), it all hard to swallow. And yes, he is on record saying he plans to give the Constitution a hard one in the back door by raising gun prices such that most people can no longer afford to purchase them while also outlawing lead bullets via EPA channels. Obama is anti-Constitution.
As much as I'd love to vote for Obama from a progressive social perspective, now is not the time to do it. He's likely be elected - and I sure as well hope I'm wrong about him.
Regardless of who wins, this is a historic election and it will shape this country for the better in one form or another. So either way, it's hard to not get excited about this election. It's just once you learn enough about Obama to make an intelligent decision, you can't but yearn for a third choice and be forced to vote McCain.
This is exactly why I don't like getting deep into this stuff on forums because it's all complicated stuff and books often don't do the topic justice. There is no way a short forum post can begin to address it.
Likely you won't see my position. I know I won't see your position. Reply if you must. I'm done.
More likely it is you that has a KKK hood. Mentioning race does not make one racist. Repeated data cited by analysts does not make one racists. The fact that this is lost on you implies you are racists and projecting on to me.
Christian Children's Fund made the decision to decline the gift from Gen Con, LLC as the request presented to us gave the appearance that CCF (the organization) was an endorser or supporter of a gaming convention, which CCF was not.
Therefore, anyone they do accept money from, they are endorsing. Interesting. Sure makes you wanna know who's been donating.
So USA is a democracy, but people can't change the system they don't like?
You make the assumption the masses actually care to make a change. This is exactly why the founders want land owners to have the right to vote and no one else. This is exactly why those that wanted to abuse government changed it. Those that have no vested interest should have no right to vote.
As is, we now have masses being used and manipulated and yet have no clue as to who they are voting for and why (aside from the fact that a candidate is black). Sure it's gone on in just about every other election but the scale of it in this election has likely never been seen before in the US.
To say the least, this election will surely be interesting and very likely historical. Frankly I never thought I'd see a black man elected President in my life time; or at least not until I was very old. Regardless, the social implications are mind boggling and will hopefully shape this country for the better for many years to come. In other words, even if Obama is elected, there is still plenty of reasons to happy and excited about this historical event.
Change is slow and takes time. Hopefully things will swing back the other direction before the US Constitution is completely destroyed.
You do have an option. Ralph Nader
That's a fairly ignorant reply. Until a third party is recognized, voting for Nader is a vote for Obama. Most people understand that's not a third option at all. At least not at this point in time.
It really pisses me the fuck off someone keeps repeating this statement that the reason why Obama is going to get elected is because he's black.
Ya, right. And obviously the color of OJ's skin wasn't he reason he was set free. According to the black communities, by in large, that's who most blacks are voting for. Period. Sure there are exceptions, but by in large, blacks that have never voted and know absolutely nothing about anything are coming out to vote for Obama. Polls are re-enforcing the statements made by black community leaders. In fact, most polls of blacks indicate they are so paranoid "the man" is going to rob them of this election, it's widely understood this in turn will further motivate the black community to mobilize and vote Obama. Everyone seems to understand this *IS* about color as much as anything else, EXCEPT FOR YOU.
I'm sorry the known information conflicts with your personal opinion, but that's where we're at. A large charge elsewhere isn't voting for Obama so much as they are not voting for McCain. Which is exactly why Nader is a silly "option" to put forward. You might as well not vote or vote for Mickey Mouse if you want to vote for Nader.
It's fairly obvious you don't understand the situation and have made no effort to understand what's been publicly stated and tabulated via polls.
So what is your excuse for re-electing Bush in 2004? That you had no idea what he would do in 2003?
Simple. The two party system is broken. Until the US realizes that limiting our options to two parties is stupid, we will continue to (re)elect people that are unqualified for the position.
Obama makes for another great example of the failure of the two party system in America. He'll likely be elected because first and foremost, he's black, two, people feel like they don't have an option. It's the same reason Bush was re-elected. Ironically, Bush was elected because Kerry was an idiot on military matters. And at the time, the war was number one priority in the mind of voters. Voters believed it was the "devil they knew."
Obama has proved to be equally inept, if not more so, at military matters yet will likely win. The difference is, US citizens care more for themselves (economy) than the war, the resulting effects on the world, or the standing of the US in relationship to the war. If the war proves to be much of an issue to US voters (not likely given the polls), McCain will win. Well, that and if guilty white voters who claim they'll vote for Obama in polls, change their mind when they vote. Some estimates place that as high as 10% of the potential voters.
I fully expect the 10% guilt-white voter will be more the offset by black voters voting for Obama simply because he's black. Not to mention, the interest in black voters is thought to be at an all time high so it's likely the "I'm ignorant and have no clue what I'm doing other than voting for a guy that's also black" will more than make up for any possible white-guilt-poll-voter skew.
To be clear, I'm not raciest, it just annoys me to see people vote on issues when they have no clue what they are doing. I don't care who they vote for, it should just be an informed vote. Likely, IMO, greater than 50% of the black vote Obama receives will be from people that have no idea who is, what he's done, what his qualifications are, and will know even less about McCain - aside from the fact he's not black. In other words, not qualified to vote let alone shape the direction of a country - any country.
US politics is so depressing.
Guys, you voted Bush back in for 4 more years after it was all out!
This proves only that the two party system used in the US is completely broken. Period. The public tried to fix it with a Democratic Congress - guess what, it's still the same.
Until the people get tired of the general corruption of politicians and press in the US, we continue to travel the road created by Rome. These days, it's hard to find US press which has even a partially accurate report. The press in the US, for the most part, is as corrupt on the government it self.
It's easy to blame those in power, but as a nation you voted the fuckers in
This is one of the dumbest statements I've ever read on /. before. If we are to run with your logic, it's safe to say, when you elect your leaders, you know before hand, in detail, every action they will ever make for the entire duration they will be in office.
Obviously that statement is as full of shit and as moronic as your statement. When you learn to critically think, feel free to come back to the table.
And contrary to the bullshit pushed by the press, the election was not "stolen". Learn the facts. People that say it was stolen are ignorant of reality and are simply bitter of the results. Popular vote has never placed a man in the Whitehouse.
No surprise you've been moderated, flamebait or troll. Doing otherwise means people would be forced to realize they've been spoon feed shit and loved it. Doing otherwise means they've been forced to realize they have no clue what the hell is going on in the country.
Finally someone here that can comprehend and critical think!
+1 Intelligent Life Discovered!
Most people seem to only understand the press' headlines and how they've negatively spun things; making statements exactly opposite of what Bush actually said in numerous speeches. You're the first person that I've ever read or spoken to that actually understood what happened there. Which if you think about it, is actually pretty scary once you realize how many people are voting yet have absolutely no clue what the hell is going on.
Sadly, it seems the more uninformed I've meet the more they intend to vote for Obama. It's even more sad once you realize Obama will likely be elected 1, because he's black, 2, because he's lied, pandering to the uninformed and ignorant.
That's interesting... I've never once seen any marches by the Iraqis where they are shouting chants about how much they love us and want us to stay
It's well known they want us out and want us to stay. It's a double edged sword. They want us out but know we can't leave until the government is strong enough to keep the peace by themselves. They know it; including the man on the street. Their government knows it. Our government knows it. Informed Americans know it too.
Hey, we want out too, but we have a commitment to meet. A commitment we as a nation made. Sad to think most Americans are not honourable; which is one of many reasons why we were attacked in the first place. Nope, you sure wouldn't want to do anything to fix the root cause.
The stupidity of many of the anti-war groups is often dumbfounding to me. They want us to leave and often cite made up causality figures about dead civilians yet can't wait to have Iraqis slaughtered in mass if we pull out prematurely. The hypocrisy is unbelievable. This is another Vietnam waiting to happen should we pull out before the job is done.
If you are wanting a premature withdraw, you will be a mass murder. Yet I'm sure these hypocrites have figures some way to rationalize why they're not responsible.
Lets not forget the American Intelligence has never actually produced any solid evidence linking OBL to Sept 11.
You mean aside from the fact that he's admitted it on video? You mean aside from the reams of intelligence of him planning it? Nope, you mean the fact he never denied it before he admitted it? Nope, no proof exists at all.
Several of his lieutenants have even come forward in various documentaries where he discusses various elements of the plan with them. Shesh. Some people are some uninformed.
the proper response should probably have been a good long look at why the US was being attacked by these people
Some did suggest this. They were considered unamerican, unpatriotic, and quickly scorned and excised from society.
generally poke fun at their greater level of social maturity.
Looking down your nose at the people that allow you to preserve your way of life, twice, is not a "greater level of social maturity." To the contrary, that is exactly why they are made the brunt of many jokes. The fact that they consider themselves to be a greater society yet act far less mature is exactly the punchline. It really is pretty funny.
McCain will stay until Petraeus can say that we've "won"
Considering McCain has said otherwise, you're making shit up. McCain doesn't want us to be there. Period. But we are. Period. Deal with it. McCain has decided he too will deal with it. Oboma seems to really think he can close his eyes and it will all go away. He's a fool and constantly proved so at all things military.
We can either run, fucking us for decades, if not centuries (Obama's excellent plan), or we can do the right thing, the thing *WE AS A NATION* committed to do. Which do you want? An honourable exit with peace in the region and a possible democracy in Iran or for the war to move elsewhere while tens of thousands Iraqis are slaughtered in the streets? That's the only options you have at this point. This is exactly why Congress, a Democratic Congress, continues to fund the war. Remember, they were elected because idiots believed them when they said they would get us out of there? They are not stupid. They understand where we are at. Would it be nice to not be in this position? YES! But we are in this position and we must deal it. Period!
If the war were not a factor, frankly, I'd vote for Obama. But he's already proved he is unfit for the job so long as a war exists. And to boot, I don't like him lying to face - I say lying because I don't believe he's an idiot. On the other hand, I do believe he's clueless when it comes to military matters.
Obama is another lying Democrat, or an idiot. Those are the only two possibilities. You want to vote for him because he's an idiot? You want to vote for him because he believes you are? Or you can vote for the nessessary and known evil. And contrary to the bullshit adds put forth by Obama, McCain is not another GWB. He has gone against his party on almost everything that had to do with the war.
"One career general" actually means "one career general and his ENTIRE staff".
Which must then report to the DoD where their entire staffs review the reports and progress and verify the facts on the ground. To be absolutely clear, this is not a "one man show." Thousands of people are involved in these decisions and double checking the facts on the ground.
LOL. Still 100% clear my comment went way over your head, which is sad as it doesn't take much to understand the basis for my comment. You clearly don't.
I jumped in because...well, it's obvious and you're too dumb to see it. You're, "b-b-b-b-but the Democrats!" continues to speak poorly of you. And your dumb comment compounds it. The fact that you can't understand a reasonable, neutral comment again, speaks very poorly of you.
Perhaps you should drink less caffeine and pull your head out of your ass. Not everyone has an agenda such as yours and not everyone gets angry such as you when your agenda is pointed out.
Read what was implied by his post. No one else seems to have trouble following the thread or the point of my reply.
One can only assume you hate for people to be well informed. That says a lot for your political position.
It's my understanding that this was originally done to allow a President to right some wrongs which were thrown asunder because of simple, bad politics. Sounds simple enough.
It would be interesting if the History Channel put together a list of oddities done by presidents as they exit the door for the last time. It would also be interesting to learn exactly when it started to be abused.
Heck for all I know, I don't even have the basis for my comment correct.
They are the hopes and dreams of the parents who raised them, the future of our society, innocent and worthy of our very best efforts to protect them.
Everyone agrees children need to be protected. But that's not the least bit topical given the context. Just the same, no child in inherently innocent; and that is not a sexual reference. That's a flawed Western-Christian philosophy. I've known far too many children that were far from innocent and far too many parents dismiss their actions simply because they are "innocent children." That child then grows up to be a monster of an adult.
So please stop with the "innocent child" bullshit. Ignorance is not heavenly innocence. A child is well behaved and "good", very poorly behaved and "bad", or fits somewhere in between. Many children have at least some understanding of their actions at very early ages and that doesn't suddenly change at age 18. Even if a child doesn't fully understand the ramifications of their actions (example, pull trigger = death), many do understand it is not something they should be doing - assuming the parents were doing their job in the first place.
Republicans don't let Republicans go to jail.
What a short memory you have. Democrats don't let Democrats go to jail either. There is a long history of presidents doing odd things on their way way out - just because they can. This is not about Republicans or Democrats.
Unless you are using some private label card, which is not regulated by the banking industry, all credit cards have fraud protection. This is not always true with debit cards.
You are at much higher risk of feeling the pains of fraud when using your debit card so if you have a choice, never use your debit card unless it is an emergency.
Didn't anyone actually read his books?!?!
The underlying message in almost all of his stories which center about robotic laws is that they are fundamentally broken. One story after another explains how robots go crazy (or otherwise exceed their permissible boundaries) because of conflicts and ambiguities within these laws and the English language.
If you don't understand how that could be, go read his books! If my point isn't completely clear after doing so, you obviously didn't read his books.
Please stop quoting these laws as if they are the salvation of humanity because is only makes you look silly and ignorant. Simply put, you shouldn't be quoting something you obviously don't understand.
Yes, I've heard that same line from pretty much every specialist perspective. "Sure, agile's fine for development, but you can't possibly do good X that way. It's impossible!" Where X is visual design, interaction design, product management, software release, QA testing, usability, project planning, project budgeting, and product portfolio management. But guess what, people are making it work, and have spent the last decade confounding naysayers like yourself.
You obviously don't get it and that's the point. A process is a process. No process is magic; yet that's what you're saying. That's why the BS detector has exploded and so many pounced. I know enough about the process to know it's nothing close to what you're asserting. Regardless, ultimately, a process is a process. Period.
No process can hide the fact that everyone working on trunk/master/main (whatever your RC software calls it) is going to cause problems for complex software problems and feature sets. That's the reality of developing and maintain complex software. It is not and has never been a people/community/team problem; it's all about managing concurrency. Since you're not managing concurrency, you have serialized your developers which is slow and incredibly inefficient; costly to boot. Furthermore, unless you're blessed (some are) where you can always move your customers to the latest software, you must have the ability to branch and merge. If you are so blessed, this strongly implies you do not have complex software.
If you want to imagine your magical process has solved a problem you don't have (because your software is simple and your feature set development concurrency is low), that's fine. You're not fooling anyone but yourself. Likely after you've matured more, perhaps in five years or so, you'll realize why you missed the boat; and that's no hand waving.
To boot, CM is an entire process in of it self and most developers will have nothing to do with it aside from dealing with the associated implications. If CM is entirely in your development process then your process is both broken and inefficient.
I could go on and on but simple RC/CM 101 books pretty well explain why you wrong.
At this point we have to agree to disagree. Reply if you must, but I'm done talking to the wall.
I've participated in the agile process early on. I've never heard of anyone, until now, suggest that it's more than a development process. And I can't imagine how it can begin to address CM process. Your post seems to suggest the same. And to be clear, your people-argument is nothing but hand waving. All development models/processes benefit from strong communication and team work. Period.
I'm not anti-agile. To be clear, I'm not an agile expert, but I just don't see the benefit. Even if you are able to make it work for you, it's still just another *development* process. There are lots of processes and all bring something to the table. Development processes do not directly address RC/CM process. They are distinct processes. It's true RC elements must be part of a strong development model - there is clear overlap. But there is lots that doesn't overlap and falls squarely into the CM arena. Many are able to largely ignore RC/CM issues because frankly, their project is so small, their project not complex, and the development pool tiny. And that's fine, but that's a far cry from claiming a broken/deficient process is superior to others.
What is sounds like is you have very poor RC/CM process and have developed a development process to hide that fact. If it works for you, that's fine, but it's still inferior to RC/CM best practises. Does the earth stop spinning? No. Do you have a lot to learn? Absolutely.