Can you say Free File? Look into it. Over 10 million people every year, their taxes are prepaired and filed for free.
Real real greedy that whole, use-our-site-and-servers-and-we'll-give-you-the-so ftware-you-need-to-help-you-do-your-taxes-instead- of-dealing-with-numerous-complex-forms-and-we'll-e ven-do-it-all-for-free thing is isn't it?
The/. article is totally misleading. Makes it sound like Intuit is actively tracking the actual returns and trying to compile info on the users, not just tracking and compiling the user process. Until there's something shown that the tracking is done beyond the site, I'm gonna reserve judgement.
If you're gonna get the tin hats out for this, then don't forget that Intuit also makes and sells the number one financial tool for not just businesses, but also personal finances. Quicken and Quickbooks. They don't need your tax return information. All your bank accounts are belong to Intuit. If they wanted to track your buying habits, the checking history of hundreds of thousands of individuals is at their fingertips.
welll.....I don't know about that.....and so maybe you can explain it to me...but..
I have a brand new HP laptop. WinXP sp1. I had autoupdates on to get the basic bunch and eventually (after about 9 restarts, each one with new auto updates...) I got asked if I wanted to install SP2. I said no and clicked don't ask me again. Two days later after another auto update, it asked again and again, I said no, don't ask me.
I now have SP2. I didn't install it. I didn't click through anything. I booted up and noticed that something was different.
So, when do I get to file the lawsuit agains MS about how they are now actively engaging in manipulating and controlling my personal property. Where in the license does it say they can update and install whatever they want whenever they want and how far does that go? *puts on tinfoil hat* When do they start installing programs that uninstall other programs I own because of 'incompatibility'? When does XP start going through my music library and delete/lock/break my mp3's that don't have DRM because I used AudioGrabber back in the day?
I can understand patches etc...but not forced ones.
Regardless of the legitamacy of this story, I don't worry. I don't trust HP for printers, and I never have. I refuse to pay exhorbant amounts for disposable/depletable cheap commodities, and if you do, it's your own fault. Get a Canon. Not a plug for them, I don't work for them, but I've had HP (horrible horrible drivers), I've used Lexmark (messy messy printing), and I just don't trust Compaq. My Canon uses 4 tanks and I only replace what I run out of. To throw away ink tanks when there's still juice left is just ridiculous and these companies deserve any kind of lawsuit they get for fleecing their consumers.
Have you ever given thought to the possibility that it was the fact that Bush won the presidency that sent the economy south? Depression=lack of motivation to spend.
And your article quotes the shutdown of napster as being a major cause for the nonproliferation of broadband/telecommunication services. I can't say I really feel that napster is the reason so many small ISP's failed. But, I'm not an economice analyst. Give me a few years and a few books, I'll get back at ya.
And what exactly is the value you're placing on the human lives in the car at risk? You're saying that if they die because of a defect that was known by the manufacturer, that's ok because it's cheaper to sacrafice the life for convienence? To even discuss matters of safety in terms of dollar amounts is sick and irresponsible. We need to discuss responsiblilty. Kyocera, upon learning that their was an irregularity in their product and that irregularity could cause harm, they have a responsibility to notify the purchaser. Whether or not the purchaser then decides to return the product becomes their own decision, and therfore, their responsibility. I admire Kyocera for doing the right thing and recalling these cellphones. Even if it is 'only' 40,000, They've shown that they are a responsible and well-minded corporation. It makes me even happier to support them by continuing to use my own Kyocera phone. I realize it might be cliched, but does anyone else wonder if this corporate attitude is surprising coming from their Japanese background and origins? Why don't we hear more of this sort of thing with american companies? We only ever seem to hear about them covering up, or as stated above, about them waiting for it to be cheaper to do the recall than to slide the problem under the rug.
You misinterpret what I said and have taken it out of context. I said that you can't cannot fight Terrorism with military action. It can be combatted with force, but a different type than that allowed by military might. Terrorism is a type of Guerilla warfare. It's small concentrated attacks at mostly random moments. It takes a similar strategy to defend against it. Police action, arrest those involved or supporting, freeze bank accounts, etc...these are not the things that a military specializes in. If military might intercedes, they generally only end up promoting the things that the terrorists are arguing against, thus proving their point and garnering more support for them in the long run. You don't bring a knife to a gunfight, and you don't use M80's when you're trying to destroy beehives.
Ask yourself why people commit terrorist acts. Usually terrorists are small groups acting independently for some idealogue or percieved virtue of self or vice of other. Islam Jihad because we're the infidels spoiling their land, IRA because England invaded first, Boston Tea Party because the British rasied our taxes. Motivations for terrorism often stem from perception of societal conflicts. They're extreme examples of what you and I and everyone else already does: We act according to what we perceive to be the truth. You see someone else get a raise at work and become jealous or resentful because you worked harder. Truth? yea, sure, but it's not the whole truth. Maybe you didn't see the other person save some big account, or they have some great skill you're not aware of. Knowing the whole truth is more likely to stem your resentment and jealous, making you less likely to treat that person like shit. However, there is no accounting for irrationality, another trait we as humans excel at.
Let's use Palestine as an example: Israel had the backing of the USA. They fight Palestine with rockets and tanks and helicopter, lobbing gernades and missles. Palestine attacks with rocks. And suicided bombers. A suicide bomber is going to be someone with absolute conviction in their cause and belief that there is no alternative. Suicide bombs are the artillary and weaponry of Palestine, because they lack the tanks and rockets of Israel. But we call them Terrorists. Why? If it's all you have left to fight with, wouldn't you do the same?
But if we were to push for social change and understanding, rationality and compromise, we would stand a better chance at changing the perceptions of the Palestine people, and they would see a different alternative to their suicide bombs. When a terrorist attacks, ask why they did it. Then try to discover what else they might not be seeing. Because sometimes, as scary as it is, the terrorists are right.
Remember to think not in terms of what they want you to think the words mean, but think in terms of what the word really means. Selfishness is a virtue and Terrorism is not simply fanaticism.
And in all fairness to Clinton's "ballyhooed' peace process, that was how many years ago? and what has the current administration done to facilitate the process exactly?
First point taken, they've (Bush and Kerry) have both had their way paved for them, except that in Kerry's case, we could argue that he had less pavement and more dirt road than Bush Jr. Bush Sr. is the one who started that fortune, and it wasn't without help from financiers from back east (re: Fortunate Son). Point of note: The first 50,000 dollars invested into Bush Jr's first buisness, Arbusto (Spanish for Bush), came from Stephen Bath. Bath at the time was the head representative for the interests and investments of Sheik Bin Laden. Check it out.
Vietname was an ugly ugly time, and the only soldiers who dishonored anybody were the ones that did commit war crimes, and war crimes were committed. I (and I'm sure you as well) have reletives who were in Vietnam. My uncle still refuses to share much of what happened. Fact: Atrocities were committed by soldiers of a country involved in an unjust war. That deserves being spoken out against. In fact, it takes a lot of guts and a lot of character. Don't forget that Kerry took no less than 3 shots during his tour in Vietnam. Minor or major, a bullet is a bulllet. While Bush may have also taken three shots, they were whisky, in a bar, just outside his station with the NG.
Married into money? Yea, and? By point of acception of your first argument, this point becomes invalid, as you've stated that Kerry is/has Old Money. So does it matter that he married money? This is a common thing. And besides, you ever met a rich chick? Man, that takes work to get into if you don't already have the funds. They don't marry just anybody.
As for what makes America safe, This topic would constitute a much larger post, so I'll try to be brief. In today's Global environement, no society can consider its actions only with regards itself. Any action that America takes impacts the Entire World. So Global Opinion must be considered if we are to truly progress as a nation. I must've said it in a different post but: Before the Iraq war, we had alot of terrorists screaming "look at how they've destroyed our country!" Nobody listened, cause they were crazy terrorists. Now, they point and say "look how they destroy our country!" and people start to listen, because they're not so crazy all of a sudden. Our actions in Iraq have increased the support for terrorist nations. You cannot fight terrorism with military action! It's akin to destroying jello with a baseball bat. It takes social change and understanding. Good foreign policy is at the hear of this! And Bush doesn't have it! That will help ease the threat of terrorism. It will never fully go away, there will always be people who hate us. And have you asked the Iraq's how they feel about US presence? If they feel so good, why are there still so many of them fighting us?
Meeting with enemy nationalists? I want citations for that one. I've heard of one incident, but I would hardly call it treason. Certainly not worse than Rumsfield shaking hands and having lunch with one S. Huessein only days after he had (according to some reports, I've been hearing controversy lately) hundreds of thousands of Kurds.
I can't, or rather, won't argue one way or the other about the N. Korea issue. I agress and disagree with both sides and points. (bilateral vs. multilateral) I don't think that the influence China has over NK is the friendly kind, so I don't know that they'd be the best to have in talks. Not sure that we should really be playing good cop/bad cop.
As for the nuclear issue: They're going to do it, there isn't much we can do short of war that will stop them from initiating nuclear programs. For countries wanting to increase energy and consequently the status and wealth of their nations, this is a way of doing that. What we can do is become friendly and try to direct how they use this energy. This goes back to the Foriegn Policy issue.
Sorry this is so long, but you brought up a lot of different points. And now my g/f is giving me the look. Fire back, please! I do want to actively engage in rational discussion, not just shouting and rhetoric as so many people on the extreme left and right are so want to do.
Is anyone else out there bothered by the fact that technically, because of the use of electronic voting machines and paperless ballots, there is no way to prove that Bush actually won the election?
Oh, sure, you can argue that we wouldn't know if Kerry won either, but still, either way, doesn't that bother anyone else?
No no no, I don't think it's that extreme. For example, I too agree that the 'critical thinking' of America needs to be reconsidered, but I can tell you why. It's not because the people that voted for Bush are idiots, no. I just don't understand why people think that a man that has never been to war knows more about fighting one? Or how a man who has driven every buisness he's ever had into the ground is fit to steer fiscal policy? Or how a man who has ridden on coattails his entire life and has hardly held a steady job, or who thinks that a DUI at 36 is just being 'young and irresponsible' knows what hard work is really about. What positive note has this man left us over the last four years? and why do so many people think he deserves another four? I just don't get it, and I desspretly want to understand.
But I think I've learned more about Republican morality, and its this: If the safety, security, and future of America takes a sacrafice of our fellow citizens, then so be it. But if the safety, security, and future of America takes the sacrafice of money, you better just forget about it.
And you're free to argue of course, but I don't see it as being much of one. Most every republican I meet, nay, even the ones I've only seen on TV, talk freely about their willingness to go to war (with a country that wasn't harboring WMD's, etc etc...) and that's why we should elect Bush, and the reason you shouldn't vote for the other guy is because he'll raise your taxes.
In the meantime, I think I'm going to move to Canada. You can call me when I get my country back. The REAL good 'ol USA.
What about the fallout from this? Who's liable? Can we sue companies like Diebold (or whatever manufacturer created this particular machine) for this sort thing?
To live on my knees? No. I stand on my own two feet. Thanks. However, what needs to be recognized are the long term effects of these types of actions. Yes, Sadam was evil, yes, he killed/maimed/raped/etc... however many thousands of peoples. However, he was the SOB. And from a world perspective, that was the general consensus. But us going in under false pretenses for base assumptions like we did, only made US look like the SOB. The real reasons for our invasion (yes, I use the 'i' word, the transfer of power as such is not a liberation) are more likely for control of oil. Cross reference and search subject matter 'Peak Oil', and do some fact finding. This still does not excuse our actions. The death of 30,000 citizens (if we'll agree on that number as a minimum) may be viewed as acceptable in our POV, but perhaps not in theirs. Did anybody ask the Iraqi's? The fact that there is still so much support for these guerilla soldiers should indicate something about the social mentality of this nation. Before, it was warring tribal states with thousand year old feuds. They hated each other. Now, we've given them a common ground to stand upon to strike out at something. Us.
To say that Islam is the reason for the 'cesspool' nature of the Middle East is a horribly ignorant statement to make. Islam predates Christianty. Surprise! And Christianity was responsible for how many deaths, how many years of suffering and respresion, and how many dividing lines have been driven between even those who profess to follow the word of God? So is it any better? I apologize if I am making a presumption about your beliefs, but because you would reference it directly, I can only assume that you believe that some other religion is 'better'. Religion is a weapon and a tool. It can be used equally for creation and peace or war and destruction. It depends only on the one who would wield its word.
No great movement forward in society has ever been borne in the ideaology of closed minded men.
I stand on My Own Two Feet and I will not bow down to any other mans ignorance and righteousness. Shoot me where I stand, but the truth will still remain.
I'm getting really tired of the "Terrorists for Kerry" argument. It's entirely baseless and is absurd. If the terrorists didn't like Bush as much as the Republicans say they don't, why haven't there been any attempts on his life? Secondly, after all that Bush has really managed to accomplish with regards Terrorism, it makes more sense that the terrorsists want Bush in office. His actions have actually increase the support that these organizations have by building sympathy. It's like using a baseball bat to destroy a jello mold. Sure, you broke the jello mold, but now you've just got jello over everything else and people are pissed becuase now they have to worry about jello on them.
Treats the War on Terrorism as a War, not a law enforcement problem
Which is why we've been searching for WMD's in Iraq, at the cost of over 100,000 civilian casualties + 200 billion some odd dollars, and 1,000 lives of US forces.
Treats the Poles, Italians, British, Australians and the 28 other nations allied to us in our fight against terrorism as valued friends
Friends, yea, but 28 nations that constitute about 10% of the total resources being used to invade, I mean, remove Sadam from power.
Actually paid taxes on his income instead of sheltering most of it from funding the government
Why shelter it when you can simply cut it? Bush policy actually allows more companies to hide their incomes. Here's an interesting site BTW. I didn't know that being the VP of the US was that lucrative.
Understands that a "plan" is more than just a laundry-list of Monday-morning complaints you throw out whenever your opponent actually accomplishes something in the big game Sunday evening.
Name those accomplishments exactly. And what exactly is Kerry complaining about that isn't something of importance? If there is an important issue that a president is not addressing or is not handling properly to the detriment of his country, shouldn't it be addressed? Get a grip!
Has liberated 50 million people from totalitarian regimes, including liberated millions of women from the yolk of religious oppression.
No, he's still president, remember?
Seriously though, the administration never talks about Afghanistan except in soundbites. Then we talk about elections and womens rights, elections that have been delayed for over three years and are still continuing. Women just came under the opression of totalitarian warlords. Why are they still there anyways? And as for Iraq, well, we're still there, they are not free, and we've killed over 100,000 of them, not counting those injured. And you can make every argument you want about it being the fault of the terrorists, but because of our administrations inability to truly win the peace, more and more suppore is gained for the side of the terrorists. And we still look like the bad guy because there is almost no one else there except us. We started it, now we can't finish it.
All we had before was a bunch of crazies shouting "They're evil! they're destroying our country" And nobody really listened, cause they were crazy.
Now we've got a bunch of crazies shouting
"See! They're evil! They're destroying our country!" And people are starting to listen because they might not be so crazy.
Now, quick! Who am I talking about? Us or them?
Get yourself informed, there's plenty of difference between the two. I'll do my best not to preach my opinion about which canidate you should vote for and why, but at the very least, you need to understand that by not voting, you too are part of the problem. You can't just say, "I didn't vote for either of them, it's not my problem.". This is a public office in your country. It's a responsibility we all have to get informed and make an intellegent decision about which man is going to take us through the next 4 years. You DO NOT get points for apathy.
No person of rational thought and intellect could seriously reason to themselves that Bush presented a more convincing argument during any of these last three debates, most especially the third one.
Bush made huge errors when referencing Kerry's history and even lied about things that he had said, denying that he ever said he "wasn't concerned" about Bin Laden when Kerry brought it up. If Kerry went around telling falsehoods or misquoting Bush, especially during these debates, he would be over and done, the media centers would eat him alive. But what happens when Bush does it? We get a weeks worth of shite about how Kerry mentioned Cheny's daughter. Give me a break! He didn't even use any derogatory innuendos, and instead, gave the family credit that despite their beliefs, they remained caring. But they seem only care when they want to. When Alan Keyes decried M.Cheny as being a selfish hedonist and sinner, the Cheney family said naught a word. And they shout about privacy rights when she was already publicly known to be a lesbian.
Get a grip.
Jon Stewert was right on, and I'm glad that their are still Men in this world who will not back down.
no, it's not. One of the reasonings for the high price of music is because you are purchasing a license for that artist to perform for you in your home. The BMC RIAA whatever consider any playing of an artist to be a performance of that artist. So if you bought a tape a long time back, you shouldn't need to repurchase the license, period. You should only need to pay for materials, and cd's are dirt cheap. If the music vendor is unable to supply the purchaser with a new format, then they (the purchaser) should be able to get their music from somewhere else and not have to pay the licensing all over again.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here but: how is this of any practical use? Unless Alice and Bob have an absolute direct connection, then the signal has to travel through nodes, and each of those nodes will act as a relay. For each node to succesfully pass on the correct key, then it has to observer the packet, which in this case, should change the photon (observation = interaction) right? So then what? it passes on a packet that is similar but not the same, ruining the key? or does it pass on a 'copy' of the same photon? And if it does that, then whats there to say that a man in the middle attack wouldn't be successful in intercepting the data. If anything, this whole schema seems less practical and more susceptible to multiple type of vulnerablity because now (hesienberg?) you fundamentally can't now if what you see is what they sent. But I confess that IANAS. Somebody enlighten me please.
ok, but if you intercept and then reproduce the transmission from the very start, and say your delay isn't too unreasonable (little less than the sol) how could any delay truly be measured? Betty wouldn't have any frame of reference to measure the delay against right? Even if the send signal was synched any other way, besides within the transmission itself, there would be a delay because the sync signal (I'm thinking a guy on the phone or some such "ready? and now.") isn't at the sol. And if you need line of sight for this kind of protocol, how useful is it going to be? anything besides sol is slower, and well, how do you compensate for low flying bugs/birds?
While we might not be able to change the laws, even dear Scotty bent them all to hell at times.
I can't imagine any form of communication being absolutly secure, especially in transmission. While we might not be able to do so now, new technologies and theorys are always emerging. We can do things now that would've been impossible 50 years ago. Even ten years ago. I would've thought that my CRT monitor was safe from viewing (short of hidden cameras) but then I read some article awhile ago that talked about being able to read the scanlines projected because they extend beyond the mounting...something along those lines...
I know less than anything about higher levels of physics and photon transmissions etc... but what is it exactly that makes this form of transmission secure?
Wave has the rounded handles as well along with locking blades, definitly a plus on any tool. Admittedly, since I purchased my wave almost 5 years ago, I haven't really looked at the new devices out, juice or anything else. I do remember one Leatherman tool though...don't remember the model, but I remember it being the diners delight, with a fork, pate knife, and corkscrew. I didn't see it as useful for much else. For me it all comes down to tenacity. Any device I own that made it through a season in my posession gets a special place in my heart, if only because it managed to survive so much abuse.
Slashdot Mirror
Can you say Free File? Look into it. Over 10 million people every year, their taxes are prepaired and filed for free. Real real greedy that whole, use-our-site-and-servers-and-we'll-give-you-the-so ftware-you-need-to-help-you-do-your-taxes-instead- of-dealing-with-numerous-complex-forms-and-we'll-e ven-do-it-all-for-free thing is isn't it?
The /. article is totally misleading. Makes it sound like Intuit is actively tracking the actual returns and trying to compile info on the users, not just tracking and compiling the user process. Until there's something shown that the tracking is done beyond the site, I'm gonna reserve judgement.
If you're gonna get the tin hats out for this, then don't forget that Intuit also makes and sells the number one financial tool for not just businesses, but also personal finances. Quicken and Quickbooks. They don't need your tax return information. All your bank accounts are belong to Intuit. If they wanted to track your buying habits, the checking history of hundreds of thousands of individuals is at their fingertips.
welll.....I don't know about that.....and so maybe you can explain it to me...but..
I have a brand new HP laptop. WinXP sp1. I had autoupdates on to get the basic bunch and eventually (after about 9 restarts, each one with new auto updates...) I got asked if I wanted to install SP2. I said no and clicked don't ask me again. Two days later after another auto update, it asked again and again, I said no, don't ask me.
I now have SP2. I didn't install it. I didn't click through anything. I booted up and noticed that something was different.
So, when do I get to file the lawsuit agains MS about how they are now actively engaging in manipulating and controlling my personal property. Where in the license does it say they can update and install whatever they want whenever they want and how far does that go? *puts on tinfoil hat* When do they start installing programs that uninstall other programs I own because of 'incompatibility'? When does XP start going through my music library and delete/lock/break my mp3's that don't have DRM because I used AudioGrabber back in the day?
I can understand patches etc...but not forced ones.
Regardless of the legitamacy of this story, I don't worry. I don't trust HP for printers, and I never have. I refuse to pay exhorbant amounts for disposable/depletable cheap commodities, and if you do, it's your own fault. Get a Canon. Not a plug for them, I don't work for them, but I've had HP (horrible horrible drivers), I've used Lexmark (messy messy printing), and I just don't trust Compaq. My Canon uses 4 tanks and I only replace what I run out of. To throw away ink tanks when there's still juice left is just ridiculous and these companies deserve any kind of lawsuit they get for fleecing their consumers.
Have you ever given thought to the possibility that it was the fact that Bush won the presidency that sent the economy south? Depression=lack of motivation to spend.
And your article quotes the shutdown of napster as being a major cause for the nonproliferation of broadband/telecommunication services. I can't say I really feel that napster is the reason so many small ISP's failed. But, I'm not an economice analyst. Give me a few years and a few books, I'll get back at ya.
And what exactly is the value you're placing on the human lives in the car at risk? You're saying that if they die because of a defect that was known by the manufacturer, that's ok because it's cheaper to sacrafice the life for convienence? To even discuss matters of safety in terms of dollar amounts is sick and irresponsible. We need to discuss responsiblilty. Kyocera, upon learning that their was an irregularity in their product and that irregularity could cause harm, they have a responsibility to notify the purchaser. Whether or not the purchaser then decides to return the product becomes their own decision, and therfore, their responsibility. I admire Kyocera for doing the right thing and recalling these cellphones. Even if it is 'only' 40,000, They've shown that they are a responsible and well-minded corporation. It makes me even happier to support them by continuing to use my own Kyocera phone. I realize it might be cliched, but does anyone else wonder if this corporate attitude is surprising coming from their Japanese background and origins? Why don't we hear more of this sort of thing with american companies? We only ever seem to hear about them covering up, or as stated above, about them waiting for it to be cheaper to do the recall than to slide the problem under the rug.
Read 'Anthem' by Ann Rand. Nuff Said. Orwell isn't the only one who's talked about the future we're facing.
You misinterpret what I said and have taken it out of context. I said that you can't cannot fight Terrorism with military action. It can be combatted with force, but a different type than that allowed by military might. Terrorism is a type of Guerilla warfare. It's small concentrated attacks at mostly random moments. It takes a similar strategy to defend against it. Police action, arrest those involved or supporting, freeze bank accounts, etc...these are not the things that a military specializes in. If military might intercedes, they generally only end up promoting the things that the terrorists are arguing against, thus proving their point and garnering more support for them in the long run. You don't bring a knife to a gunfight, and you don't use M80's when you're trying to destroy beehives.
Ask yourself why people commit terrorist acts. Usually terrorists are small groups acting independently for some idealogue or percieved virtue of self or vice of other. Islam Jihad because we're the infidels spoiling their land, IRA because England invaded first, Boston Tea Party because the British rasied our taxes. Motivations for terrorism often stem from perception of societal conflicts. They're extreme examples of what you and I and everyone else already does: We act according to what we perceive to be the truth. You see someone else get a raise at work and become jealous or resentful because you worked harder. Truth? yea, sure, but it's not the whole truth. Maybe you didn't see the other person save some big account, or they have some great skill you're not aware of. Knowing the whole truth is more likely to stem your resentment and jealous, making you less likely to treat that person like shit. However, there is no accounting for irrationality, another trait we as humans excel at.
Let's use Palestine as an example: Israel had the backing of the USA. They fight Palestine with rockets and tanks and helicopter, lobbing gernades and missles. Palestine attacks with rocks. And suicided bombers. A suicide bomber is going to be someone with absolute conviction in their cause and belief that there is no alternative. Suicide bombs are the artillary and weaponry of Palestine, because they lack the tanks and rockets of Israel. But we call them Terrorists. Why? If it's all you have left to fight with, wouldn't you do the same?
But if we were to push for social change and understanding, rationality and compromise, we would stand a better chance at changing the perceptions of the Palestine people, and they would see a different alternative to their suicide bombs. When a terrorist attacks, ask why they did it. Then try to discover what else they might not be seeing. Because sometimes, as scary as it is, the terrorists are right.
Remember to think not in terms of what they want you to think the words mean, but think in terms of what the word really means. Selfishness is a virtue and Terrorism is not simply fanaticism.
And in all fairness to Clinton's "ballyhooed' peace process, that was how many years ago? and what has the current administration done to facilitate the process exactly?
First point taken, they've (Bush and Kerry) have both had their way paved for them, except that in Kerry's case, we could argue that he had less pavement and more dirt road than Bush Jr. Bush Sr. is the one who started that fortune, and it wasn't without help from financiers from back east (re: Fortunate Son). Point of note: The first 50,000 dollars invested into Bush Jr's first buisness, Arbusto (Spanish for Bush), came from Stephen Bath. Bath at the time was the head representative for the interests and investments of Sheik Bin Laden. Check it out.
Vietname was an ugly ugly time, and the only soldiers who dishonored anybody were the ones that did commit war crimes, and war crimes were committed. I (and I'm sure you as well) have reletives who were in Vietnam. My uncle still refuses to share much of what happened. Fact: Atrocities were committed by soldiers of a country involved in an unjust war. That deserves being spoken out against. In fact, it takes a lot of guts and a lot of character. Don't forget that Kerry took no less than 3 shots during his tour in Vietnam. Minor or major, a bullet is a bulllet. While Bush may have also taken three shots, they were whisky, in a bar, just outside his station with the NG.
Married into money? Yea, and? By point of acception of your first argument, this point becomes invalid, as you've stated that Kerry is/has Old Money. So does it matter that he married money? This is a common thing. And besides, you ever met a rich chick? Man, that takes work to get into if you don't already have the funds. They don't marry just anybody.
As for what makes America safe, This topic would constitute a much larger post, so I'll try to be brief. In today's Global environement, no society can consider its actions only with regards itself. Any action that America takes impacts the Entire World. So Global Opinion must be considered if we are to truly progress as a nation. I must've said it in a different post but: Before the Iraq war, we had alot of terrorists screaming "look at how they've destroyed our country!" Nobody listened, cause they were crazy terrorists. Now, they point and say "look how they destroy our country!" and people start to listen, because they're not so crazy all of a sudden. Our actions in Iraq have increased the support for terrorist nations. You cannot fight terrorism with military action! It's akin to destroying jello with a baseball bat. It takes social change and understanding. Good foreign policy is at the hear of this! And Bush doesn't have it! That will help ease the threat of terrorism. It will never fully go away, there will always be people who hate us. And have you asked the Iraq's how they feel about US presence? If they feel so good, why are there still so many of them fighting us?
Meeting with enemy nationalists? I want citations for that one. I've heard of one incident, but I would hardly call it treason. Certainly not worse than Rumsfield shaking hands and having lunch with one S. Huessein only days after he had (according to some reports, I've been hearing controversy lately) hundreds of thousands of Kurds.
I can't, or rather, won't argue one way or the other about the N. Korea issue. I agress and disagree with both sides and points. (bilateral vs. multilateral) I don't think that the influence China has over NK is the friendly kind, so I don't know that they'd be the best to have in talks. Not sure that we should really be playing good cop/bad cop.
As for the nuclear issue: They're going to do it, there isn't much we can do short of war that will stop them from initiating nuclear programs. For countries wanting to increase energy and consequently the status and wealth of their nations, this is a way of doing that. What we can do is become friendly and try to direct how they use this energy. This goes back to the Foriegn Policy issue.
Sorry this is so long, but you brought up a lot of different points. And now my g/f is giving me the look. Fire back, please! I do want to actively engage in rational discussion, not just shouting and rhetoric as so many people on the extreme left and right are so want to do.
Is anyone else out there bothered by the fact that technically, because of the use of electronic voting machines and paperless ballots, there is no way to prove that Bush actually won the election?
Oh, sure, you can argue that we wouldn't know if Kerry won either, but still, either way, doesn't that bother anyone else?
No no no, I don't think it's that extreme. For example, I too agree that the 'critical thinking' of America needs to be reconsidered, but I can tell you why. It's not because the people that voted for Bush are idiots, no. I just don't understand why people think that a man that has never been to war knows more about fighting one? Or how a man who has driven every buisness he's ever had into the ground is fit to steer fiscal policy? Or how a man who has ridden on coattails his entire life and has hardly held a steady job, or who thinks that a DUI at 36 is just being 'young and irresponsible' knows what hard work is really about. What positive note has this man left us over the last four years? and why do so many people think he deserves another four? I just don't get it, and I desspretly want to understand.
But I think I've learned more about Republican morality, and its this: If the safety, security, and future of America takes a sacrafice of our fellow citizens, then so be it. But if the safety, security, and future of America takes the sacrafice of money, you better just forget about it.
And you're free to argue of course, but I don't see it as being much of one. Most every republican I meet, nay, even the ones I've only seen on TV, talk freely about their willingness to go to war (with a country that wasn't harboring WMD's, etc etc...) and that's why we should elect Bush, and the reason you shouldn't vote for the other guy is because he'll raise your taxes.
In the meantime, I think I'm going to move to Canada. You can call me when I get my country back. The REAL good 'ol USA.
I told you so?
What about the fallout from this? Who's liable? Can we sue companies like Diebold (or whatever manufacturer created this particular machine) for this sort thing?
To live on my knees? No. I stand on my own two feet. Thanks. However, what needs to be recognized are the long term effects of these types of actions. Yes, Sadam was evil, yes, he killed/maimed/raped/etc... however many thousands of peoples. However, he was the SOB. And from a world perspective, that was the general consensus. But us going in under false pretenses for base assumptions like we did, only made US look like the SOB. The real reasons for our invasion (yes, I use the 'i' word, the transfer of power as such is not a liberation) are more likely for control of oil. Cross reference and search subject matter 'Peak Oil', and do some fact finding. This still does not excuse our actions. The death of 30,000 citizens (if we'll agree on that number as a minimum) may be viewed as acceptable in our POV, but perhaps not in theirs. Did anybody ask the Iraqi's? The fact that there is still so much support for these guerilla soldiers should indicate something about the social mentality of this nation. Before, it was warring tribal states with thousand year old feuds. They hated each other. Now, we've given them a common ground to stand upon to strike out at something. Us.
To say that Islam is the reason for the 'cesspool' nature of the Middle East is a horribly ignorant statement to make. Islam predates Christianty. Surprise! And Christianity was responsible for how many deaths, how many years of suffering and respresion, and how many dividing lines have been driven between even those who profess to follow the word of God? So is it any better? I apologize if I am making a presumption about your beliefs, but because you would reference it directly, I can only assume that you believe that some other religion is 'better'. Religion is a weapon and a tool. It can be used equally for creation and peace or war and destruction. It depends only on the one who would wield its word.
No great movement forward in society has ever been borne in the ideaology of closed minded men.
I stand on My Own Two Feet and I will not bow down to any other mans ignorance and righteousness. Shoot me where I stand, but the truth will still remain.
So you're saying that if it's only 10,000 to 30,000 civilian casualties, pluse whatever other injuried, that's ok?
Identify and give evidence of the attempt on 9/11. Bush was in a school house that was nowhere near the 9/11 crash sites. Try again.
And what are you talking about, "Another one of the history starts on 9/12 democrats shows up". That's not even a complete sentance.
I'm getting really tired of the "Terrorists for Kerry" argument. It's entirely baseless and is absurd. If the terrorists didn't like Bush as much as the Republicans say they don't, why haven't there been any attempts on his life? Secondly, after all that Bush has really managed to accomplish with regards Terrorism, it makes more sense that the terrorsists want Bush in office. His actions have actually increase the support that these organizations have by building sympathy. It's like using a baseball bat to destroy a jello mold. Sure, you broke the jello mold, but now you've just got jello over everything else and people are pissed becuase now they have to worry about jello on them.
Treats the War on Terrorism as a War, not a law enforcement problem
Which is why we've been searching for WMD's in Iraq, at the cost of over 100,000 civilian casualties + 200 billion some odd dollars, and 1,000 lives of US forces.
Treats the Poles, Italians, British, Australians and the 28 other nations allied to us in our fight against terrorism as valued friends
Friends, yea, but 28 nations that constitute about 10% of the total resources being used to invade, I mean, remove Sadam from power.
Actually paid taxes on his income instead of sheltering most of it from funding the government
Why shelter it when you can simply cut it? Bush policy actually allows more companies to hide their incomes. Here's an interesting site BTW. I didn't know that being the VP of the US was that lucrative.
Understands that a "plan" is more than just a laundry-list of Monday-morning complaints you throw out whenever your opponent actually accomplishes something in the big game Sunday evening.
Name those accomplishments exactly. And what exactly is Kerry complaining about that isn't something of importance? If there is an important issue that a president is not addressing or is not handling properly to the detriment of his country, shouldn't it be addressed? Get a grip!
Has liberated 50 million people from totalitarian regimes, including liberated millions of women from the yolk of religious oppression.
No, he's still president, remember?
Seriously though, the administration never talks about Afghanistan except in soundbites. Then we talk about elections and womens rights, elections that have been delayed for over three years and are still continuing. Women just came under the opression of totalitarian warlords. Why are they still there anyways? And as for Iraq, well, we're still there, they are not free, and we've killed over 100,000 of them, not counting those injured. And you can make every argument you want about it being the fault of the terrorists, but because of our administrations inability to truly win the peace, more and more suppore is gained for the side of the terrorists. And we still look like the bad guy because there is almost no one else there except us. We started it, now we can't finish it.
All we had before was a bunch of crazies shouting
"They're evil! they're destroying our country"
And nobody really listened, cause they were crazy.
Now we've got a bunch of crazies shouting
"See! They're evil! They're destroying our country!"
And people are starting to listen because they might not be so crazy.
Now, quick! Who am I talking about? Us or them?
Get yourself informed, there's plenty of difference between the two. I'll do my best not to preach my opinion about which canidate you should vote for and why, but at the very least, you need to understand that by not voting, you too are part of the problem. You can't just say, "I didn't vote for either of them, it's not my problem.". This is a public office in your country. It's a responsibility we all have to get informed and make an intellegent decision about which man is going to take us through the next 4 years. You DO NOT get points for apathy.
Isis, Isis
Ra! Ra! Ra!
fnord
No person of rational thought and intellect could seriously reason to themselves that Bush presented a more convincing argument during any of these last three debates, most especially the third one.
Bush made huge errors when referencing Kerry's history and even lied about things that he had said, denying that he ever said he "wasn't concerned" about Bin Laden when Kerry brought it up. If Kerry went around telling falsehoods or misquoting Bush, especially during these debates, he would be over and done, the media centers would eat him alive. But what happens when Bush does it? We get a weeks worth of shite about how Kerry mentioned Cheny's daughter. Give me a break! He didn't even use any derogatory innuendos, and instead, gave the family credit that despite their beliefs, they remained caring. But they seem only care when they want to. When Alan Keyes decried M.Cheny as being a selfish hedonist and sinner, the Cheney family said naught a word. And they shout about privacy rights when she was already publicly known to be a lesbian.
Get a grip.
Jon Stewert was right on, and I'm glad that their are still Men in this world who will not back down.
no, it's not. One of the reasonings for the high price of music is because you are purchasing a license for that artist to perform for you in your home. The BMC RIAA whatever consider any playing of an artist to be a performance of that artist. So if you bought a tape a long time back, you shouldn't need to repurchase the license, period. You should only need to pay for materials, and cd's are dirt cheap. If the music vendor is unable to supply the purchaser with a new format, then they (the purchaser) should be able to get their music from somewhere else and not have to pay the licensing all over again.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here but: how is this of any practical use? Unless Alice and Bob have an absolute direct connection, then the signal has to travel through nodes, and each of those nodes will act as a relay. For each node to succesfully pass on the correct key, then it has to observer the packet, which in this case, should change the photon (observation = interaction) right? So then what? it passes on a packet that is similar but not the same, ruining the key? or does it pass on a 'copy' of the same photon? And if it does that, then whats there to say that a man in the middle attack wouldn't be successful in intercepting the data. If anything, this whole schema seems less practical and more susceptible to multiple type of vulnerablity because now (hesienberg?) you fundamentally can't now if what you see is what they sent. But I confess that IANAS. Somebody enlighten me please.
ok, but if you intercept and then reproduce the transmission from the very start, and say your delay isn't too unreasonable (little less than the sol) how could any delay truly be measured? Betty wouldn't have any frame of reference to measure the delay against right? Even if the send signal was synched any other way, besides within the transmission itself, there would be a delay because the sync signal (I'm thinking a guy on the phone or some such "ready? and now.") isn't at the sol. And if you need line of sight for this kind of protocol, how useful is it going to be? anything besides sol is slower, and well, how do you compensate for low flying bugs/birds?
While we might not be able to change the laws, even dear Scotty bent them all to hell at times.
I can't imagine any form of communication being absolutly secure, especially in transmission. While we might not be able to do so now, new technologies and theorys are always emerging. We can do things now that would've been impossible 50 years ago. Even ten years ago. I would've thought that my CRT monitor was safe from viewing (short of hidden cameras) but then I read some article awhile ago that talked about being able to read the scanlines projected because they extend beyond the mounting...something along those lines...
I know less than anything about higher levels of physics and photon transmissions etc... but what is it exactly that makes this form of transmission secure?
Wave has the rounded handles as well along with locking blades, definitly a plus on any tool. Admittedly, since I purchased my wave almost 5 years ago, I haven't really looked at the new devices out, juice or anything else. I do remember one Leatherman tool though...don't remember the model, but I remember it being the diners delight, with a fork, pate knife, and corkscrew. I didn't see it as useful for much else.
For me it all comes down to tenacity. Any device I own that made it through a season in my posession gets a special place in my heart, if only because it managed to survive so much abuse.