That was a facetious remark that was taken out of context, as he states in this interview, in which he responded "Blow up the U.N. building? C'mon, I'm a Libertarian. You know that I'd rather sell the U.N. than blow it up." His statement about blowing up the UN was more a jocular political point about how weak and ineffective that organization has become. (They even let themselves be blown up in Iraq by refusing military protection.)
The Federal Income Tax is illegal?
I wouldn't say the tax itself is illegal, but some of the methods the IRS has used in its collection definitely are.
Strapping prisoners to their beds for a month so that their muscles atrophy?
Would you prefer the current policy of strapping them to electrical wires?
Does he understand that the President doesn't wield this kind of power?
Are you kidding me? That's one of the primary themes of his campaign, the fact that politicians today (the President in particular) wield far more power than they should.
I think you might want to take a look at the deeper meaning of some of the things he is saying before labeling him a nutcase.
and GWB has demonstrated how much influence a president can have in this domain
GWB has demonstrated how much influence a President can have in practically every domain. Kind of ironic for someone who ran on the traditional republican platform of limited federal power and reduction in government bureaucracy.
I'm curious to know the source the submitter had in mind when he stated that NASA is planning a manned mission to Mars before 2020. I have not seen anything like that come out of NASA.
The President's roadmap they recently adopted only had manned missions to the moon resuming by 2020.
Come one now, this is/. I have to stand up for my right to make totally asinine posts completely devoid of any relevant subject matter related to the article which I haven't even read.
Science projects like this have taken a back seat to "Bush's dream for Mars."
Don't get me wrong, going to Mars would be a great achievement and I think it should get support, but it is highly unlikely that it will occur anytime in the next 20-25 years. We shouldn't slack off in all unmanned science in space until that point.
Sorry but I don't buy that argument. It's incredibly easy to recognize these 419 scams. The emails sound pretty much exactly the same. Do X and I will deposit $xx, xxx, xxx into your account. No legitimate businessman is going to send an email like that to a total stranger.
where is the line drawn that the counter-scammer doesn't become a scammer himself?
Obviously he is a scammer himself. But that is the whole point. The people doing this wouldn't consider it wrong becasue they are not scamming innocents, but rather those who would scam innocents. Whether that argument is valid is more of a personal opinion. This is just a new form of vigilante justice which has always been a topic of disagreement. If I knew you were going to kill me tomorrow would I be justified in killing you today?
While all that is correct, I think when people today refer to "private enterprise" as it relates to space, they are usually thinking of private funded as opposed to government sponsored.
Paypal isn't a regular bank though, so you can't make the same comparison. Merchant providers do a credit check and look at the info of a business before agreeing to accept them. They do that so no one that will violate their policies and expose them to unnecessary risk is accepted. Paypal doesn't do that. Anyone can sign up with Paypal and start accepting credit cards in 5 minutes. Because of that, they have to take steps to protect themselves from exposure to the risky industries that they have chosen not to deal with. If people are going to exploit the convenience of Paypal to violate their TOS, then I say they have it coming to them.
There is another very significant problem with Pay Pal. Pay Pal censors what you can buy and sell and has stated a policy that they will "fine" buyers or purchasers of "adult" items $500. The definition of whether an item meets PayPal's standards is decided solely by PayPal and its official censors, who will even go so far as to read through romance novels/erotic fiction to see whether they pass muster.
This is hardly unique to Paypal. A huge range of merchant account providers also refuse to accept merchants selling adult items or services due to the high risk associated with that sector and the greater percentage of chargebacks. Paypal is not doing anything underhanded or monopolistic by adopting the same policy. It is a very standard one in the e-commerce biz.
Ever notice why almost all adult sites use only a handful of payment services (CCbill, iBill, Verotel, etc.)? It's because they are the only ones that accept them.
I tell you, the/. article summaries are slipping in quality. We've long moved passed RTFA, but pretty soon it will get to the point where even RTFS will be impossible. I suspect that when that occurs all future posts will just be references to M$, Linux, l33tn3ss, pr0n, or SCO.
Slashdot Mirror
But Badnarik is a bloody nutcase.
Sorry but I have to disagree.
Blowing up the UN within a week of taking office?
That was a facetious remark that was taken out of context, as he states in this interview, in which he responded "Blow up the U.N. building? C'mon, I'm a Libertarian. You know that I'd rather sell the U.N. than blow it up." His statement about blowing up the UN was more a jocular political point about how weak and ineffective that organization has become. (They even let themselves be blown up in Iraq by refusing military protection.)
The Federal Income Tax is illegal?
I wouldn't say the tax itself is illegal, but some of the methods the IRS has used in its collection definitely are.
Strapping prisoners to their beds for a month so that their muscles atrophy?
Would you prefer the current policy of strapping them to electrical wires?
Does he understand that the President doesn't wield this kind of power?
Are you kidding me? That's one of the primary themes of his campaign, the fact that politicians today (the President in particular) wield far more power than they should.
I think you might want to take a look at the deeper meaning of some of the things he is saying before labeling him a nutcase.
and GWB has demonstrated how much influence a president can have in this domain
GWB has demonstrated how much influence a President can have in practically every domain. Kind of ironic for someone who ran on the traditional republican platform of limited federal power and reduction in government bureaucracy.
I'm curious to know the source the submitter had in mind when he stated that NASA is planning a manned mission to Mars before 2020. I have not seen anything like that come out of NASA.
The President's roadmap they recently adopted only had manned missions to the moon resuming by 2020.
FYI, to anyone reading this, all those are goatse.cx crap not gmail invites.
I just wish people would see Badnarik as Not Bush.
Well, I'm voting for Badnarik as well but unfortunately most people will never see his name until they view the ballot.
Isn't a Saturn V type rocket a little much for finishing the ISS. You don't need to achieve escape velocity just to reach the ISS.
Yeah I know. I got to meet Taco this week so at least that's a plus. ;)
Ok, who modded me troll?
/. I have to stand up for my right to make totally asinine posts completely devoid of any relevant subject matter related to the article which I haven't even read.
Come one now, this is
If the patent gods are sexually violated, the terrorists win.
The fact is, "Bush's dream for Mars" is a sleight of hand, a decision to "wait for the technologies to develop" rather than pursue them.
Well NASA had that problem even before Bush. Just look at what happened with the X-33.
Science projects like this have taken a back seat to "Bush's dream for Mars."
Don't get me wrong, going to Mars would be a great achievement and I think it should get support, but it is highly unlikely that it will occur anytime in the next 20-25 years. We shouldn't slack off in all unmanned science in space until that point.
Small world. I live in Georgia and I'm voting for Badnarik also.
Sorry but I don't buy that argument. It's incredibly easy to recognize these 419 scams. The emails sound pretty much exactly the same. Do X and I will deposit $xx, xxx, xxx into your account. No legitimate businessman is going to send an email like that to a total stranger.
where is the line drawn that the counter-scammer doesn't become a scammer himself?
Obviously he is a scammer himself. But that is the whole point. The people doing this wouldn't consider it wrong becasue they are not scamming innocents, but rather those who would scam innocents. Whether that argument is valid is more of a personal opinion. This is just a new form of vigilante justice which has always been a topic of disagreement. If I knew you were going to kill me tomorrow would I be justified in killing you today?
They got this one guy to send a pic of himself holding up a sign that said "I take it up the arse."
/.
i can't link it bc the site is
Timothy the dupe king reigns again.
The prediction was that the current age would end then and a new one would begin. No one really knows what they meant by that though.
Ancient Mayan predicition.
Yeah that's what I was getting at. That Mayan's plus this guy's.
The Mayans predicted the world would end in 2012
Actually no. They just predicted it would be the dawn of a new age.
Why does everyone's calendar end at 2012?
While all that is correct, I think when people today refer to "private enterprise" as it relates to space, they are usually thinking of private funded as opposed to government sponsored.
Is that you John?
Paypal isn't a regular bank though, so you can't make the same comparison. Merchant providers do a credit check and look at the info of a business before agreeing to accept them. They do that so no one that will violate their policies and expose them to unnecessary risk is accepted. Paypal doesn't do that. Anyone can sign up with Paypal and start accepting credit cards in 5 minutes. Because of that, they have to take steps to protect themselves from exposure to the risky industries that they have chosen not to deal with. If people are going to exploit the convenience of Paypal to violate their TOS, then I say they have it coming to them.
There is another very significant problem with Pay Pal. Pay Pal censors what you can buy and sell and has stated a policy that they will "fine" buyers or purchasers of "adult" items $500. The definition of whether an item meets PayPal's standards is decided solely by PayPal and its official censors, who will even go so far as to read through romance novels/erotic fiction to see whether they pass muster.
This is hardly unique to Paypal. A huge range of merchant account providers also refuse to accept merchants selling adult items or services due to the high risk associated with that sector and the greater percentage of chargebacks. Paypal is not doing anything underhanded or monopolistic by adopting the same policy. It is a very standard one in the e-commerce biz.
Ever notice why almost all adult sites use only a handful of payment services (CCbill, iBill, Verotel, etc.)? It's because they are the only ones that accept them.
knob...can give us quite some feeling...
I think I already have one of those.
I tell you, the /. article summaries are slipping in quality. We've long moved passed RTFA, but pretty soon it will get to the point where even RTFS will be impossible. I suspect that when that occurs all future posts will just be references to M$, Linux, l33tn3ss, pr0n, or SCO.