It's silly to blame the current mess on lack of regulation when the banks, financial lenders, and mortgage provides were regulated.
Yes they were regulated, but that's not the point. The credit default swap market was entirely unregulated, and THAT is one of the prime factors leading up to the crash. There WERE NO REGULATIONS ENCOURAGING BAD LOANS.
As an internationalist, socially leftist Obama supporter who believes it is vital to repair our reputation overseas,and is beyond thrilled that Obama won, let me just say: I utterly disagree with the GP poster, and am thrilled that our relations with other countries will hopefully be repaired.
In as much as it was my fault for not being politically active enough to prevent Bush from getting and maintaining power, I apologize for his actions, and hope that my efforts to make Obama president will go to some good effect for both the US and the international community.
How, exactly, is Carter to blame for either of those? The gas lines were due to OPEC's manipulation of the market, and the hostages were out of his control. He sent special forces in, but they failed to accomplish their objective. Unless he was there on the ground with them, I fail to see how the blame for that can be laid on him.
The reason for this is that the age discrimination a) applies to everyone uniformly, and b) is temporary. No matter what, eventually each person will reach voting age and be enfranchised. With the women's suffrage issue, it was a problem because women NEVER got to vote.
What the hell are you talking about? I usually try not to compare candidates and use one's faults as excuses for the other having the same ones, but come on! McCain's changed so much since 2006 you would think he's been replaced by a pod person! WHICH of Obama's convictions have changed, if you don't mind illuminating me?
Oy, mod parent up! He has very well explained why candidates are like they are, and that revolutionary views will not be implemented without a revolution; the best bet is to get someone you mostly agree with (but who doesn't go far enough), and get them to actually do something.
Who the hell cares about Ayers? He was awarded Citizen of the Year in 1997 for his work in education, which is what Obama was working with him on.
Oh, and this ACORN thing is ridiculous. Yes, they have a system that encourages people to submit fraudulent registrations, and that should be stopped. However, stop trying to paint Obama as trying to manipulate the vote, it's fearmongering and shady logic at its worst.
What in the world are you going on about? When did either of the candidates ever say anything like this?
I read an article the other day about the power of stereotypes in politics, and how they're used in campaigns. In this case, I would wager that you are putting words in the candidates' mouths and acting as if they're planning to do this based solely upon your preexisting stereotypes of the party, rather than anything they've said or done. AND YOU WERE MODDED +2 INSIGHTFUL FOR YOUR WORTHLESS RANT. This is a prime example of how we all need to think more.
I agree with what you're saying about the enumeration of authority in the Constitution. While I believe that it is wrong to expand the scope of government to cover things not specifically enumerated, I can see why it's happened.
The world has changed since 1789, and people expect more out of the government than it was originally equipped to deal with. However, the Constitution is held in such high regard that attempts to amend it have been fraught with peril and political folly for those who suggest it, in addition to requiring an onerous 75% majority to amend, which would be very difficult to obtain.
While I don't like expanding beyond the original scope, I can tolerate it provided there aren't any violations of the things I personally consider important, mostly the Bill of Rights. Unfortunately, I have to be disappointed there too.....
Hear, hear. I'm personally amazed at what people look for in a president. I, for one, would really have loved to have Gore as a president. He's boring as hell, and that's a FANTASTIC quality in a president! Presidents who are not boring seem to want to stir up trouble just to keep their base motivated to support them, especially in a time of "war".
She did bad in one interview, but both the Couric and the Gibson interviews were hostile cut, splice, and smear pieces.
Did we both see the same Couric interview? There weren't any splices that I could see, and the long continuous shots of completely incomprehensible answers could not have been faked.
Please, I don't find any evidence whatsoever to support the statement that Palin is smart. I wish I were wrong.
Some of those are almost true, but most are not. In any case, who the hell cares? What impact does this have on how he would be president? Why have you become so brainwashed that you would even repeat any of this drivel?
How can you possibly lump in the official campaign with the rantings of some loonies on the Web? This is really irresponsible, and I've noticed a bunch of comments like this: blaming everything bad anyone says about McCain/Palin on Obama / the "liberals" in general, as if that somehow makes it a good thing to vote for the team that is an obviously worse choice to run the country.
Not true. I have a Civic VX HB, which at 16 years old and a questionable maintenance history still gets 38-40 mpg combined (original EPA estimate was 42 city, 57 highway). New, it went 0-60mph in 9.5 seconds, which while not fast is still a second quicker than a new Prius. Metros, on the other hand, sucked.:)
Erm, as far as the throttle plate goes, I don't think that diesels actually require a "throttle" per se. The air intake may be a bit more restrictive on a diesel in order to swirl the intake air/add velocity to it, but you control the power output by controlling the amount of fuel injected. There are less pumping losses in diesels generally than gasoline engines.
I think the engine braking that is illegal is only for trucks, since they have really crappy muffler systems and huge diesel engines that make a LOT of noise when engine braking. I think that in a normal car no one would be able to even tell you were engine braking, much less charge you with a crime for it.
True, but remember that we invaded because of NUCLEAR weapons that we thought he had. We already knew about the chemical weapons (that was 20 years ago, before the first Gulf War).
Slashdot Mirror
It's silly to blame the current mess on lack of regulation when the banks, financial lenders, and mortgage provides were regulated.
Yes they were regulated, but that's not the point. The credit default swap market was entirely unregulated, and THAT is one of the prime factors leading up to the crash. There WERE NO REGULATIONS ENCOURAGING BAD LOANS.
Look, matey, I know a dead business model when I see one, and I'm looking at one right now
MPAA: I'm not dead yet!
Shut up, you're not fooling anyone.
He could grip it by the husk.
I think that was opium, wasn't it?
You know, this comment is even funnier if you imagine Hunter S. Thompson saying it...
In as much as it was my fault for not being politically active enough to prevent Bush from getting and maintaining power, I apologize for his actions, and hope that my efforts to make Obama president will go to some good effect for both the US and the international community.
How, exactly, is Carter to blame for either of those? The gas lines were due to OPEC's manipulation of the market, and the hostages were out of his control. He sent special forces in, but they failed to accomplish their objective. Unless he was there on the ground with them, I fail to see how the blame for that can be laid on him.
The reason for this is that the age discrimination a) applies to everyone uniformly, and b) is temporary. No matter what, eventually each person will reach voting age and be enfranchised. With the women's suffrage issue, it was a problem because women NEVER got to vote.
Sorry, but I just love the irony of writing about avoiding hitting neighbouring keys on the keyboard, then hitting one in the next sentence. :)
What the hell are you talking about? I usually try not to compare candidates and use one's faults as excuses for the other having the same ones, but come on! McCain's changed so much since 2006 you would think he's been replaced by a pod person! WHICH of Obama's convictions have changed, if you don't mind illuminating me?
Oy, mod parent up! He has very well explained why candidates are like they are, and that revolutionary views will not be implemented without a revolution; the best bet is to get someone you mostly agree with (but who doesn't go far enough), and get them to actually do something.
Who the hell cares about Ayers? He was awarded Citizen of the Year in 1997 for his work in education, which is what Obama was working with him on. Oh, and this ACORN thing is ridiculous. Yes, they have a system that encourages people to submit fraudulent registrations, and that should be stopped. However, stop trying to paint Obama as trying to manipulate the vote, it's fearmongering and shady logic at its worst.
Nice, I loved that poem. Dumb Carlucci....
What in the world are you going on about? When did either of the candidates ever say anything like this?
I read an article the other day about the power of stereotypes in politics, and how they're used in campaigns. In this case, I would wager that you are putting words in the candidates' mouths and acting as if they're planning to do this based solely upon your preexisting stereotypes of the party, rather than anything they've said or done. AND YOU WERE MODDED +2 INSIGHTFUL FOR YOUR WORTHLESS RANT. This is a prime example of how we all need to think more.
I agree with what you're saying about the enumeration of authority in the Constitution. While I believe that it is wrong to expand the scope of government to cover things not specifically enumerated, I can see why it's happened.
The world has changed since 1789, and people expect more out of the government than it was originally equipped to deal with. However, the Constitution is held in such high regard that attempts to amend it have been fraught with peril and political folly for those who suggest it, in addition to requiring an onerous 75% majority to amend, which would be very difficult to obtain.
While I don't like expanding beyond the original scope, I can tolerate it provided there aren't any violations of the things I personally consider important, mostly the Bill of Rights. Unfortunately, I have to be disappointed there too.....
Hear, hear. I'm personally amazed at what people look for in a president. I, for one, would really have loved to have Gore as a president. He's boring as hell, and that's a FANTASTIC quality in a president! Presidents who are not boring seem to want to stir up trouble just to keep their base motivated to support them, especially in a time of "war".
She did bad in one interview, but both the Couric and the Gibson interviews were hostile cut, splice, and smear pieces.
Did we both see the same Couric interview? There weren't any splices that I could see, and the long continuous shots of completely incomprehensible answers could not have been faked.
Please, I don't find any evidence whatsoever to support the statement that Palin is smart. I wish I were wrong.
Some of those are almost true, but most are not. In any case, who the hell cares? What impact does this have on how he would be president? Why have you become so brainwashed that you would even repeat any of this drivel?
How can you possibly lump in the official campaign with the rantings of some loonies on the Web? This is really irresponsible, and I've noticed a bunch of comments like this: blaming everything bad anyone says about McCain/Palin on Obama / the "liberals" in general, as if that somehow makes it a good thing to vote for the team that is an obviously worse choice to run the country.
Not true. I have a Civic VX HB, which at 16 years old and a questionable maintenance history still gets 38-40 mpg combined (original EPA estimate was 42 city, 57 highway). New, it went 0-60mph in 9.5 seconds, which while not fast is still a second quicker than a new Prius. Metros, on the other hand, sucked. :)
No, the greatest would have to be the Great Attractor, a.k.a. Ring, from the Baxter novel.
My amp can do it in 11 parsecs.
Well, that's one better now, isn't it?
Erm, as far as the throttle plate goes, I don't think that diesels actually require a "throttle" per se. The air intake may be a bit more restrictive on a diesel in order to swirl the intake air/add velocity to it, but you control the power output by controlling the amount of fuel injected. There are less pumping losses in diesels generally than gasoline engines.
I think the engine braking that is illegal is only for trucks, since they have really crappy muffler systems and huge diesel engines that make a LOT of noise when engine braking. I think that in a normal car no one would be able to even tell you were engine braking, much less charge you with a crime for it.
True, but remember that we invaded because of NUCLEAR weapons that we thought he had. We already knew about the chemical weapons (that was 20 years ago, before the first Gulf War).