Since Linus is speaking honestly, he makes the entire community look good.
So rather than talking about the fact that administration can't get on the same page on whether the Libyan embassy attacks were a protest or a planned terrorist attack, or that Obama has time for Letterman, The View, Beyonce and JayZ, or that he and his wife flew out to NY on the taxpayer dime for dinner and a Broadway show, or the fact that he's spending more time of the golf course than with his financial advisors and his national security team combined, or the fact that a budget has not been passed since Obama has been in office, or the fact that more people are on food stamps, are in poverty and/or can't find a job.... Let's talk about Romney's knowledge of aeronautics and atmospheric science.
Allowing aircraft windows to be opened is recipe for disaster, pressure and whatnot.
I've opened the window on a plane. I've even opened the door on a plane. If you are at a low enough altitude, it doesn't matter. Of course, I was on a plane that probably wouldn't make it to an altitude that is unsafe, but it was an aircraft and opening them was not a recipe for disaster. The damn thing had air vents!
I don't ask Romney to fix kernel bugs just as I don't look to Linux for political advice. Both should stick to what they know.
I agree if you talk at all the people believing in the same God. You know, Christians, Jews and Muslims.
Yes, cause they are all the same. I remember fondly when Viacom and Fox were razed to the ground and the CEO's raped, killed and dragged through the streets by Catholics because of the way that Jesus was portrayed on SouthPark and Family Guy. And the nasty stuff that Jews did to Sarah Silverman and Seth MacFarlane before cutting off their heads for not just leaving Judaism, but ridiculing Jews and God.
Good thing that hating people for their religion is considered bigotry... well, except it is.
If you want Cherokee Purples, why not grown them yourself? Tomatoes are the easiest thing to grow and the CP is fairly forgiving. My first year growing anything at all, I was able to get a few CP's from my plant, and I knew nothing. Still no nothing, but more than I did back then.
If you are limited on space, may I suggest Raybo's InnTainers (PDF warning). If you are not growing inside, you may skip all the waterproofing steps. If nothing else, this will give you a rough idea as to how to make your own, even if you don't follow Raybo's steps to the letter. I just set one 18 gallon tote inside another rather that all the steps he uses. Sure, his are better, but mine were easier and more idiot proof. With this, you can grow two plants per container that will even work on an apartment balcony or home deck.
I think there are certain cases, such as using growth hormones in meat, where the organic has an advantage. But yeah, look at tomatoes: nothing beats a big, juicy, ripe beefsteak grown in your own backyard, whether you fertilize it with chemicals or compost. The tomatoes at the grocery stores -- again, organic or otherwise -- are special cultivars that have been selected for ruggedness and shelf life. Nutritional content (and taste) is secondary to the vendor.
Tomatoes have also been bred to be pretty. You can't taste a tomato when you're standing the produce section so all you have to go on is the looks. People want a tomato that is solid red all over. As I'm sure you've noticed the best tasting tomatoes don't always ripen evenly. My favorite tomato, the Cherokee Purple, ripens with a green top as all blacks do. No one will buy this in the store as they'd think it's not ripe yet, but they are missing out as it is one of the best tasting tomatoes in the world! Of course, taste is subjective, but if you read the tomato grower's forums, the majority agree that it is the best tomato.
I read an article that said the reason heirloom tomatoes taste better is because they have more chlorophyll in the tomato itself, and thus, produce more sugar in the tomato itself. The gene that causes the extra chlorophyll also causes tomatoes to ripen unevenly, which is why it's been bred out of tomatoes grown for market. Of course, this doesn't account for the piss poor texture, but I believe that is caused by picking them green and ripening with ethylene gas.
Either way, there is nothing about the problems I've mentioned above that prevents an organic grower from using the same technique. If you want a good tomato, look for the word, "Heirloom", not organic. But be aware that you will pay extra for it.
Have a universal installer format that will install and run on everything. On all Linux, all BSD, all Windows. A single install file that will go anywhere means developers only need to code once. For a new version of windows you just re-install. Done with full compatibility. If you support all versions of Windows fully then developers will love you.
It doesn't need to be cross platform, but a single application repo that works across all Linux distro's would certainly be a good thing and go a long way towards making Linux more mainstream.
The point was not that the SIII was part of the original suit, but that the SIII has the same features as the SII that Apple sued over. So even though they were not part of the same lawsuit, they can still be included if they try to block sales.
For example, let's say Dodge patents a radio for a car. Ford releases a Mustang of that same radio. During the lawsuit, Ford releases two more cars, the F150 and the Taurus with the same radio. The court rules that Ford's Mustang violated Dodge's patent. Do you think Dodge will have to re sue to get the F150 and Taurus blocked? Of course not. It's the same radio, just as the SIII has the same features as the SII.
My original comment was responding to a post that said "No Apple has patented a particular rectangle of a particular size". I pointed out that the Galaxy SIII was much larger than an iphone. That is true of the entire Galaxy line of phones and they all have the same shape. This is fact. I don't know why you are being such a little bitch about it. It does not matter if the SIII was part of the original lawsuit or not as THAT WAS NOT MY POINT. My point was that Apple is suing over the shape, NOT the size.
Also, Apple has sued over the Galaxy SIII in a separate lawsuit. I provided a link earlier if you care to go back and read it.
The Galaxy S III was not out when the lawsuit started. There is no way Apple could have included it in the original lawsuit. However, the Galaxy S II was released and absolutely was part of the original lawsuit.
The jury in particular found Samsung's Fascinate, Epic 4G and Galaxy S II smartphones were rogue products that warranted more than $100 million each in damages for copying the iPhone, although the panel spared Samsung much punishment for infringing the iPad. The jury rejected Samsung's counterclaims that Apple infringed some of its wireless technology patents.
Apple sued over 28 different products. My 10 minutes of Googling has not managed to find a list of those 28 products. We do know that the SII was one of them. If the SIII was not on the original list, all Apple has to do is go back to that fanboi judge they have on their payroll and say, "Hey! We need the SIII blocked as well since it is a Galaxy phone and has all the same infringing features as the SII" and the judge will say, "Yes Master!" This is because Apple has already won the lawsuit protecting their "patents". Any other Samsung devices that have the same features that Apple claims violates their designs will be just as guilty as the 28 products listed in the lawsuit. Apple probably won't even have to go back to court!
Also, I have shown that Apple is trying to block the sales of the SIII just as they tried to block the latest line of Evos. They were unsuccessful blocking the Evos, but did get them delayed for a while at the port. Now with a judgment under their belt, there is nothing to stop them from going after the SIII or any other Android or Windows phone without sharp edges.
This lawsuit was about the Galaxy line of phones, all of which have a larger screen than the iphone.
If I'm mistaken, tell me where I am mistaken and tell me the correct answer. Don't just say, "YOUR WRONG!" and leave it at that. Tell me which devices are part of this lawsuit because everything I can find says the Galaxy line. I also read that they are using this lawsuit to try to ban the Galaxy SIII.
The verdict, which came much sooner than expected, could lead to an outright ban on sales of key Samsung products and will likely solidify Apple's dominance of the exploding mobile computing market.
As part of its lawsuit, Apple also demanded that Samsung pull its most popular cellphones and computer tablets from the U.S. market. A judge was expected to make that ruling at a later time.
I wonder how you will talk if you weren't handed talking points.
You do realize Apple did not sue Samsung before 2010 when Samsung's phones did not look like the iPhone, right?
Was that before or after Steve Jobs vowed to go "thermonuclear" on android devices?
Apple has also sued Motorolla, HTC, and of course Samsung. Apple has sued over phones and tablets over everything from rounded corners, hyperlinked phone numbers, click to zoom on text, searching more than one source when a voice search is used, pinch to zoom, icon placement and many, many more frivolous reasons. Apple is not just trying to get Samsung phones banned in the US, including the new SIII, but they are also going after tablets and other manufacturers, trying to get them BANNED as well.
So, if Apple were to have won all her lawsuits, we'd have no HTC phones, no Samsung phones or tablets and no Motorolla phones being sold in the US. This is not a talking point, this is FACT! Apple is trying to BAN THE COMPETITION!
This ban was placed before Samsung was even guilty of anything. The latest HTC Evo line was delayed for the same reason as Apple is trying to get the banned.
If you were being sarcastic, allow me to support you. If you were being sincere, allow me to refute you.
Here's a device that is full screen, one primary button on the bottom middle, icons lined up in rows and columns, has installable apps, and is rectangular shaped with rounded corners. I'm sure you know by looking at the image provided that it is NOT an Apple device and came out years before the first iphone. The design for this device had been around for years before this particular model came out.
So, you think Apple should have had sole ownership of GUIs and smartphones? Windows and Android should just go away? Now that is facile.
Actually, that is EXACTLY what Apple and its fanbois want. Now, I understand why Apple wants to eliminate the competition, but I've never been able to figure out why Apple's fanbois want to see all other smartphones to go away. Again, it would be good for Apple, but the fanbois would actually be hurt if they are locked into purchasing from an Apple monopoly. It's as if they get mad or feel threatened when someone other than Apple gets something they used to have exclusively or never had at all. For example, when Instagram was released for Android, Apple fans got mad. Why? Why would they care if Android users got Instagram?
No Apple has patented a particular rectangle of a particular size. There are phones that involve rectangles that Apple indicated in court don't infringe. Just don't do things the way Apple does.
Sorry, but the Galaxy SIII is MUCH larger than any iphone. I don't think it was the size they were upset about.
Maybe. But meanwhile, Samsung has already been reacting to the legal heat and is making devices that are less copycat of Apple devices now.. Which is after all Apple's objective.
No, Apple's "objective" is to sue every other smart phone maker out of business so they can be the only player left in the market. Once Samsung is out of the way, they'll move on to HTC or some other Android based phone manufacturer.
"We do not agree with your political views. A Christian is suppose to protect, empower and promote the needs and interests of the poor, the weak, and the sick. Your actions are dedicated to serving the wealthy. Yours is not a Christian agenda."
Source? Not that I doubt you, but you quote yielded no results.
Either way, they are half right. It is the Christian's job to do such things. Not the government's. When government forces your property from you at gunpoint and decides how to dole it out, they strip the citizen the freedom of making that choice. Paying taxes is not charity. Charity is charity.
You dug up something from 1972? Wasn't Obama snorting coke in 1972? Wasn't Clinton NOT inhaling in 1972? Either way, HERE is another take on it.
And you are trying to hammer a minister on opposing gay marriage? Oh! The HORROR! What kind of prick does a minister have to be to believe and teach what the Bible says?!!?
Wait... Didn't Clinton sign the Defense of Marriage Act? Didn't Obama say that he believed that marriage was between a man and a woman? Why are you not wishing for them to die horribly in a storm?
I guess the one thing they just cannot tolerate is intolerance...
See, that's the problem. They accuse Republicans of being intolerant so that they may show bigotry towards them. Remember, Dick Cheney, the most hated of all Republicans and who is seen as the most right wing extreme, has a lesbian daughter. His daughter is a Republican too, by the way. Gee, you'd think that all Republicans were as intolerant as the left would have us believe, shouldn't Cheney have shot his daughter in the face by now? You'd think that he would at least not talk to her or shun her from family functions. Mary Cheney even got married. Dick Cheney said of his new daughter-in-law “Mary and Heather and their children are very important and much loved members of our family and we wish them every happiness.”
Those intolerant bastards!
Even if you want to say, "yeah, but Dick Cheney is different". Um... yeah. I haven't seen Dick get a lot of love from the gay community. (I mean Dick Cheney, of course)
Just another liberal happy to kill for the cause I suppose. There sure are a disturbing number of you around these days, unwilling to debate and only to destroy.
That's some nice projection you've got going on there. I invite you to visit any number of message boards and count the number of death threats vs. liberals vs. death threats against conservatives and see if it supports your assumption.
--Jeremy
I don't think it's projection when he's posting on a forum with hundreds of posts wishing for Republicans to die. Projection is when your project your own faults onto others who do not have those faults. So, in this case, it is hardly what I'd call "projection".
Next, I challenge you to go to "right wing" sites and find me some death wishes. May I recommend Hot Air, Red State or even News Busters. Now, granted, you will find a few whack jobs out there, but nothing like what you have seen here and nothing like what you may find on Democratic Underground or Daily Kos.
Sorry, but in light of what I've read here, it would appear that you are the one who is projecting.
And that "liberal" Jesus was against sexual deviancy, which includes homosexuality. That's not exactly what I would call a "liberal". Sure, Jesus was a liberal for someone living he first century, but not a liberal by today's standard. You should really clarify that.
The poster may be referring to the repeated statements by GOP celebrity favorites (Fallwell, Graham, B-list megachurch pastors, etc) who claim that disasters like Katrina and 9/11 are the fault of America's fall from the grace of the Christian God.
You mean like Jeremiah Wright?
Sorry, but the right does not have monopoly on schmuck ministers. And for the record, I'm a Republican and I don't know a single person who likes Falwell. As for Graham, you won't find a better man. Of course, you wouldn't know that since you put him in the same category as Falwell.
But remember, Obama sat in Wright's church for 20 years or so. I don't know of a single Republican President who has ever sat in Falwell's church.
Flash has always sucked on mobile. I'm glad Adobe is finally admitting it.
I agree, but many sites still use it, unfortunately. Those sites will become unavailable if Flash is removed on mobile devices.
Which makes me wonder about the wisdom of this decision. As mobile devices become more popular, website designers are forced to make a choice; keep using Flash and be unavailable on mobile devices or redesign with a switch to something else. Adobe loses either way.
It is a beautiful fantasy: you are stuck in endless traffic, you push a button on the dash and float into the air, then zoom along effortlessly to your destination while looking down on all the "normal" people stuck in traffic.
Unfortunately without a major technology breakthrough (which none of the designs are), it will remain a fantasy.
I don't understand why we do not have small, one to two-person blimps flying around. The technology is there. They are safe. They might crash into eachother but will more than likely just bounce off. If they do plumet to the earth, they'll do it slow motion.
We obviously have the technology. No major breakthrough required. What am I missing here?
Slashdot Mirror
Since Linus is speaking honestly, he makes the entire community look good.
So rather than talking about the fact that administration can't get on the same page on whether the Libyan embassy attacks were a protest or a planned terrorist attack, or that Obama has time for Letterman, The View, Beyonce and JayZ, or that he and his wife flew out to NY on the taxpayer dime for dinner and a Broadway show, or the fact that he's spending more time of the golf course than with his financial advisors and his national security team combined, or the fact that a budget has not been passed since Obama has been in office, or the fact that more people are on food stamps, are in poverty and/or can't find a job.... Let's talk about Romney's knowledge of aeronautics and atmospheric science.
Allowing aircraft windows to be opened is recipe for disaster, pressure and whatnot.
I've opened the window on a plane. I've even opened the door on a plane. If you are at a low enough altitude, it doesn't matter. Of course, I was on a plane that probably wouldn't make it to an altitude that is unsafe, but it was an aircraft and opening them was not a recipe for disaster. The damn thing had air vents!
I don't ask Romney to fix kernel bugs just as I don't look to Linux for political advice. Both should stick to what they know.
I agree if you talk at all the people believing in the same God. You know, Christians, Jews and Muslims.
Yes, cause they are all the same. I remember fondly when Viacom and Fox were razed to the ground and the CEO's raped, killed and dragged through the streets by Catholics because of the way that Jesus was portrayed on SouthPark and Family Guy. And the nasty stuff that Jews did to Sarah Silverman and Seth MacFarlane before cutting off their heads for not just leaving Judaism, but ridiculing Jews and God.
Good thing that hating people for their religion is considered bigotry... well, except it is.
HERE is the article I was referring to.
If you want Cherokee Purples, why not grown them yourself? Tomatoes are the easiest thing to grow and the CP is fairly forgiving. My first year growing anything at all, I was able to get a few CP's from my plant, and I knew nothing. Still no nothing, but more than I did back then.
If you are limited on space, may I suggest Raybo's InnTainers (PDF warning). If you are not growing inside, you may skip all the waterproofing steps. If nothing else, this will give you a rough idea as to how to make your own, even if you don't follow Raybo's steps to the letter. I just set one 18 gallon tote inside another rather that all the steps he uses. Sure, his are better, but mine were easier and more idiot proof. With this, you can grow two plants per container that will even work on an apartment balcony or home deck.
Also, THIS is worth a look.
I think there are certain cases, such as using growth hormones in meat, where the organic has an advantage. But yeah, look at tomatoes: nothing beats a big, juicy, ripe beefsteak grown in your own backyard, whether you fertilize it with chemicals or compost. The tomatoes at the grocery stores -- again, organic or otherwise -- are special cultivars that have been selected for ruggedness and shelf life. Nutritional content (and taste) is secondary to the vendor.
Tomatoes have also been bred to be pretty. You can't taste a tomato when you're standing the produce section so all you have to go on is the looks. People want a tomato that is solid red all over. As I'm sure you've noticed the best tasting tomatoes don't always ripen evenly. My favorite tomato, the Cherokee Purple, ripens with a green top as all blacks do. No one will buy this in the store as they'd think it's not ripe yet, but they are missing out as it is one of the best tasting tomatoes in the world! Of course, taste is subjective, but if you read the tomato grower's forums, the majority agree that it is the best tomato.
I read an article that said the reason heirloom tomatoes taste better is because they have more chlorophyll in the tomato itself, and thus, produce more sugar in the tomato itself. The gene that causes the extra chlorophyll also causes tomatoes to ripen unevenly, which is why it's been bred out of tomatoes grown for market. Of course, this doesn't account for the piss poor texture, but I believe that is caused by picking them green and ripening with ethylene gas.
Either way, there is nothing about the problems I've mentioned above that prevents an organic grower from using the same technique. If you want a good tomato, look for the word, "Heirloom", not organic. But be aware that you will pay extra for it.
Google for "Organic vs Inorganic Taste Test" then select "videos"...eg this one
Hehe, you serious? That was some impressive "science". Almost beats the Pepsi challenge. It's slated for peer review publising soon?
Of course, they never show the ones that picked Coke.
Have a universal installer format that will install and run on everything. On all Linux, all BSD, all Windows.
A single install file that will go anywhere means developers only need to code once. For a new version of windows you just re-install. Done with full compatibility.
If you support all versions of Windows fully then developers will love you.
It doesn't need to be cross platform, but a single application repo that works across all Linux distro's would certainly be a good thing and go a long way towards making Linux more mainstream.
Love your sig....
Also, read the response I posted to someone else.
The point was not that the SIII was part of the original suit, but that the SIII has the same features as the SII that Apple sued over. So even though they were not part of the same lawsuit, they can still be included if they try to block sales.
For example, let's say Dodge patents a radio for a car. Ford releases a Mustang of that same radio. During the lawsuit, Ford releases two more cars, the F150 and the Taurus with the same radio. The court rules that Ford's Mustang violated Dodge's patent. Do you think Dodge will have to re sue to get the F150 and Taurus blocked? Of course not. It's the same radio, just as the SIII has the same features as the SII.
My original comment was responding to a post that said "No Apple has patented a particular rectangle of a particular size". I pointed out that the Galaxy SIII was much larger than an iphone. That is true of the entire Galaxy line of phones and they all have the same shape. This is fact. I don't know why you are being such a little bitch about it. It does not matter if the SIII was part of the original lawsuit or not as THAT WAS NOT MY POINT. My point was that Apple is suing over the shape, NOT the size.
Also, Apple has sued over the Galaxy SIII in a separate lawsuit. I provided a link earlier if you care to go back and read it.
The Galaxy S III was not out when the lawsuit started. There is no way Apple could have included it in the original lawsuit. However, the Galaxy S II was released and absolutely was part of the original lawsuit.
The jury in particular found Samsung's Fascinate, Epic 4G and Galaxy S II smartphones were rogue products that warranted more than $100 million each in damages for copying the iPhone, although the panel spared Samsung much punishment for infringing the iPad. The jury rejected Samsung's counterclaims that Apple infringed some of its wireless technology patents.
(http://newsfeedresearcher.com/data/articles_b34_3/apple-samsung-patents.html)
Now go for a picture of the Galaxy line of phones. Notice the similarities? Notice that they all have the same shape with rounded corners? Notice how the icons all look similar and are arranged in the same "Touchwiz" manner? Is that NOT what Apple was suing over?
Apple sued over 28 different products. My 10 minutes of Googling has not managed to find a list of those 28 products. We do know that the SII was one of them. If the SIII was not on the original list, all Apple has to do is go back to that fanboi judge they have on their payroll and say, "Hey! We need the SIII blocked as well since it is a Galaxy phone and has all the same infringing features as the SII" and the judge will say, "Yes Master!" This is because Apple has already won the lawsuit protecting their "patents". Any other Samsung devices that have the same features that Apple claims violates their designs will be just as guilty as the 28 products listed in the lawsuit. Apple probably won't even have to go back to court!
Also, I have shown that Apple is trying to block the sales of the SIII just as they tried to block the latest line of Evos. They were unsuccessful blocking the Evos, but did get them delayed for a while at the port. Now with a judgment under their belt, there is nothing to stop them from going after the SIII or any other Android or Windows phone without sharp edges.
At the risk of repeating myself:
This lawsuit was about the Galaxy line of phones, all of which have a larger screen than the iphone.
If I'm mistaken, tell me where I am mistaken and tell me the correct answer. Don't just say, "YOUR WRONG!" and leave it at that. Tell me which devices are part of this lawsuit because everything I can find says the Galaxy line. I also read that they are using this lawsuit to try to ban the Galaxy SIII.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/48783982
The verdict, which came much sooner than expected, could lead to an outright ban on sales of key Samsung products and will likely solidify Apple's dominance of the exploding mobile computing market.
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2012/08/24/jury-reaches-verdict-in-apple-vs-samsung-case/
As part of its lawsuit, Apple also demanded that Samsung pull its most popular cellphones and computer tablets from the U.S. market. A judge was expected to make that ruling at a later time.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/avantgo/2018986876.html
Apple lawyer plans to formally demand Samsung pull its most popular cellphones and computer tablets from the U.S. market.
While the SIII is not listed specifically, it is the most popular cellphone Samsung sells right now.
I wonder how you will talk if you weren't handed talking points.
You do realize Apple did not sue Samsung before 2010 when Samsung's phones did not look like the iPhone, right?
Was that before or after Steve Jobs vowed to go "thermonuclear" on android devices?
Apple has also sued Motorolla, HTC, and of course Samsung. Apple has sued over phones and tablets over everything from rounded corners, hyperlinked phone numbers, click to zoom on text, searching more than one source when a voice search is used, pinch to zoom, icon placement and many, many more frivolous reasons. Apple is not just trying to get Samsung phones banned in the US, including the new SIII, but they are also going after tablets and other manufacturers, trying to get them BANNED as well.
So, if Apple were to have won all her lawsuits, we'd have no HTC phones, no Samsung phones or tablets and no Motorolla phones being sold in the US. This is not a talking point, this is FACT! Apple is trying to BAN THE COMPETITION!
This ban was placed before Samsung was even guilty of anything. The latest HTC Evo line was delayed for the same reason as Apple is trying to get the banned.
You appear to be under the impression that the SIII is part of this lawsuit.
Why do you believe that?
The Galaxy SIII was part of THIS lawsuit.
This lawsuit was about the Galaxy line of phones, all of which have a larger screen than the iphone.
They didn't even copy Palm
If you were being sarcastic, allow me to support you. If you were being sincere, allow me to refute you.
Here's a device that is full screen, one primary button on the bottom middle, icons lined up in rows and columns, has installable apps, and is rectangular shaped with rounded corners. I'm sure you know by looking at the image provided that it is NOT an Apple device and came out years before the first iphone. The design for this device had been around for years before this particular model came out.
It's not just about the corners.
Don't just say that he's wrong. Explain WHY he's wrong. In this case, tell us what this case was about beyond the corners.
So, you think Apple should have had sole ownership of GUIs and smartphones? Windows and Android should just go away? Now that is facile.
Actually, that is EXACTLY what Apple and its fanbois want. Now, I understand why Apple wants to eliminate the competition, but I've never been able to figure out why Apple's fanbois want to see all other smartphones to go away. Again, it would be good for Apple, but the fanbois would actually be hurt if they are locked into purchasing from an Apple monopoly. It's as if they get mad or feel threatened when someone other than Apple gets something they used to have exclusively or never had at all. For example, when Instagram was released for Android, Apple fans got mad. Why? Why would they care if Android users got Instagram?
No Apple has patented a particular rectangle of a particular size. There are phones that involve rectangles that Apple indicated in court don't infringe. Just don't do things the way Apple does.
Sorry, but the Galaxy SIII is MUCH larger than any iphone. I don't think it was the size they were upset about.
Maybe. But meanwhile, Samsung has already been reacting to the legal heat and is making devices that are less copycat of Apple devices now.. Which is after all Apple's objective.
No, Apple's "objective" is to sue every other smart phone maker out of business so they can be the only player left in the market. Once Samsung is out of the way, they'll move on to HTC or some other Android based phone manufacturer.
"We do not agree with your political views. A Christian is suppose to protect, empower and promote the needs and interests of the poor, the weak, and the sick. Your actions are dedicated to serving the wealthy. Yours is not a Christian agenda."
Source? Not that I doubt you, but you quote yielded no results.
Either way, they are half right. It is the Christian's job to do such things. Not the government's. When government forces your property from you at gunpoint and decides how to dole it out, they strip the citizen the freedom of making that choice. Paying taxes is not charity. Charity is charity.
You dug up something from 1972? Wasn't Obama snorting coke in 1972? Wasn't Clinton NOT inhaling in 1972? Either way, HERE is another take on it.
And you are trying to hammer a minister on opposing gay marriage? Oh! The HORROR! What kind of prick does a minister have to be to believe and teach what the Bible says?!!?
Wait... Didn't Clinton sign the Defense of Marriage Act? Didn't Obama say that he believed that marriage was between a man and a woman? Why are you not wishing for them to die horribly in a storm?
Try again.
I guess the one thing they just cannot tolerate is intolerance...
See, that's the problem. They accuse Republicans of being intolerant so that they may show bigotry towards them. Remember, Dick Cheney, the most hated of all Republicans and who is seen as the most right wing extreme, has a lesbian daughter. His daughter is a Republican too, by the way. Gee, you'd think that all Republicans were as intolerant as the left would have us believe, shouldn't Cheney have shot his daughter in the face by now? You'd think that he would at least not talk to her or shun her from family functions. Mary Cheney even got married. Dick Cheney said of his new daughter-in-law “Mary and Heather and their children are very important and much loved members of our family and we wish them every happiness.”
Those intolerant bastards!
Even if you want to say, "yeah, but Dick Cheney is different". Um... yeah. I haven't seen Dick get a lot of love from the gay community. (I mean Dick Cheney, of course)
Just another liberal happy to kill for the cause I suppose. There sure are a disturbing number of you around these days, unwilling to debate and only to destroy.
That's some nice projection you've got going on there. I invite you to visit any number of message boards and count the number of death threats vs. liberals vs. death threats against conservatives and see if it supports your assumption.
--Jeremy
I don't think it's projection when he's posting on a forum with hundreds of posts wishing for Republicans to die. Projection is when your project your own faults onto others who do not have those faults. So, in this case, it is hardly what I'd call "projection".
Next, I challenge you to go to "right wing" sites and find me some death wishes. May I recommend Hot Air, Red State or even News Busters. Now, granted, you will find a few whack jobs out there, but nothing like what you have seen here and nothing like what you may find on Democratic Underground or Daily Kos.
Sorry, but in light of what I've read here, it would appear that you are the one who is projecting.
And that "liberal" Jesus was against sexual deviancy, which includes homosexuality. That's not exactly what I would call a "liberal". Sure, Jesus was a liberal for someone living he first century, but not a liberal by today's standard. You should really clarify that.
The poster may be referring to the repeated statements by GOP celebrity favorites (Fallwell, Graham, B-list megachurch pastors, etc) who claim that disasters like Katrina and 9/11 are the fault of America's fall from the grace of the Christian God.
You mean like Jeremiah Wright?
Sorry, but the right does not have monopoly on schmuck ministers. And for the record, I'm a Republican and I don't know a single person who likes Falwell. As for Graham, you won't find a better man. Of course, you wouldn't know that since you put him in the same category as Falwell.
But remember, Obama sat in Wright's church for 20 years or so. I don't know of a single Republican President who has ever sat in Falwell's church.
If you were a straight chick who wanted to get pregnant, then yes--the balls most definitely do matter.
We are talking about birth control here. If your "straight chick" wants to get pregnant, then why would you be using birth control?
Flash has always sucked on mobile. I'm glad Adobe is finally admitting it.
I agree, but many sites still use it, unfortunately. Those sites will become unavailable if Flash is removed on mobile devices.
Which makes me wonder about the wisdom of this decision. As mobile devices become more popular, website designers are forced to make a choice; keep using Flash and be unavailable on mobile devices or redesign with a switch to something else. Adobe loses either way.
It is a beautiful fantasy: you are stuck in endless traffic, you push a button on the dash and float into the air, then zoom along effortlessly to your destination while looking down on all the "normal" people stuck in traffic.
Unfortunately without a major technology breakthrough (which none of the designs are), it will remain a fantasy.
I don't understand why we do not have small, one to two-person blimps flying around. The technology is there. They are safe. They might crash into eachother but will more than likely just bounce off. If they do plumet to the earth, they'll do it slow motion.
We obviously have the technology. No major breakthrough required. What am I missing here?