the polls are shit, haven't you learned this yet? Even the liberal nuts on ABCNNBCBS are making fun of them.
The chance of the roughly 1 million absentee votes going 650,000 to 350,000 Kerry to Bush is absolutely zero. More Republicans requested absentee ballots than Dems and historically more Repubs than Dems use absentee ballots.
Florida is done. Even the Kerry/Edwards swarm of deadly lawyer ninjas has given up on it. They're all going to Ohio.
Have any friends/fam in the millitary? Yes. Why is the military going to vote 3 to 1 for Bush?
It didn't take M Moore to make that appearant. If Michael Moore made anything "appearant" to you... give me a break. That movie was the most misleading piece of propaganda. You realize that almost everything he implies is almost entirely false, right? That entire movie is intellectually dishonest.
# One candidate is a radical, whereas in past elections, both candidates were more or less moderate. (In 2000, most people thought Bush was a moderate) I voted for Gore in 2000. I personally feel that a large segment of the left has jumped off the deep end. Bush may have moved right (as did I) but much of the left moved even farther.
# The winner will likely decide the composition of the Supreme Court for the next 20+ years. John Kerry, during the debates, listed a huge list of litmus tests for the supreme court. Bush just stated that he wants one that follows the constitution.
# If Bush wins, Republicans will likely control all 3 branches of goverment, allowing for the most extreme changes since FDR. And so, you wish for these extreme changes to be made with a democrat controlled congress (it could happen next election in 2006), executive, and judicial?
# Military commitments made during the next 4 years could easily last decades. And if Kerry wins, with a record of voting against military programs and funding and voting for cuts in intelligence funding, that will be a better alternative?
But in reality here are my issues (in no particular order): - Taxes - Terrorism - UN/EU - Why are we worried what France/Germany/Russia care about when they accepting billions in bribes from Saddam? - Restrictions on Abortion - Increased Government bureaucracy in Healthcare (I've read Kerry's healthcare plan, and all I've seen is level upon level of new government agencies - and increased costs) - It also bothers me greatly to have a lawyer for both president and vice president, especially a trial lawyer like Edwards - lawsuits are already out of control. Why again does the US have over half the worlds lawyers? - And others
What would be interesting would be to go to some real political sites, with people who have actual backgrounds in this type of stuff, instead of this make-believe one.
The reporting over the last 7-10 of the NY Times has been a down right embarrassing example of journalistic bias. Above the fold it has been story after story after story of just non-stop Bush bashing.
Look at the collusion between the Times and CBS. What are they doing discussing holding back anti-bush stories to two days before the election? Stories based on information that is so muddled and unclear that they approach CBS's wonderful Bush memo. And people wonder why old media is dying (no, netcraft has not yet confirmed this).
And let's not forget the political modding. Say one thing that slightly supports one candidate or the other (although, especially a conservative candidate like "Bush doesn't eat babies! He just hunts them.") and prepare to have your post moderated into oblivion.
The other major problem with the moderation system is how how one post, say a post that many people find funny, but others find offensive, can completely decimate your karma. On my old account I went from Excellent karma to Terrible because of one post. The mods that found it funny kept modding it up +1 Funny (which ads no karma) and the mods that found it offensive kept modding it down -1 Troll or -1 Overrated.
This happened with this account as well, but it only went from Excellent to Positive. The unfortunate thing is that there's a easy fix to this. First, Overrated mods should only take karma away if a post has already received a positive mod. Otherwise, it should decrease the score (or shouldn't be allowed?). Two, there needs to be a limit on the amount of negative karma one can get through the moderation of a single post.
Hell, there's still plenty of room available for me. I claim 90 degrees west to 150 degrees west.
And what's with France being stuck between two Australian sections?
And then Norway. There's no end to their claim. Does their claim then just expand outwardly forever? Wrapping around the Earth to encompass the whole world?
No, it's true. This is designed to help simulate complete blindness. The neat thing is that, after you use it, the VR Blindness experience lasts for quite some time afterwards.
It was some what of a weak answer, but the idea that we will help educate people in order to help them get a new job isn't exactly a horrible idea. And it wasn't an attack.
I fail to see where I was harping on this idea as if it was an end all to all the worlds problems. I simply said it wasn't a horrible idea.
Can you extend the "Education is Good" rationalization more than two feet out of your mouth?
As your uber-smart Senator Kerry has often mentioned the average 4-year college grad makes, over their life, $900,000 more than the average high school grad. His figure, not mine.
There are plenty of companies/orginizations that offer job training for people newly unemployed. It simply training that offers them basic up to date training in an in demand field.
You sir are a stupid, stupid man.
But, whatever. You're determined to be a jackass, and an ignorant one at that, so I really don't know why I'm bothering responding to you.
It's attitudes like yours that caused me to stop being a Catholic. Just because someone doesn't think the way you do doesn't mean that they aren't a Christian. The last time I checked there were only two qualifications for being a Christian:
You are confusing Catholicism with Christianity. Also, your actions are what are important. If all that mattered were intentions...
You might not have read far enough back into the thread to see what I was replying too. It was this:
He's not for promoting faith over science or democracy, though Bush throws that to the religious zealots who form his base.
To which I responded: Well, I'm a Catholic (much like your beloved Kerry, although by most definitions he is not a Catholic). The vast majority of citizens in the US disagree with Kerry's positions on partial-birth abortion and public funding for abortions.
I then went on to the stem cell topic (as I inferred that he was referring to that as well) as it is such a ridiculous topic of debate. It was meant to be seperate from the first two issues.
an issue is brought up that you can't defend, you just attack on another issue.
Hmmm...I seem to remember a certain president who used this tactic extensively during the third debate. And I quote:
It was some what of a weak answer, but the idea that we will help educate people in order to help them get a new job isn't exactly a horrible idea. And it wasn't an attack.
Saddam would still be struggling with UN sanctions
Interesting definition of struggling. Saddam had pocketed over $11 billion via the "oil for food" scandal. Clearly you have not read into the Duelfer report which clearly stated that Saddam's goal was to contiunally wear down the sanctions through bribery and political manipulation.
From 1991 to 2003, he made no measurable headway on it. But I'm sure at any minute, he was going to become Nuclear capable.
From the report (yes, the same one that many of the leftist editorialists used to attack Bush):
"Saddam's primary goal from 1991 to 2003 was to have UN sanctions lifted, while maintaining the security of the Regime. He sought to balance the need to cooperate with the UN inspections -- to gain support for lifting the sanctions -- with his intention to preserve Iraq's intellectual capital for WMD with a minimum of foreign intrusiveness and loss of face."
over 1000 American troops would still be alive
Yes, the loss of life is horrible and unfortunate. But, in the long run, it will be worth it. If the troops didn't feel this way, why will they vote 3 to 1 Bush to Kerry.
over 15000 iraqa would still be alive
An average of 32,000 Iraqis were killed per year under Saddam including tens (if not hundreds) of thousands during the years where he was "struggling with UN sanctions". It's horrible that so many innocents have died during his reign. But while allowing Saddam to continue his reign would have allowed for this to continue, his removal will, in the long run, greatly decrease the loss of innocent life in the future. It may pain you to know this, but the lives of the average Iraqi is better now than it was before the war. This is especially true for the children of Iraq (of which over 3.2 million have been properly vaccinated and 95% of which are attending school - almost twice as high as before the war.)
Here's a question for you, if we weren't in Iraq, and the terrorists weren't coming into Iraq to fight us, what would Zarqawi and his friends be doing? Knitting? Playing squash?
The sad thing about Kerry and American Politics is that it would be suicide for him to state that we would be better off if we had left Saddam in power.
Kerry has become the anti-war candidate, but you are correct to state that it would be suicide for him to state that we would be better off if Saddam was in power, because it would be completely false. Kerry, of course, would have used one of his magical "plans" to take care of Saddam. Probably along the lines of another UN resolution, or a strongly worded letter.
Only a party-felating apologist like yourself could defend US actions in Iraq.
I voted for Gore in 2000 and Jesse Ventura in 1998 (to send a message to the left and the right in Minnesota - what a fuck up he turned out to be).
Slashdot Mirror
the polls are shit, haven't you learned this yet? Even the liberal nuts on ABCNNBCBS are making fun of them.
The chance of the roughly 1 million absentee votes going 650,000 to 350,000 Kerry to Bush is absolutely zero. More Republicans requested absentee ballots than Dems and historically more Repubs than Dems use absentee ballots.
Florida is done. Even the Kerry/Edwards swarm of deadly lawyer ninjas has given up on it. They're all going to Ohio.
Have any friends/fam in the millitary?
Yes. Why is the military going to vote 3 to 1 for Bush?
It didn't take M Moore to make that appearant.
If Michael Moore made anything "appearant" to you... give me a break. That movie was the most misleading piece of propaganda. You realize that almost everything he implies is almost entirely false, right? That entire movie is intellectually dishonest.
# One candidate is a radical, whereas in past elections, both candidates were more or less moderate. (In 2000, most people thought Bush was a moderate)
I voted for Gore in 2000. I personally feel that a large segment of the left has jumped off the deep end. Bush may have moved right (as did I) but much of the left moved even farther.
# The winner will likely decide the composition of the Supreme Court for the next 20+ years.
John Kerry, during the debates, listed a huge list of litmus tests for the supreme court. Bush just stated that he wants one that follows the constitution.
# If Bush wins, Republicans will likely control all 3 branches of goverment, allowing for the most extreme changes since FDR.
And so, you wish for these extreme changes to be made with a democrat controlled congress (it could happen next election in 2006), executive, and judicial?
# Military commitments made during the next 4 years could easily last decades.
And if Kerry wins, with a record of voting against military programs and funding and voting for cuts in intelligence funding, that will be a better alternative?
Cuz Kerry is a bitch
But in reality here are my issues (in no particular order):
- Taxes
- Terrorism
- UN/EU - Why are we worried what France/Germany/Russia care about when they accepting billions in bribes from Saddam?
- Restrictions on Abortion
- Increased Government bureaucracy in Healthcare (I've read Kerry's healthcare plan, and all I've seen is level upon level of new government agencies - and increased costs)
- It also bothers me greatly to have a lawyer for both president and vice president, especially a trial lawyer like Edwards - lawsuits are already out of control. Why again does the US have over half the worlds lawyers?
- And others
Yes, that's why he threatened states that go Bush will be the targets of terrorist attacks.
The discussion you "heard" is stupid. Both ways. This discussion is stupid. I'm stupid too.
In the spirit of capitalistic competition here is the link to another company in communist China.
That's irony folks.
Go here: Real Clear Politics
Simple as that.
What would be interesting would be to go to some real political sites, with people who have actual backgrounds in this type of stuff, instead of this make-believe one.
Rasmussen Reports
Real Clear Politics
Wow, yes, those ever reliable Internet polls! We all know how accurate those are.
This post makes excellent points. Therefore it will be modded down into oblivion within the next hour.
Who fucking cares?
The reporting over the last 7-10 of the NY Times has been a down right embarrassing example of journalistic bias. Above the fold it has been story after story after story of just non-stop Bush bashing.
Look at the collusion between the Times and CBS. What are they doing discussing holding back anti-bush stories to two days before the election? Stories based on information that is so muddled and unclear that they approach CBS's wonderful Bush memo. And people wonder why old media is dying (no, netcraft has not yet confirmed this).
Yes, when trying to dock with the International Space station, how is this done with the Delta II rocket?
How much oxygen and how much livable space does the Delta II rocket provide?
Do you enjoy pickles? If so, what type, if not, why?
Will you be upset when people find out about your antelope fetish?
Does it make you feel good when you pee in public areas with old women around?
The warranty period for the Xbox and PS2 (and maybe the Gamecube?) is 90 days parts and labor. Other small electronics have this same warranty period.
Many TVs also have 90 day labor warranties (although they include 1 year parts... but the labor is the expensive part).
And let's not forget the political modding. Say one thing that slightly supports one candidate or the other (although, especially a conservative candidate like "Bush doesn't eat babies! He just hunts them.") and prepare to have your post moderated into oblivion.
The other major problem with the moderation system is how how one post, say a post that many people find funny, but others find offensive, can completely decimate your karma. On my old account I went from Excellent karma to Terrible because of one post. The mods that found it funny kept modding it up +1 Funny (which ads no karma) and the mods that found it offensive kept modding it down -1 Troll or -1 Overrated.
This happened with this account as well, but it only went from Excellent to Positive. The unfortunate thing is that there's a easy fix to this. First, Overrated mods should only take karma away if a post has already received a positive mod. Otherwise, it should decrease the score (or shouldn't be allowed?). Two, there needs to be a limit on the amount of negative karma one can get through the moderation of a single post.
See, nothing complex here....
1. Uninstall
2. Install OpenBSD
3. Cry because pretty hardware doesn't increase perfomance or productivity
4. Have a sex change
Hell, there's still plenty of room available for me. I claim 90 degrees west to 150 degrees west.
And what's with France being stuck between two Australian sections?
And then Norway. There's no end to their claim. Does their claim then just expand outwardly forever? Wrapping around the Earth to encompass the whole world?
In practice it means you can exclude healthy straight non-old males
healthy straight white non-old males
Otherwise you're clearly racist against <insert "minority" group here>
No. This should need no explanation.
Read Snowcrash. It's a Neal Stephenson book.
That is all.
No, it's true. This is designed to help simulate complete blindness. The neat thing is that, after you use it, the VR Blindness experience lasts for quite some time afterwards.
see... now this is funny!
and .hax0r
It was some what of a weak answer, but the idea that we will help educate people in order to help them get a new job isn't exactly a horrible idea. And it wasn't an attack.
I fail to see where I was harping on this idea as if it was an end all to all the worlds problems. I simply said it wasn't a horrible idea.
Can you extend the "Education is Good" rationalization more than two feet out of your mouth?
As your uber-smart Senator Kerry has often mentioned the average 4-year college grad makes, over their life, $900,000 more than the average high school grad. His figure, not mine.
There are plenty of companies/orginizations that offer job training for people newly unemployed. It simply training that offers them basic up to date training in an in demand field.
You sir are a stupid, stupid man.
But, whatever. You're determined to be a jackass, and an ignorant one at that, so I really don't know why I'm bothering responding to you.
Have fun rioting Novemeber 3rd!
It's attitudes like yours that caused me to stop being a Catholic. Just because someone doesn't think the way you do doesn't mean that they aren't a Christian. The last time I checked there were only two qualifications for being a Christian:
You are confusing Catholicism with Christianity. Also, your actions are what are important. If all that mattered were intentions...
You might not have read far enough back into the thread to see what I was replying too. It was this:
He's not for promoting faith over science or democracy, though Bush throws that to the religious zealots who form his base.
To which I responded:
Well, I'm a Catholic (much like your beloved Kerry, although by most definitions he is not a Catholic). The vast majority of citizens in the US disagree with Kerry's positions on partial-birth abortion and public funding for abortions.
I then went on to the stem cell topic (as I inferred that he was referring to that as well) as it is such a ridiculous topic of debate. It was meant to be seperate from the first two issues.
an issue is brought up that you can't defend, you just attack on another issue.
Hmmm...I seem to remember a certain president who used this tactic extensively during the third debate. And I quote:
It was some what of a weak answer, but the idea that we will help educate people in order to help them get a new job isn't exactly a horrible idea. And it wasn't an attack.
Saddam would still be struggling with UN sanctions
Interesting definition of struggling. Saddam had pocketed over $11 billion via the "oil for food" scandal. Clearly you have not read into the Duelfer report which clearly stated that Saddam's goal was to contiunally wear down the sanctions through bribery and political manipulation.
From 1991 to 2003, he made no measurable headway on it. But I'm sure at any minute, he was going to become Nuclear capable.
From the report (yes, the same one that many of the leftist editorialists used to attack Bush):
"Saddam's primary goal from 1991 to 2003 was to have UN sanctions lifted, while maintaining the security of the Regime. He sought to balance the need to cooperate with the UN inspections -- to gain support for lifting the sanctions -- with his intention to preserve Iraq's intellectual capital for WMD with a minimum of foreign intrusiveness and loss of face."
over 1000 American troops would still be alive
Yes, the loss of life is horrible and unfortunate. But, in the long run, it will be worth it. If the troops didn't feel this way, why will they vote 3 to 1 Bush to Kerry.
over 15000 iraqa would still be alive
An average of 32,000 Iraqis were killed per year under Saddam including tens (if not hundreds) of thousands during the years where he was "struggling with UN sanctions". It's horrible that so many innocents have died during his reign. But while allowing Saddam to continue his reign would have allowed for this to continue, his removal will, in the long run, greatly decrease the loss of innocent life in the future. It may pain you to know this, but the lives of the average Iraqi is better now than it was before the war. This is especially true for the children of Iraq (of which over 3.2 million have been properly vaccinated and 95% of which are attending school - almost twice as high as before the war.)
Here's a question for you, if we weren't in Iraq, and the terrorists weren't coming into Iraq to fight us, what would Zarqawi and his friends be doing? Knitting? Playing squash?
The sad thing about Kerry and American Politics is that it would be suicide for him to state that we would be better off if we had left Saddam in power.
Kerry has become the anti-war candidate, but you are correct to state that it would be suicide for him to state that we would be better off if Saddam was in power, because it would be completely false. Kerry, of course, would have used one of his magical "plans" to take care of Saddam. Probably along the lines of another UN resolution, or a strongly worded letter.
Only a party-felating apologist like yourself could defend US actions in Iraq.
I voted for Gore in 2000 and Jesse Ventura in 1998 (to send a message to the left and the right in Minnesota - what a fuck up he turned out to be).