true, committees dont make law, but they decide if/when something comes up for vote, plus they reconcile house/senate versions of passed bills. so i would rather have my party in charge of that.
if someone makes it through a party to the point of being able to run for office, odds are that they fit the majority of the ideals for that party and as a result they fit the majority of my ideals.
that said, i still research each candidate and if my party person is a total 'f up i will not vote for that person.
i disagree with some of my parties positions and i 'break out', if you will, when certain referendums, initiatives and amendments are up for popular vote locally.
there is never going to be a candidate that matches you exactly. i think that in life we have to take what most closely matches what we want.
its like the trucker steak special, you have to eat the gristle too.
if you were to cast the deciding vote, would you vote for the person who most closely matches your ideals, and have your party loose control? or vote for the the party that most closely matches your ideals?
i just want to point out that your sig is misleading. the intent of the tax deduction on heavy vehicles was so a company could more easily afford to expand operations buy purchasing a fleet of large trucks for hauling things about. think u-haul or a trucking company. it wasnt some nefarious means to encourage suv purchases. also, the wieght has been upped. i dont think any suvs count anymore.
being said, there needs to be a larger deduction for efficient cars for companies that use fleets of smaller cars, like couriers.
i know i am going to get pounced on for this, and i am not trying to start a fight, but here goes......i am one of those 'ignorant' people who votes down party lines. i do this because in the u.s.a. politicians form their coalitions before running for office. for me, party trumps person. when it is all said and done the party that has the most 'heads' gets to chair committees etc. i would rather have the party that most closely matches my philosphy heading up committees.
i see your point, however; by your logic we shouldnt use any words to describe people at all. this just seperates them.
i dont see it as seperation.
if someone says they are a libertarian, i know soemthing about their personality. if someone says they just got married. it doesnt mean anything. now if they say they just got 'marrited' i know something about them and know not to ask what their wifes' name is.
i think it all comes down to what words mean to a person. personally i dont like the idea of 'gay marriage' because to me 'marriage' means a man and a woman. i would like to see a seperate term that means a man and man or a woman and woman. like gay, lesbian, heterosexual. it tells us something, it is more precise. while 'civil union' works, it seems very clinical.
i see no reason why two people of the same sex, who are committed to each other, shouldnt have the same legal rights as two committed people of opposite sex.
perhaps the president came to the same conclusion?
there is alot to be said about perceived homogeneity within a neighborhood. once one person puts up a sign, others of the same type begin to follow more easily. and opposing signs tend to be fewer for fear of not fitting in. most neighborhoods lean heavily one way or the other, at least around here. so yeah, unsure people want to feel like they fit in, so they vote signs.
ever notice how some areas have really nice lawns? lots of flowers in planters on the front steps? an antique something made of iron in the front yard? people hanging out on the front porch?
the desire to fit in, perceived homogeneity, many people do what they *think* they are supposed to do.
over the holiday season, take note of who puts up decorations and the amount. i bet you dollars to donuts the more socially active/popular people will have the most.
is it fascism when revelers (after superbowls, world series, etc.) are dispersed in the same manner? or is it for protection for property/person?
granted it seems like the response by local authorities was over the top. but remember bush supporters where present too. even musilini (and stalin) didnt attack those who supported them.
i would chalk this up to the police begin stupid. since political emotions are really high right now. i find it really hard to believe bush (or kerry should roles be reversed) or his people would tell the cops to start peppering people, for this very reason, it will get reported.
the cops started to move the crowd for 'security reasons', i am sure. one cop was probably green and got jittery.
i have seen cops stand there and ignore people screaming at them during new years parties or when the local team wins a huge game. i have even seen them wrestle down the few trouble makers and let everyone go about there business. sometimes the crowd gets dispersed w/ pepper/gas. usually once some morons flip over a car or something.
what are cops going to do? let property get destoyed or pepper some people.
in summary, more likely jittery cops than political.
some guy in colorado claims to have registered 35 times under different names and addresses. check out www.9news.com for all the voter fraud stories here.
in my post 'they' refers to the radio broadcaster. specifically the economics guy who does the report. he was speculating that the inclement weather could be partially responsible for the numbers.
i never said: 'the bls reported on the radio today...'
i am surpsrised to hear someone on/. holding what a government body says as gospel truth.
if he where wired, why wouldnt it be in the small of his back where everone else on tv wears mic transmitters? it would be hidden under the loose part of his jacket instead the between his shoulder blades. which is really the tightest part of any mans jacket.
perhaps people dont vote because alot of what politicians say is shit.
as long as i have been paying attention, since the early nineties, it has been the same thing over and over. 'we have to fix this, that and the other thing'
since both parties want to be the ones to say: 'we fixed that for you' nothing will get done. i want a politician who will have some balls. i wanted clinton to say: 'yeah, i did her. mind your own damn business.' i wanted bush to say: 'iraq violated a dozen or so U.N. resolutions we need to send a message to the world that that is not o.k."
in closing of this short rant. if politicians could say what really needs to be said and have integrity, more people might just vote.
so, is moving to a city the catalyst that makes a person smart? if so, what happens when a person moves back, as many people do later in life?
wright spent alot of time in rural wisconsin and arizona.
...that this is mearly a misprint from the printing company?
raise your hand if you have hand misprinted business cards or inivitations. oh, quite a few out there.
what about presidents that pander to city people by talking about health-care, social security?
besides, what makes you think rural people dont need health-care and social secrity? just so you know, rural areas have cops, industrial workers, institutions of higher learning and the possibility of terroism. just not at the same scale as large cities.
apparently only idiots come from rural areas. idiots like: tom brokaw, frank lloyd wright, dick cheney and oh yeah, bill clinton
prior to the tour... "As you probably know, most of the people who design houses hate your guts. For example, they know you'll never use the formal living room, yet they include it so you'll have to pay extra. They tease you with a fancy-schmancy dining room, making you fantasize about hosting important dinners for heads of state, despite the reality that you eat your meals directly from the refrigerator."
apparently our boy has been buying mass produced housing and never actually hired an architect. besides, nothing says you have to put a table in there. make it a reading room, or any number of things.
Slashdot Mirror
if space elevator technology ever becomes reality, why cant we just put it on the moon or detonate it in space down solar wind from us?
true, committees dont make law, but they decide if/when something comes up for vote, plus they reconcile house/senate versions of passed bills. so i would rather have my party in charge of that.
if someone makes it through a party to the point of being able to run for office, odds are that they fit the majority of the ideals for that party and as a result they fit the majority of my ideals.
that said, i still research each candidate and if my party person is a total 'f up i will not vote for that person.
i disagree with some of my parties positions and i 'break out', if you will, when certain referendums, initiatives and amendments are up for popular vote locally.
there is never going to be a candidate that matches you exactly. i think that in life we have to take what most closely matches what we want.
its like the trucker steak special, you have to eat the gristle too.
if you were to cast the deciding vote, would you vote for the person who most closely matches your ideals, and have your party loose control? or vote for the the party that most closely matches your ideals?
which do you think would be more effective?
i just want to point out that your sig is misleading. the intent of the tax deduction on heavy vehicles was so a company could more easily afford to expand operations buy purchasing a fleet of large trucks for hauling things about. think u-haul or a trucking company. it wasnt some nefarious means to encourage suv purchases. also, the wieght has been upped. i dont think any suvs count anymore.
being said, there needs to be a larger deduction for efficient cars for companies that use fleets of smaller cars, like couriers.
i know i am going to get pounced on for this, and i am not trying to start a fight, but here goes... ...i am one of those 'ignorant' people who votes down party lines. i do this because in the u.s.a. politicians form their coalitions before running for office. for me, party trumps person. when it is all said and done the party that has the most 'heads' gets to chair committees etc. i would rather have the party that most closely matches my philosphy heading up committees.
i see your point, however; by your logic we shouldnt use any words to describe people at all. this just seperates them.
i dont see it as seperation.
if someone says they are a libertarian, i know soemthing about their personality. if someone says they just got married. it doesnt mean anything. now if they say they just got 'marrited' i know something about them and know not to ask what their wifes' name is.
do you get what i mean?
out of curiosity, are cash machines and the computers they talk to acutally connected to the web?
i dont see this as an issue. unless a bank worker plugs the virus in at work. in that case it should be easy to track.
hmm, would it be possible to upload a virus to an atm via a magnetic strip on a card?
i think it all comes down to what words mean to a person. personally i dont like the idea of 'gay marriage' because to me 'marriage' means a man and a woman. i would like to see a seperate term that means a man and man or a woman and woman. like gay, lesbian, heterosexual. it tells us something, it is more precise. while 'civil union' works, it seems very clinical.
i see no reason why two people of the same sex, who are committed to each other, shouldnt have the same legal rights as two committed people of opposite sex.
perhaps the president came to the same conclusion?
there is alot to be said about perceived homogeneity within a neighborhood. once one person puts up a sign, others of the same type begin to follow more easily. and opposing signs tend to be fewer for fear of not fitting in. most neighborhoods lean heavily one way or the other, at least around here. so yeah, unsure people want to feel like they fit in, so they vote signs.
ever notice how some areas have really nice lawns?
lots of flowers in planters on the front steps?
an antique something made of iron in the front yard?
people hanging out on the front porch?
the desire to fit in, perceived homogeneity, many people do what they *think* they are supposed to do.
over the holiday season, take note of who puts up decorations and the amount. i bet you dollars to donuts the more socially active/popular people will have the most.
...so am i going to be able to search through my entire IM history through one easy interface? :)
groovy man
is it fascism when revelers (after superbowls, world series, etc.) are dispersed in the same manner? or is it for protection for property/person?
granted it seems like the response by local authorities was over the top. but remember bush supporters where present too. even musilini (and stalin) didnt attack those who supported them.
just overzealous cops here, move along.
we know already.
republicans are the spawn of lucifer himself and democrats are all budda.
republicans will burn in hell and democrats will get little stupas built over them.
come on, the are f^ckers on both sides of the aisle and in between. get over it and prosecute the criminals, whoever their golden god is.
i would chalk this up to the police begin stupid. since political emotions are really high right now. i find it really hard to believe bush (or kerry should roles be reversed) or his people would tell the cops to start peppering people, for this very reason, it will get reported.
the cops started to move the crowd for 'security reasons', i am sure. one cop was probably green and got jittery.
i have seen cops stand there and ignore people screaming at them during new years parties or when the local team wins a huge game. i have even seen them wrestle down the few trouble makers and let everyone go about there business. sometimes the crowd gets dispersed w/ pepper/gas. usually once some morons flip over a car or something.
what are cops going to do? let property get destoyed or pepper some people.
in summary, more likely jittery cops than political.
yes, morals. unfortunatley not everyone has them.
some guy in colorado claims to have registered 35 times under different names and addresses. check out www.9news.com for all the voter fraud stories here.
what is to stop someone from registering at 10 locations and voting at all of them?
is does function as a national id, just under a guise that more people will accept?
i dont think americans will take to have fingerprints and retinal scans on cards. talk about identity theft.
true. fair enough.
in my post 'they' refers to the radio broadcaster. specifically the economics guy who does the report. he was speculating that the inclement weather could be partially responsible for the numbers.
/. holding what a government body says as gospel truth.
i never said: 'the bls reported on the radio today...'
i am surpsrised to hear someone on
...they said that the difference in what was expected and what the numbers actually are, could be attributed to the hurricanes in florida.
though i expect construction jobs to really pick up there in the next few months.
if he where wired, why wouldnt it be in the small of his back where everone else on tv wears mic transmitters? it would be hidden under the loose part of his jacket instead the between his shoulder blades. which is really the tightest part of any mans jacket.
;>
well next to having a beer belly
perhaps people dont vote because alot of what politicians say is shit.
as long as i have been paying attention, since the early nineties, it has been the same thing over and over. 'we have to fix this, that and the other thing'
since both parties want to be the ones to say: 'we fixed that for you' nothing will get done. i want a politician who will have some balls. i wanted clinton to say: 'yeah, i did her. mind your own damn business.' i wanted bush to say: 'iraq violated a dozen or so U.N. resolutions we need to send a message to the world that that is not o.k."
in closing of this short rant. if politicians could say what really needs to be said and have integrity, more people might just vote.
so, is moving to a city the catalyst that makes a person smart? if so, what happens when a person moves back, as many people do later in life? wright spent alot of time in rural wisconsin and arizona.
get them the easy way, follow the linky below...
...that this is mearly a misprint from the printing company? raise your hand if you have hand misprinted business cards or inivitations. oh, quite a few out there.
what about presidents that pander to city people by talking about health-care, social security?
besides, what makes you think rural people dont need health-care and social secrity? just so you know, rural areas have cops, industrial workers, institutions of higher learning and the possibility of terroism. just not at the same scale as large cities.
apparently only idiots come from rural areas. idiots like: tom brokaw, frank lloyd wright, dick cheney and oh yeah, bill clinton
prior to the tour... "As you probably know, most of the people who design houses hate your guts. For example, they know you'll never use the formal living room, yet they include it so you'll have to pay extra. They tease you with a fancy-schmancy dining room, making you fantasize about hosting important dinners for heads of state, despite the reality that you eat your meals directly from the refrigerator."
apparently our boy has been buying mass produced housing and never actually hired an architect. besides, nothing says you have to put a table in there. make it a reading room, or any number of things.