Or they fade into obscurity as the Liberals did in Great Britain and as the Canadian Liberal party seems on the cusp of doing. The problem in the US is that the two big parties control the electoral systems of many parts of the US, thus assuring they retain ultimate control of the ballot itself.
At any rate what Canada is about to experience is what happened in Great Britain when the Liberals died off in the 1920s. In both cases a more centrist party was essentially replaced by a more strident left wing party.
You do all understand, I hope, that Lyons is himself hardly the picture of virtue. This is a guy who gave SCO a free ride for years and even when he finally forced to admit he'd been wrong, still managed to blame Linux supporters for the whole thing.
Being somewhat familiar with the few extreme constitutional crises of the modern Westminster Parliaments, I fail to see how Byng was abused by the Liberals. It is a tradition in Westminster Parliaments that in the case of a hung Parliament (where no party has an absolute majority in the Lower House), the incumbent Prime Minister is given the first chance to form a government. Byng was bound by tradition and by the unwritten aspects of the Canadian constitution to give King his chance if King thought he could do it, but made King agree that if the Government fell, Byng would not dissolve Parliament. Later, when King advised Byng to drop the writ, Byng invoked his reserve powers, refused King's request and King was forced to resign.
A similar thing might have happened in the 2010 UK election. Gordon Brown, as the incumbent Prime Minister, had the first chance to try to make a Government. Brown went to the Queen and resigned instead, in fact much quicker than anyone expected, which was why the Conservatives and LibDems were still negotiating the terms of a possible coalition when news reached them that Brown would not attempt to form another Government. But if Brown had decided to give it a go, the Queen would have felt bound to give him his chance, but likely would have done the same as Lord Byng had done, and made him agree that if he lost the confidence of Parliament, she would not take any advice to dissolve Parliament.
The robocalling scandal certainly takes it to another level, but dirty tricks, even if just defacing opposing candidates' election signs, has gone on for a long time. I worked for a fellow who was a campaign manager and he had stories to tell about harassing phone calls, letting air out of tires, send small squads of hecklers to shout down other candidates at election events. Yes, these are lesser evils than deliberately trying to fool voters directly, but you can see a continuum here. We have a bunch of pumped up people who, for whatever psychological reason, view their candidate or party's success as the most important thing in the world, and thus enter the realm where the ends justify the means.
Quite frankly, I think any card-carrying party member should probably have their head examined. I consider extreme partisanship to be something of a mental disorder. You can kind of forgive it in the young, because if they weren't worshiping at the feet of the party leader, they'd probably be worshiping at the feet of Marilyn Manson or some football superstar. But it's the middle aged guys that get me. You would think that at some point along the road they would have become wise to the fact that parties are fundamentally corrupt creatures, dens of inequity and sin, machines of special interests masquerading as electoral beacons.
In this regard, I think what will happen is that Elections Canada will get broader investigative and prosecutorial powers. The opposition parties are clamoring for it, and as it becomes clearer that CIMS was accessed specifically for the purpose of interfering with the election, the Conservatives will feel forced to bend in that direction. I have to wonder if, somewhere in a dark dark room at each of the opposition parties' HQs, there isn't some committee of strategists groaning that giving EC this much power will cost them all in the long run.
Crap, at my high school, as I later found out (it wasn't common knowledge at the time), three of the four P.E. teachers had married students, and that a fifth, who had moved to middle school but who had been part of the faculty at the time had also married a student.
Nowadays, of course, these guys would be registered sex offenders, banned from a specific radius around the school or being the presence of someone under the age of 18, and so on. Back then it was just "Naughty man, now marry that girl!" Hell, I'll wager back the dads were as proud as punch that their little girl was marrying the football coach.
Is it? It strikes me that if you have a list of voter affiliations, then you automatically have a list that could be regarded by those who suffer from the partisanship disease as a list of friends and enemies.
I'm not saying CIMS, or any such database (and most political parties with any resources in most democratic countries have them), is compiled for the purpose of identifying your enemies. It has uses such as projecting electoral results, finding the demographics in question to determine how to tailor the message, in some cases being able to tell what voters not to bother with at all, and so on. There are lots of what one might consider legitimate uses for such lists, but at the end of the day, if you are sufficiently bloody minded, that list can be turned on its head and used, as the cliche goes, for evil.
This is why I pretty much refuse to answer any question on my political leanings to strangers on the phone; whether they be pollsters or political parties (and honestly, with this sort of conduct going on, I can well imagine that campaign workers and hired called centers are likely being hired to impersonate pollsters as well). How I will vote is no one's business; not a political party's, not a pollsters, not even my wife's.
Actually most political parties in the Western world compile voter lists, and since, curiously enough, all these laws out there banning telemarketing explicitly give political parties an out, they've nicely made sure it isn't illegal.
Profiling voters is an extraordinarily important aspect of modern political campaigning at the ground level.
Some of these calls apparently claimed they were from Elections Canada, and the law is not written that the only way this is illegal is if you pose as an Elections Canada representative, but any attempt to prevent a voter from exercising their right is illegal.
Could you provide a link to said report because the last official word on the extent of the robocalls said dozens of tidings were involved and what you're saying would mean Elections Canada just repudiated everything it had said for months.
The Ottoman Empire had been in serious decline for over a century, the chief threat being Russia, but in reality many of its possessions were under threat and some had already been lost (Greece and a big chunk of the Balkans). When Britain and France joined with Russia in the Grand Alliance the Ottomans had little choice but to make a firm alliance with Germany and Austro-Hungary, despite historic antagonism with Austria.
I've read a few historians who describe WW1 as the Great Powers failing to manage th decline of the Ottoman Empire.
But the root of the Pauls' objection to the TSA isn't because of nude scans or genital gropes, but because they think the Federal Government should be shrunken to levels that would likely have shocked late 19th century Americans. Yes, I'm sure they're appalled by the nonsense that goes on, but even if the TSA was an effective and reasonable security agency, the Pauls would still want it gone.
Actually I don't think boxing is more dangerous. As powerful as some boxer's swing might be, when you think about the momentum of two 200+ pound guys running at each other, and then the amount of force that will exert on the brain when they do ultimately hit, I suspect you're going to find that no boxer could produce that much force.
And what a lovely idea, until one sees how things worked in the South until civil rights legislation passed. Since virtually no white restaurant would serve a black person, this whole "competition will kill racism" line suddenly looks pretty fucking retarded, no?
No one is saying we don't need airport security, so just simply eliminating the TSA is not a rational solution. And since the Pauls would kill a huge number of Federal agencies, some that do a considerable amount of work keeping Americans safe, hitting on a nearly universally loathed department and saying "It should go!" is not a sign of sanity or good sense, but simply consistency.
VLC works for about 90% of the DVDs and videos I'll download off the Internet. It works well enough for me, well enough that I haven't needed to use WMP to play a video in a long long time.
Oh come on. What happens if France repudiates th Franco-German relationship. It goes broke in a hurry. France needs that German economic engine just as much as the PIIGS (which is awfully close to including Belgium and the Netherlands as well). The only thing that will stop this is the German voter deciding they don't want to back the scheme. That may very well happen. But France, she's in no position to negotiate anything. If the Germans decide to pull back, France will almost instantly become a catastrophe.
I don't think people realize just how much the Euro is just basically the Deutsche Mark by another name. For centuries everyone realized Germany, one way or the other, was going to dominate Europe. It had the higher population, that peculiar German workthrift culture, all playing together that the only things keeping it in check was disunity. After Germany unified, all of a sudden France and Britain join together in the Entente Cordiale, but France has pretty much repudiated that now and made its bed with Germany. Maybe not a bad choice, if the Germans don't walk, it means France becomes the junior partner in a Franco-German empire, but if either repudiates that relationship, France is in deep deep trouble.
The article makes it pretty clear that what will be missing will be the codecs. Since VLC doesn't use Windows codecs to decode DVDs, it will work. I'm sure MS knows this, not to mention that a lot of OEMs are just going to stick some third party DVD app on the machines they sell anyways, so really, there's nothing to see here. If you're still watching videos with WMP, there's something wrong with you anyways. VLC is pretty much the first thing I put on a new install, and the last time I used WMP is because I wanted to rip some CDs.
Slashdot Mirror
Considering Lyons' personal history, I think ethics in general is something he has a hard time grasping.
Or they fade into obscurity as the Liberals did in Great Britain and as the Canadian Liberal party seems on the cusp of doing. The problem in the US is that the two big parties control the electoral systems of many parts of the US, thus assuring they retain ultimate control of the ballot itself.
At any rate what Canada is about to experience is what happened in Great Britain when the Liberals died off in the 1920s. In both cases a more centrist party was essentially replaced by a more strident left wing party.
Let's also remember that Microsoft also blatantly stole. Remember Stacker?
Vista got blamed because Microsoft and Intel colluded to get substandard video hardware rated as "Vista Ready".
In other words you're an ignoramus spouting off about what you don't know.
Or are you just that MS shill?
You do all understand, I hope, that Lyons is himself hardly the picture of virtue. This is a guy who gave SCO a free ride for years and even when he finally forced to admit he'd been wrong, still managed to blame Linux supporters for the whole thing.
You can always vote for a third party or independent.
Being somewhat familiar with the few extreme constitutional crises of the modern Westminster Parliaments, I fail to see how Byng was abused by the Liberals. It is a tradition in Westminster Parliaments that in the case of a hung Parliament (where no party has an absolute majority in the Lower House), the incumbent Prime Minister is given the first chance to form a government. Byng was bound by tradition and by the unwritten aspects of the Canadian constitution to give King his chance if King thought he could do it, but made King agree that if the Government fell, Byng would not dissolve Parliament. Later, when King advised Byng to drop the writ, Byng invoked his reserve powers, refused King's request and King was forced to resign.
A similar thing might have happened in the 2010 UK election. Gordon Brown, as the incumbent Prime Minister, had the first chance to try to make a Government. Brown went to the Queen and resigned instead, in fact much quicker than anyone expected, which was why the Conservatives and LibDems were still negotiating the terms of a possible coalition when news reached them that Brown would not attempt to form another Government. But if Brown had decided to give it a go, the Queen would have felt bound to give him his chance, but likely would have done the same as Lord Byng had done, and made him agree that if he lost the confidence of Parliament, she would not take any advice to dissolve Parliament.
The robocalling scandal certainly takes it to another level, but dirty tricks, even if just defacing opposing candidates' election signs, has gone on for a long time. I worked for a fellow who was a campaign manager and he had stories to tell about harassing phone calls, letting air out of tires, send small squads of hecklers to shout down other candidates at election events. Yes, these are lesser evils than deliberately trying to fool voters directly, but you can see a continuum here. We have a bunch of pumped up people who, for whatever psychological reason, view their candidate or party's success as the most important thing in the world, and thus enter the realm where the ends justify the means.
Quite frankly, I think any card-carrying party member should probably have their head examined. I consider extreme partisanship to be something of a mental disorder. You can kind of forgive it in the young, because if they weren't worshiping at the feet of the party leader, they'd probably be worshiping at the feet of Marilyn Manson or some football superstar. But it's the middle aged guys that get me. You would think that at some point along the road they would have become wise to the fact that parties are fundamentally corrupt creatures, dens of inequity and sin, machines of special interests masquerading as electoral beacons.
In this regard, I think what will happen is that Elections Canada will get broader investigative and prosecutorial powers. The opposition parties are clamoring for it, and as it becomes clearer that CIMS was accessed specifically for the purpose of interfering with the election, the Conservatives will feel forced to bend in that direction. I have to wonder if, somewhere in a dark dark room at each of the opposition parties' HQs, there isn't some committee of strategists groaning that giving EC this much power will cost them all in the long run.
Crap, at my high school, as I later found out (it wasn't common knowledge at the time), three of the four P.E. teachers had married students, and that a fifth, who had moved to middle school but who had been part of the faculty at the time had also married a student.
Nowadays, of course, these guys would be registered sex offenders, banned from a specific radius around the school or being the presence of someone under the age of 18, and so on. Back then it was just "Naughty man, now marry that girl!" Hell, I'll wager back the dads were as proud as punch that their little girl was marrying the football coach.
Is it? It strikes me that if you have a list of voter affiliations, then you automatically have a list that could be regarded by those who suffer from the partisanship disease as a list of friends and enemies.
I'm not saying CIMS, or any such database (and most political parties with any resources in most democratic countries have them), is compiled for the purpose of identifying your enemies. It has uses such as projecting electoral results, finding the demographics in question to determine how to tailor the message, in some cases being able to tell what voters not to bother with at all, and so on. There are lots of what one might consider legitimate uses for such lists, but at the end of the day, if you are sufficiently bloody minded, that list can be turned on its head and used, as the cliche goes, for evil.
This is why I pretty much refuse to answer any question on my political leanings to strangers on the phone; whether they be pollsters or political parties (and honestly, with this sort of conduct going on, I can well imagine that campaign workers and hired called centers are likely being hired to impersonate pollsters as well). How I will vote is no one's business; not a political party's, not a pollsters, not even my wife's.
Actually most political parties in the Western world compile voter lists, and since, curiously enough, all these laws out there banning telemarketing explicitly give political parties an out, they've nicely made sure it isn't illegal.
Profiling voters is an extraordinarily important aspect of modern political campaigning at the ground level.
Some of these calls apparently claimed they were from Elections Canada, and the law is not written that the only way this is illegal is if you pose as an Elections Canada representative, but any attempt to prevent a voter from exercising their right is illegal.
Could you provide a link to said report because the last official word on the extent of the robocalls said dozens of tidings were involved and what you're saying would mean Elections Canada just repudiated everything it had said for months.
The Ottoman Empire had been in serious decline for over a century, the chief threat being Russia, but in reality many of its possessions were under threat and some had already been lost (Greece and a big chunk of the Balkans). When Britain and France joined with Russia in the Grand Alliance the Ottomans had little choice but to make a firm alliance with Germany and Austro-Hungary, despite historic antagonism with Austria.
I've read a few historians who describe WW1 as the Great Powers failing to manage th decline of the Ottoman Empire.
Ottoman Empire is a terrible example. It's disintegration was one of the causes of WW1.
But the root of the Pauls' objection to the TSA isn't because of nude scans or genital gropes, but because they think the Federal Government should be shrunken to levels that would likely have shocked late 19th century Americans. Yes, I'm sure they're appalled by the nonsense that goes on, but even if the TSA was an effective and reasonable security agency, the Pauls would still want it gone.
Actually I don't think boxing is more dangerous. As powerful as some boxer's swing might be, when you think about the momentum of two 200+ pound guys running at each other, and then the amount of force that will exert on the brain when they do ultimately hit, I suspect you're going to find that no boxer could produce that much force.
And what a lovely idea, until one sees how things worked in the South until civil rights legislation passed. Since virtually no white restaurant would serve a black person, this whole "competition will kill racism" line suddenly looks pretty fucking retarded, no?
No one is saying we don't need airport security, so just simply eliminating the TSA is not a rational solution. And since the Pauls would kill a huge number of Federal agencies, some that do a considerable amount of work keeping Americans safe, hitting on a nearly universally loathed department and saying "It should go!" is not a sign of sanity or good sense, but simply consistency.
Yes, but he will say the same thing about the US Geological Survey, NOAA and the CDC.
VLC works for about 90% of the DVDs and videos I'll download off the Internet. It works well enough for me, well enough that I haven't needed to use WMP to play a video in a long long time.
Oh come on. What happens if France repudiates th Franco-German relationship. It goes broke in a hurry. France needs that German economic engine just as much as the PIIGS (which is awfully close to including Belgium and the Netherlands as well). The only thing that will stop this is the German voter deciding they don't want to back the scheme. That may very well happen. But France, she's in no position to negotiate anything. If the Germans decide to pull back, France will almost instantly become a catastrophe.
I don't think people realize just how much the Euro is just basically the Deutsche Mark by another name. For centuries everyone realized Germany, one way or the other, was going to dominate Europe. It had the higher population, that peculiar German workthrift culture, all playing together that the only things keeping it in check was disunity. After Germany unified, all of a sudden France and Britain join together in the Entente Cordiale, but France has pretty much repudiated that now and made its bed with Germany. Maybe not a bad choice, if the Germans don't walk, it means France becomes the junior partner in a Franco-German empire, but if either repudiates that relationship, France is in deep deep trouble.
The article makes it pretty clear that what will be missing will be the codecs. Since VLC doesn't use Windows codecs to decode DVDs, it will work. I'm sure MS knows this, not to mention that a lot of OEMs are just going to stick some third party DVD app on the machines they sell anyways, so really, there's nothing to see here. If you're still watching videos with WMP, there's something wrong with you anyways. VLC is pretty much the first thing I put on a new install, and the last time I used WMP is because I wanted to rip some CDs.