I am NOT and never have in this entire thread said ONE thing about you or made any personal attacks whatsoever.
No, what you have done in the best case scenario is repeat lies spread by the Republican propaganda machine without doing even the most cursory investigation as to whether or not they were true or even reasonable. That is an attack on the truth, an attack on open discussion, and support of the people blatantly starting these lies that you are spreading.
It's this level of outroight animosity toward the truth that has become epidemic in out country most especially with this current administration that I am attacking. That you chose to be a part of it was your decision. Any attacks were based upon your statements, not on you personally. There is a huge difference there.
IMHO, the worst possible thing that can happen in a free country is for people to not only buy into blatant lies but to repeat them over and over even after they have been informed of the truth. That attitude is diametrically opposed to what it means to be a citizen.
That said, the rightness or wrongness of this particular filibuster issue is something that I didn't even address, however:
The fillibuster rules have to change. The minority party must not be able to force confirmation of judges to now reqiure 60 votes versus a simple majority.
That is what is known as an unsupported belief.
I think that when the Republicans continue to nominate extremist nut jobs (Bolton among others), promote based on either *lack* of competence (Condie, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld) or outright treasonous activities ( Poindexter, Negroponte ) that it is incumbent upon anybody with a scrap of patriotism or integrity to do everything in their power to prevent them from succeeding. That is also a belief, but at least it is supported by the facts.
What you've got to do next is explain why BOTH parties need this power when in the minority.
A little thing called the tyranny of the majority. Slightly off topic, but a good example: Bush barely won reelection. He then claimed to have a mandate, and he has continued to push his agenda that almost half the country is extremely opposed to. It's for the same reason that we actually have a constitution. It doesn't matter if 100% of the voters want to throw all members of some race in prison, it is unconstitutional so that law won't stand. Granted anything 100% support would probably end up being an amendment, but nonetheless.
Similarly, when the administration continues to nominate people so utterly lacking in integrity, honor, or basic human decency as Bolton it is absolutely essential that our representatives stand up and fight it by every means at their disposal.
Now, in this case, the Democrats are actually doing the right thing. Of course, if history is any indication, what will happen the next time the Republicans are in the minority is that they will use the same tactics to block even decent people from being appointed without regard for what is good for the country. This is due to the constantly reinforced fact that the Republicans have completely given up any loyalty to their country in favor of loyalty to their party.
One of two things are true. Either you honestly have no idea that what you are saying is 100% false yet continue to repeat the lies you have been fed due to cowardice or whatever else it is that keeps you from doing your duty as a citizen to be informed, or you do know that you're spreading extremely ignorant lies for the purpose of promoting an anti-freedom agenda.
Either one of these cases speaks very poorly of you.
I and many other people here are citizens, not subjects or consumers like yourself. We are trying to discuss important issues in a factual manner.
The blatant shit that you are spewing serves no possible positive purpose.
Either actually learn something (anything at all for crying out loud) about the subject and discuss it in a manner that demonstrates some level of understanding above that of a barn yard animal, or just act like you have the tiniest scrap of integrity and quit spreading blatant lies.
Now, you seem completely unable to actually figure out how to learn things as demonstrated convincingly by those lies that you spewed above so here is a link to the actual facts.
You and people like you are the worst enemies of freedom, truth, and honest open discussion.
Because we're the ones running around blowing the shit out of people, throwing them in prison camps without any evidence of guilt, and generally being freedom hating assholes around the world.
All in the name of shoving our Orwellian version of freedom down their throats at gunpoint.
It's not really that difficult to figure these things out for yourself with a little common sense and some critical thinking.
And thats not really a political viewpoint, all I'm saying is that if the Democrats can do this then the Republicans can do it too if they lose the majority. The precident has been set, in fact if the Democrats don't allow Republicans to fillibuster nominees of future Democrat presidents, the will be utter and complete hypocrates.
Actually, this precedent was set by the Republicans some time ago. I guess that makes your point that the Republicans are "complete and utter hypocrates". It's certainly a fair point and I doubt anybody could argue against it.
Where the FUCK is the judicial branch? Hello? Checks and balances? Wake up, courts! Congress is planning to expand their craptastic Patriot Act so that the executive branch can go gathering information WITHOUT YOUR APPROVAL.
Why exactly do you think that the Republicans have been carrying out a full out assault on the Judicial branch?!? To sow distrust among the people so that any checking or balancing will be seen as an "attack on freedom" or whatever Orwellian mantra they're chanting this week.
It's good to see that there are actually some (ex) Republicans like yourself who are capable of choosing loyalty to their country over loyalty to their party because it's obvious that none of them are in office.
If it's bad for MS, it's good "just because". Pay backs, you know? Like little children...
No, if it is bad for a criminal monopolist who bought their way out of any punishment whatsoever for their knowingly illegal actions then odds are it *is* good for everybody (are you seriously saying criminals should never be punished for their crimes?).
That is the adult idea that people should be responsible for their actions combined with an honest approach to the attitude that honest people being able to have any sort of recourse to the law without billions of dollars in their pocket is an absolute good thing.
So it has nothing at all to do with your spoutings, does it?
I have a couple of questions for you, mainly unrelated to this, instead based off of reading your website and some links off of it.
You say:
I believe Saddam Hussein is a very bad man indeed, and that he and his evil sons fully deserved what they got. And I'm proud of the fact that Iraq is now a much better place than it was before we invaded.
You don't provide any evidence for this so called fact and you state the one actual fact in that paragraph as a belief. Why is that?
Also, you link to free republic who I'm not that familiar with. When I clicked the link, the main topic was Deep Throat. All of the links there were violently against one of if not the greatest hero in American history who single-handedly saved Democracy (for a few years at least). One of the first links was from Ann Coulter saying, "Felt leaked details of the Watergate investigation to The Washington Post only because he had lost a job promotion -- making him the Richard Clarke of the Watergate era."
So, while you do say that you agree "There are many people there who are mean-spirited, prejudiced, intolerent, and - worst of all! - illiterate", it seems that at least in this limited view of the site that they are promoting the foremost examples of hatred of freedom and a totally Orwellian view of reality.
I guess my point is I'd like to hear some sort of rational defense of these views as they seem diametrically opposed to your stated beliefs of
"people should be allowed as much freedom as possible. The freedom to win, and the freedom to lose. The freedom to try, the freedom to succeed and the freedom to fail."
The people that you seem to support want to remove the freedom to fail from those in power by removing truth and all accountability for their actions. I mean, Ann Coulter?!? Sure, she has the right to spew hate based vitriolic lies and even make money off of the books filled entirely with them, but lending any legitimacy to that anti-freedom rhetoric is contrary to your stated beliefs, and my deeply held ones as far as I can see.
uh postscript is a programming langauge generally written using ASCII text. so if you are going to bang out some ascii why not just the text of the paper in ascii format?
High quality publications don't often print papers where the charts and graphs are done in ASCII art.
Our software vendor committed an absurd amount of resources to make sure that we'd be fully operational on Jan 02, 2000. To the point that many priomised upgrades had to be pushed back to a later release date.
I worked for a software vendor to Credit Unions during that time frame, so you're welcome;-) Assuming of course that the vendor you're talking about is Symitar.
Hell yeah! I knew Macs were badass, but Mace Windu badass? Awesome!
Seriously, what the heck is the big deal with Mace Windu? OK, he's Samuel L Jackson which is pretty cool. But in the movies he had a couple of lines which indicated his total lack of any insight into the situation (along with the rest of the Jedi) and then he got his dumb ass beat down. Why is he supposed to be such a badass? Is there some back story on him that never made it into the movies?
Really. I think you need to do a little more history. Nero used Christians as a scapegoat for his own mistakes. Christians were never trying to overthrow the emperor, but as they were unpopular they made a convenient scapegoat.
As I said, new information has come out that casts that old idea in a lot of doubt. Maybe you should update your knowledge before suggesting that I learn more history.
Next time someone covers you with tar, sticks you up on a pole in their garden, and sets you alight (as a night light) you make sure that you are telling them that they are doing the right thing. I'm sure that they will appreciate it.
I'm sure they're just "doing God's will". Maybe you should check out the history of the people you're defending?
Besides, what I said was that punishing treason is generally considered a "good thing" or at least it is to be expected. That's it. Are you actually attempting to counter that point?
I can't be bothered to read the rest of your comment if this is a sample
Ahhh I see. You're just engaging in the old out of context strawman troll.
I understand how free wifi would potentially bring boom to a growing economic area, but should we all pay for it out of pocket?
Oops. You're on the fence about a totally different issue.
The issue here is whether your state government should be allowed to ban your town from enacting a policy even if you and every single one of your neighbors voted for it and for the sole benefit of a few huge multinational corporations.
Whether it is more efficient to do it one way or the other doesn't even enter into it. In the minds of the Nanny state promoting politicians who were pushing this piece of garbage, you would not have been allowed to make up your own mind or even try it out and see.
I would really be surprised if there was anybody who wasn't directly getting paid by the telcos who was anywhere near the fence on this issue, since there is no justification whatsoever for their blatant attempt to fuck their citizens.
Yet despite all the socialist alarm bells about the present president turning this nation into the bastard offspring of Stalinist Russia and Nazi Germany,
You misspelled "Freedom-loving, patriotic, rational, intelligent, informed Americans"
Try and pay attention in the future. It might help keep you from looking like a tool. Again.
Funny, I don't recall anybody characterizing the majority as tyrannical when it tried to enact the platform upon which it ran during the elections when that majority was the Democratic party
Gee, maybe that is because their stated goals were not diametrically opposed to the constitution unlike this current crop of scum (they're all scum, just this crop is waging an aggressive war against freedom). That would be why we have a constitution, and those actions are what constitutes a tyrrany of the majority.
This really isn't rocket science. It's past the point where you need more than a scrap of common sense ot recognize it.
All you had to do was look up the words we're discussing, and you wouldn't have had to ask the question.
Oh right. You really didn't want an answer, did you? Just more partisan trolling.
The problem with this is the fact that they are christian is not the reason for the persecution. Compare this to say the way Christians were treated under Nero.
No, he is doing his best to spread hatred of everyone who isn't part of his whacked out cult of "anti-Christians". By giving the people that think like him any sort of legitimacy, real Christians get associated with the psychopathic anti-freedom anti-Christian beliefs that he holds so dearly.
That to me is the real persecution. Their beliefs are evil and completely contradictory.
As it turns out, it looks like Nero was really doing the right thing. Or at least as close to right as that sort of thing ever is. History or Discovery or one of those had a show recently that made it look like the people he was going against were actually rebels trying to overthrow the Emperor. Whether or not this was a good idea is irrelevant to the fact that when you try to overthrow the emperor and get caught you're fucked. It really had nothing to do with their religion. It seems to be very important to Christians to believe in the lie of how oppressed they have always been for some reason, but it never really happened. There were a few isolated incidents, but even for the vast majority of the Roman Empire, they were in control.
As I said, I just don't think we are seeing serious division yet. Sure there is division, but frankly there is always division in churches. No I don't like it. There are the seeds for more serious division, but we aren't seeing that right now. I am waiting to see where this goes.
I see very serious divisions. Bush and his fellow anti-Christians stand diametrically opposed to Christian ideals on almost every single issue. Gay marriage, abortion, birth control, social programs, rich versus poor etc. etc. etc.
There are no similarities at all between Christians and Bush & his supporters. The fundamental thing they have accomplished is getting their utter contempt and hatred of Christ's teachings put forth as mainstream Christianity in America. Seriously, where are all the actual Christians when Bush and his ilk are pissing right in the face of everything that they claim to believe?
I don't believe that there is an actual AntiChrist, but it really would be tough to get closer to Bush. You don't have to burn people alive who claim to be Christian if you can completely reverse what people mean when they claim to be Christian.
WTF? When is the last time someone tried to force you to become religious wearing a right-wing label of any kind?
The whole bastardization of the Pledge of Alliegance. The wackos trying to shove a constitutional amendment to promote discrimination. etc. etc. etc. In other words: All the fucking time as you would know if you weren't blinded by your sick need to push your anti-freedom agenda.
Christians are fighting to KEEP their rights, not enforce them on others.
Given the above examples and all of the others, it's clear to any person capable of rational thought, that you are totally bat-shit insane. Your ability to distinguish reality from your delusions is non existant.
Nobody in government in the history of this entire country has ever tried to restrict the rights of anybody for being Christian. Not once. Not in any way.
The now common tactic that you use of whining like a little bitch that your rights are being violated when all that is happening is that you are not being allowed to shove your religious beliefs down other people's throats at gunpoint is used constantly by the very same right wing religious nut jobs who you are claiming don't even exist. Sorry, Sparky but I'm not buying it because I actually know how to use my brain and I live in reality.
Why is an alternate pronunciation of nuclear stupid as hell?
Because there is no way to get to that pronounciation from the way that the word is spelled. That demonstrates ignorance on the part of the person pronouncing it "nukuler".
This is totally different than the whole po tay toe po tah toe thing since both are possible pronounciations given the spelling although one or the other will probably sound dumb to you depending on how you say it.
I was wondering how the Mac trolls would twist this story into an advertisement for Macs.
Now that you know, how do you feel about the angle on that one?
Re:So, you programmers ready to give up your jobs?
on
McVoy Strikes Back
·
· Score: 1
Its actually worse that this....
No, it's really not. You're not looking at all the facts or thinking it through.
The fact is that the vast majority of software is not written to be sold in boxes. Most software development is done in house to fill needs of the particular business.
Wider adoption of OSS would allow more productive use of the various tools than is currently possible with proprietary solutions.
So, while it is true that a small portion of the market (those companies who sell boxed software) will suffer as a result of their product becoming a commodity, the rest of the market will end up in a much better place.
So really, the only argument that you gave that it could possibly cause harm was that you don't understand the breakdown of the programming industry. I'm inclined to believe that that really is the only argument for that position, but I'm open to hearing any reasonable arguments.
Why parse all that garbage when I can send JSON (JavaScript Object Notion) or even plaintext back and forth? It's lightweight and does the job.
Because you can return a result set and immediately perform an XSL transform on it to generate HTML properly formatted for whatever section of the page you plan to display it on.
That way you don't need to explicitly parse the XML, you can just use the mature toolset available for handling it in 3 or 4 lines of code.
This is, of course, just one example, and it might not fit your needs. I've used that method quite a bit and it really makes things simple if you already have stylesheets set up for it.
If you're returning data that you then need to pull out and use in calculations and/or decision making before displaying any output to the browser, then it might not be worth the trouble.
A solution for the family is to paint it for a big mural and declare it an artistic expression.
btw, IANAL dont use my advice, check with your lawyer, or go take the bar and 4 years of law school coupled with some practical experience.
But most importantly, check with your local chemist to make sure that the paint doesn't interfere with the effectiveness of the aluminiumyness of the protective wall.
Okay, just for the record, I understood what "no more late fees" meant as soon as I heard it. I also intuited *immediately* that there would still be fees of some kind associated with keeping movies past their return date.
So you magically understand that "no more late fees" means that there will be more late fees. i.e. that it is a bald faced lie and you have the audacity to claim that people who actually can think clearly, read, and process the information that they read are morons?
The fact is that they flat out lied and they got busted for their lies. There is nothing unclear in what they said.
The fact that you are defending them and attacking those who assumed that Blockbuster was telling the truth really shows your character (or utter lack thereof).
I think you make some very good points, but I also think that you are missing some points as well.
ask the a kid in Afghanistan (now allowed to fly kites again) whose mom was executed in a soccer stadium for working. Or check in with the Kurds.
You aren't asking how the Taliban got into power, or who was allied with the people oppressing the Kurds. America allowed the Taliban into power. America betrayed the Kurds to our Ally Saddam.
You come across as pretty reasonable, but with a touch of jingoism thrown in that clouds your view. America has done many very bad things, we have supported brutal regimes in the interest of profit and against the will and the best interests of the people of those nations. Those who say we are totally evil are blinding themselves to reality. It sounds like you are falling a bit to the other extreme though. We have done much good in the world, but we have done a great deal of bad as well. A great deal of the causes for our current terrorism problem can be laid squarely on our doorstep. By brushing over this fact, I think you do a disservice to the discussion. Granted, you are far more reasonable and lucid then most of the people talking here on any side of this issue and you have the ability to actually support your position with facts and reasoned arguments which seems increasingly rare these days.
Just hoping to give you a little something extra to think about.
Slashdot Mirror
I am NOT and never have in this entire thread said ONE thing about you or made any personal attacks whatsoever.
No, what you have done in the best case scenario is repeat lies spread by the Republican propaganda machine without doing even the most cursory investigation as to whether or not they were true or even reasonable.
That is an attack on the truth, an attack on open discussion, and support of the people blatantly starting these lies that you are spreading.
It's this level of outroight animosity toward the truth that has become epidemic in out country most especially with this current administration that I am attacking.
That you chose to be a part of it was your decision. Any attacks were based upon your statements, not on you personally. There is a huge difference there.
IMHO, the worst possible thing that can happen in a free country is for people to not only buy into blatant lies but to repeat them over and over even after they have been informed of the truth. That attitude is diametrically opposed to what it means to be a citizen.
That said, the rightness or wrongness of this particular filibuster issue is something that I didn't even address, however:
The fillibuster rules have to change. The minority party must not be able to force confirmation of judges to now reqiure 60 votes versus a simple majority.
That is what is known as an unsupported belief.
I think that when the Republicans continue to nominate extremist nut jobs (Bolton among others), promote based on either *lack* of competence (Condie, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld) or outright treasonous activities ( Poindexter, Negroponte ) that it is incumbent upon anybody with a scrap of patriotism or integrity to do everything in their power to prevent them from succeeding.
That is also a belief, but at least it is supported by the facts.
What you've got to do next is explain why BOTH parties need this power when in the minority.
A little thing called the tyranny of the majority.
Slightly off topic, but a good example:
Bush barely won reelection. He then claimed to have a mandate, and he has continued to push his agenda that almost half the country is extremely opposed to.
It's for the same reason that we actually have a constitution. It doesn't matter if 100% of the voters want to throw all members of some race in prison, it is unconstitutional so that law won't stand. Granted anything 100% support would probably end up being an amendment, but nonetheless.
Similarly, when the administration continues to nominate people so utterly lacking in integrity, honor, or basic human decency as Bolton it is absolutely essential that our representatives stand up and fight it by every means at their disposal.
Now, in this case, the Democrats are actually doing the right thing. Of course, if history is any indication, what will happen the next time the Republicans are in the minority is that they will use the same tactics to block even decent people from being appointed without regard for what is good for the country.
This is due to the constantly reinforced fact that the Republicans have completely given up any loyalty to their country in favor of loyalty to their party.
One of two things are true.
Either you honestly have no idea that what you are saying is 100% false yet continue to repeat the lies you have been fed due to cowardice or whatever else it is that keeps you from doing your duty as a citizen to be informed, or you do know that you're spreading extremely ignorant lies for the purpose of promoting an anti-freedom agenda.
Either one of these cases speaks very poorly of you.
I and many other people here are citizens, not subjects or consumers like yourself. We are trying to discuss important issues in a factual manner.
The blatant shit that you are spewing serves no possible positive purpose.
Either actually learn something (anything at all for crying out loud) about the subject and discuss it in a manner that demonstrates some level of understanding above that of a barn yard animal, or just act like you have the tiniest scrap of integrity and quit spreading blatant lies.
Now, you seem completely unable to actually figure out how to learn things as demonstrated convincingly by those lies that you spewed above so here is a link to the actual facts.
You and people like you are the worst enemies of freedom, truth, and honest open discussion.
Quit spreading lies you slimy piece of shit.
Why do you set the bar higher for Americans?
Because we're the ones running around blowing the shit out of people, throwing them in prison camps without any evidence of guilt, and generally being freedom hating assholes around the world.
All in the name of shoving our Orwellian version of freedom down their throats at gunpoint.
It's not really that difficult to figure these things out for yourself with a little common sense and some critical thinking.
And thats not really a political viewpoint, all I'm saying is that if the Democrats can do this then the Republicans can do it too if they lose the majority. The precident has been set, in fact if the Democrats don't allow Republicans to fillibuster nominees of future Democrat presidents, the will be utter and complete hypocrates.
Actually, this precedent was set by the Republicans some time ago.
I guess that makes your point that the Republicans are "complete and utter hypocrates".
It's certainly a fair point and I doubt anybody could argue against it.
Where the FUCK is the judicial branch? Hello? Checks and balances? Wake up, courts! Congress is planning to expand their craptastic Patriot Act so that the executive branch can go gathering information WITHOUT YOUR APPROVAL.
Why exactly do you think that the Republicans have been carrying out a full out assault on the Judicial branch?!?
To sow distrust among the people so that any checking or balancing will be seen as an "attack on freedom" or whatever Orwellian mantra they're chanting this week.
It's good to see that there are actually some (ex) Republicans like yourself who are capable of choosing loyalty to their country over loyalty to their party because it's obvious that none of them are in office.
If it's bad for MS, it's good "just because". Pay backs, you know? Like little children...
No, if it is bad for a criminal monopolist who bought their way out of any punishment whatsoever for their knowingly illegal actions then odds are it *is* good for everybody (are you seriously saying criminals should never be punished for their crimes?).
That is the adult idea that people should be responsible for their actions combined with an honest approach to the attitude that honest people being able to have any sort of recourse to the law without billions of dollars in their pocket is an absolute good thing.
So it has nothing at all to do with your spoutings, does it?
True enough, all of that.
I was just hoping I was missing something.
I have a couple of questions for you, mainly unrelated to this, instead based off of reading your website and some links off of it.
You say:
I believe Saddam Hussein is a very bad man indeed, and that he and his evil sons fully deserved what they got. And I'm proud of the fact that Iraq is now a much better place than it was before we invaded.
You don't provide any evidence for this so called fact and you state the one actual fact in that paragraph as a belief.
Why is that?
Also, you link to free republic who I'm not that familiar with.
When I clicked the link, the main topic was Deep Throat. All of the links there were violently against one of if not the greatest hero in American history who single-handedly saved Democracy (for a few years at least). One of the first links was from Ann Coulter saying, "Felt leaked details of the Watergate investigation to The Washington Post only because he had lost a job promotion -- making him the Richard Clarke of the Watergate era."
So, while you do say that you agree "There are many people there who are mean-spirited, prejudiced, intolerent, and - worst of all! - illiterate", it seems that at least in this limited view of the site that they are promoting the foremost examples of hatred of freedom and a totally Orwellian view of reality.
I guess my point is I'd like to hear some sort of rational defense of these views as they seem diametrically opposed to your stated beliefs of
"people should be allowed as much freedom as possible. The freedom to win, and the freedom to lose. The freedom to try, the freedom to succeed and the freedom to fail."
The people that you seem to support want to remove the freedom to fail from those in power by removing truth and all accountability for their actions. I mean, Ann Coulter?!? Sure, she has the right to spew hate based vitriolic lies and even make money off of the books filled entirely with them, but lending any legitimacy to that anti-freedom rhetoric is contrary to your stated beliefs, and my deeply held ones as far as I can see.
Am I mistaken in this somehow?
uh postscript is a programming langauge generally written using ASCII text. so if you are going to bang out some ascii why not just the text of the paper in ascii format?
High quality publications don't often print papers where the charts and graphs are done in ASCII art.
Our software vendor committed an absurd amount of resources to make sure that we'd be fully operational on Jan 02, 2000. To the point that many priomised upgrades had to be pushed back to a later release date.
;-)
I worked for a software vendor to Credit Unions during that time frame, so you're welcome
Assuming of course that the vendor you're talking about is Symitar.
Hell yeah! I knew Macs were badass, but Mace Windu badass? Awesome!
Seriously, what the heck is the big deal with Mace Windu? OK, he's Samuel L Jackson which is pretty cool. But in the movies he had a couple of lines which indicated his total lack of any insight into the situation (along with the rest of the Jedi) and then he got his dumb ass beat down.
Why is he supposed to be such a badass? Is there some back story on him that never made it into the movies?
Really. I think you need to do a little more history. Nero used Christians as a scapegoat for his own mistakes. Christians were never trying to overthrow the emperor, but as they were unpopular they made a convenient scapegoat.
As I said, new information has come out that casts that old idea in a lot of doubt. Maybe you should update your knowledge before suggesting that I learn more history.
Next time someone covers you with tar, sticks you up on a pole in their garden, and sets you alight (as a night light) you make sure that you are telling them that they are doing the right thing. I'm sure that they will appreciate it.
I'm sure they're just "doing God's will". Maybe you should check out the history of the people you're defending?
Besides, what I said was that punishing treason is generally considered a "good thing" or at least it is to be expected. That's it. Are you actually attempting to counter that point?
I can't be bothered to read the rest of your comment if this is a sample
Ahhh I see. You're just engaging in the old out of context strawman troll.
I'm really on the fence with this one,
Fair enough.
I understand how free wifi would potentially bring boom to a growing economic area, but should we all pay for it out of pocket?
Oops. You're on the fence about a totally different issue.
The issue here is whether your state government should be allowed to ban your town from enacting a policy even if you and every single one of your neighbors voted for it and for the sole benefit of a few huge multinational corporations.
Whether it is more efficient to do it one way or the other doesn't even enter into it. In the minds of the Nanny state promoting politicians who were pushing this piece of garbage, you would not have been allowed to make up your own mind or even try it out and see.
I would really be surprised if there was anybody who wasn't directly getting paid by the telcos who was anywhere near the fence on this issue, since there is no justification whatsoever for their blatant attempt to fuck their citizens.
Yet despite all the socialist alarm bells about the present president turning this nation into the bastard offspring of Stalinist Russia and Nazi Germany,
You misspelled "Freedom-loving, patriotic, rational, intelligent, informed Americans"
Try and pay attention in the future. It might help keep you from looking like a tool.
Again.
Funny, I don't recall anybody characterizing the majority as tyrannical when it tried to enact the platform upon which it ran during the elections when that majority was the Democratic party
Gee, maybe that is because their stated goals were not diametrically opposed to the constitution unlike this current crop of scum (they're all scum, just this crop is waging an aggressive war against freedom).
That would be why we have a constitution, and those actions are what constitutes a tyrrany of the majority.
This really isn't rocket science. It's past the point where you need more than a scrap of common sense ot recognize it.
All you had to do was look up the words we're discussing, and you wouldn't have had to ask the question.
Oh right.
You really didn't want an answer, did you?
Just more partisan trolling.
The problem with this is the fact that they are christian is not the reason for the persecution. Compare this to say the way Christians were treated under Nero.
No, he is doing his best to spread hatred of everyone who isn't part of his whacked out cult of "anti-Christians". By giving the people that think like him any sort of legitimacy, real Christians get associated with the psychopathic anti-freedom anti-Christian beliefs that he holds so dearly.
That to me is the real persecution. Their beliefs are evil and completely contradictory.
As it turns out, it looks like Nero was really doing the right thing. Or at least as close to right as that sort of thing ever is. History or Discovery or one of those had a show recently that made it look like the people he was going against were actually rebels trying to overthrow the Emperor. Whether or not this was a good idea is irrelevant to the fact that when you try to overthrow the emperor and get caught you're fucked.
It really had nothing to do with their religion.
It seems to be very important to Christians to believe in the lie of how oppressed they have always been for some reason, but it never really happened. There were a few isolated incidents, but even for the vast majority of the Roman Empire, they were in control.
As I said, I just don't think we are seeing serious division yet. Sure there is division, but frankly there is always division in churches. No I don't like it. There are the seeds for more serious division, but we aren't seeing that right now. I am waiting to see where this goes.
I see very serious divisions. Bush and his fellow anti-Christians stand diametrically opposed to Christian ideals on almost every single issue.
Gay marriage, abortion, birth control, social programs, rich versus poor etc. etc. etc.
There are no similarities at all between Christians and Bush & his supporters.
The fundamental thing they have accomplished is getting their utter contempt and hatred of Christ's teachings put forth as mainstream Christianity in America.
Seriously, where are all the actual Christians when Bush and his ilk are pissing right in the face of everything that they claim to believe?
I don't believe that there is an actual AntiChrist, but it really would be tough to get closer to Bush. You don't have to burn people alive who claim to be Christian if you can completely reverse what people mean when they claim to be Christian.
WTF? When is the last time someone tried to force you to become religious wearing a right-wing label of any kind?
The whole bastardization of the Pledge of Alliegance. The wackos trying to shove a constitutional amendment to promote discrimination. etc. etc. etc.
In other words: All the fucking time as you would know if you weren't blinded by your sick need to push your anti-freedom agenda.
Christians are fighting to KEEP their rights, not enforce them on others.
Given the above examples and all of the others, it's clear to any person capable of rational thought, that you are totally bat-shit insane. Your ability to distinguish reality from your delusions is non existant.
Nobody in government in the history of this entire country has ever tried to restrict the rights of anybody for being Christian. Not once. Not in any way.
The now common tactic that you use of whining like a little bitch that your rights are being violated when all that is happening is that you are not being allowed to shove your religious beliefs down other people's throats at gunpoint is used constantly by the very same right wing religious nut jobs who you are claiming don't even exist.
Sorry, Sparky but I'm not buying it because I actually know how to use my brain and I live in reality.
Why is an alternate pronunciation of nuclear stupid as hell?
Because there is no way to get to that pronounciation from the way that the word is spelled. That demonstrates ignorance on the part of the person pronouncing it "nukuler".
This is totally different than the whole po tay toe
po tah toe thing since both are possible pronounciations given the spelling although one or the other will probably sound dumb to you depending on how you say it.
I was wondering how the Mac trolls would twist this story into an advertisement for Macs.
Now that you know, how do you feel about the angle on that one?
Its actually worse that this....
No, it's really not. You're not looking at all the facts or thinking it through.
The fact is that the vast majority of software is not written to be sold in boxes.
Most software development is done in house to fill needs of the particular business.
Wider adoption of OSS would allow more productive use of the various tools than is currently possible with proprietary solutions.
So, while it is true that a small portion of the market (those companies who sell boxed software) will suffer as a result of their product becoming a commodity, the rest of the market will end up in a much better place.
So really, the only argument that you gave that it could possibly cause harm was that you don't understand the breakdown of the programming industry. I'm inclined to believe that that really is the only argument for that position, but I'm open to hearing any reasonable arguments.
Thanks.
I think my pvr-350 is broken. I can't seem to get a video input signal at all. Not even using Knoppmyth.
Oh well.
Why parse all that garbage when I can send JSON (JavaScript Object Notion) or even plaintext back and forth? It's lightweight and does the job.
Because you can return a result set and immediately perform an XSL transform on it to generate HTML properly formatted for whatever section of the page you plan to display it on.
That way you don't need to explicitly parse the XML, you can just use the mature toolset available for handling it in 3 or 4 lines of code.
This is, of course, just one example, and it might not fit your needs. I've used that method quite a bit and it really makes things simple if you already have stylesheets set up for it.
If you're returning data that you then need to pull out and use in calculations and/or decision making before displaying any output to the browser, then it might not be worth the trouble.
A solution for the family is to paint it for a big mural and declare it an artistic expression.
btw, IANAL dont use my advice, check with your lawyer, or go take the bar and 4 years of law school coupled with some practical experience.
But most importantly, check with your local chemist to make sure that the paint doesn't interfere with the effectiveness of the aluminiumyness of the protective wall.
Okay, just for the record, I understood what "no more late fees" meant as soon as I heard it. I also intuited *immediately* that there would still be fees of some kind associated with keeping movies past their return date.
So you magically understand that "no more late fees" means that there will be more late fees. i.e. that it is a bald faced lie and you have the audacity to claim that people who actually can think clearly, read, and process the information that they read are morons?
The fact is that they flat out lied and they got busted for their lies. There is nothing unclear in what they said.
The fact that you are defending them and attacking those who assumed that Blockbuster was telling the truth really shows your character (or utter lack thereof).
I think you make some very good points, but I also think that you are missing some points as well.
ask the a kid in Afghanistan (now allowed to fly kites again) whose mom was executed in a soccer stadium for working. Or check in with the Kurds.
You aren't asking how the Taliban got into power, or who was allied with the people oppressing the Kurds. America allowed the Taliban into power. America betrayed the Kurds to our Ally Saddam.
You come across as pretty reasonable, but with a touch of jingoism thrown in that clouds your view.
America has done many very bad things, we have supported brutal regimes in the interest of profit and against the will and the best interests of the people of those nations. Those who say we are totally evil are blinding themselves to reality. It sounds like you are falling a bit to the other extreme though. We have done much good in the world, but we have done a great deal of bad as well.
A great deal of the causes for our current terrorism problem can be laid squarely on our doorstep. By brushing over this fact, I think you do a disservice to the discussion.
Granted, you are far more reasonable and lucid then most of the people talking here on any side of this issue and you have the ability to actually support your position with facts and reasoned arguments which seems increasingly rare these days.
Just hoping to give you a little something extra to think about.