It still baffles me how anyone, right, left, or indifferent, could ever trust what comes out of a politician's mouth or their mouth pieces. So the nonsense of FauxNews or the Communist News Network, are all in cahoots to sell you soda and a side of fear.
Yeah, but the didn't start attacking the US until we got our military fully involved in defending our oil supplies. Even though they weren't ours.
Biggest user of said supply. It is an interest of the US. Yes, it's an interest of the companies that sell it, which is in turn an interest of the US govt for wealth and control.
That being said, this isn't new stuff here. The US did not have the creation rights to defending it's interests. It's been done by every nation/culture past and present. This is how it goes, someone/people have control over a resource and will defend it until it's no longer needed. The Egyptians did it. The Norse did it, the Chinese did it, the Russians did it, the French did it, Native American Tribes did it, and so on, and so forth. (note: Different resources (water, trade routes, land, buffalo herds, etc, but waging war over resources is not new)
I'm not justifying or defending it, however that has been the way of the world for thousands of years. And guess what, it will remain that way until someone figures out a better way.
Yeah, this was a bad idea. Unfortunately choosing to make such a public statement on this will basically give the highly vocal Conservatives some more ammunition to use against him, basically in their eyes invalidating the stuff she leaked. While we all know that it's got absolutely nothing to do with anything, that's never stopped the highly vocal Conservative minority from making a big deal of this stuff.
The same people who were screaming for him to be hanged will now feel smug in their self-righteousness and will start finding a way to correlate this gender change with an ability and desire to fabricate the leaked information. This will then invalidate this entire process in the eyes of these people... and believe me they make a lot of noise.
Well put. Non-techies go "ooh, ahh" because the end products are what they see. Meanwhile, how many people have heard of Nyquist, Bardeen, Brattain, Shockley, Shannon, Kilby, Noyce and all the other tech pioneers and inventors who made this stuff possible. Money? Sure, but there are others with more. Nor is Jobs even colorful enough to be interesting, like Howard Hughes. Please stop, this is getting worse than the 24x7 coverage of the OJ trial.
Agreed. If they want a modern day Howard Hughes, I'd vote for Sir Richard Branson. Heck, even they had/have a passion for flight and would probably make for a better biopic at the end of the day. Jobs, was all about Jobs.
Could be just an opportunity to re-label positions to manager or technician, then they save face by stating that they removed 90% of SysAdmins. Systems will always need attention by folks. Even if they are dumb terminals.
2 - Right to keep and bear arms in order to maintain a well regulated militia.
#2 - Second Amendment is an incorrect interpretation.
"In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment "codified a pre-existing right" and that it "protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home"[15][16] but also stated that "the right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose". They also clarified that many longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession listed by the Court are consistent with the Second Amendment.[17]"
"The downside is that I'm stuck with whatever basic service the government decides is suitable."
And there is the problem with any and all government intervention/rules/regulations/etc. There will be someone (or group of someones) who will be pulling the strings of the government to suit their business/personal interests. Then you will be held accountable (threatened) by an enforced law. On the flip-side, no govt intervention could and does mean, you get one choice. Lump it or leave it.
Somewhere, someday, there will be a balance of govt to business actions. But probably not in my lifetime.
" potentially save the DMV some of the $20 million spent each year in postage for renewals."
Why would it safe the DMV money. Isn't that paid for when you pay for the registration anyways as part of the fee/tax? I have no issue with it, but the savings should be passed to those paying the bills, not for the govt to keep. But they love taking and keeping our money.
At this point, anyone who doubts that Fox News is putting extremely heavy spin and lies into their "news" is just not paying attention. It's an entertainment network, not a news network.
They are all entertainment. If the "News" just gave facts and no opinion, no one would watch.
Say you have a same-sex marriage in a state that recognizes it or a country that recognizes it. Now you move to Alabama. Are you unmarried? And can Alabama still discriminate against your marriage? Or does this just apply to the federal government?
This is where States rights come in and the Federal governments rights stop. Well, it used to be that way. Because of Federal dollars luring the States to follow what the Federal govt wants done, States rights are becoming fewer and fewer.
Re:I believe I speak for a dozen people when I say
on
Amtrak Upgrades Wi-Fi
·
· Score: 1
Good point dutchmaan.
Re:I believe I speak for a dozen people when I say
on
Amtrak Upgrades Wi-Fi
·
· Score: 0
You'd think that with all the federal money that Amtrak gets that they would already have better services available. But then again, when does a program work out well that federal money supports? Airlines may be the only success.
Good analogy. So, let's put the same restrictions on guns like we do on automobiles here in the U.S. You know, registration is required, licenses are required, insurance is required. In some states, an inspection is required. How does all that work for you?
I'm not an avid hunter, but a license is required. Also, to carry a weapon, again a license is required (unless it's outlawed by a particular State). To purchase a gun, registration/background check is required. You don't actually think that the local, state, and federal governments would miss out on an opportunity to require licenses and collect those taxes so you can go enjoy a nice skeet shoot do you?
Where do people get the idea that you can get a gun as easily getting a candy bar from a machine?
And last time I checked, you don't have to have a license to actually purchase a used vehicle. However, you will need a license to register said purchased vehicle to be able to use it on the public roads. However, if I only use the vehicle on my property, I do not have to register the vehicle. But that is a state by state decision.
However, a significant difference between cars and guns: cars provide a heck of a lot more than 50% more useful functionality to society than guns, so they're perhaps "worth" slightly more carnage. Which would cause more problems: all the guns in the country spontaneously jamming and failing to fire, or all the cars in the country breaking down?
Oh I don't know....Every time I bite into a juicy steak, I thank the gun that put that killed that cow quickly.
Just because someone has Islam on his facebook page doesn't make him an Islamic terrorist. Were all the school shootings in the states Christian terrorists (Crusaders?) because they had Christian on their facebook page?
We don't currently know what the brother's motivations were. Perhaps it was do with Chechen independence. Perhaps it was to do with religion. Perhaps they are just mentally ill individuals with an axe to grind with their local community. We don't know at the moment.
Just like the newtown nut case doesn't represent gun owners? Or that the nut case abortion doctor in Philly doesn't represent pro-choice?
Slashdot Mirror
It still baffles me how anyone, right, left, or indifferent, could ever trust what comes out of a politician's mouth or their mouth pieces. So the nonsense of FauxNews or the Communist News Network, are all in cahoots to sell you soda and a side of fear.
"put a rubber plug into the wood shaft of a pencil"
For some reason, I felt the writer worked on a pr0n set at one time.
Elon Musk
Every time I see his name, I think what a cool name for mens cologne.
Shouldn't he be out fighting the forest fires out west spewing carbon dioxide without paying for it?
Yeah, but the didn't start attacking the US until we got our military fully involved in defending our oil supplies. Even though they weren't ours.
Biggest user of said supply. It is an interest of the US. Yes, it's an interest of the companies that sell it, which is in turn an interest of the US govt for wealth and control.
That being said, this isn't new stuff here. The US did not have the creation rights to defending it's interests. It's been done by every nation/culture past and present. This is how it goes, someone/people have control over a resource and will defend it until it's no longer needed. The Egyptians did it. The Norse did it, the Chinese did it, the Russians did it, the French did it, Native American Tribes did it, and so on, and so forth. (note: Different resources (water, trade routes, land, buffalo herds, etc, but waging war over resources is not new)
I'm not justifying or defending it, however that has been the way of the world for thousands of years. And guess what, it will remain that way until someone figures out a better way.
Yeah, this was a bad idea. Unfortunately choosing to make such a public statement on this will basically give the highly vocal Conservatives some more ammunition to use against him, basically in their eyes invalidating the stuff she leaked. While we all know that it's got absolutely nothing to do with anything, that's never stopped the highly vocal Conservative minority from making a big deal of this stuff.
The same people who were screaming for him to be hanged will now feel smug in their self-righteousness and will start finding a way to correlate this gender change with an ability and desire to fabricate the leaked information. This will then invalidate this entire process in the eyes of these people... and believe me they make a lot of noise.
Not that you are judging.
Well put. Non-techies go "ooh, ahh" because the end products are what they see. Meanwhile, how many people have heard of Nyquist, Bardeen, Brattain, Shockley, Shannon, Kilby, Noyce and all the other tech pioneers and inventors who made this stuff possible. Money? Sure, but there are others with more. Nor is Jobs even colorful enough to be interesting, like Howard Hughes. Please stop, this is getting worse than the 24x7 coverage of the OJ trial.
Agreed. If they want a modern day Howard Hughes, I'd vote for Sir Richard Branson. Heck, even they had/have a passion for flight and would probably make for a better biopic at the end of the day. Jobs, was all about Jobs.
Edison was a dick who took credit for work that his underlings did. Jobs is of the same cut.
Is that you Mr. President?
Could be just an opportunity to re-label positions to manager or technician, then they save face by stating that they removed 90% of SysAdmins. Systems will always need attention by folks. Even if they are dumb terminals.
I can see the future of the internet. There will always be somebody in authority wanting to ban something.
It will also be nothing but teletubbies. Plus, you get an award for logging in.
Because the President also supported the decision from the Congress.
Wow, I finally have a reason to like/admire Bill Gates....
I know. I'm sure he won't ask for any government grants for the research either.
Sorry, but Bill is still Bill with better publicists.
2 - Right to keep and bear arms in order to maintain a well regulated militia.
#2 - Second Amendment is an incorrect interpretation.
"In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment "codified a pre-existing right" and that it "protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home"[15][16] but also stated that "the right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose". They also clarified that many longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession listed by the Court are consistent with the Second Amendment.[17]"
"The downside is that I'm stuck with whatever basic service the government decides is suitable."
And there is the problem with any and all government intervention/rules/regulations/etc. There will be someone (or group of someones) who will be pulling the strings of the government to suit their business/personal interests. Then you will be held accountable (threatened) by an enforced law. On the flip-side, no govt intervention could and does mean, you get one choice. Lump it or leave it.
Somewhere, someday, there will be a balance of govt to business actions. But probably not in my lifetime.
" potentially save the DMV some of the $20 million spent each year in postage for renewals."
Why would it safe the DMV money. Isn't that paid for when you pay for the registration anyways as part of the fee/tax?
I have no issue with it, but the savings should be passed to those paying the bills, not for the govt to keep. But they love taking and keeping our money.
we'll have to call their tech support and get a reading from a script to find out
But when you call, you get someone in Texas.
At this point, anyone who doubts that Fox News is putting extremely heavy spin and lies into their "news" is just not paying attention. It's an entertainment network, not a news network.
They are all entertainment. If the "News" just gave facts and no opinion, no one would watch.
Say you have a same-sex marriage in a state that recognizes it or a country that recognizes it. Now you move to Alabama. Are you unmarried? And can Alabama still discriminate against your marriage? Or does this just apply to the federal government?
This is where States rights come in and the Federal governments rights stop. Well, it used to be that way. Because of Federal dollars luring the States to follow what the Federal govt wants done, States rights are becoming fewer and fewer.
Good point dutchmaan.
You'd think that with all the federal money that Amtrak gets that they would already have better services available. But then again, when does a program work out well that federal money supports? Airlines may be the only success.
Good analogy. So, let's put the same restrictions on guns like we do on automobiles here in the U.S. You know, registration is required, licenses are required, insurance is required. In some states, an inspection is required. How does all that work for you?
I'm not an avid hunter, but a license is required. Also, to carry a weapon, again a license is required (unless it's outlawed by a particular State). To purchase a gun, registration/background check is required. You don't actually think that the local, state, and federal governments would miss out on an opportunity to require licenses and collect those taxes so you can go enjoy a nice skeet shoot do you?
Where do people get the idea that you can get a gun as easily getting a candy bar from a machine?
And last time I checked, you don't have to have a license to actually purchase a used vehicle. However, you will need a license to register said purchased vehicle to be able to use it on the public roads. However, if I only use the vehicle on my property, I do not have to register the vehicle. But that is a state by state decision.
However, a significant difference between cars and guns: cars provide a heck of a lot more than 50% more useful functionality to society than guns, so they're perhaps "worth" slightly more carnage. Which would cause more problems: all the guns in the country spontaneously jamming and failing to fire, or all the cars in the country breaking down?
Oh I don't know....Every time I bite into a juicy steak, I thank the gun that put that killed that cow quickly.
When guns are killing more than 30,000 people every year? Yes. Yes I can.
By that logic then, you must ban the automobile. It killed over 32000 people last year alone.
Give gun nuts a tool to blow themselves up with.
Just because you find weapons have no purpose in your life doesn't mean that you can decry someone who appreciates and finds value in weapons.
Just because someone has Islam on his facebook page doesn't make him an Islamic terrorist. Were all the school shootings in the states Christian terrorists (Crusaders?) because they had Christian on their facebook page?
We don't currently know what the brother's motivations were. Perhaps it was do with Chechen independence. Perhaps it was to do with religion. Perhaps they are just mentally ill individuals with an axe to grind with their local community. We don't know at the moment.
Just like the newtown nut case doesn't represent gun owners? Or that the nut case abortion doctor in Philly doesn't represent pro-choice?