Should those web sites have to register as lobbyists?
Well, in my opinion, the whole registration thing seems pretty silly. So personally speaking, I don't think so. But I'm not sure how the law will be interpreted. I'll leave that to lawyers
Should they have to refuse ads from the people who have the most reason to want to communicate with that market segment?
The law doesn't say anything about banning this, just that you would have to register.
Why shouldn't politicians be able to communicate with the most active and sympathetic segment of the population?
Well, they should be. But again, I don't see anything written about this being banned, just requiring registration. Daily Kos and LGF are pretty big sites, I'm sure they could manage the registration process.
Not that I think it's a good thing, but let's see what the law actually says, rather than embellishing.
1) They play their music (heavy polka/bass beat) in their houses so loud at 2 am that you can hear it 3 blocks away.
As opposed to the white folk that play their music loud at 2am?
3) They are mostly catholic and are going to enforce catholic social values once they are in the majority.
Just like white folk enforce their values and religion when in the majority?
4) They mostly speak spanish- not english so I can't understand them.
Why is that a problem? If you want to understand them, you could learn Spanish. but why do you need to understand them, anyway?
5) Many feel they should take the area back to Mexico and carry mexican flags when they demonstrated recently.
And what's your point?
7) Their children tend to form gangs more than we did when we were children.
If they are breaking the law, arrest them, just like we arrest white kids who break laws.
8) They tend to favor more authoritarian governments (because of the catholicism I suspect).
Any evidence of that? America already has a pretty authoritarian government.
I don't - I could go on but why bother. You've already made up your mind.
Well, you definitely seem to have. I'm not sure how you can infer that from my question. All I asked was "what's the problem" - I didn't even put forward a position. But your answer mostly revolved around bigotry and intolerance of others, so I don't find your reasoning to be compelling. White folk have been in a majority for a long time, and have caused all sorts of problems. Might be good to experience being a minority for once, see what it's like. Once upon a time there were no white people in America, but they didn't have any problem with becoming a majority and pushing the native people out. The whites expected the natives to learn English, not the other way around. Pretty easy to talk shit from a position of privilege.
So, what's your solution to this "problem" that you perceive? Ban immigration?
Let's hope it's better than Islam's "solution" for infidels.
I didn't realize that the only two options were ultra-right-wing racist Westerners and ultra-right-wing racist Islamists. I could have sworn there were other choices of how we run our societies and governments.
Why act surprised, when you were trolling with racism and sexism, and you know it? The GP post is not flamebait - it's just exposing your flamebait for what it really is.
If they have ads they are getting paid to run the site.
But they are being paid to run ads - not to lobby for a particular outcome by a politically motivated group. That is, if they are running generic ads (like Google's) and not specifically running ads by people who fund them for specific political outcomes.
so it's much easier (and funnier) to put together a "worst PS2 games" list
Link?
Re:Not this crap again
on
Who won?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Why didn't Kerry win? Because he was a weak candidate
And Bush was a strong candidate? Don't make me laugh! If someone like Bush is considered a credible candidate for the freakin' presidency, then all hope is lost.
Re:That's not really the point
on
Who won?
·
· Score: 1
Paper ballots, and keeping them for reasonable periods of time, and safeguarding ballots in their massive numbers, and bringing them back for recount after recount, is expensive
It's cheap compared to many other government functions. And it's priceless when compared to the alternative - losing democracy or widespread distrust.
Well, in New York we've used mechnical voting machines for decades, and nobody is complaining about them.
Wrong. Plenty of people complain about those machines, including myself.
Of course it's their fault (at least, in rich countries like the US where one has choices).
You only have the choice if you have plenty of money. And if you are a child, you don't get that choice. Is it your fault where your parents decide to live? You know, there is this thing called poverty, so not everyone has the choice of living in a "good" neighborhood.
Wouldn't it be a great world if everyone took responsibility for their own circumstances?
When you don't have any power or choice over those responsibilities, then what responsibility can you take?
In any case, you seem to be advocating lack of responsibility for actions, by blaming the victim rather than the perpetrator. Perhaps it is those who are deliberately doing harm who should be taking responsibility? And perhaps society should be taking more responsibility for its actions, which help cause things like the poverty gap and crime.
See my prior comments.
What you call "stupidity" could be a minor error of judgement, or even bad luck. I'm pretty sure that if something bad happened to you, you would not be blaming yourself, but justifying your actions as smart, and your attacker's actions as wrong.
I didn't say it wasn't a crime or that the perpetrator shouldn't be punished, only that it's mostly the victim's fault.
Mostly the victim's fault? Surely it is mostly the fault of the person who pulled the trigger?
Stupidity led directly to the circumstance.
So, what happens if you live in the "bad neighborhood" and have to walk home from work at night? Your fault for your living circumstances? And how does one tell what a "bad neighborhood" is anyway? Some places look "bad" but are pretty safe. And other places look pretty safe, but have plenty of crime. Is it the victims fault if it happens in a place that seems safe?
Yes. Grow up, for $DEITY's sake. (Note that I have the same disdain for Rock And Rollers who still Rock And Roll past age 35.)
Why? Is music just for kids, or something?
The Baby Boomer focus on Youth as the be-all and end-all lead them to do all sorts of stupid things to "maintain their youth", when they should be getting jobs (that does not imply becoming wage slave!), having families and dressing like adults instead of large 20 year olds.
Ummm, most people who like rock'n'roll and electronic music DO have jobs. And enjoying music is something for all ages, not just those trying to "reclaim youth."
It sounds like you are the one with problems. There's something a bit sick and disturbing about calling people perverts and having disdain for them just because they like to have fun and enjoy different music than you. Talk about narrow-minded! You appear to have a very unhealthy attitude towards life and other people.
I still occasionally think of buying one of the last generation Hi-MD recorders. I'd like to have one for taping.
Don't bother. A better alternative would be one of the professional digital recorders that generally use flash memory for storage.
In device recording abilities is something I am still waiting to see in iPods.
Meh. I prefer the add-on approach, because it is more flexible. So you can buy an add-on that has nice features like proper XLR connectors and level meters, rather than trying to cram more into the iPod itself. You're never going to fit professional-grade input connectors into something that is supposed to be as compact as an iPod.
A minor short term safety net is not socialism. What we had was.
No, it wasn't. Did the government take over private industry to enrich the state?
"Think of the children" is an endless wedge they use to expand government at every opportunity.
An expanded government is not socialism. You can expand the power of any type of government, be it capitalist, fascist or libertarian, without it becoming socialist.
I do not like the government taking all my money and giving it to others without my consent.
When did the government take ALL your money? And since when were taxes an inherently socialist thing? Capitalist governments have been taking taxes for a very long time. Seems you just don't like government power and taxes - but I don't know why you call that socialism, when those things are common to all types of government.
It's a version of socialism. Not pure socialism where they take the means of production but close enough.
No, it's not "close enough" by any means.
Welfare is only safe for very short periods. Any kind of long term welfare destroys its recipients.
Do you have any evidence of that? It's certainly not the experience of most countries in the world. America has a huge problem with poverty, quite stunning compared to other modern wealthy countries. Meanwhile, the countries with good welfare systems have much fewer problems with crime and health and other problems relating to poverty. The poor are more equal members of society than they are in America. Contrast this with almost every country without any welfare or safety net, and there are shocking problems.
If you want to help people- DO IT. Don't TAKE MY MONEY or TIME to do it with.
So, I guess the government shouldn't take any of your money to build roads, or fund the army, or help corporations? By the way, the government issues the money, it's not really yours, it's the property of the US Mint. Without any government, you wouldn't have currency in the first place.
But the biggest thing is that it probably costs you more NOT to have that money help people - your standard of living is lower if there are lots of people suffering. And if society falls apart into chaos, then your money isn't going to help you much. It also isn't going to help much if you get robbed or killed.
MY CHOICE. MY MONEY. MY TIME.
So, I guess you shouldn't take advantage of any of the services the government provides, like roads, police, parks and fire departments. After all, those things were created from money taken without people's consent. It's all socialism.
But once again, you have confirmed that you're a pretty hardcore right-winger, so it's no surprise you see any more moderate position as socialism or "left wing." Perhaps you shouldn't live in a democratic society, and more to somewhere without much of a government, where everything is based on who has the most money or guns.
Raves are where 16yo girls go to pop E and lose their inhibitions.
Uhh, no. Sure some 16 year-olds go - but they are not a particular majority. people from all walks of life go. And while many take drugs, many also don't, and go for the music and dancing. Electronic music and dancing is a passion and hobby for many people, just like computers are for geeks. Lots of people who were around for the early days of the techno culture are well into their 50s or older by now. If you like electronic music, are you just supposed to give it up when you reach a certain age? Should geeks give up computers at 50, because they are just for pimply geeks playing immature computer games?
Perverts.
Why?
Ronald Reagan chopped wood and rode horses well into his 70s.
For most people, going to a rave is more fun than chopping wood. Why can't exercise be fun and involve cultural participation as well?
That's an invalid leap of logic from my assertion.
Well, what is behind your assertion, other than a completely stereotypical and narrow view of what raves can be like? It sounds like you have never been to one, or if you have, haven't experienced the wide variety of types of rave there are.
Slashdot Mirror
No, that's a something.
That's why I prefer my constitutions on audio cassette. Preferably narrated by James Earl Jones or Sir David Attenborough.
Well, in my opinion, the whole registration thing seems pretty silly. So personally speaking, I don't think so. But I'm not sure how the law will be interpreted. I'll leave that to lawyers
Should they have to refuse ads from the people who have the most reason to want to communicate with that market segment?The law doesn't say anything about banning this, just that you would have to register.
Why shouldn't politicians be able to communicate with the most active and sympathetic segment of the population?Well, they should be. But again, I don't see anything written about this being banned, just requiring registration. Daily Kos and LGF are pretty big sites, I'm sure they could manage the registration process.
Not that I think it's a good thing, but let's see what the law actually says, rather than embellishing.
As opposed to the white folk that play their music loud at 2am?
3) They are mostly catholic and are going to enforce catholic social values once they are in the majority.Just like white folk enforce their values and religion when in the majority?
4) They mostly speak spanish- not english so I can't understand them.Why is that a problem? If you want to understand them, you could learn Spanish. but why do you need to understand them, anyway?
5) Many feel they should take the area back to Mexico and carry mexican flags when they demonstrated recently.And what's your point?
7) Their children tend to form gangs more than we did when we were children.If they are breaking the law, arrest them, just like we arrest white kids who break laws.
8) They tend to favor more authoritarian governments (because of the catholicism I suspect).Any evidence of that? America already has a pretty authoritarian government.
I don't - I could go on but why bother. You've already made up your mind.Well, you definitely seem to have. I'm not sure how you can infer that from my question. All I asked was "what's the problem" - I didn't even put forward a position. But your answer mostly revolved around bigotry and intolerance of others, so I don't find your reasoning to be compelling. White folk have been in a majority for a long time, and have caused all sorts of problems. Might be good to experience being a minority for once, see what it's like. Once upon a time there were no white people in America, but they didn't have any problem with becoming a majority and pushing the native people out. The whites expected the natives to learn English, not the other way around. Pretty easy to talk shit from a position of privilege.
So, what's your solution to this "problem" that you perceive? Ban immigration?
Yeah, so what's the problem?
I didn't realize that the only two options were ultra-right-wing racist Westerners and ultra-right-wing racist Islamists. I could have sworn there were other choices of how we run our societies and governments.
Why act surprised, when you were trolling with racism and sexism, and you know it? The GP post is not flamebait - it's just exposing your flamebait for what it really is.
But they are being paid to run ads - not to lobby for a particular outcome by a politically motivated group. That is, if they are running generic ads (like Google's) and not specifically running ads by people who fund them for specific political outcomes.
What "naivte"? How many people didn't already know this?
Link?
And Bush was a strong candidate? Don't make me laugh! If someone like Bush is considered a credible candidate for the freakin' presidency, then all hope is lost.
It's cheap compared to many other government functions. And it's priceless when compared to the alternative - losing democracy or widespread distrust.
Well, in New York we've used mechnical voting machines for decades, and nobody is complaining about them.Wrong. Plenty of people complain about those machines, including myself.
You only have the choice if you have plenty of money. And if you are a child, you don't get that choice. Is it your fault where your parents decide to live? You know, there is this thing called poverty, so not everyone has the choice of living in a "good" neighborhood.
Wouldn't it be a great world if everyone took responsibility for their own circumstances?When you don't have any power or choice over those responsibilities, then what responsibility can you take?
In any case, you seem to be advocating lack of responsibility for actions, by blaming the victim rather than the perpetrator. Perhaps it is those who are deliberately doing harm who should be taking responsibility? And perhaps society should be taking more responsibility for its actions, which help cause things like the poverty gap and crime.
See my prior comments.What you call "stupidity" could be a minor error of judgement, or even bad luck. I'm pretty sure that if something bad happened to you, you would not be blaming yourself, but justifying your actions as smart, and your attacker's actions as wrong.
Buying Apple shares around the time the first iPod was announced.
It's like a balloon, and ... something bad happens.
There oughtta be a law against that kind of thing.
Because Moore's law is like Moore's love: Hard and fast, and doubles every 18 months.
Now with ponies.
Mostly the victim's fault? Surely it is mostly the fault of the person who pulled the trigger?
Stupidity led directly to the circumstance.So, what happens if you live in the "bad neighborhood" and have to walk home from work at night? Your fault for your living circumstances? And how does one tell what a "bad neighborhood" is anyway? Some places look "bad" but are pretty safe. And other places look pretty safe, but have plenty of crime. Is it the victims fault if it happens in a place that seems safe?
Why? Is music just for kids, or something?
The Baby Boomer focus on Youth as the be-all and end-all lead them to do all sorts of stupid things to "maintain their youth", when they should be getting jobs (that does not imply becoming wage slave!), having families and dressing like adults instead of large 20 year olds.Ummm, most people who like rock'n'roll and electronic music DO have jobs. And enjoying music is something for all ages, not just those trying to "reclaim youth."
It sounds like you are the one with problems. There's something a bit sick and disturbing about calling people perverts and having disdain for them just because they like to have fun and enjoy different music than you. Talk about narrow-minded! You appear to have a very unhealthy attitude towards life and other people.
If there's no fork, then how do you eat your meat (and consequently get the pudding)?
Don't bother. A better alternative would be one of the professional digital recorders that generally use flash memory for storage.
In device recording abilities is something I am still waiting to see in iPods.Meh. I prefer the add-on approach, because it is more flexible. So you can buy an add-on that has nice features like proper XLR connectors and level meters, rather than trying to cram more into the iPod itself. You're never going to fit professional-grade input connectors into something that is supposed to be as compact as an iPod.
No, it wasn't. Did the government take over private industry to enrich the state?
"Think of the children" is an endless wedge they use to expand government at every opportunity.An expanded government is not socialism. You can expand the power of any type of government, be it capitalist, fascist or libertarian, without it becoming socialist.
I do not like the government taking all my money and giving it to others without my consent.When did the government take ALL your money? And since when were taxes an inherently socialist thing? Capitalist governments have been taking taxes for a very long time. Seems you just don't like government power and taxes - but I don't know why you call that socialism, when those things are common to all types of government.
It's a version of socialism. Not pure socialism where they take the means of production but close enough.No, it's not "close enough" by any means.
Welfare is only safe for very short periods. Any kind of long term welfare destroys its recipients.Do you have any evidence of that? It's certainly not the experience of most countries in the world. America has a huge problem with poverty, quite stunning compared to other modern wealthy countries. Meanwhile, the countries with good welfare systems have much fewer problems with crime and health and other problems relating to poverty. The poor are more equal members of society than they are in America. Contrast this with almost every country without any welfare or safety net, and there are shocking problems.
If you want to help people- DO IT. Don't TAKE MY MONEY or TIME to do it with.So, I guess the government shouldn't take any of your money to build roads, or fund the army, or help corporations? By the way, the government issues the money, it's not really yours, it's the property of the US Mint. Without any government, you wouldn't have currency in the first place.
But the biggest thing is that it probably costs you more NOT to have that money help people - your standard of living is lower if there are lots of people suffering. And if society falls apart into chaos, then your money isn't going to help you much. It also isn't going to help much if you get robbed or killed.
MY CHOICE. MY MONEY. MY TIME.So, I guess you shouldn't take advantage of any of the services the government provides, like roads, police, parks and fire departments. After all, those things were created from money taken without people's consent. It's all socialism.
But once again, you have confirmed that you're a pretty hardcore right-winger, so it's no surprise you see any more moderate position as socialism or "left wing." Perhaps you shouldn't live in a democratic society, and more to somewhere without much of a government, where everything is based on who has the most money or guns.
Why? Last time I checked, it was still a crime to shoot somebody.
Uhh, no. Sure some 16 year-olds go - but they are not a particular majority. people from all walks of life go. And while many take drugs, many also don't, and go for the music and dancing. Electronic music and dancing is a passion and hobby for many people, just like computers are for geeks. Lots of people who were around for the early days of the techno culture are well into their 50s or older by now. If you like electronic music, are you just supposed to give it up when you reach a certain age? Should geeks give up computers at 50, because they are just for pimply geeks playing immature computer games?
Perverts.Why?
Ronald Reagan chopped wood and rode horses well into his 70s.For most people, going to a rave is more fun than chopping wood. Why can't exercise be fun and involve cultural participation as well?
That's an invalid leap of logic from my assertion.Well, what is behind your assertion, other than a completely stereotypical and narrow view of what raves can be like? It sounds like you have never been to one, or if you have, haven't experienced the wide variety of types of rave there are.