"There is no way someone under your viewpoint can show themselves as good because logically, your mind is made up."
My mind is not made up: it is informed by the facts about Chavez. He could show himself as good by apologizing for his speech about destroying the US, and better yet to repeal the law which criminalizes media dissent along with the other dictatorial powers he has assumed.
"In Britain companies can be plural or singular depending on context. You would use singular when the company is acting as one e.g. 'Zob corporation is in agreement with the ruling' but plural when the corporate entity is not acting as one e.g. 'Zob Corporation are internally in disagreement about the best way forward'."
That makes as much sense as someone who has an upset stomach or a numb foot referring to themselves in the plural until the bodily disagreement has passed ("I'm healthy and happy today" vs "Our stomach is upset today"). It's still one company, regardless.
"I get most of my news from the web now, as I'm not that impressed with any of the news networks. I don't watch Fox News at all anymore, though I used to watch it every day. I knew then that they were biased. It wasn't until later that I realized how misinformed their viewers are [mediamatters.org]"
I watch them very little anymore. Everyone has bias, but in terms of political bias Fox tended to be neither left or right. I also had the "pleasure" of watching CNN Headline News yesterday. There was a guy on there for a few hours talking about how great conservative Republicans are. It looks like "Headline News" has gone to that place on the right where Fox News never really was... However, can't you come up with a better source than a biased editorial from Media Matters, which is one branch of the George Soros political campaign industry?
(quoted) "Some of the misperceptions Fox News viewers have are that they are statistically more likely to believe WMDs were found in Iraq, and to believe Saddam Hussein is tied to Bin Laden, than viewers of any other network or newspaper."
On the first issue, that makes them more informed. According to actual data, many WMD have been found. As for the second one, there were ties, but how deep and close were they?
"Fox News isn't just biased. They spread false information."
No more or no less than any organization. I did watch the documentary. It was a perfect example of a partisan piece, sort of like a campaign ad, designed to selectively build a case.
Wanting to censor Fox News? Not you personally. However cooked editorial pieces by outfits that basically hate Fox News for not having their preferred bias are used as fodder by those who actually push to censor it.
"Meanwhile I'm going to enjoy sharing these films, articles, links, etc. with others whom are interested, as I have just done."
By all means. You have as much right to misinform as Rupert Murdoch does:)
No, I mean better. They do the same job without overcharging for it: a much better deal. I don't mean "unable to demand more". However, if they improve their skills or change careers to something more valuable, they might earn more. If you want more, you should earn it, not beg for it. Just like the store that wants to charge $10.00 for a gallon of milk can "demand more", even if everyone will laugh at the outrageous demand.
"The fault lies with corporations for their attitude of "labor is a commodity"
That is not a fault at all. It's the attitude they should have. Labor is no different from any other good or service traded for: it is a commodity. In fact, it is a service: something done which is paid for. Why shouldn't the business's job be "to pay as little for it as possible"? Wasting money makes no sense. Just like when you want to buy a gallon of milk, you go to the store that sells it for less. Paying more than something is worth is an unnecessary waste.
"If we were to further research the matter I think we would quickly discover that the top of most corporate hierarchy's are right leaning in that they represent the interest of concentrated power outside democratic control"
Realizing that "democratic control" is the euphemism for "state/government control", what it really means is that they don't want their own stuff stolen by the government.
I'm sure you don't hear everything the dictator says. The statements about burying the United States were in his address to the "6th World Social Forum - Americas" on
Friday, May 05, 2006.
"Chavez will get what's coming to him sooner or later."
You mean to die happily in "office" in a country where the entire thing is his personal property and playground? Castro's going this way. Kim Il Sung went this way.
"That's pretty cool, considering we've got US pundits trying to claim that Chavez is censoring the press [washingtonpost.com]. "
Did you actually read that Washington Post link? It wasn't pundits claiming anything. It was the actual text of the censorship bill. I had a Chavezista explain it to me this way: yes, the law gets rid of free speech, but Chavez does not intend to enforce it yet. Gee, that is some defense! Despite the article from Venezuela you quote, there are instances of it being enforced already, even if the law has not been enforced on a widespread basis.
"The point is, an "s" at the end of a word is not necessary to consider that word as representing more than one object (i.e. plural). In the case of Alienware..."
Why not check the actual British usage? If you look for references at the BBC's own site, they use "the BBC is..." almost all the time, and rarely use "the BBC are.... If the BBC "are" not up on correct British usage, then who is....ahem...are?
"What part of establishment of religion don't you understand?"
It looks like you don't understand it. This part of the Bill of Rights is certainly not a justification for censoring individual expression that happens to be "religious." What part of "abridging the freedom of speech" do you not understand?
There's abolutely no distinction. This is reminding me of the Chavez apologists who tried to claim that Chavez was not using the ancient antisemitic code-word "Christ killers" in the speech where he blamed Jews for the evil of 2000 years. I only take it for what it means. As for "imperial" America", that is long long gone. It's not even rotting: it's been dust for decades.
No, I don't like any of the dictators. By the way, are you incapable of spelling the President's name? You look as bad as those right-wingers who have difficulty not saying "Slick Willy."
"but please do NOT conflate American liberalism with the brand of socialism that Chavez is pandering."
Why not? There's a disturbing number of mainstream American liberal leaders from Michael Moore to Cindy Sheehan to Danny Glover who proudly proclaim Chavez' system as a great example of what the US should be moving to. You can't deny this element among liberals who go much farther than wanting "respect free markets and only wish to implement certain safety nets" and instead side with Chavez and the fascist approach which is "concerned with overthrowing the market and having heavy government involvement in the economy to the point that the government basically runs it".
Or do you merely count the numbers of liberals who are pro-Chavez as not really being liberals at all?
"Aside from economics, liberals fight tooth and nail to preserve civil liberties and natural rights"
Aside from the Chavez issue, there are examples where this is not true at all. Race is the most clear example, as the majority in the US liberal favor policies that discriminate against people based on the color of their skin. This advocacy of racism is rather mainstream. The US liberals are also strongly likely to favor forcing people to contribute to political causes and campaigns against their will: that is not friendly to "civil liberties", is it?
I wonder what the British have to say about this. What is the most famous British corporation of all? It is probably the BBC. On the BBC's own site, hosted in the United Kingdom, you find this line "BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites." See the treatment as singular. There are 340 times as many references (34 million to 100 thousand) for "The BBC is" are there are for "The BBC are", which makes the latter grammatically incorrect usage look more and more like a mere mistake.
"You should check Apple's latest prices, now that we can do apples to apples comparisons."
Yes, things are pretty good now. That is why I mentioned the situation as being one in the past, prior to OS-X and other changes. You know, those mid-1990s machines from Apple that were as fast as PCs from two years before, but cost about twice as much as the PCs of the current year. "Yesterday's power at twice today's price."
How much money did they waste on THIS study? All they had to do is ask the Vogons, who have many reports on file concerning galactic traffic patterns (never mind that you have to file the requests at a planet 18 light years away, and that the files are located in cabinets in mynock-infested rooms).
"Its all find and dandy that the ACLU is trying to protect my civil liberties but when they are pushing to have a cross on the side of a road where someone has died be removed or pushing to have a stone ten commandments be removed, how are these civil liberties away from anyone?"
That's one of the many examples where the ACLU works to censor expression. I don't think they need to be "investigated". However, they can do more work to protect individual rights instead of fight against them, as they sometimes do. Examples of this include the pro-censorship fights, and instances where the ACLU fights for policies that deny individuals their rights based on skin color as part of meeting "diversity" policies.
Slashdot Mirror
"There is no way someone under your viewpoint can show themselves as good because logically, your mind is made up."
My mind is not made up: it is informed by the facts about Chavez. He could show himself as good by apologizing for his speech about destroying the US, and better yet to repeal the law which criminalizes media dissent along with the other dictatorial powers he has assumed.
"In Britain companies can be plural or singular depending on context. You would use singular when the company is acting as one e.g. 'Zob corporation is in agreement with the ruling' but plural when the corporate entity is not acting as one e.g. 'Zob Corporation are internally in disagreement about the best way forward'."
That makes as much sense as someone who has an upset stomach or a numb foot referring to themselves in the plural until the bodily disagreement has passed ("I'm healthy and happy today" vs "Our stomach is upset today"). It's still one company, regardless.
"I get most of my news from the web now, as I'm not that impressed with any of the news networks. I don't watch Fox News at all anymore, though I used to watch it every day. I knew then that they were biased. It wasn't until later that I realized how misinformed their viewers are [mediamatters.org]"
:)
I watch them very little anymore. Everyone has bias, but in terms of political bias Fox tended to be neither left or right. I also had the "pleasure" of watching CNN Headline News yesterday. There was a guy on there for a few hours talking about how great conservative Republicans are. It looks like "Headline News" has gone to that place on the right where Fox News never really was... However, can't you come up with a better source than a biased editorial from Media Matters, which is one branch of the George Soros political campaign industry?
(quoted) "Some of the misperceptions Fox News viewers have are that they are statistically more likely to believe WMDs were found in Iraq, and to believe Saddam Hussein is tied to Bin Laden, than viewers of any other network or newspaper."
On the first issue, that makes them more informed. According to actual data, many WMD have been found. As for the second one, there were ties, but how deep and close were they?
"Fox News isn't just biased. They spread false information."
No more or no less than any organization. I did watch the documentary. It was a perfect example of a partisan piece, sort of like a campaign ad, designed to selectively build a case.
Wanting to censor Fox News? Not you personally. However cooked editorial pieces by outfits that basically hate Fox News for not having their preferred bias are used as fodder by those who actually push to censor it.
"Meanwhile I'm going to enjoy sharing these films, articles, links, etc. with others whom are interested, as I have just done."
By all means. You have as much right to misinform as Rupert Murdoch does
No, I mean better. They do the same job without overcharging for it: a much better deal. I don't mean "unable to demand more". However, if they improve their skills or change careers to something more valuable, they might earn more. If you want more, you should earn it, not beg for it. Just like the store that wants to charge $10.00 for a gallon of milk can "demand more", even if everyone will laugh at the outrageous demand.
"The fault lies with corporations for their attitude of "labor is a commodity"
That is not a fault at all. It's the attitude they should have. Labor is no different from any other good or service traded for: it is a commodity. In fact, it is a service: something done which is paid for. Why shouldn't the business's job be "to pay as little for it as possible"? Wasting money makes no sense. Just like when you want to buy a gallon of milk, you go to the store that sells it for less. Paying more than something is worth is an unnecessary waste.
"But most businesses are made up of more than one person"
What does this have to do with it? All objects are made up of atoms. Does it then follow that "My pencil are broken" is now proper usage?
"If we were to further research the matter I think we would quickly discover that the top of most corporate hierarchy's are right leaning in that they represent the interest of concentrated power outside democratic control"
Realizing that "democratic control" is the euphemism for "state/government control", what it really means is that they don't want their own stuff stolen by the government.
"The Daedalus [wikipedia.org] is coming back from Pegasus though"
No WAY! The Pegasus blowed up real good two weeks ago.
I'm sure you don't hear everything the dictator says. The statements about burying the United States were in his address to the "6th World Social Forum - Americas" on Friday, May 05, 2006.
"Chavez will get what's coming to him sooner or later."
You mean to die happily in "office" in a country where the entire thing is his personal property and playground? Castro's going this way. Kim Il Sung went this way.
"That's pretty cool, considering we've got US pundits trying to claim that Chavez is censoring the press [washingtonpost.com]. "
Did you actually read that Washington Post link? It wasn't pundits claiming anything. It was the actual text of the censorship bill. I had a Chavezista explain it to me this way: yes, the law gets rid of free speech, but Chavez does not intend to enforce it yet. Gee, that is some defense! Despite the article from Venezuela you quote, there are instances of it being enforced already, even if the law has not been enforced on a widespread basis.
"The point is, an "s" at the end of a word is not necessary to consider that word as representing more than one object (i.e. plural). In the case of Alienware..."
Why not check the actual British usage? If you look for references at the BBC's own site, they use "the BBC is..." almost all the time, and rarely use "the BBC are.... If the BBC "are" not up on correct British usage, then who is....ahem...are?
"What part of establishment of religion don't you understand?"
It looks like you don't understand it. This part of the Bill of Rights is certainly not a justification for censoring individual expression that happens to be "religious." What part of "abridging the freedom of speech" do you not understand?
There's abolutely no distinction. This is reminding me of the Chavez apologists who tried to claim that Chavez was not using the ancient antisemitic code-word "Christ killers" in the speech where he blamed Jews for the evil of 2000 years. I only take it for what it means. As for "imperial" America", that is long long gone. It's not even rotting: it's been dust for decades.
No, I don't like any of the dictators. By the way, are you incapable of spelling the President's name? You look as bad as those right-wingers who have difficulty not saying "Slick Willy."
"Apple's designs are functional - there are no alien head ornaments or strange plastic bubbles attached for "looks". "
You obviously don't remember the Apple Cube and its accompanying jellyfish-like cable tangle.
"but please do NOT conflate American liberalism with the brand of socialism that Chavez is pandering."
Why not? There's a disturbing number of mainstream American liberal leaders from Michael Moore to Cindy Sheehan to Danny Glover who proudly proclaim Chavez' system as a great example of what the US should be moving to. You can't deny this element among liberals who go much farther than wanting "respect free markets and only wish to implement certain safety nets" and instead side with Chavez and the fascist approach which is "concerned with overthrowing the market and having heavy government involvement in the economy to the point that the government basically runs it".
Or do you merely count the numbers of liberals who are pro-Chavez as not really being liberals at all?
"Aside from economics, liberals fight tooth and nail to preserve civil liberties and natural rights"
Aside from the Chavez issue, there are examples where this is not true at all. Race is the most clear example, as the majority in the US liberal favor policies that discriminate against people based on the color of their skin. This advocacy of racism is rather mainstream. The US liberals are also strongly likely to favor forcing people to contribute to political causes and campaigns against their will: that is not friendly to "civil liberties", is it?
"Not in Britain. Companies are always plural."
I wonder what the British have to say about this. What is the most famous British corporation of all? It is probably the BBC. On the BBC's own site, hosted in the United Kingdom, you find this line "BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites." See the treatment as singular. There are 340 times as many references (34 million to 100 thousand) for "The BBC is" are there are for "The BBC are", which makes the latter grammatically incorrect usage look more and more like a mere mistake.
It makes no sense at all. One business is typically one business.
Companies are plural, but company is singular. No matter what country you are in, one business is one business.
"You should check Apple's latest prices, now that we can do apples to apples comparisons."
Yes, things are pretty good now. That is why I mentioned the situation as being one in the past, prior to OS-X and other changes. You know, those mid-1990s machines from Apple that were as fast as PCs from two years before, but cost about twice as much as the PCs of the current year. "Yesterday's power at twice today's price."
How much money did they waste on THIS study? All they had to do is ask the Vogons, who have many reports on file concerning galactic traffic patterns (never mind that you have to file the requests at a planet 18 light years away, and that the files are located in cabinets in mynock-infested rooms).
"Its all find and dandy that the ACLU is trying to protect my civil liberties but when they are pushing to have a cross on the side of a road where someone has died be removed or pushing to have a stone ten commandments be removed, how are these civil liberties away from anyone?"
That's one of the many examples where the ACLU works to censor expression. I don't think they need to be "investigated". However, they can do more work to protect individual rights instead of fight against them, as they sometimes do. Examples of this include the pro-censorship fights, and instances where the ACLU fights for policies that deny individuals their rights based on skin color as part of meeting "diversity" policies.
"They have always had over-priced, flashy cases with mediocre hardware"
Don't knock this business model. It kept Apple going in the years prior to OS-X and the iPod.
Should be "Alienware admits...."
Bush and Cheney, being long-term conservatives (no "neo-" conversion from liberalism) do not meet the definition of neoconservative.