I thought that remark showed a lack of respect for these students, as did the whole idea that blown to bits was too adult for them. It would actually be perfect for this.
But the 200 page limit would require the questioner to become thoroughly familiar with the work, so as to select the correct 200 pages to make a coherent course out of it.
If the poster is sophisticated enough to be using LaTeX I would think he would realise that you shouldnt be editing and typesetting at the same time anyway. Edit in an editor. Once the editing is done, format it with LaTeX.
You can use any editor you want, although MSWord is probably the worst excuse for an editor you will find, it's still capable of spitting out text so it should work.
Not only do you probably overestimate Gore (who was beholden to the same interests as Bush and would have probably been taking his marching orders from the very same or at most extremely similar sources) you are also giving Obama a pass he does not deserve. Obama has shown no lack of backbone at all - look at him recently threatening to veto the entire appropriations bill rather than see congress defund one illegal operation.
To the contrary, he has shown tremendous backbone, he's expanded all the Bush era nonsense at warp speed and steamrolled anyone that tried to slow it down let alone stop it, and he's persecuting whistle-blowers so aggressively he topped all previous administrations combined early on.
It's true that the vast majority of people that lived in ancient times lived and died in obscurity.
It's not true, however, that the Jesus of the fables was just another regular Joe that we would expect no one outside of his circle of followers to have taken notice of. Plenty of people that would have been less famous even then were nonetheless mentioned in some surviving document written by a contemporary. It seems awfully strange that a man who did signs and wonders, who astounded and confounded the wise and powerful, who fed multitudes in a miraculous fashion and so forth and so on, wouldnt show up as such in the historial record until roughly a century after his death.
By itself this is not conclusive either way, but it certainly doesnt strengthen the case for a historical Jesus. Not by itself.
There is no provision in the US Constitution for Martial Law - a most inconvenient fact for those who wish to wield that power. As a result, they have traditionally taken to citing I:9, which does permit Congress to suspend Habeas Corpus in case of "rebellion or invasion." Since suspending Habeas Corpus and imposing Martial Law are kind of related it has been cited in this context.
The only case law on it I can recall is ex Parte Milligan, where the Supreme Court rationalised a power to declare martial law, yet still ruled that it was inherently unconstitutional to do so in any area where legitimate civilian courts were open and functioning, and therefore ruled against the government anyway. By that precedent I think Congress would have to declare it, and it would only be valid in areas where the civilian courts and authority had already been destroyed or rendered inoperable in one way or another, and only as long as there was a rebellion or invasion in progress as well.
I provided a link which you clearly did not actually watch. The pattern is clear. You have made up your mind without knowing any relevant facts, and you arent about to let any of those facts into your mind now. Posting facts, links, or arguments for you is a waste of time, you will simply reply with your preset slogans regardless.
Why is it worth reading? Did you check their assertions? The link they describe with "he's loudly trumpeting the moral superiority of the Putin government" only leads to him very briefly thanking the Russians, among others, who did not simply deny his asylum appeal without consideration. I dont see any 'trumpeting' at all, and I have no reason to expect the rest of this link-heavy screed actually supports its conclusions either.
Causes me no problem on the front page. When I loaded the article I said 'oh, what's this, they are trying to load flash, wtf now? And I was spared seeing this awful bunch of crud that everyone is complaining about because this is not one of the handful of sites I trust to run javascript, let alone flash.
I'm not surprised though. They've been publishing broken links for years now, and they get away with that, why not the next level?
Funny how you know so much about him you feel qualified to sit here and spout multiple paragraphs of bile about his supposed activities, yet you dont have the slightest clue what he actually did.
Here's a list of the representatives that Paul managed to bring together: Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee, Dennis Kucinich, Maxine Waters, Jim McGovern, John Conyers (DEMOCRAT) Walter Jones, John Duncan, Justin Amash (REPUBLICAN). You might notice a few names on there that were also important in todays vote from both sides of that list. You might also notice quite a few Democrats in both places as well.
You might try to actually do a little research on a person before you start calling them names in public. Or you might prefer to continue to be rude, petty, and ignorant. Your choice.
The core of this was a cross-party coalition Paul built over his last few years in Congress, so in a sense the good Doctor was there. But in the mundane sense, he is now retired.
It's interesting someone brought up COINTELPRO. The contrast between COINTELPRO and Watergate is instructive. Watergate took down one President who had gone too far - NOT in acting against, and lying to, the American people, but in acting against the other powerful faction in DC. That got reported and everyone has heard of it.
COINTELPRO was much, much worse, it was decades of continuous criminal action. But it was targeted at the people, rather than against a faction of the ruling class. Mainstream media has studiously ignored it more than not, many people have never even heard of it, and those who have mostly have no real idea what it involved.
The rot in this country isnt new, it's been rotting for quite awhile now, it's just that we are finally reaching the point where average folks can no longer avoid being aware of it.
Negative, both broadcast and cable routinely cut part of the show to make more room for commercials. (You generally have to travel to another country to see a US show full-length because of this.)
In order to get monopoly grants to lay cable through small towns across america, cable companies promised ad-free tv. Of course once they got what they wanted they quickly started backtracking on that promise, first introducing limited ads on certain channels, but quickly graduating to the current state where they show more advertising than programming.
Would they charge customers more if they couldnt advertise? No. They already charge the customer every penny the customer will pay, they have experts working hard every day to make sure of that. But their profit margins might go down and I am sure from the point of view of a cable executive that would be the end of the world.
"I wish I could mod summaries as troll. Honestly, many of us here make our livings creating proprietary software. Whining that Google makes proprietary apps just makes us all look bad. Stop it."
No one is whining that Google makes proprietary apps. We are taking note of the disconnect between the credit they want us to give them, and what they actually put out.
If you feel like that makes you look bad, perhaps you have something on your conscience?
There are very good reasons to want a flood light around the house at night - so that if you need to move around you can see well enough not to hurt yourself, so that if something is moving you can see whether it's a raccoon or a burglar, for instance.
But for these purposes I would always use a relatively dim, diffuse red light. These are great for allowing you to see shape and movement without simultaneously blinding anyone and shouldnt be as big a problem with close neighbors.
Oh come on. Wikipedia's definition is a rather mercurial thing, without a timestamp that quote isnt even a reference, and the dominance of Murcans (you'll notice I am capitalising this for you consistently since you seem to care) on Wikipedia has been noticed many times before.
Even the completely Murcan-centric Merriam-Webster's even gives as it's #1 definition "A landmass in the western hemisphere that consists of the continents of North and South America joined by the Isthmus of Panama." The same unimpeachable source still relegates the Murcan usage to a subsidiary entry.
So there we go, cite vs cite, I clearly have you on that one.
My condolences on your location. I lived for a few years in 'stra'ia ms'eff mate. And your location makes your opinion make slightly more sense. In so many ways Au and US have been tied at the hips for many decades now. The ugly Murcan and the 'stra'ian bogan are sibling trailer parks and they have been cross-fertilising for awhile. Australians hate having to deal with Indian call-centers even worse than Murcans do!
You dont need a cite just use your head. There's North America and South America and at minimum there are 35 American States and the adjective American, by the rules of English is the proper adjective form to refer to any of those. Including Murcans, yes that's true, but not somehow allowing us to turn around and exclude everyone else. The fact that we dont have a good word for ourselves that others werent using already before we even got started is actually pretty extraordinary, can you think of any other group that claims to be a nation, even including ones that currently dont have any independence, that you can say the same about?
(There are several different systems of capitalisation and I normally am not pedantic about it. Language can be choked by too much order. However just to humor you I have deliberately used them everywhere I expect you expect them in this post. Except for the 'apostrophes' of course, you'll have to imagine those somehow capitalised when appropriate. )
Slashdot Mirror
I thought that remark showed a lack of respect for these students, as did the whole idea that blown to bits was too adult for them. It would actually be perfect for this.
But the 200 page limit would require the questioner to become thoroughly familiar with the work, so as to select the correct 200 pages to make a coherent course out of it.
If the poster is sophisticated enough to be using LaTeX I would think he would realise that you shouldnt be editing and typesetting at the same time anyway. Edit in an editor. Once the editing is done, format it with LaTeX.
You can use any editor you want, although MSWord is probably the worst excuse for an editor you will find, it's still capable of spitting out text so it should work.
Not only do you probably overestimate Gore (who was beholden to the same interests as Bush and would have probably been taking his marching orders from the very same or at most extremely similar sources) you are also giving Obama a pass he does not deserve. Obama has shown no lack of backbone at all - look at him recently threatening to veto the entire appropriations bill rather than see congress defund one illegal operation.
To the contrary, he has shown tremendous backbone, he's expanded all the Bush era nonsense at warp speed and steamrolled anyone that tried to slow it down let alone stop it, and he's persecuting whistle-blowers so aggressively he topped all previous administrations combined early on.
Watch what they do, not what they say.
"He stopped being that the moment he revealed classified information that did not concern what he was 'whistleblowing'."
And what material was that, specifically?
It's true that the vast majority of people that lived in ancient times lived and died in obscurity.
It's not true, however, that the Jesus of the fables was just another regular Joe that we would expect no one outside of his circle of followers to have taken notice of. Plenty of people that would have been less famous even then were nonetheless mentioned in some surviving document written by a contemporary. It seems awfully strange that a man who did signs and wonders, who astounded and confounded the wise and powerful, who fed multitudes in a miraculous fashion and so forth and so on, wouldnt show up as such in the historial record until roughly a century after his death.
By itself this is not conclusive either way, but it certainly doesnt strengthen the case for a historical Jesus. Not by itself.
There is no provision in the US Constitution for Martial Law - a most inconvenient fact for those who wish to wield that power. As a result, they have traditionally taken to citing I:9, which does permit Congress to suspend Habeas Corpus in case of "rebellion or invasion." Since suspending Habeas Corpus and imposing Martial Law are kind of related it has been cited in this context.
The only case law on it I can recall is ex Parte Milligan, where the Supreme Court rationalised a power to declare martial law, yet still ruled that it was inherently unconstitutional to do so in any area where legitimate civilian courts were open and functioning, and therefore ruled against the government anyway. By that precedent I think Congress would have to declare it, and it would only be valid in areas where the civilian courts and authority had already been destroyed or rendered inoperable in one way or another, and only as long as there was a rebellion or invasion in progress as well.
Synopsis from memory, do your own research etc.
I provided a link which you clearly did not actually watch. The pattern is clear. You have made up your mind without knowing any relevant facts, and you arent about to let any of those facts into your mind now. Posting facts, links, or arguments for you is a waste of time, you will simply reply with your preset slogans regardless.
I'll even be super nice and give you a link to start with. http://www.ronpaul.com/2010-09-13/ron-paul-and-dennis-kucinich-allies-against-war/
Why dont you do your own homework, Mr Expert?
Why is it worth reading? Did you check their assertions? The link they describe with "he's loudly trumpeting the moral superiority of the Putin government" only leads to him very briefly thanking the Russians, among others, who did not simply deny his asylum appeal without consideration. I dont see any 'trumpeting' at all, and I have no reason to expect the rest of this link-heavy screed actually supports its conclusions either.
You realize this is the 2013 version of the internet right?....
You know that is exactly why you need to turn off javascript, right?
In 1992 we didnt have Reveton.
Just turn off javascript, all better.
So that's what it is eh?
Causes me no problem on the front page. When I loaded the article I said 'oh, what's this, they are trying to load flash, wtf now? And I was spared seeing this awful bunch of crud that everyone is complaining about because this is not one of the handful of sites I trust to run javascript, let alone flash.
I'm not surprised though. They've been publishing broken links for years now, and they get away with that, why not the next level?
Funny how you know so much about him you feel qualified to sit here and spout multiple paragraphs of bile about his supposed activities, yet you dont have the slightest clue what he actually did.
Here's a list of the representatives that Paul managed to bring together: Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee, Dennis Kucinich, Maxine Waters, Jim McGovern, John Conyers (DEMOCRAT) Walter Jones, John Duncan, Justin Amash (REPUBLICAN). You might notice a few names on there that were also important in todays vote from both sides of that list. You might also notice quite a few Democrats in both places as well.
You might try to actually do a little research on a person before you start calling them names in public. Or you might prefer to continue to be rude, petty, and ignorant. Your choice.
This is a straight bluff, and not even very well done. If you fold to that you will lose your shirt everytime.
The guy getting these stupid emails should have just trashed them and not responded instead of wasting his time treating it like a serious concern.
In what strange upside down universe are all these Democrats "conservative nutjobs?"
The core of this was a cross-party coalition Paul built over his last few years in Congress, so in a sense the good Doctor was there. But in the mundane sense, he is now retired.
It's interesting someone brought up COINTELPRO. The contrast between COINTELPRO and Watergate is instructive. Watergate took down one President who had gone too far - NOT in acting against, and lying to, the American people, but in acting against the other powerful faction in DC. That got reported and everyone has heard of it.
COINTELPRO was much, much worse, it was decades of continuous criminal action. But it was targeted at the people, rather than against a faction of the ruling class. Mainstream media has studiously ignored it more than not, many people have never even heard of it, and those who have mostly have no real idea what it involved.
The rot in this country isnt new, it's been rotting for quite awhile now, it's just that we are finally reaching the point where average folks can no longer avoid being aware of it.
Negative, both broadcast and cable routinely cut part of the show to make more room for commercials. (You generally have to travel to another country to see a US show full-length because of this.)
You are wrong, the cable companies dont just passively rebroadcast commercials, they add more of their own, constantly.
In order to get monopoly grants to lay cable through small towns across america, cable companies promised ad-free tv. Of course once they got what they wanted they quickly started backtracking on that promise, first introducing limited ads on certain channels, but quickly graduating to the current state where they show more advertising than programming.
Would they charge customers more if they couldnt advertise? No. They already charge the customer every penny the customer will pay, they have experts working hard every day to make sure of that. But their profit margins might go down and I am sure from the point of view of a cable executive that would be the end of the world.
Oh, excuse me, how dare I expect any consistency between what you someone says two or three years ago and what they are doing now.
Did you really just try to pass that off as an argument?
"I wish I could mod summaries as troll. Honestly, many of us here make our livings creating proprietary software. Whining that Google makes proprietary apps just makes us all look bad. Stop it."
No one is whining that Google makes proprietary apps. We are taking note of the disconnect between the credit they want us to give them, and what they actually put out.
If you feel like that makes you look bad, perhaps you have something on your conscience?
There are very good reasons to want a flood light around the house at night - so that if you need to move around you can see well enough not to hurt yourself, so that if something is moving you can see whether it's a raccoon or a burglar, for instance.
But for these purposes I would always use a relatively dim, diffuse red light. These are great for allowing you to see shape and movement without simultaneously blinding anyone and shouldnt be as big a problem with close neighbors.
Oh come on. Wikipedia's definition is a rather mercurial thing, without a timestamp that quote isnt even a reference, and the dominance of Murcans (you'll notice I am capitalising this for you consistently since you seem to care) on Wikipedia has been noticed many times before.
Even the completely Murcan-centric Merriam-Webster's even gives as it's #1 definition "A landmass in the western hemisphere that consists of the continents of North and South America joined by the Isthmus of Panama." The same unimpeachable source still relegates the Murcan usage to a subsidiary entry.
So there we go, cite vs cite, I clearly have you on that one.
My condolences on your location. I lived for a few years in 'stra'ia ms'eff mate. And your location makes your opinion make slightly more sense. In so many ways Au and US have been tied at the hips for many decades now. The ugly Murcan and the 'stra'ian bogan are sibling trailer parks and they have been cross-fertilising for awhile. Australians hate having to deal with Indian call-centers even worse than Murcans do!
You dont need a cite just use your head. There's North America and South America and at minimum there are 35 American States and the adjective American, by the rules of English is the proper adjective form to refer to any of those. Including Murcans, yes that's true, but not somehow allowing us to turn around and exclude everyone else. The fact that we dont have a good word for ourselves that others werent using already before we even got started is actually pretty extraordinary, can you think of any other group that claims to be a nation, even including ones that currently dont have any independence, that you can say the same about?
(There are several different systems of capitalisation and I normally am not pedantic about it. Language can be choked by too much order. However just to humor you I have deliberately used them everywhere I expect you expect them in this post. Except for the 'apostrophes' of course, you'll have to imagine those somehow capitalised when appropriate. )