Filibusters are permitted by rules of the Senate, not Constitutional provision. The Senate can change that.
And protection or at least recognition if minorities is traditionally an American value.
Congress needs to be accountable for their actions or lack thereof. Even our President complains about congressional inaction when at times it's hid own party that it's a failing to act. Extremism is a problem for all parties.
"False equivalence. The Democrats have never focused so single-mindedly on the destruction of a president. You're just telling yourself that the Dems are just as bad as a defense mechanism."
You wrote that? Nixon resigned. Despite being guilty, the Democratic Party focused so single-mindedly on Nixon that he left office. Rightly or not, this was the beginning of the politics of public personal destruction. Nixon was guilty. The Democrats destroyed him.
"Only one party threatened to cut off unemployment benefits for millions if they didn't get a tax cut extension for the rich." So quickly forgotten.
"Only one party forced the country to default on its debts in order to force major budget cuts to both military and domestic program, and then even had the gall to try to renege on the military cuts."
"Only one party proposed cap and trade as a capitalist alternative to environmental regulations, and then called it socialism when the other guys tried to implement it."
Crony Capitalism serves both sides. The Obama Administration is engaged in it as every other Administration since, what, Reagan?
"Only one party proposed an individual mandate as a capitalist alternative to single-payer health care, and then screamed about "death panels" when the other guys tried to implement it."
No quote here. You are wrong, in that this was never a Republican Party platform plank. But the party is a big tent, and some in it have tried to compromise on this issue of healthcare. Republicans tend to compromise. Democrats tend not to. I'm not at all sure this is a good thing for Republicans to do.
"Only one party proposed giving illegal immigrants a path to citizenship through military service or college, and then screamed "amnesty!" when the other guys tried to implement it."
I entered the USAF in 1972, and while in basic training I stood for a wonderful young man from Columbia who was sworn in as a citizen of the US while he was in basic training also. Gaining citizenship via military service is not new. Sadly, neither is illegal immigration into the US. But Alberto came legally. More to the point, I gather you think giving a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants is ok, even as we fail to stop the flow. That's what 'changed' the Republicans stand. When they could not get Democrat agreement on taking actual measures to reduce illegal immigration. When the deal changes, do you stick with your initial agreement, or do you change your mind?
"The Republicans today are nothing like those of the 90s or 80s or 70s or any other point in time. They're nothing like this country has ever seen. They've realized that politics is just a game, and they can break the game by refusing to negotiate on anything. Our country cannot survive that sort of game-breaking exploit. If people like you don't wise up and punish them for it, we're through."
You are absolutely right. The Democrats have spent the last 40 years refusing to negotiate on anything of substance. Examples? I want to punish the Democrats also, but I can vote for only one candidate per office. Do your part.
- Reagan's budgets were declared 'dead on arrival'. - I'm bored with any other examples. Your premise is that the Republicans are 'worse'. You are deluded.
We have one goverment, and anything other than compromise and mutual accomplishment is wrong. The Republican Party is now playing the game like the Democratic Party has been, and now it's wrong? Keep your blinders on. Much easier than dealing with the problem. Just keep focused on the other guys.
Partisanship harms ALL policy. It is inevitable in our system, but for the past few cycles it has been an increasingly more violent atmosphere (blatant space lingo there) that is harming a lot more than just space policy.
The solution? Smarter and more involved voters. Politicians will not change unless we make them. We let this happen.
And while I'm a Republican, space exploration is what government does better, so far, than private industry. We should be doing a LOT more. But I would happily exchange that initiative for an Apollo-style alternative energy program to render fossil fuels largely obsolete in 10 years. A manned mission to mars would ahve impact on our science, engineering, etc, so either project is a drvier for me. But making NASA a political football makes no sense, unless you're just a partisan that needs something to argue over.
ps - Side note, blame the Republicans all you want, remembering that the other parties are not innocent of the same problem - arguing anything for the sake of it.
Particularly the poor bastards who'learned' system administration by inheriting a survey when they were writing the corporate intranet website.
You've seen the job descriptions - Java/js, HTML, C++ or C#, PHP, oh, and network admin. I used to feel bad for these poor blighters until i realized they were taking my job. But employers who need 1.2 people to do two jobs will try and find a 1.0 to do it.
But I've only been at this job for 6 years, so it'a hard to say how I'm working out. I average 7+ years before my employer is bought out, and this outfit is not going anywhere.
Tenure is not always a measure of anything but time.
You will be faced with a lot of candidates. After you've culled the ones with actual experience and positive or neutral recommendations, this is where you can start in phone interviews:
1. Ask them to describe DHCP. An amazing number of candidates will not do well with this. Extra points for the ones who can expand slightly and describe the implications of static addressing, but they are probably older than you are l;ooking for, despite the blatant discrimination that implies. Deduct for those who treat this question with disdain - they are perhaps being too imperious to get along, and getting along is second only to knowing stuff. Maybe more important.
2. Ask them to discuss Active Directory design from a high level, the forest and trees, for example. Big points if they ask about your current structure. More points if they discuss the disadvantages of ripping up your current directory. Deduct points for those who seem to use an axe in the forest. You willl know.
3. Ask them about roaming profiles. No, you aren't using them, but you're interested in both their general reaction and their questions about why you are asking at all. Deduct points here for those who go 'poo-poo' and describe their loathing for roaming profiles. More deductions for focusing on the limitations.
4. Did any of them ask about your environment? Did any of them perk up at the mention of Linux? Did any of them expand unprovked about Windows' servers potential for integration with a Linux enviuronemnt? More points to these. Fewer points to those who are not at all curious about yoru Linux environment, and how you got saddled with some mongrel Windows severs in the mix.
I would be very interested in this position if it is in the Phoenix area, but I love my pool, and besides, you already know me too well. Ah.
Since half of my color printing at home is photos, color lasers are not cost effective at home, for me.
And I suspect many of us.
I will probably get a B&W laser soon, reteach the wife how to choose her printer, and put up with the 'PRINTRR"S NOT WORKING' screams, but it is no worse than now. After severl HPs and one Epson, I ahve a Canon MP620 that is not cheap to run, but is reliable and never fades or sputters ink. It's just a major PITA to get networked.
And I won't be buying an office style laser - too many kwh for me.
Some of it is where I live. In Phoenix, leaving electronics on my car all day bakes them at up to 140 degrees. Hard on stuff, so i dont bother with much. Some of it is having about 90 minutes a day top listen to music - none at work, and my wife is usually done with music when she finishes a day teaching piano and choir. My other times to listen are twice a week at the gym, and the weekend when I'm doing yard work. When I drove for a living, I had more time. Feh.
'Blood doping', that is, transfusing stored blood during a multi-day race such as leTour, is indeed cheating. It is usually packed cells, and is intended to boost hemoglobin and therefore oxygen carrying capacity. It overcomes your physiology, training, exertion, and recovery characteristics.
Armstrong is reputed to be an exceptional physical specimem. with extraordinary capacity for work. This is what bicyclists train for, to both be able to do the maximum amount of work without injury and with good recovery, to be able to do so on a regular basis, and to recover consistently so they can, in the case of leTour, do it for almost a month.
Over exertion results in damage from lactic acid, which takes more time to recover from than the mere exertion of racing. One of the reasons you will see a rider win a stage, and the next day fall to the back. And Amrstrong is reputed to be able to do more, more consistently, than virtually all other riders.
So other riders, not just because they are competing with Armstrong but also others, will try and gain an advantage in work output and recovery, as those are key to winning leTour. Among the strategies currently in vogue are doping to improve blood characteristics, testosterone enhancements to promote muscle growth and performance, and respiratory enhancements to improve oxygen intake.
I quit racing in the 70s due to my asthma. I would be fighting a constant battle with the testers if I ever got to the level of competition where that was an issue, and i had aspirations to do so. A middle-of-the-pack rider warned me I would be in trouble, and having been diagnosed as an adult would make it worse. today, up to 80% of the riders in UCI events have doctors' notes diagnosign them as asthmatics, and they skirt the dosage limits for Albuterol among other things with a keen eye. Pathetic to think that successful bicycle racers are predisposed to be asthmatics. This sort of manipulation also affects other sports, such as biathalon and other shooting events. Sad, but here we are. ps - I know know I would never have made it in racing, I was young and stupid, but to this day I love climbing a mountain on a bike. The mountain cannot win. It just cannot. If you don't have to rind another 40 miles after, it is just the will to do it.
Armstrong has been accused virtually all of his career of doping, and at this pojtn all we have are other guilty riders testifying that they saw him do so. Not a few of whom think they could be winners if not for Armstrong. And most of which are coerced into testimony.
Bicycling is rife with doping, but the USADA has lost all credibility with this pursuit of Armstrong. They can, with the standards they are usign now, disqualify any rider. They don't need results, only questionable accusations and secret results. A sad end to a brilliant career. You would not want your dog treated like this.
I'me not a Marine, but I know quite a few, many fighter pilots (that's just not fair, BTW, to be Marine AND a fighter pilot, but FTW anyways), and they would indeed shout 'Ooh-Rah' when appropriate. It is best to shout the same cry, satisfies the military requirement for order and discipline, and may ocasionally expose an imposter.
But, if you are not a Marine, it is understandable that you would think as you do, unless you paid a little attention and asked about such things. If you're not a total dork, they wil tell you. Sometimes even if you are.
I don't stream music in my vehicle because it is not worth the hassle. Older vehicles limit you greatly, and an integrated radio/CD/info system like the Saab NG900s makes replacing the radio both nontrivial and dissatisfying in many ways. Yes, a cassette adapter and bluethooth plugin would solve it, but I'm not interested, and Pandora, for one, does not do a good enough job with the channels I crate to make it worth it. Plus I have a huge library already. I just need a better shuffler, and another 300GB on my phone to carry it around. I take stuff off and put stuff on weekly to shake it up.
Oh, and it is a chore - a genuine chore - to find anything new that is interesting. Pop is dead, hip-hop is largely offensive, rap is worse, what passes for rock is not the least inventive. I can listen to Katy Perry only so long, and I can find lots of artists that offer me one or two tracks I can bear to hear twice, but nothing like a whole disc worh of good marterial. I've been rediscovering The Who, but listening to that in a vehicle is a discrace - the noise floor means I miss so much beauty, and tney did such great work early on. Yes, I sample high or go lossless, hence the space crunch.
Lots of reasons to be underwhelmed with music these days.
1. The First Amendment relies upon the next four. Any of these being diminished, the First is diminished. I'm not at all hopeful that the TSA will be required to honor any of these Constitutional protections, but hope springs eternal.
2. Delta is not new to the customer disservice game. I haven't willingly flown them for 36 years, having been stranded in Boston too many times in the 70s. But this is a new low. I have no reason to believe the pilot acted outside of his authority, but his judgement is suspect in this matter. And that won't be a problem, since the arlines are stuck with the TSA, and play the game.
Hitting the ATM has to be done within minutes. Driving to the airport is the dangerous part, they can get my plate. After that, the bus trip into town is a problem, but changing to a taxi is just vanity. I'm hoping they linger at the airport and don't catch me at the bus terminal - I'll be swapping buses before my first trip is completed. From then on the radius is pretty big.
I need about 6 hours. In America, that's maybe 300 miles. After that it gets hard enough they will have to exert themselves. In 24 hours I should be able to get anywhere in the U.S., and then it's a bug hunt I can win if I stay anon. It's choosing the border crossing that is tough, but that is manageable.
Oh, and I'm not 25-45, which is fine. My biggest problem will be cash, of course. I would need a co-conspirator to solv ethat, and I might get lucky and conscript an acquaintance from way, way back in my past, someone too hard to find quickly. One I'm pretty sure would help me, the other slightly less likely. I have more if I think of them. Not a very inventive plan, but adequate. You have to pick the city carefully, since facial recognition systems are springing up everywhere. Something like Markham or York PEI. Not that I would go there, of course, Happy Valley or Cartwright would make more sense.
If I could somehow get across the Pond, then it gets a lot easier.
I do not speak another language besides English, though I can get by in French.
- ATM, get cash.
- Drive to airport, ditch car in cell lot.
- Bus into town, taxi to real bus station, bus anywhere.
- Disposable phone. Use my wife's Google Voice account to leave her a message. Thrown in the trash at any bus stop.
- Another bus ticket. Different direction.
- No McDonalds. Taco Bell, or worse, for food. I'm known for my fast food habits, let's not make it too easy.
- I'm inclined to cross the border at a place I know they are perpetually lax in one direction. I won;t be coming back for a while.
- Find work in a kitchen. Cliché, but hey. Or landscaping. You can do this easier than you think, and I can pretty much make up Social Security numbers, easy when you know the formula. I will, of course appear to be very old. And my favored employer won't care. They still exist in North America
Maybe this keeps me alive for a month. I obviously will not be very happy.
- Slither into the library/etc. and create a Slashdot indentity.
I'm genuinely happy that you're happy with the situation. And I'm mindful that I have clean water and shelter, which is more than most people on earth have.
My complaint is not going to resonate with you, and that is testament to your contentment, which I choose to not find fault with.
America is not and never has been the land of equal results. It is the land of opportunity. You write that you want to make American a more equal place. Levelling the field. Personally, I am not nearly so interested in levelling the field as I am in having an opportunity, and those two things are not the same.
But more to the point, I think, I don't believe the government should take a dollar more in taxes than it needs to do what needs to be done.
Any more than that is taking from me without giving me even value. Taxes are not the government's money, they are mine. I want to get good value for my taxes. Am I now?
"because when you're that rich you can't imagine a better life"
So why is Mitt running for President? Oh, I can answer that.
Your statement I quoted above is naive and illogical. Mitt is runing for President for several reasons, but one would be, I presume, to preserve the United States that he got rich in. To go just a tiny step further, this would be to improve the chances that he STAYS rich.
For the rich, it's not just about imagining a 'better life'. Sometimes it's about imagining a worse life, like not being rich any more.
The comment that started me off imagined that we should take in taxes what the rich 'don't need'. I think that meant making them not rich any more. When you know that number, please let me know.
And it is not $70,000/yr. My household income is a bit more than that, and I can use more. I can barely afford a week's vacation to my hometown.
Slashdot Mirror
Filibusters are permitted by rules of the Senate, not Constitutional provision. The Senate can change that.
And protection or at least recognition if minorities is traditionally an American value.
Congress needs to be accountable for their actions or lack thereof. Even our President complains about congressional inaction when at times it's hid own party that it's a failing to act. Extremism is a problem for all parties.
"False equivalence. The Democrats have never focused so single-mindedly on the destruction of a president. You're just telling yourself that the Dems are just as bad as a defense mechanism."
You wrote that? Nixon resigned. Despite being guilty, the Democratic Party focused so single-mindedly on Nixon that he left office. Rightly or not, this was the beginning of the politics of public personal destruction. Nixon was guilty. The Democrats destroyed him.
"Only one party threatened to cut off unemployment benefits for millions if they didn't get a tax cut extension for the rich."
So quickly forgotten.
"Only one party forced the country to default on its debts in order to force major budget cuts to both military and domestic program, and then even had the gall to try to renege on the military cuts."
Not that the Democrats are above the same tactic if it suits them.
"Only one party proposed cap and trade as a capitalist alternative to environmental regulations, and then called it socialism when the other guys tried to implement it."
Crony Capitalism serves both sides. The Obama Administration is engaged in it as every other Administration since, what, Reagan?
"Only one party proposed an individual mandate as a capitalist alternative to single-payer health care, and then screamed about "death panels" when the other guys tried to implement it."
No quote here. You are wrong, in that this was never a Republican Party platform plank. But the party is a big tent, and some in it have tried to compromise on this issue of healthcare. Republicans tend to compromise. Democrats tend not to. I'm not at all sure this is a good thing for Republicans to do.
"Only one party proposed giving illegal immigrants a path to citizenship through military service or college, and then screamed "amnesty!" when the other guys tried to implement it."
I entered the USAF in 1972, and while in basic training I stood for a wonderful young man from Columbia who was sworn in as a citizen of the US while he was in basic training also. Gaining citizenship via military service is not new. Sadly, neither is illegal immigration into the US. But Alberto came legally. More to the point, I gather you think giving a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants is ok, even as we fail to stop the flow. That's what 'changed' the Republicans stand. When they could not get Democrat agreement on taking actual measures to reduce illegal immigration. When the deal changes, do you stick with your initial agreement, or do you change your mind?
"The Republicans today are nothing like those of the 90s or 80s or 70s or any other point in time. They're nothing like this country has ever seen. They've realized that politics is just a game, and they can break the game by refusing to negotiate on anything. Our country cannot survive that sort of game-breaking exploit. If people like you don't wise up and punish them for it, we're through."
You are absolutely right. The Democrats have spent the last 40 years refusing to negotiate on anything of substance. Examples? I want to punish the Democrats also, but I can vote for only one candidate per office. Do your part.
- Reagan's budgets were declared 'dead on arrival'.
- I'm bored with any other examples. Your premise is that the Republicans are 'worse'. You are deluded.
We have one goverment, and anything other than compromise and mutual accomplishment is wrong. The Republican Party is now playing the game like the Democratic Party has been, and now it's wrong? Keep your blinders on. Much easier than dealing with the problem. Just keep focused on the other guys.
Partisanship harms ALL policy. It is inevitable in our system, but for the past few cycles it has been an increasingly more violent atmosphere (blatant space lingo there) that is harming a lot more than just space policy.
The solution? Smarter and more involved voters. Politicians will not change unless we make them. We let this happen.
And while I'm a Republican, space exploration is what government does better, so far, than private industry. We should be doing a LOT more. But I would happily exchange that initiative for an Apollo-style alternative energy program to render fossil fuels largely obsolete in 10 years. A manned mission to mars would ahve impact on our science, engineering, etc, so either project is a drvier for me. But making NASA a political football makes no sense, unless you're just a partisan that needs something to argue over.
ps - Side note, blame the Republicans all you want, remembering that the other parties are not innocent of the same problem - arguing anything for the sake of it.
Fags have style. You have an N90.
Props where due.
Isn't that a little like complaining how steak takes up so much room on your plate? If that is a problem, perhaps you should stick to carrots instead.
The CPU is there to be used. Get a bigger battery or rejoin reality and adjust your expectations.
Or perhaps hit the STOP button so your poor CPU has a break while you go back to /. to look at something less demanding.
Honestly, it's always something.
Particularly the poor bastards who'learned' system administration by inheriting a survey when they were writing the corporate intranet website.
You've seen the job descriptions - Java/js, HTML, C++ or C#, PHP, oh, and network admin. I used to feel bad for these poor blighters until i realized they were taking my job. But employers who need 1.2 people to do two jobs will try and find a 1.0 to do it.
You think I like roaming profiles? Since you don't know to use them properly, I'm not surprised at your response.
Btw, you are the sort of person my interview questions are designed to score down, but you do much better in person, I bet.
Nope, it was a temp gig and we nailed it.
But I've only been at this job for 6 years, so it'a hard to say how I'm working out. I average 7+ years before my employer is bought out, and this outfit is not going anywhere.
Tenure is not always a measure of anything but time.
You will be faced with a lot of candidates. After you've culled the ones with actual experience and positive or neutral recommendations, this is where you can start in phone interviews:
1. Ask them to describe DHCP. An amazing number of candidates will not do well with this. Extra points for the ones who can expand slightly and describe the implications of static addressing, but they are probably older than you are l;ooking for, despite the blatant discrimination that implies. Deduct for those who treat this question with disdain - they are perhaps being too imperious to get along, and getting along is second only to knowing stuff. Maybe more important.
2. Ask them to discuss Active Directory design from a high level, the forest and trees, for example. Big points if they ask about your current structure. More points if they discuss the disadvantages of ripping up your current directory. Deduct points for those who seem to use an axe in the forest. You willl know.
3. Ask them about roaming profiles. No, you aren't using them, but you're interested in both their general reaction and their questions about why you are asking at all. Deduct points here for those who go 'poo-poo' and describe their loathing for roaming profiles. More deductions for focusing on the limitations.
4. Did any of them ask about your environment? Did any of them perk up at the mention of Linux? Did any of them expand unprovked about Windows' servers potential for integration with a Linux enviuronemnt? More points to these. Fewer points to those who are not at all curious about yoru Linux environment, and how you got saddled with some mongrel Windows severs in the mix.
I would be very interested in this position if it is in the Phoenix area, but I love my pool, and besides, you already know me too well. Ah.
License it from Oakley, and you can try it out.
Doesn;t seem suitable, but it has so many different properties and uses in eyeglasses, who knows? Might work.
Since half of my color printing at home is photos, color lasers are not cost effective at home, for me.
And I suspect many of us.
I will probably get a B&W laser soon, reteach the wife how to choose her printer, and put up with the 'PRINTRR"S NOT WORKING' screams, but it is no worse than now. After severl HPs and one Epson, I ahve a Canon MP620 that is not cheap to run, but is reliable and never fades or sputters ink. It's just a major PITA to get networked.
And I won't be buying an office style laser - too many kwh for me.
Some of it is where I live. In Phoenix, leaving electronics on my car all day bakes them at up to 140 degrees. Hard on stuff, so i dont bother with much. Some of it is having about 90 minutes a day top listen to music - none at work, and my wife is usually done with music when she finishes a day teaching piano and choir. My other times to listen are twice a week at the gym, and the weekend when I'm doing yard work. When I drove for a living, I had more time. Feh.
'Blood doping', that is, transfusing stored blood during a multi-day race such as leTour, is indeed cheating. It is usually packed cells, and is intended to boost hemoglobin and therefore oxygen carrying capacity. It overcomes your physiology, training, exertion, and recovery characteristics.
Armstrong is reputed to be an exceptional physical specimem. with extraordinary capacity for work. This is what bicyclists train for, to both be able to do the maximum amount of work without injury and with good recovery, to be able to do so on a regular basis, and to recover consistently so they can, in the case of leTour, do it for almost a month.
Over exertion results in damage from lactic acid, which takes more time to recover from than the mere exertion of racing. One of the reasons you will see a rider win a stage, and the next day fall to the back. And Amrstrong is reputed to be able to do more, more consistently, than virtually all other riders.
So other riders, not just because they are competing with Armstrong but also others, will try and gain an advantage in work output and recovery, as those are key to winning leTour. Among the strategies currently in vogue are doping to improve blood characteristics, testosterone enhancements to promote muscle growth and performance, and respiratory enhancements to improve oxygen intake.
I quit racing in the 70s due to my asthma. I would be fighting a constant battle with the testers if I ever got to the level of competition where that was an issue, and i had aspirations to do so. A middle-of-the-pack rider warned me I would be in trouble, and having been diagnosed as an adult would make it worse. today, up to 80% of the riders in UCI events have doctors' notes diagnosign them as asthmatics, and they skirt the dosage limits for Albuterol among other things with a keen eye. Pathetic to think that successful bicycle racers are predisposed to be asthmatics. This sort of manipulation also affects other sports, such as biathalon and other shooting events. Sad, but here we are. ps - I know know I would never have made it in racing, I was young and stupid, but to this day I love climbing a mountain on a bike. The mountain cannot win. It just cannot. If you don't have to rind another 40 miles after, it is just the will to do it.
Armstrong has been accused virtually all of his career of doping, and at this pojtn all we have are other guilty riders testifying that they saw him do so. Not a few of whom think they could be winners if not for Armstrong. And most of which are coerced into testimony.
Bicycling is rife with doping, but the USADA has lost all credibility with this pursuit of Armstrong. They can, with the standards they are usign now, disqualify any rider. They don't need results, only questionable accusations and secret results. A sad end to a brilliant career. You would not want your dog treated like this.
"I would have went with"
Not really making any progress on the professional front. But grammar is not as important as it once was.
Forgive me for caring about what I listen to.
Yes.
I'me not a Marine, but I know quite a few, many fighter pilots (that's just not fair, BTW, to be Marine AND a fighter pilot, but FTW anyways), and they would indeed shout 'Ooh-Rah' when appropriate. It is best to shout the same cry, satisfies the military requirement for order and discipline, and may ocasionally expose an imposter.
But, if you are not a Marine, it is understandable that you would think as you do, unless you paid a little attention and asked about such things. If you're not a total dork, they wil tell you. Sometimes even if you are.
I don't stream music in my vehicle because it is not worth the hassle. Older vehicles limit you greatly, and an integrated radio/CD/info system like the Saab NG900s makes replacing the radio both nontrivial and dissatisfying in many ways. Yes, a cassette adapter and bluethooth plugin would solve it, but I'm not interested, and Pandora, for one, does not do a good enough job with the channels I crate to make it worth it. Plus I have a huge library already. I just need a better shuffler, and another 300GB on my phone to carry it around. I take stuff off and put stuff on weekly to shake it up.
Oh, and it is a chore - a genuine chore - to find anything new that is interesting. Pop is dead, hip-hop is largely offensive, rap is worse, what passes for rock is not the least inventive. I can listen to Katy Perry only so long, and I can find lots of artists that offer me one or two tracks I can bear to hear twice, but nothing like a whole disc worh of good marterial. I've been rediscovering The Who, but listening to that in a vehicle is a discrace - the noise floor means I miss so much beauty, and tney did such great work early on. Yes, I sample high or go lossless, hence the space crunch.
Lots of reasons to be underwhelmed with music these days.
1. The First Amendment relies upon the next four. Any of these being diminished, the First is diminished. I'm not at all hopeful that the TSA will be required to honor any of these Constitutional protections, but hope springs eternal.
2. Delta is not new to the customer disservice game. I haven't willingly flown them for 36 years, having been stranded in Boston too many times in the 70s. But this is a new low. I have no reason to believe the pilot acted outside of his authority, but his judgement is suspect in this matter. And that won't be a problem, since the arlines are stuck with the TSA, and play the game.
Any bets if Arijit is on the no fly list?
Hitting the ATM has to be done within minutes. Driving to the airport is the dangerous part, they can get my plate. After that, the bus trip into town is a problem, but changing to a taxi is just vanity. I'm hoping they linger at the airport and don't catch me at the bus terminal - I'll be swapping buses before my first trip is completed. From then on the radius is pretty big.
I need about 6 hours. In America, that's maybe 300 miles. After that it gets hard enough they will have to exert themselves. In 24 hours I should be able to get anywhere in the U.S., and then it's a bug hunt I can win if I stay anon. It's choosing the border crossing that is tough, but that is manageable.
Oh, and I'm not 25-45, which is fine. My biggest problem will be cash, of course. I would need a co-conspirator to solv ethat, and I might get lucky and conscript an acquaintance from way, way back in my past, someone too hard to find quickly. One I'm pretty sure would help me, the other slightly less likely. I have more if I think of them. Not a very inventive plan, but adequate. You have to pick the city carefully, since facial recognition systems are springing up everywhere. Something like Markham or York PEI. Not that I would go there, of course, Happy Valley or Cartwright would make more sense.
If I could somehow get across the Pond, then it gets a lot easier.
I do not speak another language besides English, though I can get by in French.
- ATM, get cash.
- Drive to airport, ditch car in cell lot.
- Bus into town, taxi to real bus station, bus anywhere.
- Disposable phone. Use my wife's Google Voice account to leave her a message. Thrown in the trash at any bus stop.
- Another bus ticket. Different direction.
- No McDonalds. Taco Bell, or worse, for food. I'm known for my fast food habits, let's not make it too easy.
- I'm inclined to cross the border at a place I know they are perpetually lax in one direction. I won;t be coming back for a while.
- Find work in a kitchen. Cliché, but hey. Or landscaping. You can do this easier than you think, and I can pretty much make up Social Security numbers, easy when you know the formula. I will, of course appear to be very old. And my favored employer won't care. They still exist in North America
Maybe this keeps me alive for a month. I obviously will not be very happy.
- Slither into the library/etc. and create a Slashdot indentity.
I'm genuinely happy that you're happy with the situation. And I'm mindful that I have clean water and shelter, which is more than most people on earth have.
My complaint is not going to resonate with you, and that is testament to your contentment, which I choose to not find fault with.
America is not and never has been the land of equal results. It is the land of opportunity. You write that you want to make American a more equal place. Levelling the field. Personally, I am not nearly so interested in levelling the field as I am in having an opportunity, and those two things are not the same.
But more to the point, I think, I don't believe the government should take a dollar more in taxes than it needs to do what needs to be done.
Any more than that is taking from me without giving me even value. Taxes are not the government's money, they are mine. I want to get good value for my taxes. Am I now?
The priciple (sic) being what? That we should decide how much is enough, and take the rest for the common good ?
Wrong country. Unless you're trying to make America into something else. You will understand if I don't agree.
"because when you're that rich you can't imagine a better life"
So why is Mitt running for President? Oh, I can answer that.
Your statement I quoted above is naive and illogical. Mitt is runing for President for several reasons, but one would be, I presume, to preserve the United States that he got rich in. To go just a tiny step further, this would be to improve the chances that he STAYS rich.
For the rich, it's not just about imagining a 'better life'. Sometimes it's about imagining a worse life, like not being rich any more.
The comment that started me off imagined that we should take in taxes what the rich 'don't need'. I think that meant making them not rich any more. When you know that number, please let me know.
And it is not $70,000/yr. My household income is a bit more than that, and I can use more. I can barely afford a week's vacation to my hometown.
Your ideas are not well thought out. Keep trying.