Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2000:November:09 Thursday <Friday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2000/11/9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:19673 Activity:high 60%like:19693
11/9    http://cnn.com: bush +437, Gore +1391.  Gore - Bush = Gore + 954.  9:02am.
        38 of 62 counted.  Mostly smaller and a few mid sized ones left.
        \_ [typo corrected, sorry]
        \_ When they say +XXX, does it mean that they miscounted by -XXX
           during the first count?  I find that rather troubling.
           \_ I find your jumping to conclusions troubling.  No, +XXX simply
              means XXX is added to current tally.
                \_ Seems to me your answer is just a restatement of what
                   I just said.  Also, you seem very sensitive.
2000/11/9 [Uncategorized] UID:19674 Activity:nil
11/8    [Ridiculous non-political mostly-geekish stuff purged]
                -motd pro-politics god
                \_ fuck you. this is the motd.
                        \_ Fuck you, this is RICE!
                        \_ Yes.  It is.  And your point is?
2000/11/9-10 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:19675 Activity:nil
11/8    http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2000/11/08/politics2207EST1052.DTL&type=election
        For those who don't read the wallog. It's about the 19,000
        ballots thrown out in Palm Beach Florida.
2000/11/9-10 [Computer, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:19676 Activity:high
11/8    Miffed at the latest attack on him from Vice President Gore,
        George W. Bush accuses the vice president of stretching the
        truth.

        "He's the man who said he invented the Internet," Bush gibed,
        echoing a common joke at Gore's expense.

        Now let's kill the joke.

        A) Gore did not claim to have invented the Internet. In an
           interview with Wolf Blitzer in March 1999, Gore said:
           "During my service in the U.S. Congress, I took the
           initiative in creating the Internet."
           \- i think this is still bogus. when you are handed a list
              of things to fund and you check off a bunch you like,
              that is a far cry from "taking the initiative to
              create". a more reasonable politician would have said "i
              am a staunch supporter" or "lobbyied my colleauges"
              etc. if someone brought you a human genome sequencing
              project to you cong cmte and you decide to fund them, it
              is no more your initiative than it is your money.  --psb
              \_ I read an article a few weeks ago where many of the
                 internet pioneers like Vint Cerf credited Gore.  They
                 didn't mention any other politicians, but said that
                 Gore was instrumental in getting funding for R&D on
                 the internet.  I think what Gore should have said was
                 he took the _political_ initiative in creating the
                 internet.  Obviously the man is a politician and not
                 an engineer and I think it is reasonably clear that
                 he was claiming credit for his political work not
                 anything technical. -!orignal poster
                \_ Gore's statement was not well-worded, but the mockery of
                   it is completely inaccurate.  -tom
                        \_ Welcome to American politics.  All public figures
                           screw up.  The better lines get remembered.  Tough
                           shit.  And I saw the clip where he said this and
                           he made it clear the internet as a concept was his
                           idea.  "I saw all these different research and
                           educational and other big computer places that
                           couldn't talk to each other so I...".  Something
                           along those lines.  The real thing is out there if
                           you care to find it.  In context.
           \_ motd formatting !god was here
        \_ But Gore invented pants!
           \_ URL PLEASE! Stop making blatant accusations and assumptions
              without providing a URL, regardless of the source. Without
              a URL, I am able to discredit all comments ever made about
              pants, but if you provide a URL, even a GeoCities one, well,
              then I'll just sit down and shut the fuck up.

              \_ you are an idiot.
        A) Gore did not claim to have invented the Internet. In an
           interview with Wolf Blitzer in March 1999, Gore said:
           "During my service in the U.S. Congress, I took the
           initiative in creating the Internet."
              project to you cong cmte and you decide to fund them, it
           \_ that doesn't sound very different from I invented the internet.
              \_ And I dare say it was deliberately meant to sound that way,
                 while supposedly giving him a way of weasling out now.
                 So he deserves all the flak he gets on it.
                 \_ Obfusication is an art. Gore learnt from the
                    master Bill "I prefer Double-D's" Clinton.
           \- i think this is still bogus. when you are handed a list
              of things to fund and you check off a bunch you like,
              that is a far cry from "taking the initiative to
              create". a more reasonable politician would have said "i
              am a staunch supporter" or "lobbyied my colleauges"
              etc. if someone brought you a human genome sequencing
              project to your cong cmte and you decide to fund them, it
              is no more your initiative than it is your money.  --psb
              \_ I read an article a few weeks ago where many of the
                 internet pioneers like Vint Cerf credited Gore.  They
                 didn't mention any other politicians, but said that
                 Gore was instrumental in getting funding for R&D on
                 the internet.  I think what Gore should have said was
                 he took the _political_ initiative in creating the
                 internet.  Obviously the man is a politician and not
                 an engineer and I think it is reasonably clear that
                 he was claiming credit for his political work not
                 anything technical. -!orignal poster
                 \_ I read the same thing and Vint Cerf recollection
                    of history is flawed. The internet began in the mid
                    60's (before Gore was elected to any office) when
                    the DOD and DARPA asked BBNPlanet to "wire the
                    world". Gore had some minor role in converting
                    ARPAnet to NFSnet, but the DOD created the internet.
                    Some visionary general who wanted to defend America
                    and ensure its survival in a nuclear war created the
                    Internet. Not a weenie socialist named Gore.
                    \_ Under the leadership of Democratic President
                       Lyndon B. Johnson.
                       \_ Despite the leadership of LBJ.
                \_ Gore's statement was not well-worded, but the mockery of
                   it is completely inaccurate.  -tom
                           \_ Gore's lying. He BS'ed and someone called him.
                              You are just apologizing for Gore cause he's
                              a socialist just like you are and you are
                              afraid that conservatives will let the people
                              continue to think for themselves and that the
                              people will figure out that you are wrong.
                              Half of them already have.
                        \_ Welcome to American politics.  All public figures
                           screw up.  The better lines get remembered.  Tough
                           shit.  And I saw the clip where he said this and
                           he made it clear the internet as a concept was his
                           idea.  "I saw all these different research and
                           educational and other big computer places that
                           couldn't talk to each other so I...".  Something
                           along those lines.  The real thing is out there if
                           you care to find it.  In context.
           \_ motd formatting !god was here
              \_ all hail
2000/11/9-10 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:19678 Activity:high
11/8    Perhaps the electoral college should be changed to give each
        candidate the number of electoral votes proportional to the
        percentage of popular vote they win in that state. This would
        make things a lot more exciting and the outcome of this
        election wouldn't hang on a few thousand votes in FL.
        \_ Why?  Fuck that, use the popular vote.
            \_ Fuck the popular vote.  We live in the United
               **STATES** of America, not the Undifferentiated Blob of
               America.  We don't want something like the following
               happening: I was in IL for '96 Senate election.
               Repub. won _every_ county; except, that is, Cook County
               (where Chicago is) which is so huge and so
               pro-Demo. that the Demo. won the election.
            \_ More exiciting. Ties will be more common, making the
               houses' role in elections important.
                   \_ with the advent of the whole internet thing, we'll
                      all hopefully be able to go back to a popular vote
                      system using email.  a big important factor will be
                      security and preventing tampering with the system.
                      \_ "a big important factor will be security and
                          preventing tempering with the system." G'duh.  And
                          you advocate this over e-mail?  Please don't
                          procreate.
                          \_ Actually, voting over the internet has the
                             potential to be much more secure than voting
                             like we do now. -crypto grad student
        \_ After reading some articles by constitutional lawyers, I think
           that the Electoral College works well a designed. The founding
           fathers wanted to ensure that large centers of population in a
           few states did not dictate federal policy for all states. I'm
           still amazed by the effectiveness of the constitution and of
           the foresight demonstrated by the founding fathers.
           \_ Can you explain a little bit more as to how one (Electoral
              College) leads to the other (large centers of population not
              dictating federal policy for all states)?  It's not
              apparent to me.
              \_ Candidates would only need to visit big cities to win
                 the popular vote, ignoring the backwater hick-states
              One problem I have with Electoral College, is that when
              pupular election, I will feel that my vote always matters.
              I am in a state clearly leaning one way or another, I
              don't feel that my vote counts, whereas if it is a
              popular election, I will feel that my vote always matters.
              \_#t, esp. in CA. The only way individual CA votes mattered
                in this election was that they tipped the popular vote,
                which is meaningful, yet irrelevant to the EC president
                selection system.
             \_ CA wasn't the best example. It was getting sort of close,
                and Gore had some last minute worries about CA.

You have new mail.
2000/11/9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Reference/Military] UID:19679 Activity:high
11/8    Time to forget Florida and just give Bush & Gore each a partner
        from the WWF and let a tag-team grudge match decide the winner.
        \_ Let them duel for it, as great men did in ages past. (a la
           Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton)
                 \_ that would be really exciting.  Or a western style
                    showdown.  or maybe even pitting them gladiator style
                    against each other.
                    \_ Western style showdown would be cool. Showdown
                       at the Dade County Corral. It may not be a fair
                       contest though since Bush is a reasonably good
                       marksman who has a permit to carry a concealed
                       firearm (AFAIK).
                        \_ well we can just give Gore a knife, since knives
                           are more deadly than guns.  -tom
                           \_ In some situations.  This wouldn't be one of
                              them.  Thanks for taking that out of context,
                              though.  You can give yourself a twink point
                              now.
                           \_ Tom that ruled. - tom #1 fan!
                           \_ Yes give them knife and sword so they can
                              settle it like gentlement.
2000/11/9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:19680 Activity:nil
11/8    Was President Lincoln a Democrat or Republican?
        \_ President Lincoln founded the Republican party.
                             \_ This is technically incorrect.
                                Lincoln was the first republican
                                presidential candidate, but the
                                party was founded by someone else.
                                \_ That's right.  See
                                   http://www.rnc.org/2000/gophistory
           \_ Why did all the southern states vote Republican when
              Lincoln trashed them up so badly?
              \_The Southern States have traditionally always voted
              Democratic until recently. The Southern Democratic states
              have always been the traditional bastion of Democratic
              conservatism, and it's also traditionally been the place
              of getting voting blocks. However, the new Democratic party
              has become, in essence, too liberal. The result is the slow
              and eventual decay of the Democratic party to be replaced
              by the Republican party. In fact, even though they were until
              recentely Democratic, they were at heart conservative socially.
              The South has just recentely shown its true colors.
              \_ The South switched after LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act
                 of 1965. White Southerners abandoned the Democratic Party
                 in droves after that, just as LBJ anticipated they would.
              \_ The south and the north have really changed
                 from the civil war days. Back then northerners
                 cared about liberty and freedom. Now they
                 just want to turn America into a big welfare
                 state like europe.
        \_ Back then, Republican party was the more liberal party.
           \_ Back then, the concept of "liberal" and "conservative" are
           quite different from modern concepts. You have to remember that
           in those days America was mainly agrarian. The Republican party
           was the party of Industry and Commerce, while the Democratic party
           was for the agrarian farmer (both big and small). In a sense, the
           two parties have merely evolved with the times. You can see why
           Republicans supported abolishing slavery while the Democratic party
           for the most part didn't. Agrarian economies require large forces
           of manual labor, and the system in place at the time was slavery.
           By abolishing slavery the south was afraid it would destory their
           socio-economic system (which actualleally didn't).
           \_ That's why the Southern economies are booming and vibrant,
              especially when compared to their wealth then.
              \_ Texas and Florida have strong economies. Most of the other
                 states don't have enough people to need a industrial economy.
2000/11/9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:19681 Activity:very high
11/8    Business-as-usual vote fraud in Florida:
        http://www.herald.com/content/archive/news/elocal/digdocs/072105.htm
        This poor woman isn't even dead and got her vote stolen.
        \_ How come our election sounds more and more like fraud-filled
           elections in some third-world countries?
           \_ Because the Dems get caught more often now and the internet
              allows wider reporting.  See Dornan vs Sanchez.
              \_ You mean Republicans, right?
                 \_ No.  Classic Chicago Mayor Daley.  Go pick up a history
                    book instead of a Leftist pamphlet off the ground on
                    Sproul.  Re: Sanchez, a white chick who changed her pasty
                    white name to Sanchez to run for office, had 2000+
                    non-citizens (aka illegal aliens) voting for her.  Enough
                    to steal the election and subvert the law.  Don't be a
                    stupid propoganda spewing thoughtless clown.  Go read a
                    god damned book or just pay attention to what's been going
                    on around you.  Damn, even Nixon let it go in 1960 rather
                    than torture the country after he was robbed.  Gore can't
                    have the decency Nixon had??
                    \_ yeah, and we know that nobody who ever wrote a book
                       had an agenda.  i like books too, but your statement
                       is absurd at best.
                    \_ Oh yeah, The Republicans are all boy scouts and honest
                       and brave and trustworthy and the The Democrats are all
                       lying cheating scumbags. Thanks for setting me straight.
                        \_ You're ducking again.  I never said that.  Don't put
                           words in my mouth or on my keyboard.  Obviously, you
                           have nothing to say but spew and personal attack and
                           no URLs or anything to back up any of your positions.
                           The truth is that you really don't have a real
                           position on anything.  Just mere _feelings_ which is
                           nice and warm and fuzzy and all that and I'm glad
                           you've such a strong faith in your unfounded beliefs
                           but some of us require more than your feelings to be
                           convinced.  --Nader'04!
                    \_ Nixon was cheated by Joe Kennedy and he let it go. Gore
                       lost (after fighting the good fight) and he can't let it
                       go because he is much less of a man than Nixon. (Yes,
                       I'm assuming that Bush will win FL, because if he
                       doesn't a thousand years of darkness started
                       yesterday).
                       \_ "Thousand years of darkness"??? Where are you getting
                           this crap, Revelations?
                           \_ Uhm, duh.  It's a quote.  Grow up.
                       \_ Gore is less of a man than Nixon?  Are we talking
                          about the same Richard Milhouse Nixon who claimed
                          that he would achieve "Peace with honor" in Vietnam?
                          The Richard Nixon who resigned in disgrace?  And
                          it won't be one thousand years, at most it will be
                          40 because that's about how long the Supreme Court
                          judges the next President appoints will be around.
                          That said, how you could possibly believe the
                          judges Bush would appoint would do anything other
                          than try to revert the country to the '50s (i.e.
                          the 1850s) is beyond me.  I guess that Bush
                          supporters share his deep intellect.
                          P.S. If you dig slavery and isolationism, why aren't
                          you a Pat Buchanan supporter?
                          \_ I'm a Nader supporter.  Now then, back to the
                             issue at hand which you clearly want to avoid.
                             If Gore had any decency he'd accept the final
                             tally of the recount and not drag this through
                             endless court proceeding.  End of story.  You're
                             so typically 'Gore'.  You represent everything I
                             hate about politicians like Gore and why I voted
                             for the better man.
                             \_ Actually, I don't support any of the
                                candidates.  What is this better man, decency
                                bullshit anyway?  Dude, if Nixon conceeding
                                the vote makes him such a decent and good
                                man, explain why he later turned into such
                                a fuckhead!  You're so typically 'Nader'.
                                You represent everything I hate about Green
                                party members and why I abstain from voting
                                because all the candidates suck.
                                \_ Figure it out yourself.  Read Nixon's own
                                   words.  You'd *never* find a Gore thinking
                                   stuff like this:
                                http://www.suntimes.com/output/neal/neal09.html
                                   As a Gore slave, this is about something you
                                   wouldn't understand: the best thing for the
                                   country.  Something more important than
                                   Gore's ego.  --Nader'04
                        \_ It's commonly thought Nixon didn't challenge the
                           Chicago results because he didn't want an
                           investigation to turn up Republican cheating
                           downstate.
                           \_ Commonly thought?  By whom?  URL please.  I
                              provided one with full quotes.  Let's see a URL
                              with more than "sources say".
                              \_ You'd rather believe "Nixon says" than
                                 "Sources say"?  I eschew your political
                                 naivete.  --!above poster
2000/11/9-10 [Recreation/Computer/Games] UID:19682 Activity:moderate
11/9    Is HL:Counterstrike all that? Worth getting? I haven't played FPS
        since Quake2 and am itching for some shmucks to frag.
        \_ http://Gamers.com has the exclusive.
            http://www.gamers.com/s/feature/001107-counter/index
           \_ when are they going ipo? if u hear 'soon' too many times
              its not going ipo.
2000/11/9-10 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:19683 Activity:nil
11/9    Maybe they're Pat's votes after all....
        http://www.nationalreview.com/nr_comment/nr_comment110900c.shtml
2000/11/9-10 [Politics/Domestic, Reference/History/WW2] UID:19684 Activity:nil
11/9    It's amazing how many political figures use the word "liberal"
        interchangably with "communist freak". All you have to do is
        look it up.
        5 : BROAD-MINDED; especially : not bound by authoritarianism,
        orthodoxy, or traditional forms
        \_ Liberals in America are communist freaks.
2000/11/9-10 [Politics/Domestic/Gay] UID:19685 Activity:moderate
11/9    dpetrou, are you gay?
        \_ are you up for some hot gay sex with him?
          \_ give the guy a break, its the first non-politics entry
        \_ dpet, is <DEAD>partita.rem.cs.cmu.edu<DEAD> Bach's Partitas?
2000/11/9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:19686 Activity:nil 80%like:19688
11/9    http://cnn.com *UPDATED 12PM*: bush +346, Gore +1343.  Bush = Gore + 787.
        53 of 67 counted.  Mostly smaller and a few mid sized ones left.
        \_ [typo corrected, sorry]
        \_ When they say +XXX, does it mean that they miscounted by -XXX
           during the first count?  I find that rather troubling.
           \_ I find your jumping to conclusions troubling.  No, +XXX simply
              means XXX is added to current tally.
                \_ Seems to me your answer is just a restatement of what
                   I just said.  Also, you seem very sensitive.
                   \_ We just have a lot of troubled souls in CSUA.
                      \_ You mean Gore voters don't you?
2000/11/9-10 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:19687 Activity:high
11/9    In regards to the presidential race, check out ~dpetrou/petition.
        \_ Don't be stupid.  We don't have grade school "do-overs" in this
           country because some morons can't read.  In fact, I find it
           frightening that anyone would seriously consider as valid the
           opinion of someone so stupid they can't figure out how to punch
           out a ballot properly.  There *is* a minimum requirement in this
           country to vote.  You must be able to poke the right hole and only
           one hole.  If you can't do something *that* simple your
                \_ look, even aspo, an otherwise intelligent individual, can't
                   figure out that he's been poking the wrong hole all along
           \_ What if we have a legally enforced 'do-over'?
           vote gets tossed out.  Give it up.  This is a Gore pipe dream.
           \_ The ballot form looks reasonably clear to me.  - Gore supporter
        \_ The other equitable, but probably not legal, option would be
           to take the ballots which selected multiple candidates and
           give each candidate selected a fractional vote.
           \_ That's not fair, then Gore would win.
           \_ then i would want to switch my vote from nader to bush if they
              get to do that crap.
              \_ it would be hillarious if there were three rounds of,
                 "Okay, now whoever wants to switch votes, do so now"

{deleted a few older threads to save space, not to censor them}
2000/11/9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:19688 Activity:nil 73%like:19693 80%like:19686
11/9    http://cnn.com *UPDATED 12PM*: bush +369, Gore +1372.  Bush = Gore + 781.
        55 of 67 counted.  Mostly smaller and a few mid sized ones left.
        \_ [typo corrected, sorry]
        \_ When they say +XXX, does it mean that they miscounted by -XXX
           during the first count?  I find that rather troubling.
           \_ I find your jumping to conclusions troubling.  No, +XXX simply
              means XXX is added to current tally.
              \_ actually, yes it DOES mean that.
                \_ Seems to me your answer is just a restatement of what
                   I just said.  Also, you seem very sensitive.
                   \_ We just have a lot of troubled souls in CSUA.
                      \_ You mean Gore voters don't you?
2000/11/9-10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:19689 Activity:kinda low
11/9    5 secs ago: Bush +405 with 6 counties to go.
        \_ most of the remaining counties (except one) favor Bush.
         \_ in a recount who favors who is pretty much irrelevant as
            they are looking at changes in the total to say +405
            \_ assuming no error in the remaining counties, you can do
                the math.
                \_ but the +405 bush is assuming no error in the remaining
                   counties.  So who is ahead in which county is pretty
                   much meaningless.
        \_ doesn't this feel like that last 40 seconds of a game, but
           the other team is ready to challenge the call?
           \_ can't, there is no instant-reply booth. So the call
              on the field stands. Plus it's under 2 minutes.
              \_ aren't lawsuits a form of instant replay?
                 \_ No. not in the NFL rulebook or USA rulebook (Constitution)
2000/11/9-10 [Industry/Startup] UID:19690 Activity:kinda low
11/9    Suppose I form a company and somehow convince one or several VCs
        to give me money.  Like say $5 million.  They will write the check
        in the name of my company. But I then turnaround and give myself,
        as CEO of the company, a $5 million dollar bonus.  And then declare
        the company bankrupt.  Is this possible?  I know it's unethical, but
        what's to prevent me from grabbing the money for myself after I get
        it.  Is this legal?
        \_ You'll be signing a contract 2 inches thick.  Figure it out.
        \_ Yes, it is, but you will have the shareholder majority vote behind
        you to defend it, which is highly unlikely after VCs are through
        with you. You can also count on getting sued. -muchandr
2000/11/9-10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:19691 Activity:high
11/9    If Bush wins the recount, Gore should have nothing more to say.
        If Gore wins the account, I think we will have a crisis.
        \_ That's what you said 8 years ago about Clinton and we now
           have the best damn economy in the world.
           \_ Thanks to Alan Greenspan, a Republican
              \_ And Ronald Reagan's tax cut in 1981 that allowed
                 businesses to expand and thrive.
                 \_ And Ronald Reagan's victory over Soviet Communism
                    \_ And the Internet Revolution (by Al Gore)
                       \_ Yeah. Al Gore the author of TCP/IP, UDP,
                          FTP, HTTP, BGP, OSPF, RIP, RIPNG and
                          countless RFCs and Internet Standards.
                          Sustanining Member of the IETF!
                          \_ Please post the article where Gore
                             actually says "I invented the Internet".
                             I mean the actual quote. Not where
                             other people says he said he invented
                             the internet but where he actually
                             said it. Oh, of course, you can't
                             find it. BECAUSE IT DOESN'T FUCKING
                             EXIST.
                                \_ Wow.  Then when I saw that on a taped
                                   interview, it was a fabrication of the
                                   VWRC that controls the major media?  Is
                                   there a controlling legal authority to keep
                                   the VWRC from completely taking over the
                                   media?  What's the world coming to?
        \_ If Bush wins the recount, Gore will still demand a revote in 4
           counties.
           \_ And while we're at it, let's cleanup the vote tally and check
              how many non-citizens voted *then* do a revote.  Welcome to
              office, President Bush.
        \_ Thanks prodictivity growth in the service sector for the first
        time since yermama was skinny.  -muchandr

{deleted a few older threads to save space, not to censor them}
2000/11/9-10 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA] UID:19692 Activity:nil
11/9    In the CSUA, which do you think will have the more popular support?
        Communist Party?  Hippy Party?  The Gun-Toting, NRA Party?
        \_ Party at yermom's house
2000/11/9-10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:19693 Activity:kinda low 60%like:19673 73%like:19688
11/9    http://cnn.com *UPDATED 1PM*: bush +419, Gore +1800.  Bush = Gore + 403.
        58 of 67 counted.  Mostly smaller and a few mid sized ones left.
        \_ [typo corrected, sorry]
        \_ When they say +XXX, does it mean that they miscounted by -XXX
           during the first count?  I find that rather troubling.
           \_ I find your jumping to conclusions troubling.  No, +XXX simply
              means XXX is added to current tally.
              \_ actually, yes it DOES mean that.
              \_ Seems to me your answer is just a restatement of what
                 I just said.  Also, you seem very sensitive.
                 \_ We just have a lot of troubled souls in CSUA.
                    \_ You mean Gore voters don't you?
        \_ Where is your money right now?
                Gore Presidency -- $5
                Bush Presidency -- $7
           \_ Stock Market. I'm a long term investor. I'll ride out
              any storm ;-).
              \_ Ever since Bush started his campaign, my stocks
                 have been losing money! forking shyt
                 \_ you should have been into "drugs."
              \_ from CNNFN:
                "The comments from the Gore campaign this afternoon
                 accelerated the selling," Clark Yingst,
                 market analyst at Prudential Securities, told
                 CNNfn's market coverage.

                Still, Yingst also linked the losses to concerns about
                slowing economic growth that have plagued the markets
                for months.
2000/11/9 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Motd] UID:19694 Activity:nil
11/9    lewd, informative, idiotic MOTD back -- motd restoration god
2000/11/9-10 [Uncategorized] UID:19695 Activity:nil
11/9    Congratulations to Dusty Baker, National League Manager of the Year.
        \_ "Year," of course, referring to just the regular season.
2000/11/9-10 [Computer/Domains, Computer/SW/Unix] UID:19696 Activity:kinda low
11/9    When you telnet to elaine.stanfurd or tree it uses some
        sort of rotating dns alias. How does one set that up?
        \_ One has multiple address entries for the same hostname.
           Look for "DNS Round Robin"   -muchandr
        \_ Just list all the addresses and let BIND do the rest.
           http://ocf.berkeley.edu also does this.
2000/11/9-10 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:19697 Activity:nil
11/9    I know this is unlikely (and not related to current election), but
        what happens if there is a tie, either in the popular vote within a
        state (barring voting irregularities, inconsistencies, ballot
        stuffing, etc) or at electoral state level?
        \_http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate/constitution/toc.html
        \_ I think that it goes to the house.
2000/11/9-10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:19698 Activity:kinda low
11/9    That "recount" is just more commie "fuzzy math". Bush already won!
        \_ it's called obeying florida law, moron.  the existence of a
           recount has nothing to do with party politics.  the way it's
           handled is a different matter.
2000/11/9-10 [Uncategorized/Profanity] UID:19699 Activity:kinda low
11/9    What's the purpose of Lockeed Martin advertising their shit when
        people can't buy their shit? Is it to convince people that defense
        contract is good?
        \_ recruiting employees and stock investors?
              \_ There are commerical companies that do buy their shit
                 aside from government contracts.  That applies mostly to
                 the satellite divison over at Lockheed.  Management is
                 pushing for on that commercial side since the Cold War
                 is old news.  Unfortunately, this has created alot of
                 angry employees b/c the satellite people tend to get
                 preferential treatment as an entire department while
                 everyone else just sort of gets fucked up the ass.
                   -- Lockheed Martin unhappy employee.
                 \_ j, is that you?
2000/11/9-10 [Reference/RealEstate] UID:19700 Activity:nil
11/9    Is the number of senate seats or house seats per state dependent
        on the population of the state?         - reformed ex-commie
        \_ no. yes.
        \_ house  -> based on population (min. 1 per state, otherwise
                     every ~ 600K people +1 seat)
                     \_ Does that mean we have > 1000 seats in the house?
                        \_ I think its 435 seats, but I could be wrong.
           senate -> two per state

           Every state has a equal say in the Senate, in the house
           its based on population. Madisonian Checks and Balances.
        \_ is it a fixed 435 house members no matter what size of the
           country?
           \_ No. The house was much smaller when there were only 13
              states.
2000/11/9-10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:19701 Activity:nil
11/8    http://www.modernhumorist.com/mh/0011/call
a35 46
2000/11/9 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:19702 Activity:nil
11/9    Congress and Supreme Court issue order for nation-wide presidential
        run-off election:
        http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/11/09/election.president/index.html
2000/11/9-10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:19703 Activity:high
11/9    Is Bush better for stock market? Republicans give tax cuts and
        better business incentives, while Gore will tax us to death.
        But then the gridlock will allow the markets to run more freely.
        So which is best for the stock market?
        \_ Well, I can tell you this much: when Gore's people announced that
           they were going to demand a hand recount of some/all of Florida,
           the market tanked 60 seconds later....  The market just wants a
           stable government.  The rest is BS.
        \_ Republican's traditionally increase federal outlays - receipt
           difference. Just look at the numbers on the annual budget
           reports published by the government (you can figure out the
           presidents that go along with them). As a result, Republicans
           increase the incentives to invest in government bonds rather
           than the stock market. If history repeats itself, Gore would
           be healthier to the stock market than Bush.
           \_ quick errata: In the past the the (outlays -
              receipts) difference tends to increase under Republican
              administrations and decrease under Democratic ones.
        \_ Bush is better, neither is ideal.
           \_ BUSH == inflation, unemployment
              \_ That statement evaluates to FALSE
                 \_ True if he presidess like the sr bush.
                    \_ Not true. 1992 was a small correction. There is
                       always a correction when we switch from a wartime
                       economy to a peacetime economy. The people just
                       couldn't see that.
                       \_ that applies to clinton as well.  he only looked
                       good as a president b/c of the sudden explosion in the
                       internet economy, he just happened to around when it
                       really took off, as predicted before '94.
                    \_ I'd like to hear exactly what policies Clinton enacted
                       that brought about prosperity, other than keeping
                       Greenspan, a Republican appointee, in office.
                       \_ The president is the gatekeeper to what spending
                          bills get passed or not. During Clinton's term,
                          the annual deficit reduced each year to help
                          drive down interest rates on federally issued bonds
                          and increase market capitalization of the stock
                          market. It was the complete opposite during the
                          Bush and Reagan years. There were also several
                          telecommunications bills but those were bipartisan.
                          \_ This is nice.  What bills?  Please name them.
                          \_ BS. Clinton only vetoed bills that he felt
                             went too far in preserving the freedoms that
                             the founding fathers gave us. The republicans
                             in congress and the Alan Greenspan kept
                             Clinton and the Democrats in check. Besides
                             Clinton was too busy getting it on.
                             \_ Nice try. But if you want to sound more
                                intelligent than a little child, you're
                                going to have to do much better than shoot
                                off the hips generalizations like that.
                                Numbers: In 1994 corporate income tax to
                                the federal government totalled $140
                                billion compared to $184 billion today.
                                Given inflation and a dramatic increase
                                in economic activity in the last decade,
                                that's not much of an increase (in fact
                                I would hazard to say it may have gone
                                down). I'd have to do more research but
                                at least I went to the trouble of getting
                                REAL information unlike you. Just because
                                you're too damn lazy, I'll post the damn
                                URL for you.
                                http://www.fms.treas.gov/cfs/index.html
                                \_ And Clinton gets credit for this
                                   because...?
                                   \_ You cannot approve federal outlays
                                      without the president's signature
                                      or an overriding majority. Much of
                                      it's probably a mutual comprimise
                                      between Democrats and Republicans
                                      but you can't blaim Clinton for
                                      being a "tax and spend commie".
                                      Federal outlays decreased during
                                      his time.
        Federal outlays increased while _/
        congress was friendly to Clinton.
        Federal outlays decreased because
        of congressional restraint, not
        Clinton.

        In the years 1994 to 1995 (before the Republican congress was
        elected) spending rose from $1.51 T to $1.79 T, while revenues
        increased from $1.38 T to $1.48 T. As you can see the spending
        deltas rose significantly under Clinton's watchful eye.  The
        spending delta was much worse in Clintons' first two terms (see
        the chart in [1]). (Chart [1] is quite interesting, as things
        were *much* worse under Clinton's watch than under any one else).

        Part of the problem was Clintons' tax increase which reduced
        tax revenues between $60 B and $79 B in his first two years in
        office. This coupled with increased spending (on the order of
        1000 spending bills a year) lead to the deep deficit shown in
        [1]. (See [2] for more information).

        The statement above about stock capitalization is completely
        wrong. Stock capitalization increased because of increased
        individual investment in the stock market. Increased individual
        investement was caused primarily by the tax cut enacted by
        congress in 1997. The increased individual investment lead to
        increased individual income which resulted in the largest
        increase in federal revenues, from $543 B (1994) to $1.45 T (1999).
        As pointed out above corporate tax revenuse did not increase
        nearly as much. It sill resulted in a inflation adujsted (based
        on the chart in [3]) increase of about $35 B.

        These increased revenues combined with steady federal spending
        ($ 1.75 T in 1999 which is less than $ 1.79 T in 1995 even before
        inflation adj) resulted in the reduction in the deficit. Steady
        spending was due in no small part to the reduction in spending
        bills passed by congress (around 300 per year under Republicans).
        Clinto did nothing to reduce the number or content of the spending
        bills; occaisionally he did not sign a given bill, but that just
        saved more money.

        The statement that the lower deficit lead to lower interest rates
        is also wrong. Lower interest rates were enacted by the Fed to
        keep inflation/deflation in check (which might have been
        caused by the extra capital generated by the tax cuts). The lower
        deficit was caused by rather than causing lower interest rates.

        [1] http://policy.house.gov/documents/leadership/socsecraid.htm
        [2] <DEAD>www.ncpa.org/pd/monthly/pd496f.html<DEAD>
        [3] http://fintrend.com/ftf/html/1990sI.html
        \_ You've used the "F" word!  Don't bring _F_acts into this!  It's
           unfair to the Clinton/Gore crowd!
           \_ I was asked. My analysis could be wrong, and I gladly invite
              someone to point it out.
              \_ My work is never done. -someone
2017/09/20 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
9/20    
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2000:November:09 Thursday <Friday>