Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2004:June:28 Monday <Sunday, Tuesday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2004/6/28 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:31034 Activity:insanely high
6/28    New Iraqi leadership demonstrates intelligence -- arrange for transfer
        of sovereignty two days early, catching enemies off guard.
        State Department (Powell et al.) takes over from Pentagon.
        Say hello to four more years of Dubya!
        \_ Sounds like a total lack of confidence to me.  I am not against
           the war, but this is defeatism at its best.  Are we going to
           suddenly withdraw all the troops unilaterally to catch the enemy
           off guard too?
           \_ Transfering early shows a lack of confidence?  It's defeatist?
              What are you smoking?  Would you like to explain how this is
              anything even remotely negative for the US and new Iraqi
              \_ Chickening out on keeping it on the scheduled date is lack of
                 confidence on one's ability to defend against the insurgence,
                 especially when they're trying to make people believe that
                 they can defeat the insurgence.
                 \_ Handing over power early was a brilliant move to circumvent
                    violence planned for the day of takeover and avoid the
                    nastiness that might have ensued if they'd tried to delay.
                    HOWEVER, troops are going to remain for quite a while,
                    and they're going to continue to be targeted and killed.
                    No love for the Bush reelection campaign. -!op
              \_ It sure looks like they're trying to cut-and-run early.
                 \_ I would say the U.S. gave up on trying to do it all by
        \_ Why? So the new government can be blamed for attacks instead of the
           provisional one? Why would W profit from this?
           \_ Because people don't follow these things so closely, despite
              saying they're interested when polled.  Easily spunnable.
           \_ This is what Iraqis have said they wanted all along, and they're
              getting it.  Who knows what happens now.
        \_ "Mr. Khafaji's circle of friends, most in ankle-length
            dishdasha shirts, said their principal criticism of the US
            occupation was that the US hasn't been brutal enough with
            insurgents and criminals. They predicted that Allawi will get
            tough. "These murders are supposed to have their throats slit
            and be thrown into the river,'' says Kassem Fadel Hassan, the
            cafe owner. "Hopefully, we'll start to see that."" w00t!
2004/6/28 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:31035 Activity:high
6/28    I'm tired of people calling the LA Times the liberal newspaper (they're
        guilty of Ah-nold bashing, that's true, but he is clearly a groper)
        when the NY Times is the champ, and the Washington Post is running
        Kerry ads with polling data like this:
        ... which lists registered voters, not likely voters, where Bush
        \_ The liberal media?  That's so 1993...
           \_ And 1973 and 1983 and 2003 and....
              \_ Yeah GE, Westinghouse and NewsCorp are all so .... liberal???
                 \_ you forgot Disney, Rupert Murdoch, Ted Turner, and
2004/6/28 [Science] UID:31036 Activity:high
6/28    our soldiers should be tagged so we can find them easily
        \_ and the enemies can find them easily too?
           \_ americans stick out like sore thumbs. better to
              put deep implants so they wont get beheaded
           \_ The enemies don't have the technology. This is a great idea,
              because it also allows us to find the people who abducted them.
              \_ The enemy might not have the technology to decode whatever
                 data the device is transmitting, but does the enemy have the
                 technology to detect that there is simply some radio
                 transmission coming out of somewhere?
                 \_ It depends, but I am referring to these thugs in Iraq.
                    I doubt they do and if they do there is no reason for
                    them to suspect it. Technically, they can probably
                    just jam the transmission but if we do not advertise
                    what we are doing they probably do not do this
                    typically. If we announce this then we are stupid.
2004/6/28-29 [Politics/Domestic/California, Reference/Law/Court] UID:31037 Activity:insanely high
6/28    Not quite unanimous:  Three Supreme Court decisions today.  8-1,
        6-3, 5-4.  President does not get blank check for detaining U.S.
        citizens indefinitely without a legal hearing during wartime (8-1).
        Non-citizen detainees also have access to federal courts (6-3).
        Guantanamo is in U.S. jurisdiction.  Padilla case rejected on
        technicality (should have filed in S. Carolina, not New York, since
        he is detained in Charleston) (5-4).
        \_ Sad that the Rheinquist court is the last bastion of sanity in the
           Federal govt.  But three cheers for these decisions.
        \_ My opinion had been that it would have been unanimous against
           \_ Think of it as the court voting to preserve the authority of the
              \_ I think of it as the court voting to preserve the authority
                 of the constitution.  You remember what that is?
                 \_ "The constitution?  Oh, that thing."
        \_ My opinion had been that it was going to be unanimous against
           detaining U.S. citizens indefinitely without a legal hearing.
           Guess who the lone dissenter was?
           \_ What's odd is that Scalia and Thomas usually vote
              had to be one of them, right?
              \_ If you say to yourself, Scalia prides himself on being the
                 smartest dude on the Supreme Court and won't go into history
                 books as clearly making the wrong decision -- what do you
                 have left?
                 \-Does anyone know what STEVENS J. wrote in the where
                   he wrote a separate opinion? Also I was crossing my
                   he wrote a separate opinion? I was also crossing my
                   fingers that the Ct would be the "last bastion of sanity".
                   I think it affirms their role in the checks and balance
                   system against the executive power and i think the very
                   idea of *anybody* should *never* get a day in *any* court
                   is completely shocking to any lawyer and undermines the
                   meta-principle of the "rule of law" rather than taking
                   sides on any particular law. --psb
                   \_ The process that gave Thomas a seat does damage to the
                      "last bastion" ideal - particularly as a raft of judges
                      are headed to the SC the same way. -- ulysses
                      \_ This must also apply to O'Connor then?
                         \_ What do you mean? Was there something particular
                            about the way O'Conner was apppointed to the court
                            or her voting patterns that you object to?
                            \_ She was a Reagan judge.
                          \- The SupCt isnt responsible for Thomas being
                             there. The executive is. The OCONNOR comment
                                     \_ the legislative branch must take some
                                        share of the blame as well, for politi
                                        cizing the consent process. -crebbs
                                        \-i dont think "advise and consent"
                                          leaves them with much room. yeah i
                                          suppose it is too bad they had to
                                          go in for all the anita madness
                                          when they just should have said
                                          "you are too short to be on the ct".
                                          and i think if anything the executive
                                          cyntically used the black factor
                                          to put the legislature in an awkward
                                          position. if you decompartmentalize
                                          from just talking about thomas to
                                          the bork as well, i suppose you
                                          have a point. but that doesnt
                                          mean you float thomas to "get even"
                                          and it certainly doesnt make him
                                          well qualified. --psb
                                          \_ It's not exactly "to get even"
                                             (though...), It is simply a
                                             case of "hey, you played politic
                                             with someone who was qualified
                                             so here's one at least as conserv.
                                             but who is immune to that tactic.
                                                 \- well really to "get even"
                                                    the went with souter the
                                                    stealth candidate who
                                                    didnt have a long record
                                                    like bork. and that sort
                                                    of backfired. but nobody
                                                    is saying DS isnt qualified
                                                    to be there. --psb
                                                    \_ C.T. was chosen also
                                                       because he is immune to
                                                       the type of character
                                                       assassination that hurt
                                                       Bork.  If there had not
                                                       been so much playing
                                                       politics by the Leg.
                                                       with exec. appointments
                                                       I do not believe C.T.
                                                       would have been
                                                       nominated. -crebbs
                             doesnt make any sense. Not only is OConnor
                             super-well qualified to be on the Ct [Rhenquist
                             was 1st in his law class at Stanford and OConnor
                             was 3rd in that class] but arguably she is more
                             influential than the chief because she is closer
                             to the center. It is amazing how many of the
                             most sig decisions have been written by her.
                             See e.g. --psb
                             \_ She *is* the swing vote, but she seems to favor
                                pragmatism over principle too much for my
        \_ I remember when I posted that the USSC would probably declare
           that it had jurisdiction over the Guantanimo detainees and was
           that it had jurisdiction over the Guantanamo detainees and was
           mocked for claiming this and especially mocked for using the
           qualifier "probably." Well, Right Wing Nutjob, I mock you back
           for being wrong and especially mock you for being such an
           idiot extremist that you only respect people who claim
           certaintly when they do not have it. Like the entire White
           House Administration, come to think of it. No wonder you
           are so lost.
        \_ Why does the Court hate America?
           \_ Why is it a "right wing nutjob" who you think was in favor of
              us upholding our own constitution?  --conservative
              \_ Claiming that Bush is above the law is upholding the
                 Constitution? Sorry a very conservative supreme court
                 voted 6-3 against your very vocal and strenuous claim
                 that Bush could do anything he wanted to in Gitmo.
                 All your quotes from WH lawyers to naught. You and
                 the WH are both way out on a limb and you don't
                 even know it.
                                \-this is quite a simplistic comment.
                                  her equal protection approach to in
                                  texas vs johnson is quite principled.
                                  part of the jobs of the USSC is to give
                                  practical advice lower courts can apply
                                  with some consistency, such as the
                                  lemon test. do you really have any idea
                                  what you are talking about. --psb
                                  \_ hun?  url please.  I went and read this
                                     case and do not see anything by her at
                                     all, let alone anything regarding
                                     "equal protection". -!principle boy
                                     \- sorry, my mistake. the case to look
                                        at is lawrence v texas, not
                                        tx v johnson [which was the flag
                                        burning case]. there are a lot of
                                        strange departures from "principle"
                                        in sup ct jurisprudence. it's not
                                        so simple as practical vs principle.
                                        like how to blanace sep powers,
                                        federalism, legis intent, article i
                                        powers, orig intent, stare decisis,
                                        process vs. substance, disparate
                                        impact ... see e.g. Benjamin Nathan
                                        Cardozo: Nature of the Judicial
                                        Process, A. Bickel: The Least
                                        Dangerous Branch etc. i assume that
                                        is the case you are asking about,
                                        not the "lemon test" case, which
                                        is lemon v. kurtzman interpreted by
                                        oconnor in various "establishment
                                        clause" cases like lynch v donnelly
                                        to define govt endorsement. --psb
2004/6/28-29 [Transportation/Car, Transportation/Car/Hybrid] UID:31038 Activity:high
6/28    Need a friendly auto mechanic or someone knowledgeable about cars
        in Silicon Valley. I have a crashed car and they unhooked the battery
        in the impound lot. I need to get the mileage for insurance and a
        couple of CDs out of the car. Can anyone recommend a person at
        reasonable cost(insurance co. will reimburst me for cost)?
        \_ I went to Fred's Wrench in Alameda a couple years ago after Midas
           told me I needed a new transmission.  Fred drove around with me
           while I showed him all the weird noises, and told me the
           transmission was fine for the age of the car, and that the motor
           mounts needed replacement (which he did for 1/3 the price Midas
        \_ Can't you just go there and connect a battery to it?  If you can't
           do it, I'll do it for $100...
        \_ get one of those cigarette-lighter attachment car starter things,
           hook that up and it should give the car enough power to give you
           an ODO reading and let you retrieve CD's.
2004/6/28-29 [Computer/HW/Display] UID:31039 Activity:high
6/28    New Apple 30inch LCD $3299, wow, I want one!!
        \_ That's a lot of pennies.
        \_ Don't forget the Mac-only $600 video card it requires.
           \_ Eh? I've seen Apple LCDs connected to Dells.
              \_ They say the 30" requires a dual-DVI GeForce 6800...
2004/6/28-29 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:31040 Activity:insanely high
6/28    I watched F911 and frankly I don't see anything controversial except
        its choice of targets.  This movie does not stand out at all in the
        technics it employs to make its pointed criticism.  OK, It does not
        compare to the artistically great but evil propaganda from the last
        century, nor is it for publication on Nature or Daedalus.  It is about
        as wicked and biased as the all the mainstream network news,
        documentaries, or frontline exposes, i.e. the normal media you immerse
        yourself in and rave about on the motd, freerepublic or slashdot.,
        perhaps even a tiny bit less so.  If you have a problem with its
        fairness, you can't just cherry pick this one.  You should disconnect
        yourself from TV, printed media, internet etc even when they are just
        picking on M$, EPA, or Bangladesh.  On the other hand, if you hate F911
        because you think strong criticism of our Leader is unpatriotic and
        challenge to the upper echelon of society is subversive, you can
        and should make your point directly without shame.
        \_ I disagree.  I think Moore is qualitatively different from mainstream
           news.  His vibe as entertainer reminds me of Limbaugh, only he
           uses film as his medium, not talk radio. -- ilyas
        \_ I disagree.  I think Moore is qualitatively different from
           mainstream news.  His vibe as entertainer reminds me of Limbaugh,
           only he uses film as his medium, not talk radio. -- ilyas
        \_ What is the big deal about this movie? The dude sounds like a huge
           retard who doesn't know jack about anything and just goes around
           mouthing off. Whatever.
           \_ The "big deal" seems to be created by the staunch right-wing
              who have never seen the movie (or anything by Michael Moore)
              but telling others that it is an un-American movie and that
              they shouldn't watch it.
              \_ Ad-hominem attack #2.
                 \_ How the hell is this "ad-hominem"?
                    \_ I was wondering that too -AH#1
              \_ I don't care what movie people go and see. You want
                 to pay $9 and see the movie, bully for you. Whatever.
                 To me it doesn't look like a good movie and the comments
                 the director makes make it sound like a terrible movie.
                 But then again, maybe I'm not the best judge of such
                 things since I only watch movies with the words 'Star Trek'
                 in the title.
                 \_ Well, I personally didn't like the movie myself and,
                    like so many movies I've seen, wished I didn't pay
                    $10 for it. But whether a movie's good or bad is a
                    matter of opinion from people who've seen it. What
                    I think is absured are all these people who haven't
                    seen the movie and are telling others to boycott the
                    movie and calling them unpatriotic otherwise.
           \_ Ad-hominem attack #1.
              \_ It's not ad-hominem since Moore is the director and also in
                 the movie.
                 \_ people, please stop putting a hyphen in ad hominem. do it
                    for the children.
                 \_ Yes it is.  You insulted MM without adressing any of the
                    content of the movie.
                    \_ Would it be better if he said "He seems like a huge/fat
                       retard, speaking through a megaphone outside the capital"
                       He's in the movie, so attacking him is attacking one of
                       the characters/protaganists of the film. I vaguely
                       " He's in the movie, so attacking him is attacking one
                       of the characters/protaganists of the film. I vaguely
                       enjoyed the film, but not really the parts that he was
                       \_ Saying he made an ass of himself in front of the
                                            \_ the british calls it arse
                          White House is a criticism of the movie.  Just saying
                          he's "a huge retard who doesn't know jack about
                                                               \_ who's jack?
                          anything" is a personal attack.  If you had said
                          "MM says foobar, which is wrong." that would be
                           \_ what's MM?
                                   \_ what's foobar?
                          a fair criticism.
                       in. I don't like watching fat people in movies/TV.
               \_ Whatever. I've read speeches/interviews with this guy
                  (about this and other movies). He has a very one sided
                  view about stuff and passes it off as informed and
                  objective. If he was honest about the fact that his
                  movies and writing are anything but objective then he
                  might not come off as such a huge jackass.
                  \_ When did Moore ever say he was objective?  As far as I
                     know, he has always tried to push his agenda.
        \_ This is one of those things I don't need to see to know I won't
           like it.  I heard enough about the Passion of Christ to know I
           wouldn't want to see that.  I eventually saw Titanic but wished I
           hadn't.  Really, MM is just about self glorification.  In some ways,
           he is very much like Limbaugh.  The difference I see is that I can
           pick up the phone and challenge Rush 5 days a week any time during
           his 2 to 4 hour show and put him on the spot and make him explain
           if he said something I disagree with or if he twisted something.  I
           do not have that option with MM.  I only have people like this to
           "talk" with about him:

        Boredcast Message from 'brain': Mon Jun 28 08:34:19 2004

        if someone who is not a raging asshole sees that movie,
        I can pretty much gaurantee they will vote against Bush
                \_ Interesting.  This is the usual trick of defending your
                   opinon by taking an example of your opponents out of
                   context (like when he is stoned or walling) or
                   representativeness and ridicue it.  This is something MM
                   might been guilty, but see it is SO mainstream.
                   context (like when he is stoned or walling, which is same)
                   or representativeness and ridicule it.  This is something MM
                   might been guilty of, but see it is SO mainstream.
                   \_ I indented your interruption bc it looks like a continue
                      of the rest of my post.  So, the wall log is there.  What
                      did I take out of context?  What exactly is the context
                      on the wall log that I have unfairly smeared brain or
                      taken his post out of context?  It's there.  Maybe I'm
                      blind or something.  Please explain.  As far as stoned or
                      walling goes, I get the same replies on the motd and the
                      wall is covered in that sort of noise.  I picked the
                      first one I saw related to the topic.  I didn't dig for
                      a special case.  I didn't have to.  It was said, that's
                      who I have the opportunity to discuss anything with and
                      I still can't chat with MM and I can still call Rush 5
                      days a week.  Please explain my 'trick' and maybe answer
                      some of my other questions and points as well.  Thank
                      you. --c
                      \_ Um, perhaps becuase you WEREN'T discussing it with
                         brian, and pulled his quote from wall to try to
                         illustrate an impervious liberal veneer.  If you
                         had engaged him, on wall, or by email, you might
                         have the chance to find that he is intelligent,
                         reasonable, and possibly could give you something
                         to think about on the subject.  But you seem to
                         like your blinders. --scotsman
                         \_ I must be an asshole -- I am voting Nader.  This
                            brain fellow better be using some sort of
                            hyperbole, because it sure sounds like he is
                            mouthing off mindlessly on wall. -- ilyas
                            \_ Why don't you go ask him?  Something like:
                               "Hi brain, I don't know you, but on wall today
                               you sounded like you were mouthing off
                               mindlessly.  Were you using some sort of
                            \_ you'll notice I said "against Bush" ilyas.
                                Not "for Kerry."  You don't know me, so you
                                don't know my politics.  But you haven't asked.
                                go ahead, ask me!  I'm not a hostile person.
                                most of the time.  Unlike most people, I'm not
                                offended that you don't agree with me.  It's a
                                free country, and it doesn't make you less of an
                                American.  My point with the movie is: regardless
                                of your politics, it is pretty hard to see thepain
                                of a mother who has lost her son to a war cometo
                                grips with the realization that there may not have
                                been a good reason for it.  And this experience
                                will make you ask yourself questions; perhaps
                                questions you should have been asking yourself
                                previously.  To ignore the possibility of a new
                                experience is a sign of intellectual and in this
                                case moral weakness.  Just think about it.  -brain
                                free country, and it doesn't make you less of
                                an American.  My point with the movie is:
                                regardless of your politics, it is pretty hard
                                to see the pain of a mother who has lost her
                                son to a war come to grips with the realization
                                that there may not have been a good reason for
                                it.  And this experience will make you ask
                                yourself questions; perhaps questions you
                                should have been asking yourself previously.
                                To ignore the possibility of a new experience
                                is a sign of intellectual and in this case
                                moral weakness.  Just think about it.  -brain
                                \_ Heh.  I am voting for Nader because CA is
                                   not a battleground state, and because I wish
                                   to splinter the liberal vote further by
                                   encouraging Nader to run again.
                                   I sympathize with people (both American and
                                   otherwise) who were harmed by Bush's
                                   policies, but I think your conclusion on,
                                   for instance the worth of the war, seems a
                                   little premature.  Even if Bush lied through
                                   his teeth about the reasons, the actual
                                   positive effects of the war (of a
                                   humanitarian nature, for example) is
                                   something neither you nor indeed the mother
                                   of a slain soldier should discount quite so
                                   readily.  As for ignoring the possibility of
                                   a new experience, with all due respect to
                                   Mr. Moore, I do not consider his films an
                                   intellectual experience at all.  I have
                                   plenty of intelligent liberal friends to
                                   argue with. -- ilyas
                                   \_ off topic I guess but I'm not totally
                                      convinced that Bush has zero chance here.
                                      anyway, I'll vote for Kerry just because
                                      I believe he's a better human being. I
                                      don't think the Iraq action itself should
                                      be the basis of voting. Bush bothers me
                                      across a lot of fronts independent of
                                      conservative/liberal politics. -IND voter
                                  \_ and what is my conclusion on the worth
                                     of the war?  I have never even brought it
                                     up, and honestly it's not the reason I
                                     think Bush is a terrible leader.  You need
                                     to understand that, at his core, Bush does
                                     not value your welfare, nor that of
                                     America, and that his policies, not just
                                     with regard to Iraq, are self-serving
                                     and evil.  Look at the results of Leave
                                     No Child Behind, or what has happened to
                                     the FCC or EPA's policies.  The Clear
                                     Skies Initiative.  Even a little research
                                     will show you a larger picture than just
                                     Iraq.  Not the ideology, I'm talking about
                                     the actual, measurable results.  This is
                                     important stuff here, and unless you
                                     personally own a gigantic manufacturing or
                                     oil corporation you have personally not
                                     benefitted from any of these things.  Do
                                     the math on the dividend tax cut- how much
                                     money did you save?  How much money was
                                     saved by others, never to be circulated
                                     back into our economy?     -brain
                               \_ I find Brian often weighs in on things
                                  he has not given much thought to or
                                  is not especially knowledgeable about.
                                  In some cases I assume it is just
                                  immaturity, but in this case I think he
                                  is carried away by emotion.  I've known
                                  him for a little while and I'm not a knee-
                                  jerk liberal.  I think part of his problem
                                  is he gets all of his news from web sites
                                  and soundbite sources.  But there are some
                                  niches he does seem knowledgeable.  But
                                  they are sort of superficial subjects.
                                 \_  I'm guessing you are referring to the
                                     tax law discussion, in which I was shouted
                                     down for trying to save you fools a few
                                     thousand dollars.  If someone shows me I am
                                     misinformed, I always apologise.  Always.
                                     But I'm not going to argue with you on wall
                                     when I can tell you are not interested in
                                     discussion.  While you guys snipe and rotin
                                     your cubes, other people are running around
                                     thousand dollars.  If someone shows me I
                                     am misinformed, I always apologise.
                                     Always.  But I'm not going to argue with
                                     you on wall when I can tell you are not
                                     interested in discussion.
                                     While you guys snipe and rot in your
                                     cubes, other people are running around
                                     the world accomplishing great things.  So
                                     forgive me for voicing an opinion, or sharing
                                     a piece of very expensive information it cost
                                     me a great deal to obtain.  Information that
                                     forgive me for voicing an opinion, or
                                     sharing a piece of very expensive
                                     information it cost me a great deal to
                                     obtain.  Information that
                                     came from my corporate tax lawyer.  -brain
                                     \_ It looks like someone made Brian cry.
                                       \_ nah it's cool.  I enjoy spending
                                          your tax money.   -brain
                                          \_ You'd have to, if you like Moore's
                                             movies with good conscience.
                                             \_ I'm not sure what you mean.
                                                Michael Moore is funded by
                                                tax dollars?
                   \_ I agree with this point as well.  The "conservative"
                      poster has taken the wall of one user and generalized
                      it to be the mindset of all liberals.  This is not a
                      convincing way to make an argument, and ironically makes
                      the op look close-minded.
           Now then, what's the point of even trying to talk to some of you
           when disagreeing with you or your media heroes make me an asshole
           in your eyes?  I don't think any of you are assholes simply for
                \_ It doesn't, and I never said that.  Interesting that you didn't
                    bring this up when I said it... No, what makes you an asshole is
                    writing this Rush Limbaugh diatribe in which you ascribe all
                    kinds of motives to a single portion of my conversation with
                    Rand.  Maybe O'Reilly actually... Limbaugh never cut his
                    guests' microphone.                 -brain
                \_ It doesn't, and you know that's not what that wall meant.
                   Interesting that you didn't bring this up when I said it...
                   No, what makes you an asshole is writing this (anonymous)
                   Rush Limbaugh diatribe in which you ascribe all kinds of
                   motives to a single portion of my conversation with Rand.
                   Maybe O'Reilly actually... Limbaugh never cut his guests'
                   microphone.       -brain
           disagreeing with me.  I don't even think most of you are assholes.
           If you are an asshole, you know it and you're proud of it and I'm
           ok with that.  But don't call me names because I don't like your
           hero or I disagree with your political philosophy.  If I said the
           same as the above but turned it around you'd call me a right wing
           nutter and dig up your motd watch logs to find out who I was so
           you could give me some twink points or try to get me squished.  As
           far as watching MM goes, I don't have the time or money to waste on
           things that get reviews like the above.  --conservative
           \_ This is why I thought F911 was a weak movie. Contrary to brain's
              suggestion, I don't think it'll win over any conservative votes.
              At best (and I don't think it'll do this either), it might
              "energize the party base".
              \_ It doesn't have to do that stuff to not be a weak movie. I'll
                 probably watch it at some point. I never watched Bowling just
                 because the subject matter seemed too boring. I don't expect
                 it to be a religious experience, but some insight and
        \_ Why would I want to pay $9 and waste 2 hours to watch MORE
           crappy propaganda?  Or even GOOD propaganda for that matter?
           \_ Or any movie.  period.
           \_ You watch for the footage they don't show on CNN.
              The Emperor has no clothes, and we want to see that. ;-)
           \_ good point.  You could probably get a bootleg, or sneak into the
                movie... or just go to a matinee!
2004/6/28-29 [Recreation/Pets] UID:31041 Activity:kinda low
6/28    Dog saves Toronto:,2933,123882,00.html
        \_ Why does the dog hate America?
2004/6/28-29 [Computer/SW/Languages] UID:31042 Activity:very high
6/28    anyone else have problem with's GIF/JPG loading? Can't
        see any pics. ok thx.
        \_ Works for me.
        \_ ok now works. Now, how do you leave a feedback for a hotel?
2004/6/28 [Uncategorized] UID:31043 Activity:nil
6/28    Help, timothym has locked the motd and can't get up!
2004/6/28 [Consumer/CellPhone, Science/GlobalWarming] UID:31044 Activity:nil
6/28    Can you type the following in less than 44 seconds with all
        punctuations correct?
        "The razor-toothed piranhas of the genera Serrasalmus and Pygocentrus
        are the most ferocious freshwater fish in the world. In reality they
        seldom attack a human."
        Now try typing it on your cell phone. (Yahoo! News)
2004/6/28-29 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:31045 Activity:nil
6/28    Interesting non-partisan 1995 documentary gives some funny insight
        into political spin. Pretty large download for the mpegs though.
2004/6/28-29 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:31046 Activity:high
6/28    Fahrenheit 9/11 is No. 1 at box office
        - Michael Moore's controversial Bush-bashing film has strongest opening
          ever for a documentary.
        \_ look at what it's up against.  I'll be knocked down once the
           July 4th weekend blockbusters come out.
           \_ It might've already been knocked down, now that Iraqi
              sovereignty has been handed over.
           \_ what's news about this?  Americans would rather see Wayans films
              than pay attention to the world around them?  It's remarkable
              that a film with a tiny budget, that opened on less than 1000
              screens was the #1 money earner for any weekend.  Of course it
              can't compete with a big-budget movie on 3000 screens, but
              it doesn't need to, to become by far the most successful
              documentary ever.  -tom
              \_ Tiny budget?  What does he need a large budget for?  To hire
                 Andy Serkis + a team of CGI programmers to portray Bush?
                   -- ilyas
                 \_ I don't know what tom wants, but I do want to see this:
            (Mad Magazine, old link)
            (related to above)
        \_ I never liked "Roger and Me" which made MM famous, and didn't
           watch his later films.  I went to see F911 because others were
           footing the bill.  It is way bettern then "Roger and Me" and
           definitely worth watching.  I think people are boycotting it not
           because of high principle but because they are afraid, really
        \_ and it barely beats White Chicks!
           \_ hey, white chicks looked pretty funny from the previews!
        \_ I think Moore's a liar and a scumbag (not to mention anti-American
           and a flt slob), but this is a huge success for the opening
           and a fat slob), but this is a huge success for the opening
           weekend.  Look at the per-screen totals and it's as big a hit as
           Return of the King.  We'll see what it's staying power is, but MM is
           definitely the reigning king of hype. -emarkp
           \_ ^Moore^Bush
           \_ At worst, I can say Moore is a conspiracist, a Bush-hater, a
              hater of pro-Bush Americans, and fat -- but the footage he has
              collected is what interests me.  I don't really care about the
              bin Laden - Saudi - Bush links or the make corporations rich
              theme, which seem ridiculous; or the ambushing, which is unfair.
              I do want to see Bush put in his place, since, while he is not
              a liar or a scumbag, IMO -- he is a dumbass.
2004/6/28-29 [Uncategorized] UID:31047 Activity:nil
6/28    Has anyone had their car's air-conditioning system refitted to use the
        new (134A) refrigerant?  What did it cost?
2004/6/28-30 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:31048 Activity:moderate
6/28    Pop Quiz!  A CBS News poll today ( shows the
        following results.  Q - The Bush administration's policies have
        made the U.S.:  Safer from terrorism (53%), Less safe (28%), No
        effect (15%) among registered voters.  A CNN poll from last week
        seemed to show the opposite result.  Why the discrepancy?
        \- did the previous poll ask about "bush co policies" or "invading
           iraq" ... yes, erasing the taliban hurt al quedas training
           infrastructure, but i think bushco also has also given al queda
           their latest recruiptment poster in the hooded fellow --psb
           \_ Correct.  The CNN poll question was:  Do you think the war
              with Iraq has made the US safer -- or less safe -- from
              terrorism?  Safer (37%), Less safe (55%), No change (6%).
              People appreciate that Southwest or United Airlines flights
              aren't blowing up, but they're irritated that there were no WMDs,
              with the prisoner abuse, dead Iraqis and GIs, and with the
              corresponding effect on America's credibility.
              \_ goes to show that the American people are smarter
                 than your average motd troll?
                 \_ All polls are push polls.  Polling shows nothing but it
                    does keep us amused until the real thing.
        \_ Using sub-sampling and not giving the MoE for that subsample,
           or even the sample size?  Also, the Q is quite different.
           the CBS poll asked about "the bush admin's policies."  The
           CNN poll asked about "the war in iraq."
2004/6/28-30 [Recreation/Computer/Games] UID:31049 Activity:insanely high
6/28    What's a better 3D WW2 shooter game, Battlefield 1942, Call of Duty,
        or something else?
        \_ Medal of Honor.  Very cool, very difficult D-Day Landing.  Well,
           then it kinda gets repetitive, but there you go.  BF1942 is best
           played multiplayer with lots of people, preferably not twinks.
           \_ Seconded.  I really enjoy 1942 (loads of variety, not too
              twitchy) multiplayer, ith some clued people.  I understand
              that for single-player, CoD is brilliant though.  -John
           \_ Thirded.  BF42 is pretty awesome with good teams. -eric
           \_ Fourthed.  BF1942 also has the awesome expansion pack Desert
              Combat which is free and revolves around the first Gulf War
              (vaguely).  There are better vehicles to pilot including
              choppers and an AC130 gunship.  Also, consider BF:Vietnam
              where the terrain and tactics are more interesting.
              I say BF1942 has better graphics and gameplay than MoH.
        \_ Does anyone else think that turning genuine human sacrifice
           into a game is deeply disturbing?
           \_ nope.
           \_ Yup. Kids might get ideas, better ban it.  -John
                \_ That is not what I mean. I don't think that these
                   games are bad in and of themselves. It just seems
                   to me that most people I've met treat these just
                   like any other FPS and do not realize that real
                   men fought and died at the battles that are
                   depicted in the game. This I found somewhat
                   disturbing. I was wondering if anyone else felt
                   the same way.
                   \_ They turn it into movies, why not games? By the way
                      you just jumped from "deeply" to "somewhat" disturbing.
                      \_ He's already getting used to the violence.
                      \_ Guess you are right.
           \_ You mean like that Aztec ball game?
        \_ Don't forget the Call of Duty Russian missions.  Those were great.
2004/6/28-30 [Reference/Law/Court, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:31050 Activity:moderate
6/28    I read this today: "the gov. may try...hold terror suspects somewhere
        other than its military base in Cuba, where the court said legal rights
        apply." What determines where legal rights don't apply... war zones?
        \_ I'd speculate that the court would rule that prisoner's have access
           to the court anywhere under American control where providing that
           access would not put an undue burden on the military.  So a brig on
           the front line, no, but a brig at a secure base, yes.
        \_ Well, given that a US court could indict Manuel Noriega in
           Panama guilty of drug offenses, and the US military could invade
           Panama (and kill lots of innocent people in the process). Seems
           like a court's jurisdiction has the whole world to play with, if
           it chooses, since a precedent has already been set.
        \_ Now at least we know why Bush wants to go to Mars.
           \_ You prefer what?  Sitting on this little rock forever or until
              the sun grows cold?  Leaving it to the future, take care of
              yourself now?  We stand on the shoulders of giants and have a
              responsibility to the future to continue progress.
2004/6/28-30 [Computer/SW/P2P] UID:31051 Activity:moderate
6/28    Looking for Macross Do You Remember Love, 0 on Kazaa. Where else
        can you download it from?
        \_ emule
        \_ What does the ", 0" on the end mean? Are you looking for both
           MDYRL and Macross Zero?
           \_ Sigh.  Read the "0" as "zero" and parse as describing the number
              of results from Kazaa.
        \_ If you want Macross Zero it's probably easiest to goto
  and download it with bittorrent.
2004/6/28-30 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:31052 Activity:moderate
6/28    "Things were better under Saddam" - "Only criminals could say such a
        thing. The victims deserve better than this," Idrissi concludes.
        \_ Watch "Control Room."  Even Al Jazeera was saying that Saddam was
           no good.
        \_ only the UN says this cuz they are losing millions of dollars
        in the Oil for Food program
        \_ Heh, we shall see.  Allawi is going to institute martial law.  I
           expect he will eventually be setting himself up as dictator.
           \_ Not a chance.  He doesn't have the power base for that.  He'll
              either get elected properly in January or get shot.
2019/08/22 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2004:June:28 Monday <Sunday, Tuesday>