| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 2004/10/5-6 [Uncategorized] UID:33923 Activity:nil |
10/4 \_ before I answer this may I ask you what method do you use
(did you use your own scripts, and what techniques did you
use) to find out who posted what messages? Thanks.
\_ Familiarity with paolo and deduction. Your privacy methods
are powerless before the might of social engineering.
\_ I doubt it is ever paolo. he's too busy working
and polluting livejournal. - danh
\_ HEIL social engineering guy.
\_ that's not really social engineering. social engineering
would be taking paolo out to a bar and him telling you all
about his posting while drinking free beer. (for example) |
| 2004/10/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33924 Activity:high |
10/5 FOUR MORE WEEKS!
\_ 4 more years!!! Thanks to Floridians.
\_ On a more serious note.... Both parties are so entrenched and
absolutely certain of victory in this election and the complete
lack of qualification of the opposition and certain doom if the
other guy is elected. It will be interesting to see the losing
party completely implode on November 3rd. I wonder if this will
be one of those rare moment in American history where a major
party vanishes and is replaced by something new or is consumed
by some currently tiny party.
\_ This is what Nader banked on in 2000. Worked great didn't it?
\_ It wasn't like this in 2000. Both parties wanted it but
neither was so self certain of getting it as they are now.
\_ if you live in CA or another non swing state, feel
free to vote for the Green Party. Nader is NOT
the green party candidate.
\_ go Nader!!!
\_ Ross Perot 4 EVAH!
\_ The Republicans will not implode. They are used to being
the minority party. They will just retrench. The Democrats
might implode if they do badly. -Liberal
\_ Uhm, why? I don't think this assertion is based on reality.
\_ Umm the Dems have controlled Congress for a very large
proportion of the 20th century... maybe 60-70%?
\_ This doesn't explain anything. This is a fact. There
is a significant difference between a fact and a
logical argument. Kindly show your knowledge of
the difference with a demonstration. thzx
\_ Sigh. This motd is not large enough to contain
this explaination. But to start with: the Republican
Party somehow survived Watergate and losing both
Houses of Congress and the Presidency for many years.
It is unlikely that merely a close loss in a
Presidential race will be their undoing. Especially
since they are likely to hold the Senate and almost
certain to hold the House, thereby having at least
some say in the running of the Federal government.
Kapich? The case of the Democrats is not as clearcut.
I am not sure if there is a historical precedent for
the Democratic Party being totally out of power for
8 years. The Democratic Party is fundamentally a
populist, working class and poor party. Their
base comes from people either wholely or partially
dependent on government subsidy. Without controlling
the levers of government, how are they going to
provide the.. uh.. rewards, that being an ally of
the party in power recieves? Furthermore, with a
moderately educated populist base they risk losing
the bulk of their support if they lose too often.
Sort of like how the 49ers have lost most of their
fans by losing week after week. A Conservative
(the real Buckley kind, not the Dubya kind) does
not really mind being in the minority. In fact, he
might be kind of disturbed at being in the majority
too often, since his sense of self is predicated on
being "different" i.e. superior, to the commoner.
A Liberal who does not "lead the masses" is kind of
a sorry sight. -liberal
\_ I don't know that I agree with much of what you
say, but thank you for providing a more detailed
explanation.
\_ "populist, working class, poor party". Are
you joking? Have you looked at their contributors
or political platform recently?
\_ This is lamer than my "GOOG will drop a lot the first week and
a lot more by half a year" prediction - and that's pretty lame.
\_ Props! --googler
\_ What? This is totally off topic. Get over your google
fetish. Links have been posted and were unrefuted by you
kool aid drinkers. Go make your own thread. |
| 2004/10/5-6 [Computer/SW/WWW/Browsers] UID:33925 Activity:nil |
10/5 Is there a way to _always_ get Mozilla to open a new tab/window
for links you click on outside of an actual web browser window?
I hate being in the middle of writing something in a form (webmail,
whatever) and getting a mail or document with a link in it, clicking
on it, and having the page replace the one I was on before. This
is under XP.
\_ tabbrowser extensions plug-in lets you specify what opens a new
tab, I've found it very helpful.
\_ If I click a link with the middle mouse button it opens in a new
tab. If you don't have a middle mouse button, I pity you.
\_ i think you should re-read op's post.
\_ Oh, sorry. I'm not on a WinXP system now, but go to
about:config and see browser.tabs.opentabfor.* Might work...
\_ <DEAD>bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=172962<DEAD>
which links to an earlier Mozilla bug... pending since 2001!
Gotta love open source. You might be able to use an extension
or some hack. Basically tab browsing looks like a big mess and
requests for features seem to sit around forever with devs
saying it's too hard. Whatever. |
| 2004/10/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:33926 Activity:moderate |
10/5 Truth: "To my knowledge, I have not seen any strong, hard evidence
that links the two [al Qaeda and Saddam] ... I have seen the answer to
that question migrate in the intelligence community over a period of a
year in the most amazing way ... Second, there are differences in the
intelligence community as to what the relationship was"
- Rumsfeld, Monday afternoon
Dubya's truth: "A question I answered today ... regrettably was
misunderstood ... I have acknowledged since September 2002 that there
were ties between Al-Qaeda and Iraq"
- Rumsfeld, Monday night, via web site
\_ Yoo-hoo, hello? Bush defenders, where are you now? Neo-cons?
\_ There are no "neo-cons" on the motd. It's a mde up term of the
left to make a word that sounds like "neo-nazi". Get over it.
No one is eating that bait. |
| 2004/10/5-6 [Uncategorized] UID:33928 Activity:low |
10/5 My dad has a lot of LPs and an analog turntable from the old days.
Recently he bought a home theatre system that doesn't have analog
input. Is there something he can use to connect the turntable to the
home theatre? Some kind of A to D converter, I suppose. Thanks.
\_ There's NO analog input? Not even for say a microphone?
\_ Let me get this right. You have a system that doesn't have a single
RCA-jack input?
\_ Is Apple making stereos now?
\_ what's the brand and model of the new system?
\_ "No analog input" -- This seems really unlikely, it's more likely
that there is no phono input, and you get get a phono preamp that
will raise the signal to a line-level signal.
\_ after 10 years there will only be 802 and bluetooth as interfaces
\_ after 10 years if the RIAA has its way there will only be speakers
as outputs and a credit card slot as input. |
| 2004/10/5-6 [Reference/RealEstate] UID:33929 Activity:moderate |
10/5 Just read in an article in today's WSJ that 10-15% of new mortgages
today are interest only ARM, and the percentages are even higher
in regions where housing prices have soared. After say 5 years,
these people would suddenly face much higher payments due to the
principle payments kicking in and potentially higher interest
rates. It uses an example of a $350k loan where the home owner
currently pays about $1900 monthly but would have to pay about
$3700 when the principle kicks in and assuming a higher interest
rate of 7%. Historically, the percentage of these interest only
loan is about 2% of total number of loans, and most of it is used
by very well-off people for tax / invesment purposes, but now it
is often used to entice people to buy a bigger house than they
can afford.
\_ And in the Bay Area the precentage is quite a bit higher, like
30% and even higher in The City, like 60%
\_ And in California the precentage is quite a bit higher, like
50% and even higher in The City, like 60%
\_ Overall in the Bay Area it's about 65% for ARM, but I do not
know what percentage of that is interest-only.
\_ Oops, misread it. I thought you meant all ARMs.
\_ Statistically, the average stay of a first house is about 3.5 yrs.
Getting a ARM for your first house makes sense. There's no
point of paying more interest for a 15 yr loan when you know
you won't stay for more than 5 years on your first house.
\_ with big bubbles and its aftermath, you can throw history out
the window.
the window. there's this thing called negative equity.
\_ Most people keep their house for 7 years before selling.
\_ If that's the case a 5yr ARM and a 15 year fixed are
same.
\_ First time home buyers keep theirs shorter, especially
those who buy condos and townhouses.
\_ Can these people refinance after 5yrs and get a new interest-only
ARM?
\_ Yes.
\_ I get a 15yr fixed mortgage when I bought my first home 4yrs ago. I
guess I'm conservative compared to the average Bay Area homeowner.
\_ I got a 30yr fixed when I bought our first house last year (and
am Bay Area). I guess I'm more conservative than you.
Well... poorer, I guess.
\_ I got a 30 year fixed too when I bought my house 2 years ago
in the south bay. Often loan agents advocate ARM because if
everyone gets 15/30 year fixed, then they will have less business.
\_ the problem with this is if housing prices collapse, these people
will be completely and royally screwed as they wont even be able to
sell the house to recover the mortgage debt.
\_ I recently met a dude from HK who said he still has a condo in
HK with negative equity. The price got halved after they
bought it a few years ago.
HK with negative equity. The price got halved after he and his
wife bought it a few years ago.
\_ And if he bought in Bumfuck, Arkansas, it would have cost
1/20th as much, been 5x larger and the price wouldn't have
changed at all. So?
\_ that's not the point. the point is he and his wife
would rather have bought after the price came down. |
| 2004/10/5-6 [Transportation/Car/RoadHogs, Transportation/Car/Hybrid] UID:33930 Activity:very high |
10/5 Republican Car vs Democrat Car:
Hummer: Republican
Prius: Democrat
M1 Abrams Tank: Libertarian
Bulldozer: Likud
Lowered VW bus with Porsche Engine and big stereo: non-voter
\_ Bug?
Public transportation: America hating libuhral
Bike: Green
Others?
\_ This is stupid. --aaron
\_ BWM 525i
\_With an "I'd rather be smashing imperialism" bumpersticker.
\_ Huh?
\_ Don't you drive a BMW 525i aaron?
\_ Don't you drive a BMW 525i?
\_ no sense of humour
\_ this is your idea of wit? i've got some archives of 1993
internet humor that could keep you in stitches. --aaron
\_ please forgive aaron. He's one of those people who like
to say things like "when I was your age the computer
lab was in W.E.B. (workstations in Evan's basement)
and a bit was ye big and I programmed in registers
but then I got into politics and stopped being funny."
\_ Back in my day, we didn't have no electricity, we
used gas, and dagnabit, we liked it! Back then we used
to clack numbers together. We didn't have none of these
digital computers.
\_ You had numbers? We could only dream that someone
would invent the zero in my day....
Nazi: Mercedes
\_ VW.
\_ Porsche.
\_ Dodge (but really, VW bug. Ein Volk! Ein Wagen!) |
| 2004/10/5-6 [Consumer/TV] UID:33931 Activity:moderate |
10/5 DVD quality < HDTV quality. Are DVDs obsolete?
\_ DSL bandwidth < Fiber bandwidth. Is DSL obsolete?
\_ Vagina < Penis. Is vagina obsolete?
\_ Anus < vagina. Is anus obsolete?
\_ Anus < vagina. Is anus obsolete? No! Some people prefer anus
for its tightness.
\_ Dude. How do you guys handle the issue with anal fissures?
They're a pain in the butt, literally.
\_ I use lubricant and go gentle on my gal when doing her
anal.
\_ hi danh
\_ the above doesn't sound like me at all. - danh
\_ the above doesn't sound like me at all. - danh
\_ BUGGERY IS THE STANDARD!
\_i asked for head.. not more or less
\_ PEGGING! PEGGING IS THE STANDARD!
\_ It only has one ass, it's of no use to me!
\_ cassette quality < CD quality. Cassettes are obsolete.
\_ bullshit. there are different kinds of quality. I'd
rather have inferior audio quality, but still be able
to play the goddamn thing after 10 years, and have something
that might start to show some age in parts but won't
catestrophically fail. fuck optical data storage media.
cassetes will be obsolete when technology comes out with
the sound quality of CD and the general robustness of
tapes. not before. same for VHS vs DVD.
\_ Chill down. Some people do agree with you. See the link
below.
\_ one key difference: with digital media you can have bit-
perfect backup copies. Or rip to mp3 and stop risking
your originals. Analog tapes are failure prone besides
being noisy. CD/DVD could have been designed in a cassette
format like a floppy disk to protect against scratching,
but I guess they were too cheap.
\_ Cassettes and VHS tapes are re-recordable.
\_ So are CDRWs and DVD+-RWs.
\_ http://homepage.mac.com/danielturek/PhotoAlbum50.html
\_ They will be, once blu-ray and HD-DVD come out. But those aren't
out, and the existing DVD base will force it to be supported for
a relatively long time. By 2005 the HD stuff should be out (as in
hollywood movies out on the format).
\_ If blu-ray AND HD-DVD come out, it will be Betamax/VHS all over
again. Note that SACD/DVD-Audio hasn't taken off for that exact
same reason.
\_ Yep. Sony is trying to use it's clout as a movie company (Sony
and they bought MGM, plus Fox signed on for Blu-ray) and plan
to put Blu-ray in the PS3. Blu-ray is superior but HD-DVD
is similar to DVD and therefore cheap. MS's choice for Xbox2
will be interesting. |
| 2004/10/5-6 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:33932 Activity:high |
10/5 "Ambassador Bremer differed with the commanders in the field. That is
his right, but the president has always said that he will listen to his
commanders on the ground and give them the support they need for
victory." -Bush spokesman, today
\_ adding, "Any commander wishing to go into early retirement should
feel free to request more troops"
\_ bremer was too busy implementing free market fantasy land
laws too do a good job in iraq. - danh
\_ [I will fill in his unspoken thoughts in parentheses.]
Bremer says we should have had more troops early on to prevent
looting (to stabilize Iraq and to crush the insurgents).
He says currently we have the appropriate troop levels (because
Iraqis would be pissed to see more U.S. troops flying in to
occupy them). -liberal
[BTW, Lt. Gen. Sanchez was the lead "commander on the ground"
prior to the Allawi handover, and we know all about what was
going on with him. Today, I can't think of any lead
"commander on the ground" to request additional troops.
Is there one?]
\_ Dubya, some commander in chief. Why didn't he give the troops
a good plan to begin with?
\_ We're making progress. It's hard. You can't have a
Commander-in-Chief who says that it's the wrong war at the
wrong place at the wrong time. You can't have a
Commander-in-Chief that gives mixed messages. We're making
progress. It's hard. You can't have a Commander-in-Chief who
says that it's the wrong war at the wrong place at the wrong
time. You can't have a Commander-in-Chief that gives mixed
messages. We're making progress.
\_ Don't forget Poland!
\_ Like Kerry did?
\_ Tell us how much great Poland has contributed. |
| 2004/10/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic] UID:33933 Activity:high |
10/5 Mexico refuses to treat american citizen without medical insurancew
http://www.kake.com/news/headlines/1070556.html
\_ INVADE AND CONVERT THEM TO CHRISTIANITY!
\_ America refuses to treat american citizen without medical insurance
too.
\_ Not true. By Federal law emergency rooms can not refuse
patients. Duh.
\_ Oh, it's illegal? Then I'm sure compliance is perfect
and they adhere to the spirit of the law. Pah. Talk
to anyone who works in an ER sometime.
\_ So emergency rooms are breaking Fed law and denying
patients service? I have never seen reports of this,
ever.
\_ You don't need facts to spew on the motd. Let him be.
\_ Emergency rooms cannot refuse to treat emergencies. If it
is not an emergency, they just refer you to the county
hospital. -used to work in an ER |
| 2004/10/5 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic] UID:33934 Activity:high |
10/4 bipartisan name calling contest. I'll start:
\_
Republican: red-neck, suv lovers, blue-blooded deficit-spending elites
\_ motherfucker (implied by red-neck)
\_ spend and spend, free-labor conservative
Democrat: hippy, tree-hugger, tax-and-spend liberal, baby killer,
limousine liberal
\_ Aren't more "blue-bloods" Democrat these days?
\_ No. They're actually pretty evenly split. The nouveau-riche,
however, are almost exclusively Repubs, Soros gleefully excepted.
\_ We don't know where he gets his money, whether it's from drugs
or what.
\_ you're a right wing nut job!
\_ you're a liberal weiner! |
| 2004/10/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/Gay, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33935 Activity:high |
10/4 bipartisan name calling contest. I'll start:
Republican: red-neck, suv lovers, blue-blooded deficit-spending elites
\_ motherfucker (implied by red-neck)
\_ spend and spend, free-labor conservative
\_ trigger happy bible thumping earth rapers
\_ drunk driving, draft dodging, bible-thumping morons
Democrat: hippy, tree-hugger, tax-and-spend liberal, baby killer,
limousine liberal
\_ Aren't more "blue-bloods" Democrat these days?
\_ No. They're actually pretty evenly split. The
nouveau-riche, however, are almost exclusively Repubs,
Soros gleefully excepted.
\_ We don't know where he gets his money, whether it's
from drugs or what.
\_ pot smoking, draft dodging, free loving dropouts
\_ Lying piece of sack of shit slut trashcan scummest dirtbag...
Bitchhhh!
Democrat: hippy, tree-hugger, tax-and-spend liberal, baby killer,
limousine liberal
\_ Aren't more "blue-bloods" Democrat these days?
\_ No. They're actually pretty evenly split. The
nouveau-riche, however, are almost exclusively Repubs,
Soros gleefully excepted.
\_ We don't know where he gets his money, whether it's
from drugs or what.
\_ pot smoking, draft dodging, free loving dropouts
\_ sounds good to me
\_ you're a right wing nut job!
\_ you're a liberal weiner!
\_ communist treehugging homosexual godless traitors!
\_ Republican: fag haters Democrats: fag lovers
\_ This whole thread is stupid. |
| 2004/10/5-6 [Computer/SW/OS/OsX] UID:33936 Activity:nil |
10/4 OS X for XBox:
http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~ranma1/mac_install.html |
| 2004/10/5-6 [Reference/RealEstate] UID:33937 Activity:very high |
10/4 Vegas bubble pops. Can CA be far behind?
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/041005/vegas_pulte_2.html
\_ Your schaudenfreude is unseemly. I feel pity for you that your
\_ Wow, a Simpsons fan trying to sound smart.
\_ You nailed it perfectly. Now just read that paragraph
in the tone of "the comic store guy."
life is so hollow and empty that triumphalism about housing
prices is one of your high points. Enjoy your glee.
\_ An admirable effort, but still Worst. Troll. Ever.
\_ Uhm, having housing prices drop is a GOOD thing. We pay less
for the house, the property tax goes down, responsible people
can afford to buy a house again. This artificial atmosphere
of low interest rates/high housing prices is not healthy
in the long run. Look at what happened to Tokyo, look at
what happened to LA during the early ninties. The market
is way overdue for a correction.
\_ Lest we forget potentially massive fraud at Fannie
Mae, home of the Democrat sinecure. It could get very
very ugly.
\_ Housing prices drop will have cascading effects on the
economy. You may be paying lower prop tax or rents, but
those who lost their equity will spend less. This will
cause stores and companies to make less and start laying
off workers.
\_ Not to mention some companies own their office buildings.
Now they'll have less capital to work with.
\_ I'm with him. It sounds evil but watching a housing market
crash would please me quite a bit. I don't actually think
it will happen anytime soon though. This Vegas pop isn't
yet a pop so much as a "stop growing so fucking fast".
\_ Why would it please you? Still renting and missed the boat?
\_ No. I am more "nervous homeowner" than showingFreud. -op
\_ Nervous about what? If you truly believe what you're saying
then the only smart thing to do is sell now and buy back after
this coming catastrophe in the housing market.
\_ Nervous about a drop in the housing market of course.
Isn't that what I said? Nervous about something happening
isn't the same thing as being certain that it will happen.
\_ Well, look at it this way. There's no way that
housing prices will go up. $500,000 for a crap house
isn't going to last when interest rates hit 7-8% by
next year. Remember, this has been THE LOWEST rates
have been for the past 40 plus years. You're not
likely to see rates like this again in your lifetime.
So, although they might not go down, it's unlikely
that they will go up. In other words, you shouldn't
rush into a housing market. (Boy, where did you hear
that one before, oh yeah, a couple years ago when
everyone was buying internet stocks, har har har).
Plus, historically house prices track inflation, so
it seems like that there is a very high probability
that there will be a major adjustment coming in the
next 12 months. My family has personally seen this
happen with real-estate in SoCal during the early
ninties. Housing prices dropped 25-33% from peaks.
\_ That could be kind of a weird situation.
Homeowners' loans would not be 'underwater', but
housing prices could still fall in real dollars.
Hmm... So if inflation was a cumulative 200% and
housing prices went up 100%, then your house fell
33% in real dollars, but if you sell you gained
100% in book value.
Thinking about it a bit more, since houses are
generally a heavily-levereged investment, the
homeowner could come out way ahead in this
scenario. If you put $100K down on a $500K house
and a few years later you sell for $1M, you've
increased your equity by 500%, which in real
dollars might still mean doubling your money.
\_ like all heavily-leveraged investments,
you can come out way ahead or way behind.
As leveraged investments go, a house
ain't bad in terms of volatility. In
the current market, it's hard to say ...
\_ I guess just about any heavily-levereged
investment will do well in inflation if
you have fixed-rate interest.
\_ you seem to be talking about really
drastic inflation though. But how did
housing prices go during the 70s,
when inflation was very high?
\_ I just picked big numbers to make the
math easy.
\_ They rose a lot in CA. One thing
not to miss is that this money is
tax-free.
\_ Your HOUSE is so BIG and TAX FREE!
What does this mean? Basically it means that your
downpayment for your house is basically wiped out.
So, there is reason to be nervous... Let's just
hope the next quake isn't too big....
\_ Actually there is a really easy way for housing
prices to go up: inflation shoots up. I am
starting to believe this is how it will play out.
\_ when inflation shoots up, doesn't it mean
that the fed would be forced to raise
the interest rate more? would not that
cause a decrease in home prices? I am
confused on this one. Anyone?
\_ Sure, they would raise interest rates.
Sure this would tend to cause a crimp
in home prices. But inflation could
still force nominal prices up.
\_ I think the effect of a interest
rate rise would be more drastic
and immediate.
\_ I don't think this is going to happen in Bay Area anytime soon.
I can understand it happening in Vegas. LV has land to meet the
demand. But here, there's no more land. There's always a big
demand. Another reason for the Vegas bubble is very similar to
Japan and HK. People in Vegas buy houses in hope of making money
out them. But here people buy houses because they need a place
to live and start a family. Thirdly, there are still people who
can buy houses with all cash regardless of the interest rates.
\_ Oh, it will happen in the Bay Area and relatively soon, too.
The irony is that the renters still won't be able to afford
a house owing to higher rates and the homeowners will still
have a place to live that they can afford. After that, the
prices will go up again. There is a high demand and a lot of
wealth, but demand will fall and take prices with it. Prices
will still be expensive relative to elsewhere, but less than
they are now. All the factors you cite are already in play. |
| 2004/10/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:33938 Activity:insanely high |
10/4 Ok so who won the debate today?
\_ Edwards won. He has better hair, a better smile, and whiter teeth.
\_ actually this works really well especially with undecided
women voters. Case in point, Kennedy, Reagan and *Clinton*
\_ I am a master debater!
\_ can i master debate you?
\_ Don't think anyone did, although the fact checkers are going to have
their work cut out for them with Cheney...VP debate is fairly
meaningless anyway, Lloyd Bentsen wiped the floor with Quayle
but look what happened to him...
\- 1. it's not a debate so in a sense it isnt totally zero sum.
2. edwards agenda was "i am a non-stupid shallow inexperienced
stuffed shirt" ... accomplished, i think.
3. cheney was ok ... he didnt explode or have vast regions of
silence ... which would be sort of reassuring after the
unambigious bush failure last time. --psb
\_ I learned three very important things. The most important thing
I learned is that Cheney is so smart, but so wrong - and this
scares me. The second most important thing I saw was that
Edwards and Cheney's performances make Kerry look really good.
The last thing is that all three make Dubya look very dumb, and I
don't want a dumb guy "who knows how to be tough", as president,
surrounded by a bunch of really smart people who all are wrong.
\_ I just want an explaination of 'global test', nukes to Iran,
\_ On why basis do you determine that Cheney or Edwards is 'smart'?
Because they communicate stylishly or slickly, or on the merit
of their ideas?
\_ Wait I am confused... how can you determine if someone's smart
using either the former OR the latter? The former is just
rhetoric skill, the latter could well be subjective beliefs,
independent of any meaningful notion of 'smart.' -- ilyas
\_ The latter of course.
\_ I have met Gore, Cheney, and Kerry. Of them, Cheney
seemed the most polished, smooth, and professional. Gore
seemed smart in a bookish way. Kerry was kind of dopey
but friendly. Based only on meeting them I would say
Cheney is the smartest and most well-spoken. This is
probably true since he actually had a very successful career
outside of politics and has served on more than one
cabinet. I am not sure what it means, though.
\_ Like I said: So smart, and so wrong - and this scares me.
\_ I don't think you got the memo, buddy.
Conservative = redneck, hick, gunrack, pickup truck, etc.
Liberal = college educated, progressive, intellectual.
\_ While I'm serious, you're horsing around, "buddy".
\_ I just want an explanation of 'global test', bribing Iran
by effectively giving them nuclear weapons,
and the humanitarian need in Sudan but not Iraq.
\_ Ugh, drop it. He for once (count the number of times bush does
it) chose his words poorly. And that's the best thing the
repubs can grasp onto?
\_ This was not an accident, it is central to his platform.
Please, an explanation. Building 1000's of nuclear
ICBMs is a good idea, but building an ABM technology is
bad idea - I don't understand. BTW, why do you delude
yourself into thinking Kerry is something he is not??
Its like leftists pretending not to be Marxists.
\_ That's certainly misleading of you. Where has Kerry said
we should build 1000s of ICBMs? In the 1st debate when
what is most important for America's safety he said
'non-proliferation' and opposing Star Wars II seems quite
consistant with this.
\_ No. Kerry slipped and said what he's been saying for 30
years in public... until he ran for President... but has been
trying to hide since declaring. He's a pro-UN, one-worlder,
get permission from other countries kind of guy. There's
nothing wrong with that, per se, but it is not ok for the
PotUS to be that way, IMO. He erred by revealing what he
really thinks with that comment. It was not a simple slip or
a poor word choice in the sense you imply. It was a poor word
choice for a man running for President. You want it dropped
because you know it will kill your guy if he has to answer it
for real, which he hasn't. Edwards flubbed it again tonight.
The only answer is that he means what he said and that is not
an acceptable answer for the PotUS.
\_ You offer little of substance to support your partisan
conclusion. It's what you would *like* to be true.
\_ He specifically said it doesn't mean "permission from other
countries". In other news, when bush says "it's hard" the
only answer is that he means his penis.
On the permission point, the underlying implication of
course is that these other countries and the UN are denying
permission to protect ourselves, i.e. they are enemies.
Of course it ignores the fact that the case for Iraq being
any kind of real threat and needing a prompt invasion was
never made. But no, Kerry is a French homo Saddam lover.
\_ Another interesting fact is that pro-Kerry/Edwards people jammed
up any available online poll. CNN quickly changed their question
when it had been 84% Edwards, and http://latimes.com took it down when it
was 97% Edwards. http://msnbc.com still shows 70% Edwards.
Thanks goes to the DNC e-mail list I suppose.
\_ Republicans-- older, more mature, less tech saavy.
Democrats-- younger, less mature, more tech saavy, more
likely to be young hippies who write script/loops to
vote on the web sites. |
| 2004/10/5-6 [Uncategorized] UID:33939 Activity:nil |
10/4 RIP Rodney Dangerfield. |
| 2004/10/5 [Recreation/Media] UID:33940 Activity:nil |
10/4 Okay, Rove isn't Darth Vader, Cheney is. Whoa.... |
| 2004/10/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:33941 Activity:high |
10/4 Sinister Republicans strike again
Rangel votes against own draft measure
http://www.thehill.com/news/100604/rangel.aspx |
| 3/17 |