Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2006:January:18 Wednesday <Tuesday, Thursday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2006/1/18-20 [Health, Health/Men] UID:41412 Activity:low
1/17    What are the pros/cons of doing a workout that doesn't include
        weights but rather pushups, situps, pullups, dips, etc. versus
        a weight-lifting workout regimen? I know I can't build as much
        muscle mass as I could with weights, but are there any benefits?
        Thanks.
        \_ What is your goal?
                \_ My goal is to maintain muscle mass and possibly
                   gain some. I've been lifting weights for years,
                   and I'm just getting bored with it. I've changed
                   up my regimen a few times, but I'm just tired of lifting.
                   I had some decent progress, but I think I'm just
                   in the mood to change my workout drastically.
                   Thanks for all the responses so far. -op
                   \_ Check out http://www.crossfit.com  Their approach uses
                      high-intensity training with functional movements
                      like squatting and pullups, and it's very
                      effective for building muscle mass and cutting fat.
        \_ Depends on what you want, really. Sounds like you're describing
           weight-training but using your own body weight instead of
           dumbbells. Any weight exercises (whether your own or others) are
           beneficial to your muscle - your muscle reacts more to heavier
           weights of course (e.g. the tear from lifting 200 lbs vs. your
           body weight of 150 lbs would cause muscle to rebuild in stronger
           form). Physicians often recommend novices to start doing weights
           using their own body mass (situps, pushups, dips, etc) before
           attempting real weights.
        \_ less control ; more difficult to vary stress levels and/or precisely
           target different muscles. However it is definitely cheaper and more
           convenient from an equipment standpoint.  You should be somewhat
           suspect of a regimen tthat someone is trying to 'sell' you if
           they're going to get some benefit (i.e. a sale) out of you.
        \_ there is a surprising variation of exercises you can do with just
           your own body mass. pushups for example: wide stance, narrow,
           using an exercise ball (either on your feet or on your hands).
           granted, doesn't have the potential of weights, but there's a lot
           to be done.
        \_ You want to increase muscle mass or cardio for your heart?
           \_ ... or burn fat?
           \_ ... or build endurance?
        \_ I have no advice, but I found these fascinating:
           http://www.geocities.com/rutgerseskrima/art_prison.html
           http://exn.ca/Stories/2003/06/20/54.asp
2006/1/18-20 [Health, Health/Skin] UID:41413 Activity:low
1/18    Pentagon plans to produce Mass Intestination weapon
        http://tinyurl.com/8qvrf - danh
        \_ "deploying the weapon merely invites other nations to follow suit."
           Having already considered that, the Pentagoy has already secretly
           deployed a Code-Three classfied space-age anti-ADS hidden
           personnel defense system to all military bases throughout out
           country.  Next time when you visit a military base, don't say
           anything like "I can put these under my clothes" when you see the
           $2/roll of aluminum foils in the kitchens, or you'll be immediately
           $2/roll aluminum foils in the kitchens, or you'll be immediately
           arrested by the MP's and tossed into a torture chamber!
           \_ Is "pentagoy" a typo, or are you actually mocking the pentagon
              for their goyish ways?
              \_ Sorry.  Typo.
        \_ I guess I don't get it.  Is a pain gun worse than a lead pellet
           gun in some way?
           \_ Not to mention that it takes seconds to cause an effect.
           \_ Testing was conducted on heavily-screened "participants,"
              unlikely to represent an actual crowd in terms of health, age,
              discipline (i.e., moving away rapidly rather than freezing in
              pain), grouping (i.e., individuals with room to move rather than
              tightly packed mobs), and bling (i.e., having removed all metal
              objects prior to testing as opposed to having genital piercing
              and other objects that might heat up uncomfortably under the
              ray). Also, consider use of "pain ray" for traceless torture.
              I'm not saying it's worse, I'm just saying it's more complex.
2006/1/18-20 [Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:41414 Activity:nil
1/18    "U.S. is No. 7 in FIFA rankings"
        http://sports.yahoo.com/sow/news?slug=ap-fifarankings&prov=ap&type=lgns
        US ranks higher than England, Italy and Germany.  What a different
        world.
        \_ Given that England, Italy, and Germany all have to play each other
           and US's only real competition is Mexico, it's surprising this
           hasn't happened before.
2006/1/18 [Health/Women] UID:41415 Activity:low
1/18    Why is birth control called "birth control" instead of "pregnancy
        control".  Condoms, pills, and so on are really controlling pregnancy,
        not birth.
        \_ They are called "contraceptives" where I come from.  "birth
           control" is metonymic.
        \_ Because out here in the real world it is generally assumed that
           pregnancy leads to birth.  This is a basic birds n bees thing.
           \_ no.. it leads to the guillotine of partial birth abortion
              \_ hi troll
        \_ fewer syllables
2006/1/18-20 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Recreation/Humor] UID:41416 Activity:kinda low
1/17    The Iraq Invasion as Zork I transcript
        http://www.defectiveyeti.com/archives/001561.html
        \_ You went to the trouble to transcript that boring drivel?
                                      \_ transcribe
           \_ You have missed the humor and been eaten by a Grue.
              \_ It's not very humorous.  -tom
                 \_ It was worth a few chuckles.  It wasn't the super brilliant
                    "OMGROFLMAOWTFBBQ!!!!" that 90% of the ditto head "me too!"
                    commenters made it out to be but it had humor value.  You
                    didn't think "IT IS NOT THAT KIND OF SEAL" was funny?
                    \_ No.  -tom
                       \_ So what's out there that you do find funny?
                          \_ Clearly not this.
                             \_ Clearly.  I want to know what he does find
                                funny.
        \_ That was pretty funny, but it didn't need FILL SHOES.
           Probably lost some audience with that.
           \_ The truth hurts huh?
              \_ The weak trolls are out in force today.
              \_ nah, the FILL SHOES line was forced, albeit true
2006/1/18-20 [Politics/Domestic/Immigration, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:41417 Activity:nil
1/17    I don't get it.  Why hasn't the Smedly Butler plot gotten more
        attention, either at the time or now?
        http://www.claytoncramer.com/amcoup.html
        \_ Perhaps because it wasn't so much a plot by Smedly Butler as a
           plot defused by Smedly Butler?
           \_ Well, ok, but I mean, a bona-fide pseudo-fascist plot to
              assassinate the President and stage a military coup in
              America, and nobody even gets punished?  Talk about swept
              under the rug.
2006/1/18 [Uncategorized] UID:41418 Activity:low
1/18    people can't read my email (using pine) has X-UNKNOWN characterset?
        \_ because?  if it has?  while under a blue moon?  during the month
           of may?  what?
        \_ Could you phrase that in the form of a complete sentence?
2006/1/18-21 [Computer/SW/Apps/Media] UID:41419 Activity:low
1/18    Anyone know of a good website that has explanations of song lyrics?
        Googling for individual songs is nigh impossible.  The sort of thing
        you'd imagine would be on the bands' websites but often isn't.
        \_ Explanations?
           \_ Someone told me that this song was about trying to get into
              some girl's pants.
              http://www.lyricsfreak.com/e/extreme/52203.html
              \_ They are all about trying to get into some girl's
                 pants, even the ones written by women, just the
                 opposing viewpoint. Yes, this means "Happy Birthday" is
                 about trying to get into some girl's pants.
                 \_ For example, "Happy Birthday, Mr. President" as sung
                    by Marilyn Monroe.
                    \_ ...and which girl's pants was Marilyn trying to get
                       into?
                       \_ She's trying to steal from inside Jacqueline's pants.
        \_ "People often ask me, 'what is that song about?'  If I could
            say it in words other than what are in the song...I would have
            written a different song."   --Elvis Costello
        \_ I've been wondering about the same thing.  Some lyrics are too
           poetic for me to understand.  (I'm a foreigner and I did poorly in
           English 1B at a community college.)  For example, what is Barbra
           Streisand's "Send In The Clowns" really about?  Very beautiful
           melody, but I can't understand the lyrics.
           http://www.digitaltimes.com/karaoke/singers/SendInTheClowns.html
           \_ http://www.songmeangings.net.
           \_ http://www.songmeanings.net.
              It's a Sondheim song from a musical, it doesn't have to make
              sense.  -tom
              \_ Well, it makes sense in the context of the show.  It's a
                 couple that got together when they were younger, then were
                 split for 10 or so years.  She was pregnant but didn't tell
                 him, and is on the road as an actress.  He marries a 19 year
                 old virgin who won't sleep with him.  They meet again a year
                 into his marriage, have a brief affair, but he ends it. This
                 is when she has this song.  They've both been fools.  Ergo
                 "don't bother, they're here."
                 \_ Well, it could mean that.  Or "send in the clowns" could
                    be old show biz talk for throwing in the towel (as in
                    things are so bad that salvage is impossible and you
                    send in the clowns to distract the audience).
                    \_ Or it could be... both.
                    \_ Hmm, the more I read the lyrics the more it sounds like
                       what you said.
                       "Me here at last on the ground, you in mid-air..."
                       "Sure of my lines,  No one is there."
                       "Don't you love farce?  My fault, I fear.  I thought
                       that you'd want what I want."
                       "Losing my timing this late in my career?"
                       All these sound like "oops" moments when performing a
                       play on stage.
              \_ I got redirected to http://lb3.netster.com
                 \_ try http://www.songmeanings.net (not "meangings")
           \_ It was originally the theme song to EPS2, when EPS2 had
              its original title "Attack of the Clowns."
2006/1/18-21 [Computer/SW/Apps, Computer/SW/Languages/Perl] UID:41420 Activity:low
1/18    I need to gain 20-30lbs of weight and want to track my progress.
        I could do this in an Excel spreadsheet but I don't have it
        installed right now and would rather have some nifty web thingie -
        I googled and most of the stuff I found kind of sucked. Before
        I revert to Excel (if lazy) or write my own (if bored) does anyone
        have recommendations?
        \_ "need" to gain?  why?
           \_ My BMI is 15.4 . If it wasn't from being sick and/or I was a
              girl, I'm sure that's eating disorder range :) -op
        \_ http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/library/l-gnuplot
           Look at figure 8.
           \_ Sigh, duh. I actually have used gnuplot a fair amount. This
              should be perfect for an unpolished barebones thing. Thanks!
              -op
        \_ If I wanted to gain 30 pounds, I'd get a spiked tail grafted on to
           my ass.  This would help with both balance and self-defense, and
           seems like the best possible way to gain weight.  It might also be
           possible to use your mouse or trackball with the tip of your tail,
           increasing productivity.
        \_ Dude, just roll your own. It's a really simple bit of Perl.
           \_ I'm not a big Perl hacker. It is pretty trivial but a nice
              one with login/security, and pretty pictures rather than text
              would take me at least a few hours to write, because I'm not
              particularly familiar with the web/graphics libraries - op
        \_ The less you do on the couch, the faster you can put on that
           weight.  (or more seriously, vi does this just fine)
           \_ depends on what kind of weight.  he could put on a lot of
              weight sitting on the couch or in front of the computer, he
              just needs to eat more.  EAT MORE LARD!
              \_ I lost the weight because I was/am sick, and need to gain it
                 back in a healthy way or it defeats the purpose. Thanks
                 anyway! (defeating silly comments with reasonable responses)
                 - op
                 \_ So far as I know the only way to quickly gain weight is
                    to gain fat.  If you eat right and exercise a lot, you
                    might take a couple of years to gain 30lbs of lean-ish
                    body mass.  Unless you have naturally high levels of
                    testosterone and/or take steroids.  Though there are some
                    other drugs you could possibly take.
                    \_ Luckily (?), I am actually on (safe) steriods for medication
                       for a few months. I have seen a nutritionist... it's not
                       too bad to put on a pound a week, it turns out (eat a lot
                       and drink Ensure). More than that, maybe I'll get lucky -
                       if I'm underweight, maybe my body wants to recover or
                       something. -op
        \_ I know dawne wrote one a few years ago; I'll see if it's still lying
           around somewhere and easy to get working again.  --dbushong
           \_ Found it: http://bushong.net/dawn/widgets/tracker
              The graphing's a little sluggish b/c GD's broken under mod_perl
              for me, but otherwise it seems to work.  --dbushong
              \_ Oh, right, it doesn't handle weight _gain_.  I'll work on it.
        \_ If you have a palm use EatWatch:
           http://www.fourmilab.ch/hackdiet/palm
2006/1/18-20 [Recreation/House] UID:41421 Activity:nil
1/18    Hello homeowners who have marble floors. I posted the following
        message a few weeks ago:
        http://csua.com/?entry=41190
        I know the answer now. First of all water based cleaners don't
        work well. Use the floor finish stripper and scrub your marbles
        till it's clean. Assume the marble's flat and clean, coat it
        using any "urethane fortified" solution. Some solutions
        require proper mixture, read the instructions carefully.
        Let it dry 30 min, and open all the windows unless you want
        to get high. Repeat coating two more times. Viola! You now
        have shiny looking, sealed marbles.
2006/1/18-21 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Recreation/Humor] UID:41422 Activity:nil Cat_by:auto
1/18    http://www.babybushtoys.com
        \_ Wow, that looks like an awful lot of work for jokes that are only
           "heh" level.
2006/1/18-21 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:41423 Activity:kinda low
1/18    Zogby: 52% of Americans agree that Bush should be impeached:
        http://www.democrats.com/bush-impeachment-poll-2
        \_ How does that jibe with the poll that said "americans don't care
           about presidential spying; they think it's making them safer"
           \_ urlP
              \_ #t
           \_ About as well as polls comparing "police should be able to
              arrest people" to "police should be able to arrest people
              without warrants or PC."
        \_ Amusing but not very interesting.   Classic push polling.  Yawn.
           \_ Please elaborate.
              \_ "If your spouse was cheating on you, would you be upset?"
                 "96% of spouses said yes to this question."
                 "Headline on motd: 96% of spouses are mad dog killers!  Beware
                  of married people!"
                  \_ President Bush has said that he has wiretapped American
                     citizens without the approval of a judge.  You're barking
                     up the wrong tree.
                     \_ What happened was illegal and impeachable if you think
                        Ohio was stolen in '04.  As usual, cooler heads will
                        prevail.  I do admit a small shock that you honestly
                        think his handlers would put him in front of a mic to
                        say he had committed an impeachable offense if it was
                        that simple and obvious.  I'm not the one barking.  I
                        find the whole thing silly.  His political enemies
                        have been talking impeachment for years, they bring it
                        up for each new 'scandal' hoping against hope this is
                        the one that sticks.  Anyway, if you think this is so
                        horrible, what do you think of Echelon which is/was a
                        much broader program that it is claimed scooped up data
                        in mass quantities on everyone not specific people
                        suspected of treasonous activities or terrorist ties?
                        Shouldn't Echelon's creation and use have triggered
                        the impeachment of the last few administrations?
                        \_ was the use of ECHELON for domestic surveillance
                           authorized by FISA?
                           also, pp probably meant to say "President Bush has
                           not denied that ..."
                           \_ Complicated question.  Echelon technically only
                              monitors global non-USA communication and
                              therefore does not require FISA authorization.
                              However, there are unsubstantiated allegations
                              that Echelon partner countries can monitor
                              communications inside the US without FISA
                              approval.  This is technically correct, however
                              there has been no proof that I know of this has
                              ever happened.  I imagine Echelon would also
                              pick up communication between US nationals who
                              are abroad, and I do not know if this would
                              require FISA approval.  I imagine in the
                              deliberate instance, FISA approval is required.
                              However, if US-to-US national communication
                              abroad is captured as part of the general Echelon
                              monitoring, I assume no prior FISA authorization
                              would be obtained.
                              \_ That is a truly amazing bit of intellectual
                                 dodging.  So you're not ok with tapping the
                                 NSA tapping specific targets suspected of
                                 terrorism ties after 9/11, but you're ok with
                                 using Echelon or other systems to tap
                                 American citizens in bulk as long as the
                                 tapping is done by a foreign agency who
                                 then hands over the data to us (and we do
                                 the same so they can spy on their citizens)?
                                 Oh-tay!  Let's hear it for putting one's
                                 party and political agenda ahead of common
                                 sense and civil rights.  IMO, both are wrong,
                                 but Echelon is far worse and no one screamed
                                 about that.  IIRC, the NYT was actually doing
                                 op-eds defending Echelon at the time.  Sigh.
                                 \_ A lot of people have screamed about it.
                                    The crucial difference being that some
                                    abstract concept of listening stations, no
                                    matter how bad, does not ring the same
                                    alarm bells with Joe Schmo as "wiretaps".
                                    I've noticed a pretty strong rise in the
                                    number of people using PGP/SSL'ing web
                                    pages/whatever since the mid-1990s, that I
                                    wouldn't just ascribe to a general growth
                                    in security & privacy awareness--many whom
                                    I know do so out of principle, to "add
                                    entropy" in one colleague's words.  Doesn't
                                    make much difference, but it's a start.
                                    And yes, it's wrong.  -John
                                    \_ Who was screaming for impeachment?
                                 \_ Bushco was not wire tapping just people
                                    suspected of terrorism. They were wire
                                    tapping everyone. That is the crucial
                                    difference.
                                    \_ And this is different from Echelon
                                       how exactly?
                                       \_ Echelon spies on non-Americans,
                                          hence non-voters.
                    \_ Opinion piece from John Schmidt, AAG 1994 to 1997.
                       "President had legal authority to OK taps"
                       http://csua.org/u/eoj
                           indicated in more or less words that ..."
        \_ it's 52% think "Congress should consider" impeachment not
           "Bush should be impeached", but anyways ...
           The key marker here is IF they added the phrase, U.S. citizens
           "suspected of terrorist activity", which is what Dubya would say
           he did, and then you'd have a much different result.
        \_ According to phone company execs, the NSA was basically wiretapping
           everyone, not just suspected terrorists, and running a massive
           data mining operation on it. When Americans find out that it is
           *their* phone calls that have been tapped, they will be pissed.
           \_ Again: this is different from Echelon how?  Americans already
              heard about Echelon and already assumed they were being
              tapped.  Nothing is going to come from this or any of the
              previous 50 "obviously rises to impeachable levels of offense"
              scandals coming off the DNC fax machine.
              \_ We'll see. You seem to very sure of your reading of the
                 public's attitude. After massive GOP losses in November,
                 let's see what Congress does. When it becomes clear that
                 the NSA was wiretapping the media, Congress, the judiciary
                 and the Kerry campaign, it might cause an uproar.
                 \_ I'm very sure of human nature.  People are what they are.
                    One thing the vast bulk of people never do is get overly
                    upset about anything for more than one news cycle.  People
                    care about their food and gas bills, their rent, who is in
                    the super bowl this year and how about that rain yesterday,
                    it was someithng, huh?  Elections are local.  Incumbents
                    almost never lose.  Nothing massive is going to happen.
                    Go have a beer and watch the superbowl with everyone else.
                    \_ Gas bills are way up and the Abramoff scandal could have
                       some real impact.  These things are far more real than
                       complexities concerning NSA spying.
2006/1/18-21 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:41424 Activity:moderate
1/18    "I predict to you that this administration will go down in history as
         one of the worst that has ever governed our country."
        -Hillary Clinton (Jan 18, 2006)
        \_ I predict to you that Hillary Clinton will foolishly run for
           the president and fail, setting up for another four years of
           GOP incompetence that will go down in history as the worst
           platform that has ever controlled our country.
           \_ I predict that she will not even come in second in the primary.
           \_ President Hillary Clinton. Get used to saying it, because
              you will be saying it for eight long years.
              \_ Just because someone *really* wants power *really* badly
                 doesn't mean we should give it to them.  Quite the opposite.
                 It'll be interesting if she does run and some how gets
                 nominated for the (D) party.  She has never gone through the
                 journalist gauntlet.  Never been in a public debate of any
                 note.  Never really had to do any of the things experienced
                 politicians normally have to go through to get into the top
                 levels of politics.  No polish.  The (R) would have to find
                 a child raping axe murderer to lose to someone so poorly
                 prepared for a brutal Presidential bid.  I'm not sure why
                 you'd want a President who didn't earn it but whatever.
                 \_ As opposed to Dubya?  What would "we" need to do, have
                    millionaires give Hillary an oil company, a baseball
                    team, and a magazine to run into the ground first?  -tom
                    \_ What "we" are you talking about?  If the (D) party had
                       put up a human being instead of a self righteous "I'm
                       owed the Presidency" plank of wood, Bush would've been
                       crushed.  They put up the proverbial axe murdering
                       child rapist and lost.  Big deal.  Kerry was even
                       worse.  He only happened through Dean's "Yeaaarrrggh!"
                       fluke, and the idea that "Even though we think he's
                       an idiot we think he's got the creds to beat W so let's
                       nominate this guy we don't otherwise believe in".  He
                       was the only available candidate in 04 worse than Gore
                       was in 00.  Going back a bit we can see Dole was also
                       only running because "it was his turn" just like Gore
                       and he got crushed and rightly so.  Bush I was busted
                       on stage looking at his watch during a debate.  Clearly
                       not interested and out of touch.  Crushed.  Rightly so.
                       Attacking a former candidate or President doesn't make
                       Hillary a better candidate or more Presidential for the
                       future.
                       \_ I realize that this puts me in a small minority, but
                          I genuinely liked and believed in Kerry.
                          \_ I'm not saying he had zero real supporters just
                             that the typical noise at the time (on the motd
                             and other places) was "We don't like him but we
                             think his war record can win enough middle ground
                             people to beat W".  Very cynical and not a very
                             good way to choose a candidate.
        \_ If we ever managed to uncover all of the backroom bullshit
           corporate and private selling out that's going on?  That might be
           true.  Will history reveal all that?  Probably not.
           \_ Why do you hate America?
           \_ Why do you think any of this is somehow a new thing?  You think
              politics was clean and money free until January 2001 when it
              suddenly all magically changed?  Status quo.
        \_ BUSHCO is worse than Nixon, Hover and Grant? WOW.
           \_ Nixon was embarassing.  Hoover probably was swamped by
              inexorable market forces.  Grant allowed all kinds of
              corruption and failed to win the Reconstruction, but those
              racist southern bastards were probably gonna do all that shit
              one way or another anyway.  BUSHCO has mushroomed our national
              debt and deficit in addition to discarding our civil rights,
              making "USA" synonymous with "torture", alienated most of
              our allies....  It'll take two generations to undo the damage
              BUSHCO has caused.
              \_ Well this is an improvement.  Weren't you saying last year
                 it would take "many" generations?  So things are better
                 now.  All we need to do now is stay the course.
                 \_ Because clearly motd consists of only two people, so
                    naturally....
                 now.  All we need to do now is stay the course.
                    \_ Same phrasing.  Likely the same person.  And certainly
                       coming off the same DNC talking points memo either way.
                        \_ I never weighed in on BUSHco before.  I wrote the
                           above.  I read google news and don't watch much TV,
                           that is how my opinions are formed.  If I echo DNC,
                           then maybe the liberal media conspiracy is true,
                           OR maybe I came to my conclusion above independently.
              \_ Nixon was embarrassing? Do you even remember watergate? Nixon
                 ran roughshod over the constitution to cover the asses of his
                 campaign staffers, &c. He directed the intelligence services
                 to cover up these crimes.
                 In contrast, BUSHCO has been overtly working for the defense
                 of the REPUBLIC.  Even if this effort has enriched them pers-
                        \_ Plame?  Halliburton?  Misleading us about WMD?
                           \_ I'm not PP.  With that in mind:
                              Plame: stupid but not the first time someone in
                              government outted an agent.
                                \_ Not the last either for BushCO (see Khan)
                              Halliburton: what about it?
                              Misleading: this is so beaten to death.  Every
                              western government and spy agency in the world
                              believed it at the time.  Let the horse die.
                 onally, the primary focus has been on the safety and security
                 of Americans. Arguably they have used poor judgment in many
                 situations, but their motivation is not overly criminal as
                 Nixon's was.
                        \_ Blameworthy as Nixon was and non-criminal as this
                           administration is, BUSHCO has done more real harm
                           to our international image (torture, lies about WMD)
                           and to our long-term finances than Nixon did.
                           I stand by what I say:  Nixon was embarassing,
                           BUSHCO has done massive harm.
                           \_ I find it curious that people seem to think the
                              US had some sort of golden image around the
                              world pre-Bush.  The US not only had a history of
                              but an active and intentional policy throughout
                              the Cold War of supporting thugs, dictators and
                              drug dealers as long as they were OUR thugs.  I
                              don't see any change for the worse in terms of
                              how the US deals with the rest of the world.  At
                              least we now give lip service and sometimes
                              actually do something to push better ideals than
                              we have in the past.
                 \_ So says you. I suspect that when we really find out the
                    extent of the NSA wiretapping, it will turn out to be
                    much worse than anything Nixon did. Using the NSA to
                    spy on your political opponents, things like that...
                    And the Valerie Plame coverup is pretty criminal as well.
                    Not like the Watergate coverup, but pretty bad.
                 By most stds, the Grant admin was the epitome of poor mgmt.
                 His VP had accepted bribes (let's see some proof that Cheney
                 has been bribed), his brother-in law was taking bribes and
                 giving him bad advice, the Treasury Dept. was taking bribes,
                 the Sec. of War was taking bribes, &c. You are willing to
                 write this all off as southern bastards acting normally, but
                 you won't write off BUSHCO as southern bastards? Sounds like
                 a double std to me.
                 I noticed that you didn't include Hoover. Why? Perhaps the
                 Depression and his failure to deal w/ that were maybe just a
                 BIT worse than ANYTHING BUSHCO has done?
                 BTW, I completely left out any reference to the Alien and
                 Sedition acts, which were at least as bad as the Patriot Act.
        \_ Are people too young to remember living under Carter?
           \_ Much better to flush $2-$3 trillion down the toilet instead of
              spending it on switching on renewables.  God will provide more
              spending it on switching to renewables.  God will provide more
              magic oil!
              \_ Apparently, yes, you're too young to remember Carter.
                 \_ Nope, I'm not.  He may not have managed things well,
                    but he was the last President to tell the truth on
                    energy.
                    \_ You win this week's Motd Blue Ribbon For Understatement!
                       Carter "may not have managed things well, but...".  How
                       old were you when that loser gave the infamous "malaise
                       speech"?  How old during that little itty bitty
                       "Hostage Crisis" thing?  How badly were you hurt from
                       double digit inflation?  You may have been alive but
                       you don't remember.
                        \_ Get ready for more maliase, and this time the
                           energy crisis is a permanent one.
                           \_ Is this the Peak Oil thing again?  So if Carter
                              "told us the truth about energy" back in 76-80,
                              what did Reagan x2, Bush I, Clinton x2 do about
                              it differently that saves them from your scorn
                              yet Bush II is deserving of it?  Actually, since
                              we're here, what did Carter do about it?
                                \_ Carter put programs in place to start moving
                                   the nation away from oil dependency, which
                                   Reagan quickly abandoned.  Fortunately for
                                   Reagan, the oil bonanza that followed saved
                                   our asses.  That oil bonanza is rapidly
                                   fading ... Like I said, none of the
                                   Presidents after Carter dealt with the
                                   problem or admitted to it.  I blame all
                                   them for the position we are in.  However,
                                   Bush's wasteful spending is using money
                                   that could be used to get us out of the
                                   situation, that's all.  Hence the flushing
                                   of money down the toilet.
                                   \_ Ok, I looked this up.  Carter's plan was
                                      essentially: conserve/reduce usage, burn
                                      a lot of coal, insulate homes, create a
                                      strategic oil reserve, put solar on 2.5
                                      million homes by 1985.  Today: cars burn
                                      less gas, we tried to not burn coal until
                                      more recently when cleaner burning tech
                                      could be put in place, homes and all new
                                      construction are insulated, we have a
                                      strategic oil reserve.  I have no idea
                                      how many homes have solar but people can
                                      get it if they want to.  Which parts of
                                      the plan got ditched?
                                      I found several sources but it was all
                                      nicely summed up here:
                    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/carter/filmmore/ps_energy.html
                                      So, where were we?  Oh yes, Peak Oil and
                                      Carter's energy policy.  What about it?
                                      What did Carter do besides depress
                                      everyone and lead poorly?  Check out
                                      some of the quotes in this classic:
                    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/carter/filmmore/ps_crisis.html
                                      Jimmy, where are you now?  We need you!
                                      Oh yeah, you're out there putting your
                                      stamp of approval on stolen elections in
                                      South America.
                                      \_ If the GOP hadn't gutted the Carter
                                         CAFE standards and written an exemption
                                         literally large enough to drive an
                                         SUV through, Americans would be using
                                         1/2 the gasoline we do today. Gasoline
                                         is 1/2 of our total energy consumption
                                         so we would be using 25% less oil.
                                         This is most of our imported oil.
                                         We would be in much better shape if
                                         we hadn't catered to the oil and
                                         car interests.
                                         \_ I gave you a detailed summary of
                                            his energy plan and 2 URLs straight
                                            from Carter's speeches which you
                                            couldn't bother to post in the
                                            first place so I looked it up for
                                            you.  Now you give more
                                            unreferenced noise and
                                            speculation.  Put up for shut up.
                                            If you're going to defend a useless
                                            wanker like Carter, you need to
                                            prove your statements.  I'm not
                                            doing any more of your research
                                            for you.
                                            [Actually, I lied.  I looked up
                                             CAFE and it predated Carter]
                                     http://www.ita.doc.gov/td/auto/cafe.html
                                            So, Carter didn't even do CAFE.
                                            What did Carter do?
                                            \_ See above. He implemented
                                               stringent CAFE standards, just
                                               like I said. Do you really have
                                               this tough a problem with the
                                               English language?
                                               \_ Stringent is a relative
                                                  term.  Go find us the actual
                                                  standard and we can then
                                                  all decide how stringent
                                                  they are.  The concept
                                                  sure as hell wasn't his and
                                                  if his only claim to fame
                                                  in 4 years in office was to
                                                  pick highish CAFE numbers
                                                  in 1978 after being in office
                                                  ~2 years then we sure as hell
                                                  didn't need him.  Any random
                                                  beaurocrat could've picked a
                                                  number.
        \_ "When you look at the way the House of Representatives has been
           run, it has been run like a plantation, and you know that I'm
           talking about."
                \_ It's spin unless you include the second half of that
                   thought.
                   \_ The second half?
                        \ "It has been run in a way so that nobody with a
                           contrary view has had a chance to present
                           legislation, to make an argument, to be heard."
                           \_ Gosh!  Imagine that!  When you have a government
                              system with 2 major parties, the party out of
                              power can't get their agenda through!  Shocking!
                              Were you equally upset about the 50 years the
                              Democrat party ran the show while Republicans
                              got sidelined?  Sheesh, read a civics book.
                              Hillary said a stupid thing and barely got
                              called on it.  This time.  All this idiocy will
                              come back later though.  Always does.
                                \_ Of course, but the media is "enraged" about
                                   the plantation bit, not the whining that
                                   the Democrats can't get their agenda
                                   through.
        \_ President Hillary Rodham Clinton. Get used to saying it
           because we will be saying it for eight long years.
                \_ Good news for Republicans ... Osama bin Laden is saying
                   new attacks are planned for the United States.  Voters
                   will be scared and vote in more right wingers promising
                   to take away our liberty for security!
                   \_ The rest of the Osama tape saying essentially, "we offer
                      you a truce to rebuild Afghanistan and Iraq" which sure
                      sounds like weakness and surrender.  This is much more
                      likely to be played as "See?  We're winning, now we just
                      need to stay the course and finish them off" than "OMG!
                      We're going to get hit again eeeek!"  But, yes, anytime
                      Osama spews forth it is bad for the Democrat party.
                      \_ He's always offering compromises that sound
                         "reasonable".
                         But of course if we meet offer #1 then immediately
                         there will be offer #2 until offer #n which is "the
                         whole world is a Muslim theocracy ruled by me"
                         \_ Of course.  I don't think it'll be portrayed like
                            that by either party or anyone in the media,
                            though.  Dealing with someone like Osama just isn't
                            an option.  So the discussion will be on what it
                            means that he said it.  I'm surprised he's still
                            alive, simply due to age, stress, and poor living
                            conditions but that's another story.  I don't
                            think he's in a position to negotiate anything
                            even if he was a reliable treaty partner and we
                            actually wanted to talk with him.
                      \_ It's "Democratic" party.  Not "Democrat" party.
                         \_ I have a term paper due in a few months.  Will you
                            spell check that for me, too?  Thanks!
                            \_ If you post it to MOTD, I'm sure we'd have a
                               blast editing your term paper for you.
                               \_ Holy crap!  This could be really entertaining!
                                  Why not let the motd collectively write
                                  your paper?
                                  \_ Meh, I've generally found that MOTD has
                                     the collective creativity of a kumquat.
                                     We're quite creative provided we have
                                     something to start working on, though....
2006/1/18-20 [Uncategorized] UID:41425 Activity:nil
1/18    Yahoo is rolling out SSL for everything! Seems a bit flaky and
        inconsistent right now, but maybe they are in the process of
        converting.
        \_ .... sorry but... so?
        \_ url?
2006/1/18-20 [Uncategorized] UID:41426 Activity:nil
1/18    Does anyone know of a good, easy-to-use online test/quiz generator?
        The only one I know of is Blackboard, which both costs and has
        too many features. I'm looking for something that makes it easy
        to create multiple choice question tests, grades it, and then
        submits the name of the student who just completed it. Thanks.
        \_ Sakai probably has something like that.
           http://www.sakaiproject.org  -tom
2006/1/18-21 [Recreation/Activities] UID:41427 Activity:nil
1/18    German thief left a Hansel and Grentel trail and got caught:
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060118/od_nm/germany_thief_dc
2006/1/18-21 [Health/Men] UID:41428 Activity:nil
1/18    Why Irish men are horniest:
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060118/od_nm/science_ireland_dc
2006/1/18 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:41429 Activity:nil
1/18    A real Republican sticks to his guns. The following article proves
        that Michael Brown is a very bad Republican by admitting mistakes:
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/fema_brown
2017/09/21 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
9/21    
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2006:January:18 Wednesday <Tuesday, Thursday>