|
2006/3/23-25 [Politics/Domestic/Abortion] UID:42387 Activity:moderate |
3/22 I'm a foreigner and new to the concept of the legislative branch. If both the executive and the congress are controlled by pro-Life Republicans, why don't the congress & Bush pass an anti-abortion law? Why do you guys need the judiciary branch to interpret what is legal and what is not when the other 2 branches can create the law? \_ The Constitution places limits on the power of Congress and the executive branch; the Supreme Court's job is to enforce those limits by striking down legislation which is unconstitutional. -tom \_ this is the most interesting part of US government. There is one branch of government which is not exactly democratic and provide a check and balance for those who are in the minority group. I don't think other government put this much power to a handful of judges like the way US does. \_ not being democratic ensures that one branch can do what is right as opposed to what is popular. \_ that is why when I said "not exactly democratic," I meant in a good way. \_ huh? every branch of the government has its checks and balances. in the case of the judicial branch, the president nominates the judges and senate has to confirm \_ And judges can be impeached, as well. \_ my point is that once they are confirmed, they are there for life, and they can do things that are right but unpopular. If all 3 branches are elected, they may all be susceptible to the current popular opinion, which may not always be what is right. In that sense, the judicial branch is a good check on susceptibility to the current popular opinion. \_ Canada has a judicial branch that has pretty much the same powers (as I understand it) but they are appointed unilaterally by the Prime Minister. \_ I wouldn't exactly call it "undemocratic." Congress can always amend the constitution, which overrules the judges. We all agreed (3/4?) on the constitution when we became states, overrulling a 3/4 majority with a 1/2 majority isn't very democratic either. \_ Actually, this is true, it is possible for Congress to pass legislation that will essentially overturn Roe v. Wade. Whether that law will withstand a Constitutional Challenge is questionable. The reasoning behind Roe v. Wade is actually rather flawed (at least according to many law pundits) and is based on the rather flimsy (at least in my opinion) "right to privacy." The Court itself refused to delve into when "life" begins and the dissenting opinion by Rheinquist shows that the debate is hardly resolved. Roe v. Wade has a good chance of being overturned with the recent SD legislation. I'm quite sure that the reason why the right wing government has avoided pushing for anti-abortion legislation is because it will no doubt polarize the nation even further and may result in the party losing many seats. Abortion is one of those things that most politicians really don't want to deal with in reality because it is so controversial. \_ Check your assumptions. While there are aspects of Roe v. Wade that suffer from flimsy reasoning, the right to privacy is well understood and established. It's true that some pundits with very specific and narrow agendas make a lot of noise in an effort to raise doubts about the existence of the right to privacy, but the vast majority of case law in the last thirty years upholds and supports the right to privacy. I am not aware of any practicing lawyer that would actually try to argue a case on the basis that there is no such thing as a right to privacy. -dans \- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marbury_case you may also wish to read THE FEDERALIST PAPERS, esp say #51. BTW, there are sort of two isues involved, one if the separation of powers/checks and balances and the constitution, the second is that of federalism. for example the congress doesnt get involved in say laws about shoplifting. that is left to the states. --publius \_ Underlying all of the above is the concept that our Founders did not trust government so they went out of their way to create just enough government to keep things going but put in enough road blocks and snags to keep it from growing out of control. They made it to the 1940s. Not too shabby for a bunch of old dead rich white guys in powdered wigs. \_ s/1940s/1860s/ |
2006/3/23 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:42388 Activity:nil |
3/22 OJ \_ Simpson \_ guilty \_ Chewbacca Defence \_ juice \_ vitamin C \_ Oliver Juang \_ hello kitty \_ Japan \_ TRACI LORDS \_ engineer \_ LIBERTARIAN!!1!! \_ nerd \_ Oliver Klozoff |
2006/3/23-25 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:42389 Activity:kinda low |
3/22 I'm writing a word association program that parses motd text and links to other words. For example, if enough people write the following on motd: Bush \_ crook \_ Nixon \_ Bush \_ katrina \_ disaster \_ incompetence then the program will "learn" and associate Bush with the words crook and katrina. It'll also loosely associate Bush with disaster. The more it learns, the more it'll understand how people on motd think. So go ahead and play the word association game. Only simple words (with nouns) are parsed. Anything more complex will be ignored. Results will be shown this summer. \_ This needs to be smart enough to draw these relationships from the regular motd posts, not these artificial one-word things. Nobody is really gonna be posting those except maybe yourself. \_ I beg to differ. Look at the responses we got from "Republican" \_ But that's an artificial troll for responses to a chosen word. Real posts would illustrate more meaningful relationships as well as offer much more data points. \_ look into Shannon's Information Theory \_ kchang \_ twink \_ points \_ excuse me I have nothing to do with this troll, why is my name here? |
2006/3/23-25 [Recreation/Dating] UID:42390 Activity:nil |
3/22 When MOTD boob guy gives up on the boobs http://www.bearchive.com/~chili/pestorieshome.html |
2006/3/23-25 [Recreation/Dating, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Israel] UID:42391 Activity:nil |
3/22 http://ijc.typepad.com/ijc/2004/09/the_start_of_it.html http://www.flickr.com/groups/ijc Welcome to the world of the IJC. These girls are called IJC's for the simple reason that both on the surface and underneath they are all more or less exactly the same Interchangeable Jappy Chick. Common characteristics of IJC's include but are not limited to: -full breasted -straight dark hair -well tanned -slightly overweight -over-educated and underemployed -teeth a little too white and straight (daddy is a dentist after all) \_ Given the amount of time you invested in posting this trash, did she dump you for someone else or what? \_ "Jappy"? \_ Since she doesn't look like a Nip, I'm going to guess "Jewish American Princess" --Jon \_ this makes no sense whatsoever. \_ It's more of an east coast phenomenon. The slightly overweight thing is inconsistent with my experience, but, eh. Things change. Oh, just read the blog entry. Dude, you go to the Bowery Bar, what do you expect? -dans |
2006/3/23-25 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:42392 Activity:very high |
3/22 Leaders of the muslim faith "Cut off his head!" he exclaimed, sitting in a courtyard outside Herati Mosque. "We will call on the people to pull him into pieces so there's nothing left." \_ Link? \_ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,188903,00.html \_ No, no, CREDIBLE link. \_ quotes are always credible regardless of source \_ Au Contraire, Mon Frere! The NYT is an excellent example of a place that not only gets quotes wrong but gets the most basic story points and often the entire story wrong. Foxnews doesn't have nearly as poor a record of this as the NYT but they're still just people. However in this case I don't find the quotes out of character with other things we know. \_ I am willing to bet that the vast majority of people in this world would say that NYT is one of the most respected news organizations in the world. Only right wing political freaks would dare to discredit that. You want to say Fox News is more respected than NYT? Try passing that by the typical educated American. \_ The pp didn't say it wasn't respected. He criticized their accuracy. cf the recent Saturday- edition retraction about their identification of "the man in the hood" in Abu Ghraib. \_ This isn't an opinion poll world wide about news quality. It is a fact that the NYT has a really poor track record for several years now (that we know of). Respect and opinion has nothing to do with it. You want to say that the NYT has a great track record for fact checking? Try passing that by the typical educated American. Call me whatever names you'd like. That doesn't change the facts. When you're doing nwes and claim to be "all the news thats fits to print" you damned well better get it right, especially when you're doing hit pieces. Anything less leaves you open to valid criticism for being a propaganda organ instead of a news organisation. -pp \_ So are you simply referring to the Jayson Blair scandal? Or do you take equal issue with their blatant pimping of the Whitewater "story," their huge flubs on WMD reporting, and the whole mess they've gotten themselves in over Plamegate? Or is inaccuracy in reporting only bad when it's against conservatives? \_ At what point did you decide what my politics are? The fact is the NYT has a really shitty record re: accuracy in reporting the last several years. I could be anything from ultra liberal to arch conservative and the facts would remain unchanged. I am not a part of the facts. I merely state the publicly known. I note you haven't yet actually addressed my point which is that the NYT's accuracy is in the toilet. Thanks. \_ It's pretty obvious that if you're criticizing the NYT over Fox News, we can safely assume where your political leanings are. Fox News makes no attempt \_ No you can safely assume that I was on topic with the thread noting that the NYT has a bad track record for accuracy and that at least in this case, we have no reason not to believe the foxnews quotes were anything but genuine. Anything more is just your personal bias coloring the situation. Not everyone here has a political axe to grind. Some of us actually care about the truth and more to the point are sickened by hypocrites at places like the NYTimes. At least fox doesn't pretend to be much more than op/ed with a wink to objective news. Quite the contrary, anyone defending the integrity of the times is much more likely to be the one unable to see the truth. The NYT has no integrity. And while we're here, why would you assume that only a conservative would attack the NYT? Could it be because the NYT has shown over and over that they can't report anything like objective truth without inserting their agenda? Even if they were able to do so, they still continue to screw up like a bunch of Daily Cal quality amateurs pretending to be journalists. When it is hard to tell the difference between the op/ed page and the news pages, all is lost. \_ In case, you've forgotten, journalism has always had its roots in placing checks on government. "muckraking", "investigative journalism" are all aimed at bringing out the truth, and obviously our current president has a problem with the idea of truth and likes to bend it. And really... you dont think NYT was there covering Clinton and his scandals? \_ I'm ok with muckraking. In fact, I love muckraking. I can't stand hypocritical self righteous and *inaccurate* muckraking. If the NYT got it right I'd be their biggest supporter and renew my daily sub. \_ What grievous errors did they commit (and not correct) that you just can't forgive? I suspect "getting it right" may mean "supplying the facts I like". \_ You'd suspect wrong. They 'correct', sure, after being busted by someone else and dragging it out and doing a page 18 mini blurb hidden behind the ad for shoe deodorant. \_ You didn't answer my question. I continue suspecting... \_ Answered your question. It is the fact that they never fess up to anything until someone else busts them on it and then the correction is grudging, duh. Suspect all you want, you have yet to do anything but attack my integrity when the NYT's is a matter of public record. This is the exact issue we're been discussing but on a micro level. Instead of looking at the NYT's facts, you have decided you like the NYT's message so it's ok they're a bunch of wankers. You don't like my pointing out their flaws so I become the one with flaws. I'm sorry the NYTs has a long public track record of screwing up and only correcting or retracting after being forced into it (a la Dan and the "forged but accurate Bush papers") and you consider that ok. Where as you don't like the Fox op/ed slant on the world, therefore anything they say is automatically bad for you yet you are unable to provide an example of them screwing anything up. It is your own suspicians and bias that colors the truth and prevents you from seeing the reality of the situation. Go ahead and have another shot at my character without responding to my core point and then we can stop. I've tried to take you seriously but you refuse to respond in kind. \_ I asked you for examples. You should be able to come up with at least one. You haven't "pointed out flaws". You've made a claim. You haven't backed up that claim. \_ From Jason B. to WMD coverage to falsely identifying the Abu photo victim to the one they had a few days after that fuckup and a few others along the way. I'm not going to prove the sky is blue, I don't have to but there's 3 specific and 1 more from a few days ago I can't recall the details of. NYT = teh suk. Thanks for the chat but I'm now really truly done here. I'm going to delete this whole thing later today to save precious bits if someone else doesn't first. to hide that they are a right wing organization and are headed by one of Bush's distant relatives, if I remember correctly. NYT, and other news organizations like CNN, at least try to apply the traditional news models of being unbiased. So if you want to talk about being a "propaganda organ", you're looking in the wrong direction. As for accuracy, NYT at least tries for it, and admits wrong when its news isn't. I have never seen Fox News do that, but that's prob because Fox News gives mostly opinion pieces anyway. \_ "we cannot find security." GWB, SotU. \_ Hey, a real martyr in the Christian tradition. \_ I like how the cleric calling for the execution of the Christian, no matter if he's labelled "insane" or not, is labeled "a moderate". no matter if he's declared "insane" or not, is labeled "a moderate". What, you don't believe in OUR invisible all powerful deity? You must be insane! \_ This illustrates a point made in "The End of Faith", namely that religious moderates provide "cover" for religious extremism... even across faiths. Do you think Bush is going to say "you shouldn't use religion/holy texts to guide your courts"? Of course not. But he should. \_ Which is why we'll never win the war against islamist extremists as long as those fuckers are in the white house. This global conflict centers on the two things this administration is more incapable of speaking truthfully about than anything: religion and oil. \_ What's the truth about oil? \_ That 1) the peak in production is imminent (might be now, prob right around 2010, 2020 if we're insanely lucky) and that 2) this fact is the main driver behind our foreign policy, for example, invading Iraq. \_ I'm actually reading the book right now. It has some good points but also long rambles about ethics. |
2006/3/23-25 [Reference/Tax] UID:42393 Activity:high |
3/23 Chinese levies taxes on non-environmentally-friendly products: http://tinyurl.com/k3922 (NY times) I can't wait to see what would happens if USA does the same thing. and... if Bush is serious about remove dependency on foreign oil, he should levy taxes on gasoline :p \_ bush would never raise taxes. well, except on the poor. \_ I think any commodity tax is innately a regressive tax, and therefore "on the poor". \_ Does he also call them fees? \_ are you nuts? any idea how much each gallon is already taxed? what do you mean "he should levy taxes on gasoline". we already have gas taxes and they only go up. \_ I am talking about raise it to $1 / gallon. Use these taxes to fund roads, freeway, bridges. \_ Seriously, dude. It's already higher than that. It already funds roads, freeways and bridges.... Wanna do a little research before deciding on public policy? \_ he's just dumb. he also has bad grammar. "Chinese levies..." \_ not if levies is a noun \_ then "Chinese levies taxes" doesn't work. so you're dumb too. \_ bad grammar, but dumb? I beg differ. I am just making too much sense here, because gasoline tax will encourage people drive less, drive a smaller car, etc. \_ How about if the US would just stop subsidizing so many environmentally UNfriendly things? \_ wow, ship all the democrats to china, they'd love these taxes. \_ Why not send the Republicans--they'd love the oppression, prison camps and corruption? \_ We already ship all of our pollution to China, by proxy. \_ Gasoline should be taxed to pay all the costs of roads, pollution cleanup, etc. etc. A lot of car ownership and usage is subsidized. \_ That's a nice delusion tree-hugger. Keep smokin' whatever it is you are smoking, it obviously makes you smarter than the suits that run the world. \_ Are you trying to bait foaming-at-the-mouth anti-car guy into a rant? \_ how much was the highway bill last year again? you don't call it a subsidies? \_ because without highways our economy and society would mostly collapse. all government spending is a form of subsidy for something. if you don't like subsidies then let's cancel taxes and stop having a government. \_ Yep. Without those billions spent on bridges to nowhere in Alaska, the fucking planet would probably stop spinning. \_ Every bill has pork. Picking a single pork project and painting the entire system with it is intellectually dishonest and rhetorically cheap. What's the point of posting one liner snap shots? \_ That may or may not be true, but it is hard to argue with a straight face that car driving is not subsidized. \_ Of course it is. Who said it wasn't? -driver \_ why highway? why not railroad tracks? light rails? bike lane? \_ Rails are already subsidised and have been for 150+ years. Bike? Nice for short single trips for healthy people but we're not about to restructure society so everyone lives in a village or near quality public transit. Public transit \_ Why aren't we? Do you think magic Jetson style perpetual motion runs on air funny cars are going to be sold by GM next year? We should start preparing for a non car centric lifestyle now or suffer the serious consequences later. has other issues such as inflexibility and one event can bring 10s of thousand of people to a halt such as the Oakland BART shut down the other day. We need a variety of transit options and quite frankly all of them have already been subsidised. How many bikers ever paid for using or creating a bike lane, for example? \_ Would people please stop bitching about subsidies for mass transit/biking? The subsidies for automobiles dwarf any other transit subsidies. \_ I wasn't bitching. I'm saying *all* transit is subsidised. Yes, some more than others but it all is. \_ URL? I want to see the amount of $$$ spent on highways outside of the $$$ collected by gas and automobile taxes versus the amount spent on mass transit. \_ Actually a Carter-era tax idea was to raise taxes on gasoline $1- $2 per gallon, and then rebate the same money back in the form of lower payroll taxes (most Americans pay more in payroll taxes than in income taxes). It doesn't raise taxes and still encourages conservation. \_ Don't "payroll taxes" _include_ income taxes? \_ no. \_ until they make up a reason to raise payroll taxes later then you're stuck with both taxes which will continue rising. \_ You mean like what Reagan did? Well the current climate is to never raise taxes, cut them whenever possible and have future generations & massive inflation deal with the ensuing problems. |
2006/3/23-25 [Recreation/Food] UID:42394 Activity:moderate |
3/23 What do you think of the latest South Park, Chef Returns episode. \_ I haven't seen it, but heard it was totally over the top. I'm looking forward to it. -dans \_ It was awesome. \_ It was indeed awesome, if a bit silly. \_ What happened, did they get a new Chef voice or something? \_ i hear they spliced and re-used his old lines \_ yep, and worked that into the plot \_ They also worked in a few digs at Isaac Hayes and Scientology through metaphor. \_ almost as good as zardoz. |
2006/3/23-25 [Politics/Domestic/California, Reference/Tax] UID:42395 Activity:high |
3/23 Have you done your taxes yet? Do you owe or do you get a refund? \_ owed $4500 (too much capital gains) \_ L'chaim. -dans \_ Only got $1500 from the feds, $600 from CA. \_ you didn't "get" anything. it was your money in the first place. \_ Except for the portion lent to us from China, Japan, Europe, etc. \_ Damn alternative minimum tax cost us $4000 above what we'd normally pay. No weird deductions, just a mortgage. Doh! \_ Yeah so? That just means you're rich and need to be taxed even more. \_ $160 back Fed, $700 CA (don't ask) \_ $3k Fed, $3k CA...first year with a home, I immediately raised my exemptions after I found out how much money I could have had all year to invest. I love home ownership, I compared my apt to home taxes and have saved $12K overall. Even accounting for property tax ($7k), I still save $5k a year with a home. \_ really? can you show us the math? |
2006/3/23-25 [Recreation/Pets, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:42396 Activity:nil |
3/23 http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/03/22/doghandler.sentenced/index.html Abu Ghraib dog handler conviction "He also was convicted of allowing the dog to participate in the lewd acts of licking peanut butter off of a woman's chest and a man's genitalia." (Not off prisoners, but fellow soldiers, for entertainment) \_ Dog's razor sharp teeth + genitalia == Worst jackass episode evar! \_ A dog's not going to _accidentally_ bite you while licking peanut butter. \_ Uhm, either way, why would anyone want a dog doing that to them? Yech! \_ I beg to differ. I think the dog would try to take a bite out of what it's licking. For instance, I've never seen a dog satisfied with just licking a piece of meat - it usually tries to bite a chunk off of it. -!pp \_ dogs are experts at licking balls.. \_ Dogs know the difference between a hunk of meat and a person. \_ That's true in general...but once a dog gets excited, the line often gets a little blurry, then Bad Things are (much) more likely to happen -- especially when you've mixed dog+genitals+food. -!PP \_ I don't think peanut-buttered dangling penises are things a dog normally knows much about. \_ How drunk would you have get to test that theory? \_ That would be a great darwin award. \_ So this joker just magically got it in his head one day to "release the hounds"? What about his superiors? \_ I think the way it worked was: there was a lot of bad stuff that happened that produced some sort of results. The superiors didn't order or condone it, but probably rewarded the results. The people we're seeing are the failures who got caught. \_ Umm... "let slip the dogs of war"... \_ So all the underlings had spontaneous outbreaks of uncontrollable urges to torture inmates? I still don't know how anyone prosecuting the absolutely lowest people on the totem pole do not break out laughing uncontrollably. \_ Maybe they used to be Wal-Mart executives. "Here's your payroll. You can't actually run your store with it legally, but that's your problem. Be creative!" |
2006/3/23-25 [Uncategorized] UID:42397 Activity:nil |
3/23 Incompetence or planned chaos? Your choice: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11965317/site/newsweek |
2006/3/23-25 [Computer/Blog] UID:42398 Activity:nil |
3/23 Ickiest Flickr set ever http://www.flickr.com/photos/90495823@N00/sets/72057594066067989 \_ Ick factor is high. Thanks for the warning, ass. \_ Hard to tell for sure what some of them are - is there a list anywhere? Guesses from people? \_ Dude says "micro photos". Microscopic photos of his skin? \_ certainly microscopic photos of the body, just trying to figure out which specific parts each are, and whether this set is educational or pornographic. |
2006/3/23-25 [Uncategorized] UID:42399 Activity:nil |
3/23 I love these http://www.flagrantdisregard.com/flickr/motivator.php http://static.flickr.com/36/83315953_82ca365610_o.jpg http://static.flickr.com/25/56787838_e675c8e66f_o.jpg http://flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=25925432&size=o \_ Text borrowed from http://www.despair.com \_ With additional typo. |
2006/3/23-25 [Recreation/Dating] UID:42400 Activity:very high |
3/23 I was watching Donny Deutsch show, and he was doing the child sex baiting thing again. How come all the 50 people who showed up at the house ready to have sex with a "13 year old girl" were guys. Also, how come like 49 of them are white guys (only exception is one indian sikh dude)? Is internet porn turning lots of ordinary people into sex perverts? Then again, while we think of these peole as law breaking perverts, they behavior would be okay in ancient Greece, China, Rome, etc., and also some third world countries today. Also, many of them seem to be gay (likes boys too). This particular sting was done in LA. \_ http://www.anthemamerica.com/New%20Jpegs/Chance_1%5B1%5D.jpg As time goes on you become more and more frustrated. That's all. \_ Isn't 14 the legal age in at least one state? And in a lot of countries even today I think it's that or even lower. So 13 being a "child" is a little misleading. I'm not saying it's right, but there is a huge difference between say 8-9 and 13. I guess they picked the oldest plausible age for a "child". I wonder how the turnout statistics would vary with a lower age. \_ Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul. \_ What do you mean by asking "How come all the 50 people who showed up at the house ready to have sex... were guys"? Were you expecting lots of dykes? \_ Donny was mentioning about it, and there were previous shows where the bait was a 13 year old boy, and everyone showing up were also guys. \_ Yes, because lots of women just love sex with strange teenaged boy. I don't understand your comments. Are you surprised?! \_ Especially if they are grade school teachers! \_ That's why I added 'strange'. The teachers had 'relationships' with these kids. |
2006/3/23-25 [Computer/SW/Unix] UID:42401 Activity:nil |
3/23 FYI, I extolled the virtues of Emacs TRAMP mode on the motd a little while back. It still rocks out, but takes a little tweaking to work effectively on soda. I was unable to get it working with tcsh, so I changed my default shell to bash. I didn't put much effort in to this. If you're married to tcsh, it's probably doable. More importantly, you'll want to set '(tramp-chunksize 150) in your .emacs. -dans |
2006/3/23-25 [Recreation/Computer/Games] UID:42402 Activity:high |
3/23 Any one reccomend a mod chip installer for the ps2? \_ Well, if all you want to do is play your completely legitimate single backup copy of a game or imports, you will most likely be better served by a bootdisc. While there are a couple odd exceptions that don't work with it, they are a minute minority. The office currently is using Swap Magic 3.6 to great effect. There are physical mods for your case (for both the regular and slim line) that make swapping the disc really easy. All in all, considering the probability of borking your ps2 terribly or paying through the nose for a modchip and someone to install it, the bootdisc is the better deal. \_ If you have the old school ps2, you can backup your games to an IDE hard drive w/ the network adaptor, and play them using a memory card + PS1 game with buffer overflow trick -- google for PS2 Independence exploit -- it's quite nice: no swapping, reduced loading times, etc... You will probably need to swap once, or know someone who can write arbitrary data to a memcard to get you started though. \_ I should have been more specific Iwant to modify a ps2 to play Japanese games. I know, for example, the ps1 required a single mod chip that I got installed at a local shop that is no longer in business. \_ Apparently hdloader (the program you boot with the exploit trick) ignores region checks so it will allow you to play most .jp games, no mods needed BTW, a similar trick supposedly exists for XBOX, too. \_ all of the hardware you have to buy online ? |
4/15 |