Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2008:March:21 Friday <Thursday, Saturday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2008/3/21-25 [Computer/Theory] UID:49522 Activity:nil
3/20    Road Coloring Problem solved.
        "Let's say you are lost in a town you have never been in before and
        you have to get to a friend's house and there are no street signs, the
        directions will work no matter what."  How likely is it that all the
        intersections (vertices) in a town have the same number of streets
        leaving them (out-degree)?
        \_ This is not possible, I don't think, unless there is some kind
           of landmark you can orient yourself to.
           \_ How about if you have bendy roads?
              \_ Yes, I guess I can imagine a town that is all on one
                 circular road, with one way in and out. So your directions
                 could just be "keep going around the circle until you get
                 to my house."
2008/3/21 [Uncategorized] UID:49523 Activity:kinda low
3/21    If Hillary is elected: [blogger]
        \_ are you inbred?
           \_ No. And this was on FSJ.
              \_ it's incredibly stupid.
2008/3/21-24 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:49524 Activity:nil
3/21    State Department refusing to release names of passport-breaching
        \_ It would give aid and comfort to the terrorists.
2008/3/21 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:49525 Activity:nil
3/21    "God didn't call America to engage in a senseless, unjust war. . . .
        And we are criminals in that war. We've committed more war crimes
        almost than any nation in the world, and I'm going to continue to say
        it. And we won't stop it because of our pride and our arrogance as a
        nation. But God has a way of even putting nations in their place."
        -- Martin Luther King, 1968.
        Clearly, MLK hated America, and anyone who ever associated with him
        also hates America.  When will the associates of MLK come clean about
        their America-hating relationship with this America-hater?
2008/3/21-25 [Uncategorized] UID:49526 Activity:nil
3/21    Anyone ever read and finish the The Shadow Of The Torturer
        books?  Would anyone like to explain to me what the hell
        is going on?  Thanks.  -danh
        \_ Yes and I have no fucking clue.
        \_ Gene Wolfe?
        \_ Yes, the author has this thing where he never repeats a plot clue.
           These books are like puzzle games for lit geeks. -- ilyas
2008/3/21-24 [Reference/History/WW2/Germany, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:49527 Activity:nil
3/21    I had no idea that German toilets were so odd, any comments?
        \_ Heil German John! Can you explain to us, John?
2008/3/21-25 [Health/Women] UID:49528 Activity:low
3/21    This is old, but probably important to the motd community
        Birth control pills may permanently reduce female libido
        \_ In my experience, it's temporary.  Glad I got fixed, because it's
           made a huge difference.
        \_ If that's true, doesn't it mean birth control pills are more
           capable of doing its job than we thought?
        \_ The freedom of not having to handle condoms made sex more enjoyable
           between my wife and me.
           for my wife and me.
           \_ Don't you read the motd? Women don't enjoy sex.  You may enjoy
              it more; she pretends to for cynical reasons.
              \_ It could be more enjoyable in the sense that having one
                 arm cut off is more enjoyable than having two arms cut off.
        \_ kids and mother in-law are the most effective forms of
           birth control.
           \_ Wait, which mother-in-law?
              \_ Mrs. Robinson.
           \_ No kidding!  My mother-in-law stays with us a few days a week,
              and she likes to busts into our bedroom without even knocking
              first.  Holy cow.
              \_ Duh.  Put a lock on the friggin door.  $24.99 at Home Depot.
              \_ Just arrange things so that she catches you and your wife
                 doing something really embarassing and she will learn to
              \_ Share your story here:
2008/3/21-25 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics] UID:49529 Activity:nil
3/21    Obama: "Typical white [people]" are racist.  Thanks for clearing that
        up, Obama. (us news) (full quote at NRO)
        \_ and?
           \_ And Obama's a racist, who's been going to a racist church for 20
              \_ WHITEY MUST PAY!
        \_ Well, we are.  Typical [insert whatever adjective you want, or
           not] people are racist.
           \_ I am wondering why this obviously true statement is
        \_ Oh nice, more out of context slime!  How about we talk about real
           issues, like the economy or the war?
        \_ "The black is a better athlete to begin with because he's been bred
           to be that way"
           "typical white person....there is a reaction that has been bred into
           our experiences"
           \_ Breeding can be cultural instead of genetic.  And do you deny
              that there's a lot of racist white people?  Yeah some minorities
              (or members of minorities) are "good ones" but that doesn't mean
              they aren't racist.  Racism exists in almost everyone.  Not
              letting racism control you is what is really imporant.
              \_ Not to mention that "behavior" and "physical traits" imply
                 much different ideas in the context of "breeding"
              \_ Jimmy the Greek was fired for his statement, and pretty much
                 shunned everywhere.
                 \_ And your point?
           \_ He's being misquoted. "bred into our experiences": he is saying
              everyone has prejudices based on their experiences. If you see
              green berries are poisonous but blue ones taste good, you might
              think all green berries are poisonous. It's human nature. He's
              not using bred in the genetic sense. It's kind of jumbled and
              I haven't seen the original source but he apparently means
              "we have reactions that our experiences have bred in us, that
              don't go away, and can come out in the wrong way." "Breed" has
              a generic meaning in addition to literal sexual reproduction.
2008/3/21-25 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/Crime, Reference/Religion] UID:49530 Activity:high
3/21    Krauthhammer on Obama's speech
        \_ Does Krauthammer still call them Freedom Fries? When is he going
           to apologize for the Iraq War? The guy is a fool.
           \_ So, in other words, he's right and you have no answer to any
              of his points?  Thanks.
              \_ No, he has shown himself time and again to be mendatious
              \_ No, he has shown himself time and again to be mendacious
                 and has shown repeated bad judgement. Why would anyone
                 waste their time bothering to untangle what a proven
                 fool is blubbering on about?
                 \_ It's an opinion piece that *many* people would agree with.
                    Fine if you don't want to read someone's opinions.
                    \_ I don't waste my time reading Ann Coulter's "opinions"
                       either. Some people have worthwhile things to say,
                       this guy has proven, to me at least, that he does not.
                       \- you remember that reporter in manhunter/red dragon?
                          think krauthammer.
                       \_ That's nice.  If you don't want to read something
                          that is fine.  However, that puts you in a poor
                          position to comment on the article.  Your opinion
                          of the writer's previous statements does not create
                          the logical grounds for outright dismissing a later
                          statement.  -!pp  (and no, like you I haven't read
                          it either, but unlike you I am not going to comment
                          on something I haven't read)
                          \_ I didn't comment on his article. I dismissed
                             him as a fool.
                             \_ Exactly.  You gave a zero-content knee-jerk
                                response to seeing his name.  Why bother?
                                Is that really going to convince anyone of
                                anything or just venting?  I see no reason
                                to post content-free rants.  Perhaps you can
                                explain the value of your original post?
                                \_ It is pretty funny that a guy who defends
                                   Krauthammer would complain about a content
                                   free rant.
                                  \_ It's even funnier that a guy who
                                     complains about Krauthammer would engage
                                     so much in content free rants. -!pp
                                     \_ Show me even one column of his that is
                                        not: 1) tendentious 2) partisan and
                                        3) wrong and I will reconsider my
                                        POV. The truth is, I have read over
                                        20 of his columns and not even one of
                                        them was worth the time I spent.
                                        them was worth the time I spent. And
                                        btw, saying "Krauthammer was wrong
                                        about Iraq and I will not consider his
                                        opinion until he recants" is hardly
                                        comment free. Perhaps you don't agree
                                        with the comment, but it is certainly
                                        not comment-free.
                                  \_ I'm at no point defending Krauthammer.
                                     I made it quite clear I didn't read the
                                     article and it doesn't matter at all what
                                     the article says since you didn't read it
                                     either.  You are intellectually dishonest
                                     or possibly just mentally deficient.
                                     Either way you have still failed to make
                                     a point or even attempt to. -pp
                                     \_ No, I made my point just fine, you just
                                        refuse to admit it: some people aren't
                                        worth wasting your time considering.
                                        Do you remember when the motd was
                                        covered with Freeper trolls? I used
                                        to post links to Prof. Thomas'
                                        excellent blog, The Economist's Voice,
                                        excellent blog, The Economist's View,
                                        until some of the Motd Conservatives
                                        complained about the tone of the
                                        comments section. Krauthammer is
                                        far worse.
                                        \_ You didn't make a point.  A point
                                           might have been convincing.  You
                                           expressed a content-free opinion.
                                           There is nothing wrong with that.
                                           It just isn't a point.  Don't
                                           confuse your opinion with fact.
                                        \_ My reply was deleted, so here's the
                                           rehashed version: You posted your
                                           opinion.  Yay.  I'm happy for you.
                                           It still isn't a fact and your
                                           opinion is not something that can
                                           be falsified.  You don't like him.
                                           Ok.  As far as freepers go, if you
                                           were the one posting freeper links,
                                           I was the one saying we don't need
                                           that here.  There's no reason at
                                           all to post a freeper link when all
                                           we're getting is freeper hate plus
                                           a link to the original article.
                                           Just post the original link without
                                           the hate.  I also don't see a need
                                           for dailykos hate either, just so
                                           you understand I'm even handed with
                                           my hate-link complaints.
        \_ The answer to his question (why he stayed in the church) is pretty
           obvious.  A church is primarily about religion and faith.  Politics
           are secondary.  A preacher expressing an opinion he doesn't agree
           with isn't a crime that reflects on him or his judgement.  Unless
           you say he should have left because, cynically, it might be used
           against him for political muckraking and fearmongering purposess.
           \_ A preacher saying the things Wright said should have no
              \_ Well, I'd say any preacher should have no congregation since
                 religion is all a giant pile of bullshit.  But go figure: it
                 seems to help them.  You aren't in that church, you don't
                 know what pros there might be to counter these supposed cons.
                 \_ It's an opinion piece that *many* people would agree with.
                    Fine if you don't want to read someone's opinions.
                 \_ There *is no pro* that can counter these cons.  And what do
                    you mean by 'supposed'?
                    \_ You know everything, why don't you figure it out?
          \_ You know, this kind of shit is amazing to read, given how much
             shit famous ring-wing christians get here. -- ilyas
             shit famous right-wing christians get here. -- ilyas
             \_ Well, I guess to me the thing is that Obama explicitly and
                publically rejects the controversial statements at hand. The
                only real controversy with him then is his church membership
                and apparent friendship with this man.  I don't recall the
                right wing politicians rejecting wacky religious right stuff.
                Actually they (Bush etc) invoke it in public policy matters.
             \_ Slightly off-topic, but if you take a closer look at Wright's
                philosophy, he's far more of a conservative than a liberal.
             \_ Hey, I think he is a kook, but I think that about most
                religious people, so I think my opinion doesn't really matter
                religious people, so my opinion doesn't really matter
                here. What is going on, imho, is that religious conservatives
                are waking up to the fact that there are other strains of
                Christian faith and it kind of freaks them out.
2008/3/21-25 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:49531 Activity:kinda low
3/21    "Why associate myself with Reverend Wright in the first place, they
         may ask? Why not join another church?"
        That's obama being quoted, the very next line is K saying:
        "But that is not the question. The question is, Why didn't he leave
         that church?"
        Umm, "join another church" implies "leave that church" pretty damn
        strongly.  Obama spends quite a bit of a 30+ minute speach
        answering this question (fairly well imho).
        \_ The public agrees with you.
           \_ that's a bad sign, enough that I'll add here that Ks
              "moral equiv." point is (his 1) reasonable (point). -top
              "moral equiv." point is (his 1) reasonable (one). -top
               \_ Why is it a bad sign?  More to the point, What the
                  HELL are you trying to say.  Language is communication.
                  You should try it sometime.
        \_ You misunderstand.  It's not "why not join another church now", it's
           "why didn't you leave that one as soon as you realized it was crazy".
        \_ You misunderstand.  It's not "why not join another church now",
           it's "why didn't you leave that one as soon as you realized it
           was crazy".
           \_ Because it wasn't crazy.  You should pay more attention.  Perhaps
              there is more to this church than a few inflammatory sound bites.
              \_ Anyone who believes that HIV was CREATED by the USA to kill
                 the black race is crazy.  Just like those who believe the moon
                 landing was a hoax, etc.
           \_ You mean the "crazy radical pastor" who was courted by the
              Clintons while they were in the white house, who served as
              a Marine, and who attended to LBJ in a hospital while he was
              a corpsman?
              How about some "fair and balanced" coverage:
              Especially amusing is that "chickens coming home to roost"
              was actually him quoting a Fox News commentator!
              \_ Was "God Damn the USA" a quote?  Was US of KKK-A a quote?  Was
                 his open hatred of white people a quote?  No.  Sorry, the guy
                 is a racist nutjob.  Doesn't matter what his prior services
                 was.  Funny, he says "we took this country by terrorism".
                 Yah, that kind of moral relativism doesn't fly.
                 \_ So you do think only in soundbites.  Sorry.
           \_ [Andrew Sullivan]
              Sounds like a good reason to me. Other posts there in this vein.
              "I worked four years as a teacher in the Black community in
               Oakland in the early 90's and these ideas from Wright's
               sermons were endemic." Only way to change them is from the inside.
               sermons were endemic." Only way to change them is from the
           \_ [Andrew Sullivan]
              Here the full text of Wright's sermon. He was quoting someone else
              who said "we took this country by terrorism".
              I must say, this sermon is a lot more engaging and interesting than
              anything I ever heard as a Catholic.
              Here the full text of Wright's sermon. He was quoting someone
              else who said "we took this country by terrorism".
              I must say, this sermon is a lot more engaging and interesting
              than anything I ever heard as a Catholic.
2008/3/21-25 [Uncategorized] UID:49532 Activity:nil 71%like:49533
3/21    For those of you who have Asian fetish: (click on video)
        PS Rachael Taylor is hot!
2008/3/21 [Uncategorized] UID:49533 Activity:nil 71%like:49532
3/21    For those of you who have Asian fetish: (click on video)
2022/01/17 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2008:March:21 Friday <Thursday, Saturday>