| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 12/25 |
| 2004/4/9 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:13106 Activity:insanely high |
4/9 "It is not just considered bad form to discuss ethnicity in the new
California. It can land one in jail. Added to the penal code is the
crime of "divisionism," a nebulous offense that includes speaking too
provocatively about ethnicity."
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/09/international/africa/09RWAN.html?hp
yes, I replaced the word "Rwanda" with "California." The amazing
thing is how little of a stretch it is.
\_ you're an idiot.
\_ Yeah, in California you'll just get yelled at, or maybe
beat up. Well, unless someone (non-white) gets offended
and manages to portray what you said as "Hate Speech."
THAT could land you in jail.
\_ As the above said, you're an idiot. Returneth thee to hate
radio from whence thee came.
\_ Darn you're right. You can't be jailed for "Hate
Speech" in CA unless the "victim" feels
"threatened."
http://caag.state.ca.us/civilrights/htm/laws.htm
A Google on Canadian Hate Speech Laws is fun though.
\_ yeah, burning a cross on someone's lawn is free
speech. people who feel threatened by that should
lighten up. What is America coming to?
\_ Usually I think of speech as refering to the
practice of expelling air from the lungs
though the mouth the produce a series of
sounds known as language, which is then
recieved by another persons ear. In fact,
transmission by writing or electronic media
could also be conisdered speech. But I
would think burning a cross on someone's lawn
would constitute other areas of the law, such
as "tresspassing" and "fire ordinances." As
far as spoken threats, there are other law
for that. Anyway, I'm sure that Straw Man
went over great a People's Park, but outside
in reality it sounds pretty silly.
\_ I'm not sure about what the People's Park
reference is about but, anyway, Justice
Scalia, for one, argued strongly that cross
burning is free speech.
\_ "Threatened" is way too broad. There is a similar
law about weapons (not necessarily guns). In
theory, you can carry certain weapons as long as
they are visible. In practice, if someone feels
"threatened" by this, off to jail you go. I can't
help but remember Monty Burns: "Thank God we
live in a country so hysterical about crime..."
-- ilyas
\_ Don't forget, if the person feeling "threatened"
happened to be sleeping with a member of the
politburo, it can even get the motd shut down. |
| 2004/4/2 [Politics/Domestic/California, ERROR, uid:12987, category id '18005#6.97536' has no name! , ] UID:12987 Activity:very high |
4/2 4 more years. Like the man said, It's the economy, stupid".
http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/63342|top|04-02-2004::10:05|reuters.html
http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=71000001&refer=us&sid=a.1MWgSskH6M
\_ budget deficit, trade deficit. Do the math kiddo; if you are
making less than $200k a year or do not own your own business,
and you still vote republican, you are a big-ass sucker
\_ uhm, yeah, tossing out 2 word phrases like that makes a really
strong point. uhm, whatever. if you've got something to say, go
ahead, people will read it.
\_ i drive a j- car and use j- appliances and electronics.
blame me for the trade deficit.
\_ I blame American manufacturers for trying to sell less
reliable, less efficient products for more money. I'd
pay a premium to buy American if the quality was better
than the Japanese stuff.
\_ 300,000 part time jobs. Yawn.
\_ spoken like a college student or someone with a job.
\_ Have you worked out how much money you can make working a
min. wage part-time job? It's not enough to pay your rent
and eat.
\_ Have you lived outside the expensive SF Bay Area? Yes, it
is not only enough to pay rent and eat but some raise kids
on it as well with some assistance. Get out of your
bubble.
\_ Have you tried doing the math? $5.15/hour is a little
over $10k a year, full time. Let's assume you paid
no taxes. $200/mo for a small one bedroom in a shithole
takes out $2400. $5/day for food is 1800. A car pay-
ment, say $150/month and insurance at (really bare bones)
$50/month is another $2400. Better hope absolutely
nothing ever goes wrong.
\_ divide by 2 for part time.
\_ That's sorta the point.
\_ "with some assistance" Yeah. Better hope you or
your kids don't get sick.
\_ why not? who says they pay their medical bills?
and they don't have to either. every tax payer has
been paying for them.
\_ Every taxpayer has benefited from lower prices made
possible by paying people minimum wage. Or do you
not consume goods and services?
\_ They'll need those extra part-time jobs to make up for the loss of
all these mowing jobs:
http://csua.org/u/6qa (Wired)
\_ This number is bunk:
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t05.htm
There are only 150,000 more on the payroll than there were
in January. I think they adjusted the Feb numbers down so
that this month would look good. We are only creating 60,000
or so jobs/month in the rolling average. |
| 2004/4/1-2 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:12977 Activity:low |
4/1 I have heard it stated that our (the US's) system of
Plurality/Majority elections discourage people from voting. Now,
I can see the reasoning here (I hate both presidential canidates)
but I was curious if this claim can be backed up with numbers.
Possiably comparing places of similar culture and
circumstance that use the diffrent types of voting.
\_ I'd say that's probably a specious opinion that was stated
without much evidence to support it. There's a lot of other,
move provable reasons for the decline in voter interest in
the US. Also rarely mentioned, but a factor in decreased voter
registration over the past 30 years has been an increase in
immigrant, non-citizen population relative to citizens.
I'm not trying to race-bait here, and its not nearly the only
factor, but its often ignored when people decry decreasing voter
participation.
\_ Interesting. Actually, that raises another question. Why
do people think that immigration has anything to do with
race? I've met immigrants of all manner of races, even...
*gasp* white.
\_ *I* don't think it has anything to do with race, of course.
I was trying to head off the usual motd flame war. Not that
it will help.
\_ So you're saying the ratio of immigrant to citizen is too many?
\_ I didn't say that. You're putting words in my mouth. I was
just citing it as a partial reason for decreasing voter
registration. In fact, if you take this into account, voter
registration amongst _those eligible to register_ hasn't
declined significantly since the 1970s. Of course, it declined
markedly from, say, the 40s to the 70s in real terms. I have
no problem with immigration. Its more of an argument for
urging people to become citizens and participate in the process
than anything else.
\_ Countries with proportional-representation-based voting systems
have higher voter turn-out than countries that use first past the
post (like the US).
More info: http://www.fairvote.org/turnout/index.html
\_ People don't vote because they think their vote doesn't matter. It
really is just that simple. |
| 2004/3/31-4/1 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29890 Activity:very high |
3/31 After his represensible treatment of Dr. Wen Ho Lee, I can't
fathom why Bill Richardson is being considered for VP. Is
it really that expedient for Dems to trade Asian American
votes/donations for Latino votes?(On second thought, don't
answer that question.) - elizp
\_ Mmmm, tasty troll. Carefully phrased, good finish. Could use
something slightly more inflammatory though. B+
\_ Why is it a trool? - not elizp
\_ The not so subtle pitting of one race against another?
Always a winner in motd land.
\_ This kind of trade off does actually enter political
equation more often than the motd. You know that,
don't you? Or maybe you are a troll?
\_ Oh blah fucking blah. You and everyone else knows
the motd is just for inciting stupid arguments.
\_ Wasn't Wen Ho Lee mistreated by the Federal goverment? What
does the governor of New Mexico have to do with that?
\_ He was the head of the DOE, which ran the lab and did everything
in its power and beyond to make Lee's life miserable and so on.
\_ I see. Well, there are far more latinos than asians,
as I am sure you are aware.
\_ what does this have to do the the above entry?
\_ Can you speak English?
\_ I'm of the same ethnic background as Dr. Lee and did follow the
story, and even I have trouble making the link to Bill Richardson.
In fact I remember the blame falling on one of the chief
investigators, on whom there were many media reports.
investigators, a Mr. Trulock, on whom there were many media reports. |
| 2004/3/30 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:29887 Activity:nil |
3/29 Take a political compass test. Also here's where those democratic
primary guys fell on their scale:
http://www.digitalronin.f2s.com/politicalcompass/usprimaries.html
Based on that scale, China does fall closest to fascism, since it's
authoritarian but economically going towards center-right.
\_ Check out the wording on those questions. Most impressive.
-- ilyas
\_ Well, they also have a FAQ. I think it placed me correctly
(slightly left and libertarian).
\_ "Why are you throwing tomatoes at yourself?" Let's look at
this gem of a 'proposition' as they call it:
"Many personal fortunes are made by people who simply
manipulate money and contribute nothing to their society."
Now, let's say I put in 'disagree.' How will they read this?
Will they read it as "I think many personal fortunes are NOT
made by people like that" ... OR "Manipulating money
contributes something (loans provide value)". The question
is so loaded and faulty that any possible response will likely
be incorrectly interpreted. Their test, btw, incorrectly
placed me as basically a moderate republican, which I am
certainly not. -- ilyas
\_ Right, well, I would hope that the intent of that question
would be a judge on economic left-rightedness, where
agreement implies that some control should be put on these
useless capitalists. Based on their rationale I don't think
it has to be flawed, but it obviously can't be perfect and
they likely have a bias anyway.
\_ Except this question does not judge any such thing.
I could be a card-carrying liberal and still believe
most personal fortunes are not made by manipulation
of money (in fact, I don't have handy statistics on
this matter). The question is stupid, as is the entire
test. You have to phrase things a lot more carefully
and 'wordily'. -- ilyas
\_ it didn't say "most" it said "many". Although many is
a relative term. Anyway though I agree, their agenda
appears to be to have right wingers take the test and
discover they're somehow actually lefties. But the
background stuff surrounding it seems sound. And the
bias they do have could be justified if it tests
discrepancies between what someone thinks they think
and what they actually think, if they haven't thought
about it much already. (notions of pol. correctness)
\_ See, you don't understand the nature of my
objection. A test like this only works when a
given response to a question actually
differentiates political views. I gave an example
where the same response could be given by both
a fiscal liberal and a fiscal conservative.
Anyways, it's late, and I am tired of explaining
the same thing three different ways. If you think
it's a good test, that's great. -- ilyas
\_ well you're basically quibbling with the word
"many" in that example. anyway, fine, motd
censor will clean this up before long, g'nite. |
| 2004/3/30 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:12934 Activity:nil |
3/30 English majors are all lefties!
http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=10762
\_ Starts out fun, but then launches into uncalled-for, irrelevant
ad-hominem attacks on authors championed by the liberal Liberal Arts
\_ No shit sherlock. It's always the dumb humanities kids who start
and take part in all the protests. Useful idiots indeed.
\_ Humanities students are no more or less dumb as a group than
engineering students. Propensity for blatant generalizations,
\_ prove it.
\_ Thanks for your comment, demonstrating that engineering
students can be just as dumb!
\_ can't prove your assertion, can you?
\_ I don't have to. The assertion that must be
proved is that humanities student --> dumb, which
is patently ridiculous.
\_ "patently ridiculous" means you have no factual
proof against the claim, right?
\_ Correct! There is absolutely no way to prove
humanities student --> dumb, its just small
dicked engineering student smug superiority
syndrome rearing its ugly head for the
zillionth time.
\_ how about entrance exam scores? or
relative performance in "neutral" classes?
or post college achievement? none of them
are perfect measures, but they would tend to
make claims of patent ridiculousness
silly.
\_ Yeah, but none of them would prove the
assertion at all.
\_ The assertion that humanities students
are dumb, or that they're no more or
less dumb? Certainly the first
assertion is the one requiring proof.
\_ by again refusing to answer the
question, i assume you realize that
while my suggestions would not
perfectly prove or disprove the
proposition, it would make your
claim of "patently ridiculous", well,
patently ridiculous.
\_ of course, you have completely misinterpreted
the post you replied to. a claim that dumb
humanities students do something does not
imply the claim that all humanities
students are dumb.
\_ Actually, the claim is that, as a group,
humanities students are as smart as engineering
students. To disprove this, you just have to
show, as a group, that one group is smarter than
the other, using some accepted metric
\_ great. what are the relative entrance
exam scores between the 2 groups? what
is their relative performance in "neutral"
classes? how do the post college achievement
of the 2 groups compare?
\_ Come to think of it, the claim is "no
more or less dumb". This implies the metric
is "common sense", not intelligence in
general. In this sense, it can be
reasonably claimed that humanities and
engineering students as groups have
similar levels of common sense (are no
less dumb than the other group).
\_ Why yes, that's pretty much what I meant.
At least someone gets it. For some
reason as soon as you say "intelligence"
some people here automatically assume
you must be referring to "ability to do
second order differential equations."
Sorry, I should have been more clear.
\_ Guy, you don't even understand that
the claim of stupid humanities kids
doing something is not equivalent to
a claim that all humanities students
are stupid.
\_ Does the common understanding of
"dumb" imply a lack of common sense?
Well, dumb originally meant the inability
to speak, as in "deaf and dumb". Does
that have anything to do with common
sense? "Dumb" came to mean, from WordNet
via dict, "slow to learn or understand,
lacking intellectual acuity". Does that
have anything to do with common sense?
Are you ascribing new meaning to the word
just to make your claim plausible?
\_ Someone please shoot this guy. His
pretentiousness is starting to make
my head hurt.
\_ Dewd, he already said sorry for not
being clear.
\_ Was he unclear? Or did he just
latch onto some non-plausible
excuse that would make his claim,
well, less "dumb"? I suspect the
latter.
however, can be found in almost any group of students. |
| 2004/3/30-31 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:12921 Activity:very high |
3/30 Chen permits recount to proceed immediately, Taiwan stock market soars
http://csua.org/u/6o4 (NY Times, password needed)
U.S. forensics team talks with doctors, note openness of investigation
http://csua.org/u/6o6
Same experts discuss common misperceptions about the ballistics
http://csua.org/u/6o3
Chen comments on China's predicted hard-line move in Hong Kong
http://csua.org/u/6o5
Moron complains about Taiwan election
http://csua.org/u/6o7
\_ CSI Taipei! Was David Caruso there?
Same experts discuss common misperceptions about the ballistics
http://csua.org/u/6o3
Chen comments on China's predicted hard-line move in Hong Kong
http://csua.org/u/6o5
Moron complains about Taiwan election
http://csua.org/u/6o7
\_ Given Chen's long history as a drama queen and the very close
vote count, the opposition's peaceful and orderly demand for a
recount and investigation into the shooting incident is totally
reasonable.
\_ You should talk to the DPP college student getting beat on TV
by 4+ KMT folks for speaking to TV reporters just outside
their rally.
\_ Is that the best you can come up with for a rally of
500k people? how many people did the DPP mobs beat
up in its many rallies over the years? These days,
in many places in Taiwan, if you don't speak Taiwanese,
you can get cursed and ostracized, thanks to DPP's
divisive politics.
\_ And how many of those people (who watch KMT-biased TV
coverage) believe in the faked assassination theory?
Your dismissal of KMT's televised violence is also
disturbing.
\_ feel free to post urls of any other violent
rally incidents from the multitudes of pro-DPP
newspapers as opposed to your so-claimed
"KMT-biased TV".
newspapers.
\_ This entire thing has missed a huge point. Extremely large
number of military personnel were denied their consititution
right to vote. And it turned out that there is no legal basis
for their detention. Thus, by definition, this election
result is invalid, and thus, the legimacy of this so-called
democratic government is in question.
\_ Are you talking about Taiwan or the US?
\_ First URL, a viewpoint not well-covered by the KMT-controlled
press: "The opposition Nationalist Party on Monday publicly
dropped its demand that the Taiwan military be allowed to
vote again after a disputed presidential election a week ago...
Mr. Chen and the Defense Ministry replied that the
alert had had no effect on voting, because staggered shifts
had made it possible for the servicemen and police officers
to vote."
\_ Contrary to what this guy is saying, KMT doesn't control
the press at all. Chen and DPP is the government in
power, and has systematically moved to control the press
to silence the opposition. Just recently, the owner of
a pro-DPP press told all its employees to vote for DPP
or be fired.
\_ URL? 'Cos the same rumor mill sez the KMT drinks the
\_ This is in the news a few weeks before the
election. Go ask a few people in Taiwan and you
should find someone who've read about it. Taiwan
related news sites don't seem to keep good
archives of older articles online, so I can't
find any url, unfortunately.
blood of babies.
\_ See "Formosa Betrayed" written by U.S. vice consul
during the 2/28 incident. obGoogle. There is a
similar book called "Formosa Calling". Both are
published way back.
\_ errr .... 228 incident is 57 years ago. Taiwan's
government, while under KMT, had admitted to the
wrong doing, and had compensated families of the
victims long ago. Taiwan has been under pro-
independence presidents for the last 16 years.
yet, DPP supporters like yourself constantly need
to bring up 228 for political purposes to fan
hatred against mainlanders and their descendants,
most of whom has nothing to do with 228, or
\_ actually, I just bring up 2/28 to criticize
the KMT as a political party. I think you're
being a bit prejudiced.
weren't even born then.
\_ http://tinyurl.com/3xwo6
Search for "station". You'll find other links on google.
Like I said yesterday, the KMT has had over 50 years of
total control of Taiwan to consolidate its power.
\_ snicker ... this starry eyed russian commentator has
no clue what he is talking about. he portrayed
putin and chen as heroes of democracy. I bet he is
real happy with putin and his rubber stamp parliament
and recent election. chen of course, could not care
less about the development of democratic principles and
institutions. he will bend all rules as long as it
helps him win. the commentator also portrayed Lee
Teng-hui as representative of the big-bad KMT. He
didn't even know Lee has always sympathized with
everything the DPP believes in, and made it his
personal life mission to destroy the KMT from within.
what a joke! Of all things, you chose this
clueless commentary to post.
\_ Uh ... the point is that the KMT controls the major
TV stations, and stirs up anti-Chen sentiment in
order to get the KMT back into office.
I just want to make sure you see this.
\_ I am sorry, but if this Russian commentator is
so clueless about the above, you can't
expect anyone to accept his unsupported
assertion the Taiwan's media is controlled
by the KMT. Besides that piece of clueless
writing was from 4 years ago, kind of
outdated. I don't know about TV, but
contrary to your belief, most of Taiwan's
\_ So what would you say if I provided a URL
that showed the KMT controls the major
TV stations? Does it suffice to say that
most newspapers are pro-DPP, and most
TV stations are pro-KMT?
BTW, it was my mistake way above. When
I said "press", I meant to say "TV".
I just want to make sure you see this.
\_ snicker ... this starry eyed
newspapaers are actually pro-DPP.
\_ btw, someone broke http://csua.org/u see motd entries above |
| 2004/3/29-30 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Foreign/Asia/Taiwan] UID:12914 Activity:kinda low |
3/29 So I just got back from Taiwan. You know nearly all TV news stations
are controlled by the opposition party (the same coverage being beamed
into the Bay Area)? It's no wonder you have all these people
frothing at the mouth. I'm ashamed to think that most Taiwanese
people are stupid enough to believe the faked assassination theory.
They just can't believe that their party lost, and they're annoyed
at their stock holdings taking hits during Chen's presidency. Lien
beat his wife in grad school, his wife lies about it on TV, the
opposition party has suggested that Chen's wife's accident in 1985
was staged as well, and the opposition party is synonymous with
corruption, vote buying, and organized crime.
\_ huh? Lien is bad so Chen must be good? What is your superior
source of information? I'm an American, trying to follow this
in the English-speaking international press and I'm curious why
you're so sure that the conspiracy theories about Chen are
false, even if Lien is totally evil.
\_ Dude, where do I say "Lien is bad so Chen must be good"?
Re the assassination attempt, obGoogle for details, and think
about how it could have been staged, and everything necessary
for that. Anyway, obGoogle for these keywords in various
combinations: KMT controlled television stations vote-buying
organized crime 2/28. You will find links to books too.
Also, if you go to http://news.yahoo.com and search for
Taiwan, you will see a story on a U.S. investigation into the
shooting and the preliminary opinion.
\_ So I just got back from America. You know nearly all TV news
stations are controlled by the Democratic Party? It's no wonder
you have all these people frothing at the mouth. I'm ashamed to
think that most American people are stupid enough to believe the
Florida vote fixing theory. They just can't believe that their
party lost, and they're annoyed at their stock holdings taking
hits during the Dot Boom.
\_ People love a conspiracy. The most ridiculous the better and
more frothy the better.
\_ The KMT has controlled Taiwan ever since it was transferred
from Japanese control in 1945, until in 2000 when Chen won.
The KMT has > 50% ownership in the three major TV news stations.
As for Florida vote-fixing, it was decided by the Supreme Court,
which was a first for a Presidential election.
\_ I'm sure there'd be just as much outrage if the "opposition" party
(isn't that a nice name) won, given the number of pro-independent
Taiwan people around. People just hate any sense of impropriety
in important things like presidential elections
\_ If the KMT had won, the DPP would be complaining about KMT vote-
buying, which would be a respectable position. Now that the
DPP has won, the pro-KMT are complaining about a faked
assassination, which is pretty damned dumb position to take.
Like I said, it's the effect of KMT control of TV news, and
people being upset about their stock holdings and their candidate
suddenly losing when they thought they would win.
\_ it's not *only* the faked assassination, from what I've been
reading. I could care less about that part.
\_ So what do you care about?
\_ The KMT is now (inexplicably) for reunification with the PRC.
How is this strange reversal in their position being viewed,
and are they getting any help/support from the PRC?
\_ The KMT has *not* been for reunification with the PRC
as of the 2004 election year. This equals political
suicide.
\_ Okay, so the KMT has just been Independence-neutral?
Is that why the PRC has been favoring them?
\_ The KMT is for direct trade links / better business
with China, and has indicated more flexibility
on the independence issue than the DPP.
\_ Taiwan President Chen is like Chavez of Venezuela. He is a
demagogue. Very dangerous person. He likes to play divisive
politics pitching taiwanese against people who came from mainland
China in 1949 with the KMT. - tainan taiwanese
\_ The KMT is just plain bad. Refresh your memory on the 2/28
incident, and more recent stuff on vote-buying and organized
crime links. You may be watching too much KMT-controlled TV.
As for China, China is bad too, in case you need reminding.
\_ If Lien can't even out smart and out maneuver Chen in this election,
how can the public trust him in representing taiwan in negotiations
with PRC? Lien is responsible for the downfall of KMT.
A bian, A bian, Go Go Go. |
| 2004/3/25-27 [Politics/Domestic/California, Transportation/Airplane] UID:12869 Activity:high |
3/25 I got a ticket for running a stop sign [around midnight in SF ...
(no traffic)]. The cop claimed I didnt even slow down but went
throught it at 30mph. I may have not done a full stop, but what
he is claiming is totally wrong. This is hopeless to argue and I
should just do traffic school, right?
\_ Do a trial by written declaration. I got out of a red light ticket
in SF. The cop claimed that I "totally" ran a red light and he
even saw the camera light flash. I checked with the city and there
was no camera in the direction I was driving so I wrote and said
that the cop must have been either distracted or something, because
no such flash could have gone off... he was a jerk anyway for giving
me a ticket even though he thought that I'd get a second one in the
mail.
\_ concur with this respondent, do this.
\_ Unfortunately there were two cops in the car for one thing
and I'm sure they would back each other up. And the best
I could say is "I live around here, so of course I would
have known there was a STOP there." I can't "prove" something
like you could about the camera.
\_ i tried to get out of a california stop in berkeley several years
ago, no luck.
\_ Your best bet is to ask for a hearing in traffic court and hope
\_ this isnt a "best bet" but "rolling the dice". and
considering you dont know what your 'saving throw' roll
is, this doesnt seem a great thing to bet on. is the cop
not showing up probability 50% or 5% or ... ? anyone have
some guess about the base rate on a no show? --psb
\_ Whoah. "saving throw", Partha? You must be as old as I am
or older. -- ulysses
\_ Because kids today don't play d&d, they play magic?
\_ why is that old? a bunch of 13 year old proto dorks
play D&D at the cafe by my house.
\_ I see. Please forgive my ignorance. I really was
under the impression that rolling dice, indexing
damage tables and all that had been replaced by
more automated modes of play like card decks and
software. Then again, my last attempt an an RPG
session was coming on a decade ago. -- ulysses
\_ nope, new charts, new tables, same dice.
\_ Hell, Ulysses, being older than you isn't that hard.
Or rare.
\_ True. I think my issue is that I didn't know how
old Partha is, though. Then again, Sandy
or somebody else probably did tell me at some
point. -- ulysses
\_ Old... old like the hills... old.
\_ If you are just going to ask the judge for traffic
school if they show, the risk is low. There is a tiny
chance the judge will say no and fine you I guess,
but most likely they will just accept your plea.
school if they show, the risk is low. There is a
tiny chance the judge will say no, I guess, but most
likely they will just accept your plea.
\_ I'm not trying to offend you, but do you know
this because you worked for a city gov or your
brother-in-law is a cop or...
\_ I could claim any reason, since this is an
anonymous forum. Let's just say that I know
plenty of lawyers, including a couple in my
\_ I'm not trying to offend you, but do you know
family. This is the "standard way" to fight
a traffic ticket. Pay a lawyer $100 to tell
you the same thing if it makes you feel better.
\_ CA cops almost always show so don't depend on that.
\_ I see. It's always CHP busting me, not locals. tx.
this because you worked for a city gov or your
brother-in-law is a cop or...
\_ CA cops almost always show so don't depend on that.
\_ Not true. CHP almost always show, but for city cops,
it depends on the locality. I dunno for SF.
\_ This is true; my brother has beaten tix in CA by
counting on local PD not to show.
\_ I see. It's always CHP busting me, not locals. tx.
that he doesn't show up. If he shows, then just ask for traffic
school. If you really want to be clever, if he shows, you can
ask for a continuation, saying your lawyer didn't show, and then
try and reschedule for when the officer is on vacation or something
but you are on pretty thin ice here. I would just plead guilty
at that point and ask for traffic school.
\_ If your dad is the president or head of the CIA, you can have all
charged dropped.
\_ Wow! That worked! Thanks! -op
\_ What if I belong to a powerful political MA dynasty and I left
a woman to drown to death in my car in a lake? Can I still be
a Senator?
\_ Or if you abandon your children (ie not pay child support)
after you abandoned your wife and she divorced you, and
you lead a charge to champion "family values" while
Speaker of the House
\_ Kill the cop, then he can't show. With no witnesses, you win!
\_ Time == money. The fine is $315 or so. If it's worth your time
to fight it (and possibly lose), go ahead. Read the citation.
If it's just failure to stop, it's just about impossible to fight
it (without witnesses). If it says you missed the sign completely
or went through at specific high speed, you might have a case,
especially if you very are familiar with the area (ie. you know
the stop is there and could NEVER have run it at the speed noted.)
\_ If your dad is the president or head of the CIA, you can have all
charged dropped.
\_ Wow! That worked! Thanks! -op
\_ What if I belong to a powerful political MA dynasty and I left
a woman to drown to death in my car in a lake? Can I still be
a Senator?
\_ Or if you abandon your children (ie not pay child support)
after you abandoned your wife and she divorced you, and
you lead a charge to champion "family values" while
Speaker of the House |
| 2004/3/20-21 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:12777 Activity:high |
3/19 This has got to be tearing Taiwan apart right now. Anyone with
relatives/friends/actual presence there like to comment?
\_ I am in TW right now. Really think DPP rigged the election.
Numerous of things, such as disallowing police and military
to vote really made a difference this time. DPP fully aware
that police / military tend to be pro KMT, and using assassination
as an excuse to put them in high alert is a relatively reasonable
as an excuse to put them in high alert. It's a relatively reasonable
reason to disallowing them to vote. The assassination attempt,
which many believed is being staged by DPP, really helped in
galvanizing the swing voters to vote DPP at last minute.
Having said that, I don't think pan-KMT fraction can do anything
about this. I, for one, now leaning toward CCP instead.
\_ Many people believe that Bush paid the Israeli secret service
to blow up the towers in NY, too. Just because many people are
stupid doesn't mean they're right.
\_ My dad said Chen placed 300000 army and police on high alert after
the "assassination" attempt on him, so these 300000 people
couldn't vote. DPP "won" by 30000, one tenth of 300000.
\_ just in case someone wonders, the above numbers were not typos.
The army and police who were supposed to vote in special voting
places but were mobilized just on the election day and didn't
get any chance to vote numbered at least ten times the margin of
of "victory" claimed to be won by Chen. There are numerous irreg
in the vote counting process, including massive selective
\_ The assassination stunt Chen pulled is kind of like the President
of the United States using his presidential powers to stage an
assassination attempt by Al Queda in a last minute bid to
win the election.
\_ Look, I'm not disputing whether the assassination attempt was
staged or not. I'm looking for insight from people who are
there. Do you know anyone who's there right now? Then ask
them what they think is going on and post it.
labelling of votes against Chen as beling invalid. Frankly, I
don't like Lien, because he seems like a indifferent wimp. What
worries me is having someone who is capable of a treachery of
this magnitude as the leader of a still young democracy.
\_ Too true, once we kill off the splittists, the motherland will
be reunited and we can execute or put in mental hospitals the
splittists who remain.
\_ well, even CCP have not been saying things like that, for
many year. Almost no people on taiwan want immediate
reunification, including those against Chen and DPP. Even
many people on the mainland does not think unification is
a viable idea now, including all of the leadership, not the
least because of the divergent political system. They
just want to maintain the status quo, perhaps indefinitely.
The DPP and Chen, however, want to severe any hope and good
will between Taiwan and the mainland. They want to write
textbooks that claim "Taiwanese" (Chinese immigrated there
two centuries earlier, not the minoriity aborigines) as
a different and superior race and glorify Japanese's role
in WWII. To achieve the former, they used all the media
they control to forment hatred against and demonize all
people on the mainland as well as Taiwanese who disagree
with their agenda. When the last time there was a solar
storm disrupting satelite communication, they put out
"news" that claim Beijing is send death ray against their
with their agenda. Example: I remember when there was a
solar storm disrupting satelite communication, they put out
"news" that claim Beijing sent death ray against
Beijing.
satelite. During SARS, they first claimed Taiwanese are
immune from it during to their superiority. When it broke
out there too, they claim it was a biological attack from
Beijing. You don't hear this on the western media because
they are clever enough to realize it is not PC so they
do not release it in English, and (at least the american)
media never picks it up, intentionally or not.
\_ The mainland leadership doesn't want reunification?
Excuse me, but that's complete bullshit. I won't
actually call you a liar. They've been putting out
pro-unification noise since day one. They're building
up military force on the mainland side of the water for
years and continue to do so. They have stated outright
that if they don't reunify at some unspecified but
near-future date that the mainland *will invade* to
make it happen. I don't know about the propaganda
coming out of Taiwan but the mainland makes their own
positions very public and very clear.
\_ summary:
The margin which DPP won by: < 30k (or 0.23%)
The number of military/police personel which are not given
the chance to vote: 300k
The number of votes which counted as "invalid" due to
"more stringent validation process:" 330k
The number of ballots casted: 13 million
\_ "We didn't like the results so let's have a do-over!" |
| 2004/3/20-21 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12774 Activity:very high |
3/19 Apparently the Taiwanese have hired Jeb Bush to run their election.
\_ Huh?
\_ I don't know about that comparison. If, however, the President
of the United States use his presidential powers to stage an
assassination attempt by Al Queda in a last minute bid to
win the election, that would be comparable to what happened in
Taiwan.
\_ No matter how many times you repeat this, it is still
not true.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/US_election_race/Story/0,2763,430306,00.html
\_ What's not true? "It"? "It" is true. Join us in the
year 2004. The weather is great up here!
\_ I was referring to the ballot shennanigans, not the assasination.
\_ Oh my God, can't you just let it go and moveon? The whole
country has been over this a million times. The press did
their own recount of everything, Gore lost, join us up here
in the now and the future.
\_ No matter how many times you repeat this, it is still
not true.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/US_election_race/Story/0,2763,430306,00.html
\_ What's not true? "It"? "It" is true. Join us in the
year 2004. The weather is great up here!
\_ Will you please open your eyes? The recount itself is
meaningless. The only way that election would have
been valid is if they'd had a runoff. The difference
in ballots was squarely within the margin of error!
Take Stats and you'll know that you can draw no solid
conclusions in a contest like that.
\_ We don't do "runoffs" nith si country. Were *you*
calling for a run off in 92 when Perot took 19%? The
election was valid. It followed the laws and it's
unfortunate but there is no procedure for statistical
margin of error problems. Winner takes all and that's
that. I've had "stats", thanks. Have you had civics?
It's over, move on. Frothing won't bring more people
\_ Oh, he became president through a _legit_ process.
(You could make the argument that the process
needs fixing, but so far, it's legit by
definition).
to your party for 2004.
\_ There are so many red herrings here, I think you
must be a fishmonger. I know we don't have run-
offs; I'm saying that not having runoffs is
assinine. I'm calling for a runoff because the
difference in votes fell within the margin of
error; in 92, this was not the case in any state.
\_ It wasn't worth saying anything more to such crap. If
you had posted something worth responding to, you would
have had a real response. As I said when I responded.
There's no reason to provide a real response to a frothing
troll who has added nothing to the thread. You might as
well just say, "Yes, it is!" so I can say, "No, it isn't!"
and we can cut'n'paste back n forth for a while. Add value
and you'll get a real reply. Do you really honestly
believe you said something worth responding to?
\_ I don't know about that comparison. If, however, the President
of the United States use his presidential powers to stage an
assassination attempt by Al Queda in a last minute bid to
win an election, that would be comparable to what happened in
Taiwan.
meaningless. The only way that election would have
been valid is if they'd had a runoff. The difference
in ballots was squarely within the margin of error!
Take Stats and you'll know that you can draw no solid
conclusions in a contest like that.
\_ This has got to be tearing Taiwan apart right now. Anyone with
relatives/friends/actual presence there like to comment?
I'm done frothing; I'm trying to get reforms.
Bush is president now, so be it; but don't pretend
he's president through a legit process.
\_ Oh, he became president through a _legit_ process.
(You could make the argument that the process
needs fixing, but so far, it's legit by
definition).
\_ Rule #1) Have family in high places. Rule #2) Have the supreme
court in your back pocket - maybe go duck hunting together. It
worked for us!
\_ Rule #3) wear tinfoil hat. If you had a higher quality post
you'd get a higher quality response, frother.
\_ Uh huh. Your only response is to continue to claim,
against all evidence, things that are not true.
\_ It wasn't worth saying anything more to such crap. If
you had posted something worth responding to, you would
have had a real response. As I said when I responded.
There's no reason to provide a real response to a frothing
troll who has added nothing to the thread. You might as
well just say, "Yes, it is!" so I can say, "No, it isn't!"
and we can cut'n'paste back n forth for a while. Add value
and you'll get a real reply. Do you really honestly
believe you said something worth responding to? |
| 2004/3/19-20 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:12761 Activity:moderate |
3/19 Taiwan's President narrowly escapes assassination:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3550517.stm
\_ there are indications that it was staged by him and his campaign
staff. President Chen is trailing behind polls and he is doing
everything he can to win the 20% swing voters' vote
\_ urlP
\_ http://www.csmonitor.com/earlyed/early_world031904a.htm
\_ There is no actual information in this post whatsoever.
For that, you have to tune to reports from Taiwan. (It will
hard to get any decent news about it in English. Every
American news organization already equate DPP = democracy =
must be potrayed postively all the time.) There are various
pecularity, such as the hospital where Chen was sent after
\_ There are no indications in this post. For that, you
the "assasination" was visited by Chen's security detail
for mysterious preparation *before* the "shooting," and the
have to tune to reports from Taiwan. There are various
pecularity, such as the hospital when Chen went after
the "assasination" was visited by Chen's security detail
for preparation *before* the "shooting," and the location
of the bullet fragments and shells.
location of the bullet fragments and shells, etc.
\- #t
\_ I am not the poster above but after what happened in Spain,
this is a very natural thing to do, esp. with Mr. Chen's
(and his wife's) bribery scandal getting bigger and bigger.
Of course, this does not prove that he staged it, but really,
at this moment the only persons who can gain from an
"assasination" attempt are Mr. Chen's family and team.
\_ So you think scrubbing out the pro-splittist party chief
is of no benefit to the mainland??
\_ It wouldn't be wise to assasinate now, or ever. Chen
is not more separatist than many others in his party or
even outside his party. He is an opportunist who is
\_ so you believe he had himself and his vp shot
because he has some petty bribe scandal
brewing? thats just nuts.
using this issue as a vote-getter. If he goes, more
radical people are ready to replace him. He has in fact
become sort of a liability for the separatist cause.
\_ A liability? Say what? How do you figure that?
\_ His (or his wife's) bottomless appetite for
bribe.
\_ so you believe he had himself and his vp shot
because he has some petty bribe scandal
brewing? thats just nuts.
\_ So is DU the proper liberal counterpart to FreeRepublic, or are
we still waiting for the Bolshevik Daily to achieve extremist
parity?
\_ The democraticunderground is a respectable site. Freepers
are frothing insane lunatics.
\_ A bian a bian, go go go.
\_ This is a non-sequitur.
\_ When come november, we should expect an assassination attempt?
\_ No, but after Spain got wobbly you can expect a terrorist
act to kill a few hundred people. Something flashy with
pizzaz.
\_ Is the KMT really the remnant of Chiang Kai Shek's Koumintang party?
Those guys were a bunch of thugs...
\_ Well, the DPP (the party of President Chen) is the
reincarnation of the Taiwanese Communist Party, the TaiCom.
\_ A bian a bian, go go go. |
| 2004/3/10-11 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:12610 Activity:moderate |
3/10 Will something like this help UC Berkeley's fiscal crunch?
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/living/education/8133259.htm
\_ no, the only thing to do is follow UCLA's lead and start selling
body parts from freshmen found drunk after bad parties.
\_ too bad we don't have a medical school or the facilities
that UCLA has or it would mean $billions!!
\_ what? the budget cuts are so steep we can't even afford a
UC hack saw? what more do we need?
\_ it's hard to get people to donate bodies when there
isn't a hospital. maybe we can work out a profit-
sharing scheme with UCSF?
\_ no problem really, just hang out frat row after parties
and at all hours during rush and haze weeks.
\_ One of the most effective teachers I've ever had did this
regularly, even though the school and area was well-to-do.
She also made us wash overhead transparencies every couple weeks
when they ran out. It's not horrible to expect students to
contribute a bit toward the day to day operations of the classroom.
A box of kleenex may not be within the reach of *every* student,
but I'd bet 99% can afford it.
\_ no this is bullshit. my taxes are already paying for the
school system and I don't even have kids. the kids and their
parents shouldn't have to add even more on top of that. CA is
about in the middle of the pack for school spending per student,
how do other states manage to purchase supplies and educate
their studENTs without trading grades for kleenex? sheesh.
\_ I'm not sure about the UCs, I'm having trouble finding
comparative data, but K-12 is (cost-adjusted) 46th by
state in spending. (32nd in absolute $) unfortunately, your
taxes really /aren't/ paying for it, and the teachers (who
are not exactly mtakinm that much to begin with -- and note the
story is about Palo Alto, where the district is comparatively
extremely well funded) are expected to make up the gap and
buy all sorts of things. -chialea
\_ Stop interefering with the libertarian fantasy that
public schools are already receiving too much money! You
must not obstruct the march to vouchers!
\_ whatever, no one said a word about vouchers. please
try to pretend not to troll. it makes for better trolls.
\_ Ah, well I flushed you out into the open pretty well,
now, didn't I?
\_ Very true. I have a friend who teaches at an elementary
school and is living with two other teachers. They often
have parties where the guests are encouraged to bring
school supplies.
\_ I don't know where the hell all these poor teachers are
coming from or where they're working. A friend who
worked in Hayward for 5 years and quit was taking in almost
$80k when she quit. She wasn't a Berkeley grad or Phd or
anything special. Just someone who couldn't do so she
taught. I get the feeling there's some Big Lie(c) being
told and retold but we'll never see real spending numbers
broken out.
\_ But isn't that curious. I have a friend who is
*currently* teaching junior high in Hayward with 5 yrs
seniority. He is making about $52K before taxes. I've
seen his stubs. Perhaps we should compare notes before
you take your Big Lie idea much further. --ulysses |
| 12/25 |
| 2004/3/8 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12567 Activity:nil |
3/8 Bush gang is furious that they won't be able to steal Florida again:
http://csua.org/u/6c6
\_ I have to hear a rational response to this question: how did
Bush 'steal' Florida - what is your evidence?
\_ Supreme Court decision which effectively awarded Presidency to
one side was unprecedented? The vote was also 5-4, aligned
conservative vs. liberal.
\_ As reported below the key issue was decided 7:2, read
the decision.
\_ CNN: "Broadly speaking, the 7-2 split was over the
question of reversing the Florida court, but the 5-4
split was over the termination of manual recounts."
\_ Please don't rely on CNN for vague explanations.
Read the decision, 7-2 the recounts violated
equal protection. The 5-4 was the remedy.
\_ Which was one of the most perverse
missapplications of the equal protection clause
that I've ever heard of. They basically said
"County A can't have recounts because you're not
doing a recount in County B, which doesn't need
one, and that somehow harms County B."
\_ If you actually read the decision you
would understand the justification.
You're right in the sense they didn't
even need to invoke equal protection,
they should have stuck with Article 2
of the Constitution.
\_ I don't see what in Article 2 would have
stopped a recount. Only that the electors
must give their votes on the day set by
congress. It seems like the SC had no
grounds to stop a recount, only to compel
the electors to reach a decision.
\_ So you would have been happier if the
(R) controlled Florida legislators had
a vote on it instead? That was the
other option at the time which seemed
more legal to me.
\_ Yes, I understand 7-2 was about violating equal
protection, and 5-4 was about the remedy.
However, I still think the 5-4 decision was more
important than 7-2 -- as indicated by all the
media I've seen, conservative and liberal.
Please provide one relatively non-partisan URL
which says otherwise, since your viewpoint is
the one that differs from the accepted view.
\_ The accepted view? As defined by who? I
don't "accept" that view and neither does
anyone else who has actually read the court's
decisions and followed it closely at the time.
\_ Katherine Harris scrubbed 57000 legal voters, almost all
black and Democratic, from the rolls.
http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=217&row=2
\_ Actually, the majority of the voters removed were white.
Given the preexisting rampant voter fraud in Florida
clearly some sort of reform was in order:
http://csua.org/u/5ei
Is it your contention then that most felons, pets and dead
people vote democrat?
\_ Suarez, who committed all these crimes, is a Republican.
\_ Suarez was a Democrat at the time.
Carollo was the Repub. candidate
http://csua.org/u/6cb
\_ Nope Suarez was independent at the time:
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/time/2000/11/20/storm.html
my bad
\_ 90% of the purged voters were black. Read the link.
"My office carefully went through the scrub list
and discovered that at minimum, 90.2 percent of
the people were completely innocent of any crime
except for being African American. We didn't have
to guess about that, because next to each voter's
name was their race."
\_ Step back a second and read his quote. 90.2
of which people - he doesn't specify. He is
either stretching the truth or lying. The best
the ACLU could was 54%, in one county.
http://archive.aclu.org/news/2001/n060601c.html
57,000 legal voters were not removed as you stated
above, that is also a lie. The people removed were either
felons, dead, or did not exist. I reassert what
I said before - a majority of these 57,000 were white
\_ At least 57000, maybe more:
http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=182&row=2
They were removed from the polls for having names
similar to felons and for being the same race.
Salon says "half were black":
http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2002/11/01/lists/index_np.html
\_ Christ its another article by the same guy. Talk
about being tautological. First he says its 90.2
percent then more than 50%? Very convincing source..
\_ Here is another article then:
http://http://www.democrats.com/view2.cfm?id=6543
Do you have even one source that says that
most of the purged voters were white?
NAACP says "a larger percentage of Black voters
than white voters"
http://http://www.naacp.org/news/archives/2000/florida_lawsuit.shtml
The Nation says 200,000 were either scrubbed
or had their ballots thrown away:
http://http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20010430&s=lantigua&c=1
\_ Again you are not referring to the 57,000
people removed. Clearly errors were made, but
your article names only 5 people. Given the
massive, pulitzer prize documented fraud in
Southern Florida clearly reform was necessary.
http://csua.org/u/6c8
\_ That was voter fraud committed by another
Republican. What a surprise.
\_ Suarez was a Democrat at the time.
Carollo was the Repub. candidate
http://csua.org/u/6cb
\_ Wrong. Suarez was never a Democrat.
\_ According to Palm Beach Post (as quoted in http://democrats.com),
~43k 'probable' and 'possible' felons were identified.
Out of that, 6500 names were not exact matches. From that,
5400 appeals were filed, and 2500 were upheld. After the
election, "at least 108" who were purged were later proven
to be legal voters. There were also 996 convicted of
crime in another state, who should have been allowed to
vote in FL, but were not.
\_ From the results of the Federal inquiry:
http://http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/ch5.htm
At least 8000 were removed that should not have been
for sure, according to Florida state testimony:
"Other voters were disenfranchised because a company
hired by the Department of State to match voter
rolls against other databases to ensure that felons
and the dead could not vote did not properly do so.
Database Technologies included in their list the names
of more than 8,000 voters who should not have been
removed from the voting rolls. However, by the time
the error was caught, it was too late for the counties
to fix it; in fact, the first time many of these voters
realized they had been removed from the voter rolls
was on Election Day."
Still waiting for your evidence that a majority of
those scrubbed were white. Do you have any evidence?
\_ Look I have no idea how to respond to you.
You are all over the map changing your position
every time you add something. First it
was 90.2 percent were black and were removed.
Then it was 50%, then .. fuck if I know.
I'd look forward to responding to a coherent
argument, were it put forth.
Please don't continue
this neurotic stream of consciousness of
links and babble, count to
10 take a deep breath and read my comments
above.
\_ I have posted from differing sources to
prove the overwhelming evidence that makes
my point: a majority of those disenfranchised
were black. Not every source agrees on the
exact percentage and I suspect that your
reading of Palast's 90.2% is correct, but
ALL agree that a majority were black. You
on the other hand, have not posted one
iota of evidence to support your contention
that most were white. Balls in your court.
\_ I figured you would actually be familiar
with the USCCR report...
'Furthermore, whites were twice as
likely as blacks to be placed on the
list erroneously, not the other way
around.' But she's a liar right?
http://http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/appendix/dissent.htm
You can find the rest of the info
for yourself.
\_ That was from the dissent, not the
conlusions. Only two commissioners
signed the dissent out of eight.
You want me to find it myself, eh?
In other words, you can't find it,
mostly because it doesn't exist.
\_ Are you aware of the make up of this
so-called investigative panel? Or
any of the hateful racist shit that
came from these people?
\_ And here's the switch to attacking
the source of the report! Right on
time!
\_ Let me add that is part of
testimony presented before the
Senate - are you implying
Thernstrom perjured herself?
\_ i'm the palm beach post guy, not the white voter guy.
however you cheat. you merely quoted the usccr.gov
report QUOTING fl state senator daryl jones and state
rep chris smith. you are not quoting the report itself.
tsk tsk. the report also stated that clayton roberts,
director of the division of elections, stated that the
problem was addressed and "no person was removed from
the voter rolls based on tat erroneous information."
\_ Fine I will quote the report then:
The most dramatic undercount in the Florida election was
the uncast ballots of countless eligible voters who
were wrongfully turned away from the polls. Statistical
data, reinforced by credible anecdotal evidence, point
to the widespread denial of voting rights. It is
impossible to determine the extent of the disenfranchisement
or to provide an adequate remedy to the persons whose
voices were silenced by injustice, ineptitude, and
inefficiency. However, careful analysis and some
reasonable projections illustrate what happened in Florida.
The disenfranchisement of Florida's voters fell most
harshly on the shoulders of black voters.
http://http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/exesum.htm
\_ note that you are now beating a hasty retreat from your
own 8000 number. i am not contesting that eligible
voters were left off the list. my contention is that
1) the original 57000 was not backed up by fact,
2) the number was way smaller, quoting tampa bay
post "at least 108". i will merely observe that even
8000 is an order of magnitude less than the claimed 57000,
and now you've even backed off from the 8000.
\_ I am not "backing off of it" at all. Everything I
have seen indicates that the vast majority of those
57000 scrubbed were not guilty of any crime. Do you
have any evidence otherwise, other than partisan
sniping by Republican election officials?
\_ 1) i quoted http://democrats.com quoting tampa bay post
with "at least 108". 2) i refuted your bogus claim
from the usccr report. give me something credible
that says 57000. if i could find a http://democrats.com
ref, you can find me something non obviously
partisan, and we're even.
\_ more quoting fun from teh usccr.gov report,
"Although the Commission.s record reflects that
some supervisors of elections registered general
complaints regarding the use of the exclusion lists,
the record does not reflect that the Division of
Elections was flooded with specific examples of
Floridians erroneously identified as felons."
note that i am quoting the CONCLUSION of the report,
instead of dishonestly quoting the report QUOTING
a partisan polician.
\_ No, that is not the conclusion. This is the
conclusion:
http://http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/exesum.htm
I can't even find the line you quote. What
section is it in?
\_ God, this is such old news. It's like the abortion or death penalty or
other hot button issues. Blacks were denied voting rights, well
so were people in the panhandle and the military, the USSC gave
the election to one side 5:4, well no, the key issue was decided
7:2 and the FLSC had previously given it to Gore 5:4, blah, blah
blah until we all drop dead of age and partisanship.
\_ None of these other people had their right to vote
taken from them. Everyone who wished to vote in the
Florida panhandle and showed up on time was able to.
Florida bent over backwards accepting military votes.
They even counted votes that came in late. All the FUD
in the world can't change these facts.
\_ Exactly, blah, blah, blah. It's like abortion or the
death penalty. This is a huge troll going nowhere fast.
\_ Thank you, anti-Bush person, for deleting my post.
\_ I did not delete your post. The coward that refuses to use
motdedit did it.
\_ Fuck motdedit. In the ear.
\_ Miami Herald report: http://http://www.miami.com/mld/miami/news/2071226.htm
Lead: "Republican George W. Bush's victory in Florida,
which gave him the White House, almost certainly would have
endured even if a recount stopped by the U.S. Supreme Court
had been allowed to go forward."
\_ I agree that 4+ out of 5 articles I've seen on this topic say
"Bush would have won anyway". Anyone have well-supported URLs
against this?
\_ This is about the recount. This has nothing to do with
all the voters being scrubbed from the rolls.
\_ So, find a URL talking about roll-scrubbing in this case
being illegal, and how Gore would have won otherwise.
Points if the URL isn't from ACLU, NAACP, Salon, etc. |
| 2004/3/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:12553 Activity:kinda low |
3/8 Has anyone gotten their California e-tax booklet (together with the pin)
yet? For some reason, I still haven't received mine ..:/
\_ render unto caesar that which is his. |
| 2004/3/3 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:12507 Activity:nil |
3/3 Bush is going to win California.. hahahahhaha:
http://csua.org/u/69o
\_ Uhm, this state used to vote heavily (R). Nothing says it can't
switch back. The (D) take too many people for granted.
\_ Schwarzenegger is a democrat fool
\_ California won't forgive Bush for Enron. CA as a battleground is
a pipe dream.
\_ It's March, don't start making predictions until August, fool.
Remember, Bush upset Gore in 2000, he did the impossible in
2002 by actually increasing the number of Republicans in
the legislature during an interim election year, and who
would've thought that the recall would work and Arnie would
be governor? And remember, a solid majority within california
voted Republican in the last election.
\_ Bush will win California when monkeys fly out of Arnold's ass.
\_ Are you the same guy that predicted three months ago that Bush
would take California?
\_ More like a Freeperdream. |
| 2004/3/3-4 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:12500 Activity:high |
3/3 Apparently if you put the word "school" in it, people will vote for any
bond measure. I hope I never hear Democrats whining about fiscal
responsibility. I certainly won't care about that whining any more.
Thanks for voting yes on 55, $12B for the schools with $12B in
interest.
\_ dude, school funding is traditionally funded by bonds. It is the
way it has always worked. The other 15B in bonds are the ones you
should be grumpy about.
\_ Oh I'm grumpy about both of them. How long has this been
tradition? 10 years? Since the lottery? My point was that in a
year where we need to cut spending, a huge bond was passed. The
$15B bond at least has the facade of buying more time to balance
the budget.
\_ Go ahead and be grumpy. You got yer contra costa county
walmart didn't you?
\_ I don't live in CC so I couldn't vote against it, thanks.
didn't you?
\_ Incorrect. Traditionally school funding came from property and
income taxes. Large improvements (not maintenance) were funded
by bonds. However, it takes an ubermajority to raise taxes, so
the cheat is creating a bond and paying it via fees.
\_ There's nothing inherently irresponsible about bond financing;
as with a mortgage, you get the cash up front in exchange for
paying more over time, the idea being that you can get greater
value out of having the cash now. As long as state revenues
continue to rise, there shouldn't be anything wrong with bond
issues (within reason). -tom
\_ This is the first time a bond has been issued to pay for past
daily expenses and not a special specific project. This is a
nightmare precident.
\_ Precedent. Also alarming is the size of the bond issue.
It's one of the largest ever issued anywhere. How
liberals can whine about $15 billion in bonds for money
we've already spent and yet vote to put $15 billion more
\_ You are confusing the two different bonds. Start another
thread if you want to talk about the Gropinator's
bailout bond.
\_ Oh yeah, sorry. Ok, back to school bonds: more waste tax
pay dollars down the drain into the educational beaurocracy
never to be seen again. After the educational system is
completely reformed we can talk about putting more money in
it if necessary.
issues (within reason). -tom
\_ how about issuing bonds in one hand, and got rid of license
tax on the other hand?
\_ This sort of ridiculousness is no more than you can expect in
a system that basically mandates fiscal governance by ballot
since the legislature has its hands tied by the supermajority.
But hey! Smile! the legislature can never increase taxes on
you and you can still blame them for CA's budget problems when
you're done blaming the governor.
\_ It's hard to justify giving a $4 billion handout to the
well-off in difficult budget times. -tom
\_ It's irresponsible to take on a new mortgage when you are already
drowning in debt. Refinancing at least makes some sense.
\_ I agree that the bond was stupid. This is for local districts
to address. In fact, many of them had Measures on my local
ballot. The money is better spent when it is is raised and
spent locally.
\_ Does anyone else just vote against all propositions on general
principles? Its a terrible way to make laws.
nightmare precident.
on the credit card is beyond me. |
| 2004/3/2 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Prop] UID:12482 Activity:very high |
3/2 Does anyone know how long can you drive with an expired vehicle
registration sticker? This morning I realized my car has an expired
Feb sticker, and I wonder if I will get ticketed. But I paid
registration fee but haven't received the sticker.
\_ I had a friend who had Michigan tags that were expired for
more than a year. He got pulled over, ticketed for speeding
but the cop never realized that he had expired tags. I'm
not sure they're that observant.
\_ until you get caught. Youmay be able to argue that it is paid
and only get a fix-it ticket for not having the sticker.
\_ I went all of last year without one (had it but put it on in
February, after it expired) and I still don't have one for this
year. I've been pulled over once for speeding but the cop said
nothing. It's an old car, maybe they're taking pity on me?
\_ you can drive as long as you want, but you're eligible to be
ticketed the instant it expires. if it's expired for more
than 6 months, they can impound your car if they want to.
\_ Same situation happened to me and I got pulled over for speeding.
Cop can look up your registration and verify it's paid. Still got
the speeding ticket though.
\_ I always pay late. You can avoid the ticket up to a couple months
in but after a while the cops and esp. chp get anal about it.
If you don't drive on the highway much you might be able to
get away with it. However, your car might be missing if you
leave it on the street and they decide to tow.
\_ In California, it's standard practice to get one month's grace.
If your sticker says FEB, it's policy to ticket you on April 1.
Parking enforcement left two tickets for me over two weeks in L.A.,
but they also make a business of ticketing residents who park on
the wrong side of the street during street-cleaning days.
\_ Depending on the city they will pull you over just for expired tags,
I have gotten tickets in SJ and Castro Valley. -oj
I have gotten fix-it tickets in downtown SJ and Castro Valley,
from a cop who was directly behind me when I was stopped at a light.
e/2 Today is super tuesday. Don't forget to vote. Here's the obPoll:
Kerry: ..
Kerry: .. (lemmings)
Edwards: .
Kucinich: ..
Sharpton: .
Neither: .
yes on prop 55: .....
no on prop 55: .
yes on prop 56: ...
no on prop 56: ..
yes on prop 57: ..
no on prop 57: ...
yes on prop 58: .
no on prop 58: ....
tired of polls: .
\_ Don't care -- the primary have already been decided so there's no
more point in voting.
don't care: .
\_ No open primaries this year. This sucks if you are an independent
but want to actually have a say in what your choices for the
prez vote are.
\_ Not true. You can request a Democrat ballot if you want.
\_ You can still vote for Nader...
\_ If you want to have a say, you should have registered as a Dem
for this election, then switched back before November. If you
can't figure out how to game the system, you have no place
whining about it.
\_ Not true. You can request a Democrat ballot if you want. I
am an independent and I voted for a Democrat in the primary.
\_ Yeah, those damn parties thinking they should base the primary on
who the party members choose...
\_ Let the parties hold their own elections then instead of
having the government foot the bill.
\_ Don't care -- the primary have already been decided so there's no
more point in voting.
\_ Odd...my poll responses were overwritten. Or maybe the censor is
enforcing the fact that nobody cares?
\_ Which prop is about raising the bridge tolls? I'm so ignorant.
\_ Measure 2, comes with good things and bad things.
Translink would be great, but ferries are a waste of money
as is extending BART to Byron.
\_ I agree that ferries suck, but BART builds slowly and it makes
sense to build in the direction of future growth, which is
to the east.
\_ How is a proposition different from a measure?
\_ Prop=Statewide, Measure [1-9]=County, Measure [A-Z] = City
\_ Why are they trying to fund healthcare with a sales tax increase?
It's regressive taxation and falls whenever the economy is in
trouble. Not to mention it harms the local economy more than an
income or property tax because it's easier for people to shop
somewhere else than to move or change jobs.
\_ Because nothing but a sales tax increase will ever pass county
wide. Any policymaker worth their spit would prefer an income or
property tax but they are generally impossible to pass in CA.
\_ Where are they trying to do this?
\_ Alameda county. Proposed sales tax increase to 8.75%
It's a worthy cause, being funded in one of the most ass-ways
possible.
\_ So for the "yes on 55" folks, why do you want to add a $12B bond
with $12B interest to the CA finance mess?
\_ Because it is an investment for the future, because I think
education is usually money well spent, because CA spends less
than it should on education, because we are in a recession
and I believe in Keynesian economics. Yeah, I know we will
probably not still be in a recession by the time the money
is spent, but the CA finance mess is not a good reason to
not spend money on worthy causes, since the economy will
be better sooner or later, probably sooner.
\_ Prop 55 includes a $300m grant to build more charter schools.
On this basis alone, I cannot, in good conscience, support
it.
\_ Building schools makes no sense when the kids at the
current schools don't even have books or teachers. This
is money poorly spent in the name of education.
\_ For the "yes on 56" folks, why do you want to lower the number of
legislators needed to increase taxes to 55% from 2/3?
\_ The state budget has been in chaos over not being able to return
tax rates to an equitable level. Giving the legistature the
ability to actually do their job sounds like a good idea, unless
you are one of the many in CA who doesn't like paying for what we
have here.
\_ I for one think welfare queens should start paying their fair
share.
\_ What percentage of the state budget is spent by your
so-called "welfare queens"? Do you even know?
\_ I already pay more than my share for what "we" have here.
\_ If you really fell that way, why not leave?
\_ Ah. "Love it or leave it." If they make me pay even
more for what "we" have then maybe I will. Lots of
Californians are.
\_ Because it only takes 51% to lower them.
\_ Is that true? I thought *all* tax legislation had to be
passed by the same amount.
\_ and when was the last time your state taxes were lowered?
\_ It's sad how easy y'all get brainwashed by right wing talk
radio.
\_ Last fall, by Herr Gropenator.
\_ Case in point. Look for a reference to a "car tax"
before, oh, '96.
\_ In real dollars, property taxes go down every day. Thanks,
prop 13.
\_ Until you move.
\_ Because it is past time that California raised its taxes.
\_ no its past time California lowered its expendatures.
\_ Okay, show me where.
\_ None of this really matters as long as the e-voting machines can be
shown to be easily compromised and voters are not required to show
ID in order to vote. Aargh!
\_ When I was voting this morning I saw an old person asking about
paper receipts and audit trails. It made me happy.
\_ In San Francisco, we vote by filling in lines with a pen on
a piece of paper, which is then read by an optical scanner.
This seems like an ideal solution - not prone to error or
fraud, easy to understand for everyone, leaves a permanent
record for recount, and not labor intensive for the precincts.
Why do other counties insist on using such awful solutions
like Diebold?
\_ Who keeps the piece of paper, the voter or the polling
station? If it's the voter, this system is highly
vulnerable to verifiable vote-selling. If it's put in
a lock-box at the polling place, you're in much better
shape.
\_ The actual ballot with the pen markings is fed into
the optical scanner by the voter themselves - after this
it is locked away for safekeeping. The voter keeps
only the receipt torn from the top of the sheet.
See here:
http://www.fairvote.org/administration/votetech.htm
Scroll down to "optical scanning."
\_ Wow, that rocks! Thank you! Now if only Alameda
County would implement this. |
| 2004/3/1-2 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12478 Activity:nil |
3/1 America headed for one-party PRI-style rule?
http://www.prospect.org/print/V15/2/kuttner-r.html |
| 2004/2/28 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:12443 Activity:nil |
2/28 In Mountain View, voting in the upcoming election is being held in a
church. I find this disturbing. Is there something illegal about it
or is separation of church and state just a lofty idea?
\_ Not a bad idea for a troll, but the execution is a bit too
transparent.
\_ Agreed, if someone wants to get a response to something this
stupid, it pretty much has to be in the middle of an already
heated thread.
\_ oh my god dude that is so horrible! you should sue or call the
aflcio or bomb the church! i cant believe anyone would violate
chuch and state like that! ill bet the priest makes people take
communion or something before theyre allowed to vote! im sure it
is totally illegal! im am as shocked and disturbed as you are! in
fact my doctor said i should stop reading and posting to the motd
and i think you should stop too! |
| 2004/2/28-29 [Politics/Domestic/California, Computer/HW/Drives, Computer/SW] UID:12442 Activity:nil |
2/27 I've googled this but w/o any luck. I'm trying to find the mpeg/wmv
file of the AOL 9.0 commercial with Jerry Stiller and that rap/hip
hop guy where they made a fish out of AOL CDs. Thanks.
\- "that rap/hip hp guy" = mr. s. dogg, of long beach, ca. --master psb
\_ that's "hop" to you.
\- "that rap/hiphop guy" = mr. s. dogg, of long beach, ca. --master psb |
| 2004/2/27 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29837 Activity:nil |
2/27 Turn your sleepy little podunk town into a tourism lightning rod and
media circus in one easy step:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/27/nyregion/27CND-PALT.html?hp
\_ Hang on: "Mr. West, who is 26 and was elected last year on the
Green Party ticket...."
??? How many Green mayors are there? I thought Gonzalez would
have been the first.
\_ How wrong I was:
http://www.feinstein.org/greenparty/greenmayors.html |
| 2004/2/27-28 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29835 Activity:low 75%like:29838 |
2/26 No, really... /var/mail is getting full:
-rw-rw---- 1 njh mail 24023725 Feb 26 17:18 njh
-rw-rw---- 1 georgy mail 22633905 Feb 26 17:11 georgy
-rw------- 1 vlin mail 20938590 Feb 26 15:19 vlin
-rw------- 1 uctt mail 20938475 Feb 26 14:28 uctt
-rw------- 1 leec mail 20921676 Feb 26 16:17 leec
-rw------- 1 danberry mail 20881048 Feb 26 16:18 danberry
-rw------- 1 ericwo mail 20872793 Feb 26 10:55 ericwo
-rw-rw---- 1 isabelle mail 20446008 Feb 26 11:41 isabelle
-rw-r--r-- 1 nivra csua 19251192 Feb 23 12:36 nivra
-rw-rw---- 1 marc mail 18391040 Feb 26 17:20 marc
Why isn't there a quota on this partition?
\_ I don't know about you, but my /var/mail quota is 15 MB, hard 20 MB.
\_ I guess if you're cool and know the right people and maybe run
for CA governor as a joke candidate you get more space.
\_ I think selling ladies underwear with your name on it
should count towards the secret-csua-life-point-that-gives-
you-more-mail-quota. No comment on the other evil-doers,
though. -John
\_ two of those accounts are sorry'd. can they still retrieve email?
how are they supposed to fix their mess? |
| 2004/2/27 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:12431 Activity:high |
2/27 I don't live in California anymore, and it's dissapeared from the
headlines...What's the deal with Arnie? Has he improved the fiscal
situation? done anything else useful?
\_ Of course not. The main thing he's done is claim that allowing
gay marriage in SF will cause civil unrest.
\_Gay marriage in SF doesn't work, the state doesn't recognize
gay marriage. If you don't like it, either change the laws
in Sac. or secede from California. I don't really give a
rats ass about fags getting married, but the law in its current
form definitely does not recognize homosexual unions as a
legal entity, no matter how you may try to reinterpret it.
If a law is discriminatory, go and get it changed. Good luck
trying to get the Latinos to vote for it.
\_ Mmm... racist and homophobic all in one breath.
\_ I don't think it was racist. Latino voters are more against
gay marriage than non-Latino voters. Statement of fact.
\_ Civics lesson 101: Marriage is not mentioned in the US
Constitution. Marriage is not restricted in the CA Const.
CA State Law defines marriage as being between a man and
woman, but relegates issuance of marriage licenses to cities.
By allowing gay marriages in San Francisco, Newsom is defying
CA State Law. In order to censure him, however, the Judicial
branch has to find the state ban on gay marriage constitutional
according to CA Constitution, which is unlikely after the
recent Mass. Supreme Court decision. Until the court rules,
the marriages are presumed legal and legitimate. If the court
rules that the ban is constitutional, the marriages will be
rendered null and void (and Newsom could face criminal
charges); if not, the law will be struck down, and the
marriages will stand and continue.
\_ Why do Americans think the Executive branch has anything to do
with the economy? As if they can push the "create jobs" button
and some choose not to? Not Arnold, not Davis, not Bush, not
Clinton nor any other Executive has the power to "improve the
fiscal situation". And if they did, the few months he's been in
office wouldn't be enough time anyway. I didn't vote for Arnold
and don't like Arnold and I'm voting against his prop 57/58
insanity but I'll grant that he's trying. How many people on the
motd have ever taken a real US Civics course?
\_ In CA, state spending is wholy incumbent upon the Governor and
on how well he can woo the legislature. Do a little more civics
studies yourself.
http://www.dof.ca.gov/fisa/bag/process.htm
Also take a short course on economics, and see how much of an
effect government spending has upon the economy. Connect the
dots, young man.
\_ Woo the legislature? As if the legislature is some mythical
beast that is intent on the destruction of the economy? No,
dummy, it is incumbent upon the legislature to write and pass
bills that will have a positive effect. Since when did the
legislature lose all responsibility for their own actions?
Like I said, take a civics course. Worse than being ignorant,
you're actually completely ass backwards on the subject.
\_ The motd continues to amaze.
\_ Since the Recall put the blame for all of California's
economic woes at the feet of Gray Davis.
\_ Actually they do have a "create jobs" button, but not on such
a big enough scale to make a difference. For that they need
legislative help.
\_ He didn't say "economy"--he said "fiscal situation". You know,
the CA gov't budget problems? Moron.
\_ *laugh* Yes, the governor can magically fix the "fiscal
situation" which is dramatically different and unrelated to
the economy. Refer to my reply above about who writes and
passes legislation in this state. The other guy only needs
a civics class. You're hopeless.
\_ You know, being abrasive doesn't make you any less
wrong. Certainly the governor can't magically fix
anything, but he has a significant amount of control
over both state expenditures and state income, which
are the two aspects of the fiscal situation. For
example, Arnie simply threw away $4 billion in revenues.
100% his own decision, for his own political gain. -tom
\_ Yeah, vs. Davis tripling the car tax to raise money,
also 100% his own decision, which unfortunately
was so unpopular that they threw him out of office.
I guess you won't be running any winning campaigns
in your lifetime, Tommy boy.
\_ Wrong. Davis cut the car tax by 1/3 back in 99,
when the state was flush with cash. It went back
to its normal level automatically.
\_ He's been busy raising money to fund the "borrow $15 billion to
balance the budget this year" prop. It's going to get very ugly
out here very quickly.
\_ The Gropinator wants to borrow $15B in bonds to pay for his
$4B/yr car tax cut. Dunno if it going to pass or not. CA voters
are nuts.
\_ Yes they are. Whee! Actually, CA voters aren't much different
than other states. Which is to say that their collective
intelligence is that of a child.
\_ I think the problem with california voters is that they
really represent the equivalent of at least three states
in terms of interests. Very large blocks of California
voters differ by as much as, say, South Carolina voters
and Utah voters. |
| 2004/2/25-26 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:12401 Activity:moderate |
2/24 Polling sodans who have moved out of california. What state did
you move to and why? Thanks.
\_ to someplace cold because I'm a fucking idiot. I've dreamt
about being back in california every night for the last week.
You know what I dream about? just not being cold.
\_ south africa, wanted to find another charlize theron
\_ southern california, for the money and cultural vacuum ;-)
\_ not to mention intelligence. looks like you fit right in.
\_ New Mexico. Couldn't find a job which didn't suck in CA, in
my area. (Computational plasma physics.) I've found that
though my salary is 2/3 the going rate in CA for my job,
housing costs 1/4 as much per sq. ft. --PeterM
\_ wow that's pretty cool. Do you get funded by DARPA/army?
Do you research on atom bombs or some type of cool weaponry?
\_ The MiB will be at your place soon to discuss the topic with
you at their secret facility in Cuba.
\_ I help develop high power microwave devices. These can be
used for non-lethal crowd control and destroying electronics
rather than killing people. Say Saddam locates his control
center in a politically hardened location such as a hospital.
You destroy all the computers instead of killing everyone.
That is what I do. --PeterM
\_ Couldn't clued-in bad guys just build a Faraday cage around
their command center?
\_ Yes, but that's harder than you might think. And bombs
will still work....
\_ It's for crowd control, i.e. peanik or gay marchers.
\_ Partly right.
\_ big deal. you'll destroy their wrist watches so
they'll miss the big protest?
\_ EM storm can cause flash concussion.
\_ How do you like the weather and life in NM? Does it get way
damn hot? Enough good restaurants and recreation? I've
heard people badmouth Albuquerque.
\_ I badmouth Albuquerque. Still, it has its nice
parts. Weather is dry. Cold in the winter, hot
in the summer, not much rain, some snow. I'm
OK with the restaurants and I like to eat out.
There is very good mountain biking and other
outdoor activities. I go dancing on Friday nights.
It gets way damn hot, but it's dry, so not that
miserable. Y'all can ask me further questions
directly if you want. --peterm@soda
\_ Any good looking women in NM?
\_ Yes. --peterm
you a their secret facility in Cuba.
\_ southern california for the food, culture (we have more classical
stations and museums than N Cal you know?), women, and education.
Go BRUINS!!! Speaking of bruins, am I considered a bruin bear
or a bear bruin? -happy (but stupid)
Go BRUINS!!! Speaking of bruins, am I considered a bruin bear
or a bear bruin? -happy (bruin bear) or (bear bruin)
\_ There is education in socal? -- ucla student
\_ So I take it you're a fan of plastic boobies then...
\_ no, but I make sure I don't date them by not dating
blonds and Korean girls who drive nice cars.
\_ you'd prefer flat korean chicks in nice cars? i
think it's good they're putting in some effort
to overcome their shortcomings.
blonds and Korean girls who drive nice cars.
\_ Korean girls mostly have plastic boobies?
\_ Korean girls mostly have plastic boobies?
\_ no, they drive nice cars.
\_ In LA they sure as hell have both. |
| 2004/2/24-25 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:12386 Activity:nil |
2/23 http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.03/robot.html?tw=wn_tophead_8 Wired has a ling (5 pages) article on the Grand Challenge |
| 2004/2/24 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:12376 Activity:nil |
2/23 there is talk about some southern states wanting to suceed because
of the liberalism in california
\_ yermom can't be in two places at the same time
\_ Yeah, and everytime a Republican gets into office Alec Baldwin
says he's going to move to Canada. Never going to happen.
What's your point? |
| 2004/2/9 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:12171 Activity:nil |
2/8 CA: At-a-glance look at Proposition 56
Vote NO unless you'd like to tax CA out of existence.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1073758/posts
\_ When was the last time anyone here voted yes on a propsition in CA?
\_ I vote some up and some down. I actually read them in full plus
the various opinions and analyst reports before voting. You say
that as if you expect everyone always votes NO on all of them.
If that were the case they'd all have always failed, yes? We
know that isn't the case. |
| 2004/2/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:12063 Activity:nil |
2/1 More on why electronic voting is bad
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/7849090.htm
\_ Evoting has lots of problems but if you think standard paper voting
hasn't been rigged in *every* election since 1800 you're only
fooling yourself. For a serious case where it mattered, see the
Nixon/Kennedy race. The mob had more dead people voting and voting
often than were registered to vote in their Chicago precints.
\_ Vote early, vote often! Seriously, though, so what? We're
supposed to let e-voting off the hook because previous voting
systems have been open to corruption? That makes no sense.
\_ Not at all. I'm only saying what I'm saying which is that
the current scheme is no better and probably much worse in
many ways. I'd prefer that all voting was 100% clean but
it isn't and anyone saying evoting is bad because it doesn't
come to the high standards of paper voting is only fooling
themselves. Vote outcomes are so important that if there is
any way at all to rig them, they will be. I'm perfectly
happy with paper voting and I agree that evoting is just a
waste right now but the moment evoting is more secure than
paper we should spend the money on it as a nation. I make
no excuses or exceptions for any voting system that can be
rigged.
\_ Right on, except that I think that it's not that people
are necessarily surprised that evoting is easily riggable,
it's that there's no point in updating a system if you're
not going to make an actual attempt at fixing it. It also
seems to me that while paper receipts are not going to
make the system tamper-proof, they'll go a long way to
making the system more tamper-resistant.
\_ I'm with you. We're in total agreement. Is that even
allowed on the motd? |
| 2004/1/27 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11964 Activity:nil |
1/27 Given that in the most recent election in CA, the Republican candidates
combined vote total was significantly higher than the Democrat combined
total, would you not agree that this bodes well for a Republican
victory in the state later this year?
\_ No. You're taking it out of context, not to mention comparing
apples to oranges.
\_ I think you are grasping for low-hanging fruit, going forward.
\_ In the dead of night, as white as a sheet. |
| 2004/1/27 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11962 Activity:nil |
1/27 If Bush cuts unfair taxes on missing WMDs, will the price of housing
in California be inflated by Arnold's new budget? If only people
used motdedit, we would know the answer!
Yes: .
No: |
| 2004/1/26-27 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:11947 Activity:moderate |
1/26 Hm, I never heard about this thing. Guess I'm too young. http://www.awesome80s.com/Awesome80s/News/1980/February/3-Abscam_Revealed.asp \_ Being too young or knowing nothing about a topic or history has never stopped any motd poster from expressing extreme views before. I think it's a good topic. You should go for it! \_ I thought it's illegal for law enforcement to bait targets? \_ No. That's not the definition of entrapment. |
| 2004/1/23 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11900 Activity:nil |
1/23 Cho: don't dish it out if you can't take it.
http://www.nydailynews.com/01-23-2004/front/story/157605p-138358c.html
\_ Haha, from Drudge? This is the guy that's famous for excerpting
words from speeches that are sometimes minutes or even hours
apart and then using ellipsis to glue them together into whatever
phrase he wants to publish.
\_ "Cheney... gather... violent... law enforcement personnel...
and... come all... over... my... face."
\_ From anyone. If you're going to spew, be prepared to get
quoted, misquoted, and slammed. |
| 2004/1/22 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Gay, Politics/Foreign] UID:11879 Activity:nil |
1/21 "Dictionaries are opinion, disguised as fact, in alphabetical order."
-- A wise man
\_ Maybe I haven't been following the news, or am just one of the
many unelightened allued to below, but what does this quote
have to do with forms of government?
\_ Look, you have to pick. If you don't like democracy, like me,
you should be busy thinking of a better form of government, since
it's a larger problem than gay rights (no offense to homosexual
americans). If you do like democracy, you should learn to bow to
the opinions of the majority in political matters. -- ilyas
\_ Just do it like th greeks. Land owners and people who have a
reason to give a shit about society get to vote. All the teat
sucking proles continue on as before and maybe their offspring
will do better than they did in life.
\_ Plato called democracy the second worst form of government
(after tyranny). I agree with him. The problem with any
form of democracy is that masses of people, land-owners or
not, do not make good decisions. -- ilyas
\_ So what about a republic, which is the form of
government we have. Wasn't Plato speaking of
direct democracy? I agree with you that
direct democracy is horrible (look at CA's
initiative system), but I disagree with you
about republics.
\_ Introducing layers of indirection does not address the
basic problem. I don't really know what the answer is,
and neither did Plato. Plato wanted some sort of
enlightened monarchy, but he couldn't solve the throne
inheritance problem. -- ilyas
\_ "Do not make good decisions"? that's a bit much isn't it?
surely they sometimes do, sometimes don't. there are a lot
of factors that can affect the quality of the democracy.
How much incentive is there for the "good" decision-makers
to be in politics? Also, in this country, political parties
have become a joke due to the 2 party dominance. If we
had proportional representation, real parties and coalitions,
and something like instant runoff voting, I think we would
get government that is more representative of society. I also
think more power should rest with the more locally elected
people, instead of governors, senators and presidents who
have become television actors. I believe that the federal
government has gained a lot more power than the founders
envisioned.
\_ Sure, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. And
you are also right in that there are factors affecting
the quality of a democracy. Nevertheless, I can't help
but feel that there is something fundamentally wrong
with democracy itself. -- ilyas
\_ The PRC is probably the closest alternative, where
you have a ruling elite who select each leader
in turn, and control accession to their group. But
anything other than democracy requires crushing
freedoms to maintain control, and will be prone to
a lot of inherent corruption.
\_ I am not sure you are right, which is why I am
still thinking about it. To use Plato's analogy
of the State as the soul, there are more kinds of
souls than those of serial killers and
schizophrenics. -- ilyas
\_ What's your metric of a better government?
Happiness of people, national power...?
\_ I don't really know the answer since if I
did I would have a better idea of what
kind of government is best. I do know that
a prerequisite for the kind of government
that doesn't make me cringe is some sort of
universal morality. Without this, it's just
competing warlords with perhaps a civil
veneer (or perhaps not...). -- ilyas
\_ SERVICE guarantees CITIZENSHIP!
\_ Enlightened beings rule themselves. They dont need a government
to rule over them. We earthlings, however, are not very enlightened
most of the time.
\_ you mean most of us don't think like you? |
| 2004/1/22-23 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11877 Activity:nil |
1/21 Go Margaret!
http://margaretcho.com/blog/frommichael.htm
\_ I usually don't find Margaret Cho funny, but this
is a riot!
\_ Can we get Margaret an honorary csua account? She'd make an
excellent addition to the motd.
\_ Yeah she is about well informed about the budget as the
average American. Entitlements have always taken a larger
chunk than defense or places for the VP to relax.
\_ See? Even you can't resist being trolled by her. We
should sign her up!
\_ The idea of a celebrity motd flame warrior is pretty
cool.
\_ Dude, seriously. We could set her up with macho@csua
and watch the flames take off.
\_ Straw man. She didn't say "entitlements." Go back and
reread and try again.
\_ She wouldn't add anything to the motd. We already have enough
trolls, leftists, and ignorant ranting. She could increase the
4-letter-word count. That's about it.
\_ since the motd is mostly anonymos anyway, why don't we just
pretend that she has an account? Who'll know the difference?
-mcho
\_ mostly no one and no one will care. go for it.
\_ Sup, Republican ass monkey biyotch! --macho@csua |
| 2004/1/21 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11874 Activity:nil |
1/21 You know... all this bitching about social security won't make a
difference. Most young people don't vote. Old folks do vote. The
baby boomers will come close to bankrupting this nation when they
start to retire in the next decade. They'll vote to keep getting
every last penny they can from the govt because "they deserve it".
\_ They will outnumber the young people anyway.
\_ Two wolves. One sheep. Dinner. Yay democracy!
\_ Our only hope is to keep raising the retirement age
anyway. They might do that.
\_ No. Our only hope is to figure out a better form of
government.
\_ how about: PAY TO VOTE.
\_ No, it's more complicated than the current system
'Buy a politician'
\_ I was told that in WW2 Japan, many old people were told to die
(commit suicide, etc) because they were non-essential and were
using precious Japanese food, time, labor, and other resources.
Is this true? If so, maybe we can do something similar in the US.
\_ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074812
\_ soylent green |
| 2004/1/20 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11849 Activity:nil |
1/19 Shouldn't Iraqis be allowed to vote in out presidential election?
... since our leaders are controlling their country. Aren't these
the principles upon which the American Revolution occurred?
\_ No. Have a cookie, troll. |
| 2004/1/16 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:11804 Activity:high |
1/15 If minority of wealthy people own a huge percentage of the wealth in
the US, then woludn't it make more sense for them have a bigger
percentage of tax?
\_ How much bigger? Serious question here. How much more should rich
people pay in your opinion?
\_ perhaps are you suggesting a hefty property/wealth tax in liu of
income taxes? One important function of gov't is protect property,
and so one could easily argue that those with the most for the
govt to protect should be paying the lion's share of the govt
expenses.
\_ Only because they earn more, but it would not make sense to charge
them more per dollar, just more dollars because they're making
more dollars. And you're confusing "wealth" with "high income
earning". They are not the same thing. A wealthy person with low
or no income should be paying the same taxes as a poor person with
low or no income: zero.
\_ And we suddenly race back to serfdom! So those not making an
"income" shouldn't be contributing to the common defence simply
because they've got theirs? Grow up.
\_ They pay in other ways such as property taxes, death taxes,
utility taxes, bridge tolls, sales taxes, and a million
other fees. Get an education and grow up yourself. When
you're less ignorant you can come back and discuss adult
topics with us.
\_ One rhetorical technique really bothers me: the term
"death tax". Calling it that makes it seem cruel and
unfair, but you can't tax a dead person. Call it what it
really is: a tax on recieving an inheritance.
\_ Yeah, but it's been obliterated by Bushco, so is it
worth talking about? Yay inherited plutocracy!
\_ Don't forget, this death tax was only on assets
exceeding 2 mill, which hardly sounds excessive.
I can understand pegging this to inflation, but
doing away with it entirely seems excessive since
that will need to be made up in other ways.
\_ Yeah, the whole process leading up to it has
been utter bullshit. It's greed, plain and
simple. Inheritance tax has an interesting
history, and is a deeply anti-monarchic response
(and rightly so).
\_ How much bigger?
\_ This contradicts what people consider 'fair' in non-tax contexts.
This reminds me of a truly amazing article in the Daily Bruin I
read the other day where someone was complaining how unfair it
was that Schwarzenegger wasn't willing to tax rich people in
California more, to solve the budget problem... Then in the same
breath the person complained how the Federal government has this
progressive scheme of taxing states, where California only gets
back 76% or so of the revenue they give up to the Feds (which
apparently is also very unfair). It seems he saw no contradiction
in what he was saying, or maybe he didn't want to be principled
but favored any tax scheme which gave him the biggest slice of
the pie possible in the current political climate. -- ilyas
\_ The analogy is false. "States" don't suffer from the
problems of poverty, people do. There's no reason the
state with the highest cash flow should pay proportionally
more than other states. (You can't call California the
"richest" state since right now our state government is
actually the poorest.) California also has more poor people
and more need for social services than, say, Wyoming. -tom
\_ I think California is passing the 'suffering'
from this progressive taxing scheme the feds have onto
the residents just fine. Who is to say the Feds have a less
optimal income redistribution plan than you do? Maybe it's
worth it to take away from some social services in CA and
optimal income redistribution plan than you do?
give to social services in MA, etc. The analogy is not false.
\_ If the other states are getting more for pork-barrel projects,
then it's logically consistant. If it's to subsidize poor states
then he is a hypocrite.
\_ Well, even if it goes exclusively to pork, you are still not
in the clear. You have to prove that _your_ method of income
redistribution is better than this other one. I think it's
better to simply agree on whether progressive taxation is
fair or not first, and worry about the specifics of how
it gets spent later.
\_ You're missing the point. Taking more money from
California because it has the highest cash flow is not
"progressive taxation." California is billions of dollars
in the hole--"rich" people who lose money during a given
year pay no taxes that year. California has no earnings,
just a budget. -tom
\_ Bzzt! California has 'earnings'. They're called taxes.
Just because CA spends more than it takes in doesn't
mean it isn't doing well. That's called overspending.
If I made a million dollars last year but spent 1.5
million on toys for myself do you think I shouldn't
have to pay taxes on that million?
\_ If you spent the 1.5 million on charity projects like
education for all children and health care for the
poor and elderly, then you'd have a 1.5 mil deduction
million on toys for myself do you think I shouldn't
and not have to pay any taxes. It's not like the
state is buying itself sports cars.
\_ Exactly right. -- ilyas
\_ California is *NOT* the richest state in terms of average
per capita income. And if you look at the distribution scheme
fair or not first, and worry about the specifics of how
it gets spent later.
have to pay taxes on that million?
\_ Exactly right. -- ilyas
you will see that the money goes to politically favored states
and is taken away from those the Republicans want to punish.
Poverty and wealth have nothing to do with it.
\_ All methods of income distribution are unfair to someone. That is
one of the core problems with any tax system. No matter what you
do someone will say it is unfair to them. And they'd be right. The
only real question is not "fair or unfair?" but "who do we screw?"
In the U.S. we screw wealthy people by charging them more money but
not providing more services for their tax dollar. We then screw
them again when they want to leave their wealth to other family
members so the money has been unfairly taxed twice. I was going to
balance my comments by saying how we screw poor people but I can't
think of anything that isn't some form of "we don't give them enough
money from wealthier people".
\_ I disagree. I don't think forming societies is an inherently
losing proposition for someone. I also think there is one
notion of fairness that is 'right.' -- ilyas
\_ That's an interesting opinion but not meaningful and does not
bear out in reality where historically no matter what the tax
system has looked like there is always a group that
justifiably feels screwed by it while others remain silent.
If you can find that one correct notion of fairness that the
rest of us can agree on, A Universal Fair Tax Truth, then you
should run for office. I'd vote for you in a split second.
\_ Well, I think 'feeling screwed' is not a good yardstick
for universal fairness. Maybe someone is unusual
and would feel screwed with any scheme that didn't give him
losing proposition for someone. I also think there is one
notion of fairness that is 'right.' -- ilyas
justifiably feels screwed by it while others remain silent.
If you can find that one correct notion of fairness that the
rest of us can agree on, A Universal Fair Tax Truth, then you
should run for office. I'd vote for you in a split second.
the whole world on a platter. I don't claim to know how
to approach universal fairness, but I have a feeling it
exists (even if it's not as elegant and simple a concept as I
\_ Actually he is getting more for his money. Our education
system, our infrastructure, our millitary, our police, etc.
ALL are needed to help keep him rich. Third world
countries are not conducive to getting rich.
would like). -- ilyas
\_ Well, i'm not sure your vague "feeling of existence"
is such a good basis for your claim that a
notion of universal fairness exists.
\_ You're probably not wealthy enough to know that our tax system
is so deliberately laden with loopholes that the very richest
pay far far less of their income in taxes than you probably think
\_ They may be too ethical to play shell games with companies.
But that doesn't mean they don't exist for those with
less scruples.
Is moneybags using more gov't services than regular guy?
Maybe he is getting more value from the military. What is fair?
that they do.
\_ Compare a regular guy making 40k, gets taxed 20% = $8000.
Then there's moneybags making $400k, gets taxed 5% = $20000.
Is moneybags using more gov't services than regular guy?
\_ I thought it was Spock who said, "The good of the many,
outweighs the good of the few, or the one." Live long and
prosper - even with high taxes.
it gets spent later.
Maybe he is getting more value from the military. What is fair?
\_ Noblesse Oblige?
\_ Actually he is getting more for his money. Our education
system, our infrastructure, our millitary, our police, etc.
ALL are needed to help keep him rich. Third world
countries are not conducive to getting rich.
\_ No, actually, my parents are fantastically wealthy and I know
that your concept of "the rich pay nothing! it's all full of
holes! the poor pay more!" is a crock of shit. They pay more
every year in absolute and percentage terms than any middle
class or poor person will pay in a lifetime. You're not
wealthy enough to know what the rich really pay, you just
repeat the noise you read on http://moveon.org.
\_ I disagree. Jean-Luc Piccard once said the life of a few is
worth sacraficing for the benefit of the many. Or maybe that
was from a Vulcan, I can't remember.
\_ No, Picard never said this. He was not a utilitarian. What
he did say in one episode was that he refuses to let
arithmetic decide such matters.
\_ I thought it was Spock who said, "The good of the many,
outweighs the good of the few, or the one." Live long and
prosper - even with high taxes. |
| 2004/1/16 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11802 Activity:nil |
1/15 Here is the question which always bothers me: how caucuses
is choosen?based upon its monetary contribution to its party?
\_ no, these are joe-average people. pretty much anyone who is
on the party lists and willing to sit through 8 hours of babble
and bullshit before the vote is allowed to if they're a citizen
of the state. |
| 2004/1/12-14 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11759 Activity:nil |
1/11 Good thing DeLay stopped the Democrats from Gerrymandering Texas:
http://gis1.tlc.state.tx.us
\_ Gah, must control fist of death.
\_ No worse than CA or any other state. |
| 2004/1/12 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11757 Activity:nil |
1/11 Look at the body on Harris (Florida 2000)! I'd vote for *that*!
http://www.drudgereport.com/kh.jpg
\_ It's amazing the kind of body a Republican bribe can buy....
\_ I think she was born with it.
\_ As was Pamela Anderson.
\_ You better not look too closely at the face though:
http://csua.org/u/5j8
\_ Bag it, flip the lights, nail it. Be happy. |
| 2004/1/11-12 [Politics/Domestic/California, Science/GlobalWarming] UID:11754 Activity:kinda low |
1/11 Harry Braun in 2004!!!
http://www.braunforpresident.us
\_ That picture totally needs some flying cars and Zeppelins in the
background.
\_ It iz about doing bad thingz! To good people! Mit Zcienze!
\_ source?
\_ The Tick.
\_ _Your_ movie is here: http://csua.org/u/5iv (Apple preview)
\_ I would so vote for him if I thought he had a chance in hell of
winning.
\_ you can see him and 14 other random, unknown candidates
talk at http://www.cspan.org click on the "lesser known candidates"
forum video on the left hand side fo the page. There
are a few republicans and a bunch of democrats, and it
makes for interesting watching.
\_this is totally fucking hilarious. You have to see this.
\_ http://csua.org/u/5iy
\_ If he gets together with Clark we can have time travel and
energy supplies from perpetual motion machines.. WOO HOO!
\_ Was Clark a part of the philadelphia experiment?
\_ That was the Navy, son.
\_ Oh yeah. Forgot. Did the army have its own time machine
and invisibility program?
\_ Well, the Air Force has Stargate SG-1....
\_ They should just huck some nukes out the bad guy's
portals and be done with it. I never understood
the whole "send 4 people out to go stir up shit"
thing. It's very non-military culture.
\_ Yeah, but while the nuke option is much more
reasonable, it doesn't make for a good serial.
\_ No but he said he thinks we can travel faster than the
speed of light.
\_ I can! I hold my breath and spin and spin and spin and
tap my ruby slippers three times and I'm back in Arkansas!
\_ My question is, why can't we get Mary Carey to run? Did you
see those babajangas?
\_ her hamburgers are too big, they spill out of the bun.
\_ Babajangas? The motd has taught me a new term. Thank you. |
| 2004/1/10 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11741 Activity:nil |
1/9 Examining Berkeley's liberal legacy
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/09/elec04.berkeley/index.html
\_ Go CNN! In other news, Sun still rising in the East tomorrow!
\_ cool it's about time. Nippon ichiban! BONZAI!!!! |
| 2004/1/8-9 [Politics/Domestic/California, Academia/Berkeley] UID:11718 Activity:nil |
1/7 http://www.berkeleydates.com \_ Hey, there's no yellow fever option. What good is this thing? \_ There are no other users on the system at the moment. \_ Is there a real Berkeley alum site that let's us make non-romantic (ie: job contact & networking) connections but doesn't hit us up for money constantly like the utterly useless on campus alumni org? |
| 2004/1/8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11713 Activity:nil |
1/7 What's proper attire for a play in a nice theater? I don't have
a tux and am wondering what to wear. Thanks.
\_ In California, whatever you want.
\_ Within reason. I'd say ideal would be a shirt with collar and
a sportcoat (not matched pants, that would be a suit). Or
some decent slacks and a nice sweater. If you show up in torn
jeans and a computer t-shirt you probably won't get kicked out
but you will look a bit out of place.
\_ You *can* wear whatever you'd like, but you *should* wear a decent
shirt (buttons & collar), not jeans, not sneakers or other lesser
except for Prada, D&G, etc. sports shoes _/
quality footwear, and for christ's sake *shower* and put on some
deordorant before you go. There's nothing worse than sitting next
to someone that smells like a hacker or homeless person after
shelling out big bucks to go out. The tux, etc is overkill, btw.
I don't think you'll ever see that in CA.
\_ Purple suit, feathered hat, gold tooth, cane
\_ But watch out for those goldfish shoes!
\_ Thanks to all who answered. I was just really wondering whether
a sportcoat was absolutely necessary (since I don't have one of
those either).
\_ Only if it's cold or you feel like it. You won't be horribly
out of place without one. Button/collar shirt, real shoes,
shower, real pants. |
| 2004/1/7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:11704 Activity:insanely high |
1/7 Court: N.C. must broaden its Medicaid coverage for illegal
immigrants
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1053196/posts
\_ It only makes sense. Legislation through the courts is the only
way the minority party can push their agenda. It's been this way
for years.
\_ If you agree with what the court is doing, its fair and
reasonable. If you disagree, its "legislative activism."
There is no political party I know if thats actually
consistent about this, other than maybe the libertarians,
and they have virtually nobody in office that I recall.
\_ There are libertarians in office. They just call themselves
socially liberal Republicans, or fiscally conservative
Democrats because no-one votes for a third party. |
| 2004/1/7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Recreation/Computer/Games] UID:11701 Activity:nil |
1/6 Pete Rose is a liar and a scumbag.
\_ I was shocked, shocked to hear that he had bet on baseball.
\_ Casablanca reference acknowledged.
\_ please tell us how you really feel about him
\_ Why is he a scumbag, aside from betting on baseball and then lying
about it? I'm serious.
\_ baseball elders get cranky when you bet on baseball,
especially if you are managing a team. ever
heard of the "black sox"?
\_ well what you mention is at the center of it. It's also about
him constantly pandering for attention, refusing to admit to
truth, showing no remorse or guilt for wrong-doing. If you
believe Gioso, he also had no qualms about corking his bat.
What about the insinuation that since he bet everyday on
games, and on the Reds, who he managed, only sometimes, that
the very act of "not betting" on the Reds is a signal that
he thought the Reds might lose. Oh, and perhaps the only
reason that this news is hitting the airwaves "now," is
because Pete stands to profit from a book, and the HOF
announcement is today.
\_ I hadn't heard about any bat corking. Re: the gambling, I
think that although it was against the rules, it was not
"wrong". Lying about it was, but not bad enough to make him a
scumbag.
\_ bat corking: http://csua.org/u/5g1
also, the gambling is wrong. Again, do you really think
Pete would manage the same when he bet for the Reds to
win and when he did not bet for the Reds to win? What
about blowing out a pitcher's arm in May in order to get
that crucial last inning when there's 5 months of
baseball left? Furthermore, Pete had to know that not
betting on the Reds would signal the mob bosses. How
hard do you think he played to win while he had that
knowledge.
\_ I would expect that rather than doing a half-assed job
when he didn't have any bets going, it's more likely
that he placed bets when he had "inside information"
which favored the Reds. This would be insider trading
with respect to his bookie, but that doesn't bother me.
\_ of course he had inside information. he was their
manager. What about the situation which may or may
not have happened where he gets pressure put on him
by mob bosses to whom he owes money to throw a game?
If the betting on baseball doesn't bother you, and
the inherent conflict in interest involved, whether
he was betting to win or to lose, and the lying,
public pandering, and insincere begging he has done
in public since 1989 don't bother you, then maybe
in your eyes he's not a scumbag. These things do
bother me, however. In general, it's been his
character, his willingness to do anything for a $,
and his willingness to do anything, say anything
to get back into the HOF regardless of what he hurts
or what he has to say to do it.
\_ some people just don't care about character. to
them there is nothing someone can do that is
'wrong' or immoral because they don't believe in
morality. anything that someone can get away
with is ok because they have no sense of right
and wrong. you're wasting your time trying to
explain immorality to someone that has no morals.
\_ you people are incredible. we just had a thread
about how EVIL teachers are bleeding the
taxpayer dry with their 30k/yr salaries for
teaching kids, but when it comes to baseball
teams
subsidised by the taxpayer for the profit
of a few millionares all you fuckers
care about is who gambled or cheated.
\_ 30k/year? Bullshit. In CA, try 50k for
passing the 10th grade level exam and 70-80k
for taking a few night or summer classes and
getting an "advanced" teaching credential or
"masters" in education from *any* third rate
school. You're so full of crap. You know
nothing about the teacher's union or
teaching. You're not even trolling anymore.
You're just spreading outright lies and
complete misinformation at best. Please
just go away.
\_ Is there anything more boring than baseball. I'd rather watch
grass grow.
\_ Yes, there is. It's called Cricket. |
| 2004/1/6 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:11671 Activity:high |
1/5 A Poll for the majority of you out there who do not support
School vouchers:
Do you think that the advent of FedEx and UPS made the USPS
better or worse in the long run?
And, while i know it is ridiculous to expect any sort of
restraint or accuracy from a motd poll, i am JUST asking anti-
voucher folks. Feel free to comment/flame though. -phuqm
Better: ...
Worse:
No effect:
\_ There's a much better argument for vouchers based on an analogy.
America has competition in it's university system, which is
widely regarded as the best in the world, and no competition
in it's k-12 system, which is close to the worse in the
industrialized world. Also, we already have school choice for
those whose parents care enough about education and have enough
money to move to a town with a better school system. The
current form of school choice benefits only those lucky few whose
parents fall into this category, and already has destroyed inner
city schools in exactly the way voucher opponents claim "will"
happen. The irony is that the people who excersise school choice
now, by moving to an expensive town to get a good education for
their kids are the very middle class liberals who most vocally
oppose school choice. I also think it's worth pointing out that
presently the k-12 education system in the US is so bad that
the burden of proof is actually on those who *don't* want
change, not the other way around.
\_ but there are no vouchers for going to a private university
so that argument makes no sense.
\_ It's not just the Evil Middle-Class Liberals:
http://csua.org/u/5fx
\_ This is a very good short argument. tnx. And I plan to steal
it, and since you didn't sign you name, claim it as my own.
:). I have also said the same thing re: burden of proof
many times, but the college analogy is not perfect since
1.) it has always been there. (i.e. no sudden change is
involved) and 2.) even at the cheapest of public Us the
student still pays some. -phuqm
\_ I would say the same thing about the burden of proof re:
health care. Would you?
\_ yes, actually. perhaps you've mistaken me for a
conservative? I happen to agree with the conservatives
on school choice, but that does not mean i support their
love of the insurance industry. For the record, I'm
\_ K-12 education is simply not that bad nationwide. What makes
you think that it is? If you compare us to other industrialized
nations, we do fine. Our worst schools are far worse, but that
is true for everything in America, due to the income disparity.
also not a libertarian, and am ashamed to agree with
"phuqm" on any issue.
\- I am not sure what you are suggesting by mentioning school
vouchers. Are you going to suggest "since the existence of
FedEx improved USPS, we should have subsidized FedEx"?
maybe that would have "benefitted the taxpayers" but that would
have benefitted the fedex stockholders much more. i think the
better question has nothing to do with school vouchers. the usps
is obligated to deliver mail to everybody for the same price.
i assume there is no reason fedex cant charge more to send a
package to a cabin in the montana woods [or just refuse to
deliver there ... surely they arent obligated to have an office
near by or poll the denizen of said cabin 6 times a week to see
if he has anything to mail]. so if fedex gets to cherrypick
routes and packages, do what extent does that adverse selection
put the usps in a bigger and bigger hole. you should lay your
cards on the table. --psb
\_ Are you against vouchers? If so, please vote. I will
happily "lay [my] cards on the table" soon, but i'd like to
get some votes first. (you seem to be suggesting "worse")
\- i think the vouchers will be underfunded and will be a
total boondoggle. the way they might cause some improvement
is by causing the teachers unions to keel over or maybe
the unions will panic enough to be more reasonable. but
it would seem to make more sense to just take on the unions
directly. i think if money is given to decent private
school and they are continually allowed to pick their
students you will have the quality of the schools improve
but the students getting shafted now will continue to be
shafted. it's hard to be "for or against vouchers" since
it isnt self-evident what you mean by them. --psb
\_ Subsidising is beside the point. The USPS pays
for itself. Taxpayers already do more than "subsidise"
EDU, they pay for it outright. My suggestion is that, imho
the USPS has gotten markedly better since FedEx and UPS have
arrived on the scene. Since the only reasonable objection
to vouchers is that it will make the existing public schools
much worse, I would suggest that this is an indication that
it might not. Your point about CherryPicking is highly
pertinent though, and I think that it is obvious that any
legislation re: vouchers should attempt to address the
problem of voucher schools rejecting hard cases. ( Which
has been a major problem in the "corporate" schools in SF
and other places ). Self-selection is an insolvable problem
but I believe that advantages far outweigh the disadvantages.
\_ The point here is that private schools already exist, so
there is already a FedEx equivalent. I don't relate FedEx
to vouchers in any way. --dim
\_ But parents are forced to double pay. I can choose not
to ever pay the USPS but even if I pay full rate to put
my kids in private school, I am also paying full rate
for them in the public schools which I'm not using. If
vouchers meant that money was no longer a double payment
you bet your ass the public schools would improve... right
after breaking the spine of the very evil teacher's union.
\_ Union bad! Neocon Hulk smash!
\_ Ah, but "parents" aren't the only ones who pay for
public school. Childless taxpayers put into the system
too. Do they get their money back too? You are for
private school for extra performance, by your choice.
Why pay for an airplane ticket when your tax money
already pays for the interstate road system?
\_ If you don't pay into the system for education,
you end up paying down the road with crime and
prison costs. Even if you libertarian gun nuts
take over, and all justice is meted out by
vigilantes, uneducated masses of criminals will
cost you time in gunning them down when you could
be doing something profitable. Remember,
time is money.
\_ I think the university argument is a good one. There
are no vouchers for university students and those
who go to private colleges still end up paying to
support public colleges. If there are no vouchers
for universities and it works so well then maybe
vouchers aren't the answer. --dim
\_ BZZZT! University isn't a requirement. I'm not
required by law to send my children to a U. but
I am required by law to send them to k-12 (or
until 18 or whatever age). If U. attendance was
required then the same voucher concept would
apply.
for universities and it works so well then maybe
vouchers aren't the answer. --dim
\_ You are required to *PAY* for a U, though,
whether you send your kids or not. --dim
\_ Delivery service is like utility companies. There isn't enough
of them to compete for free market, and instead, each and every
one has a monopoly in it's small niche. UPS delivers big packages,
Fedex delivers next day reliably, and USPS delivers mail. All
three domains end up not really competing with each other, and
all three end up overcharging the consumers. Like utility companies
I think delivery service should be highly regulated.
\- i dont mean to insult you but this is too confused to be easily
corrected. you may wish to read a book like "optimal regulation"
by K. Train, although you will probably need to read some
prerequisits ... not sure how far you will have to recurse.--psb
\_ you know that by law fedex and ups are not allowed to deliver
\_ so there's no real freedom in this market, as I said.
regular mail or touch your mailbox, right? the market is not
even remotely free.
\_ Yeah and FedEx and UPS aren't required by Congress to deliver
mail to BFE at the same price as the house next door.
\_ so there's no real freedom in this market, as I said.
\_ The teacher's unions are the largest unions in America. They
have a monopoly on public education monies and are not
constrained by the Hatch Act like federal employees. Guess
who they donate almost to exclusively, and why the Dems
are so anti voucher.
\_ The teachers' union comprises under-paid and largely
idealistic people who see kids for 8 hours a day (i.e.,
more time than the kids' parents). They are well-educated
and know they could earn more money elsewhere (the ones
who couldn't earn more elsewhere can't teach and leave
the profession). I have no problem with the teachers' union.
I have a problem with the administrators who never taught
and never intend to teach and who get paid ridiculous
amounts of money only to squander the meager budgets of
their districts.
\_ I know lots of teachers like that. And I know teachers
who have left the profession and made more money
elsewhere.
amounts of money only to squander the meager budgets of
their districts.
\_ HOLY SHIT IN A CUP! I don't think you've actually *met*
any teachers! Under paid? Idealistic? 8 hours? Well
edjumikated? Earn more elsewhere? Leave the profession
because they can't teach? *None* of these things are
generally true. I think I've been trolled.
\_ Well there is no incentive to get rid of the
whose incentive is to increase their budget and number
administrators. The ratio in the 1950s was 5:1 teacher
to administrator, today it is 2:1. The private schools
whos incentive is to increase their budget and number
cost is ~ 3000$ per student, the public > 7500$ per
student. The public cost per student is something
like 30% higher than in the 1980s but test results
have declined. The inner city schools are nothing
but affirmative action self-perpetuating bureaucracies
whose incentive is to increase their budget and number
of employees, not educate children.
How I Joined Teach for America -- and Got Sued for
\_ private schools get to pick and choose students. The
ones that would cost too much to educate (the disabled,
the retarded, the violent, etc) get the boot while the
cheap ones get welcomed. It is the 90% for 10% of
the cost type situation that exists everywhere.
$20 Million
http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=5528
As for pay, if you prorate it over 12 months they are not
underpaid in a majority of communities.
\_ Are you referring to that article as a source for your
argument?
\_ No, but here's more:
The Union That Killed Education
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/846177/posts |
| 2004/1/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:11667 Activity:very high |
1/5 Hits the nail on the head regarding living in the Bay Area
http://sfgate.com/columnists/nelson
\_ Yup, just because someone is a liberal doesn't make him any
smarter or a better person than the average joe. It just makes
him more hypocritical. Hopefully they'll die out because they
don't appear to be having a lot of kids.
\_ Not all liberals are hypocritical. And not everyone in the
bay area is rude. And us non-rude liberals get just as
\_ The author never claims this. The 5th to the last paragraph
says essentially the same thing.
\_ I was addressing both the article and the above reply.
--scotsman
frustrated about the rudeness as our couterparts. Also I
have never seen such behaviour towards my sisters (two kids
apiece) or my friends who have been pregnant recently. Perhaps
this particular woman is rude herself, and gets it back in
spades. --scotsman
\_ It is really funny to watch conservatives accuse liberals of
being hypocritical. See Rush Limbaugh, William Bennett, Strom
Thurmond and many many others just in the last couple of months.
Can you name one famous liberal of similar hypocrisy? Can you
say "projection"? I knew you could.
\_ Barbara Streisand, Ted Kennedy, Michael Moore.
\_ Barbara Streisand, Ted Kennedy, Michael Moore, ELF.
\_ I think part of ELF's hypocracy is not the organization but
its members. These people commit vandalism and endanger
people they disagree with, but yet you know ELF members
were strongly protesting the war.
\_ I don't know that at all. Did ELF take a stand on
the war?
\_ I didn't say ELF had a stance. I'm just saying I'd
bet you dollars-to-donuts that ELF members were
against the war.
\_ What do these people preach that they do not practice?
You do know the definition of hypocricy, right?
\_ Google the following:
"barbara streisand environment"
"michael moore fear-mongering"
right to left. c.f. "hate speech," "racism," "diversity"
\_ ad hominem attacks does not suddenly make that
person an hypocrite.
\_ no but criticising the gun lobby of using fear
tactics while using fear tactics himself to
advocate social welfare does
\_ You think they're fear tactics? Did you even
watch the film?
\_ yes, I watched the film. And you do not
think they're fear tactics? Manipulated
much?
who expects society to bend over backwards to accomidate her
"ted kennedy chappaquiddick"
can't get over the shock of having race and class privilege.
"elf desctruction"
\_ See your problem is that you don't know what the
word hypocricy means. When did Ted Kennedy or
liberals in general advocate not driving drunk?
Did elf ever advocate non-violence? I am not
sure what your beef with Barbara Striesand and
the enviornment is, but you might have one there.
\_ Babs advocates enviornmentalism and conservation
but owns a huge house with air conditioning.
\_ Um, she also sued a scientist who was
studying the effects of erosion on the
California coast. Did anybody actually
Google the terms above?
\_ And there was that time she turned into a
giant fire-breathing robot and flattened a
hick mountain town in Colorado.
\_ Strom Thurmond never advocated white men not
having sex with black women either. ELF claims
to be for protecting the environment, but their
actions have done more harm to the environment
than good.
\_ He most certainly was against miscegenation:
http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/usa/strom-thurmond
And your opinion of ELF's actions is
debatable. They think what they do helps
the environment, and so do I.
\_ How have ELF's actions done more harm to the
environment than good? What, people have
started hating trees because the ELF's been
firebombing construction sites?
\_ I agree that it's debatable. In the long
term one can argue that they've increased
awareness of their cause. But in the short
term, the polution caused by the fires
they set have done more harm then what
they targetted. The sad thing is the
author is right. Most people in the Bay
Area are incapable of seeing more than
one side of an issue.
\_ Tell me the name of a place where people
are not like that.
\_ They delayed clear-cutting by months in
some cases at a minimal cost in burned
material. This is clearly a plus for
the environment. Of course, it's also
a huge minus for environmentalists who
want to be taken seriously, which I
suspect was more your original point.
\_ She didn't even mention by far the worst part about the
Bay Area, and the one reason I'll never move back: housing.
She's probably stuck in some idiotic mortgage on an overpriced
home just like all the flame warriors here.
\_ I'm guessing she didn't mention it because the essay was about
society, not the economy.
\_ She mostly just sounds like she has a bug up her ass. I've
never seen anyone with the attitude about children that she
describes. If she wants to bash stupid Bay Area lefties, how
about the Critical Mass yahoos or ACT UP SF (the offshoot
ACT UP group that spreads the HIV IS A LIE meme). She's
right about the turn signal thing, but thats got nothing to
do with politics, for fuck's sake - if anything George
Deukmejian's cuts to drivers ed programs in the '80s have more
to do with that.
\_ waah waah! I'm oppressed!
\_ "Jennifer Nelson, an Oakland writer, worked in policymaking
positions in the Deukmejian and Wilson administrations."
Hell, she's lucky she hasn't been lynched.
\_ One more demonstration of how political language migrates from
left to right. c.f. "hate speech," "racism," "diversity"
\- i think the author should have focused on "chez panisse
liberalism" or on anti-children seniments. they are different
phenomena and combining them sounds like random bitching
rather than dissecting something coherent. --psb
\_ Her problem is that she is a white person with three children
who expects society to bend over backwards to accommodate her
and her concerns. Here she is nothing special and she still
can't get over the shock of not having race and class privilege.
\_ The responses on this motd illustate her point perfectly. -ax
\_ Do you think people like her deserve special treatment? |
| 2004/1/2 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11645 Activity:nil |
1/1 Voters Crossed the Line in Miami
http://csua.org/u/5ei |
| 2003/12/24-25 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:11584 Activity:low |
12/13 "Organizers charge white students $1 for a cookie, while blacks and
other minorities pay 25 to 95 cents. Doughnuts are available for 50
cents to everyone except Asian Americans and whites, who cannot
purchase them... Unfair? So is affirmative action, organizers contend."
from http://csua.org/u/5d4
\_ The most pathetic thing is that these stunts were first pulled
by conservatives at UM during their recent affirmative action
debate, and it appears on the news wires every time some imitators
buy a couple of poster boards and $20 of cookies at the local
supermarket. (The people who were suing UM were horribly deluded
to think that their race kept them out, btw.) And also, wtf wants
to go to UW?
\_ Not everyone can get into your rich little white boy school.
\_ How come Asian Americans cannot purchase them? -asian am
\_ There are no asians in Washington.
\_ Because Asian Americans, like whites, need higher GPAs and test
scores to get admitted compared to applicants of other races.
\_ that is sooooo untrue. Look at Vietnamnese people. I've
roomed with 2 of them and 1 of them was a total complete
loser who liked to mod his car with ugly looking spoilers.
The other one was a thief who took my mail and stole
my CC # to buy things. Both of them went to VCs.
\_ VCs = vietcongs?
\_ Trolling with public funds. Obtaining cookies has an even playing
field. Education does not.
\_ Wtf does 'even playing field' even mean? What about poor white
immigrants, etc?
\_ At the most distilled, Opportunity. Anything from parents
that actually know that they should help you learn (and
hopefully had an education themselves) to having a teacher
that recognizes your individual needs in education and has
the funds and time to address them. --scotsman
p.s. and before you get your panties in a bunch, no, race
lines are not a perfect way to draw the boundaries, but
strangely enough, the economic and racial lines show a
strong corellation.
\_ Then why not just choose economic lines and ignore race?
Do you seriously believe that middle class black parents
will raise their kids less well or know less than poor
white trash from the sticks? Doing anything by race is
evil. No bullshit. No excuses.
\_ Do you seriously believe that racism is not still a
part of the problem? And "anything by race is evil" is
a little strong. Look at the reasons Prop 54 went down
so hard. There are real divisions in terms of health
care and education that must be addressed in terms of
race/culture. --scotsman
\_ Nice dodge. What about those middle class black kids
vs. the poor white kids? Go read your own words
above starting with "Opportunity. Anything from
parents...". Stop ducking and please answer.
\_ It's not a dodge. It's multiple parts of
the problem of education. There is racism, and
there is insufficient funding and opportunity
for poorer schools/students etc. There is no
panacea. Racism has perhaps garnered more
attention, but calling it solved is ludicrous.
Scholastic funding for poor areas is a problem
that has headed in the wrong direction for a
long time. --scotsman
\_ Ben, what problem are you solving? Are you
solving: (a) that some parents are idiots,
and don't instill the value of education in
their kids (such people exist in all races)
(b) that some people are poor and some are not
(such people exist in all races) or
(c) racist attitudes about some people (they
exist about people of all races, in particular
jews, members of the caucasian race, have been
the 'beneficiaries' of racism for thousands of
years). So, which problem is it? And why
penalize whites, regardless of which of the
three it is? -- ilyas
\_ I am not a communist as you believe,
ilya, but I do believe that education and
health care are rights that everyone should
be guaranteed. I think that racism impinges
on peoples' access to education. I think
that the best teachers spend nearly as much
time educating parents as they do on their
students (which shouldn't be necessary, but
is). I think the phrase "benefitting from
racism" is loaded, and as unhelpful to
discourse as comparing affirmative action
to cookies is. Returning to the financial
aspect, I believe investment in education
has a higher return that most people suppose,
and deserves more funding than we have
devoted thus far. --scotsman
\_ Let me ask this again. What justification
do you have for penalizing whites?
It doesn't have to be moral, it could
be pragmatic. I just want to know what
the justification is, because I don't
think it has been articulated yet.
-- ilyas
\_ Refer to history. Social movements brought us here.
Helping the poor is not what the rich do... Helping
those who were socially outcast has much more political
leverage. Besides the "Poor" don't vote...
\_ Helping the poor is exactly what the rich do. It is
not what the middle class does because they can't
afford it. That's why you get ultra rich leftists
like Gates and Buffet saying taxes are too low. They
don't care what the tax rates are because it doesn't
mean anything to them but it makes them feel less
guilty to know they may have helped some poor people
(at the real world expense of the middle class). So,
anyway, you seem to be saying that we should help
the middle class black kid but ignore the poor white
kid... because he's white? Brilliant. Glad you're
\_ Then you're reading me wrong.
not making public policy. It's already fucked up
enough. At least today that poor white kid can get
*some* help for being poor, although not as much as
the middle class black kid. In your world, the black
kid would get 100% and the white kid nothing solely
because of the color of their skin. Sickening.
\_ I should make one correction. Gates is NOT
a leftist. Gates is a big Ayn Rand fan.
\_ He probably meant Gates Sr.
\- "help help. i am an item." i really really hope the aclu
gets involved in this one. --psb |
| 2003/12/18-19 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11509 Activity:nil |
12/17 Is there a web site that lists the California and federal
income tax rate schedule not only for 2003, but for 2004, 2005,
etc., as well as the exemption amounts.
STUPID INCONSIDERATE MOVIE SPOILERS...DON'T DO IT.
At least prepend your drivel with "Don't read if you
haven't seen the movie."
\_ Those amounts have been decided already?
\_ No.
STUPID INCONSIDERATE MOVIE SPOILERS...DON'T DO IT.
At least prepend your drivel with "Don't read if you
haven't seen the movie."
\_ The butler, in the study, with the wrench. -John |
| 2003/12/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11462 Activity:very high |
12/15 With Saddam in custody now the '04 election is done. Stick a fork in
it and vote for Green so we can end the "1 party, 2 faces" nightmare.
What is this? _/
\_ In answer to "what is this?", "1 party, 2 faces" is what our
political system has become. Both parties are the same. They
have the same agenda, offer the same solutions, they 'steal'
each other's platforms not because they believe in them but because
the polls say it's a good idea to do so. This is a one party
nation that uses 2 names for the same party. We need a second
party in this country for those of us tired of business as usual.
\_ Yeah voting for Ralph Nader surely helped Al Gore, Jr. win.
\_ Why would I want the other side of the one party to win? Gore
and Bush might as well be twins. Why is this so hard to
understand?
\_ Watch the polls dip as we lose another 500 soldiers between now
and the election.
\_ Nah, the economy could only add an anemic 150,000 jobs last quarter,
in spite of the biggest productivity gains in twenty years. Expect
things to cool off a bit next year, leading to more job losses
and further wage stagnation. This economy is great for the stock
market, but not so good for Joe Sixpack.
\_ Hence the phrase, jobless recovery.
\_ Unlike you I am Joe6 and work with a ton of other union guys
and we're doing just fine, thanks. Get out of your ivory tower.
\_ Yeah, support for Bush is up a whole 3%!!!!
http://csua.org/u/5a2 |
| 2003/12/9 [Politics/Domestic/California, Reference/BayArea] UID:11369 Activity:high |
12/8 If you are a San Franciscan, vote today. This is going to be
a very close race and every vote will count.
\_ soda poll?
Gonzalez: ....
Newsomm: .
!psb: .
\_ poll of those who wish they could vote
Gonzalez: ..
Newsom:
\_ Yes, your choices are A) drive businesses out in 5 years
or B) drive businesses out in 1 year
\_ You don't know much about SF, do you? |
| 2003/12/6 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11336 Activity:low |
12/5 Prohibition Repealed 70 years ago today. Celebrate.
http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/big/1205.html
\_ FDR " improved the occasion to address a plea to the American people
to employ their regained liberty first of all for national manliness."
\_What are "Recovery Taxes" ? |
| 2003/12/2 [Politics/Domestic/California, Recreation/Dating] UID:11270 Activity:kinda low |
12/1 I understand why marrying one's sibling would be illegal. But how about
consensual sex between two adults who happens to be siblings? Why
should that be illegal? Government has no right to dictate what
should or shouldn't happen between two consenting adults.
\_ you can have children whether or not you're married.
\_ In a family, just because you're over 18 doesn't mean you have full
autonomy. If it truly is consensual, the only reason for it to be
illegal is the increased likelyhood of having handicapped kids.
\_ Shouldn't there be a minimum genetic distant between two
people before they are allowed to marry? Not just siblings but
cousins shouldn't be allowed nor should uncle/niece.
\_ There was a study showing that occasional marriage between
first cousins has a minimal effect on birth defect rates.
There was only a problem when it is commonplace to marry
your cousin.
\_ I would die for you Saddam, and the right to marry a
first cousin!
\_ That's a weird reason. By that logic, it should be illegal for
older women to have sex. After all, they have an increased
likelyhood of having handicapped kids.
\_ There were a number of eugenics laws in this country in the
early 20th century. I'm not saying it's fair, but society
frequently bans things it frowns upon.
\_ http://csua.org/u/54q California Eugenics history
\_ I belive FDR married his 2nd cousin. And marrying one's cousin is
legal in CA. It's a state law, not a federal law.
\_ Didn't Einstein marry his first cousin? Did they have any
kids? Were they nearly as smart as the dad?
\- TACO: Einstein's older son used to teach at Berkeley.
\- IAOC: Einstein's older son used to teach at Berkeley.
The younger had some kind of brain problem and died
young, I believe. --psb
\_ TACO?
young, I believe. --psb
\_ IAOC?
\_ THAC0 |
| 2003/11/24-25 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11204 Activity:nil |
11/23 Any recommendations for a nice hotel near Mt. Shasta CA?
\_ Beware the Lemurians:
http://www.outwestnewspaper.com/rsj4.html
\_ HAIL Mighty THONGOR!
\_ Beware the Norse:
http://forum.kicken.fm/topic.cgi?forum=44&topic=3927
\_ NOT WORK SAFE! |
| 2003/11/24 [Politics/Domestic/California, Transportation/Car] UID:11203 Activity:kinda low |
11/24 So is it legal or illegal to not have a front license plate?
I've heard both answers from various sources, and I haven'et
had luck finding answers online. Does anyone know?
\_ Wrong. It is legal if the CA DMV only gives you one plate.
\_ It is legal if the CA DMV only gives you one plate.
If they give you two plates it is 'illegal' to not have
\_ Why is the OP wrong? I don't get it.
one in front.
my first car 12 years ago it only had a rear plate. Then later
I got a citation for a missing front plate. However, I see
\_ Why would the CA DMV only give you one plate? BTW when I bought
their excuse is their front bumpers are not designed to hold a
plate. Hell, just drill two holes. Why should you be exempt
my first car (used) 12 years ago it only had a rear plate. Then
later I got a citation for a missing front plate. However, I see
people driving fancy Mercedes which have no front plate, and
their excuse is that their front bumpers are not designed to hold
a plate. Hell, just drill two holes. Why should you be exempt
just because you have a fancy car.
\_ the cops don't care whether or not you front bumper isn't
"designed" to hold a plate or not, my sister's old car was
like that and she got a ticket for it. she went to the
dealership and complained about it enough that they drilled
the bumper for a plate and gave her a new license plate
holder and a car wash.
\_ A lawyer friend of mine told me that, in general, they can't
give you a ticket solely for that, but technically it's illegal.
Dunno if that's true or not, but I was given a ticket for it
also (I had expired registration stickers cuz I was a dumbass,
and the CHP tacked on the no-front-plate to the citation).
\_ in CA it's not "legal" but nobody seems to care.
\_ except for the cop that gave me a ticket for
that very reason.
\_ Yeah LAPD tickets for this also.
\_ Just curious, how much was your fine? I'm thinking about
getting a new car and I don't want them to drill holes
into my bumper.
\_ fixit ticket
\_ Well, fixit ticket after you "fixit". You are supposed
to have a front plate. I've had my front plate stolen
a number of times, and have had anywhere from $50-120
tickets that changed to $10 after i payed the DMV $7
for new plates. Total joke...
\_ It's illegal. You will be ticketed. Plus it gives cops a reason
to pull you over.
\_ Bought a new car last month. They made me sign a form that said
I chose not to have the front plate put on and indemnifying the
dealership. |
| 2003/11/22 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11187 Activity:nil 53%like:11481 53%like:29667 |
11/21 Congress voting on Anti-spam:
http://news.com.com/2100-1024_3-5110622.html?tag=nefd_top |
| 2003/11/22 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11184 Activity:nil |
11/21 California secretary of state anounces that all electronic voting
machines must provide paper receipts by 2006 http://tinyurl.com/w26j
\_ This is good news. Including the fact that voters can't take them
outside of the polling place (preventing vote buying).
\_ So you get the receipt and then you have to throw it away right
away? What's the use then?
\_ The election officials keep the slips. You verify the
result, then put the slip in a lock box, and they keep
the slip in case they need to verify/recount.
\_ sounds like a complete waste of time and money. -tom
\_ You're right. Democracy is the least efficient form
of government, but it's better than the alternatives.
\_ you prefer what? nothing? i found it really spooky
to hand my e-voting card to some old guy who plugged
it into some hand held toy which beeped after a few
seconds. at least with the paper i know there's a real
thing out there someone can check if need be.
\_ If you don't think that *some* kind of physical audit
trail is necessary, then I suggest that you google
"Diebold 18181".
\_ Slips? Why not punch cards? |
| 2003/11/21 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29657 Activity:nil |
11/20 George W. Bush "lost the popular vote." So did JFK.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1025615/posts
\_ stop spnning the issue. If he and his brother didn't rigged the
votes in Florida, I wouldn't have problem the legimacy of his
presidency reguardless the popular votes. |
| 2003/11/18 [Politics/Domestic/California, Computer/SW/OS/Windows] UID:11115 Activity:nil |
11/17 I just got MS California Standard Claim Form. I can list up to 5
purchases without a proof of purchase. I can get $29 for Office,
$5 for Word, $26 for Excel, $16 for Windows. What are the best
combinations to put down?
\_ umm, dude. do you have any recollection of something called
basic arithmetic? and if you mean the best combination to lie
about to prevent being caught (or some other weird shit),
how the fuck should we know?
\_ write to atterney general telling them that you prefer spend
money on something else other than Microsoft product. The
current term of settlement is nothing more than another
Microsoft's ploy to increase its buttom line.
\_ uh, you get vouchers good for whatever software and a
fairly liberal range of hardware, not just microsoft stuff.
\_ I just got another claim form even though I already sent in
mine weeks ago. Looking forward to get $70+. Incredibly,
I still have all the receipts even though they are not
required.
\_ I didn't read the paper one but the online one said proof of
purchase was required? |
| 2003/11/16 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:11094 Activity:nil |
11/15 California budget head calls deficit 'staggering'
http://www.forbes.com/newswire/2003/11/15/rtr1149508.html
Recall Arnold, bring back Davis!!!
\_ good link. yeah we need 4 more years of davis to reach that
$62b budget gap. bring back davis. im finding a new state. |
| 2003/11/14-15 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11075 Activity:high |
11/14 Do I have to register as a Democrat to vote in the primary?
\_ I believe the 'open primary' law was struck down. Stil plenty of
time to register, though. Also, party registration is not needed
to vote on any ballot measures on the primary.
\_ Open Primary was squished by Supreme Court. If you want to
vote for a particular Dem candidate, you'll need to register
as a Dem.
\_ what was the reasoning for the squish?
\_ Private organizations (the parties) have the right to
control who can vote in the organization. Althouth I
liked the open primary, it sets bad legal precedant.
\_ I think private organizations should pay for the
poll and hold it themselves then. If the government
(public) is paying for it then everyone should be
able to vote in it. --dim
\_ Well, they can vote in the other primary. Why do
people want to help choose a different party's
candidate? You don't support that party anyway.
Would the repubs vote for someone they like, or
someone they think would be a bad candidate?
\_ Personally, I voted for the guy I liked most. If
this is a Party thing then the Party should
conduct its own selection process and let us
all know who they chose instead of putting it
on a general ballot.
\_ If my heart is with the Republicans, can I register as
a Democrat and then vote for the lamest one among the
Democratic candidates in their primary? And vice versa?
\_ No, you may not. As a Republican, you're bound by
the supposedly higher morality that your kind
constantly bray about to vote your conscience, not
for political gain. Anything else would be
hypocritical. The rest of us godless heathens,
OTOH, are free to make sure that bozos like Bill
Simon represent you in close elections.
\_ nice.
\_ no, you have to register as a hypocrite first. |
| 2003/11/14-15 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Gay] UID:11072 Activity:high |
11/14 About Judge Moore, I'm curious about the anti-Moore people here.
Moore was elected by the people to his office. Do you think it
is ok that some appointed body removed him from office? If so,
did you think it was *not* ok for the people of CA to vote to
remove an official the people of CA elected? If so, how do you
reconcile that double standard and why place an appointed body
above the will of the people in the greater scheme of things?
What was so wrong about the 10 commandments statue that it required
Moore's immediate removal by an appointed body while we were supposed
to wait until the next election to remove Davis in a time of crisis?
It's 8am. I hope that's not too early to try to start a real non-troll
discussion on a hot topic.
\_ it's worth pointing out that the decision to remove him was a
*unanimous* one, made by a group of legal experts from both the
Democrat and Republican party, which included elected officials.
The issue at stake was not the ten commandments statue, it was
an open contempt for the law.
\_ Judge Moore is a complete moron, I don't see how anyone can
defend him hauling his 10 ton commandments monument
INTO THE ROTUNDA OF THE STATE CAPITAL BUILDING. the
mind boggles.
\_ Yeah. The guy keeps saying that he's being forced to "deny god".
What an absolutely refrickindiculous statement. Hey Christians,
do you have giant statues with biblical crap on them in your
workplace? If not you're denying god and will BURN.
\_ this "judge" reffered to homosexuality as a "violation of the laws
of nature and of nature's God upon which this nation and our laws
are predicated." That means that 10 percent of the Alabama
citizens who walk through his courtroom door have already commited
a mortal sin in his eyes before their guilt or innocence
is determined. This man cannot be allowed to be a judge.
I believe this case is severe enought to warrant *any* action
to remove this man from power. Don't forget that majority will
of the people of Alabama was to hold *slaves* until we beat
them in a war, and to have black people live as second class
citizens until we had to send troops down there in the 60's.
If it comes to war again, so be it.
\_ In the 1700s there were more slaves in New York than
all of South. Only a few percent of Southerners, ie.
landed aristocrats, were slave holders.
For 2000 years homosexuality has been considered
unnatural - they can't reproduce! Don't you secular
humanists see the contradiction with evolution?
\_ I want more fags and less lesbos in the world.
That way there's less competition for the women.
\_ And i suppose that all the animals who demonstrate
homosexuality in the wild are just victims of an
evil liberal conspiracy by the Clintons?
\_ Being gay may be an evolutionary disadvantage, but having
some 'gay' behaviors may be an advantage, so the gene
lives on. Sort of like a heterozygus recessive, if
you'll pardon the pun.
\_ So then it would be morally wrong for a guy to just work
all the time and never date? I mean he can't
reproduce!
\_ The question is why some minority group deserves
special protection under the law simply because
of what the do in the bedroom. The irony is
this exact was predicted in a concurring opinion
in Griswald vs. Connecticut.
\_ This is a canard. No one (almost no one, okay)
wants special protection, just equal treatment.
\_ That is not what existing statutes
provide for. So now "equal treatment"
based on how you have sex is a natural
right? As dictated and
regulated by who? How do renconcile
this with freedom of association. Now
the government tells us how we have to
treat people because of what they do in
the bedroom.
\_ No, the government is telling us we
must treat all people equally
_regardless_ of what they do in the
bedroom. How this is not simply
common sense seriously boggles the mind.
\_ So if a congregation believes
homosexuality is a sin the
government has the power to force
it to accept a gay pastor in the
name of being 'fair'. The term 'fair'
when related to sexual choice
is so vague that its invites
gross abuse and the infringement
of freedom of association.
Now bestiality fetishes
and trangenders have the right
to force businesses them to hire
them because its 'fair'. Sorry,
you are a fascist. You should
not have the right to force
your bizarre agenda on other
people. If you want to do
it through 1) referendum
2) the legislature, fine.
However, as you know that will
never succeed.
\_ Bestiality involves non-
consensual sex. It is possible
(and preferable) to make rules
that allow for certain conduct
while continuing to outlaw
other conduct. The Santorum
argument ignores the ability
of people to make moral
distinctions outside of Biblical
proclamations. Stop trying to
throw the baby out with the
bath water.
\_ Never is a long time. People
thought slavery would last
forever, too.
\_ I think it's unnatural to drive a car. Thus, it's
immoral! And airplanes are even more immoral. Fire
too! Let's all go back into our caves.
\_ RIDE BIKE! LIGHT CANDLE! USE LINUX!
\_ Dead wrong. The Catholic Church widely condoned
homosexuality until about the 13th C, and even allowed
gay marriages. -- hetersexual catholic
\_ I think you mean clerical marriage.
John Boswell died of AIDS complications at
age 42 - think he could have had an agenda?
This is called historical revisionism, an art
perfected by the left.
http://www.dailycatholic.org/issue/2002May/may23tru.htm
\_ That's right. And the banner that read
"Mission Accomplished" was mysteriously
hung on the aircraft carrier by leftist
insurgents.
\_ Yawn, redirection with a puerile
display of stupidity.
\_ Yet another classic case of right-wing
of civil disobedience, but if you are at all familiar with the
concept as practiced by Ghandi, King and Thoreau, you understand
issue dodging. No, seriously, you
don't believe the right engages in
historical revisionism?
\_ I agree. the left does historical revisionism
\_ To a Christian, all men are sinners, and all sins are
mortal. Adultery is sin too, for example. That doesn't
book, just a simple political power struggle, which he lost.
\_ nice.
mean they would advocate criminalizing adultery.
\_ Well, yes and no. Most sins can be forgiven if the sinner
repents or feels remorse and goes to confession. You can be
in a state of grace at least some of the time. Homosexuality
is unrepentant, ongoing sin. Isn't alabama one of the states
that has sodomy laws which are technically still enforced?
the US Circuit Court judges for ignoring the 1st and 10th
amendments.
\_ there are also venal sins. er, venial.
\_ Do you have a source that 10% of people are homosexual?
I don't believe this claim to be true, from personal
experience. -- ilyas
\_ Even if it's one percent or half a percent -- the man is a
JUDGE -- he's supposed to be passing judgement based on the
laws in the LAW books...not the religious ones. The exact
figure is kind of irrelevant.
\_ When has he ever stated that he ignores the law
in favor of the Bible. In the interviews I've
seen he states just the opposite.
\_ The 10% is based on the Kinsey study, which I personally
think overstated it, since they based it on lifetime
behavior not self-identification. But there are many
studies (use google) that indicate that the real percentage
of active GLBT in the general population is at least
4-5% -ausman
\_ I don't know. I lived in San Francisco, Berkeley, and
Los Angeles, not the most sexually repressed places
in the world. The figure of 4-5% still seems quite high.
-- ilyas
\_ My estimate is kind of on the conservative side,
actually. I am only including people who are
sexually active. Look at this study:
http://www.qrd.org/qrd/www/youth/tremblay/app-a.html
Do you think that 4-5% of SF is gay? You have got
to be kidding me. The real number is more like 15-20%.
\_ I don't think ilya gets out much.
\_ When I was in the co-ops, I'd guess 2% gay,
additional 2% Bi
\_ 2% bi? Heh, not among the girls. Sweet!
\_ Straights have notoriously bad gay-dar.
\_ A judge takes a vow to uphold the law. Moore believed himself to
be above the law and willfully violated it. So yes, I think
he should have been removed. I am well aware of the principle
of civil disobedience, but if you are familiar with the concept
as practiced by Ghandi, King and Thoreau, you understand
that you accept the punishment that comes from violating the law
as part of the deal. Additionally, they were not judges. I think
by holding himself above the law, he made a mockery of the
whole idea. He was not engaging in civil disobedience in my
book, just a simple political power struggle, which he lost.
\_ nice.
\_ he's preparing for a senate run, or governorship, duh
he's happy to be removed, do you think he's that dumb?
\_ If you support his removal then you must also support impeachment
the US Circuit Court judges for ignoring the 1st and 10th
amendments.
\_ If you think that boolean logic applies to the real world,
you must be a hopeless twink.
\_ If an appreciation of the historical context of the
amendments and their authors designates a twink,
I suppose so.
\_ Nice try, but your twinkness hinges on your inability
to see the shading between black and white, a disability
that will make you a great and courageous crusader, but
a poorly socialized member of society and a twink. |
| 2003/11/14 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11071 Activity:nil |
11/13 Is there a politics code (a la the geek code)?
\_ 3 choices: (D) (R) (I)
\_ Yeah man, DRI rules! But Sick of it All is better.
\_ play pac man and i watch TV!
i'm so happy cause it pleases me!
couldn't really ask for anything else
maybe my own chain of taco bells!!!!!!!
\_ my favorite category is poor whites who vote based on coded
appeals to race. boy the republicans are fucking those guys
up the ass.
\_ wow, what a weak ass troll! go home, boy! there's no room for
little boys on this ride. |
| 2003/11/14 [Politics/Domestic/California, Computer/SW/OS/Windows] UID:11066 Activity:nil |
11/13 Anyone else get a California - Microsoft Settlement mail?
what are you going to do about it? (postal mail)
\_ I already sent in my claim. When will we get our money
back?
\_ how did they get all of our mailing addresses?
\_ We are Microsoft. All your info are belong to us!
\_ That's what I'd like to know.
\_ addresses are public info. stop being an ignorant paranoid.
\_ Yes, and I plan to milk them for as much as I can. Is there
somewhere we can look to find out more information about this
settlement/suit?
\_ You need proof you bought something in that time frame. Your
warez copy of office and win2k doesn't count.
\_ It says you don't need a receipt. |
| 2003/11/13-14 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11059 Activity:high |
11/13 Does anyone have any information on these 4 judicial court nominees?
\_ sure. what do you want to know, unless you're being
a troll I have decided
Pickering is not completely totally evil. - danh
\_ Any urls on Pickering?
\_ here's one from the Village Voice where Pickering
does something that I would consider way out of character
for a member of the Federalist Society:
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0345/hentoff.php - danh
\_ how about the 63 the little republican bitches blocked during
the Clinton years? 168 nominees have been passed. this is
absurd.
\_ Were they passed from committee to the floor? Were they voted up
or down?
\_ See, these are things you could verify for yourself, but
instead you swallow the GOP claims whole and try to pick
apart statements to the contrary. in '99-00 60% of the
Clinton nominees to appeals court did not receive the
"up or down vote" that the GOP is whining about now.
\_ What was the decision of the judicial committee? The
current committee can't send them to the floor for a vote
because of the filibuster threats, even if the committee
chose to.
\_ What a strange topsy-turvy Alice-In-Wonderland view
of reality.
\_ How so? You're simply ignorant of how our federal
government works. It is standard practice to
not bring up anything for a vote until it is known
that there is support for it to pass. Where "it"
is any bills, nomination, or anything else. It is
very rare for a bill to be voted on without everyone
knowing in advance that it will be passed.
\_ The Republicans who controlled the committee
refused to even hear the nominees:
http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200307/070903.html
\_ Which has nothing to do with the current issue
about whether the above person has an alice
in wonderland view or not.
\_ The NAACP on Carolyn Kuhl:
http://www.naacp.org/work/washington_bureau/Kuhl081303.shtml
People for the American Way on Caroline Kuhl:
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=9734
The NAACP on Priscilla Owen:
http://www.naacp.org/work/washington_bureau/PriscillaOwen.pdf
The Independent Judiciary on Priscilla Owen:
link:csua.org/u/4zp (PDF)
\_ The National Assocation For The Advancement of Left Wing
Colored People?
\_ For a strict constructionist, you take a lot of liberties
in adding a letter to that acronym.
\_ Just calling it like I see it. Why is an .org that says
it is for the advancement of black people opposed to a
black person advancing? Only because she's not left wing.
I take no liberties.
\_ Bzzt. Because she's against the advancement of
colored people when those colored people are not her.
You can't promote an Uncle Tom and then say you're
advancing the cause of black people.
\_ You don't know shit about her background, do you?
Come back after reading her bio. I'm not going to
spoon feed you the reader's digest version.
\_ My fiancee is an attorney, has appeared in front of Judge Kuhl,
and thinks she's pretty much horrible ... ideology aside (she's
very right wing), my fiancee felt she doesn't follow the law.
\_ Very few judges follow the law and there's little recourse
in most cases starting from small claims and family court all
the way up. A judge "not following the law" is hardly a
reason to not promote a judge in this country. If that was the
standard we'd have to start all over. Your fiancee is rather
naive for a lawyer. She must be quite young. Don't worry,
though, she'll be corrupt and bitter soon enough.
\_ There's following the letter of the law and following the
spirit of the law, and then there's not following the law
at all. The first two are highly debated, but the third is
universally recognised as being wrong. Kuhl has a tendency
to go with her personal belief even when they conflict with
the latter _and_ spirit of the law.
\_ There's no difference between a judge following what they
decide is the spirit of the law and doing whatever the
hell they please. They're either following the law or not
and as soon as it's ok to do something other than strictly
adhere to the law as written, the show is over, anything
goes. It is intellectually dishonest to claim you want
judges to follow the law, kind of, sort of, sometimes.
\_ Thank you, strict constructionist. According to your
view of the law, it is illegal to wink at an
unacquainted female in Ottumwa, Iowa, and anyone
caught doing so must be prosecuted to the full extent
of the law, despite the fact that modern morality
significantly differs from the morality prevalent at
the time the legislation was enacted. The purpose of
the judicial branch is to add the element of human
wisdom to the process of the law. Without loose
interpretation, the law is merely code, and the
executive branch has all the power.
\_ No, enforcement and the decision to prosecute lay
this other person we call "the prosecutor". In some
places we call this person "the district attorney".
Yes, this will be on your Basic Civics 1A quiz at
the end of the week.
\_ Following the law is secondary. Bush appointees must be
ideologically pure. The right-wing is terrified of another
Souter.
\_ No we just want judges to follow the law. So you attack us
for being strict constructionists and then you attack us for
not wanting to follow the law at all. You can't get it both
ways without looking like an idiot.
\_ Like Roy Moore, right: that conservative who was just
removed from the Alabama Supreme Court for acting like
an Anarchist?
\_ try upholding Alabama Constitution, which mentions
God. They take on oath.
\_ He also has to uphold the U.S. Constitution, and the
U.S. Constitution takes precedence over state ones.
\_ Where in the USC does it say he can't have the
10 commandments in a public space? I'm a
strict atheist (none of that agnostic weenie
stuff for me) and I've got no problem with it.
The USC says no such thing. In God We Trust.
\_ He was ordered by a higher court to remove
it and refused to. That is not called
enforcing the law, that is called breaking it.
\_ Uh oh, looks like a debate bait n switch!
So you agree the USC doesn't say any such
thing. Now let's address your new point.
He has the right to refuse. He has the
right to appeal. He has the right to
protest and engage in an act of civil
disobedience. This is still a free
country. The word of a higher court, even
the highest court is not always the
correct decision. He has the right to say
no and suffer the legal, political, and
career consequences of his protest and
has bravely chosen to do so. I'm stunned
that you'd come on here and say that just
because a court said something that it is
automatically 'good' and he should blindly
obey. I'd scream "fascist!" but I don't
think you really understood or believed
what you were saying above.
\_ You claim that you want judges that
follow the law, then in the next
statement, claim that judges have
the "right" to engage in civil
disobedience??? The USC clearly
states that the Federal Governemnt
is sovereign over the states. Look
at the statement "the US Constitution
takes precedent over state ones" and
you will see that it is you that keeps
trying to change the subject away from
judicial responsibilty to obey and
enforce the law. I'd scream "hypocrite"
but I don't think you'd really
understand what the word means.
\_ thanks -nivra
\_ We don't need to vote! We already know they're all eevvviiill
BushCo Republicans! We only vote on people we like!
\_ How many Bush nominees have already been voted on?
\_ right. Bush is the only one who likes to talk about EVIL.
Evil. A big issue in the world today. Domestic violence, war,
it's all just evil. Why doesn't Bush declare war on Satan?
\_ BushCo won't declare war on Satan because BushCo is Eevvvill!
We all know BushCo reports directly to Satan!! Like all the
eeeeevvvvviiill!! Republicans! Eeevvviiill! |
| 2003/11/10-11 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11007 Activity:high |
11/10 Sigh...If only those votes could have been recounted...
http://www.moveon.org/gore/speech.html
\_ Does no one else see the irony of a site called "Move On" is carrying
a speech from Gore whining about Election 2000?
\_ This speech isn't about Election 2k. Does no else see the
irony of opinionated windbags on the motd that post about
URLs without looking at them?
\_ Sigh, if only Gore had pushed for a statewide recount instead of
cherry picking heavily Democratic districts.... Had he pushed for
that on day one instead of trying to be clever, there wouldn't have
been any Constitutional questions to raise.
\_ They were... and in every recount by the major media outlets
Bush WON. Sour grapes I suppose, but don't let the rule of law
get in your way.
\_ Except for all the ones where he didn't... I guess that can
be true if you're very selective about how you define
"major", huh? Did they discuss the last-minute
disenfranchisement of 90,000 black voters in those nicely
impartial major media reports? Don't let facts get in your way.
\_ They could not identify one, not one. If they
could you better believe it would plastered over the entire
front page of every newspaper. Please, give me any name.
There was a commission that investigated this, they found
nothing. And please, don't give unsubstantiated
demagoguery by Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. The irony
here is that is all of these purported districts the
election was run Democrats.
\_ Cathy Jackson. Donnise DeSouze. Angenora Ramsey. That
enough? If you want more, read
http://digital.library.miami.edu/gov/voting.html
\_ The report was very damning of the Republicans:
http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/06/08/florida.vote
\_ The rolls are statewide, but nice try. Care to name
your sage commission or maybe make up more stuff?
\_ Read the report, did you even bother to read
it??? They give no accounts of individuals
who wanted to vote but were unable, NOT ONE.
Just anecdotal evidence blah blah blah.
Here's the worst they can say from the
abstract:
"Potential voters confronted inexperienced
poll workers, antiquated machinery,
inaccessible polling locations, and other
barriers to being able to exercise their
right to vote."
\_ I read the entire report and I agree with the
CNN summary of it, not yours.
\_ Then please, give me the name of
one of the 90,000. Just one is all I ask.
I'm not talking about someone who was
too stupid to fill out the ballot
properly, rather some one who was
prevented from voting.
\_ Keep begging you racist right wing
fascist! We won't give up one, not one
victim for you to hunt down and destroy!
\_ So since you cant produce one
you resort to thinly veiled
threats. Ah yes, the Left.
Nice display of reason and
rational thought.
Let me see if I understand
your argument: the Democrat
constituency in these districts
are too stupid to fill out
votes properly. Nefariously,
the Democrat controlled
canvasing boards in these
districts purposely
undercounted the said votes to
hurt Gore.
Is this your contention?
Do you have a personal stake
in this... were you one
the said voters? I just don't
understand.
\_ http://csua.org/u/4y7
includes five. Are you really
a leftist pretending
to be a dumb right winger?
\_ Even a casual google search turns up
dozens. Johnny Jackson Jr, is one
a retired cleric.
\_ Did these three people try to vote?
This is not disenfranchisement,
it is a clerical mistake. Even
the article admits more whites
were removed than blacks. Sorry
try again. Somehow it seems
you guys still came out ahead.
Hundreds of felons cast votes
illegally
http://csua.org/u/4y8
\_ Not even close to true. A full recount of Florida would have
given the state to Gore:
http://democrats.com/view.cfm?id=2300
But I guess the New York Times and Miami Herald don't
qualify as "major" in your book, right?
\_ LOL your article contradicts itself. Somehow every
newspaper they list lied in its headline?? From the
article:
"And why did the New York Times report:
"An Analysis of Florida Balloting Favors Bush""
Even the leftwing NYT disagrees with you.
\_ "Leftwing NYT"? You crack me up. Read the NYT
article. NYT is mildly left of center, at best.
Any publically traded corporation with billions
in revenue is never going to be left wing, but you are
such an extremist, you don't realize that. Thanks for
reminding me of the 2000 rip-off. I am going to go
donate another $500 to the Dean campaign. |
| 2003/11/9 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10996 Activity:nil |
11/8 Vote Quimby!
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/cpress/tv_quimby |
| 2003/11/8-9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:10989 Activity:moderate |
11/7 Liberal views force soldier out of military
http://csua.org/u/4xk
\_ There is no free speech in the military. Good thing they got
rid of this guy.
\_ I'm ashamed to call you an American.
\_ ITs the military, chain of command and all that stuff.
DUH.
\_ Just following orders?
\_ Non sequiter?
\_ Here's a good line which motd leftists should take to heart,
"The unfortunate aspect of this is not my demise, but their
inability to understand or accept the opinions of others as
different from their own." And here we see a leftist of all people
correctly describing the difference between the right and left in
our little motd world. As a conservative I understand and accept
the opinions of the leftists here. I simply disagree. What I do
not do is rant about how you're all automatically evil and wrong
and stupid without discussion simply for thinking differently.
Mostly I feel badly for you. I have hope you'll one day think about
the world with open eyes and see how it is for others and come
around. I'm not giving up on you.
\_ What are your thoughts on Bush?
\_ He's not a real conservative. Mostly, I'm disappointed.
\_ if only any of this were true....
\_ I think you so-called real conservatives need to take a good
look at how suppressing differing viewpoints is really starting
to hurt America. Here is a case where a good, and it turns out
accurate, young Marine was driven out for telling the truth.
The Bush Administration is increasingly driven by ideology and
not facts.
\_ There is no opinion in the military - don't you
understand this? You follow the Commander in
Chief's orders - thats it. If every soldier acted
on some whim based on the alignment of the planets
chaos would reign (not an effective military
not facts.
machine).
\_ We've been watching differing viewpoints get suppressed for
years in the media. This is nothing new to us. We're quite
aware how suppressing other viewpoints is bad for America.
Pot, kettle, black. --conservative
\_ And your point is...? Just because it's happened to
the conservative team (since all politics can clearly be
categorized by one of exactly two labels) doesn't make it
somehow magically okay or any more acceptable. Two wrongs
& etc.
\_ When others do it, it is just as bad. It is just more
disturbing when those in power do it.
\_ Maybe you and the person above missed the other reply
where I said Bush isn't a real conservative and I'm
\_ Well, since you don't sign your fucking posts,
expecting people to automatically associate them
where I said Bush isn't a real conservative and I'm
as originating from the same source is a little
silly.
mostly disappointed with his actions/policy/whatever?
If you think Bush is a conservative, which he isn't,
and want to stick real conservatives with his policy
as if we all 100% believe in all 100% of it then you're
nuts. That's a strawman argument. I hope you can do
better than that. Would it make sense for me to claim
that Al Sharpton represents all liberals and everything
he says and believes is something you all 100% believe
at all times, too? Real conservatives disavowed Bush
about 30 days into his first term when one of his first
actions was to expand all government programs by 4%
across the board. From that day forward he became
nothing more than the lesser evil of the Bush/Gore pair.
It's the very same media bias that conservatives
complain about that keeps people like you thinking that
conservatives like me are pro-Bush zombie ditto head
clones. Real conservatives don't exist in the media.
We're just a caricature that your media kicks around.
\_ the Weekly Standard crowd aren't "real conservatives"
either? ok, fine. from now on I will identify all
my unusual opinions as those of a "real liberal"
and claim every liberal you've ever heard of isn't
really a liberal so you can't use any published
information on liberal ideology to disagree with me.
this is absurd. why don't you start a new thread
and post the three to five most basic priciples of
whatever you're calling "real conservatism?"
I suspect you're the same person who signs their posts
"real conservative" periodically on the motd, and
some of us are genuinely curious.
-real transcendentalist
\_ I don't write for the weekly standard. They have
nothing to do with anything. It's a for-profit
publication of no interest to me. Some basics:
1) smaller government, lower taxes 2) no
religious hijacking of government in *either*
direction which means the 10 commandments being
posted in a school or court room is not a crime,
but we shouldn't have prayer in school either, 3)
no business in people's personal lives which
includes sex, abortion, euthanasia, and other
medical decisions, however that also means being
gay or whatever doesn't make you a protected
class either, 4) the end of government created
poverty: give a man a fish and he eats for a day
(and then comes back for another fish tomorrow).
There's more but that should give you some idea.
The core concept is the government stands in the
way of personal achievement and progress for all
people once it grows beyond a certain size and
exceeds it's mandate as laid out in the
constitution. We need government, because
without it we'd have anarchy leading to
dictatorship, but we don't need a government that
has the power and the will to destroy and steal
our freedoms through the sheer size of government
and the average citizen's inability to fight
against it to protect our most basic rights.
Would you like to provide a few summary points of
what a real liberal is?
\_ actually, I don't consider myself a "real
liberal" at all, I just said that to point
out the flaw in your argument. I basically
agree with most of the points you claim for
"real conservatism". However, I don't
believe you can claim point (3) above for
coservatives. If you look at the opinions
of the vast majority of republicans vs.
democrats, there is not question that the
republicans are the worse party for civil
\_ waco, elian, creating swat teams
within virtually every Fed department
(eg. IRS, Forest Service, FEMA)
rural cleansing through endangered
species, etc..... what Pres did this?
The Patriot Act was written
during the Clinton administration and
contains provisions proposed much earlier,
law enforcement has always wanted power.
The Act merely codified actions
used by law enforcement for decades.
The problem is government, period.
If you are concerned with government
intrusion why do you insist on giving
the Fed more power and money to pass
more laws to regulate more aspects of our
lives. This is common sense, freedom
and a social welfare state are
irreconcilable. The latter always
marches inexorably towards tyranny.
\_ How many Canadians do you know? How
many got sick? The ones I know came
to the US to get medical care
because their oppressive government
doesn't allow them to purchase
better care than the government
offers. They are forced into using
sub standard care and must cross to
our country to restore their free
access to western medical standards
even though ours has sunk since
HMOs took over and destroyed most
of it, it's still better than there.
\_ Yeah, like Canada. Those Canadians
with their welfare state and
socialized medicine are so oppressed.
Philosophical support for a small
government inherently protects
liberty... this always has been
provenance of the right (though there
are many, probably a majority, of
RINOs in government). The 'opinions
of ...' is a very vague term.
liberties. To claim otherwise is an analogous
arguement to that made by leftists who
claim all the evils of communism in the 20th
century were by governments that were
"not real communists." I don't buy into either
argument. Your claims for "real conservatism"
sound a lot like William Safire's brand of
"conservatism." Unfortunately, you and
William Safire appear to be the only
"conservatives" in America who give a
damn about civil liberties. My point about
real liberals above was just this: just
because I like to call myself a liberal and
believe in smaller government and fewer
\_ Once again, you only see the conservatives
as the leftist media presents them. It
*really* pisses me off to read the pseudo
right wing op/ed chick in the Chronical
who makes the most idiotic points in the
most illogical manner possible. We exist
and we are not happy with Bush but it's
better than anything the minority party
has to offer so we hold our nose and vote.
not facts.
\_ Here's a good line which motd right-wingers should take to heart,
"The unfortunate aspect of this is not my demise, but their
inability to understand or accept the opinions of others as
different from their own." And here we see a leftist of all people
correctly describing the difference between the right and left in
our little motd world. As a liberal I understand and accept
the opinions of the right-wingers here. I simply disagree. What I
do not do is rant about how you're all automatically evil and wrong
and stupid without discussion simply for thinking differently.
Mostly I feel badly for you. I have hope you'll one day think about
the world with open eyes and see how it is for others and come
around. I'm not giving up on you.
\_ if only any of this were true....
what a real liberal is?
subsidies does not make that a liberal ideology
no matter how much I wish it was. so I don't
call myself a liberal. |
| 2003/11/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10982 Activity:nil |
11/7 http://www.spamlaws.com/state/ca1.html |
| 2003/11/7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic] UID:10976 Activity:high |
11/7 http://discover.npr.org/features/feature.jhtml?wfId=1494600 More proof that evil old dead rich white business people are out to destroy the left in this country. I think we should raise taxes to match this amount in support. It's only fair. \_ Governor Wilson, is that you? \_ Yes, I've kept my account all these years after graduation. I've never forgotten my CS root at Cal. --GW |
| 2003/11/5 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10957 Activity:nil |
11/4 http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/TV/11/05/offbeat.pornstar.tv.ap/index.html \_ http://csua.org/u/4wf |
| 2003/11/5 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10956 Activity:nil |
11/4 When is the next election? I wanna vote for someone who'll undo the
mess we're in, including: post-war mess, environment mess, economy,
abortion, and everything else. Thanks.
\_ California primaries are in March. Federal Presidential Election
is in October. CA requires 15 days notice to register to vote,
\_ ???? Another person who suddenly became aware of politics
since Clinton.
not sure what the national requirement is.
\_ IFILE! I mean, DEAN!
\_ Don't you mean ED?! ED! for president! He's the standard!
\_ Yeah, I trust you know who to pick when you don't even know when
the next election is. Just how many years of politics did you
study that you think a new President will magically "undo" the
economy. |
| 2003/11/1-2 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10898 Activity:low |
11/1 How many of you libertarian fuckheads are planning to go try to
ruin the great state of New Hampshire?
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/27/national/27LIBE.html
\_ I loved the major party reactions.
GOP: "Great to have you, guys! Come on over!"
DNC: <trembling voice> "The best way to describe these people is
anarchists..."
-- libertarian fuckhead
\_ What's so fucking great about NH? Their only claim to fame is
voting second in the primaries and being almost the smallest
state. Is there *anything* they do right?
\_ Libertarians have a hardon over the slogan on their license plate:
"Live free or die"
\_ And the lack of state income tax makes them ejaculate.
\_ Lye, is that you?
\_ I'm guessing all the rightwing assholes at Dartmouth
have something to do with it also. It's probably the most
right-wing of the Ivy League colleges. |
| 2003/10/31-11/1 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10887 Activity:nil |
10/31 John, why did you move the switzerland and became a swiss citizen?
Is it because of the fat american women here totally turned you off?
\_ He's not a swiss citizen. The swiss don't naturalize first gen
immigrants.
\_ Introduction.
you are an idiot.
Proof
my aunt became a swiss citizen some years ago.
References
http://live-in-switzerland.com/e/faq/citizenship.html
Author Bio
-ali.
\_ make sure to bring your committee members donuts
\_ I moved here because my girlfriend lives here. I'm a born dual
citizen, but you can very well get a passport. After 5 years,
you can get a 'C' or unlimited 'B' permit, which is the same
as citizenship without voting rights, regardless. I really like
it, the climate is nice, Zurich is a great city, I'm close to
a lot of cool places, there's virtually no crime, the trains run
on time, taxes are low, I'm an hour away from 5 great snowboarding
areas, and the girls are cute and pretty stylish (on the whole.)
Downsides are having to be tolerant of some pretty questionable
attitudes (no difference from elsewhere), and lack of good cheap
Chinese food. Why do you ask? -John
\_ No voting rights? Why don't you let illegals vote and get
driver's licenses like more civilized countries like the US
and California?
\_ Because it's Europe. Unlike the USA/California where the
right to vote, drive and own guns is an inalienable right
even though most of the population don't know how to
properly perform any of the three.
\_ *shrug* it's got its problems. I just find it to be
a really pleasant place to live. There are a lot of
Americans and Brits who bring their families here because
it "just works". -John
\_ Yeah but they can't vote like here. |
| 2003/10/30 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:10854 Activity:very high |
10/29 This Paul Krugman guy sounds like a commie.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/16730
\_ Krugman rocks, despite the impending denunciations and
accusations of hating America that are sure to follow
in this thread. Thanks for the link.
\_ There won't be any followups because no one reads zero context
links or cares about Paul Krugman.
\_ My my, very presumptuous aren't you.
\_ Whatever. The only thing going on now is us bickering
about why others aren't bickering over the URL. The fact
that no one has read it and commented on it makes it clear
I'm right and you're, well, just being yourself.
\_ Obviously you weren't around last night before the thread
got extirpated.
\_ No, I wasn't. I don't sit here 24x7 talking about Paul
Krugmna's latest article.
\_ It may come as a shock to you, but not everyone cares
about you.
\_ There. Thread was requested. Thread was restored
-anonymous motd uncensorer
\_ And how did they come to power? Through
"the increasing manipulation of the media
and the political process by lavishly funded
right-wing groups. Yes, Virginia, there is a
vast right-wing conspiracy," he concludes.
I think rather than denounce him, I ll just laugh at him.
-- conservative
\_ Fox News.
\_ How fair and balanced of you.
\_ I think this is really funny. Whenever someone wants
to talk "right wing conspiracy" in the media they
ALWAYS say Fox news. Errr.. what about NYT? ABC,
NBC, AP, and UP, and every other news source? The're
all extremely left wing. One news station makes a
conspiracy, huh?
\_ umm... "extremely left wing!?!?" Are you kidding me?
Holy shit. you _really_ need to wake up and think a
bit objectively. None of them dared criticize
Bush until recently. The _most_ they could be
is a little left, if that. But "extremely?" Stop
reading crazy ass neo-con rags and start thinking
for yourself.
\_ A conservative who is getting screwed in the arse by a
huge budget deficit and loving every minute of it?
\_ I am not getting screwed in the ass. I am getting my
taxes back. At any rate, the government needs a constant
deficit as an incentive to become more efficient
(much like a corporation needs constant scarcity).
Without scarcity or deficits, neither governments nor
corporations have any need to innovate or solve
problems elegantly and cheaply. They will simply expand.
-- conservative
\_ Nah, more likely they will just do another "read my
lips no new taxes" to solve the deficit problem.
Under Clinton, with a budget surplus, number of
government employees and government spending
both decreased according to the WSJ.
\_ Think about it, who wants to work for the gubmint
when times are good? What for?
\_ gubmint? is that the racket Junior is running?
Minting the country's future away with lots of
IOUs?
\_ Your logic is flawed.
\_ Brilliant. Perhaps you'd like to elaborate?
\_ Under your logic, Iraqi government should be the
most efficient government on earth, as it is drawning
with debt, so much so that USA is asking Russian, and
French to forgive their debt... why?
\_ You are confusing necessary and sufficient
conditions. A cash starved government is
a necessary, but not a sufficient condition for
a small, effective, workable government. A
government flushed with cash always results in
corruption and inefficiency, simply because
there is no incentive for a government to produce
anything, as it is not driven by profit like
a business. However, more than just a shortage
of funds is needed for a government to be good
(things like a tradition of democracy, rule of law,
etc).
\_ Nah, more likely they will just do a "read my lips
no new taxes" to solve the deficit problem.
\_ unfortunately, his voice doesn't have much influence in terms
of policy. |
| 2003/10/29 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:29595 Activity:high |
10/28 UC Berkeley professor George Lakoff tells how conservatives use language
to dominate politics.
http://csua.org/u/4u2
\_ I think the particulars of his metaphor are WAY off. -- ilyas
\_ They need to learn the meaning of the word "brevity"
\_ Uhm yeah and leftists don't. Turn on cnn sometime.
\_ What makes you think Ted Turner is a leftist?
\_ Bahwahahhaha!! AMC?
\_ AMC is not a rightwing asshole. go suck a dick. -AMC
\_ You're not the AMC. The AMC is funny.
\_ Um...
\_ He's created a 'think tank'. Which ideas are these exactly?
Victory of the proletariat? Universal health care, 100 % income
redistribution? Enhanced race baiting and vote buying?
You are seeing (I hope) the death throes of Socialism / Communism.
\_ Hey, how do we make the freeper guy go away?
\_ well, when you figure out how to make "the freeper guy" go
away let the rest of us know so we can deal with the
tens of millions of these fuckers who are holding our
country hostage.
\_ yeah, the majority of voters, buncha fuckers deciding how
the country is run when it should really be the elite
liberal minority. we all know elections are just to keep
the people in fly over country from spreading east and
west and shooting us all from their suvs and pickups while
we're out enjoying nature, riding our linux powered bikes.
we should elect hillary empress because she knows whats
best for everyone. it takes a village idiot to vote (D).
\_ Well, he's right that most liberals sound like idiots. I certainly
am tired of hearing the same old lame propaganda from the 1890s.
Or wait, does that make me an evil capitalist oppressor, or just
a racist?
\_ both. you're also a dead rich white male fascist as well even
if we know from (white man's) history that you were brilliant
but poor and gave up what little you had including often your
life for this country. go look up what happened to the signers
of the D of I. several were shot/executed, and almost all of
them died poor after either having everything they owned
confiscated or donating it to the cause of freedom. fucking
dead rich white male capitalist oppressor racist bastards.
\_ 'Taxes are what you pay to be an American, to live in a civilized
society that is democratic and offers opportunity, and where there's
an infrastructure that has been paid for by previous taxpayers.'
Funny, what percentage of the (much lower) taxes in CA where spent
on "infrastructure" in the 60s and what percentage is spent now?
(answer: over 30, much less than 3 respectively) and who was it
(need you ask?) that supported enacting a 3% minimum? and who
opposed? hint: they need that money to give to those on "the dole"
\_ NO FACTS! DO NOT BRING FACTS INTO THIS! NO FACTS! Racist! |
| 2003/10/29 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:10839 Activity:nil |
10/29 Black woman getting Borked?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1009019/posts
In that speech, Brown said that "where government moves in,
community retreats, civil society disintegrates, and our
ability to control our destiny atrophies. The result is:
families under siege, war in the streets, unapologetic
expropriation of property, the precipitous decline of
the rule of law, the rapid rise of corruption, the
loss of civility and the triumph of deceit."
\_ Racist |
| 2003/10/19 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29579 Activity:nil |
10/18 It's a guud teeme-a tu be-a a Repoobleecun. Ve-a tuuk CA. Ve-a tuuk
FL. Ve'fe-a gut ell 3 brunches ooff gufernment. In 2004 ve'll hefe-a
un incoombent preseedent roonneeng egeeenst ieezeer un unelecteble-a
ultra leeberel oor a retured Repoobleecun generel es zee frunt mun
fur zee meenurity perty. Bork Bork Bork!
\_ hi! go fuck yourself! You've destroyed the economy, and are
doing a great job of destroying the government. I think if
Bush wins another term things will get bad enough that the
government will actually collapse into civil war. when that
happends i'll enjoy killing fucks like you.
\_ You already took CA long ago - this state has been very busy
dismantling the school system and building a gigantic prison
system for over 20 years - Gray Davis represented the status quo
and was about as Republican a Democrat as you could get.
\_ Mmmm, yummy tasty troll. |
| 2003/10/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10640 Activity:nil |
10/15 Finally, an article the helps all you out there understand those
who chose to make a leap of faith (I don't but I still vote that way)
http://slate.msn.com/id/2089641
\_ cool, learn something new
-non Christian outcast
\_ "Based on their income and education levels, Jews ought to be
voting Republican...." Say what? What is he saying about Jewish
education levels and income?
\_ That they remind him of Idaho???
\_ Hey, you're on a roll today. Do you have any books with
lists of jokes about blacks, mexicans, and women, too?
\_ And the final nail in that coffin is that people vote based on
what they believe in and their own goals, not based on their
race, religion, or other tidy little demographic title. |
| 2003/10/14 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10618 Activity:high |
10/13 The Soviet Republic of Texas
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21839-2003Oct13.html
\_ Well, all the partisan posturing aside, what is the right way
to create districts? -- ilyas
\_ Don't let politicians do it.
\_ yep.
\_ This is avoiding the question. The article implied that
high reelection rates are somehow bad, equating high turnover
with healthy democracy. It's not clear that this is right.
While low turnover may be indicative of lack of
While low turnover may be indicated of lack of
democracy, like in Soviet Union, it may also be indicative
of voter satisfaction. Also, assuming a particular state
has a definite political majority, does it not seem fair
to district in such a way as to reflect this? (Not to say
Texas is necessarily such a state). The writer of the
article clearly didn't like Texan redistricting, but failed
to point out a standard to which districting should adhere.
It's easy to be a critic.
\_ It depends on why there are high reelection rates. In the
case of highly gerrymandered states like Ca and soon to be
Texas, it is because the minority party voters are being
disenfranchised. Their candidates *can't* win because
the lines are drawn to guarantee this.
\_ Fair enough-- it's also easy to go along with the
rowdies when they kvetch and scream loudly. Ignoring
the article for a moment, the correct way to create
districts is the way it was originally intended: by
population numbers, not politics. Each state has a
number of Representatives based on its population;
create districts to reflect that and let the voters
decide themselves on the person they want to elect.
When compared with a fair and balanced plan like this,
DeLay's plan to redistrict along voting lines is
exposed as the naked power-grab that it is.
\_ You are pointing out features of districting that
any districting plan whatsoever has. 'Letting the
voters decide' sounds great in theory, but how do you
actually draw the lines? In each geographic area, there
are political minorities and majorities. How is
districting to be done?
\_ Start at the border. Draw a modified rectangle
that incorporates the shape of the border. Make
the rectangle large enough to incorporate a
fraction of the population that reflects the
population of the state divided by the number
representatives allowed. Add more rectangles
until you've run out of districts. Adjust
rectangles to equally absorb segments of population
not incorporated into existing rectangles.
\_ What if political affiliations are geographically
segregated? (Not a very farfetched assumption,
btw).
\_ As long as you pick an arbitrary (random,
perhaps?) corner to begin with, you'll have
at least taken a stab at fairness. If the
end result is a corner where one party or
the other holds significant sway, then so
be it. Vox populi, and all that.
\_ The problem with this is people aren't equally
spread throughout the state or even counties.
We already have county lines. We should use
those. Larger counties elect more people, while
the least populated elect the minimum of 1.
\_ First, counties are geographical, not
population-based, so there's no even
distribution whatsoever there. Second,
how do you determine who gets sent from a
county? By divvying up the county into
smaller districts? You'll get a great
picture of each district, but you'll lose
your view of the state as a whole.
\_ But these are supposed to be local reps to
the state level government. I don't see
anything wrong with my local rep to the
state being representative of who I am and
what my local concerns are. If my local
rep doesn't represent me, who does? Why
did I vote for them? Part of the reason
so few vote is the feeling of disconnect
between the people we vote for and what
\_ 1) Local rep is a misnomer: your local
rep represents your district, not
your immediate locale. 2) If your
district rep doesn't represent you or
fails to represent you after being
elected, campaign to have him/her
recalled or ejected at the next
election. If you can convince the
majority of your peers, you'll be on
your way.
It's easy to be a critic.
they do afterwards.
\_ PLEASE! Come to Cali, where re-districting the opposite way gets
no attention. Use your head - Cali - massive gun restrictions -
liberal bastion, Texas - exposed gun permitted - the opposite.
\_ What the hell are you trying to say?
\_ The problem with politicians creating districts is that over the
years, the majority party will create districts such that the
minority party becomes the zero party. Texas Republicans are
following in the footsteps of California Democrats on this one.
Republicans make roughly 40% of CA voters but have zero state wide
posts and a continously shrinking number of local ones. The
majority party in every state always uses redistricting to punish
the minority party and provide guaranteed lockin of their own for
future elections. You can't allow politicians to draw the lines.
The really sickeningly gerrymandered stuff eventually ends up in
front of a judge but only after decades of abuse. The mildly
sick stuff never goes to court.
\_ The problem with your theory is that the California Republicans
agreed with the redistricting of CA in 2000 and supported it.
It passed 65-8. Only 8 voted against it.
\_ No, that only confirms it. They needed a few votes to pass
and created enough majority Republican districts to keep
those few folks in power. Everyone else gets screwed. The
district lines should not be a political issue. It's too
important to trust to the people most affected by it.
\_ Right symptoms, wrong problem. Gerrymandering creates districts
which can easily be labelled Republican or Democratic. So each
representative is less likely to vote counter to his party lest
draw the ire of the local voters, thus creating more gridlock.
\_ I cover this in my reply above. Yes, some in the minority
liberal bastion, Texas - exposed gun permitted - the opposite.
party will vote to save their own ass. They'll get burned
later. |
| 2003/10/12-13 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10602 Activity:nil |
10/11 Many soldiers, same letter:
http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20031011/frontpage/121390.shtml
\_ Yeah and they all vote the same, too! We should make sure they
can't vote and corrupt our democracy anymore. |
| 2003/10/11 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Gay] UID:29572 Activity:very high |
10/10 Fiery Black Conservative Running For Congress in North Carolina
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/999124/posts
\_ Is this some homosexual code word?
\_ is this called projection? |
| 2003/10/9 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:10562 Activity:nil |
10/9 Texas Republican Party Platform for 2000:
http://csua.org/u/4o6
How can Democrats be "left wing loonies" and yet Republicans that
propose platforms like this are moderate and reasonable? Check out
especially the bits about abolishing the income tax, taking away the
Supreme Court's ability to determine the Constitionality of a law
under the bill of rights, and the bit about re-annexing Panama.
Look here for a good summary:
http://www.calpundit.com/archives/002393.html
And here for a California Democratic Platform for comparison:
http://12.158.174.200/Platform.pdf
\_ Sounds like the AIP platform. Wow.
\_ What's wrong with abolishing the income tax? It's an abomination,
at least in its current form. -John
\_ Why is it an abomination? It needs to more progressive,
especially the SS payroll tax, but other than that I don't see it
being worthy of that particular adjective. Besides, John,
aren't you in Europe, home of the VAT and the 45% marginal rate?
\_ The 2002 platform (a pdf), contains a ringing endorsement of the
Pres.'s "War on Terrorism," concluded with an exuberant Texan
"LET'S ROLL!" Yeah, they're all level-headed.
\_ " we urge our legislators to fully investigate and prosecute,
where appropriate, any breeches in national security"
I hate it when pants end up in the national security, too.
Sheesh, can't these guys afford a proof reader? |
| 2003/10/9 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10551 Activity:nil |
10/9 Is it possible to recall the president?
\_ ohmygod it's a troll
\_ I believe that's called impeachment.
\_ That's a different process -- there's no federal mechanism
for an electorate-initiated impeachment as such. The best you
can do is raise enough ruckus in enough congressional districts
that your congressman catches wind of it and gets the idea
that that's what his people want.
\_ Is there such thing as impeachment to the CA governor then?
\_ No. The recall process in CA is state law. There is no process
of that sort in US federal law. See above.
\_ BTW for those trollers who think this recall law is unique
it's on the books for 34 states and DC.
\_ And has only been used twice to recall a governor. |
| 2003/10/9 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10541 Activity:kinda low |
10/8 "Arnold Schwarzenegger strongly suggested that he would call on
President Bush to provide federal aid to California." -nytimes
Crap! Stupid Californians need us non-Californians to bail them
out again.
\_ I hope the Pres. refuses. Though some might say that the reason for
letting the states stew was to prevent encouraging the states to run
for federal aid whenever they have trouble. However, we did oust our
Governor, so we are trying. Maybe that's an argument to rethink an
aid package.
\_ But that would leave less money for his golfing buddies who are
rebuilding iraq!
\_ CA gives more to the Feds than it receives each year.
\_ So does my state. What's your point? That CA shouldn't pony
up for its share of national defense?
\_ Which state is that?
\_ No, bitch, that both your state and ours should get a
larger chunk of that sweet federal pie.
\_ Keep your dirty paws off my pie!
\_ But! CA voters, voters on the West Coast mostly, like to
throw out their federally elected officials fairly often
that they build almost no seniority. Which is why CA gets
back so little. Look W.VA. miles of new highways going to
cities with hardly any people. Why? KKK Byrd
\_ Boxer and Feinstein have no seniority? Train harder
young grasshopper. (also see Pete Stark, Nancy Pelosi...)
\_ Yeah and look what they bring back... see any bases?
Any kind of bacon?
\_ CA should secede from the union. We can survive on our own.
We are the 5th largest economy in the world. The fed tax
we pay should cover our state deficit.
\_ i guess that's one way ahnold can be president
\_ Yeah... try that.. you forget about defense. Except for
San Diego, there's not much left. Even San Diego lost the NTC
and those enviro nuts want the carriers out of there.
\_ What could possibly threaten California militarily
except the US? And no amount of military force
could defend against that threat, anyway.
\_ Mexico?
\_ Don't need defense when you're no longer "USA", and
not poking you nose into middleast affairs.
\_ Let's see. North Korea invades the Republic of
California and then put tons of short-range missles here
pointing to the USA.
\_ Not possible. USA invades and occupies north korea
before they have a chance to invade new CA. You
think USA would let north korea to reach that far?
\_ Of course not. US would just slap CA around
like it does to Mexico.
\_ CA != Mexico.
\_ They _want_ us to secede. They'd invade,
slap martial law on us, and never have
to worry about winning the CA vote again.
\_ We have no oil. No worries.
\_ ??? We have oil, onshore and off.
\_ Why doesn't North Korea invade Canada, then? |
| 2003/10/8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29570 Activity:nil |
10/7 Florida Voters say it is a Conspiracy not to let us vote
http://www.angelfire.com/ak2/intelligencerreport/rightwing29.html |
| 2003/10/8 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:29568 Activity:high |
10/7 I'm glad to see so many maoderates and conservatives out there voting
today. I can vote my principles without seeing a slime like Davis or
Cruz be governor. Nader in '04!
\_ You should always vote your principles. If you don't then who will?
\_ almost everyone who voted for any of the top three candidates
probably voted for `least damage`, not for their principles...
\_ That means that 80% (or something) of voters could've put
their guy in office, but didn't. That's what they get.
\_ Voting by principle is for suckers!!1! I voted for the GR0P3R!1
\_ heh |
| 2003/10/8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10536 Activity:nil |
10/8 Carter power will soon go away
I will be Fuhrer one day
I will command all of you
Your kids will meditate in school
California! Uber Alles!
Uber Alles! CALIFORNIA!
Zen fascists will control you
100% natural
You will jog for the master race
And always wear the happy face
Close your eyes can't happen here
Big Bro' on white horse is near
The hippies won't come back you say
Mellow out or you will pay!
California! UBER ALLES!
UBER ALLES! CALIFORNIA!
\_ the version from Convenience is probably more appropriate now.
or the remix about Wilson.
\_ I'm so proud to know the Great Communicator
Wanna be known as the Great Incarcerator
I'll blow environmentalists away
And I'll be the fuhrer some day
I'll keep cuttin' Public Education
even though we rang 45th in the nation
I've got a plan for all the minorities
Send'em to the California Youth Authorities
From San Francisco Urban Elementary
to Pelican Bay State Penitentiary
There they can work for the master race
and always wear a happy face
Close your eyes, it can't happen here
Big Brother in a squad car's comin' near
Come enjoy the surf and the sun
and help California number one !
\_ that's the one. who wrote that(the remix)?
i have a pirated tape copy.
\_ Disposable Heroes of Hiphoprisy, appearing
on the Virus 100 tribute album to the DKs.
\_ thanks!
\_ [ HEY. WRONG THREAD. I said buzz off. ] |
| 2003/10/8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10534 Activity:nil |
10/8 how many votes did Georgie get?
0% (1,930): http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2003/recall/pages/governor
\_ That's 192900% more than you did.
\_ she should run for president next.
\_ less than Angelyne
\_ "Brains, beauty, leadership" as a campaign slogan? Sorry, but
that's lame. |
| 2003/10/8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10533 Activity:nil |
10/8 Media myth of large turnout for recall...Secretary of State's site
shows 7.78 million voted in the recall. Look at this pdf:
http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/sov/2002_general/sum.pdf
7.74 million voted in the 2002 general...So I'd hardly call
40,000 extra votes a "record turnout."
\_ Yeah, I checked some numbers too - for a (2000 census)
population of 34 million, 7.74 million is not a very high
percentage (even considering the portion of 34 million not
old enough/registered/etc to vote)
\_ According to:
http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/sov/2002_general/reg.pdf
the turnout for the Nov 2002 election was 50.57% of registered
voters.
\_ More disturbing is the 36.05% of elligible voters.
\_ Don't you mean "voting-age population", which includes
a lot of people who can't vote? |
| 2003/10/8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10527 Activity:high |
10/8 Check this out:
http://www.fuckedstate.com/archives/mapN4031007215410.gif
I think its time the North Coast of California woke the fuck up
and seceded from the rest of the state. We can call ourselves
"Marijuania."
\_ Good riddance.
\_ Um, where do you think N. California starts? I say North of
Sacremento. Which pretty much all heavily voted for the recall,
so I don't see your point. If you had said western CA...
\_ I said NORTH COAST. READ. |
| 2003/10/8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10522 Activity:nil |
10/7 Now that the election is over, how is California going to fix its
budget deficit? I hope the state won't go bankrupt requiring my
tax dollars to bail it out.
\_ We already are bankrupt. Too late for that. Last I saw we were
$8 billion in the hole since the courts didn't allow the shenanigans
that pushed that into next year's budget. Cuts & taxes are the
only choices left.
\_ By bankrupt, I mean the state defaulting on its bonds.
\_ Oh. Even without money that's still a long time off because
we pay our bonds before we pay anything else. |
| 2003/10/8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10520 Activity:high |
10/7 Why is the Bay Area 80% on No on recall? What makes the Bay Area
different? Education (cuz we're smarter than everyone else)? Cuz
of our Cal/StanfUrd education? Cuz of our jobs? I just don't see
a strong connection in any of the above I mentioned. -confused.
\_ Gays and hippies. The people in Silicon Valley are alarmingly
to the right like good businesspeople tend to be.
\_ right. and that's why SV voted down the recall and for Cruz?
\_ I was referring more to the business leaders.
\_ Groupthink. Most who want to think differently have already left;
there's no good reason to stay in the Bay Area when you can get
it better elsewhere.
\_ Education has nothing to do with it. The BA is just very left.
You don't need to look any deeper than that. This is a place where
people talk openly about how "all republicans are evil and I hate
them all!" on a daily basis even though most of them never met a
republican. Maybe they have a friend who mismarked a ballot once.
\_ People who are highly educated tend to vote Democratic.
http://www.thelonious.com/ephemera/voter_education.html
\_ Academia is full of leftists. I'm not at all surprised they
vote left. Where's the shocker?
\_ We spend our money on books and whiskey, they spend it on
boob jobs and movies. Who do you think is smarter?
\_ Who is 'we' and 'they'?
\_ Don't be confused. That's what I expected. BA people are
well-informed. Most realized the problems in CA are not all because
of Davis. These are national problems.
\_ no...there are too many women in the BA.
\_ I believe it was nearly split for women voters. Something
like 52:48 or so last I saw. It certainly isn't because
BA people are brilliant and open minded. I've been around
and never met a bigger bunch of self righteous knuckle
draggers anywhere. It's ok to be arrogant if you really
*are* better than everyone else. The people in the BA are
no better than elsewhere; worse because they think they are.
\_ Yes, BA residents are a lot more well educated than the residents
in the south (Latinos, blacks, and Korean gangs). In fact we
make more $ and have more prestigious jobs and most of us own
properties that are valued at least 2X as high as the properties
in the south. In general, South is full of hicks and North rules.
History has proved this over and over again. Confederates are
hicks and Unions rule. South Americans are hicks and North
Americans rules. South Hemispherians are hicks and North
Hemispherians rule. Southern Californians are hicks and Northern
Californians rule. So yes, we are vastly SUPERIOR and hence
Hemispherians rule. So yes, we are vastly SUPERIOR and hence
we are really better than everyone else.
\_ No more educated or rich than people in, say, Orange County.
What did you think when houses cost more in the South, which
was the case forever until recently? In fact, for equivalent
we are really better than everyone else.
neighborhoods I think they still do. |
| 2003/10/7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29559 Activity:nil |
10/6 This is pretty fuckin' awful.
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,60713,00.html
\_ You've got no sense of perspective. That's all bullshit. *This*
is what "pretty fuckin' awful" means:
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/2530446/detail.html
\_ you're a self-righteous prick. why don't i one-up you with say,
the kitty genovese incident? and no one bring up hitler now...
\_ many things are awful. see ny'er below.
\_ makes me ashamed to be a human being. why would anyone
do something so horrible? that's AWFUL.
\_ you're a pansy. as people exposed to american media, we
should all be desensitized to all sorts of violence by now.
now excuse me while i go kick a puppy.
\_ agree with comment, but not example. The american media
won't even show us the results of what Bush did in Iraq. |
| 2003/10/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10512 Activity:nil |
10/7 Remember when you're in the voting booth today: it will be your
fault afterwards if everything gets more fucked up. A vote against
the recall means more of the same. A vote for Cruz means more of
the same x10. A vote for Arnold is a vote for gridlock. If you
really want to change the course of CA, then you have to start at
the top and do it for real. This goes double for you jobless or
underemployed people. The welfare state never created a job for
anyone.
\_ so what you're really saying(since Arnie, Davis and Bustamante are
the only candidates with a chance) is that if you want to change
anything, you have to vote out the crooks in the legislature
in the next real election.
\_ Won't happen. The ledge in California is just as gerrymandered
as in any other state.
\_ Yes. However, due to the incredibly gerrymandered lines in this
state, there's no chance of that happening either.
\_ Yes, please do vote for McClintock. We're counting on it.
-- Democrat.
\_ I did and was happy to do so. The worst that will happen is
Cruz will fuck up the state for the rest of Davis' term and
that'll be that. As a real conservative I have no need for
faux conservative-lite like Arnold. If I can't get the real
thing, it doesn't matter which fraud is in office. |
| 2003/10/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10509 Activity:nil |
10/7 Just voted in oakland, they are using some sort of Windows-based
e-vote machine and javacard. No paper trail. No auditing. This
is subject to tinkering.
\_ of course, paper would never, ever be subject to tinkering.
\_ Fear not, no one involved is smart enough to tinker with it.
\_ Hah. You think?
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,60713,00.html
\_ Yeah right, like any poll worker is going to ever be able
to figure out how to rig it when they can barely figure
out how to run it properly. These aren't rocket scientists
running the polling stations.
\_ MSCAPI & the card middleware are actually surprisingly
robust; I'd put a lot of trust in their inviolability.
That's not to say anything about other components of the
OS, or the human factor, though. Also, it isn't
necessarily a javacard or even smart card--from the sounds
of that article, they could just be using a regular chip
storage card (like European payphone cards.) -John |
| 2003/10/4-5 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10471 Activity:nil |
10/4 I love motdlogic. If someone suggested here that a bass guitar player
would make an excellent software engineer without any training, you'd
laugh him off the forum. But a bad action movie actor to run the
the world's fifth largest economy? That's a-ok!
\_ Yeah, I've reconsidered and now Arnie is my last-place choice for
replacement. A guy who knows nothing, won't debate, and doesn't even
have any record of leadership (being an actor is about following
directions), not got my vote.
\_ You forgot the number one rule: anyone the press hates *that*
much has to be doing *something* right.
\_ yeah, like Saddam, or Hitler
\_ Welcome to democracy.
\_ he's also ahead in the polls in the most populous state in the
U.S. i don't see why you're blameing the motd. he's probably
less popular on the motd than in california at large.
\_ So should we only vote for economists or politicians? I'd be fine
with only voting for economists. But since when do economists run
for public office?
\_ This is contrary to what was intended when this country was founded.
The idea was that serving in public office was a duty, like jury
duty, not a career. They never intended for career politicians to
exist. Term limits were an attempt to resurrect the concept but
the term limit laws didn't go far enough. Right idea, though.
\_ Obviously you know nothing about government. Term limits
are an exceedingly bad idea, and it is what got us into
this mess. The government is the largest entity you have
to deal with, and people need time to learn the ropes.
If term limits were implemented in the federal level
the House would be a non-functional body. There needs
to be, and should be career politicians. If you don't like
it then maybe we should hand over government to you and you
can try to deal with the daily headaches of governing.
\_ The House is already a non-functioning body. WTF are you
talking about? It's *you* who doesn't know how the government
works. You think it was really cool to have a doddering vet
of the War of 1812 in there for a few centuries like Strom?
Get your two or three terms and get the hell out. It should
be like jury duty, not a place to suck off the public teat
and drink in the power for life. Shit, I even think Strom
was kind of funny at times and here and there he did do
some good things, but 60+ years in office? Fuck that.
\_ Though if anything, term limits as currently implemented have
just made special interests more powerful, because newly
elected candidates are that much more beholden to the money
that got them into office. We need serious, hardcore
campaign finance laws for term limits to be effective, but the
courts seem dead set against that. Also, things are a lot
different than they were in 1792.
\_ I agree term limits alone aren't enough. I had this very
same conversation over dinner tonight. However, I don't
agree that things are different from 1792. People are still
people, power still corrupts and absolute etc etc etc. Some
things never change. Like old crusty career politicians.
\_ Yeah, but the country is something like 200 times as large
population wise as it was in 1792. You don't think that
General Motors needs the same corporate structure as
the mom and pop grocery down the street do you? Our
government is large and complicated enough to require
career politicians. Note that I have change my position
on this after watching what has happend to California
since we instituted term limits. -AML
\_ Career politicians don't run the country. The
beaurocrats do. That's why you end up with so many
fucked up laws. The people voting on them already don't
don't what they're voting on or what effect the bills
might have so how is being in office for a few decades
good for the rest of us?
courts seem dead set against that. |
| 2003/10/3-5 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10458 Activity:nil |
10/3 Right, so I understand why nobody likes Gray Davis. What is the
rationale behind hating Cruz Bustamante?
\_ He's a disloyal opportunist who's proposed giving drivers licenses
to illegal aliens, which is a cheap way of getting the Latino
vote. Being the lieutenant gov, he's also part of the establishment
that got us into this mess.
\_ Waitasec. So you're the lone Davis loyalist out here? Or
do you hate Davis but also loathe Bustamante for running
as the only Dem replacement?
\_ I don't want to vote for Davis or Bustamante. To me,
Bustamante seems like a "right place right time" candidate.
\_ He'll sell the state to mexico for a song? He'll tax you so he
can give your money to illegals? He's "more of the same"?
\_ He's a greasy Mexican, isn't it obvious?
\_ RACIST FUCKER!
\_ doesn't he pretty much tell Mexicans to vote for him because
he is Mexican? I've never seen that done so obviously before.
\_ I'm praying you're being facetious here.
\_ In other words, he was against Prop 187 and supported the
"drivers licences for illegals" measure? So if I'm against
Prop 187 I should vote for him?
\_ sure if you want to compete with mexicans for jobs
\_ For what jobs? The folks benefiting from the repeal
of 187 aren't code monkeys.
\_ not at all unless you're a mindless single-agenda voter.
that's your choice but others have more concerns.
\_ He doesn't seem to know the difference between "immigrant" and
"illegal immigrant".
\_ he does. like all pro-illegal whores he intentionally ignores
the difference.
\_ He's quoted as saying "Just because the border moved doesn't
mean the people did."
\_ Actually 187 is another Davis "fuck you" since he promised he'd
fight for it before he got into office and then just, oh, sort of
didn't afterwards. Whether or not you liked 187, you can add the
lie to his plate. Hey, how weird! He did the exact same thing over
the budget gap at the last election cycle! Must be an anti-Davis
conspiracy from the right wing hordes! |
| 2003/10/3-4 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10452 Activity:nil |
10/3 Does McClintock have a chance now? I think (hope) Davis will still
be recalled. Perhaps the Democrat-controlled legislature will
prevent any wacky pro-life or tax cuts for the rich moves. Does
anyone think there will be reliable poll data released before
Tuesday?
\_ No because the people have seen through the LA Times' sleazy
last second hatchet job. I'm still voting for Tom anyway.
\_ Because of Arnold's confession yesterday (I'm sorry I got caught) I
can't cast a vote for him.
\_ http://helptom.com
\_ Are you referring to the serial groping or the Hitler comments?
\_ Does anyone think Republican officials are kind of steamed that
they finally endorsed Arnold, then the LA Times showed he was such
a cad? Let's assume it was totally scripted by the left-wing
Davis-sympathizers and media, too.
\_ There was nothing new in the LA Times.
\_ Has anyone else changed their mind due to these revelations?
I am still voting for the recall, but was trying to decide
whether or not to vote for Arnold. I had pretty much decided
to, but then this came out. Now I am voting for Georgie. -AM liberal
\_ I'm going to switch my vote from Arnie to McClintock, and
hope to god Bustamante doesn't win.
\_ I hope Bustamante doesn't win. He's weak. I am for the
recall, I don't think CA is better off with any these
candidates.
\_ Actually, while I'm against the recall on principle,
I like the effect it's had on Davis-- he's finally
doing some of the radical things I look for in a
liberal candidate. If another recall would make him
declare amnesty for illegal migrant workers, legalize
dope, and put together a statewide universal health-
care system, I'd sign the petition.
\_ Come on, that's too obvious. Your troll fu is weak.
\_ It's a valid point.
\_ Maybe gov office should up for vote every year.
\_ The problem is we don't have elections in CA
anymore since the whole state is so incredibly
gerrymandered. Almost none of the people in
office have any chance of losing their seat.
\_ Well, no. Because of term limits. But other
wise you are right.
\_ They just swap seats. Term limits hasn't
helped as much as I'd hoped. You still
get "safe" districts where one party is
absolutely guaranteed to win the seat. |
| 2003/10/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10425 Activity:very high |
10/2 Let's see, in the last week we've had:
The Plame Affair
Rush gets fired from ESPN for being a racist
Rush gets exposed as a pill popper
Arnold admits being a groper and harasser of women
Kay says WMD will not be found in Iraq
Iraqis riot outside police station claiming bribes required to apply
Yay for right wing meltdown week!
\_ Neo-cons are just trying to make republicans look bad temporarily
so people will either keep Davis or put in Bustamante. That way
they can still blame the mess in California on the Democrats
when Bush runs for re-election. Just a theory. ;)
\_ You read alt.conspiracy every day too, huh?
\_ Nope, just naturally paranoid.
\_ - Claims of Rush being a racist are absurd--the comment was on the
media. The criticisms of Rush's comment have been racist.
\_ "I think what we've had here is a little social concern in
the NFL. The media has been very desirous that a black
quarterback do well." -Rush Limbaugh
racism 2 : racial prejudice or discrimination
prejudice 2 a (2) : an adverse opinion or leaning
formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge
\_ The second part of the quote: "There is a little hope
invested in McNabb, and he got a lot of credit for the
performance of this team that he didn't deserve. The
defense carried this team." --- Anyone that knows
football knows that this is blatantly wrong. McNabb has
been incredible on the field. This is Rush showing his
bias against black QB's, and then not understanding
why everyone else was saying he was so good, and
therefore attributing the media accolades to media
racism. -nivra
\_ whether Rush is right or not on his opinion is
irrelevant. The question is whether his statements
are racist or not. Rush's statements never implied
that McNabb is bad because he is black. he was talking
about the media. In fact, Rush thinks McNabb is
good, but not as good as he is portrayed by the media
\_ His statement belies the fact that he has a lower
opinion of McNabb's worth than the media. His
attribution of this difference due to race belies
the fact that he thinks about race himself, and
believes that the media does as well. This is
racial prejudice. -nivra
\_ Wow, that's a cool way to flip everything on it's
head! Rhetoric 100 with Jameson?
\_ Rush's opinion:
McNabb = +3
Media Perception:
McNabb = +6
Rush's goal: explain the +3 difference
between reality and perception.
Rush thinks McNabb is good, but not
+6 good.
\_ That's double-plus good, brother.
\_ Ignoring the point, but nice attempt
at creating a false reply with a
witty literary reference.
\_ Agreed. The charge of racism lies in how he
chose to explain the extra +3. The fact that
his knee-jerk reaction was media "race" bias,
combined with the other factors I mentioned
below, such as his implicit support of people
who have outright expressed racism, such as
Lott (albeit when he let his guard down),
point to the fact that he is most _likely_
racist. Not definitely, just likely. -nivra
\_ If being knee-jerk about accusations of
racism makes one racist, then just look to
your left to find all the racism you can
stand.
\_ let's face it. We all have prejudices
of some sort. all of us, white, yellow,
black. I guess the Right thinks that
the Left only thinks the Right is
racist. In reality, we all have
prejudiced views one way or another.
The Left is as guilty as the Right
in these things.
\_ I can read the dictionary, moron. His comment is that the
media is making a bigger deal of the QB than they should
because of his race (that is, the press want to present a
good example of a black QB). That is a criticism that the
media is racist.
\_ Analogous statement:
"Colin Powell only got appointed because he was black."
\_ Your analogy would be better if Colin Powell was
an elected official --aaron
\_ fixed.
\_ except it's still wrong.
\_ And before Rush stuck his stupid head into this, nobody
had mentioned race at all. McNabb was judged on his
acheivements as an *individual*. Only after the dumbass
made his "commentary" was McNabb being judged as a
*representative of the black race.* *Rush* is the one
obsessed with race, not the sports media. Clearly you
are NOT a football fan or a follower of the sport.
\_ He's not saying that and you know. He was commenting
on the press making the guy into a better athlete
than he is *because the press* wants to see a black
QB doing well. Anything else is from your own head.
\_ I'm a different poster from the above. I agree
that his comments are more directed towards the
media overhyping black quarterbacks than a statement
on McNabb being not good because he is black.
\_ But the media isn't overhyping black quarterbacks.
\_ But they are.
\_ ... which is why he's racist.
\_ You have terrible logic. The media
isn't overhyping black quarterbacks.
This implies that Rush thinks that
McNabb is not as good as he really is.
This does not imply at all that he
thinks that McNabb is not good because
he's black. Rush may have thought that.
But he certainly didn't say that or even
imply it.
-not generally someone to defend Rush
\_ Mm, I think it's pretty clear that Rush
is suggesting there's some sort of
affirmative-action effect going on
for the black person.
\_ That doesn't make him racist.
I know that affirmative action
Logically, you are correct. _/exists. I know that some
You cannot conclude that minorities got into Berkeley
Rush must be a racist from because of their race. I mean
his statement. However, this is a fact. I know this
taking into account: fact. Therefore, I'm racist?
1) He was wrong about the I know. This is different
presumed media bias. because Rush was wrong about the
2) His reasoning that affirmative action, but it still
identified race as the doesn't make him racist. Maybe
most likely reason for he thinks that McNabb isn't
his assumed media that good (maybe because he's
overestimation. racist, or maybe because he doesn't
3) His history record of like the Eagles, who knows). And
conservativeness, and then he thinks that the media has
support of conservatives a bias towards blacks. He puts
who have been blatantly these 2 ideas together. That's not
racist. enough to conclude that he's racist.
One can conclude it is \_ I agree. -- not white
likely that he iss a racist \_ me too.,
or at the minimum, has \_ You go through such logical
racial prejudices. -nivra contortions to defend this idiotic
\_ are you saying that windbag, and then you wonder why
conservatives are black people think white folks
racist? are out to get them.
\_ reread, then see Lott, \_ Please see the definitions
Trent & Dixiecrats -op of racism and prejudice again.
\_ see new upcoming
thread
\_ dude, this is hard to \_
format. how do you do 2: discriminatory or abusive
it? behavior towards members of another race.
overwrite-mode _/ I don't see Rush being a racist based on
-nivra the definition of racist.
exists. I know that some
minorities got into Berkeley
because of their race. I mean
this is a fact. I know this
fact. Therefore, I'm racist?
I know. This is different
because Rush was wrong about the
\_ he's controvserial because he has
opinions that not everyone shares, only
about 25 million people listen to his
radio show every day.
affirmative action, but it still
doesn't make him racist. Maybe
he thinks that McNabb isn't
that good (maybe because he's
racist, or maybe because he doesn't
like the Eagles, who knows). And
then he thinks that the media has
a bias towards blacks. He puts
these 2 ideas together. That's not
\_ The statement is actually more clearly described as
"racially insensitive". However, some of the
secondary definitions of "racist" cover racially
insensitive remarks.
\_ "racially insensitive" is a meaningless phrase.
it means whatever a self-created victim wants it
to mean.
enough to conclude that he's racist.
\_ I agree.
\_ Thanks, so your answer is "zero, but I read what
some other guys think!"
\_ I agree. -- not white
\_ me too.
\_ You go through such logical
contortions to defend this idiotic
windbag, and then you wonder why
black people think white folks
are out to get them.
\_ Please see the definitions
of racism and prejudice again.
\_
\_ dude, this is hard to \_ Please see the definitions
format. how do you do of racism and prejudice again.
\_ What part of "independently confirmed" do you not
understand?
\_ You know what an "allegation" is? It's what the
National Enquirer reports after paying off someone's
maid.
it? \_
2: discriminatory or abusive
behavior towards members of another race.
I don't see Rush being a racist based on
the definition of racist.
\_ irrelevant whether or not it is true that
the media is overhyping black quarterbacks.
it is just an opinion. he was hired by ESPN
to be controversial and not a typical
sports commentator patsy.
\_ The reason he's "controversial" is because
he's bigoted.
\_ what about all those people and sports
writers trying to promote the
"Great White Hope"
\_ I'm a Tom voter. I still think doing a hit job a few
days before the vote is incerdibly transparent.
\_ Rush *IS* a racist. Period. He is also a homophobe.
His show is filled with hateful comments, with
hints of truth in them. A hint of truth != a pound
of objective reality.
\_ He may be a racist, but the statement he is being
criticized for was not racist.
\_ The statement is actually more clearly described as
"racially insensitive". However, some of the
secondary definitions of "racist" cover racially
insensitive remarks.
\_ Curious, how many hours have you listened to his show?
\_ http://www.fair.org/articles/limbaugh-color.html
- Rush story about pills is in the National Enquirer. Please, if
you're going to discount conservative sources, discount tabloids
too at least.
\_ Which took 7 weeks and only got printed a week
from the election? You really believe the LA
Times isn't grinding an axe and this is good
journalism??
- The Arnold story is old--it's troubling, but so is the holding back
of the story until the week before the election.
\_ Idiot. Even Fox is covering this:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,98871,00.html
\_ "The New York Daily News, without identifying its source,
reported Thursday that Limbaugh was being investigated by the
Palm Beach County (search) state attorney's office. The
newspaper said it had independently confirmed the
allegations, which were first reported by the supermarket
tabloid the National Enquirer."
Source is still the National Enquirer.
\_ What part of "independently confirmed" do you not
understand?
- The Arnold story is old--it's troubling, but so is the holding
back of the story until the week before the election.
\_ Tell that to all the women he humiliated and who didn't pursue
charges for fear of losing their job.
"What could you do? He was the highest-paid actor in the world.
I was a peon," [one victim] said. "The only thing you could do
is stay away from him."
\_ Wah! A week before an election I've got no sympathy. If
they were so concerned we should've heard about it 2 months
ago (or more). But that wouldn't have been politically
useful.
\_ Actually, we did hear about his behavior. Anyway Arnie
admitted it. But if you already thought Arnie is the sort
of person you want to see be the governor, I doubt this
information would change your mind. Arnie has too much
subconscious goodwill from being a movie star.
\_ It was in a UK newspaper shortly after he announced his
candidacy. The LA Times just sat on it to release it 1
week before the election.
\_ You could also say that the LA Times had spent the
last seven weeks collecting as many cases as they could,
so Arnold couldn't just dismiss it as an isolated
incident. The reporters wanted to show a lifetime
pattern of behavior. Irrespective of the political
edge to it, doesn't it change voters opinions of Arnold,
especially for the women voters?
\_ Then why was there no new information in the LA Times
story? It had the same info as the UK story.
\_ The general idea is the same, but the specific
examples are either reconfirmed through re-
interviews, or entirely new.
- In Kuwait, WMD smugglers were caught trafficking $60M of chemical
weapons OUT of Iraq.
\_ Which has about as much credibility as the Enquirer story,
so shut the hell up.
- (I haven't heard the Iraqi police story) |
| 2003/10/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10423 Activity:kinda low |
10/2 Anybody want to waste your vote? That poll below gave me an idea.
You can write in a candidates name. I'm tempted to write in
"!psb". I wonder if they'll tally those. -psb #1 fan
\_ Pffft! You're not the real psb #1 Fan. His *real* #1 Fan would
never suggest a write in for !psb. His Greatness, the psb, would
be governor of this small state if he chose to. --psb #1 Fan
\_ let's all write in "John Smith"
\_ John Galt.
\_ Who is John Galt?
\_ "Jedi"
\_ since this is a circus, how about Dumbo?
\_ How about Krusty? |
| 2003/10/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/SIG] UID:10419 Activity:nil |
10/1 Does anyone have any good urls to why Davis sucks? Democratic URLs are
a plus. -reg'd dem.
\_ what's the free east bay rag that has "savage love" in it? Check
their website, the recent issue has an article that talks a bit
about my "favorite" example of Davis's incomptetance/criminality
(the oracle bribe). The funny thing is that although Davis is the
worst govenor we have had in my lifetime, and is everything bad
that people *think* is bad about republicans vis-a-vis big business.
There is *nothing* that is known about him now that wasn't known
before the last election when he was elected.
\_ Simon was just a weak candidate and even so came close.
\_ Yep. Simon was worse than weak. He outright lied in his
attacks against Davis. Any halfway decent candidate would've
beaten Davis. Blame the Repubs for that one.
\_ From FTCR, more a consumer rights website, but still good stuff:
http://www.ftcr.org/insurance/pr/pr003676.php3
http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/utilities/nw/nw002082.php3
Oh man, there are too many to list here. Just type "Davis" in
the searchbar.
\_ Is this a troll or are you serious? What state have you been living
in for the last few years? The sky is still blue.
\_ yes, this is serious. i see people bash davis mostly on car tax,
electricity, and recently, drivers licenses for illaliens... i
am looking more for the lies and big business links.
\_ go see Davis and Oracle. Davis and the prison unions. Davis
and the teacher's union. Davis and (insert special interest
here). Anyway, you don't think the issues you came up with
are more than enough? Are you a masochist? How much more
abuse would you like to see inflicted on the citizens of
this once great state? |
| 2003/10/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:10415 Activity:kinda low |
10/1 I got a stupid question. There are more than 40 states in USA
suffering budget crisis. Why California governor is the only one
get recalled?
\_ An aside here: Did you know $87 billion would cover the deficits
of all 50 states combined?
\_ it's an order of magnitude problem.
\_ California's economy is an order of magnitude, if not more,
larger than many of those States. Further, California's
economy was concentrated on high-tech sector. Granted,
Davis is not nearly as effective as, let say, Pete Wilson.
But using budget crisis as the ground for recall when
the budget crisis arises due to severe lack of capital gains
and sales taxes than lavishing state spending?
--OP, not a Davis fan.
\_ From 1993-94 to 2000-01 spending increased from $47.3 billion
to $80.1 billion. As a percentage of budget, CA's deficit
is among the 6 worst (with OR, NV, TX, AL, and WI). What say
you? --dim
\_ the business week article 2 weeks ago said that CA
spending between the same period you quoted increases
on average 1% per year. Now I am *REALLY* confused.
-kngharv
\_ http://www.bailard.com/CA%20muni%20market%20piece_2003.pdf
\_ how about revenue drop? can anyone give me a lead
on where i can find info like that?
\_ From $75.7 billion to $65.8 billion. I've seen
other, but similar numbers like $66.6 billion.
http://www.nctimes.net/news/2003/20030309/52655.html
\_ you are ignoring the rising costs and population in CA
since 1994.
\_ Rising population should mean rising revenues, unless
you mean there are more freeloaders now. In fact,
revenues have almost doubled and yet we are still
outspending them.
\_ That was the case in 2000 when there was a surplus.
But now it turned into rising unemployment benefits.
\_ Higher energy price is part of the reason.
\_ heck, gasoline was $1.20 in 1993.
\_ And under $1.00 in 2001. Your point?
\_ those 5 other states are not recalling their govenors.
\_ Other governors don't have the power crisis (for good or
bad) hanging over their head. Also, there is no politician
who is as uncharismatic as Davis; he really has no friends,
so he's easy to kick while he's down.
\_ I would think the power "crisis" should be hanging over
the head of Pete Wilson and the Bush appointed FERC.
\_ I'm sure you would think that.
\_ Yawn. He's not being recalled because we're in debt. He's being
recalled for being a criminal, for selling out the state in such
a huge way to special interests, for selling his signature, for
telling the Big Lie one too many times, and for being so cynical
\_ Is this some homosexual code word?
\_ no
it makes other politicians look good by comparison. This is so
old. It's been discussed over and over. Please stop the really
lame loaded questions with the pre-loaded assumptions.
\_ How is he "a criminal"? I don't like Davis either, but don't
get ahead of yourself here, chippy.
\_ When there's quid pro quo cash for his political support and
it's so blatant (Davis opposes measure, business reps show up
and write $100k check, Davis signs bill next day) then it's
criminal. Keep up with the news. Chippy, indeed.
\_ Funny. When Wilson did this it was called free speech.
\_ And when Bush gets whopping donations from oil
lobbies, no one bats an eye.
\_ And give government contracts to his friend companies
to rebuild iraq. What is company did Cheney work
for as CEO? How is that company doing?
\_ He has not been arrested or charged with any crime.
Calling him a criminal just makes you look stupid.
\_ And BC lied in a federal court. And several in the
Kennedy family have raped or killed someone. So what?
Powerful people never go to jail or get charged. You're
very naive if that's your standard. |
| 2003/10/1-3 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10407 Activity:kinda low |
10/1 Informal CSUA voting. Please vote only once (don't be a hozer).
Recall Davis
Yes: .................................................................
.................................................................
.................
No: ...........
\_ I like how the number of No votes changed from 5 to 9 votes
in the space of two minutes ... hoser.
\_ What about the number of yes votes? Sheesh...Besides,
saying "don't be a hoser" on the motd is like asking
people to spare the air by not breathing for a few days.
\_ The No votes showed the ballot stuffing first. The
Yes votes only appeared after I pointed this out.
I feel like a moron.
\_ trust your feelings.
\_ Yo, it's a motd poll. Whatever. That's to both of you.
Bustmante: .......
Camejo: .
Schwarzenegger: ......
Tom: ...
georgy@soda: ...
!psb: ..
\_ does the fact that Arnie is an idiot, knows nothing of government,
and refuses to give any specifics of what he will do not bother you?
\_ your opinion doesn't bother me at all but I'm voting for TM
because his views most closely match my own on topics important
to me that the governor has some control over. I hope that
properly answered your loaded & rhetorical question.
\_ well if you're voting for TM I wasn't talking to you.
\_ you weren't talking to anyone. it was rhetorical.
\_ According to the L.A. Times poll, everyone knows he has
considerably less experience than the mainstream candidates,
but he ranks at the top in leadership. I think of Arnie as
someone who wasn't in the club when he got to America, but
leveraged his musclebuilding into acting, then into small
community contributions, running businesses, and then ending
up governor of California. I think people approve of this.
Implicitly, they do not consider him an idiot. As for not
giving specifics, people are motivated primarily by "kick
the bums out" and avoiding "business as usual". They are
satisfied as well when he says it will be "Governor Arnold,
not Governor Wilson". By the way, someone is overwriting
posts like mad (not just mine).
\_ Ok. Well, I'll actually vote No on recall and Yes on Arnie.
Just because I hate Bustamante.
\_ Just curious, why do you hate him? Because he's Mexican?
\_ Why do you automatically assume race is an issue?
\_ Bustamante is a twink. He also has zero charisma.
\_ Bustamente seems more oily than Davis. As much as
Davis has dissed him, he seemed to salivate over the
revenge aspect of running against Davis and leading
in the polls, more than wanting to save CA.
\_ Wowwee, now that's what I call an informed opinion.
\_ Well, if you want something more hard, he's
a part of the Democratic establishment that
increased spending to a level where we're in
the hole that we are now. They shouldn't be
rewarded by replacing one Democrat for another.
In any case, do you disagree with my earlier
characterization? Doesn't it just SEEM right?
\_ I firmly disagree. Its fairly obvious that
your prejudice against anything Democratic
is clouding your judgement. You need to
relax.
\_ actually, I am a Democrat. They just
overspent by way too much. Bustamante
and Davis should not be representing this
party, and those politicians may have
gotten too full of themselves, what
with the "conservative" stupidity going
on in the rest of the country.
\_ I think our idiotic initiative system,
the special interests that have ruined it,
and the stupid California voters that
passed the budget restrictions that
lock up 2/3rds in the money in this
state are the real villians. Not to
mention Enron and the other energy
companies that screwed us. I don't know
why I bring this up though, because it
gets deleted every time I do.
\_ Wah! I write to a dynamic file that
hundreds have access to and my posts
are so brilliant it must be that i'm
being silenced! its a VRWC i tell ya!
\_ It still doesn't change the fact
that Davis brought up the deficit
after he got elected, and attacked
Riordan so he could face Simon.
He's a coward.
\_ I love this complaint. It's as if
no one had the opportunity to say
"We're in trouble on the budget"
other than Davis. Was he doing the
numbers in his closet?
\_ And how is replacing him with
someone with zero political
experience and a cabal of
Pete Wilson advisors going
to solve our problems?
\_ It sends a message, one.
Two, Arnie's governance would
be one of delegating
responsibilities. It really
doesn't work in Dubya's
administration, but I think
it might work better on the
state level. He's a different
person than Ventura, very
charismatic, and it might just
work.
\_ right, Ventura's politics
were/are way better.
\_ I can't see what facts you
are basing number 1 or number
2 on, so I guess I'll just
have to think that you're
going on some sort of faith
in Arnold's powers. Fair
enough. I for one am
concerned about a government
of ex-Wilson cronies, as
Wilson was a terrible
governor. I also think
Arnold's effectiveness is
going to be questionable
given a firmly Democratic
legislature and voting public,
not to mention the strangeness
of the budget process given
that 2/3rd voting requirement
and all the spending mandates.
I also think he's going to
be subject to a recall of his
own, and I'm very afraid
given the state of California
politics that we will soon
be subjected to an endless
series of tit for tat recalls.
_/
It's not that I think Arnold will do a better
job, but he hasn't demonstrated the cowardice
that Davis has (see earlier post). Arnold
has the promise of doing an adequate job.
You're all about, "Who's likely to do the
best job?" which is entirely valid. I'm
all about, "Davis showed he was a coward,
boot him. I don't want my vote indicating
I condone his practices" which to me,
trumps that.
\_ I wouldn't call it cowardice. Just plain
brutal cynicism. Davis is a bastard.
\_ Fair enough, thanks for the reasonable
debate (on the motd no less!). I guess
we'll just have to see how it all turns out,
as Governor Arnold looks sort of
inevitable at this point. For me, this
is yet another reason to consider moving
out of Cali (*sniff* *sniff*).
\_ Arnold has demonstrated even more cowardice!
He refused to debate Davis or the other
candidates except that one scripted thing.
He also refuses to say anything specific,
for fear of criticism.
\_ But you see, the Democrats have already
had their chance. Arnold just had to
show in the first debate that he
wouldn't go psycho, and he didn't. That
means I'm going to vote for him.
I certainly don't blame your logic, since
the L.A. Times uses it.
\_ this is the thread that doesn't end
it just goes on and on my friend
some people started trolling it
not knowing what it was
and they just kept on trolling it
forever just because
this is the thread that never
ends, it just goes on and on my
friend.
\_ I don't feel like writing an essay about the man.
Suffice it to say, I disagree with his plans, I feel
that he doesn't represent my interests, and I have a
personal distaste for him based on what I've seen of
what he says and how he operates. The "oily" description
sums it up as much as anything.
\_ I predict that Arnold will win and the first thing he will have
to do is raise taxes, pissing off the Republicans to no end. -ausman
\_ Shrug. I predict you're wrong. (heh) |
| 2003/10/1 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10393 Activity:nil |
9/30 Bustamante: "They are against food"
http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/insider
\_ You know, it's sad how little the context redeems this quote.
\_ I'm tempted to read the link but I think I'll skip this one.
\_ Ok, I lied. It was too much. I understand what he was _trying_
to say after thinking about it in context but he's still an
anti-American, blame-America-first, kill-whitey kinda guy. |
| 2003/10/1 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10392 Activity:nil |
9/30 Does anyone know the labor laws in here in CA? Are employers
allowed to force their employees to take breaks?
\_ Force? There are labor laws on the books to protect you.
\_ Oh evil boss man! Please don't make me stop working yet continue
to pay me! Oh and stop buying me free lunch and snacks too! Woe! |
| 2003/9/30 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:10386 Activity:high |
9/30 When people say "fiscal conservative." What do they mean by that?
Is fiscal "responsible" i.e. no deficit spending a "conservative"
or "liberal" platform traditionally?
\_ Various definitions, several of them very, er, interesting.
Generally means don't spend more than you can bring in as tax
revenues, don't spend one-time revenues (i.e. increased taxes
during boom times) on long-term commitments, keep as much spending
as possible in the private sector and only spend public money
on services that the private sector would probably not invest in
if left to its own (see Adam Smith), keep taxes low to make more
private income available to spend on goods and services.
Essentially, the same sort of common-sense money management that
private individuals ought to engage in. Most implementations have
some problems, like the EU's stability pact, which prevents
governments from 'priming the pump' to kick-start their economies,
if their deficits are already too high, and the fact that many
elected representatives try to bolster their electoral popularity
through sometimes unnecessary spending "at home". And let's face
it, you'll be hard-pressed to find two people who'll agree
entirely on who should be taxed how much on what. -John
\_ It means fiscally conservative: e.g. only spend and increase
national debt to fund issues like: defense, anti-immigrant,
big-tax-cuts-for-wealthy-few, pro-business-let-them-do-what-
they-want-no-oversight-Enron, anti-environmental-regulation.
\_ Are you angry? -John |
| 2003/9/30 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10384 Activity:nil |
9/29 This has probably been covered already, but what is the prevailing
rationale, if any, on the part of recall proponents as to why this
recall is merited? Considering that we anyway have elections every
4 years, Davis won, and the stuff ppl complain about is no different
than what they complained about before the election? And does anyone
doubt that if he gets recalled, the replacement will also get recalled?
\_ no, you're right, it's dumb, it sucks that the rest of
us have to suffer due to a quirk in the law, and it sucks
that this stuff has to be test driven in one of the world's
largest economies and America's most populous state.
\_ a quirk in the law? the recall isn't a technicality.
\_ Davis needs punished for sucking. Cutting Davis' career short is
reason enough for me (conservative policy is more likely to help
california also). -- petty and vindictive
\_ so when democrats decide to try to recall a republican govorner
a few months into their term and win, only to be recalled by
angry republicans whose candidate is recalled, etc., will
that have been worth it? the whole thing seems like a bad
precedent for an already over politicized state.
\_ Over politicized now? Check the polls. Lots of democrats are
for the recall. If it was only politics, that wouldn't be the
case.
\_ You *might* buy enough signatures to start a recall against
Arnold but it'll *never* pass the general voting population
a few months into his term. Don't confuse the minimum req'd
sigs to start a recall with step 2 where we all get to vote.
\_ Troll, he's getting recalled primarily for lying his ass off about
the true state of the economy before his election and then dumping
the truth on us only after he thought his position was secure. He
is so cynical it even makes me ill and I've got really thick skin.
The rest of his corruption, lying, incompetence, and stupidity is
just icing on the recall cake. Davis is dead. Unless someone gets
Arnold on tape raping under age nuns, it's over.
\_ Sadly, no matter who is elected, this state is still Fucked (tm). |
| 2003/9/29-30 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Prop] UID:10372 Activity:very high |
9/29 My father told me over the weekend that he had told the RNC to take
his name off of all their lists, and that he was changing his voting
registration to undeclared after 40 years of registering R. This is
a man who was in the Navy 25 years, and is very proud of his service.
He has become disgusted with the current administration, not to mention
the circus that is California. I'm astounded that the conservatives
speaking here have not been more introspective themselves about their
convictions, and where their alignments lie. --scotsman
\_ I cannot speak for other conservatives, but I gave up
discussing political issues on the motd because it
was impossible to have a decent conversation due to
the censors, trolls and flamers (right and left are
both guilty of this).
BTW, your father isn't the only Republican who is
upset with the current state of the party and its
leadership. My family has voted Republican since
we first immigrated to this country (~ 30 yrs ago).
For the last year or so we have been considering
changing our registration to undeclared.
\_ Wesley Clark is also proud of his service. What that has to do
with R or D is beyond me. --dim
\_ Clark's history as a Democrat goes back about 6 months. I don't
count that against him, and I'd vote for him if he were
nominated, but I'm just saying. If you're considering Bush,
you need to really look at what has happened in a 4 year term.
\_ you're dad is a twit
\_ This one's truly beautiful. --scotsman
\_ Why do you assume that being introspective "about [your] convictions,
and where [your] alignments lie" means we'll come to the same
conclusion as your father? While I don't think he's a twit, I'm
rather surprised at his conclusions.
\_ I'm not saying you should arrive at the same conclusions, but
the responses I see here are kneejerk, lopsided, and often
uninformed. I think there's a lot to think about that many
here have rejected flat out. --scotsman
\_ I see the same among the liberal views here except they're more
emboldened. Practically every conservative response in the
motd or wall is just an invitation for a pile-on. We thinking
conservatives have given up putting our comments up for the
inevitable liberal spin/lie/pile-on that follows. And of
course there are also the outright deletions. Please don't
make the (very poor thinking) assumption that the motd is a
realistic slice of the philosophical spectrum.
\_ Funny that the deletions I've seen come shortly after a
salient point by a lefty gets posted. I think there are
people on both sides lying to themselves. --scotsman
\_ I think *both* sides get deletions.
\_ How in the world can he blame CA on the RNC? Democrats hold *every*
statewide office, and have dominated for decades.
\_ Mmm.. logical leaps. Look at prop 13.
\_ I think he meant more the current electoral joke. --scotsman
\_ What electoral joke? Hint: just because some call the recall a
joke doesn't mean that it is. The number of people signing the
petition is a massive showing of democracy in action.
\_ Massive? perhaps when we get a turnout >30% in an election,
you can call it a "massive showing of democracy".
\_ Massive? perhaps when we get a turnout >30% in an
election, you can call it a "massive showing of
democracy". Anyway, I'm the one calling it a joke.
Take it or leave it. --scotsman
\_ son of a twit
\_ When have you ever seen ~2x10^6 people sign a petition?
It's amazing. Please detail why you think it's a joke,
and why you yourself are not a twit.
\_ Did you sign it? Are you voting yes? Why? --scotsman
\_ After carefully reading your comments, I've concluded that you're a
twit. And so is your dad.
\_ Then I'm glad we'll likely never meet. --scotsman |
| 2003/9/27-29 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:10351 Activity:nil |
9/27 CIA asks Justice Dept. to investigate allegations that White House blew
agent's cover to get back at her husband for writing article condemning
knowing inclusion of false statements in the State of the Union Address:
http://csua.org/u/4je
\_ the white house has a record of every single incoming
and outgoing call, i wonder when they'll release the
records?
\_ Probably about the same time they release details of who attended
the Energy Policy meeting.
\_ what's 'rose law firm'? recently the white house
almost immediately released records of wesley clark
calling the white house, so they have the technology
to tell who called who in the white house when.
\_ if you don't know that then you've got no business sharing
your political views, however, yes, everyone here already
agrees it was bad *if* it happened and should be investigated
\_ Or where the Rose Law Firm records were for 7 years.
\_ The rest of us already knew this. Where have *you* been?
\_ making ad hominem attacks in the Medea Benjamin thread below.
\_ And this republican says they should do it. That action, if true, is
indefensible. -emarkp
\_ If the dems had done this, I'd still be right with you. --erikred.
\_ Reprehensible behavior transcends political allegiance.
There's no excuse for it. -John
\_ I agree that it should be investigated. It should not be assumed to
be true or false until there's been a non-partisan finding.
\_ Do you think Novak (and Newsweek, which published essentially
the same story at the same time) were lying about it? And
seriously now, do you think that there is any chance of this
getting investigated, with all three branches of government
firmly in Republican hands?
\_ Novak didn't say who told him so we don't know. That's what
\_"Two Senior administration officials"
investigations are for. If you think Republicans are all
liars and into conspiracies, etc, maybe you weren't aware
that Novak is a conservative? If conservatives were all so
universally evil why would one print this? Thanks.
\_ This is the kind of logical leap that makes discussions
on motd so fucking pointles. No one said "Republicans are
all liars". Grow up. --scotsman
\_ Duh. It's right there. Go fucking read it in the thing
I was replying to. People who can't fucking read is
what makes the motd pointless. I don't care if you grow
up but you should learn to fucking read before posting.
\_ Read it again, after putting away the GOP card.
--scotsman
\_ But my credit cards aren't maxed out! What the
fuck is a republican administration having the CIA
raise taxes for?!?
\_ Exactly. Thank you.
\_ Will you hold your breath until they appoint an independent
council to investigate it? Please??? There is no way that
this is going to happen. And yes, I know that Novak is a
Republican. He is also a reporter, not a White House
official. |
| 2003/9/26-27 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10341 Activity:nil |
9/26 Anyone know anything about Garrett Gruener? I just visited http://gg4g.com. He seems legit, and pretty interesting. \_ Yeah, I've gotten pop-up-adds from him... \_ Garrett's a great guy and throws a nice party. OTOH, this does not a governor make. --ex-Ask Jeeves employee |
| 2003/9/22-23 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10281 Activity:kinda low |
9/22 Get those bags packed, George.
http://csua.org/u/4fu
\_ Hide those skeletons, Wes!
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/robertnovak/printrn20030922.shtml
\_ if this is the best the Bush and his minions can dig up,
he's in serious trouble
\_ Why? Do you really think that the peace love dope lefties
in the democratic party will vote for a solider?
\_ When did this rumor become "fact" that the dems hate the
military? oh, and by the way, check service records before
you say anything else this stupid. --scotsman
\_ Service records? They got drafted or felt the need to
signup since they had political ambitions. Fact? This
isn't a provable concept but common sense would say
that a pacifist wouldn't vote for a soldier.
\_ How many dems are "peace love dope lefties"? Most
of the "peace love dope lefties" vote Green. Get
over yourself, you knee-jerk rightist hawk bozo.
military? --scotsman
\_ Do tell, oh Great Wise One and Knower of All History!
\_ you know the massacre they are talking about happened 11 months
AFTER Clark met with him.
\_ How dare you bring facts into this!
\_ Shut up! Cut his mic!
\_ you might be a rocket scientist but you're no genius if you
can't see something wrong with Clark's actions vis a vis
Mladic. Also, his CNN record is public as well as the rest
of the stuff here. The man is a crackpot and very dangerous.
I'd no more vote for Clark than I've vote for a whacko like
McArthur (who wanted to nuke mainland China). Go ahead, vote
for him. Whatever. You deserve what you vote for.
\_ Good, you've bought into the right-wing spin.
\_ If polls this early meant anything, we'd have had President Dole
from '96 to '00 and maybe right now. It's a big yawner.
\_ -- ilyas
\_ It pains me that our youth have forgotten their history. |
| 2003/9/21-22 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:10270 Activity:nil |
9/20 Family to lose home by eminent domain for Costco store
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/981262/posts?page=1,50
\_ Funny thing is, she's willing to sell. She just wants $2.13m for a
property valued at $400k. No sympathy here. URL:
http://www.dallasnews.com/localnews/stories/091003dnmetdomain.c284f.html
login: yeahright@@dallasnews.com pwd: password
\_ Eminent domain should not be allowable no matter how much she
wants for it. They are building a COSTCO, not a bridge. --dim
\_ You miss the point. Her dollar figure is intentionally well
beyond market value because, get this, *she doesn't want to sell
at any price*!!! Eminent domain is evil and gets abused for all
sorts of shit. It got so bad in CA with school districts(!!!)
doing things like declaring eminent domain on some people's
houses, then sitting on the land for 10-15 years and selling it
for profit that there's now a law against just such a thing. You
should have tremendous sympathy for anyone who gets their house
and property stolen by the government. More so, it should piss
you off unless you're some sort of socialist who doesn't believe
in personal property rights. And yes, I consider the government
forcing me to sell my house to them at whatever they consider
FMV without bidding, on their timeline, without recourse to not
sell or find a higher bidder or any other options to be theft.
You think the government is going to pay her $30k agent's fee to
buy her replacement home? That's $30k right out of her pocket.
\_ I'm going to go out on a limb here and do the unthinkable (at
least on the motd): I apologize. In not offering sympathy
to this woman for trying to squeeze every penny out of the
the sale of her house, I did not mean to imply approval of the
sneaky and dastardly policy of using eminent domain to grab
land for a commercial venture. Now, please go back to the
article and read the part where she says she was willing to
sell the house for $10 per square foot. If she's not willing
to sell, she shouldn't have said she was-- at any price.
There's more to this story than meets the eye on both sides.
\_ My house has FMV of about $590k. However, I would not
consider selling it for $590k right now if I was *forced*
to. I'm not ready yet. However, if I was offered some
ridiculously larger number, being forced to sell wouldn't
be quite so bad. About 1.75x to 2x FMV would be about
right to get me to move without a lawsuit assuming they
covered all my related expenses in addition to the FMV.
Everything has a price. FMV isn't enough money to get
99% of home owners to move without problems. By definition
they can get FMV any time they want on their own schedule.
\_ well duh, there is a $ point at which people will give in
to eminent domain. the point is that she shouldn't
be forced to give up her home. people put a price on
the sentimental and priceless part of a home.
\- if you are interested in property rights and the law,
two interesting things to look at are: Spur Industries
v. Del E. Webb [494 P.2d 701], and the famous article
by Guido Calabresi and Melamed: Property Rules,
Liability Rules, and Inalienability: One view of the
Cathedral [85 Harvard Law Rev. 1089]. The case is
between two private parties but has a sort of interest-
ing outcome [the winner of the injuction, is liable for
money]. G. Calabresi was the deal of Yale Law School and
is now a Federal judge. --psb |
| 2003/9/17 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10230 Activity:nil |
9/17 Mary Carey has no breast implants.
http://et.tv.yahoo.com/celebrities/2003/08/20/marycareyintv
http://www.marycareyforgovernor.com
\_ I did not have sexual relations with that woman
\_ It's just that someone said she's a "Pr0n0 princess with fake
tits" yesterday. |
| 2003/9/17 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10222 Activity:nil |
9/16 New california drivers license
http://www.terrymeiners.com/images/480_mexifornia_license.jpg
\_ throw in a joke about drunken indians and black people with big
lips chowing down on the watermellon and fried chicken and you
have comedy gold there.
\_ Glad to see racism no longer exists.
\_ If only it really said "illegal alien" in the corner. The new
"legal driving for illegal aliens" license will look like everyone
else's. I'm still trying to figure out why someone who is here
illegally and already driving would feel the need to register with
the state and get a driver's license. And if they fail will they
stop driving?
\_ They are probably dying to pay for insurance, too. The
reality is that they want them (if they want them) to use as
ID, which is precisely why I oppose giving DL to them.
\_ They shouldn't even be here. That's the whole "illegal" part
of "illegal" alien.
\_ let's all email this terry meiners fellow and let him know how
much of an ignorant racist asshole he is. I just did. that thing
is just ridiculous.
\_ go for it. I can't wait to see his "these low grade witless
humorless morons sent me hate mail" page.
\_ ahh the "can't they take a joke" defense! A classic!
\_ Should be "... morons who support *illegal* aliens ...".
\_ there are a lot of illegal aliens from europe, canada, and asia,
but I guess that's ok with most of you.
\_ not at all. why would you think that? illegal is illegal. why
is that so hard for you to understand? |
| 2003/9/16 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10212 Activity:nil |
9/16 So who is the hottest candidate for governor?
\_ Brooke Adams: http://www.brookeforgovernor.com
\_ Georgy's hotter than that.
\_ Typical nerdling lack of taste in women. Brooke is out of your
league so your brain goes into denial mode and decides she's
inferior.
\_ Mary Carey, of course! http://www.marycareyforgovernor.com
\_ gach! Pr0n0 princess with fake tits. whatever. |
| 2003/9/16 [Politics/Domestic/California, Consumer/CellPhone, Politics/Domestic] UID:10207 Activity:kinda low |
9/15 What are good 17"/18" LCD displays? The viewsonics seem popular
and cheap. Any gotchas? Are 18" displays worth the $100-$200 premium
they're currently going for? -saarp
\_ Solarism
\_ Samsung
\_ You mean Samsuck? I have one. I also have a Viewsonic. And
I also have an Eizo. Samsuck has decent panel, but supporting
electronics is crap. Viewsonic's panel is not that great
(VX800) and the electronics is also hit or miss. Viewsonic
VE170 uses old technology panel, but otherwise, it's just fine.
I love my Eizo in every way. Conclusion is that I recommend
Eizo.
\_ Eizo? It's more popular in asia than over here right?
Haven't seen them around for some time.
\_ Eizo is part of Nanao Japan. They don't seem to care
about the "cheap is everything" consumer market. You
can really see the quality in these things. They're
somewhat expensive than others, but you get what you
pay for. Newegg has them cheaper than most others, but
you pay tax in CA.
Never seen them around for some time.
\_ There's only about 3 LCD manufacturers for the screen part. The
rest you'll have to compare the features vs price vs warrantee.
Find out what the dead pixel replacement policy is and if you
can live with 10 dead or semi dead pixels before it kicks in.
\_ I service other people's computers, so my experience is that
Viewsonics are very hit and miss. One customer had two consecutive
replacements fail on her (bad capacitor and a bad inverter). Other
customers have had similar problems. About half the installs never
report any problems. Perhaps this is a batch issue. Quality is
so-so (according to my eyes), not as vibrant as others I've seen.
Samsung, Sony, etc. seem to have less problems, but I've seen
failures on all brands at least once. LG-Phillips/Hitachi/Sharp
are the ones I know in terms of LCD manufaturers. LCD quality
AFAIK is dependent on batch. If they produce a good batch you
get a good vibrant screen. If you get a crappy batch you tend to
can live with 10 dead or semi dead pixels before it kicks in.
get washed out colors. YMMV. |
| 2003/9/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10199 Activity:low |
9/14 Federal appeals court delays recall!
All I can say is: HAAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHA!
\_ Cool, all I can say is, 6 more months of incompetent non-leadership
from the lame duck governor who is going to continue his standard
pandering and mass sell out of the general population in an effort
to buy more illegal alien votes. Whoop-di-doo. So glad to live
in CA. If you weren't a student, you'd care more.
\_ "Illegal alien votes"? Troll.
\_ Drivers license for illegals + motor voter law =
Illegal alien votes
\_ Bzzt. You really do suck up everything you hear on the
radio, doncha?
\_ Nice comeback. Wouldn't want to actually address the
issue.
\_ If it were an issue. Verification of voter
registration is an entirely separate process.
You brought up the point. The burden of proof
is on you.
\_ Wow, pot kettle black eh? Troll.
\_ No pots and kettles. He refused to address the
issue. Getting nailed on it doesn't make the
hammer into a troll.
\_ You put forward a baseless claim. As I said,
the burden of proof is on you.
\_ It isn't baseless. Anyone who can get a
driver's license which will soon be every
illegal gets paperwork for voting. There's
no other checking, genius. Illegals driving
\_ Prove this. This is what your entire rant
is based on.
== illegals voting. 2+2 still = 4 outside
your little ivory towers.
\_ Just because someone can break the law
does not mean that they will. Not
everyone has the criminal/Republican
mentality. Illegals tend to be more
afraid of law enforcement that most,
so I bet very very few will engage
in illegal voting. I think you are worried
about something that will not happen,
but let's keep an eye on it and see.
If it becomes a problem, then we can
do something about it.
\_ illegal alien votes => those with relatives/sympathy for
illegal aliens => the Hispanic vote
\_ If you really believe this, then explain why the hispanic
vote is so influential, yet prop 184 passed.
\_ Surely you mean Prop 187, right?
\_ there are more white people
"The Times's exit poll that year found that 23 percent
of Latino voters supported Proposition 187 and
77 percent opposed it." http://csua.org/u/4bs
\_ Do you really think the recall would have passed?
\_ Absolutely. Hard core support to recall, soft support to
not recall. It's a done deal if the election is in Oct.
\_ I'm not a student. Ah-nold would have just made things worse:
O'REILLY: Yes, I know, but do you have any ideas that you can
offer the other governors or the president of the United States?
All of them seem to be confused about the issue. Do you have
any ideas on how you can control the borders?
SCHWARZENEGGER: I think we just have to-I think we just have to
bring leadership there and really make sure that the-explain
the case, that how bad it is for the state and how bad it is
for the country to do that-We have to work on those kind of
issues together, the border states.
\_ It's not his fault, his scriptwriter didn't anticipate the
question.
\_ You're avoiding the issue. The issue is Davis is an
incompetent and criminal boob. Thus he needs to go. Arnold
giving a politician's answer to a question doesn't make me
want that Davis scumbag in office any more. It has nothing
to do with it.
\_ What makes him criminal?
\_ Selling his signature for campaign cash quid pro quo?
Isn't that enough? Have you been out of CA for the last
few years?
\_ It's the 9th circuit. They might as well not exist. Off to the
supreme court we go. And since when does a federal court get
involved in a state election.
\_ Are memories that short?
\_ *cough*Florida*cough*
\_ Is your chad hanging?
\_ That was an election for a FEDERAL office. You know, President
of the United States?
\_ No facts! Do not bring facts into this! Everyone knows
the SC conspired with the right wing to steal the election!
Even though by every measure and later re-re-re-re-count
Bush still won! No facts!
\_ Wow, I have to call troll. Your "not exist" comment is
laughable in the face of the actual 9th circuit statistics.
\_ You mean the 70-80% overturn rate?
\_ Thanks for deleting my question rather than answering it.
Got any evidence to back up this statement?
\_ I'm "involved" in the legal profession but not a lawyer.
The 9th Circuit is known for being a bunch of fuck nuts
within the profession and lawyers don't take an adverse
9th Circuit ruling seriously. It just means both sides
make more legal fees for the appeal.
\_ The 9th are all liberal nuts.
\_ That may be, but they're OUR liberal nuts!
\_ suck my liberal nuts
\_ What was Federal statute / Consitutional issue in question?
Crickey Davis is so incompetent he can't even modernize
Californias voting systems nearly three years after
Florida - what a disgrace.
\_ The modernization of voting machines is left up to the individual
counties. It really wasn't Davis' responsibility.
\_ The state was supposed to be ready in March 2004, in time for
the next planned vote. The recall advanced that schedule by six
months. They are understandably behind. The constitutional issue
is "one person, one vote."
\_ One citizen, one vote, thanks. We're not *yet* making it so
all the illegals can easily vote. Yet.
\_ Wow, you've really convinced yourself that immigration
does you serious harm, haven't you? I feel sad for you.
\_ As always, brown people provide a convenient punching
bag, especially during electoral cycles. This is a
fundamental feature of our politics.
\_ 1) I am an immigrant. A *legal* one. 2) Legal
immigration is bad. 3) Illegal immigration is bad.
4) opening your borders so you can get near slave wage
labor is unethical, sickening, and you should go shoot
yourself for thinking it's ok to bring in slaves to do
your dirty work, asshole.
\_ Oh, we're going to get snippy, about are we? Remove also
all those convicted of a felon, officially mentally
incapable, and unregistered voters. Gods, it's folks
that you that make lawyers drool.
\_ Nothing wrong with preventing felons, the mentally
incapable and unregistered voters from voting. |
| 2003/9/13 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10179 Activity:low |
9/12 California to give free college to illegals
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/981662/posts
\_ This is nothing next to the mass voter fraud that's going to
occur with the driver's license bill. Remember the Motor Voter
law? That means every illegal will get voter registration papers
BY LAW when they get their driver's license from the DMV. Once
you've got those papers, there's no further check stopping an
illegal alien from voting in both CA and Federal elections. When
the pendulum swings back, the backlash to destroying the value and
meaning of citizenship is going to knock your socks off.
\_ Until the early/mid 90's, illegals *had* drivers licenses,
and your cataclysmic apocalyptic destruction of all that is
good and conservative didn't happen.
\_ not that I necessarily agree with PP, but the motor-voter
law didn't exist when illegals had drivers licenses.
\_ Hope you are right... somehow I'm not so sure. |
| 2003/9/11-12 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:10156 Activity:nil |
9/11 "Gov. Gray Davis' administration says it is unlikely to approve plans
for substantial reductions to the state payroll until the middle of
next month. That makes it likely that the impact of the cuts -- in
thousands of layoffs and in reduced state services -- won't become
public until after the Oct. 7 recall election."
http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/ca/budget/story/7393104p-8336582c.html
\_ Davis is a master at hiding bad news until after the election,
which a huge part of why he's up for recall now. Look, its not
smooth sailing once he's elected, he still has to deal with the
consequenses of his policies. Thank goodness for the Recall! |
| 2003/9/10 [Politics/Domestic/California, Finance/Investment] UID:10137 Activity:very high |
9/10 http://csua.org/u/492 (news.yahoo.com) Alabama voters suckered into voting down modest tax hike. School programs in jeopardy. Only the rich and middle class would have paid for it but polls showed only mixed support among blacks and lower income voters! This is appalling! I blame the media for this travesty! \_ 19% of Americans think that they are in the top 1% of wage earners and 20% more think that they *will* be in that top 1% within their lifetime... this should help explain why so many Americans like Bush's tax policy (Source: Economist) \_ could you elaborate on where I can find this? \_ I read it in this week's print edition. \_ Wow, I've always thought this sort of thing was true but I've never seen numbers to back it up. What a sorry bunch of delusional wage slaves. \_ Damn, now that I thought about this a little further, that's just pathetic. I believe the top decile is around $80k, correct me if I'm wrong, so there are people that make under $80k that believe they're in the top 1%? \_ You were close, top 20% of households is at $83.5k: http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/h01.html Oops, I actually used real data on the motd? I hope my account doesn't get sorry'd. \_ what do they mean by household income? I make 90k and my hubby makes 80k. does that mean our household income is 170k? \_ Yes, and those numbers would put you in the top 5%, so now you can stick it to the rest of us! (Does anyone have figures for the top 4%, 3%, 2%, 1% so that we can see how, for the lack of a better word, asymptotic it gets?) \_ 90k and 80k doing what? How long does it take to get there? \_ The real question is how to break that barrier. 100k is easy. 200k is much harder. \_ I was making $85k/yr as a sysadmin 5 years out of college. This was the boom years though. \_ so what is the range of gross income for a middle class? $40k-80k? If someone who can afford a $50k car does that qualify him/her as a well off middle class or upper class? \_ http://ferret.bls.census.gov/macro/032002/faminc/new07_000.htm The poverty line is $18k for a family of four, so the bottom of what is the middle class must be much lower, unless you think half of America is "poor." \_ The federal pvoery definition is so out of whack that most social and economics statistics reporting work around with stats like % within n multiples of poverty line. -- ulysses, whose wife writes socioeconomic studies for a living. \_ Fine then, most of America is poor by your very odd definition of it. Look at the tables. 13% of Americans live in families that make below the poverty levels. Most people who live in families with incomes of $25k think of themselves as "middle class", no matter how much self-entitled Cal students and grads would piss and moan at having to survive on it. \_ "866,623 people opposed [it] while 416,310 voted for it" ??? There are roughly 1.3 million people in Alabama? Isn't that a pretty low voter turn out? \_ voter turnout in this country is always low \_ I find this site illuminating: http://www.lcurve.org \_ retarded. or should i say... you are so obviously a fat sysadmin. \- note by the way: you should not just focus on income but wealth also. e.g. i know some modestly paid teacher in the silicon valley who have lived there since the 60 or early 70s and owned millions of dollars in real-estate. note also there are some well-defined groups for whom current income is artificially low. like some law/med/engineering graduate students. does anyone know which congressman suggested changing the exempt amount before the "death taxes" kicked in to $100m to shut up the people talking about the farmers and small business owners? |
| 2003/9/10 [Politics/Domestic/California, Finance/Investment] UID:10132 Activity:high |
9/10 How many libertarians does it take to change a light bulb?
None, the invisible hand will do it.
\_ Bzzt. It's my light bulb, and I'll fix it when I goddamn want to,
not when it suits the government.
\_ ...and if you can't afford a lightbulb, it's your own damn fault
for not being an overpaid dickhead sysadmin. As long as my taxes
are low, i don't give a damn if you freeze in the dark, you
fucking plebe.
\_ p.s. - I'm gonna go eat another Top Dog. I heart Ayn Rand
\_ ...but I don't feel any compulsion to pay for her books
when I can dl them off the net for free. |
| 2003/9/8 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10111 Activity:high |
9/6 87 billion! That's an 87 with 9 zeros after it, folks!
\_ So why are liberals so cost-concious with this item, especiall with
the "if only one child is saved..." crap that goes on all the time?
\_ why are "conservatives" NOT cost conscious with anything Bush
does?
\_ I for one am. I'm in agreement with most of the war stuff
(although if there still are now WMD's found by next year I'm
going to have some serious questions). But I'm against the
ANWR drilling, unless better gas economy controls are also
enacted (as an example). Bush needs to stop growing the
federal budget as well (minus defense as necessary). -emarkp
\_ yep. ANWR would have gone through if republicans had not
been willing to switch sides on this issue. it's not
just an environmental issue. There's about 6 months
worth of oil up there, and the *only* reason
to drill ANWR is as s a giveaway to the
U.S. oil companies. Republicans may not like envrionmental
arguments, but there are some who see that this is just
a special interest giveaway.
\_ It's 6 months of oil if we had *no other sources* of
oil. That's a *huge* amount of oil. The world economy
would rock and tremble if the US stopped buying foreign
oil for 6 months. Half of the middle east dictatorships
would collapse for starters.
\_ This is the first I've heard this clarification (and
google hasn't helped). Can you point to a URL that
says this? -emarkp
\_ That's like a couple years of defecit in this state! ;)
\_ States don't run deficits. They just stop paying people.
\_ At the rate we're going it'd be a single budget soon.
\_ Most of us got into and some graduated from college. We don't
need to you spell out how many zeros are in a number for us.
Would you care to tell us how many zeros have gone into welfare,
social security, and other forms of socialism? Care to tell us
how much the cold war against such things cost?
\_ troll purged. see archives if you care.
\_ The only cold war vs. social security is the one being
fought by the Heritage Foundation. I hope they go bankrupt
trying to turn back the clock.
\_ say what? what are you talking about?
\_ You are so obviously a fat sysadmin.
\_ That's a great line. No sarcasm. -#1 fan
\_ Yeah when you're caught with nothing to say on topic you
should always fall back to personal attack. You'll be the
hero of people like "-#1 fan" above. That's the smart move.
Are you running for governator, too? You're almost as smart
as Huffington.
\_ And you sir, are an ah hominem fat sysadmin.
\_ The only cold war vs. social security is the one being
fought by the Heritage Foundation. I hope they go bankrupt
trying to turn back the clock.
\_ I wonder what he wanted to say on Sunday, more money for
his defense friends. Yeah, who gives a fuck about the
dosmetic issues, as long as he and his friends are racking
in the $$$, and when the next suicide bomber hits the US
before the next election, he is well on his way to another
4 years.
\_ mmm. Frothy bile.
\_ its one of the reasons to read the motd. its always a good
laugh to see someone froth and you _know_ they pounded the
\_ This response makes no sense at all.
\_ obMotd.
hell out of their keyboard while typing that out since he
managed to 'typo' (being generous) two simple words.
\_ that's right. all we should ever think about, ever, are
those domestic issues.
\_ Funny, it used to be what the republicans harped on.
In fact, it was part of Georgie's platform.
\_ Funny, it used to be what the Demo's said also.
Shows your political ignorance if you don't take
into account the '92 election.
\_ Both parties say whatever they think people want to
\_ I got lost. Can you explain that slowly for me?
hear that year to get elected.
\_ This response makes no sense at all.
\_ fuck bush hard
\_ I just did. Or did you mean the president?
\_ yeah, that'll sure change the political landscape. you should
spend a few million of your dotcom dollars on advertising your
message to the people. we're with you, guy!
\_ Just think, 87 billion comes to about $300 for every man,
woman and child in the U.S.
\_ Your sis' bush? That's gotta feel great.
\_ yermom. but it was too easy.
\_ Yup. My mom seduced her brother-in-law when she was in her
teens, and then has been lying that he raped her ever
since. I feel sorry for you.
\_ Sort of fitting:
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAkennedyJ2.JPG -John
\_ Very fitting. Thank you, John. --erikred
\_ Just think, 87 billion comes to about $300 for every man,
woman and child in the U.S.
\_ If you're going to quote the newspaper, at least provide the
URL instead of pretending you've had some amazing insight.
\_ or $29M for each person that died in the WTC.
\_ That's right, $29M/victim to continue the submission of a
country that had no links to the events of 9/11.
\_ And NO proof whatsoever of any WMDs either (remember
Collin Powell and his ridiculous satellite pictures of
trucks moving in and out of some alledged "chemical
weapons" facility? Where the hell are they now?)
\_ Yeah! See how thye put minorities out with bullshit and
hang them out to dry when we all see the truth later?
\_ Not at all. Going to be 4 more years. I don't care that
CA blindly votes (D) like sheep because CA doesn't matter.
\_ Read it and weep, neocon boy
http://www.pollingreport.com
\_ Yep, now go find any of the polls putting Bush against a
real person instead of some fantasy ideal. 4 more years!
That's why we have to prevent the Bushies from putting more
\_ brilliant! this will change minds everywhere! buy two!
\_ Billions for Halliburton, pay cuts for the troops on the ground.
Bushonomics in action.
\_ liar. no pay cuts.
country that had no links to the events of 9/11.
trucks moving in and out of some alledged "chemical
weapons" facility? Where the hell are they now?)
minorities into high government positions, so they'll stop
abusing them! Hold up all Bushies minority candidates to
protect them!
\_ "And we acted in Iraq, where the former regime sponsored terror,
possessed and used weapons of mass destruction, and for 12 years
defied the clear demands of the United Nations Security Council."
Notice how Dubya no longer claims WMD will be found ...
\_ All the nuts and fruits are safely tucked away in CA. CA will
blindly vote (D), most of the rest will vote (R) and you'll be
here bitching and moaning about how there must have been a
conspiracy in '04, too, and that '00 was just practice because
everyone _you_ know voted (D).
\_ You're the one bitching and moaning, boy-o.
\_ Read it and weep, neocon boy
http://www.pollingreport.com
\_ http://www.cafeshops.com/no_dubya
\_ Billions for Halliburton, pay cuts for the troops on the ground.
Bushonomics in action. |
| 2003/9/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:10107 Activity:nil |
9/6 Did the Democrats steal the 1960 election?
\_ probably -democrat
\_ Yes. It's generally accepted what took place in Chicago was both
highly illegaly and made the difference nationwide.
\_ Vote early, vote often.
\_ In answer to the unspoken question, it was a crime then and it was
a crime in 2000. Any election that depends on a margin of victory
less than the margin of error is flawed and should be redone.
\_ To correct your misstatement, it was a felony then, it was a
politcal issue settled by the courts in 2000. Your opinion in
your second sentence is properly noted.
\_ You have interpreted the word crime to mean a criminal act
punishable by the law where I intended it to mean a despicable
and unethical act worthy of public censure.
\_ Enforcing the 14th Amendment is an unethical
act worth of public censure? NOT changing
election laws after it is over
is unscrupulous? Sorry, you're full of shit.
\_ Then you need to get a dictionary - the person before
you was correct.
\_ ok mr dictionary...
crime
n 1: an act punishable by law; usually considered an evil act; "a
long record of crimes" [syn: {law-breaking}]
2: an evil act not necessarily punishable by law; "crimes of
the heart"
note the second definition. "You need to get a
dictionary" type reponses are pathetic even when
valid, but when you aren't even right, well god
damn you look like a moron.
\_ Don't worry, I'm sure all the fat sysadmin votes will
get counted every time. You're not poor and black and
living in the South, don't worry!
\_ i really like this new phrase that has entered the
motd lexicon(fat sysadmin.) That really sums it up.
\_ adminus systemae fatso. related to the just as
pathetic geekus comico |
| 2003/9/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10105 Activity:insanely high |
9/6 "...that an in-depth state audit showed only 19% of
illegals bother to file taxes, and the best
data on illegal immigrants, from the late 1990s
National Science Foundation study, shows that
each citizen-headed household in California
pays out a net extra $1,178 to shore up 3
million mostly low-income illegal immigrants."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/977367/posts
\_ Do you expect fact to change the opinion of democrats?
\_ when was the last time you changed your mind about something
based on a motd post? and nice english.
\_ a motd post? it's happened. an off site url provided by a
motd poster? much more often. im not either of the above
but if you're going to point out someone's writing flaws you
should first board up your own windows.
\_ just wait until you get your wish, and your grocery bills are several
times what they are today
\_ Funny, that's the same argument people made against the abolition
\- shipping is probably cheeper than you think
it is. look if you are serious about *reducing*
the number of *illegal* immigrants [as opposed
to focusing on abusing them], you clearly need
to crack down on employers. you start *jailing*
employers [for harboring potential terrorists?]
including soccer moms hiring illegal domestic
workers, and then the the numbers will decline.
and while you are at it, go after illegals
from EU countries. --psb
of slavery. And I'm wearing mostly cotton clothing. Nice
argument, slaver.
\_ cotton clothing and food are not the same, food is perishable
so you can't simply move to imports with little effects since
the price of refrigerated shipping is not as negligible as
throwing clothing into a tanker container.
\_ shipping is probably cheeper than you think it is. the std
example of non-tradable item is a "haircut". look if
you are serious about *reducing* the number of *illegal*
immigrants [as opposed to focusing on abusing them], you
clearly need to crack down on employers.you start *jailing*
employers [for harboring potential terrorists?] including
soccer moms hiring illegal domestic workers, and then the
\_ Some of my best friends are black. No, really!
\_ nice retort
the numbers will decline. and while you are at it, go
after illegals from EU countries. --psb
\_ Sounds like a good plan. Why aren't you running for
Governor?
\_ If that were his only platform I'd vote for psb for
Governator. Unfortunately the current batch are all
afraid of "the latino community" voting against them
for any efforts to clean up the illegal mess. Who
said the thing about democracy only works until
the people figure out they can vote themselves
public funds?
\_ The product doesn't matter. The price will go up if we
don't have illegal immigrant labor, yes. But the product
won't go away, and if the employers are deprived of their
cheap labor, they'll have to modernize or increase wages.
You're basically arguing about maintaining a second class
resident who can be exploited for cheap labor with little
chance to rise above that. Talk about your class warfare.
How is this fundamentally different from slavery?
\_ Exactly, they want an underclass to work basically as
slaves to keep things cheap.
\_ And the Dems say they're for the working class...
\_ the labor illegals do can't be modernized. i.e., not
everything can be picked by machines.
\_ tough shit. so people will pay more for non-slave
laber speciality food items. im not shedding any
tears that a few of your favorite and unnecessary
food favorites will go up in price because you won't
have third class slave labor to pick it anymore.
cheap prices is the lamest reason ive ever heard to
ignore our own immigration and labor laws.
\_ And you want to deny them things like driver license so
their condition become even more like slaves?
\_ No you moron. I want to send them back home. If they want
to come here, let them come legally. Crazy idea, rule of
law and all that.
\_ You guys just hate them damn spics. Come on, admit it.
\_ What are you talking about you idiot? Legal
immigration is open to everyone of every nation.
You're the one using the racial slur.
\- immigration policy is not "first in - first out"
the policy very much affects the composition of
who actually gets approved. also there are a lot
of different visas, rather than a single pool.
--psb
\_ Yea, again US should learn from my country Singpaore.
When Singapore started to have some illegal
immigrants, it just says, come forward before such and
such date and we will send you home. Otherwise, if we
find you, we will cane you and then send you home.
Worked like a charm. Solves the problem and allows
the illegal immigrant to get on with life, unlike
wimpy US measures like denying them driving license
which just makes their life miserable while they
would continue to remain in the US. Of course, US
already allowed the problem to fester for too long,
and I suspect the US economy would suffer if all the
illegals all go home all at once. - bglee
\- yeah, the US is just like SIN. really the place
to use caning are certain white collar crimes.--psb
\_ no. destroying the lives and careers of american
workers, families, soon-to-be retirees and others
should be punishable by death. the cane was
appropriate for that idiot child who spray painted
the cars in singapore, not billion dollar crimes. |
| 2003/9/6 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10098 Activity:nil |
9/5 Thank you liberals so very fucking much.
Davis Signs Illegal Alien Drivers' License Bill
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/977061/posts
\_ Based upon your logic, then, if we don't make condom
avaliable to teenager, they won't have sex, right?
\_ For those who hate Illegal Aliens, here is my question for you.
Would you for the idea of erecting a WALL between Mexico and
USA border, treating illegal aliens as "invaders?"
\_ Last time I checked, California's economy actually depend
upon illegal aliens.
\_ Last time I checked illegals destroyed the world
trade center and flew a plane into the pentagon.
But you're right, cheap lawn and pool
care is more important. |
| 2003/8/26 [Politics/Domestic/California, ERROR, uid:29475, category id '18005#6.125' has no name! , ] UID:29475 Activity:high |
8/26 http://csua.org/u/41k (from http://story.news.yahoo.com -urld) Bunch of social security free-loaders. Work-safe link. \_ 4700 dollars for a fucking paint job? it's clear who the freeloaders are here. the sad thing is that when the government ends up paying for it they'll pay the extortion prices rather than fixing the real problem which is that they're being ripped off by the prosthesis company in the first place. \_ actually I think it is 4700 of the whole foot, and insurance was only willing to pay if she got the slightly cheaper white version. \_ relax, it's in britain anyway. |
| 2003/8/20 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29406 Activity:nil |
8/20 http://www.amigovernorornot.com |
| 2003/8/14-15 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Foreign/Canada] UID:29348 Activity:high |
8/14 NYC and parts of the Northeastern US (and Southeast Canada) hit by
massive power outage. Reports of smoke from ConEd plant in Manhattan.
Started at 4:14PM EDT. One plant out may have caused a cascading effect
on the rest of the system. Welcome to California's pain Easties. (Some
details gotten from 740AM)
http://csua.org/u/3xn
\_ OH MY GOD!!! SKYNET IS BECOMING SELF AWARE!!! Soon all the
electronics will shut down in preparation for dooms day and
John Conners will be assassinated by drones!
\_ As long as it's Eddie Furlong. Nick Stahl actually did a decent
job in T3.
\_ nice try. we lost power for all of about 10 seconds in southern
connecticut. and this is with a severe spike in power useage from
air conditioners, powered by plants that go back to the 19th
century in some cases. we pay less money than you for better
service, and that's with a de-regulated power system.
\_ http://csua.org/u/3xr
How long are they going to keep the 9 nukes down for "safety"
reasons while they ream your ass with power rate increases?
\_ and yet we never had such a massive outage. Plus those poor
NYC folks are unarmed.
\_ They've got boards, they've got nails. They're armed.
\_ Let's see, should I believe you or AP, which says that power
is out in NYC, Detroit, Cleveland and Toronto? hmmm...
\_ dear moron, (is there something about soda geeks that
makes them incapable of reading english?), the above
even if he did understand the person he is responding to
poster does NOT say it didn't go out in those other
cities, nor does he imply it. You are an idiot. trust
me on this one. Anyone who says "should i trust you
or the media?" as a rhetorical question is an idiot
even if he does understand the person he is responding to
(which you clearly didn't) -phuqm
\_ op said "welcome to California's pain Easties" Jackass
#1 said "nice try" I said "who should I believe" you
defended Jackass #1. Guess that makes you Jackass #2.
"Nice try" implies that op was wrong, in the English
langauge at least. Trust me on this one, I speak
English far better than you.
\_ Aside from minor capitalization issues, which you
seem to suffer from equally, what is wrong with his
English? Plus he knows how to SPELL HIS LOGIN, which
is a damn sight more than I can say for you, monkey
boy. -John
\_ What is it about the phrase "nice try" that you
do not understand?
\_ it's just Con Ed trying to get in on the Big Money that the
power companies in Texas made off of California.
\_ Did "The Worm" do it?
\_ Yes he did, and it was great! -yermom
\_ The office of Canadian prime minister said a lightning strike on
a power plant near Niagara Falls, New York, was the cause of the
blackout. (nytimes) |
| 2003/8/14 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:29343 Activity:very high 57%like:29339 |
8/13 Warren Buffett hired as Schwarzenegger's campaign adviser:
http://csua.org/u/3xe (sfgate.com)
\_ Great. He can help invest all of that surplus money CA has.
\_ Buffett is a Democrat. Interesting.
\_ Buffett is an interesting guy. Read about him! -brain
\_ So is Ah-nold's wife. Is the guy really a Republican?
\_ he's not a true Republican.
\_ what makes someone a true republican? an MOTD vote?
at least he is willing to work with ppl based on
who they are not who they vote for.
\_ And we want Warren Buffet running this state? Why?
\_ Not a troll... what issues make Arnold Republican? Might be a troll:
What makes some call Dean a Commie/Socialist (is it a health-care
thing, or the bush-bashing thing) while others say that he is more
\_ Dean's a commie because he raised taxes and guaranteed health care
to every child up to age 18. He's a conservative because his
economic policy is very centrist-- don't borrow from the future,
balance the budget, and so on.
conservative than the other Democrats. --not too political
\_ Dean's a commie because he raised taxes and guaranteed health
care to every child up to age 18. He's a conservative because
his economic policy is very centrist-- don't borrow from the
future, balance the budget, and so on. [formatd]
\_ Who knows? He won't talk about what he stands for until he's
good and ready for it. Suspect pro-business, fewer regulations,
less welfare. The standard centralist Republican line.
\_ He's already on record as pro-welfare.
\_ Being pro-welfare isn't like being pro-life, there are
man different levels of pro-welfare. Not many on pro-life.
\_ Pro-life? What does that even mean? Who is Pro-death?
\_ I'm not taking this troll. try again later.
\_ I don't think he's a true republican
\_ i just found out that arnold supported prop 187. -ntp
\_ uh-huh... so...?
\_ Holy shit! So did a *majority* of voters since it passed!
\_ dude, Pete Wilson is his mentor |
| 2003/8/13 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:29339 Activity:nil 57%like:29343 |
8/13 Warren Buffett hired as Schwarzenegger's campaign adviser:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/08/13/financial1529EDT0203.DTL
\_ Great. He can help invest all of that surplus money CA has.
\_ Buffett is a Democrat. Interesting.
\_ So is Ah-nold's wife. Is the guy really a Republican?
\_ he's not a true Republican.
\_ Not a troll... what issues make Arnold Republican? Might be a troll:
What makes some call Dean a Commie/Socialist (is it a health-care
thing, or the bush-bashing thing) while others say that he is more
conservative than the other Democrats. --not too political
\_ Dean's a commie because he raised taxes and guaranteed health care
to every child up to age 18. He's a conservative because his
economic policy is very centrist-- don't borrow from the future,
balance the budget, and so on. |
| 2003/8/11-12 [Politics/Domestic/California, Computer/SW/OS/Linux] UID:29314 Activity:very high |
8/11 Come on Georgy - give us your Motd Campaign Speech
\_ No, please don't. You should save your energy for the big race!
\_ /home/sequent/georgy/.hushlogin - no motd love from georgy
\_ I do that too but I'm active. Who wants the 30+ page motd to
scroll by on every login?
\_ I don't know, I may vote for her, but for you diehard CSUA'ers,
doesn't this look like M$ Windows on a Dell?!?:
http://www.georgyforgov.com/images/gpic1.jpg
\_ Notice the _Running Linux_ book?
\_ you mean the Unix book, she even knows linux is dead
\_ LINUX IS DYING!
\_ More and more each day. The courts take even
longer to decide things than the Senate. We must
do something quickly to stop SCO.
\_ D00de! L3tz hax0r there s3rv3rz!11 You're not
going to do a god damned thing about it and neither
is any other unwashed linux geek. The courts will
continue to grind away. Companies will continue to
install and develop on linux. Life will go on. It
is unfortunate that SCO doesn't stand a chance of
putting linux into a grave in corporate America
because there are certainly better OS's for the
enterprise environment which are freer and more
stable without the unwashed hype.
\_ You just got trolled by a TPM quote.
Do you feel dirty?
\_ TPM? I don't even know who TPM is so a TPM
quote means nothing to me. No, I don't. I
deal with stupid people everyday so yet
another stupid person, quote or not, doesn't
bother me at all.
\_ "Our people are dying, Senator!"
\_ Uh huh.
\_ lol! |
| 2003/8/11-12 [Computer/SW/Languages/C_Cplusplus, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29306 Activity:very high |
8/10 Did anyone know Georgy Russell (CS c/o '99)? He's running for governor.
\_ you are aware that Georgy's a she, right?
\_ Does it matter? -!op
\_ well, if the op is looking for people who know her, yes, it
does.
\_ Not really. The people who know her would know she's a
she, would they not?
\_ So's Gary Coleman, big deal, what's your point.
\_ Questions don't have points, they are inquiries... if someone
was a classmate of his, they might say "Ya, the dude was a big
dork, I couldn't stand him." or "he was always stepping outside
of soda to smoke doobies."
\_ Or they could be asking a question to call attention to
something. You might also want to look up "rhetorical
question". I deserve a fucking medal for being so polite to
you, this being the motd and all....
question".
\_ I'm with ya, friend! --motd grammarian #1 Fan
\_ If he wins will he accept millions every year from the Computer
Scientists Union to keep pushing their part of the budget up while
everything else goes down?
doing the heroine look. I bumped into her at a bar/club in SF (near
\_ fyi: http://www.georgyforgov.com
\_ What's the "heroine look"?
\_ I read it last week. She isn't quite joking, yet she isn't
serious either. What's she trying to do with the website?
\_ Oh shit, I know who she is. I took several classes with her. I
remember her name as Georgina. She was kind of cute, then started
doing the heroin look. I bumped into her at a bar/club in SF (near
the baseball stadium) once. She was also my reader for CS162.
\_ "I think I'll look like a heroin addict today." fuck off.
\_ I'll vote for her if she stops using pine.
\_ What's the "heroin look"?
\_ Too thin. Underfed looking. Pale. Gaunt. Boney. Sickly.
\_ So you knew her too?
\_ nope. I've seen the type. It's common among young
women with self worth issues.
\_ [ motdspellingd was here ]
\_ She's cute! And EECS? Got my vote!
\_ Your vote went easy. There's nothing on her site about bjs for
eecs votes.
\_ From her website: 630r6y == G0\/3R|\|0R. no joke.
\_ I hope she didn't dump $3500 on this. The state will just
spend it on something stupid.
\_ she's raising money by selling underwear on ebay.
\_ new or used?
\_ Hell, anyone who puts big, ugly Simpsons graphics in her .plan
can't be all bad.
\_ And she logs in to soda while she's at work-- c'mon, folks,
she's _got_ to be our candidate.
\_ So does everyone else here.
\_ ...and none of the rest of you are running for gov.
Ergo, she really represents us.
\_ Dear god man, did you read her platform? She is far
too liberal.
\_ "Ergo" probably is, too. Remember we're not all
60 hour/week alumni. Some people on the motd are
students who haven't yet reached political maturity.
Things like legal pot seem important to them.
\_ There's almost no one on here that could represent "us".
Why? Because there is no "us". Maybe you've noticed a
few times here and there where there were some minor
political disagreements on the motd? In what way does
she represent "us"? Ergo, et al, etcetera, cum laude.
\_ "Ergo" is the only word I remember from that dumb
Architect monologue.
\_ Anyone at Veritas know her? |
| 2003/8/7 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29266 Activity:high |
8/6 The Next Governor of California!
http://members.aol.com/ArnoldTheLegend/naked.jpg
\_Gray Davis will be terminated.
\_ I think we should vote for her instead. Yes, she is on the
ballot http://www.marycarey.com
\_ Her bio says she lives in Florida...
\_ She's got my vote and who cares what state she lives in? Davis
lives here and what good did that do us? |
| 2003/8/7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic] UID:29265 Activity:very high |
8/6 Everyone blames the governor. Don't you have to also look at the dumb-
asses in the state legislature? I think no one really knows who their
state rep is or what he/she does. That's the problem when there are too
many people for voters to worry about.
\_ Don't worry, this whole thing is just a bake sale for the state.
At $3,500 per candidate we'll pay of the deficit in no time.
\_ LOL this is cool
\_ I know! We can just tax people for voting! We can have a poll
tax! That'll fix the economy right up!
\_ The legislature is and has been controlled by the dems.
\_ I blame the legislature. I just don't currently have the option of
dumping any of them and with the gerrymandered 'safe' districts all
over the state, I never will. There's no point in voting in most
CA elections because whoever is assigned by the Democratic party to
run in each district gets it. The primaries are just the Dem way of
telling us who is going to run that region for the next few terms.
The only reason I show at the polls is for the national vote which
usually doesn't matter and the initiatives which still do. |
| 2003/8/7 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29264 Activity:nil |
8/6 A vote - how many of you liberals (not classical) have read
The Road to Serfdom by Nobel laureate Hayek? |
| 2003/8/7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:29263 Activity:very high |
8/6 Arnold Schwarzenegger's running for governor.
\_ Too bas hes a RINO.
\_ Too bad hes a RINO.
\_ What do you care? You're not voting anyway. If the election
gets even 15% of eligible adults I'll be shocked (because I'm
going to stick a finger in a wall socket to celebrate).
\_ So, what was voter turnout in CA in 2000?
\_ Interesting that you are able to divine the future.
I voted for Simon in 2002 and will vote for
McClintock this fall.
\_ McClintock? You're kidding, right? Why him? At least
the porn queen has nice tits.
\_ If he wins, there must be something about being in Predator (see
also: Jesse Ventura) that gives governor-hopefuls a chance.
\_ Jesse didn't just have a chance. He won and governed better
than certain CA governors we know.
\_ By your logic, all the other actors in the movie, including
Jean Claude van-Damme will run for governor one day. (Van Damme
was the predator for one day but complained about the suit.)
\_ How broken is this logic?
\_ Quite solid. Philosophy 25.
\_ I think he is going to win, though. Then again, for some reason
he reminds me of Ronald Reagon, someone I would much rather
to forget.
\_ If you're going to insult the man at least spell his name right.
How many real reasons can you have to hate someone you know so
little about? I voted for Reag_A_n. Were you even in HS yet?
\_ ...so you're over 40 and you're insulting someones spelling
on the motd. awsome. so this is what we all have to look
forward to. |
| 2003/8/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29261 Activity:high |
8/6 Hey, so now that this recall mess is going on, where is Mr. "We Are
A Republic, NOT a Democracy"? You were ALWAYS on the motd before,
but you are suspiciously silent of late. Too busy filing your
candidacy papers?
\_ the soviet union was a republic. u.s.a is a democrisy..
\_ It's still a republic. Do you *really* need a 3rd grade level
lesson in the difference? Don't make me spank you.
\_ The U.S. is both a republic and a democracy, if you look at
the dictionary definitions. Then again, you could say some
Liberal changed the definition of democracy under our noses.
\_ No, it's a republic with strong democratic influence. Anyways,
in response to the poster above, the U.S. is a republic, that
does not state anything about California. How California
chooses to elect its governor (in a democratic method) does not
reflect upon our federal government. I would hope a Berkeley
undergrad would be able to decipher the difference. And what
exactly about the recall are you complaining about? The fact
that Gray Davis is trying to subvert the whole democratic ideals
of our nation?
\_ Please post the dictionary definition of democracy closest
to what we have in the U.S. Feel free to post republic too.
\_ The democratic ideals of a few rich conservatives that lost
a general election, but weren't appointed to the post like
El Presidente Bush so they subvert the will of the people
with this recall? |
| 2003/8/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Foreign/Asia/Taiwan] UID:29260 Activity:nil |
8/6 > ping http://journalism.berkeley.edu ping: cannot resolve http://journalism.berkeley.edu: Unknown host Some people should not be allowed near the DNS zone files. \_ Journalism is practiced at Cal?? \_ Only the yellow kind. \_ Isn't that why everything is named after Hearst? \_ No. Everything is named after Heart because their family donated a shitload of money without which Berkeley wouldn't exist as it does today if at all. \_ William and Phoebe are nice people, but who the heck is Tan Kah Kee? |
| 2003/8/6 [Politics/Domestic/Abortion, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29253 Activity:very high |
8/6 Supreme Court - Ginsburg: Int'l Law Shaped Court Rulings
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/959020/posts
Why limit ourselves to the EU, I think we should really
push for diversity and incorporate decisions from North Korea,
Zimbabwe, and Sudan.
All you purported civil libertarians, this is the true
danger to our republic. If you want to invent law, do it
through the legislature not activist judges.
\_ There are worse things to worry about on the Supreme Court than
\_ I love reading freeper links. The comments remind me just how
insane you freaknuts are. Calling for lynchings and revolution
over a justice saying she looks are what other countries are
doing as guidance is hillarious.
\_ there are worse things to worry about on the Supreme Court than
Ginsburg. Sadly.
\_ Good point! When there's more than 1 problem we should only
look at them 1 at a time and ignore the rest! I love that sort
of purist linear thinking. Are you running for CA Governor?
\_ Not all international legal ideas are bad things. Both
Napoleonic law and English common law set useful precedents (in
our case, what do you think our corpus of laws is loosely based
on?) And as for your "North Korea, Zimbabwe, and Sudan" argument,
why do you believe that we, at least in theory, have an independent
judiciary? Do you think there are laws governing every single
possible facet of society and conduct, or is the judiciary actually
supposed to have some leeway interpreting what's applicable in
various cases? And concerning Scalia's statement that "the court
should not 'impose foreign moods, fads, or fashions on Americans.'",
look to yourself. Don't you think that is highly ironic, given that
Hilary Rosen has been appointed to help draft copyright law for
Iraq? I would be highly interested in your responses. -John
\_ Please refer to my aforementioned statement, but I will
reiterate. You are welcome to whatever English
law not already included in the Constitution (although
how can you improve upon Constitution?) - but do
it through the legislative process. Bypassing the
legislatures perverts the entire process. In other
words, the process is just as if not more important
than the law, in part because of stare decisis.
One example, FDR implemented the New Deal by forcing
Justices to resign and stacking the court.
\_ You're still mad about that whole New Deal thing
aren't you
\_ The Constitution says nothing about the death
penalty, abortion, traffic tickets, and a whole slew
of other issues. These are open to interpretation by
judges and courts. You'll note the article's use of
the phrase "guidance"--there is nothing preventing our
judiciary, created under the Constitution (how can you
improve upon the Constitution?) from looking to other
legal, philosophical, ethical, societal, and political
models for ideas on how to interpret the law of the
land. In addition, have a closer look at the article's
reference to treaties--the Constitution provides for the
ratification of treaties by the legislature--if the US
Congress and Senate accept our adherence to an intl.
treaty, the judiciary may very well use it as a source
of guidance for legal judgments, if that treaty does not
contravene the Constitution itself, according to the
Supreme Court, whose job it is to interpret that
document. -John
\_ Correct, however the SC isn't necessarily talking
about treaty based rulings but just whatever the
EU happens to be doing this week or next.
\_ Look if congress wanted to say something about it, they
could have said it. the only reason why the supreme court
is involved in the first places is that congress was mute
about the subject.
\_ The Constitution does not leave for the SC the right to
invent new law where the Congress has failed to create
one, but only to interpret existing laws as written.
The SC is *not* a "fill-in-the-blank" law making body.
Or at least was never intended to be until recently. |
| 2003/8/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29244 Activity:high |
8/5 Does one have to be a California citizen, US citizen, a permanent
resident, etc. to win the CA lottery? Someone told me that if
someone is here on a tourist or student visa and if they don't pay
taxes here, then they are not eligible to win. Is this true?
\_ there's something ingenious about a tax that only applies to
morons who don't understand statistics. we need more idiot
taxes.
\_ I used to think the same way. But it's not true.
The lottery is essentially gambling with no risk.
You put in a very small insignificant amount of
money. Most likely you lose it all, but what
difference does it make? (If you put in $1000 a week
or some significant amount, then you are a moron.)
And 1 in a 40 million chance, it changes your life.
Sure, the expected value of a $1 ticket is less than
50 cents, but that's not the point. The point is you
lose virtually nothing and just maybe you will be
rich. Going to Vegas, on the other hand, people seem
to always lose hundreds of dollars in one weekend.
And when they win, it's typically not enough that
really makes any difference in their lives anyway.
Even though the expected earnings on each $1 you
spend in Vegas is far better, people tend to lose a
lot more in a weekend in Vegas than they do in
playing the lottery each week all year. If you play
the lottery responsibly, you can't lose (a
significant amount of money).
\_ i have no idea. on the east coast, however, this is huge
pain in the ass. everyone is eligible for all the lotteries,
so when the stakes get really really high traffic jams appear at
the borders from all the idiots driving over the border to
buy tickets. of course, the circumference to area ratio is
much higher in the little east coast states, so more people
are affected by border idiocy.
\_ No. 5: http://www.calottery.com/media/winnersqanda.asp
\_ This doesn't seem to answer my question. It says how much
they withhold in taxes if you are a US citizen or a
permanent resident. What if you are a tourist? Are you
still eligible to win?
\_ http://www.calottery.com/media/lotteryregulations.asp
\_ This only says that "No ticket shall be sold to, nor
prize paid to...anyone prohibited by law or regulation
from purchasing CA Lottery tickets ... and/or winning CA
lottery prizes." So, what is the law or regulation
about purchasing lottery tickets?
\_ Just call and ask them you lazy bastard.
http://www.calottery.com/locations/lotteryoffice.asp
\_ No one gets out of California alive without paying taxes. Even
the dead pay taxes here.
\_ that's fine, as long as the dead get to vote.
\_ woohoo! more dead money!
\_ since dead people don't have any money, they don't pay any
taxes. |
| 2003/8/3 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29224 Activity:kinda low |
8/3 Saw interview with Congressman Issa few days ago. He says hi income-
producing businesses have left California. Which businesses are those?
\_ I seem to recall HP moved 500 jobs to TX. Ah yes, here's a url:
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/0,39020645,2129668,00.htm
\_ All the tech industry jobs that moved to China, India, Colorado,
Texas, North Carolina (Research Triangle), etc.
\_ Plus TV & Movie production to places like Vancouver from
Hollywood.
\_ That's "high income". "hi income" would be income that you greet
or that greets you. "high income" is income that is the opposite
of "low income". As far as your question goes, maybe you haven't
noticed the mass job losses going on all around you? You must be
in school because out here in the real world people in CA are
hurting. It's very bad. Stay behind those ivory walls as long as
you can.
\_ I love how you get all pissy about sloppy spelling and then
use a mixed metaphor.
\_ SCO Executives & Lawyers (the only people making money off this
IBM/Linux lawsuit silliness). The "Santa Cruz Operation" is now
run out of Utah. |
| 2003/8/3 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29221 Activity:high |
8/2 California Governor May Sign She/Male Bill And Pagan AIDS Memorial Bill
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/957203/posts
Now you have to employ a crossdresser or pay 150,000$ fine.
\_ awesome, and I mean that non sarcastically
\_ Yeah, pretty soon there will be no small businesses left in the
state.
\_ awesome!
\_ no problem! just have a 'small business support tax' so
the state will sub the small businesses but only if
they're owned by a politcally loud minority group.
\_ women's clothing stores will do just fine
\_ yes. this is critical to an economic recovery! |
| 2003/8/2 [Politics/Domestic/California, Reference/Tax] UID:29216 Activity:insanely high |
8/1 http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0115-05.htm How the Bush Tax Cuts really break down. \_ What an idiot. You mean people who make $1 million+ get much more back than people who make less than $10,000? Wow, what a surprise. Hey, what precisely is the average tax burden of someone making less than $10,000? Moron. \_ Do yourself a favor and actually track down the statistics of who pays income taxes and the distribution of rates. What you posted in partisan vitrol - it only reveals how irrational you are. \_ And do yourself a favor and track down who really pays social security tax, sales tax, etc. \_ Here ya go, somehow I doubt you care, you much rather demagogue and assuage your liberal guilt: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/sitemap.cfm#overview This is Brookings Inst, so it is still left of center. Exactly how do you think this country survived until Wilson had the 16th Amendment passed? One does not tax yourself into prosperity - in order to increase economic prosperity we need to make it cheaper to do business in America. This entails eliminating taxes and government restriction. \_ iraq, liberia, most of the former soviet union have no ability to collect taxes and no government restriction, you should move there. \_ You only included federal taxes. This is state tax in CA: http://www.cbp.org/2002/qh020415.htm One cannot "tax cut" youself into prosperity either. Look at the countries with the lowest tax rates, they are hardly examples of prosperity. I think we can agree there is a golden mean, somewhere between nothing and everything, that the State should take. \_ Yes but you're making the common mistake of seeing causality in cases where there is none. There are many countries with low taxes doing very well, but one assumes a minimum degree of economic, social and political stability before this is applicable. Monaco, Luxembourg, the UK (compared to Germany and France), and Switzerland have at least relatively low taxes and show higher degrees of growth and investment than their neighbors. Germany recently cut both business and personal income taxes and noticed a strong surge in growth and job creation. -John \_ The fastest growing economies in Western Europe, Ireland, Norway and Luxemborg, are all high tax states, at least for individuals. They all have low corporate tax though, so there might be something there. \_ Don't forget to lower minimum wage! Also, make sure to let the largest corporations import their work force and set up tax shelters so we don't have to deal with those pesky unions and accountants. \_ In order to prosper in America, we need to round up all the scared little white men like you and castrate them. \_ Hmm lets consider the contributions to modern civilization. I sense race envy. Your very presence in this country exposes your hypocrisy. \_ How do you know? Perhaps its a part of a nefarious plot by the Elders of Zion to infiltrate your country and impregnate your women. \_ Yes, but that's stupid, so I'm not overly worried. \_ You are far to easy to troll, but then that may be because you too are in fact a troll. \_ Having done plenty of fact-checking on Ivins, I can't believe anyone listens to her anymore. She's her own little New York Times. \- ivins is a dumb cow. she's certainly not politically insightful but the amazing thing is she's not funny. she and andy rooney should be tied together and floated out to sea. ALFRANKEN at least can be pretty funny. --psb \_ The Mobile Uplink Unit finds truth where others fear to tread. -John |
| 2003/7/31 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29198 Activity:high |
7/31 Poll, your hobbies:
TV: .
running for governor in CA: .
\_ I know a guy that's running for fun.
\_ how much to run for fun?
vid game: ...
bashing bush: ..
defending Bush: .
bike: .
linux: .
\_ that's not a hobby. it's a sickness.
\_ it's not a sickness. it's just a second rate OS with good PR.
golf:
debauchery: .
beer: .
cooking:
irritating tom holub: ...
\_ fun but kind of easy so it doesn't take much time
fighting the conservative republican corporate run media: .
fighting the liberal media: .
sex with partner(s): ..
masturbation: ..
fighting reverse racial discrimination: .
\_ no such thing. you're either discriminated against and denied
jobs, housing, various benefits, etc, due to your race or you're
not. are = racial discrimination. not = not. |
| 2003/7/31-8/1 [Politics/Domestic/California, Finance/Investment] UID:29195 Activity:high |
7/31 How does the US government make up for its budget deficit?
Does it print the money or does it borrow money? If borrow
money, how does it do it? Is it through what they call
"treasury notes"? And how does that relate to the "Fed
interest rate" used for stimulating/cooling the economy?
Is it possible that there would not be enough interest in
the "treaury notes or whatever" due to interest rate
being too low such that the government is forced to raise
the rates to finance its budget deficit?
\_ The US government borrows money from the treasuries market, yes.
There is no direct relation between the Fed overnight rate
and the bond rate. Government demand for borrowed money
pushes up interest rates.
\_ When people buy trearuries, where does the money go?
Does the Fed just keep the money in a vault, or does
the government spend it? I guess my question is when
there is a budget deficit, where does the government
get the extra money? Do they have some kind of reserve
(federal reserve?) or need to make bond offerings
(treasuries?)?
\_ Don't confuse The Fed (a bank) with the Federal Government.
The federal government borrows money by issuing bonds. I
don't know how else to explain it. It is different than
just printing money because they promise to repay bonds.
A lot of the money used to finance US government deficit
spending comes from overseas investors.
\_ Is the Fed just like a regular bank? Say, can I open a
savings or checking account at the Fed?
\_ Thanks, things are clearer now. Are there no
connection at all between the the Fed and the Federal
Government? There is never any money transfers
between the two entities? Also, does the Fed only
lend out money? Does it ever borrow money?
Where does it get all the money? Is it in charge
of printing money? It only lends to banks and
never directly to companies or individuals, right?
\_ This is way too much to answer in the motd.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/pf/pf.htm
\_ useful!
\_ Is the link like, since the fed rate is so low, I have
to put my money somewhere else, like bonds and stocks,
so that causes bond rates to drop and stock market to
go up. Is that how the fed rate is supposed to affect
the economy?
\_ That is part of it. Another part is that since The Fed
is lending money at such a cheap rate to banks, they
are encouraged to lower their rates on things like
car and home mortgages. Since the money is so cheap
for the banks, they can lower their rates and still
make a profit. They can't lower them too far though,
since they are taking on the risk that rates will go
up in the future and they will be stuck with a crappy
rate.
\- um it's not possible to address all of the issues
in here except maybe give references. but quickly:
1. the treasury doesnt do much. they write the checks
but dont manage the money. they are a instrumental
player in fiscal policy. most of the churn in treasury
instruments is turn over in debt obligations [paying
off one matruing instruments and selling to someone
[mostly likely a bank] who wants to buy one. most of
the volume is not to fianance deficit spending.
2. the fed matters. they are the govt's bank and
the czar of the overall money supply/money base.
they are the main players in monetary policy.
the main way they control the money supply are
open markey operations run by the trading desk
at the new york fed. they can also affect money
supply by banking reg changes like reserve requirements
but that is really a sledgehammer and rately done.
the treasury also keeps money with the fed [the fed
has a hell of a lot more money at the ny fed than
fort knox ... probably something very few people knew
until whatever diehard movie that mentioned this].
a lot of money is created by fiat rather than
actually creating federal reserve notes or treasury
coins.
3. as in the above case about trade balance it is best to
start with accounting identities and defns to under-
stand the fundametnals. the govt can fiance a deficit
by raising taxes, selling assets or borowing from
private sources, foreign sources, or from the fed.
[note: raiting taxes != raising tax rates ... we
survive debt and deficits in part by GDP growth]
--psb |
| 2003/7/28 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic] UID:29156 Activity:very high |
7/28 Bob Hope. 100. RIP.
\_ http://suck.com article on him from 2000:
http://csua.org/u/3qt -brain
\_ Oh shit. All week we're going to have tributes to him on TV.
Time to go find a nice book to read.
\_ Beat me to it. What you didn't do was the "YEE HAA! BOB HOPE IS
DEAD!" part. No one who knows him will miss him.
\_ As his closest friend and confidante, would you care to
share some anecdotes to support your thesis?
\_ google pig farm neighbors "bob hope" and see what you find
\_ Unlike the dancing on your grave when you go.
\_ yeah yeah whatever. i know who bob hope is. you know
nothing about anything about me. why even bother posting
something like this? did it make you feel manly or smart?
\_ does it make *you* feel manly and smart to dance on
bob hope's grave? or just cool. yeah, you
probably think your pretty damned cool all right.
look how cool i am, i can so painlessly hate and be nasty!
anyway, that person (and i) know eenough about you to
think you're a class A asshole - your post about bob
hope. i mean, i've never thought bob was funny, at all,
but i'm not happy he died. you've said enough about
yourself for me to know you totally suck.
\_ if you knew more about bob hope you'd be happy he was
dead, too. it has nothing at all to do with his career
or talents. i've judged bob hope on his life. you've
judged me based on my statement about someone else you
could know about if you chose to but you instead choose
ignorance and the easy road. its understandable. its
easier to stand up and claim the moral high ground from
a position of ignorance and it probably feels good too.
\_ When I die feel free to throw a party. I won't mind,
I'll be too busy being dead. |
| 12/25 |