|
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!" |
12/25 |
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 |
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 |