| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/16 |
| 2007/9/4-7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:47896 Activity:very high |
9/4 "Annual job growth has definitely not reached pre-recession levels in
1990s. In California, 200,000 jobs were added last year compared to
400,000 (annually) between 1997 and 2000. In the United States, we're
still nowhere where we were in annual job additions as a whole." The
200,000 increase was unable to keep up with the state's increasing
population, with unemployment jumping to 5.2 percent in the last 12
months from 4.9 percent the previous year. The same holds true for
wages. While earnings rose by 0.4 percent between 2006 and 2007
nationwide, the biggest increase in five years, in California real
wages fell by 0.8 percent. Statewide, wages are 1 percent lower in 2007
than in 2003.
-Arindrajit Dube, UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education
\_ You mean the economy of the 90s that was based on nothing, like
http://pets.com? And "jumped" to 5.2%? I thought that was theoretically
full employment. Or are we supposed to ignore the unemployment rate
only when it's going down?
\_ From poking around http://www.bls.gov/lau (regional
resources there on the right) it looks like unemplyment
is due for a serious upswing soon. One thing to note
about those graphs, if you look at the cycles they have
they are pretty cyclical, but the unemployment percentages
have been trending down over the years. That's because
politicians have had a strong intrest in redefining unemployment
so that the numbers come out lower. In the 70s it was a hell
of a lot easier to be classified as unemployed than it is now.
\_ Screw your predictions. Let us know when it actually happens.
\_ http://tinyurl.com/3asgnu
Tell me that doesn't look like the start of a big jump.
\_ Oh good grief. You can't extrapolate 100 data points from
3 (numbers pulled out of my ass).
\_ I'm not saying it is a sure thing, but I'd bet even
money on it. In a heartbeat.
\_ This bet is looking better and better:
http://www.csua.org/u/jgl
\_ I read this morning that for the first time since 2001, Japan
and a few EU countries might have exceeded US GDP growth. So
clearly the non-US countries have the right economic plans in
place. It just took 6+ years to see the positive results.
\_ Japan's GDP growth has a lot to do with trade surplus against
China. And China can only afford such trade plus because
*ITS* trade surplus against USA. So, in that regard,
you should give yourself a bit more credit. Now, please
go ahead take out another equity loans for the sake of global
economy growth.
\_ Umm.. I don't think that follows, exactly.
\_ This. Is. MOTD!! Where non sequitur rules!
\_ What has GDP/capita growth been like in those countries?
Who really cares if the nations overall GDP has gone up
if all that has just been due to population growth? Most of
Europe has beaten US GDP/capita growth for about three
years. And even Japan is starting to beat us now.
\_ 5.2% is a cooked figure that does not include all the out
of work illegals. According to The Economist, if we used
the pre-Clinton way of counting unemployment, it would
be about 1.5% higher. Most economists these days discount
the idea of "full employment" after the decade long period
of 4% unemployment and low inflation in the 90s. How man
people do you think actually worked at http://pets.com and other
<DEAD>dot.com<DEAD>s? It was a pretty small part of the economy.
\_ Pre-Clinton? You mean Bush/Reagan? 6.7% is still lower
\_ Pre-Clinton? You mean Bush/R \_ Pre-Clinton? You mean B\
ush/Reagan? 6.7% is still lower
than anywhere in Europe yet their economies and health plans
are stronger than here so we should be emulating their
success.
\_ No, there are many countries in Europe with an
unemployment rate less than 6.7 or even 5.2. Try
Ireland, The Netherlands and Switzerland, to start.
And it was Clinton who really started fudging the
numbers, not Reagan.
\_ Those are not big economies. My village of 12 people
has a 0% jobless rate. And I don't know about the
other two but Ireland is hardly known for their high
productivity, hard work, and strong work ethic. Take
a look at real countries like Germany and France.
\_ What benefit do hard work and a strong work ethic
bring to the citizens of a country? Other than
more work. -tom
\_ Prosperity. Or we could all just live off the
government dole with magically created food,
housing, and other products. Where do you come
up with this stuff? Is there some web site
where I can just pre-read all this bizareness?
\_ The countries in western Europe are plenty
prosperous. And they're more productive
than the U.S. on a per-hour-worked basis. -tom
\_ http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/04/business/worldbusiness/04output.html?ref=business
-- ilyas
\_ hi ilyas my elisp killed your url.
sorry.
\_ So you have the 5 seconds to apologize
but not 5 seconds to put the url back?
It's this btw:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/04/business/worldbusiness/04output.html
ERROR: Moved Temporarily
If your scripts are broken don't use
them. -- ilyas
\_ my url shorterner really hates
that url. very very odd.
\_ Not only are you wrong about current
productivity but western europe's socialist
system is headed towards complete collapse
as the number of workers per slacker has
dropped dramatically in the last few
decades. But nevermind all those pesky
facts. The government will just raise
someone else's taxes and magically provide
the rest of us with all we need from cradle
to grave.
\_ Usenet libertarians have been predicting
the imminent collapse of "socialist
Europe" since at least 1989. Since
then, if anything, they have been
catching up to the US.
\_ Catching up in what way? Europe
will collapse before the US
does. They have already started
cutting services.
\_ Median GDP per person as a
percentage of the US median GDP.
How would you measure "catching
up"?
\_ I didn't see what you were
getting at. I don't think
median GDP per person is
useful in this sense. What
is important is to look at
outlays versus expenditures,
especially commitments
that have been made. If
GDP doubles, but outlays
will triple then Europe
will still go broke.
\_ If their economy is growing
faster than ours, it is
pretty hard to make the
case that it is collapsing.
No one (no one who is
intellectually serious at
least) believes that govt
outlays will exceed the
size of the economy.
\_ Of course not, because
they will be cut before
then as is already
happening. When
those outlays shrink
then, surprise!,
socialism becomes
strikingly similar
to what we have in
the US currently. It
is impossible to
continue with the
current European model.
You should look at
"profit" as defined
by GDP growth minus
growth of outlays at
the current level of
benefits. I am betting
this is a negative number.
\_ Not a chance that this
is a negative number
since 1989.
\_ What makes you
say this? France's
2% GDP growth?
This chart doesn't
show what I'd like,
but it still shows
that France is
borrowing heavily:
http://tinyurl.com/23d4ny
ERROR: Don't shorten\
urls from other shortening services
BTW, the unfunded
SS liability in
France is 2x that
of the USA.
Yes, that chart doesn't show what you'd like_/
In fact, it shows the exact opposite of what
you'd like. It shows that public deficit
peaked at 5.9% in 1993 and since then has
more or less steadily been going down to
the current level of 2.5%. Unless taxes
have been going up (hint: they have not)
the "growth of outlays" as you put it
has been negative. So GDP (per capita,
because that is what really matters)
minus growth of outlays (which has been
negative) is quite strongly positive.
How do I know this? Because I pay
attention to stuff like this, that's
why. The government's expenditures as
a percentage of the total economy has
been trending down for a while in Europe,
which is the exact opposite of your
thesis.
http://qsi.cc/blog/pictures/GovConsShareofGDP.gif
link:xrl.us/5puc
\_ France reformed its SS system, so that could be why
expenditures have been less. It could be because they
cut other programs like defense. We don't know from
this data. However, cuts will continue to happen. If you
look at your own chart you will see that expenditure
is flat from 1991 to 2002 (slightly higher for France,
actually). As for the chart I showed, that is the
deficit each year. The country is in the red every
year. How many years can that continue? Sure, they are
better off now than in 1993, but essentially flat since
1990. In fact, the deficit exceeded that of 1990 in
15 of 18 years. When a country runs a deficit every
year that means the current model is not sustainable.
I have an aunt and many cousins in France and two aunts
and a cousin in Holland and they all say that the level
of government services that they had in the 1970s and
1980s does not exist anymore. They blame the influx of
immigrants from Africa and the Middle East. Regardless
of who is to blame, the socialist utopia is breaking
down and I think it will ultimately erode almost to the
point of the US system. It is ironic that so many in
the US wish to emulate them when their governments are
trying to emulate us (though it is a hard sell to
people used to being on the dole). My Dutch cousin, a
teacher by trade but an artist and author in an ideal
world, was made to go back to work for the first time
in her life (she's 45). She had worked when she wanted
and took time off (paid for the government, of course)
to do art and write when she wanted. Needless to say,
she eventually didn't bother teaching at all. Why would
you when you get checks and an apartment for nothing?
Well, the government finally (after the last reform)
told her they needed teachers, she wasn't injured and
to get her butt back to work. The horror! Oh she was so
mad! It's just another sign that things are not how
they used to be and I think that is good for the
Europeans, many of whom had gotten lazy.
\_ The plural of anecdote is not data. What other
major economic power has run a budget deficit every
single year (except one) for the last 20 years? Hint:
you don't have to look too far to find it. The EU has
huge efficiencies that that US does not, which I will
not bother trying to explain to you, since your mind
is already made up, in the abscence of any factual
information whatsover. In any case, my prediction is
that the US and EU economies will converge, and that
neither one will "collapse", which is your prediction.
Let's watch and see who is correct, shall we?
\_ The EU will collapse *unless they change what
they are doing*. If they converge with the US
then of course they won't collapse. However,
that's not status quo now is it? The US is
running debts because of defense spending and not
because of social programs. I have anecdotal
evidence *and* data. You don't have either. have
you ever been to Europe? Do you know anything
about it?
\_ Yes, I have been to Europe, many times. You
predicted the complete and inevitable collapse
of the EU economy. Nice to see that you are
backpeddling now in the face of evidence. The
only data you presented not only didn't support
your case, it argued against it. And why is
deficit spending due to defense spending any
more likely to improve an economy than any other?
The best kind of deficit spending is probably
on infrastructure improvement and education, not
on blowing up people in Iraq.
\_ Uh, no. My chart does not argue against my
point. France is running a deficit every
year and 15 of the last 18 years it
has run deficits larger than it did in 1990
so clearly it is digging itself a hole with
current policy. I never said that defense
spending is "better" only that we are
talking about social programs. The US will
not spend itself to death because of social
programs unless Hilary does something stupid.
France, on the other hand, will do so
unless they change their system. It's a lot
easier to cut defense spending than to tell
several generations of people to expect less
because their expectations of housing and
health care were unrealistic. BTW, I
predict that EU will collapse *if they
continue doing what they are doing*. They
can always alter the course. I would never
argue against that. It's not backpeddling.
I would lump in Japan, too.
\_ As stated, the EU continues to make
more non-working people than working
people. If you can explain how that
trend can continue without leading
to inevitable collapse I'd love to
hear it. If you can explain what
will stop that trend, instead, that
would be nice too. Until you can do
so, smearing people with some silly
'usenet libertarian' label and
changing what was said into a straw
man.
\_ "European socialist" is not a
straw man, but "usenet libertarian"
straw man, but "usenet
libertarian"
is? How about this one then? You
are a crackpot.
libertarian" is? How about
this one then? You are a crackpot.
\_ They proudly call themselves
that. It is not an insult to
call them socialists. Now then
anytime you'd like to answer my
trendline questions, feel free.
\_ Did you say "anywhere in Europe" or not? And those
are just the ones I knew of off the top of my head,
I am sure there are others. But yes, the big
countries in Europe all have high unemployment,
with the exception of the UK, if that is Europe.
And you obviously don't know about the "Irish
miracle." It is one of the fastest growing
economies in Europe.
\_ Based on freakishly low, nearly illegal levels of
business taxes designed to drain their neighbor's
economies. Miracle indeed.
\_ Can you explain for us not economically
enabled how you can drain your neighbor's
economies by doing something in your own
country?
\_ "illegal levels"? lol
\_ If you have free trade and work agreements
with other countries those may very well
have rules to stop just this kind of
abuse. Treaties with other nations
work like laws, the penalties for breaking
them are just different than if you get
caught going 150 mph with 5 kilos of
blow and trunkload of dead hookers.
\_ Low business taxes are not an abuse. Why
must there be any business taxes? A
business is not a person. It's redundant
with other forms of taxes. It's the
argument of idiots that we should "tax
the rich greedy corporations" as if they
are magical beings independent of their
employees, customers, and shareholders.
\_ Because then everyone who can afford
to incorperates, and has a magic
bussiness that buys them what they
need and it is a huge loophole. But
mostly because taxes are not a one
time thing. The same money gets
taxed over and over again, goes
into the government who spends it
and guess what, gets taxed AGAIN.
It's not a simple system and any
attempt to claim that taxes should
only happen at one place because
anything else is double taxation or
whatever bullshit is the ravings
of a moronic libritarian utopian.
\_ No, it is the ravings of a perfectly
intellegent and self-serving wealthy
person who is trying to shift their
tax burden to someone else.
\_ "intellegent"? stupid fuck.
\_ spelling flames: the last
refuge of he who has lost
his argument
\_ I saw no argument, merely
an idiotic assertion.
\_ Incorporating isn't that expensive.
You file some paperwork, it costs a
few bucks well within reach of anyone
with income to be taxed.
\_ A magic business buying everything
someone needs is illegal. You can't
write off everything unless you
are committing fraud. I didn't
say tax should happen at one place
because of double taxation. I just
say that business taxes result are
say that business taxes are
ultimately paid by people. And
your argument is fucking stupid:
"mostly because taxes are not a
one time thing". Uh, stupid?
one time thing". That's not even
an argument. "You need business
taxes because taxes are not a
one time thing." ???
Libertarianism is a worthy goal
where it works. We should avoid
something because it is "libertarian"?
Yes control is good for its own
sake. Totalitarian fuckwad.
\_ Libertarianism is a great
thing in your magic utopian
world where it works worth a
damn. Then again so is
communism. And benevolent
fascism. Sadly, we don't live
in any of those worlds.
\_ Only in your pessimistic
communist world is Liberty itself
and impossible ideal.
\_ And you want to flame others
for their spelling? Oy vey.
\_ Yeah, those lazy Irish can't do crap. Eatin'
potatoes and drinking beer all the time.
\_ Not so much on the potatoes anymore but
otherwise just about right, yeah. |
| 2007/8/30-9/3 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:47830 Activity:nil |
8/30 so what if i want sex? so what if i seek out eligible
partners in bathrooms? there's nothing wrong with that.
\_ As long as you can tap that out in Morse Code with your foot,
good luck to you.
\_ in CA it's illegal to go past first base in a public place, and a
closed stall in a public bathroom is considered public
\_ I want to see that law. "If two people start getting all
freaky and pass first base in public that's like gross. And
illegal."
\_ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disorderly_conduct
\_ I was just amused by the idea of a law actually using
first base in its terminology. |
| 2007/8/29-31 [Politics/Domestic/California, Science/Electric] UID:47800 Activity:nil |
8/29 Time stopping next month:
\_ of day over the phone
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lazarus29aug29,0,2466396,full.column?coll=la-home-center
\_ Gee. I was using this service to prove to our IT guy that it's
our server whose time is wrong, not my machine, and so please stop
sync'ing my machine's time to the server's.
\_ http://nist.time.gov |
| 2007/8/21-23 [Politics/Domestic/California, Science/GlobalWarming] UID:47678 Activity:nil |
8/21 "Arctic sea ice shrinks to record low"
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070817/ap_on_sc/low_ice
And it's not even the end of summer yet.
\_ I was reading about how the snow pack is pretty low in the
Sequoia mountain range in CA, exposing more corpses from plane
crashes in WW2. pretty cool.
\_ Because the ice has always been there.
\_ Huh? |
| 2007/8/7-13 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:47551 Activity:nil |
8/7 the most honest, ethical, and open Congress in history
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyEfmDtxdhM
\_ Straw man. |
| 2007/8/6-8 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:47550 Activity:very high 88%like:47545 |
8/6 Karl Rove + iPhone
http://urltea.com/15ng (time.com)
\_ Perhaps the Bush administration would like to know what most people
working at Apple (inluding their top executives) really think of the
Bush administration. Even Steve Jobs told his employees to vote
Democrat during a company-wide conference.
\_ Just because Steve told them to doesn't mean they did. Voting
is still anonymous in this country.
\_ So what? Technology crosses political lines. Rush Limbaugh is
a huge apple fan boi who has been pitching apple gear for years.
\_ I could say the same thing about the flip side.
Republicans are always quick to point out that the
military is comprised primarily of Republicans and,
therefore, Republicans are entitled the protection
of the armed forces and not Democrats (e.g. Bill-O
soliciting terrorists to attack "liberal" SF and
military should not defend it). Of course, this is
entirely ludicrous because if you looked at policies
which Republicans like to promote so much, you would
actually think that Republicans hate our military.
The point I was originally trying to make was this:
Republicans like to portray Democrats (you know,
like the vast majority who work at Apple) as these
crazy, evil, godless, tree-hugging, pot-smoking,
terrorists-loving, anti-military, communist bums
who smell like garbage when, in reality, they're
just a bunch of smart and talented engineers and
entrepreneurs who believe in the free market and
love making cool products like the iPhone. Karl
Rove is using a product made by the same people
he ridicules so much.
\_ Oh. Well, I totally agree w/ that.
\_ So, can you post a link where Karl Rove makes fun of
Apple? 'Cause, I think you're just a paranoid nutcase.
\_ Sticks and stones. Paranoid nutcases believe that
if we don't attack them there (Iraq), they'll come swim
over and attack us here. I don't need to post a link.
You can google this all you want. "liberals saw the
savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare
indictments and offer therapy and understanding for
our attackers." Rove doesn't directly attack
Apple and I never said he did. But he does attack
the people who comprise the majority of the company.
\_ Who says the majority of Apple employees are
Democrats?
\_ So, you think it's ok to be a paranoid nutcase
because Karl Rove is? There's an odd justification.
\_ Take Reading Comprehension 101.
\_ Nice try, I'd say you need a writing class,
but but you need coherent thought more.
Your posts jump between multiple unconnected
topics and are full of bizarre over-
generalizations. They basically make no sense.
It's just plain old raving. Sorry.
\_ You can't even point out when I said it
was okay to be a paranoid nutcase.
\_ You're right, I just kind of assumed
you thought it was ok, since you do it
so well.
\_ Exec Summary: Republicans = evil, stupid, cranky, smearing,
hypocritical baby killers. Democrats = good, kind, smart,
all-knowing, loving, generous, tolerant victims of moronic
Republican abuse. All Apple Engineers = Democrats. Did I
miss anything in your bizarre rant?
\_ Did I say any of that? Boy, you must not know how to
read. Or do you only hear what you want to hear?
\_ It's standard motd noise, yes, you did. That is the
correct executive summary. So answer me this: do
you disagree with any of those statements? Which
ones, if any?
\_ Yes, I disagree with all of them. You put words
into other people mouths. I never said Republicans
were all of those things. There are some who are
but I never made that generalization. And there
are Demorcrats who are those things. And no,
being an Apple employee doesn't make you a Dem.
But from my personal experience (I'm no Gallup
Poll but I know way more Apple employees than
you do) most of them are Dems. So once again,
you're wrong. I never said any of those things
you claim I did.
\_ Is that good thing? A boss telling his employees how to vote
is jaw-droppingly inappropriate. If that's true I'm never buying
apple again.
\_ I've heard bosses (but not the CEO) tell people how they
should or shouldn't vote frequently. I'm guessing its
pretty common.
\_ No it's not. They're adults, they're not being coerced, and,
the whole premise of Democracy is that people can think for
themselves. -dans
\_ I didn't say the couldn't, or even that there's some way
for Jobs to verfiy what they did. It's still wrong to
order people how to vote. It's an attempt at misuse of
power. Attempted murder is a crime, and so is attempted
corruption. It's fine if he says "I'm voting for Ds,
and I think everyone should." "You must vote D" is not ok.
I'm sure if he said "You must vote R" you'd see why it's a
problem.
\_ He didn't order people to vote D. An employee had a
concern about how the unstable state of the world
was negatively impacting the Apple and Silicon
Valley environment and he responded by recommending
that (s)he vote D.
\_ Well, that's different then, isn't it?
\_ Apple needs some smarter employees. The world is
always in an 'unstable state'. Or at least some
more employees who have read some history.
\_ Troll was here |
| 2007/7/26 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:47427 Activity:high |
7/26 Tom McClintock's floor speech about the ridiculous state budget
http://www.carepublic.com/blog.html?domain=tom_mcclintock&blog_id=153
"And while we.re on the subject of 'irrational exuberance,' the budget
also depends on a brisk comeback in the real estate market next year,
defying every economist that I'm aware of - not to mention our own
Legislative Analyst."
\_ Sigh. The dems have really been in power too long in CA.
\_ Isn't this the same guy who is pushing for more tax cuts?
\_ Sort of. He tends to push "cut expenses, then cut taxes."
Usually at least no new taxes. He believes CA spending is
out of control, and maybe restraining income will help restrain
spending.
\_ Consider the budget is $27B more than when Davis was recalled,
and we're taking in considerably more in taxes. Spending and tax
cuts make sense in that kind of environment.
\_ Are taxes as a percentage of GDP generally going down or up?
I was under the impression that they went down from 1999-2004
and are going up slightly now, but I have incomplete data.
I am only talking about California state taxes here.
\_ I'm only talking about the CA budget. |
| 2007/7/24-26 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:47410 Activity:nil |
7/24 Every politician lies, therefore you should vote for the candidate
whose policies mostly closely resemble those of George W. Bush.
\_ Farewell to Bizarro World. You is our best friend. |
| 2007/7/24-27 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:47405 Activity:nil |
7/24 Hillary prefers "Progressive". Hmm...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era
Progressives ... tended to assume that opponents were motivated by
ignorance or corruption
\_ what is wrong about the above statement?
\_ "In the United States, the Progressive Era was a period of reform
which lasted from the 1890s through the 1920s."
Hell, if you're going to go that far back, why not call Giuliani
a Whig?
\_ Hillary specifically referred to Progressive as an early 20th
century movement.
\_ Would it kill you to type out the quote?
\_ "I prefer the word "progressive," which has a real American
meaning, going back to the progressive era at the beginning
of the 20th century."
http://csua.org/u/j7m
\_ Thank you! Wow, now I'm actually excited to vote for
her.
\_ Huh? Why?
\_ Reform or bust, baby!
\_ Oho, you sneaky out-of-context quoter! From the next
line of the article:
"I consider myself a modern progressive, someone who
believes strongly in individual rights and freedoms,
who believes that we are better as a society when we'
re working together and when we find ways to help
those who may not have all the advantages in life get
the tools they need to lead a more productive life for
themselves and their families. So I consider myself a
proud modern American progressive, and I think that's
the kind of philosophy and practice that we need to
bring back to American politics."
Yup, looks good to me.
\_ You sneaky out-of-context replier! Does she disclaim
any of the principles? No, she specifically included
the early 20th century and she agrees with the
principles of that movement. And my reply was to the
person criticizing my reference to the early 20th
century movement.
\_ So, the word "modern" in no way modifies the
views espoused in the early 20th century?
\_ I didn't say it "in no way modifies" anything.
\_ Soooo, if one of the principles of the
early 20th century Progressives was
that all of their opponents were corrupt or
ignorant, which they generally were, is it
reasonable that a modern Progressive, faced
with a different political climate, might
not view her opposition with such contempt?
\_ That is one of the aspects of early
Progressives which I see as relatively
the same as modern liberals (or modern
Progressives).
\_ BushCo invites oil execs to a secret
meeting to determine America's energy
policy, and you don't see corruption?
If there's contempt for a corrupt GOP,
it's hard to pretend the GOP hasn't
earned it. |
| 2007/7/23-26 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:47390 Activity:low |
7/23 Senate on track to have more than three times the record amount of
filibusters recorded since 1963
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/226/story/18218.html
\_ Yes, if you extrapolate 6 months out to 24.
\_ Yes, and that's what "on track" seemed to imply
\_ It is of course lying with stats. They don't show comparable
filibusters in the same time period for other sessions,
especially the session just before a presidential election.
-pp
\_ How about YOU come up with those stats to show that
it isn't a reasonable statistic? So much easier to
just shout down the problem and hope that works, eh? |
| 2007/7/20-23 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:47367 Activity:nil |
7/20 How the great state of CA has been stealing from people for decades:
http://csua.org/u/j72
\_ SOMEONE GET HOWARD JARVIS ON THIS RIGHT NOW!!!!1!!1!111
\_ But, but, but, the CA state legislature are Democrats! |
| 2007/7/19-20 [Computer/Companies/Google, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:47349 Activity:moderate |
7/19 GOOG has almost 14,000 employees. For a search engine. What do
they do?! I read one whitepaper from them about analyzing MTBF
for disk drives, which is kind of cool, but low on the profit
generation side of things.
\_ You're right, google doesn't make any money. Kill yourself.
\_ I am not saying that. I am asking how many of those
14,000 employees are relevant. We can build a rocket and a
spacecraft to send on it and send it to Mars with fewer people
than that - and that's with government bureaucracy.
Obviously, there are a lot of people doing good work, but
is there a lot of dead wood already? I checked and Edison
has 12,000. Stanford has 10,000. Amgen has 7,000. Walt
Disney has 6,000 in California. Oracle has 8,000 in
California. 14,000 would make GOOG the 6th largest employer
in all of CA if all the employees worked in CA. The first 5 are
PacBell/AT&T, the Naval Base in San Diego, UCLA, UC Davis, and
Edwards AFB. Most of the top of the list is comprised of
government entities. GOOG isn't in a really manpower
intensive field like, say, McDonald's.
\_ it is interesting you worry about the number of
non optimal people at one of the most successful startups
of all recorded history. please get a life, or
optimally, write out a check for your net work to your
favorite charity, THEN KILL YOURSELF. ok thanks.
\_ I'm not worried. I just wonder if there's really a
need for that many people or if GOOG just hired people
because it could. Even the CEO said that they would
really think hard about hiring much less.
\_ Microsoft has about 30k employees, + 30k contractors,
I think they fired all of the non programmers / managers
and hired all support staff back on as low paid contractor
scum.
\_ What is wrong with you? The pp raises a good question, what
is GOOG doing with all those employees? He didn't say
"GOOG WILL FAIL! DOOM!" Stop putting words in his mouth.
It might also be pointed out, Atari could have also been
called "one of the most successful startups of all recorded
history" at a similar point in it's lifetime, and Atari had
a similar business strategy...
\_ dimwit, is that you?
\_ Wow, you're an idiot. Gmail. Maps. Earth. ADVERTISEMENT
(AdWords, AdSense). Video/YouTube. Huge infrastructure to
store and deliver contents. Where have you been since 2004?
\_ you're right in a sense - most of their money is off ads displayed
with their uber-fast/-relevant search results
\_ Not when you have as many hard drives as google has. |
| 2007/7/18-20 [Politics/Domestic/Gay, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:47328 Activity:high |
7/18 So the Dems keep the Senate up all night for a publicity stunt.
Wouldn't this be illegal if it were at Gitmo?
\_ weak troll. you get a D.
\_ Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the term "filibuster."
\_ Interesting how the MSM won't call it a filibuster unless the
Dems do it.
\_ Too bad the Republicans didn't use the "nuclear option"
when they had the chance.
\_ That's because it's not a filibuster. It's just the Senate
leader pulling a hissyfit.
\_ BBZZZZTT.
\_ From the Washington Post: "The Republican success, using
the power of the filibuster, came after a marathon
all-night debate on an amendment to the defense bill. The
52-47 tally left Democrats eight votes short of the 60
necessary to force a vote on the measure."
Facts are such bitter, stubborn things.
\_ No need to be snotty. I actually hadn't heard it was a
filibuster. Thanks for the correction.
\_ Which is part of the point. Almost noone in the
media is willing to admit this is a filibuster.
\_ When Democrats do a filibuster, it's because they
hate America. When Republicans do it, it's
because they support the troops. I hope that
clears things up.
\_ No, the Dems are filibustering something that
we know the Pres would veto, so if they can't
even muster cloture, they can't override the
veto. So why waste the time pandering to
http://moveon.org? When Pubs filibustered court
nominations, they were asking for a simple
up-or-down vote. There is a difference and
pretending that there isn't one makes you look
silly. -emarkp
\_ The dems are not filibustering here. I think
you are unclear on your terms.
\_ The dems are not the ones filibustering
here. I think you are unclear on your terms
\_ Yep, I mistyped. I know that the
filibuster takes place with the minority.
Replace "are filibustering" with "are
pushing". -emarkp
\_ Dude, not being able to muster cloture MEANS
FILIBUSTER. That's what a filibuster is,
refusing cloture. The senate, unlike the
house, has slightly different rules so you
don't need to stand up at the podium and
read from a phone book, but refusing
cloture filibustering. The dems don't have
the votes to get around a veto, true, but
that is an entirely differnent issue. Why,
pray tell, won't the republicans in the
senate let them vote on the bill let it
go to the president to veto or not.
\_ Oh and also, the vote is on an amendment
to bill. (A amendment to a bill that it
is strongly related to I'll add.) If the
president vetos the bill he has to veto
the entire bill. A veto that may not
be politically feasable to do.
\_ Why bring attention to a policy that
over 2/3 of the voting public agrees
over 3/4 of the voting public agrees
with? Is that a serious question?
\_ Overriding the veto has nothing to do with
it. Nice dodge, though.
\_ Why does it have nothing to do with it?
It's legislation that Bush has vowed to
veto, and he's proved that he will veto
something like this (when they tried this
with the last appropriation bill for the
war). So unless they can muster 2/3,
it's pointless. -emarkp
\_ Again, do you really think it is
pointless to show your support for
a policy that an overwhelming majority\
of Americans agree with? You dismiss
a policy that an overwhelming majority
of Americans agree with? You dismiss
the anti-war opinion as the "moveon
crowd" but the truth is half the
country wants out of Iraq now and
another 1/4 wants out soon.
\_ Yeah, instead of wasting time
debating stuff the country actually
cares about, Congress should
follow the model of the Republican-led
Congress and spend their time
debating gay marriage and
flag-burning amendments. That
wouldn't be pointless at all! -tom |
| 2007/7/11 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:47256 Activity:very high |
7/11 Remember all the screaming back in 2005 or so about "up or down votes"
and "the nuclear option?" What happened to all that talk now that
the Rs are effectively filibustering everything in the Senate
that can't get 60 votes?
\_ That was about political tests for judicial appointments. I don't
think anyone wants to pull that lever for significant legislation.
\_ Bullshit. The whining was because the democratic minority
DIDN'T abuse the fillibuster for ever damn vote ever. They
used it for extreme cases as it should be used. If the minority
had filibustered every damn vote that had between 50 and 60
ayes the rebpublican majority would have flipped out. But they
didn't do that. The republican minority however, after whining
like babies when a fillibuster happened is now fillibustering
more than any other Senate. It's called hipocracy, you can't
defend it.
\_ That non-existent lever, you mean. But this is a bullshit
response. The reason is that, especially in the Senate, things
are designed to move achingly slowly unless there's a broad
consensus. The R's have whined and moaned about it, sometimes
\_ Which explains the massive effort to get amnesty passed in
the middle of the night. Oh wait, no it doesn't.
\_ Uh, what?
to effective ends (read Contract on^Wfor America), for decades.
The D's can't bring themselves to complain about it in a way
that will bring any results. They have, imo, misplaced faith
in "finding compromise" and "bipartisanship". |
| 2007/7/10-11 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:47245 Activity:moderate |
7/10 What is the legality of buying and using a stun gun in CA?
\- ilyas? Are you back?
\_ I like slings now. -- ilyas
\_ Using?
\_ fetish sex toy?
\_ "Oh honey getting painfully shocked into unconciousness was
so hot, let's do it again!"
\_ Using as in the OP wants to know if they'll go to jail for
stunning someone with it. |
| 2007/7/6-10 [Recreation/Dating, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:47207 Activity:kinda low |
7/6 We know how predictably southern male will vote. But what about
southern women? Will they vote for a woman of a different party?
\_ I have lots of in-laws in The South. I just came back from
Georgia and Alabama and in April I was in Louisiana, Alabama,
and Mississippi. Like anywhere else, you cannot reliably
predict how any single person will vote. Remember, too, that
The South is not just comprised of evangelical whites. Polling
people I know and met, none of them are too happy with Bush at
the moment. Will that translate to them voting Republican in
2008? That depends on the candidates both parties put up. I
also want to say, regarding Southern women, that I had almost
forgotten that tall, slender, light-eyed women exist. Well, not
forgotten completely, but forgotten that there are places where
they are in the majority. Atlanta in particular was brimming
with attractive white women, if you spent time in the upscale
areas. The (upper middle class) black women there were very
attractive and put together, too, but it was all the blonde
women with light eyes that really stood out to me. California
has some fine women, but not so many of the fairer variety,
unless you count blonde out of a bottle.
\_ If you like blondes, you will love the upper midwest. Wisconsin
and North Dakota are something like 50% blonde.
\_ Yes and 98% of them will never date anything but white.
\_ You know this how exactly? No matter what your color no
one decent will want someone with a giant chip on their
shoulder like you have.
\_ http://neuropolitics.org/defaultfeb07.asp
The more conservative you are the more likely you
will only want to date white.
\_ Yeah yeah you found a new website with tons of
what you consider high quality troll material.
Got anything to actually say on any of these
topics?
\_ Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't they tend to be
overweight up there? The South is full of fit, athletic
women - at least when they are 40 and under. If you look
at the older women, a lot of them have let themselves go.
\_ You are correct, but you're also assuming that all
men like skinny skanks. I like my women to be full
grown and I don't mind them being a bit chunky.
\_ Why does skinny == skank to you? Any woman that didn't
stuff her face and maybe put in some time staying fit is
a skank?
\_ Mmmmmm, yeah, because people aren't individuals. They're just
demographic clumps. You already know in advance exactly what each
person is going to do based on their race and gender. |
| 2007/7/3-5 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:47154 Activity:moderate |
7/3 iTard Nation:
http://urltea.com/wdp (ostroyreport.blogspot.com)
\_ Sheesh.
\_ "I stood in line for the iPhone. Three hours. It was a fun way to
spend an afternoon with my wife, child, and a bunch of strangers."
What fun! I love standing in lines. Sometimes I go to amusement
parks and stand in line just for the camaraderie of the line, the
joy of finally being in front. Then I go stand in another line.
I only wish I had children so I could stand in lines with them like
this man.
\_ Hey, in Japan standing in lines is a family activity.
\_ In Soviet Russia, line stand in You!
\_ In Hong Kong, lines are longer but they move much faster.
\_ why is that? |
| 2007/6/28-29 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:47092 Activity:high |
6/27 People vote with emotions and not brains. Fear-mongering works
better than reasoning-- Why Democrats are destined to lose:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19461257/site/newsweek/page/0
\_ Because Democrats are the party of logic? Er, ok. And here I
thought they did the same fear mongering and heart string pulling
as the other party. Or maybe you meant that some third party
candidate is going to win?
\_ ...are you really going to tell me that you think the Dems have
fear-mongered anywhere near the level of Bush and the current
GOP, the party that made the "us or suitcase nukes in your city"
part of their 2004 campaign?
\_ They are no more 'pro-logic' than the other party, yes. D=R.
\_ I'm certainly not exonerating them for their petty foibles,
but comparing them to the current Admin and the GOP under
DeLay and Gingrich is utterly laughable. Let's try to
preserve a modicum of scale.
\_ It's on the same scale, just open your eyes and see
that just because you agree with something doesn't mean
they got there by logic. Both parties do it equally
and treat all the voters like a commodity.
\_ I agree with you that they are neither of them
logical. We can also agree that firecrackers and
thermonuclear devices are explosive, but you wouldn't
suggest that the damage done by the first is the
same as that done by the latter, would you?
\_ OUR LIZARDS ARE BETTER, DAMN IT! -- ilyas
\_ You're begging the question. It isn't
firecrackers vs. nukes. The two parties are the
same. That is exactly the point here. |
| 5/16 |
| 2007/6/23-25 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:47050 Activity:nil |
6/23 i'd vote for this guy
http://www.evilchan.com/but/src/11820882906722.jpg |
| 2007/6/23-28 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:47049 Activity:nil |
6/23 San Jose, a place where the rule of law means something
(unlike Southern California)
link:www.mercurynews.com/ci_6211664
\_ i thought it was to raise more revenue because of deceleration in
property tax growth: slowing local economy -> more tickets
\_ Every day in San Jose is "drive the speed limit day". |
| 2007/6/20-24 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:47026 Activity:moderate |
6/20 Rancho Cucamonga is a total dump.
\_ Riverside is a total dump.
\_ Pomona is a total dump.
\_ Upland & Indio. Total dump. Drove there on the way back to LA.
It's just like Mexico, except it's in California, and people
speak English... kind of.
\_ San Bernadino is a total dump.
\_ Chino is a total dump. I am so not kidding. Fuck Chino. Place
where all the super dumb asses live.
\_ Ontario is a total dump.
\_ Gilroy is a total dump.
\_ At least it doesn't smell like unwashed <girl parts>.
\_ Inland Empire is a wasteland of meth addicts and gangbangers.
\_ This is funny and true at the same time. Inland Empire blows.
It's like the worst part of Phoenix, but much bigger. The closer
you get to Inland Empire the dumber you get.
\_ Reseda is a total dump.
\_ Interesting, and what about the rest of San Fernando?
\_ It's a long day, living in Reseda. There's a freeway
running through the yard.
\_ We are all in some way or another going to Reseda some day,
to die.
\_ Southern California in general is dumpy.
\_ Downtown San Diego is really starting to bloom. The rest of it,
well, yes, your point is valid.
\_ IN SUMMARY Southern California, with the exception of a few
spots where really wealthy people can afford to live in, is
a total dump.
\_ This is true for Northern California, too. What's your
point? "All the areas that are not nice are not nice?" |
| 2007/6/19-22 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:47012 Activity:kinda low |
6/19 Bloomberg leaves GOP, probably as prelude to third party presidential
run. This will split R vote, leading inevitably to PRESIDENT HILLARY
HAHAHAHAHA DOOOMMMMM!!!!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070619/ap_on_el_pr/bloomberg_politics
\_ Bloomberg is a RINO, won't he take more D votes than R?
\_ being a RINO sounds great now. Who'd want to be a real
Republican?
\_ Fo real, anyone else want to announce they're leaving that
load of bull behind?
\_ Yah, this was only the formal announcement of something we already
knew. Arnold will hopefully be next.
\_ I'm sure it has nothing to do with the R party's current
connotation with corruption and spectacular incompetence.
\_ How will Arnold run for president? That whole Constitution
thing and all...
\_ The Governator is trying to change the Constitutuion on that.
\_ Demolition Man!
\_ When I said "Arnold will hopefully be next" I meant the next
to drop the pretense of being an R. -pp
\_ Bloomwho? No one is voting for Bloomberg and he already said
flat out he isn't running now or ever.
\_ Where did he say that?
\- Bloomberg -> Henri IV
\_ Talking to reporters about 2-3 days ago.
\_ Bloomberg is whatever he thinks he is. He's going to run
a-la Independent. You know how far that got Perot, and Anderson.
He's was not even remotely Republican to begin with.
\_ Then again, maybe not
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070620/pl_nm/bloomberg_dc |
| 2007/6/19-21 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:47009 Activity:moderate |
6/19 ABC News reports that average height in USA is shrinking (relative to
other countries). They mention health care, but fail to mention
immigration.
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=3293191
\_ "Researchers said that one reason for Denmark's top ranking could
be that the Dutch health-care system provides better care to
children ..." What does the Dutch health-care system have to do
with people in Denmark??? (And this is coming from a big media
company.)
\_ "Researchers said that one reason for Denmark's top ranking could be
that the Dutch health-care system provides better care to children
..." What does the Dutch health-care system have to do with people
in Denmark??? (And this is coming from a big media company.)
\_ They are just being clueless. It is true that Dutch people are
fucking huge. I'm 5'9" and everyone towers over me when I
visit.
fucking huge. I'm 5'9" and everyone towers over me when I visit.
\_ Are Dutch chicks fucking huge too? That sounds really hot.
\_ Do they have huge tits? Really tall with huge tits would
be hot.
\_ Do they have huge tits? Really tall chicks who look like
eric with huge tits would be hot.
\_ double EE cups
i wonder if she is Danish?
i wonder if she is Dutch?
\_ Do they have huge tits? Really tall chicks who look like eric
with huge tits would be hot.
\_ double EE cups i wonder if she is Dutch?
http://www.dumpert.nl/mediabase/17607/92081a1d
\_ Which Euro country has the biggest tits?
\_ HOT!! Real or fake?
\_ I once had a Danish female co-worker and she was hawt. She
was average height, though.
\_ DUTCH, fool. The Netherlands and Daneland are different places.
\_ I had sex once with a girl who's grandparents were
from the Netherlands. Goddamn.
\_ DUTCH, fool. The Netherlands and Deutchland are
different places.
\_ I had sex once with a girl who's grandparents were from the
Netherlands. Goddamn.
\_ I found a cartoon about hot Dutch girls.
http://tinyurl.com/32v8zc
\_ DUTCH, fool. The Netherlands and Deutchland are different
places.
\_ NO SHIT, asshole. The dude who said "Dutch" got it
\_ fuck YOU dutch nazi appeaser.
I read Diary Of Anne Frank
i am onto you
wrong, not me. Denmark is the country with the huge
people. The Netherlands is the place with the health
care system.
\_ fuck YOU dutch nazi appeaser. I read Diary Of Anne
Frank i am onto you wrong, not me. Denmark is the
country with the huge people. The Netherlands is the
place with the health care system.
\_ I AM fucking Dutch, the Dutch are huge (but I am
not)
The Danish may be tall too, but my relatives tell
me the Dutch are the tallest in Europe.
not) The Danish may be tall too, but my relatives
tell me the Dutch are the tallest in Europe.
\_ I'm Danish and 7'. My greatgrandmother was
Danish and 5'. Height is a function of genes and
diet. --erikred
\_ Dutch chicks are tall, have huge tits and great bodies from
riding their bicycles everywhere, which they show off in
tight spandex pants. They hate the suburbs though :-(
\_ are there suburbs in dutchland?
\_ There are plenty of then in the netherlands, yes
My aunt & uncle just moved from the suburbs of
Amsterdam to the city.
\_ And chernobyl
\_ It also failed to mention too many video games and too much TV.
\_ I absolutely agree that this has to do with immigration. Have you
ever walked around the Mission District? I'm only 5'7" but I feel
like a giant there.
\_ You're all short. --erikred
\_ What about average penis size in USA relative to other countries? |
| 2007/6/18-21 [Politics/Domestic/California, Transportation/PublicTransit] UID:46995 Activity:high |
6/18 TLC (The Learning Channel) featured "Building the Future" where
other countries are building big ass dams, longest manmade rivers,
planned cities, fast mass transits, levys, etc. None of projects
on the show is in the US. What have we built lately to secure
our future?
\_ We're building DEMOCRACY in the MIDDLE EAST!
\_ as long as Hamas or Islamic Brotherhood or anyone else we don't
like didn't win the election.
\_ i wish we built more fast mass transits. I don't think we need
more big ass dams. What would we dam? we really should work
on improving CA levies before CA gets turned into a vast desert
wasteland by the next earthquake.
\_ where exactly do you want to put these transits?
\_We've built universities where all of the engineers come from that
build these dams. We also own all of the banks that finance these
projects.
\_ We've also learned from studies that show that damming and
concreting everything is neither as ecologically or economically
productive as it first appears. A lot of countries that subsidize
non-stop construction have hugely corrupt construction ministries.
\_ We've built the strongest military force to secure whatever natural
resources we want that are located in other countries.
\_ This was a lot more successful in Civ1, not so much in Civ4.
\_ I think you mean Civ2, Civ1 didn't have the same drive for
natural resources.
\_ We don't do 'projects' in the US anymore. EIRs and NIMBYism
will delay or kill almost any project. What projects would you
like to see in the US?
\_ High speed rail. Maybe a big bridge somewhere. Personally, I would
like to see something like another big water project, but I know
this would be hard to build in today's environment. The sad truth
is that the US is falling behind technologically.
\_ High speed rail. Maybe a big bridge somewhere. Personally, I
would like to see something like another big water project,
but I know this would be hard to build in today's environment.
The sad truth is that the US is falling behind technologically.
\_ Where does your HSR go to/from? Where did we need a bridge
where don't already have one? Maybe an island off the
Alaskan coast? ;-) These are reasonably 'solved'
technologies. The US is moving forward in materials sciences
with nano-everything and a lot of really solid bio work in
genetics and more traditional medicines/chemicals.
\_ There are literally dozens of obvious corridors in
the US for high-speed rail that would be cheaper,
faster, better for the environment, and far more
popular than flying or driving. SF to LA is the
trivially simple example. -tom
\_ There are literally dozens of obvious corridors in the US
for high-speed rail that would be cheaper, faster,
and far more popular than flying or driving. SF to LA
is the trivially simple example. -tom
\_ I wasn't saying there weren't. I was just asking for
examples. More on this in a bit. Busy now.
\_ As someone who has to fly a lot for his job, I say 'fuck
flying.' I would vastly prefer high speed rail to flying.
High speed rail stretching from San Diego to Seattle, say,
would be awesome. -- ilyas
\_ We fixed the MacArthur Maze?
\_ the new bay bridge, should it ever get completed...
\_ We still have the best space program. It doesn't secure our future
but it's cool. We do get knowledge out of that although we don't
hoard that all to ourselves. It adds to our civilization score.
\_ We can barely get the shuttle into orbit anymore and the
replacement is years away. The current program outside of the
JPL robotics work is an embarassment.
\_ This is an excellent example of the best not being good enough.
We could be much, much more. |
| 2007/6/17-19 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:46992 Activity:high |
6/13 Spielberg endorses Hillary.
\_ How is this any suprise? This Clintons, like Obama and Gore
are owned by Jews and products of finance and media Jews.
are owned by Jews and products of finance and media Jews. -jblack
\_ [racist troll deleted]
\_ [racist troll deleted, twice]
\_ how is it racist to point out that the Democratic party
is wholly controlled by individuals who own the media
and sectors of finance, and who constitute a tiny fraction
of a tenth of a percent of the population? I am telling
you who your master's are, even though you are too
blind to see it.
\_ Why would *anyone* outside Hillary's campaign care? Anyone who
votes based on Spielberg's "endorsement" is too stupid to live. |
| 2007/6/17-19 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:46991 Activity:nil |
6/15 How unpatriotic Dems plan to kill the American auto industry:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/16/democrats.radio.ap |
| 2007/6/15-19 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:46976 Activity:low |
6/15 Hilary has *no* *chance* in 2008, I read it in the motd:
http://www.csua.org/u/ixn (WSJ)
\_ At a glance, which one of the candidates _does_ have a chance?
\_ Cthulhu 2008. Why vote for a lesser evil?
\_ Clinton with Obama VP would be an interesting combo I think.
Still, the only thing that matters is when you get down to
election day. That's pretty far off yet and I think a lot of
states may not really vote Democrat when we get down to it,
or vote for a woman CIC etc etc.
\_ I do not think Hilary can win. I think it's because she's a
woman and a polarizing one at that. I never vote Republican,
but I don't think I'd vote for her. I'd probably vote for a
3rd party candidate.
\_ A lot has to do with who her opposition is at the time.
If the GOP pushes forward a Spiro Agnew, she might not need much
more than the votes of the faithful to win.
If the GOP pushes forward a Spiro Agnew, she might not
need much more than the votes of the faithful to win.
\_ Spiro Agnew -> grow a penis
\_ Someone's going to win, and none of the candidates are strong.
Sort of like a 'lesser evil' vote, the winner will be the
least weak.
\_ So far, the GOP has given us adulterers, flip-floppers,
and cranky old men. Oh, and Ron Paul. Which of these is
lesser evil you speak of? |
| 2007/6/12-15 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46923 Activity:nil |
6/12 Courtroom of the absurd (this seriously had me LOL):
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/offbeat/?hpid=topnews
\_ I like the old lady Godwinning.
\_ Between this and Bork's "You made me fall down" lawsuit, it's quite
the week for legal laughs.
\_ If anything, today's is even better.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/rawfisher |
| 2007/6/7-10 [Politics/Domestic/California, Transportation/Car] UID:46888 Activity:low |
6/7 Can sun reflections, like from the windows and chrome of cars on a
California freeway, cause permanent eye damage?
I think I might be developing a blind spot in one eye. But
it kind of comes and goes so it's hard to be sure.
\_ yes, definitely.
\_ Wear some polarized sunglasses. It should get rid of the glare.
\_ Agreed. Even a cheap ugly clip-on worked for me. It also
improves visibility over non-polarized sunglasses, even if not
for preventing eye damage.
\_ unless the reflection is a focused sunray, I don't think so.
Go get a ritina test for blind spot. |
| 2007/5/29-6/1 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:46787 Activity:nil 88%like:46779 |
5/29 stokke not enjoying the attention
http://urltea.com/nn8 (washingtonpost.com)
\_ what a shock |
| 2007/5/29 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:46779 Activity:nil 88%like:46787 |
5/29 stokke not enjoying the attention
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/28/AR2007052801370.html |
| 2007/5/15 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Abortion] UID:46643 Activity:nil |
5/15 Pros and cons of various Republican presidential candidates
http://mcsweeneys.net/2007/5/2moe.html |
| 2007/5/11-15 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:46600 Activity:nil |
5/11 '[A] Vote for Romney is [a] vote for Satan'
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55642 |
| 2007/5/10-14 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:46585 Activity:nil |
5/10 Hey campus employees viewing your new 5 hour
required online ethic course, there's a message
from Regent Parsky at the end:
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/2007-05-09/news/parsky-s-party |
| 2007/5/10-14 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:46583 Activity:nil |
5/10 What happens when you "run government like a business"
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/2007-05-09/news/parsky-s-party
\_ The Post Office is a good example. It's quite successful,
providing better QoS and lowering costs.
\_ No, that's what happens when you run government like an
idiot. I can't really see how what the UC did is
anything like a business, except that a badly run
business would probably have similar problems. |
| 2007/5/7-9 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:46540 Activity:high |
5/6 Mon Dieu, Sarkozy wins:
http://urltea.com/i89 (cnn.com)
\_ I told you CONSERVATISM is spreading throughout the world and
nothing is going to stop it! Privatization, pro-business, less
tax, less immigrants, tough on crime, less communism, less
social programs, & more self reliance!
\_ A surprise, I know. What do you think of the result?
\_ Freedom Fries! Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys! Acck! Phht! |
| 2007/5/5-7 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:46532 Activity:nil |
5/4 hello has anybody here used the REI SUBKILO 20deg sleeping bag?
i am looking for a smaller/lighter bag than my -10/-5 bag i have
been using for more than 15yrs now and it is hard for me to justify
paying +$300 for a MARMOT HELIUM for a second bag (and this is
coming from someone who owns a BIBLER TENT) and I see REI has them
on sale for $160 (-%5 for REI credit card + CA tax) so this might
be a good deal for you 3season campers. Anyway, I was curious if
this 20deg rated bag is actually comfortable at say 35deg [my
current bag is overkill for the conditions i've been in 99% of
the time, so I am not really sure how bags do within say 10-20degs
of their rated temps, i.e. is that truly a "comfor rating" or more
like a "you will not die" rating. Specific questions: if you have
this bag: is it warm enough for autumn at 10-12k [say 30deg outside].
Two are these sub-2lbs, high power fill bags especually fragile ...
my other bag has lasted years and years. |
| 2007/5/2-4 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:46512 Activity:high |
5/2 Asian men are crazy:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18442224/site/newsweek
\_ That was about the most useless interview imaginable.
\_ Was it Hoyt Sze?
\_ I guess I don't get the reference. I see from google
he's some kind of anti-whitey, but does he give crappy
interviews?
\_ He's a former Daily Cal reporter, and a legend in his
own mind.
\_ http://www.modelminority.com/article269.html
"Interracial dating between white men and Asian women
undermines the integrity of Asian America."
\_ http://urltea.com/hj7 (youtube.com)
\_ Quite funny, thanks.
\_ Hello racist troller! Don't forget they are also good at math!
http://nomorequo.blogspot.com/2007/04/why-asians-are-better-at-math.html
http://urltea.com/hde (nomorequo.blogspot.com) |
| 2007/4/29-5/1 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:46475 Activity:nil |
4/29 MacArthur Maze = screwed. Turn on the news or see:
http://csua.org/u/iks
\_ Ride Bike!
\_ If you can make that jump, I want to see the video. |
| 2007/4/28-5/1 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:46472 Activity:nil |
4/29 CA Supreme Court rules to limit future speech.
http://csua.org/u/ikp (LA Times)
What implications does this have? -emarkp
\_ The implication is that someone who has already been convicted
of slanderous speech can't say the same thing again. Oh no. -tom
\_ None. Prior restraint law is fairly well developed and there
is nothing really remarkable about this case. The CA S. Ct.
felt that the presumption of invalidity of a prior restraint
was overcome.
\_ I suspect the USSC will overturn this. The restraining order
should be enough, imo.
\_ Doubtful, there is really nothing to justify taking cert. |
| 2007/4/24-27 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:46441 Activity:low |
4/24 Dianne Feinstein comes down squarely on the RIAA's side on the
Copyright Royalty Board ruling. Please write her snail mail, or
phone her office, to tell her how wrong she is!
http://somafm.com/blogs/rusty/2007/04/senator-dianne-feinstein-has-wrong.html
\_ DiFi is a sell-out, and has been a sell-out on this particular
issue for many years. -tom
\_ Was it Pelosi or Diane who has the concealed carry permit issued
in SF?
\_ That's Feinstein. Don Perata (the California State Senator
who writes most of California's state-level gun ban
legislation) also has one. --alawrenc |
| 2007/4/24-25 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/HateGroups] UID:46427 Activity:high |
4/23 "This guy had to be a liberal. You start railing against the rich and
all this other -- this guy's a liberal. He was turned into a liberal
somewhere along the line. So it's a liberal that committed this act.
Now, the drive-bys will read on a website that I'm attacking
liberalism by comparing this guy to them. That's exactly what they do
every day, ladies and gentlemen. I'm just pointing out a fact. I am
making no extrapolation; I'm just pointing it out."
-- Rush Limbaugh on Cho
\_ What day and time did he say this? I'm almost 100% sure this was a
joke, but http://mm.org never distinguishes between serious commentary and
jokes.
\_ (responding to myself), http://mm.org falls for Rush's joke hook, line,
and sinker
http://mediamatters.org/items/200704230012
\_ please.
\_ Perfect Rush response: "I was joking and you guys fell for
it, ha ha! I'm smarter than you! Oh, and I really meant
it, ha ha! I'm smarter than you! Oh, and I really wasn't
joking, either!" -tom
\_ I bet Hitler was joking too!
\_ He wouldn't have said so. Why did you have to say
something so ridiculous?
\_ Guess what, "can't you guys take a joke" is in the same
vein as "Some of my best friends are black!" When you have
to go there you already lost and aren't doing yourself any
favors by not trying to drop the subject.
\_ Except that he made it clear the point he was making with
humor at the time. Since he uses humor all through his
show, you nutty libs are left scratching your collective
heads, because you apparently don't have a sense of humor.
Unless of course you're watching Jon Stewart.
\_ yeah, you nigger. ohh, i was joking too.
\_ No, sometimes humor is offensive. Defending it as
just being a joke doesn't make it any less offensive.
\_ And an offensive joke that isn't funny is useless.
Along with Imus, Limbaugh deserves shit for his
"jokes" because he's simply not funny.
\_ You mean I can't tell black jokes at work anymore??? |
| 2007/4/22-25 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:46408 Activity:kinda low |
4/21 Cho bought ammo clips on eBay. His user name was Blazers5505@hotmail.com
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18246522
http://feedback.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewFeedback&userid=Blazers5505
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=140098812797
\_ And... ? http://www.gunbroker.com http://www.auctionarms.com provide far
better auction houses for gun stuff. Besides he could have
bought some Schrer 33 round mags for the Glock 18 for $28
from http://www.topglock.com I have some stamped LE/Military use only
\_ Is it legal to mail order stuff like this in CA? Gun laws are
confusing. Is there some place with ALL of the issues laid out
clearly for each state?
\_ You can't legally buy (or import) magazines with greater
than a ten-round capacity in California. Although the federal
ban expired, California has its own ban. Most of the
magazines stamped for law enforcement or military use only
were manufactured during the federal ban. The California DOJ
has a section on firearms law on its web site that is
reasonably useful. The CRPA puts out a booklet on the new
firearms laws for the state every year. If you don't mind
the annoyingly low reading level, there's a book called "How
to Own a Gun and Stay out of Jail: California Edition" by
John Machtinger that gets updated every year that spells out
what the intersection of state and federal laws means for
California residents (though it doesn't attempt to cover
local ordinances, such as Berekeley's ban on rifles that
local ordinances, such as Berkeley's ban on rifles that
accept detachable magazines). --alawrenc
\_ Thanks. I'll have to read through this stuff...
http://www.ag.ca.gov/firearms
\_ Incidentally, one of the consequences of California's
ban on full capacity magazines has been that it makes
it illegal for servicemen to supplement their
equipment before deploying overseas from a base in
California. It's routine for soldiers to buy extra
gear to supplement what they're issued, including
magazines for their rifles and sidearms. California's
full capacity magazine ban only makes an exemption for
law enforcement, not for active duty military personnel.
--alawrenc |
| 2007/4/16-18 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:46314 Activity:nil |
4/16 emarkp, you said below that you could never vote for McCain because of
his assault on 1st amendment (campaign finance)." Which part of McCain-
Feingold did you consider an assault on 1st amendment rights? --erikred
\_ The part about what can be said X days before an election. -emarkp |
| 2007/4/16-18 [Politics/Domestic/California, Recreation/Media] UID:46310 Activity:kinda low |
4/16 Just a quick question for those who aren't upset about Imus being
fired...If the two reverends who had gotten Imus fired were Robertson
and Fallwell, and talked about "cleaning up the airwaves", would you be
upset? -emarkp
\_ this isn't about "cleaning up the airwaves". imus has said many
horribly offensive things in the past. so have many other radio
hosts. he got fired because this time the story grew legs. the
same reverends you are so upset about have complained about him
before, but it never led to his firing. the story got legs, the
advertisers got worried, they pulled their support, he got fired.
now, if you want to examine why it got legs this time around, that
may be an interesting topic. but tom's right. this is a red
herring. --scotsman
\_ Rather a red herring, don't you think, considering those are both
bigoted assholes who would never call on anyone to be fired for
racist remaks against blacks.
If Imus had instead called the University of Utah basketball
team a bunch of "Mormon white boys screwing their own sisters,"
I think he should have been fired for that, too. -tom
\_ I don't think those two got him fired. I think advertisers
threatening to not advertise with CBS anymore got him fired.
I am curious, do you listen to Imus' show? Are you really
going to defend someone who hired someone just to
write nigger jokes? I had more respect than that for you.
\_ Sharpton and Jackson were in on the board meeting of CBS
before he got fired. They also were publicly calling for
pressure on his advertising. From that I conclude that they
were involved. -emarkp
\_ See tom I see the problem as anyone being able to point at
someone and get him fired. Imus has been making nasty comments
for decades, but this time the Reverends pointed their fingers
and he was gone. I would think that would raise eyebrows here
considering how much antipathy there is on motd for organized
religion. -emarkp
\_ Imus has gotten fired numerous times without Jackson and
Sharpton being involved. And frankly, it is sad that he
wasn't fired immediately by CBS and that it took community
pressure. -tom
\_ He wasn't fired by CBS immediately because he was making
money for them. And has been for years. I've never listened
to him and given his history I wouldn't ever listen to him.
However, I *also* wouldn't call for him to be fired.
-emarkp
\_ Really? Why not? There's nothing stopping him from
spewing his shit somewhere else. If he is going to
to be a well paid moron, he should be tough enough to
face hard economic consequences.
\_ I think freedom is very important, especially
freedom of speech. For instance, I hate smoking but
voted against the massive taxes on smoking (prop 10)
and outlawing it in all buildings. I could never
vote for McCain because of his assault on 1st
amendment (campaign finance). -emarkp
\_ Imus makes money for CBS, therefore it's OK
for him to say what he wants--is that your
position? Well, I think it's also freedom of
speech for the people affected by his bigoted
speech to use *their* free speech rights to
call CBS's advertisers (the ones paying Imus)
and tell them to fire the guy. -tom
\_ No, it's for CBS to decide if he should be
fired. I just wonder why people aren't pointing
out that it's clergy that are calling for the
air to be cleaned up. And as for others using
their speech, I think it would be better for
others to respond to it and stop listening if
they're offended. Wasn't that what people were
saying when Janet Jackson flashed her boob?
-emarkp
\_ Of course when Janet Jackon showed her
boobies THE GOVERNMENT (FCC) was involved
in punitive actions. Do you see the
difference between government action
and private citizens taking action?
Imus managed to fly under most people's
for a long time, went way over the line
and suddenly people noticed "hey, what is
this asshole doing this schtick that makes
CBS many millions a year?" and found
a way to make it clear to CBS that hey,
if they wanted to keep him around it was
going to cost them via private economic
boycotts.
\_ People *are* pointing out it's clergy. You
are. It's completely irrelevant, which is
why no one else is. And are you really
trying to equate insulting people based on
their race, with flashing a nipple? Who
did Janet injure? -tom
\_ My children were injured. Tom, if you
injure my children, I WILL GET YOU. |
| 2007/4/12 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:46268 Activity:nil 76%like:46264 |
4/11 Judge approves racism in enrollment:
http://www.csua.org/u/igd (SFGate)
\_ double plus good |
| 2007/4/11 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:46264 Activity:low 76%like:46268 |
4/11 Judge approves racial consideration in enrollment:
http://www.csua.org/u/igd (SFGate)
\_ Stop editing my post. -OP
\_ Who edited my post? -OP |
| 2007/4/10-11 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:46248 Activity:nil |
4/10 And the winner of the Half-Billion Swimming Contest is: Birkhead!
http://www.csua.org/u/ifr (Yahoo! News) |
| 2007/4/2-3 [Finance/Banking, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:46180 Activity:kinda low |
4/2 New Century files for bankruptcy
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN0242080520070402
\_ Any idea how many defaults are occuring in the Bay area?
\_ http://tinyurl.com/ysnblw (sfgate.com)
It really depends on the county. SF/Santa Clara/Marin remain
strong. Concentration of rich bastards and plentiful $80-150K
jobs do that to an area. Look at Manhattan.
\_ Um...but you can't afford an SF house on a 150K income...
\_ dual-income via marriage/SO/friend + family help +
several years of saving for a deposit assumed
\_ Sure you can. There are plenty of starter homes for
$700k in The City. And a person who makes 150k can
afford the $3k/mo (after tax break) that this costs.
\_ Actually there aren't plenty of $700K starter homes
any more. The price is still going up.
\_ Going to http://sfarmls.com putting in price from 650-700
and including only districts 1-9 (excluding 10)
gives me 25 homes. If I include 10, which is the
roughest part of town, I get 65. Granted, most of
the 25 are pretty small, but that is what $700k
gets you these days.
\_ And in 6 unit ellis acted tics. Or maybe in
the farthest reaches of visitation valley.
Any place remotely buyable is snapped up ASAP.
The SF markey is still insane.
\_ You may want to visit http://patrick.net to
commiserate with others in your same
situation.
\_ How sad that $700k is considered a starter
home and you get the benefits of slum life
to go with it. |
| 2007/4/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:46178 Activity:low |
4/3 Dear Motd Christians: Would you rather vote for a Libural devisive
bitch who is pro-abortion, or a good looking man with similar
beliefs but has the wrong religion?
\_ I vote for the one who knows how to spell. |
| 2007/3/30-4/3 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:46151 Activity:nil |
3/38 Out of 69 senate votes on the war, Clinton and Obama differ on only
one vote, the confirmation of Casey:
http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2007/mar/29/comparison_of_hillary_and_obama_votes_on_iraq
\_ I am going to vote for the one that pisses off the most Republicans.
\_ I am going to vote for the one that pisses off the most Freepers.
\_ I'm pretty sure that would be Clinton.
\_ Or (shockingly) you could vote for who you honestly think would
be the best President for the country.... |
| 2007/3/28-29 [Politics/Domestic/California, Recreation/Dating] UID:46135 Activity:nil |
3/28 Damn, they really can't even keep their lies straight anymore
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002901.php |
| 2007/3/27-31 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:46115 Activity:nil |
3/27 Are you a member of the libertarian party and you're not white?
Are you active in the party? What race are you and how do the mostly
white members treat you? I'm asian-american and I'm thinking of
joining the LP. After reading a lot of the materials on http://lp.org and
http://cato.org, I find that their beliefs are very compatible with mine.
But that's libertarianism at the national level. What about at the
grass roots local level? Is there a lot of minority participation?
Thanks.
\_ If your beliefs can be simplified to the organizations you
belong to or associate with, then that says a lot about your
intellectual inflexibility and overall lack of.
\_ Go to http://freerepublic.com
Now please go away.
\_ Why don't you vote your conscience and use http://match.com for socialization.
\_ Why don't you vote your conscience and use http://match.com for
socialization. |
| 2007/3/23-27 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:46076 Activity:nil |
3/23 http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1805580/posts "a 'dramatic shift' in political party identification since 2002, when Republicans and Democrats were at rough parity. Now, 50% of those surveyed identified with or leaned toward Democrats, whereas 35% aligned with Republicans." Do we need to reweight polls with the updated party identification #'s? \_ Don't forget the I's, which are growing quite a bit. |
| 2007/3/20-24 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:46035 Activity:nil |
3/20 Valorie Plame's oral testimony last week contradicts her oral testimony
before the Senate Intelligence Committee:
http://www.csua.org/u/ia1 (National Review)
\_ awful, slanted article.
\_ awful, stupid comment
\_ awful, stupid comment
\_ Thanks for confirming that Plame was a covert CIA agent when
Cheney and Libby outed her. Even the National Review admits it. |
| 2007/3/12-15 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45936 Activity:nil 80%like:45942 |
3/12 Pete Stark comes out of the theism closet
http://www.secular.org/news/pete_stark_070312.html
\_ http://www.thegodmovie.com |
| 2007/3/1 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45850 Activity:nil |
3/01 ---------------------------------------------------
< 1.8 20:52:40 37.897N 122.112W 13.8 Lafayette, CA >
---------------------------------------------------
.,ooOOOOOoo .
.oOOOOOOOOOOOOO le...
oOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO lllllee...
OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO llllllllllllle... .,,;
'*OOOOOOOOOOO llllllllllllllllllleeeee`;,:,,;.
``""*OOO*`lllllllllllllllllllllllllll`.,,;,.
``"*elllllllllllll;;llllll:`;;;.
`""*elllllllllllll::`'," ;
` ``""elllllll: :`;'.,
`le@@eee; "':`'"
.@@@@@@@%:'';';,
*@@@@@@@%%:.',;'
*@@@@@@@@@@.,;'
'@@@@@@@@;';';;
~@@@@@~ ;';' |
| 2007/2/2-6 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Prop] UID:45643 Activity:moderate |
2/2 http://republican.sen.ca.gov/web/mcclintock/article_detail.asp?PID=289 Link that talks about how CA spends $3200 per capita now versus $1240 (inflation adjusted) in the 1960s. \_ Thanks for the link. Do you know where he got those statistics? I am actually most interested in what local+state taxes collected have looked like over time, both inflation adjusted and as a percentage of income. I know there was a big shift from local to state when Prop 13 passed, so this is going to kind of distort the number that McClintock reports here. to state when Prop 13 passed, so this is going to distort the number that McClintock reports here. \_ I assumed that he meant *ALL* taxes in CA (local+state), but I really don't know. Obviously, if State doubled and local fell in proportion then it's just cooking the books. I think we are both interested in *TOTAL* spending and re-reading what McClintock wrote it seems like he might be referring only to State spending. You might want to read the following, though: http://www.caltax.org/MEMBER/digest/Jun98/jun98-4.htm It reports that total spending is higher now than it was, although not so much higher. Look at the chart on this page: http://www.caltax.org/research/taxspend.htm \_ Yeah, I also would like to know if McClintock measured from "peak to peak" or "trough to peak" as these kinds of factors make a huge difference. The first caltax article measures spending as a percentage of GDP, which is probably a better measure than inflation adjusted anyway, since the things that government spends money on (health care, education, bridges and roads) has on (health care, education, bridges and roads) have increased in price faster than inflation. This is \_ Government always over-pays for everything. This is not a surprising finding. probably not a conincidence. The second caltax article \_ We are in agreement here. probably not a coincidence. The second caltax article measures overall tax burden, which is mostly because the federal government overtaxes Californians compared to the rest of the country, because of the relatively high wages here. \_ So what have our reps done to correct this imbalance? I haven't checked but my bet is on "nothing". \_ You are surprised that after 12 years of GOP dominated Congress that pork tends to flow from blue states to red states? What could the (Democratic) California caucus have done about that? Hopefully, Nancy Pelosi will even things out a bit. \_ Oh please, what did they do in the previous 50 years of Dem control? The same nothing. This has nothing to do with the evuuul GOP and everything to do with tax'n'spend. Nancy isn't going to even anything out. If Hillary was elected in 08 and the Dems had both houses, there would still be no cost/location based federal tax system that accounted for living in higher price/wage states. It isn't even on anyone's radar. \_ We used to get a larger percentage of our taxes dollars back. I don't think that the Democrats are going to lower my taxes. I do think they will start diverting tax money from Republican favored states (wars, defence contractors, etc) to Democratic favored states (mass transit, public health care, etc). \_ I don't want a larger portion of federal tax dollars coming back to the state. I want them to take into account that I live in a more expensive area with higher wages and thus need more money to maintain the same standard of living as someone making half as much in some other states and lower my tax bracket. I agree that the Dems won't lower anyone's taxes, but you're off base in claiming that "Republican States" are the "War States" and "Democratic States" are the peace loving, we take care of our people states. CA is chock full of military bases, defense contractors, etc. I used to live with in get-nuked range of a nuclear sub base and related defense contractors in CT. They are in every state. I also don't see the Dems unporking the budget since they invented the concept, although the last Repub. government honed that skill to a fine point. They're the same, we're all hosed either way. \_ You are full of it. CA lost most of its military bases in the 80s. \_ You are wrong about spending. CA lost most of its military bases in the 90s. Maybe you are too young to remember. In any case, most of the defence contractors are heavily Republican. Whatever you want to call it, the pork should start flowing our way. http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/443.html Shows overall state and local tax burden as exactly the same today as in 1970. And this is from an anti-tax site (!) This site also shows a drop from 1978 to 1995, so at this point it is almost a case of dueling experts: http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/rb/RB_998MSRB.pdf \_ My expert can beat up your expert. \_ I think the key point to take away here is that there's at least as much money now as ever. So why is the infrastructure falling apart? \_ That is a really good question and I do not have the answer for it. A small part is that we spend more on prisons, but that can't be the whole answer. \_ While tax revenue increases linearly, waste and corruption increase quadratically. \_ Exactly and most of it is not in the prison system. It is in the k-12 education system. Which is not to say the prisons aren't a big scam, too, just a smaller scam than the k-12 system. |
| 2007/1/16-25 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45551 Activity:nil |
1/17 Why people move to and stay in California: http://www.king5.com/sharedcontent/VideoPlayer/makeASX.php?title=www.king5.com/kiraw_011607portlandhomevid.wmv \_ It's amazing how stupid some people are. Once your car starts to move like that, why are you still trying to accelerate? \_ I think he's in a hurry to watch TV. Must Watch TV. |
| 2006/12/29-30 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45516 Activity:very high |
12/29 What are some of the most racist stereotypes you personally agree
with but don't tell anyone else because it's not PC? I'll start:
\_ Blonds are dumb. Dumb blond!
\_ Chicomm
\_ The more you drive, the dumber you are.
\_ Where in this is race involved?
\_ People of color seem to drive more. Gardeners, truck
drivers, custodians, taxi drivers, etc. This is mostly
because they can can only afford to live at the outer
fringe of society. Driving is repetitive hard work and
nobody likes doing it repeatedly.
v nobody likes doing it repeatedly.
\_ You may be surprised to find out that those in the
suburbs tend to be more wealthy and better educated
than those in the jity centers.
\_ "Tend to be" according to a study? According to your
narrow sample? Let's compare Atherton CA to
Chicago IL then your statement would have tractions.
However, compare Boston MA to Compton CA, your
statement would be flawed. I'd be interested to
see a study of average and median IQ + income of
the entire US. Until that happens, your statement
is as stupid as "women tend to be bad drivers."
\_ This is certainly not true world wide. Perhaps
this is true in the Bay Area, but I would have
to see the statistics to be certain. Housing is
cheaper in the suburbs, especially the outer ring.
\_ Women are terrible drivers. Asian women are the worst of the
women. Sad... but in my experience very very true. |
| 2006/12/26-30 [Politics/Domestic/California, Finance/Investment] UID:45498 Activity:nil |
12/26 Thomas Sowell's take on the fixation of income disparity.
http://csua.org/u/hs4
\- this is such a bullshit essay. he is mischaracterizing the
"it makes no sense" line. the question is about equillibria
and looking for explanations for "out-of-equillibria" behavior.
for example for sports stars or hollywoods starts, there is
actually an explanation offered for the giant paychecks of
megastars, and that is the "winner-takes-all" or "superstar"
\_ "prize economy" is the phrase
you are looking for
theory [i dont know anything about sports, but the rough
explanation is megastars like MJ dont just help you win games,
MJ sell tickets, sell merchandise, sell the brand ... simlarly
if you hire tom cruise-level stars, they arent just fulfilling
an acting role, but casting them serves as advertising etc ...
people magazing, entertainment tonight etc will advertise your
movie because you have cast tom cruise. i.e. there are not
really many substitutes for these types. there are a limited
number. YMWTGF(sherwin rosen, economics of superstars).]
this is more what an honest discussion of compensation issue
and trends looks like: http://csua.org/u/hs5
and to go from "these salaries seem historically high" to
"govt dept of regulation salaries" is obviously a textbook
strawman.
also the "famous essay" about the pencil was actually made
famous by milton friedman. i dont think it was especially
famous until he talked about it in his free to choose show.
\_ Everyone should be paid according to their needs. Sorry,
I just read Atlas Shrugged. ;) |
| 2006/12/19-28 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:45470 Activity:high |
12/19 Zucker's take on the ISG: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-w77sLtz754 \_ Ah, yes, that Neville Chamberlain of our time, James Baker. I'm sorry, wtf are you talking about? \_ Sorry, no one is buying your BS anymore. \_ What BS? I pointed to a video on youtube. \_ The BS that America is strong and can make other people listen to us. Sorry neocons, the real world doesn't work that way. People hate America and you're not going to make them do what you want them to do just because you think you have the world's greatest military power. Military power comes and goes but resentments live on forever. \_ Who hates America? Do you? The Arabs do because it serves their political leaders for them to do so. I bet China prefers a bit of healthy dislike in its people too given the totalitarianism. The fact is their countries are in a state of shittitude because of their own fucked governments (cf. Iran). \_ The Iranians might hate us because we overthrew their democratically elected government and replaced it with a totalitarian one. Just a thought. Why do the Iraqis hate us? Do you really have to ask that? that? Oh, and just a little geography lesson: Iranians are not Arabs. Thought you might like to know. \_ I didn't say they were. If you asked the average Iranian I bet you will not hear "because they replaced our democratic government". \_ this may shock you, but Chinese government is more popular across the globe than American one. \_ Really? When did we vote on that? I haven't missed a vote on anything since I was old enough to vote. \_ anti-American senitment is very stron across the globe during the time when China is forgiving debt and cut checks to Africian oil rich nations with *NO STRING ATTACHED*. You should also dig out old newspaper on how popular Hu Jing-Tao was during his Latin-America tour. As for Middle East, do you have any idea what kind of government would we have today across the Arab nation if we allow them to *VOTE* for their leader? (hint, Hamas). \_ http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8324290 But it wasn't mentioned in MM's blog, so you might have missed it... \_ A Pew poll? With no numbers? Ok, whatever. I'm sure you also believe Iraq was a land of chocolate rivers with candied banks under Hussein. And what exactly would be the surprise if a bunch of socialists prefered a communist country to a democratic capitalist one anyway? \_ I am sure you can google for the source if you really want to see the numbers. I am also sure you won't bother to, since it upsets your fantasy about how the world is. world is. You do know that the vast majority of Iraqis think the country is worse off now than it was under SH, right? \_ No I won't do your work for you. If you have something to say, go find a real source for it and post it. No one here has the time to google every half- assed zero-information link posted to the motd by some crank who believes in chocolate rivers. Then you make another unsubstantiated claim that I'm supposed to google, too? How about you tell me what my fantasy about the world is since the only thing I've said so far is your link is garbage. I see you also ignored the underlying issue with a poll "of the world" in that "the world" is all about predisposed bias and the odds of getting a "fair" poll about what "the world" thinks are about zero. Just curious, do you see yourself as a "Citizen of the World"? \_ Tactic 1: ad hominem Tactic 2: attack the source Tactic 3 (will occur as soon as I post a link): claim polls are meaningless. -tom \_ Facts are such bitter stubborn things. http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=247 \_ They don't like Bush. It doesn't translate to a general hatred of America as you imply. At least half our population doesn't like Bush (approval ratings etc). \_ I predict it will take a long time, at least a decade or two, to undo the damage the Bush and his crowd has done to US opinion worldwide. \_ I believe it's customary to include either "nutjob" or "He's right, you know" with links like this. Omission thereof tends to imply support. --!pp \_ http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm Support for the warmonger faction is down to 28%. |
| 2006/12/19-21 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45469 Activity:kinda low |
12/19 Welcome to CA, now part of Mexico
http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/homepage/abox/article_1386317.php
\_ The purpose of a school is to educate its local population. If this
lets them do that more effectively, what's the problem?
\_ The point is that CA is becoming part of Mexico.
\_ The school district's plan sounds like a good idea, actually.
The only people it is bad for are people like me who would
have to pay for childcare during the day when the kids
are out of school. No instructional time is lost and no
(school) dollars are lost. It's a more creative plan than
I would give most school districts credit for.
\_ School administrators have always been infinitely creative
when it comes to getting state funds for their child/day
rate. This is all about money, not doing something for
the benefit of parents. For kicks I'm going to look for
the Santa Ana school district's test scores to see how
creative the administrators are with that whole silly
teaching thing.
\_ Mexico's annexed OC without annexing San Diego? Taxes are
being funneled to MC? Vicente Fox has bought a retirement
home here? They're electing (and then crucifying) PRI
candidates? What part, other than genetics, makes this
different from Korean Town or China Town? |
| 2006/11/25-12/8 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:45368 Activity:nil |
11/25 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4230372.stm The Republican Party. Survival of the Fittest. |
| 2006/11/17-21 [Politics/Foreign, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45349 Activity:nil |
11/17 <DEAD>cusa.com<DEAD>? Is the kchang's site? I think http://cusa.org has a better interface, but this is nice. \_ It's ausman's site. \_ This one is more authentic. |
| 2006/11/11-12 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:45326 Activity:moderate |
11/11 Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry-- 16 percent would
vote for him in 2008, 24 percent maybe, and 55 will not vote
for him, period. And therein lies some good news for President
Bush as he faces the final two years of his Presidency. At
least he's not John Kerry. Bahahahahahahahahaha
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15667442/site/newsweek/page/3
\_ ELECTION IS OVER. This thread will be deleted in an hour. Sorry.
\_ Loser says what?
\_ Hmm, yes, elevating political discourse. Once an election has
been ended no one is allowed to discuss it if 'their side' lost.
ended no one is allowed to discuss it if 'their side' lost.
Ok, whatever.
\_ Enjoy your 31% approval rating:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15667442/site/newsweek
\_ I don't have an approval rating and whatever either
party's approval rating is at has nothing to do with
the level of political discourse or having the right
to express political opinions.
\_ Loser says what?
\_ Exactly. Thanks for reinforceing my point.
\_ It's so enjoyable to have the shoe on the other foot. |
| 2006/11/10-11 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:45318 Activity:moderate |
11/9 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15643639/site/newsweek/page/3 "Polls going into the election showed a dramatic shift to the Democrats, but the actual numbers were less dramatic... The national generic polls always exaggerate the Democratic advantage... You generally get an over representation of Democrats in the polls. If you averaged the pre-election polls, there was a 12-point Democratic advantage." Just as I said. Liberals are very vocal but they're too lazy to vote whereas Republicans don't express their views but tend to be loyal hardcore voters. \_ Loser say what? \_ No, I think it's a case of who is around to answer the phone at the times they call and who would actually bother to do so. I don't think either party's voters are "lazy" about voting. You might want to note that a number of conservative ballot measures around the country passed (or liberal ones failed) in a lot of the same places that voted out incumbent Republicans in favor of an unknown Democrat. Conservatives showed up, they just didn't vote for the faux-conservative Republican candidates. |
| 2006/11/9 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:45298 Activity:nil 80%like:45300 |
11/9 Allen to concede this afternoon:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/y25erv (washingtonpost.com)
\_ No recount? |
| 2006/11/9 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:45296 Activity:nil 66%like:45300 |
11/9 Allen to concede this afternoon:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/09/AR2006110900775.html |
| 2006/11/9-10 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic] UID:45293 Activity:high |
11/9 Can anyone think of a legitimate reason for the flag to be at half-staff
today? I'm suspecting that some crybaby republican security guard did
this because of the election, but I want to know if there's *any*
other possible explanation.
\_ OP here: I was being paranoid, it's legit:
http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/local/31709.php
A Border Patrol officer died in a car accident.
\_ What state are you in? Gov Schwarzaneggar ordered flags
to half staff when those fire fighters died in the LA wildfire
\_ The control of the Republican congress died. It's a dark dark
day out there for America. God Bless. -Republican
\_ Only plausible explanation is that a member of congress has died.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-staff
\_ Someone confused 11/9 with 9/11? Where did you see the flag at
half-staff anyway?
half-staff anyway? A lot of times people lower the flag to
half-staff to honor some local people. That's not an appropriate
use of half-staff'ing of the US flag, but nobody is going to
complain "oh we liked so-and-so but he didn't deserve a half-staff
US flag".
\_ This is at a Federal institution (a lab), so the formal rules
should apply and should be known by whoever is resonsible for
the flag out front. This is certainly either becuase of some
obscure rule or because someone is knowingly being a little
crybaby asshole. Given the nature of the local security guards
who are the only ones here in the middle of the night, the
latter explanation is very plausible.
\_ You should follow up with this and find out. This is
highly inappropriate and the person should be fired, if
in fact this is wrt the death of the control of the congress
\_ No one is going to get fired over a half staff flag. You
can legally burn the damned thing as a matter of free
speech, you can certainly half staff it. Get over your
big self.
\_ No free speech if you're king, eh?
\_ Free speech is fine. Co-opting the tools of state to
express your free speech is unprofessional. Fire him on
that.
\_ Uh yeah right. Have you ever worked in the real
world? Short of raping his boss's boss's wife
whoever "co-opted the tools of the state" is not
going to get anyone fired. You're being ridiculous.
\_ You're being naive. People get fired for less than
this all the time.
\_ Not federal employees.
\_ Nonsense. In CA it is almost impossible to
fire someone. In order to avoid a lawsuit you
need so much documentation and efforts at
making sure it "was done right" it will take
several months, loads of paperwork and multiple
wrong doings (except theft, assault, etc) to
fire someone. Who are these 'people getting
fired for trivial nonsense all the time'?
You're full of it. And frankly, even if you
*could* get someone fired for half staffing
the flag as a sign of his personal political
distaste for the results of the election, you'd
be a complete ass for doing so.
\_ No idea but I noticed a fire station had the flag at half
mast this weekend and wondered why as well.
\_ The US flag is supposed to be lowered every evening and raised
again the next morning. So whoever's there in the middle of
the night shouldn't have anything to do with it.
\_ This flag flies 24/7 normally. Are you sure about that
rule? So you're claiming that all the flags one sees flying
at night all over the country are violating some flag rule?
I don't believe that.
I don't believe that. link:csua.org/u/hf6
\_ If flown at night, the flag is supposed to be
illuminated somehow. Otherwise it is supposed to be
taken down at sunset.
\_ Well, yes, it's illuminated(duh).
\_ Title 4, Chapter 1, #6, (a):
"It is the universal custom to display the flag only
from sunrise to sunset on buildings and on stationary
flagstaffs in the open. However, when a patriotic effect
is desired, the flag may be displayed 24 hours a day if
properly illuminated during the hours of darkness."
http://www.csua.org/u/hf7 (www4.law.cornell.edu) |
| 2006/11/9-10 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Gay] UID:45285 Activity:nil |
11/8 Comedy gold. The site "Rapture Ready" reacts to the election of the
first Muslim to the US Congress:
http://www.rr-bb.com/showthread.php?t=282679
\_ I love that someone's sig is "My other car is the Rapture". |
| 2006/11/8-10 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45284 Activity:nil |
11/8 Inland valley hicks voted NO on prop 90 (limiting Eminent Domain).
Why is that? Do they enjoy having personal property taken away?
http://vote.ss.ca.gov/Returns/prop/mapR090.htm
\_ hi troll!
\_ 90 was a great proposition with a really horrible one attached to it
..but since i don't expect most of the inland valleys to read.. no
clue why they voted against it
\_ There are lots of reasons to both like and dislike this Prop.
It depends on what side of the fence you are on. A similar law
passed in Oregon led to lots of litigation.
\_ I think you read the map backwards or we have different definitions
of "NO" or "inland valley"
\_ Anti-ED is good but prop 90 had some stuff some people may have
thought went too far. I'm a bit surprised it wasn't a land slide
in 90's favor. Next time.
\_ 90 was dumb. it was written very generally. even the official
CA explanation of it was full of "well it might...."
and "could be interpreted...." clauses. That sucks.
Props should be very specific.
\_ The official explanations are always written in those terms.
You have to read the prop itself. I don't do more than
skim the official explanations as a quick prep for reading
the actual real text of the prop. I hope you don't think
it sucked based on the generalised terms used by to describe
it by the Secretary of State's office. |
| 2006/11/8-10 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45281 Activity:low |
11/7 http://vote.ss.ca.gov/Returns/gov/mapBN.htm The only counties that voted for Angelides were the LA county and N Cal liberal counties. The OC (south of LA) overwhelmingly voted for Republican as expected, as did the inline empires. \_ But he will wear the Crown of Appolonius upon a troubled brow... \_ But he will wear the Crown of Aquilonia upon a troubled brow... \_ Thanks for the correction. I bow to your superior Conan knowledge. -OP knowledge. -PP |
| 2006/11/8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45280 Activity:nil |
11/8 AP Reporting dems take senate. All the networks are reporting this.
"An adviser to Allen, speaking on condition of anonymity because his
boss had not formally decided to end the campaign, said the senator
wanted to wait until most of canvassing was completed before
announcing his decision, possibly as early as Thursday evening.
The adviser said that Allen was disinclined to request a recount if
the final vote spread was similar to that of election night."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061109/ap_on_el_se/democrats_senate |
| 2006/11/8-9 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45271 Activity:low |
11/8 Every single CA prop failed! Thank you CA voters for
restoring my faith in humanity.
\_ Except for the ones that passed?
http://vote.ss.ca.gov/Returns/prop/00.htm
\_ Maybe this person meant the non-bond-issue props. The sex-
offender one passed.
\_ Mmm. That's $2B well spent. I mean, there are serious doubts
it will actually protect a single child, but you can't vote
against TEH CHILDREN!
\_ "sex offender" + "children" = sure win prop
\_ Sigh. Never mind that public urination is considered a sex
crime (misdemeanor) in some places.
\_ Of course prop 83 didn't apply to public urination.
\_ Man, i just had a way better idea than Jessica's law. When
the Child molesters get out of prison, we'll give them the
option of $10,000 and a free 1-way ticket to Bankok as long
as they agree to never return. (We revoke citizenship.) I
think John Mark Karr would take it. |
| 2006/11/8-9 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45267 Activity:nil |
11/8 So what happened to all the absentee ballots? Wasn't that one of the
big pre-election stories?
\_ i thought absentee ballots are not counted unless the election is
really close, no?
\_ 50% of voters in CA were estimated to be absentee. And absentee
ballots are *always* counted if they qualify. |
| 2006/11/8-9 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:45266 Activity:nil |
11/8 So I guess we can dismiss all the nutty claims that Diebold was fixing
their machines to make Republicans win?
\_ Great. Maybe the first time someone hacks a US election, it'll
be the dems, maybe it'll be a foreign power, and maybe it'll be a
super 37337 15 year old jolt addict from St. Petersburg. But as
long as it didnt' happen yesterday, and didn't involve the GOP,
you're happy? Does it seriously not bother you that we have less
oversight for voting machines than the state of Nevada does for
video slot machines? When every vote is counted electronically,
and our next president ends up being a death metal star from
eastern Europe, don't come crying to me.
\_ how about just Ah-nold? ob after constitutional amendment
\_ No. You can say that any vote machine fixing that took place
was insufficient to skew the overall result. -John |
| 2006/11/8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45259 Activity:nil |
11/7 Webb up to almost 12,000 votes ahead, getting really tough for a
recount...
\_ Back down to a little over 7,000. Still, Webb is going to win this
one. Last year, Virginia had a re-count for a state attorney
general race. 323 vote margin. After the re-count, it went up to
a 360 vote margin. So don't expect George Allen to be able to make
up a freaking 7,000+ vote margin. That's what you get for calling
psb's relative a macaca.
\- i'm not worried about george allen making up a 7k vote margin.
i am worried about karl rove making up 7000 votes.
see http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200411/green etc. --psb |
| 2006/11/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45250 Activity:low |
11/7 whoa, Webb pulling ahead of Allen by 7,800 votes with 99.63% precincts
did someone hack the voting machines, cuz exit polls say Allen should
win by at least 1.5 points
\_ Exit polls do not reflect absentee votes.
\_ People also lie to pollsters.
\_ ask Gore. He will tell you everything about exit polls. |
| 2006/11/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:45244 Activity:nil |
11/7 wtf? freeper thread says Dems will take Senate
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1734539/posts |
| 2006/11/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45236 Activity:nil |
11/7 Most election comedy so far:
So far Foley winning in FL 16 49% - 48%.
This is what we might call "joke voting."
\_ Foley is not really the candidate they are voting for. FL is a
state where the party can change the candidate late in the game
and a vote for Foley is really a vote for the Republican
candidate.
\_ Foley/GOP lost. HAHAHAHAH! |
| 2006/11/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:45227 Activity:nil |
11/7 http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/07/election.main/index.html "Don't underestimate our ability to blow it." -sr democratic aide Wow, I didn't know the Dems were like Cal football! Go Bears!</troll> \_ Learn to spell. It is GO BEAH! not Go Bears! |
| 2006/11/7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:45222 Activity:moderate |
11/7 Democrat: "Fuck the War in Iraq! Impeach Bush!" -> Forget to vote
Republican: "My vote is none of your business." -> Votes Republican
My prediction: Forget the polls. Republicans will hold on to power.
\_ Republican: "You know, we've got a lot of problems, but you've
still got to vote for us. Because my opponent is a slug, and
they're going to tax you into the poorhouse. And on the way to
the poorhouse, you'll meet a terrorist on every street corner.
And when you try to run away from that terrorist, you'll trip
over an illegal immigrant.
\_ Hahaha that's a funny way of putting it.
\_ You're confusing the party message with OP's idea of voter
thinking & action. The Dem message is the equally stupid,
"We hate GWB!" and that's about it.
\_ 6 in '06, first 100 hours, etc. Dems have published their
plans. That you've only heard "We hate GWB!" is telling.
\_ Not giving an incompetent and abusive executive
administration a congressional blank check is not
considered "stupid", IMHO.
\_ but GOP won't retain majority in the House, right?
\_ Election Swami has read the polls and says all shall be
revealed within 24 hours!
\_ http://images.chron.com/apps/comics/images/2006/11/7/Heart.806.g.gif |
| 2006/11/7 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45220 Activity:nil |
11/7 Don't forget to vote and don't get too complacent about the polls!
Remember, you need to add 10-15pts in favor of Republicans. Democrats
may be loud and vocal thus giving the faulty impression that they're
leading the polls. Republicans on the other hand tend to be quiet
until the election day.
\_ I thought it was because of the get-out-the-vote machine.
\_ No. That's only worth a tiny 1-2% at best.
\_ oic, thanks!! |
| 2006/11/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:45217 Activity:nil |
11/7 http://www.electoral-vote.com Review the 2006 polls, watch all Blue-leaners go Red just like '04! \_ After Al Gore and Kerry's uber-fuckups beyond comprehension I'm no longer voting for anyone. -disillusioned \_ Sorry Republicans have to work. \_ in the Gurus section, add Novak: Senate 47-53, House 222-213 -op \_ Where do you get specific state results? (Props, etc.) \_ there probably isn't a central repository for state ballot item pre-election polls \_ You can get the CA stuff from the CA Secretary of State site. \_ for completeness, here's the Washington Post "tournament of champions" (of previous election-prediction winners) http://csua.org/u/hed (washingtonpost.com) \_ So why is it only a third of the Senate? \_ So why is it so many motd'ers are idiots? \_ Because I flunked history? How about be helpful rather than a prick? \_ Have you flunked google as well? Or the great wikipedia search? Grow up. \_ No, his real problem is the schools stopped teaching any form of civics before he was born. It isn't his fault his government controlled education taught him nothing about government. \_ BACK IN MY DAY WE WALKED UP HILL BOTH WAYS IN THE SNOW AND WENT TO SCHOOL 10 HOURS A DAY STUDYING POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY IN LATIN. THESE DAMN KIDS TODAY ARE IGNORANT AND HAVE NO RESPECT UNLIKE WE DID IN THE OLD DAYS. \_ yer hawt 6th grade teacher who wants to have sex with you sez: "because Senators have 6-year terms, House reps have 2-yr terms" \_ Thanks! (Duh) \_ So why is it only half-ish of the Senate? |
| 2006/11/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45213 Activity:nil |
11/7 so where's that button in the back of the voting machine
that lets me vote multiple times? I can't find the www link.
Please post soon so I can vote early and often during lunch.
Do you think they'll get mad if I bring my linesman headset
into the booth?
\_ You need to stop blocking GOP email as spam. It's in there.
\_ Uh, isn't the Democratic party historically the vote-rigging
party? Where does this revisionist history come from?
\_ The last six years.
\_ Ah. Got it. So this is typical Dem rationalization here.
"Anyone who disagrees with us must be stupid/racist!" and
"We lost so the winners must have cheated!"
\_ You missed a 30 there.
\_ That's right. Dems demanded new voting machines--this was
just a Rovian plot to get machines that Repubs could rig
more easily.
\- somewhat ironically handicapped access is/was one
the driver to electronic voting.
\_ Because mashing a virtual button that provides no
feedback is easier than punch cards with a little
stick?
\_ No, numbnuts, because electronic voting machines
allow blind people to have their choices read to
them by a machine instead of a condescending poll
worker. Also, it's easier to use the controllers
they have for EVMs than to poke holes in paper if
you have CP or MS.
\_ I got it from my local DNC rep. They had a few boxes for us
to practice on. We then tossed the real votes in the SF bay
just like last time. |
| 2006/11/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45212 Activity:nil |
11/7 Josh Marshall's got lots of nice vote suppression stories. Sounds like
lots of e-voting machines may be broken in poor districts. Go GOP!
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061107/ap_on_el_ge/eln_voting_problems
\_ Go Democrats! http://www.soundpolitics.com/archives/003472.html
\_ Can you explain how it is the GOP's fault? Does the GOP run these
district's vote machines? Train the staff? Purchase the machines?
Send evil haxx0rz out to break them? |
| 2006/11/6-8 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Prop] UID:45207 Activity:low 79%like:45200 |
11/6 1A: .
1B:
1C:
1D:
1E: ..
\_ None of the above because running your failed state via
proposition to purchase basic structural needs and services
while using the general fund for pork is nutty and doomed: .
\_ So, how much of the general fund is used for pork? It does
seem crazy to borrow money for basic structure, but it's
pretty obvious the CA legislature isn't going to become sane
anytime soon.
\_ In the last 3 years, tax revenue has grown by about 22% and
spending about 28%. You tell me -not pp
\_ None of the 1*'s are propositions. They're all either amendments
to passed initiatives (1A) or bond measures which the legislature
approved, but which by CA law require direct voter approval to
pass. Bonds used to be (and in most other states are) sold
without direct voter approval.
\_ ok, ok, I'm voting for 1a but not the rest.
\_ why not 1e?
\_ eh. Compared to the size of the general fund and
considering it takes several budget cycles to build,
repair, etc, on that scale, we can or at least should
be able to afford the levees from general funds.
\_ the bonds are all going to get paid that way anyway.
Why not get some balls in the legislature and get
the work done, wihtout having to pay interest for
borrowing the money to do the job. That way just costs
more in the long run.
\_ yeah that's what i'm saying. we're in agreement.
\_ If you're in favor of the legislature being able to
operate as they do in other states, as the person above,
that's exactly backwards.
\_ I'm definitely no on 1C. The problem with housing in CA won't
be solved by the govt. giving handouts. Lifiting building
restrictions would do a lot more.
\_ McClintock on the props. As usual, good on bonds.
http://www.tommcclintock.net/news.php?news_id=85&start=5
Good, Interesting justification on 1E. (no on B, C, D)
\_ Gah, hadn't read that, but that was the exact reason I came up
with for having that be my only 1* "yes"
Sad to see he actually believes 83 will do anything.
\_ I don't think opposing that prop is politically tenable.
\_ Yeah, I've decided to vote no on 83. Sad as it is to see
kids get raped, it's too much money to reduce a very rare
crime. Not to meantion things like Satutory rape can get
you a GPS tracker. Seems a bit much.
\_ False. Statutory isn't part of it.
\_ Why should my tax money go to support someone who decided
build in a flood plain? I'm voting no on 1E. |
| 2006/11/6 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45200 Activity:low 79%like:45207 |
11/6 1A:
1B:
1C:
1D:
1E: .
\_ None of the above because running your failed state via
proposition to purchase basic structural needs and services
while using the general fund for pork is nutty and doomed: .
\_ So, how much of the general fund is used for pork? It does
seem crazy to borrow money for basic structure, but it's
pretty obvious the CA legislature isn't going to become sane
anytime soon.
\_ In the last 3 years, tax revenue has grown by about 22% and
spending about 28%. You tell me -not pp
\_ None of the 1*'s are propositions. They're all either amendments
to passed initiatives (1A) or bond measures which the legislature
approved, but which by CA law require direct voter approval to
pass. Bonds used to be (and in most other states are) sold
without direct voter approval.
\_ ok, ok, I'm voting for 1a but not the rest.
\_ I'm definitely no on 1C. The problem with housing in CA won't
be solved by the govt. giving handouts. Lifiting building
restrictions would do a lot more.
\_ McClintock on the props. As usual, good on bonds.
http://www.tommcclintock.net/news.php?news_id=85&start=5 |
| 2006/11/6-8 [Politics/Domestic/California, ERROR, uid:45196, category id '18005#6.55' has no name! , ] UID:45196 Activity:nil |
11/6 Taking a page from Rove, the GOP robocalls to the point of harassment--
on behalf of their opponents:
http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/11/06/2011251
(Slashdot link leads to multiple articles in multiple locales.)
How can anyone think of this as a valid campaign tactic?
\_ as I understand it, these calls are originated by the national
GOP committee. they hired "Conquest Communications Group":
http://www.conquestgroup.com |
| 2006/11/6 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45189 Activity:moderate |
11/7 I'd like to thank all absentee voters for making it impossible to know
the outcome of this election on Wednesday.
\_ I'd like to thank all the NeoCons and Jesus worshippers who
don't participate in polls AND vote the last minute. I thank
for our glorious victories in 2000 and 2004. Surprise!
\_ your welcome. -absentee voter
\_ ur welcome. -absentee voter
\_ ^your^you're
\_ ^y^Y
\_ ur w31c0me! -4b53nt33 v073r
\_ It was impossible to know even without absentee voting. |
| 2006/11/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:45183 Activity:nil |
11/7 wtf #2? The most recent poll shows the Dems with a 20-point lead
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/06/demos.poll/index.html
\_ Sigh, I've been saying on the motd for a long time that polls are
all whacky voodoo bs and just got mocked for it. Welcome to
reality.
\_ The scariest part of being ahead in the polls is that it
encourages voter apathy when "your" party is ahead in the polls. |
| 2006/11/5-7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:45176 Activity:nil |
11/5 I'm lazy. I'm watching a talk show host (Glenn Beck) claim
that the draft was created in WW2 because too many
college graduates were joining the armed forces.
Is this true?
\_ Glenn Beck is a fucking conservative installed by CNN to
boost up their ratings by capturing the Fox News demographs
\_ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_Service_Act
\_ Why would they need a draft if too many people were joining?
\_ If everyone is an officer, who actually does the fighting?
\_ If the whole army is officers, who does the fighting? |
| 2006/11/5-7 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45173 Activity:nil |
11/5 Vote yes on Prop H!!!
\_ Vote no on all props. Make the legislature do their jobs and kick
them out if they suck.
\_ Vote no on all props. Make the legislature do their jobs and kick
them out if they suck. |
| 2006/11/3-4 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45154 Activity:nil |
11/3 http://www.google.com/search?q=prop+87 http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=prop+87 If big oil companies are spending 80 million dollars on anti- Prop 87 which will cut their profit, let's help them spend some of that 80 million by clicking their ads. Click on the NoOilTax dot com link now! \_ You're kidding, right? |
| 2006/11/3-4 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45138 Activity:low |
11/3 Chevron and the big guys raised 80 million dollars to defeat
Prop 87. Too bad they can't give back some of that money
to the consumers.
\_ The fact that they already allocated 80 million dollars
translates to 80 million extra dollars the consumers will soon
have to pay at the pumps.
\_ When I lived in California, back in the late 90's, there were
propositions in the 200's. How come there is now a two digit
proposition? Did they reset the counter?
\_ It's a 10 year rotation. There was a time when the numbers
reset every single election.
\_ Cool, thanks for that tidbit.
\_ If someone was trying to reach into my pocket for $4B, I might spend
$80M to prevent it as well.
\_ They're a corporation. Their responsibility is to their share
holders not consumers. Prop 87 is stupid anyway.
\_ The fact that it specifically excludes itself from conflict of
interest laws is a little more than stupid IMO. |
| 2006/11/3-4 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:45126 Activity:nil |
11/2 Congress terminates Inspector General of Iraq Reconstruction
http://www.csua.org/u/hd6 (nytimes.com) |
| 2006/11/2-4 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:45100 Activity:low |
e1/02 What does everyone think of CA props 1A-1E? I'm voting no on
everything else, but I'm still undecided on those.
\_ all the bond measures are part of the same 'borrow&spend'
shennanigans we kicked Davis out of office for. The rest of it
look like bypassing what the legislature is supposed to be doing.
\_ i kicked out davis because he hid the magnitude of the deficit.
i think every admin, GOP or Dem, borrows and spends to roughly
the same level.
\_ I supported the recall because I was unhappy with the
way Davis handled the 'energy crisis'.
\_ Did you vote for Schwarzenegger?
\_ 1A is a bad idea. The California Legislature has a tough enough
\_ 1A is a bad idea. The California Legisslature has a tough enough
time making a budget because of all the current set asides. I
voted for all the rest, because I think the State needs to
fix all sorts of things that these bond issues address. 1B
was a tough choice, since most of the money goes to freeways,
but I voted for it anyway. -ausman
\_ Wow, I'm exactly the opposite. 1A is an attempt to make taxes
get spent on what they were supposed to be spent on. For B-E I'm
not interested in getting $35B+ more in debt for things that
should be paid for out of the general fund. -emarkp
\_ where do you think the money to pay those bonds off is
supposed to come from? yep, general fund.
\_ Yes, with interest. My objection to bond measures is
typically that they use the general fund for pork, and then
borrow to pay for essentials. -emarkp
\_ What percentage of the CA general fund budget would you
say is pork? -tom
\_ I voted no on every single prop. We have a legislature
for a reason. - danh
\_ You voted against Prop 83? You are in favor of less harsh
sentencing against sex offenders? Interesting.
\_ the legislature can't issue bonds.
\_ and this is a good thing!
\_ I always vote no on all bond measures even if it is something that
would directly benefit me. Buying bonds via propositions is a
horrible way to run the government.
\_ Did you pay all-cash for your house?
\_ My house is not the state government. My problem is not
bonds. My problem is doing things like passing taxes on
people we don't like to give ourselves stuff. My other
problem is taking out loans/bonds to give ourselves more
stuff and leaving the debt for the future to deal with.
\_ Highways and schools aren't "stuff" they are infrastructure
investments that should pay themselves back many times over.\
This is exactly when it makes financial sense to borrow.
investments that should pay themselves back many times over.
This is exactly when it makes financial sense to borrow.
\_ This should come from the general fund, gas taxes and
other things we're already paying, not proposition
sponsored bonds. CA is one of the few states with a
proposition system yet all the other states somehow
manage to fund highways and schools without props.
\_ Without props, yes. Without bonds, no. The problem
is with the system that requires the public to
vote on the bonds, not (necessarily) with the bonds
themselves.
\_ I've got no problem with the legislature issuing
bonds. They can be removed from office if they
screw up. Props are paid for by third parties
who are not directly responsible to the voters.
They also have the problem of "tax $unpopular_grp
for my gain". Because hey if $you are getting
taxed and $I get the benefits, why not tax $you?
\_ Yes, those states can fund highways and schools
because they don't have the bloody voters mucking
around in the legislative system. Kal-eee-forn-ee-a
is ungovernable _because_ of the proposition system.
\_ I agree it's gone too far, thus I vote against
all the bond type issues. Every so often there
is a proposition that changes a law or fixes
some hole in the system the legislature is too
gutless to deal with. Those are the ones I'm
much more likely to vote for. I've also seen
plenty that look good until I read the entire
text, not the he-said-she-said political garbage
and a lot of them have all sorts of stupid
nonsense in them. So I vote against those as well
even though they look good at first. |
| 2006/10/31-11/1 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45063 Activity:kinda low |
10/31 The GOP strategory for the 2006 general election:
- Allow only the slimmest of a Dem majority in the House.
- Prevent Dems from obtaining six Senate seats, since just five will
result in a 50-50 tie, giving the nominal majority to the GOP because
of the inherent VP swing vote, and thus, 1-vote majorities on all
(except Ethics) Senate committees. If Dems get six, negotiate with
Lieberman until he aligns his independent vote with GOP, which gets
them back to a 50-50 tie.
- Whip up the base as much as possible, so they'll be primed to blame
the Dem-controlled House as much as possible through 2008.
\_ Lieberman doesn't have a rat's ass chance of getting re-elected.
\_ Polls show him leading Lamont by more than
what could be called statistical error. I think he's going
to win. - danh
\_ ??? Is there no GOP candidate here?
\_ http://www.schlesinger2006.com
Consistently polling in the single-digit percents. Not
a serious candidate. Judging from the above website, he
is not considering himself to be a seroius candidate either.
\_ I like how you make such a solid statement with no facts, just
your own emotions and desires to base it on.
\_ Well, if you like that one, you'll love this one: you're a
dick, and you fill a place in my life as someone worthy of
trolling.
- Whip up the base as much as possible, so they'll be primed to blame
the Dem-controlled House as much as possible through 2008.
\_ Unless you have special inside information, please don't waste
precious motd bits with either the obvious (Keep control of
Congress) or the inane (whip up the base blah blah blah). |
| 2006/10/31 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45054 Activity:nil |
10/31 http://vbg.spreadshirt.com/?p=4849 |
| 2006/10/31-11/1 [Politics/Domestic/California, Finance/Shopping] UID:45050 Activity:high |
10/31 10 part "Economics for the Citizen." (very basic)
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0503g.asp
\_ My summary from reading the intro and the last paragraph-- there
is a cost of doing something, and there is a cost of not doing
something. In most cases one will be more costly than the others,
but it is often not so clear which one is cheaper/costlier at the
time that you needed to make a decision.
\_ The long version (by Sowell)
http://csua.org/u/hbx
\_ The short version: "THE INVISIBLE HAND IS ALL-POWERFUL!
LALALALALA!"
\_ Let me guess, you like big government beauracracy and wastage?
\_ Let me guess, you like knocking down straw men?
\_ Fuck you talking 'bout? --Da Invisible Hand
\_ He's a bit of a male chauvinist, isn't he?
\_ You mean how he beliddles his wife, something else? |
| 2006/10/30-11/1 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45037 Activity:nil |
10/30 I'm still waiting for the October Surprise. What's up? -GOP #1 fan
\_ Dems win the election, show up at Congress to discover that the
GOP has pried up everything of value and skipped out on the rent.
\_ Ah, so all that'll be left behind is their moral superiority
\_ of the GOP? No, that was sold for crack long ago.
\_ Dem's win the election, show up at congress to find the govt with
taxes slashed, spending levels raised, and a massive debt built
up.
\_ Whereas the Dem plan is to raise taxes, raise spending levels
and build up a massive debt. Vote third party.
\_ Ah, you're describing the platform of legendary Democratic
candidate Dumbshit McDoesntexist.
\_ Is that anything like the Clinton's trashing the Whitehouse
on their way out?
\_ As in, it didn't/won't happen? |
| 2006/10/27-30 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:45012 Activity:nil |
10/27 http://money.cnn.com/2006/10/27/news/economy/gdp/index.htm There you go, Q3 GDP estimated at 1.6%. Looks like the markets had not factored this in. \_ http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1727125/posts |
| 2006/10/26-29 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:44996 Activity:low |
10/26 wow, check out http://drudgereport.com's headline. that's some quality mudslinging, probably the GOP candidate's only hope. the books are fiction, btw. \_ That's pretty awesome. Reagan (and plenty of other people) thought Allen's book "Fields Of Fire" was the best book written on the Vietnam War, ever. \_ California Inferno? \_ refresh! mebbe your proxy is messed up \_ OK, what the fuck is it w/ politicans and perverted fictional sex? \_ D'oh! Webb's in some deep macaca. \_ Why do you think being fictional saves his ass? That makes it even worse. He's not reporting something he witnessed, it came from his own twisted brain. \_ did i say/imply being fictional makes it better? yes, i agree it makes it worse. -op \_ yes. \_ reading comprehension++ \_ You obviously have not served... |
| 2006/10/26-29 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:44984 Activity:nil |
10/26 I find this short term gain for long term loss an interesting choice.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-dems26oct26,0,3860101.story?coll=la-home-headlines
So the DNC is putting quite a number of conservatives who are running
as Democrats. If they win sufficient seats to take congress, the
party will have short term control over various committees at the
long term expense of having very conservative incumbents in the party
who are not going to vote for a liberal agenda. So what's the point
of having control if you really don't?
\_ In either case the Jews remain in control -jblack #1 fan
\_ One related theory I read recently was that short term gains
would be offset by long-term losses by turning blue voters
complacent come next election time. My main question is, what
happens if a bomb goes off before the midterms? -John
\_ I don't buy into the whole morale thing about voters and
complacency and all that. We're losing so that will motivate
us to win. We're winning so that will motivate us to win.
We're neck and neck so that will motivate us to win. Shrug. |
| 2006/10/23-24 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:44934 Activity:low |
10/23 Barron's predicts GOP will retain control of Congress:
GOP will lose eight House seats, three Senates seats
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1723630/posts
\_ Barron's is a rag.
\_ They're probably right. They based their analysis solely on how
much money each candidate has in each district. The candidate
with the most money has won 93 percent of all House races since
1972. Barron's method predicted the 2002 and 2004 House results
fairly closely.
\_ Barron's is right, except when they're wrong. Analysts and
polls think this election's going to be exceptional. Bush
and the Republicans have really, really fucked up to the
point where only Bill Gates could save them.
\_ Analysts and polls are right, except when they're wrong. All
this prognostication is a wasted effort for those who want to
know the future. The polling is all about trying to cause a
certain outcome, not predict one. If the polls were so good
we wouldn't be discussing who might win, we'd be discussing
who won. We have elections to determine winners.
\_ 93% is not impressive for 435 house seats, where candidates
with more money are nearly all the time the more popular ones.
anyways, it's moot, because we'll find out soon enough the
result for the ~ 40-50 competitive House races. < 50% for
competitive races would be a dismal failure of predictive
ability, I think. |
| 2006/10/12-13 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:44790 Activity:low |
10/12 GOP hit squad goes after poor innocent Harry Reid in brutal political
hit design only to destroy a good man's reputation. </sarcasm>
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20061011/D8KMO6NG0.html
\_ The "reporter" who "broke" this is John Solomon. This is the
third time he's written hit pieces on Reid with no there there.
\_ Is this the same guy who wrote a story on Reid about him
going to a boxing match when he was boxing commissioner...
in Nevada?
\_ So his name was thrown around to push through rezoning and he hid
the sale. So far this doesn't seem _that_ bad. (vs. championing
a bill that would increase the value of his property, as Hastert
did)
\_ As a leader of his party (and I don't care which) he or any other
party leader should be held to a higher standard, not lower nor
should the crimes of others (such as stuffing $10k wads in your
fridge) make this sort of 'alternative ethical lapse' ok.
\_ Agreed. Let him step down as leader of his party, and let
Hastert resign as a poltician. This would be commensurate
with their respective crimes.
\_ If he wasn't a leader I'd say the same thing. They should
all go. Corruption of any sort to any degree is *not* ok.
Kick out all the so-called 'career politicians'.
\_ Preach on, brother! Clear Bush/Cheney out of the White
House!
\_ If you're going to troll at least put some effort in.
\_ No troll! I'm right behind you! All corrupt SOBs
out, startng at the top!
\_ Both parties are equally corrupt, they just have
different patrons. For the GOP it is Big Oil and
the military-industrial complex, for the Dems it
is the Unions and Blacks.
\_ "Blacks" are a patron?
\_ My favorite part is that he hung up the phone when asked about
it. That's classic. |
| 2006/10/7-10 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:44718 Activity:low |
10/7 GOP in meltdown: "How low can the Republicans go?"
Bush at 33% approval
35% want the Republicans to remain in power
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15167150/site/newsweek
Cue "polls don't matter" dude and "Newsweek is left wing trash" guy.
\_ Um, most Republicans no longer associate Bush with Republicanism.
They'll still vote Republican because they value conservatism
over liberalism, and it has nothing to do with Bush. The
Bush Administration != GOP
\_ Republicans are only a third of the voters, remember. --!Diebold
\_ Wasn't Pete Wilson at something ridiculous like an 11% approval
rating when he was governor of California? And then he rode the
anti-illegal immigration sentiment to a landslide re-election
victory over Democratic challenger Kathleen Brown? Just goes to
show you that you should never under-estimate the ability of the
GOP to unite white people by playing upon middle America's fears
leading up to election time.
\_ My dog could have beat Brown in that election. She ran a truly
horrible campaign. I also saw her speak in person. She was a
fourth rate speaker who makes Bush look good. She lost because
she was the lesser candidate. |
| 2006/10/5-7 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:44703 Activity:nil |
10/5 Do Amish people vote?
\_ nope. |
| 2006/10/5-7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:44691 Activity:low |
10/6 http://FOXNews.com - Internal Poll Suggests Hastert Could Devastate GOP http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,218043,00.html "'The data suggests Americans have bailed on the speaker,' a Republican source briefed on the polling data told FOX News. 'And the difference could be between a 20-seat loss and 50-seat loss.'" ... Hastert refuses to resign: http://csua.org/u/h4a (Yahoo! News) \_ Hastert looks like he eats 2 or 3 sticks of butter per day. \_ So do the assholes who are probably going to re-elect a republican majority in November. \_ Are you sure the elections are honest? There are a lot of unanswered questions about the polls. Maybe you mean the minority who are going to rig the elections to put the republican majority in. \_ Oh, c'mon. Just because 90% of Diebolds campaign contributions dollars have gone to Republicans and their machines seem to have been designed with hacking as a feature not a bug doesn't imply an bias. as a feature not a bug doesn't imply a bias. |
| 2006/9/29-11/2 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:44603 Activity:nil |
10/31 The GOP strategory for the 2006 general election:
- Allow only the slimmest of a Dem majority in the House.
- Prevent Dems from obtaining six Senate seats, since just five will
result in a 50-50 tie, giving the nominal majority to the GOP because
of the inherent VP swing vote, and thus, 1-vote majorities on all
(except Ethics) Senate committees. If Dems get six, negotiate with
Lieberman until he aligns his independent vote with GOP, which gets
them back to a 50-50 tie.
\_ It's not that bad, at least he didn't eat the 16-year old
boy -Republican
\_ I will be really amused if the Democrats don't win their race.
They need to start running ads like 'the Republican
opponent was trolling for hot boy ass on Myspace'
\_ Good riddance.
\_ Lieberman doesn't have a rat's ass chance of getting re-elected.
\_ Polls show him leading Lamont by more than
what could be called statistical error. I think he's going
to win. - danh
\_ ??? Is there no GOP candidate here?
\_ http://www.schlesinger2006.com
Consistently polling in the single-digit percents. Not
a serious candidate. Judging from the above website, he
is not considering himself to be a seroius candidate either.
\_ I like how you make such a solid statement with no facts, just
your own emotions and desires to base it on.
\_ Well, if you like that one, you'll love this one: you're a
dick, and you fill a place in my life as someone worthy of
trolling.
- Whip up the base as much as possible, so they'll be primed to blame
the Dem-controlled House as much as possible through 2008.
\_ Unless you have special inside information, please don't waste
precious motd bits with either the obvious (Keep control of
Congress) or the inane (whip up the base blah blah blah). |
| 2006/9/29 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:44600 Activity:moderate |
9/29 So, you lesbians, you still think penis is an ineffective pleasure?
The stupid detainee (lack of rights) bill was passed.
No Habeas Corpus; no examine of secret evidence against the
accused. the accused can not sue the government for violation
of their rights. Democrats end up follow Bush's lead? Jesus.
for a moment I thought the judicial system in China was bad,
it looks like there is a big trend of convergence!
\_ At least we don't charge for the cartridgess used in executions
\_ He's a Republican President with a Republican Congress going into
election season to try to hang onto their majority. In order for
them to abandon him, they'd have to have the kind of moral
fortitude that gets you shunned in the Capitol. Seriously, short
of raping a schoolbus full of nuns and retarded children on
national TV, there's not much he could do to lose the support of
the hangers-on.
\_ Or maybe *not* have sex with that woman! (rim shot!)
\_ I was really depressed about all of this until I realized that
there's almost no chance it will stand up in court - in fact,
apparently a lot of of the Congresscritters that voted FOR the
law don't think it is Constitutional either.
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001637.php
\_ Right, but since traiters like Bill Frist have made it clear
that they do not support the judiciary branch as a check on
the other two branches of government, one has to ask how long
such a check will last? When a solid majority of the people in
a democratic nation fail to hold democratic values, democracy
dies. I think op may have the right idea that as China increases
the rule of law and the U.S. erodes it that we'll meet in the
middle. |
| 2006/9/27-28 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:44569 Activity:nil |
9/27 Keith Olbermann receives letter from California with white powder
(which turned out to be detergent) with note saying it was payback
for his left-wing views
http://csua.org/u/h10 (nypost.com) |
| 2006/9/27-28 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:44566 Activity:kinda low 71%like:44555 |
9/26 God wants to limit and simplify college choices:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/09/26/higher.education.ap/index.html
\_ Motd nutcase likes to post misleading headlines:
Right here.
\_ isn't she a Republican?
\_ Bush is actually a closet liberal.
\_ Bush is actually a social conservative and economic liberal.
\_ Go back to school. Trickle down theory is in no way
economically liberal.
\_ He's a liberal spender, not a trickle downer. The
budget has ballooned under Bush since day 1. Go read
a newspaper and avoid dailykos if you want to stay in
touch with reality.
\_ Cutting taxes to the wealthy, cutting social
programs, and spending gobs on the military is
not liberal in any way. -tom
\_ Actually, the first two are indeed economically
liberal. The last one is not.
\_ liberal != libertarian, troll. -tom
\_ The entire federal budget has ballooned under
Bush. If you want to talk about cuts in social
programs go look at the the previous admin's cuts
to welfare programs. Spending on the military is
neither liberal nor conservative. Cutting taxes
is a moral issue, not an economic one. The truly
wealthy (the top 1%) never paid taxes, while the
upper middle and middle classes get reamed every
April.
\_ Asserting things doesn't make them true. -tom |
| 2006/9/19-22 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:44452 Activity:low |
9/19 See the fucking future of California
http://csua.org/u/gxs
\_ Oh no! Fewer white people! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!!!
\_ I like the title of the piece. A nice The Other moment there.
\_ I like the fucking title of the piece. A nice The Other moment there.
Consider a piece about a comunity say becoming a lot more Jewish
having that title.
\_ "a lot more" -- going from 75% white to 25% white in a few years
is massive, not "a lot".
\_ yeah, we really pine for the days when you could choose
\_ yeah, we really pine for the fucking days when you could choose
between a truck stop meal, Denny's, and McDonald's;
now you can only get good Mexican food. And our treasured
redneck traditions of getting drunk, doing pickup truck drag
races, and shooting road signs are in dire peril. -tom
\_ Alright tom, way to reduce real, complex cultural
issues to what kind of food you can get on the hiway.
issues to what kind of food you can get on the fucking hiway.
Life insulated much? -jrleek
\_ no. -tom
\_ "This city of 5,087 (and rising fast) is the closest thing to a
'Petri dish' for observing the effects of immigration in their
most concentrated form, said Roberto Suro, director of the Pew
\_ "This city of 5,087 (and rising fast) is the fucking closest thing to a
'Petri dish' for observing the fucking effects of immigration in their
most concentrated form, said Roberto Suro, director of the fucking Pew
Hispanic Center."
This sounds more like "the future of rural California" than the
future of urban California; the cities will absorb this without a
future of urban California; the fucking cities will absorb this without a
hiccup. |
| 2006/9/19-22 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:44446 Activity:low |
9/19 Coup attempt in Thailand:
http://tinyurl.com/f6bj4 (bbc.co.uk)
\_ Looking more and more like coup accomplished.
\_ Funny thing, when I was there, one of our friends--a former
army officer and the daughter of one of the governor--gave us
the impression that the army wasn't really happy with Thaksin.
Of course she was also an opposition politician, so YMMV. -John
\_ Can our military do the same thing to outst Bush?
\_ Why would they?
\_ I hope not. With Bush out of office, where will John
Stewart and Stephen Colbert get their material?
\_ The comedy sector of the economy recovered after the
great loss of Dan Quayle as VP. There is always a more
clueless leader in our future. Never give up hope.
\_ Can the military do it? Probably. Will the military do it?
Probably not. There are no MacArthurs in today's military.
\_ Whoa there cowboy! Mac was no coup attempting anti-American.
He was a loyal patriot who did his duty and stepped aside
when ordered so. Wth did you get the idea Mac had any ideas
about taking over the US government or was in any way opposed
to the government? He was GI all the way.
\_ There is plenty of evidence that MacArthur wanted to
defy the orders of his President
\_ "wanted to defy" is nothing like "wanted to overthrow"
and in any even it is established historical fact that
when he was essentially 'fired' and called home he
went with no real fuss. he wanted to nuke china but
wasn't allowed to. he wanted to do a lot of things
but followed orders. sheesh, i cant believe this is
subject to debate.
\_ I am not saying that MacArthur had any designs on taking
power extra-constitutionally. I am saying that if a coup
was required, only MacArthur could have pulled it off.
\_ MacArthur could not have. He did not want to. He did
not try. He did not talk in those terms. He would not
have had the support of his generals, his staff, his
officers or his soldiers. The very idea is completely
ludicrous from top to bottom.
\_ Think of the incident of the Bonus March. No one
but MacArthur would have done that.
\_ None of you have served. Your oath is to the Constitution
not to one man.
\_ What do you mean? You're saying the oath is not to Bush, so
the military can outst Bush?
\_ Does the const. give the military the power to
replace the CinC? No, that power rests w/ the
people via the Presidential election.
A more complex question is present if the Pres.
acts unconstitutionally (ie defies a USSC order).
\_ If you want to be really anal about it, the power to
elect the President comes from the states, not the
people. "Each state shall appoint, in such manner as
the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of
electors..." The Constitution does not mandate that
states hold elections to determine their electors.
\_ True. Furthermore, the Constitution does not mandate
that the electors cast their votes for the
Presidental candidate which the majority of the
state's people prefer, or divide their vote
proportionally among candidates, either. -- !PP
\_ Not much. The same thing happens if the USSC or
Congress screws up. Pretty much nothing. Later
courts and congresses and presidents reverse earlier
decisions and life goes on.
\_ The const. in Thailand doesn't give their military the
power to replace their head of govt. either. Yet it
still happens.
\_ "The coup went largely unnoticed in Bangkok's popular tourist
districts, where foreigners packed bars and cabarets, oblivious to
the activity about two miles away. ...... Hundreds of people
gathered at Government House taking pictures of themselves with the
tanks."
\_ Has the navy or the air force taken any side? |
| 2006/9/18-20 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:44427 Activity:nil |
9/18 Does the Right to Keep and Arm Bears [in certain states] include the
right to arm wolves, raccoons, cougars, bison, ducks, possums, or
even wolverines? I'm guessing you can't own any of these in CA
but what about other states?
\_ The Navy has attempted to arm dolfins, but it turns out they're too
smart to be suicide bombers. Too bad for the navy that dolfins
haven't discovered religion.
\_ You mean dolphins? What are dolfins?
\_ Daily Orders, Ledgers and
FINance Systems:
http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/DOLFINS
\_ Is this a serious question or a troll?
\_ The right must include the ability to own armed turtles trained
in martial arts. |
| 2006/9/18-20 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:44423 Activity:nil |
9/18 Easy Diebold vote stealing!
http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting |
| 2006/9/18 [Politics/Domestic/California, Reference/Military] UID:44420 Activity:nil |
9/18 Does the Right to Keep and Bear Arms [in certain states] include the
right to keep grenades, mines, bazooka, artillery, tanks, or even
chemical weapons? I'm guessing you can't own any of these in CA
but what about other states? |
| 2006/9/18-20 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:44417 Activity:nil |
9/18 Sweden, the newest red state:
http://tinyurl.com/kbgrt (cnn)
\_ So? The entire earth is leaning towards right. Singapore for
example used to provide government built homes but stopped doing
so and recently have cut taxes and social benefits. China is
totally embracing Capitalism and giving land to whoever has
enough money to bribe officials. The entire earth is leaning
towards the right, to cut social programs to get lazy people
working again. |
| 2006/9/15-17 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:44393 Activity:nil |
9/15 http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-091506cell,0,2855679.story http://csua.org/u/gwg (leginfo.ca.gov) Starting July '08, you will be fined $20 + city/county surcharges ($50 repeat offenses) if you are caught driving with a cell phone in your hand in CA. Not illegal when the phone is "configured to allow hands-free listening and talking ... and is used in that manner". \_ So, what if you are not talking on the phone, but are holding it in your hand? \_ Why can't they start it sooner? |
| 2006/9/14-16 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:44380 Activity:nil |
9/14 Princeton CS professor pwns Diebold
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060913/ap_on_hi_te/electronic_voting
\_ Check out http://opensecrets.org. It looks like greater than 90% of
Diebold's contribution dollars have gone to Republicans. |
| 2006/9/11-14 [Recreation/Dating, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:44344 Activity:low |
9/11 Anna Nicole Smith's 20-year-old son died in his bed, days after Anna
gave birth to a daughter.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060911/ap_en_tv/anna_nicole_smith_son
\_ who?
\_ You're too young.
\_ You're too young. -- OP
\_ no, I just don't waste time on idiotic pop culture.
\_ then why ask?
\_ I was just thinking that you recognize a different
generation of sex symbols. -- OP
\_ "fat, blonde, and stupid is no way to go through life"
\_ Yeah, she's about as appealing as Tammy Faye Bakker
\_ Nah, I'd do ANS after only a month of sexual
deprivation. It'd take a year for TFB to seem
appealing.
\_ I'd have to be dead for TFB
\_ She looked great in To the Limit, Skyscraper, and
Anna Nicole Smith: Exposed.
\_ hundreds of million of dollar, death of her young son... talking
about ups and downs in her life!
\_ Not to mention post-partum (sp?) depression, damn that's
horrible. |
| 2006/9/10-12 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:44335 Activity:nil |
9/9 Yes or no on Prop 87?
\_ Undetermined. The tax part may or may not raise gas prices in CA.
The spending part has a similar flavor to Stem Cell Research prop.
In short, it has the potential for good, but it's not a sure thing. |
| 2006/9/4-5 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:44270 Activity:low |
9/4 Small favor to ask anyone here: would you be so kind as to
post the measurements of a standard CA license plate? -John
\_ As per Cal. Vehicle Code Sec. 4852(a), license plates are
12" long by 6" wide:
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d03/vc4852.htm
Mine looks like it is 1/8" larger in both dimensions. HTH.
--ranga
\_ Awesome, thanks (need to know if CA plate frames would fit
a Chilean one.) -John |
| 2006/9/2-5 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:44250 Activity:nil |
9/2 Protest over Pluto's demotion ... The "Size doesn't matter" sign I
think captures all the theonion glory of the story (note, it's
NOT a theonion story, or at least CNN doesn't think it is):
http://tinyurl.com/epvlx |
| 2006/8/31-9/3 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:44218 Activity:nil |
8/31 I just got a proxy vote. It says:
-PROPOSAL FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE ADOPTION OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2007
EXECUTIVE BONUS PLAN. Directors Recommend: FOR
-PROPOSAL FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE AMENDED AND RESTATED 1993 DIRECTORS'
STOCK PLAN. Directors Recommend: FOR
Fuck the directors.
\_ Unfortunately, the directors are often large shareholders and/or
buddies of the large shareholders. Feel free to cast your 100
votes against. |
| 2006/8/30-9/3 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:44206 Activity:kinda low |
8/30 Governor signs bill requiring any institution in CA to condone sexual
deviancy. http://csua.org/u/gsw
\_ What a loaded way of putting it. What do you mean by sexual
deviancy? Child rapists? Or hetero blowjobs and cunnalingus?
\_ Congratulations, you have been trolled.
\_ I was trolled? I thought I was calling out a troll.
\_ No, I wasn't trolling. It's not PC, but homosexuality,
transgenderism, etc. are sexual deviancies. -op
\_ A deviancy is a variance from the norm. Blacks in
Danville are racially deviant. OK to discrimate against
them?
Danville are racially deviant. OK to discriminate
against them?
\_ It's ok to descriminate against all
residents of Danville. It's fucking Danville for
Christ's sake.
\_ It's ok to descriminate against all residents of
Danville. It's fucking Danville for Christ's sake.
\_ So what about Danville?
\_ "Focus on the Family (FOTF) Action chairman Dr. James Dobson and FOTF
Action senior vice president of government and public policy Tom
Minnery pointed out during Wednesday.s radio broadcast that the bill
could result in a church no longer being able to receive police or
fire protection if the pastor preaches from biblical passages
against homosexuality"
That can't be true.
\_ How could you ever imply the Honorable Dr. James Dobson could
be so bold as to fib? You sir, offended me.
\_ I wonder what BUD DAY thinks.
\_ Some of the text: (from http://csua.org/u/gsy
"No person in the State of California shall, on the basis of race,
national origin, ethnic group identification, religion, age, sex,
sexual orientation, color, or disability, be unlawfully denied
full and equal access to the benefits of, or be unlawfully
subjected to discrimination under, any program or activity that
is conducted, operated, or administered by the state or by any
state agency, is funded directly by the state, or receives any
financial assistance from the state."
I can see Dobson's interpretation being an interpretation of this
text (though it seems unlikely).
\_ http://www.outinamerica.com/home/news.asp?articleid=29852
They have the same interpretation as Dobson.
\_ Not quite: "Senate Bill 1441 protects all Californians who
utilize public services such as police and fire protection,
financial aid, social services and food stamps." It's saying
it protects the consumers of those services, which makes it
sound like that was an end run around the issue of "it only
protects citizens"
\_ Read the article in context. It protects them from
discrimination based on sexual orientation.
\_ Right, but it implies that the people it's protecting
are the service consumers, not that it's targetting
service consumers for coercion.
\_ How does it feel to be on the losing end of history, you hate
filled little bigot? I guess you know how the crackers in The
South felt now after the Civil Rights Act was passed, don't you?
\_ Wow, just wow, this is awesome. In only three lines you managed
to spew generic hatred, racist hatred, and look like an idiot
all at the same time without adding any value to the thread.
That is a rare feat even for the motd. I salute you, sir!
\_ Why do gays hate America? |
| 2006/8/24-26 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:44144 Activity:nil |
8/24 Problems w/ Diebold machines in AK primary:
http://www.adn.com/news/politics/elections/story/8113627p-8006175c.html |
| 2006/8/22-24 [Politics/Domestic/California, Reference/Tax] UID:44093 Activity:nil |
8/22 This is not a critical tax question so I'm not going to ask my
accountant. At any rate I used to claim "2" on my tax W2 and had
always gotten money back (a few thousand dollars a year) every year,
thanks to itemizing tax & owning my parents' properties in my name.
This year I decided that I'd get more money back immediately and
pay tax later, and decided to put down "3" instead of "2". However,
I'm still getting taxed at around 34% which is the same tax rate as
before! Below is the breakdown of my current tax:
Federal: 18.4% of my pay
SS Tax: 6.18%
Medicare: 1.44%
CA Tax: 6.69%
CA VDPI: 0.78% <-- BTW what is this?
Medical: 0.57%
Does this sound about right? Are you CA single dudes making 6
digits also getting taxed around 34% claiming "3" instead of "2"?
\_ Changing your withholding by 1 won't make a big change.
\_ See IRS Publication 15, Circular E. This has the formula
on how much each witholding does exactly. Assuming you are
paid semimonthly, each witholding means ~$137 of your salary
won't be taxed. So assumes you are at 35% bracket, you'll get
~$48 more a pay check.
\_ CA VPDI is voluntary plan disability insurance. It is similar to
SDI which is state-run. BTW, you can claim itemized deduction on
SDI but not on VPDI. |
| 2006/8/17-24 [Reference/RealEstate, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:44044 Activity:low |
8/17 For the sake of posterity, San Diego County had its first year-over-
year decline in median home price in June 2006 (for the current cycle).
L.A. and the Bay Area have not gone negative year-over-year, yet.
Also, if you look at month-to-month, I believe San Diego County
went negative Jan 2006, but not certain about that.
http://csua.org/u/gpa (signonsandiego.com)
\_ Keep dreaming if you think the real estate markets in L.A. and
the Bay Area are going to crash. Maybe there will be a slight
market correction and a 10 percent price dip, but if you ride
out the dip over the next couple of years, your home price will
be fine. To all you renters out there, you are still screwed.
\_ All renters are screwed, huh? By "renter", you mean anyone
who wants to live and work in california, but who does not
already own a home. In other words, any recent college,
highschool or professional school graduate, any immigrant,
or anyone from out of state--i.e. the workforce that would
be required to grow or even continue the california economy
at its current levels. When one of you California homeowners
retires, who's going to replace you? When you want to grow
your business, who are you going to hire? You'll only be able
to get so many suckers to spend 10 times their annual salary on a
home, which means that when there are no more suckers, the
california economy will shrink hard and fast. It's already
happening, as business leave your state in droves to Texas
and other parts of the southwest to escape your la-la-land
prices.
prices. And as the economy continues to shrink, the number of
people willing to pay your prices will continue to drop. Do
you really think that in the face of a rapidly shrinking economy,
these prices will be sustainable? Or perhaps you think there
will always be another sucker willing to move to california to
either be a serf to the landowning class forever or pay 10 times
their yearly salary for a home?
\_ Try to come up with a convincing argument. Your entry just
says that you think houses prices will crash because: (1) CA
homewoners will retire someday, (2) people are going to get
tired of over-paying for homes, and (3) CA business are going
to move to Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico. Now, it may be
true that CA residential real estate prices drop, but it won't
be because of CA homeowners retiring, people suddenly becoming
smart about home prices, or because of this supposed future
max exodus of CA business to dust bowl crappy states like
Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico. The truth is that because
there are so many more professionals and people in general in
California, that has increased the demand for homes, as there
is a limited amount of space here. And unfortunately, people
don't all of a sudden realize that they should correct market
prices. People are stupid. And trust me, no one in CA is
worried about the "threat" of its neighboring crappy states.
The SF Bay Area, which is the financial and technology center
of the West, and Los Angeles, which is the entertainment capital
of the world, aren't worried about New Mexico. Believe me. But
anyway, in the meantime, have fun in your 750 square foot studio.
\_ Your summary of those reasons is generally correct; the crash
or whatever you wish to call it will happen for basic economic
reasons. When most homes are bought for speculation, an
increase of value of say, >10% is needed to cover the various
fees for the sale, any upgrades you added, and the cost of
of the house itself (assuming this is a 2nd home).
Without such growth, the speculators lose money. When most
of the GDP growth, increase in jobs, etc. is from the real
estate boom, a pause in real estate is sufficient to gut the
economy. Which, of course, will go back to house prices.
Oh, and DQ News reports 30-40% decline in sales volume for the
BA. Pull up a chair, pop a beer, and wait for the fun.
of the West, and Los Angeles, which is the entertainment
capital of the world, aren't worried about New Mexico.
Believe me. But anyway, in the meantime, have fun in
your 750 square foot studio.
\_ Your summary of those reasons is generally correct;
the crash or whatever you wish to call it will happen
for basic economic reasons. When most homes are bought
for speculation, an increase of value of say, >10%
is needed to cover the various fees for the sale, any
upgrades you added, and the cost of of the house itself
(assuming this is a 2nd home). Without such growth, the
speculators lose money. When most of the GDP growth,
increase in jobs, etc. is from the real estate boom, a
pause in real estate is sufficient to gut the economy.
Which, of course, will go back to house prices. Oh,
and DQ News reports 30-40% decline in sales volume
for the BA. Pull up a chair, pop a beer, and wait for
the fun.
\_ As a home owner for several years I don't care *at all*
what happens to housing pricing. The only time the
prices matter to me is when I'm trying to sell my
current home to buy a new one. I tried to explain this
to a renter-wannabe-home-owner at work several times
but he keeps gloating as prices in the area slowly
decline. I'd love to see housing prices crash to the
price of a cup of coffee so I could easily sell my home
in 5 minutes and buy anything I wanted much closer to
work where homes are nicer and going for over a million.
Housing prices going up and down is normal and healthy
and good for home owners overall. As a home owner I am
not losing money when prices drop since I choose when
I sell and since I want a more expensive house than I
have now prices compressing downwards saves me money
when I move to a nicer place even though my house has
also dropped in price. It will not have dropped as
much as the place I want. --someone else
\_ Exactly. So your house is worth $700K and drops
20% to $550K. The house you want is worth $1M
and drops to $800K. The gap is now $50K less.
If you bought your place for, say, $350K then
this can be a boon depending on rates. If
housing prices drop then it's a buying opportunity,
if you can afford it. If they don't drop, then
you've lost nothing. That said, I certainly
wouldn't buy now if I didn't already own.
\_ I am a homeowner in LA and also studying to be a real estate
broker. I think a 10% decline is optimistic. We will see
perhaps as much as a 30% decline. However, so what, unless
you're sitting on a huge pile of cash?
\_ If you think a million-dollar home will suddenly
depreciate in value to 700K in the span of 1 year or 2
years, and if you think starter homes in middle-class
neighborhoods currently at about 600K will suddenly drop
to about 400K, you are living in fantasyland.
\_ I don't know what the span of time will be, but I
think that this will happen as long as interest rates
continue to rise. It's happened before. However, like I
said, so what?\
\_ The last time it happened was the early '90s when the
drop in prices was due to a serious national economic
recession, high unemployment rates, and increased
taxes (thank you George Bush Sr.). Somehow, we have
\_I'm glad you truthfully wrote that Mitchell
pushed for this as Senate Majority leader.
\_ "Read my lips. No new taxes."
-George H. Bush, Sr.
been able to avoid a recession, significant rises in
the unemployment rate, and any tax hikes. If that
stuff DOES all happen in the near future, housing
prices will be the least of all our worries.
\_ I think that all of this is possible, but the
driver will be rising interest rates. As for how
important this is to "you", that is your own
list of priorities.
\_ Dude, anything is "possible." But the
reason for rising interest rates is to
put a damper on inflation. Rising
interest rates do not lead by themselves
to a recession, increased unemployment,
or added taxes. |
| 2006/8/16-18 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:44032 Activity:nil |
8/16 For the tip-obsessed:
http://www.pulitzer.org/year/2005/commentary/works/schultz1.html
\- FYI: i dunno what kind of setting the article talks about
but my understanding for Califnornia restaurants is
"tips can only go to front of the house people", meaning, not the
management, not the dishwashers, not the cooks. I dont know
if there are rules at a club with coat check or some other
if there are diff rules at a club with coat check or some other
kind of "event" rather than establishment. I assume there is
some kind of different rules at say a family owned places
where the server is likely a relative of the owner etc.
\_ You think wrong. People tip out to the back room all the time.
\- I am not talking about what is true in practice. Who knows
about that. However, that is my statement about what I believe
is the legal mandate in CA. If I'm wrong about the law, let
me know. I also dont know how much of this is CA and how
much is Federal.
much is Federal. BTW, an anonymous "you are wrong" doesnt
really mean much. How about some facts.
\_ http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/FAQ_TipsAndGratutities.htm
Not explicitly covered: family-run businesses.
Not explicitly covered: family-run businesses. -!pp
\_ #4: Tips only for "front room". |
| 2006/8/15-19 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:44013 Activity:nil |
8/15 If anyone is interested in working at Lawrence Livermore National
Lab, now or in the future, contact me. I would also recommend
LLNL's internsip program. I can help with that too. -jrleek
\_ Maybe if you explain why working at LLNL is a cool place to work
at people would start inquiring more. For example, what are some
of the reason why people should ditch private sectors that
offer lots of opportunities and flexibilities and offer lucrative
stock options, near 6 digit salaries, located in the heart
of Silicon Valley, San Francisco, and convenient places for
positions at LLNL, far from civilization in the middle of nowhere?
Secondly, there are many talented Asians who simply refuse to work
at any US government agency these days given its history,
recent fuck-ups in the news, and perceived hostility towards
minories (which are agreed upon in Asian communities). What has
the US government done recently to improve its poor perception
in these minority communities? Why should minorities quit their
nice jobs in the vally to go to LLNL?
\_ I hate Bush, right wing nuts, skinheads, Republicans, and the
US government. -Minority male
\_ Hi troll.
\_ I'm not him but a job at LLNL should be pretty secure and
you get a nice pension. You could also find cheaper housing in
the Livermore area probably. I don't work for the gov't but
working on research projects in a secure job can't be all bad.
\_ Hi troll.
\_ Livermore is far from civilization? Wha?
\_ LLNL pay seems pretty comparable to other tech companies.
Most CS Phds here make over 100,000. I make 80,000, with a
BS and 2 years experience. -jrleek
\_ I hate Bush, right wing nuts, skinheads, Republicans, and the
US government. -Minority male
\_ Nice. What is the ethnicity make-up, and what is it doing
to promote the image that the US government does NOT hate
Chinese and other minorities?
\_ Ethnicity isn't an issue in hiring. Being able to get a
security clearance is. Your skin color does not have any
effect on your ability to get clearance.
\_ Thanks, you said that more clearly than I was
apparently capable of. -jrleek
\_ Sorry, I wasn't quite finished with that post, I got
interuppted. I admit, the lab is pretty white. I
generally ascribe this to the "must be a citizen"
requirement, and related fallout, but I'm not really
sure. I know and work with a number of asians
(mostly Chinese), but I can't really say much about
image issues in asian communities. I guess I could
ask them. -jrleek
\_ Yes, I believe that is exactly the target
demographic. That, and anti-war socialists who don't
mind working for the military-industrial complex.
\_ So, San Jose is kind of my personal version of Hell, so I
consider that reason enough to not get a job there.
Livermore, is short on big city ammenities, like good
restraunts. -jrleek
\_ As for why you might like working here, it's a very stable
job, with a good pension. If you think scientific computing
on massively parallel super-computers is cool (I do), you
might like it here. If not, probably not. I have a lot of
time flexibility, I can come and go when I please, and
work at home at will. This really depends on your project
though. Oh, and no one EVER asks me to work more
than 8 hours a day, 5 days a week. It's a good job
for someone with a family. (like me) -jrleek
\_ No commies, huh? And you're posting here?
Out of curiousity, do you have like a finger-prick
test for communism?
test for communism? <This post is in response to what was
posted on jobs@csua, not the motd.>
\_ Sheesh, humor circuits disengaged, huh? The Communist line
was tounge-in-cheek, but obviously LLNL doesn't hire people
who advocate the violent overthrow of the US governement.
-jrleek
\_ Livermore is far from civilization? Wha?
\_ But will you hire libertarians who sit on their ass all day
at their government job preaching small government and low
taxes on the motd?
\_ Yes, I believe that is exactly the target
demographic. That, and anti-war socialists who don't
mind working for the military-industrial complex.
\_ Ethnicity isn't an issue in hiring. Being able to get a
security clearance is. Your skin color does not have any
effect on your ability to get clearance.
\_ If you ever worked for government and saw the waste
involved you'd quickly turn into a small government
libertarian if you were intellectually honest about it.
The government doesn't need more money. They need a lot
less waste.
\_ Thanks, you said that more clearly than I was
apparently capable of. -jrleek
\_ What's funny is that I've been working for the federal
government now for 8 months, and I've actually done
just that. I told them I'm quitting by the end of
2006. Yes, they need less waste, and in my opinion,
my life as a government employee counts as waste.
I don't agree with the drooling worship of giant
corporations practiced by most libertarians, particularly
since most of those corporations are in bed with big
government anyway. But as far as government waste goes,
i'm right with them now. I've gotten in fights with the
secretaries about the fact that they pay about ten times
what I need for food when I travel, and their arguement
was that it would cost more to fight the system and
try to get a "special" low per diem than to just
take the money, and that I should just go eat at the
most expensive place I can find. So I've decided to
keep track of my travel expenses, and give the difference
between what I spend and what I get to government fraud
and waste watchdog organizations.
\_ I found the per diem only slightly higher than I
needed on travel. If I ate McDonald's and nothing
else maybe it'd be 10x but I care more than that
what I put in my body. The real waste is elsewhere.
\_ I would apply for the job, but my grades suck. -average American male
\_ I find the per diem isn't really enough and neither
is the hotel. I usually end up paying out of
pocket on travel to avoid staying at a dump, and
that's with the (very good) government rates at
hotels. If you like Motel 6 and Subway for dinner
then I guess it's too much.
\_ 120$/day just for food, in Paris, when the hotel
provides good free breakfast and the host
institution provides lunch? A factor of ten was
an excageration, but if you really need more than
20 dollars to get something better than Subway
for dinner in Paris, than you're an idiot.
Perhaps I have higher per diems than you. |
| 2006/8/3-6 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:43888 Activity:nil |
8/2 Panoramic photos of California sprawl
http://leblog.exuberance.com/2006/07/suburban_sprawl.html
\_ Urban sprawl is a good thing. It allows more Americans to achieve
their American dream. Urban sprawl makes Bush's promise to give
a home to every American a reality.
\_ Urban sprawl makes home ownership _harder_ because of the wasted
land. It makes large-yard ownership easier.
\_ Dude, post links of Angie Everhart sprawling, not the urban
sprawl of California. -proud American |
| 2006/8/2-6 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:43873 Activity:nil |
8/2 Every single contributor to Green Party Senate candidate is a
conservative - except for the candidate himself
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001256.php
\_ Ilya, is that you?
\_ Yes. -proud American |
| 2006/7/27-30 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:43820 Activity:moderate |
7/27 I have two $100 Best Buy gift cards that I got as graduation
presents and I really don't need anything from Best Buy. I'll
sell them for $160. I work on campus.
Addendum: these cards don't expire and I believe in California
it is illegal to deduct a service fee for non-use (but you should
double-check). They can be used at any U.S. Best Buy, and
possibly online (check their website about that) --peterl
\_ This offer has been taken. Thanks Peter -kchang
\_ One more data point that shows that people don't want gifts, they
want cash. Please be a good citizen and give cash instead
of gifts, especially at weddings.
\_ OK, I have two $100 bills that I really don't need anymore,
I'll sell them for $260. -John
\_ Yes and what is your point? On average, we're smarter and
work harder than the rest of the people on earth EXCEPT for
the Indians because they're also smart and hard working AND
they are kicking our ass in terms of the % of share of
outsourced workers, but we're working on it.
\_ Americans on average work harder than the rest of the people
on earth? You haven't been to east Asia.
\_ You must be Chinese.
\_ A gift card is almost the same as cash for most of us.
\_ I personally think gift cards are a rip off.
\_ Explain. A $100 gift card buys $100 worth of merchandise.
How is that a rip off?
\_ Probably because $100 worth of cash that could have
bought anything anywhere now has to be spent in one
place - !ppp
\_ That's not a ripoff by definition.
\_ Probably because you can buy the same merchandise for
less than $100 at a different store.
\_ Stupid argument. What if you get a gift card for
a store that does has the lowest prices? Let
a store that does have the lowest prices? Let
us say a Wal-Mart gift card?
\_ Maybe you don't want to spend all of it at the
same store? Cash is always better than a gift
card of the same amount. Cash doesn't expire.
Cash can be put in a bank. Cash can be used
anywhere for anything.
\_ This says nothing about it being either a
rip off or about buying the same
merchandise for less. If you cannot buy the
same merchandise for less does that make
a gift card okay?
\_ Was your "what if" argument part of the "rip off"
statement above?
\_ No.
\_ They are a rip-off because there is no benifit over
cash, but there are many drawbacks. Buying a gift
card is like giving the store a free loan. They
have your money, and you may later be able to get
some of it back in the form of merchendise. You
can never get back the actual money. They won't
even give you a penny in change. This means the
store almost guaranteed to make more than the value
on the gift card, as you must either buy more to
use the whole gift card, of leave money on the card
forever. Furthermore, the store benifits because
they have an interest free loan, every bit of
inflation is now free money to the company. Some
places even go so far as to charge the card if you
don't use it fast enough. Rip Off.
\_ None of this speaks to being a rip off except
perhaps the second to last sentence, and I've
never encountered that.
\_ Perhaps you have a stronger definition of rip
off than anyone else. I would call trading
$5 for $4.50 a rip off, but hey, maybe you
don't think so.
\_ Please explain how a $100 gift card is
akin to trading $5 for $4.50.
\_ Some gift cards expire. Some "decay" over time - the
remaining dollar amount goes down slowly even if you
don't use it.
\_ It is illegal in California for gift cards to
expire or lose value. -tom
\_ I know it's illegal to expire, but I've
definatly seen the "service charge" scam in
CA.
\_ Are you sure? The true RIP OFF is fixed value
CC's which charge several $$$/mo + transaction.
\_ Ah, I see the no service charge law
went into effect in 2004. I may have
seen this pre-2004.
\_ I would have bought it a month ago..
\- per a thread a while ago, if you are going to go with a gift card,
go AMAZONG, rahter than something more restrictive. AMAZONG is also
just as convenient to procure as anything else.
just as convenient to procure as anything else. --psb |
| 2006/7/25-27 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:43782 Activity:nil |
7/24 How many weeks does it take for a personalized license plate to
arrive in California?
\_ Call the DMV. The motd no longer issues personalized plates. |
| 2006/7/18-20 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:43721 Activity:nil |
7/17 http://www.lcurve.org The L Curve. \_ That's a lot more alarmist than a simple Gini curve, and I'm not sure it's as educational. \- i think they illustrate different things. for example the gini curve [sic ... you mean gini coef and lorenz curve] may say something about the fallout from a tax law change or maybe even something like school vouchers or other cases where you may think in terms of income bands, but if you want to talk about say money and politics [free speech and elections per Buckley v Vallejo, political contributions, campaign spending per huffington, corzine, bloomberg etc] then maybe it makes sense to talk about super-rich individuals. i assume you also realize the gini coef with wide bands will be lower than the GC for the same distribution chopped into narrower bands. there are a lot of problems with the "educational" gini coef. i think this example is just something to keep in mind when we talk about the "american metritrocracy" or "death taxes" [aka "the billionare tax"] and obviously not intended for econometrics calculations or macroeconomic comparasions of economies at different points in time or in different countries. --psb |
| 2006/7/17-19 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:43691 Activity:nil |
7/16 How hard is it to become a notary? What kind of certifications
do you need? I'm thinking about doing it to make a few bucks
a week. I'm tired of eating cup-o-noodle. -poor student
\_ There is a one-day course you can take. The costs have to do with
the course and the materials you're required to buy (also, getting
bonded, etc.). You may make this up depending on how hard you
promote yourself.
\_ Notaries may only charge a set fee ($15) for most notarizations-
however you may charge travelling fees! -ca notary
\_ That's hilarious--in Germany, only something like the top 5 or
10% of each graduating law school class have the right to go
for a notary slot, and almost every piece of official paper
(like home sales contracts for example) has to be notarized,
which sometimes costs as much as a percentage of the contract
sum ==> license to print money. -John
\_ Home sales in Amerika also need to be notarized. Heil.
\_ So why is this hilarious? Why do you hate the free-market
notary model in America?
\_ That's remarkably 'efficient'. Why do they put up with that?
\_ What can you say. One isn't even legally require to have any
form of picture ID to be a citizen in this country.
\_ When I was working on a financial services startup in
Munich, we were required to get a banking license if
we intended to clear payments above ca. $5 million. That
needed 39 separate official application and permit
processes. I think "what can you say" about covers it
pretty well. -John
\_ 39? Uuuh. 39? .... what? 39?
\_ Wow, you guys should have posted this stuff on the 4th
I'm starting to hear various patriotic country songs
running through my head. Of course, maybe I should be
expecting more than "not as lame as Europe". Especially
with "not even legally require"d boy up there reminding
me that it won't be long till that isn't true.
\_ What would be wrong with proving with easily obtainable
photo id that you are who you say you are when you vote?
\_ I heard from the news that there were some stupid
constitutional right issues. I forgot.
\_ Such as?
\_ I don't remember. Maybe something like the
right to express yourself anonymously or some
shit like that.
\_ Who put a bug up your ass? I was pointing out a silly
aspect of an overly bureaucratized country. Ask any
even semi-literate German if he thinks his country has
not too many, but way-crazy-stupid-too-many regulations
that stand in the way of pretty much anything getting
done, then report back with his response. -John
\_ also... bear in mind that a "notary" here is much less than in
other countries. In the training they warn you to clear up
misunderstandings with immigrants, who may expect a notary to have
the powers of a lawyer. In practice I haven't used my commission
much, but it's come in handy for friend's papers etc. Possible
pitfall: when you are a notary, you cannot turn someone away for
lack of funds. So if you notarize something, and say "pay me",
they could say "no." -ca notary |
| 2006/7/13-18 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:43666 Activity:nil |
7/13 Record California power demand possible soon - Yahoo! News:
http://www.csua.org/u/gfd
Power off your machines and monitors when you leave work.
\_ This looks pretty normal: http://www.caiso.com/outlook/outlook.html
\_ The shape may be normal, but not the magnitude. From the
article: "Friday demand is forecast about 46,300 megawatts around
4 p.m. PDT, which would break the record of 45,431 set last July
20, the Cal ISO said." |
| 2006/7/11-16 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:43636 Activity:nil |
7/11 Sort of an esoteric request: I'm looking for an online collection
of all the plates (ca. 900) from "Description de l'Egypte". On the
off chance anyone's heard of this and has an idea, mind pointing me
towards it? I'm not having much look on Google. -John |
| 2006/7/1 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:43546 Activity:nil |
7/1 Gang expert backs Tancredo charges
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50703 |
| 2006/6/26-29 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:43504 Activity:nil |
6/26 Senate within one vote of passing constitutional amendment to ban
flag burning
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/06/26/flag
\_ Thank God our elected representatives are making us safer.
\_ Shouldn't it set off alarm bells among (are there any left?) the
small gvt folks that "A total of 14 Democrats, including Minority
Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Dianne Feinstein of California,
are expected to join 52 Republicans who support changing the
Constitution to allow federal prohibitions of flag burning."?
\_ Yes, but it's also a midterm election year.
\_ The small government folks are voting for the few real
conservatives who show up on the election rosters.
\_ Feinstein is a sell-out and a tool. -tom
\_ 'In a recent USA Today editorial, (Feinstein) wrote, "There is no
idea or thought expressed by the burning of the American flag that
cannot be expressed equally well in another manner."'
Does she have any idea what a foolish road that is to walk?
\_ here's the op-ed: http://csua.org/u/g9m
I strongly disagree with her. For one, her argument about
the Lincoln Memorial is ass, as there is only one of those,
and a ton of U.S. flags anyone can buy.
I also watched her on CNN last week on the panel of woman
Democrat senators, and she looked ... senile.
This is in contrast to Boxer, who seems articulate and informed.
\_ If their political views/votes were reversed I suspect your
opinion of each would reverse as well.
\_ I doubt it. I've seen a lot of Boxer, but not that much
Feinstein. Boxer looks dynamic; Feinstein, senile.
Feinstein. Boxer looks dynamic; Feinstein, slow.
\_ I doubt it. I've seen a lot of Boxer, and she's always
looked dynamic, informed, and articulate.
\_ Uh huh. I've seen a lot of both and I think Boxer is
a mindless party line drone. My politics are much
closer to Feinstein however so I at least realise that
my opinion of each is tainted by my political views.
\_ Her conclusion is pure hand-waving. If there is some other
expression similar to burning the flag, would it not also
be reasonable that congress has the power to block it as well?
\_ We should also disallow not standing up when the national
anthem is playing. You diminish the bravery of every
soldier who has fought for the United States, some of whom
have been horribly injured for their sacrifice.
\_ I might have to partake in a protest mass flag burning if this shit
happens. I wonder if pissing on the flag will still be allowed?
\_ A more clever way to protest this is to serve up a nice batch
of American flag cookies, with a note pointing out that anyone
who actually eats one would be breaking the law by directly
transforming the American flag into excrement.
\_ Uh... no. The way to protest most things is to do that
thing on a large scale. The sillier the thing, the larger
the scale.
\_ I think that's the wrong approach in this case. Part of
the reason it didn't pass is that the severity of the
problem (very very small) vs. the encroachment on freedom
of expression makes it not appealing to pass. If people
come out and start defacing the flag right and left, I
can't imagine it swaying opinion _away_ from passing the
bill.
\_ Uh, the bill didn't and probably never will pass and
even if it does that's only the start of a long process
to attempt to change the Constitution. I think it's
stupid but if someone wants to burn the flag go ahead.
No one is going to change the Constitution because
some people in Berkeley burned the flag.
\_ Don't forget to provide American flag napkins for the
crumbs. |
| 2006/6/26-28 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:43502 Activity:nil |
6/26 http://csua.org/u/g9l (Wash Post) Republican House members buy cheap real estate, earmark a freeway next to it, then sell the land at a huge profit \_ republicans rool while liberals drool1!!!111!!1one \_ From what I hear, he's actually owned the land for many years, and the buyer insists that the price is up because of general real estate trends, not the freeway. Gonna be hard to prove one way or another, but I'd hardly call it a slam-dunk. \_ that is a completely bull-shit. no one will *INSIST* on spending extra million or two for a lot of land if s/he can buy that land for cheap. Just admit it, he earmarked the bill and he is personally benefiting from it. \_ Uh, where'd you get "extra" million from? The price has gone up since he bought it... what real estate _hasn't_? \_ You do know about conflict of interest don't you? |
| 2006/6/22-26 [Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:43463 Activity:nil |
6/22 Interesting clause by clause comparison of the US constitution to
the Confedercy constitution.
http://www.filibustercartoons.com/CSA.htm
\_ "call a spade a spade." The comparison is interesting but his
comments are sometimes ridiculous. |
| 2006/6/14-17 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:43385 Activity:nil |
6/14 http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/14/bush.newser Bush says something's different in Iraq! Watch out you disorganized Democrats without a unified voice, the Republicans are fighting back. The point is you don't have to change anything to get people to like you. You just need to tell people what they want to hear, and you say it with confidence. You lost 2000 and 2004 because you failed to understand how to win the heart of the people. Let's summarize your lessons: 1) don't change anything 2) if you did something bad, ignore it 3) cover up 2 by saying something clever or something new, tell people what they want to hear 4) say it with optimism, enthusiasm, smile, and don't repeatedly sigh like Al Gore. Good luck in November. \_ Evil will always win, because good is stupid. \_ "Evil will always triumph over good because good is dumb." - Dark Helmet \_ Even if good = dumb, dumb != good. The fact that the Dems are dumb does not imply that they are good. \_ Wingnut Troll Alert! Wingnut Troll Alert! \_ Nice of you to announce yourself. Did you have something to say as well? \_ Perhaps we should ship you back to texas with your little wingnut friends (or perhaps get williamc to pay for your deporatation to canada). \_ It's always disappointing to me when this is the best a college educated person can do. -someone else \_ It's always disappointing to me when this is the best a college educated person can do. -someone else \_ It's always disappointing to me when this is the best a college educated person can do. -someone else \_ Actually they won both those elections but were defrauded. But to really win people's hearts, you need to be an actor above all. Just really look, sound, and act presidential, so women feel good just looking at you. For the issues, have analysts design something as middle-of-the-road as possible. Talk as if you're mostly conservative, but still support all the big government programs even as you badmouth big government and say you won't raise taxes. Actually better promise to cut some taxes too, and also promise to cut the deficit. Talk about families and how important they are, because most people are part of families and will appreciate your understanding. Have really top shelf speechwriters. Hope the other guy says something dumb or does a Howard Dean. Humor is good, but spontaneous is too dangerous: memorize some humor based on projected common public scenarios. \_ Hillary? Is that you? \_ Wow, still bringing up the election fraud canard? Way to not let facts get in the way of your beliefs. \_ Is it really a canard? I think there's enough circumstantial evidence to strongly implicate Republicans strategists with deliberately attempting to prevent blocks of people from voting who were not inclined to vote Republicans, be they black people or felons who have done their time. It might not be real fraud, but it's pretty devious and infuriating when it was such a close election, and now the administration in power is busy attempting to make the entire world loathe and despise us. Thanks guys! \_ Ok so it wasn't really fraud but now it is fraud-lite? If you want to be that 'nuanced' about it, you're opening a huge can of worms. Let's start with slashing the tires on the (R) get-out-the-vote vans. What was that? Just \_ 5 kids in Milwaukee vs. RNC backed operatives and elected officials in NH, NV, OH, FL, etc dumping D voter registrations, jamming DNC GOTV phone lines, lowballing turnout estimates in highly D areas leading to 8 hour lines, "cleansing" voter roles, etc. \_ I don't think that happened on a very wide scale. The organized effort to hire companies to analyze the voting rolls for ineligible voters, removing those people from the rolls with no fact checking, was on a much wider scale, and in several states. Who cares about get-out the-vote vans. some isolated little prank? How about all the college students double (and more) voting? How about the fact that without an ID system anyone, citizen or not, can \_ Have you ever voted? It doesn't work that way. Oh sanchez now, good one. \_ I've never been asked for my ID and I vote in every election. They just ask me my name and address. vote? Sanchez got in fair n square? You really don't want to walk down this path. |
| 2006/6/12-15 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:43366 Activity:nil |
6/12 Motd troll vote of the day: Tiffany or Debbie Gibson? Vote now.
\_ No: .
\_ Abstain: .
\_ Only from behind: . |
| 2006/6/9-11 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:43338 Activity:nil |
6/9 http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/09/ap/strange/mainD8I4E19G0.shtml A left-wing nut mails shit (yes, feces) to a Republican candidate. Would you do the same thing to GWB? Vote now: yes: . no: . \_ I submit that if you think that's a reasonable thing to do, there's is something wrong with you. |
| 2006/6/8-13 [Politics/Domestic/California, Reference/Tax] UID:43323 Activity:nil |
6/8 GOP loses bid in Senate to eliminate inheritance tax. Two GOPers
(Voinovich/Ohio, Chafee/RI) voted against, four Dems voted for.
BTW, the credit which covers $1 million for gifts and $2 million
for inheritance is per-person. So your parents can gift out $2 mill
to the kids and $4 mill out of the estate, for $6 mill total, or
$24,000/year to each kid without counting against the gift and an
unlimited amount for tuition, medical expenses, PACs, and charities
\_ That's fine and all except it does nothing for the people who got
there by working hard instead of riding their IPO stock up. The
inheritance tax kills family owned businesses. When the parents
die the kids can't keep the business running because they have to
pay taxes on the value of the business which is a non-liquid asset,
so they have to sell to pay up. It isn't that hard for a family
run business that's been around for decades to be worth that or more
on paper but have near zero cash.
\_ The "family owned business" is the distraction. There are
relatively few legitimate hard-luck cases like this
compared to the amount of wealth turning over to
relatives. And haven't you ever heard of a "loan"? You
can use that to pay taxes and pay it back over time.
I bet the interest is even deductible as a business
expense. Second, the parents, if they're not stupid,
can put the business in a trust and shield it from
inheritance tax. The real deal here is that the Bush
administration and their republican cronies are
skewing things in favor of the wealthy, setting up
hereditary aristocracies. --PeterM
\_ And what is wrong with that? Are you jealous?
\_ A distraction? Small businesses employ what percentage of the
American population? Off the top of my head, it's something
like 40%. Please correct that if you have a better number but
it is not a trivial number. And no, trusts don't work like
that. If they did then everyone would do it and we wouldn't
be having a discussion about it. And I don't even know what
to say about the idea of dinging the kids with having to get
a loan to pay taxes on the transfer of the family business.
Why exactly should some bank make big bucks on the parent's
deaths? I'm left speechless. The truly wealthy don't pay
these taxes because their money is off shore. You think the
Kennedys or the Bushs pay these taxes? Fat chance. The
truly wealthy don't follow the same laws the rest of us do.
\_ If the concern is really for the small business owner,
the proper response is to raise the threshhold, not to
eliminate the tax. The fact that proposals to raise the
threshhold are shot down by Republicans exposes their
true motives. -tom
\_ The threshhold has been raised many times over the
years. What are you talking about?
\_ "[I]nstead of seeking a compromise that
might win over a handful of crucial Democrats,
[Frist] is pushing for a permanent repeal of the
estate tax.
Though Republican aides say Mr. Frist has not
closed off the possibility of a compromise, the
senator has pointedly refused to schedule any
floor time for debate about alternatives in the
event that his own effort fails."
Oh, and by the way, the estate tax affects less than
2% of estates even at today's levels. -tom
\_ And? Mr. Frist is not "Republicans" and as I said,
the number has increased several fold over the years.
Why should he compromise anyway? Better to kill a
bad law entirely than make yet another confusing
tax mess full of loop holes for the rich. As Diane
Feinstein said, "Death should not be a taxable
event".
\_ Yeah, that's brilliant, to get rid of loopholes
for the rich, let's just stop taxing them
entirely! My point is that the Republicans
are trying to protect the extremely wealthy,
not the hard-working small business owner.
Thank you for making my point. -tom
\_ My point is that the Republicans are NOT
trying to protect the wealthy, but to assist
their friends and family members. Thank you
for making my point you fucking idiot
\_ "A study by the CBO shows that in 2000 only 1659 farms
and 458 small business were liable for the estate tax,
almost all of which had sufficient liquid assets to pay
it. The rest can stretch their tax payments over many
years." -The Economist 6/10/2006. I am curious, since
you think the extremely wealthy should not have to pay
tax, who would you tax in their place? -ausman
\_ There is no reason for tax if everyone is self
reliant. The reason we have tax today is because
negros don't work hard and we have to pay for their
social security and welfare. Forget tax and forget
social progrems, let the beast starve. -conservative
\_ If this is a troll, it's in poor taste. If it isn't
then, uhm, wow.
\_ If you made it to Cal you're most likely smart
enough to not preach hardcore self-reliance,
racist and conservative messages, so this must
be a troll.
\_ Well, yes, that's probably right...but my time
on motd has made me realize that I can't take
that as a given. |
| 2006/6/7-9 [Politics/Domestic/California, ERROR, uid:43313, category id '18005#35.455' has no name! , ] UID:43313 Activity:nil |
6/7 http://csua.org/u/g43 It should not be a surprise that the Republicans are willing to do things that are unethical to manipulate elections. \_ Oh and the Daleys of Chicago have been completely, honestly elected through the years without the use of a politcal machine. \_ and of course the mayor of Chicago is a position with prominence and importance similar to the President of the U.S. -tom \_ Funny you should point that out, esp. after it is confirmed that many dead people voted for JFK from Chicago area through the same political machine that helps the Daleys. \_ Oh! Right! As long as both sides are doing it, then it's totally okay! YESSIREEBOB! Thank you for your clear and objective insight! \_ Sad troll. The OP tried to make a connection about one party. I pointed out the hypocrisy of it. I bet you think politics started with Clinton? \_ You'd be wrong -- but that's okay, I expect that from partisan wingnuts. \_ He points out that both parties are dirty, and that makes him partisan? I think you need a dictionary. \_ I think you need better reading skills. \_ If you're looking for a JFK lover, you're barking up the wrong tree. -tom \_ You do know that JFK would have won the election without Illinois, right? -ausman \_ Shh.. it's ok if you're doing to for the greater good. \_ Said it before, I'll say it again, it's not okay for anyone. |
| 5/16 |