Politics Domestic California - Berkeley CSUA MOTD
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Domestic:California: [Arnold(228) | Prop(52) ]
Results 301 - 450 of 1361   < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2021/12/08 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
12/8    

2004/4/9 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:13106 Activity:insanely high
4/9     "It is not just considered bad form to discuss ethnicity in the new
         California. It can land one in jail. Added to the penal code is the
         crime of "divisionism," a nebulous offense that includes speaking too
         provocatively about ethnicity."
         http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/09/international/africa/09RWAN.html?hp
         yes, I replaced the word "Rwanda" with "California."  The amazing
         thing is how little of a stretch it is.
         \_ you're an idiot.
            \_ Yeah, in California you'll just get yelled at, or maybe
               beat up.  Well, unless someone (non-white) gets offended
               and manages to portray what you said as "Hate Speech."
               THAT could land you in jail.
                \_ As the above said, you're an idiot. Returneth thee to hate
                   radio from whence thee came.
                   \_ Darn you're right.  You can't be jailed for "Hate
                      Speech" in CA unless the "victim" feels
                      "threatened."
                       http://caag.state.ca.us/civilrights/htm/laws.htm
                       A Google on Canadian Hate Speech Laws is fun though.
                       \_ yeah, burning a cross on someone's lawn is free
                          speech.  people who feel threatened by that should
                          lighten up.  What is America coming to?
                          \_ Usually I think of speech as refering to the
                             practice of expelling air from the lungs
                             though the mouth the produce a series of
                             sounds known as language, which is then
                             recieved by another persons ear.  In fact,
                             transmission by writing or electronic media
                             could also  be conisdered speech.  But I
                             would think burning a cross on someone's lawn
                             would constitute other areas of the law, such
                             as "tresspassing" and "fire ordinances."  As
                             far as spoken threats, there are other law
                             for that.  Anyway, I'm sure that Straw Man
                             went over great a People's Park, but outside
                             in reality it sounds pretty silly.
                             \_ I'm not sure about what the People's Park
                                reference is about but, anyway, Justice
                                Scalia, for one, argued strongly that cross
                                burning is free speech.
                      \_ "Threatened" is way too broad.  There is a similar
                          law about weapons (not necessarily guns).  In
                          theory, you can carry certain weapons as long as
                          they are visible.  In practice, if someone feels
                          "threatened" by this, off to jail you go.  I can't
                          help but remember Monty Burns: "Thank God we
                          live in a country so hysterical about crime..."
                            -- ilyas
                       \_ Don't forget, if the person feeling "threatened"
                          happened to be sleeping with a member of the
                          politburo, it can even get the motd shut down.
2004/4/2 [Politics/Domestic/California, ERROR, uid:12987, category id '18005#6.97536' has no name! , ] UID:12987 Activity:very high
4/2     4 more years.  Like the man said, It's the economy, stupid".
        http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/63342|top|04-02-2004::10:05|reuters.html
        http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=71000001&refer=us&sid=a.1MWgSskH6M
        \_ budget deficit, trade deficit.  Do the math kiddo; if you are
           making less than $200k a year or do not own your own business,
           and you still vote republican, you are a big-ass sucker
           \_ uhm, yeah, tossing out 2 word phrases like that makes a really
              strong point. uhm, whatever.  if you've got something to say, go
              ahead, people will read it.
              \_ i drive a j- car and use j- appliances and electronics.
                 blame me for the trade deficit.
                 \_ I blame American manufacturers for trying to sell less
                    reliable, less efficient products for more money.  I'd
                    pay a premium to buy American if the quality was better
                    than the Japanese stuff.
        \_ 300,000 part time jobs. Yawn.
           \_ spoken like a college student or someone with a job.
              \_ Have you worked out how much money you can make working a
                 min. wage part-time job?  It's not enough to pay your rent
                 and eat.
                 \_ Have you lived outside the expensive SF Bay Area?  Yes, it
                    is not only enough to pay rent and eat but some raise kids
                    on it as well with some assistance.  Get out of your
                    bubble.
                    \_ Have you tried doing the math?  $5.15/hour is a little
                       over $10k a year, full time.  Let's assume you paid
                       no taxes.  $200/mo for a small one bedroom in a shithole
                       takes out $2400.  $5/day for food is 1800.  A car pay-
                       ment, say $150/month and insurance at (really bare bones)
                       $50/month is another $2400.  Better hope absolutely
                       nothing ever goes wrong.
                        \_ divide by 2 for part time.
                           \_ That's sorta the point.
                    \_ "with some assistance"  Yeah.  Better hope you or
                        your kids don't get sick.
                        \_ why not? who says they pay their medical bills?
                         and they don't have to either. every tax payer has
                        been paying for them.
                        \_ Every taxpayer has benefited from lower prices made
                           possible by paying people minimum wage.  Or do you
                           not consume goods and services?
        \_ They'll need those extra part-time jobs to make up for the loss of
           all these mowing jobs:
           http://csua.org/u/6qa (Wired)
        \_ This number is bunk:
           http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t05.htm
           There are only 150,000 more on the payroll than there were
           in January. I think they adjusted the Feb numbers down so
           that this month would look good. We are only creating 60,000
           or so jobs/month in the rolling average.
2004/4/1-2 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:12977 Activity:low
4/1     I have heard it stated that our (the US's) system of
        Plurality/Majority elections discourage people from voting.  Now,
        I can see the reasoning here (I hate both presidential canidates)
        but I was curious if this claim can be backed up with numbers.
        Possiably comparing places of similar culture and
        circumstance that use the diffrent types of voting.
        \_ I'd say that's probably a specious opinion that was stated
           without much evidence to support it.  There's a lot of other,
           move provable reasons for the decline in voter interest in
           the US.  Also rarely mentioned, but a factor in decreased voter
           registration over the past 30 years has been an increase in
           immigrant, non-citizen population relative to citizens.
           I'm not trying to race-bait here, and its not nearly the only
           factor, but its often ignored when people decry decreasing voter
           participation.
           \_ Interesting.  Actually, that raises another question.  Why
              do people think that immigration has anything to do with
              race?  I've met immigrants of all manner of races, even...
              *gasp* white.
              \_ *I* don't think it has anything to do with race, of course.
                 I was trying to head off the usual motd flame war.  Not that
                 it will help.
           \_ So you're saying the ratio of immigrant to citizen is too many?
              \_ I didn't say that.  You're putting words in my mouth.  I was
                 just citing it as a partial reason for decreasing voter
                 registration.  In fact, if you take this into account, voter
                 registration amongst _those eligible to register_ hasn't
                 declined significantly since the 1970s.  Of course, it declined
                 markedly from, say, the 40s to the 70s in real terms.  I have
                 no problem with immigration.  Its more of an argument for
                 urging people to become citizens and participate in the process
                 than anything else.
        \_ Countries with proportional-representation-based voting systems
           have higher voter turn-out than countries that use first past the
           post (like the US).
           More info: http://www.fairvote.org/turnout/index.html
        \_ People don't vote because they think their vote doesn't matter.  It
           really is just that simple.
2004/3/31-4/1 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29890 Activity:very high
3/31    After his represensible treatment of Dr. Wen Ho Lee, I can't
        fathom why Bill Richardson is being considered for VP. Is
        it really that expedient for Dems to trade Asian American
        votes/donations for Latino votes?(On second thought, don't
        answer that question.) - elizp
        \_ Mmmm, tasty troll.  Carefully phrased, good finish.  Could use
           something slightly more inflammatory though.  B+
           \_ Why is it a trool?  - not elizp
              \_ The not so subtle pitting of one race against another?
                 Always a winner in motd land.
                 \_ This kind of trade off does actually enter political
                    equation more often than the motd.  You know that,
                    don't you?  Or maybe you are a troll?
                    \_ Oh blah fucking blah.  You and everyone else knows
                       the motd is just for inciting stupid arguments.
        \_ Wasn't Wen Ho Lee mistreated by the Federal goverment? What
           does the governor of New Mexico have to do with that?
           \_ He was the head of the DOE, which ran the lab and did everything
              in its power and beyond to make Lee's life miserable and so on.
              \_ I see. Well, there are far more latinos than asians,
                 as I am sure you are aware.
                 \_ what does this have to do the the above entry?
                    \_ Can you speak English?
        \_ I'm of the same ethnic background as Dr. Lee and did follow the
           story, and even I have trouble making the link to Bill Richardson.
           In fact I remember the blame falling on one of the chief
           investigators, on whom there were many media reports.
           investigators, a Mr. Trulock, on whom there were many media reports.
2021/12/08 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
12/8    

2004/3/30 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:29887 Activity:nil
3/29    Take a political compass test. Also here's where those democratic
        primary guys fell on their scale:
        http://www.digitalronin.f2s.com/politicalcompass/usprimaries.html
        Based on that scale, China does fall closest to fascism, since it's
        authoritarian but economically going towards center-right.
        \_ Check out the wording on those questions.  Most impressive.
             -- ilyas
           \_ Well, they also have a FAQ. I think it placed me correctly
              (slightly left and libertarian).
              \_ "Why are you throwing tomatoes at yourself?"  Let's look at
                 this gem of a 'proposition' as they call it:
                 "Many personal fortunes are made by people who simply
                 manipulate money and contribute nothing to their society."
                 Now, let's say I put in 'disagree.'  How will they read this?
                 Will they read it as "I think many personal fortunes are NOT
                 made by people like that" ... OR "Manipulating money
                 contributes something (loans provide value)".  The question
                 is so loaded and faulty that any possible response will likely
                 be incorrectly interpreted.  Their test, btw, incorrectly
                 placed me as basically a moderate republican, which I am
                 certainly not. -- ilyas
                 \_ Right, well, I would hope that the intent of that question
                    would be a judge on economic left-rightedness, where
                    agreement implies that some control should be put on these
                    useless capitalists. Based on their rationale I don't think
                    it has to be flawed, but it obviously can't be perfect and
                    they likely have a bias anyway.
                    \_ Except this question does not judge any such thing.
                       I could be a card-carrying liberal and still believe
                       most personal fortunes are not made by manipulation
                       of money (in fact, I don't have handy statistics on
                       this matter).  The question is stupid, as is the entire
                       test.  You have to phrase things a lot more carefully
                       and 'wordily'. -- ilyas
                       \_ it didn't say "most" it said "many". Although many is
                          a relative term. Anyway though I agree, their agenda
                          appears to be to have right wingers take the test and
                          discover they're somehow actually lefties. But the
                          background stuff surrounding it seems sound. And the
                          bias they do have could be justified if it tests
                          discrepancies between what someone thinks they think
                          and what they actually think, if they haven't thought
                          about it much already. (notions of pol. correctness)
                          \_ See, you don't understand the nature of my
                             objection.  A test like this only works when a
                             given response to a question actually
                             differentiates political views.  I gave an example
                             where the same response could be given by both
                             a fiscal liberal and a fiscal conservative.
                             Anyways, it's late, and I am tired of explaining
                             the same thing three different ways.  If you think
                             it's a good test, that's great. -- ilyas
                             \_ well you're basically quibbling with the word
                                "many" in that example. anyway, fine, motd
                                censor will clean this up before long, g'nite.
2004/3/30 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:12934 Activity:nil
3/30    English majors are all lefties!
        http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=10762
        \_ Starts out fun, but then launches into uncalled-for, irrelevant
           ad-hominem attacks on authors championed by the liberal Liberal Arts
        \_ No shit sherlock. It's always the dumb humanities kids who start
           and take part in all the protests. Useful idiots indeed.
           \_ Humanities students are no more or less dumb as a group than
              engineering students.  Propensity for blatant generalizations,
              \_ prove it.
                 \_ Thanks for your comment, demonstrating that engineering
                    students can be just as dumb!
                    \_ can't prove your assertion, can you?
                       \_ I don't have to.  The assertion that must be
                          proved is that humanities student --> dumb, which
                          is patently ridiculous.
                          \_ "patently ridiculous" means you have no factual
                             proof against the claim, right?
                             \_ Correct!  There is absolutely no way to prove
                                humanities student --> dumb, its just small
                                dicked engineering student smug superiority
                                syndrome rearing its ugly head for the
                                zillionth time.
                                \_ how about entrance exam scores?  or
                                   relative performance in "neutral" classes?
                                   or post college achievement?  none of them
                                   are perfect measures, but they would tend to
                                   make claims of patent ridiculousness
                                   silly.
                                   \_ Yeah, but none of them would prove the
                                      assertion at all.
                                      \_ The assertion that humanities students
                                         are dumb, or that they're no more or
                                         less dumb?  Certainly the first
                                         assertion is the one requiring proof.
                                      \_ by again refusing to answer the
                                         question, i assume you realize that
                                         while my suggestions would not
                                         perfectly prove or disprove the
                                         proposition, it would make your
                                         claim of "patently ridiculous", well,
                                         patently ridiculous.
                                \_ of course, you have completely misinterpreted
                                   the post you replied to.  a claim that dumb
                                   humanities students do something does not
                                   imply the claim that all humanities
                                   students are dumb.
                          \_ Actually, the claim is that, as a group,
                             humanities students are as smart as engineering
                             students.  To disprove this, you just have to
                             show, as a group, that one group is smarter than
                             the other, using some accepted metric
                             \_ great.  what are the relative entrance
                                exam scores between the 2 groups?  what
                                is their relative performance in "neutral"
                                classes?  how do the post college achievement
                                of the 2 groups compare?
                                \_ Come to think of it, the claim is "no
                                   more or less dumb".  This implies the metric
                                   is "common sense", not intelligence in
                                   general.  In this sense, it can be
                                   reasonably claimed that humanities and
                                   engineering students as groups have
                                   similar levels of common sense (are no
                                   less dumb than the other group).
                                   \_ Why yes, that's pretty much what I meant.
                                      At least someone gets it.  For some
                                      reason as soon as you say "intelligence"
                                      some people here automatically assume
                                      you must be referring to "ability to do
                                      second order differential equations."
                                      Sorry, I should have been more clear.
                                      \_ Guy, you don't even understand that
                                         the claim of stupid humanities kids
                                         doing something is not equivalent to
                                         a claim  that all humanities students
                                         are stupid.
                                   \_ Does the common understanding of
                                      "dumb" imply a lack of common sense?
                                      Well, dumb originally meant the inability
                                      to speak, as in "deaf and dumb".  Does
                                      that have anything to do with common
                                      sense?  "Dumb" came to mean, from WordNet
                                      via dict, "slow to learn or understand,
                                      lacking intellectual acuity".  Does that
                                      have anything to do with common sense?
                                      Are you ascribing new meaning to the word
                                      just to make your claim plausible?
                                      \_ Someone please shoot this guy.  His
                                         pretentiousness is starting to make
                                         my head hurt.
                                      \_ Dewd, he already said sorry for not
                                         being clear.
                                         \_ Was he unclear?  Or did he just
                                            latch onto some non-plausible
                                            excuse that would make his claim,
                                            well, less "dumb"?  I suspect the
                                            latter.
              however, can be found in almost any group of students.
2004/3/30-31 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/911] UID:12921 Activity:very high
3/30    Chen permits recount to proceed immediately, Taiwan stock market soars
        http://csua.org/u/6o4 (NY Times, password needed)
        U.S. forensics team talks with doctors, note openness of investigation
        http://csua.org/u/6o6
        Same experts discuss common misperceptions about the ballistics
        http://csua.org/u/6o3
        Chen comments on China's predicted hard-line move in Hong Kong
        http://csua.org/u/6o5
        Moron complains about Taiwan election
        http://csua.org/u/6o7
        \_ CSI Taipei!  Was David Caruso there?
        Same experts discuss common misperceptions about the ballistics
        http://csua.org/u/6o3
        Chen comments on China's predicted hard-line move in Hong Kong
        http://csua.org/u/6o5
        Moron complains about Taiwan election
        http://csua.org/u/6o7
        \_ Given Chen's long history as a drama queen and the very close
           vote count, the opposition's peaceful and orderly demand for a
           recount and investigation into the shooting incident is totally
           reasonable.
           \_ You should talk to the DPP college student getting beat on TV
              by 4+ KMT folks for speaking to TV reporters just outside
              their rally.
              \_ Is that the best you can come up with for a rally of
                 500k people?  how many people did the DPP mobs beat
                 up in its many rallies over the years?  These days,
                 in many places in Taiwan, if you don't speak Taiwanese,
                 you can get cursed and ostracized, thanks to DPP's
                 divisive politics.
                 \_ And how many of those people (who watch KMT-biased TV
                    coverage) believe in the faked assassination theory?
                    Your dismissal of KMT's televised violence is also
                    disturbing.
                    \_ feel free to post urls of any other violent
                       rally incidents from the multitudes of pro-DPP
                       newspapers as opposed to your so-claimed
                       "KMT-biased TV".
                       newspapers.
        \_ This entire thing has missed a huge point.  Extremely large
           number of military personnel were denied their consititution
           right to vote.  And it turned out that there is no legal basis
           for their detention.  Thus, by definition, this election
           result is invalid, and thus, the legimacy of this so-called
           democratic government is in question.
           \_ Are you talking about Taiwan or the US?
           \_ First URL, a viewpoint not well-covered by the KMT-controlled
              press:  "The opposition Nationalist Party on Monday publicly
              dropped its demand that the Taiwan military be allowed to
              vote again after a disputed presidential election a week ago...
              Mr. Chen and the Defense Ministry replied that the
              alert had had no effect on voting, because staggered shifts
              had made it possible for the servicemen and police officers
              to vote."
              \_ Contrary to what this guy is saying, KMT doesn't control
                 the press at all.  Chen and DPP is the government in
                 power, and has systematically moved to control the press
                 to silence the opposition.  Just recently, the owner of
                 a pro-DPP press told all its employees to vote for DPP
                 or be fired.
                 \_ URL?  'Cos the same rumor mill sez the KMT drinks the
                    \_ This is in the news a few weeks before the
                       election.  Go ask a few people in Taiwan and you
                       should find someone who've read about it.  Taiwan
                       related news sites don't seem to keep good
                       archives of older articles online, so I can't
                       find any url, unfortunately.
                    blood of babies.
                    \_ See "Formosa Betrayed" written by U.S. vice consul
                       during the 2/28 incident.  obGoogle.  There is a
                       similar book called "Formosa Calling".  Both are
                       published way back.
                       \_ errr .... 228 incident is 57 years ago.  Taiwan's
                          government, while under KMT, had admitted to the
                          wrong doing, and had compensated families of the
                          victims long ago.  Taiwan has been under pro-
                          independence presidents for the last 16 years.
                          yet, DPP supporters like yourself constantly need
                          to bring up 228 for political purposes to fan
                          hatred against mainlanders and their descendants,
                          most of whom has nothing to do with 228, or
                          \_ actually, I just bring up 2/28 to criticize
                             the KMT as a political party.  I think you're
                             being a bit prejudiced.
                          weren't even born then.
                 \_ http://tinyurl.com/3xwo6
                    Search for "station".  You'll find other links on google.
                    Like I said yesterday, the KMT has had over 50 years of
                    total control of Taiwan to consolidate its power.
                    \_ snicker ... this starry eyed russian commentator has
                       no clue what he is talking about.  he portrayed
                       putin and chen as heroes of democracy.  I bet he is
                       real happy with putin and his rubber stamp parliament
                       and recent election.  chen of course, could not care
                       less about the development of democratic principles and
                       institutions.  he will bend all rules as long as it
                       helps him win.  the commentator also portrayed Lee
                       Teng-hui as representative of the big-bad KMT.  He
                       didn't even know Lee has always sympathized with
                       everything the DPP believes in, and made it his
                       personal life mission to destroy the KMT from within.
                       what a joke!  Of all things, you chose this
                       clueless commentary to post.
                       \_ Uh ... the point is that the KMT controls the major
                          TV stations, and stirs up anti-Chen sentiment in
                          order to get the KMT back into office.
                          I just want to make sure you see this.
                          \_ I am sorry, but if this Russian commentator is
                             so clueless about the above, you can't
                             expect anyone to accept his unsupported
                             assertion the Taiwan's media is controlled
                             by the KMT.  Besides that piece of clueless
                             writing was from 4 years ago, kind of
                             outdated.  I don't know about TV, but
                             contrary to your belief, most of Taiwan's
                             \_ So what would you say if I provided a URL
                                that showed the KMT controls the major
                                TV stations?  Does it suffice to say that
                                most newspapers are pro-DPP, and most
                                TV stations are pro-KMT?
                                BTW, it was my mistake way above.  When
                                I said "press", I meant to say "TV".
                          I just want to make sure you see this.
                    \_ snicker ... this starry eyed
                             newspapaers are actually pro-DPP.
        \_ btw, someone broke http://csua.org/u see motd entries above
2004/3/29-30 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Foreign/Asia/Taiwan] UID:12914 Activity:kinda low
3/29    So I just got back from Taiwan.  You know nearly all TV news stations
        are controlled by the opposition party (the same coverage being beamed
        into the Bay Area)?  It's no wonder you have all these people
        frothing at the mouth.  I'm ashamed to think that most Taiwanese
        people are stupid enough to believe the faked assassination theory.
        They just can't believe that their party lost, and they're annoyed
        at their stock holdings taking hits during Chen's presidency.  Lien
        beat his wife in grad school, his wife lies about it on TV, the
        opposition party has suggested that Chen's wife's accident in 1985
        was staged as well, and the opposition party is synonymous with
        corruption, vote buying, and organized crime.
        \_ huh? Lien is bad so Chen must be good?  What is your superior
           source of information?  I'm an American, trying to follow this
           in the English-speaking international press and I'm curious why
           you're so sure that the conspiracy theories about Chen are
           false, even if Lien is totally evil.
           \_ Dude, where do I say "Lien is bad so Chen must be good"?
              Re the assassination attempt, obGoogle for details, and think
              about how it could have been staged, and everything necessary
              for that.   Anyway, obGoogle for these keywords in various
              combinations:  KMT controlled television stations vote-buying
              organized crime 2/28.  You will find links to books too.
              Also, if you go to http://news.yahoo.com and search for
              Taiwan, you will see a story on a U.S. investigation into the
              shooting and the preliminary opinion.
        \_ So I just got back from America.  You know nearly all TV news
           stations are controlled by the Democratic Party?  It's no wonder
           you have all these people frothing at the mouth.  I'm ashamed to
           think that most American people are stupid enough to believe the
           Florida vote fixing theory.  They just can't believe that their
           party lost, and they're annoyed at their stock holdings taking
           hits during the Dot Boom.
           \_ People love a conspiracy.  The most ridiculous the better and
              more frothy the better.
           \_ The KMT has controlled Taiwan ever since it was transferred
              from Japanese control in 1945, until in 2000 when Chen won.
              The KMT has > 50% ownership in the three major TV news stations.
              As for Florida vote-fixing, it was decided by the Supreme Court,
              which was a first for a Presidential election.
        \_ I'm sure there'd be just as much outrage if the "opposition" party
           (isn't that a nice name) won, given the number of pro-independent
           Taiwan people around.  People just hate any sense of impropriety
           in important things like presidential elections
           \_ If the KMT had won, the DPP would be complaining about KMT vote-
              buying, which would be a respectable position.  Now that the
              DPP has won, the pro-KMT are complaining about a faked
              assassination, which is pretty damned dumb position to take.
              Like I said, it's the effect of KMT control of TV news, and
              people being upset about their stock holdings and their candidate
              suddenly losing when they thought they would win.
              \_ it's not *only* the faked assassination, from what I've been
                 reading.  I could care less about that part.
                 \_ So what do you care about?
              \_ The KMT is now (inexplicably) for reunification with the PRC.
                 How is this strange reversal in their position being viewed,
                 and are they getting any help/support from the PRC?
                 \_ The KMT has *not* been for reunification with the PRC
                    as of the 2004 election year.  This equals political
                    suicide.
                    \_ Okay, so the KMT has just been Independence-neutral?
                       Is that why the PRC has been favoring them?
                       \_ The KMT is for direct trade links / better business
                          with China, and has indicated more flexibility
                          on the independence issue than the DPP.
        \_ Taiwan President Chen is like Chavez of Venezuela.  He is a
           demagogue.  Very dangerous person.  He likes to play divisive
           politics pitching taiwanese against people who came from mainland
           China in 1949 with the KMT.              - tainan taiwanese
           \_ The KMT is just plain bad.  Refresh your memory on the 2/28
              incident, and more recent stuff on vote-buying and organized
              crime links.  You may be watching too much KMT-controlled TV.
              As for China, China is bad too, in case you need reminding.
        \_ If Lien can't even out smart and out maneuver Chen in this election,
           how can the public trust him in representing taiwan in negotiations
           with PRC?  Lien is responsible for the downfall of KMT.
           A bian, A bian, Go Go Go.
2004/3/25-27 [Politics/Domestic/California, Transportation/Airplane] UID:12869 Activity:high
3/25    I got a ticket for running a stop sign [around midnight in SF ...
        (no traffic)].  The cop claimed I didnt even slow down but went
        throught it at 30mph.  I may have not done a full stop, but what
        he is claiming is totally wrong.  This is hopeless to argue and I
        should just do traffic school, right?
        \_ Do a trial by written declaration. I got out of a red light ticket
           in SF. The cop claimed that I "totally" ran a red light and he
           even saw the camera light flash. I checked with the city and there
           was no camera in the direction I was driving so I wrote and said
           that the cop must have been either distracted or something, because
           no such flash could have gone off... he was a jerk anyway for giving
           me a ticket even though he thought that I'd get a second one in the
           mail.
           \_ concur with this respondent, do this.
              \_ Unfortunately there were two cops in the car for one thing
                 and I'm sure they would back each other up.  And the best
                 I could say is "I live around here, so of course I would
                 have known there was a STOP there."  I can't "prove" something
                 like you could about the camera.
        \_ i tried to get out of a california stop in berkeley several years
           ago, no luck.
        \_ Your best bet is to ask for a hearing in traffic court and hope
                \_ this isnt a "best bet" but "rolling the dice". and
                   considering you dont know what your 'saving throw' roll
                   is, this doesnt seem a great thing to bet on. is the cop
                   not showing up probability 50% or 5% or ... ? anyone have
                   some guess about the base rate on a no show? --psb
                   \_ Whoah. "saving throw", Partha? You must be as old as I am
                      or older. -- ulysses
                      \_ Because kids today don't play d&d, they play magic?
                      \_ why is that old?  a bunch of 13 year old proto dorks
                         play D&D at the cafe by my house.
                         \_ I see. Please forgive my ignorance. I really was
                            under the impression that rolling dice, indexing
                            damage tables and all that had been replaced by
                            more automated modes of play like card decks and
                            software. Then again, my last attempt an an RPG
                            session was coming on a decade ago. -- ulysses
                            \_ nope, new charts, new tables, same dice.
                      \_ Hell, Ulysses, being older than you isn't that hard.
                         Or rare.
                            \_ True. I think my issue is that I didn't know how
                               old Partha is, though. Then again, Sandy
                               or somebody else probably did tell me at some
                               point.  -- ulysses
                               \_ Old... old like the hills... old.
                   \_ If you are just going to ask the judge for traffic
                      school if they show, the risk is low. There is a tiny
                      chance the judge will say no and fine you I guess,
                      but most likely they will just accept your plea.
                      school if they show, the risk is low. There is a
                      tiny chance the judge will say no, I guess, but most
                      likely they will just accept your plea.
                      \_ I'm not trying to offend you, but do you know
                         this because you worked for a city gov or your
                         brother-in-law is a cop or...
                         \_ I could claim any reason, since this is an
                            anonymous forum. Let's just say that I know
                            plenty of lawyers, including a couple in my
                      \_ I'm not trying to offend you, but do you know
                            family. This is the "standard way" to fight
                            a traffic ticket. Pay a lawyer $100 to tell
                            you the same thing if it makes you feel better.
                   \_ CA cops almost always show so don't depend on that.
                         \_ I see.  It's always CHP busting me, not locals. tx.
                         this because you worked for a city gov or your
                         brother-in-law is a cop or...
                   \_ CA cops almost always show so don't depend on that.
                      \_ Not true. CHP almost always show, but for city cops,
                         it depends on the locality. I dunno for SF.
                         \_ This is true; my brother has beaten tix in CA by
                            counting on local PD not to show.
                         \_ I see.  It's always CHP busting me, not locals. tx.
           that he doesn't show up. If he shows, then just ask for traffic
           school. If you really want to be clever, if he shows, you can
           ask for a continuation, saying your lawyer didn't show, and then
           try and reschedule for when the officer is on vacation or something
           but you are on pretty thin ice here. I would just plead guilty
           at that point and ask for traffic school.
        \_ If your dad is the president or head of the CIA, you can have all
           charged dropped.
           \_ Wow! That worked! Thanks! -op
           \_ What if I belong to a powerful political MA dynasty and I left
              a woman to drown to death in my car in a lake?  Can I still be
              a Senator?
              \_ Or if you abandon your children (ie not pay child support)
                 after you abandoned your wife and she divorced you, and
                 you lead a charge to champion "family values" while
                 Speaker of the House
        \_ Kill the cop, then he can't show.  With no witnesses, you win!
        \_ Time == money. The fine is $315 or so. If it's worth your time
           to fight it (and possibly lose), go ahead. Read the citation.
           If it's just failure to stop, it's just about impossible to fight
           it (without witnesses). If it says you missed the sign completely
           or went through at specific high speed, you might have a case,
           especially if you very are familiar with the area (ie. you know
           the stop is there and could NEVER have run it at the speed noted.)
        \_ If your dad is the president or head of the CIA, you can have all
           charged dropped.
           \_ Wow! That worked! Thanks! -op
           \_ What if I belong to a powerful political MA dynasty and I left
              a woman to drown to death in my car in a lake?  Can I still be
              a Senator?
              \_ Or if you abandon your children (ie not pay child support)
                 after you abandoned your wife and she divorced you, and
                 you lead a charge to champion "family values" while
                 Speaker of the House
2004/3/20-21 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:12777 Activity:high
3/19    This has got to be tearing Taiwan apart right now.  Anyone with
        relatives/friends/actual presence there like to comment?
        \_ I am in TW right now.  Really think DPP rigged the election.
           Numerous of things, such as disallowing police and military
           to vote really made a difference this time.  DPP fully aware
           that police / military tend to be pro KMT, and using assassination
           as an excuse to put them in high alert is a relatively reasonable
           as an excuse to put them in high alert. It's a relatively reasonable
           reason to disallowing them to vote.  The assassination attempt,
           which many believed is being staged by DPP, really helped in
           galvanizing the swing voters to vote DPP at last minute.
           Having said that, I don't think pan-KMT fraction can do anything
           about this.  I, for one, now leaning toward CCP instead.
           \_ Many people believe that Bush paid the Israeli secret service
              to blow up the towers in NY, too.  Just because many people are
              stupid doesn't mean they're right.
        \_ My dad said Chen placed 300000 army and police on high alert after
           the "assassination" attempt on him, so these 300000 people
           couldn't vote.  DPP "won" by 30000, one tenth of 300000.
           \_ just in case someone wonders, the above numbers were not typos.
              The army and police who were supposed to vote in special voting
              places but were mobilized just on the election day and didn't
              get any chance to vote numbered at least ten times the margin of
              of "victory" claimed to be won by Chen.  There are numerous irreg
              in the vote counting process, including massive selective
        \_ The assassination stunt Chen pulled is kind of like the President
           of the United States using his presidential powers to stage an
           assassination attempt by Al Queda in a last minute bid to
           win the election.
           \_ Look, I'm not disputing whether the assassination attempt was
              staged or not.  I'm looking for insight from people who are
              there.  Do you know anyone who's there right now? Then ask
              them what they think is going on and post it.
              labelling of votes against Chen as beling invalid.  Frankly, I
              don't like Lien, because he seems like a indifferent wimp.  What
              worries me is having someone who is capable of a treachery of
              this magnitude as the leader of a still young democracy.
              \_ Too true, once we kill off the splittists, the motherland will
                 be reunited and we can execute or put in mental hospitals the
                 splittists who remain.
                 \_ well, even CCP have not been saying things like that, for
                    many year.  Almost no people on taiwan want immediate
                    reunification, including those against Chen and DPP.  Even
                    many people on the mainland does not think unification is
                    a viable idea now, including all of the leadership, not the
                    least because of the divergent political system.  They
                    just want to maintain the status quo, perhaps indefinitely.
                    The DPP and Chen, however, want to severe any hope and good
                    will between Taiwan and the mainland.  They want to write
                    textbooks that claim "Taiwanese" (Chinese immigrated there
                    two centuries earlier, not the minoriity aborigines) as
                    a different and superior race and glorify Japanese's role
                    in WWII.  To achieve the former, they used all the media
                    they control to forment hatred against and demonize all
                    people on the mainland as well as Taiwanese who disagree
                    with their agenda.  When the last time there was a solar
                    storm disrupting satelite communication, they put out
                    "news" that claim Beijing is send death ray against their
                    with their agenda.  Example: I remember when there was a
                    solar storm disrupting satelite communication, they put out
                    "news" that claim Beijing sent death ray against
                    Beijing.
                    satelite.  During SARS, they first claimed Taiwanese are
                    immune from it during to their superiority.  When it broke
                    out there too, they claim it was a biological attack from
                    Beijing.  You don't hear this on the western media because
                    they are clever enough to realize it is not PC so they
                    do not release it in English, and (at least the american)
                    media never picks it up, intentionally or not.
                    \_ The mainland leadership doesn't want reunification?
                       Excuse me, but that's complete bullshit.  I won't
                       actually call you a liar.  They've been putting out
                       pro-unification noise since day one.  They're building
                       up military force on the mainland side of the water for
                       years and continue to do so.  They have stated outright
                       that if they don't reunify at some unspecified but
                       near-future date that the mainland *will invade* to
                       make it happen.  I don't know about the propaganda
                       coming out of Taiwan but the mainland makes their own
                       positions very public and very clear.
              \_ summary:
                 The margin which DPP won by: < 30k  (or 0.23%)
                 The number of military/police personel which are not given
                       the chance to vote: 300k
                 The number of votes which counted as "invalid" due to
                 "more stringent validation process:" 330k
                 The number of ballots casted:  13 million
                 \_ "We didn't like the results so let's have a do-over!"
2004/3/20-21 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12774 Activity:very high
3/19    Apparently the Taiwanese have hired Jeb Bush to run their election.
        \_ Huh?
        \_ I don't know about that comparison.  If, however, the President
           of the United States use his presidential powers to stage an
           assassination attempt by Al Queda in a last minute bid to
           win the election, that would be comparable to what happened in
           Taiwan.
                 \_ No matter how many times you repeat this, it is still
                    not true.
          http://www.guardian.co.uk/US_election_race/Story/0,2763,430306,00.html
                    \_ What's not true?  "It"?  "It" is true.  Join us in the
                       year 2004.  The weather is great up here!
           \_ I was referring to the ballot shennanigans, not the assasination.
              \_ Oh my God, can't you just let it go and moveon?  The whole
                 country has been over this a million times.  The press did
                 their own recount of everything, Gore lost, join us up here
                 in the now and the future.
                 \_ No matter how many times you repeat this, it is still
                    not true.
          http://www.guardian.co.uk/US_election_race/Story/0,2763,430306,00.html
                    \_ What's not true?  "It"?  "It" is true.  Join us in the
                       year 2004.  The weather is great up here!
                 \_ Will you please open your eyes?  The recount itself is
                    meaningless.  The only way that election would have
                    been valid is if they'd had a runoff.  The difference
                    in ballots was squarely within the margin of error!
                    Take Stats and you'll know that you can draw no solid
                    conclusions in a contest like that.
                    \_ We don't do "runoffs" nith si country.  Were *you*
                       calling for a run off in 92 when Perot took 19%?  The
                       election was valid.  It followed the laws and it's
                       unfortunate but there is no procedure for statistical
                       margin of error problems.  Winner takes all and that's
                       that.  I've had "stats", thanks.  Have you had civics?
                       It's over, move on.  Frothing won't bring more people
                          \_ Oh, he became president through a _legit_ process.
                             (You could make the argument that the process
                              needs fixing, but so far, it's legit by
                              definition).
                       to your party for 2004.
                       \_ There are so many red herrings here, I think you
                          must be a fishmonger.  I know we don't have run-
                          offs; I'm saying that not having runoffs is
                          assinine.  I'm calling for a runoff because the
                          difference in votes fell within the margin of
                          error; in 92, this was not the case in any state.
                 \_ It wasn't worth saying anything more to such crap.  If
                    you had posted something worth responding to, you would
                    have had a real response.  As I said when I responded.
                    There's no reason to provide a real response to a frothing
                    troll who has added nothing to the thread.  You might as
                    well just say, "Yes, it is!" so I can say, "No, it isn't!"
                    and we can cut'n'paste back n forth for a while.  Add value
                    and you'll get a real reply.  Do you really honestly
                    believe you said something worth responding to?
        \_ I don't know about that comparison.  If, however, the President
           of the United States use his presidential powers to stage an
           assassination attempt by Al Queda in a last minute bid to
           win an election, that would be comparable to what happened in
           Taiwan.
                    meaningless.  The only way that election would have
                    been valid is if they'd had a runoff.  The difference
                    in ballots was squarely within the margin of error!
                    Take Stats and you'll know that you can draw no solid
                    conclusions in a contest like that.
        \_ This has got to be tearing Taiwan apart right now.  Anyone with
           relatives/friends/actual presence there like to comment?
                          I'm done frothing; I'm trying to get reforms.
                          Bush is president now, so be it; but don't pretend
                          he's president through a legit process.
                          \_ Oh, he became president through a _legit_ process.
                             (You could make the argument that the process
                              needs fixing, but so far, it's legit by
                              definition).
        \_ Rule #1) Have family in high places. Rule #2) Have the supreme
           court in your back pocket - maybe go duck hunting together. It
           worked for us!
           \_ Rule #3) wear tinfoil hat.  If you had a higher quality post
              you'd get a higher quality response, frother.
              \_ Uh huh. Your only response is to continue to claim,
                 against all evidence, things that are not true.
                 \_ It wasn't worth saying anything more to such crap.  If
                    you had posted something worth responding to, you would
                    have had a real response.  As I said when I responded.
                    There's no reason to provide a real response to a frothing
                    troll who has added nothing to the thread.  You might as
                    well just say, "Yes, it is!" so I can say, "No, it isn't!"
                    and we can cut'n'paste back n forth for a while.  Add value
                    and you'll get a real reply.  Do you really honestly
                    believe you said something worth responding to?
2004/3/19-20 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:12761 Activity:moderate
3/19    Taiwan's President narrowly escapes assassination:
        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3550517.stm
        \_ there are indications that it was staged by him and his campaign
           staff.  President Chen is trailing behind polls and he is doing
           everything he can to win the 20% swing voters' vote
           \_ urlP
              \_ http://www.csmonitor.com/earlyed/early_world031904a.htm
                 \_ There is no actual information in this post whatsoever.
                    For that, you have to tune to reports from Taiwan. (It will
                    hard to get any decent news about it in English.  Every
                    American news organization already equate DPP = democracy =
                    must be potrayed postively all the time.) There are various
                    pecularity, such as the hospital where Chen was sent after
                 \_ There are no indications in this post.  For that, you
                    the "assasination" was visited by Chen's security detail
                    for mysterious preparation *before* the "shooting," and the
                    have to tune to reports from Taiwan.  There are various
                    pecularity, such as the hospital when Chen went after
                    the "assasination" was visited by Chen's security detail
                    for preparation *before* the "shooting," and the location
                    of the bullet fragments and shells.
                    location of the bullet fragments and shells, etc.
              \- #t
              \_ I am not the poster above but after what happened in Spain,
                 this is a very natural thing to do, esp. with Mr. Chen's
                 (and his wife's) bribery scandal getting bigger and bigger.
                 Of course, this does not prove that he staged it, but really,
                 at this moment the only persons who can gain from an
                 "assasination" attempt are Mr. Chen's family and team.
                 \_ So you think scrubbing out the pro-splittist party chief
                    is of no benefit to the mainland??
                    \_ It wouldn't be wise to assasinate now, or ever.  Chen
                       is not more separatist than many others in his party or
                       even outside his party.  He is an opportunist who is
                            \_ so you believe he had himself and his vp shot
                               because he has some petty bribe scandal
                               brewing?  thats just nuts.
                       using this issue as a vote-getter.  If he goes, more
                       radical people are ready to replace him.  He has in fact
                       become sort of a liability for the separatist cause.
                       \_ A liability?  Say what?  How do you figure that?
                          \_ His (or his wife's) bottomless appetite for
                             bribe.
                            \_ so you believe he had himself and his vp shot
                               because he has some petty bribe scandal
                               brewing?  thats just nuts.
           \_ So is DU the proper liberal counterpart to FreeRepublic, or are
              we still waiting for the Bolshevik Daily to achieve extremist
              parity?
              \_ The democraticunderground is a respectable site.  Freepers
                 are frothing insane lunatics.
        \_ A bian a bian, go go go.
              \_ This is a non-sequitur.
           \_ When come november, we should expect an assassination attempt?
              \_ No, but after Spain got wobbly you can expect a terrorist
                 act to kill a few hundred people.  Something flashy with
                 pizzaz.
        \_ Is the KMT really the remnant of Chiang Kai Shek's Koumintang party?
           Those guys were a bunch of thugs...
           \_ Well, the DPP (the party of President Chen) is the
              reincarnation of the Taiwanese Communist Party, the TaiCom.
        \_ A bian a bian, go go go.
2004/3/10-11 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:12610 Activity:moderate
3/10    Will something like this help UC Berkeley's fiscal crunch?
        http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/living/education/8133259.htm
        \_ no, the only thing to do is follow UCLA's lead and start selling
           body parts from freshmen found drunk after bad parties.
           \_ too bad we don't have a medical school or the facilities
              that UCLA has or it would mean $billions!!
              \_ what? the budget cuts are so steep we can't even afford a
                 UC hack saw?  what more do we need?
                 \_ it's hard to get people to donate bodies when there
                    isn't a hospital.  maybe we can work out a profit-
                    sharing scheme with UCSF?
                    \_ no problem really, just hang out frat row after parties
                       and at all hours during rush and haze weeks.
        \_ One of the most effective teachers I've ever had did this
           regularly, even though the school and area was well-to-do.
           She also made us wash overhead transparencies every couple weeks
           when they ran out.  It's not horrible to expect students to
           contribute a bit toward the day to day operations of the classroom.
           A box of kleenex may not be within the reach of *every* student,
           but I'd bet 99% can afford it.
           \_ no this is bullshit.  my taxes are already paying for the
              school system and I don't even have kids.  the kids and their
              parents shouldn't have to add even more on top of that.  CA is
              about in the middle of the pack for school spending per student,
              how do other states manage to purchase supplies and educate
              their studENTs without trading grades for kleenex?  sheesh.
              \_ I'm not sure about the UCs, I'm having trouble finding
                 comparative data, but K-12 is (cost-adjusted) 46th by
                 state in spending. (32nd in absolute $) unfortunately, your
                 taxes really /aren't/ paying for it, and the teachers (who
                 are not exactly mtakinm that much to begin with -- and note the
                 story is about Palo Alto, where the district is comparatively
                 extremely well funded) are expected to make up the gap and
                 buy all sorts of things. -chialea
                 \_ Stop interefering with the libertarian fantasy that
                    public schools are already receiving too much money! You
                    must not obstruct the march to vouchers!
                    \_ whatever, no one said a word about vouchers.  please
                       try to pretend not to troll. it makes for better trolls.
                       \_ Ah, well I flushed you out into the open pretty well,
                          now, didn't I?
                 \_ Very true.  I have a friend who teaches at an elementary
                    school and is living with two other teachers.  They often
                    have parties where the guests are encouraged to bring
                    school supplies.
                 \_ I don't know where the hell all these poor teachers are
                    coming from or where they're working.  A friend who
                    worked in Hayward for 5 years and quit was taking in almost
                    $80k when she quit.  She wasn't a Berkeley grad or Phd or
                    anything special.  Just someone who couldn't do so she
                    taught.  I get the feeling there's some Big Lie(c) being
                    told and retold but we'll never see real spending numbers
                    broken out.
                    \_ But isn't that curious. I have a friend who is
                        *currently* teaching junior high in Hayward with 5 yrs
                        seniority. He is making about $52K before taxes. I've
                        seen his stubs. Perhaps we should compare notes before
                        you take your Big Lie idea much further. --ulysses
2004/3/8 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12567 Activity:nil
3/8     Bush gang is furious that they won't be able to steal Florida again:
        http://csua.org/u/6c6
        \_ I have to hear a rational response to this question: how did
           Bush 'steal' Florida - what is your evidence?
           \_ Supreme Court decision which effectively awarded Presidency to
              one side was unprecedented?  The vote was also 5-4, aligned
              conservative vs. liberal.
                \_ As reported below the key issue was decided 7:2, read
                   the decision.
                   \_ CNN:  "Broadly speaking, the 7-2 split was over the
                      question of reversing the Florida court, but the 5-4
                      split was over the termination of manual recounts."
                        \_ Please don't rely on CNN for vague explanations.
                           Read the decision, 7-2 the recounts violated
                           equal protection.  The 5-4 was the remedy.
                           \_ Which was one of the most perverse
                              missapplications of the equal protection clause
                              that I've ever heard of.  They basically said
                              "County A can't have recounts because you're not
                              doing a recount in County B, which doesn't need
                              one, and that somehow harms County B."
                              \_ If you actually read the decision you
                                 would understand the justification.
                                 You're right in the sense they didn't
                                 even need to invoke equal protection,
                                 they should have stuck with Article 2
                                 of the Constitution.
                                 \_ I don't see what in Article 2 would have
                                    stopped a recount.  Only that the electors
                                    must give their votes on the day set by
                                    congress.  It seems like the SC had no
                                    grounds to stop a recount, only to compel
                                    the electors to reach a decision.
                                    \_ So you would have been happier if the
                                       (R) controlled Florida legislators had
                                       a vote on it instead?  That was the
                                       other option at the time which seemed
                                       more legal to me.
                           \_ Yes, I understand 7-2 was about violating equal
                              protection, and 5-4 was about the remedy.
                              However, I still think the 5-4 decision was more
                              important than 7-2 -- as indicated by all the
                              media I've seen, conservative and liberal.
                              Please provide one relatively non-partisan URL
                              which says otherwise, since your viewpoint is
                              the one that differs from the accepted view.
                              \_ The accepted view?  As defined by who?  I
                                 don't "accept" that view and neither does
                                 anyone else who has actually read the court's
                                 decisions and followed it closely at the time.
           \_ Katherine Harris scrubbed 57000 legal voters, almost all
              black and Democratic, from the rolls.
              http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=217&row=2
                \_  Actually, the majority of the voters removed were white.
                    Given the preexisting rampant voter fraud in Florida
                    clearly some sort of reform was in order:
                    http://csua.org/u/5ei
                    Is it your contention then that most felons, pets and dead
                   people vote democrat?
                   \_ Suarez, who committed all these crimes, is a Republican.
                                \_ Suarez was a Democrat at the time.
                                   Carollo was the Repub. candidate
                                   http://csua.org/u/6cb
                                   \_ Nope Suarez was independent at the time:
                      http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/time/2000/11/20/storm.html
                      my bad
                   \_ 90% of the purged voters were black. Read the link.
                      "My office carefully went through the scrub list
                      and discovered that at minimum, 90.2 percent of
                      the people were completely innocent of any crime
                      except for being African American. We didn't have
                      to guess about that, because next to each voter's
                      name was their race."
                        \_ Step back a second and read his quote.  90.2
                           of which people - he doesn't specify.  He is
                           either stretching the truth or lying.  The best
                           the ACLU could was 54%, in one county.
                           http://archive.aclu.org/news/2001/n060601c.html
                           57,000 legal voters were not removed as you stated
                           above, that is also a lie.  The people removed were either
                           felons, dead, or did not exist.  I reassert what
                           I said before - a majority of these 57,000 were white
                           \_ At least 57000, maybe more:
                      http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=182&row=2
                      They were removed from the polls for having names
                      similar to felons and for being the same race.
                      Salon says "half were black":
        http://archive.salon.com/politics/feature/2002/11/01/lists/index_np.html
                        \_ Christ its another article by the same guy.  Talk
                           about being tautological.  First he says its 90.2
                           percent then more than 50%?  Very convincing source..
                           \_ Here is another article then:
                              http://http://www.democrats.com/view2.cfm?id=6543
                              Do you have even one source that says that
                              most of the purged voters were white?
                      NAACP says "a larger percentage of Black voters
                      than white voters"
        http://http://www.naacp.org/news/archives/2000/florida_lawsuit.shtml
                      The Nation says 200,000 were either scrubbed
                      or had their ballots thrown away:
        http://http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20010430&s=lantigua&c=1
                         \_ Again you are not referring to the 57,000
                            people removed.  Clearly errors were made, but
                            your article names only 5 people.  Given the
                            massive, pulitzer prize documented fraud in
                            Southern Florida clearly reform was necessary.
                                http://csua.org/u/6c8
                            \_ That was voter fraud committed by another
                               Republican. What a surprise.
                                \_ Suarez was a Democrat at the time.
                                   Carollo was the Repub. candidate
                                   http://csua.org/u/6cb
                                   \_ Wrong. Suarez was never a Democrat.
              \_ According to Palm Beach Post (as quoted in http://democrats.com),
                 ~43k 'probable' and 'possible' felons were identified.
                 Out of that, 6500 names were not exact matches.  From that,
                 5400 appeals were filed, and 2500 were upheld.  After the
                 election, "at least 108" who were purged were later proven
                 to be legal voters.  There were also 996 convicted of
                 crime in another state, who should have been allowed to
                 vote in FL, but were not.
                 \_ From the results of the Federal inquiry:
                http://http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/ch5.htm
                At least 8000 were removed that should not have been
                for sure, according to Florida state testimony:
                "Other voters were disenfranchised because a company
                hired by the Department of State to match voter
                rolls against other databases to ensure that felons
                and the dead could not vote did not properly do so.
                Database Technologies included in their list the names
                of more than 8,000 voters who should not have been
                removed from the voting rolls. However, by the time
                the error was caught, it was too late for the counties
                to fix it; in fact, the first time many of these voters
                realized they had been removed from the voter rolls
                was on Election Day."
                Still waiting for your evidence that a majority of
                those scrubbed were white. Do you have any evidence?
                        \_ Look I have no idea how to respond to you.
                           You are all over the map changing your position
                           every time you add something.  First it
                           was 90.2 percent were black and were removed.
                           Then it was 50%, then .. fuck if I know.
                           I'd look forward to responding to a coherent
                           argument, were it put forth.
                           Please don't continue
                           this neurotic stream of consciousness of
                           links and babble, count to
                           10 take a deep breath and read my comments
                           above.
                           \_ I have posted from differing sources to
                              prove the overwhelming evidence that makes
                              my point: a majority of those disenfranchised
                              were black. Not every source agrees on the
                              exact percentage and I suspect that your
                              reading of Palast's 90.2% is correct, but
                              ALL agree that a majority were black. You
                              on the other hand, have not posted one
                              iota of evidence to support your contention
                              that most were white. Balls in your court.
                               \_ I figured you would actually be familiar
                                  with the USCCR report...
                                  'Furthermore, whites were twice as
                                  likely as blacks to be placed on the
                                  list erroneously, not the other way
                                  around.'  But she's a liar right?
          http://http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/appendix/dissent.htm
                                  You can find the rest of the info
                                  for yourself.
                                  \_ That was from the dissent, not the
                                     conlusions. Only two commissioners
                                     signed the dissent out of eight.
                                     You want me to find it myself, eh?
                                     In other words, you can't find it,
                                     mostly because it doesn't exist.
                                     \_ Are you aware of the make up of this
                                        so-called investigative panel?  Or
                                        any of the hateful racist shit that
                                        came from these people?
                                        \_ And here's the switch to attacking
                                           the source of the report!  Right on
                                           time!
                                        \_ Let me add that is part of
                                           testimony presented before the
                                           Senate - are you implying
                                           Thernstrom perjured herself?
                \_ i'm the palm beach post guy, not the white voter guy.
                   however you cheat.  you merely quoted the usccr.gov
                   report QUOTING fl state senator daryl jones and state
                   rep chris smith.  you are not quoting the report itself.
                   tsk tsk.  the report also stated that clayton roberts,
                   director of the division of elections, stated that the
                   problem was addressed and "no person was removed from
                   the voter rolls based on tat erroneous information."
                   \_ Fine I will quote the report then:
                The most dramatic undercount in the Florida election was
                the uncast ballots of countless eligible voters who
                were wrongfully turned away from the polls. Statistical
                data, reinforced by credible anecdotal evidence, point
                to the widespread denial of voting rights. It is
                impossible to determine the extent of the disenfranchisement
                or to provide an adequate remedy to the persons whose
                voices were silenced by injustice, ineptitude, and
                inefficiency. However, careful analysis and some
                reasonable projections illustrate what happened in Florida.
                The disenfranchisement of Florida's voters fell most
                harshly on the shoulders of black voters.
                http://http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/exesum.htm
                \_ note that you are now beating a hasty retreat from your
                   own 8000 number.  i am not contesting that eligible
                   voters were left off the list.  my contention is that
                   1) the original 57000 was not backed up by fact,
                   2) the number was way smaller, quoting tampa bay
                   post "at least 108".  i will merely observe that even
                   8000 is an order of magnitude less than the claimed 57000,
                   and now you've even backed off from the 8000.
                   \_ I am not "backing off of it" at all. Everything I
                      have seen indicates that the vast majority of those
                      57000 scrubbed were not guilty of any crime. Do you
                      have any evidence otherwise, other than partisan
                      sniping by Republican election officials?
                      \_ 1) i quoted http://democrats.com quoting tampa bay post
                         with "at least 108".  2) i refuted your bogus claim
                         from the usccr report.  give me something credible
                         that says 57000.  if i could find a http://democrats.com
                         ref, you can find me something non obviously
                         partisan, and we're even.
                   \_ more quoting fun from teh usccr.gov report,
                      "Although the Commission.s record reflects that
                      some supervisors of elections registered general
                      complaints regarding the use of the exclusion lists,
                      the record does not reflect that the Division of
                      Elections was flooded with specific examples of
                      Floridians erroneously identified as felons."
                      note that i am quoting the CONCLUSION of the report,
                      instead of dishonestly quoting the report QUOTING
                      a partisan polician.
                      \_ No, that is not the conclusion. This is the
                         conclusion:
                http://http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/exesum.htm
                         I can't even find the line you quote. What
                         section is it in?
           \_ God, this is such old news.  It's like the abortion or death penalty or
              other hot button issues.  Blacks were denied voting rights, well
              so were people in the panhandle and the military, the USSC gave
              the election to one side 5:4, well no, the key issue was decided
              7:2 and the FLSC had previously given it to Gore 5:4, blah, blah
              blah until we all drop dead of age and partisanship.
              \_ None of these other people had their right to vote
                 taken from them. Everyone who wished to vote in the
                 Florida panhandle and showed up on time was able to.
                 Florida bent over backwards accepting military votes.
                 They even counted votes that came in late. All the FUD
                 in the world can't change these facts.
                 \_ Exactly, blah, blah, blah.  It's like abortion or the
                    death penalty.  This is a huge troll going nowhere fast.
        \_ Thank you, anti-Bush person, for deleting my post.
           \_ I did not delete your post. The coward that refuses to use
              motdedit did it.
              \_ Fuck motdedit.  In the ear.
        \_ Miami Herald report: http://http://www.miami.com/mld/miami/news/2071226.htm
           Lead: "Republican George W. Bush's victory in Florida,
           which gave him the White House, almost certainly would have
           endured even if a recount stopped by the U.S. Supreme Court
           had been allowed to go forward."
           \_ I agree that 4+ out of 5 articles I've seen on this topic say
              "Bush would have won anyway".  Anyone have well-supported URLs
              against this?
              \_ This is about the recount. This has nothing to do with
                 all the voters being scrubbed from the rolls.
                 \_ So, find a URL talking about roll-scrubbing in this case
                    being illegal, and how Gore would have won otherwise.
                    Points if the URL isn't from ACLU, NAACP, Salon, etc.
2004/3/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:12553 Activity:kinda low
3/8     Has anyone gotten their California e-tax booklet (together with the pin)
        yet? For some reason, I still haven't received mine ..:/
        \_ render unto caesar that which is his.
2004/3/3 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:12507 Activity:nil
3/3     Bush is going to win California.. hahahahhaha:
        http://csua.org/u/69o
        \_ Uhm, this state used to vote heavily (R).  Nothing says it can't
           switch back.  The (D) take too many people for granted.
        \_ Schwarzenegger is a democrat fool
        \_ California won't forgive Bush for Enron.  CA as a battleground is
           a pipe dream.
           \_ It's March, don't start making predictions until August, fool.
              Remember, Bush upset Gore in 2000, he did the impossible in
              2002 by actually increasing the number of Republicans in
              the legislature during an interim election year, and who
              would've thought that the recall would work and Arnie would
              be governor? And remember, a solid majority within california
              voted Republican in the last election.
              \_ Bush will win California when monkeys fly out of Arnold's ass.
              \_ Are you the same guy that predicted three months ago that Bush
                 would take California?
           \_ More like a Freeperdream.
2004/3/3-4 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:12500 Activity:high
3/3     Apparently if you put the word "school" in it, people will vote for any
        bond measure.  I hope I never hear Democrats whining about fiscal
        responsibility.  I certainly won't care about that whining any more.
        Thanks for voting yes on 55, $12B for the schools with $12B in
        interest.
        \_ dude, school funding is traditionally funded by bonds.  It is the
           way it has always worked.  The other 15B in bonds are the ones you
           should be grumpy about.
           \_ Oh I'm grumpy about both of them.  How long has this been
              tradition?  10 years?  Since the lottery?  My point was that in a
              year where we need to cut spending, a huge bond was passed.  The
              $15B bond at least has the facade of buying more time to balance
              the budget.
              \_ Go ahead and be grumpy. You got yer contra costa county
                 walmart didn't you?
                 \_ I don't live in CC so I couldn't vote against it, thanks.
                 didn't you?
           \_ Incorrect. Traditionally school funding came from property and
              income taxes. Large improvements (not maintenance) were funded
              by bonds. However, it takes an ubermajority to raise taxes, so
              the cheat is creating a bond and paying it via fees.
        \_ There's nothing inherently irresponsible about bond financing;
           as with a mortgage, you get the cash up front in exchange for
           paying more over time, the idea being that you can get greater
           value out of having the cash now.  As long as state revenues
           continue to rise, there shouldn't be anything wrong with bond
           issues (within reason).  -tom
           \_ This is the first time a bond has been issued to pay for past
              daily expenses and not a special specific project.  This is a
              nightmare precident.
              \_ Precedent. Also alarming is the size of the bond issue.
                 It's one of the largest ever issued anywhere. How
                 liberals can whine about $15 billion in bonds for money
                 we've already spent and yet vote to put $15 billion more
              \_ You are confusing the two different bonds. Start another
                 thread if you want to talk about the Gropinator's
                 bailout bond.
                 \_ Oh yeah, sorry.  Ok, back to school bonds: more waste tax
                    pay dollars down the drain into the educational beaurocracy
                    never to be seen again.  After the educational system is
                    completely reformed we can talk about putting more money in
                    it if necessary.
           issues (within reason).  -tom
           \_ how about issuing bonds in one hand, and got rid of license
              tax on the other hand?
              \_ This sort of ridiculousness is no more than you can expect in
                 a system that basically mandates fiscal governance by ballot
                 since the legislature has its hands tied by the supermajority.
                 But hey! Smile! the legislature can never increase taxes on
                 you and you can still blame them for CA's budget problems when
                 you're done blaming the governor.
              \_ It's hard to justify giving a $4 billion handout to the
                 well-off in difficult budget times.  -tom
           \_ It's irresponsible to take on a new mortgage when you are already
              drowning in debt.  Refinancing at least makes some sense.
        \_ I agree that the bond was stupid. This is for local districts
           to address. In fact, many of them had Measures on my local
           ballot. The money is better spent when it is is raised and
           spent locally.
        \_ Does anyone else just vote against all propositions on general
           principles?  Its a terrible way to make laws.
              nightmare precident.
                 on the credit card is beyond me.
2004/3/2 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Prop] UID:12482 Activity:very high
3/2     Does anyone know how long can you drive with an expired vehicle
        registration sticker?  This morning I realized my car has an expired
        Feb sticker, and I wonder if I will get ticketed.  But I paid
        registration fee but haven't received the sticker.
        \_ I had a friend who had Michigan tags that were expired for
           more than a year. He got pulled over, ticketed for speeding
           but the cop never realized that he had expired tags. I'm
           not sure they're that observant.
        \_ until you get caught.  Youmay be able to argue that it is paid
           and only get a fix-it ticket for not having the sticker.
        \_ I went all of last year without one (had it but put it on in
           February, after it expired) and I still don't have one for this
           year.  I've been pulled over once for speeding but the cop said
           nothing.  It's an old car, maybe they're taking pity on me?
        \_ you can drive as long as you want, but you're eligible to be
           ticketed the instant it expires.  if it's expired for more
           than 6 months, they can impound your car if they want to.
        \_ Same situation happened to me and I got pulled over for speeding.
           Cop can look up your registration and verify it's paid. Still got
           the speeding ticket though.
        \_ I always pay late. You can avoid the ticket up to a couple months
           in but after a while the cops and esp. chp get anal about it.
           If you don't drive on the highway much you might be able to
           get away with it. However, your car might be missing if you
           leave it on the street and they decide to tow.
        \_ In California, it's standard practice to get one month's grace.
           If your sticker says FEB, it's policy to ticket you on April 1.
           Parking enforcement left two tickets for me over two weeks in L.A.,
           but they also make a business of ticketing residents who park on
           the wrong side of the street during street-cleaning days.
        \_ Depending on the city they will pull you over just for expired tags,
           I have gotten tickets in SJ and Castro Valley.  -oj
           I have gotten fix-it tickets in downtown SJ and Castro Valley,
           from a cop who was directly behind me when I was stopped at a light.

e/2     Today is super tuesday.  Don't forget to vote.  Here's the obPoll:
        Kerry:   ..
        Kerry:   .. (lemmings)
        Edwards: .
        Kucinich: ..
        Sharpton: .
        Neither: .
        yes on prop 55: .....
        no on prop 55:  .
        yes on prop 56: ...
        no on prop 56:  ..
        yes on prop 57: ..
        no on prop 57:  ...
        yes on prop 58: .
        no on prop 58:  ....
        tired of polls: .
        \_ Don't care -- the primary have already been decided so there's no
           more point in voting.
        don't care: .
        \_ No open primaries this year.   This sucks if you are an independent
           but want to actually have a say in what your choices for the
           prez vote are.
           \_ Not true. You can request a Democrat ballot if you want.
           \_ You can still vote for Nader...
           \_ If you want to have a say, you should have registered as a Dem
              for this election, then switched back before November. If you
              can't figure out how to game the system, you have no place
              whining about it.
           \_ Not true. You can request a Democrat ballot if you want. I
              am an independent and I voted for a Democrat in the primary.
           \_ Yeah, those damn parties thinking they should base the primary on
              who the party members choose...
              \_ Let the parties hold their own elections then instead of
                 having the government foot the bill.
        \_ Don't care -- the primary have already been decided so there's no
           more point in voting.
        \_ Odd...my poll responses were overwritten.  Or maybe the censor is
           enforcing the fact that nobody cares?
        \_ Which prop is about raising the bridge tolls?  I'm so ignorant.
           \_ Measure 2, comes with good things and bad things.
              Translink would be great, but ferries are a waste of money
              as is extending BART to Byron.
              \_ I agree that ferries suck, but BART builds slowly and it makes
                 sense to build in the direction of future growth, which is
                 to the east.
              \_ How is a proposition different from a measure?
                 \_ Prop=Statewide, Measure [1-9]=County, Measure [A-Z] = City
        \_ Why are they trying to fund healthcare with a sales tax increase?
           It's regressive taxation and falls whenever the economy is in
           trouble.  Not to mention it harms the local economy more than an
           income or property tax because it's easier for people to shop
           somewhere else than to move or change jobs.
           \_ Because nothing but a sales tax increase will ever pass county
              wide. Any policymaker worth their spit would prefer an income or
              property tax but they are generally impossible to pass in CA.
           \_ Where are they trying to do this?
              \_ Alameda county.  Proposed sales tax increase to 8.75%
                 It's a worthy cause, being funded in one of the most ass-ways
                 possible.
        \_ So for the "yes on 55" folks, why do you want to add a $12B bond
           with $12B interest to the CA finance mess?
           \_ Because it is an investment for the future, because I think
              education is usually money well spent, because CA spends less
              than it should on education, because we are in a recession
              and I believe in Keynesian economics. Yeah, I know we will
              probably not still be in a recession by the time the money
              is spent, but the CA finance mess is not a good reason to
              not spend money on worthy causes, since the economy will
              be better sooner or later, probably sooner.
              \_ Prop 55 includes a $300m grant to build more charter schools.
                 On this basis alone, I cannot, in good conscience, support
                 it.
              \_ Building schools makes no sense when the kids at the
                 current schools don't even have books or teachers. This
                 is money poorly spent in the name of education.
        \_ For the "yes on 56" folks, why do you want to lower the number of
           legislators needed to increase taxes to 55% from 2/3?
           \_ The state budget has been in chaos over not being able to return
              tax rates to an equitable level. Giving the legistature the
              ability to actually do their job sounds like a good idea, unless
              you are one of the many in CA who doesn't like paying for what we
              have here.
              \_ I for one think welfare queens should start paying their fair
                 share.
                 \_ What percentage of the state budget is spent by your
                    so-called "welfare queens"? Do you even know?
              \_ I already pay more than my share for what "we" have here.
                 \_ If you really fell that way, why not leave?
                    \_ Ah. "Love it or leave it." If they make me pay even
                       more for what "we" have then maybe I will. Lots of
                       Californians are.
           \_ Because it only takes 51% to lower them.
              \_ Is that true?  I thought *all* tax legislation had to be
                 passed by the same amount.
              \_ and when was the last time your state taxes were lowered?
                 \_ It's sad how easy y'all get brainwashed by right wing talk
                    radio.
                 \_ Last fall, by Herr Gropenator.
                    \_ Case in point.  Look for a reference to a "car tax"
                       before, oh, '96.
                 \_ In real dollars, property taxes go down every day.  Thanks,
                    prop 13.
                    \_ Until you move.
           \_ Because it is past time that California raised its taxes.
              \_ no its past time California lowered its expendatures.
                 \_ Okay, show me where.
        \_ None of this really matters as long as the e-voting machines can be
           shown to be easily compromised and voters are not required to show
           ID in order to vote.  Aargh!
           \_ When I was voting this morning I saw an old person asking about
              paper receipts and audit trails.  It made me happy.
              \_ In San Francisco, we vote by filling in lines with a pen on
                 a piece of paper, which is then read by an optical scanner.
                 This seems like an ideal solution - not prone to error or
                 fraud, easy to understand for everyone, leaves a permanent
                 record for recount, and not labor intensive for the precincts.
                 Why do other counties insist on using such awful solutions
                 like Diebold?
                 \_ Who keeps the piece of paper, the voter or the polling
                    station?  If it's the voter, this system is highly
                    vulnerable to verifiable vote-selling.  If it's put in
                    a lock-box at the polling place, you're in much better
                    shape.
                    \_ The actual ballot with the pen markings is fed into
                       the optical scanner by the voter themselves - after this
                       it is locked away for safekeeping.  The voter keeps
                       only the receipt torn from the top of the sheet.
                       See here:
                       http://www.fairvote.org/administration/votetech.htm
                       Scroll down to "optical scanning."
                       \_ Wow, that rocks!  Thank you!  Now if only Alameda
                          County would implement this.
2004/3/1-2 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:12478 Activity:nil
3/1     America headed for one-party PRI-style rule?
        http://www.prospect.org/print/V15/2/kuttner-r.html
2004/2/28 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:12443 Activity:nil
2/28    In Mountain View, voting in the upcoming election is being held in a
        church. I find this disturbing. Is there something illegal about it
        or is separation of church and state just a lofty idea?
        \_ Not a bad idea for a troll, but the execution is a bit too
           transparent.
            \_ Agreed, if someone wants to get a response to something this
               stupid, it pretty much has to be in the middle of an already
               heated thread.
        \_ oh my god dude that is so horrible!  you should sue or call the
           aflcio or bomb the church!  i cant believe anyone would violate
           chuch and state like that!  ill bet the priest makes people take
           communion or something before theyre allowed to vote!  im sure it
           is totally illegal!  im am as shocked and disturbed as you are! in
           fact my doctor said i should stop reading and posting to the motd
           and i think you should stop too!
2004/2/28-29 [Politics/Domestic/California, Computer/HW/Drives, Computer/SW] UID:12442 Activity:nil
2/27    I've googled this but w/o any luck. I'm trying to find the mpeg/wmv
        file of the AOL 9.0 commercial with Jerry Stiller and that rap/hip
        hop guy where they made a fish out of AOL CDs. Thanks.
        \- "that rap/hip hp guy" = mr. s. dogg, of long beach, ca. --master psb
           \_ that's "hop" to you.
        \- "that rap/hiphop guy" = mr. s. dogg, of long beach, ca. --master psb
2004/2/27 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29837 Activity:nil
2/27    Turn your sleepy little podunk town into a tourism lightning rod and
        media circus in one easy step:
        http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/27/nyregion/27CND-PALT.html?hp
        \_ Hang on: "Mr. West, who is 26 and was elected last year on the
                     Green Party ticket...."
           ??? How many Green mayors are there?  I thought Gonzalez would
           have been the first.
           \_ How wrong I was:
              http://www.feinstein.org/greenparty/greenmayors.html
2004/2/27-28 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29835 Activity:low 75%like:29838
2/26    No, really... /var/mail is getting full:
        -rw-rw----  1 njh            mail    24023725 Feb 26 17:18 njh
        -rw-rw----  1 georgy         mail    22633905 Feb 26 17:11 georgy
        -rw-------  1 vlin           mail    20938590 Feb 26 15:19 vlin
        -rw-------  1 uctt           mail    20938475 Feb 26 14:28 uctt
        -rw-------  1 leec           mail    20921676 Feb 26 16:17 leec
        -rw-------  1 danberry       mail    20881048 Feb 26 16:18 danberry
        -rw-------  1 ericwo         mail    20872793 Feb 26 10:55 ericwo
        -rw-rw----  1 isabelle       mail    20446008 Feb 26 11:41 isabelle
        -rw-r--r--  1 nivra          csua    19251192 Feb 23 12:36 nivra
        -rw-rw----  1 marc           mail    18391040 Feb 26 17:20 marc
        Why isn't there a quota on this partition?
        \_ I don't know about you, but my /var/mail quota is 15 MB, hard 20 MB.
           \_ I guess if you're cool and know the right people and maybe run
              for CA governor as a joke candidate you get more space.
                \_ I think selling ladies underwear with your name on it
                   should count towards the secret-csua-life-point-that-gives-
                   you-more-mail-quota.  No comment on the other evil-doers,
                   though.  -John
        \_ two of those accounts are sorry'd.  can they still retrieve email?
           how are they supposed to fix their mess?
2004/2/27 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:12431 Activity:high
2/27    I don't live in California anymore, and it's dissapeared from the
        headlines...What's the deal with Arnie?  Has he improved the fiscal
        situation?  done anything else useful?
        \_ Of course not.  The main thing he's done is claim that allowing
           gay marriage in SF will cause civil unrest.
           \_Gay marriage in SF doesn't work, the state doesn't recognize
             gay marriage. If you don't like it, either change the laws
             in Sac. or secede from California. I don't really give a
             rats ass about fags getting married, but the law in its current
             form definitely does not recognize homosexual unions as a
             legal entity, no matter how you may try to reinterpret it.
             If a law is discriminatory, go and get it changed. Good luck
             trying to get the Latinos to vote for it.
             \_ Mmm... racist and homophobic all in one breath.
                \_ I don't think it was racist.  Latino voters are more against
                   gay marriage than non-Latino voters.  Statement of fact.
             \_ Civics lesson 101:  Marriage is not mentioned in the US
                Constitution.  Marriage is not restricted in the CA Const.
                CA State Law defines marriage as being between a man and
                woman, but relegates issuance of marriage licenses to cities.
                By allowing gay marriages in San Francisco, Newsom is defying
                CA State Law. In order to censure him, however, the Judicial
                branch has to find the state ban on gay marriage constitutional
                according to CA Constitution, which is unlikely after the
                recent Mass. Supreme Court decision. Until the court rules,
                the marriages are presumed legal and legitimate. If the court
                rules that the ban is constitutional, the marriages will be
                rendered null and void (and Newsom could face criminal
                charges); if not, the law will be struck down, and the
                marriages will stand and continue.
        \_ Why do Americans think the Executive branch has anything to do
           with the economy?  As if they can push the "create jobs" button
           and some choose not to?  Not Arnold, not Davis, not Bush, not
           Clinton nor any other Executive has the power to "improve the
           fiscal situation".  And if they did, the few months he's been in
           office wouldn't be enough time anyway.  I didn't vote for Arnold
           and don't like Arnold and I'm voting against his prop 57/58
           insanity but I'll grant that he's trying.  How many people on the
           motd have ever taken a real US Civics course?
           \_ In CA, state spending is wholy incumbent upon the Governor and
              on how well he can woo the legislature.  Do a little more civics
              studies yourself.
              http://www.dof.ca.gov/fisa/bag/process.htm
              Also take a short course on economics, and see how much of an
              effect government spending has upon the economy.  Connect the
              dots, young man.
              \_ Woo the legislature?  As if the legislature is some mythical
                 beast that is intent on the destruction of the economy?  No,
                 dummy, it is incumbent upon the legislature to write and pass
                 bills that will have a positive effect.  Since when did the
                 legislature lose all responsibility for their own actions?
                 Like I said, take a civics course.  Worse than being ignorant,
                 you're actually completely ass backwards on the subject.
                 \_ The motd continues to amaze.
                 \_ Since the Recall put the blame for all of California's
                    economic woes at the feet of Gray Davis.
           \_ Actually they do have a "create jobs" button, but not on such
              a big enough scale to make a difference. For that they need
              legislative help.
           \_ He didn't say "economy"--he said "fiscal situation".  You know,
              the CA gov't budget problems?  Moron.
              \_ *laugh* Yes, the governor can magically fix the "fiscal
                 situation" which is dramatically different and unrelated to
                 the economy.  Refer to my reply above about who writes and
                 passes legislation in this state.  The other guy only needs
                 a civics class.  You're hopeless.
                 \_ You know, being abrasive doesn't make you any less
                    wrong.  Certainly the governor can't magically fix
                    anything, but he has a significant amount of control
                    over both state expenditures and state income, which
                    are the two aspects of the fiscal situation.  For
                    example, Arnie simply threw away $4 billion in revenues.
                    100% his own decision, for his own political gain.  -tom
                    \_ Yeah, vs. Davis tripling the car tax to raise money,
                       also 100% his own decision, which unfortunately
                       was so unpopular that they threw him out of office.
                       I guess you won't be running any winning campaigns
                       in your lifetime, Tommy boy.
                       \_ Wrong. Davis cut the car tax by 1/3 back in 99,
                          when the state was flush with cash. It went back
                          to its normal level automatically.
        \_ He's been busy raising money to fund the "borrow $15 billion to
           balance the budget this year" prop. It's going to get very ugly
           out here very quickly.
        \_ The Gropinator wants to borrow $15B in bonds to pay for his
           $4B/yr car tax cut. Dunno if it going to pass or not. CA voters
           are nuts.
           \_ Yes they are. Whee! Actually, CA voters aren't much different
              than other states. Which is to say that their collective
              intelligence is that of a child.
              \_ I think the problem with california voters is that they
                 really represent the equivalent of at least three states
                 in terms of interests.  Very large blocks of California
                 voters differ by as much as, say, South Carolina voters
                 and Utah voters.
2004/2/25-26 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:12401 Activity:moderate
2/24    Polling sodans who have moved out of california.  What state did
        you move to and why?   Thanks.
        \_ to someplace cold because I'm a fucking idiot.  I've dreamt
           about being back in california every night for the last week.
           You know what I dream about?  just not being cold.
        \_ south africa, wanted to find another charlize theron
        \_ southern california, for the money and cultural vacuum ;-)
           \_ not to mention intelligence. looks like you fit right in.
        \_ New Mexico.  Couldn't find a job which didn't suck in CA, in
           my area.  (Computational plasma physics.)  I've found that
           though my salary is 2/3 the going rate in CA for my job,
           housing costs 1/4 as much per sq. ft.  --PeterM
           \_ wow that's pretty cool. Do you get funded by DARPA/army?
              Do you research on atom bombs or some type of cool weaponry?
              \_ The MiB will be at your place soon to discuss the topic with
                 you at their secret facility in Cuba.
              \_ I help develop high power microwave devices.  These can be
                 used for non-lethal crowd control and destroying electronics
                 rather than killing people.  Say Saddam locates his control
                 center in a politically hardened location such as a hospital.
                 You destroy all the computers instead of killing everyone.
                 That is what I do.  --PeterM
                 \_ Couldn't clued-in bad guys just build a Faraday cage around
                    their command center?
                    \_ Yes, but that's harder than you might think.  And bombs
                       will still work....
                    \_ It's for crowd control, i.e. peanik or gay marchers.
                        \_ Partly right.
                        \_ big deal.  you'll destroy their wrist watches so
                           they'll miss the big protest?
                           \_ EM storm can cause flash concussion.
                 \_ How do you like the weather and life in NM? Does it get way
                    damn hot? Enough good restaurants and recreation? I've
                    heard people badmouth Albuquerque.
                        \_ I badmouth Albuquerque.  Still, it has its nice
                           parts.  Weather is dry.  Cold in the winter, hot
                           in the summer, not much rain, some snow.  I'm
                           OK with the restaurants and I like to eat out.
                           There is very good mountain biking and other
                           outdoor activities.  I go dancing on Friday nights.
                           It gets way damn hot, but it's dry, so not that
                           miserable.  Y'all can ask me further questions
                           directly if you want.  --peterm@soda
                 \_ Any good looking women in NM?
                        \_ Yes.  --peterm
                 you a their secret facility in Cuba.
        \_ southern california for the food, culture (we have more classical
           stations and museums than N Cal you know?), women, and education.
           Go BRUINS!!! Speaking of bruins, am I considered a bruin bear
           or a bear bruin?             -happy (but stupid)
           Go BRUINS!!! Speaking of bruins, am I considered a bruin bear
           or a bear bruin?             -happy (bruin bear) or (bear bruin)
           \_ There is education in socal? -- ucla student
           \_ So I take it you're a fan of plastic boobies then...
                \_ no, but I make sure I don't date them by not dating
                   blonds and Korean girls who drive nice cars.
                            \_ you'd prefer flat korean chicks in nice cars?  i
                               think it's good they're putting in some effort
                               to overcome their shortcomings.
                   blonds and Korean girls who drive nice cars.
                   \_ Korean girls mostly have plastic boobies?
                   \_ Korean girls mostly have plastic boobies?
                      \_ no, they drive nice cars.
                         \_ In LA they sure as hell have both.
2004/2/24-25 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:12386 Activity:nil
2/23    http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.03/robot.html?tw=wn_tophead_8
        Wired has a ling (5 pages) article on the Grand Challenge
2004/2/24 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:12376 Activity:nil
2/23   there is talk about some southern states wanting to suceed because
        of the liberalism in california
        \_ yermom can't be in two places at the same time
        \_ Yeah, and everytime a Republican gets into office Alec Baldwin
           says he's going to move to Canada. Never going to happen.
           What's your point?
2004/2/9 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:12171 Activity:nil
2/8     CA: At-a-glance look at Proposition 56
        Vote NO unless you'd like to tax CA out of existence.
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1073758/posts
        \_ When was the last time anyone here voted yes on a propsition in CA?
           \_ I vote some up and some down.  I actually read them in full plus
              the various opinions and analyst reports before voting.  You say
              that as if you expect everyone always votes NO on all of them.
              If that were the case they'd all have always failed, yes?  We
              know that isn't the case.
2004/2/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:12063 Activity:nil
2/1     More on why electronic voting is bad
        http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/7849090.htm
        \_ Evoting has lots of problems but if you think standard paper voting
           hasn't been rigged in *every* election since 1800 you're only
           fooling yourself.  For a serious case where it mattered, see the
           Nixon/Kennedy race.  The mob had more dead people voting and voting
           often than were registered to vote in their Chicago precints.
           \_ Vote early, vote often!  Seriously, though, so what? We're
              supposed to let e-voting off the hook because previous voting
              systems have been open to corruption? That makes no sense.
              \_ Not at all.  I'm only saying what I'm saying which is that
                 the current scheme is no better and probably much worse in
                 many ways.  I'd prefer that all voting was 100% clean but
                 it isn't and anyone saying evoting is bad because it doesn't
                 come to the high standards of paper voting is only fooling
                 themselves.  Vote outcomes are so important that if there is
                 any way at all to rig them, they will be.  I'm perfectly
                 happy with paper voting and I agree that evoting is just a
                 waste right now but the moment evoting is more secure than
                 paper we should spend the money on it as a nation.  I make
                 no excuses or exceptions for any voting system that can be
                 rigged.
                 \_ Right on, except that I think that it's not that people
                    are necessarily surprised that evoting is easily riggable,
                    it's that there's no point in updating a system if you're
                    not going to make an actual attempt at fixing it. It also
                    seems to me that while paper receipts are not going to
                    make the system tamper-proof, they'll go a long way to
                    making the system more tamper-resistant.
                    \_ I'm with you.  We're in total agreement.  Is that even
                       allowed on the motd?
2004/1/27 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11964 Activity:nil
1/27    Given that in the most recent election in CA, the Republican candidates
        combined vote total was significantly higher than the Democrat combined
        total, would you not agree that this bodes well for a Republican
        victory in the state later this year?
        \_ No.  You're taking it out of context, not to mention comparing
           apples to oranges.
           \_ I think you are grasping for low-hanging fruit, going forward.
              \_ In the dead of night, as white as a sheet.
2004/1/27 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11962 Activity:nil
1/27    If Bush cuts unfair taxes on missing WMDs, will the price of housing
        in California be inflated by Arnold's new budget?  If only people
        used motdedit, we would know the answer!
        Yes: .
        No:
2004/1/26-27 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:11947 Activity:moderate
1/26    Hm, I never heard about this thing. Guess I'm too young.
  http://www.awesome80s.com/Awesome80s/News/1980/February/3-Abscam_Revealed.asp
        \_ Being too young or knowing nothing about a topic or history has
           never stopped any motd poster from expressing extreme views before.
           I think it's a good topic.  You should go for it!
        \_ I thought it's illegal for law enforcement to bait targets?
           \_ No.  That's not the definition of entrapment.
2004/1/23 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11900 Activity:nil
1/23    Cho: don't dish it out if you can't take it.
        http://www.nydailynews.com/01-23-2004/front/story/157605p-138358c.html
        \_ Haha, from Drudge?  This is the guy that's famous for excerpting
           words from speeches that are sometimes minutes or even hours
           apart and then using ellipsis to glue them together into whatever
           phrase he wants to publish.
           \_ "Cheney... gather... violent... law enforcement personnel...
               and... come all... over... my... face."
           \_ From anyone.  If you're going to spew, be prepared to get
              quoted, misquoted, and slammed.
2004/1/22 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Gay, Politics/Foreign] UID:11879 Activity:nil
1/21    "Dictionaries are opinion, disguised as fact, in alphabetical order."
        -- A wise man
        \_ Maybe I haven't been following the news, or am just one of the
           many unelightened allued to below, but what does this quote
           have to do with forms of government?
        \_ Look, you have to pick.  If you don't like democracy, like me,
           you should be busy thinking of a better form of government, since
           it's a larger problem than gay rights (no offense to homosexual
           americans).  If you do like democracy, you should learn to bow to
           the opinions of the majority in political matters. -- ilyas
           \_ Just do it like th greeks.  Land owners and people who have a
              reason to give a shit about society get to vote.  All the teat
              sucking proles continue on as before and maybe their offspring
              will do better than they did in life.
              \_ Plato called democracy the second worst form of government
                 (after tyranny).  I agree with him.  The problem with any
                 form of democracy is that masses of people, land-owners or
                 not, do not make good decisions. -- ilyas
                 \_ So what about a republic, which is the form of
                    government we have.  Wasn't Plato speaking of
                    direct democracy?  I agree with you that
                    direct democracy is horrible (look at CA's
                    initiative system), but I disagree with you
                    about republics.
                    \_ Introducing layers of indirection does not address the
                       basic problem.  I don't really know what the answer is,
                       and neither did Plato.  Plato wanted some sort of
                       enlightened monarchy, but he couldn't solve the throne
                       inheritance problem. -- ilyas
                \_ "Do not make good decisions"? that's a bit much isn't it?
                   surely they sometimes do, sometimes don't. there are a lot
                   of factors that can affect the quality of the democracy.
                   How much incentive is there for the "good" decision-makers
                   to be in politics? Also, in this country, political parties
                   have become a joke due to the 2 party dominance. If we
                   had proportional representation, real parties and coalitions,
                   and something like instant runoff voting, I think we would
                   get government that is more representative of society. I also
                   think more power should rest with the more locally elected
                   people, instead of governors, senators and presidents who
                   have become television actors. I believe that the federal
                   government has gained a lot more power than the founders
                   envisioned.
                   \_ Sure, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.  And
                      you are also right in that there are factors affecting
                      the quality of a democracy.  Nevertheless, I can't help
                      but feel that there is something fundamentally wrong
                      with democracy itself. -- ilyas
                      \_ The PRC is probably the closest alternative, where
                         you have a ruling elite who select each leader
                         in turn, and control accession to their group. But
                         anything other than democracy requires crushing
                         freedoms to maintain control, and will be prone to
                         a lot of inherent corruption.
                         \_ I am not sure you are right, which is why I am
                            still thinking about it.  To use Plato's analogy
                            of the State as the soul, there are more kinds of
                            souls than those of serial killers and
                            schizophrenics.  -- ilyas
                            \_ What's your metric of a better government?
                               Happiness of people, national power...?
                               \_ I don't really know the answer since if I
                                  did I would have a better idea of what
                                  kind of government is best.  I do know that
                                  a prerequisite for the kind of government
                                  that doesn't make me cringe is some sort of
                                  universal morality.  Without this, it's just
                                  competing warlords with perhaps a civil
                                  veneer (or perhaps not...). -- ilyas
            \_ SERVICE guarantees CITIZENSHIP!
        \_ Enlightened beings rule themselves.  They dont need a government
           to rule over them.  We earthlings, however, are not very enlightened
           most of the time.
           \_ you mean most of us don't think like you?
2004/1/22-23 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11877 Activity:nil
1/21    Go Margaret!
        http://margaretcho.com/blog/frommichael.htm
        \_ I usually don't find Margaret Cho funny, but this
           is a riot!
        \_ Can we get Margaret an honorary csua account? She'd make an
           excellent addition to the motd.
           \_ Yeah she is about well informed about the budget as the
              average American. Entitlements have always taken a larger
              chunk than defense or places for the VP to relax.
              \_ See?  Even you can't resist being trolled by her.  We
                 should sign her up!
                 \_ The idea of a celebrity motd flame warrior is pretty
                    cool.
                    \_ Dude, seriously.  We could set her up with macho@csua
                       and watch the flames take off.
              \_ Straw man. She didn't say "entitlements." Go back and
                 reread and try again.
        \_ She wouldn't add anything to the motd.  We already have enough
           trolls, leftists, and ignorant ranting.  She could increase the
           4-letter-word count.  That's about it.
           \_ since the motd is mostly anonymos anyway, why don't we just
              pretend that she has an account?  Who'll know the difference?
              -mcho
              \_ mostly no one and no one will care.  go for it.
           \_ Sup, Republican ass monkey biyotch! --macho@csua
2004/1/21 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11874 Activity:nil
1/21    You know... all this bitching about social security won't make a
        difference.  Most young people don't vote.  Old folks do vote.  The
        baby boomers will come close to bankrupting this nation when they
        start to retire in the next decade.  They'll vote to keep getting
        every last penny they can from the govt because "they deserve it".
        \_ They will outnumber the young people anyway.
           \_ Two wolves.  One sheep.  Dinner.  Yay democracy!
                \_ Our only hope is to keep raising the retirement age
                   anyway.  They might do that.
                   \_ No.  Our only hope is to figure out a better form of
                      government.
                      \_ how about: PAY TO VOTE.
                         \_ No, it's more complicated than the current system
                            'Buy a politician'
        \_ I was told that in WW2 Japan, many old people were told to die
           (commit suicide, etc) because they were non-essential and were
           using precious Japanese food, time, labor, and other resources.
           Is this true? If so, maybe we can do something similar in the US.
           \_ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074812
        \_ soylent green
2004/1/20 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11849 Activity:nil
1/19    Shouldn't Iraqis be allowed to vote in out presidential election?
        ... since our leaders are controlling their country. Aren't these
        the principles upon which the American Revolution occurred?
        \_ No.  Have a cookie, troll.
2004/1/16 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:11804 Activity:high
1/15    If minority of wealthy people own a huge percentage of the wealth in
        the US, then woludn't it make more sense for them have a bigger
        percentage of tax?
        \_ How much bigger?  Serious question here.  How much more should rich
           people pay in your opinion?
        \_ perhaps are you suggesting a hefty property/wealth tax in liu of
           income taxes?  One important function of gov't is protect property,
           and so one could easily argue that those with the most for the
           govt to protect should be paying the lion's share of the govt
           expenses.
        \_ Only because they earn more, but it would not make sense to charge
           them more per dollar, just more dollars because they're making
           more dollars.  And you're confusing "wealth" with "high income
           earning".  They are not the same thing.  A wealthy person with low
           or no income should be paying the same taxes as a poor person with
           low or no income: zero.
           \_ And we suddenly race back to serfdom!  So those not making an
              "income" shouldn't be contributing to the common defence simply
              because they've got theirs?  Grow up.
              \_ They pay in other ways such as property taxes, death taxes,
                 utility taxes, bridge tolls, sales taxes, and a million
                 other fees.  Get an education and grow up yourself.  When
                 you're less ignorant you can come back and discuss adult
                 topics with us.
                 \_ One rhetorical technique really bothers me:  the term
                    "death tax".  Calling it that makes it seem cruel and
                    unfair, but you can't tax a dead person.  Call it what it
                    really is:  a tax on recieving an inheritance.
                    \_ Yeah, but it's been obliterated by Bushco, so is it
                       worth talking about?  Yay inherited plutocracy!
                       \_ Don't forget, this death tax was only on assets
                          exceeding 2 mill, which hardly sounds excessive.
                          I can understand pegging this to inflation, but
                          doing away with it entirely seems excessive since
                          that will need to be made up in other ways.
                          \_ Yeah, the whole process leading up to it has
                             been utter bullshit.  It's greed, plain and
                             simple.  Inheritance tax has an interesting
                             history, and is a deeply anti-monarchic response
                             (and rightly so).
        \_ How much bigger?
        \_ This contradicts what people consider 'fair' in non-tax contexts.
           This reminds me of a truly amazing article in the Daily Bruin I
           read the other day where someone was complaining how unfair it
           was that Schwarzenegger wasn't willing to tax rich people in
           California more, to solve the budget problem...  Then in the same
           breath the person complained how the Federal government has this
           progressive scheme of taxing states, where California only gets
           back 76% or so of the revenue they give up to the Feds (which
           apparently is also very unfair).  It seems he saw no contradiction
           in what he was saying, or maybe he didn't want to be principled
           but favored any tax scheme which gave him the biggest slice of
           the pie possible in the current political climate. -- ilyas
           \_ The analogy is false.  "States" don't suffer from the
              problems of poverty, people do.  There's no reason the
              state with the highest cash flow should pay proportionally
              more than other states.  (You can't call California the
              "richest" state since right now our state government is
              actually the poorest.)  California also has more poor people
              and more need for social services than, say, Wyoming.  -tom
              \_ I think California is passing the 'suffering'
                 from this progressive taxing scheme the feds have onto
                 the residents just fine.  Who is to say the Feds have a less
                 optimal income redistribution plan than you do?  Maybe it's
                 worth it to take away from some social services in CA and
                 optimal income redistribution plan than you do?
                 give to social services in MA, etc.  The analogy is not false.
           \_ If the other states are getting more for pork-barrel projects,
              then it's logically consistant.  If it's to subsidize poor states
              then he is a hypocrite.
              \_ Well, even if it goes exclusively to pork, you are still not
                 in the clear.  You have to prove that _your_ method of income
                 redistribution is better than this other one.  I think it's
                 better to simply agree on whether progressive taxation is
                 fair or not first, and worry about the specifics of how
                 it gets spent later.
                 \_ You're missing the point.  Taking more money from
                    California because it has the highest cash flow is not
                    "progressive taxation."  California is billions of dollars
                    in the hole--"rich" people who lose money during a given
                    year pay no taxes that year.  California has no earnings,
                    just a budget.  -tom
                    \_ Bzzt!  California has 'earnings'.  They're called taxes.
                       Just because CA spends more than it takes in doesn't
                       mean it isn't doing well.  That's called overspending.
                       If I made a million dollars last year but spent 1.5
                       million on toys for myself do you think I shouldn't
                       have to pay taxes on that million?
                       \_ If you spent the 1.5 million on charity projects like
                          education for all children and health care for the
                          poor and elderly, then you'd have a 1.5 mil deduction
                       million on toys for myself do you think I shouldn't
                          and not have to pay any taxes.  It's not like the
                          state is buying itself sports cars.
                       \_ Exactly right. -- ilyas
           \_ California is *NOT* the richest state in terms of average
              per capita income. And if you look at the distribution scheme
                 fair or not first, and worry about the specifics of how
                 it gets spent later.
                       have to pay taxes on that million?
                       \_ Exactly right. -- ilyas
              you will see that the money goes to politically favored states
              and is taken away from those the Republicans want to punish.
              Poverty and wealth have nothing to do with it.
        \_ All methods of income distribution are unfair to someone.  That is
           one of the core problems with any tax system.  No matter what you
           do someone will say it is unfair to them.  And they'd be right.  The
           only real question is not "fair or unfair?" but "who do we screw?"
           In the U.S. we screw wealthy people by charging them more money but
           not providing more services for their tax dollar.  We then screw
           them again when they want to leave their wealth to other family
           members so the money has been unfairly taxed twice.  I was going to
           balance my comments by saying how we screw poor people but I can't
           think of anything that isn't some form of "we don't give them enough
           money from wealthier people".
           \_ I disagree.  I don't think forming societies is an inherently
              losing proposition for someone.  I also think there is one
              notion of fairness that is 'right.'  -- ilyas
              \_ That's an interesting opinion but not meaningful and does not
                 bear out in reality where historically no matter what the tax
                 system has looked like there is always a group that
                 justifiably feels screwed by it while others remain silent.
                 If you can find that one correct notion of fairness that the
                 rest of us can agree on, A Universal Fair Tax Truth, then you
                 should run for office.  I'd vote for you in a split second.
                 \_ Well, I think 'feeling screwed' is not a good yardstick
                    for universal fairness.  Maybe someone is unusual
                    and would feel screwed with any scheme that didn't give him
              losing proposition for someone.  I also think there is one
              notion of fairness that is 'right.'  -- ilyas
                 justifiably feels screwed by it while others remain silent.
                 If you can find that one correct notion of fairness that the
                 rest of us can agree on, A Universal Fair Tax Truth, then you
                 should run for office.  I'd vote for you in a split second.
                    the whole world on a platter.  I don't claim to know how
                    to approach universal fairness, but I have a feeling it
                    exists (even if it's not as elegant and simple a concept as I
                 \_ Actually he is getting more for his money.  Our education
                    system, our infrastructure, our millitary, our police, etc.
                    ALL are needed to help keep him rich.  Third world
                    countries are not conducive to getting rich.
                    would like).  -- ilyas
                    \_ Well, i'm not sure your vague "feeling of existence"
                       is such a good basis for your claim that a
                       notion of universal fairness exists.
           \_ You're probably not wealthy enough to know that our tax system
              is so deliberately laden with loopholes that the very richest
              pay far far less of their income in taxes than you probably think
                \_ They may be too ethical to play shell games with companies.
                   But that doesn't mean they don't exist for those with
                   less scruples.
                 Is moneybags using more gov't services than regular guy?
                 Maybe he is getting more value from the military. What is fair?
              that they do.
              \_ Compare a regular guy making 40k, gets taxed 20% = $8000.
                 Then there's moneybags making $400k, gets taxed 5% = $20000.
                 Is moneybags using more gov't services than regular guy?
              \_ I thought it was Spock who said, "The good of the many,
                 outweighs the good of the few, or the one." Live long and
                 prosper - even with high taxes.
                 it gets spent later.
                 Maybe he is getting more value from the military. What is fair?
                 \_ Noblesse Oblige?
                 \_ Actually he is getting more for his money.  Our education
                    system, our infrastructure, our millitary, our police, etc.
                    ALL are needed to help keep him rich.  Third world
                    countries are not conducive to getting rich.
              \_ No, actually, my parents are fantastically wealthy and I know
                 that your concept of "the rich pay nothing!  it's all full of
                 holes!  the poor pay more!" is a crock of shit.  They pay more
                 every year in absolute and percentage terms than any middle
                 class or poor person will pay in a lifetime.  You're not
                 wealthy enough to know what the rich really pay, you just
                 repeat the noise you read on http://moveon.org.
           \_ I disagree. Jean-Luc Piccard once said the life of a few is
              worth sacraficing for the benefit of the many. Or maybe that
              was from a Vulcan, I can't remember.
              \_ No, Picard never said this.  He was not a utilitarian.  What
                 he did say in one episode was that he refuses to let
                 arithmetic decide such matters.
              \_ I thought it was Spock who said, "The good of the many,
                 outweighs the good of the few, or the one." Live long and
                 prosper - even with high taxes.
2004/1/16 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11802 Activity:nil
1/15    Here is the question which always bothers me:  how caucuses
        is choosen?based upon its monetary contribution to its party?
        \_ no, these are joe-average people.  pretty much anyone who is
           on the party lists and willing to sit through 8 hours of babble
           and bullshit before the vote is allowed to if they're a citizen
           of the state.
2004/1/12-14 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11759 Activity:nil
1/11    Good thing DeLay stopped the Democrats from Gerrymandering Texas:
        http://gis1.tlc.state.tx.us
        \_ Gah, must control fist of death.
        \_ No worse than CA or any other state.
2004/1/12 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11757 Activity:nil
1/11    Look at the body on Harris (Florida 2000)!  I'd vote for *that*!
        http://www.drudgereport.com/kh.jpg
        \_ It's amazing the kind of body a Republican bribe can buy....
           \_ I think she was born with it.
              \_ As was Pamela Anderson.
        \_ You better not look too closely at the face though:
           http://csua.org/u/5j8
           \_ Bag it, flip the lights, nail it.  Be happy.
2004/1/11-12 [Politics/Domestic/California, Science/GlobalWarming] UID:11754 Activity:kinda low
1/11    Harry Braun in 2004!!!
        http://www.braunforpresident.us
        \_ That picture totally needs some flying cars and Zeppelins in the
           background.
           \_ It iz about doing bad thingz!  To good people!  Mit Zcienze!
              \_ source?
                 \_ The Tick.
           \_ _Your_ movie is here: http://csua.org/u/5iv (Apple preview)
        \_ I would so vote for him if I thought he had a chance in hell of
           winning.
           \_ you can see him and 14 other random, unknown candidates
              talk at http://www.cspan.org click on the "lesser known candidates"
              forum video on the left hand side fo the page.  There
              are a few republicans and a bunch of democrats, and it
              makes for interesting watching.
              \_this is totally fucking hilarious.  You have to see this.
                \_ http://csua.org/u/5iy
        \_ If he gets together with Clark we can have time travel and
           energy supplies from perpetual motion machines.. WOO HOO!
           \_ Was Clark a part of the philadelphia experiment?
              \_ That was the Navy, son.
                 \_ Oh yeah.  Forgot.  Did the army have its own time machine
                    and invisibility program?
                    \_ Well, the Air Force has Stargate SG-1....
                       \_ They should just huck some nukes out the bad guy's
                          portals and be done with it.  I never understood
                          the whole "send 4 people out to go stir up shit"
                          thing.  It's very non-military culture.
                          \_ Yeah, but while the nuke option is much more
                             reasonable, it doesn't make for a good serial.
              \_ No but he said he thinks we can travel faster than the
                 speed of light.
                 \_ I can!  I hold my breath and spin and spin and spin and
                    tap my ruby slippers three times and I'm back in Arkansas!
        \_ My question is, why can't we get Mary Carey to run?  Did you
           see those babajangas?
           \_ her hamburgers are too big, they spill out of the bun.
           \_ Babajangas?  The motd has taught me a new term.  Thank you.
2004/1/10 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11741 Activity:nil
1/9     Examining Berkeley's liberal legacy
        http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/09/elec04.berkeley/index.html
        \_ Go CNN! In other news, Sun still rising in the East tomorrow!
                \_ cool it's about time. Nippon ichiban! BONZAI!!!!
2004/1/8-9 [Politics/Domestic/California, Academia/Berkeley] UID:11718 Activity:nil
1/7     http://www.berkeleydates.com
        \_ Hey, there's no yellow fever option. What good is this thing?
        \_ There are no other users on the system at the moment.
        \_ Is there a real Berkeley alum site that let's us make non-romantic
           (ie: job contact & networking) connections but doesn't hit us up
           for money constantly like the utterly useless on campus alumni
           org?
2004/1/8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11713 Activity:nil
1/7     What's proper attire for a play in a nice theater? I don't have
        a tux and am wondering what to wear. Thanks.
        \_ In California, whatever you want.
           \_ Within reason.  I'd say ideal would be a shirt with collar and
              a sportcoat  (not matched pants, that would be a suit).  Or
              some decent slacks and a nice sweater.  If you show up in torn
              jeans and a computer t-shirt you probably won't get kicked out
              but you will look a bit out of place.
        \_ You *can* wear whatever you'd like, but you *should* wear a decent
           shirt (buttons & collar), not jeans, not sneakers or other lesser
                 except for Prada, D&G, etc. sports shoes _/
           quality footwear, and for christ's sake *shower* and put on some
           deordorant before you go.  There's nothing worse than sitting next
           to someone that smells like a hacker or homeless person after
           shelling out big bucks to go out.  The tux, etc is overkill, btw.
           I don't think you'll ever see that in CA.
        \_ Purple suit, feathered hat, gold tooth, cane
           \_ But watch out for those goldfish shoes!
        \_ Thanks to all who answered. I was just really wondering whether
           a sportcoat was absolutely necessary (since I don't have one of
           those either).
           \_ Only if it's cold or you feel like it.  You won't be horribly
              out of place without one.  Button/collar shirt, real shoes,
              shower, real pants.
2004/1/7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:11704 Activity:insanely high
1/7     Court: N.C. must broaden its Medicaid coverage for illegal
        immigrants
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1053196/posts
        \_ It only makes sense.  Legislation through the courts is the only
           way the minority party can push their agenda.  It's been this way
           for years.
           \_ If you agree with what the court is doing, its fair and
              reasonable.  If you disagree, its "legislative activism."
              There is no political party I know if thats actually
              consistent about this, other than maybe the libertarians,
              and they have virtually nobody in office that I recall.
              \_ There are libertarians in office.  They just call themselves
                 socially liberal Republicans, or fiscally conservative
                 Democrats because no-one votes for a third party.
2004/1/7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Recreation/Computer/Games] UID:11701 Activity:nil
1/6     Pete Rose is a liar and a scumbag.
        \_ I was shocked, shocked to hear that he had bet on baseball.
           \_ Casablanca reference acknowledged.
        \_ please tell us how you really feel about him
        \_ Why is he a scumbag, aside from betting on baseball and then lying
           about it?  I'm serious.
           \_ baseball elders get cranky when you bet on baseball,
              especially if you are managing a team.  ever
              heard of the "black sox"?
           \_ well what you mention is at the center of it.  It's also about
              him constantly pandering for attention, refusing to admit to
              truth, showing no remorse or guilt for wrong-doing.  If you
              believe Gioso, he also had no qualms about corking his bat.
              What about the insinuation that since he bet everyday on
              games, and on the Reds, who he managed, only sometimes, that
              the very act of "not betting" on the Reds is a signal that
              he thought the Reds might lose.  Oh, and perhaps the only
              reason that this news is hitting the airwaves "now," is
              because Pete stands to profit from a book, and the HOF
              announcement is today.
              \_ I hadn't heard about any bat corking.  Re: the gambling, I
                 think that although it was against the rules, it was not
                 "wrong".  Lying about it was, but not bad enough to make him a
                 scumbag.
                 \_ bat corking: http://csua.org/u/5g1
                    also, the gambling is wrong.  Again, do you really think
                    Pete would manage the same when he bet for the Reds to
                    win and when he did not bet for the Reds to win?  What
                    about blowing out a pitcher's arm in May in order to get
                    that crucial last inning when there's 5 months of
                    baseball left?  Furthermore, Pete had to know that not
                    betting on the Reds would signal the mob bosses.  How
                    hard do you think he played to win while he had that
                    knowledge.
                    \_ I would expect that rather than doing a half-assed job
                       when he didn't have any bets going, it's more likely
                       that he placed bets when he had "inside information"
                       which favored the Reds.  This would be insider trading
                       with respect to his bookie, but that doesn't bother me.
                       \_ of course he had inside information. he was their
                          manager.  What about the situation which may or may
                          not have happened where he gets pressure put on him
                          by mob bosses to whom he owes money to throw a game?
                          If the betting on baseball doesn't bother you, and
                          the inherent conflict in interest involved, whether
                          he was betting to win or to lose, and the lying,
                          public pandering, and insincere begging he has done
                          in public since 1989 don't bother you, then maybe
                          in your eyes he's not a scumbag.  These things do
                          bother me, however.  In general, it's been his
                          character, his willingness to do anything for a $,
                          and his willingness to do anything, say anything
                          to get back into the HOF regardless of what he hurts
                          or what he has to say to do it.
                          \_ some people just don't care about character.  to
                             them there is nothing someone can do that is
                             'wrong' or immoral because they don't believe in
                             morality.  anything that someone can get away
                             with is ok because they have no sense of right
                             and wrong.  you're wasting your time trying to
                             explain immorality to someone that has no morals.
                             \_ you people are incredible. we just had a thread
                                about how EVIL teachers are bleeding the
                                taxpayer dry with their 30k/yr salaries for
                                teaching kids, but when it comes to baseball
                                teams
                                subsidised by the taxpayer for the profit
                                of a few millionares all you fuckers
                                care about is who gambled or cheated.
                                \_ 30k/year?  Bullshit.  In CA, try 50k for
                                   passing the 10th grade level exam and 70-80k
                                   for taking a few night or summer classes and
                                   getting an "advanced" teaching credential or
                                   "masters" in education from *any* third rate
                                   school.  You're so full of crap.  You know
                                   nothing about the teacher's union or
                                   teaching.  You're not even trolling anymore.
                                   You're just spreading outright lies and
                                   complete misinformation at best.  Please
                                   just go away.
        \_ Is there anything more boring than baseball.  I'd rather watch
           grass grow.
           \_ Yes, there is.  It's called Cricket.
2004/1/6 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:11671 Activity:high
1/5     A Poll for the majority of you out there who do not support
        School vouchers:
             Do you think that the advent of FedEx and UPS made the USPS
        better or worse in the long run?
             And, while i know it is ridiculous to expect any sort of
        restraint or accuracy from a motd poll, i am JUST asking anti-
        voucher folks.  Feel free to comment/flame though. -phuqm

        Better: ...
        Worse:
        No effect:
        \_ There's a much better argument for vouchers based on an analogy.
           America has competition in it's university system, which is
           widely regarded as the best in the world, and no competition
           in it's k-12 system, which is close to the worse in the
           industrialized world. Also, we already have school choice for
           those whose parents care enough about education and have enough
           money to move to a town with a better school system.  The
           current form of school choice benefits only those lucky few whose
           parents fall into this category, and already has destroyed inner
           city schools in exactly the way voucher opponents claim "will"
           happen.  The irony is that the people who excersise school choice
           now, by moving to an expensive town to get a good education for
           their kids are the very middle class liberals who most vocally
           oppose school choice.  I also think it's worth pointing out that
           presently the k-12 education system in the US is so bad that
           the burden of proof is actually on those who *don't* want
           change, not the other way around.
            \_ but there are no vouchers for going to a private university
               so that argument makes no sense.
           \_ It's not just the Evil Middle-Class Liberals:
              http://csua.org/u/5fx
            \_ This is a very good short argument. tnx.  And I plan to steal
                it, and since you didn't sign you name, claim it as my own.
                :).  I have also said the same thing re: burden of proof
                many times, but the college analogy is not perfect since
                1.) it has always been there.  (i.e. no sudden change is
                involved) and 2.) even at the cheapest of public Us the
                student still pays some. -phuqm
            \_ I would say the same thing about the burden of proof re:
                health care.  Would you?
                \_ yes, actually.  perhaps you've mistaken me for a
                   conservative?  I happen to agree with the conservatives
                   on school choice, but that does not mean i support their
                   love of the insurance industry.  For the record, I'm
            \_ K-12 education is simply not that bad nationwide. What makes
               you think that it is? If you compare us to other industrialized
               nations, we do fine. Our worst schools are far worse, but that
               is true for everything in America, due to the income disparity.
                   also not a libertarian, and am ashamed to agree with
                   "phuqm" on any issue.
        \- I am not sure what you are suggesting by mentioning school
           vouchers. Are you going to suggest "since the existence of
           FedEx improved USPS, we should have subsidized FedEx"?
           maybe that would have "benefitted the taxpayers" but that would
           have benefitted the fedex stockholders much more. i think the
           better question has nothing to do with school vouchers. the usps
           is obligated to deliver mail to everybody for the same price.
           i assume there is no reason fedex cant charge more to send a
           package to a cabin in the montana woods [or just refuse to
           deliver there ... surely they arent obligated to have an office
           near by or poll the denizen of said cabin 6 times a week to see
           if he has anything to mail]. so if fedex gets to cherrypick
           routes and packages, do what extent does that adverse selection
           put the usps in a bigger and bigger hole. you should lay your
           cards on the table. --psb
            \_ Are you against vouchers?  If so, please vote.  I will
               happily "lay [my] cards on the table" soon, but i'd like to
               get some votes first. (you seem to be suggesting "worse")
               \- i think the vouchers will be underfunded and will be a
                  total boondoggle. the way they might cause some improvement
                  is by causing the teachers unions to keel over or maybe
                  the unions will panic enough to be more reasonable. but
                  it would seem to make more sense to just take on the unions
                  directly. i think if money is given to decent private
                  school and they are continually allowed to pick their
                  students you will have the quality of the schools improve
                  but the students getting shafted now will continue to be
                  shafted. it's hard to be "for or against vouchers" since
                  it isnt self-evident what you mean by them. --psb
            \_ Subsidising is beside the point.  The USPS pays
               for itself.  Taxpayers already do more than "subsidise"
               EDU, they pay for it outright.  My suggestion is that, imho
               the USPS has gotten markedly better since FedEx and UPS have
               arrived on the scene.  Since the only reasonable objection
               to vouchers is that it will make the existing public schools
               much worse, I would suggest that this is an indication that
               it might not.  Your point about CherryPicking is highly
               pertinent though, and I think that it is obvious that any
               legislation re: vouchers should attempt to address the
               problem of voucher schools rejecting hard cases.  ( Which
               has been a major problem in the "corporate" schools in SF
               and other places ).  Self-selection is an insolvable problem
               but I believe that advantages far outweigh the disadvantages.
               \_ The point here is that private schools already exist, so
                  there is already a FedEx equivalent. I don't relate FedEx
                  to vouchers in any way. --dim
                  \_ But parents are forced to double pay.  I can choose not
                     to ever pay the USPS but even if I pay full rate to put
                     my kids in private school, I am also paying full rate
                     for them in the public schools which I'm not using.  If
                     vouchers meant that money was no longer a double payment
                     you bet your ass the public schools would improve... right
                     after breaking the spine of the very evil teacher's union.
                     \_ Union bad! Neocon Hulk smash!
                     \_ Ah, but "parents" aren't the only ones who pay for
                        public school. Childless taxpayers put into the system
                        too. Do they get their money back too? You are for
                        private school for extra performance, by your choice.
                        Why pay for an airplane ticket when your tax money
                        already pays for the interstate road system?
                        \_ If you don't pay into the system for education,
                           you end up paying down the road with crime and
                           prison costs.  Even if you libertarian gun nuts
                           take over, and all justice is meted out by
                           vigilantes, uneducated masses of criminals will
                           cost you time in gunning them down when you could
                           be doing something profitable.  Remember,
                           time is money.
                        \_ I think the university argument is a good one. There
                           are no vouchers for university students and those
                           who go to private colleges still end up paying to
                           support public colleges. If there are no vouchers
                           for universities and it works so well then maybe
                           vouchers aren't the answer. --dim
                           \_ BZZZT!  University isn't a requirement.  I'm not
                              required by law to send my children to a U. but
                              I am required by law to send them to k-12 (or
                              until 18 or whatever age).  If U. attendance was
                              required then the same voucher concept would
                              apply.
                           for universities and it works so well then maybe
                           vouchers aren't the answer. --dim
                              \_ You are required to *PAY* for a U, though,
                                 whether you send your kids or not. --dim
        \_ Delivery service is like utility companies. There isn't enough
           of them to compete for free market, and instead, each and every
           one has a monopoly in it's small niche. UPS delivers big packages,
           Fedex delivers next day reliably, and USPS delivers mail. All
           three domains end up not really competing with each other, and
           all three end up overcharging the consumers. Like utility companies
           I think delivery service should be highly regulated.
           \- i dont mean to insult you but this is too confused to be easily
              corrected. you may wish to read a book like "optimal regulation"
              by K. Train, although you will probably need to read some
              prerequisits ... not sure how far you will have to recurse.--psb
           \_ you know that by law fedex and ups are not allowed to deliver
                 \_ so there's no real freedom in this market, as I said.
              regular mail or touch your mailbox, right?  the market is not
              even remotely free.
              \_ Yeah and FedEx and UPS aren't required by Congress to deliver
                 mail to BFE at the same price as the house next door.
                 \_ so there's no real freedom in this market, as I said.
        \_ The teacher's unions are the largest unions in America.  They
           have a monopoly on public education monies and are not
           constrained by the Hatch Act like federal employees.  Guess
           who they donate almost to exclusively, and why the Dems
           are so anti voucher.
           \_ The teachers' union comprises under-paid and largely
              idealistic people who see kids for 8 hours a day (i.e.,
              more time than the kids' parents). They are well-educated
              and know they could earn more money elsewhere (the ones
              who couldn't earn more elsewhere can't teach and leave
              the profession). I have no problem with the teachers' union.
              I have a problem with the administrators who never taught
              and never intend to teach and who get paid ridiculous
              amounts of money only to squander the meager budgets of
              their districts.
                   \_ I know lots of teachers like that. And I know teachers
                      who have left the profession and made more money
                      elsewhere.
              amounts of money only to squander the meager budgets of
              their districts.
                \_ HOLY SHIT IN A CUP!  I don't think you've actually *met*
                   any teachers!  Under paid?  Idealistic?  8 hours?  Well
                   edjumikated?  Earn more elsewhere?  Leave the profession
                   because they can't teach?  *None* of these things are
                   generally true.  I think I've been trolled.
                \_ Well there is no incentive to get rid of the
                   whose incentive is to increase their budget and number
                   administrators.  The ratio in the 1950s was 5:1 teacher
                   to administrator, today it is 2:1.  The private schools
                   whos incentive is to increase their budget and number
                   cost is ~ 3000$ per student, the public > 7500$ per
                   student.  The public cost per student is something
                   like 30% higher than in the 1980s but test results
                   have declined.  The inner city schools are nothing
                   but affirmative action self-perpetuating bureaucracies
                   whose incentive is to increase their budget and number
                   of employees, not educate children.
                   How I Joined Teach for America -- and Got Sued for
                   \_ private schools get to pick and choose students.  The
                      ones that would cost too much to educate (the disabled,
                      the retarded, the violent, etc) get the boot while the
                      cheap ones get welcomed.  It is the 90% for 10% of
                      the cost type situation that exists everywhere.
                   $20 Million
                   http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=5528
                   As for pay, if you prorate it over 12 months they are not
                   underpaid in a majority of communities.
                   \_ Are you referring to that article as a source for your
                      argument?
                        \_ No, but here's more:
                        The Union That Killed Education
                        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/846177/posts
2004/1/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:11667 Activity:very high
1/5     Hits the nail on the head regarding living in the Bay Area
        http://sfgate.com/columnists/nelson
        \_ Yup, just because someone is a liberal doesn't make him any
           smarter or a better person than the average joe. It just makes
           him more hypocritical. Hopefully they'll die out because they
           don't appear to be having a lot of kids.
           \_ Not all liberals are hypocritical.  And not everyone in the
              bay area is rude.  And us non-rude liberals get just as
              \_ The author never claims this. The 5th to the last paragraph
                 says essentially the same thing.
                 \_ I was addressing both the article and the above reply.
                    --scotsman
              frustrated about the rudeness as our couterparts.  Also I
              have never seen such behaviour towards my sisters (two kids
              apiece) or my friends who have been pregnant recently.  Perhaps
              this particular woman is rude herself, and gets it back in
              spades. --scotsman
           \_ It is really funny to watch conservatives accuse liberals of
              being hypocritical. See Rush Limbaugh, William Bennett, Strom
              Thurmond and many many others just in the last couple of months.
              Can you name one famous liberal of similar hypocrisy? Can you
              say "projection"? I knew you could.
              \_ Barbara Streisand, Ted Kennedy, Michael Moore.
              \_ Barbara Streisand, Ted Kennedy, Michael Moore, ELF.
                 \_ I think part of ELF's hypocracy is not the organization but
                    its members.  These people commit vandalism and endanger
                    people they disagree with, but yet you know ELF members
                    were strongly protesting the war.
                    \_ I don't know that at all. Did ELF take a stand on
                       the war?
                       \_ I didn't say ELF had a stance.  I'm just saying I'd
                          bet you dollars-to-donuts that ELF members were
                          against the war.
                 \_ What do these people preach that they do not practice?
                    You do know the definition of hypocricy, right?
                    \_ Google the following:
                       "barbara streisand environment"
                       "michael moore fear-mongering"
           right to left.  c.f. "hate speech," "racism," "diversity"
                       \_ ad hominem attacks does not suddenly make that
                          person an hypocrite.
                          \_ no but criticising the gun lobby of using fear
                             tactics while using fear tactics himself to
                             advocate social welfare does
                             \_ You think they're fear tactics?  Did you even
                                watch the film?
                                \_ yes, I watched the film. And you do not
                                   think they're fear tactics? Manipulated
                                   much?
           who expects society to bend over backwards to accomidate her
                       "ted kennedy chappaquiddick"
           can't get over the shock of having race and class privilege.
                       "elf desctruction"
                        \_ See your problem is that you don't know what the
                           word hypocricy means. When did Ted Kennedy or
                           liberals in general advocate not driving drunk?
                           Did elf ever advocate non-violence? I am not
                           sure what your beef with Barbara Striesand and
                           the enviornment is, but you might have one there.
                           \_ Babs advocates enviornmentalism and conservation
                              but owns a huge house with air conditioning.
                              \_ Um, she also sued a scientist who was
                                 studying the effects of erosion on the
                                 California coast. Did anybody actually
                                 Google the terms above?
                                 \_ And there was that time she turned into a
                                    giant fire-breathing robot and flattened a
                                    hick mountain town in Colorado.
                           \_ Strom Thurmond never advocated white men not
                              having sex with black women either. ELF claims
                              to be for protecting the environment, but their
                              actions have done more harm to the environment
                              than good.
                              \_ He most certainly was against miscegenation:
                       http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/usa/strom-thurmond
                                 And your opinion of ELF's actions is
                                 debatable. They think what they do helps
                                 the environment, and so do I.
                              \_ How have ELF's actions done more harm to the
                                 environment than good?  What, people have
                                 started hating trees because the ELF's been
                                 firebombing construction sites?
                                 \_ I agree that it's debatable. In the long
                                    term one can argue that they've increased
                                    awareness of their cause. But in the short
                                    term, the polution caused by the fires
                                    they set have done more harm then what
                                    they targetted. The sad thing is the
                                    author is right. Most people in the Bay
                                    Area are incapable of seeing more than
                                    one side of an issue.
                                    \_ Tell me the name of a place where people
                                       are not like that.
                                    \_ They delayed clear-cutting by months in
                                       some cases at a minimal cost in burned
                                       material.  This is clearly a plus for
                                       the environment. Of course, it's also
                                       a huge minus for environmentalists who
                                       want to be taken seriously, which I
                                       suspect was more your original point.
        \_ She didn't even mention by far the worst part about the
           Bay Area, and the one reason I'll never move back: housing.
           She's probably stuck in some idiotic mortgage on an overpriced
           home just like all the flame warriors here.
           \_ I'm guessing she didn't mention it because the essay was about
              society, not the economy.
              \_ She mostly just sounds like she has a bug up her ass.  I've
                 never seen anyone with the attitude about children that she
                 describes.  If she wants to bash stupid Bay Area lefties, how
                 about the Critical Mass yahoos or ACT UP SF (the offshoot
                 ACT UP group that spreads the HIV IS A LIE meme).  She's
                 right about the turn signal thing, but thats got nothing to
                 do with politics, for fuck's sake - if anything George
                 Deukmejian's cuts to drivers ed programs in the '80s have more
                 to do with that.
        \_ waah waah!  I'm oppressed!
        \_ "Jennifer Nelson, an Oakland writer, worked in policymaking
            positions in the Deukmejian and Wilson administrations."
           Hell, she's lucky she hasn't been lynched.
        \_ One more demonstration of how political language migrates from
           left to right.  c.f. "hate speech," "racism," "diversity"
           \- i think the author should have focused on "chez panisse
              liberalism" or on anti-children seniments. they are different
              phenomena and combining them sounds like random bitching
              rather than dissecting something coherent. --psb
        \_ Her problem is that she is a white person with three children
           who expects society to bend over backwards to accommodate her
           and her concerns. Here she is nothing special and she still
           can't get over the shock of not having race and class privilege.
        \_ The responses on this motd illustate her point perfectly.  -ax
           \_ Do you think people like her deserve special treatment?
2004/1/2 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11645 Activity:nil
1/1     Voters Crossed the Line in Miami
        http://csua.org/u/5ei
2003/12/24-25 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:11584 Activity:low
12/13   "Organizers charge white students $1 for a cookie, while blacks and
        other minorities pay 25 to 95 cents. Doughnuts are available for 50
        cents to everyone except Asian Americans and whites, who cannot
        purchase them... Unfair? So is affirmative action, organizers contend."
        from http://csua.org/u/5d4
        \_ The most pathetic thing is that these stunts were first pulled
           by conservatives at UM during their recent affirmative action
           debate, and it appears on the news wires every time some imitators
           buy a couple of poster boards and $20 of cookies at the local
           supermarket.  (The people who were suing UM were horribly deluded
           to think that their race kept them out, btw.)  And also, wtf wants
           to go to UW?
           \_ Not everyone can get into your rich little white boy school.
        \_ How come Asian Americans cannot purchase them?       -asian am
           \_ There are no asians in Washington.
           \_ Because Asian Americans, like whites, need higher GPAs and test
              scores to get admitted compared to applicants of other races.
                \_ that is sooooo untrue. Look at Vietnamnese people. I've
                   roomed with 2 of them and 1 of them was a total complete
                   loser who liked to mod his car with ugly looking spoilers.
                   The other one was a thief who took my mail and stole
                   my CC # to buy things. Both of them went to VCs.
                   \_ VCs = vietcongs?
        \_ Trolling with public funds.  Obtaining cookies has an even playing
           field.  Education does not.
           \_ Wtf does 'even playing field' even mean?  What about poor white
              immigrants, etc?
              \_ At the most distilled, Opportunity.  Anything from parents
                 that actually know that they should help you learn (and
                 hopefully had an education themselves) to having a teacher
                 that recognizes your individual needs in education and has
                 the funds and time to address them. --scotsman
                 p.s. and before you get your panties in a bunch, no, race
                 lines are not a perfect way to draw the boundaries, but
                 strangely enough, the economic and racial lines show a
                 strong corellation.
                 \_ Then why not just choose economic lines and ignore race?
                    Do you seriously believe that middle class black parents
                    will raise their kids less well or know less than poor
                    white trash from the sticks?  Doing anything by race is
                    evil.  No bullshit.  No excuses.
                    \_ Do you seriously believe that racism is not still a
                       part of the problem?  And "anything by race is evil" is
                       a little strong.  Look at the reasons Prop 54 went down
                       so hard.  There are real divisions in terms of health
                       care and education that must be addressed in terms of
                       race/culture. --scotsman
                       \_ Nice dodge.  What about those middle class black kids
                          vs. the poor white kids?  Go read your own words
                          above starting with "Opportunity.  Anything from
                          parents...".  Stop ducking and please answer.
                          \_ It's not a dodge.  It's multiple parts of
                             the problem of education.  There is racism, and
                             there is insufficient funding and opportunity
                             for poorer schools/students etc.  There is no
                             panacea.  Racism has perhaps garnered more
                             attention, but calling it solved is ludicrous.
                             Scholastic funding for poor areas is a problem
                             that has headed in the wrong direction for a
                             long time. --scotsman
                             \_ Ben, what problem are you solving?  Are you
                                solving: (a) that some parents are idiots,
                                and don't instill the value of education in
                                their kids (such people exist in all races)
                                (b) that some people are poor and some are not
                                (such people exist in all races) or
                                (c) racist attitudes about some people (they
                                exist about people of all races, in particular
                                jews, members of the caucasian race, have been
                                the 'beneficiaries' of racism for thousands of
                                years).  So, which problem is it?  And why
                                penalize whites, regardless of which of the
                                three it is?  -- ilyas
                                \_ I am not a communist as you believe,
                                   ilya, but I do believe that education and
                                   health care are rights that everyone should
                                   be guaranteed.  I think that racism impinges
                                   on peoples' access to education.  I think
                                   that the best teachers spend nearly as much
                                   time educating parents as they do on their
                                   students (which shouldn't be necessary, but
                                   is).  I think the phrase "benefitting from
                                   racism" is loaded, and as unhelpful to
                                   discourse as comparing affirmative action
                                   to cookies is.  Returning to the financial
                                   aspect, I believe investment in education
                                   has a higher return that most people suppose,
                                   and deserves more funding than we have
                                   devoted thus far. --scotsman
                                   \_ Let me ask this again.  What justification
                                      do you have for penalizing whites?
                                      It doesn't have to be moral, it could
                                      be pragmatic.  I just want to know what
                                      the justification is, because I don't
                                      think it has been articulated yet.
                                        -- ilyas
                    \_ Refer to history.  Social movements brought us here.
                       Helping the poor is not what the rich do...  Helping
                       those who were socially outcast has much more political
                       leverage.  Besides the "Poor" don't vote...
                       \_ Helping the poor is exactly what the rich do.  It is
                          not what the middle class does because they can't
                          afford it.  That's why you get ultra rich leftists
                          like Gates and Buffet saying taxes are too low.  They
                          don't care what the tax rates are because it doesn't
                          mean anything to them but it makes them feel less
                          guilty to know they may have helped some poor people
                          (at the real world expense of the middle class). So,
                          anyway, you seem to be saying that we should help
                          the middle class black kid but ignore the poor white
                          kid... because he's white?  Brilliant.  Glad you're
                          \_ Then you're reading me wrong.
                          not making public policy.  It's already fucked up
                          enough.  At least today that poor white kid can get
                          *some* help for being poor, although not as much as
                          the middle class black kid.  In your world, the black
                          kid would get 100% and the white kid nothing solely
                          because of the color of their skin.  Sickening.
                          \_ I should make one correction.  Gates is NOT
                             a leftist.  Gates is a big Ayn Rand fan.
                             \_ He probably meant Gates Sr.
           \- "help help. i am an item." i really really hope the aclu
              gets involved in this one. --psb
2003/12/18-19 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11509 Activity:nil
12/17   Is there a web site that lists the California and federal
        income tax rate schedule not only for 2003, but for 2004, 2005,
        etc., as well as the exemption amounts.

        STUPID INCONSIDERATE MOVIE SPOILERS...DON'T DO IT.
        At least prepend your drivel with "Don't read if you
        haven't seen the movie."
        \_ Those amounts have been decided already?
           \_ No.

        STUPID INCONSIDERATE MOVIE SPOILERS...DON'T DO IT.
        At least prepend your drivel with "Don't read if you
        haven't seen the movie."
        \_ The butler, in the study, with the wrench.  -John
2003/12/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11462 Activity:very high
12/15   With Saddam in custody now the '04 election is done.  Stick a fork in
        it and vote for Green so we can end the "1 party, 2 faces" nightmare.
                                                What is this? _/
        \_ In answer to "what is this?", "1 party, 2 faces" is what our
           political system has become.  Both parties are the same.  They
           have the same agenda, offer the same solutions, they 'steal'
           each other's platforms not because they believe in them but because
           the polls say it's a good idea to do so.  This is a one party
           nation that uses 2 names for the same party.  We need a second
           party in this country for those of us tired of business as usual.
        \_ Yeah voting for Ralph Nader surely helped Al Gore, Jr. win.
           \_ Why would I want the other side of the one party to win?  Gore
              and Bush might as well be twins.  Why is this so hard to
              understand?
        \_ Watch the polls dip as we lose another 500 soldiers between now
           and the election.
        \_ Nah, the economy could only add an anemic 150,000 jobs last quarter,
           in spite of the biggest productivity gains in twenty years. Expect
           things to cool off a bit next year, leading to more job losses
           and further wage stagnation. This economy is great for the stock
           market, but not so good for Joe Sixpack.
           \_ Hence the phrase, jobless recovery.
           \_ Unlike you I am Joe6 and work with a ton of other union guys
              and we're doing just fine, thanks.  Get out of your ivory tower.
        \_ Yeah, support for Bush is up a whole 3%!!!!
           http://csua.org/u/5a2
2003/12/9 [Politics/Domestic/California, Reference/BayArea] UID:11369 Activity:high
12/8    If you are a San Franciscan, vote today. This is going to be
        a very close race and every vote will count.
        \_ soda poll?
           Gonzalez: ....
           Newsomm: .
           !psb: .
           \_ poll of those who wish they could vote
              Gonzalez: ..
              Newsom:
        \_ Yes, your choices are A) drive businesses out in 5 years
           or B) drive businesses out in 1 year
           \_ You don't know much about SF, do you?
2003/12/6 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11336 Activity:low
12/5    Prohibition Repealed 70 years ago today.  Celebrate.
        http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/big/1205.html
        \_ FDR " improved the occasion to address a plea to the American people
         to employ their regained liberty first of all for national manliness."
        \_What are "Recovery Taxes" ?
2003/12/2 [Politics/Domestic/California, Recreation/Dating] UID:11270 Activity:kinda low
12/1    I understand why marrying one's sibling would be illegal. But how about
        consensual sex between two adults who happens to be siblings?  Why
        should that be illegal?  Government has no right to dictate what
        should or shouldn't happen between two consenting adults.
        \_ you can have children whether or not you're married.
        \_ In a family, just because you're over 18 doesn't mean you have full
           autonomy.  If it truly is consensual, the only reason for it to be
           illegal is the increased likelyhood of having handicapped kids.
           \_ Shouldn't there be a minimum genetic distant between two
              people before they are allowed to marry? Not just siblings but
              cousins shouldn't be allowed nor should uncle/niece.
              \_ There was a study showing that occasional marriage between
                 first cousins has a minimal effect on birth defect rates.
                 There was only a problem when it is commonplace to marry
                 your cousin.
                 \_ I would die for you Saddam, and the right to marry a
                    first cousin!
           \_ That's a weird reason. By that logic, it should be illegal for
              older women to have sex. After all, they have an increased
              likelyhood of having handicapped kids.
              \_ There were a number of eugenics laws in this country in the
                 early 20th century.  I'm not saying it's fair, but society
                 frequently bans things it frowns upon.
                \_ http://csua.org/u/54q     California Eugenics history
        \_ I belive FDR married his 2nd cousin.  And marrying one's cousin is
           legal in CA.  It's a state law, not a federal law.
        \_ Didn't Einstein marry his first cousin?  Did they have any
           kids?  Were they nearly as smart as the dad?
           \- TACO: Einstein's older son used to teach at Berkeley.
           \- IAOC: Einstein's older son used to teach at Berkeley.
                    The younger had some kind of brain problem and died
                    young, I believe. --psb
              \_ TACO?
                    young, I believe. --psb
              \_ IAOC?
               \_ THAC0
2003/11/24-25 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11204 Activity:nil
11/23   Any recommendations for a nice hotel near Mt. Shasta CA?
        \_ Beware the Lemurians:
           http://www.outwestnewspaper.com/rsj4.html
           \_ HAIL Mighty THONGOR!
        \_ Beware the Norse:
           http://forum.kicken.fm/topic.cgi?forum=44&topic=3927
           \_ NOT WORK SAFE!
2003/11/24 [Politics/Domestic/California, Transportation/Car] UID:11203 Activity:kinda low
11/24   So is it legal or illegal to not have a front license plate?
        I've heard both answers from various sources, and I haven'et
        had luck finding answers online. Does anyone know?
        \_ Wrong. It is legal if the CA DMV only gives you one plate.
        \_ It is legal if the CA DMV only gives you one plate.
           If they give you two plates it is 'illegal' to not have
           \_ Why is the OP wrong?  I don't get it.
           one in front.
              my first car 12 years ago it only had a rear plate.  Then later
              I got a citation for a missing front plate.  However, I see
           \_ Why would the CA DMV only give you one plate?  BTW when I bought
              their excuse is their front bumpers are not designed to hold a
              plate.  Hell, just drill two holes.  Why should you be exempt
              my first car (used) 12 years ago it only had a rear plate.  Then
              later I got a citation for a missing front plate.  However, I see
              people driving fancy Mercedes which have no front plate, and
              their excuse is that their front bumpers are not designed to hold
              a plate.  Hell, just drill two holes.  Why should you be exempt
              just because you have a fancy car.
              \_ the cops don't care whether or not you front bumper isn't
                 "designed" to hold a plate or not, my sister's old car was
                 like that and she got a ticket for it.  she went to the
                 dealership and complained about it enough that they drilled
                 the bumper for a plate and gave her a new license plate
                 holder and a car wash.
        \_ A lawyer friend of mine told me that, in general, they can't
           give you a ticket solely for that, but technically it's illegal.
           Dunno if that's true or not, but I was given a ticket for it
           also (I had expired registration stickers cuz I was a dumbass,
           and the CHP tacked on the no-front-plate to the citation).
        \_ in CA it's not "legal" but nobody seems to care.
           \_ except for the cop that gave me a ticket for
              that very reason.
              \_ Yeah LAPD tickets for this also.
              \_ Just curious, how much was your fine? I'm thinking about
                 getting a new car and I don't want them to drill holes
                 into my bumper.
                 \_ fixit ticket
                    \_ Well, fixit ticket after you "fixit".  You are supposed
                       to have a front plate.  I've had my front plate stolen
                       a number of times, and have had anywhere from $50-120
                       tickets that changed to $10 after i payed the DMV $7
                       for new plates.  Total joke...
        \_ It's illegal. You will be ticketed. Plus it gives cops a reason
           to pull you over.
        \_ Bought a new car last month.  They made me sign a form that said
           I chose not to have the front plate put on and indemnifying the
           dealership.
2003/11/22 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11187 Activity:nil 53%like:11481 53%like:29667
11/21   Congress voting on Anti-spam:
        http://news.com.com/2100-1024_3-5110622.html?tag=nefd_top
2003/11/22 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11184 Activity:nil
11/21   California secretary of state anounces that all electronic voting
        machines must provide paper receipts by 2006 http://tinyurl.com/w26j
        \_ This is good news.  Including the fact that voters can't take them
           outside of the polling place (preventing vote buying).
           \_ So you get the receipt and then you have to throw it away right
              away?  What's the use then?
              \_ The election officials keep the slips.  You verify the
                 result, then put the slip in a lock box, and they keep
                 the slip in case they need to verify/recount.
                 \_ sounds like a complete waste of time and money.  -tom
                    \_ You're right. Democracy is the least efficient form
                       of government, but it's better than the alternatives.
                    \_ you prefer what?  nothing?  i found it really spooky
                       to hand my e-voting card to some old guy who plugged
                       it into some hand held toy which beeped after a few
                       seconds.  at least with the paper i know there's a real
                       thing out there someone can check if need be.
                    \_ If you don't think that *some* kind of physical audit
                       trail is necessary, then I suggest that you google
                       "Diebold 18181".
        \_ Slips?  Why not punch cards?
2003/11/21 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29657 Activity:nil
11/20   George W. Bush "lost the popular vote." So did JFK.
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1025615/posts
        \_ stop spnning the issue.  If he and his brother didn't rigged the
           votes in Florida, I wouldn't have problem the legimacy of his
           presidency reguardless the popular votes.
2003/11/18 [Politics/Domestic/California, Computer/SW/OS/Windows] UID:11115 Activity:nil
11/17   I just got MS California Standard Claim Form. I can list up to 5
        purchases without a proof of purchase. I can get $29 for Office,
        $5 for Word, $26 for Excel, $16 for Windows. What are the best
        combinations to put down?
        \_ umm, dude. do you have any recollection of something called
           basic arithmetic? and if you mean the best combination to lie
           about to prevent being caught (or some other weird shit),
           how the fuck should we know?
        \_ write to atterney general telling them that you prefer spend
           money on something else other than Microsoft product.  The
           current term of settlement is nothing more than another
           Microsoft's ploy to increase its buttom line.
           \_ uh, you get vouchers good for whatever software and a
              fairly liberal range of hardware, not just microsoft stuff.
        \_ I just got another claim form even though I already sent in
           mine weeks ago.  Looking forward to get $70+.  Incredibly,
           I still have all the receipts even though they are not
           required.
        \_ I didn't read the paper one but the online one said proof of
           purchase was required?
2003/11/16 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:11094 Activity:nil
11/15   California budget head calls deficit 'staggering'
        http://www.forbes.com/newswire/2003/11/15/rtr1149508.html
        Recall Arnold, bring back Davis!!!
        \_ good link.  yeah we need 4 more years of davis to reach that
           $62b budget gap. bring back davis. im finding a new state.
2003/11/14-15 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11075 Activity:high
11/14   Do I have to register as a Democrat to vote in the primary?
        \_ I believe the 'open primary' law was struck down.  Stil plenty of
           time to register, though.  Also, party registration is not needed
           to vote on any ballot measures on the primary.
           \_ Open Primary was squished by Supreme Court.  If you want to
              vote for a particular Dem candidate, you'll need to register
              as a Dem.
              \_ what was the reasoning for the squish?
                 \_ Private organizations (the parties) have the right to
                    control who can vote in the organization.  Althouth I
                    liked the open primary, it sets bad legal precedant.
                    \_ I think private organizations should pay for the
                       poll and hold it themselves then. If the government
                       (public) is paying for it then everyone should be
                       able to vote in it. --dim
                        \_ Well, they can vote in the other primary. Why do
                           people want to help choose a different party's
                           candidate? You don't support that party anyway.
                           Would the repubs vote for someone they like, or
                           someone they think would be a bad candidate?
                           \_ Personally, I voted for the guy I liked most. If
                              this is a Party thing then the Party should
                              conduct its own selection process and let us
                              all know who they chose instead of putting it
                              on a general ballot.
                    \_ If my heart is with the Republicans, can I register as
                       a Democrat and then vote for the lamest one among the
                       Democratic candidates in their primary?  And vice versa?
                       \_ No, you may not.  As a Republican, you're bound by
                          the supposedly higher morality that your kind
                          constantly bray about to vote your conscience, not
                          for political gain.  Anything else would be
                          hypocritical.  The rest of us godless heathens,
                          OTOH, are free to make sure that bozos like Bill
                          Simon represent you in close elections.
                          \_ nice.
        \_ no, you have to register as a hypocrite first.
2003/11/14-15 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Gay] UID:11072 Activity:high
11/14   About Judge Moore, I'm curious about the anti-Moore people here.
        Moore was elected by the people to his office.  Do you think it
        is ok that some appointed body removed him from office?  If so,
        did you think it was *not* ok for the people of CA to vote to
        remove an official the people of CA elected?  If so, how do you
        reconcile that double standard and why place an appointed body
        above the will of the people in the greater scheme of things?
        What was so wrong about the 10 commandments statue that it required
        Moore's immediate removal by an appointed body while we were supposed
        to wait until the next election to remove Davis in a time of crisis?
        It's 8am.  I hope that's not too early to try to start a real non-troll
        discussion on a hot topic.
        \_ it's worth pointing out that the decision to remove him was a
          *unanimous* one, made by a group of legal experts from both the
           Democrat and Republican party, which included elected officials.
           The issue at stake was not the ten commandments statue, it was
           an open contempt for the law.
        \_ Judge Moore is a complete moron, I don't see how anyone can
           defend him hauling his 10 ton commandments monument
           INTO THE ROTUNDA OF THE STATE CAPITAL BUILDING.  the
           mind boggles.
           \_ Yeah. The guy keeps saying that he's being forced to "deny god".
              What an absolutely refrickindiculous statement. Hey Christians,
              do you have giant statues with biblical crap on them in your
              workplace? If not you're denying god and will BURN.
        \_ this "judge" reffered to homosexuality as a "violation of the laws
           of nature and of nature's God upon which this nation and our laws
           are predicated."  That means that 10 percent of the Alabama
           citizens who walk through his courtroom door have already commited
           a mortal sin in his eyes before their guilt or innocence
           is determined.  This man cannot be allowed to be a judge.
           I believe this case is severe enought to warrant *any* action
           to remove this man from power.  Don't forget that majority will
           of the people of Alabama was to hold *slaves* until we beat
           them in a war, and to have black people live as second class
           citizens until we had to send troops down there in the 60's.
           If it comes to war again, so be it.
                \_ In the 1700s there were more slaves in New York than
                   all of South.  Only a few percent of Southerners, ie.
                   landed aristocrats, were slave holders.
                   For 2000 years homosexuality has been considered
                   unnatural - they can't reproduce!  Don't you secular
                   humanists see the contradiction with evolution?
                   \_ I want more fags and less lesbos in the world.
                      That way there's less competition for the women.
                   \_ And i suppose that all the animals who demonstrate
                      homosexuality in the wild are just victims of an
                      evil liberal conspiracy by the Clintons?
                   \_ Being gay may be an evolutionary disadvantage, but having
                      some 'gay' behaviors may be an advantage, so the gene
                      lives on.  Sort of like a heterozygus recessive, if
                      you'll pardon the pun.
                   \_ So then it would be morally wrong for a guy to just work
                      all the time and never date?  I mean he can't
                      reproduce!
                        \_ The question is why some minority group deserves
                           special protection under the law simply because
                           of what the do in the bedroom.  The irony is
                           this exact was predicted in a concurring opinion
                           in Griswald vs. Connecticut.
                           \_ This is a canard. No one (almost no one, okay)
                              wants special protection, just equal treatment.
                                \_ That is not what existing statutes
                                   provide for.  So now "equal treatment"
                                   based on how you have sex is a natural
                                   right? As dictated and
                                   regulated by who?  How do renconcile
                                   this with freedom of association.  Now
                                   the government tells us how we have to
                                   treat people because of what they do in
                                   the bedroom.
                                   \_ No, the government is telling us we
                                      must treat all people equally
                                      _regardless_ of what they do in the
                                      bedroom.  How this is not simply
                                      common sense seriously boggles the mind.
                                        \_ So if a congregation believes
                                           homosexuality is a sin the
                                           government has the power to force
                                           it to accept a gay pastor in the
                                           name of being 'fair'.  The term 'fair'
                                           when related to sexual choice
                                           is so vague that its invites
                                           gross abuse and the infringement
                                           of freedom of association.
                                           Now bestiality fetishes
                                           and trangenders have the right
                                           to force businesses them to hire
                                           them because its 'fair'.  Sorry,
                                           you are a fascist.  You should
                                           not have the right to force
                                           your bizarre agenda on other
                                           people.  If you want to do
                                           it through 1) referendum
                                           2) the legislature, fine.
                                           However, as you know that will
                                           never succeed.
                                           \_ Bestiality involves non-
                                              consensual sex.  It is possible
                                              (and preferable) to make rules
                                              that allow for certain conduct
                                              while continuing to outlaw
                                              other conduct.  The Santorum
                                              argument ignores the ability
                                              of people to make moral
                                              distinctions outside of Biblical
                                              proclamations.  Stop trying to
                                              throw the baby out with the
                                              bath water.
                                           \_ Never is a long time. People
                                              thought slavery would last
                                              forever, too.
                   \_ I think it's unnatural to drive a car.  Thus, it's
                      immoral!  And airplanes are even more immoral.  Fire
                      too!  Let's all go back into our caves.
                      \_ RIDE BIKE! LIGHT CANDLE! USE LINUX!
                   \_ Dead wrong.  The Catholic Church widely condoned
                      homosexuality until about the 13th C, and even allowed
                      gay marriages.  -- hetersexual catholic
                        \_ I think you mean clerical marriage.
                           John Boswell died of AIDS complications at
                           age 42 - think he could have had an agenda?
                           This is called historical revisionism, an art
                           perfected by the left.
                           http://www.dailycatholic.org/issue/2002May/may23tru.htm
                           \_ That's right.  And the banner that read
                              "Mission Accomplished" was mysteriously
                              hung on the aircraft carrier by leftist
                              insurgents.
                                \_ Yawn, redirection with a puerile
                                   display of stupidity.
                                   \_ Yet another classic case of right-wing
           of civil disobedience, but if you are at all familiar with the
           concept as practiced by Ghandi, King and Thoreau, you understand
                                      issue dodging.  No, seriously, you
                                      don't believe the right engages in
                                      historical revisionism?
                           \_ I agree.  the left does historical revisionism
           \_ To a Christian, all men are sinners, and all sins are
              mortal.  Adultery is sin too, for example.  That doesn't
           book, just a simple political power struggle, which he lost.
           \_ nice.
              mean they would advocate criminalizing adultery.
              \_ Well, yes and no.  Most sins can be forgiven if the sinner
                 repents or feels remorse and goes to confession.  You can be
                 in a state of grace at least some of the time.  Homosexuality
                 is unrepentant, ongoing sin.  Isn't alabama one of the states
                 that has sodomy laws which are technically still enforced?
           the US Circuit Court judges for ignoring the 1st and 10th
           amendments.
              \_ there are also venal sins. er, venial.
           \_ Do you have a source that 10% of people are homosexual?
              I don't believe this claim to be true, from personal
              experience. -- ilyas
              \_ Even if it's one percent or half a percent -- the man is a
                 JUDGE -- he's supposed to be passing judgement based on the
                 laws in the LAW books...not the religious ones.  The exact
                 figure is kind of irrelevant.
                        \_ When has he ever stated that he ignores the law
                           in favor of the Bible.  In the interviews I've
                           seen he states just the opposite.
              \_ The 10% is based on the Kinsey study, which I personally
                 think overstated it, since they based it on lifetime
                 behavior not self-identification. But there are many
                 studies (use google) that indicate that the real percentage
                 of active GLBT in the general population is at least
                 4-5% -ausman
                 \_ I don't know.  I lived in San Francisco, Berkeley, and
                    Los Angeles, not the most sexually repressed places
                    in the world.  The figure of 4-5% still seems quite high.
                      -- ilyas
                    \_ My estimate is kind of on the conservative side,
                       actually. I am only including people who are
                       sexually active. Look at this study:
                       http://www.qrd.org/qrd/www/youth/tremblay/app-a.html
                       Do you think that 4-5% of SF is gay? You have got
                       to be kidding me. The real number is more like 15-20%.
                       \_ I don't think ilya gets out much.
                 \_ When I was in the co-ops, I'd guess 2% gay,
                    additional 2% Bi
                    \_ 2% bi?  Heh, not among the girls.  Sweet!
                    \_ Straights have notoriously bad gay-dar.
        \_ A judge takes a vow to uphold the law. Moore believed himself to
           be above the law and willfully violated it. So yes, I think
           he should have been removed. I am well aware of the principle
           of civil disobedience, but if you are familiar with the concept
           as practiced by Ghandi, King and Thoreau, you understand
           that you accept the punishment that comes from violating the law
           as part of the deal. Additionally, they were not judges. I think
           by holding himself above the law, he made a mockery of the
           whole idea. He was not engaging in civil disobedience in my
           book, just a simple political power struggle, which he lost.
           \_ nice.
           \_ he's preparing for a senate run, or governorship, duh
              he's happy to be removed, do you think he's that dumb?
        \_ If you support his removal then you must also support impeachment
           the US Circuit Court judges for ignoring the 1st and 10th
           amendments.
           \_ If you think that boolean logic applies to the real world,
              you must be a hopeless twink.
                \_ If an appreciation of the historical context of the
                   amendments and their authors designates a twink,
                   I suppose so.
                   \_ Nice try, but your twinkness hinges on your inability
                      to see the shading between black and white, a disability
                      that will make you a great and courageous crusader, but
                      a poorly socialized member of society and a twink.
2003/11/14 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11071 Activity:nil
11/13   Is there a politics code (a la the geek code)?
        \_ 3 choices: (D) (R) (I)
                      \_ Yeah man, DRI rules!  But Sick of it All is better.
                         \_ play pac man and i watch TV!
                            i'm so happy cause it pleases me!
                            couldn't really ask for anything else
                            maybe my own chain of taco bells!!!!!!!
        \_ my favorite category is poor whites who vote based on coded
           appeals to race. boy the republicans are fucking those guys
           up the ass.
           \_ wow, what a weak ass troll!  go home, boy!  there's no room for
              little boys on this ride.
2003/11/14 [Politics/Domestic/California, Computer/SW/OS/Windows] UID:11066 Activity:nil
11/13   Anyone else get a California - Microsoft Settlement mail?
        what are you going to do about it?  (postal mail)
        \_ I already sent in my claim.  When will we get our money
           back?
           \_ how did they get all of our mailing addresses?
              \_ We are Microsoft.  All your info are belong to us!
              \_ That's what I'd like to know.
              \_ addresses are public info. stop being an ignorant paranoid.
        \_ Yes, and I plan to milk them for as much as I can. Is there
           somewhere we can look to find out more information about this
           settlement/suit?
        \_ You need proof you bought something in that time frame.  Your
           warez copy of office and win2k doesn't count.
           \_ It says you don't need a receipt.
2003/11/13-14 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11059 Activity:high
11/13   Does anyone have any information on these 4 judicial court nominees?
        \_ sure.  what do you want to know, unless you're being
           a troll I have decided
           Pickering is not completely totally evil. - danh
           \_ Any urls on Pickering?
              \_ here's one from the Village Voice where Pickering
                 does something that I would consider way out of character
                 for a member of the Federalist Society:
                 http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0345/hentoff.php - danh
        \_ how about the 63 the little republican bitches blocked during
           the Clinton years?   168 nominees have been passed.  this is
           absurd.
           \_ Were they passed from committee to the floor?  Were they voted up
              or down?
              \_ See, these are things you could verify for yourself, but
                 instead you swallow the GOP claims whole and try to pick
                 apart statements to the contrary.  in '99-00 60% of the
                 Clinton nominees to appeals court did not receive the
                 "up or down vote" that the GOP is whining about now.
                 \_ What was the decision of the judicial committee?  The
                    current committee can't send them to the floor for a vote
                    because of the filibuster threats, even if the committee
                    chose to.
                    \_ What a strange topsy-turvy Alice-In-Wonderland view
                       of reality.
                       \_ How so?  You're simply ignorant of how our federal
                          government works.  It is standard practice to
                          not bring up anything for a vote until it is known
                          that there is support for it to pass.  Where "it"
                          is any bills, nomination, or anything else.  It is
                          very rare for a bill to be voted on without everyone
                          knowing in advance that it will be passed.
                          \_ The Republicans who controlled the committee
                             refused to even hear the nominees:
                             http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200307/070903.html
                             \_ Which has nothing to do with the current issue
                                about whether the above person has an alice
                                in wonderland view or not.
        \_ The NAACP on Carolyn Kuhl:
           http://www.naacp.org/work/washington_bureau/Kuhl081303.shtml
           People for the American Way on Caroline Kuhl:
           http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=9734
           The NAACP on Priscilla Owen:
           http://www.naacp.org/work/washington_bureau/PriscillaOwen.pdf
           The Independent Judiciary on Priscilla Owen:
           link:csua.org/u/4zp (PDF)
           \_ The National Assocation For The Advancement of Left Wing
              Colored People?
              \_ For a strict constructionist, you take a lot of liberties
                 in adding a letter to that acronym.
                 \_ Just calling it like I see it.  Why is an .org that says
                    it is for the advancement of black people opposed to a
                    black person advancing?  Only because she's not left wing.
                    I take no liberties.
                    \_ Bzzt.  Because she's against the advancement of
                       colored people when those colored people are not her.
                       You can't promote an Uncle Tom and then say you're
                       advancing the cause of black people.
                       \_ You don't know shit about her background, do you?
                          Come back after reading her bio.   I'm not going to
                          spoon feed you the reader's digest version.
        \_ My fiancee is an attorney, has appeared in front of Judge Kuhl,
           and thinks she's pretty much horrible ... ideology aside (she's
           very right wing), my fiancee felt she doesn't follow the law.
           \_ Very few judges follow the law and there's little recourse
              in most cases starting from small claims and family court all
              the way up.  A judge "not following the law" is hardly a
              reason to not promote a judge in this country.  If that was the
              standard we'd have to start all over.  Your fiancee is rather
              naive for a lawyer.  She must be quite young.  Don't worry,
              though, she'll be corrupt and bitter soon enough.
              \_ There's following the letter of the law and following the
                 spirit of the law, and then there's not following the law
                 at all.  The first two are highly debated, but the third is
                 universally recognised as being wrong.  Kuhl has a tendency
                 to go with her personal belief even when they conflict with
                 the latter _and_ spirit of the law.
                 \_ There's no difference between a judge following what they
                    decide is the spirit of the law and doing whatever the
                    hell they please.  They're either following the law or not
                    and as soon as it's ok to do something other than strictly
                    adhere to the law as written, the show is over, anything
                    goes.  It is intellectually dishonest to claim you want
                    judges to follow the law, kind of, sort of, sometimes.
                    \_ Thank you, strict constructionist.  According to your
                       view of the law, it is illegal to wink at an
                       unacquainted female in Ottumwa, Iowa, and anyone
                       caught doing so must be prosecuted to the full extent
                       of the law, despite the fact that modern morality
                       significantly differs from the morality prevalent at
                       the time the legislation was enacted.  The purpose of
                       the judicial branch is to add the element of human
                       wisdom to the process of the law.  Without loose
                       interpretation, the law is merely code, and the
                       executive branch has all the power.
                       \_ No, enforcement and the decision to prosecute lay
                          this other person we call "the prosecutor".  In some
                          places we call this person "the district attorney".
                          Yes, this will be on your Basic Civics 1A quiz at
                          the end of the week.
           \_ Following the law is secondary.  Bush appointees must be
              ideologically pure.  The right-wing is terrified of another
              Souter.
              \_ No we just want judges to follow the law.  So you attack us
                 for being strict constructionists and then you attack us for
                 not wanting to follow the law at all.  You can't get it both
                 ways without looking like an idiot.
                 \_ Like Roy Moore, right: that conservative who was just
                    removed from the Alabama Supreme Court for acting like
                    an Anarchist?
                    \_ try upholding Alabama Constitution, which mentions
                       God.  They take on oath.
                       \_ He also has to uphold the U.S. Constitution, and the
                          U.S. Constitution takes precedence over state ones.
                          \_ Where in the USC does it say he can't have the
                             10 commandments in a public space?  I'm a
                             strict atheist (none of that agnostic weenie
                             stuff for me) and I've got no problem with it.
                             The USC says no such thing.  In God We Trust.
                             \_ He was ordered by a higher court to remove
                                it and refused to. That is not called
                                enforcing the law, that is called breaking it.
                                \_ Uh oh, looks like a debate bait n switch!
                                   So you agree the USC doesn't say any such
                                   thing.  Now let's address your new point.
                                   He has the right to refuse.  He has the
                                   right to appeal.  He has the right to
                                   protest and engage in an act of civil
                                   disobedience.  This is still a free
                                   country.  The word of a higher court, even
                                   the highest court is not always the
                                   correct decision.  He has the right to say
                                   no and suffer the legal, political, and
                                   career consequences of his protest and
                                   has bravely chosen to do so.  I'm stunned
                                   that you'd come on here and say that just
                                   because a court said something that it is
                                   automatically 'good' and he should blindly
                                   obey.  I'd scream "fascist!" but I don't
                                   think you really understood or believed
                                   what you were saying above.
                                   \_ You claim that you want judges that
                                      follow the law, then in the next
                                      statement, claim that judges have
                                      the "right" to engage in civil
                                      disobedience??? The USC clearly
                                      states that the Federal Governemnt
                                      is sovereign over the states. Look
                                      at the statement "the US Constitution
                                      takes precedent over state ones" and
                                      you will see that it is you that keeps
                                      trying to change the subject away from
                                      judicial responsibilty to obey and
                                      enforce the law. I'd scream "hypocrite"
                                      but I don't think you'd really
                                      understand what the word means.
        \_ thanks -nivra
        \_ We don't need to vote!  We already know they're all eevvviiill
           BushCo Republicans!  We only vote on people we like!
           \_ How many Bush nominees have already been voted on?
           \_ right. Bush is the only one who likes to talk about EVIL.
              Evil. A big issue in the world today. Domestic violence, war,
              it's all just evil. Why doesn't Bush declare war on Satan?
              \_ BushCo won't declare war on Satan because BushCo is Eevvvill!
                 We all know BushCo reports directly to Satan!!  Like all the
                 eeeeevvvvviiill!! Republicans!  Eeevvviiill!
2003/11/10-11 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11007 Activity:high
11/10   Sigh...If only those votes could have been recounted...
        http://www.moveon.org/gore/speech.html
        \_ Does no one else see the irony of a site called "Move On" is carrying
           a speech from Gore whining about Election 2000?
           \_ This speech isn't about Election 2k.  Does no else see the
              irony of opinionated windbags on the motd that post about
              URLs without looking at them?
        \_ Sigh, if only Gore had pushed for a statewide recount instead of
           cherry picking heavily Democratic districts....  Had he pushed for
           that on day one instead of trying to be clever, there wouldn't have
           been any Constitutional questions to raise.
        \_ They were... and in every recount by the major media outlets
           Bush WON.  Sour grapes I suppose, but don't let the rule of law
           get in your way.
           \_ Except for all the ones where he didn't... I guess that can
              be true if you're very selective about how you define
              "major", huh? Did they discuss the last-minute
              disenfranchisement of 90,000 black voters in those nicely
              impartial major media reports? Don't let facts get in your way.
                \_ They could not identify one, not one.  If they
                   could you better believe it would plastered over the entire
                   front page of every newspaper.  Please, give me any name.
                   There was a commission that investigated this, they found
                   nothing.  And please, don't give unsubstantiated
                   demagoguery by Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.  The irony
                   here is that is all of these purported districts the
                   election was run Democrats.
                   \_ Cathy Jackson. Donnise DeSouze. Angenora Ramsey. That
                      enough? If you want more, read
                      http://digital.library.miami.edu/gov/voting.html
                   \_ The report was very damning of the Republicans:
                      http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/06/08/florida.vote
                   \_ The rolls are statewide, but nice try. Care to name
                      your sage commission or maybe make up more stuff?
                        \_ Read the report, did you even bother to read
                           it???  They give no accounts of individuals
                           who wanted to vote but were unable, NOT ONE.
                           Just anecdotal evidence blah blah blah.
                           Here's the worst they can say from the
                           abstract:
                            "Potential voters confronted inexperienced
                            poll workers, antiquated machinery,
                            inaccessible polling locations, and other
                            barriers to being able to exercise their
                            right to vote."
                           \_ I read the entire report and I agree with the
                              CNN summary of it, not yours.
                                \_ Then please, give me the name of
                                   one of the 90,000.  Just one is all I ask.
                                   I'm not talking about someone who was
                                   too stupid to fill out the ballot
                                   properly, rather some one who was
                                   prevented from voting.
                                   \_ Keep begging you racist right wing
                                      fascist!  We won't give up one, not one
                                      victim for you to hunt down and destroy!
                                        \_ So since you cant produce one
                                           you resort to thinly veiled
                                           threats.  Ah yes, the Left.
                                           Nice display of reason and
                                           rational thought.
                                           Let me see if I understand
                                           your argument:  the Democrat
                                           constituency in these districts
                                           are too stupid to fill out
                                           votes properly.  Nefariously,
                                           the Democrat controlled
                                           canvasing boards in these
                                           districts purposely
                                           undercounted the said votes to
                                           hurt Gore.
                                           Is this your contention?
                                           Do you have a personal stake
                                           in this... were you one
                                           the said voters? I just don't
                                           understand.
                                           \_ http://csua.org/u/4y7
                                              includes five. Are you really
                                              a leftist pretending
                                              to be a dumb right winger?
                                    \_ Even a casual google search turns up
                                       dozens. Johnny Jackson Jr, is one
                                       a retired cleric.
                                        \_ Did these three people try to vote?
                                           This is not disenfranchisement,
                                           it is a clerical mistake.  Even
                                           the article admits more whites
                                           were removed than blacks.  Sorry
                                           try again.  Somehow it seems
                                           you guys still came out ahead.
                                           Hundreds of felons cast votes
                                           illegally
                                           http://csua.org/u/4y8
            \_ Not even close to true. A full recount of Florida would have
               given the state to Gore:
               http://democrats.com/view.cfm?id=2300
               But I guess the New York Times and Miami Herald don't
               qualify as "major" in your book, right?
                \_ LOL your article contradicts itself.  Somehow every
                   newspaper they list lied in its headline??  From the
                   article:
                   "And why did the New York Times report:
                    "An Analysis of Florida Balloting Favors Bush""
                   Even the leftwing NYT disagrees with you.
                   \_ "Leftwing NYT"? You crack me up. Read the NYT
                      article. NYT is mildly left of center, at best.
                      Any publically traded corporation with billions
                      in revenue is never going to be left wing, but you are
                      such an extremist, you don't realize that. Thanks for
                      reminding me of the 2000 rip-off. I am going to go
                      donate another $500 to the Dean campaign.
2003/11/9 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10996 Activity:nil
11/8    Vote Quimby!
        http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/cpress/tv_quimby
2003/11/8-9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:10989 Activity:moderate
11/7    Liberal views force soldier out of military
        http://csua.org/u/4xk
        \_ There is no free speech in the military.  Good thing they got
           rid of this guy.
           \_ I'm ashamed to call you an American.
                \_ ITs the military, chain of command and all that stuff.
                   DUH.
                   \_ Just following orders?
                      \_ Non sequiter?
        \_ Here's a good line which motd leftists should take to heart,
           "The unfortunate aspect of this is not my demise, but their
           inability to understand or accept the opinions of others as
           different from their own."  And here we see a leftist of all people
           correctly describing the difference between the right and left in
           our little motd world.  As a conservative I understand and accept
           the opinions of the leftists here.  I simply disagree.  What I do
           not do is rant about how you're all automatically evil and wrong
           and stupid without discussion simply for thinking differently.
           Mostly I feel badly for you.  I have hope you'll one day think about
           the world with open eyes and see how it is for others and come
           around.  I'm not giving up on you.
           \_ What are your thoughts on Bush?
              \_ He's not a real conservative.  Mostly, I'm disappointed.
           \_ if only any of this were true....
           \_ I think you so-called real conservatives need to take a good
              look at how suppressing differing viewpoints is really starting
              to hurt America. Here is a case where a good, and it turns out
              accurate, young Marine was driven out for telling the truth.
              The Bush Administration is increasingly driven by ideology and
              not facts.
                        \_ There is no opinion in the military - don't you
                           understand this?  You follow the Commander in
                           Chief's orders - thats it.  If every soldier acted
                           on some whim based on the alignment of the planets
                           chaos would reign (not an effective military
              not facts.
                           machine).
              \_ We've been watching differing viewpoints get suppressed for
                 years in the media.  This is nothing new to us.  We're quite
                 aware how suppressing other viewpoints is bad for America.
                 Pot, kettle, black.  --conservative
                 \_ And your point is...?  Just because it's happened to
                    the conservative team (since all politics can clearly be
                    categorized by one of exactly two labels) doesn't make it
                    somehow magically okay or any more acceptable.  Two wrongs
                    & etc.
                 \_ When others do it, it is just as bad. It is just more
                    disturbing when those in power do it.
                    \_ Maybe you and the person above missed the other reply
                       where I said Bush isn't a real conservative and I'm
                       \_ Well, since you don't sign your fucking posts,
                          expecting people to automatically associate them
                       where I said Bush isn't a real conservative and I'm
                          as originating from the same source is a little
                          silly.
                       mostly disappointed with his actions/policy/whatever?
                       If you think Bush is a conservative, which he isn't,
                       and want to stick real conservatives with his policy
                       as if we all 100% believe in all 100% of it then you're
                       nuts.  That's a strawman argument.  I hope you can do
                       better than that.  Would it make sense for me to claim
                       that Al Sharpton represents all liberals and everything
                       he says and believes is something you all 100% believe
                       at all times, too?  Real conservatives disavowed Bush
                       about 30 days into his first term when one of his first
                       actions was to expand all government programs by 4%
                       across the board.  From that day forward he became
                       nothing more than the lesser evil of the Bush/Gore pair.
                       It's the very same media bias that conservatives
                       complain about that keeps people like you thinking that
                       conservatives like me are pro-Bush zombie ditto head
                       clones.  Real conservatives don't exist in the media.
                       We're just a caricature that your media kicks around.
                       \_ the Weekly Standard crowd aren't "real conservatives"
                          either?  ok, fine.  from now on I will identify all
                          my unusual opinions as those of a "real liberal"
                          and claim every liberal you've ever heard of isn't
                          really a liberal so you can't use any published
                          information on liberal ideology to disagree with me.
                          this is absurd.  why don't you start a new thread
                          and post the three to five most basic priciples of
                          whatever you're calling "real conservatism?"
                          I suspect you're the same person who signs their posts
                          "real conservative" periodically on the motd, and
                          some of us are genuinely curious.
                          -real transcendentalist
                          \_ I don't write for the weekly standard.  They have
                             nothing to do with anything.  It's a for-profit
                             publication of no interest to me.  Some basics:
                             1) smaller government, lower taxes 2) no
                             religious hijacking of government in *either*
                             direction which means the 10 commandments being
                             posted in a school or court room is not a crime,
                             but we shouldn't have prayer in school either, 3)
                             no business in people's personal lives which
                             includes sex, abortion, euthanasia, and other
                             medical decisions, however that also means being
                             gay or whatever doesn't make you a protected
                             class either, 4) the end of government created
                             poverty:  give a man a fish and he eats for a day
                             (and then comes back for another fish tomorrow).
                             There's more but that should give you some idea.
                             The core concept is the government stands in the
                             way of personal achievement and progress for all
                             people once it grows beyond a certain size and
                             exceeds it's mandate as laid out in the
                             constitution.  We need government, because
                             without it we'd have anarchy leading to
                             dictatorship, but we don't need a government that
                             has the power and the will to destroy and steal
                             our freedoms through the sheer size of government
                             and the average citizen's inability to fight
                             against it to protect our most basic rights.
                             Would you like to provide a few summary points of
                             what a real liberal is?
                             \_ actually, I don't consider myself a "real
                                liberal" at all, I just said that to point
                                out the flaw in your argument.  I basically
                                agree with most of the points you claim for
                                "real conservatism".  However, I don't
                                believe you can claim point (3) above for
                                coservatives.  If you look at the opinions
                                of the vast majority of republicans vs.
                                democrats, there is not question that the
                                republicans are the worse party for civil
                                \_   waco, elian, creating swat teams
                                     within virtually every Fed department
                                     (eg. IRS, Forest Service, FEMA)
                                     rural cleansing through endangered
                                     species, etc..... what Pres did this?
                                     The Patriot Act was written
                                     during the Clinton administration and
                                     contains provisions proposed much earlier,
                                     law enforcement has always wanted power.
                                     The Act merely codified actions
                                     used by law enforcement for decades.
                                     The problem is government, period.
                                     If you are concerned with government
                                     intrusion why do you insist on giving
                                     the Fed more power and money to pass
                                     more laws to regulate more aspects of our
                                     lives.  This is common sense, freedom
                                     and a social welfare state are
                                     irreconcilable.  The latter always
                                     marches inexorably towards tyranny.
                                        \_ How many Canadians do you know?  How
                                           many got sick?  The ones I know came
                                           to the US to get medical care
                                           because their oppressive government
                                           doesn't allow them to purchase
                                           better care than the government
                                           offers.  They are forced into using
                                           sub standard care and must cross to
                                           our country to restore their free
                                           access to western medical standards
                                           even though ours has sunk since
                                           HMOs took over and destroyed most
                                           of it, it's still better than there.
                                     \_ Yeah, like Canada.  Those Canadians
                                        with their welfare state and
                                        socialized medicine are so oppressed.
                                     Philosophical support for a small
                                     government inherently protects
                                     liberty... this always has been
                                     provenance of the right (though there
                                     are many, probably a majority, of
                                     RINOs in government).  The 'opinions
                                     of ...' is a very vague term.
                                liberties.  To claim otherwise is an analogous
                                arguement to that made by leftists who
                                claim all the evils of communism in the 20th
                                century were by governments that were
                                "not real communists."  I don't buy into either
                                argument.  Your claims for "real conservatism"
                                sound a lot like William Safire's brand of
                                 "conservatism."  Unfortunately, you and
                                 William Safire appear to be the only
                                 "conservatives" in America who give a
                                 damn about civil liberties.  My point about
                                 real liberals above was just this: just
                                 because I like to call myself a liberal and
                                 believe in smaller government and fewer
                                 \_ Once again, you only see the conservatives
                                    as the leftist media presents them.  It
                                    *really* pisses me off to read the pseudo
                                    right wing op/ed chick in the Chronical
                                    who makes the most idiotic points in the
                                    most illogical manner possible.  We exist
                                    and we are not happy with Bush but it's
                                    better than anything the minority party
                                    has to offer so we hold our nose and vote.
              not facts.
        \_ Here's a good line which motd right-wingers should take to heart,
           "The unfortunate aspect of this is not my demise, but their
           inability to understand or accept the opinions of others as
           different from their own."  And here we see a leftist of all people
           correctly describing the difference between the right and left in
           our little motd world.  As a liberal I understand and accept
           the opinions of the right-wingers here.  I simply disagree.  What I
           do not do is rant about how you're all automatically evil and wrong
           and stupid without discussion simply for thinking differently.
           Mostly I feel badly for you.  I have hope you'll one day think about
           the world with open eyes and see how it is for others and come
           around.  I'm not giving up on you.
           \_ if only any of this were true....
                             what a real liberal is?
                                 subsidies does not make that a liberal ideology
                                 no matter how much I wish it was. so I don't
                                 call myself a liberal.
2003/11/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10982 Activity:nil
11/7    http://www.spamlaws.com/state/ca1.html
2003/11/7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic] UID:10976 Activity:high
11/7    http://discover.npr.org/features/feature.jhtml?wfId=1494600
        More proof that evil old dead rich white business people are out
        to destroy the left in this country.  I think we should raise taxes
        to match this amount in support.  It's only fair.
        \_ Governor Wilson, is that you?
           \_ Yes, I've kept my account all these years after graduation.  I've
              never forgotten my CS root at Cal.  --GW
2003/11/5 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10957 Activity:nil
11/4    http://www.cnn.com/2003/SHOWBIZ/TV/11/05/offbeat.pornstar.tv.ap/index.html
        \_ http://csua.org/u/4wf
2003/11/5 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10956 Activity:nil
11/4    When is the next election? I wanna vote for someone who'll undo the
        mess we're in, including: post-war mess, environment mess, economy,
        abortion, and everything else. Thanks.
        \_ California primaries are in March.  Federal Presidential Election
           is in October.  CA requires 15 days notice to register to vote,
                 \_ ???? Another person who suddenly became aware of politics
                    since Clinton.
           not sure what the national requirement is.
        \_ IFILE!  I mean, DEAN!
           \_ Don't you mean ED?!  ED! for president!  He's the standard!
        \_ Yeah, I trust you know who to pick when you don't even know when
           the next election is. Just how many years of politics did you
           study that you think a new President will magically "undo" the
           economy.
2003/11/1-2 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10898 Activity:low
11/1    How many of you libertarian fuckheads are planning to go try to
        ruin the great state of New Hampshire?
        http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/27/national/27LIBE.html
        \_ I loved the major party reactions.
           GOP: "Great to have you, guys!  Come on over!"
           DNC: <trembling voice> "The best way to describe these people is
                                   anarchists..."
             -- libertarian fuckhead
        \_ What's so fucking great about NH?  Their only claim to fame is
           voting second in the primaries and being almost the smallest
           state.  Is there *anything* they do right?
           \_ Libertarians have a hardon over the slogan on their license plate:
              "Live free or die"
              \_ And the lack of state income tax makes them ejaculate.
                 \_ Lye, is that you?
              \_ I'm guessing all the rightwing assholes at Dartmouth
                 have something to do with it also. It's probably the most
                 right-wing of the Ivy League colleges.
2003/10/31-11/1 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10887 Activity:nil
10/31   John, why did you move the switzerland and became a swiss citizen?
        Is it because of the fat american women here totally turned you off?
        \_ He's not a swiss citizen.  The swiss don't naturalize first gen
           immigrants.
           \_ Introduction.
                you are an idiot.
              Proof
                my aunt became a swiss citizen some years ago.
              References
                http://live-in-switzerland.com/e/faq/citizenship.html
              Author Bio
                -ali.
              \_ make sure to bring your committee members donuts
        \_ I moved here because my girlfriend lives here.  I'm a born dual
           citizen, but you can very well get a passport.  After 5 years,
           you can get a 'C' or unlimited 'B' permit, which is the same
           as citizenship without voting rights, regardless.  I really like
           it, the climate is nice, Zurich is a great city, I'm close to
           a lot of cool places, there's virtually no crime, the trains run
           on time, taxes are low, I'm an hour away from 5 great snowboarding
           areas, and the girls are cute and pretty stylish (on the whole.)
           Downsides are having to be tolerant of some pretty questionable
           attitudes (no difference from elsewhere), and lack of good cheap
           Chinese food.  Why do you ask?  -John
           \_ No voting rights?  Why don't you let illegals vote and get
              driver's licenses like more civilized countries like the US
              and California?
              \_ Because it's Europe. Unlike the USA/California where the
                 right to vote, drive and own guns is an inalienable right
                 even though most of the population don't know how to
                 properly perform any of the three.
                 \_ *shrug* it's got its problems.  I just find it to be
                    a really pleasant place to live.  There are a lot of
                    Americans and Brits who bring their families here because
                    it "just works".  -John
                    \_ Yeah but they can't vote like here.
2003/10/30 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:10854 Activity:very high
10/29   This Paul Krugman guy sounds like a commie.
        http://www.nybooks.com/articles/16730
        \_ Krugman rocks, despite the impending denunciations and
           accusations of hating America that are sure to follow
           in this thread.  Thanks for the link.
           \_ There won't be any followups because no one reads zero context
              links or cares about Paul Krugman.
              \_ My my, very presumptuous aren't you.
                 \_ Whatever.  The only thing going on now is us bickering
                    about why others aren't bickering over the URL.  The fact
                    that no one has read it and commented on it makes it clear
                    I'm right and you're, well, just being yourself.
              \_ Obviously you weren't around last night before the thread
                 got extirpated.
                 \_ No, I wasn't.  I don't sit here 24x7 talking about Paul
                    Krugmna's latest article.
                    \_ It may come as a shock to you, but not everyone cares
                       about you.
                    \_ There. Thread was requested. Thread was restored
                       -anonymous motd uncensorer
           \_ And how did they come to power? Through
              "the increasing manipulation of the media
              and the political process by lavishly funded
              right-wing groups. Yes, Virginia, there is a
              vast right-wing conspiracy," he concludes.
              I think rather than denounce him, I ll just laugh at him.
                -- conservative
                \_ Fox News.
                   \_ How fair and balanced of you.
                  \_ I think this is really funny.  Whenever someone wants
                     to talk "right wing conspiracy" in the media they
                     ALWAYS say Fox news.  Errr.. what about NYT? ABC,
                     NBC, AP, and UP, and every other news source?  The're
                     all extremely left wing.  One news station makes a
                     conspiracy, huh?
                     \_ umm... "extremely left wing!?!?"  Are you kidding me?
                        Holy shit. you _really_ need to wake up and think a
                        bit objectively.  None of them dared criticize
                        Bush until recently.  The _most_ they could be
                        is a little left, if that.  But "extremely?"  Stop
                        reading crazy ass neo-con rags and start thinking
                        for yourself.
              \_ A conservative who is getting screwed in the arse by a
                 huge budget deficit and loving every minute of it?
                 \_ I am not getting screwed in the ass.  I am getting my
                    taxes back.  At any rate, the government needs a constant
                    deficit as an incentive to become more efficient
                    (much like a corporation needs constant scarcity).
                    Without scarcity or deficits, neither governments nor
                    corporations have any need to innovate or solve
                    problems elegantly and cheaply.  They will simply expand.
                      -- conservative
                   \_ Nah, more likely they will just do another "read my
                      lips no new taxes" to solve the deficit problem.
                      Under Clinton, with a budget surplus, number of
                      government employees and government spending
                      both decreased according to the WSJ.
                       \_ Think about it, who wants to work for the gubmint
                          when times are good?  What for?
                          \_ gubmint?  is that the racket Junior is running?
                             Minting the country's future away with lots of
                             IOUs?
                   \_ Your logic is flawed.
                      \_ Brilliant.  Perhaps you'd like to elaborate?
                   \_ Under your logic, Iraqi government should be the
                       most efficient government on earth, as it is drawning
                       with debt, so much so that USA is asking Russian, and
                       French to forgive their debt... why?
                       \_ You are confusing necessary and sufficient
                          conditions.  A cash starved government is
                          a necessary, but not a sufficient condition for
                          a small, effective, workable government.  A
                          government flushed with cash always results in
                          corruption and inefficiency, simply because
                          there is no incentive for a government to produce
                          anything, as it is not driven by profit like
                          a business.  However, more than just a shortage
                          of funds is needed for a government to be good
                          (things like a tradition of democracy, rule of law,
                          etc).
                    \_ Nah, more likely they will just do a "read my lips
                       no new taxes" to solve the deficit problem.
           \_ unfortunately, his voice doesn't have much influence in terms
                of policy.
2003/10/29 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:29595 Activity:high
10/28   UC Berkeley professor George Lakoff tells how conservatives use language
        to dominate politics.
        http://csua.org/u/4u2
        \_ I think the particulars of his metaphor are WAY off. -- ilyas
        \_ They need to learn the meaning of the word "brevity"
        \_ Uhm yeah and leftists don't.  Turn on cnn sometime.
           \_ What makes you think Ted Turner is a leftist?
              \_ Bahwahahhaha!!  AMC?
                 \_ AMC is not a rightwing asshole.  go suck a dick.  -AMC
                    \_ You're not the AMC.  The AMC is funny.
                 \_ Um...
        \_ He's created a 'think tank'.  Which ideas are these exactly?
           Victory of the proletariat?  Universal health care, 100 % income
           redistribution?  Enhanced race baiting and vote buying?
           You are seeing (I hope) the death throes of Socialism / Communism.
           \_ Hey, how do we make the freeper guy go away?
              \_ well, when you figure out how to make "the freeper guy" go
                 away let the rest of us know so we can deal with the
                 tens of millions of these fuckers who are holding our
                 country hostage.
                 \_ yeah, the majority of voters, buncha fuckers deciding how
                    the country is run when it should really be the elite
                    liberal minority.  we all know elections are just to keep
                    the people in fly over country from spreading east and
                    west and shooting us all from their suvs and pickups while
                    we're out enjoying nature, riding our linux powered bikes.
                    we should elect hillary empress because she knows whats
                    best for everyone.  it takes a village idiot to vote (D).
        \_ Well, he's right that most liberals sound like idiots.  I certainly
           am tired of hearing the same old lame propaganda from the 1890s.
           Or wait, does that make me an evil capitalist oppressor, or just
           a racist?
           \_ both.  you're also a dead rich white male fascist as well even
              if we know from (white man's) history that you were brilliant
              but poor and gave up what little you had including often your
              life for this country.  go look up what happened to the signers
              of the D of I.  several were shot/executed, and almost all of
              them died poor after either having everything they owned
              confiscated or donating it to the cause of freedom.  fucking
              dead rich white male capitalist oppressor racist bastards.
        \_ 'Taxes are what you pay to be an American, to live in a civilized
           society that is democratic and offers opportunity, and where there's
           an infrastructure that has been paid for by previous taxpayers.'
           Funny, what percentage of the (much lower) taxes in CA where spent
           on "infrastructure" in the 60s and what percentage is spent now?
           (answer: over 30, much less than 3 respectively) and who was it
           (need you ask?) that supported enacting a 3% minimum? and who
           opposed?  hint:  they need that money to give to those on "the dole"
           \_ NO FACTS!  DO NOT BRING FACTS INTO THIS!  NO FACTS!  Racist!
2003/10/29 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:10839 Activity:nil
10/29   Black woman getting Borked?
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1009019/posts
        In that speech, Brown said that "where government moves in,
        community retreats, civil society disintegrates, and our
        ability to control our destiny atrophies. The result is:
        families under siege, war in the streets, unapologetic
        expropriation of property, the precipitous decline of
        the rule of law, the rapid rise of corruption, the
        loss of civility and the triumph of deceit."
        \_ Racist
2003/10/19 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29579 Activity:nil
10/18   It's a guud teeme-a tu be-a a Repoobleecun.  Ve-a tuuk CA.  Ve-a tuuk
        FL.  Ve'fe-a gut ell 3 brunches ooff gufernment.  In 2004 ve'll hefe-a
        un incoombent preseedent roonneeng egeeenst ieezeer un unelecteble-a
        ultra leeberel oor a retured Repoobleecun generel es zee frunt mun
        fur zee meenurity perty.  Bork Bork Bork!
        \_ hi!  go fuck yourself!  You've destroyed the economy, and are
           doing a great job of destroying the government.   I think if
           Bush wins another term things will get bad enough that the
           government will actually collapse into civil war.  when that
           happends i'll enjoy killing fucks like you.
        \_ You already took CA long ago - this state has been very busy
           dismantling the school system and building a gigantic prison
           system for over 20 years - Gray Davis represented the status quo
           and was about as Republican a Democrat as you could get.
        \_ Mmmm, yummy tasty troll.
2003/10/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10640 Activity:nil
10/15   Finally, an article the helps all you out there understand those
        who chose to make a leap of faith (I don't but I still vote that way)
        http://slate.msn.com/id/2089641
        \_ cool, learn something new
                        -non Christian outcast
        \_ "Based on their income and education levels, Jews ought to be
            voting Republican...."  Say what?  What is he saying about Jewish
            education levels and income?
            \_ That they remind him of Idaho???
               \_ Hey, you're on a roll today.  Do you have any books with
                  lists of jokes about blacks, mexicans, and women, too?
            \_ And the final nail in that coffin is that people vote based on
               what they believe in and their own goals, not based on their
               race, religion, or other tidy little demographic title.
2003/10/14 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10618 Activity:high
10/13   The Soviet Republic of Texas
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21839-2003Oct13.html
        \_ Well, all the partisan posturing aside, what is the right way
           to create districts?  -- ilyas
           \_ Don't let politicians do it.
              \_ yep.
              \_ This is avoiding the question.  The article implied that
                 high reelection rates are somehow bad, equating high turnover
                 with healthy democracy.  It's not clear that this is right.
                 While low turnover may be indicative of lack of
                 While low turnover may be indicated of lack of
                 democracy, like in Soviet Union, it may also be indicative
                 of voter satisfaction.  Also, assuming a particular state
                 has a definite political majority, does it not seem fair
                 to district in such a way as to reflect this?  (Not to say
                 Texas is necessarily such a state).  The writer of the
                 article clearly didn't like Texan redistricting, but failed
                 to point out a standard to which districting should adhere.
                 It's easy to be a critic.
                 \_ It depends on why there are high reelection rates.  In the
                    case of highly gerrymandered states like Ca and soon to be
                    Texas, it is because the minority party voters are being
                    disenfranchised.  Their candidates *can't* win because
                    the lines are drawn to guarantee this.
                 \_ Fair enough-- it's also easy to go along with the
                    rowdies when they kvetch and scream loudly.  Ignoring
                    the article for a moment, the correct way to create
                    districts is the way it was originally intended: by
                    population numbers, not politics.  Each state has a
                    number of Representatives based on its population;
                    create districts to reflect that and let the voters
                    decide themselves on the person they want to elect.
                    When compared with a fair and balanced plan like this,
                    DeLay's plan to redistrict along voting lines is
                    exposed as the naked power-grab that it is.
                    \_ You are pointing out features of districting that
                       any districting plan whatsoever has.  'Letting the
                       voters decide' sounds great in theory, but how do you
                       actually draw the lines?  In each geographic area, there
                       are political minorities and majorities.  How is
                       districting to be done?
                       \_ Start at the border.  Draw a modified rectangle
                          that incorporates the shape of the border. Make
                          the rectangle large enough to incorporate a
                          fraction of the population that reflects the
                          population of the state divided by the number
                          representatives allowed.  Add more rectangles
                          until you've run out of districts.  Adjust
                          rectangles to equally absorb segments of population
                          not incorporated into existing rectangles.
                          \_ What if political affiliations are geographically
                             segregated?  (Not a very farfetched assumption,
                             btw).
                             \_ As long as you pick an arbitrary (random,
                                perhaps?) corner to begin with, you'll have
                                at least taken a stab at fairness.  If the
                                end result is a corner where one party or
                                the other holds significant sway, then so
                                be it.  Vox populi, and all that.
                          \_ The problem with this is people aren't equally
                             spread throughout the state or even counties.
                             We already have county lines.  We should use
                             those.  Larger counties elect more people, while
                             the least populated elect the minimum of 1.
                             \_ First, counties are geographical, not
                                population-based, so there's no even
                                distribution whatsoever there.  Second,
                                how do you determine who gets sent from a
                                county?  By divvying up the county into
                                smaller districts?  You'll get a great
                                picture of each district, but you'll lose
                                your view of the state as a whole.
                                \_ But these are supposed to be local reps to
                                   the state level government.  I don't see
                                   anything wrong with my local rep to the
                                   state being representative of who I am and
                                   what my local concerns are.  If my local
                                   rep doesn't represent me, who does?  Why
                                   did I vote for them?  Part of the reason
                                   so few vote is the feeling of disconnect
                                   between the people we vote for and what
                                   \_ 1) Local rep is a misnomer: your local
                                      rep represents your district, not
                                      your immediate locale. 2) If your
                                      district rep doesn't represent you or
                                      fails to represent you after being
                                      elected, campaign to have him/her
                                      recalled or ejected at the next
                                      election.  If you can convince the
                                      majority of your peers, you'll be on
                                      your way.
                 It's easy to be a critic.
                                   they do afterwards.
        \_ PLEASE! Come to Cali, where re-districting the opposite way gets
           no attention. Use your head - Cali - massive gun restrictions -
           liberal bastion, Texas - exposed gun permitted - the opposite.
           \_ What the hell are you trying to say?
        \_ The problem with politicians creating districts is that over the
           years, the majority party will create districts such that the
           minority party becomes the zero party.  Texas Republicans are
           following in the footsteps of California Democrats on this one.
           Republicans make roughly 40% of CA voters but have zero state wide
           posts and a continously shrinking number of local ones.  The
           majority party in every state always uses redistricting to punish
           the minority party and provide guaranteed lockin of their own for
           future elections.  You can't allow politicians to draw the lines.
           The really sickeningly gerrymandered stuff eventually ends up in
           front of a judge but only after decades of abuse.  The mildly
           sick stuff never goes to court.
           \_ The problem with your theory is that the California Republicans
              agreed with the redistricting of CA in 2000 and supported it.
              It passed 65-8. Only 8 voted against it.
              \_ No, that only confirms it.  They needed a few votes to pass
                 and created enough majority Republican districts to keep
                 those few folks in power.  Everyone else gets screwed.  The
                 district lines should not be a political issue.  It's too
                 important to trust to the people most affected by it.
            \_ Right symptoms, wrong problem. Gerrymandering creates districts
              which can easily be labelled Republican or Democratic. So each
              representative is less likely to vote counter to his party lest
              draw the ire of the local voters, thus creating more gridlock.
               \_ I cover this in my reply above.  Yes, some in the minority
           liberal bastion, Texas - exposed gun permitted - the opposite.
                  party will vote to save their own ass.  They'll get burned
                  later.
2003/10/12-13 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10602 Activity:nil
10/11   Many soldiers, same letter:
        http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20031011/frontpage/121390.shtml
        \_ Yeah and they all vote the same, too!  We should make sure they
           can't vote and corrupt our democracy anymore.
2003/10/11 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Gay] UID:29572 Activity:very high
10/10   Fiery Black Conservative Running For Congress in North Carolina
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/999124/posts
        \_ Is this some homosexual code word?
                \_ is this called projection?
2003/10/9 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:10562 Activity:nil
10/9    Texas Republican Party Platform for 2000:
        http://csua.org/u/4o6
        How can Democrats be "left wing loonies" and yet Republicans that
        propose platforms like this are moderate and reasonable?  Check out
        especially the bits about abolishing the income tax, taking away the
        Supreme Court's ability to determine the Constitionality of a law
        under the bill of rights, and the bit about re-annexing Panama.
        Look here for a good summary:
        http://www.calpundit.com/archives/002393.html
        And here for a California Democratic Platform for comparison:
        http://12.158.174.200/Platform.pdf
        \_ Sounds like the AIP platform.  Wow.
        \_ What's wrong with abolishing the income tax?  It's an abomination,
           at least in its current form.  -John
           \_ Why is it an abomination?  It needs to more progressive,
              especially the SS payroll tax, but other than that I don't see it
              being worthy of that particular adjective.  Besides, John,
              aren't you in Europe, home of the VAT and the 45% marginal rate?
        \_ The 2002 platform (a pdf), contains a ringing endorsement of the
           Pres.'s "War on Terrorism," concluded with an exuberant Texan
           "LET'S ROLL!"  Yeah, they're all level-headed.
        \_ " we urge our legislators to fully investigate and prosecute,
             where appropriate, any breeches in national security"
           I hate it when pants end up in the national security, too.
           Sheesh, can't these guys afford a proof reader?
2003/10/9 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10551 Activity:nil
10/9    Is it possible to recall the president?
        \_ ohmygod it's a troll
        \_ I believe that's called impeachment.
           \_ That's a different process -- there's no federal mechanism
              for an electorate-initiated impeachment as such. The best you
              can do is raise enough ruckus in enough congressional districts
              that your congressman catches wind of it and gets the idea
              that that's what his people want.
           \_ Is there such thing as impeachment to the CA governor then?
        \_ No. The recall process in CA is state law. There is no process
           of that sort in US federal law. See above.
           \_ BTW for those trollers who think this recall law is unique
              it's on the books for 34 states and DC.
              \_ And has only been used twice to recall a governor.
2003/10/9 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10541 Activity:kinda low
10/8    "Arnold Schwarzenegger strongly suggested that he would call on
        President Bush to provide federal aid to California." -nytimes
        Crap! Stupid Californians need us non-Californians to bail them
        out again.
        \_ I hope the Pres. refuses.  Though some might say that the reason for
           letting the states stew was to prevent encouraging the states to run
           for federal aid whenever they have trouble.  However, we did oust our
           Governor, so we are trying.  Maybe that's an argument to rethink an
           aid package.
        \_ But that would leave less money for his golfing buddies who are
           rebuilding iraq!
        \_ CA gives more to the Feds than it receives each year.
           \_ So does my state.  What's your point?  That CA shouldn't pony
              up for its share of national defense?
              \_ Which state is that?
              \_ No, bitch, that both your state and ours should get a
                 larger chunk of that sweet federal pie.
                 \_ Keep your dirty paws off my pie!
              \_ But! CA voters, voters on the West Coast mostly, like to
                 throw out their federally elected officials fairly often
                 that they build almost no seniority. Which is why CA gets
                 back so little. Look W.VA. miles of new highways going to
                 cities with hardly any people. Why? KKK Byrd
                 \_ Boxer and Feinstein have no seniority?  Train harder
                    young grasshopper.  (also see Pete Stark, Nancy Pelosi...)
                    \_ Yeah and look what they bring back... see any bases?
                       Any kind of bacon?
           \_ CA should secede from the union.  We can survive on our own.
              We are the 5th largest economy in the world.  The fed tax
              we pay should cover our state deficit.
              \_ i guess that's one way ahnold can be president
              \_ Yeah... try that.. you forget about defense. Except for
                 San Diego, there's not much left. Even San Diego lost the NTC
                 and those enviro nuts want the carriers out of there.
                 \_ What could possibly threaten California militarily
                    except the US? And no amount of military force
                    could defend against that threat, anyway.
                    \_ Mexico?
                 \_ Don't need defense when you're no longer "USA", and
                    not poking you nose into middleast affairs.
                    \_ Let's see.  North Korea invades the Republic of
                       California and then put tons of short-range missles here
                       pointing to the USA.
                       \_ Not possible.  USA invades and occupies north korea
                          before they have a chance to invade new CA.  You
                          think USA would let north korea to reach that far?
                          \_ Of course not.  US would just slap CA around
                             like it does to Mexico.
                             \_ CA != Mexico.
                             \_ They _want_ us to secede.  They'd invade,
                                slap martial law on us, and never have
                                to worry about winning the CA vote again.
                                \_ We have no oil.  No worries.
                                   \_ ??? We have oil, onshore and off.
                       \_ Why doesn't North Korea invade Canada, then?
2003/10/8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29570 Activity:nil
10/7    Florida Voters say it is a Conspiracy not to let us vote
        http://www.angelfire.com/ak2/intelligencerreport/rightwing29.html
2003/10/8 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:29568 Activity:high
10/7    I'm glad to see so many maoderates and conservatives out there voting
        today.  I can vote my principles without seeing a slime like Davis or
        Cruz be governor.  Nader in '04!
        \_ You should always vote your principles. If you don't then who will?
           \_ almost everyone who voted for any of the top three candidates
              probably voted for `least damage`, not for their principles...
              \_ That means that 80% (or something) of voters could've put
                 their guy in office, but didn't. That's what they get.
        \_ Voting by principle is for suckers!!1!  I voted for the GR0P3R!1
           \_ heh
2003/10/8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10536 Activity:nil
10/8    Carter power will soon go away
        I will be Fuhrer one day
        I will command all of you
        Your kids will meditate in school
        California! Uber Alles!
        Uber Alles! CALIFORNIA!
        Zen fascists will control you
        100% natural
        You will jog for the master race
        And always wear the happy face
        Close your eyes can't happen here
        Big Bro' on white horse is near
        The hippies won't come back you say
        Mellow out or you will pay!
        California! UBER ALLES!
        UBER ALLES! CALIFORNIA!
        \_ the version from Convenience is probably more appropriate now.
           or the remix about Wilson.
           \_   I'm so proud to know the Great Communicator
                Wanna be known as the Great Incarcerator
                I'll blow environmentalists away
                And I'll be the fuhrer some day
                I'll keep cuttin' Public Education
                even though we rang 45th in the nation
                I've got a plan for all the minorities
                Send'em to the California Youth Authorities
                From San Francisco Urban Elementary
                to Pelican Bay State Penitentiary
                There they can work for the master race
                and always wear a happy face
                Close your eyes, it can't happen here
                Big Brother in a squad car's comin' near
                Come enjoy the surf and the sun
                and help California number one !
                \_ that's the one.  who wrote that(the remix)?
                   i have a pirated tape copy.
                   \_ Disposable Heroes of Hiphoprisy, appearing
                      on the Virus 100 tribute album to the DKs.
                      \_ thanks!
        \_ [ HEY.  WRONG THREAD.  I said buzz off. ]
2003/10/8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10534 Activity:nil
10/8    how many votes did Georgie get?
        0% (1,930): http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2003/recall/pages/governor
        \_ That's 192900% more than you did.
        \_ she should run for president next.
        \_ less than Angelyne
        \_ "Brains, beauty, leadership" as a campaign slogan?  Sorry, but
           that's lame.
2003/10/8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10533 Activity:nil
10/8    Media myth of large turnout for recall...Secretary of State's site
        shows 7.78 million voted in the recall.  Look at this pdf:
        http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/sov/2002_general/sum.pdf
        7.74 million voted in the 2002 general...So I'd hardly call
        40,000 extra votes a "record turnout."
        \_ Yeah, I checked some numbers too - for a (2000 census)
           population of 34 million, 7.74 million is not a very high
           percentage (even considering the portion of 34 million not
           old enough/registered/etc to vote)
        \_ According to:
           http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/sov/2002_general/reg.pdf
           the turnout for the Nov 2002 election was 50.57% of registered
           voters.
           \_ More disturbing is the 36.05% of elligible voters.
              \_ Don't you mean "voting-age population", which includes
                 a lot of people who can't vote?
2003/10/8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10527 Activity:high
10/8    Check this out:
        http://www.fuckedstate.com/archives/mapN4031007215410.gif
        I think its time the North Coast of California woke the fuck up
        and seceded from the rest of the state.  We can call ourselves
        "Marijuania."
        \_ Good riddance.
        \_ Um, where do you think N. California starts?  I say North of
           Sacremento.  Which pretty much all heavily voted for the recall,
           so I don't see your point.  If you had said western CA...
           \_ I said NORTH COAST.  READ.
2003/10/8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10522 Activity:nil
10/7    Now that the election is over, how is California going to fix its
        budget deficit?  I hope the state won't go bankrupt requiring my
        tax dollars to bail it out.
        \_ We already are bankrupt.  Too late for that.  Last I saw we were
           $8 billion in the hole since the courts didn't allow the shenanigans
           that pushed that into next year's budget.  Cuts & taxes are the
           only choices left.
           \_ By bankrupt, I mean the state defaulting on its bonds.
              \_ Oh.  Even without money that's still a long time off because
                 we pay our bonds before we pay anything else.
2003/10/8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10520 Activity:high
10/7    Why is the Bay Area 80% on No on recall? What makes the Bay Area
        different? Education (cuz we're smarter than everyone else)? Cuz
        of our Cal/StanfUrd education? Cuz of our jobs? I just don't see
        a strong connection in any of the above I mentioned.    -confused.
        \_ Gays and hippies. The people in Silicon Valley are alarmingly
           to the right like good businesspeople tend to be.
           \_ right. and that's why SV voted down the recall and for Cruz?
              \_ I was referring more to the business leaders.
        \_ Groupthink.  Most who want to think differently have already left;
           there's no good reason to stay in the Bay Area when you can get
           it better elsewhere.
        \_ Education has nothing to do with it.  The BA is just very left.
           You don't need to look any deeper than that.  This is a place where
           people talk openly about how "all republicans are evil and I hate
           them all!" on a daily basis even though most of them never met a
           republican.  Maybe they have a friend who mismarked a ballot once.
           \_ People who are highly educated tend to vote Democratic.
              http://www.thelonious.com/ephemera/voter_education.html
              \_ Academia is full of leftists.  I'm not at all surprised they
                 vote left.  Where's the shocker?
        \_ We spend our money on books and whiskey, they spend it on
           boob jobs and movies. Who do you think is smarter?
           \_ Who is 'we' and 'they'?
        \_ Don't be confused.  That's what I expected.  BA people are
           well-informed.  Most realized the problems in CA are not all because
           of Davis.  These are national problems.
           \_ no...there are too many women in the BA.
              \_ I believe it was nearly split for women voters.  Something
                 like 52:48 or so last I saw.  It certainly isn't because
                 BA people are brilliant and open minded.  I've been around
                 and never met a bigger bunch of self righteous knuckle
                 draggers anywhere.  It's ok to be arrogant if you really
                 *are* better than everyone else.  The people in the BA are
                 no better than elsewhere; worse because they think they are.
        \_ Yes, BA residents are a lot more well educated than the residents
           in the south (Latinos, blacks, and Korean gangs). In fact we
           make more $ and have more prestigious jobs and most of us own
           properties that are valued at least 2X as high as the properties
           in the south. In general, South is full of hicks and North rules.
           History has proved this over and over again. Confederates are
           hicks and Unions rule. South Americans are hicks and North
           Americans rules. South Hemispherians are hicks and North
           Hemispherians rule. Southern Californians are hicks and Northern
           Californians rule. So yes, we are vastly SUPERIOR and hence
           Hemispherians rule. So yes, we are vastly SUPERIOR and hence
           we are really better than everyone else.
           \_ No more educated or rich than people in, say, Orange County.
              What did you think when houses cost more in the South, which
              was the case forever until recently? In fact, for equivalent
           we are really better than everyone else.
              neighborhoods I think they still do.
2003/10/7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29559 Activity:nil
10/6    This is pretty fuckin' awful.
        http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,60713,00.html
        \_ You've got no sense of perspective.  That's all bullshit.  *This*
           is what "pretty fuckin' awful" means:
           http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/2530446/detail.html
           \_ you're a self-righteous prick. why don't i one-up you with say,
              the kitty genovese incident? and no one bring up hitler now...
           \_ many things are awful.  see ny'er below.
           \_ makes me ashamed to be a human being.  why would anyone
              do something so horrible?  that's AWFUL.
              \_ you're a pansy. as people exposed to american media, we
                 should all be desensitized to all sorts of violence by now.
                 now excuse me while i go kick a puppy.
                 \_ agree with comment, but not example.  The american media
                    won't even show us the results of what Bush did in Iraq.
2003/10/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10512 Activity:nil
10/7    Remember when you're in the voting booth today: it will be your
        fault afterwards if everything gets more fucked up.  A vote against
        the recall means more of the same.  A vote for Cruz means more of
        the same x10.  A vote for Arnold is a vote for gridlock.  If you
        really want to change the course of CA, then you have to start at
        the top and do it for real.  This goes double for you jobless or
        underemployed people.  The welfare state never created a job for
        anyone.
        \_ so what you're really saying(since Arnie, Davis and Bustamante are
           the only candidates with a chance) is that if you want to change
           anything, you have to vote out the crooks in the legislature
           in the next real election.
           \_ Won't happen.  The ledge in California is just as gerrymandered
              as in any other state.
           \_ Yes.  However, due to the incredibly gerrymandered lines in this
              state, there's no chance of that happening either.
        \_ Yes, please do vote for McClintock. We're counting on it.
            -- Democrat.
           \_ I did and was happy to do so.  The worst that will happen is
              Cruz will fuck up the state for the rest of Davis' term and
              that'll be that.  As a real conservative I have no need for
              faux conservative-lite like Arnold.  If I can't get the real
              thing, it doesn't matter which fraud is in office.
2003/10/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10509 Activity:nil
10/7    Just voted in oakland, they are using some sort of Windows-based
        e-vote machine and javacard. No paper trail. No auditing. This
        is subject to tinkering.
        \_ of course, paper would never, ever be subject to tinkering.
        \_ Fear not, no one involved is smart enough to tinker with it.
           \_ Hah. You think?
              http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,60713,00.html
                \_ Yeah right, like any poll worker is going to ever be able
                   to figure out how to rig it when they can barely figure
                   out how to run it properly.  These aren't rocket scientists
                   running the polling stations.
                \_ MSCAPI & the card middleware are actually surprisingly
                   robust;  I'd put a lot of trust in their inviolability.
                   That's not to say anything about other components of the
                   OS, or the human factor, though.  Also, it isn't
                   necessarily a javacard or even smart card--from the sounds
                   of that article, they could just be using a regular chip
                   storage card (like European payphone cards.)  -John
2003/10/4-5 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10471 Activity:nil
10/4    I love motdlogic.  If someone suggested here that a bass guitar player
        would make an excellent software engineer without any training, you'd
        laugh him off the forum.  But a bad action movie actor to run the
        the world's fifth largest economy?  That's a-ok!
        \_ Yeah, I've reconsidered and now Arnie is my last-place choice for
           replacement. A guy who knows nothing, won't debate, and doesn't even
           have any record of leadership (being an actor is about following
           directions), not got my vote.
           \_ You forgot the number one rule: anyone the press hates *that*
              much has to be doing *something* right.
              \_ yeah, like Saddam, or Hitler
        \_ Welcome to democracy.
        \_ he's also ahead in the polls in the most populous state in the
           U.S. i don't see why you're blameing the motd. he's probably
           less popular on the motd than in california at large.
        \_ So should we only vote for economists or politicians?  I'd be fine
           with only voting for economists.  But since when do economists run
           for public office?
        \_ This is contrary to what was intended when this country was founded.
           The idea was that serving in public office was a duty, like jury
           duty, not a career.  They never intended for career politicians to
           exist.  Term limits were an attempt to resurrect the concept but
           the term limit laws didn't go far enough.  Right idea, though.
           \_ Obviously you know nothing about government. Term limits
              are an exceedingly bad idea, and it is what got us into
              this mess. The government is the largest entity you have
              to deal with, and people need time to learn the ropes.
              If term limits were implemented in the federal level
              the House would be a non-functional body. There needs
              to be, and should be career politicians. If you don't like
              it then maybe we should hand over government to you and you
              can try to deal with the daily headaches of governing.
              \_ The House is already a non-functioning body.  WTF are you
                 talking about?  It's *you* who doesn't know how the government
                 works.  You think it was really cool to have a doddering vet
                 of the War of 1812 in there for a few centuries like Strom?
                 Get your two or three terms and get the hell out.  It should
                 be like jury duty, not a place to suck off the public teat
                 and drink in the power for life.  Shit, I even think Strom
                 was kind of funny at times and here and there he did do
                 some good things, but 60+ years in office?  Fuck that.
           \_ Though if anything, term limits as currently implemented have
              just made special interests more powerful, because newly
              elected candidates are that much more beholden to the money
              that got them into office.  We need serious, hardcore
              campaign finance laws for term limits to be effective, but the
              courts seem dead set against that.  Also, things are a lot
              different than they were in 1792.
              \_ I agree term limits alone aren't enough.  I had this very
                 same conversation over dinner tonight.  However, I don't
                 agree that things are different from 1792.  People are still
                 people, power still corrupts and absolute etc etc etc.  Some
                 things never change.  Like old crusty career politicians.
                 \_ Yeah, but the country is something like 200 times as large
                    population wise as it was in 1792. You don't think that
                    General Motors needs the same corporate structure as
                    the mom and pop grocery down the street do you? Our
                    government is large and complicated enough to require
                    career politicians. Note that I have change my position
                    on this after watching what has happend to California
                    since we instituted term limits. -AML
                    \_ Career politicians don't run the country.  The
                       beaurocrats do.  That's why you end up with so many
                       fucked up laws.  The people voting on them already don't
                       don't what they're voting on or what effect the bills
                       might have so how is being in office for a few decades
                       good for the rest of us?
              courts seem dead set against that.
2003/10/3-5 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10458 Activity:nil
10/3    Right, so I understand why nobody likes Gray Davis.  What is the
        rationale behind hating Cruz Bustamante?
        \_ He's a disloyal opportunist who's proposed giving drivers licenses
           to illegal aliens, which is a cheap way of getting the Latino
           vote.  Being the lieutenant gov, he's also part of the establishment
           that got us into this mess.
           \_ Waitasec.  So you're the lone Davis loyalist out here?  Or
              do you hate Davis but also loathe Bustamante for running
              as the only Dem replacement?
              \_ I don't want to vote for Davis or Bustamante.  To me,
                 Bustamante seems like a "right place right time" candidate.
        \_ He'll sell the state to mexico for a song?  He'll tax you so he
           can give your money to illegals?  He's "more of the same"?
           \_ He's a greasy Mexican, isn't it obvious?
              \_ RACIST FUCKER!
              \_ doesn't he pretty much tell Mexicans to vote for him because
                 he is Mexican? I've never seen that done so obviously before.
              \_ I'm praying you're being facetious here.
           \_ In other words, he was against Prop 187 and supported the
              "drivers licences for illegals" measure?  So if I'm against
              Prop 187 I should vote for him?
                \_ sure if you want to compete with mexicans for jobs
                   \_ For what jobs?  The folks benefiting from the repeal
                      of 187 aren't code monkeys.
                \_ not at all unless you're a mindless single-agenda voter.
                   that's your choice but others have more concerns.
           \_ He doesn't seem to know the difference between "immigrant" and
              "illegal immigrant".
              \_ he does.  like all pro-illegal whores he intentionally ignores
                 the difference.
           \_ He's quoted as saying "Just because the border moved doesn't
              mean the people did."
        \_ Actually 187 is another Davis "fuck you" since he promised he'd
           fight for it before he got into office and then just, oh, sort of
           didn't afterwards.  Whether or not you liked 187, you can add the
           lie to his plate.  Hey, how weird!  He did the exact same thing over
           the budget gap at the last election cycle!  Must be an anti-Davis
           conspiracy from the right wing hordes!
2003/10/3-4 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10452 Activity:nil
10/3    Does McClintock have a chance now?  I think (hope) Davis will still
        be recalled.  Perhaps the Democrat-controlled legislature will
        prevent any wacky pro-life or tax cuts for the rich moves.  Does
        anyone think there will be reliable poll data released before
        Tuesday?
        \_ No because the people have seen through the LA Times' sleazy
           last second hatchet job.  I'm still voting for Tom anyway.
        \_ Because of Arnold's confession yesterday (I'm sorry I got caught) I
           can't cast a vote for him.
           \_ http://helptom.com
           \_ Are you referring to the serial groping or the Hitler comments?
        \_ Does anyone think Republican officials are kind of steamed that
           they finally endorsed Arnold, then the LA Times showed he was such
           a cad?  Let's assume it was totally scripted by the left-wing
           Davis-sympathizers and media, too.
           \_ There was nothing new in the LA Times.
        \_ Has anyone else changed their mind due to these revelations?
           I am still voting for the recall, but was trying to decide
           whether or not to vote for Arnold. I had pretty much decided
           to, but then this came out. Now I am voting for Georgie. -AM liberal
           \_ I'm going to switch my vote from Arnie to McClintock, and
              hope to god Bustamante doesn't win.
              \_ I hope Bustamante doesn't win.  He's weak.  I am for the
                 recall, I don't think CA is better off with any these
                 candidates.
                 \_ Actually, while I'm against the recall on principle,
                    I like the effect it's had on Davis-- he's finally
                    doing some of the radical things I look for in a
                    liberal candidate.  If another recall would make him
                    declare amnesty for illegal migrant workers, legalize
                    dope, and put together a statewide universal health-
                    care system, I'd sign the petition.
                    \_ Come on, that's too obvious.  Your troll fu is weak.
                       \_ It's a valid point.
                          \_ Maybe gov office should up for vote every year.
                             \_ The problem is we don't have elections in CA
                                anymore since the whole state is so incredibly
                                gerrymandered.  Almost none of the people in
                                office have any chance of losing their seat.
                                \_ Well, no. Because of term limits. But other
                                   wise you are right.
                                   \_ They just swap seats.  Term limits hasn't
                                      helped as much as I'd hoped.  You still
                                      get "safe" districts where one party is
                                      absolutely guaranteed to win the seat.
2003/10/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10425 Activity:very high
10/2    Let's see, in the last week we've had:
        The Plame Affair
        Rush gets fired from ESPN for being a racist
        Rush gets exposed as a pill popper
        Arnold admits being a groper and harasser of women
        Kay says WMD will not be found in Iraq
        Iraqis riot outside police station claiming bribes required to apply
        Yay for right wing meltdown week!
        \_ Neo-cons are just trying to make republicans look bad temporarily
           so people will either keep Davis or put in Bustamante.  That way
           they can still blame the mess in California on the Democrats
           when Bush runs for re-election.  Just a theory. ;)
           \_ You read alt.conspiracy every day too, huh?
              \_ Nope, just naturally paranoid.
        \_ - Claims of Rush being a racist are absurd--the comment was on the
             media.  The criticisms of Rush's comment have been racist.
             \_ "I think what we've had here is a little social concern in
                 the NFL. The media has been very desirous that a black
                 quarterback do well." -Rush Limbaugh
                 racism 2 : racial prejudice or discrimination
                 prejudice 2 a (2) : an adverse opinion or leaning
                 formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge
                 \_ The second part of the quote: "There is a little hope
                    invested in McNabb, and he got a lot of credit for the
                    performance of this team that he didn't deserve. The
                    defense carried this team."  ---  Anyone that knows
                    football knows that this is blatantly wrong. McNabb has
                    been incredible on the field. This is Rush showing his
                    bias against black QB's, and then not understanding
                    why everyone else was saying he was so good, and
                    therefore attributing the media accolades to media
                    racism.   -nivra
                    \_ whether Rush is right or not on his opinion is
                       irrelevant.  The question is whether his statements
                       are racist or not.  Rush's statements never implied
                       that McNabb is bad because he is black.  he was talking
                       about the media.  In fact, Rush thinks McNabb is
                       good, but not as good as he is portrayed by the media
                       \_ His statement belies the fact that he has a lower
                          opinion of McNabb's worth than the media.  His
                          attribution of this difference due to race belies
                          the fact that he thinks about race himself, and
                          believes that the media does as well.  This is
                          racial prejudice. -nivra
                          \_ Wow, that's a cool way to flip everything on it's
                             head!  Rhetoric 100 with Jameson?
                          \_ Rush's opinion:
                                McNabb = +3
                                Media Perception:
                                McNabb = +6
                                Rush's goal: explain the +3 difference
                                   between reality and perception.
                                   Rush thinks McNabb is good, but not
                                   +6 good.
                                   \_ That's double-plus good, brother.
                                      \_ Ignoring the point, but nice attempt
                                         at creating a false reply with a
                                         witty literary reference.
                             \_ Agreed.  The charge of racism lies in how he
                                chose to explain the extra +3.  The fact that
                                his knee-jerk reaction was media "race" bias,
                                combined with the other factors I mentioned
                                below, such as his implicit support of people
                                who have outright expressed racism, such as
                                Lott (albeit when he let his guard down),
                                point to the fact that he is most _likely_
                                racist.  Not definitely, just likely.  -nivra
                                \_ If being knee-jerk about accusations of
                                   racism makes one racist, then just look to
                                   your left to find all the racism you can
                                   stand.
                                \_ let's face it.  We all have prejudices
                                   of some sort.  all of us, white, yellow,
                                   black.  I guess the Right thinks that
                                   the Left only thinks the Right is
                                   racist.  In reality, we all have
                                   prejudiced views one way or another.
                                   The Left is as guilty as the Right
                                   in these things.
                 \_ I can read the dictionary, moron.  His comment is that the
                    media is making a bigger deal of the QB than they should
                    because of his race (that is, the press want to present a
                    good example of a black QB).  That is a criticism that the
                    media is racist.
                    \_ Analogous statement:
                       "Colin Powell only got appointed because he was black."
                       \_ Your analogy would be better if Colin Powell was
                          an elected official --aaron
                          \_ fixed.
                             \_ except it's still wrong.
                    \_ And before Rush stuck his stupid head into this, nobody
                       had mentioned race at all.  McNabb was judged on his
                       acheivements as an *individual*.  Only after the dumbass
                       made his "commentary" was McNabb being judged as a
                       *representative of the black race.*  *Rush* is the one
                       obsessed with race, not the sports media.  Clearly you
                       are NOT a football fan or a follower of the sport.
                       \_ He's not saying that and you know.  He was commenting
                          on the press making the guy into a better athlete
                          than he is *because the press* wants to see a black
                          QB doing well.  Anything else is from your own head.
                       \_ I'm a different poster from the above.  I agree
                          that his comments are more directed towards the
                          media overhyping black quarterbacks than a statement
                          on McNabb being not good because he is black.
                          \_ But the media isn't overhyping black quarterbacks.
                             \_ But they are.
                             \_ ... which is why he's racist.
                                 \_ You have terrible logic.  The media
                                    isn't overhyping black quarterbacks.
                                    This implies that Rush thinks that
                                    McNabb is not as good as he really is.
                                    This does not imply at all that he
                                    thinks that McNabb is not good because
                                    he's black.  Rush may have thought that.
                                    But he certainly didn't say that or even
                                    imply it.
                                      -not generally someone to defend Rush
                                    \_ Mm, I think it's pretty clear that Rush
                                       is suggesting there's some sort of
                                       affirmative-action effect going on
                                       for the black person.
                                        \_ That doesn't make him racist.
                                           I know that affirmative action
             Logically, you are correct. _/exists.  I know that some
             You cannot conclude that      minorities got into Berkeley
             Rush must be a racist from    because of their race.  I mean
             his statement.  However,      this is a fact.  I know this
             taking into account:          fact.  Therefore, I'm racist?
             1) He was wrong about the     I know.  This is different
                presumed media  bias.      because Rush was wrong about the
             2) His reasoning that         affirmative action, but it still
                identified race as the     doesn't make him racist.  Maybe
                most likely reason for     he thinks that McNabb isn't
                his assumed media          that good (maybe because he's
                overestimation.            racist, or maybe because he doesn't
             3)  His history record of     like the Eagles, who knows).  And
                conservativeness, and      then he thinks that the media has
                support of conservatives   a bias towards  blacks.  He puts
                who have been blatantly    these 2 ideas together.  That's not
                racist.                    enough to conclude that he's racist.
              One can conclude it is       \_ I agree. -- not white
             likely that he iss a racist   \_ me too.,
             or at the minimum, has        \_ You go through such logical
             racial prejudices. -nivra        contortions to defend this idiotic
             \_ are you saying that           windbag, and then you wonder why
                conservatives are             black people think white folks
                racist?                       are out to get them.
                \_ reread, then see Lott,  \_ Please see the definitions
                   Trent & Dixiecrats -op     of racism and prejudice again.
                   \_ see new upcoming
                      thread
            \_ dude, this is hard to            \_
                format. how do you do          2: discriminatory or abusive
                it?             behavior towards members of another race.
        overwrite-mode _/       I don't see Rush being a racist based on
          -nivra                the definition of racist.
                                           exists.  I know that some
                                           minorities got into Berkeley
                                           because of their race.  I mean
                                           this is a fact.  I know this
                                           fact.  Therefore, I'm racist?
                                           I know.  This is different
                                           because Rush was wrong about the
                                   \_ he's controvserial because he has
                                      opinions that not everyone shares, only
                                      about 25 million people listen to his
                                      radio show every day.
                                           affirmative action, but it still
                                           doesn't make him racist.  Maybe
                                           he thinks that McNabb isn't
                                           that good (maybe because he's
                                           racist, or maybe because he doesn't
                                           like the Eagles, who knows).  And
                                           then he thinks that the media has
                                           a bias towards  blacks.  He puts
                                           these 2 ideas together.  That's not
                      \_ The statement is actually more clearly described as
                         "racially insensitive".  However, some of the
                         secondary definitions of "racist" cover racially
                         insensitive remarks.
                         \_ "racially insensitive" is a meaningless phrase.
                            it means whatever a self-created victim wants it
                            to mean.
                                           enough to conclude that he's racist.
                                           \_ I agree.
                       \_ Thanks, so your answer is "zero, but I read what
                          some other guys think!"
                                           \_ I agree. -- not white
                                           \_ me too.
                                           \_ You go through such logical
                                              contortions to defend this idiotic
                                              windbag, and then you wonder why
                                              black people think white folks
                                              are out to get them.
                                           \_ Please see the definitions
                                              of racism and prejudice again.
                                                \_
            \_ dude, this is hard to       \_ Please see the definitions
                format. how do you do         of racism and prejudice again.
                   \_ What part of "independently confirmed" do you not
                      understand?
                      \_ You know what an "allegation" is?  It's what the
                         National Enquirer reports after paying off someone's
                         maid.
                it?                             \_
                                               2: discriminatory or abusive
                                behavior towards members of another race.

                                I don't see Rush being a racist based on
                                the definition of racist.
                             \_ irrelevant whether or not it is true that
                                the media is overhyping black quarterbacks.
                                it is just an opinion.  he was hired by ESPN
                                to be controversial and not a typical
                                sports commentator patsy.
                                \_ The reason he's "controversial" is because
                                   he's bigoted.
                                   \_ what about all those people and sports
                                      writers trying to promote the
                                        "Great White Hope"
                      \_ I'm a Tom voter.  I still think doing a hit job a few
                         days before the vote is incerdibly transparent.
              \_ Rush *IS* a racist. Period. He is also a homophobe.
                 His show is filled with hateful comments, with
                 hints of truth in them. A hint of truth != a pound
                 of objective reality.
                   \_ He may be a racist, but the statement he is being
                      criticized for was not racist.
                      \_ The statement is actually more clearly described as
                         "racially insensitive".  However, some of the
                         secondary definitions of "racist" cover racially
                         insensitive remarks.
                 \_ Curious, how many hours have you listened to his show?
                    \_ http://www.fair.org/articles/limbaugh-color.html
           - Rush story about pills is in the National Enquirer.  Please, if
             you're going to discount conservative sources, discount tabloids
             too at least.
                            \_ Which took 7 weeks and only got printed a week
                               from the election?  You really believe the LA
                               Times isn't grinding an axe and this is good
                               journalism??
           - The Arnold story is old--it's troubling, but so is the holding back
             of the story until the week before the election.
             \_ Idiot.  Even Fox is covering this:
                http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,98871,00.html
                \_ "The New York Daily News, without identifying its source,
                   reported Thursday that Limbaugh was being investigated by the
                   Palm Beach County (search) state attorney's office. The
                   newspaper said it had independently confirmed the
                   allegations, which were first reported by the supermarket
                   tabloid the National Enquirer."
                   Source is still the National Enquirer.
                   \_ What part of "independently confirmed" do you not
                      understand?
           - The Arnold story is old--it's troubling, but so is the holding
             back of the story until the week before the election.
             \_ Tell that to all the women he humiliated and who didn't pursue
                charges for fear of losing their job.
                "What could you do? He was the highest-paid actor in the world.
                I was a peon," [one victim] said. "The only thing you could do
                is stay away from him."
                \_ Wah!  A week before an election I've got no sympathy.  If
                   they were so concerned we should've heard about it 2 months
                   ago (or more).  But that wouldn't have been politically
                   useful.
                   \_ Actually, we did hear about his behavior. Anyway Arnie
                      admitted it. But if you already thought Arnie is the sort
                      of person you want to see be the governor, I doubt this
                      information would change your mind. Arnie has too much
                      subconscious goodwill from being a movie star.
                   \_ It was in a UK newspaper shortly after he announced his
                      candidacy.  The LA Times just sat on it to release it 1
                      week before the election.
                   \_ You could also say that the LA Times had spent the
                      last seven weeks collecting as many cases as they could,
                      so Arnold couldn't just dismiss it as an isolated
                      incident.  The reporters wanted to show a lifetime
                      pattern of behavior.  Irrespective of the political
                      edge to it, doesn't it change voters opinions of Arnold,
                      especially for the women voters?
                      \_ Then why was there no new information in the LA Times
                         story?  It had the same info as the UK story.
                         \_ The general idea is the same, but the specific
                            examples are either reconfirmed through re-
                            interviews, or entirely new.
           - In Kuwait, WMD smugglers were caught trafficking $60M of chemical
             weapons OUT of Iraq.
             \_ Which has about as much credibility as the Enquirer story,
                so shut the hell up.
           - (I haven't heard the Iraqi police story)
2003/10/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10423 Activity:kinda low
10/2    Anybody want to waste your vote?  That poll below gave me an idea.
        You can write in a candidates name.  I'm tempted to write in
        "!psb".  I wonder if they'll tally those. -psb #1 fan
        \_ Pffft!  You're not the real psb #1 Fan.  His *real* #1 Fan would
           never suggest a write in for !psb.  His Greatness, the psb, would
           be governor of this small state if he chose to.  --psb #1 Fan
        \_ let's all write in "John Smith"
           \_ John Galt.
              \_ Who is John Galt?
        \_ "Jedi"
        \_ since this is a circus, how about Dumbo?
                \_ How about Krusty?
2003/10/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/SIG] UID:10419 Activity:nil
10/1    Does anyone have any good urls to why Davis sucks? Democratic URLs are
        a plus. -reg'd dem.
        \_ what's the free east bay rag that has "savage love" in it?  Check

           their website, the recent issue has an article that talks a bit
           about my "favorite" example of Davis's incomptetance/criminality
           (the oracle bribe).  The funny thing is that although Davis is the
           worst govenor we have had in my lifetime, and is everything bad
           that people *think* is bad about republicans vis-a-vis big business.
           There is *nothing* that is known about him now that wasn't known
           before the last election when he was elected.
           \_ Simon was just a weak candidate and even so came close.
              \_ Yep. Simon was worse than weak. He outright lied in his
                 attacks against Davis. Any halfway decent candidate would've
                 beaten Davis. Blame the Repubs for that one.
        \_ From FTCR, more a consumer rights website, but still good stuff:
           http://www.ftcr.org/insurance/pr/pr003676.php3
           http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/utilities/nw/nw002082.php3
           Oh man, there are too many to list here. Just type "Davis" in
           the searchbar.
        \_ Is this a troll or are you serious?  What state have you been living
           in for the last few years?  The sky is still blue.
           \_ yes, this is serious. i see people bash davis mostly on car tax,
              electricity, and recently, drivers licenses for illaliens... i
              am looking more for the lies and big business links.
              \_ go see Davis and Oracle.  Davis and the prison unions.  Davis
                 and the teacher's union.  Davis and (insert special interest
                 here).  Anyway, you don't think the issues you came up with
                 are more than enough?  Are you a masochist?  How much more
                 abuse would you like to see inflicted on the citizens of
                 this once great state?
2003/10/2-3 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:10415 Activity:kinda low
10/1    I got a stupid question.  There are more than 40 states in USA
        suffering budget crisis.  Why California governor is the only one
        get recalled?
        \_ An aside here: Did you know $87 billion would cover the deficits
           of all 50 states combined?
        \_ it's an order of magnitude problem.
           \_ California's economy is an order of magnitude, if not more,
              larger than many of those States.  Further, California's
              economy was concentrated on high-tech sector.  Granted,
              Davis is not nearly as effective as, let say, Pete Wilson.
              But using budget crisis as the ground for recall when
              the budget crisis arises due to severe lack of capital gains
              and sales taxes than lavishing state spending?
                        --OP, not a Davis fan.
              \_ From 1993-94 to 2000-01 spending increased from $47.3 billion
                 to $80.1 billion. As a percentage of budget, CA's deficit
                 is among the 6 worst (with OR, NV, TX, AL, and WI). What say
                 you? --dim
                 \_ the business week article 2 weeks ago said that CA
                    spending between the same period you quoted increases
                    on average 1% per year.  Now I am *REALLY* confused.
                                -kngharv
                    \_ http://www.bailard.com/CA%20muni%20market%20piece_2003.pdf
                 \_ how about revenue drop?  can anyone give me a lead
                    on where i can find info like that?
                    \_ From $75.7 billion to $65.8 billion. I've seen
                       other, but similar numbers like $66.6 billion.
                       http://www.nctimes.net/news/2003/20030309/52655.html
                 \_ you are ignoring the rising costs and population in CA
                    since 1994.
                    \_ Rising population should mean rising revenues, unless
                       you mean there are more freeloaders now. In fact,
                       revenues have almost doubled and yet we are still
                       outspending them.
                       \_ That was the case in 2000 when there was a surplus.
                          But now it turned into rising unemployment benefits.
                       \_ Higher energy price is part of the reason.
                 \_ heck, gasoline was $1.20 in 1993.
                    \_ And under $1.00 in 2001. Your point?
                 \_ those 5 other states are not recalling their govenors.
              \_ Other governors don't have the power crisis (for good or
                 bad) hanging over their head. Also, there is no politician
                 who is as uncharismatic as Davis; he really has no friends,
                 so he's easy to kick while he's down.
                 \_ I would think the power "crisis" should be hanging over
                    the head of Pete Wilson and the Bush appointed FERC.
                    \_ I'm sure you would think that.
        \_ Yawn.  He's not being recalled because we're in debt.  He's being
           recalled for being a criminal, for selling out the state in such
           a huge way to special interests, for selling his signature, for
           telling the Big Lie one too many times, and for being so cynical
                       \_ Is this some homosexual code word?
                          \_ no
           it makes other politicians look good by comparison.  This is so
           old.  It's been discussed over and over.  Please stop the really
           lame loaded questions with the pre-loaded assumptions.
           \_ How is he "a criminal"? I don't like Davis either, but don't
              get ahead of yourself here, chippy.
              \_ When there's quid pro quo cash for his political support and
                 it's so blatant (Davis opposes measure, business reps show up
                 and write $100k check, Davis signs bill next day) then it's
                 criminal.  Keep up with the news.  Chippy, indeed.
                 \_ Funny.   When Wilson did this it was called free speech.
                    \_ And when Bush gets whopping donations from oil
                       lobbies, no one bats an eye.
                       \_ And give government contracts to his friend companies
                          to rebuild iraq.  What is company did Cheney work
                          for as CEO?  How is that company doing?
                 \_ He has not been arrested or charged with any crime.
                    Calling him a criminal just makes you look stupid.
                    \_ And BC lied in a federal court.  And several in the
                       Kennedy family have raped or killed someone.  So what?
                       Powerful people never go to jail or get charged.  You're
                       very naive if that's your standard.
2003/10/1-3 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10407 Activity:kinda low
10/1    Informal CSUA voting.  Please vote only once (don't be a hozer).
        Recall Davis
        Yes: .................................................................
             .................................................................
             .................
        No: ...........
             \_ I like how the number of No votes changed from 5 to 9 votes
                in the space of two minutes ... hoser.
                \_ What about the number of yes votes?  Sheesh...Besides,
                   saying "don't be a hoser" on the motd is like asking
                   people to spare the air by not breathing for a few days.
                   \_ The No votes showed the ballot stuffing first.  The
                      Yes votes only appeared after I pointed this out.
                      I feel like a moron.
                      \_ trust your feelings.
                \_ Yo, it's a motd poll.  Whatever.  That's to both of you.
        Bustmante: .......
        Camejo: .
        Schwarzenegger: ......
        Tom: ...
        georgy@soda: ...
        !psb: ..
        \_ does the fact that Arnie is an idiot, knows nothing of government,
           and refuses to give any specifics of what he will do not bother you?
           \_ your opinion doesn't bother me at all but I'm voting for TM
              because his views most closely match my own on topics important
              to me that the governor has some control over.  I hope that
              properly answered your loaded & rhetorical question.
              \_ well if you're voting for TM I wasn't talking to you.
                 \_ you weren't talking to anyone.  it was rhetorical.
           \_ According to the L.A. Times poll, everyone knows he has
              considerably less experience than the mainstream candidates,
              but he ranks at the top in leadership.  I think of Arnie as
              someone who wasn't in the club when he got to America, but
              leveraged his musclebuilding into acting, then into small
              community contributions, running businesses, and then ending
              up governor of California.  I think people approve of this.
              Implicitly, they do not consider him an idiot.  As for not
              giving specifics, people are motivated primarily by "kick
              the bums out" and avoiding "business as usual".  They are
              satisfied as well when he says it will be "Governor Arnold,
              not Governor Wilson".  By the way, someone is overwriting
              posts like mad (not just mine).
              \_ Ok. Well, I'll actually vote No on recall and Yes on Arnie.
                 Just because I hate Bustamante.
                 \_ Just curious, why do you hate him?  Because he's Mexican?
                    \_ Why do you automatically assume race is an issue?
                    \_ Bustamante is a twink. He also has zero charisma.
                    \_ Bustamente seems more oily than Davis.  As much as
                       Davis has dissed him, he seemed to salivate over the
                       revenge aspect of running against Davis and leading
                       in the polls, more than wanting to save CA.
                       \_ Wowwee, now that's what I call an informed opinion.
                          \_ Well, if you want something more hard, he's
                             a part of the Democratic establishment that
                             increased spending to a level where we're in
                             the hole that we are now.  They shouldn't be
                             rewarded by replacing one Democrat for another.
                             In any case, do you disagree with my earlier
                             characterization?  Doesn't it just SEEM right?
                             \_ I firmly disagree.  Its fairly obvious that
                                your prejudice against anything Democratic
                                is clouding your judgement.  You need to
                                relax.
                                \_ actually, I am a Democrat.  They just
                                   overspent by way too much.  Bustamante
                                   and Davis should not be representing this
                                   party, and those politicians may have
                                   gotten too full of themselves, what
                                   with the "conservative" stupidity going
                                   on in the rest of the country.
                                   \_ I think our idiotic initiative system,
                                      the special interests that have ruined it,
                                      and the stupid California voters that
                                      passed the budget restrictions that
                                      lock up 2/3rds in the money in this
                                      state are the real villians.  Not to
                                      mention Enron and the other energy
                                      companies that screwed us.  I don't know
                                      why I bring this up though, because it
                                      gets deleted every time I do.
                                      \_ Wah!  I write to a dynamic file that
                                         hundreds have access to and my posts
                                         are so brilliant it must be that i'm
                                         being silenced! its a VRWC i tell ya!
                                      \_ It still doesn't change the fact
                                         that Davis brought up the deficit
                                         after he got elected, and attacked
                                         Riordan so he could face Simon.
                                         He's a coward.
                                         \_ I love this complaint.  It's as if
                                            no one had the opportunity to say
                                            "We're in trouble on the budget"
                                            other than Davis.  Was he doing the
                                            numbers in his closet?
                                         \_ And how is replacing him with
                                            someone with zero political
                                            experience and a cabal of
                                            Pete Wilson advisors going
                                            to solve our problems?
                                            \_ It sends a message, one.
                                               Two, Arnie's governance would
                                               be one of delegating
                                               responsibilities.  It really
                                               doesn't work in Dubya's
                                               administration, but I think
                                               it might work better on the
                                               state level.  He's a different
                                               person than Ventura, very
                                               charismatic, and it might just
                                               work.
                                               \_ right, Ventura's politics
                                                  were/are way better.
                                               \_ I can't see what facts you
                                                  are basing number 1 or number
                                                  2 on, so I guess I'll just
                                                  have to think that you're
                                                  going on some sort of faith
                                                  in Arnold's powers.  Fair
                                                  enough.  I for one am
                                                  concerned about a government
                                                  of ex-Wilson cronies, as
                                                  Wilson was a terrible
                                                  governor.  I also think
                                                  Arnold's effectiveness is
                                                  going to be questionable
                                                  given a firmly Democratic
                                                  legislature and voting public,
                                                  not to mention the strangeness
                                                  of the budget process given
                                                  that 2/3rd voting requirement
                                                  and all the spending mandates.
                                                  I also think he's going to
                                                  be subject to a recall of his
                                                  own, and I'm very afraid
                                                  given the state of California
                                                  politics that we will soon
                                                  be subjected to an endless
                                                  series of tit for tat recalls.
                                                  _/
                                It's not that I think Arnold will do a better
                                job, but he hasn't demonstrated the cowardice
                                that Davis has (see earlier post).  Arnold
                                has the promise of doing an adequate job.
                                You're all about, "Who's likely to do the
                                best job?" which is entirely valid.  I'm
                                all about, "Davis showed he was a coward,
                                boot him.  I don't want my vote indicating
                                I condone his practices" which to me,
                                trumps that.
                                \_ I wouldn't call it cowardice.  Just plain
                                   brutal cynicism.  Davis is a bastard.
                                \_ Fair enough, thanks for the reasonable
                                   debate (on the motd no less!).  I guess
                                   we'll just have to see how it all turns out,
                                   as Governor Arnold looks sort of
                                   inevitable at this point.  For me, this
                                   is yet another reason to consider moving
                                   out of Cali (*sniff* *sniff*).
                                \_ Arnold has demonstrated even more cowardice!
                                   He refused to debate Davis or the other
                                   candidates except that one scripted thing.
                                   He also refuses to say anything specific,
                                   for fear of criticism.
                                   \_ But you see, the Democrats have already
                                      had their chance.  Arnold just had to
                                      show in the first debate that he
                                      wouldn't go psycho, and he didn't.  That
                                      means I'm going to vote for him.
                                      I certainly don't blame your logic, since
                                      the L.A. Times uses it.
                                      \_ this is the thread that doesn't end
                                          it just goes on and on my friend
                                          some people started trolling it
                                          not knowing what it was
                                          and they just kept on trolling it
                                          forever just because
                                          this is the thread that never
                                          ends, it just goes on and on my
                                          friend.
                    \_ I don't feel like writing an essay about the man.
                       Suffice it to say, I disagree with his plans, I feel
                       that he doesn't represent my interests, and I have a
                       personal distaste for him based on what I've seen of
                       what he says and how he operates. The "oily" description
                       sums it up as much as anything.
        \_ I predict that Arnold will win and the first thing he will have
           to do is raise taxes, pissing off the Republicans to no end. -ausman
           \_ Shrug.  I predict you're wrong.  (heh)
2003/10/1 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10393 Activity:nil
9/30    Bustamante: "They are against food"
        http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/insider
        \_ You know, it's sad how little the context redeems this quote.
        \_ I'm tempted to read the link but I think I'll skip this one.
           \_ Ok, I lied.  It was too much.  I understand what he was _trying_
              to say after thinking about it in context but he's still an
              anti-American, blame-America-first, kill-whitey kinda guy.
2003/10/1 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10392 Activity:nil
9/30    Does anyone know the labor laws in here in CA? Are employers
        allowed to force their employees to take breaks?
        \_ Force? There are labor laws on the books to protect you.
        \_ Oh evil boss man!  Please don't make me stop working yet continue
           to pay me!  Oh and stop buying me free lunch and snacks too!  Woe!
2003/9/30 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:10386 Activity:high
9/30    When people say "fiscal conservative." What do they mean by that?
        Is fiscal "responsible" i.e. no deficit spending a "conservative"
        or "liberal" platform traditionally?
        \_ Various definitions, several of them very, er, interesting.
           Generally means don't spend more than you can bring in as tax
           revenues, don't spend one-time revenues (i.e. increased taxes
           during boom times) on long-term commitments, keep as much spending
           as possible in the private sector and only spend public money
           on services that the private sector would probably not invest in
           if left to its own (see Adam Smith), keep taxes low to make more
           private income available to spend on goods and services.
           Essentially, the same sort of common-sense money management that
           private individuals ought to engage in.  Most implementations have
           some problems, like the EU's stability pact, which prevents
           governments from 'priming the pump' to kick-start their economies,
           if their deficits are already too high, and the fact that many
           elected representatives try to bolster their electoral popularity
           through sometimes unnecessary spending "at home".  And let's face
           it, you'll be hard-pressed to find two people who'll agree
           entirely on who should be taxed how much on what.  -John
        \_ It means fiscally conservative: e.g. only spend and increase
           national debt to fund issues like: defense, anti-immigrant,
           big-tax-cuts-for-wealthy-few, pro-business-let-them-do-what-
           they-want-no-oversight-Enron, anti-environmental-regulation.
           \_ Are you angry?  -John
2003/9/30 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10384 Activity:nil
9/29    This has probably been covered already, but what is the prevailing
        rationale, if any, on the part of recall proponents as to why this
        recall is merited? Considering that we anyway have elections every
        4 years, Davis won, and the stuff ppl complain about is no different
        than what they complained about before the election? And does anyone
        doubt that if he gets recalled, the replacement will also get recalled?
        \_ no, you're right, it's dumb, it sucks that the rest of
           us have to suffer due to a quirk in the law, and it sucks
           that this stuff has to be test driven in one of the world's
           largest economies and America's most populous state.
           \_ a quirk in the law?  the recall isn't a technicality.
        \_ Davis needs punished for sucking.  Cutting Davis' career short is
           reason enough for me (conservative policy is more likely to help
           california also). -- petty and vindictive
           \_ so when democrats decide to try to recall a republican govorner
              a few months into their term and win, only to be recalled by
              angry republicans whose candidate is recalled, etc., will
              that have been worth it?  the whole thing seems like a bad
              precedent for an already over politicized state.
              \_ Over politicized now?  Check the polls.  Lots of democrats are
                 for the recall.  If it was only politics, that wouldn't be the
                 case.
              \_ You *might* buy enough signatures to start a recall against
                 Arnold but it'll *never* pass the general voting population
                 a few months into his term.  Don't confuse the minimum req'd
                 sigs to start a recall with step 2 where we all get to vote.
        \_ Troll, he's getting recalled primarily for lying his ass off about
           the true state of the economy before his election and then dumping
           the truth on us only after he thought his position was secure.  He
           is so cynical it even makes me ill and I've got really thick skin.
           The rest of his corruption, lying, incompetence, and stupidity is
           just icing on the recall cake.  Davis is dead.  Unless someone gets
           Arnold on tape raping under age nuns, it's over.
           \_ Sadly, no matter who is elected, this state is still Fucked (tm).
2003/9/29-30 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Prop] UID:10372 Activity:very high
9/29    My father told me over the weekend that he had told the RNC to take
        his name off of all their lists, and that he was changing his voting
        registration to undeclared after 40 years of registering R.  This is
        a man who was in the Navy 25 years, and is very proud of his service.
        He has become disgusted with the current administration, not to mention
        the circus that is California.  I'm astounded that the conservatives
        speaking here have not been more introspective themselves about their
        convictions, and where their alignments lie.  --scotsman
                \_ I cannot speak for other conservatives, but I gave up
                   discussing political issues on the motd because it
                   was impossible to have a decent conversation due to
                   the censors, trolls and flamers (right and left are
                   both guilty of this).
                   BTW, your father isn't the only Republican who is
                   upset with the current state of the party and its
                   leadership. My family has voted Republican since
                   we first immigrated to this country (~ 30 yrs ago).
                   For the last year or so we have been considering
                   changing our registration to undeclared.
        \_ Wesley Clark is also proud of his service. What that has to do
           with R or D is beyond me. --dim
           \_ Clark's history as a Democrat goes back about 6 months.  I don't
              count that against him, and I'd vote for him if he were
              nominated, but I'm just saying.  If you're considering Bush,
              you need to really look at what has happened in a 4 year term.
        \_ you're dad is a twit
           \_ This one's truly beautiful. --scotsman
        \_ Why do you assume that being introspective "about [your] convictions,
           and where [your] alignments lie" means we'll come to the same
           conclusion as your father?  While I don't think he's a twit, I'm
           rather surprised at his conclusions.
           \_ I'm not saying you should arrive at the same conclusions, but
              the responses I see here are kneejerk, lopsided, and often
              uninformed.  I think there's a lot to think about that many
              here have rejected flat out. --scotsman
              \_ I see the same among the liberal views here except they're more
                 emboldened.  Practically every conservative response in the
                 motd or wall is just an invitation for a pile-on.  We thinking
                 conservatives have given up putting our comments up for the
                 inevitable liberal spin/lie/pile-on that follows.  And of
                 course there are also the outright deletions.  Please don't
                 make the (very poor thinking) assumption that the motd is a
                 realistic slice of the philosophical spectrum.
                 \_ Funny that the deletions I've seen come shortly after a
                    salient point by a lefty gets posted.  I think there are
                    people on both sides lying to themselves. --scotsman
                    \_ I think *both* sides get deletions.
        \_ How in the world can he blame CA on the RNC?  Democrats hold *every*
           statewide office, and have dominated for decades.
           \_ Mmm.. logical leaps.  Look at prop 13.
           \_ I think he meant more the current electoral joke. --scotsman
              \_ What electoral joke?  Hint: just because some call the recall a
                 joke doesn't mean that it is.  The number of people signing the
                 petition is a massive showing of democracy in action.
                 \_ Massive?  perhaps when we get a turnout >30% in an election,
                    you can call it a "massive showing of democracy".
                 \_ Massive?  perhaps when we get a turnout >30% in an
                    election, you can call it a "massive showing of
                    democracy".  Anyway, I'm the one calling it a joke.
                    Take it or leave it.  --scotsman
                    \_ son of a twit
                    \_ When have you ever seen ~2x10^6 people sign a petition?
                       It's amazing.  Please detail why you think it's a joke,
                       and why you yourself are not a twit.
                       \_ Did you sign it?  Are you voting yes?  Why? --scotsman
        \_ After carefully reading your comments, I've concluded that you're a
           twit.  And so is your dad.
           \_ Then I'm glad we'll likely never meet. --scotsman
2003/9/27-29 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:10351 Activity:nil
9/27    CIA asks Justice Dept. to investigate allegations that White House blew
        agent's cover to get back at her husband for writing article condemning
        knowing inclusion of false statements in the State of the Union Address:
        http://csua.org/u/4je
        \_ the white house has a record of every single incoming
           and outgoing call, i wonder when they'll release the
           records?
           \_ Probably about the same time they release details of who attended
              the Energy Policy meeting.
            \_ what's 'rose law firm'?  recently the white house
               almost immediately released records of wesley clark
               calling the white house, so they have the technology
               to tell who called who in the white house when.
               \_ if you don't know that then you've got no business sharing
                  your political views, however, yes, everyone here already
                  agrees it was bad *if* it happened and should be investigated
              \_ Or where the Rose Law Firm records were for 7 years.
        \_ The rest of us already knew this.  Where have *you* been?
           \_ making ad hominem attacks in the Medea Benjamin thread below.
        \_ And this republican says they should do it.  That action, if true, is
           indefensible. -emarkp
           \_ If the dems had done this, I'd still be right with you. --erikred.
                \_ Reprehensible behavior transcends political allegiance.
                   There's no excuse for it.  -John
        \_ I agree that it should be investigated.  It should not be assumed to
           be true or false until there's been a non-partisan finding.
           \_ Do you think Novak (and Newsweek, which published essentially
              the same story at the same time) were lying about it? And
              seriously now, do you think that there is any chance of this
              getting investigated, with all three branches of government
              firmly in Republican hands?
              \_ Novak didn't say who told him so we don't know.  That's what
                                  \_"Two Senior administration officials"
                 investigations are for.  If you think Republicans are all
                 liars and into conspiracies, etc, maybe you weren't aware
                 that Novak is a conservative?  If conservatives were all so
                 universally evil why would one print this?  Thanks.
                 \_ This is the kind of logical leap that makes discussions
                    on motd so fucking pointles.  No one said "Republicans are
                    all liars".  Grow up. --scotsman
                    \_ Duh.  It's right there.  Go fucking read it in the thing
                       I was replying to.  People who can't fucking read is
                       what makes the motd pointless.  I don't care if you grow
                       up but you should learn to fucking read before posting.
                       \_ Read it again, after putting away the GOP card.
                          --scotsman
                       \_ But my credit cards aren't maxed out!  What the
                          fuck is a republican administration having the CIA
                          raise taxes for?!?
                          \_ Exactly.  Thank you.
                \_ Will you hold your breath until they appoint an independent
                   council to investigate it? Please???  There is no way that
                   this is going to happen. And yes, I know that Novak is a
                   Republican. He is also a reporter, not a White House
                   official.
2003/9/26-27 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10341 Activity:nil
9/26    Anyone know anything about Garrett Gruener?  I just visited http://gg4g.com.
        He seems legit, and pretty interesting.
        \_ Yeah, I've gotten pop-up-adds from him...
        \_ Garrett's a great guy and throws a nice party.  OTOH, this does
           not a governor make.  --ex-Ask Jeeves employee
2003/9/22-23 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10281 Activity:kinda low
9/22    Get those bags packed, George.
        http://csua.org/u/4fu
        \_ Hide those skeletons, Wes!
           http://www.townhall.com/columnists/robertnovak/printrn20030922.shtml
           \_ if this is the best the Bush and his minions can dig up,
              he's in serious trouble
              \_ Why? Do you really think that the peace love dope lefties
                 in the democratic party will vote for a solider?
                 \_ When did this rumor become "fact" that the dems hate the
                    military? oh, and by the way, check service records before
                    you say anything else this stupid. --scotsman
                    \_ Service records?  They got drafted or felt the need to
                       signup since they had political ambitions.  Fact?  This
                       isn't a provable concept but common sense would say
                       that a pacifist wouldn't vote for a soldier.
                       \_ How many dems are "peace love dope lefties"?  Most
                          of the "peace love dope lefties" vote Green.  Get
                          over yourself, you knee-jerk rightist hawk bozo.
                    military? --scotsman
                    \_ Do tell, oh Great Wise One and Knower of All History!
           \_ you know the massacre they are talking about happened 11 months
              AFTER Clark met with him.
              \_ How dare you bring facts into this!
              \_ Shut up! Cut his mic!
              \_ you might be a rocket scientist but you're no genius if you
                 can't see something wrong with Clark's actions vis a vis
                 Mladic.  Also, his CNN record is public as well as the rest
                 of the stuff here.  The man is a crackpot and very dangerous.
                 I'd no more vote for Clark than I've vote for a whacko like
                 McArthur (who wanted to nuke mainland China).  Go ahead, vote
                 for him.  Whatever.  You deserve what you vote for.
                 \_ Good, you've bought into the right-wing spin.
        \_ If polls this early meant anything, we'd have had President Dole
           from '96 to '00 and maybe right now.  It's a big yawner.
        \_ -- ilyas
                 \_ It pains me that our youth have forgotten their history.
2003/9/21-22 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:10270 Activity:nil
9/20    Family to lose home by eminent domain for Costco store
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/981262/posts?page=1,50
        \_ Funny thing is, she's willing to sell.  She just wants $2.13m for a
           property valued at $400k.  No sympathy here. URL:
           http://www.dallasnews.com/localnews/stories/091003dnmetdomain.c284f.html
           login: yeahright@@dallasnews.com pwd: password
           \_ Eminent domain should not be allowable no matter how much she
              wants for it. They are building a COSTCO, not a bridge. --dim
           \_ You miss the point.  Her dollar figure is intentionally well
              beyond market value because, get this, *she doesn't want to sell
              at any price*!!!  Eminent domain is evil and gets abused for all
              sorts of shit.  It got so bad in CA with school districts(!!!)
              doing things like declaring eminent domain on some people's
              houses, then sitting on the land for 10-15 years and selling it
              for profit that there's now a law against just such a thing.  You
              should have tremendous sympathy for anyone who gets their house
              and property stolen by the government.  More so, it should piss
              you off unless you're some sort of socialist who doesn't believe
              in personal property rights.  And yes, I consider the government
              forcing me to sell my house to them at whatever they consider
              FMV without bidding, on their timeline, without recourse to not
              sell or find a higher bidder or any other options to be theft.
              You think the government is going to pay her $30k agent's fee to
              buy her replacement home?  That's $30k right out of her pocket.
              \_ I'm going to go out on a limb here and do the unthinkable (at
                 least on the motd):  I apologize.  In not offering sympathy
                 to this woman for trying to squeeze every penny out of the
                 the sale of her house, I did not mean to imply approval of the
                 sneaky and dastardly policy of using eminent domain to grab
                 land for a commercial venture.  Now, please go back to the
                 article and read the part where she says she was willing to
                 sell the house for $10 per square foot.  If she's not willing
                 to sell, she shouldn't have said she was-- at any price.
                 There's more to this story than meets the eye on both sides.
                 \_ My house has FMV of about $590k.  However, I would not
                    consider selling it for $590k right now if I was *forced*
                    to.  I'm not ready yet.  However, if I was offered some
                    ridiculously larger number, being forced to sell wouldn't
                    be quite so bad.  About 1.75x to 2x FMV would be about
                    right to get me to move without a lawsuit assuming they
                    covered all my related expenses in addition to the FMV.
                    Everything has a price.  FMV isn't enough money to get
                    99% of home owners to move without problems.  By definition
                    they can get FMV any time they want on their own schedule.
                 \_ well duh, there is a $ point at which people will give in
                    to eminent domain.  the point is that she shouldn't
                    be forced to give up her home.  people put a price on
                    the sentimental and priceless part of a home.
                    \- if you are interested in property rights and the law,
                       two interesting things to look at are: Spur Industries
                       v. Del E. Webb [494 P.2d 701], and the famous article
                       by Guido Calabresi and Melamed: Property Rules,
                       Liability Rules, and Inalienability: One view of the
                       Cathedral [85 Harvard Law Rev. 1089]. The case is
                       between two private parties but has a sort of interest-
                       ing outcome [the winner of the injuction, is liable for
                       money]. G. Calabresi was the deal of Yale Law School and
                       is now a Federal judge. --psb
2003/9/17 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10230 Activity:nil
9/17    Mary Carey has no breast implants.
        http://et.tv.yahoo.com/celebrities/2003/08/20/marycareyintv
        http://www.marycareyforgovernor.com
        \_ I did not have sexual relations with that woman
           \_ It's just that someone said she's a "Pr0n0 princess with fake
              tits" yesterday.
2003/9/17 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10222 Activity:nil
9/16    New california drivers license
        http://www.terrymeiners.com/images/480_mexifornia_license.jpg
        \_ throw in a joke about drunken indians and black people with big
           lips chowing down on the watermellon and fried chicken and you
           have comedy gold there.
        \_ Glad to see racism no longer exists.
        \_ If only it really said "illegal alien" in the corner.  The new
           "legal driving for illegal aliens" license will look like everyone
           else's.  I'm still trying to figure out why someone who is here
           illegally and already driving would feel the need to register with
           the state and get a driver's license.  And if they fail will they
           stop driving?
           \_ They are probably dying to pay for insurance, too. The
              reality is that they want them (if they want them) to use as
              ID, which is precisely why I oppose giving DL to them.
              \_ They shouldn't even be here.  That's the whole "illegal" part
                 of "illegal" alien.
        \_ let's all email this terry meiners fellow and let him know how
           much of an ignorant racist asshole he is. I just did. that thing
           is just ridiculous.
           \_ go for it.  I can't wait to see his "these low grade witless
              humorless morons sent me hate mail" page.
               \_ ahh the "can't they take a joke" defense!  A classic!
              \_ Should be "... morons who support *illegal* aliens ...".
        \_ there are a lot of illegal aliens from europe, canada, and asia,
           but I guess that's ok with most of you.
           \_ not at all.  why would you think that?  illegal is illegal.  why
              is that so hard for you to understand?
2003/9/16 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10212 Activity:nil
9/16    So who is the hottest candidate for governor?
        \_ Brooke Adams:  http://www.brookeforgovernor.com
        \_ Georgy's hotter than that.
           \_ Typical nerdling lack of taste in women.  Brooke is out of your
              league so your brain goes into denial mode and decides she's
              inferior.
        \_ Mary Carey, of course!  http://www.marycareyforgovernor.com
           \_ gach!  Pr0n0 princess with fake tits.  whatever.
2003/9/16 [Politics/Domestic/California, Consumer/CellPhone, Politics/Domestic] UID:10207 Activity:kinda low
9/15    What are good 17"/18" LCD displays? The viewsonics seem popular
        and cheap. Any gotchas? Are 18" displays worth the $100-$200 premium
        they're currently going for? -saarp
        \_ Solarism
        \_ Samsung
           \_ You mean Samsuck?  I have one.  I also have a Viewsonic.  And
              I also have an Eizo.  Samsuck has decent panel, but supporting
              electronics is crap.  Viewsonic's panel is not that great
              (VX800) and the electronics is also hit or miss.  Viewsonic
              VE170 uses old technology panel, but otherwise, it's just fine.
              I love my Eizo in every way.  Conclusion is that I recommend
              Eizo.
              \_ Eizo?  It's more popular in asia than over here right?
                 Haven't seen them around for some time.
                 \_ Eizo is part of Nanao Japan.  They don't seem to care
                    about the "cheap is everything" consumer market.  You
                    can really see the quality in these things.  They're
                    somewhat expensive than others, but you get what you
                    pay for.  Newegg has them cheaper than most others, but
                    you pay tax in CA.
                 Never seen them around for some time.
        \_ There's only about 3 LCD manufacturers for the screen part.  The
           rest you'll have to compare the features vs price vs warrantee.
           Find out what the dead pixel replacement policy is and if you
           can live with 10 dead or semi dead pixels before it kicks in.
        \_ I service other people's computers, so my experience is that
           Viewsonics are very hit and miss. One customer had two consecutive
           replacements fail on her (bad capacitor and a bad inverter). Other
           customers have had similar problems. About half the installs never
           report any problems. Perhaps this is a batch issue. Quality is
           so-so (according to my eyes), not as vibrant as others I've seen.
           Samsung, Sony, etc. seem to have less problems, but I've seen
           failures on all brands at least once. LG-Phillips/Hitachi/Sharp
           are the ones I know in terms of LCD manufaturers. LCD quality
           AFAIK is dependent on batch. If they produce a good batch you
           get a good vibrant screen. If you get a crappy batch you tend to
           can live with 10 dead or semi dead pixels before it kicks in.
           get washed out colors. YMMV.
2003/9/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10199 Activity:low
9/14    Federal appeals court delays recall!
        All I can say is: HAAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHA!
        \_ Cool, all I can say is, 6 more months of incompetent non-leadership
           from the lame duck governor who is going to continue his standard
           pandering and mass sell out of the general population in an effort
           to buy more illegal alien votes.  Whoop-di-doo.  So glad to live
           in CA.  If you weren't a student, you'd care more.
           \_ "Illegal alien votes"? Troll.
              \_ Drivers license for illegals + motor voter law =
                 Illegal alien votes
                 \_ Bzzt.  You really do suck up everything you hear on the
                    radio, doncha?
                    \_ Nice comeback.  Wouldn't want to actually address the
                       issue.
                       \_ If it were an issue.  Verification of voter
                          registration is an entirely separate process.
                          You brought up the point.  The burden of proof
                          is on you.
                       \_ Wow, pot kettle black eh? Troll.
                          \_ No pots and kettles.  He refused to address the
                             issue.  Getting nailed on it doesn't make the
                             hammer into a troll.
                             \_ You put forward a baseless claim. As I said,
                                the burden of proof is on you.
                                \_ It isn't baseless.  Anyone who can get a
                                   driver's license which will soon be every
                                   illegal gets paperwork for voting.  There's
                                   no other checking, genius.  Illegals driving
                                   \_ Prove this.  This is what your entire rant
                                      is based on.
                                   == illegals voting.  2+2 still = 4 outside
                                   your little ivory towers.
                                   \_ Just because someone can break the law
                                      does not mean that they will. Not
                                      everyone has the criminal/Republican
                                      mentality. Illegals tend to be more
                                      afraid of law enforcement that most,
                                      so I bet very very few will engage
                                      in illegal voting. I think you are worried
                                      about something that will not happen,
                                      but let's keep an eye on it and see.
                                      If it becomes a problem, then we can
                                      do something about it.
              \_ illegal alien votes => those with relatives/sympathy for
                 illegal aliens => the Hispanic vote
                 \_ If you really believe this, then explain why the hispanic
                    vote is so influential, yet prop 184 passed.
                    \_ Surely you mean Prop 187, right?
                    \_ there are more white people
                       "The Times's exit poll that year found that 23 percent
                       of Latino voters supported Proposition 187 and
                       77 percent opposed it."  http://csua.org/u/4bs
           \_ Do you really think the recall would have passed?
              \_ Absolutely.  Hard core support to recall, soft support to
                 not recall.  It's a done deal if the election is in Oct.
           \_ I'm not a student.  Ah-nold would have just made things worse:

              O'REILLY: Yes, I know, but do you have any ideas that you can
              offer the other governors or the president of the United States?
              All of them seem to be confused about the issue. Do you have
              any ideas on how you can control the borders?

              SCHWARZENEGGER: I think we just have to-I think we just have to
              bring leadership there and really make sure that the-explain
              the case, that how bad it is for the state and how bad it is
              for the country to do that-We have to work on those kind of
              issues together, the border states.
              \_ It's not his fault, his scriptwriter didn't anticipate the
                 question.
              \_ You're avoiding the issue.  The issue is Davis is an
                 incompetent and criminal boob.  Thus he needs to go.  Arnold
                 giving a politician's answer to a question doesn't make me
                 want that Davis scumbag in office any more.  It has nothing
                 to do with it.
                 \_ What makes him criminal?
                    \_ Selling his signature for campaign cash quid pro quo?
                       Isn't that enough?  Have you been out of CA for the last
                       few years?
        \_ It's the 9th circuit.  They might as well not exist.  Off to the
           supreme court we go.  And since when does a federal court get
           involved in a state election.
           \_ Are memories that short?
           \_ *cough*Florida*cough*
           \_ Is your chad hanging?
              \_ That was an election for a FEDERAL office.  You know, President
                 of the United States?
                 \_ No facts!  Do not bring facts into this!  Everyone knows
                    the SC conspired with the right wing to steal the election!
                    Even though by every measure and later re-re-re-re-count
                    Bush still won!  No facts!
           \_ Wow, I have to call troll. Your "not exist" comment is
              laughable in the face of the actual 9th circuit statistics.
              \_ You mean the 70-80% overturn rate?
                 \_ Thanks for deleting my question rather than answering it.
                    Got any evidence to back up this statement?
                    \_ I'm "involved" in the legal profession but not a lawyer.
                       The 9th Circuit is known for being a bunch of fuck nuts
                       within the profession and lawyers don't take an adverse
                       9th Circuit ruling seriously.  It just means both sides
                       make more legal fees for the appeal.
              \_ The 9th are all liberal nuts.
                 \_ That may be, but they're OUR liberal nuts!
                 \_ suck my liberal nuts
        \_ What was Federal statute / Consitutional issue in question?
           Crickey Davis is so incompetent he can't even modernize
           Californias voting systems nearly three years after
           Florida - what a disgrace.
           \_ The modernization of voting machines is left up to the individual
              counties.  It really wasn't Davis' responsibility.
           \_ The state was supposed to be ready in March 2004, in time for
              the next planned vote. The recall advanced that schedule by six
              months. They are understandably behind. The constitutional issue
              is "one person, one vote."
              \_ One citizen, one vote, thanks.  We're not *yet* making it so
                 all the illegals can easily vote.  Yet.
                 \_ Wow, you've really convinced yourself that immigration
                    does you serious harm, haven't you? I feel sad for you.
                    \_ As always, brown people provide a convenient punching
                       bag, especially during electoral cycles.  This is a
                       fundamental feature of our politics.
                    \_ 1) I am an immigrant.  A *legal* one.  2) Legal
                       immigration is bad.  3) Illegal immigration is bad.
                       4) opening your borders so you can get near slave wage
                       labor is unethical, sickening, and you should go shoot
                       yourself for thinking it's ok to bring in slaves to do
                       your dirty work, asshole.
                 \_ Oh, we're going to get snippy, about are we? Remove also
                    all those convicted of a felon, officially mentally
                    incapable, and unregistered voters. Gods, it's folks
                    that you that make lawyers drool.
                    \_ Nothing wrong with preventing felons, the mentally
                       incapable and unregistered voters from voting.
2003/9/13 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10179 Activity:low
9/12    California to give free college to illegals
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/981662/posts
        \_ This is nothing next to the mass voter fraud that's going to
           occur with the driver's license bill.  Remember the Motor Voter
           law?  That means every illegal will get voter registration papers
           BY LAW when they get their driver's license from the DMV.  Once
           you've got those papers, there's no further check stopping an
           illegal alien from voting in both CA and Federal elections.  When
           the pendulum swings back, the backlash to destroying the value and
           meaning of citizenship is going to knock your socks off.
           \_ Until the early/mid 90's, illegals *had* drivers licenses,
              and your cataclysmic apocalyptic destruction of all that is
              good and conservative didn't happen.
              \_ not that I necessarily agree with PP, but the motor-voter
                 law didn't exist when illegals had drivers licenses.
                \_ Hope you are right... somehow I'm not so sure.
2003/9/11-12 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:10156 Activity:nil
9/11    "Gov. Gray Davis' administration says it is unlikely to approve plans
        for substantial reductions to the state payroll until the middle of
        next month. That makes it likely that the impact of the cuts -- in
        thousands of layoffs and in reduced state services -- won't become
        public until after the Oct. 7 recall election."
        http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/ca/budget/story/7393104p-8336582c.html
        \_ Davis is a master at hiding bad news until after the election,
           which a huge part of why he's up for recall now.  Look, its not
           smooth sailing once he's elected, he still has to deal with the
           consequenses of his policies.  Thank goodness for the Recall!
2003/9/10 [Politics/Domestic/California, Finance/Investment] UID:10137 Activity:very high
9/10    http://csua.org/u/492   (news.yahoo.com)
        Alabama voters suckered into voting down modest tax hike.  School
        programs in jeopardy.  Only the rich and middle class would have paid
        for it but polls showed only mixed support among blacks and lower
        income voters!  This is appalling!  I blame the media for this
        travesty!
        \_ 19% of Americans think that they are in the top 1% of wage earners
           and 20% more think that they *will* be in that top 1% within their
           lifetime... this should help explain why so many Americans like
           Bush's tax policy (Source: Economist)
                              \_ could you elaborate on where I can find this?
                                 \_ I read it in this week's print edition.
           \_ Wow, I've always thought this sort of thing was true but I've
              never seen numbers to back it up.  What a sorry bunch of
              delusional wage slaves.
           \_ Damn, now that I thought about this a little further, that's
              just pathetic.  I believe the top decile is around $80k, correct
              me if I'm wrong, so there are people that make under $80k that
              believe they're in the top 1%?
              \_ You were close, top 20% of households is at $83.5k:
                 http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/h01.html
                 Oops, I actually used real data on the motd? I hope my account
                 doesn't get sorry'd.
                 \_ what do they mean by household income?  I make 90k and
                    my hubby makes 80k.  does that mean our household income
                    is 170k?
                    \_ Yes, and those numbers would put you in the top 5%, so
                       now you can stick it to the rest of us!  (Does anyone
                       have figures for the top 4%, 3%, 2%, 1% so that we can
                       see how, for the lack of a better word, asymptotic it
                       gets?)
                    \_ 90k and 80k doing what? How long does it take to get
                       there?
                       \_ The real question is how to break that barrier. 100k
                          is easy. 200k is much harder.
                       \_ I was making $85k/yr as a sysadmin 5 years out
                          of college. This was the boom years though.
           \_ so what is the range of gross income for a middle class?
              $40k-80k? If someone who can afford a $50k car does that qualify
              him/her as a well off middle class or upper class?
              \_ http://ferret.bls.census.gov/macro/032002/faminc/new07_000.htm
                 The poverty line is $18k for a family of four, so the bottom
                 of what is the middle class must be much lower, unless you
                 think half of America is "poor."
                 \_ The federal pvoery definition is so out of whack that most
                    social and economics statistics reporting work around with
                    stats like % within n multiples of poverty line.
                     -- ulysses, whose wife writes socioeconomic
                       studies for a living.
                     \_ Fine then, most of America is poor by your very
                        odd definition of it. Look at the tables. 13% of
                        Americans live in families that make below the
                        poverty levels. Most people who live in families
                        with incomes of $25k think of themselves as
                        "middle class", no matter how much self-entitled
                        Cal students and grads would piss and moan at having
                        to survive on it.
        \_ "866,623 people opposed [it] while 416,310 voted for it" ???
            There are roughly 1.3 million people in Alabama? Isn't that a
            pretty low voter turn out?
            \_ voter turnout in this country is always low
        \_ I find this site illuminating:
           http://www.lcurve.org
                \_ retarded. or should i say...
                   you are so obviously a fat sysadmin.
                   \- note by the way: you should not just focus on income
                      but wealth also. e.g. i know some modestly paid
                      teacher in the silicon valley who have lived there
                      since the 60 or early 70s and owned millions of
                      dollars in real-estate. note also there are some
                      well-defined groups for whom current income is
                      artificially low. like some law/med/engineering
                      graduate students. does anyone know which congressman
                      suggested changing the exempt amount before the "death
                      taxes" kicked in to $100m to shut up the people talking
                      about the farmers and small business owners?
2003/9/10 [Politics/Domestic/California, Finance/Investment] UID:10132 Activity:high
9/10    How many libertarians does it take to change a light bulb?
        None, the invisible hand will do it.
        \_ Bzzt.  It's my light bulb, and I'll fix it when I goddamn want to,
           not when it suits the government.
           \_ ...and if you can't afford a lightbulb, it's your own damn fault
              for not being an overpaid dickhead sysadmin.  As long as my taxes
              are low, i don't give a damn if you freeze in the dark, you
              fucking plebe.
              \_ p.s. - I'm gonna go eat another Top Dog. I heart Ayn Rand
                 \_ ...but I don't feel any compulsion to pay for her books
                    when I can dl them off the net for free.
2003/9/8 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10111 Activity:high
9/6     87 billion!  That's an 87 with 9 zeros after it, folks!
        \_ So why are liberals so cost-concious with this item, especiall with
           the "if only one child is saved..." crap that goes on all the time?
           \_ why are "conservatives" NOT cost conscious with anything Bush
              does?
              \_ I for one am.  I'm in agreement with most of the war stuff
                 (although if there still are now WMD's found by next year I'm
                 going to have some serious questions).  But I'm against the
                 ANWR drilling, unless better gas economy controls are also
                 enacted (as an example).  Bush needs to stop growing the
                 federal budget as well (minus defense as necessary). -emarkp
                 \_ yep. ANWR would have gone through if republicans had not
                    been willing to switch sides on this issue.  it's not
                    just an environmental issue.  There's about 6 months
                    worth of oil up there, and the *only* reason
                    to drill ANWR is as s a giveaway to the
                    U.S. oil companies.  Republicans may not like envrionmental
                    arguments, but there are some who see that this is just
                    a special interest giveaway.
                    \_ It's 6 months of oil if we had *no other sources* of
                       oil.  That's a *huge* amount of oil.  The world economy
                       would rock and tremble if the US stopped buying foreign
                       oil for 6 months.  Half of the middle east dictatorships
                       would collapse for starters.
                       \_ This is the first I've heard this clarification (and
                          google hasn't helped).  Can you point to a URL that
                          says this? -emarkp
        \_ That's like a couple years of defecit in this state!  ;)
           \_ States don't run deficits.  They just stop paying people.
           \_ At the rate we're going it'd be a single budget soon.
        \_ Most of us got into and some graduated from college.  We don't
           need to you spell out how many zeros are in a number for us.
           Would you care to tell us how many zeros have gone into welfare,
           social security, and other forms of socialism?  Care to tell us
           how much the cold war against such things cost?
           \_ troll purged.  see archives if you care.
           \_ The only cold war vs. social security is the one being
              fought by the Heritage Foundation. I hope they go bankrupt
              trying to turn back the clock.
              \_ say what?  what are you talking about?
           \_ You are so obviously a fat sysadmin.
                \_ That's a great line. No sarcasm. -#1 fan
                \_ Yeah when you're caught with nothing to say on topic you
                   should always fall back to personal attack.  You'll be the
                   hero of people like "-#1 fan" above.  That's the smart move.
                   Are you running for governator, too?  You're almost as smart
                   as Huffington.
                   \_ And you sir, are an ah hominem fat sysadmin.
           \_ The only cold war vs. social security is the one being
              fought by the Heritage Foundation. I hope they go bankrupt
              trying to turn back the clock.
        \_ I wonder what he wanted to say on Sunday, more money for
           his defense friends. Yeah, who gives a fuck about the
           dosmetic issues, as long as he and his friends are racking
           in the $$$, and when the next suicide bomber hits the US
           before the next election, he is well on his way to another
           4 years.
           \_ mmm.  Frothy bile.
              \_ its one of the reasons to read the motd.  its always a good
                 laugh to see someone froth and you _know_ they pounded the
                    \_ This response makes no sense at all.
                       \_ obMotd.
                 hell out of their keyboard while typing that out since he
                 managed to 'typo' (being generous) two simple words.
           \_ that's right. all we should ever think about, ever, are
              those domestic issues.
              \_ Funny, it used to be what the republicans harped on.
                 In fact, it was part of Georgie's platform.
                 \_ Funny, it used to be what the Demo's said also.
                    Shows your political ignorance if you don't take
                    into account the '92 election.
                    \_ Both parties say whatever they think people want to
                    \_ I got lost.  Can you explain that slowly for me?
                       hear that year to get elected.
                    \_ This response makes no sense at all.
        \_ fuck bush hard
           \_ I just did.  Or did you mean the president?
           \_ yeah, that'll sure change the political landscape.  you should
              spend a few million of your dotcom dollars on advertising your
              message to the people.  we're with you, guy!
        \_ Just think, 87 billion comes to about $300 for every man,
           woman and child in the U.S.
           \_ Your sis' bush?  That's gotta feel great.
              \_ yermom.  but it was too easy.
                 \_ Yup.  My mom seduced her brother-in-law when she was in her
                    teens, and then has been lying that he raped her ever
                    since.  I feel sorry for you.
        \_ Sort of fitting:
           http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAkennedyJ2.JPG  -John
           \_ Very fitting.  Thank you, John. --erikred
        \_ Just think, 87 billion comes to about $300 for every man,
           woman and child in the U.S.
           \_ If you're going to quote the newspaper, at least provide the
              URL instead of pretending you've had some amazing insight.
        \_ or $29M for each person that died in the WTC.
           \_ That's right, $29M/victim to continue the submission of a
              country that had no links to the events of 9/11.
              \_ And NO proof whatsoever of any WMDs either (remember
                 Collin Powell and his ridiculous satellite pictures of
                 trucks moving in and out of some alledged "chemical
                 weapons" facility? Where the hell are they now?)
                 \_ Yeah!  See how thye put minorities out with bullshit and
                    hang them out to dry when we all see the truth later?
                 \_ Not at all.  Going to be 4 more years.  I don't care that
                    CA blindly votes (D) like sheep because CA doesn't matter.
              \_ Read it and weep, neocon boy
                 http://www.pollingreport.com
                 \_ Yep, now go find any of the polls putting Bush against a
                    real person instead of some fantasy ideal.  4 more years!
                    That's why we have to prevent the Bushies from putting more
           \_ brilliant!  this will change minds everywhere!  buy two!
        \_ Billions for Halliburton, pay cuts for the troops on the ground.
           Bushonomics in action.
           \_ liar.  no pay cuts.
              country that had no links to the events of 9/11.
                 trucks moving in and out of some alledged "chemical
                 weapons" facility? Where the hell are they now?)
                    minorities into high government positions, so they'll stop
                    abusing them!  Hold up all Bushies minority candidates to
                    protect them!
        \_ "And we acted in Iraq, where the former regime sponsored terror,
           possessed and used weapons of mass destruction, and for 12 years
           defied the clear demands of the United Nations Security Council."
           Notice how Dubya no longer claims WMD will be found ...
           \_ All the nuts and fruits are safely tucked away in CA.  CA will
              blindly vote (D), most of the rest will vote (R) and you'll be
              here bitching and moaning about how there must have been a
              conspiracy in '04, too, and that '00 was just practice because
              everyone _you_ know voted (D).
              \_ You're the one bitching and moaning, boy-o.
              \_ Read it and weep, neocon boy
                 http://www.pollingreport.com
        \_ http://www.cafeshops.com/no_dubya
        \_ Billions for Halliburton, pay cuts for the troops on the ground.
           Bushonomics in action.
2003/9/7-8 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:10107 Activity:nil
9/6     Did the Democrats steal the 1960 election?
        \_ probably -democrat
        \_ Yes.  It's generally accepted what took place in Chicago was both
           highly illegaly and made the difference nationwide.
           \_ Vote early, vote often.
        \_ In answer to the unspoken question, it was a crime then and it was
           a crime in 2000.  Any election that depends on a margin of victory
           less than the margin of error is flawed and should be redone.
           \_ To correct your misstatement, it was a felony then, it was a
              politcal issue settled by the courts in 2000.  Your opinion in
              your second sentence is properly noted.
              \_ You have interpreted the word crime to mean a criminal act
                 punishable by the law where I intended it to mean a despicable
                 and unethical act worthy of public censure.
                        \_ Enforcing the 14th Amendment is an unethical
                           act worth of public censure?  NOT changing
                           election laws after it is over
                           is unscrupulous?  Sorry, you're full of shit.
                 \_ Then you need to get a dictionary - the person before
                    you was correct.
                    \_ ok mr dictionary...
  crime
       n 1: an act punishable by law; usually considered an evil act; "a
            long record of crimes" [syn: {law-breaking}]
       2: an evil act not necessarily punishable by law; "crimes of
          the heart"
                       note the second definition.  "You need to get a
                       dictionary" type reponses are pathetic even when
                       valid, but when you aren't even right, well god
                       damn you look like a moron.
                    \_ Don't worry, I'm sure all the fat sysadmin votes will
                       get counted every time.  You're not poor and black and
                       living in the South, don't worry!
                       \_ i really like this new phrase that has entered the
                          motd lexicon(fat sysadmin.)  That really sums it up.
                          \_ adminus systemae fatso.  related to the just as
                             pathetic geekus comico
2003/9/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:10105 Activity:insanely high
9/6     "...that an in-depth state audit showed only 19% of
        illegals bother to file taxes, and the best
        data on illegal immigrants, from the late 1990s
        National Science Foundation study, shows that
        each citizen-headed household in California
        pays out a net extra $1,178 to shore up 3
        million mostly low-income illegal immigrants."
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/977367/posts
        \_ Do you expect fact to change the opinion of democrats?
           \_ when was the last time you changed your mind about something
              based on a motd post?  and nice english.
              \_ a motd post?  it's happened.  an off site url provided by a
                 motd poster?  much more often.  im not either of the above
                 but if you're going to point out someone's writing flaws you
                 should first board up your own windows.
        \_ just wait until you get your wish, and your grocery bills are several
           times what they are today
           \_ Funny, that's the same argument people made against the abolition
                          \- shipping is probably cheeper than you think
                             it is. look if you are serious about *reducing*
                             the number of *illegal* immigrants [as opposed
                             to focusing on abusing them], you clearly need
                             to crack down on employers. you start *jailing*
                             employers [for harboring potential terrorists?]
                             including soccer moms hiring illegal domestic
                             workers, and then the the numbers will decline.
                             and while you are at it, go after illegals
                             from EU countries. --psb
              of slavery.  And I'm wearing mostly cotton clothing.  Nice
              argument, slaver.
              \_ cotton clothing and food are not the same, food is perishable
                 so you can't simply move to imports with little effects since
                 the price of refrigerated shipping is not as negligible as
                 throwing clothing into a tanker container.
                 \_ shipping is probably cheeper than you think it is. the std
                    example of non-tradable item is a "haircut". look if
                    you are serious about *reducing* the number of *illegal*
                    immigrants [as opposed to focusing on abusing them], you
                    clearly need to crack down on employers.you start *jailing*
                    employers [for harboring potential terrorists?] including
                    soccer moms hiring illegal domestic workers, and then the
                 \_ Some of my best friends are black.  No, really!
                    \_ nice retort
                    the numbers will decline.  and while you are at it, go
                    after illegals from EU countries. --psb
                    \_ Sounds like a good plan.  Why aren't you running for
                       Governor?
                       \_ If that were his only platform I'd vote for psb for
                          Governator.  Unfortunately the current batch are all
                          afraid of "the latino community" voting against them
                          for any efforts to clean up the illegal mess.  Who
                          said the thing about democracy only works until
                          the people figure out they can vote themselves
                          public funds?
                 \_ The product doesn't matter.  The price will go up if we
                    don't have illegal immigrant labor, yes.  But the product
                    won't go away, and if the employers are deprived of their
                    cheap labor, they'll have to modernize or increase wages.
                    You're basically arguing about maintaining a second class
                    resident who can be exploited for cheap labor with little
                    chance to rise above that.  Talk about your class warfare.
                    How is this fundamentally different from slavery?
                    \_ Exactly, they want an underclass to work basically as
                       slaves to keep things cheap.
                       \_ And the Dems say they're for the working class...
                    \_ the labor illegals do can't be modernized. i.e., not
                       everything can be picked by machines.
                       \_ tough shit.  so people will pay more for non-slave
                          laber speciality food items.  im not shedding any
                          tears that a few of your favorite and unnecessary
                          food favorites will go up in price because you won't
                          have third class slave labor to pick it anymore.
                          cheap prices is the lamest reason ive ever heard to
                          ignore our own immigration and labor laws.
              \_ And you want to deny them things like driver license so
                 their condition become even more like slaves?
                 \_ No you moron.  I want to send them back home.  If they want
                    to come here, let them come legally.  Crazy idea, rule of
                    law and all that.
                    \_ You guys just hate them damn spics.  Come on, admit it.
                       \_ What are you talking about you idiot?  Legal
                          immigration is open to everyone of every nation.
                          You're the one using the racial slur.
                          \- immigration policy is not "first in - first out"
                             the policy very much affects the composition of
                             who actually gets approved. also there are a lot
                             of different visas, rather than a single pool.
                                                             --psb
                    \_ Yea, again US should learn from my country Singpaore.
                       When Singapore started to have some illegal
                       immigrants, it just says, come forward before such and
                       such date and we will send you home.  Otherwise, if we
                       find you, we will cane you and then send you home.
                       Worked like a charm.  Solves the problem and allows
                       the illegal immigrant to get on with life, unlike
                       wimpy US measures like denying them driving license
                       which just makes their life miserable while they
                       would continue to remain in the US.  Of course, US
                       already allowed the problem to fester for too long,
                       and I suspect the US economy would suffer if all the
                       illegals all go home all at once.  - bglee
                       \- yeah, the US is just like SIN. really the place
                          to use caning are certain white collar crimes.--psb
                          \_ no.  destroying the lives and careers of american
                             workers, families, soon-to-be retirees and others
                             should be punishable by death.  the cane was
                             appropriate for that idiot child who spray painted
                             the cars in singapore, not billion dollar crimes.
2003/9/6 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10098 Activity:nil
9/5     Thank you liberals so very fucking much.
        Davis Signs Illegal Alien Drivers' License Bill
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/977061/posts
        \_ Based upon your logic, then, if we don't make  condom
           avaliable to teenager, they won't have sex, right?
        \_ For those who hate Illegal Aliens, here is my question for you.
           Would you for the idea of erecting a WALL between Mexico and
           USA border, treating illegal aliens as "invaders?"
        \_ Last time I checked, California's economy actually depend
           upon illegal aliens.
                \_ Last time I checked illegals destroyed the world
                   trade center and flew a plane into the pentagon.
                   But you're right, cheap lawn and pool
                   care is more important.
2003/8/26 [Politics/Domestic/California, ERROR, uid:29475, category id '18005#6.125' has no name! , ] UID:29475 Activity:high
8/26    http://csua.org/u/41k (from  http://story.news.yahoo.com -urld)
        Bunch of social security free-loaders. Work-safe link.
        \_ 4700 dollars for a fucking paint job?  it's clear who the freeloaders
           are here.  the sad thing is that when the government ends up
           paying for it they'll pay the extortion prices rather than
           fixing the real problem which is that they're being ripped off
           by the prosthesis company in the first place.
           \_ actually I think it is 4700 of the whole foot, and insurance
              was only willing to pay if she got the slightly cheaper
              white version.
           \_ relax, it's in britain anyway.
2003/8/20 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29406 Activity:nil
8/20    http://www.amigovernorornot.com
2003/8/14-15 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Foreign/Canada] UID:29348 Activity:high
8/14    NYC and parts of the Northeastern US (and Southeast Canada) hit by
        massive power outage. Reports of smoke from ConEd plant in Manhattan.
        Started at 4:14PM EDT. One plant out may have caused a cascading effect
        on the rest of the system. Welcome to California's pain Easties. (Some
        details gotten from 740AM)
        http://csua.org/u/3xn
        \_ OH MY GOD!!! SKYNET IS BECOMING SELF AWARE!!! Soon all the
           electronics will shut down in preparation for dooms day and
           John Conners will be assassinated by drones!
           \_ As long as it's Eddie Furlong. Nick Stahl actually did a decent
              job in T3.
        \_ nice try.  we lost power for all of about 10 seconds in southern
           connecticut.  and this is with a severe spike in power useage from
           air conditioners, powered by plants that go back to the 19th
           century in some cases.  we pay less money than you for better
           service, and that's with a de-regulated power system.
           \_ http://csua.org/u/3xr
              How long are they going to keep the 9 nukes down for "safety"
              reasons while they ream your ass with power rate increases?
           \_ and yet we never had such a massive outage.  Plus those poor
              NYC folks are unarmed.
              \_ They've got boards, they've got nails. They're armed.
           \_ Let's see, should I believe you or AP, which says that power
              is out in NYC, Detroit, Cleveland and Toronto? hmmm...
                \_ dear moron, (is there something about soda geeks that
                   makes them incapable of reading english?), the above
                   even if he did understand the person he is responding to
                   poster does NOT say it didn't go out in those other
                   cities, nor does he imply it.  You are an idiot. trust
                   me on this one.  Anyone who says "should i trust you
                   or the media?" as a rhetorical question is an idiot
                   even if he does understand the person he is responding to
                   (which you clearly didn't) -phuqm
                   \_ op said "welcome to California's pain Easties" Jackass
                      #1 said "nice try" I said "who should I believe" you
                      defended Jackass #1. Guess that makes you Jackass #2.
                      "Nice try" implies that op was wrong, in the English
                      langauge at least. Trust me on this one, I speak
                      English far better than you.
                      \_ Aside from minor capitalization issues, which you
                         seem to suffer from equally, what is wrong with his
                         English?  Plus he knows how to SPELL HIS LOGIN, which
                         is a damn sight more than I can say for you, monkey
                         boy.  -John
                         \_ What is it about the phrase "nice try" that you
                            do not understand?
        \_ it's just Con Ed trying to get in on the Big Money that the
           power companies in Texas made off of California.
        \_ Did "The Worm" do it?
           \_ Yes he did, and it was great! -yermom
        \_ The office of Canadian prime minister said a lightning strike on
           a power plant near Niagara Falls, New York, was the cause of the
           blackout. (nytimes)
2003/8/14 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:29343 Activity:very high 57%like:29339
8/13    Warren Buffett hired as Schwarzenegger's campaign adviser:
        http://csua.org/u/3xe   (sfgate.com)
        \_ Great. He can help invest all of that surplus money CA has.
           \_ Buffett is a Democrat.  Interesting.
              \_ Buffett is an interesting guy.  Read about him!  -brain
              \_ So is Ah-nold's wife. Is the guy really a Republican?
                 \_ he's not a true Republican.
                    \_ what makes someone a true republican? an MOTD vote?
                       at least he is willing to work with ppl based on
                       who they are not who they vote for.
                       \_ And we want Warren Buffet running this state?  Why?
        \_ Not a troll... what issues make Arnold Republican? Might be a troll:
           What makes some call Dean a Commie/Socialist (is it a health-care
           thing, or the bush-bashing thing) while others say that he is more
           \_ Dean's a commie because he raised taxes and guaranteed health care
              to every child up to age 18.  He's a conservative because his
              economic policy is very centrist-- don't borrow from the future,
              balance the budget, and so on.
           conservative than the other Democrats. --not too political
           \_ Dean's a commie because he raised taxes and guaranteed health
              care to every child up to age 18.  He's a conservative because
              his economic policy is very centrist-- don't borrow from the
              future, balance the budget, and so on.  [formatd]
           \_ Who knows? He won't talk about what he stands for until he's
              good and ready for it. Suspect pro-business, fewer regulations,
              less welfare. The standard centralist Republican line.
              \_ He's already on record as pro-welfare.
                 \_ Being pro-welfare isn't like being pro-life, there are
                    man different levels of pro-welfare. Not many on pro-life.
                    \_ Pro-life?  What does that even mean?  Who is Pro-death?
                       \_ I'm not taking this troll.  try again later.
           \_ I don't think he's a true republican
           \_ i just found out that arnold supported prop 187. -ntp
              \_ uh-huh... so...?
              \_ Holy shit!  So did a *majority* of voters since it passed!
              \_ dude, Pete Wilson is his mentor
2003/8/13 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:29339 Activity:nil 57%like:29343
8/13    Warren Buffett hired as Schwarzenegger's campaign adviser:
        http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/08/13/financial1529EDT0203.DTL
        \_ Great. He can help invest all of that surplus money CA has.
           \_ Buffett is a Democrat.  Interesting.
              \_ So is Ah-nold's wife. Is the guy really a Republican?
                 \_ he's not a true Republican.
        \_ Not a troll... what issues make Arnold Republican? Might be a troll:
           What makes some call Dean a Commie/Socialist (is it a health-care
           thing, or the bush-bashing thing) while others say that he is more
           conservative than the other Democrats. --not too political
           \_ Dean's a commie because he raised taxes and guaranteed health care
              to every child up to age 18.  He's a conservative because his
              economic policy is very centrist-- don't borrow from the future,
              balance the budget, and so on.
2003/8/11-12 [Politics/Domestic/California, Computer/SW/OS/Linux] UID:29314 Activity:very high
8/11    Come on Georgy - give us your Motd Campaign Speech
        \_ No, please don't.  You should save your energy for the big race!
        \_ /home/sequent/georgy/.hushlogin - no motd love from georgy
           \_ I do that too but I'm active.  Who wants the 30+ page motd to
              scroll by on every login?
        \_ I don't know, I may vote for her, but for you diehard CSUA'ers,
           doesn't this look like M$ Windows on a Dell?!?:
                http://www.georgyforgov.com/images/gpic1.jpg
           \_ Notice the _Running Linux_ book?
                \_ you mean the Unix book, she even knows linux is dead
                   \_ LINUX IS DYING!
                      \_ More and more each day.  The courts take even
                         longer to decide things than the Senate.  We must
                         do something quickly to stop SCO.
                         \_ D00de!  L3tz hax0r there s3rv3rz!11  You're not
                            going to do a god damned thing about it and neither
                            is any other unwashed linux geek.  The courts will
                            continue to grind away.  Companies will continue to
                            install and develop on linux.  Life will go on.  It
                            is unfortunate that SCO doesn't stand a chance of
                            putting linux into a grave in corporate America
                            because there are certainly better OS's for the
                            enterprise environment which are freer and more
                            stable without the unwashed hype.
                            \_ You just got trolled by a TPM quote.
                               Do you feel dirty?
                               \_ TPM?  I don't even know who TPM is so a TPM
                                  quote means nothing to me.  No, I don't.  I
                                  deal with stupid people everyday so yet
                                  another stupid person, quote or not, doesn't
                                  bother me at all.
                                  \_ "Our people are dying, Senator!"
                                     \_ Uh huh.
                                        \_ lol!
2003/8/11-12 [Computer/SW/Languages/C_Cplusplus, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29306 Activity:very high
8/10    Did anyone know Georgy Russell (CS c/o '99)? He's running for governor.
        \_ you are aware that Georgy's a she, right?
           \_ Does it matter?  -!op
              \_ well, if the op is looking for people who know her, yes, it
                 does.
                 \_ Not really.  The people who know her would know she's a
                    she, would they not?
        \_ So's Gary Coleman, big deal, what's your point.
           \_ Questions don't have points, they are inquiries... if someone
              was a classmate of his, they might say "Ya, the dude was a big
              dork, I couldn't stand him." or "he was always stepping outside
              of soda to smoke doobies."
              \_ Or they could be asking a question to call attention to
                 something.  You might also want to look up "rhetorical
                 question".  I deserve a fucking medal for being so polite to
                 you, this being the motd and all....
                 question".
              \_ I'm with ya, friend!  --motd grammarian #1 Fan
        \_ If he wins will he accept millions every year from the Computer
           Scientists Union to keep pushing their part of the budget up while
           everything else goes down?
           doing the heroine look. I bumped into her at a bar/club in SF (near
        \_ fyi: http://www.georgyforgov.com
           \_ What's the "heroine look"?
           \_ I read it last week.  She isn't quite joking, yet she isn't
              serious either.  What's she trying to do with the website?
        \_ Oh shit, I know who she is. I took several classes with her. I
           remember her name as Georgina. She was kind of cute, then started
           doing the heroin look. I bumped into her at a bar/club in SF (near
           the baseball stadium) once. She was also my reader for CS162.
           \_ "I think I'll look like a heroin addict today." fuck off.
           \_ I'll vote for her if she stops using pine.
           \_ What's the "heroin look"?
              \_ Too thin.  Underfed looking.  Pale.  Gaunt.  Boney.  Sickly.
                 \_ So you knew her too?
                    \_ nope.  I've seen the type.  It's common among young
                       women with self worth issues.
           \_ [ motdspellingd was here ]
        \_ She's cute! And EECS? Got my vote!
           \_ Your vote went easy.  There's nothing on her site about bjs for
              eecs votes.
        \_ From her website: 630r6y == G0\/3R|\|0R. no joke.
           \_ I hope she didn't dump $3500 on this.  The state will just
              spend it on something stupid.
              \_ she's raising money by selling underwear on ebay.
                 \_ new or used?
        \_ Hell, anyone who puts big, ugly Simpsons graphics in her .plan
           can't be all bad.
           \_ And she logs in to soda while she's at work-- c'mon, folks,
              she's _got_ to be our candidate.
              \_ So does everyone else here.
                 \_ ...and none of the rest of you are running for gov.
                    Ergo, she really represents us.
                    \_ Dear god man, did you read her platform?  She is far
                       too liberal.
                       \_ "Ergo" probably is, too.  Remember we're not all
                          60 hour/week alumni.  Some people on the motd are
                          students who haven't yet reached political maturity.
                          Things like legal pot seem important to them.
                    \_ There's almost no one on here that could represent "us".
                       Why?  Because there is no "us".  Maybe you've noticed a
                       few times here and there where there were some minor
                       political disagreements on the motd?  In what way does
                       she represent "us"?  Ergo, et al, etcetera, cum laude.
                       \_ "Ergo" is the only word I remember from that dumb
                          Architect monologue.
        \_ Anyone at Veritas know her?
2003/8/7 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29266 Activity:high
8/6     The Next Governor of California!
        http://members.aol.com/ArnoldTheLegend/naked.jpg
        \_Gray Davis will be terminated.
        \_ I think we should vote for her instead.  Yes, she is on the
           ballot  http://www.marycarey.com
           \_ Her bio says she lives in Florida...
           \_ She's got my vote and who cares what state she lives in?  Davis
              lives here and what good did that do us?
2003/8/7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic] UID:29265 Activity:very high
8/6     Everyone blames the governor. Don't you have to also look at the dumb-
        asses in the state legislature? I think no one really knows who their
        state rep is or what he/she does. That's the problem when there are too
        many people for voters to worry about.
        \_ Don't worry, this whole thing is just a bake sale for the state.
           At $3,500 per candidate we'll pay of the deficit in no time.
           \_ LOL this is cool
           \_ I know!  We can just tax people for voting!  We can have a poll
              tax!  That'll fix the economy right up!
        \_ The legislature is and has been controlled by the dems.
        \_ I blame the legislature.  I just don't currently have the option of
           dumping any of them and with the gerrymandered 'safe' districts all
           over the state, I never will.  There's no point in voting in most
           CA elections because whoever is assigned by the Democratic party to
           run in each district gets it.  The primaries are just the Dem way of
           telling us who is going to run that region for the next few terms.
           The only reason I show at the polls is for the national vote which
           usually doesn't matter and the initiatives which still do.
2003/8/7 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29264 Activity:nil
8/6     A vote - how many of you liberals (not classical) have read
        The Road to Serfdom by Nobel laureate Hayek?
2003/8/7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:29263 Activity:very high
8/6     Arnold Schwarzenegger's running for governor.
        \_ Too bas hes a RINO.
        \_ Too bad hes a RINO.
           \_ What do you care?  You're not voting anyway.  If the election
              gets even 15% of eligible adults I'll be shocked (because I'm
              going to stick a finger in a wall socket to celebrate).
              \_ So, what was voter turnout in CA in 2000?
                \_ Interesting that you are able to divine the future.
                   I voted for Simon in 2002 and will vote for
                   McClintock this fall.
                   \_ McClintock?  You're kidding, right?  Why him?  At least
                      the porn queen has nice tits.
        \_ If he wins, there must be something about being in Predator (see
           also: Jesse Ventura) that gives governor-hopefuls a chance.
           \_ Jesse didn't just have a chance.  He won and governed better
              than certain CA governors we know.
           \_ By your logic, all the other actors in the movie, including
              Jean Claude van-Damme will run for governor one day. (Van Damme
              was the predator for one day but complained about the suit.)
              \_ How broken is this logic?
                 \_ Quite solid.  Philosophy 25.
        \_ I think he is going to win, though.  Then again, for some reason
           he reminds me of Ronald Reagon, someone I would much rather
           to forget.
           \_ If you're going to insult the man at least spell his name right.
              How many real reasons can you have to hate someone you know so
              little about?  I voted for Reag_A_n.  Were you even in HS yet?
              \_ ...so you're over 40 and you're insulting someones spelling
                 on the motd.  awsome. so this is what we all have to look
                 forward to.
2003/8/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29261 Activity:high
8/6     Hey, so now that this recall mess is going on, where is Mr. "We Are
        A Republic, NOT a Democracy"?  You were ALWAYS on the motd before,
        but you are suspiciously silent of late.  Too busy filing your
        candidacy papers?
        \_ the soviet union was a republic.  u.s.a is a democrisy..
        \_ It's still a republic.  Do you *really* need a 3rd grade level
           lesson in the difference?  Don't make me spank you.
        \_ The U.S. is both a republic and a democracy, if you look at
           the dictionary definitions.  Then again, you could say some
           Liberal changed the definition of democracy under our noses.
           \_ No, it's a republic with strong democratic influence.  Anyways,
              in response to the poster above, the U.S. is a republic, that
              does not state anything about California.  How California
              chooses to elect its governor (in a democratic method) does not
              reflect upon our federal government.  I would hope a Berkeley
              undergrad would be able to decipher the difference.  And what
              exactly about the recall are you complaining about?  The fact
              that Gray Davis is trying to subvert the whole democratic ideals
              of our nation?
              \_ Please post the dictionary definition of democracy closest
                 to what we have in the U.S.  Feel free to post republic too.
              \_ The democratic ideals of a few rich conservatives that lost
                 a general election, but weren't appointed to the post like
                 El Presidente Bush so they subvert the will of the people
                 with this recall?
2003/8/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Foreign/Asia/Taiwan] UID:29260 Activity:nil
8/6     > ping http://journalism.berkeley.edu
        ping: cannot resolve http://journalism.berkeley.edu: Unknown host
        Some people should not be allowed near the DNS zone files.
        \_ Journalism is practiced at Cal??
           \_ Only the yellow kind.
              \_ Isn't that why everything is named after Hearst?
                 \_ No.  Everything is named after Heart because their family
                    donated a shitload of money without which Berkeley wouldn't
                    exist as it does today if at all.
                    \_ William and Phoebe are nice people, but who the heck
                       is Tan Kah Kee?
2003/8/6 [Politics/Domestic/Abortion, Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29253 Activity:very high
8/6     Supreme Court - Ginsburg: Int'l Law Shaped Court Rulings
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/959020/posts
        Why limit ourselves to the EU, I think we should really
        push for diversity and incorporate decisions from North Korea,
        Zimbabwe, and Sudan.
        All you purported civil libertarians, this is the true
        danger to our republic.  If you want to invent law, do it
        through the legislature not activist judges.
        \_ There are worse things to worry about on the Supreme Court than
        \_ I love reading freeper links.  The comments remind me just how
           insane you freaknuts are.  Calling for lynchings and revolution
           over a justice saying she looks are what other countries are
           doing as guidance is hillarious.
        \_ there are worse things to worry about on the Supreme Court than
           Ginsburg.  Sadly.
           \_ Good point!  When there's more than 1 problem we should only
              look at them 1 at a time and ignore the rest!  I love that sort
              of purist linear thinking.  Are you running for CA Governor?
        \_ Not all international legal ideas are bad things.  Both
           Napoleonic law and English common law set useful precedents (in
           our case, what do you think our corpus of laws is loosely based
           on?)  And as for your "North Korea, Zimbabwe, and Sudan" argument,
           why do you believe that we, at least in theory, have an independent
           judiciary?  Do you think there are laws governing every single
           possible facet of society and conduct, or is the judiciary actually
           supposed to have some leeway interpreting what's applicable in
           various cases?  And concerning Scalia's statement that "the court
           should not 'impose foreign moods, fads, or fashions on Americans.'",
           look to yourself.  Don't you think that is highly ironic, given that
           Hilary Rosen has been appointed to help draft copyright law for
           Iraq?  I would be highly interested in your responses.  -John
                \_ Please refer to my aforementioned statement, but I will
                   reiterate.  You are welcome to whatever English
                   law not already included in the Constitution (although
                   how can you improve upon Constitution?) - but do
                   it through the legislative process.  Bypassing the
                   legislatures perverts the entire process.  In other
                   words, the process is just as if not more important
                   than the law, in part because of stare decisis.
                   One example, FDR implemented the New Deal by forcing
                   Justices to resign and stacking the court.
                   \_ You're still mad about that whole New Deal thing
                      aren't you
                     \_ The Constitution says nothing about the death
                        penalty, abortion, traffic tickets, and a whole slew
                        of other issues.  These are open to interpretation by
                        judges and courts.   You'll note the article's use of
                        the phrase "guidance"--there is nothing preventing our
                        judiciary, created under the Constitution (how can you
                        improve upon the Constitution?) from looking to other
                        legal, philosophical, ethical, societal, and political
                        models for ideas on how to interpret the law of the
                        land.  In addition, have a closer look at the article's
                        reference to treaties--the Constitution provides for the
                        ratification of treaties by the legislature--if the US
                        Congress and Senate accept our adherence to an intl.
                        treaty, the judiciary may very well use it as a source
                        of guidance for legal judgments, if that treaty does not
                        contravene the Constitution itself, according to the
                        Supreme Court, whose job it is to interpret that
                        document.  -John
                        \_ Correct, however the SC isn't necessarily talking
                           about treaty based rulings but just whatever the
                           EU happens to be doing this week or next.
                \_ Look if congress wanted to say something about it, they
                   could have said it. the only reason why the supreme court
                   is involved in the first places is that congress was mute
                   about the subject.
                   \_ The Constitution does not leave for the SC the right to
                      invent new law where the Congress has failed to create
                      one, but only to interpret existing laws as written.
                      The SC is *not* a "fill-in-the-blank" law making body.
                      Or at least was never intended to be until recently.
2003/8/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29244 Activity:high
8/5     Does one have to be a California citizen, US citizen, a permanent
        resident, etc. to win the CA lottery?  Someone told me that if
        someone is here on a tourist or student visa and if they don't pay
        taxes here, then they are not eligible to win.  Is this true?
        \_ there's something ingenious about a tax that only applies to
           morons who don't understand statistics.  we need more idiot
           taxes.
             \_ I used to think the same way.  But it's not true.
                The lottery is essentially gambling with no risk.
                You put in a very small insignificant amount of
                money.  Most likely you lose it all, but what
                difference does it make?  (If you put in $1000 a week
                or some significant amount, then you are a moron.)
                And 1 in a 40 million chance, it changes your life.
                Sure, the expected value of a $1 ticket is less than
                50 cents, but that's not the point.  The point is you
                lose virtually nothing and just maybe you will be
                rich.  Going to Vegas, on the other hand, people seem
                to always lose hundreds of dollars in one weekend.
                And when they win, it's typically not enough that
                really makes any difference in their lives anyway.
                Even though the expected earnings on each $1 you
                spend in Vegas is far better, people tend to lose a
                lot more in a weekend in Vegas than they do in
                playing the lottery each week all year.  If you play
                the lottery responsibly, you can't lose (a
                significant amount of money).
        \_ i have no idea.  on the east coast, however, this is huge
           pain in the ass.  everyone is eligible for all the lotteries,
           so when the stakes get really really high traffic jams appear at
           the borders from all the idiots driving over the border to
           buy tickets.  of course, the circumference to area ratio is
           much higher in the little east coast states, so more people
           are affected by border idiocy.
        \_ No. 5: http://www.calottery.com/media/winnersqanda.asp
            \_ This doesn't seem to answer my question.  It says how much
               they withhold in taxes if you are a US citizen or a
               permanent resident.  What if you are a tourist?  Are you
               still eligible to win?
               \_ http://www.calottery.com/media/lotteryregulations.asp
                \_ This only says that "No ticket shall be sold to, nor
                   prize paid to...anyone prohibited by law or regulation
                   from purchasing CA Lottery tickets ... and/or winning CA
                   lottery prizes."  So, what is the law or regulation
                   about purchasing lottery tickets?
                   \_ Just call and ask them you lazy bastard.
                      http://www.calottery.com/locations/lotteryoffice.asp
        \_ No one gets out of California alive without paying taxes.  Even
           the dead pay taxes here.
           \_ that's fine, as long as the dead get to vote.
           \_ woohoo! more dead money!
           \_ since dead people don't have any money, they don't pay any
              taxes.
2003/8/3 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29224 Activity:kinda low
8/3     Saw interview with Congressman Issa few days ago.  He says hi income-
        producing businesses have left California.  Which businesses are those?
        \_ I seem to recall HP moved 500 jobs to TX.  Ah yes, here's a url:
           http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/0,39020645,2129668,00.htm
        \_ All the tech industry jobs that moved to China, India, Colorado,
           Texas, North Carolina (Research Triangle), etc.
                \_ Plus TV & Movie production to places like Vancouver from
                        Hollywood.
        \_ That's "high income".  "hi income" would be income that you greet
           or that greets you.  "high income" is income that is the opposite
           of "low income".  As far as your question goes, maybe you haven't
           noticed the mass job losses going on all around you?  You must be
           in school because out here in the real world people in CA are
           hurting.  It's very bad.  Stay behind those ivory walls as long as
           you can.
           \_ I love how you get all pissy about sloppy spelling and then
              use a mixed metaphor.
        \_ SCO Executives & Lawyers (the only people making money off this
           IBM/Linux lawsuit silliness).  The "Santa Cruz Operation" is now
           run out of Utah.
2003/8/3 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:29221 Activity:high
8/2     California Governor May Sign She/Male Bill And Pagan AIDS Memorial Bill
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/957203/posts
        Now you have to employ a crossdresser or pay 150,000$ fine.
        \_ awesome, and I mean that non sarcastically
           \_ Yeah, pretty soon there will be no small businesses left in the
              state.
                \_ awesome!
                \_ no problem!  just have a 'small business support tax' so
                   the state will sub the small businesses but only if
                   they're owned by a politcally loud minority group.
            \_ women's clothing stores will do just fine
               \_ yes. this is critical to an economic recovery!
2003/8/2 [Politics/Domestic/California, Reference/Tax] UID:29216 Activity:insanely high
8/1     http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0115-05.htm
        How the Bush Tax Cuts really break down.
        \_  What an idiot.  You mean people who make $1 million+ get much more
            back than people who make less than $10,000?  Wow, what a surprise.
            Hey, what precisely is the average tax burden of someone making less
            than $10,000?  Moron.
        \_  Do yourself a favor and actually track down the statistics
            of who pays income taxes and the distribution of rates.  What
            you posted in partisan vitrol - it only reveals how
            irrational you are.
            \_ And do yourself a favor and track down who really pays
               social security tax, sales tax, etc.
                \_ Here ya go, somehow I doubt you care, you much rather
                   demagogue and assuage your liberal guilt:
                http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/sitemap.cfm#overview
                    This is Brookings Inst, so it is still left of center.
                    Exactly how do you think this country survived until
                    Wilson had the 16th Amendment passed?
                    One does not tax yourself into prosperity - in order
                    to increase economic prosperity we need to make
                    it cheaper to do business in America.  This entails
                    eliminating taxes and government restriction.
                \_ iraq, liberia, most of the former soviet union
                   have no ability to collect taxes and no government
                   restriction, you should move there.
                    \_ You only included federal taxes. This is state tax in CA:
                       http://www.cbp.org/2002/qh020415.htm
                       One cannot "tax cut" youself into prosperity either.
                       Look at the countries with the lowest tax rates, they
                       are hardly examples of prosperity. I think we can agree
                       there is a golden mean, somewhere between nothing and
                       everything, that the State should take.
                        \_ Yes but you're making the common mistake of
                           seeing causality in cases where there is none.  There
                           are many countries with low taxes doing very well,
                           but one assumes a minimum degree of economic,
                           social and political stability before this is
                           applicable.  Monaco, Luxembourg, the UK (compared
                           to Germany and France), and Switzerland have at
                           least relatively low taxes and show higher degrees
                           of growth and investment than their neighbors.
                           Germany recently cut both business and personal
                           income taxes and noticed a strong surge in growth
                           and job creation.  -John
                           \_ The fastest growing economies in Western Europe,
                              Ireland, Norway and Luxemborg, are all high
                              tax states, at least for individuals. They all
                              have low corporate tax though, so there might
                              be something there.
                    \_ Don't forget to lower minimum wage!  Also, make sure
                        to let the largest corporations import their work
                        force and set up tax shelters so we don't have to
                        deal with those pesky unions and accountants.
                    \_ In order to prosper in America, we need to round up
                       all the scared little white men like you and castrate
                       them.
                        \_ Hmm lets consider the contributions to modern
                           civilization.  I sense race envy.  Your very
                           presence in this country exposes your hypocrisy.
                           \_ How do you know?  Perhaps its a part of a
                              nefarious plot by the Elders of Zion to
                              infiltrate your country and impregnate
                              your women.
                              \_ Yes, but that's stupid, so I'm not overly
                                 worried.
                                 \_ You are far to easy to troll, but then
                                    that may be because you too are in fact
                                    a troll.
        \_  Having done plenty of fact-checking on Ivins, I can't believe anyone
            listens to her anymore.  She's her own little New York Times.
            \- ivins is a dumb cow. she's certainly not politically
               insightful but the amazing thing is she's not funny.
               she and andy rooney should be tied together and floated
               out to sea. ALFRANKEN at least can be pretty funny. --psb
                \_ The Mobile Uplink Unit finds truth where others fear to
                   tread.  -John
2003/7/31 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:29198 Activity:high
7/31    Poll, your hobbies:
        TV: .
        running for governor in CA: .
        \_ I know a guy that's running for fun.
          \_ how much to run for fun?
        vid game: ...
        bashing bush: ..
        defending Bush: .
        bike: .
        linux: .
        \_ that's not a hobby.  it's a sickness.
           \_ it's not a sickness.  it's just a second rate OS with good PR.
        golf:
        debauchery: .
        beer: .
        cooking:
        irritating tom holub: ...
        \_ fun but kind of easy so it doesn't take much time
        fighting the conservative republican corporate run media: .
        fighting the liberal media: .
        sex with partner(s): ..
        masturbation: ..
        fighting reverse racial discrimination: .
        \_ no such thing.  you're either discriminated against and denied
           jobs, housing, various benefits, etc, due to your race or you're
           not.  are = racial discrimination.  not = not.
2003/7/31-8/1 [Politics/Domestic/California, Finance/Investment] UID:29195 Activity:high
7/31    How does the US government make up for its budget deficit?
        Does it print the money or does it borrow money?  If borrow
        money, how does it do it?  Is it through what they call
        "treasury notes"?  And how does that relate to the "Fed
        interest rate" used for stimulating/cooling the economy?
        Is it possible that there would not be enough interest in
        the "treaury notes or whatever" due to interest rate
        being too low such that the government is forced to raise
        the rates to finance its budget deficit?
        \_ The US government borrows money from the treasuries market, yes.
           There is no direct relation between the Fed overnight rate
           and the bond rate. Government demand for borrowed money
           pushes up interest rates.
           \_ When people buy trearuries, where does the money go?
              Does the Fed just keep the money in a vault, or does
              the government spend it?  I guess my question is when
              there is a budget deficit, where does the government
              get the extra money?  Do they have some kind of reserve
              (federal reserve?) or need to make bond offerings
              (treasuries?)?
              \_ Don't confuse The Fed (a bank) with the Federal Government.
                 The federal government borrows money by issuing bonds. I
                 don't know how else to explain it. It is different than
                 just printing money because they promise to repay bonds.
                 A lot of the money used to finance US government deficit
                 spending comes from overseas investors.

                 \_ Is the Fed just like a regular bank?  Say, can I open a
                    savings or checking account at the Fed?
                 \_ Thanks, things are clearer now.  Are there no
                    connection at all between the the Fed and the Federal
                    Government?  There is never any money transfers
                    between the two entities?  Also, does the Fed only
                    lend out money?  Does it ever borrow money?
                    Where does it get all the money?  Is it in charge
                    of printing money?  It only lends to banks and
                    never directly to companies or individuals, right?
                    \_ This is way too much to answer in the motd.
                       http://www.federalreserve.gov/pf/pf.htm
                       \_ useful!
           \_ Is the link like, since the fed rate is so low, I have
              to put my money somewhere else, like bonds and stocks,
              so that causes bond rates to drop and stock market to
              go up.  Is that how the fed rate is supposed to affect
              the economy?
              \_ That is part of it. Another part is that since The Fed
                 is lending money at such a cheap rate to banks, they
                 are encouraged to lower their rates on things like
                 car and home mortgages. Since the money is so cheap
                 for the banks, they can lower their rates and still
                 make a profit. They can't lower them too far though,
                 since they are taking on the risk that rates will go
                 up in the future and they will be stuck with a crappy
                 rate.
                 \- um it's not possible to address all of the issues
                    in here except maybe give references. but quickly:
                    1. the treasury doesnt do much. they write the checks
                       but dont manage the money. they are a instrumental
                       player in fiscal policy. most of the churn in treasury
                       instruments is turn over in debt obligations [paying
                       off one matruing instruments and selling to someone
                       [mostly likely a bank] who wants to buy one. most of
                       the volume is not to fianance deficit spending.
                    2. the fed matters. they are the govt's bank and
                       the czar of the overall money supply/money base.
                       they are the main players in monetary policy.
                       the main way they control the money supply are
                       open markey operations run by the trading desk
                       at the new york fed. they can also affect money
                       supply by banking reg changes like reserve requirements
                       but that is really a sledgehammer and rately done.
                       the treasury also keeps money with the fed [the fed
                       has a hell of a lot more money at the ny fed than
                       fort knox ... probably something very few people knew
                       until whatever diehard movie that mentioned this].
                       a lot of money is created by fiat rather than
                       actually creating federal reserve notes or treasury
                       coins.
                     3. as in the above case about trade balance it is best to
                        start with accounting identities and defns to under-
                        stand the fundametnals. the govt can fiance a deficit
                        by raising taxes, selling assets or borowing from
                        private sources, foreign sources, or from the fed.
                        [note: raiting taxes != raising tax rates ... we
                        survive debt and deficits in part by GDP growth]
                                --psb
2003/7/28 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic] UID:29156 Activity:very high
7/28    Bob Hope. 100. RIP.
        \_ http://suck.com article on him from 2000:
                http://csua.org/u/3qt                   -brain
        \_ Oh shit.  All week we're going to have tributes to him on TV.
           Time to go find a nice book to read.
        \_ Beat me to it.  What you didn't do was the "YEE HAA! BOB HOPE IS
           DEAD!" part.  No one who knows him will miss him.
           \_ As his closest friend and confidante, would you care to
              share some anecdotes to support your thesis?
              \_ google pig farm neighbors "bob hope" and see what you find
           \_ Unlike the dancing on your grave when you go.
              \_ yeah yeah whatever.  i know who bob hope is.  you know
                 nothing about anything about me.  why even bother posting
                 something like this?  did it make you feel manly or smart?
                 \_ does it make *you* feel manly and smart to dance on
                    bob hope's grave?  or just cool.  yeah, you
                    probably think your pretty damned cool all right.
                    look how cool i am, i can so painlessly hate and be nasty!
                    anyway, that person (and i) know eenough about you to
                    think you're a class A asshole - your post about bob
                    hope.  i mean, i've never thought bob was funny, at all,
                    but i'm not happy he died.  you've said enough about
                    yourself for me to know you totally suck.
                    \_ if you knew more about bob hope you'd be happy he was
                       dead, too.  it has nothing at all to do with his career
                       or talents.  i've judged bob hope on his life.  you've
                       judged me based on my statement about someone else you
                       could know about if you chose to but you instead choose
                       ignorance and the easy road.  its understandable.  its
                       easier to stand up and claim the moral high ground from
                       a position of ignorance and it probably feels good too.
                    \_ When I die feel free to throw a party.  I won't mind,
                       I'll be too busy being dead.
2021/12/08 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
12/8    
Results 301 - 450 of 1361   < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Politics:Domestic:California: [Arnold(228) | Prop(52) ]
.