Matt
-
Content Count
3352 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by Matt
-
-
Systm - Episode 60 - Build Your Own NAS
-
Member key
Group icons not centered?
-
Depends on what you mean by "buy a server".
I would set up a headless linux machine as the server. For the distro, you could use Ubuntu server (just 'cause that's cake to set up) with FTP (this is done during installation). Then make a user account for everyone who would be FTPing in.
-
Nobel jury speaks out in defense of Obama prize
In a rare public defense of a process normally shrouded in secrecy, four of the Nobel jury's five judges spoke out Tuesday about a selection they said was both merited and unanimous.http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091014/ap_on_...bel_peace_obama
-
I think the AP is correct: the Nobel committee does occasionally award the prize to encourage people and organizations who've accomplished little or nothing but whose efforts the committee supports. One outstanding example is Aung San Suu Kyi.
Guess I'd have to see if the AP phrased it, as I thought when I was reading the article, to describe the original intent of the prize, or, as your example and many others show, how it is being used, regardless of the original intent. If the latter I'll give 'em a break.
TT's video points out many other examples like that as well.
-
TT, interesting video.
There's a big difference between peace thru victory, and peace by surrender.France had "peace" under the Vichy regime, Norway had "peace" under Vidkun Quisling, etc, etc, etc.
What's your point?
-
The links posted in this forum always amuse me
Anyway... even I don't think Obama should have won the prize. Maybe in a couple years though, he may have been more deserving. He has great plans, they just haven't happened yet.
What actually shocked me the most was Bill O'Reilly's reaction. I was expecting him to be much more critical of the situation.
"Having a US President honored with a peace prize is good for the country."
"President Obama was honored today, and deserved or not, the world is hearing 'America' and 'peace' in the same sentence. That's good."
http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html...nion/index.html
-
I was aware of the Nobility Clause... it was brought to my attention when Rudy Giuliani was running for President.
-
sultan_emerr,
Keep on topic. If you have a political post, you know where the correct forum is. If you have any questions, feel free to drop me a PM.
Matt
-
I did mix the promise of quick withdrawal from Iraq with the promise of increasing troop levels in Afhanistan.
My bad. I thought you meant he promised a quick withdrawal from Afghanistan.
-
Obama campaigned on the prospect of quickly withdrawing, but the reality of war must have set in (he's avoiding the inevitable right now: more troops are needed in Afghanistan).
False. Obama campaigned on the idea that we were going to increase troops in Afghanistan:
-
I can think of a certain media outlet owned by News Corp that would jump on Obama if he burped in public... and then call him a socialist.The media is giving this administration a free pass on everything.
Wasn't the AIG et al bailout during the former administration?We bailed out companies so thousands of bankers can keep there six and seven figure salaries
Shucks, I hate it when late night comedians don't cover the important issues!And while all this is going on leno and letterman are making Clinton and Bush jokes
Wasn't the whole point of 70,000 people marching on Washington to make news?the so called news outlets are still going on about tea parties
Yeah, those are the only people who would benefit from a public option. Certainly not a young post-graduate girl working two jobs and getting ready for grad school who lived my town who didn't have health insurance--and died. You're right. Obama wants to give a free ride to crack heads. That's his plan.And now we want to tax working people so Gangbangers, skinheads, career criminals, hillbillies, illegal aliens etc. have full health coverage adding 45 million more patients to our health facilities.
You're right it won't change anything. Everything good about the plan is being stripped out.And by rushing into a new healthcare plan nothing will change -
I think its a dumb argument. When I bashed Bush (which I did a lot) I got a lot of the "love it or leave it" replies. I was told that I was very 'un-American'. I shrugged it off. When people bash Obama, they should also expect opposition.
Treason? Really? Freedom speech and opinion goes both ways, so everyone is going to face opposition. I don't understand why people feel that they are being persecuted. To those who feel that way I suggest: just shrug it off. If you have opinions, expect people to disagree.
-
Couldn't really explain this too well myself, so I did a quick Google:
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2336142/posts
In regards to Communism on the far left and Fascism on the far right:
There is something nonsensical about a political spectrum that spans the range between tyranny and ... tyranny. If one end of the spectrum is the home of tyranny, then shouldn't the opposite end of the spectrum be the home of liberty, tyranny's opposite?Edit:
However... this doesn't quite fit the "ring" idea.
-
WASHINGTON - Sen. Max Baucus on Wednesday brought out the much-awaited Finance Committee version of an American health-system remake — a landmark $856 billion, 10-year measure that starts a rough ride through Congress without visible Republican backing.
The bill by Baucus, chairman of the Finance Committee, would make major changes to the nation's $2.5 trillion health care system, including requiring all individuals to purchase health care or pay a fine, and language prohibiting insurance company practices like charging more to people with more serious health problems.
The bill fails to fulfill President Barack Obama's aim of creating a new government-run insurance plan — or option — to compete with the private market. It proposes instead a system of nonprofit member owned cooperatives, somewhat akin to electric co-ops that exist in many places around the country. That was one of many concessions meant to win over Republicans.http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32872749/ns/po...th_care_reform/
-
Not to belabor the point, but shouldn't a nationwide debate also candidly point out that communism/ socialism is diametrically opposed to nazism/ fascism?
One cannot be both at the same time.
True, Hitler and his Nazis did use the world "socialist" in their political party name, but they were NOT socialists by any stretch of the imagination.
I understand that this fact is probably way too complicated for the Glenn Beck/ Joe Wilson crowd. But shouldn't they at least do a LITTLE reading before labeling the President of the United States as both a socialist AND a fascist? Please! I know that illiteracy is a big problem in some parts of the country, but audiobooks are readily available at most public libraries.
Just my opinion.
While that is technically true, many political scientists have abandoned the linear definitions of Communism and Fascism--with one on the far left and the other on the far right. Many have adopted an idea that the spectrum is more like a 'circle' in that if you go far left through Communism, you eventually start hitting ideals of Fascism. By this theory, the same applies for if you go far right.
Regardless, I agree with you. For the context that any of this is being used, Communism != Fascism. That is, if you are using the Merriam Webster definitions.
-
I'm a huge supporter of Kucinich. I'd vote for him for president. He was one of the very few to stand up in congress and confront Cheney on his actions. He was one of the very few to vote 'NO' in this situation that was nothing more than a waste of time and resources.
I don't agree with Wilson on any level, but this reprimand by the House was absolutely pointless right now. Get back to working on our health care reform!
Even as left-leaning as I am, that article was just ridiculous.
-
they're not likely to actually slide back the metal cover (which is where the passwords hide).
I actually used to do that to floppies all the time
-
I can deny any KNOWLEDGE of "Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Limbaugh" "constantly portraying Obama with words like "Marxist", "Hitler", Nazism", "Communist", etc." I don't watch or listen to any of 'em
Ok, that's fair.
and frankly, I'm surprised that you watch, read and listen to them with enough regularity to know this to be the case.I actually do try to cycle through MSNBC, CNN, and Fox News. While I have my opinions, I do like to watch the other side and listen to what they're saying (though CNN really annoys me since all they talk about these days is their Twitter updates ). I don't agree with most things said on Fox News, but I have it on at least once a day. And, like you, I try to turn to local sources as well... but its rather hard to watch/read/listen that much in a day--it doesn't always happen.
Bush was depicted as Hitler, burned in effigy, derided, demeaned, the list of lies and hate directed at him is practically endless. Why weren't you defending the literal definition of Nazi and why it does not apply to Bush?You're right, Bush suffered the same thing. As much as I didn't like him, though, I never called him a Nazi. Why didn't I defend him in that sense? Well, we didn't have a "World and Politics" forum then and it wasn't the topic of this thread.
-
I detest Mozilla products.
LOL, I've noticed that
Still, I really like Thunderbird, and think that it an excellent free alternative. There's also Outlook, which comes with Office. Of course... not free though.
-
This type of semantic nit-picking works on both sides of the political aisle.
It's also comparible to a tech argument that goes around occasionally concering what, exactly, defines a "hacker." Oh, there are all the dictionary definitions, there are several definitions held by various people or groups, and then there's the common useage of the word. I fall into the camp that accepts the common useage of a word, as opposed to some high-falutin', extremely narrow and highly restrictive definition.
Almost any expert in almost any speciality will argue why their definition is the only one. It's a doomed argument, you can't stop words from eventually being co-opted by common useage. You. Can't. Stop. It.
The problem then is, if conservatives believe that Obama fits under the much more moderate definition of Socialism... then how is comparing him to Marx or Hitler applicable, let alone logical? You can't have your cake and eat it too.
If you believe Socialism == Social Democracy == Obama
then Obama != Marx != Hitler
Edit:
After posting the above, I realize that my statement generalizing the beliefs and attitudes of conservatives is unfair. Let me apologize for that and attempt to reiterate what I'm trying to say.
The problem that I have--and perhaps its a problem with the media--is that many conservatives on TV, the internet, and in newspapers, are constantly portraying Obama with words like "Marxist", "Hitler", Nazism", "Communist", etc. You cannot deny that this is the frequent topic and delivery from high-profile names like Beck, Hannity, O'Reilly, and Limbaugh. They clearly are equating Obama to such extreme concepts as cold-war communism, or Nazi-German fascism. Then, I see stories of people at town hall meetings with signs defacing Obama to look like Hitler. Shortly after, I see the Student Conservatives at my University doing the same things!
So, I then believe that conservatives really do equate Obama to the far-narrow definition of Socialism. After all, if one is comparing him to Hitler or Marx, then they obviously(?) are using the Merriam-Webster definition.
So, JDoors--and anyone else who'd like to be in this conversation, my questions for you are:
What is your definition of Socialism?
Is Obama one, and why do you believe that?
Do you equate Obama to Marx, Hitler, etc, and why?
Hopefully this will steer the conversation in a better direction than what my original comments may have done.
-
He doesn't fit one man's definition of Socialist. Got it.
He doesn't fit one Socialist's definition of Socialist.
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goodsI've never heard anything like this come out out Obama's mouth. I have heard it come out of Bill O'Reilly's mouth, and Glenn Beck's mouth, and Sean Hannity's mouth... but not from Obama.
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the statea. Hmmm... I'm pretty sure we have private property and that the Obama administration has no intention of seizing it.
b. Again... am I seeing different speeches and news conferences?
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work doneThe only unequal distribution of goods and pay in this country is done by capitalism... not by any socialism...
-
Look in to AntiVir.
Edit: my bad:
Starting July 2006, Microsoft discontinued the support for Windows 98/ME. As announced some time ago on Product lifecycle information page on www.avira.com, we do not offer new versions and updates for Windows 98/ME virus protection any longer. -
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/09/09/to...ot-one-of-them/
Frank Llewellyn, the National Director of the Democratic Socialists of America, the country's largest socialist organization, said Obama is most definitely not one of them.Llewellyn:
It's silly, surreal, uninformed, and it certainly doesn't reflect what modern socialists think, and it doesn't reflect what Obama thinks. Obama's a market guy! Obama believes in markets. He probably spoke more about the role of the markets in the primary than Clinton did. So, there's no question that the Republicans are doing the same thing they did when Roosevelt was president -- confusing somebody who is trying to save capitalism from itself with somebody who is trying to destroy it. He's not trying to destroy capitalism.Q. Is Obama a socialist?A. No.
Q. Is he a secret socialist?A. He's not a secret socialist. He's not any kind of socialist at all. He's not challenging the power of the corporations. The banking reforms that have been suggested are not particularly far reaching. He says we must have room for innovation. But we had innovation -- look where it got us. So I just...I can't...I mean laugh out loud, really.
I was on Glenn Beck recently and he said Canada is a socialist country. Well, there is a party in Canada that's called "socialist" within the Democratic party, that's won some provincial elections, never won a federal election. It would be news to them that Canada is socialist. So it's just unserious.
They always use socialism to try to defeat moderate reforms...just because something is government run doesn't mean it's socialist. I've never heard anybody say we have a socialist army.
BestTechie Acquires WyldRyde
in BestTechie News
Posted
/me likes