Byrd of WV dead at 92
in [Design]
|
Prev: Archie
Next: Flexible Jumper operations
From: dagmargoodboat on 28 Jun 2010 22:07 On Jun 28, 4:36 pm, Tim Wescott <t...(a)seemywebsite.com> wrote: > On 06/28/2010 01:37 PM, Jim Yanik wrote: > > > > > Tim Wescott<t...(a)seemywebsite.com> wrote in > >news:y8WdnT0T99dLRrXRnZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d(a)web-ster.com: > > >> On 06/28/2010 09:13 AM, Jim Thompson wrote: > >>> On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 08:40:26 -0700, John Larkin > >>> <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > > >>>> On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 11:34:22 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell" > >>>> <mike.terr...(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > > >>>>>www.wvgazette.com/News/201006280099 > > >>>> Will the KKK furnish an honor guard? > > >>>> John > > >>> Doesn't exist anymore. But maybe we should bring it back to round up > >>> liberals (and Californicators ;-) > > >> Check your assumptions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KKK. > > >> There may be a local chapter near you, ready to welcome you with open > >> arms. > > > if you value the Constitution and it's principles,"liberals" aka > > "progressives",are the main threat to it and America. > > I think that one of my Libertarian friends put it best: Democrats and > Republicans may disagree on which part of the constitution doesn't > matter, but they both think that parts of it should be dispensed with, > and neither of them, on getting into office, drag their feet on tearing > up the parts that they feel get in the way. The Constitution's a control system, brilliant, with various feedbacks designed to keep government from railing. The designed feedbacks have been defeated, and that's a BIG problem. The whole original architecture was redundant, granular powers (the States), and self- governing (as in "self-limiting," as well as the other sense) and we've subverted that. You could say we've gone from an interactive "personal computer model" of government to a batch-processing "mainframe model." Economically that fails, inherently. > Do you like the second amendment but not the fourth? Vote Republican! > Value the fourth and fifth amendments? Vote Democrat! Value the whole > damn constitution, especially the first amendment? Vote really > carefully, because you don't have many allies in Washington. Amen on the "not many allies"--we're working on fixing that. But as to the amendments, the current administration is after all of them. The 4th says you have the right to be secure in your papers and effects, just not your medical records any more. The 5th says we can't deprive BP of their property without due process of law, yet we just did. The 1st says you have the right to free speech, but the House just passed HR-5175 (the DISCLOSE Act), which is particularly designed to silence the TEA Party movement. Really, despite the label, I don't think of these guys in power as Democrats--they're something new. Something scary. -- Cheers, James Arthur
From: Joel Koltner on 29 Jun 2010 00:11 <dagmargoodboat(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ff2f144f-d8d9-4783-aed0-efbc8357e9f2(a)f6g2000vbl.googlegroups.com... >The 5th says we can't deprive BP of their property without due process >of law, yet we just did. One step closer to mob rule? :-) > The 1st says you have the right to free speech, but the House just > passed HR-5175 (the DISCLOSE Act), which is particularly designed to > silence the TEA Party movement. Not that I necessarily think the DISCLOSE act is a good idea, but how is requiring political ads to be clearly labeled as to their sponsors going to silence the tea partiers? ---Joel
From: m II on 29 Jun 2010 00:44 PieHole Porker wrote: >> It's reminiscent of an interview with one of the churchmen in Rome. A >> reporter asked him 'How many people work here in the Vatican?". The >> Bishop replied "About half of them.". > We know which side of that fence you're on. Quite right. I haven't worked in years and if it weren't for your assistance, I would never have constructed this marvel of electronic circuitry. http://scotiabunk.com/ My neighbours are amazed and it's all I can do not to take all the credit. Your assistance is greatly appreciated. Thanks again, Arch... mike
From: Tim Wescott on 29 Jun 2010 00:53 On 06/28/2010 07:07 PM, dagmargoodboat(a)yahoo.com wrote: > On Jun 28, 4:36 pm, Tim Wescott<t...(a)seemywebsite.com> wrote: >> On 06/28/2010 01:37 PM, Jim Yanik wrote: >> >> >> >>> Tim Wescott<t...(a)seemywebsite.com> wrote in >>> news:y8WdnT0T99dLRrXRnZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d(a)web-ster.com: >> >>>> On 06/28/2010 09:13 AM, Jim Thompson wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 08:40:26 -0700, John Larkin >>>>> <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >>>>>> On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 11:34:22 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell" >>>>>> <mike.terr...(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>>>>>> www.wvgazette.com/News/201006280099 >> >>>>>> Will the KKK furnish an honor guard? >> >>>>>> John >> >>>>> Doesn't exist anymore. But maybe we should bring it back to round up >>>>> liberals (and Californicators ;-) >> >>>> Check your assumptions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KKK. >> >>>> There may be a local chapter near you, ready to welcome you with open >>>> arms. >> >>> if you value the Constitution and it's principles,"liberals" aka >>> "progressives",are the main threat to it and America. >> >> I think that one of my Libertarian friends put it best: Democrats and >> Republicans may disagree on which part of the constitution doesn't >> matter, but they both think that parts of it should be dispensed with, >> and neither of them, on getting into office, drag their feet on tearing >> up the parts that they feel get in the way. > > > The Constitution's a control system, brilliant, with various feedbacks > designed to keep government from railing. The designed feedbacks have > been defeated, and that's a BIG problem. The whole original > architecture was redundant, granular powers (the States), and self- > governing (as in "self-limiting," as well as the other sense) and > we've subverted that. > > You could say we've gone from an interactive "personal computer model" > of government to a batch-processing "mainframe model." Economically > that fails, inherently. > > >> Do you like the second amendment but not the fourth? Vote Republican! >> Value the fourth and fifth amendments? Vote Democrat! Value the whole >> damn constitution, especially the first amendment? Vote really >> carefully, because you don't have many allies in Washington. > > Amen on the "not many allies"--we're working on fixing that. > > But as to the amendments, the current administration is after all of > them. > > The 4th says you have the right to be secure in your papers and > effects, just not your medical records any more. > The 5th says we can't deprive BP of their property without due process > of law, yet we just did. > The 1st says you have the right to free speech, but the House just > passed HR-5175 (the DISCLOSE Act), which is particularly designed to > silence the TEA Party movement. > > Really, despite the label, I don't think of these guys in power as > Democrats--they're something new. Something scary. Unless there's something new that I don't know about, the prez said "BP really ought to put a bazzilion dollars into escrow" and BP said "OK" -- i.e. BP caved before there was even an order to do anything. In fact, I recall reading late last week that there's a shareholder lawsuit brewing against BP precisely for doing that. And I'd be a lot less worried about the DISCLOSE act if it were even-handed between unions and corporations -- I'm not nearly as concerned about big unions vs. big corporations as I'm concerned about big anything vs. little ol' me. Big corporations are where innovation goes to die, big unions have no purpose without big corporations, and we'd all be better off if we didn't have these corporate entities (corporations _and_ unions) growing ever larger and taking over the world. The older I get the less far-fetched and paranoid I find the science fiction that posits a future world that's controlled by corporations, not governments. -- Tim Wescott Wescott Design Services http://www.wescottdesign.com Do you need to implement control loops in software? "Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" was written for you. See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html
From: Pieyed Piper on 29 Jun 2010 01:00
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 22:44:16 -0600, m II <sc(a)in.the.hat> wrote: > >Quite You really have no chance of recovering your lost honor here. |