[quote] In other words tradition is out, considered old school, yadda yadda. And since administrators here aren't accountable (technically) to the public..meaning can't be voted out and civil service makes it difficult to fire people...well ya see where I'm going with this? Accountability will come I guess. It'll have too.[/quote] It's a threat, certainly, but having said that I'm not conv
[quote] I'm not questioning what I want to do with my life. I know I'm on the path I should be on, doing what I need to do so someday I can do what I want to do. But I'm in a different place than so many of those around me - not a better place, in no way superior, just very, very different.[/quote] I question your assumption that those who study business aren't motivated by intellectualism. There is no one so dogmatic as y
Tova: Interesting. In Oz it's much the same, but with a few subtle differences. Local politics is mostly identical, which is why it's considered the most commonly corrupt and inefficient level of government around. State and federal politics involve strong party affiliations and consistent vote management, whereby the party has policies and these are given to the public service to implement. The PS comes back with a program, or a couple of options (depending on the minister involved)
[quote] The only "checks and balance" on administrators are their own ethics and "transparency" laws. [/quote] Sorry for the hijack Jill, but are administrators political appointees or 'merit-based' PS promotions?
[quote] This applies to unions and other professional organizations as well (so not always the "rich.") In fact if you were to survey lobbyist organizations in this country right now, I'd guess most work for blue collar wage earners who pool their resources under union umbrellas.[/quote] True enough. But compared to ordinary citizens, who mostly aren't union members, the average 'rich' person can afford a moderate advertising
[quote] The text book (and Constitutional) answer to this question is...you do. You, as in me, as in us, the voters, decide how tax money is spent by electing policy makers, ie politicians. The REALITY is, most people who vote can't tell you what the economic policy is for the person receiving their vote. (And later I will discuss why even if they do, it may not matter.)[/quot
I'm not interested. Why would I have my car stereo and home stereo replaced just so I can play some lower quality tracks using a completely new format? Maybe in 10 years, but for now I'm happy buying CDs and music off iTunes.
[quote] Which word do you prefer to use? No, I didn't ask you whether you like people of that persuasion or not, or what your religion feels, which word do you prefer to use when you talk about homosexuals?[/quote] I prefer 'camper than a row of tents' myself. The word 'gay' is just a euphenism that people liked, presumably because it's non-perjorative and fairly apt in describing a stereot
[quote]I was under the impression that each participant in a circle jerk jerked his own ding-dong, with the goal being to be the first one to launch. Are you saying that in a circle jerk, each participant jerks the willy of the guy next to him in the circle?[/quote] I have no idea; I've never been involved in one, but I guess I've always assumed that was the case. I've never seen the point in not going all out - if you want homoeroticism, why stop at looking? Leauki:
[quote]3. We are on page 2 of this discussion now and STILL nobody managed to point out anything brilliant Obama has said or done, but we did get criticism of the question, a few personal attacks, and arguing over semantics.[/quote] Of course you haven't had any examples (apart from the ones I gave in my first post) because you've made the definition so unusually specific. [quote]I cannot find anything truly remarkable about Mr Obama (as opposed to something remarkable about t
[quote] I told ya all you should have voted for Cthulhu! (why vote for the lesser of two evils?[/quote] Heh.
You know, dial M for Murder, A for Assassination or however it goes.
[quote]It's still not relevant. I am looking for examples of Obama's brilliance, not explanations for why examples of his charity work wouldn't qualify.[/quote] You've said that for him to be considered brilliant in the context of a leader, he must first be doing his unique, clever thing for entirely selfless, altruistic reasons. Which means charity work is the only thing that might be in with a chance of qualifying, and even then that may be dubious depending on where you sta
[quote]oh so it's style you object to? So just because it's not written in today's written style you reject it? So does that mean you reject all ancient literature to be untrue or unworthy? [/quote] Much ancient literature is untrue or not especially worthy. It's interesting, but that doesn't make it worthy. When people dig up the complete A-Z of murder series I doubt they'll consider it true or worthy, and I shudder to think of the religions that would rise and fall on the basi
[quote]Umm, uhh, ahh, umm, ahh, uhh, like Obama? So you like pretty boys? Gee! now I see the level of discourse on the left. If they are pretty, that means they are swell! Gee, and all this time I thought it was content. LIke in the lack of it on the left?[/quote] Que?
[quote]LOL. This is a wonderfully ironic article. Apparently there were a LOT of people jealous of Bush then...[/quote] Absolutely! The man looked and spoke like a simpleton but was entrusted with the US - who wouldn't be jealous of his role? But as you yourself have pointed out, we saw over time that he wasn't very good as a president. That didn't justify the initial jealousy, and it was that init
[quote]But in this case I think it more likely that you are assuming a context-free environment. It is not. I thought it was clear that I was talking about Obama's brilliance with regard to leading or serving a country.[/quote] I still don't consider selflessness to be particularly important in leading or serving a country. Brilliant leaders rarely show much selflessness save through the intensity of their work. Charity workers, for example, aren't more likely to be brilliant leaders
I don't think you were following the line of my argument. No newspaper I've ever read is written in the style of revelations. Perhaps they should be, but I've never seen one. Eg on recent news: BEAST WITH ONE HEAD CROWNED IN CITY OF LAW A sussuration of two million mewling nearly overcame the voices of celestial angels yesterday as a terrible .... You know, a newspaper written in the style of Revelations.
[quote]Short memory, apparently. He hardly lost 'badly' my friend.[/quote] I don't recall a recount, or it being decided in the courts. In terms of recent US presidential elections, it was practically a landslide. But yes, in more normal terms it wasn't so much a bad loss as a convincing one. [quote]Yeah, 58 million friends just ain't what it used to be.[/quote] Oh come on. You can't seriously tell me that you don't count among your friends people whose politics
A city-state is a country built around a single city - Athens and Sparta were good examples. I'm assuming whoever wrote Revelations was referring to Rome, which was vaguely a city-state at that stage (not really though as the citizenship franchise was extended to much of Italy during the Sulla-Caesar-Augustus years). [quote]It makes much more sense today than it did 100 years ago and reads much like our newspapers of today. [/quote] I'm sorry, but it doesn't even come close. B
[quote]I really enjoy how Obama people go around using the word "hope". If you rely on a politician from Chicago to give you "hope", you are truely pathetic.[/quote] The previous president told the world it should cower in fear, that terrorists were everywhere. I like seeing a politician appealing to the better nature of people. It's a refreshing change. His background is utterly irrelevant to that. [quote]In fact when I ask people what they think of Obama the #1 comment
[quote]And his work as a lawyer for the homeless would also have to accomplish something. Many people invest a lot of time doing good without having an impact.[/quote] Clearly we have very different views of brilliance. I've never thought it has to be tied to selflessness (eg you can have a brilliant lawyer, or accountant, or high school student who's never volunteered a day in their life) but if you do that's your right as a native English speaker. But I'm not going to participate fu
[quote]Oh, I didn't know the chosen one had the power to "save" us.[/quote] I doubt he does. But he might. Two days in it's a little hard to tell just yet. The problem with mounting a successful assault on the worthiness of hope is that it's such an essentially positive human emotion. You're much better off waiting until Obama's policies have proven themselves to be cynical, rather than striking now when they're still so tied up with hope.
[quote]No, I was looking for something clever he said or did that made people vote for him. Clever things he does for himself are not what I want to know about.[/quote] If the research is to be believed - and I haven't seen any evidence to suggest it shouldn't be - clever things don't win votes. Simple policies clearly expressed win votes. I'm not sure you could ever say that someone won an election on cleverness. But that doesn't mean the politician isn't clever. [quote]I am
There seems to be a bit of a jealous streak running through the JU commentary on Obama these past few days. What's up with it? The man is clearly clever. He has an Ivy League education. He rose to the top of a political institution. He writes good speeches and hires good speechwriters. He has a good understanding of technology and hires people capable of using it for fun and profit. The man is clearly athletically gifted. He plays basketball frequently and is probably the fitt
JoeUser Forums
Stardock Forums