Re: Question Simpsons, the answer
From: Julia Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Question Simpsons, the answer Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 23:43:36 -0600 (CST) Actually, it was the bit *after* he grabbed the time machine thing that we missed, and Jon filled us in on that now. Thanks, guys. I really appreciate it. Julia You're very welcome. I only wish the show had been funnier! Jon _ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Never mind the facts, vote for my guy.
Outside of my polling place this morning, there was a lone woman holding up a Raul Grijalva for Congress sign. She was about three miles off. I'm in district 8 [Kolbe easily being re-elected.] Grijalva is running [and winning] in district 7 My worst evil thought? The democratic party bus was full of volunteers and they just kept going from west to east, from polling place to polling place. I wonder if he got many write-ins? William Taylor -- Now is the time for my party to close with the aid of my almonds. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: In Praise of Paper Ballots
Here in Georgia, the voting was completely automated. I'll admit I felt a little uneasy with no visible ballot. The touch screen voting machines installed over the last two years lack the advantage of transparency. How do I know that in the thousands of lines of programming code someone didn't slip in a line of code that subtly skews the results? I don't mean to sound paranoid and I'm not a Ludite. But even though computers have lots of advantages, their functioning is not transparent to the ordinary citizen. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:brin-l-bounces@;mccmedia.com] On Behalf Of Julia Thompson Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 7:08 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: In Praise of Paper Ballots "J. van Baardwijk" wrote: > > At 10:16 05-11-2002 -0800, John Giorgis wrote: > > >http://www.techcentralstation.com/1051/techwrapper.jsp?PID=1051-250&CID =1051-110502A > > A few comments. > > First, paper ballots are not as resistant to fraud and error as the author > wants his audience to believe. People involved in counting the votes will > have vast numbers of ballots going through their hands; it is easy count a > vote as one for candidate A, while the vote was actually for candidate B > (either intentionally (fraud) or unintentionally (human error, caused by > the monotonous nature of the job)). Well, I used a paper ballot. I put marks in ovals with a #2 pencil. The ballots will not be hand-counted; they will be going through a machine that reads forms marked with #2 pencils. You don't do a hand count unless someone complains and asks for a recount. > Second, the process of counting all those votes can take several days, > which makes it look rather outdated in this era of "I need the results > yesterday". Not if they're going through a computerized reader at a rate of at least one per second (I don't know how long it takes to actually scan them in, but based on similar forms I've had experience with, 60 a minute would be an absolute *minimum*.) > Third, there is the environmental issue: printing all those forms for all > those millions of voters is going to cost you a lot of trees. Can't argue with you there. Maybe it's possible, though, once the election is truly *over* to recycle them, in which case it won't be totally wasted. It also may be possible that the paper the ballots are printed on is recycled already. > Fourth, all those piles of papers have to be stored somewhere. The ballots > from just one election take up quite a lot of valuable storage space. Once the results are in and there's no challenge that they'd need the paper ballots for, they can be disposed of. > The alternative: electronic voting. And with that I do not mean the voting > machines that are currently in use in the US, I mean real electronic > voting, which does not require any pieces of paper to be marked or punched. > And rather than needing entire warehouses to store all the ballots from all > those elections, all you need is a harddisk and a backup tape. > > Impossible? No - we have been doing it that way for over a decade here in > The Netherlands. All you need to do is look at the board, find the name of > the candidate you wish to vote for, press the button beside the candidate's > name, press "Confirm", and you are done. When the polling station closes, > the final results are sent on to another computer which processes the > totals of all the polling stations. It is simple, it is safe, and it is > fast: the final nationwide results are known within a few hours after the > polling stations close. > > So, why is it that such a technologically advanced nation as the US is > still using outdated technology, while some European country has been using > a high-tech solution for over a decade already? Um, because the bugs aren't all worked out yet? I heard rumors of problems with the early voting in Dallas on a fully electronic system, where for some reason, everything was being recorded as straight-ticket Republican. Given that, I don't want to trust *my* vote to a fully electronic system until issues like that have been unheard of for a few election cycles. (I don't trust the programmers not to stick in something that they could be bribed to fix. I might trust specific programmers once I got to know them, but I figure there will be a couple of bad apples in the bunch and so I don't trust *all* of them as a *class*.) I'm happiest with the system under which I voted -- paper ballot that you mark to be scanned electronically and votes tallied electronically. Not paper ballot to be tallied by human, not paper ballot to have holes punched out, but paper ballot to be marked by writing instrument and scanned by machine. (And in the case of demanding a recount, you *can* have people eyeballing all the ballots; and the returns from a recount aren't under quite the same time pressure as results on election night.) Julia just my $0.02, and happy my ballot was the
Re: I voted for vitamin C
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > << > Debbi > Daily Orange Juice And Green Leafy Vegetable Maru > >> > > Not in the same glass, I hope. Oh, eeuww! That would make a most unappealing brown color, even if it would be quite a healthy snack (except for the potential 'urp' factor, which might negate any benefits). << VFP Zoom >> [William:] Veterans of Foreign Pavement? Well, Texas _is_ perhaps another country; wasn't there recent mention of 'Republic' still in its Constitution? Debbi __ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Dogs and Uplift
--- Julia Thompson wrote: > If we have the dogs outside and want to *keep* them > outside (or at least > keep the darn door closed) we have to lock the > outside door now. Our > outside doors in this new house all have levers, and > this past week, the > dogs figured out how to open at least one of them to > come inside. Sigh. Ouch - or should I say, "Mop, stat!" :P I think I've read or seen that handicapped persons with service dogs are supposed to have those types of doors, so the dog can let itself in and out (if they have a yard, that is). Dog Prints On The Kitchen Floor Maru (I keep finding messages in "Draft" that were supposed to be sent already...) __ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: I voted
In a message dated 11/5/2002 7:05:15 PM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << VFP Zoom >> Veterans of Foreign Pavement? William ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: vitamin C
In a message dated 11/5/2002 6:54:09 PM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Debbi Daily Orange Juice And Green Leafy Vegetable Maru >> Not in the same glass, I hope. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Got back from early voting a little while ago
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Back when Tristar had the old logo, did you ever go > into the theater with an > umbrella and open it up as the Pegasus flew > overhead? > > "Change the logo! For God's sake change the logo! > Incoming!" Hey! I _loved_ that leaping horse! And as the Nightmare said, no place is the worse for a little fertilizer... Just Say Neigh Maru __ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Dallas the world turns, was Re: I voted
In a message dated 11/5/2002 6:53:31 PM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << It was a necessary evil in order to get to Half Price Books. Which one? The "flagship" store? With shopping carts? >> Yes. Also the old flagship store that was near the Dr. Pepper plant. And at that time, the Central Expressway only had those tiny central island signs that told you what the next exit was. Totally unreadable when behind a van. Has anyone built a quarter circle ten story building on the eat side. With those gold reflective windows, the focal point of the curve should be the center southbound lane. William Taylor --- Worst casting for a historical movie: Benjamin Netinyahu Serious ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: I voted
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > << > The rumors of the electronic machines in Dallas > that would only record > straight-ticket Republican wasn't enough? ;) > >> > > The Devil lives in Dallas. Who else could have > designed the Central Expressway? > > It was a necessary evil in order to get to Half > Price Books. That was my favorite bookstore when I lived in Dallas (although Shakespeare, Beethoven & Co. was fun too). I sure appreciated the T-bird's acceleration capacity when merging into 70+mph traffic (aka 'the prayer zone')... Don't you just love it when someone ahead of you *stops* at the end of the on-ramp? :P VFP Zoom __ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: vitamin C
--- The Fool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://web.archive.org/web/2930151442/http://www.healthyideas.com/heal > ing/spotlight/allergy/cblocks.html > > Vitamin C Stops Histamine > > There's no doubt that vitamin C can help tame > allergic reactions, at > least under laboratory conditions. Several studies > have shown that high > levels of vitamin C help reduce histamine release > from mast cells and > also make histamine break down faster once it is > released. Not only that, > but studies have also shown that vitamin C > deficiency can send blood > levels of histamine through the roof. > Only two studies have been done in humans, however. > One small study, by > researchers at Methodist Hospital in Brooklyn, New > York, found that > people who took 1,000 milligrams of vitamin C every > day for three days > had significant reductions in blood levels of > histamine. > In another study, Italian researchers found that > people with hay fever > were better able to maintain the volume of air they > could exhale if they > were taking 2,000 milligrams of vitamin C a day... Thanks for the research and links; I'd read a bit about the heart/cardiovascular aspect, and knew that the RDA was only for scurvy prevention (and so it really should be increased to ~ 150-250mg or so). I'll have to keep an eye out for further research on the allergy aspect. And even if it's a placebo effect, I feel better for taking extra when I have a cold or flu! :) I'd like to point out that, with the exception of Linus Pauling's work, dosages involved are from 100 -> 2000 mg/day; I think the vast majority of people would not have any adverse effects from such amounts (but would urge good water intake for more than 1 gram/day). Debbi Daily Orange Juice And Green Leafy Vegetable Maru __ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: I voted
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > In a message dated 11/5/2002 6:32:55 PM US Mountain Standard Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > << > The rumors of the electronic machines in Dallas that would only record > straight-ticket Republican wasn't enough? ;) > >> > > The Devil lives in Dallas. Who else could have designed the Central > Expressway? > > It was a necessary evil in order to get to Half Price Books. Which one? The "flagship" store? With shopping carts? I went there once. *Major* droolfest. That is the *best* used bookstore I've ever been in. (By virtue of being so large, it has an incredible number of titles available.) I think the guy we were helping pack up to move lived just off of Central. (I drove his girlfriend up, and we helped him pack. I spent the nights at my brother-in-law's house in Richardson because the guy we were helping has cats, and I'm allergic. So's my brother-in-law, so he doesn't have any) I have no idea now where any of the cool places we went while taking breaks really are. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
- Original Message - From: "Julia Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 6:21 PM Subject: Re: US Unilateralism > Robert Seeberger wrote: > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Ritu Ko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 3:49 AM > > Subject: RE: US Unilateralism > > > > > Robert Seeberger wrote: > > > > > > > The point I'm trying to make is that your response has the > > > > effect of being > > > > more polarizing than Johns original statement. > > > > > > How? > > > I am not trying to be argumentative here but am genuinely curious. > > > > I believe that. Being an American, you pretty much come to expect being > > treated a bit on the shabby side. Before 911 one would hear criticism of the > > US and it would normally be about something fairly reasonable. > > But since then it seems like many non-Americans like to make the rhetoric a > > bit more personal and it can come from unexpected quarters. > > Are you sure that the non-Americans are making the rhetoric more > personal, or are you taking it more personally? > > I'm not saying that you're wrong; you may be right. But I've noticed > that we tend to be a little more touchy about some things since 9/11. > The truth may lie somewhere in between. > > Just something to think about. > Probobly both actually. Point being that divisions may be widening. I know my tolerance for the out and out baiting I have seen in some "non-mailing list" places has about worn through. And that may explain my misinterpretation of Ritus post this morning. My "filters" are being altered by defensive memes. What is on my mind right now is that if one lives in Belgium (for example), one probobly doesnt often hear what a bunch of arrogant shitheads ones countrymen are. I think having this type of talk lobbed in your direction on a regular basis can change the way you look at things. I think it is very possible that my attitude is suffering. xponent Too Busy To Be Tired Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: I voted
In a message dated 11/5/2002 6:32:55 PM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << The rumors of the electronic machines in Dallas that would only record straight-ticket Republican wasn't enough? ;) >> The Devil lives in Dallas. Who else could have designed the Central Expressway? It was a necessary evil in order to get to Half Price Books. William Taylor ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: I voted
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > In a message dated 11/5/2002 6:22:38 PM US Mountain Standard Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > << >Do those things leave a paper tape or other record of individual > >voter choices? > > I assume it's a paper tape or something. I have to be honest, though, I > don't really know how they work. > > Jim > >> > > [Visions of Democratic party boss in $700 pinstriped suit and > holding a Cuban cigar: "Excellent."] > > --Quick! Blame a Republican for something so we have list balance.--- The rumors of the electronic machines in Dallas that would only record straight-ticket Republican wasn't enough? ;) Julia who hasn't checked to see if they're substantiated, and really ought to ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: I voted
In a message dated 11/5/2002 6:22:38 PM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << >Do those things leave a paper tape or other record of individual >voter choices? I assume it's a paper tape or something. I have to be honest, though, I don't really know how they work. Jim >> [Visions of Democratic party boss in $700 pinstriped suit and holding a Cuban cigar: "Excellent."] --Quick! Blame a Republican for something so we have list balance.--- William Taylor ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: I voted
William Taylor wrote: > In a message dated 11/5/2002 3:50:49 PM US Mountain Standard Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > >voting here in NJ is they still use the old lever-voting booths >> > >Do those things leave a paper tape or other record of individual >voter choices? I assume it's a paper tape or something. I have to be honest, though, I don't really know how they work. Jim ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Market caps v. economy (was RE: Well, This Is Fun...)
In a message dated 11/5/2002 5:15:03 PM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Liar! The tweed jacket does *not* have leather elbow patches (yet)! (It has, however, been relined twice.) The shoes do not have holes in their bottoms! (The left sole has, however, separated from the upper at the toe.) >> I will fire my physic. Getting only the tin cup right isn't a good record of prediction. I've never read anything on economics by the economist David Freedman, but I've read a lot of his works. [Praise Allah.] William Taylor -- P.S. Our good Dr. Brin is back. [Or at least he's answering old email.] ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: I Voted.....
- Original Message - From: "Dan Minette" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 9:27 AM Subject: Re: I Voted. > > - Original Message - > From: "J.D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 9:14 AM > Subject: I Voted. > > > > > The other huge difficult with my votes this year is > > that I am opposed to building the "Inter-County > > Connector", a new superhighway that is being proposed. > > As an economist, I know that the evidence from the > > experience of other cities is that building > > "duplicative highways" like the ICC usually does > > little-to-nothing to reduce congestion. Rather, > > people simply take advantage of the additional roads > > to live even further from the cities than they already > > do. The only proven way to alleviate congestion is to > > invest the money into mass-transit, such that the > > critical mass of transit destinations and transit > > frequency makes the mass transit a truly viable > > alternative to roads for consumers who want to travel > > exactly where they want to go exactly when they want > > to go. > > Son, here in the Lone Star State, that'd be enough to get you branded as a > damn socialist. They wouldn't listen any mealy mouthed excuses that you > were really a conservative. > Sheesh Dan, in so many words he has branded himself a commie. He needs to move in with Jeroen! xponent Troublemaker Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: In Praise of Paper Ballots
Erik Reuter wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 06:07:31PM -0600, Julia Thompson wrote: > > > (I don't trust the programmers not to stick in something that they > > could be bribed to fix. I might trust specific programmers once I got > > to know them, but I figure there will be a couple of bad apples in the > > bunch and so I don't trust *all* of them as a *class*.) > > > > I'm happiest with the system under which I voted -- paper ballot > > that you mark to be scanned electronically and votes tallied > > electronically. Not paper ballot to be tallied by human, not paper > > ballot to have holes punched out, but paper ballot to be marked by > > writing instrument and scanned by machine. > > I seriously doubt the machine uses gears and levers. It had to be coded > on some level, micro-code, machine-language, or higher level language. > So, it depends on how it was bought. Was it bought on the used market, > from, for example, ETS, or was it bought from the manufacturer who knew > what it was to be used for? > > Actually, I think worrying about that OR programmers is rather over the > top. Just wanted to point out that it is inconsistent to worry about one > and not the other. More that the paper ballot gives a backup of the data a lot better, and you're not depending on machine programming at step 1. You can start scanning the paper ballots 10 at a time and have people eyeball them to make sure the machine is recording things accurately, or run a few test ballots through to make sure things are running correctly. If someone goofs in the programming where the initial ballot is entered (as is the rumored case in Dallas), you've got nowhere to turn. (If it weren't for the rumors about Dallas, I would have less of a problem with the whole thing right now.) Now, as my friend who voted early in Travis County pointed out, you can lose boxes of ballots or stuff the boxes, so even that's not ideal, but it's still the system I'm most comfortable with. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
Robert Seeberger wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Ritu Ko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 3:49 AM > Subject: RE: US Unilateralism > > > Robert Seeberger wrote: > > > > > The point I'm trying to make is that your response has the > > > effect of being > > > more polarizing than Johns original statement. > > > > How? > > I am not trying to be argumentative here but am genuinely curious. > > I believe that. Being an American, you pretty much come to expect being > treated a bit on the shabby side. Before 911 one would hear criticism of the > US and it would normally be about something fairly reasonable. > But since then it seems like many non-Americans like to make the rhetoric a > bit more personal and it can come from unexpected quarters. Are you sure that the non-Americans are making the rhetoric more personal, or are you taking it more personally? I'm not saying that you're wrong; you may be right. But I've noticed that we tend to be a little more touchy about some things since 9/11. The truth may lie somewhere in between. Just something to think about. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: I voted
Erik Reuter wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 05:50:14PM -0500, Jim Sharkey wrote: > > > My wife and I voted ealry today. One of the good things about voting > > here in NJ is they still use the old lever-voting booths. We were > > able to bring the kids into the booths with us and give them a little > > taste of what it's about. > > No levers in Somerset county, New Jersey. They had a nice new "computer" > in my district. It basicaly had a gigantic plasticized ballot with big > buttons next to each name and little green LEDs behind the plastic. You > hit the buttons you want causing the LEDs to light up next to the names > you selected, then make a quick check for errors, then hit the "cast > ballot" button. Pretty slick. I didn't see any ballot print out or > anything; I guess it stored the data on the computer somewhere but I'm > not sure. Saying "I voted with method X because that's what my state does" appears to be inaccurate. It's been my observation that ballot types vary from county to county. Frex, Williamson County uses the paper ballots you mark which later get scanned, while Travis County, at least for early voting, was using electronic machines that didn't use paper ballots. (They were using some sort of paper ballot today, though. I don't know the details on it.) As far as taking kids to vote: 1) We heard from Adam that he and his wife took their kids, and he had one while she had the other, and they watched the voting. That's good, IMO. 2) Sammy's at a really bad age for that sort of thing, so when *we* went, I voted while Dan had Sammy (and the nearest early voting place was at a rec center, so Sammy got to see some raquetball played), and when I was done, I tracked them down and then Dan went and voted while I was with Sammy, who bored of the raquetball but was interested in it again after a short break. 3) My friends who live in Travis County and have a daughter 23 months older than Sammy took her with them, and let her watch them vote with the fully electronic systems. (May have been touch screens involved.) I think it's cool that people are taking their kids to see how this whole voting thing works. Oh, and if anyone is curious about the counties I mentioned, Travis County is the one that contains most of Austin, and Williamson County is the one directly to the north. Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Market caps v. economy (was RE: Well, This Is Fun...)
In a message dated 11/5/2002 4:18:54 PM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << > > >> Who is the economics professor here? >> > > Nick Me! Me! Me! And it's spelled "ekonomics perfesser"! Brad DeLong >> You mean he didn't see the tweed jacket with leather elbow patches, the shoes with a hole in the bottom, and the battered tin cup? William Taylor Liar! The tweed jacket does *not* have leather elbow patches (yet)! (It has, however, been relined twice.) The shoes do not have holes in their bottoms! (The left sole has, however, separated from the upper at the toe.) Brad DeLong ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: In Praise of Paper Ballots
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 06:07:31PM -0600, Julia Thompson wrote: > (I don't trust the programmers not to stick in something that they > could be bribed to fix. I might trust specific programmers once I got > to know them, but I figure there will be a couple of bad apples in the > bunch and so I don't trust *all* of them as a *class*.) > > I'm happiest with the system under which I voted -- paper ballot > that you mark to be scanned electronically and votes tallied > electronically. Not paper ballot to be tallied by human, not paper > ballot to have holes punched out, but paper ballot to be marked by > writing instrument and scanned by machine. I seriously doubt the machine uses gears and levers. It had to be coded on some level, micro-code, machine-language, or higher level language. So, it depends on how it was bought. Was it bought on the used market, from, for example, ETS, or was it bought from the manufacturer who knew what it was to be used for? Actually, I think worrying about that OR programmers is rather over the top. Just wanted to point out that it is inconsistent to worry about one and not the other. -- "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Market caps v. economy (was RE: Well, This Is Fun...)
In a message dated 11/5/2002 4:18:54 PM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << > > >> Who is the economics professor here? >> > > Nick Me! Me! Me! And it's spelled "ekonomics perfesser"! Brad DeLong >> You mean he didn't see the tweed jacket with leather elbow patches, the shoes with a hole in the bottom, and the battered tin cup? William Taylor - How the Grinch bought stock options and closed down Christmas ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: In Praise of Paper Ballots
"J. van Baardwijk" wrote: > > At 10:16 05-11-2002 -0800, John Giorgis wrote: > > >http://www.techcentralstation.com/1051/techwrapper.jsp?PID=1051-250&CID=1051-110502A > > A few comments. > > First, paper ballots are not as resistant to fraud and error as the author > wants his audience to believe. People involved in counting the votes will > have vast numbers of ballots going through their hands; it is easy count a > vote as one for candidate A, while the vote was actually for candidate B > (either intentionally (fraud) or unintentionally (human error, caused by > the monotonous nature of the job)). Well, I used a paper ballot. I put marks in ovals with a #2 pencil. The ballots will not be hand-counted; they will be going through a machine that reads forms marked with #2 pencils. You don't do a hand count unless someone complains and asks for a recount. > Second, the process of counting all those votes can take several days, > which makes it look rather outdated in this era of "I need the results > yesterday". Not if they're going through a computerized reader at a rate of at least one per second (I don't know how long it takes to actually scan them in, but based on similar forms I've had experience with, 60 a minute would be an absolute *minimum*.) > Third, there is the environmental issue: printing all those forms for all > those millions of voters is going to cost you a lot of trees. Can't argue with you there. Maybe it's possible, though, once the election is truly *over* to recycle them, in which case it won't be totally wasted. It also may be possible that the paper the ballots are printed on is recycled already. > Fourth, all those piles of papers have to be stored somewhere. The ballots > from just one election take up quite a lot of valuable storage space. Once the results are in and there's no challenge that they'd need the paper ballots for, they can be disposed of. > The alternative: electronic voting. And with that I do not mean the voting > machines that are currently in use in the US, I mean real electronic > voting, which does not require any pieces of paper to be marked or punched. > And rather than needing entire warehouses to store all the ballots from all > those elections, all you need is a harddisk and a backup tape. > > Impossible? No - we have been doing it that way for over a decade here in > The Netherlands. All you need to do is look at the board, find the name of > the candidate you wish to vote for, press the button beside the candidate's > name, press "Confirm", and you are done. When the polling station closes, > the final results are sent on to another computer which processes the > totals of all the polling stations. It is simple, it is safe, and it is > fast: the final nationwide results are known within a few hours after the > polling stations close. > > So, why is it that such a technologically advanced nation as the US is > still using outdated technology, while some European country has been using > a high-tech solution for over a decade already? Um, because the bugs aren't all worked out yet? I heard rumors of problems with the early voting in Dallas on a fully electronic system, where for some reason, everything was being recorded as straight-ticket Republican. Given that, I don't want to trust *my* vote to a fully electronic system until issues like that have been unheard of for a few election cycles. (I don't trust the programmers not to stick in something that they could be bribed to fix. I might trust specific programmers once I got to know them, but I figure there will be a couple of bad apples in the bunch and so I don't trust *all* of them as a *class*.) I'm happiest with the system under which I voted -- paper ballot that you mark to be scanned electronically and votes tallied electronically. Not paper ballot to be tallied by human, not paper ballot to have holes punched out, but paper ballot to be marked by writing instrument and scanned by machine. (And in the case of demanding a recount, you *can* have people eyeballing all the ballots; and the returns from a recount aren't under quite the same time pressure as results on election night.) Julia just my $0.02, and happy my ballot was the type I like best ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: I voted
In a message dated 11/5/2002 3:50:49 PM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << My wife and I voted ealry today. One of the good things about voting here in NJ is they still use the old lever-voting booths >> Do those things leave a paper tape or other record of individual voter choices? I heard early stories about cross voting touch screens. William Taylor - Red lights hell! More cameras on the lines outside of poling places. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
- Original Message - From: "Alberto Monteiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 6:19 AM Subject: Re: US Unilateralism > Erik Reuter wrote: > > > >> But if you count the largest democracy by the number of > >> direct votes given to the President, then the title > >> does not belong to India, but to Brazil :-P > > > > Great, next thing you know you'll be wanting veto power > > on the UNSC, and then, god help us, we'll all be > > socialists :-P > > > We will fist build our atomic bombs and an intercontinental > missile program, then we will require a total reformulation > of the UNO, along socialist lines. > > Why one-country-one-vote? This is stupid, companheiro. > It should be one-working-class-one-vote. There would be > worldwide elections to nominate the World Representative > of the Bus Drivers, the Telephone Cleaners, and the > Elevator Pilots. > And dont forget to "Buy Union" xponent The People Who brought You The Weekends Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Tourism in Brazil [was: US Unilateralism]
[[Parent Advisory: explicit content in this message]] Dan Minette wrote: > >> BTW, I had never seen as many tourists as I saw today... > >I stayed in a hotel on the Copa when I was in Rio. > The Copa = Copacabana. >It looked very run >down; there were hookers every block or so. >They all looked like they had seen better days, as did the whole area. > Walking at night on Copacabana beach is *not* the best way to pick hookers :-))) Half of these hookers were _men_, with breast implants etc. There is a market for them. "Heterosexual" men hire them, because they don't admit having sex with a man, but they admit having it with a woman [who plays the male role (!!!)] >The next day, actually, the beach >did look OK, but I was there when the sewage line was broken, and no one >could swim. > Yikes, what a combination of bad luck! I imagine that after that you brought your Murphy Field to the P-36, didn't you? Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: I voted
> From: Jim Sharkey [mailto:templar569@;excite.com] > > My wife and I voted ealry today. One of the good things > about voting here in NJ is they still use the old > lever-voting booths. We were able to bring the kids into the > booths with us and give them a little taste of what it's about. I never got to go in when I was a kid. I just stayed outside and played with the sample voting machines until my parents got done voting... - jmh ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
- Original Message - From: "Ritu Ko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 3:49 AM Subject: RE: US Unilateralism > Robert Seeberger wrote: > > > > > With that being said, has anybody noticed that the United > > > > States has now > > > > let the United Nations deliberate for nearly two months (and > > > > counting) on > > > > its dispute with Iraq? > > > > > > > > > > > > "..the US has *let* the UN deliberate..."? > > > > > > Interesting terminology there, JDG. :) > > > > I think John meant "let" the UN debate endlessly without the > > US taking any > > further action unilaterally or otherwise. > > Oh, I know what he meant. I just thought that the choice of words was > amusing in the context of the thrust of his mail. Amusing not because I > thought 'Aha! I got JDG!', but rather because it seemed a bit careless > given both the subject and JDG's personal dynamics with some other > listees. > I was attempting a bit of harmless teasing. Quite dismally, apparently. Perhaps not, It might just be me or the way it seemed to read to me. :-( > > > I know its fairly fashionable for Non-Americans to view the > > US government in > > as cynical a light as possible, > > Fashions change, on a frequent basis. :) That makes me feel hopeful.:-) > > > but it is a bit less than > > nice to take the > > same approach with individual Americans. > > Yes, it is. > I am curious why you assumed I was doing that. > And I wonder if JDG will react the same way when he reads my mail. Reading this post and going back to read your previous post clarifies what you were trying to say for me. When I first read your previous post, the smilies appeared to indicate sarcasm. > > > The point I'm trying to make is that your response has the > > effect of being > > more polarizing than Johns original statement. > > How? > I am not trying to be argumentative here but am genuinely curious. I believe that. Being an American, you pretty much come to expect being treated a bit on the shabby side. Before 911 one would hear criticism of the US and it would normally be about something fairly reasonable. But since then it seems like many non-Americans like to make the rhetoric a bit more personal and it can come from unexpected quarters. > > > I think all of us could take a moment to wear someone elses > > shoes and see > > how our words would sound to their ears. (Sheesh, what a sentence) > > > > Well, the meaning was clear in any case. But the problem is that I don't > see how I could have changed the way it was perceived. I mean, I know > why I wrote the above comment, I included a '' and ':)' to indicate I > was joking > Would ';)' have been a better emoticon? > I dont think its a matter of "fault" really Ritu. And if it is, you are entirely blameless. I think its a matter of the context we live in these days. The world is filled with polemic rhetoric and speech. Its dividing us from the things we have in common and preventing us from seeing as clearly as we could. For my part, I apologise for misreading you. But not for a second did that diminish the esteem I hold for you. You really are a very cool person! xponent Course Correction Maru rob ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: I voted
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 05:50:14PM -0500, Jim Sharkey wrote: > My wife and I voted ealry today. One of the good things about voting > here in NJ is they still use the old lever-voting booths. We were > able to bring the kids into the booths with us and give them a little > taste of what it's about. No levers in Somerset county, New Jersey. They had a nice new "computer" in my district. It basicaly had a gigantic plasticized ballot with big buttons next to each name and little green LEDs behind the plastic. You hit the buttons you want causing the LEDs to light up next to the names you selected, then make a quick check for errors, then hit the "cast ballot" button. Pretty slick. I didn't see any ballot print out or anything; I guess it stored the data on the computer somewhere but I'm not sure. -- "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Market caps v. economy (was RE: Well, This Is Fun...)
> Who is the economics professor here? > Nick Me! Me! Me! And it's spelled "ekonomics perfesser"! Brad DeLong ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: heading towards a singularity
- Original Message - From: "The Fool" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Brin-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 9:49 AM Subject: heading towards a singularity http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.11/view.html?pg=4 I started reading this and felt that I had read it before. I read a bit further, skimming, and knew I had read it recently. Oh Hell Its that article by Brad Delong. Been posted recently on the Culture list, where Bradford can be seen with a bit more frequency than here. That's because the BRIN-L list has flame wars, while the Culture list has parodies of Charlie Stross's work that involve wombats, and also has discussions of the effect of different planetary/lunary environments on the transformations of werecreatures. Not to mention sentences like, "They were making plaintive sounds of the type penguins tend to make when they are forced to participate in an art exhibit against their will." Brad DeLong ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: heading towards a singularity
Brad asked: Now any suggestions on what I should tell the cybermasses? That they should give me their money. Or I destroy Tokyo. Adam C. Lipscomb [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Silence. I am watching television." - Spider Jerusalem A surprisingly small proportion of _Wired's_ readers live in Tokyo. Hmmm... Uplifting Gojiru. That *is* a thought... Brad DeLong ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
--- Sonja van Baardwijk-Holten wrote: > Ritu Ko wrote: > > > Well, the meaning was clear in any case. But the > problem is that I don't > > see how I could have changed the way it was > perceived. I mean, I know > > why I wrote the above comment, I included a '' > and ':)' to indicate I was joking > > Would ';)' have been a better emoticon? > > I've noticed that some are essentially humorless > when it comes to > nationalistic topics. ;o) I for one got the drift of > Ritu's message right > away. It didn't look particular polarizing/offensive > to me. But that might be because I'm a Europeen. I thought it was funny, meant to be amusing; not a slam, but irreverent in a 'Saturday Night Live' kind of way. Not to be taken seriously, in other words. Debbi __ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: I voted
My wife and I voted ealry today. One of the good things about voting here in NJ is they still use the old lever-voting booths. We were able to bring the kids into the booths with us and give them a little taste of what it's about. Jim ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: In Praise of Paper Ballots
At 10:16 05-11-2002 -0800, John Giorgis wrote: http://www.techcentralstation.com/1051/techwrapper.jsp?PID=1051-250&CID=1051-110502A A few comments. First, paper ballots are not as resistant to fraud and error as the author wants his audience to believe. People involved in counting the votes will have vast numbers of ballots going through their hands; it is easy count a vote as one for candidate A, while the vote was actually for candidate B (either intentionally (fraud) or unintentionally (human error, caused by the monotonous nature of the job)). Second, the process of counting all those votes can take several days, which makes it look rather outdated in this era of "I need the results yesterday". Third, there is the environmental issue: printing all those forms for all those millions of voters is going to cost you a lot of trees. Fourth, all those piles of papers have to be stored somewhere. The ballots from just one election take up quite a lot of valuable storage space. The alternative: electronic voting. And with that I do not mean the voting machines that are currently in use in the US, I mean real electronic voting, which does not require any pieces of paper to be marked or punched. And rather than needing entire warehouses to store all the ballots from all those elections, all you need is a harddisk and a backup tape. Impossible? No - we have been doing it that way for over a decade here in The Netherlands. All you need to do is look at the board, find the name of the candidate you wish to vote for, press the button beside the candidate's name, press "Confirm", and you are done. When the polling station closes, the final results are sent on to another computer which processes the totals of all the polling stations. It is simple, it is safe, and it is fast: the final nationwide results are known within a few hours after the polling stations close. So, why is it that such a technologically advanced nation as the US is still using outdated technology, while some European country has been using a high-tech solution for over a decade already? Jeroen "Europe Rulez!" van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
- Original Message - From: "Alberto Monteiro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 4:31 PM Subject: Re: US Unilateralism > > Jim Sharkey wrote: > > > >> Hmmm... Let me see how many votes a typical brazilian > >> girl would have: panties (1), miniskirt (2), microblouse > >> (3), bellybutton piercing (4), necklace (5), wristlaces (6) > >> and (7), anklelaces (8) and (9), ... Hmmm... Maybe it's > >> a fair criterium > > > >Since when is a belly-button piercing clothing? :) Or jewelry for that matter? > > > People _must_ wear something, right? > > >*Makes mental note to visit Brazil ASAP* > > > The window is closing, because inflation is building up > pretty fast. For example, the Mac Donalds Number 1 costs R$ 6.50, > some barbecues where you pay a fixed price and eat until you > die are costing about R$ 20.00, etc That is, indeed, very cheap. > > > BTW, I had never seen as many tourists as I saw today... I stayed in a hotel on the Copa when I was in Rio. It looked very run down; there were hookers every block or so. They all looked like they had seen better days, as did the whole area. The next day, actually, the beach did look OK, but I was there when the sewage line was broken, and no one could swim. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
Jim Sharkey wrote: > >> Hmmm... Let me see how many votes a typical brazilian >> girl would have: panties (1), miniskirt (2), microblouse >> (3), bellybutton piercing (4), necklace (5), wristlaces (6) >> and (7), anklelaces (8) and (9), ... Hmmm... Maybe it's >> a fair criterium > >Since when is a belly-button piercing clothing? :) Or jewelry for that matter? > People _must_ wear something, right? >*Makes mental note to visit Brazil ASAP* > The opportunity is now. Prices are based on US$ 1.00 = R$ 2.00, but the exchange is US$ 1.00 = R$ 4.00 - so everything will be _very_ cheap. The window is closing, because inflation is building up pretty fast. For example, the Mac Donalds Number 1 costs R$ 6.50, some barbecues where you pay a fixed price and eat until you die are costing about R$ 20.00, etc BTW, I had never seen as many tourists as I saw today... Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: I voted
As long as we are confessing: I just got back from voting. Only three races and one question. Governor, US Rep, and a lone Repub running for state house. Without saying who I selected, I'm only sure of one vote, the house race is a toss up, and the governor race is strongly to one side. I was hoping the heavy rain and wind would have gotten here this morning instead of tonight, I think that would have made the race much different. The question was: should PA float a $100 million dollar loan for volunteer fire departments. I voted yes but didn't want to. It could turn into another gapping hole we pour money into, with no real results. There were Green and Lib candidates, but their ideas were too far out there. Some of the things they said were downright silly. The gov race directly affects me as a state employee with our contract coming up in 8 months. I could be on strike then, the front runner balanced his cities budget on the backs of government workers and benefits, while spending spending spending more money. Kevin T. Fingers crossed ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
Alberto Monteiro wrote: > Erik Reuter wrote: > > No, it should be > > one-vote-for-average-number-of-pieces-of-clothing-worn. > > :-) > > > Hmmm... Let me see how many votes a typical brazilian > girl would have: panties (1), miniskirt (2), microblouse > (3), bellybutton piercing (4), necklace (5), wristlaces (6) > and (7), anklelaces (8) and (9), ... Hmmm... Maybe it's > a fair criterium Since when is a belly-button piercing clothing? :) Or jewelry for that matter? *Makes mental note to visit Brazil ASAP* Jim ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
- Original Message - From: "Matt Grimaldi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 11:26 AM Subject: Re: US Unilateralism > "John D. Giorgis" wrote: > > > > I know that the US, especially under the current Administration, is > > often-criticized for having unilateralist tendencies, and disregarding the > > opinions of the international community. > > > > With that being said, has anybody noticed that the United States has now > > let the United Nations deliberate for nearly two months (and counting) on > > its dispute with Iraq? > > > > Does anyone know if the rest of the world is giving the US credit for > > sticking with the multilateral approach, and engaging both its allies and > > the UNSC members in very long and difficult negotiations, and working > > towards an ultimate resolution in the United Nations that will not contain > > a lot of the things that the US was originally looking for? > > > > JDG > > Well, unfortunately, no, we don't get much credit for > multilateralism. We *had to be talked into* waiting for > the UNSC to debate the merits of action in Iraq, and even > then, we show disregard for multilateralism by stating > several times over that the USA would be willing to "go > it alone" if we couldn't muster the support of the U.N. > > If we wanted to claim credit for multilateralism, we would > have had to follow the model that Bush Sr. used, namely > quietly getting broad support from all of the key countries, > then going to the public with talk of war in Iraq. I think it was much easier for Bush Sr. to get the support. At that time, folks were rather worried that Hussein would push to take over Saudi Arabia and the UAE next. He had the 5th best army in the world, on paper, at that time. Now, the primary risk from an attack by Iraq appears to be for Israel and the US. Why should anyone else take any risk for terrorism attacks that might be triggered by an attack on Iraq if the risk to their country of WMD can be minimized by simply opposing the US action? Iraq may very well not use WMD, and if they do, there should be plenty of time to support the US after it got hit. My impression was that much of the spring was spent trying to drum up support, and getting lotsa maybes and nos. > The current administration seems to either be doing a > poor job of good cop/bad cop, or they found themselves > in a position where they shot their mouth off without > doing the necessary prep work and are having to go back > and fill in the details now that they've gone so far > out on a limb. That's possible, but what were they doing when high adminstration officials were flying hither and yon during the winter and spring? > All of this negotiation, etc. should have taken place > or at least been wrapping up before the President > made it a public issue. My guess is that the only thing spurring the negotiations on is the US threat to go it alone. It was sorta, US. are you with us? World No US Then, we're going alone. World Lets talk. World is a substitute for a number of different countries, not including GB. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
- Original Message - From: "Ritu Ko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 3:24 AM Subject: RE: US Unilateralism > > Dan Minette wrote: > > > Why I can see being opposed to attacking Iraq, I'm rather > > surprised by your > > language. > > Could you specify the exact portions please? Its been mentioned, but sure. "No more credit than the world gave other countries for not provoking an unnecessary war in an unprecedentedly irrational manner, no." Given the fact that the cease fire was based on the assumtion that Hussein's tenure as leader was contingent on him abiding by the terms of the cease fire, and given that we agree that he is material breach, how is the US "provoking an unnecessary war in an unprecedentedly irrational manner" I could understand an arguement that the war really isn't wise. I posted a link to an article listing the difficulties in handling post war Iraq. But, even if you took out the word unprecedentedly, it stands as a strong statement. How is carrying through on a previous agreement provoking a war? Didn't Hussein provoke the war when he threw the inspectors out? Given the potential for WMD, and given the potential for blackmail, why is going in now irrational? I think that the criterion for your sentence, even without that one word, must be a very strict one, because you have essentially stated that no responsible people could possibly be involved in planning such a war. It gives the impression to me of a bunch of trigger happy cowboys who don't care how many civilians get killed. If you remember just two years ago, there was an outcry concerning the "hundreds of thousands of Iraquies killed by the privation caused by the sancitons." While I am sure this is hyperbola, it is true that, with the limited oil sales allowed by the sanctions, the military and WMD programs get the lion share of all income, and there is mass privation among the people. This must be weighted against the civilian deaths that are unavoidable in any war; as well as the potential for violence in the future. In short, I think you have, by your wording, set your self the standard of it being self evident to any thinking individual that fighting Iraq is unreasonable at this time. > > 4) Do you think the sanctions should be continued? > > Until an acceptable alternative is found, I guess they are needed. OK, just keeping the sanctions is one option. However, it is likely that they will simply slow down the acquiring of WMD. > > However, I'm not really sure that a world in which 5-10 > > dictatorships are > > able to blackmail all the other countries in the world, because their > > leaders are willing to risk everything for their own power. > > Is a part of that sentence missing? Seems like it. Yup, typed that too late. It should have read "I'm not really sure that a world I'm not really sure that a world in which 5-10 dictatorships are able to blackmail all the other countries in the world, because their leaders are willing to risk everything for their own power is one I wish to live in. I think that we run the risk of this, unless something is done. Right now, it appears to me that North Korea has some potential to blackmail Japan, if not the US. I shudder to think what 4 A-bombs hitting Japanese cities would do. > > As far as I can see, the protection of the UN is virtually worthless. > > Examples of this include Israel and Kosova, and While, at > > the same time, > > there is some validity in protection offered by the US. > > Examples of this > > are Israel, S. Korea, Bosnia, and Taiwan. > > Certainly. I wouldn't disagree with that. And I'd have no problems if > the rest of the world chooses to opt for US protection. But, what if the UN doesn't OK it, as happened in the Balkans? It appears that the rest of the world wants the US to take all responsibility for protecting other countries while reserving the right to tell the US what to do and what not to do; including actions to protect the US. In that sense, given the many failures of the UN, it would be reasonable for the US to say that, since it has sole responsibility for world security, and since the UN has failed to keep its promises concerning the Gulf War, the US has no choice but to fulfill those promises all by itself. Now, it might not be wise, that's a totally different question, but I don't think it is inherently wrong for the US to bypass the UN as useless. I don't think the UN is useless, its just that it should be accepted for what it is, not a quasi world government. Given the history of the UN, why shouldn't governments consider it a useful place to talk, and a good tool for coordination but an organization who's pronouncements are meaningless? Finally, I am sympathetic to the idea that one country shouldn't play world policeman by itself. However, the real alternative to this, IMHO, is for other countries to become involved, not for the US to promise to do all th
In Praise of Paper Ballots
http://www.techcentralstation.com/1051/techwrapper.jsp?PID=1051-250&CID=1051-110502A = - John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] "First... to clarify what we stand for: the United States must defend liberty and justice because these principles are right and true for all people everywhere. No nation owns these aspirations, and no nation is exempt from them." -US National Security Strategy 2002 __ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 09:26:38AM -0800, Matt Grimaldi wrote: > All of this negotiation, etc. should have taken place or at least been > wrapping up before the President made it a public issue. Absolutely not. Lots of secret negotiations behind closed doors that the citizens don't know about? No thank you. -- "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
"John D. Giorgis" wrote: > > I know that the US, especially under the current Administration, is > often-criticized for having unilateralist tendencies, and disregarding the > opinions of the international community. > > With that being said, has anybody noticed that the United States has now > let the United Nations deliberate for nearly two months (and counting) on > its dispute with Iraq? > > Does anyone know if the rest of the world is giving the US credit for > sticking with the multilateral approach, and engaging both its allies and > the UNSC members in very long and difficult negotiations, and working > towards an ultimate resolution in the United Nations that will not contain > a lot of the things that the US was originally looking for? > > JDG Well, unfortunately, no, we don't get much credit for multilateralism. We *had to be talked into* waiting for the UNSC to debate the merits of action in Iraq, and even then, we show disregard for multilateralism by stating several times over that the USA would be willing to "go it alone" if we couldn't muster the support of the U.N. If we wanted to claim credit for multilateralism, we would have had to follow the model that Bush Sr. used, namely quietly getting broad support from all of the key countries, then going to the public with talk of war in Iraq. The current administration seems to either be doing a poor job of good cop/bad cop, or they found themselves in a position where they shot their mouth off without doing the necessary prep work and are having to go back and fill in the details now that they've gone so far out on a limb. All of this negotiation, etc. should have taken place or at least been wrapping up before the President made it a public issue. -- Matt ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
vitamin C [L3]
http://web.archive.org/web/2930151442/http://www.healthyideas.com/heal ing/spotlight/allergy/cblocks.html Vitamin C Stops Histamine There's no doubt that vitamin C can help tame allergic reactions, at least under laboratory conditions. Several studies have shown that high levels of vitamin C help reduce histamine release from mast cells and also make histamine break down faster once it is released. Not only that, but studies have also shown that vitamin C deficiency can send blood levels of histamine through the roof. Only two studies have been done in humans, however. One small study, by researchers at Methodist Hospital in Brooklyn, New York, found that people who took 1,000 milligrams of vitamin C every day for three days had significant reductions in blood levels of histamine. In another study, Italian researchers found that people with hay fever were better able to maintain the volume of air they could exhale if they were taking 2,000 milligrams of vitamin C a day. (In many allergic reactions, air passages narrow and restrict the flow of air into the body.) Other studies have shown that vitamin C may also help dampen some of the inflammation associated with chronic allergies. "My experience is that vitamin C can have modest beneficial effects for inhalant allergies and asthma if it's taken on a regular basis," says Richard Podell, M.D., clinical professor of family medicine at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey Robert Wood Johnson Medical School in Piscataway, New Jersey, and author of "When Your Doctor Doesn't Know Best: Errors That Even the Best Doctors Make and How to Protect Yourself." Vitamin C has not been proved to help much if it's taken once symptoms begin, Dr. Podell says. "But if you take it before you're exposed to whatever is causing your allergies and allow it to get into your bloodstream, it is helpful, although it doesn't work as dramatically as do standard anti-asthma drugs," he adds. He recommends taking the slow-release form of vitamin C--ester-C or calcium ascorbate--in 500- to 1,000-milligram doses twice a day. (If you take regular vitamin C, you'll see the best results if you take several hundred milligrams three or four times a day, he notes.) - http://www.globalherbalsupplies.com/vitamin_information/vitamin-c.htm Vitamin C (ASCORBIC ACID, CALCIUM ASCORBATE) Information Vitamin C is a water soluble vitamin. Also known as Ascorbic acid (3-oxo-L-gulofuranolactone), Anti-scorbutic Acid, Hexuronic Acid, Cevitannic Acid, L-xyloascorbic Acid, Ascorbyl Palmitate, Ascorbyl Nicotinate. Isolated from fruits, paprika and adrenal glands in 1922 by Dr. Albert Szent-Gyorgi. It can be prepared by synthesis from glucose, or extracted from plant sources such as rose hips, blackcurrants or citrus fruits. It is easily oxidized in air. Man is one of the few mammals unable to manufacture Ascorbic Acid in his liver. Vitamin C Chemical Structure, C6H8O6 Function accumulates iron in bone marrow, spleen and liver antioxidant which helps defend cells from the effects of smoke, pollution and other highly reactive substances called free radicals controls blood cholesterol levels converts amino acids into substances needed for normal brain and nerve functions converts Folic Acid into active form Folinic Acid essential for the formation of intercellular material, bone and teeth essential for the absorption of iron fights bacterial and viral infections helps in healing helps produce anti-stress hormones maintains elasticity of the skin maintains healthy blood capillaries maintains healthy reproductive organs may help protect against certain cancers, cataracts and heart disease necessary in production of red blood cells prevents allergic reactions (antihistamine activity) prevents hemorrhaging promotes healthy cell development and resistance to infections promotes wound healing protects Vitamin E vital for collagen formation which is the connective tissue protein in all cells - http://www.dietitian.com/allergie.html http://health.discovery.com/diseasesandcond/encyclopedia/1952.html - http://www.orst.edu/dept/lpi/infocenter/vitamins/vitaminC/c.html DISEASE PREVENTION The amount of vitamin C required to prevent chronic disease appears to be more than that required simply for prevention of scurvy. Much of the information regarding vitamin C and the prevention of chronic disease is based on prospective studies, where vitamin C intake is assessed in large numbers of people who are followed over time to determine whether they develop specific chronic diseases. Cardiovascular diseases (heart disease and stroke): Seven out of 12 prospective studies, which examined large numbers of people (700 to 87,000) over a number of years (3 to 20), found a significant relationship between higher levels of vitamin C intake and a lower risk of heart disease and stroke (1). The remaining studies, which did not find a relationship between vitamin C intake a
Re: I Voted.....
In a message dated 11/5/2002 9:49:44 AM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Then again, I'm one of the people who voted for a dead guy 2 years ago... >> Is he still registered as a voter? I loved the British Labour comedy bit where lack of brainwaves was not used to determine death as it might be prejudicial to some of the current employees. Body temperature became the criterion. So space heaters were used to enable some employees to work triple overtime. William Taylor Hmm. An Indian reservation on the Mall. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
- Original Message - From: "Horn, John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 10:45 AM Subject: RE: US Unilateralism > You want US unilateralism. I'll give you US unilateralism: > > In the immortal words of Randy Newman: > > "Political Science" While studying political science, you can leave your hat on . Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: US Unilateralism
You want US unilateralism. I'll give you US unilateralism: In the immortal words of Randy Newman: "Political Science" No one likes us I don't know why. We may not be perfect But heaven knows we try. But all around even our old friends put us down. Let's drop the big one and see what happens. We give them money But are they grateful? No they're spiteful And they're hateful. They don't respect us so let's surprise them; We'll drop the big one and pulverize them. Now Asia's crowded And Europe's too old. Africa's far too hot, And Canada's too cold. And South America stole our name. Let's drop the big one; there'll be no one left to blame us. Bridge: We'll save Australia; Don't wanna hurt no kangaroo. We'll build an all-American amusement park there; They've got surfing, too. Well, boom goes London, And boom Paris. More room for you And more room for me. And every city the whole world round Will just be another American town. Oh, how peaceful it'll be; We'll set everybody free; You'll have Japanese kimonos, baby, There'll be Italian shoes for me. They all hate us anyhow, So let's drop the big one now. Let's drop the big one now. - jmh ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: I Voted.....
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:Medievalbk@;aol.com] > (4 Rep, 4 Libetarian, and a hell of a lot of blank spces. > No to all gambling props.) Mostly Dems here. Actually, they were all Dems... Then again, I'm one of the people who voted for a dead guy 2 years ago... (No gambling props on our ballot this time. Lots and lots of judges though...) - jmh ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: I Voted.....
In a message dated 11/5/2002 8:22:45 AM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Son, here in the Lone Star State, that'd be enough to get you branded as a damn socialist. They wouldn't listen any mealy mouthed excuses that you were really a conservative. Dan M. >> Now is that Roman Meal, oat meal, or MRE? I'm sure John drives with a tired and sore right arm and shoulder. Everything inside the beltway is designed to veer to the left. William Taylor ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: I Voted.....
In a message dated 11/5/2002 8:15:54 AM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << The other huge difficult with my votes this year is that I am opposed to building the "Inter-County Connector", a new superhighway that is being proposed. >> Using the same criteria, you would have a very tough time voting in Tucson. Most N-S busses run once an hour, E-W every half hour. We are too spread out for any other mass transit. Downtown is a place 95 out of 100 Tucsonans never go to except to a governmental building by necessity. No freeway through town; just around the edges. No place to put one except in the dry river beds. Greens are more into zero growth than controlled growth, and very few conservationists believe in tearing down already built dams. As for abortion, I don't think anyone running can come out and say they want to make it illegal. Keeping a taxpayer from paying for it is a radical enough idea in this land of Udal et al. William Taylor (4 Rep, 4 Libetarian, and a hell of a lot of blank spces. No to all gambling props.) Too many people are belting down belts before barreling down the beltway for my tastes. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: Question Simpsons, the answer
> From: Julia Thompson [mailto:julia@;zurg.net] > Oh, if you haven't had kids yet, when the time comes that you > *do* have > them, if you want to watch TV, closed captioning is *great*. I agree totally. It's almost impossible to watch TV and understand a show with quick lines like the Simpsons or Friends or something like that with kids playing and being loud in the room without closed captioning. - jmh ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
smallpox: france, russia, iraq, N korea
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5113-2002Nov4.html ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: I voted
Me too. My wife and I took both kids to the polls - Franny sat with me, while Melissa and Drew were right next to us. I ended up voting mostly Democrat, with the exception of John Carter for Congress (you have no idea how giddy with joy I am that I no longer have Lamar Smith as my rep). There were a large number of local positions with only one candidate listed, so in those instances I either didn't fill in the bubble at all (if I wasn't up to speed on the candidate's positions or strongly disagreed with them) or, if I agreed with the candidate in some degree, filled it in. Maybe I'll run for one of those uncontested positions next time. Heh. A friend of ours was running for state representative - he's running as a Democrat in Williamson County, so the odds are he's going to get hammered, but he's running a very centrist campaign, and is in addition a very civic-minded and rational person, so I'm hoping he's got a chance. I spent a lot of time dithering about Sanchez and Perry for governor - they've both been running pretty sleazy campaigns, but after I read up on the Libertarian and Green candidates' positions, I didn't much care for either of them. Ultimately, I voted for Sanchez simply because his ads were slightly less sleazy than Perry's. I do have one question for John: Who was the Green candidate you voted for, and why? I, like many here, am extremely curious about that. Adam C. Lipscomb [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: I Voted.....
- Original Message - From: "J.D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 9:14 AM Subject: I Voted. > The other huge difficult with my votes this year is > that I am opposed to building the "Inter-County > Connector", a new superhighway that is being proposed. > As an economist, I know that the evidence from the > experience of other cities is that building > "duplicative highways" like the ICC usually does > little-to-nothing to reduce congestion. Rather, > people simply take advantage of the additional roads > to live even further from the cities than they already > do. The only proven way to alleviate congestion is to > invest the money into mass-transit, such that the > critical mass of transit destinations and transit > frequency makes the mass transit a truly viable > alternative to roads for consumers who want to travel > exactly where they want to go exactly when they want > to go. Son, here in the Lone Star State, that'd be enough to get you branded as a damn socialist. They wouldn't listen any mealy mouthed excuses that you were really a conservative. Dan M. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
I Voted.....
and if you've done your homework, so should you. Personally, given the stakes associated with control of the Senate, I can't imagine how anybody could *not* vote if you live in a State like South Dakota, Missouri, Colorado, Louisianna, New Hampshire, Minnesota, or Arkansas. Anyhow, for those of you interested, I voted in 11 partisan races, and plumped for 7 Republicans, 1 Democrat, 1 Green (who, by the way, many people are predicting will pull off the upset and become my representative in the State Legislature), and None of the Above (write-in of a non-candidate) in the remaining two. I must say that voting in a State that trends as left-wing as Maryland, and indeed, voting in Takoma Park which is one of the most left-wing areas of Maryland, can be difficult. For example, the only candidate endorsed by "Maryland Right-to-Life" in any race that I was voting for was Bob Ehrlich (R) for Governor, and Ehrlich is running ads that insist that he supports a woman's right to choose! He got the endorsement, however, because Kennedy-Townsend (D) never met an abortion she didn't like, and because Ehrlich supports parental notification for minors who want an abortion, opposes using taxpayer dollars for abortion, and most importantly for me, Ehrlich supports a "conscience clause" - that would prevent the State of Maryland from requiring doctors, nurses, and hospitals that are morally opposed to abortion from being required to assist with or perform an abortion by the State. I am continually flabbergasted that *any* American could believe that a doctor, nurse, or hospital that considers abortion to be murder should be required by the State to perform one anyways! The other huge difficult with my votes this year is that I am opposed to building the "Inter-County Connector", a new superhighway that is being proposed. As an economist, I know that the evidence from the experience of other cities is that building "duplicative highways" like the ICC usually does little-to-nothing to reduce congestion. Rather, people simply take advantage of the additional roads to live even further from the cities than they already do. The only proven way to alleviate congestion is to invest the money into mass-transit, such that the critical mass of transit destinations and transit frequency makes the mass transit a truly viable alternative to roads for consumers who want to travel exactly where they want to go exactly when they want to go. Unfortunately, a solid majority of Marylanders seem to be in favor of plunging billions of dollars into the highway. For example, I briefly considered voting for Townsend when Ehrlich began running ads emphasizing how committed he was to building the ICC - until the next week Townsend coutered with an ad accusing Ehrlich of distorting her record, since she supports building the ICC too. So, with the ICC off the table for the governor's race, and with the Green Party (unfortunately) not running a candidate for governor, and with Ehrlich not quite as pro-choice as I had first thought that he was, I ended up going with him. Besides which, I don't want to see Kennedy-Townsend become Governor and then be running for Vice-President in 2004 or 2008.Still, this then finally convinced me to balance my ticket and vote for the aptly-named Linda Schade of the Green Party for State Delegate, since she's the only State Delegate candidate opposing both the ICC and corporate welfare. For County Executive, I took the Democrat since the Democrat is in favor of "building the Metro Inner-Purple Line and the ICC" and the Republican is in favor of "building the ICC and the Purple Line." I figure that if everyone is going to support building this dumb highway, then at least the one who is lising Metro first in his campaign platform might be a bit more willing to ensure that the transit gets built too. Given how hard it is to find *anything* out about candidates in these very local races, sometimes you just have to make your vote on as little details as that. I'd like to think, though, that somehow there could be a better way for interested voters to find out some actual serious positions of candidates in these local races. One of the most difficult non-partisan races to vote in every year is for the school board, since nobody really seems to have much in the way of issues. Fortuantely, I've developed a fairly effective system of just searching out the person from the teacher's unions who is electioneering at the polling place and just voting against whomever is on the flyer that that person is handing out. :) Lastly, we had seven candidates for circuit court judge, six incumbents and one challenger (apparently he's the first challenger for judgeship to even qualify for the ballot in decades). Fortunately, the challenger is making a big deal about the fact that he is the only candidate endorsed by the (rabidly pro-abortion) National Organization for Women, so that made my six votes easier. A
DING! DING! (was Re: UN Security Council Reform)
Jeroen wrote: Oh, I am familiar with the subtlety of Giorgis -- he is about as subtle as a sledgehammer. and: given Giorgis's history on this list, I had (and still do not have) any reason to see his post as anything other than yet another display of his usual arrogance as well as: "The only good Giorgis is a silent Giorgis" I'm asking very politely here - Jeroen, will you please be so kind as to refrain from personal attacks of this nature on-list? Your tone is not exactly one that encourages reasoned discourse. Adam C. Lipscomb [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do you Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
In a message dated 11/5/2002 6:29:23 AM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << OK, I just got an image of Jeanne Kirkpatrick naked. You bastard, I'm coming to kill you for that. >> See Richard Baker for the cost of the ammunition. And it was Alberto Monteiro who first mentioned the natural state of being in Brazil. As for me, I'm going out to vote and get breakfast. I wish we still had punchcards. In honor of Bill Clinton, I could put the pin in several Democratic holes and then take it back out without going into the card. As Bill said, it doesn't count if it doesn't go in. To be fair, we do have at least one big Republican hole running for office this year. William Taylor ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
In a message dated 11/5/2002 6:22:43 AM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << The UNSC might actually work better with the men drunk and the females > naked. Ah, the old Yeltsin-Clinton approach to statesmanship! Rich VFP Cheap Shot >> Have you priced the cost of ammunition lately? William ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
At 22:22 04-11-2002 -0500, John Giorgis wrote: I know that the US, especially under the current Administration, is often-criticized for having unilateralist tendencies, and disregarding the opinions of the international community. With that being said, has anybody noticed that the United States has now let the United Nations deliberate for nearly two months (and counting) on its dispute with Iraq? The US "let" the United Nations deliberate? Excuse me? Last I heard, the UN can take all the time it needs to deliberate; no country, not even the US, can dictate to the UN how long it can take for that. You make it sound as if the UN should be *grateful* that the US has *graciously allowed* the UN to take nearly two months already to deliberate. How arrogant. Jeroen "The only good Giorgis is a silent Giorgis" van Baardwijk __ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: UN Security Council Reform Re: Just for the record
At 18:57 03-11-2002 -0600, Dan Minette wrote:
> I am not dismissing the work Giorgis put into studying the UN. What I
> am saying is that it sounds awfully arrogant when an amateur claims to
> have the One True Answer ("this *is* how " -- notice the
> emphasis on the word "is") and then add that the professionals "haven't
> figured it out yet".
>
> He could easily have avoided coming across as arrogant, simply by
> stating that *in his opinion* "this is how the UNSC will end up",
> rather than making it look as if he knows better than all those
> professionals.
John is a lot subtler than you give him credit for.
Oh, I am familiar with the subtlety of Giorgis -- he is about as subtle as
a sledgehammer.
I didn't quite ROTFLMAO when he wrote "This is how it will turn out",
but it is a pretty good example of dry wit. BTW, dry wit depends on
the humor being subtle, so a smiley is out of place with dry wit.
Dry wit also relies heavily on body language and tone of voice. These
things are difficult (if not impossible) to convey in e-mail, that is why
emoticons were invented.
His post did not contain such an emoticon; now, other people I might have
given the benefit of the doubt, but given Giorgis's history on this list, I
had (and still do not have) any reason to see his post as anything other
than yet another display of his usual arrogance.
Jeroen "The only good Giorgis is a silent Giorgis" van Baardwijk
__
Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
William wrote: > The UNSC might actually work better with the men drunk and the females naked. OK, I just got an image of Jeanne Kirkpatrick naked. You bastard, I'm coming to kill you for that. Adam C. Lipscomb [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Silence. I am watching television." - Spider Jerusalem ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
In a message dated 11/5/02 5:39:35 AM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << Nope, I think that's unfair. It ought to be one vote for a certain amount of fabric used in dress. Ritu GSV 5 Yards To A Saree >> **buzzer** Saree, your answer is Sarong. William Taylor -- Tudor recreationists will rule the Earth! ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
William said: > The UNSC might actually work better with the men drunk and the females > naked. Ah, the old Yeltsin-Clinton approach to statesmanship! Rich VFP Cheap Shot ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
In a message dated 11/5/02 5:06:06 AM US Mountain Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: << > But if you count the largest democracy by the number of direct votes > given to the President, then the title does not belong to India, but > to Brazil :-P Great, next thing you know you'll be wanting veto power on the UNSC, and then, god help us, we'll all be socialists :-P >> The UNSC might actually work better with the men drunk and the females naked. William Taylor --- Backing away slowly ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 06:05:35PM +0530, Ritu Ko wrote: > Erik Reuter wrote: > > > Isn't it ironic that the world's largest democracy treats every > > else's concerns as a joke? ;) > > > > Imo, the world ought to be grateful. Look at the mess we have made of > handling our own serious concerns. ;) So, I guess that means that you should not have any vote in the UN? And we should only read your posts if we feel like being teased or reading some pointless joke? One person's emoticon is another's trampoline, I always say ;) -- "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 10:35:33AM -0200, Alberto Monteiro wrote: > Hmmm... Let me see how many votes a typical brazilian girl would > have: panties (1), miniskirt (2), microblouse (3), bellybutton > piercing (4), necklace (5), wristlaces (6) and (7), anklelaces (8) > and (9), ... Hmmm... Maybe it's a fair criterium Don't be silly, everyone knows that the real criteria is one-vote-per-dollar-spent-on-the-military! -- "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 10:56:49PM +1000, Russell Chapman wrote: > /8qT5dS: Permission denied Ding! -- "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
/8qT5dS: Permission denied ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: US Unilateralism
Alberto Monteiro wrote: > > No, it should be > > one-vote-for-average-number-of-pieces-of-clothing-worn. > > :-) > > > Hmmm... Let me see how many votes a typical brazilian > girl would have: panties (1), miniskirt (2), microblouse > (3), bellybutton piercing (4), necklace (5), wristlaces (6) > and (7), anklelaces (8) and (9), ... Hmmm... Maybe it's > a fair criterium Nope, I think that's unfair. It ought to be one vote for a certain amount of fabric used in dress. Ritu GSV 5 Yards To A Saree ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
Erik Reuter wrote: > >> Why one-country-one-vote? This is stupid, companheiro. >> It should be one-working-class-one-vote. There would be > > No, it should be > one-vote-for-average-number-of-pieces-of-clothing-worn. > :-) > Hmmm... Let me see how many votes a typical brazilian girl would have: panties (1), miniskirt (2), microblouse (3), bellybutton piercing (4), necklace (5), wristlaces (6) and (7), anklelaces (8) and (9), ... Hmmm... Maybe it's a fair criterium Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: US Unilateralism
Erik Reuter wrote: > On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 11:21:53AM +0530, Ritu Ko wrote: > > > No more credit than the world gave other countries for not provoking > > an unnecessary war in an unprecedentedly irrational manner, no. > > Interesting terminology there, Ritu, but I guess to be expected. Okay. Here goes: I generally consider war as unnecessary and irrational though I agree that it makes more sense to fight in self-defense than submit and be killed. The word 'unprecedentedly' was uncalled for and inaccurate, so kindly permit me to withdraw it with my apologies. :) And, yes, if war is being discussed, it makes sense to expect me to react in that manner. ;) > Isn't it ironic that the world's largest democracy treats every else's > concerns as a joke? ;) Imo, the world ought to be grateful. Look at the mess we have made of handling our own serious concerns. ;) Ritu ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 10:19:45AM -0200, Alberto Monteiro wrote: > Why one-country-one-vote? This is stupid, companheiro. It should be > one-working-class-one-vote. There would be No, it should be one-vote-for-average-number-of-pieces-of-clothing-worn. :-) -- "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
Erik Reuter wrote: > >> But if you count the largest democracy by the number of >> direct votes given to the President, then the title >> does not belong to India, but to Brazil :-P > > > Great, next thing you know you'll be wanting veto power > on the UNSC, and then, god help us, we'll all be > socialists :-P > We will fist build our atomic bombs and an intercontinental missile program, then we will require a total reformulation of the UNO, along socialist lines. Why one-country-one-vote? This is stupid, companheiro. It should be one-working-class-one-vote. There would be worldwide elections to nominate the World Representative of the Bus Drivers, the Telephone Cleaners, and the Elevator Pilots. Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 09:59:48AM -0200, Alberto Monteiro wrote: > But if you count the largest democracy by the number of direct votes > given to the President, then the title does not belong to India, but > to Brazil :-P Great, next thing you know you'll be wanting veto power on the UNSC, and then, god help us, we'll all be socialists :-P -- "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
Erik Reuter wrote: > > Interesting terminology there, Ritu, but I guess to be > expected. Isn't it ironic that the world's largest > democracy treats every else's concerns as a joke? ;) > Does India treat every else's concerns as a joke? But if you count the largest democracy by the number of direct votes given to the President, then the title does not belong to India, but to Brazil :-P Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 11:21:53AM +0530, Ritu Ko wrote: > No more credit than the world gave other countries for not provoking > an unnecessary war in an unprecedentedly irrational manner, no. Interesting terminology there, Ritu, but I guess to be expected. Isn't it ironic that the world's largest democracy treats every else's concerns as a joke? ;) -- "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.erikreuter.net/ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: US Unilateralism
Ritu Ko wrote: > Well, the meaning was clear in any case. But the problem is that I don't > see how I could have changed the way it was perceived. I mean, I know > why I wrote the above comment, I included a '' and ':)' to indicate I > was joking > Would ';)' have been a better emoticon? I've noticed that some are essentially humorless when it comes to nationalistic topics. ;o) I for one got the drift of Ritu's message right away. It didn't look particular polarizing/offensive to me. But that might be because I'm a Europeen. Sonja :o) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Chocolate chip cookie recipe
Julia Thompson wrote: > p.s. the same sheet of paper also has recipes for sugar cookies (which I > thought at the time came out a little dry, but everyone else liked them > just fine) and peanut butter cookies (which no one found fault with). > Let me know if either of *those* ought to be posted. Of course they ought to be posted that is if it isn't too much trouble. :o0 Sonja, I wanne cookie. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: Archives, archives, who's got the archives?
"J. van Baardwijk" wrote: > At 14:31 28-10-2002 -0800, Nick Arnett wrote: > > > > >just past a list of unkept promises you made to share the archives, > > > > > > Those are not unkept promises, those are not-yet-fulfilled promises. > > > >I'm afraid I see no difference. I was talking specifically about the > >promise you made to me to ftp the archives. I set up a computer with an > >account for you, which is still sitting here, many months later, awaiting > >delivery. > > Well, for starters, you never sent me the info needed to upload anything > (account info, ftp address). Also, IIRC I said I would sent you a few > months worth of the archive for testing purposes, not the entire archive. > > Given the tone of your post prior to the one I am replying to here, and > given what I have had to endure from several people here recently (for the > umpteenth time), it should not surprise anyone that doing something for > this community is not ranking very high on my Priorities List right now. > Jeroen has to take over my household chores, since I've been doing much needed DIY. I've got those stairs stripped. Finally. Three days worth of really sweat driving, knuckle grinding work. Yuck, yuck and double yuck. But now that it is done I can say that it is worth it. The wood underneath is really good quality and once I've got the whole lot coated, sanded, filled, sanded, coated, sanded, painted, sanded, decorated and lacquered it'll look fab. Or so I hope. :o) Sonja ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: US Unilateralism
Robert Seeberger wrote: > > > With that being said, has anybody noticed that the United > > > States has now > > > let the United Nations deliberate for nearly two months (and > > > counting) on > > > its dispute with Iraq? > > > > > > > > "..the US has *let* the UN deliberate..."? > > > > Interesting terminology there, JDG. :) > > I think John meant "let" the UN debate endlessly without the > US taking any > further action unilaterally or otherwise. Oh, I know what he meant. I just thought that the choice of words was amusing in the context of the thrust of his mail. Amusing not because I thought 'Aha! I got JDG!', but rather because it seemed a bit careless given both the subject and JDG's personal dynamics with some other listees. I was attempting a bit of harmless teasing. Quite dismally, apparently. > I know its fairly fashionable for Non-Americans to view the > US government in > as cynical a light as possible, Fashions change, on a frequent basis. :) > but it is a bit less than > nice to take the > same approach with individual Americans. Yes, it is. I am curious why you assumed I was doing that. And I wonder if JDG will react the same way when he reads my mail. > The point I'm trying to make is that your response has the > effect of being > more polarizing than Johns original statement. How? I am not trying to be argumentative here but am genuinely curious. > I think all of us could take a moment to wear someone elses > shoes and see > how our words would sound to their ears. (Sheesh, what a sentence) Well, the meaning was clear in any case. But the problem is that I don't see how I could have changed the way it was perceived. I mean, I know why I wrote the above comment, I included a '' and ':)' to indicate I was joking Would ';)' have been a better emoticon? Ritu ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: US Unilateralism
Dan Minette wrote: > Why I can see being opposed to attacking Iraq, I'm rather > surprised by your > language. Could you specify the exact portions please? > 1) Do you think that Iraq is not in material breach of the > provisions that > ended the Gulf War? My understanding is that Iraq agreed to regular > inspections, and that it was understood that they were > required and would > be backed with force if need be. That's all correct. > 2) Do you think that it doesn't matter, the US has nuclear > weapons, India > has nuclear weapons, why shouldn't Iraq? Given Saddam's track record, it would be really nice if he didn't have access to nuclear weapons. > 3) Do you think that the sanctions should be lifted, giving > Iraq about $50 > billion a year in disposable income that can be used on weapons? No. > 4) Do you think the sanctions should be continued? Until an acceptable alternative is found, I guess they are needed. > However, I'm not really sure that a world in which 5-10 > dictatorships are > able to blackmail all the other countries in the world, because their > leaders are willing to risk everything for their own power. Is a part of that sentence missing? Seems like it. > As far as I can see, the protection of the UN is virtually worthless. > Examples of this include Israel and Kosova, and While, at > the same time, > there is some validity in protection offered by the US. > Examples of this > are Israel, S. Korea, Bosnia, and Taiwan. Certainly. I wouldn't disagree with that. And I'd have no problems if the rest of the world chooses to opt for US protection. Ritu ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
