they are unique. But -- I know it's complicated, cause it took most of
the first year of the Cisco program to get it through my head -- take
my word for it, even a packet capture would only show the MAC address
if it was on the same subnet. That's not even an expert opinion,
that's a fact.
On
I always viewed the 'whistle blower' statutes to be for when a company
is doing something illegal, or (if its possible they are separate)
putting people in harm's way.
I never looked at it from a moral standpoint, like the Edwards
affairs. I am not so sure that I think those kind of actions
the usual argument is that the public needs to know because he is
running for office. I am not sure I agree unless it is someone like
the wide-stance guy who is engaging in private in behavior he condemns
in public. In that case, exposing the hypocrisy may be a public good.
Not sure. It's
This brings up an interesting point. I agree that the evidence would
not have been used. But, why not?
This kid was obviously not working for a law enforcement agency or any
government agency, so does the 4th Amendment actually apply here? I
know, a very steep, ice covered slope, but an
The kid didn't have a warrant and you've been bitching for years about
wireless wiretapping. Based on what both of you have said a warrant
isn't needed if they find something illegal.
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 11:43 PM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it's called a warrant, lol...that
Now SS is a neo-con? And hear I thought I was the only one on this list.
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 11:47 PM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
don't help them co-opt the word conservative. It's a neo-con thing.
~|
Order the
Didn't he get like six months house arrest and he didn't even publish anything?
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 11:53 PM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
That guy installed a keylogger and read the woman's email three
thousnd different times! And he got probation, for crying out loud.
On Mon, May
So because you any many others claimed the child was her daughters she
has no right to privacy? Start the wiretaps.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 12:11 AM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
We agree there. The stuff he found would not have been usable in
court. Publishing the business letters
Fabulous video! I loved it :) It's one of my favorite activities too. Team
penning is another. I simply ADORE team penning. Fun fun fun! Hoping to get
hubby into it in the next few years.
Congratulations again. She's quite a Cowgirl :)
Oh! I love the alert, friendly, focused, genial look on her mare's face. She
looks like she has a superb attitude. Is that her horse?
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Erika L. Rich elr...@ruwebby.com wrote:
Fabulous video! I loved it :) It's one of my favorite activities too. Team
penning is
To do what, though. Seems like it also depends on who they is. The
police need a warrant, or at least used to... If someone is an alleged
terrorist I am not sure anymore. This kid did not have a warrant of
course, and I don't think items found by private citizens are usable
in court. I am of
I claimed no such thing. I don't know and I don't care. She did
however parade him at campaign events, and her pregnant daughter too,
the poor kid.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 6:26 AM, Sam sammyc...@gmail.com wrote:
So because you any many others claimed the child was her daughters she
has no
Thanks Judah
the fancy part is her grandfathers doing :)
She'd much rather be in plain jeans.
On May 3, 2010, at 5:44 PM, Judah McAuley wrote:
That's a lot of fancy. You've got quite the rhinestone cowgirl there
and you should be damn proud. Fun job with the video editing too :)
yep, it's her horse. She's told her mom that she thinks one day they'll be
able to communicate because they're so close
I don't know where she comes up with this stuff.
On May 4, 2010, at 8:36 AM, Erika L. Rich wrote:
Oh! I love the alert, friendly, focused, genial look on her mare's
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com wrote:
yep, it's her horse. She's told her mom that she thinks one day they'll be
able to communicate because they're so close
I don't know where she comes up with this stuff.
Robert Redford movies?
There's a difference? The all quack like ducks to me...
-Original Message-
From: Dana [mailto:dana.tier...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 10:47 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: Palin email hacking case - guilty!
don't help them co-opt the word conservative. It's a neo-con
Well that horse looks very happy with her rider, and very happy to be in her
hands as well. There's definitely a neat bond there. Good job :)
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Zaphod Beeblebrox
zaph0d.b33bl3b...@gmail.com wrote:
yep, it's her horse. She's told her mom that she thinks one day
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Eric Roberts
ow...@threeravensconsulting.com wrote:
There's a difference? The all quack like ducks to me...
-Original Message-
From: Dana [mailto:dana.tier...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2010 10:47 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: Palin email
there is a difference, unless you think fiscal folly, military
adventurism and invasive regulation of people's private lives
conserves anything
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 9:10 AM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Eric Roberts
ow...@threeravensconsulting.com wrote:
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 9:49 AM, Eric Roberts
ow...@threeravensconsulting.com wrote:
There's a difference? The all quack like ducks to me...
You've done quite a lot of quacking yourself on here the last couple of
weeks.
--
The suburbs have no charms to soothe
The restless dream of youth
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 10:44 AM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
To do what, though. Seems like it also depends on who they is. The
police need a warrant, or at least used to... If someone is an alleged
terrorist I am not sure anymore. This kid did not have a warrant of
course, and I
So any politician that brings there kids with them on the campaign
trail has no right to privacy including personal mail?
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 10:47 AM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
I claimed no such thing. I don't know and I don't care. She did
however parade him at campaign events,
Please show where either of us have stated that Sam. I know it's hard to
argue when the facts are against you, but please stop making shit upthat
is very dishonorable and dishonest...granted that is something that is
expected from teabaggers...
Eric
-Original Message-
From: Sam
You have said that you feel she bears some blame for what happened.
That is an opinion, not fact. (and pretty much the only thing I think
we disagree on - at least on this issue)
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Eric Roberts
ow...@threeravensconsulting.com wrote:
Please show where either of us
She is the one that put them in the spotlight and made them part of her
campaign. That makes them fair game. Look at what Presidents Clinton and
Bush did with their children...they made it clear that they were off limits
to the press and the press pretty much followed that request...with the
that's not what I said, Sam. I said the police need a warrant.
The the police can invade your privacy as long as they find something
illegal but don't use it in court?
she was not on trial, Sam, that was a criminal case and the guy who
changed her password was the defendant.
She broke no
Remember this:
As far publishing online...I don't think that would be legal,
regardless of who does it...unless it was after the case to prove guilt
(like an official release to the news agenesis) or as part of an FOIA
request...
So are you saying anyone except the police can publish your
I agree with most of this. However, just because she brought them into
the spotlight does not mean that _everything_, including personal
communications between family members, is also fair game.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Eric Roberts
ow...@threeravensconsulting.com wrote:
She is the one
So putting her kids in the spotlight gives you the right to access her
person email and publish it?
I'm not getting your train of thought.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Eric Roberts
ow...@threeravensconsulting.com wrote:
She is the one that put them in the spotlight and made them part of
And that has what to do with what was stated? I am beginning to think you
need some glasses there Scott as you seem to not be able top read very well.
She bears some blame for not properly securing her account does not equal
It's ok if they don't have a warrant if they fiond something illegal.
That is because you missed the train long ago Sam. You (I believe it was
you) where complaining about the press using her kids in the debate and
saying that her kids should be off limits. This has nothing to do with the
email.
-Original Message-
From: Sam [mailto:sammyc...@gmail.com]
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
that's not what I said, Sam. I said the police need a warrant.
OK we're getting someplace. So only the police need a warrant,
everyone else can have at it if they find a crime and it's not
admissible in court.
The the police
Is your email not threaded?
Dana said:
There's an invason of
privacy there if you can use such a word for a politican who made her
Down's syndrome son and teenaged daughter's sex life part of her
campaign.
So I said:
So because you any many others claimed the child was her daughters she
The kids had nothing to do with the email incident...
-Original Message-
From: Sam [mailto:sammyc...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 11:03 AM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: Palin email hacking case - guilty!
Is your email not threaded?
Dana said:
There's an invason of
privacy
I have not made up anything. I have expressed my opinion and
interpretations of what you and Dana have said - most of the time
trying to find some clarity.
Its kind of funny how anyone who disagrees with you eventually gets
called a liar and dishonest.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:50 AM, Eric
Thanks for clearing that up.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Eric Roberts
ow...@threeravensconsulting.com wrote:
The kids had nothing to do with the email incident...
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
I thought your bringing that up had different meaning as well. Now we
know what your intention was..still not sure I understand how it fits
into conversation though.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Eric Roberts
ow...@threeravensconsulting.com wrote:
The kids had nothing to do with the email
MAC address definitely doesn't survive out on the public internet. The
MAC address is Layer 2, the link layer, and IP Address is Layer 3, the
application layer. The destination IP address in a request stays the
same through out the entire request because it is at the application
layer. The MAC
Man, this takes me back to my Networking elective in collegedissecting
TCP/IP and message transport.
Did you remember all this stuff, or do you actually work with this kind of
nuts and bolts networking stuff every day?
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Judah McAuley ju...@wiredotter.com
omg... I don't know whether items obtained by private citizens by
breaking a law are admissible and I said so. But you have to wonder
about chain of custody and the like. Seems like it would be too easy
to get mismissed on grounds that there is no proof they are the
defendant's. If they are
are you asking me or Judah? I work with the stuff.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 10:26 AM, G Money gm0n3...@gmail.com wrote:
Man, this takes me back to my Networking elective in collegedissecting
TCP/IP and message transport.
Did you remember all this stuff, or do you actually work with this
Nah, I don't work with it at all. Actually, I've never had any formal
training in networking either, I've just been curious and also been in
positions where I needed to figure things out. Like when I was the
sysadmin for my first start up company and we had a Cisco router that
would drop packets
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 1:04 AM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
Any of you have questions about it? I am going to a preview tomorrow.
Yes, ask for a demonstration of the iPhone packager.
-Cameron
..
~|
Order the Adobe
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Judah McAuley ju...@wiredotter.com wrote:
I'm just one of those
people with an urge to figure out how things work I guess.
Can you explain women to me...because I'm stumped.
--
The suburbs have no charms to soothe
The restless dream of youth
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Cameron Childress camer...@gmail.comwrote:
Yes, ask for a demonstration of the iPhone packager.
-Cameron
LOL, that's a joke right? It won't work in a few weeks.
~|
Order the Adobe
There's your problem ;)
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 12:52 PM, G Money gm0n3...@gmail.com wrote:
...because I'm stumped.
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
I am pretty sure I was the one who pondered about evidence obtained
illegally, but not by police.
I said I did nto think it would be used, but would not be surprised if
it had been tried before.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
omg... I don't know whether
bwahahahaahahaha
Good one.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Sam sammyc...@gmail.com wrote:
There's your problem ;)
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 12:52 PM, G Money gm0n3...@gmail.com wrote:
...because I'm stumped.
~|
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 12:57 PM, Casey Dougall
ca...@uberwebsitesolutions.com wrote:
LOL, that's a joke right? It won't work in a few weeks.
It may still work in a few weeks. You just might have a problem
getting it on an iPhone through the App Store.
-Cameron
...
On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 7:49 PM, Matthew P. Smith m...@smithwebdesign.net
wrote:
Friends apartment just broken into. Two apple laptops stolen.
I googled and found some software that need to be installed before hand and
stuff like that. But it seems like there would be more options to get
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Cameron Childress camer...@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 12:57 PM, Casey Dougall
ca...@uberwebsitesolutions.com wrote:
LOL, that's a joke right? It won't work in a few weeks.
It may still work in a few weeks. You just might have a problem
getting
Jailbreaking is against the rules but you are allowed to install apps
on your own devices if you have the Apple developer toolkit and a dev
signing certificate. You only need to go through the App Store if you
want to distribute to other people.
Judah
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Casey
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Judah McAuley ju...@wiredotter.com wrote:
Jailbreaking is against the rules but you are allowed to install apps
on your own devices if you have the Apple developer toolkit and a dev
signing certificate. You only need to go through the App Store if you
want to
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Casey Dougall
ca...@uberwebsitesolutions.com wrote:
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Judah McAuley ju...@wiredotter.com wrote:
Jailbreaking is against the rules but you are allowed to install apps
on your own devices if you have the Apple developer toolkit and
That is because when you make shit up, it is lying and dishonest. You are
attributing to us things that we never stated, much like you did with me in
our discussion about homeschooling.
Eric
-Original Message-
From: Scott Stroz [mailto:boyz...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010
My supervisor sent me this link and said, Check out the and see if it would be
helpful
http://www.leaningbirchsoftware.com
I really hope he was joking
Direct link to demo wmv, otherwise it requires a silverlight install just to
watch the video.
Please show me where I did that. Please show me where I claimed to
quote you and did not use an exact quote form you.
I may have tried to use a different example of what you were saying to
get a better idea if where you are coming from, but I never said
Eric said 'X' when in fact you did not
As was pointed out earlier, we pretty much agree on this, except for
the culpability of Palin.
You think she bears some of the blame for what happened. I disagree with that.
In my opinion, when you start placing blame on the victim you are
almost validating the crime and/or saying that they
I'm curious where you feel her role as a public official comes into
play with this. She was using the Yahoo account for government
business and seemed to indicate that she was doing so, in part, to
evade public records laws. If someone in her office had seen damning
emails in that account and put
This is a good read, about an ALS patient who basically offers himself up as
a human guinea pig for human testing of a stem cell procedure that
scientists hope will one day stem (pun intended) the affects of Lou Gehrig's
disease.
my issue is that he didn't just disclose the government emails, he
posted about the family pictures that were in there too, and then made
the password public. Had he let's say simple posted emails he thought
should not have been written with that account, I would agree that it
could be a
delete
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Scott Stroz boyz...@gmail.com wrote:
As was pointed out earlier, we pretty much agree on this, except for
the culpability of Palin.
You think she bears some of the blame for what happened. I disagree with that.
In my opinion, when you start placing
I am referring solely to the fact that her account got hacked. I do
not think she bears any blame because she did not use security
measures that we (as IT professionals) may use.
Her privacy was violated (or whatever the law was the kid broke).
Period. End of story. As I have said repeatedly, if
What she was doing was legal according to the court.
McKay concluded, among other things, that not all emails relating to
state business are necessarily public records, and that the use of
private email accounts to conduct state business does not -- in and of
itself -- violate state law.
I absolutely agree that it was morally wrong to publish everything in
there. That's what I tried to indicate by saying put everything out
into public view, meaning as opposed to publishing the correspondence
that was part of government business.
I'm conflicted about the role of private
so you have said many times. As long as you are clear that *I* am not
saying it... whatever.
delete
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Scott Stroz boyz...@gmail.com wrote:
I am referring solely to the fact that her account got hacked. I do
not think she bears any blame because she did not use
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
my issue is that he didn't just disclose the government emails, he
posted about the family pictures that were in there too, and then made
the password public. Had he let's say simple posted emails he thought
should not have
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Scott Stroz boyz...@gmail.com wrote:
Her privacy was violated (or whatever the law was the kid broke).
Period. End of story. As I have said repeatedly, if we start placing
blame on the victims, we are basically legitimizing the crimes and
saying the victims
Right, but the only way we know she was doing this was because someone
illegally hacking into her account.
I understand, and to some degree, share, your feelings of being conflicted.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Judah McAuley ju...@wiredotter.com wrote:
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:44 AM,
This thread seriously needs to die in a fire.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Scott Stroz boyz...@gmail.com wrote:
Right, but the only way we know she was doing this was because someone
illegally hacking into her account.
I understand, and to some degree, share, your feelings of being
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Scott Stroz boyz...@gmail.com wrote:
Right, but the only way we know she was doing this was because someone
illegally hacking into her account.
I understand, and to some degree, share, your feelings of being conflicted.
Ideally, I'd like to see this handled
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Judah McAuley ju...@wiredotter.com wrote:
Ideally, I'd like to see this handled through a strong FOIA system.
Governor Palin, do you have any email accounts that are used for any
correspondence in an official capacity other than the ones provided by
the
The state of Alaska now requires any emails relating to state business
be cced to the state address.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Judah McAuley ju...@wiredotter.com wrote:
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Scott Stroz boyz...@gmail.com wrote:
Right, but the only way we know she was doing
actually it's just now starting to get out of its rut.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 12:59 PM, G Money gm0n3...@gmail.com wrote:
This thread seriously needs to die in a fire.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Scott Stroz boyz...@gmail.com wrote:
Right, but the only way we know she was doing
Oh snap, she deleted you
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
delete
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Scott Stroz boyz...@gmail.com wrote:
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
And again
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
so you have said many times. As long as you are clear that *I* am not
saying it... whatever.
delete
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Scott Stroz boyz...@gmail.com wrote:
That happened
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Judah McAuley ju...@wiredotter.com wrote:
Ideally, I'd like to see this handled through a strong FOIA system.
Governor Palin, do you have any email accounts that are used for any
correspondence in an official capacity other than the ones
But...but...I am still here...I think. Wait...maybe if you are
deleted, you do not know about it?
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 3:04 PM, Sam sammyc...@gmail.com wrote:
Oh snap, she deleted you
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
delete
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 12:24
I think we should start over on more time.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:59 PM, G Money gm0n3...@gmail.com wrote:
This thread seriously needs to die in a fire.
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
No it didn't.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 3:04 PM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
actually it's just now starting to get out of its rut.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 12:59 PM, G Money gm0n3...@gmail.com wrote:
This thread seriously needs to die in a fire.
Sam.
That's not the court it's a court. A different one.
And the judge goes to great lengths to say that the Alaskan law is
written in crayon and to invite the legislature to revise it. Look at
the text of the judgement to the left of this story.
Essentially the emails were not government
delete
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Sam sammyc...@gmail.com wrote:
I think we should start over on more time.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:59 PM, G Money gm0n3...@gmail.com wrote:
This thread seriously needs to die in a fire.
She deletes me all the time, it must not work.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Scott Stroz boyz...@gmail.com wrote:
But...but...I am still here...I think. Wait...maybe if you are
deleted, you do not know about it?
~|
Order
don't you have a bridge to lurk under or something? Travellers to harrass?
delete
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Sam sammyc...@gmail.com wrote:
No it didn't.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 3:04 PM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
actually it's just now starting to get out of its rut.
On
Now you don't accept the courts ruling?
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
Sam.
That's not the court it's a court. A different one.
And the judge goes to great lengths to say that the Alaskan law is
written in crayon and to invite the legislature to
Neither does the state of Alaska, look at the link right below that
judgement. You really need to start reading for yourself. I need to go
back to filtering you.
delete
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Sam sammyc...@gmail.com wrote:
Now you don't accept the courts ruling?
On Tue, May 4,
Alaska does accept the court ruling and she's innocent of all charges
you've made against her. Now your argument is the law sucks.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 3:17 PM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
Neither does the state of Alaska, look at the link right below that
judgement. You really need
Sam
I had the link in my buffer just waiting for you, cause I know you
http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=10945674
More precisely, they probably accept the ruling because they have no
choice (tho hopefully the legislature is doing something about that).
But a) that was a civil case so
That's really awesome, G, thanks. I have a friend who died from ALS
two weeks ago and it is really helpful to see continued progress on
the research front.
Cheers,
Judah
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:34 AM, G Money gm0n3...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a good read, about an ALS patient who basically
oh and ... delete
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 1:27 PM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
Sam
I had the link in my buffer just waiting for you, cause I know you
http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=10945674
More precisely, they probably accept the ruling because they have no
choice (tho
Honestly, I think the law does suck. Hopefully, Alaska uses this to
make the necessary changes to make it not suck.
That being said, she did not break the letter of the law (though, I
may argue she violated the spirit of the law)
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 3:21 PM, Sam sammyc...@gmail.com wrote:
and had a heck of a lawyer apparently. I wonder if she talked to him
before or after the suit.
Ah well, let's give the rest of the list a break on this. We
semi-agree it seems.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Scott Stroz boyz...@gmail.com wrote:
Honestly, I think the law does suck. Hopefully,
I'm sorry to hear that Judah.
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Judah McAuley ju...@wiredotter.com wrote:
That's really awesome, G, thanks. I have a friend who died from ALS
two weeks ago and it is really helpful to see continued progress on
the research front.
Cheers,
Judah
On Tue, May
Either admit your wrong already or storm off in a huff.
http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=10892318
ANCHORAGE, Alaska -- The governor, along with his or her staff, can
use private e-mail to conduct state business according to an Anchorage
judge.
Superior Court Judge Jack Smith ruled
When your argument is they probably you know you lost :)
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Dana dana.tier...@gmail.com wrote:
More precisely, they probably accept the ruling because they have no
choice (tho hopefully the legislature is doing something about that).
But a) that was a civil case
Not according to two Judges, should I look up more?
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 3:32 PM, Scott Stroz boyz...@gmail.com wrote:
Honestly, I think the law does suck. Hopefully, Alaska uses this to
make the necessary changes to make it not suck.
That being said, she did not break the letter of the
Thanks. He was a good guy. A crotchety old programmer who did things
his way. He likely ended up with ALS as a result of his service in
Vietnam, but I don't know if we'll ever be able to pinpoint that
association soundly. Regardless, the VA took good care of him, I'll
give them that. And in the
I am not sure I follow.
I am agreeing that she did not break the law as it was (or maybe still
is) written. That does not mean the law does not suck and does not
need to be changed.
It is posible, in my opinion, to violate the spirit of a law without
violating the letter of that law.
On Tue,
I won't dig back for the exact quote, but in the homeschool discussion, you
kept saying that I said something when in fact it was someone else that said
it...and continued to claim that even after you were corrected several
times.
1. You claim that I was saying that by Palin bearing culpability
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Scott Stroz boyz...@gmail.com wrote:
I am not sure I follow.
I am agreeing that she did not break the law as it was (or maybe still
is) written. That does not mean the law does not suck and does not
need to be changed.
It is posible, in my opinion, to
1 - 100 of 158 matches
Mail list logo
