Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

551 comments

What's on his iPod (5, Funny)

Phroggy (441) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205378)

"Who Let The Dogs Out" ...and whatever else he thinks might be popular with the electorate.

that's not on his ipod (5, Interesting)

User 956 (568564) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205398)

What's on his iPod: "Who Let The Dogs Out" ...and whatever else he thinks might be popular with the electorate.

That's not what's on his ipod. That's a question he really wants the answer to. Mitt Romney wants to know who let the dogs out, because Mitt Romney believes the dog(s) should be firmly locked on top of his station wagon, and covered in feces. [time.com]

Re:that's not on his ipod (2, Informative)

VValdo (10446) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205450)

Dude, his dog just likes fresh air [msn.com] , that's all.

Who woulda thought he could hear NPR all the way from outside the car?

W

Re:that's not on his ipod (1)

AP2k (991160) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205538)

I'm surprised no one has modded the hell out of parent.

America's best shot at having a secular president. (-1, Troll)

HNS-I (1119771) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205458)

I know he's a mormon and all but there is not going to be a woman and certainly not a black guy in the whitehouse. So I'd advice the slashdotters to just vote for this mormon because it's their best shot at having a secular president. Of course it's not my call, just an advice.

Re:America's best shot at having a secular preside (1)

dattaway (3088) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205534)

JFK was Catholic and that was a big thing back then.

Re:America's best shot at having a secular preside (3, Insightful)

Phroggy (441) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205564)

I know he's a mormon and all but there is not going to be a woman and certainly not a black guy in the whitehouse. So I'd advice the slashdotters to just vote for this mormon because it's their best shot at having a secular president. Of course it's not my call, just an advice.
Uhh, I think you're confused, dude...

Re:America's best shot at having a secular preside (5, Informative)

amRadioHed (463061) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205930)

Really? I'm trying real hard, but I don't see how "freedom requires religion" could in any way be considered secular.

Re:What's on his iPod (2, Funny)

Bazman (4849) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205896)

Actually, he says that his iPod has those clean-living, drug-free, god-fearing Mormon boys, The Beatles and The Rolling Stones.

oh wait...

Romney is an empty suit. (1, Flamebait)

jcr (53032) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205386)

The man's opinions on any matter are irrelevant, because he will consult opinion polls and follow them.

-jcr

Re:Romney is an empty suit. (1)

category_five (814174) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205422)

No, he'll consult opinion polls to determine what lip services he'll spout on camera. Meanwhile his real agenda will be whatever big business god damn tells him it is. Just like every other politician.

I'd prefer opinion poll leadership. (4, Insightful)

gnutoo (1154137) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205548)

At least we would get a democratic filter between McMobileDisneySoft and questions of war and peace. As it is, the corporate world drafts a Project for the New American Century and it gets implemented regardless of public opinion. Romney's answers gave no indication of any departure from that scheme. Instead all the worst of the Bush administration would go on at top speed: H1Bs slavery instead of real immigration help, "Open" markets that are bound by US Patent and Copyright ownership, corporate bail outs [technocrat.net] and other predatory policies designed to make the US "Powerful" instead of Free.

Wealth, influence and power come from freedom and justice not the other way around. Countries that waste their efforts on raw power end up like North Korea.

Re:I'd prefer opinion poll leadership. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205662)

There are unpleasant decisions that have to be taken.

I would _not_ vote someone who blindly follows the opinion polls results to keep himself in charge. I'm not sure about how democracy works exactly in your country, but in most of the civilized world, you choose someone through your vote then - if he's actually in charge - _he_ takes decisions, not you.

Re:Romney is an empty suit. (1, Troll)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205604)

The man's opinions on any matter are irrelevant, because he will consult opinion polls and follow them.
That is not necessarily a bad thing. We'd be better off if Bush did that. It would make us closer to really being a "Democracy".

   

Re:Romney is an empty suit. (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205876)

Yey popular opinion, down with educated decisions!

Oh and just think about what exactly the US majority is like before you propose to follow majority vote on everything.

US would be like Afghanistan, only christian.

Re:Romney is an empty suit. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205902)

Even better, vote everything directly! You Americans would probably be declaring war to the whole world...

Re:Romney is an empty suit. (1)

amRadioHed (463061) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205944)

Yeah, popular opinion is not always correct but the OP is right. Currently we have unpopular and uneducated decisions at just about ever turn, so yeah I'll take the popular and uneducated ones for change right about now.

interesting but (1)

zof888 (1149007) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205390)

Seems a little dated, article written November 1st, maybe we as techies could form our own special interest group and force every politician to under stand what effect us and tell us how they will make it better.

Re:interesting but (1)

wellingj (1030460) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205670)

Most of the candidates did interviews at Google.
You could... uhh... Google it... like this [google.com]

eggs poached (0, Offtopic)

category_five (814174) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205392)

burnt toast!

Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (2, Interesting)

TheBigDuck (938776) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205396)

Who cares if he uses a PC? Mitt Romney may be well organized, smart, and have a great telepresence...but middle America will never get around his being a Mormon. Of course, Middle America is never going to vote for Hillary or Barack for that matter, so whomever gets the Republican nod will be a shoe-in for the Presidency. God/Allah/Buddha/RMS help us all.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (4, Informative)

Divebus (860563) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205448)

At least Romney hasn't advertised he'll put Steve Ballmer on his cabinet [wsj.com] like McCain has. Gak! You think we have it bad NOW?

"I have four words for ya!" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205602)

There he was, Steve Ballmer, the Secretary of Homeland Security, up on stage in all his resplendent glory, skipping around [zdnet.com] ...

"I...love...this...country...yessssssss!"

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (1)

Svippy (876087) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205708)

Now I know how McCain plans to win the war in Iraq... with chairs!

Ballmer in Government (1)

fictionpuss (1136565) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205760)

That is spine-tingling, hair-raising scary. Seriously. Ick.

I don't even buy the "I'd prefer him on our side than against us" argument - you just can't trust someone that unethical and focussed FTW, who eyes FUD with more hunger than a hobo does a ham sandwich.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (1)

AuMatar (183847) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205464)

Funny- it looks like they voted for Obama in Iowa. But in the end it doesn't matter- middle america doesn't decide the presidential election. The battleground states do that, and none of them are in the bible belt. If anything, if you want a democrat to win you should be rooting for Romney- he's a carbon copy of Bush, and people realize that. He won't win vs either democrat.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (1)

heinousjay (683506) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205962)

Yeah, cause the Democrats have such a great track record at stopping Bush now.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (2, Insightful)

jcr (53032) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205500)

middle America will never get around his being a Mormon

I don't think most people would have a problem with that if he were a decent human being, but he's not. [youtube.com] So, when he loses, whether it's in the primaries or in the general election, he's got a ready-made excuse for failure.

-jcr

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (4, Interesting)

Moonpie Madness (764217) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205634)

Fair enough. I'm not a big Mitt fan, but he's a economic genius and an experienced leader. And fixing this economy and handling the war are much more important that medical marijuana, though I agree with a prescription there is no reason not to permit its use. One affects hundreds of millions of people, the other affects very few people (if you use this kid as your argument).

I don't think it's sensible to pick one issue and judge everyone who disagrees with you a monster. Of course, I also don't have that kid's disease so it's easy for me to feel this way. Still, single issue voters miss the boat these days. Who is your candidate that meets your standard? I can find something inhuman about them if I really wanna.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (5, Insightful)

Bottlemaster (449635) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205794)

And fixing this economy and handling the war are much more important that medical marijuana... I also don't have that kid's disease so it's easy for me to feel this way.
Issues like this separate folks into three different kinds of people:
1. Those who say, "I do not wish to or need to exercise this right, therefore we should persecute those who do exercise it."
2. Those who say, "I do not wish to or need to exercise this right, therefore it is not important."
3. Those who say, "I do not wish to or need to exercise this right, but it is a right and therefore must be guaranteed."

Apparently you are in group #2, and your apathy makes it easy for you to completely disregard the liberties and lives of your fellow human beings. Would you change your mind if your survival depended on medicinal marijuana? Regardless, I envy your apathy; some of us don't have it so easy.

One affects hundreds of millions of people, the other affects very few people
The criminalization of drugs in this country affects roughly 300 million people - a bit more than "very few" in my book. 300 million Americans are being deprived of basic human rights, and their money is being stolen to fund this oppression.

While this is certainly fewer people than are affected by our economy and our war-centered foreign policy, I find your dismissal of 300 million souls as "very few people" disturbing.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (1)

Scudsucker (17617) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205918)

Fair enough. I'm not a big Mitt fan, but he's a economic genius and an experienced leader.

Easy to "look" like a "genius" when your family is already wealthy.

And fixing this economy

The War on Drugs is a huge drain on this economy.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205652)

The problem with that is saying something doesn't make it true. Your video shows him being setup and he handled it in a very polite way.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (2, Informative)

Smordnys s'regrepsA (1160895) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205900)

A "set up"? As in, he would never have allowed himself into the situation if he had known the question beforehand? I would sure hate to vote for someone based completely on what they want me to know about them (read "their press releases"). Maybe you meant it was a "set up" because they used the nice polite cripple kid that will suffer and die without something (read "marijuana") to control his pain and loss of appetite. Personally, I think the point would be just as valid coming from an old homeless unwashed hippie that was in the same situation, but the point of the clip was to show the ignorant public that nice clean normal people that happen to be suffering from a medical problem need marijuana, not just dirty "druggies" or the scum of society.

Sure he was "polite", but he was "polite" while saying that he A) wants the kid to suffer/die, for no reason other than false science and a sense of moral outrage and B)wants the kid to do this while rotting in prison for trying to get help from other sources.

Might I add that the kid can easily get weed with very little chance of getting caught and going to prison - but weed from non-pharma sources can be tainted in various ways that make it more toxic (depending on whether the dealer has added other drugs, or where/in what type of soil it was grown in, and how close to other types of plants). Knowing the cost of medicine in general in this country, I'm sure he would actually pay more per ounce for the medical marijuana than some of the higher end Purple off the streets.

That being said, I want to pick my candidate based off of both the issues and what type of person they are. I'm iffy on the first one for Romney, but I now know where I stand on the second

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (1, Interesting)

Hellad (691810) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205710)

You actually fell for that plant? Lets, for the sake of argument take the position that this is actually an ill person. What exactly was he supposed to say? He stated that he didn't support medical marijuana. Beyond that, besides trying to make a federalist argument that it isn't the president that would arrest him but the state government he is pretty much SOL. It would be no different than if someone who had a child die at 23 weeks going in and demanding that (insert pro-life candidate) justify there position that a baby at that stage isn't a baby/real life but only a fetus who can be aborted. Politically inconvenient situations that these candidates are going to avoid because all positions, no matter how good the intention, have collateral damage and innocent victims. It is just plain dumb to keep yourself in those situations when you don't have to be.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (2, Insightful)

zigziggityzoo (915650) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205788)

You've convinced me to nullify my mod points on this article to post. Where do I start?

The Federal government has no right to define what I can or cannot do to my body, so long as I do not infringe on another citizen's rights. If a state defines something as legal for persons to do, then the federal government is not allowed to say otherwise. We have the U.S. Constitution to thank for that.

In addition, The FDA, while useful by nature, is unconstitutional as a federal entity (because they define what I am able to put in my body). They should set guidelines, but should NOT be the law. One should be able to legally acquire non FDA-approved foods and drugs and use them without repercussions.

Further, and more closely related to the topic: Medical marijuana is one of many pain-killers out there, Just like Cocaine is one of many local anesthetics. Hospitals all around this nation have cocaine on hand for this purpose. There are alternatives, but they keep cocaine available in case one of the other methods cannot be used or does not work. Why focus in on marijuana, when there are more dangerous (and abused) drugs already legal?

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (1)

Hellad (691810) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205844)

Huh, funny. I never said anything about the legitimacy of medical marijuana. All I spoke of was the political wisdom in trying to explain a complicated political stance to a sympathetic patient. As far as the laws of what you an and can't do with your body; of course the law can do this. It does it all the time; I mean suicide is illegal in numerous states for God's sake. Talk about an unenforceable law. They outlaw drug use, sodomy laws are on the books in some states still. The list goes on and on about those laws which don't infringe on others. The fact that you do not acknowledge their right does not mean that they have no right. That said, this doesn't mean that I agree with those laws I am just telling you how it is.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (1)

zigziggityzoo (915650) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205858)

Note: Every case you just specified were State Law. If you'll kindly re-read my post, and realize I'm talking about federal law. More specifically - Constitutional limitations on what federal law can and cannot do.

States are allowed to do this. The issue at hand is whether future presidents will defy constitutional limitations by raiding patients whom are prescribed marijuana by licensed doctors in states which marijuana is legal for medicinal use.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (1)

Hellad (691810) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205966)

When it comes to federal law, all the feds will do is make it a federal issue via a commerce clause argument. The arguments which allow the government (federal) to limit drug use are pretty piss poor and it should be a states rights issue. The problem is once the Feds start doing something it is near impossible to get them to stop. That isn't how it should be, but that is how it works. Once a state loses exclusive rights, the cat is pretty much out of the bag. The government was started based on a very limited federal government and powerful state rights, but this has pretty much been destroyed. Mostly because, I would argue, states do stupid crap. (Look at the situation with race in the south- the states screwed up and the Feds came in). Oh well. And, can I just say to no one in particular that I am a bit cranky about my -1 karma on my original post. Disagree if you will with what I said, I wasn't trolling and I did have a valid point.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (2, Insightful)

Entropius (188861) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205796)

What exactly was he supposed to say? He stated that he didn't support medical marijuana.


He could have said that he did support medical marijuana, which is the only sane position to hold.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (2, Insightful)

Hellad (691810) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205848)

I think that you get into dangerous territory when you start believing that only one side has a sane argument. But cheers to you if your world is so absolute.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (1)

Scudsucker (17617) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205890)

I think that you get into dangerous territory when you start believing that only one side has a sane argument.

But that's exactly the case. Cigarettes and alcohol claim the lives of hundreds of thousands of Americans each year, compared to zero for marijuana. Even if it wouldn't actually help this man, there is no justification for the ban of marijuana.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (1)

Hellad (691810) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205932)

OK, you honestly believe that there is not a single pot related death in the entire country? You don't think a single high kid hasn't done something stupid resulting in their death? Huh. Frankly, pot isn't my issue one way or another. But, everything has a downside, even pot. Whether that be the gateway drug effect, the stoner/motivation issues, etc. Not that those are a big deal nor do they affect all smokers, it is something that in the aggregate can add up to some social issues that raise enough concern to let people at least discuss the issue.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (1)

Entropius (188861) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205934)

I don't agree with a ban on marijuana for recreational use, but there are certainly justifications for it.

There are no justifications for banning marijuana that don't also require the banning of alcohol, however: if we're going to ban mind-altering drugs, why not start with one that actually causes crime? (People don't get stoned and beat their wives.)

There are no justifications at all for banning the medical use of marijuana. Saying "it's not really effective" is for a patient and her doctor to decide; banning it because it's also a recreational drug that we don't like is absurd. If we're going to do that, let's ban morphine too, right?

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (1)

pkulak (815640) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205766)

I don't think most people would have a problem with that

No, just the people he's trying to get to vote for him. How far do you think Mitt is going to get if all the nut-job Christians vote for the only Christian running, Barack or Hillary?

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (1)

arth1 (260657) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205910)

No, just the people he's trying to get to vote for him. How far do you think Mitt is going to get if all the nut-job Christians vote for the only Christian running, Barack or Hillary?

Mormons like Mitt Romney are Christians too. Even though your typical Lutheran might not see them as the same as themselves, seen from the outside, Mormons are very much Christians. The differences are, from an objective point of view, trivial.
Mormons have a 19th century prophet? So do the Seventh Day Adventists.
Mormons have additions to the bible? So do Catholics (the apocrypha).
Mormons ban alcohol, tobacco and coffee? Again, so do the Adventists.
Mormons preach polygamy? No, they banned polygamy over a century ago. And Martin Luther himself granted someone the right to take a second wife, so having allowed polygamy in the past is something they have in common with other Christian varieties, and not a difference.
From a non-Christian point of view, the beliefs are very similar, and compared to, say, Hinduism or Shinto, the various western sects are identical twins.

Mitt Romney is a Christian reactionary, just like most presidential candidates. His flavour of Christianity is not the same as most Americans have, but it's similar enough not to cause any noticeable difference in politics.

A sphincter says what? (1)

goingToSay (1192935) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205816)

wtf, how do you get modded +5 for that? Mitt may be looser but all that video shows is someone asking loaded question. While your at it why don't you post the video of Hillary crying, some of the race wars crap, or Mitt hearing whispers. Stop watching the 24 hour news channels!

Re:A sphincter says what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205850)

may be a looser what? a looser fit? a looser knot...what?

another example (1)

j1m+5n0w (749199) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205836)

I think this [youtube.com] is a better (less biased) illustration of a lapse in basic ethics. I don't claim to know much about him or what he really truly believes, but I don't think that anyone who claims to be opposed to torture but is unwilling to identify waterboarding as torture (when it clearly is) ought to be president.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205924)

I've never seen anything so offensive in my life. For a man who says he follows the teachings of Jesus.. I just don't know where to start. Wow.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205506)

God/Allah/Buddha/RMS help us all.

That should have read Jesus/Allah/Buddha/RMS.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205530)

I'm still trying to figure out why that's such a huge issue. I mean, if he gets the job done, who cares what he does in his spare time? My particular religious beliefs don't agree with the teachings of the Book of Mormon, but seriously, why should I give a shit what he believes? If a candidate supports the political issues I do (and I don't think he does), I don't much care what he believes in.

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205576)

He's a craven, empty-suited, flip-flopping phoney. The worst thing that could ever happen to this country would be for him to be President. Oh, wait, Giuliani would be worse. Huckabee would be even worse. McCain would be about on par I think... terrible. Dear god, I hope none of them make it anywhere close to the oval office...

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (1)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205588)

but middle America will never get around his being a Mormon

Mormon values are very middle-America. It may not be a "traditional" Christian religion in some senses, but its values and influence are very middle-America. Most of the "traditional" Christian complaints against Mormonism are just fights over subtleties in doctrines. Mormonism basically added new scriptures in addition to the Bible and interpret some stuff a bit different. That does not necessarily make them non-Christian, just, well, "creative".
           

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (1)

polar red (215081) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205618)

>God/Allah/Buddha/RMS

you realise God = Allah ?

Re:Romney doesn't have a prayer...(pun intended) (1)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205920)

I don't think even mac users want a mac-using president.. that whole fun-machine mentality just doesn't fit the image of a President-Elected of the United States of America..

...what's on his IPod. (0, Offtopic)

Spodie! (675056) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205410)

Submitter seems to be a "PC guy" too since he can't seem to spell iPod correctly.
- just sayin'

Romney 101 (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205412)

And we know that Romney's answers aren't just microtailored to his Slashdot audience, because he never does that. He isn't just another CEO who'll say anything, anytime, for power. He's honest.

Hell, we don't even know that it's really Romney answering, and not some minimum wage nerd he's to phoning in the answers.

In fact, if I built a slick robot with perfect hair, I think "Romney" would be a good name. Welcome to the Romney 101.

Re:Romney 101 (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205570)

Romney is the greatest USA Presidential candidate ever. Think about it.

Look at someone like Ron Paul. What if you don't agree with Ron Paul about something? Bad news... ...he'll still hold an opposing stance.

Mitt Romney, though, is the true candidate of hope. He likely agrees with you. He might not now, but he probably has at some point in the past and might again in the future.

In this political season where the candidates are talking about change, the change involves growing the size and roll of government (which isn't change at all). The REAL candidate of change is Mitt Romney. Sure, he'll expand government too, but his positions change often. And change is change.

Vote change. Vote Mitt Romney!

Re:Romney 101 (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205586)

/usr/games/fortune for president!

Re:Romney 101 (1)

polar red (215081) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205654)

What is it that Americans have with big government ?
Big business is much worse than big government, you are being deceived by all these people that say big government is bad ... only governments can reign in the power of the corporations.

Re:Romney 101 (1)

arth1 (260657) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205928)

And we know that Romney's answers aren't just microtailored to his Slashdot audience, because he never does that.

No, we know that because this wasn't Ask Slashdot, but a 3rd party interview. RTFA.

Wishy-Washy on H1B's (3, Interesting)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205416)

He's basically saying that *if* there are skill shortages, then H1B's are fine. But the problem is that there is no real burden for companies to show a skills shortage: the loopholes are huge. Government inspectors (the very few of them that exist) don't know a software engineer from locomotive engineer.

A more relevant question would be: "Are you for more stringent verification by employers of alleged skills shortages before H1B's are brought in?"
     

Another Rethuglican Jew-Puppet; Vote Democrat (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205672)

As a loyal /. reader and Democrat I know he is no better than his friend the Jew-Puppet Bu$Hitler Chimpy McHaliburtin.

Every dead soldier is a victory for us Democrats.
Not that it is a loss. How stupid do you have to be to get stuck in the military killing innocent children and raping Iraq women all at the orders of the Jews so they can steal the oil? Stupid enough to vote ReThuglican.

When we're back in the White House it'll be payback time for middle America.
Not that they will notice as they spend all their time raping their sisters and attending Klan meetings. Typical Christian Mor(m)ons.

Yeah, I said what you bigoted ReThuglicans are like mod me down now.

Re:Another Rethuglican Jew-Puppet; Vote Democrat (-1, Flamebait)

Cafe Alpha (891670) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205724)

I remember when /. wasn't full of racism.

But then I can remember when the Democrats weren't antisemites.

Re:Another Rethuglican Jew-Puppet; Vote Democrat (1)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205964)

Right, and I'll bet the two different parties actually had differences in their policies, and didn't hate each other irrationally for holding a different set of morals, neither of which can be shown to be more or less correct than the other one. What do you call this dream land?

PENIS PENIS HAHAHAHAHAHA PENIS (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205424)

Here it is. A rendition of my penis.

8========================D

Re:PENIS PENIS HAHAHAHAHAHA PENIS (-1, Troll)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205434)

Here it is. A rendition of my penis. ...

Indian penises are 40% bigger and work 40% longer ;-P
     

Re:PENIS PENIS HAHAHAHAHAHA PENIS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205508)

There is no 'i' in Electoral, just like there is no truth in your big penis.

Re:PENIS PENIS HAHAHAHAHAHA PENIS (OT) (0, Troll)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205556)

(That's odd, why did the above message get treed to the wrong topic? Slashbug?)

Re:PENIS PENIS HAHAHAHAHAHA PENIS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205866)

You wouldn't believe how small that looks on an iPhone.

Bill Hicks For President (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205426)

"Who does Diet Coke Want In there?"

Get ready for another corporate cocksuck!

Re:Bill Hicks For President (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205868)

Netcraft confirms [wikipedia.org] : Bill Hicks is dead.

His thoughts on niggers? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205442)

I hear Mormons don't like 'em.

BS (4, Interesting)

noiseordinance (1149049) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205474)

I still can't figure out why slashdot never posted my submission for Ron Paul's article at http://www.news.com/Technology-Voters-Guide-Ron-Paul/2100-1028_3-6224161.html?tag=st.num [news.com] which is much more interesting.

Re:BS (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205522)

Perhaps because Ron Paul has about as much of a chance of being the next POTUS as CmdrTaco.

Re:BS (2)

djpolaar (1218446) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205600)

Try Digg - they love anything about Ron Paul there.

Re:BS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205664)

No article about politics would be complete without the Ron Paul storm-troopers showing up...

Why? (2, Insightful)

frank_adrian314159 (469671) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205744)

Because people hate Ron Paul supporters?

Re:BS (1)

pkulak (815640) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205784)

Because this isn't Reddit.

8=======D (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205512)

If it were bigger then you would assume it must be a black penis.

Cue the Mormon bashing jokes... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205526)

3...2...1...

I wish Michael would have touched on more issues (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205536)

What is Mitt's position on net neutrality, online privacy, stuff that matters? I couldn't care less if he's a PC guy or what music he listens to.

I know that Ron Paul is against illegal monitoring, and that's why he has my vote, and should have yours too.

Vote Ron Paul 2008. ^_^

Give it up, please... (1)

PMJ2kx (828679) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205648)

Yes, Ron Paul will "revolutionize" this country...but...he's just not going to make it at all. Please accept this simple truth.

Re:Give it up, please... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205732)

It's too bad. Ron Paul is proof that the majority of Americans are still retarded. Not that we needed proof.

Re:Give it up, please... (1)

Starvingboy (964130) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205808)

I agree, Ron Paul does not have much of a chance. Yet I will still vote for him. I'm sick of the "Lesser of two evils" choice.

Re:Give it up, please... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205950)

So to avoid the lesser of two evils, you find an even greater one, who is even more protectionist, reactionary and populist than even Bush? Way to go.

Pot, kettle... (5, Funny)

educated_foo (93255) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205574)

As an automaton yourself, what rights do you think our constitution grants to humanoid robots?

Bah (3, Insightful)

Amorymeltzer (1213818) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205580)

The areas we were able to cover include technology growth policies in the U.S., Internet taxes, H1B visas, venture capital tax issues and renewable energy.

We were not able to cover net neutrality, the digital divide, mobile spectrum allocation issues, identity theft, China censorship or intellectual property issues on this call.
They missed the really good ones! If the congress vote on internet tax was 402-0 I think it's pretty obvious where that issue is going to go, and is a pretty dumb question. Net Neutrality, IP, censorship - those are all things that are very easy to feel one way or the other, or the myriad ways in between, especially since he already hinted at imposing trade sanctions or the like on China for IP problems. Poor choices on the editors, IMHO, but H1B was a good question as were the follow-ups. Here's hoping for round two!

Wow (5, Interesting)

MadUndergrad (950779) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205612)

It's impressive how slow those pitches were. There wasn't a single hard question among them, and the interviewer clearly spelled out the answers he wanted to hear (and knew Romney was going to give).

On another note, his idea of alternate and sustainable energy seems to be coal liquefaction and "maybe even" nuclear. Forward thinking guy much?

Re:Wow (1)

evdubs (708273) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205722)

Right - the questions were about as long as the responses!

Speaking of forward thinking, the question about China really left me confused. Mitt correctly pointed out that China doesn't respect our intellectual property but proposes to "get serious with our Chinese friends and say guys you just cant do that or you're going to suffer consequences in our markets."

How the interviewer restrained themselves for asking HOW the Chinese would respect intellectual property is beyond me.

He lost my vote when he hired Cheney (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22205632)

He lost my potential vote when he hired Dick Cheney's daughter to work on his middle east policy. We don't need another corrupt neocon agenda... granted she is his daughter, he still has an incredible amount of influence over her....

Ron Paul is our only hope.

Wonder where he downloads his Beatles from? (4, Insightful)

hawks5999 (588198) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205658)

What I typically download is country music as well as 1960's music. I'm a baby boomer, so the Beatles and the Stones and some of the old groups from the 1960's are my favorites, I listen to them and I listen to country. I might have some inspirational music as well, but those are the highlights for me.
So, could he be in favor of P2P so he can get his Beatles fix because we all know that isn't coming through iTunes.

Re:Wonder where he downloads his Beatles from? (1)

incripshin (580256) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205838)

I thought the Beatles were on iTunes. I seem to remember getting a newsletter with a lot of Beatles albums that were new. I'm not using Windows now, so I cannot check.

Re:Wonder where he downloads his Beatles from? (1)

incripshin (580256) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205854)

Doing further research on news.google.com, I see that Beatles never was on iTunes. Come to think of it, it was Led Zeppelin. Apologies.

Re:Wonder where he downloads his Beatles from? (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205842)

The Beatles catalogue may be on iTunes right now, AFAIK (I don't use iTunes or even have an MP3 player), but it sure as hell wasn't back in november 2007, when the interview was taken.
Earliest articles indicating talk about this deal are dated medium november and even those stated "early 2008" as the intended date.

Obama's Tech Platform (3, Interesting)

Myopic (18616) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205764)

Loosely related to this political thread, here is Obama's technology policy page [barackobama.com] which is very exciting because it is reasonably in line with general nerd opinion. So here I am, shilling for Obama during a Romney thread. I might be Offtopic but I hope I'm Informative! Here are some exceprts:

Barack Obama strongly supports the principle of network neutrality to preserve the benefits of open competition on the Internet. Users must be free to access content, to use applications, and to attach personal devices. They have a right to receive accurate and honest information about service plans.

Unfortunately, over the past several years, the Federal Communications Commission has promoted the concept of consolidation over diversity. As president, he will encourage diversity in the ownership of broadcast media, promote the development of new media outlets for expression of diverse viewpoints, and clarify the public interest obligations of broadcasters who occupy the nation's spectrum.

Obama supports updating surveillance laws and ensuring that law enforcement investigations and intelligence-gathering relating to U.S. citizens are done only under the rule of law.

Making government data available online in universally accessible formats to allow citizens to make use of that data to comment, derive value, and take action in their own communities.

Oh boy, another one (2, Insightful)

damburger (981828) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205798)

Ultimately we're in a competitive battle with the rest of the world; a battle where we need to stay the most powerful nation in the world. And the only way our nation stays ahead forever is with superior technology and innovation.

Well, first of all, as I mentioned a moment ago, the way a nation like ours stays ahead permanently from other nations is having superior technology and innovation

Woo! Go USA! Thousand year empire!

I hope you notice that candidates in other countries just don't talk in such belligerent terms about their nations position in the world.

That's some serious backlog. (1)

ICLKennyG (899257) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205810)

Am I the only one who noticed this interview is from Nov. 1st? In political terms it might as well be from 5 years ago. Seriously. With the softball questions and archaic date on a little publicized blog this looks to be pretty blatant attempt at courting the tech vote through slashdot.

Those where 'tech' questions? (2, Interesting)

Hellcom (1041714) | more than 6 years ago | (#22205828)

Where are the questions on copyright and patent reform, open standards and open source software, investment into maths and sciences, net neutrality and telecoms industry regulation, etc...
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...