You realize this is the 2013 version of the internet right?....
In 1992 we didnt have Reveton.
So that's what it is eh?
I'm not surprised though. They've been publishing broken links for years now, and they get away with that, why not the next level?
Funny how you know so much about him you feel qualified to sit here and spout multiple paragraphs of bile about his supposed activities, yet you dont have the slightest clue what he actually did.
Here's a list of the representatives that Paul managed to bring together: Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee, Dennis Kucinich, Maxine Waters, Jim McGovern, John Conyers (DEMOCRAT) Walter Jones, John Duncan, Justin Amash (REPUBLICAN). You might notice a few names on there that were also important in todays vote from both sides of that list. You might also notice quite a few Democrats in both places as well.
You might try to actually do a little research on a person before you start calling them names in public. Or you might prefer to continue to be rude, petty, and ignorant. Your choice.
This is a straight bluff, and not even very well done. If you fold to that you will lose your shirt everytime.
The guy getting these stupid emails should have just trashed them and not responded instead of wasting his time treating it like a serious concern.
In what strange upside down universe are all these Democrats "conservative nutjobs?"
It's interesting someone brought up COINTELPRO. The contrast between COINTELPRO and Watergate is instructive. Watergate took down one President who had gone too far - NOT in acting against, and lying to, the American people, but in acting against the other powerful faction in DC. That got reported and everyone has heard of it.
COINTELPRO was much, much worse, it was decades of continuous criminal action. But it was targeted at the people, rather than against a faction of the ruling class. Mainstream media has studiously ignored it more than not, many people have never even heard of it, and those who have mostly have no real idea what it involved.
The rot in this country isnt new, it's been rotting for quite awhile now, it's just that we are finally reaching the point where average folks can no longer avoid being aware of it.
In order to get monopoly grants to lay cable through small towns across america, cable companies promised ad-free tv. Of course once they got what they wanted they quickly started backtracking on that promise, first introducing limited ads on certain channels, but quickly graduating to the current state where they show more advertising than programming.
Would they charge customers more if they couldnt advertise? No. They already charge the customer every penny the customer will pay, they have experts working hard every day to make sure of that. But their profit margins might go down and I am sure from the point of view of a cable executive that would be the end of the world.
Oh, excuse me, how dare I expect any consistency between what you someone says two or three years ago and what they are doing now.
Did you really just try to pass that off as an argument?
"I wish I could mod summaries as troll. Honestly, many of us here make our livings creating proprietary software. Whining that Google makes proprietary apps just makes us all look bad. Stop it."
No one is whining that Google makes proprietary apps. We are taking note of the disconnect between the credit they want us to give them, and what they actually put out.
If you feel like that makes you look bad, perhaps you have something on your conscience?
There are very good reasons to want a flood light around the house at night - so that if you need to move around you can see well enough not to hurt yourself, so that if something is moving you can see whether it's a raccoon or a burglar, for instance.
But for these purposes I would always use a relatively dim, diffuse red light. These are great for allowing you to see shape and movement without simultaneously blinding anyone and shouldnt be as big a problem with close neighbors.
The following statement is not true. The previous statement is true.