>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Said it before - and I'll say it again...
Free speech is never a bad thing. I will never for the life of me understand how people can be so offended by the right of people (which includes companies & groups) to appeal to government. McCain/Fiengold was bad, stupid law and it was overturned with more than just cause because it was unconstitutional. They made a law abridging free speech. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
Another thing I don't understand - why do people get so mad at lobbyists for approaching politicians, and yet they never get mad at the politicians for being 'influenced'? Why did we make an unconstitutional law to punish free speech, and yet we have NO law to punish politicians who vote for bad policy?
If it is 'bad' for companies & interest groups to dangle money, then surely it is far worse for the politicians to actually be - you know - INFLUENCED. Money is like water. It is going to find a way into the system. You can't stop it. McCain/Fiengold was not only unconstitutional, it was stupid. You might as well run around trying to stop a monsoon by catching it in your cupped hand. The only proper solution is harsh penalties, monitoring, and regulation of GOVERNMENT officials. I think a law that throws elected officials in jail for accepting money, jobs, gifts, or favors woudl be far more effective than a law banning corporate lobbying efforts. Attack the source - not the symptom.


Ok this guy is working for the man.

Also about politicians accepting money etc. etc. It is generally argued that a john is to be blamed for prostitution. Often the john will be held criminally accountable and the prostitute will be set free maybe with a warning. The argument I think is basically that if we eliminate johns(as they're trying to do with many court-ordered programs to help them deal with their prostitute seeking behaviour) then there won't be any prostitutes.

Personally I think they both should be punished but some would pardon the prostitute because the need to get paid(to feed your kids, clothe yourself, buy a stick of deodorant) is stronger than the need to get laid. I realize my argument here is not incredibly well developed but it doesn't need to be because...

If companies are people as you so clearly claim why are they never held criminally accountable for their actions, i.e. dumping toxic waste into a community causing unknown amounts of cancer and deformed babies.

A company is just fucking not a goddamn person. Companies don't fucking eat. Companies don't fucking require shelter. Companies are not held accountable to ANYONE or ANYTHING other than their profit sheet. Literally.

Business is war and a good company will turn itself a profit like a good general will win a war. Even if that means murdering the elderly, raping the women, and brainwashing the children.

Said it before - and I'll say it again...

Free speech is never a bad thing. I will never for the life of me understand how people can be so offended by the right of people (which includes companies & groups) to appeal to government. McCain/Fiengold was bad, stupid law and it was overturned with more than just cause because it was unconstitutional. They made a law abridging free speech. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Another thing I don't understand - why do people get so mad at lobbyists for approaching politicians, and yet they never get mad at the politicians for being 'influenced'? Why did we make an unconstitutional law to punish free speech, and yet we have NO law to punish politicians who vote for bad policy?

If it is 'bad' for companies & interest groups to dangle money, then surely it is far worse for the politicians to actually be - you know - INFLUENCED. Money is like water. It is going to find a way into the system. You can't stop it. McCain/Fiengold was not only unconstitutional, it was stupid. You might as well run around trying to stop a monsoon by catching it in your cupped hand. The only proper solution is harsh penalties, monitoring, and regulation of GOVERNMENT officials. I think a law that throws elected officials in jail for accepting money, jobs, gifts, or favors woudl be far more effective than a law banning corporate lobbying efforts. Attack the source - not the symptom.

>> ^dag:
Monsoon Wedding was better.

I agree, but Monsoon Weddings isn't formulaic and isn't something you can watch and cheer on unlike Slumdog which follows alot of fairly tale conventions and is a great feel good movie of the year.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I enjoyed this movie - but thought it was maybe a bit undeserving of the level of accolades. The plot was a little formulaic. Monsoon Wedding was better.

I've taken my upper-end at work before, in a sound proof room, and could follow with good detection accuracy up to 17.4 kHz (labmates typically maxed around 16.8... I win).

The lower end is highly dependent on the speaker, and tactile detection of vibration at very low frequencies can be confused for hearing. The upper end is also speaker and background dependent. If anything I thought this ramp test might show people where they have 'notches' in hearing: frequency ranges where they have hearing damage in one or both ears. BUT, with this poorly compressed recording on my cheap Monsoon pc speakers there were all sorts of fades and rises in amplitude.

I wouldn't use this to test hearing, or even test speakers, but it was fun rumbling around on the low end.

Subsequently, I saw something about this being an abandoned seaside strip mine, if you can imagine that. Apparently, rain (choggie's monsoon) continued the erosion until it connected to the sea.

And we worry about the safety of coal miners. I wonder if all the miners had to wear snorkels and fins, just in case.

Travel channel? It's a stretch. Maybe, as in "don't travel here."

This may have been a natural event, related to monsoons-
http://www.kjc.gov.my/people/ccm/webpages/resource/csum.htm

OMG, Monsoon season. I'm ROTFLMAO!!!!

I do not have an eraser handy... score.