Re: Opium [was: Re: freelance sysadmining -- superlong -- [WAS: "Red Hat recommends Windows for consumers"]]
On Sat, 2003-11-15 at 14:02, Alfredo Valles wrote:
> On Saturday 15 November 2003 2:30 pm, Vikki Roemer wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 02:17:27PM -0500, Alfredo Valles wrote:
> > > On Friday 14 November 2003 11:23 pm, Tom wrote:
> > > > compared to the taliban and the islamists, I cannot believe you are
> > > > acusing *US* of advocating a theocracy. talk about head up the ass.
> > >
> > > But talibans and islamists don't spend billions of dollars a year in
> > > weapons.
> >
> > No, they just fund terrorist groups that fly planes into occupied
> > skyscrapers.
>
> I don't like talibans. But what I mean is that if you launch all the planes on
> US against New York city it won't cause 10% of the destruction of a single
> nuclear missile. (I'm sure that US have more nuclear missiles than civil
> plains).
>
>
> > And I heard that there was also a lot of evidence that the Democrats
> > cheated, too-- they just weren't successful. *shrug* What's done is done--
>
> Wow!. Then US citizens should be very concerned about their electoral system,
> cause it's not working as it should. What bring us back to the main question:
> Why US citizens do nothing? I don't know.
We do, though. There are all sorts of election laws, administrators,
etc. It's a *lot* more difficult (though not impossible) for dead
people to vote, and for people to register in multiple precincts.
I don't know about ballot box stuffing, because Louisiana hasn't
used ballot boxes since the 1960s, and I've always (since the early
1980s) had to provide a gov't picture ID and signature.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ron Johnson, Jr. ron.l.johnson@cox.net
Jefferson, LA USA
"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect
liberty when the Government's purposes are beneficent. Men born
to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty
by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in
insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning, but without
understanding."
Justice Louis Brandeis, dissenting, Olmstead v US (1928)
Reply to: