The First E-President 169
Szentigrade writes "Popular Science is running a letter by Daniel Engber of the online Slate Magazine in which he offers the US Presidential nominees advice on using the full potential of the Internet upon their election into office. Some examples discussed in the letter include: a project already being developed that speeds up the patent approval process, a UK site that aims to improve government-citizen interactions, and perhaps most importantly, a call for government information to be 'presented in a standardized and widely used data format, like XML, so that anyone — in or out of government — could use and reconfigure it however they pleased.' Will 2009 be the first year of the E-President?"
Not if McCain wins! (Score:4, Funny)
Not if McCain wins! (Score:4, Insightful)
The last thing that the neo-cons want is for more government-citizen interaction and less secrecy in their more 'sensitive' actions. The less that the citizens know, the better! All this government-citizen interaction just gets in the way of what they believe a government is supposed to do: give away hundreds of billions of dollars to sleazy corrupt hedge-fund managers and mercenary corporations, and to then just disappear when it's completely broke (along with everyone's pensions and 401-K plans).
Would anyone want to be entrusted to have to try and explain anything technical to Sarah Palin? The first DAZ-MO president (dumb-as-shit mommy)! God, I've got hundreds of them trying to drive their space shuttles (huge SUVs) around town, occasionally flipping them over and crashing into poles because they haven't quite mastered the art of feeding the kids, dialing the phone, changing the DVD, and driving a huge truck-sized vehicle in dense highway traffic.
And a Palin presidency? Just tell her that "this is what America wants and needs", make a huge payoff to the people who are really deciding the policies, and walk off with the billion-dollar no-bid contracts. Two months of a Palin presidency and even the staunchest liberals will be begging the military to take over the country. Just don't shoot us, please. Shoot them, instead. You know who we mean.
Jeez.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There are some tens of millions of voter registrations that have been thrown out over the past few years, predominantly by Republican secretaries-of-state, and predominantly from demographics that favor Democrats.
Throw out enough of the right (or is that left, or is that wrong) votes, and McCain can still win.
Chads and butterflies had little to do with the Florida results in 2000. Bush won because Katherin Harris, in the name of voter fraud, threw out some 30,000+ voter registrations in a wide dragnet looki
A politically correct profession (Score:2)
Like Chelsea Clinton [wikipedia.org]? Absolutely, the only respectable professions are either a teacher [wikipedia.org] or a museum-worker [wikipedia.org] (with the possible additions of working with AIDS patients in Africa [wikipedia.org]).
I wonder, what you think of fashion designers [wikipedia.org], though... Are those Ok?
Re: (Score:2)
As for McCain's ability to handle technology. Before becoming a Senator he operated in real time some of the most sophisticated machines on the planet. As senator he has been called the "Senate's savviest tech
Is XML a data format for documents? (Score:2)
Maybe you mean OOXML, that's definitely for documents.
Re:Is XML a data format for documents? (Score:5, Informative)
XML can be used for documents. just because it has broader uses doesn't mean it can't be used as a document format.
besides, OOXML, ODF, and XHTML are all based on XML--meaning they all validate as XML documents.
Re: (Score:2)
Now now, there's nothing wrong with using a gzipped xml for a document.
Now, there's lots of things wrong with using a vanilla xml fule...
"Will 2009 be the first year of the E-President?" (Score:5, Funny)
If the "E" stands for "ebony", then yeah, probably.
it's already happened (Score:5, Insightful)
in previous elections, grassroots fundraising was small time. dean certainly created buzz in 2004, and $, on the internet, but by far, obama has shown that internet fundraising is a tsunami. it dwarfs the old-boy network and other sources of funding
i think a lot of us lament the influence of money in american democracy. but i think this is the first election you would ever have republicans siding with that sentiment
Re: (Score:2)
I've seen claims that Obama's average donation size is $80 and that he has refused corporate donations. I've heard McCain refused corporate/lobbyist money too, but nothing about donation sizes and sources.
But what I would really like to see, from a place like factcheck.org, is a comprehensive breakdown of funding for both candidates by size, demographic, time frame and 'outside influences' like corps that lean on their employees to donate to a candidate or just a PAC - including the RNC and DNC and any oth
Re: (Score:2)
But what I would really like to see ... is a comprehensive breakdown of funding ...
The problem is, the Obama donations have been shown to not even implement the simplest of credit card validation. Their software readily accepts made-up names and addresses, gift cards, and doesn't even filter for credit cards sourced by American accounts (which is a violation of campaign finance laws to have contributions from foreign countries).
i should have known (Score:3, Insightful)
my comment would bring out the partisan hacks
Re: (Score:2)
Did you even read it?
OMG! (Score:2)
Obama is a tool of foreign money!
zzz
Re: (Score:2)
Well gee, the first article is a meaningless single case of credit card fraud, if that's the best they could dig up, then they suck at digging up credit card fraud stories because such are just the nature of the beast when accepting credit cards online and the system already has mechanisms for dealing with it - as in the person who was fraudulently charged calls up and disputes the charge.
The second link to a blog was typical blog bullshit - lots of hysteria about how the website doesn't immediately puke wh
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but that record I'm pretty sure has been broken several times by Obama since.
I still wonder what the political ads would look like today had Paul somehow managed to get the Republican nomination (not that I honestly believe that the people whose votes actually count would have voted for him, regardless of the primary results). And I really wonder what the people who still approve of Bush would do, once they get out of the hospital for aneurism treatment of course.
Re: (Score:2)
As an aside, several have pointed out that Obama's site didn't do decent credit card validation, leading to the possiblity of fraudulent donations. I guess I can't fight that allegation, but I will bring out an important point about it.
If there are fraudulent donations, there is no possibility for quid-pro-qou.
In other words, maybe Obama is getting extra money because fraudulent donors anticipate that they will prefer his policies, but that is completely different from the case of donors making large contr
Re: (Score:2)
Additionally, I have seen several sources where people were able to donate to the Obama campaign with false names and addresses. There is no evidence that the Obama fund raising is made up of small donors. The only thing we know for sure is that is made up of small donations.
X marks the spot (Score:5, Funny)
The government has a problem giving information to the people, so it decides to use XML... now it has two problems.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
XML is like violence, if it doesn't work, use more.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, until you actually see the results:
<congress>
<lawspassed>
<law>bigoil++</law>
<law>screw you</law>
</lawspassed>
<worthless>true</worthless>
</congress>
I guess it would be a start anyways. No more spending $150k on wardrobes when you can just give a freelancer $150 for a new XSL, at the very least.
Re: (Score:2)
XML is like violence, if it doesn't work, use more.
It's a sig of a regular here. Can't remember who though...
Re: (Score:2)
Those angle brackets do look pretty scary...
-l
Re: (Score:2)
It won't work (Score:5, Interesting)
The real "full potential of the internet" is that it allows the government to ignore people on a more massive scale than ever before.
Re:It won't work (Score:4, Interesting)
Not trying to be too harsh here, but you would rather do absolutely nothing and ignore the problem rather than try to fix it in any way you could?
Re:It won't work (Score:4, Insightful)
Refusing to legitimise the broken system by taking part *is* doing something. With enough weight behind it, non-participation can cause a lot of change.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Refusing to legitimise the broken system by taking part *is* doing something. With enough weight behind it, non-participation can cause a lot of change.
Yes, in the direction opposite of reform, unless you are willing to take up arms.
I'm reminded of the first primes in SG1. They participate in an inherently evil system, but as they train their successors they teach them how to introduce moderation to the goa'uld's despotic tendencies.
They could choose not to participate, but the snake head would just find someone else to do it, and that soldier probably won't have those values.
By choosing to participate and do what little they can, they save thousands of l
Re:It won't work (Score:4, Interesting)
Bullshit.
Sorry, but I don't buy that at all. Slow change from within is nonsense in the current situation, where embedded interests are perverting society slowly but enjoying the support of the citizenry.
Were it a totalitarian state with dictators, yes, people willing to work within the system might help.
Right now?
Dems or Repubs are going to keep on winning. The only protest possible is to stay home.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, the reason things are getting bad is because america is refusing to elect the alternating unified governments they did in the first half of the 20th century.
Back then, things got done, and got done better.
Republicans would get upwards of a decade, then democrats.
This allowed them to actually implement, in full, their policies. They and the public got to see how they played out and apply correction where necessary.
In a gridlock situation, or one in which unitary governments fluctuate every 2-6 year
Re: (Score:2)
And I'm sure you can point to lots of examples where people changed the world by doing nothing?
The reality is that inaction wont lead to change. If you want something different to the world we have now you have to get organised with other like-minded people, agree on what your alternative is and then work really fucking hard to achieve it. Staying at home wont solve anything and you're deluded if you think it will. People in power will just tell any journalists who ask that low voter turnout is a sign of ge
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I'd rather not waste my time and effort on boot licking these management assholes to get things changed only to end up where I started, which is no where.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. It's the same crap you get from your MP when you write to them. A form letter that misses the points you raise and tells you that they know best so shut the hell up.
The website just allows them to do it to everyone at once. It's a total scam.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
As has been said before about voting - taking part only legitimises a corrupt system.
And not taking part allows the system to do whatever it wants with impunity. Do you suggest we relinquish what power we do have and suffer the consequences? Human systems will forever be imperfect. Refusal to participate guarantees that power will be in the hands of the most corrupt. I refuse to stand idly by while history unfolds itself without contributing my own efforts, however small they may be.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, not taking part weakens the system to the point that change must happen because the government no longer have the mandate of the people.
It weakens the government and makes some sort of societal reset more likely and widely supported.
Not taking part is a legitimate political action, whereas voting not only gives your mandate to one or other set of sheisters, but continues to prop up and legitimise a broken system.
And then what? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
actually this is not true.
Systems like fascism and feudalism arise because a significant portion of the population actually support them.
hitler didn't seize power alone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The real "full potential of the internet" is that it allows the government to ignore people on a more massive scale than ever before.
The full potential of the internet is in making information accessible. Imagine it - budget drilldowns from full budget down to agency expenditure. Everything that should be visible under FOI just a few clicks away.
If this is done properly - and that's a big if - we could have the data automatically available. We could have truly transparent government. Anything put on file is instantly available online, unless it's given a security classification. Too much for you? How about just file indices. Knowing what
Re: (Score:2)
Internet Secretary (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe they'll even appoint a Secretary of the Internet!
Boy are you going to dissappointed when you read Part 2 [xkcd.com] and find out who they pick.
300 million critics (Score:2)
could use maybe a pdf, but I'm thinking xml makes tracking data changes too difficult. So:
1) put the US budget proposals, including all the fat and pork online for one week before it gets a vote or passage
2) put all expenditures (except the dark stuff) online in lists that can be viewed; maybe streamed.
3) mandate all legislation gets to be downloaded for one week before it can be voted on, for public scrutiny
4) mandate all trade agreements, and all bi-lateral information is published for a week prior to sig
Re: (Score:2)
Wanna read something scary? Pick any one of the above.
Am I missing something? Those are all positive things.
Or did I miss your sarcasm tag?
Hey what now? E-President getting advice (Score:2)
from the Internet?
Do we really want Anonymous Internet Trolls giving the next US President advice? That will lead to things like making "Chocolate Rain" as the new National Anthem and making it so that Plan9 is the official and only operating system to be used for the government and instead of being called The Commander In Chief the President will be called The National Idiot in Command.
Good grief! They might even try to change the US Flag to a Goatse or Tubgirl motif. :)
Anyway, yes we do need a standard fo
Re: (Score:2)
No, they'd never go that far. They might, however, change our symbol from the American Eagle to a pony. OMG! PONIES!!1! LOTS AND LOTS OF PINK PONIES111!!!!!11!!!!!lll
Will 2009 be the first year of the E-President? (Score:2, Funny)
No.
Dynamic congressional voting (Score:2)
I'd love to see a congressional voting site where you can vote on X numbers of issues that come before the congress, before they come before the congress. Congressmen could then use or ignore that information when making decisions.
Of course, that congressional divergence would be online for all to see. You could even see the %divergence between various senators and your personal votepoints on the issues. Does Feinstein really agree with your POV? Does Liberman? Now you can know.
Re: (Score:2)
Does Feinstein really agree with your POV? Does Liberman? Now you can know.
Di Fi represents only herself and her husband, though no one seems to care. I doubt putting up yet another website will change matters much. California is much changed from the days I grew up with Governor Reagan at the helm.
Senators are pretty much tenured for life, unless they do something really stupid like Larry Craig themselves. Wide Stance's "crime" was being registered Republican not Democrat and NOT just for playing footsie in the bathroom ...
Power broker? (Score:2)
You know, I'd like to be a power broker too, but I'm just as irrelevant as this douche.
Online Government Open Accountability Ledger (Score:2)
This is what I have proposed in OnlineGOAL [google.com] - the Online Government Open Accountability Ledger.
Opening up the (massive) pocketbook ledger of any level of government is going to significantly improve accountability for where the taxpayer's money flows (both in and out).
Contact your local representative and find out when they're going to support this proposal (for whatever country or level of government they are in).
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
What I want is E-candidates (Score:2)
People who run for office by saying:
I don't need hundreds of millions of dollars to run for national office. Communicating via the internet is much cheaper than buying media time, and doing it this way doesn't leave me obligated to rich donors. Choose me based on my policy ideas, not how many times you saw my face on TV this week.
Every time you see a billboard, a full-page ad, or a TV spot, you should be saying "Who paid for that, and how much of the candidate do they own as a result?"
Maybe this will be p
internet = modern wategate tapes (Score:2)
Irrelevant... (Score:2)
Does anybody remember the first telephone President? Or the first steam President? Or the first TV one? (Clearly, Joe Biden doesn't [latimes.com]).
Using/not using the Internet should not be the criteria...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Many government agencies have to release public information whenever asked, including the school I used to work for. However, you have to figure out who to ask, and make an appointment, then fill out forms, then sometimes pay a small copying fee, then they give you copies of their budgets. Why the hell aren't all government agencies (especially the small, local ones!) putting this info on the web? I brought this up to the dean of finance and she damn near had a stroke! I would love, as a taxpayer, to be
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I imagine the issue is simply money. It would cost a lot of programming time to put something good together, especially spread across all of the local departments.
The only way to convince them to do it (without major public demand) would be to show it would somehow save them money in the long run. Maybe automating output in standard formats would allow other common systems to aggregate reports and generate graphs, saving manual labor, for example.
Re: (Score:2)
The information is already there in electronic form. I se
Re: (Score:2)
Re:can they use? (Score:4, Insightful)
Right answer, wrong explanation. if they made it obvious and easily accesible to figure out where all of the money went, it would make it that much harder for any of it to stick to their hands. You really think people are willing to spend hundreds of millions of dollars just to get a 6-figure salary, a comped mansion and an impressive title for a couple of years? You think that such people could actually manage to win?
Re: (Score:2)
That's actually the funny part. I was pushing our dean of finance to do it to fight the perception that we were wasting money. The school I worked for was actually very, very lean, in an area where the k-12 districts were corrupt, and wasting money. It would be good to have people look at how we spent our money, then ask the other school districts how they spend theirs. We would look like hero's, and probably get our bond levy passed.
Re: (Score:2)
Precisely. You can't just dump documents onto the net. You have to sterilize them first to remove social security numbers or other personal information. That takes Labor and of course money to pay the labor.
If I were president I'd pressure the Telephone companies to upgrade all their lines to DSL capability. In this day-and-age there's no excuse for having someone still stuck at 56k access. The lines are already there; even the most-distant citizen has a clean enough line to handle 1 megabit/second acc
Re:can they use? (Score:4, Insightful)
perhaps one of the greatest benefits of IT is the possibility of establishing a direct democracy on a national scale through online referendums.
gone are the days when logistical obstacles prevented the public from directly participating in the legislative process. there's really no excuse to not involve the public in public policy decisions and create a participatory democracy at the federal level.
a government of the people, by the people, for the people, is not just a catchy phrase from the Gettysburg Address. if we want to continue to call ourselves a democracy, then we need to actually employ a democratic system of government that carries out the will of the people.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"there's really no excuse to not involve the public in public policy decisions and create a participatory democracy at the federal level."
Are you insane?
Re: (Score:2)
>>>direct democracy
And now I will define what that means: "A Tyranny of the Majority to squash the right of the Minority (or the individual) with a mere 50%+1 vote." EXAMPLE: The execution of Socrates by a majority vote in the Athens democracy. Why? Simply because they didn't like him.
Pass.
A Republic of Laws that defends the rights of the individual is the surest defense against an out-of control majority. In the U.S. Republic the execution of Socrates would have never happened, because the go
Re: (Score:2)
In the U.S. Republic the execution of Socrates would have never happened, because the government would guarantee his right to jury trial in front of an impartial, his right to speak freely regardless of how ridiculous his idea sounded, and protected him from a Demos trying to kill him "just because we don't like him".
O_o. Waltz, Tango, Foxtrot.
Wouldn't the constitution give Socrates the right to a fair trial? Or do you plan on changing it to "" if enough people are for it?
Let's not kill Socrates again. (Score:4, Informative)
a government of the people, by the people, for the people, is not just a catchy phrase from the Gettysburg Address. if we want to continue to call ourselves a democracy, then we need to actually employ a democratic system of government that carries out the will of the people.
"Direct democracy," no matter how well intentioned, is a recipe for dystopia. Every democracy worth living in has mechanisms set up to protect individuals from "the will of the people."
We don't "need" to make radical changes, at all. Sorry to get all conservative on you, but given such a high level of complexity, a established system, incorporating countless bug-fixes, is preferable to a complete re-write. A similar principle applies to software developement.
Re: (Score:2)
The courts will still be there to overrule unconstitutional legislation and protect minorities from
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
While it may be common sense that such a system will not work - it has worked in a number of places.
You did notice the subject of the post you are responding to? ;)
Wikipedia was slated by many to fail, and it did not.
Wikipedia allows people who know something about something to write what they know, to have it corrected by other someones and ultimately to be subject intervention from on high. Direct democracy would involve getting people who know nothing about anything to decide everything. OK, that's
Re: (Score:2)
You did notice the subject of the post you are responding to? ;)
Indeed, however direct democracy would not be the perfect government, it *could* be better than what we have now - that is all I am suggesting.
Wikipedia allows people who know something about something to write what they know, to have it corrected by other someones and ultimately to be subject intervention from on high. Direct democracy would involve getting people who know nothing about anything to decide everything.
Why do you assume that (last sentence)? Why not try adopting things from the way wikipedia is run? Direct democracy doesn't preclude things like votes being valued differently based on subject matter expertise for instance.
We (you, I and every voter) are singularly unqualified to asses the strength of prospective governments. Firstly we can't believe what the candidates or the press or the smear campaigns etc etc tell us.
We may be individually - but the result may be surprising when aggregated. We are just as vulnerable now to press and smear campaigns as we would
Re: (Score:2)
Wikipedia is not a direct democracy [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Direct democracy doesn't preclude things like votes being valued differently based on subject matter expertise for instance.
How would you propose a person's expertise is gauged? A test at voter registration? Is it re administered annually? Please tell me it's not take home, I don't want some Bible-thumping 7th-day Adventist cribbing the answers to the science questions
Re: (Score:2)
>>>Wikipedia was slated by many to fail, and it did not.
It has ruined several persons live by printing false information in their Wiki-biographies. Now imagine if wikipedia had the power to kill..... all it takes is 50%+1 majority, and your life is gone. Simply because people don't like you.
You're probably scoffing at this point, but it happened to Socrates. He exercised his right of free speech, the Athens Democracy did not like his ideas, and so they voted by majority to execute him. Had Athe
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In Bush's case, the mechanism is the Secret Service, and "the will of the people" is to tar and feather him. nd that's just for starters.
Your statement is inaccurate and should be rephrased as "Every democracy currentlyworth living in" ... we now have the means to devise a future democraciy that would have been unimaginable in times past.
Re: (Score:2)
In Bush's case, the mechanism is the Secret Service, and "the will of the people" is to tar and feather him. nd that's just for starters.
When simply voting the incumbent party out of office (or convincing oneself that the party, with its new candidate, has seriously reformed itself) would be a much more civilised response. The "tar and feather" bit is exactly what I'm afraid of, thanks.
Your statement is inaccurate and should be rephrased as "Every democracy currentlyworth living in" ... we now have the
Re: (Score:2)
I think the gp is referring to "Tyranny of the Majority." The founding fathers were very concerned, and that's part of why we have a Senate, and the Supreme Court is filled the way it is.
Re: (Score:2)
I think there's a pretty strong argument that efforts like Rock the Vote which encourage the most uninformed ignorant sectors of the population to participate in a democracy they know little about are partially responsible for the dearth of brains in elected office for the past 20 years. Now imagine if we also had "Rock the Tax Code" and "Rock the Defense Appropriations Bi
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with direct democracy in a modern large society is not simply one of communication, it is also that the number of issues is too large for people who aren't devoted to it full-time to consider well, without being manipulated by those who are devoted to policy issues full-time. Online referenda address some of the communication issue (that is, getting peop
Re:can they use? (Score:5, Insightful)
In many ways, it's You Tube that's killed the Republican coalition between fiscal conservatives (libertarians), social conservatives, and the "National Greatness" conservatives (the neo-cons, more or less.)
Obama's campaign helped the Republicans self-destruct by aggressively running a 50-state campaign, not a 50% +1 campaign. This meant that the RNC had to run ads to shore up its base in formerly secure red states. The problem is, the message that rallies the base - using "liberal" as a smear word, attacking patriotism, etc - alienates the middle. An ad attacking the Democrats in North Carolina will be seen by voters in New Hampshire and Minnesota, and they will find it repellent. Meanwhile, Obama does not have to appeal to the far left to mobilize his base, and his base is already extremely well mobilized. He is more or less in a situation where he never has to apologize or be sheepish about any ad with "I'm Barack Obama, and I approve this message" on it, while a lot of the John McCain ads are frankly embarrassing.
The result is Republican meltdown. Fiscal conservatives already suspect that it may be easier, as in the Clinton era, to get fiscally conservative policy out of a Dem administration than out of the Republicans. It's definitely easier to push fiscal conservatism in the Democratic party than it is to push social liberalism in the Republican one. Now, the tensions between the generally secular neo-cons and the religious social conservatives (many of whom, like Huckabee, are actually comfortable with a government that provides a lot of services) is being reflected in the cracks between McCain's camp and Palin's camp.
I think what YouTube has done is put an asterisk next to Tip O'Neill's old axiom that "all politics are local." That asterisk is "but all communications are global."
Re: (Score:2)
Fuck man.
You get it.
This is probably the most succinct evaluation of new society campaigning I have ever read.
Re: (Score:2)
"while a lot of the John McCain ads are frankly embarrassing"
They *ought* to be embarassing to Obama, but the media gives him a free pass on it, pooh-poohing his association with people who say a lot about his character, instead saying shame on McCain for daring to smear the messiah. McCain was the guy calling for reform for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, but he has been labeled "part of the Bush administration" by the O-camp, and the media lets it pass. Obama has gotten by far and away the most money per year
Re: (Score:2)
In short, people are aware of his associations with a variety of colourful peopl
Re: (Score:2)
I'm afraid that the HotAir.com link is exactly what the middle finds repellent about the right. The attempt to smear by association, the claim that Obama is playing the "race card" (when he clearly isn't: anything but, frankly) - and if you read HotAir.com, particularly its comments, you read the kind of over-the-top, conspiracy-theory type thinking that is turning the Republican party into a rump party.
What McCain needed to do was to work on his positives - at one time, he was a persuasive moderate with cr
Missing items: spam, public access, OSS, secure it (Score:2)
Re:can they use? (Score:4, Funny)
I think it is time that we ask both major Presidential candidates to submit code samples. Bonus points will be awarded if they submit the code in Perl, Assembly, or FORTRAN.
Lets be fair to both candidates. Switch settings for a bombe [wikipedia.org] should be acceptable.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I think it is time that we ask both major Presidential candidates to submit code samples. Bonus points will be awarded if they submit the code in Perl, Assembly, or FORTRAN.
I think blub [docforge.com] would be most appropriate.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess you're voting for Obama, [youtube.com] not McCain? [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Oh come on, if YOUR computer was hawt as Cindy, would you use an PC or an Apple?
P.S. it is well documented that having his shoulders, arms, and fingers broken keeps him from using a normal computer. Could he use one of those Hawking type computer systems? Sure he could, but see the Cindy comment...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Bonus points will be awarded if they submit the code in Perl, Assembly, or FORTRAN.
Bonus points if the same source works in 3 or more languages, see http://www0.us.ioccc.org/1986/applin.c [ioccc.org]
Re: (Score:2)
The Obama IT camp,
Re:Album title: Oval Office Party - Chiefs and Squ (Score:2)
Nah if they appealed Bill Clinton's impeachment they'll appeal Barack Obama's impeachment as well for the same reasons.
Look at all of the stuff George W. Bush is accused of doing, and they still can't impeach him. That is because they don't have enough evidence to start an impeachment trial, but what they do have is accusations, rumors, gossip, and opinions, but no "hard evidence" beyond a reasonable doubt. There wouldn't be enough "hard evidence" for Obama either even if he did make the album public becaus
Re: (Score:2)
What makes you think an impeachment can be appealed? Who would hear it? The Supreme Court? They're the judges in the impeachment, they can't also hear an appeal, and there's nobody else left. If the President is successfully impeached, he's out, no ifs, ands or buts. Judging from what you've written, you think that Clinton's impeachment hearings before Congress were an appeal. They
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is supposed to be a representative government, ...
True, the US is a Republic not a Democracy.
but how long have we been left wondering who, exactly, they were representing?
At least my lifetime, but who's counting?
Following these suggestions would bring about the transparency we need to help eliminate the (perceived) corruption and cronyism in our government.
Nope.
I have one single suggestion that would instantly result in better government:
If a representative wishes to vote AYE on a bill, he/she must pass a test that proves that he/she has read the bill and understands it.
Think about it. We really do not willy-nilly passage of a barrage of laws so much as applying some actually thinking as to how they all fit together.
Does anyone else remember the promised slowdown by a US airl
Re: (Score:2)