OT - 10 steps to fascist police state

Is that warm, dry sand, or cold, wet sand?

"Don Tabor" wrote in message
...

Or you could stick your head in the sand and hope that those of us who
are paying attention will take care of you.

"Private" wrote in message
news:XO3Yh.131241$6m4.67060@pd7urf1no...

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

They told me I was gullible...and I believed them.


Thanks for my laugh of the day!

Here is the one from yesterday.

'It would be wrong to impeach Cheney, because then Bush would be
president.'

and this cartoon strip about Internet argument
http://www.xoverboard.com/cartoons/2..._argument.html

Well, at least you have a sense of humor.

"Steve Foley" wrote in message
...
Is that warm, dry sand, or cold, wet sand?

"Don Tabor" wrote in message
...

Or you could stick your head in the sand and hope that those of us who
are paying attention will take care of you.

The funniest stuff I saw on TV the past few years (this was at relatives
home,we pulled our cable in 2000) was Jay Leno asking questions to people on
the street.

Example!

Leno: "Who is the Vice President?"
Clueless ditz: "Um...I dunno".

I'm sure Ms. Clueless, though, has an opinion.

Thing is, it was over and over. And other surveys bear him out.

"Jose" wrote in message
...

quo where pictures of Cho draw viewers, which equates to higher ratings,
which equates to higher ad revenue, which equates to higher salaries for
the executives?...

I don't even know (or care) who "Cho" is. Why? Because I choose what I
watch. Do you? If you don't, that is a problem. But if you do, then why
do you want to choose what =I= and everybody else watches?

Settle down. Nobody said anything about choosing for you.

You want to make movies about how drugs, violence and promiscuous sex are
genuinely bad, go make them. It's not all that hard.

LOL! Hell, movie making is cheap and easy, isn't it?


-c

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 21:37:38 -0400, Jose
wrote in :

If you don't like what you choose to watch, turn off the TV.

And what of the news you'd like to watch, but because it may have a
negative impact on the news media's parent company, it isn't reported?

Well said. If Enron had owned CNN...

-c

"Jose" wrote in message
.. .

Most people =prefer= to watch a white SUV drive down the highway.

=That= is the problem. It is us, collectively, who decide what is
profitable to the media companies. I agree that in doing so, we are
handing over the keys to our brains, and at some point it will be too
late. But the power was not siezed by them, it was given to them.

That was pretty much my point. WE are society, not the corporations who
control the media.

But millions of people have already "handed over the keys to their brains"
and, the fact is, showing the faces of murderers prompts copycats. There
would be no "copycat killers" if they weren't handed a role model by
somebody selling them ads.

Earlier this month a kid in Oregon fired a rifle into a high school. Later
he said he was inspired by a documentary about Columbine. That's what I'm
getting at: Kids who idolize symbolic antiheroes will emulate them to
capture the same 15 minutes of fame.

http://copycateffect.blogspot.com/20...columbine.html

-c

"Erik" wrote in message
...

PBS rocks. I was up until 2am last night for this thing
they did on Enron.


That was INSANE!

I loved the question that Ken Lay got during the employee Q&A: "Mr. Lay:
Are you on crack? ...."

They interviewed a PGE field electrician who said that his $350,000
retirement fund was cashed out at $1200 or whatever was in Gresham. That
office was right down the road. I remember when Portland energy rates
skyrocketted to cover California's power shortage, all because of Enron.
Then Enron screwed PGE employees too. Used to be a great company.


-c

I don't even know (or care) who "Cho" is. Why? Because I choose what I
watch. Do you? If you don't, that is a problem. But if you do, then why
do you want to choose what =I= and everybody else watches?
Settle down. Nobody said anything about choosing for you.

Uh.... that's not quite the case. You said:
Should stick with the status quo where pictures of Cho
draw viewers, which equates to higher ratings...

The status quo comes about because we, collectively, are choosing it.
Further you state:

Movies about how drugs, violence and promiscuous sex are genuinely bad would
be better than Snoop Dog's Girls Gone Wild extravaganza and all its
miscellaneous internet-porn spinoffs...

While that is a neutral statement of opinion, its relevance only comes
from the fact that we, collectively, are choosing differently from this
opinion. The post implies this is a Bad Thing. By implication, you
would have us choose differently, or be chosen for differently.

You want to make movies about how drugs, violence and promiscuous sex are
genuinely bad, go make them. It's not all that hard.

LOL! Hell, movie making is cheap and easy, isn't it?

1: Yes, it is. Look at YouTube.
2: If it isn't, then you need money. That means you need viewers or
backers. Viewers mean you're back making what viewers want to see.
Backers mean you're making what the backers want us to see.

Grab a super-8 camera and =make= the movie you want us to see. Then put
it on YouTube and see if we =do= want to see it.

It's cheaper than flying.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
news:2007042422113016807-christophercampbell@hotmailcom...

So Larry, what is your definition of "Control" that can boost the number
from 33.4% to 90%?

A friend of mine who is a Statistics instructor regularly dismantles
figures
such as these. The US economic system is too complex to say offhand
"this
percentage owns this percentage"; it depends on how you derive your data
and
how it is organized.

Of course. If the facts don't agree with the original premise, declare the
statistics to be meaningless and arbitrary.

Note: I'm not Larry.



-c

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

A friend of mine who is a Statistics instructor regularly dismantles
figures such as these. The US economic system is too complex to say
offhand "this percentage owns this percentage"; it depends on how you
derive your data and how it is organized. By and large, though,
corporations are run by people like Carly Fiorina and folks who get paid
hundreds of millions of dollars

Paid that much by whom?

Ultimately, America. HP descended so rapidly that the Corvallis plant has
nearly collapsed on itself. Now you buy your crap from China. Carly got a
$25,000,000 bonus for getting fired for ineptitude after her short time
there, but a lot of people I know that worked for HP--engineers who
DEVELOPED THE PRODUCTS and THE ASSEMBLY LINES TO MAKE THE PRODUCTS lost
their jobs in the meantime. If you're somehow content with that system, say
so.

And that's why our economy is outstripping ever other country in the
world,

That's what the south said right before the civil war. It was their lack of
industry and effective management that did them in.

How much responsibility does the truck driver have (a $50K rig) versus t

All the CEOs of all the airlines combined could likely not fly a single 767
from point A to point B. Nor could they train the pilots that do. Carly
would not have had a world-respected printer company to destroy were it not
for the engineers and technicians who developed thos products getting laid
off because of her crappy business management, but she's the one that got
tens of millions of dollars for nearly wrecking the company.

Maybe if you made more of a career and less of whining and barfing back

I'm a UNIX system administrator. If you don't think I'm doing "really well"
for the amount of sweat that collects on my brow... LOL!
Maybe you shouldn't generalize about people for whom you know jack squat.

-c