|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:29 am
First week get btw cool Love my gym job. Still waiting on the supermarket job to start, but there's already been a bit of conflict, since I'm trying to tell them I can't work on Sunday (Kaiser's having his Eagle Scout ceremony and I'm having a massive role in it), and the woman I spoke to said she couldn't do anything because the schedule was in place on Wednesday, and the scheduler wasn't around.
So I get to go down this afternoon when it goes up, and chew someone out if I'm up for Sunday.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:44 am
Great Tattooist Oni You know, I've always been steadfast in remaining proud and unapologetic for being American, but if I was living down there with you guys right now? I'd be very, very afraid. It's sad, but I've kind of known about this for a while. This isn't the first time I've heard about this issue, although I don't know the full extent of it. I love my country, but I don't like the people who are running it. "We love Big Brother"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 10:42 am
So...does anyone now if WJ and Stream will ever nuke the AMC?
It seems stupidity is particularly rampant today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 10:43 am
Skizzors Rae x Rae Skizzors Rae x Rae I'm currently debating whether or not buying Faunzy's flute is really worth it given my lack of money. Everyone's saying it's so fun though! I can't do the second one. He's all LOLOL GIVE ME YOUR PASSWORD. sad I'd open the mail from Faunzy and a little prompt for username/password would pop up three times. (One for each picture of rock, paper, or scissors, I assume..)
Ooooh~ Yeah, what's happening there is that something in the game is trying to access a developer server, so because it's trying to pull that data, it wants you to log-in to verify you have permissions to access that information. Just a glitch, not to worry, you don't have any information to enter. xd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 11:48 am
gonk I can't believe it's already almost July...
The next two months are gonna be so busy ;-;
AX, Zero's birthday, taking his little brother to the beach, THREE appointments in the same day as soon as I get back (because mom wants to consolidate appointments. I just want to do my freaking surgery consultation and go home), get surgery, go school shopping, go to Kentucky to spend time with dad, go out with Kin again and woo him into sweet, sexy marriage, buy my books, and move back into my dorm.
Bleh, regarding political stuff... I'm generally removed from that sort of thing, but I'll catch up on it when I can use my own computer, so that I won't have to try to wrestle with Nick's sound.
Can anyone give me a spoonfeed-version for now? D:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 12:00 pm
Rae x Rae Bleh, regarding political stuff... I'm generally removed from that sort of thing, but I'll catch up on it when I can use my own computer, so that I won't have to try to wrestle with Nick's sound.
Can anyone give me a spoonfeed-version for now? D: Basically, in the wake of 9/11, the Bush administration did a series of illegal wiretaps on "suspected terrorists". They did this with the help of some telecommunications groups, including AT&T. Now, they're trying to get a bill passed that will give the government the right to tap your phones, bug your house etc etc....basically spy on you if they suspect you may be a "threat to national security". In other words, completely disregarding the 4th Amendment, which protects our right to privacy. Now, several people who were the victim of these illegal wiretaps in the past are suing the telecommunications groups responsible. Passage of this bill would grant those groups retro immunity. In other words, even though they helped to illegally tap those phones, they don't have to pay any kind of restitution. At least, that's my understanding of the situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 12:18 pm
LunaInverse Rae x Rae Bleh, regarding political stuff... I'm generally removed from that sort of thing, but I'll catch up on it when I can use my own computer, so that I won't have to try to wrestle with Nick's sound.
Can anyone give me a spoonfeed-version for now? D: Basically, in the wake of 9/11, the Bush administration did a series of illegal wiretaps on "suspected terrorists". They did this with the help of some telecommunications groups, including AT&T. Now, they're trying to get a bill passed that will give the government the right to tap your phones, bug your house etc etc....basically spy on you if they suspect you may be a "threat to national security". In other words, completely disregarding the 4th Amendment, which protects our right to privacy. Now, several people who were the victim of these illegal wiretaps in the past are suing the telecommunications groups responsible. Passage of this bill would grant those groups retro immunity. In other words, even though they helped to illegally tap those phones, they don't have to pay any kind of restitution. At least, that's my understanding of the situation.
Yeah, I don't quite know what to say about that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 12:41 pm
... Oh dear god.
Excepting a Wii and external harddrive, I so effing KNOW what I want for my birthday.
*finally found the Mega Man season one boxset*
The second seems rarer and more expensive ;-;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 1:13 pm
LunaInverse Great Tattooist Oni You know, I've always been steadfast in remaining proud and unapologetic for being American, but if I was living down there with you guys right now? I'd be very, very afraid. It's sad, but I've kind of known about this for a while. This isn't the first time I've heard about this issue, although I don't know the full extent of it. I love my country, but I don't like the people who are running it. "We love Big Brother"
So the question is why that many democrats would vote in favor of a bill that goes against everything they supposedly stand for. The answer is that if you look at the breakdown of who voted in favor of it, they're all from battleground states. They're afraid that Republican opponents could use it against them in the upcoming campaign. Who needs principles when you can get votes? Not House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi! Kuchinich is keeping the faith, but then you can always count on him.
The biggest hypocrite in this mess isn't even a Democrat. There was a single Republican who voted against it, and guess who it wasn't. Ron Paul. He abstained from voting on it.
Clinton will vote in favor when it hits the Senate, but Obama had better come out against it or I will be beyond livid.
Guys, if you can please write to your senators and to Obama, tell them how much you value your civil liberties and holding your government accountable. This is some serious honest to God 1984 s**t.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 1:24 pm
LunaInverse Rae x Rae Bleh, regarding political stuff... I'm generally removed from that sort of thing, but I'll catch up on it when I can use my own computer, so that I won't have to try to wrestle with Nick's sound.
Can anyone give me a spoonfeed-version for now? D: Basically, in the wake of 9/11, the Bush administration did a series of illegal wiretaps on "suspected terrorists". They did this with the help of some telecommunications groups, including AT&T. Now, they're trying to get a bill passed that will give the government the right to tap your phones, bug your house etc etc....basically spy on you if they suspect you may be a "threat to national security". In other words, completely disregarding the 4th Amendment, which protects our right to privacy. Now, several people who were the victim of these illegal wiretaps in the past are suing the telecommunications groups responsible. Passage of this bill would grant those groups retro immunity. In other words, even though they helped to illegally tap those phones, they don't have to pay any kind of restitution. At least, that's my understanding of the situation.
What the original legislation did not have was immunity from oversight, review, and prosecution. What this bill is really doing is granting immunity from prosecution in both civil and criminal courts to the government and to the telecom companies that co-operated in flagrant violation of the fourth amendment.
Here's what happens if this bill gets passed:
AT&T is facing a lawsuit for allowing Gee-Dub to tap your phone. The Attourney General walks in, points his finger at the Judge, and it's game over. The case is dismissed. The judge is not empowered to determine if a wiretap was necessary. The Attorney General does not need to provide evidence that a wiretap was necessary. He just says the magic word and the case disappears. You don't even get to read about it in the newspaper.
If this bill passes, the United States becomes a police state.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 1:27 pm
Rae x Rae LunaInverse Rae x Rae Bleh, regarding political stuff... I'm generally removed from that sort of thing, but I'll catch up on it when I can use my own computer, so that I won't have to try to wrestle with Nick's sound.
Can anyone give me a spoonfeed-version for now? D: Basically, in the wake of 9/11, the Bush administration did a series of illegal wiretaps on "suspected terrorists". They did this with the help of some telecommunications groups, including AT&T. Now, they're trying to get a bill passed that will give the government the right to tap your phones, bug your house etc etc....basically spy on you if they suspect you may be a "threat to national security". In other words, completely disregarding the 4th Amendment, which protects our right to privacy. Now, several people who were the victim of these illegal wiretaps in the past are suing the telecommunications groups responsible. Passage of this bill would grant those groups retro immunity. In other words, even though they helped to illegally tap those phones, they don't have to pay any kind of restitution. At least, that's my understanding of the situation.
Yeah, I don't quite know what to say about that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 8:25 am
I wonder what the designers were thinking about when they came up with some of the poses for the Alruna's Rose... xd
It's a little kinky...not that I mind... xd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:30 pm
LunaInverse I wonder what the designers were thinking about when they came up with some of the poses for the Alruna's Rose... xd It's a little kinky...not that I mind... xd I don't mind that one bit. 8D
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 5:07 pm
LunaInverse I wonder what the designers were thinking about when they came up with some of the poses for the Alruna's Rose... xd It's a little kinky...not that I mind... xd I dunno, if it weren't for the colour being totally different, it kind of reminds me of the Borat swimsuit. xd
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 7:33 pm
... I think I might've lost my job.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
