“Ladies and Gentelman, what he said is just not true” -Kerry
“I own a timber company? Need some wood?” – Bush (Dubya)
At this point in the race, with this level of acrimony between our contenders, I’m sorry, but you can not solely rely on content . I was reading an article on Saturday’s journal that bulleted all the content that each opponent used to bolster his position, and then compared this against what in fact is true, and lets just say, you would be shocked at the results. When Bush says ‘98%’ of small business will lose out on Kerry’s plan, his definition of ‘small business’ is so loose that it even covers the 15 year old kid that shovels your driveway every winter. However, the format of these debates leaves your opponent with little if any time to set the record straight.
When Dubya (W) says we increased the child tax credit up 1000$ common sense will interpret this phrase as whatever the current child tax credit is, 1000$ has been added to it but it also increased the corporation tax. However that’s not what he meant, he means that the credit was once 500$ and is now 1000$, an increase of 500$. Sure this is a small example, but candidates will twist anything to sound better than it really is. So when Dubya’s ratings took a dip after the first debate and the conservative media is pissed off that the rest of us are more focused on oratory style, poise, and who “looks more like a president”, you can’t blame us for doing it. If we were to actually listen to what our candidates have to say, you would have absolutely no clue who to vote for.
Now, Doesn’t Kerry look more like a president to you?
image from www.youforgotpoland.com
Kerry vs Bush
Wow. To anyone that saw the presidential debate last week and is still considering voting for George Bush next month, I have one question for you: What are you a moron?!
Suffice it to say, Round 1 went to Kerry. Kerry punctuated the evening with an (al-yu-kan) uppercut to the jaw that hurled Bush half-across the room.
I think I have the clipï¿½
A preponderance of useless icons on top a black conformist background–i’d have it no other way.
Does your desktop look as disgusting as mine? Send me a screenshot!
Nowadays, the only people regurgitating those tired cliches about technology are people that don’t know anything about it. What cliches? You know, Technology is changing our lives, Computers will soon be a necessary appliance, in every home. Etc.. etc.. (vomit?) etc. These cliches may have been appropriate 20 years ago, but now, I’m sorry, there are no longer prophetic of something to come, it is already a reality and most of us have already adapted to it.
These same people are the ones that think it’s pretty nifty to send a 4mb picture attachment of their new baby niece to everyone at work. Where is the vacillation, the necessary hesitation, before filling the to field with EVERYONE. What are you doing to me? And is it really necessary to decorate your email with these rank, barely-supported, Outlook Themes. And please, chain letters? What are we 12?
You know, I think I’m turning into a cliche myself. The pompous IT guy– the know it all, who uses soap-boxes for shoes. Maybe I already am this guy. But at least I know the cause.
So for my CSC320 class (Social issues in computing), I had to pick a topic in computers that has social implications and write a short essay on it. Let me tell you, picking a topic was sooo tough, expecially when he threw in the “something that interests you” limitation. Because…frankly, nothing in computers interests me anymore. With that said I decided to write about Everquest: (may be interesting to a select few) (a very select) …
Video Games have never ceased to amaze me. It would seem as though my generation has seen the rise and fall of so many various flavors of video game consoles; and like monarchs, they are all eventually abdicated from their thrown by the next more powerful console, boasting the absolute latest technology at its disposal. At the current stage of the video game evolution, we are starting to remove the limitation of playing a game with those who you know and are locally present, to those who you donï¿½t know and are as remote as different continents. Video Games are starting to go ï¿½onlineï¿½ and are polarizing the gaming population into small communities, each with their own kind of language, dialect, and rules of etiquette.
One game in particular that has highlighted the effects that online gaming can have on our society is called Everquest, an online digital world with millions of residents made up of all your fellow players. This game is so much like reality that for some, it has taken its place. There have been reports of divorce and various domestic and social issues that have stemmed from this game alone. Money acquired from within the game has actual worth outside of it as well, as users sometimes trade actual dollars for Everquest money or equipment. The popularity of this game, along with the copious hours that players invest in it has incited some to apply rather negative labels to it such as ï¿½EverCrackï¿½ and ï¿½NeverRestï¿½, implying the game as more of a vice than a form of entertainment.
The social implication of this game, and all otherï¿½s that follow in its genre are obviously severe. Should this game be allowed for purchase? Sounds like a silly blatant infringement of our most basic rights, but is it really that silly? The effects of Everquest have been compared to those produced by most narcotics, and those are illegal. Can the makers of Everquest be held liable for a divorce caused by this game? It is a hard decision to make. Most of this may reside on whether we can trust society to exercise the discretion needed to prevent such a game from becoming an addiction. But a larger question is, do we have this right?