DIN Chart - Atomic - Where can I find one?

pigo wrote:

"klaus" wrote in message
...

If you want to take generalizations as all inclusive, go ahead.

Uhhh.. that's what generalization are.... if you don't feel they are
all inclusive, you shouldn't be using them.

Main Entry: generalization
1 : the act or process of generalizing
2 : a general statement, law, principle, or proposition

Main Entry: general
1 : involving, applicable to, or affecting the whole
2 : involving, relating to, or applicable to every member of a class,
kind, or group the general equation of a straight line

All generalizations are false. Let me try being concise: The case has
nothing to do with Bush or truth. It has to do with Intellectual
Property Law.

I don't really feel like writting page after page to qualify every
exception to the rule, which of course there are.

Ok... I take that to mean you really can't defend or feel strongly
about your position. So if you don't feel like "writting" pages and
pages, why bring it up? And in such a terse way. In an unrelated
newsgroup?

Most fair minded people looking at
a discussion would get the gist of the conversation.

Most logic oriented people would fail to see your rational regarding
how this case has anything to do with the points/false generalizations
you tried to make.

But eventually one has to get down to the real world and take care
of biz.

Like the 1st Amendment and Fair Use?

-klaus

pigo wrote:

"bdubya" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 12:51:39 -0600, "pigo"

???? I'm talking about Bill O'Reilly and Al Franken, and you chime in
with "You Bush haters are so funny." What does that suggest?

It's all part of your predictability that seems to be rooted in your
side losing the election in 2000.

Lost? Gore got 500,000 more votes than Bush in the popular vote. It's
only because of the Electoral College, an outmoded 18th-century
instititution, that little Boo-Boo won. (I won't mention the outmoded
20th-century voting machines.) Plus, if you count the Nader votes as
well, there are decidedly more of us pinko liberals than there are of
you conversatives! Now how do you figure that?

It's pretty funny, because just prior to the 2000 election, the smart
money was betting that it would go the other way: that Bush would win
the popular vote, but lose the Electoral College. I read a lot of
rumblings from GOP anonymous sources about would happen then: "We won't
roll over. We're going to fight it, and persuade electors to switch
their votes". And I'm sure they would have, too.

It's time for the EC to go. The Founders put it in there as a check on
the popular will. They wanted the electors to be able to override an
election if they didn't like the candidate. Needless to say, no one
thinks that way anymore. All the Electoral College does nowadays is
divide the states into "battleground states" which candidates have to
pander to, and "safe states" which they can ignore. Yuck. Chuck it.

Dave

"Walt" wrote in message
...
klaus wrote:

Fine, I also trademarked Bush H8rs(TM).. and...I've trademarked the
trademark symbol, the first recursive trademark ever trademarked. And
yes, I also had the foresight to copyright the copyright symbol. No
loopholes for you.

Maybe we can work out a deal that lets me use the 'e'.

So what you're saying is that you'd like to buy a vowel. Is that it?

--
//-Walt
//
// "Fair and Balanced"

obski: V__l - _lw__s m_r_ th_n ___ th___ht...

Since when is "G" a vowel? And "y" isn't a vowel in Wheel, either.

"BrritSki" wrote in message
...

I think Dan Quayle(TM) has trademarked the e, for use with potato at
least.

That would qualify for a patent, since the use it is not obvious to someone
skilled in the art.

Dave Stallard wrote:

BrritSki wrote:

Dave Stallard wrote:

I listen to the BBC to get a non-US viewpoint on the news, which I
consider vital. Telling you things you may not want to hear != bias.

Is that the BBC World Service ? BBC UK News is very anti-war and is
getting into a lot of trouble over it, rightly in my view. I don't
object to anyone holding that opionion or to the BBC airing it as long
as their coverage is balanced - I don't want my licence fee money
funding anti-war propaganda.

Yep, BBC World Service.

I think they're probably better than what we're served up - I certainly
hope so anyway !

"pigo" wrote in message
...

"klaus" wrote in message
...

Frankin was the least funny person ever on SNL. And has gotten even less
funny as he has switched to his new career as a politician.

I must warn you. Al Franken has stated that he has trademarked the term
"funny".

And I'm a BushHater? But I was also a ClintonHater. And theotherBushHater.
And a ReaganHater.

Not a CarterHater - he was too pitiful. Nor a FordHater - he's a skier.

And a NixonHater ... etc ... ad infinitum ... ad nauseum

In article , says...
"Java Man (Espressopithecus)" wrote:

as their coverage is balanced - I don't want my licence fee money
funding anti-war propaganda.

Yeah, I could have predicted that. After all, you're a known terrorist,
right?

Oops, I forgot, I am too.


Yes I'm looking forward to meeting everyone soon. What's the skiing like
in Guantanamo Bay ?

er, ah, which side did you say you were on?

Rick

"klaus" wrote in message
...


Like the 1st Amendment and Fair Use?

-klaus

They DID go out and register it in 1995. The govt. took the money or
whatever the process is. What's the use of registration then? I think
that by FoxNews being allowed to register THAT phrase so long ago that
they had some expectation that it meant something. As for fair use, go
try to open a hamburger place with golden arches. Same thing to me.

1st Amendment is a good idea when it comes to Trent Lott and John Rocker
too. Not just al frankin. But this isn't really about free speech, it
about his use of a slogan.

BrritSki wrote:

Dave Stallard wrote:

BrritSki wrote:

Dave Stallard wrote:

I listen to the BBC to get a non-US viewpoint on the news, which I
consider vital. Telling you things you may not want to hear != bias.

Is that the BBC World Service ? BBC UK News is very anti-war and is
getting into a lot of trouble over it, rightly in my view. I don't
object to anyone holding that opionion or to the BBC airing it as long
as their coverage is balanced - I don't want my licence fee money
funding anti-war propaganda.

Yep, BBC World Service.

I think they're probably better than what we're served up - I certainly
hope so anyway !

They seem pretty fair and balanced to me. Uh-oh - I've violated Fox
News' copyright! I'm going to be sent to Guantanemo!

Dave

"jvwalker51" wrote in message
...
On 8/14/03 3:27 PM, in article ,
"klaus" wrote:

No one asked but the way I look at it is there are things worth
fighting for
and things that are stupid. I think this whole thing is a waste of
time and
money.

You've got a point there. And the conservatives usually ignore that sort
of thing. I think that Fox is more demonstrating through example here of
tactics more like jesse jackson's and the aclu than it is really worried
about the words. I think that maybe Fox is making frankin spend time and
money that will have more effect on frankin's small time status than it
will Fox's legions of lawyers. In other words, they're ****ing with
him. I'm sure he hates it when the tables turn that way. They usually
do.