SaggyBalls

Would you have looked at a thread titled 'do you think this glorified headphone amp is worth $600?' Neat idea IMO...though I like lots of loudness and real drums. If acoustic guitar and cajon is ever too loud for an apartment, the better deal is rehearsal space or moving expenses. slick unit though.

how did you miss the last 2 lines (I hit return twice for you!) of my last message? Though I admit 'you're politicizing it' misses the mark, as I was lumping you and your articles together, but I did admit the difference was there and I even vaguely conceded. my reiteration of 'people implies...' ws merely just me spelling it out like a bit of an idiot for anyone that might in the future just be skimming and need a 'wait a minute, what was that he wrote? I usually just skim his bloated posts...maybe there's something here...' ? now...I wouldn't call your posts poetic but that doesn't mean that I don't like them.

'people' implies that they are something other than legal entities. correct English, but that's not the language that's used to define corporations as Persons under statute. You're politicizing it which is something totally different than what I'm talking about. Carry on.

This band *could* have millions of fans worldwide. the 'we don't have to tour much' misconception has probably done this to them. Great sound - keept it not too much of a heartbreaker that it's nothing new.

exactly. it immediately becomes a consumer's item.

multitasking would be great to have as a part of the iPad, as I have been envisioning owning Apogee's 'one' audio interface. it's a 1 channel USB device that has a built in condenser mic. the thing sounds great and is the size of an iPod... ...but it has its own control software, so it remains to be seen if it could even run on the iPad with a recording program...like a scaled back version of garageband. Though the iPad would serve a lot of people really well and the interface is great, the product I've been waiting for for months has yet to materialize. Too bad for me that the apogee products are pretty much mac only. Fingers crossed...by the time I will be able to actually purchase a product like this, the kinks *should* be evened out.

then I'd have to inform everybody that thinks that they are a person and not a flash-and-blood-human-being, which is pretty much everybody. We HAVE a persons which we act as a trustee in trust over while we ARE human beings. While I don't care enough about the 'US media and legal blogosphere' enough to post many places other than here, it's a fact that, while most likely seen with a great deal of disinterest and ignorance even here, is important to share with a community I care about (at least a little bit). Yes the internet is often wrong, no I'm not charicaturizing myself.

if he actually wrote the article or wrote for the Onion?

What do you folks think about Ocean Wave style electric generation or in-river hydroelectric generators? Why dam a river when we don't have to toget some power from it? Why not float generators out to sea?

the day after 9/11 when air travel was grounded in the USA, global pollution cover cut /sunlight energy raised by something like 10%. pretty amazing really.

Corporations are PERSONS: Very different; sense of humour duly noted.

who wants a 5 year old electronic gadget?

You sure about that Hux?

It's finally up and running, but this time it's very different! Awesome or not?

nice external graphics. Would be an awesome iphone gelaskin.

Of course, jonyak, but it would be far more ironic if they were to put the jesus quotes on landmines or a moses reference on a flamethrower - or better yet, a fire extinguisher.

Though funny, and equally offensive, here are the links to the NEW auctions that fit ebay's sensitivity guidelines. Why offensive? First of all, voodoo dolls do not come from Voudou, but from the swampy Louisiana mish mash of delta culture. Secondly, some people will take these things seriously and intend to cause harm to people, which is what shouldn't come from the tragedy in Haiti. nevertheless, the proceeds supposedly go to relief efforts. Rush Voodoo Doll Pat Voodo Doll

Is that like saying that Will plays drums for the Chili Peppers?

It seems more treasonous? Unless those references were specifically put on the scopes with that in mind, it is NOT treason, as there is no intent for said desired outcome. Whoever brought this up or hid any underlying meaning (which I sincerely doubt is the root of the verse) had an intention that was not in line with the accepted aims and attitudes that are meant to keep the US secure. My apologies to you, Dr. Mouse, as I am confident that we both would agree that we don't need to argue something as potentially trivial as this, but "treason is the crime that covers some of the more serious acts of betrayal of one's sovereign or nation. " (wiki) From my point of view, this is an issue of betrayal. "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort." (wiki) Throwing fuel on the fire in this case is far more treasonous than putting a few digits on a scope. Too bad it's now a religious war, since both sides arguably are for the same God and set of ideals. Of course this thread could easily turn into a henotheistic Judeo-Christianity vs. monotheistic Islam, but if this is enough of a talking point to you then maybe a seperate thread would be more appropriate, as would pointing me towards another more appropriate forum for this...like, say, going for a beer as I'm really only learning as I go when it comes to world religion and politics. (Perhaps) The same is true with everybody, but fwiw, I respect your perspective and (potential) understanding of this topic.

It reminds me of a salesman saying 'we want it all to work out great for everyone involved' to get support and a sale, when it's just lip service to build confidence under a thick haze of suggestion.

Thanks for the reminder of a present day perversion of politics, Hux. I want to be able to think our PM isn't ruining it all for us. It doesn't take much to snap me out of it, but sometimes I need a little pat on the back. Anybody else in my boat?

Liftin' a glass to Esau: pretty much the only guy around here that still kicks me in the shins hard enough to get my attention.

Trading the Rule of Law for Safety - a Dangerous Game The Senate is about to vote on Bill C-6, the Consumer Product Safety Act. As I mentioned in the Senate hearing, Bill C-6 represents Health Canada’s attempt to circumvent the rule of law in the name of safety. The problem is that circumventing the rule of law is never “safeâ€. Bill C-6 represents a fundamental change in the power dynamic between the citizen and the state that I am concerned about passing onto our children. Under the rule of law the state cannot take control of persons or property without the supervision of independent courts. Without the rule of law the state can imprison citizens or seize property without court supervision. I do not want our children being subjected to state control of their persons or property without court supervision. I side with political philosophers who warn of the dangers of sacrificing the rule of law. Some might think it is ironic that we are being asked to sacrifice a fundamental freedom that protects us against the state so that we can be “safeâ€. I don’t find it ironic at all. Whenever citizens are asked to sacrifice their freedom, it is in the name of safety. One only has to review the laws enacted in the U.S. following 9-11 to see this mechanism in action. The impetus of trading freedom for safety is difficult to resist. What lawmaker can vote against safety? Citizens demand to be “protected†and governments acquiesce by passing laws that erode our freedoms. I am not against safety. Nor am I against improving our consumer safety legislation. My position is that we can structure consumer protection laws to protect Canadians against unsafe products while at the same time safeguarding our fundamental freedoms. Consumer products are not suddenly so dangerous that we need to sacrifice fundamental protections. Bill C-6 threatens our property rights and our right to private enjoyment of property. Under Bill C-6, inspectors can seize property connected to the manufacture, distribution and sale of consumer products. This seizure can occur without court supervision. There is no limit to the amount of property that can be seized. There does not have to be a “safety†risk to justify the seizure. There are no defined time limits limiting the length of the seizure. If you are charged with an administrative offence, you cannot have a court hearing. The Minister decides if you are guilty. The same Minister can keep any seized property if he/she determines that you are guilty. Bill C-6 also abolishes the law of trespass. Inspectors can enter onto any property or into any place except a private home without a warrant. They are exempted from the law of trespass. We do not give the regular police, who investigate much more serious matters, this exemption. Are consumer products suddenly so dangerous that we need to sacrifice the right to enjoy our property without the incursion of state agents? This generation is responsible for protecting the rights of our children. Do we think our children will be safer in a Canada without the rule of law? Will they be safer in a Canada where the state can take their property without court supervision? Will they be safer in a Canada where they can no longer require state agents to leave their private property? These are fundamental questions that must be answered. Consumer safety is an emotional issue. We are told we need to protect our children from defective cribs and lead in their toys. I agree. We can, however, protect our children from these dangers with court supervision and the rule of law. We can protect our children from the dangers of consumer products without giving the state free range over our private property. We can protect our children without surrendering freedoms previous generations ensured were passed onto us. I expect that Bill C-6 will pass through the Senate. I expect that Bill C-6 will later be viewed as a major turning point in favour of state control. I expect that many will eventually regret the fundamental changes that we will bequeath to our children. Shawn P. Buckley

I hope any cold tone in a letter to my MP isn't going to get me questioned by police...

gO3HUPWfl7M&feature=player_embedded#