Posts by InternationalObserver
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
So let's go for a lighter note. I downloaded and watched The Brits, the British music awards, this week, and although most of the bits in between were crap, the stage performances were brilliantly produced. No more so than Rianna's collaboration with The Klaxons on that song. It looked and sounded huge, and it appears it may actually get a proper release.
I kicked it Old School and simply recorded it for later viewing. I also FFW thru the bits in between, stopping only for the live performances. I also stopped for Rianna's UMBRELLA ELLA ELLA (ha ha! there's no escaping that earworm now) but only to try and figure out how high her heels were, or whether she was actually wearing 10inch platforms under that dress.
I didn't pick up on the band (I was FFW) and merely presumed (once I'd dismissed the idea it was The Police __circa 'Syncronicity') that they were merely from Central Casting wearing some costumes left over from __Duran Duran's 'Wild Boys' video.
So they're actually a band are they? Have they released anything yet? -
Slate have just done a story on Wiki:
Social-media sites like Wikipedia and Digg are celebrated as shining examples of Web democracy, places built by millions of Web users who all act as writers, editors, and voters. In reality, a small number of people are running the show. According to researchers in Palo Alto, 1 percent of Wikipedia users are responsible for about half of the site's edits. The site also deploys bots—supervised by a special caste of devoted users—that help standardize format, prevent vandalism, and root out folks who flood the site with obscenities. This is not the wisdom of the crowd. This is the wisdom of the chaperones.
And according to these guys Wiki is edited by Paedophiles:
Wikipedia has long been a huge target for child rape advocates. Why? Because they think it legitimizes their viewpoints to have them enshrined in the user-edited "encyclopedia." It's called the Wikipedia Campaign and they've been very successful, well, until we started putting pressure on Wikipedia to bring this topic to a boiling point and due to the pedophile campaign to smear and libel pedophile sex abuse victim Justin Berry being brought to the head of Wikipedia, Jimmy Wales.
BoyChat member and Wikipedia editor BLueRibbon puts it best when he stated on BoyChat.org...__
I did make a few edits to BoyWiki's Activism article recently, however the reason I spend so much time at Wikipedia is that their Paedophilia article is the top result for that term on Google, making it an important platform for us.__
-
Made such a change from merely imagining the speaker was naked.
yeah, but isn't it meant to be the other way 'round? when you're 'public speaking' you're meant to imagine the audience naked, so you're not afraid of them?
There are very few Public Speakers I'd want to imagine naked </shiver>
-
The Truth In Ad Sales is funny cos it's 100% spot on. Which means that for anyone who recognises themselves in the vid they're going (about half way thru) "yeah, so?"
A pity more clients aren't more clued up. But everyone else in on the 'game' knows they're a player. A pity also that it's a tad too similar to this one:
-
and in other Health News:
Associate Health Minister Jim Anderton said the short-acting hallucinogenic anaesthetic will be a restricted substance after the classification is approved by Parliament.
(Not a pleasant drug so no-one minds)New Zealand researchers road-tested two of the biggest-selling drugs on 100 couples affected by erectile dysfunction.
They found women preferred Cialis, which can help men achieve erections during arousal for 36 hours, over Viagra, which works for about four hours.
(I haven't tried either yet, so I couldn't possibly comment) -
they act as guardians, to prevent a candidate in a close race from securing the nomination if it's not in the interests of the party.
The role of the superdelegate is to question "is this the best person for the job?", "does this person – popular within the democratic party – actually have the better chance of taking the White House?"
But wasn't the USA founded on the idea of "We, The People..."??
I 'get' that this is a process to select the Democrat nominee for the Presidential election; but imagine if the Presidential election was run along similar lines? The people go out and vote in November for who they want to as President. Candidate A beats Candidate B by a narrow margin. But Candidate A is not inaugurated because Congress and The House of Representatives have 'Superdelegate' status and it is their job to question "is this the best person for the job?" and they give their votes to Candidate B.
Imagine the uproar!
Besides, is Obama's success not a good indicator of "who has the better chance of taking the White House?". If at conference time Obama has a narrow lead over Clinton, and the Superdelegates use this as validation to annoint Clinton as the nominee ('there was no clear mandate from the people') then they better hope like hell she wins. Because if she doesn't they will all be swept out of the party heirarchy. Obama's supporters want change and they won't stand for their party delivering another Republican term.If Clinton doesn't win significantly in the next primary round she should step aside. If Obama wins, even by a narrow margin, she should step aside immediately.
-
I remember telling some friends at school (I was 17) that I thought Clinton was the first good looking American president since Kennedy.
They all looked at me like I was mental.
well of course they did, like, omigod - had you forgotten this guy??
-
an update courtesy of HuffPo:
Karl Rove appeared on today's premiere of Fox News' new election show, "America's Election HQ." At the tail end of his segment he addressed last night's controversial "60 Minutes" piece, which suggested that Rove worked through a Republican operative in Alabama to dig up dirt on the Governor there. Rove flatly denied the allegations and called CBS the "National Enquirer of network news," claiming that CBS never even called him for comment on the story.
-
But does being a good speaker make you a cult leader?
Me so old. Me remember Ross Perot. Ross talk good and people love Ross.
Which isn't to say I don't support Obama. US voters are possibly so jaded they'd rather someone with no experience took the job, such is the desire for change. There is a pervading feeling that they're all corrupt bastards (or bitches, vis a vis Hillary) so why risk letting any of them (politics as usual) get back in the Whitehouse?
And speaking of Perot, no Democrat minded when he got in the race because he 'stole' votes off Bush (the Elder). No Democrat minded when Kucinich got in the race for the Dem nomination either. But as soon as Ralph Nader wants to run for President as a third party ....
PS - can I plug the 60 Minutes item on Rove I posted on PAS Monitor ...?
-
It was Richard too that arranged for Flying Nun and us to jointly source and pay for an edition of Office, which we installed in both offices.
As we speak, Bill Gates' minions are winging their way to Bali to give you a right kicking. Save yourself and point the finger at Shepherd.
I presume you mean, moving files from old versions of word to new versions, rather than physically moving the files.
Kinda. I tried plugging in a cable from my old Mac to the new one but I couldn't drag and drop them over. Isn't that why we buy Macs - everything can be done by either clicking or dragging and dropping?
When the hands do their own thing without being told, you're almost there.
Yeah, well that's another problem I get, with certain sites ... </ewww!>