 | | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) No, as in meaning that your opinion that there is a problem that needs to be dealt with is not shared (currently) by the various managers involved. (...) Prosecute: no, I'm not conceding that, except as a consequence of the artist not bowing (...) (21 years ago, 12-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) It's a little hard to take this too seriously, but I'll try just for a moment of distraction... But first, let's make some things clear: 1. HD has terrible service 2. HD is usually very understaffed 3. HD is actually a dangerous place to shop (...) (21 years ago, 12-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) Meaning that they're not doing their job... we have an endemic problem in the US with management tending to ignore the actual owners of the company, and this is just one more example, albeit minor. (...) Or prosecute. Which I think you're (...) (21 years ago, 11-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) She's responsible for her own actions. But that's just my view - see below. (...) If she delibrately broke her own foot, that would actually be fraud, not theft. If an accident, and a jury found the store in part responsible because it did not (...) (21 years ago, 11-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) This seems to be your opinion more than the management of Home Depot, which seem to view it as a mild annoyance at the worst. (...) You are comparing a prosecutable crime with a non-crime. They are free to toss her from the store if they find (...) (21 years ago, 11-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) I've got a "What if?" She's stacking up these bricks without the store's OK to show off her artistic talents. One slips out of her hands as she's stacking and it is the last and highest placed. The brick then lands on her foot and breaks (...) (21 years ago, 11-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) Which someone has to clean up. That's a theft of labor (the cleanup) as well as stealing use of the materials (the pieces are not available for sale while she's "using" them) as well as hinderance of trade (while she's "sculpting", it's harder (...) (21 years ago, 11-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(...) I fail to see where she steals anything in the store. She just rearranges the stock into interesting, if ephemral, shapes. Where's she appearing next? I'll even buy something in the store. :-) -->Everyone's an Art Critic<-- (21 years ago, 11-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
|
|
(URL) ran across this from somewhere else) "since Nagorka generally goes to work in the aisles without prior permission from store officials" Except for the above, note how the story doesn't really even mention the fact that this "artist" (scare (...) (21 years ago, 11-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
(...) Except inasmuch as it would get her out of MI I am not seeing that as a good thing. IIANM, it's not legislation that is required, it would be a constitutional amendment. (the legislation would merely be the first step in getting the amendment (...) (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
(...) Why stop there? Why not just abandon all pretense and elect Fahd Bin Abdul Aziz or Salem bin Laden? On the other hand, such legislation would enable Jennifer Granholm to run. You know, one thing that embarrasses me terribly as an American is (...) (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
(...) Dude, I said maybe... ;) -- Hop-Frog (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
(...) That's a good point. There is that law saing only American born peeps can be president. Is that a good thing? Overall, I guess--it would prevent some charismatic foreigner from becoming president and screwing things over. Though to be said, it (...) (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
Under CURRENT law, Ahnold can't become president, right? He is foreign born. Not that that will stop him - someone else is currently trying to change that (probably specifically FOR him)... (...) -- Tom Stangl ***(URL) Visual FAQ home (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
Urp, dangling referent! (...) The "They" referred to in this footnote are the Saudis, not those TimeWarner folks behind TIME magazine. Whether TTWFBTM wish us well or not is an exercise left to the reader. :-) I certainly have my views, but in the (...) (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
(...) I've always supported Michael Moore despite the somewhat shaky documentation he often provides for his arguments and the somewhat hasty conclusions he often draws from them, but I'm happy to have been wrong about the above point. Michael Moore (...) (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
(...) With him so far.... (...) This was the part where I thought he veered off into foaming a bit.. (...) Don't you just hate it when people who clearly are weasely lying sniveling gits(1) might actually be right about just about everything they (...) (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
(...) Old, but extremely important news for most U.S. idiots. (...) Not new, important. (...) The case has not yet really been made against OBL -- of course, he has also vanished without a trace. Maybe they never really wanted to "get him" in the (...) (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
(...) I know that MM isn't held with much credbility in these here circles, but 'Dude, where's my country?' may hopefully restore some... (URL) which questions are asked and researched-- " 1. Is it true that the Bin Ladens have had business (...) (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More of the Usual Lies
|
|
More of the lies in detail... Claims vs. Facts: President Bush's New Hampshire Speech to Air National Guard Reservists (URL) WMD IN IRAQ claim: "Since the liberation of Iraq, our investigators have found evidence of a clandestine network of (...) (21 years ago, 10-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Impeach Bush now
|
|
Impeach Bush now Unmasking a CIA agent is bad, lying to Congress worse. With each U.S. death in Iraq, the case against the President grows stronger, says JOHN MacARTHUR (URL) Now that the U.S. government's chief weapons inspector in Iraq has, in (...) (21 years ago, 9-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | More of the Usual Lies
|
|
Bush hits back at Iraq critics (URL) Mr Bush's speech was part of a new White House public relations offensive aimed at countering growing criticism of US policy in post-war Iraq, where US forces are coming under fire daily and suffering mounting (...) (21 years ago, 9-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) We are the chorus, and we agree, we agree, we agree, we agree - Bored of the Rings (...) No, we dismiss the anonymous simply because they are anonymous. I don't have a clue as to who they are. I at least knew beforehand who Arnold was, I could (...) (21 years ago, 9-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd wrote: Once again, you're forgetting my prohibition against posting except when you agree with me. I just don't understand you sometimes. (...) There's a difference, I think, between ignoring anonymous (...) (21 years ago, 9-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) Honestly, I dismissed most of them for pretty much the same reason - I didn't know their name simply because they were not seriously running for governor. And let's add to that I dismissed the names that were similiar to better known people (...) (21 years ago, 9-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) Absolute political unknown. I had presumed that you would be able to identify the term within the context of the discussion, but I see that I am in error. You dismissed a range of other candidates just because you didn't know their names. This (...) (21 years ago, 9-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
I think its all very funny but then I don't live in CA Tim (21 years ago, 9-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) "Absolute unknown" can take on a lot of possibilities. If you mean unknown to the public in general then Arnold not an "absolute unknown". I have my sample ballot in front of me right now and am going down the list to see which names I (...) (21 years ago, 9-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) Character flaws? If true, the actions described are generally in the way of sexual assault. I might have a bad temper -- yeah, that's bad. But if I grope your wife, daughter, brother, son, or even you -- I've probably committed a crime! (...) (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) Okay, answer me this - would you assign 3 reporters to investigate bad temper when everyone involved is in one spot, or 3 reporters to investigate alleged criminal transgressions with the witnesses scattered about? Which is newsworthy? Davis (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) Bruce, 4 things: 1. The LA Times devoted 3 reporters for 7 weeks to investigate the character of one of the candidates, while ignoring any character issues on the other candidates. Gray Davis, for instance, is said to have a bad temper and has (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) You've misinterpreted my intent, so I'll restate it: I find your choice "to try someone else" to be insufficient cause for an informed citizen to cast a ballot for one canditate in preference to another. Would you care to elaborate on your (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) Alright, let's run this the other way. Another recall happens, only this time it is Arnie. 51% vote yes. 49% vote no. So, in fact, only 51% get to determine who the new governor is. And you can bet that most of that 49% who don't get to vote (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) I'll just take that as another sacarasm. (...) Again, I'm going to note Hardball on MSNBC. Arnorld has something no one else up there showed- charasima! If there is one thing I have seen all so often in this life (I was one of those teens who (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) I'll just take that as a scarcasm. (...) Hold on there as second! I was watching Hardball on MSNBC last night and people on the show brought up some very important points. One that caught my attention was IF there was a run off between (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) I am all in favor of saving the $$$. It makes a little more sense to say "yes, recall him, and replace him with X", than to say "no, do not recall him, but in the event he gets recalled, replace him with X". Maybe it is because it appears that (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) Arnold admits to some of the charges and is a "good" guy and is "slimed"? How can he be slimed if he issues an apology, and a weak, vague one at that? Sounds more like it's the Times that is being slimed. (...) This really has nothing to do (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
Recall - NO Replace - Badi Badiozamani (Local man, went to school with his daughter.) Prop 53 - NO Prop 54 - NO Matt (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) I had a pain in my chest, and I was sick of all the usual doctors telling me that it was lung cancer, so I went with my instinct and consulted a wealthy actor rather than someone with experience in treating my ailment. I just wanted to try (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
Dear California: You have my sincere sympathy (but then, you would have had that no matter who "won", just about)... (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
