I'm having problems with my computer. My CD-RW hasn't been working in ages...the BIOS won't even detect it at all, and now my cd rom drive won't spin any of the discs I put in it. It worked yesterday, but today, nothing. I checked all the connections, deleted it from device manager, rebooted, tried various CD's, and no matter what I do, it just makes a weird tapping noise and then stops...won't even begin to spin. I need a new computer. The cd-rw, the cd rom, the weird gray lines I have on my screen that I can't seem to fix...I noticed gateway's cheapest computer is like $399.
Yahoo messenger won't stop freezing on me either. You can't even tell it's frozen, because the buddy list comes up fine...but, if you click the icon in the tray, all these messages I've missed come up all at once. It's weird.
Tell me Laura from Tech TV's Unscrewed isn't hot and cute all at the same time. I heart her.
I recorded that vampire movie, Nosferatu, on Turner Classic Movies last night, and Murder In Mind on BBC America tonight, as well as So Graham Norton, which is on right now. I'm watching Father Ted on DVD, which I got from the library again...seasons 1 and 3, and Sports Night season 2. I was GOING to listen to Bill O'Reilly read his new book- I have the book itself and the CD audio book checked out right now, but I want to hear him read it, so I will go that route. I want to scan some of the info. from the book as well and post it here. Like- did you know the House voted to totally abolish the INS and make immigration a part of Homeland Security? This afternoon, I was writing a political platform for myself...some ideas I would put into play if I ran for office, and one of my ideas is to scrap the INS and most of NASA, so that was odd seeing that the House had done the INS part already. The Senate buried the legislation tho, so nothing ever came of it. About the NASA thing...I would drastically cut funds to that agency and put the money to good use, instead of sending probes to take pictures of Saturn, which does NOT help the American people. Manned space flight, which is very expensive, would be scrapped for the time being as well. The money going to NASA could help find people jobs or help pay to better the U.S. education system, or pay for health care...ya know, important things that actually matter, as opposed to Pluto!
I would also rehaul the GAO (general acct. office) and make it that agency's responsibility to track every single penny Congress spends. Billions of dollars in tax money get wasted, and it's fine, because NO government agency tracks federal spending, which is just absurd to even think about. The GAO only gets involved in emergency situations, and that's very rare. I would set up a federal agency to track every penny spent, and reports of all the money spent would be easily accessible by every citizen who wants the information. That's one way to save billions- by making Congress accountable for their actions...making them responsible to show every cent they spend- I guarantee you, most of these useless pet projects they throw your tax dollars at would go out the door in a hurry. The money saved this way would be used to better fund government projects, and we'd be able to lower taxes. The government does NOT have a right to half of what you earn.
I'll tell you what else would save tons of money- wrangling in the welfare addicts. We need much stricter limits on who gets government handouts. Until the 1930's and 40's, the American people were forced to make it on their own...today, Congress would love nothing better than to give you whatever you want, essentially buying your vote in the process. We live in a country where you can make a good living and thru various loopholes still get foodstamps and a welfare check. You can basically refuse to get a job, have ten kids, then live off the American taxpayer. That's not right, and the money spent on these idiots could be used for worthwhile projects.
One final thing I would do- end private donations to political campaigns. This has become a country where the richest man wins elections. He who spends the most on campaigns wins. That's not right. Someone on MSNBC tonight said that there are over 40 millionaires in the Senate right now (it might be both the Senate and the House, but I think it's just the senate.) I'm sorry, but that's just not right. We need to set up a system that's fair and that has the best interest of the people as it's basis. We need a system that funds campaigns and puts a limit on how much can be spent...maybe, as I said, totally cut out private donations. When companies contribute to campaigns- the candidate is automatically tainted in my opinion- and who wins when that candidate takes office? Big business- especially business that helped get that man or woman into office in the first place. It shouldn't cost half a million dollars to run for president, let alone tens of MILLIONS.
Okay, I went on a rant there about politics. I think I'm going to shut up for now. Before I go...one question- Aria Giovanni, will you marry me? I'd even look past your very very hairy arms. Anyone see this girl's amateur pics? Her arms are just plain gross, and let's face it, without the ten pounds of makeup and airbrushing done in the professional stuff, her face is kinda sick looking too. You know what? I changed my mind...I'll find a different wife. If she really looked like she does in pics, I'd marry her, but I've seen her for real, and it's not a pretty sight!
Posted by Josh at October 14, 2003 02:33 AM | TrackBack"About the NASA thing...I would drastically cut funds to that agency and put the money to good use, instead of sending probes to take pictures of Saturn, which does NOT help the American people."
The American people love exploration, and take pride in their space program (it prevented a social collapse during the cold war with the moon landing) To abolish NASA would be essentially ripping away a vital part of American pride and advancement in technology.
"Manned space flight, which is very expensive, would be scrapped for the time being as well. The money going to NASA could help find people jobs or help pay to better the U.S. education system, or pay for health care...ya know, important things that actually matter, as opposed to Pluto!"
Or you could order the cease of spending and invading countries....with an 87 billion dollar price tag, I can think of MANY social programs I could make better in the US rather than spend it on invading countries.
Or maybe slash the 350 billion dollar a year defence budget. You could cut 1/3 of that and not suffer any major loss, and use those funds to fund the programs you mentioned.
dont worry about NASA, but lets stop "invading" (as you put it) other countries? good idea. lets study a planet thats a gagillion miles away, but lets not spend money on national security.
Posted by: Josh Bozeman at October 14, 2003 12:00 PMSpend as much as you want on national security. Don't start with that neo-conservative "Saddam was about to attack the US" garbage.
As for studying a planet a "gagillion miles away"...that may seem useless to you, but not to the scientists looking into how our solar system was created.
Not to mention the many other projects NASA is working on such as space propulsion systems to maybe one day colonize other habitable planets.
Man are natural explorers. The early days, we built ships to colonize different parts of the world. With advancements of technology, it's only natural we will continue to explore.
Or how about the medical experaments that are soon to take place in zero-G space atmospheres? Cures for diseases (cancer, aids, the common cold.. etc etc) could be at our finger tips.
That doesn't seem like wasted money at all to me...but then again, I'm usually open minded when it comes to these kinds of things.
Posted by: HOODLUMinc at October 15, 2003 08:24 AMftp://ftp.hq.nasa.gov/pub/pao/budget/2003/budget_summary.pdf
Have a look at the NASA Space Program budget. Solar System reseaech and planet exploration only made up 7% of the entire NASA budget.
What this essentially proves is NASA is not a melting pot of wasted money that only studies planets far away. That very aspect of NASA only eats up 7% of their budget.
The most important aspect of NASA 9Human Space Flight) takes up roughly 44% of the budget.
That includes the building of the space station.
Posted by: HOODLUMinc at October 15, 2003 08:30 AMmanned space flight IS pointless tho. it was okay in the 60's and 70's when we actually did stuff no one had ever done before...but now, no way. its a waste
after the recent explosion, they had commentators out the wazoo talking about the experiments that go into shuttles- 99% of them are pointless and would sound silly to most of us...manned space flight is way too expensive, and with new technology, theres little need to even send man into space. it can be done other ways. then again...no one is gonna be living on pluto or saturn or any other planet for that matter, so its still a waste of time, and especially a waste of money.
the space station. whew. thats funny stuff. i mean, of course its going to benefit mankind greatly (haha)...
Posted by: Josh Bozeman at October 15, 2003 12:56 PM"manned space flight IS pointless tho. it was okay in the 60's and 70's when we actually did stuff no one had ever done before...but now, no way. its a waste"
I think you have the wrong idea on what 21st century manned space flights are made to saccomplish. They are not like the 60's/70's flights to "show off what we can do" but rather manned flights to repair orbital platforms and build the space station.
"after the recent explosion, they had commentators out the wazoo talking about the experiments that go into shuttles- 99% of them are pointless and would sound silly to most of us"
I looked a few of them up. Only one or two seemed pointless to you or me 9sex in space, etc etc) but many of them were very worthwhile for science (how plants would grow in zero-G, mixture of substances that can't be mixed on earth, etc etc...all of which could have great discoveries.
I'm sure if 60 years ago, a man walked up to you and told you many of todays cures would come from deep in the ocean or in the rain forest you would have brushed him off as "silly"....
"manned space flight is way too expensive, and with new technology, theres little need to even send man into space."
You obviously don't understand the reasons for sending people into space. It's to build, maintain, repair space vehicles and stations, as well as conduct experaments.
What technology could have the space station build itself at a cheaper cost? And more importantly, why would it cost less to send these instruments to do it automatically than to send a lighter, less feul consuming human?
"no one is gonna be living on pluto or saturn or any other planet for that matter, so its still a waste of time, and especially a waste of money."
Maybe not those planets (due to their harsh atmospheres) but perhaps Mars or the Moon could one day hold colonies and bases.
It's mans urge for exploration that make it worth while. I'm sorry you don't share the same enthusiasm as I do on the matter.
"the space station. whew. thats funny stuff. i mean, of course its going to benefit mankind greatly (haha)..."
Like I said, it all depends on how you look at it.
With a space station in orbit, it could greatly decrease the amount of space flights from earth. With an operational orbating station, the problems could be solved right away through a simple space walk.
Not to mention the many experaments that can be conducted in atmospheres of space that can't be done here on earth. Who knows...maybe the cure for cancer or aids is around the corner...
Personally, I see that as more than enough reason to spend what they do...but thats just me.
Posted by: HOODLUMinc at October 15, 2003 05:45 PMyoure not making much sense.
i made it clear that in the 60's and 70's, space was important because we were pioneers and it did a lot for society in terms of pride, in terms of strength to defeat our then biggest enemies, the russians.
TODAY, space exploration is something totally different. that was why i mentioned the 60's and 70's. id have to look up some of the experiments...but i clearly remember the experts talking about the shuttle experiments, and barely any of them have led to anything beneficial. many brought up tang and said, 'wasnt that created in space?' and the experts answered by explaining that the shuttle, manned space flight, whatever, had nothing to do with it...not to mention there are a number of products that are labeled nasa creations which really werent created in space or by NASA itself at all.
as for space stations- its pointless. if we COULD live on the moon anytime in the future, it would most likely cost obscene amts of money...and the fact is- we have this little place called earth. and there are more pressing issues on EARTH than even thinking about colonizing the moon or mars. you tell the guy paying half his yearly income to the feds that its okay that he can barely afford to take care of his family- because, someday nasa might help us live on the moon! then, you tell me what it feels like when he kicks you in the head.
Posted by: Josh Bozeman at October 15, 2003 06:48 PM"you tell the guy paying half his yearly income to the feds that its okay that he can barely afford to take care of his family-"
Yeah, paying 6 billion dollars a month and an already 87 billion dollars used to invade Iraq would piss me off too.....let alone worrying about the tiny amount NASA takes... (15 billion of a 12 trillion dollar US spending parity?..)
Tell me....is your life any different now that Saddam is gone? Can you go out and buy your big mac without fear of a dictator thousands of miles away? Are you doing anything differently?
Think about what I will say when you answer this... ;)
Posted by: HOODLUMinc at October 15, 2003 07:46 PMyou dont have to agree with the war in iraq, but the man had dangerous weapons and he spent over a decade thumbing his nose at the UN. i guess we'll just let every madman do whatever he wants in the world.
and $12 billion is a tiny amt?! 12 billion could build how many: homes/schools/medical centers for low income families/day care centers/after school program centers/etc?? how many senior citizens who have worked their entire lives to have 40% of it taken away by the feds could be taken care of with $12 billion?
Posted by: Josh Bozeman at October 15, 2003 08:15 PMhttp://www.justicejunction.com/government_nasa_waste.htm
http://www.taxpayer.net/TCS/wastebasket/space/2003-02-07.htm
http://english.pravda.ru/society/2003/04/04/45590.html
http://www.floridatoday.com/space/explore/stories/1996/060296a.htm
http://www.taxpayer.net/budget/agencyreportcard.htm
Posted by: Josh Bozeman at October 15, 2003 08:26 PMI think you should read through your links. Most of them talk about how NASA money should be better managed...not that it's a waste...
Posted by: HOODLUMinc at October 16, 2003 07:39 AMthere was talk about how money should be managed better...but most it talked about how the costs are way too high and that less money could be spent in nasa and things could still get done. i read the links. so...
Posted by: Josh Bozeman at October 16, 2003 12:36 PMso NASA is willing to spend 1 trillion dollars on this new project outreach to mars that IS A LOT OF MONEY
Posted by: Keith St.Amand at December 16, 2003 03:02 PMwhy do we need to send things/ourselves to mars? i dont get half of the stuff nasa does, and it most of it seems like a big waste. iveread a number of stories that explain that many of the so called inovations that nasa came up with, never really started with nasa- but that nasa just puts its name on different advances to boost the agencys image.
Posted by: Josh Bozeman at December 16, 2003 05:19 PM