RP Spammers Unite to Win North Carolina County Strawpoll

[FUCK THE POLICE]

"These quotations became an issue during Paul's 1996 campaign for Congress. During the campaign, he declined to distance himself from the statements. But in a 2001 interview with Texas Monthly, he said he had never written or approved those words for his own newsletter. He said he failed to disavow the words during the campaign on the advice of his political advisors. "They just weren't my words," he tells me. "They got in because I wasn't always there. I didn't have total control. And I would be on vacations and things got in there that shouldn't have been."

I am reading the whole Salon interview, and I think this paragraph bears repeating, especially the part I have bolded.

He didn't disavow these disgusting, scummy, racist things said in his own newsletter (and by the way, those things are never going to be in the Darla newsletter, whether I am "on vacation" or not, so stick that BS excuse guys ok?) because his political advisers told him not to?

So, his political advisors felt that not disavowing these lowlife, racist pig comments would play better in Tex-ass, and obviously they were correct, and Mr. Integrity himself, Ron Paul went along to get along, huh?

Yeah.

They told him nobody would understand the difference between him and a ghostwriter saying them, and it'd be better just to not have them brought up again. Of course, I don't think he ever reckoned that he'd be running for pres. again.

 

[blackascoal]

Now that his racist background has been conclusively proven .. consider his delusional myopic libertarian beliefs that have no applicable application to the real world.

There is a serious disconnect between trying to position yourself as anti-corporatist while screaming for the wonders of the "free market" and insisting on removing all regulations, restrictions, and limits on the "free market".

Who in the hell does Paul think the free market is if not large multi-national corporations? EVERY economy in the industrailized world has a mixed economy because history has demonstrated that corporations CANNOT be trusted without government oversight.

Just more snake oil.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

"He claims he's seen Chinese troops along the Mexican border. "

LOL. I wanna put that in my sig.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Don't you understand?!

Ron Paul is the teflon libertarian!

 

[DigitalDave]

Now that his racist background has been conclusively proven ..

There is a serious disconnect between trying to position yourself as anti-corporatist while screaming for the wonders of the "free market" and insisting on removing all regulations, restrictions, and limits on the "free market".

There are two things that need to be done in order for it to be a 'free-market'.

1) End government subsidies for corporations, as well as end no-bid contracts. Quit favoring corporations!

2) Remove burdensome regulations, like Sarbanes-Oxley, that are reactionary and force people like myself to do 7.5 hours of documentation for .5 hours of programming.

 

[blackascoal]

Don't you understand?!

Ron Paul is the teflon libertarian!

Or so he thinks.

 

[blackascoal]

There are two things that need to be done in order for it to be a 'free-market'.

1) End government subsidies for corporations, as well as end no-bid contracts. Quit favoring corporations!

2) Remove burdensome regulations, like Sarbanes-Oxley, that are reactionary and force people like myself to do 7.5 hours of documentation for .5 hours of programming.

Not favoring corporations, which I agree with, does nothing to protect Americans FROM corporations. Product safety and truth in advertsing are only the tip of the iceberg in what corporations will do without controls. We don't have to guess at it .. the history of the Robber Barons is a glaring example.

Some legislation is burdensome, but that hardlt dictates that all legislation is without merit.

Bad government is bad government, but not all government is bad government.

As an Oracle DBA, documentation is a wonderful thing.

 

[DigitalDave]

Not favoring corporations, which I agree with, does nothing to protect Americans FROM corporations. Product safety and truth in advertsing are only the tip of the iceberg in what corporations will do without controls. We don't have to guess at it .. the history of the Robber Barons is a glaring example.

Some legislation is burdensome, but that hardlt dictates that all legislation is without merit.

Bad government is bad government, but not all government is bad government.

As an Oracle DBA, documentation is a wonderful thing.

Documenting a database Relational Scheme, Stored Procedures, expected growth, table names and keys, backup plans are all pretty important. Not only does that provide a good plan but it provides the developer (myself) the information needed to do the code required to connect and use the database efficiently.

Documenting how I recieved an email from so and so to replace a link on the website that deals with surcharge prices, not that important, but required.

 

[blackascoal]

Documenting a database Relational Scheme, Stored Procedures, expected growth, table names and keys, backup plans are all pretty important. Not only does that provide a good plan but it provides the developer (myself) the information needed to do the code required to connect and use the database efficiently.

Documenting how I recieved an email from so and so to replace a link on the website that deals with surcharge prices, not that important, but required.

I agree with you brother but this is one of the areas that needs addressing, not by politicians and lobbyists, who've never seen a line of code, but by experts who understand the need for checks and balances, but who also understand the built in security of IT through backups of the data and data archives. They would know it's unnecessary for the coder to waste time with such tasks.

It's always a necessary pain when you're dealing with the people's money.

 

[DigitalDave]

I agree with you brother but this is one of the areas that needs addressing, not by politicians and lobbyists, who've never seen a line of code, but by experts who understand the need for checks and balances, but who also understand the built in security of IT through backups of the data and data archives. They would know it's unnecessary for the coder to waste time with such tasks.

It's always a necessary pain when you're dealing with the people's money.

I think then you understand the philosophy that politicians should just stay out of it. They don't know what is/is not important and I can't tell a person in the automotive industry how to document whatever they need to document. I know you're right that we need some regulations, but they are getting rediculous and hampering production due to reactions to companies like Enron.

 

[Litmus]

Not favoring corporations, which I agree with, does nothing to protect Americans FROM corporations. Product safety and truth in advertsing are only the tip of the iceberg in what corporations will do without controls. We don't have to guess at it .. the history of the Robber Barons is a glaring example.

Some legislation is burdensome, but that hardlt dictates that all legislation is without merit.

Bad government is bad government, but not all government is bad government.

As an Oracle DBA, documentation is a wonderful thing.

no shit.

i'm t-sql myself. the only thing I miss is %rowtype. ms has no equivalent.

t-sql as a language has become far superior to oracle. sorry to say it. But then there's still the horrid io on windows boxes in general to deal with.

 

[blackascoal]

no shit.

i'm t-sql myself. the only thing I miss is %rowtype. ms has no equivalent.

t-sql as a language has become far superior to oracle. sorry to say it. But then there's still the horrid io on windows boxes in general to deal with.

Oracle is not a language.

PL/SQL is a language

Oracle RDBMS is a relational database

SQL and PL/SQL are langauges used to manipulate the database

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

I know how to make BASIC compiler spit out "Hello World"!

 

[blackascoal]

I think then you understand the philosophy that politicians should just stay out of it. They don't know what is/is not important and I can't tell a person in the automotive industry how to document whatever they need to document. I know you're right that we need some regulations, but they are getting rediculous and hampering production due to reactions to companies like Enron.

I agree with you, but techies like you can't enforce the legislation. We can write it, but can't enforce it.

ENRON is exactly why mixed economies are required.

 

[Litmus]

Oracle is not a language.

PL/SQL is a language

Oracle RDBMS is a relational database

SQL and PL/SQL are langauges used to manipulate the database

Yes. of course I was referring to pl/sql when I said oracle.
Don't be a retarded assface. I figured you would realize that when I was also mentioning t-sql, which is the database language for manipulation of sql server databases. It's become far superior to pl/sql, which I've also used in my professional career. Any meaningful comments or more unfounded condescension would be welcome.

 

[blackascoal]

Yes. of course I was referring to pl/sql when I said oracle.
Don't be a retarded assface. I figured you would realize that when I was also mentioning t-sql, which is the database language for manipulation of sql server databases. It's become far superior to pl/sql, which I've also used in my professional career. Any meaningful comments or more unfounded condescension would be welcome.

You're an idiot.

There was nothing condescending in my post. I was simply clarifying the distinctions. but since you want to be an asshole and engage in name-calling .. let me add that there would be no reason whatsoever to assume you were talking about PL/SQL when you mentioned Transact-SQL which is quite different and used in different environments.

Nor do I, nor any IT professional I know, believe that Transact-SQL is a better product than PL/SQL. PL/SQL is a FAR more powerful language than Transact-SQL which doesn't even support arrays. Indexes, Tables, Triggers, and Procedures all have more functionality with PL/SQL. PL/SQL, like Oracle, is designed to work on a variety of platforms, where as Transact-SQL, like SQL Server, is Windows based only.

Transact-SQL does not interpret PL/SQL stored procedures and the rules for variables, conditional processing, and parameters are very different. Thus, there is no clear migration path from PL/SQL code to Transact-SQL. Using native SQL would be better.

Transact-SQL also has more code-inherent performance problems.

You're such an asshole that one can't even have a simple conversation with you without you responding like a teenager.

 

[Litmus]

You're an idiot.

There was nothing condescending in my post. I was simply clarifying the distinctions.

For a professional the distinctions were crystal clear. I figured you could make the leap that since I was discussing t-sql, the microsoft language, that the only logical corollary in the oracle world is pl/sql. Excuse the hell out of me for using the wrong word. It wasn't confusing anyone, however. You just wanted to mouth off and be an asshole.

but since you want to be an asshole and engage in name-calling .. let me add that there would be no reason whatsoever to assume you were talking about PL/SQL when you mentioned Transact-SQL which is quite different and used in different environments.

Nor do I, nor any IT professional I know, believe that Transact-SQL is a better product than PL/SQL. PL/SQL is a FAR more powerful language than Transact-SQL which doesn't even support arrays. Indexes, Tables, Triggers, and Procedures all have more functionality with PL/SQL. PL/SQL, like Oracle, is designed to work on a variety of platforms, where as Transact-SQL, like SQL Server, is Windows based only.

It's far superior in terms of flexibility, I'm finding.

Transact-SQL does not interpret PL/SQL stored procedures and the rules for variables, conditional processing, and parameters are very different. Thus, there is no clear migration path from PL/SQL code to Transact-SQL. Using native SQL would be better.

Why would t-sql interpret pl/sql. That's an assinine statment on the face of it. The migration path is learning both and rewrtiing one into the other. I've done this on a couple of occasions.

Transact-SQL also has more code-inherent performance problems.

You're such an asshole that one can't even have a simple conversation with you without you responding like a teenager.

Code inherent performance? That phrase doesn't even make sense. What does code inherent mean?

 

[blackascoal]

For a professional the distinctions were crystal clear. I figured you could make the leap that since I was discussing t-sql, the microsoft language, that the only logical corollary in the oracle world is pl/sql. Excuse the hell out of me for using the wrong word. It wasn't confusing anyone, however. You just wanted to mouth off and be an asshole.

No asswipe .. you don't know what you're talking about.

It's far superior in terms of flexibility, I'm finding.

Again asswipe .. you don't know what you're talking about for the very reasons I defined. PL/SQL is a FAR more powerful language and has FAR more functionality.

Can you manipulate Partitioned tables, External tables, Index organized tables, Object Tables, Bitmap indexes, Partitioned indexes, Function-based indexes, Domain indexes, Before Triggers, Event Triggers, Java methods, third-generation language, (3GL) routines, or Arrays with Transact-SQL?

Answer: NO

The biggest advantage of SQL Server compared to Oracle is that it's cheaper, but you get stuck with Transact-SQL which has far less functionality.

Why would t-sql interpret pl/sql. That's an assinine statment on the face of it. The migration path is learning both and rewrtiing one into the other. I've done this on a couple of occasions.

Now you've given yourself away shitstain.

MIGRATION is the process of converting data, objects, procedures, and code from legacy systems to new platforms. If your staff has to learn both systems and rewrite the code it's not MIGRATION at all. You've simply rewritten the legacy system. Not cost or time effective at all. .. Which is why Microsoft purchased DB Best, a leader in MIGRATION tools.

Thus when MIGRATING from Oracle, DB2, Informix, or Sybase, the process is easier and your staff doesn't have to learn both systems.

To infer that Transact-SQL wouldn't be a better product if it could interpret PL/SQL and call that asinine demonstrates that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

Military officer, Apache Indian, astronaut, to technology specialist .. BULLSHIT.

You sir are a fraud .. and given that this thread is not about IT or frauds, this is my last word on it.

 

[DigitalDave]

ROFLMAO! Ok, we are showing our true nerdness now that we are fighting over t-sql and pl/sql...

 

[Litmus]

No asswipe .. you don't know what you're talking about.



Again asswipe .. you don't know what you're talking about for the very reasons I defined. PL/SQL is a FAR more powerful language and has FAR more functionality.

Can you manipulate Partitioned tables, External tables, Index organized tables, Object Tables, Bitmap indexes, Partitioned indexes, Function-based indexes, Domain indexes, Before Triggers, Event Triggers, Java methods, third-generation language, (3GL) routines, or Arrays with Transact-SQL?

Answer: NO

The biggest advantage of SQL Server compared to Oracle is that it's cheaper, but you get stuck with Transact-SQL which has far less functionality.



Now you've given yourself away shitstain.

MIGRATION is the process of converting data, objects, procedures, and code from legacy systems to new platforms. If your staff has to learn both systems and rewrite the code it's not MIGRATION at all. You've simply rewritten the legacy system. Not cost or time effective at all. .. Which is why Microsoft purchased DB Best, a leader in MIGRATION tools.

Thus when MIGRATING from Oracle, DB2, Informix, or Sybase, the process is easier and your staff doesn't have to learn both systems.

To infer that Transact-SQL wouldn't be a better product if it could interpret PL/SQL and call that asinine demonstrates that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

Military officer, Apache Indian, astronaut, to technology specialist .. BULLSHIT.

You sir are a fraud .. and given that this thread is not about IT or frauds, this is my last word on it.

You're probably just unaware of new developments in t-sql.

You were the one who even brought up the notion of the t-sql interpreter running pl/sql. Chastise yourself, nimrod.