Best Coolpix for HD and low light too?
in [Digital Cameras]
|
From: David Ruether on 21 Jun 2010 14:35 "Jane Galt" <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> wrote in message news:Xns9D9DE0C8339FEJaneGgulchxyz(a)216.196.97.142... > "David Ruether" <d_ruether(a)thotmail.com> wrote : >> YOU HAVE ***GOT*** TO BE JOKING!!!! You have just lost ALL >> credibility by referencing that liar, G. B. GET REAL! He is demonstrably >> a dangerous, dissembling, malevolent idiot! NOTHING he says should be >> believed if you have ANY sense at all! > You've never watched a single show, I take it. I did try, once, but it was so rediculous that I gave up on it before the end. It was actually funny, in a painful sort of way...8^) > I suppose all idiots have lots of their books that are #1 NYT Best Sellers? > > How many is he up to now? 6? 7? This can be misleading, even if true (and if true, this DOES NOT INDICATE ANYTHING GOOD!!!). It just means that there are a LOT of people sold on Beck's warped views and his "entertaining" logic (or lack thereof) and wild conclusions ("garbage in, garbage out..."). BTW, you have heard of book-authors/sellers padding the numbers for the effect on the NYT Best Sellers list, haven't you? Seems Palin got caught doing this with that POS she put out for the gullible to "read". > The left smears anyone they disagree with, I know that for sure. > -- > - Jane Galt Not so much smears (the center/left does appear to try to tell the truth much more often than the right bothers with) as "calling to account" the right for blatant misrepresentations, lying, and hypocrisy (a specialty of the right...;-). And, golly, the center/left often actually presents checkable facts, and then logically draws conclusions from those facts - how "revolutionary" an idea! ;-) Anyway I guess there is little more worth saying to anyone who relies on Glenn Beck and his ilk for anything of value. Have fun in your "never-never" world of make-believe... --DR
From: Dudley Hanks on 21 Jun 2010 14:40 "Jane Galt" <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> wrote in message news:Xns9D9E777CEF27JaneGgulchxyz(a)216.196.97.142... > "Dudley Hanks" <dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote : > > >> I put more stock in the rule of law, as composed by a democratic >> legislature / committee, than I do in the rule of law as composed by a >> lunatic neighbour with a handgun... > > And what if your mob ( legislature ) votes to seize everything you own and > send you to a re-education camp? > > I know, serviles like you always trust your governments, up until they > toss > you into cattle cars, but keep in mind that the British just finally > apologized for the thuggery of Bloody Sunday, which was, oh, way back in > ancient history - 1972. > > > -- > - Jane Galt And, if you'd been around in Germany with a pistol in your pants, you'd have held off the SS for how long? Take Care, Dudley
From: Dudley Hanks on 21 Jun 2010 14:42 "Jane Galt" <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> wrote in message news:Xns9D9E77B8BDE08JaneGgulchxyz(a)216.196.97.142... > LOL! <lol(a)lol.org> wrote : > >> On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 12:58:12 GMT, "Dudley Hanks" >><dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote: >> >>> >>>"Jane Galt" <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> wrote in message >>>news:Xns9D9DF25E5E4D5JaneGgulchxyz(a)216.196.97.142... >>>> "Dudley Hanks" <dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote : >>>> >>>> >>>>>>>Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the >>>>>>>supremacy of >>>>>>>God and the rule of law: >>>> >>>> Rule of law? You put stock in that? What if some "democratic" types >>>> vote to >>>> make all jews wear stars on their clothing? >>>> >>>> "Rule of law" can mean rule of tyrannical law. >>>> >>>> As far as "God", some people may put no stock in that either, and >>>> consider it >>>> mythology. >>>> >>>> So where can our rights justly be derived from? >>>> >>>> Some claim that rights and values derive from "God", but they needn't. >>>> If one >>>> has a good philosophy like Objectivism, the derivation comes from the >>>> most primary ownership of our own lives. >>>> See http://www.PlanetaryBillOfRights.org/ >>>> specifically >>>> http://www.planetarybillofrights.org/ThePlanetaryBillofRights.html >>>> >>>> Another absurdity is the notion of "collective rights", and that >>>> governments >>>> have them. >>>> >>>> The only legitimate rights are individual rights, AKA HUMAN rights and >>>> only >>>> individual humans can have them. >>>> >>>> Governments and collectives can only have powers, given to them by the >>>> people, and they can be modified or even withdrawn by the people, if >>>> the people only realize that they hold the power to do so. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> - Jane Galt >>> >>>I put more stock in the rule of law, as composed by a democratic >>>legislature / committee, than I do in the rule of law as composed by a >>>lunatic neighbour with a handgun... >>> >>>Take Care, >>>Dudley >>> >> >> Your biases borne of ignorance show clearly. How about the lunatics at >> the button ready to launch a nuclear attack if they're having a bad day >> and finally snap under mass psychosis and paranoia? You know, those >> "might makes right" lunatics put in place and making their lunatic "law" >> decisions by your beloved democratic process. How are they immune to >> lunacy? They are already all proven lunatics just for considering a >> nuclear attack and having nuclear arms in the first place. >> >> Don't you get it? Of course you don't. You're just as fuckingly insane >> and fucked-up in the head as they are. >> >> >> LOL! > > The sad irony of these people is that they dont trust individuals but they > do trust large mobs of them. > > > > -- > - Jane Galt In groups, the sane ones have a chance to counter-balance the crazies... Love your logic, LOL... Take Care, Dudley
From: Jane Galt on 21 Jun 2010 14:54 "David Ruether" <d_ruether(a)thotmail.com> wrote : > > "Jane Galt" <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> wrote in message > news:Xns9D9DE0C8339FEJaneGgulchxyz(a)216.196.97.142... >> "David Ruether" <d_ruether(a)thotmail.com> wrote : > >>> YOU HAVE ***GOT*** TO BE JOKING!!!! You have just lost ALL >>> credibility by referencing that liar, G. B. GET REAL! He is >>> demonstrably a dangerous, dissembling, malevolent idiot! NOTHING he >>> says should be believed if you have ANY sense at all! > >> You've never watched a single show, I take it. > > I did try, once, but it was so rediculous that I gave up on it before > the end. It was actually funny, in a painful sort of way...8^) Righttt.. LOL >> I suppose all idiots have lots of their books that are #1 NYT Best >> Sellers? >> >> How many is he up to now? 6? 7? > > This can be misleading, even if true (and if true, this DOES NOT > INDICATE ANYTHING GOOD!!!) Of course not, people like you shreik like the wicked witch of the west when hit with water, at someone with an individualist philosophy that's so opposite to your forced-collectivist one. Read it anw shreik witch: http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/fnc/glenn_beck_makes_bestseller_history _with_new_book_142583.asp Glenn Beck Makes Bestseller History with New Book By Kevin Allocca on Nov 09, 2009 11:33 AM christmassweater11-9.jpgFox News' Glenn Beck will now have five consecutive New York Times Bestsellers with the release of his new book, The Christmas Sweater: A Picture Book. The book will debut at #1 on the November 15th children's picture book bestseller list, which, according to his publisher, will make history: Beck's publishing house, Simon & Schuster, believes that Beck has become the only author in history to ever have #1 New York Times bestsellers debut on these four different lists: hardcover fiction (The Christmas Sweater), hardcover nonfiction (Arguing with Idiots and An Inconvenient Book), nonfiction paperback (Glenn Beck's Common Sense), and now with The Christmas Sweater: A Picture Book, children's picture books. >. It just means that there are > a LOT of people sold on Beck's warped views and his "entertaining" > logic (or lack thereof) and wild conclusions ("garbage in, garbage > out..."). Oh yeah, he's just crazy, that's why so many things he's predicted have come true. > BTW, you have heard of book-authors/sellers padding the > numbers for the effect on the NYT Best Sellers list, haven't you? Seems > Palin got caught doing this with that POS she put out for the gullible > to "read". Oh I see, when liberty loving people write books, the numbers are cooked. LOL You're like a fly stuck in fly paper. >> The left smears anyone they disagree with, I know that for sure. >> -- >> - Jane Galt > > Not so much smears (the center/left does appear to try to tell the > truth much more often than the right bothers with) as "calling to > account" the right for blatant misrepresentations, lying, and hypocrisy > (a specialty of the right...;-). And, golly, the center/left often > actually presents checkable facts, and then logically draws conclusions > from those facts - how "revolutionary" an idea! ;-) Beck presents video clips and quotes from Obama and all his communist friends, but I suppose those dont count because you wont want to hear them. Did Obama say this or not?: �Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.� � Barack Obama "I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." --- Candidate Barack Obama, October 27, 2007 "To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully. The more politically active black students. The foreign students. The Chicanos. The Marxist professors and structural feminists." - Barack Obama This just further proves my point: "Oooh. Van Jones, alright! So, Van Jones. We were so delighted to be able to recruit him into the White House. We were watching him, uh, really, he�s not that old, for as long as he�s been active out in Oakland. And all the creative ideas he has. And so now, we have captured that. And we have all that energy in the White House." - Valerie Jarrett, senior advisor and assistant to the president for Public Engagement and Intergovernmental Affairs for the Obama administration. Van Jones: "I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th," he said. "By August, I was a communist. "I met all these young radical people of color - I mean really radical: communists and anarchists. And it was, like, 'This is what I need to be a part of.' I spent the next 10 years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary," he said." ( 2002 ) "I'm willing to forego the cheap satisfaction of the radical pose for the deep satisfaction of radical ends." -- Van Jones, 2009, after he was transferred out of the White House when the above statements were exposed on the Glenn Beck Program. > Anyway I guess there > is little more worth saying to anyone who relies on Glenn Beck and > his ilk for anything of value. Have fun in your "never-never" world > of make-believe... Yes, poo poo on you too, commie. -- - Jane Galt
From: Dudley Hanks on 21 Jun 2010 14:54
"Jane Galt" <Jane_G(a)gulch.xyz> wrote in message news:Xns9D9E7A8A1381EJaneGgulchxyz(a)216.196.97.142... > "Dudley Hanks" <dhanks(a)blind-apertures.ca> wrote : > > >> >> So, in order to protect the world from a nutcase at the nuke button, >> you'd >> arm everybody with sidearms? >> >> Once again, LOL, great logic! >> >> Take Care, >> Dudley > > No, you're right, we should trust any mob large enough to win a vote, and > make individual people wear government tracking collars because they cant > be > trusted. Tell them what they can eat, what they can say, what they can > hear > and where they can be. That's the eventual outcome of your forced- > collectivism, history has always proven that. > > > -- > - Jane Galt See, Jane, you can't even evaluate a whole country properly when you've got a ton of time and the vast resources of the internet at your disposal... How the hell are you going to correctly size up how to react to a hostile situation in the time it takes to strike a match, and you don't have all the facts clearly out in the open... This is why democracy is so popular... Take Care, Dudley |