Comments on: Was Arnie’s “F**k You” email – 8 billion-to-1 coincidence? Vote please! http://bawaal.com/blog/2256-was-arnies-fuck-you-email-8-billion-to-1-coincidence-vote-please The Hottest and The Most Happening News on the Web Fri, 03 Feb 2012 04:02:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: kristophe http://bawaal.com/blog/2256-was-arnies-fuck-you-email-8-billion-to-1-coincidence-vote-please/comment-page-1#comment-1266 kristophe Wed, 13 Jan 2010 10:18:05 +0000 http://bawaal.com/blog/?p=2256#comment-1266 Was this paper or email? If it's email, and word wrap is turned on, you could probably adjust the first character of any line to form many fun words or expressions. Was this paper or email? If it's email, and word wrap is turned on, you could probably adjust the first character of any line to form many fun words or expressions.

]]> By: Cracking the Code Math for Schwarzenegger's Veto Message - The Numbers Guy - WSJ http://bawaal.com/blog/2256-was-arnies-fuck-you-email-8-billion-to-1-coincidence-vote-please/comment-page-1#comment-956 Cracking the Code Math for Schwarzenegger's Veto Message - The Numbers Guy - WSJ Thu, 05 Nov 2009 03:31:53 +0000 http://bawaal.com/blog/?p=2256#comment-956 [...] the numbers say the expression was highly unlikely to emerge by chance, though their estimates, as published in the press and on blogs, differ [...] [...] the numbers say the expression was highly unlikely to emerge by chance, though their estimates, as published in the press and on blogs, differ [...]

]]> By: Tom_Cares http://bawaal.com/blog/2256-was-arnies-fuck-you-email-8-billion-to-1-coincidence-vote-please/comment-page-1#comment-1151 Tom_Cares Thu, 29 Oct 2009 19:58:07 +0000 http://bawaal.com/blog/?p=2256#comment-1151 I'm far more disturbed that he vetoed a bill, that didn't receive a single 'NO' vote, in either house of the legislature (78 Ayes, 2 abstentions, in the assembly; 40 Ayes in the Senate), without addressing the merits of the bill. I think Schwarzenegger thinks the Governor's office should have far more power than it was ever intended to have. I think the intent of the veto was to allow a Governor to overrule a Legislature's changes to the status quo, which he believes to not be good public policy. I don't believe any framers intended for it to be a tool for sacrificing good policy, to enable one elected official to extortionately force the hands of 120 elected officials.<br><br>The Governor has a veto; he doesn't have votes. 'Veto', in fact, is Latin for 'I forbid'. It is a power to stop or impede changes to the status quo, but not to bring them. I would strongly suggest, to Schwarzenegger, that he not stop any other good (often unanimously approved) policies from becoming law, simply because they may be too small to excite him, but to instead run for a seat in the State Legislature, where he can introduce 40-50 (depending on house) policy ideas, every year (plus 5-10 State Constitutional Amendments). I think he wanted the prestige of being Governor, but maybe he's really more of a legislator, at heart; plus, this way he could direct his encoded (and codified) obscenities at legislators, from within their own chambers. I actually bet he would enjoy it, but is too proud to do it. I'm far more disturbed that he vetoed a bill, that didn't receive a single 'NO' vote, in either house of the legislature (78 Ayes, 2 abstentions, in the assembly; 40 Ayes in the Senate), without addressing the merits of the bill. I think Schwarzenegger thinks the Governor's office should have far more power than it was ever intended to have. I think the intent of the veto was to allow a Governor to overrule a Legislature's changes to the status quo, which he believes to not be good public policy. I don't believe any framers intended for it to be a tool for sacrificing good policy, to enable one elected official to extortionately force the hands of 120 elected officials.

The Governor has a veto; he doesn't have votes. 'Veto', in fact, is Latin for 'I forbid'. It is a power to stop or impede changes to the status quo, but not to bring them. I would strongly suggest, to Schwarzenegger, that he not stop any other good (often unanimously approved) policies from becoming law, simply because they may be too small to excite him, but to instead run for a seat in the State Legislature, where he can introduce 40-50 (depending on house) policy ideas, every year (plus 5-10 State Constitutional Amendments). I think he wanted the prestige of being Governor, but maybe he's really more of a legislator, at heart; plus, this way he could direct his encoded (and codified) obscenities at legislators, from within their own chambers. I actually bet he would enjoy it, but is too proud to do it.

]]> By: Tom_Cares http://bawaal.com/blog/2256-was-arnies-fuck-you-email-8-billion-to-1-coincidence-vote-please/comment-page-1#comment-939 Tom_Cares Thu, 29 Oct 2009 12:58:07 +0000 http://bawaal.com/blog/?p=2256#comment-939 I'm far more disturbed that he vetoed a bill, that didn't receive a single 'NO' vote, in either house of the legislature (78 Ayes, 2 abstentions, in the assembly; 40 Ayes in the Senate), without addressing the merits of the bill. I think Schwarzenegger thinks the Governor's office should have far more power than it was ever intended to have. I think the intent of the veto was to allow a Governor to overrule a Legislature's changes to the status quo, which he believes to not be good public policy. I don't believe any framers intended for it to be a tool for sacrificing good policy, to enable one elected official to extortionately force the hands of 120 elected officials.<br><br>The Governor has a veto; he doesn't have votes. 'Veto', in fact, is Latin for 'I forbid'. It is a power to stop or impede changes to the status quo, but not to bring them. I would strongly suggest, to Schwarzenegger, that he not stop any other good (often unanimously approved) policies from becoming law, simply because they may be too small to excite him, but to instead run for a seat in the State Legislature, where he can introduce 40-50 (depending on house) policy ideas, every year (plus 5-10 State Constitutional Amendments). I think he wanted the prestige of being Governor, but maybe he's really more of a legislator, at heart; plus, this way he could direct his encoded (and codified) obscenities at legislators, from within their own chambers. I actually bet he would enjoy it, but is too proud to do it. I'm far more disturbed that he vetoed a bill, that didn't receive a single 'NO' vote, in either house of the legislature (78 Ayes, 2 abstentions, in the assembly; 40 Ayes in the Senate), without addressing the merits of the bill. I think Schwarzenegger thinks the Governor's office should have far more power than it was ever intended to have. I think the intent of the veto was to allow a Governor to overrule a Legislature's changes to the status quo, which he believes to not be good public policy. I don't believe any framers intended for it to be a tool for sacrificing good policy, to enable one elected official to extortionately force the hands of 120 elected officials.

The Governor has a veto; he doesn't have votes. 'Veto', in fact, is Latin for 'I forbid'. It is a power to stop or impede changes to the status quo, but not to bring them. I would strongly suggest, to Schwarzenegger, that he not stop any other good (often unanimously approved) policies from becoming law, simply because they may be too small to excite him, but to instead run for a seat in the State Legislature, where he can introduce 40-50 (depending on house) policy ideas, every year (plus 5-10 State Constitutional Amendments). I think he wanted the prestige of being Governor, but maybe he's really more of a legislator, at heart; plus, this way he could direct his encoded (and codified) obscenities at legislators, from within their own chambers. I actually bet he would enjoy it, but is too proud to do it.

]]>