Why Must ......

 OK, so I just got done reading a good friend's blog on another service and just absolutely got angered at our society as a whole.  We still have some people out there who want to stand back and point a finger at attributes as to call someone a servant or slave. Do these folks just not realize that they are really pointing to themselves and showing their ignorance? I mean someone wants to post that the Black Slaves of Ohio shouldn't bother going to the polls today because their votes don't count. Now at first this angered me because the article was posted today, not in the 1800's or 1900's when that was a factor of status.

I mean lets get real for a moment and break this down. Most of the slaves came over from Africa willingly to get a better life for them and their kids and to earn their freedom. They were most times originally tol dthey would be paid in room and board and food. Now that sounds a little bot like something else to me, but lets stop at the dictionary and take a look around first:

Main Entry: 1slave
Pronunciation: 'slAv
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English sclave, from Anglo-French or Medieval Latin; Anglo-French esclave, from Medieval Latin sclavus, from Sclavus Slavic; from the frequent enslavement of Slavs in central Europe during the early Middle Ages
1 : a person held in servitude as the chattel of another
2 : one that is completely subservient to a dominating influence

Main Entry: 1in·den·ture
Pronunciation: in-'den(t)-sh&r
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English endenture, from Anglo-French, from endenter
1 a (1) : a document or a section of a document that is indented (2) : a formal or official document usually executed in two or more copies (3) : a contract binding one person to work for another for a given period of time -- often used in plural b : a formal certificate (as an inventory or voucher) prepared for purposes of control c : a document stating the terms under which a security (as a bond) is issued

and lets take this one step further:

Main Entry: indentured servant
Function: noun
: a person who signs and is bound by indentures to work for another for a specified time especially in return for payment of travel expenses and maintenance

Now, I found these definitions on Merriam-Webster's Dictionary website. So its a reliable source as to their meanings. Now, reading those three definitions it sounds like there are alot more slaves running around America than most want to admit to it. And I guarantee you that if you point out to most people that they are the modern day equivalency to the previous slaves they would be offended- but should they? I would think not. You have to work to pay for what you use and possess and sometimes that also includes upkeep. But why is it in this modern age that there are still some folks that feel the need to point out factors that are now mute.

I hope and pray that all that are eligible to vote today will in whatever country you live in, use your voice and vote. And just because you go in to vote doesn't mean you have to vote for all the issues and all. You can vote for only what you want and you don't have to vote for all of the issues/candidates on the ballot. Now if ya do choose to vote selectively, and you don't like who won a race that you didn't participate in by voting. Then just shut your mouth now, no vote means
no say in the elections or results.

This is why the last immigration bill angered me so much. Why are we giving away our right to vote to people that have no vested interest in our country other than to come in and work for substandard wages and then live ten to fifteen poeple in a place made for two or three and let them send the money they save back overseas for more of them to come over and do the same thing. When are we gonna stand up and say enough is enough and we wont take anymore. I am not against legal migration, my great geat grandfather came over despite being a Jewish-German and he went thru all the hurdles that were presented to him to come to America. Just because these people can sneak into our country to work illegally, does NOT mean we have to accomodate them living here. I still say we start pulling back troops and putting them on the borders and telling them shoot any who don;t come across at an appropriate place like a border crossing. After a few weeks of a couple thousand folks dying for coming into this country illegally, then and only then will people stop sneaking into America. 

Is Microsoft overstepping their bounds?

Ok, so we all know that Microsoft loves to make something a craze and then abandon it. They did it with chat and now they are trying to do it with their browser. I thought Internet Explorer 7( IE7) was a freee download for public use. Thats the way it appears on their site, they tell you nothing else about it. But download it and try to install it, they want you to validate your copy of Windows. Some of us use Linux as our prime OS becuase Microsoft is so greedy. I mean honestly, as soon as I can pick up a copy of OS X for Intel, I will install it in a heartbeat and enjoy the performance boost over any version of Windows. Thats part of the reason why I use Fedora Core 5 with CGYWin plug in and my old faithful copy of Windows 2000 Pro as its basis. But try to download IE7 using 2000Pro and it wont happen.

And to boot that thought, why is it Microsoft thinks that their new Vista is worth 200 plus bucks when almost 4 or 5 years later they still haven't finished fixing XP ? If Microsoft really wanted to reduce their piracy rate they would put their pricing in line with other OS's and that would be closer to about a hundred bucks for a fully functioning copy of their software. Its not like the days of Windows 95 when they had the corner on the market. There are alternatives out there on the market now and Microsoft doesn't have the market cornered.

Going back to the original arguement about IE7 needing validated. Why would I waste my time and have to reboot my computer at least twice when I can download at least 3 other browsers out there and not need to reboot the puter for it to take hold. I mean there is Firefox 2.0, Opera 9.0, Maxthon, and even the old standby of Lynx. And they all install without a hitch. But to get to IE7, you have to validate. If its a free download, why do we have to validate it? Its not an integrated part of Windows, is that not overstepping the bounds of common sense and going back towards the monoply that Windows was originally heading toward? Only in America are people so lapsidisical and willing to just take what comes on a computer without questioning if there isn't something better out there for themselves to use.