Posted on 08/02/2002 6:48:21 AM PDT by rdb3
It doesn't matter around these parts. You can sign up for cable, but it's even more Liberal than AOL.
Our Cable company is Optimum Online, proud sponsor of News 12 Long Island, which is in cahoots with Marxist "Newsday", which is even more Liberal than the New York Times. I'd really rather bleed AOL on my dial-up.
Besides, AOL is a good service. So I enjoy good service, while at the same time get to contribute to bleeding AOL-Time-Warner dry.
Works for me.
Be pro-active! Of course, they might not be so happy with me if they read these posts, but I don't think they are paying attention, anyway. I've been using the Wiz for years. It costs me 4 cents to connect each time, so it is to my advantage to stay on line. I use the IE browser, which saves threads even if you are off line. Minimize aol and just use it as a connection.
If Lurkers would let me know how it goes, I would appreciate it.
Ummm no. AOLTW is a very leftist organization that is behind many of the major assaults of civil liberties in the US. That you continue to subscribe to AOL knowing damn well what they want to do regarding access to information shows that you are one of those conservatives that sees no evil in large corporations under attack. Wake up man, this isn't about success, this is about what they are trying to do to the "free press:" One World, One Media Empire, One CEO
I read in the Wall Street Journal that AOL loses money on any subscriber using more than ninety hours per month. As we use hundreds of hours per month, we are not making any money for them. We use a program called "The Wiz" to keep them from knocking us off line and leave it on for hours at a time. I downloaded it years ago and I don't even know where to get it anymore. The last version has been extemely effective, apparently.Pretty much any program (Weatherbug for example) that regularly updates its information will do the same thing. Just make sure you run Ad-Aware after installing.
-Eric
Did you not read the rest of the article, homeboy?My experience on AOL is that the majority of politically active subscribers are conservative. I've never had a problem posting stuff that's pretty far right on their message boards. I've grabbed a bunch of screen names (you can keep only seven active at a time but as many as you want reserved as long as you activate them every six months) that made fun of libs and made use of them. No problems at all.
I've never had a politically motivated problem with them and the writer clearly hasn't had dealings with them in years to have said the things he said.
-Eric
Bad troll, go back into your cave.
I've had the same experience there. But I always come back here because you can find things and there are fewer Liberals. Is there any way to revisit a thread over there? It's like posting into a vast abyss.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! And the author was doing so well up until this part. Outhouse Depress is a joke and is a good part of the reason that virii such as Klez are so devastating.
Use REAL email software such as Forte Agent or Eudora. I have to use Outhouse at work, but then again we regularly have to take the server down there to flush the latest virus.
The above is true but so is this from the MSN search engine!
| FEATURED SITES |
Top PickSo MSN is still OK in my book. I don't use the MSN service since I prefer the "real internet" and I use Windows 2000.
Oye! Dominic!
Has all that JAVA and open source gone to your head? Reading the World Socialist Web Site again?
Should we roll back the holding company?
Believe me, take a look at the power Great Britain's Asia & Pacific Tea Company had in India in the last century and you'll see some corporate power! Complete with company armies! Of course, Mellon, Rockefeller, Morgan, and other turn-of-the-century American tycoons were pretty darn powerful and pretty autocratic to boot.
While the game may be rigged, it's rigged by crooked politicians as much as the corporate powers. If the Federal government had less power to influence the outcome of success in the business world, there would be less corruption. Though TR (the first Roosevelt) understood and could use the power of government to ensure consumer protection, his trust-busting has turned into a racket. Thus, since Microsoft didn't pay protection money to the Washington mob, it was mugged by enforcers. Microsoft pays up now. Clinton just had to show who was the boss.
There are plenty of laws that enable grievances to pierce the corporate veil. The problem is that if politicians and judges really started poking around behind those veils, they'd find themselves the subject of investigation.
Get the government out of business!
AOL Drools!
:-)
Gosh, what an enthusiastic, broad post.
I'm sorry, But I don't see where you addressed my point about the current laws favoring collectively-owned, collectively-managed corporations over sole-proprietor entrepeneurs.
You point out correctly that corporations have been abusive in the past.
In fact, quite a bit of anti-trust legislation was penned as a direct result of Rockefeller, if I'm not mistaken.
You mistakenly portray MS as the innocent victim, then end with a very strange idea -- that the solution would be *less* policing of corporate crime.
Anti-trust laws isn't "govt regulation of business" anymore than rape laws are "govt regulating sex".
AOL Drools!
;-)
I'll take "None of the Above" for $600, Alex.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.