Flynn

It's the nuclear football and that pussy is about to strike Syria.

If you go back and read this entire thread you will see how the bold statement isn't true, I just see no point in restating what has already been said. But I'm glad you are dropping it as this is the second time you have hinted/stated as much. If you read through everything, I'm sure you will see where this actually derailed, it's a shame we will most likely never meet in person as I think much of the misunderstanding and misconstruing of text that can so easily be misread or written. I find most face to face discussions yield learning and understanding, I've noticed on here that it rarely happens on the forums lol. I'm sure that if a more personal setting could be achieved you would see the opposite is true of your first statement.

Yeah, we're done. This is going no where.

Please stop misusing that word. I have only directly attacked one person in anything, the rest of what I have said was directed at the arguments and ideals stated by people. If that distinction cannot be made, then I wish I could say I'm sorry, but you are absolutely correct, there is no reason for me to visit this thread again. Btw, my views about specific people are drawn from the letters and books they wrote. I have all of Thomas Jefferson's letters, bound in 1872, sitting on my book shelf (the are duplicates, not the originals, although it would be awesome to have them). I have diaries and letters written by Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, James Madison, etc. What I have proposed and argued comes STRAIGHT from their mouths, as I have grown to understand and apply their words to my life and daily practices. The leadership I've given to countless troops and my community is based on my understanding and learning of those principles and ideals, so this stuff isn't rhetoric or philosophical, it's practical and lived. What I say is founded in the source of the ideas. And most everyone I know, lives the same way. Those who don't are the ones always complaining about the state of things, why don't they get this or that, they deserve what the Jones' have, but never come up with solutions or even ideas for how to get out of it. BTW, neo-liberalism wasn't really established until the mid-1900's when FDR revamped the idea into today's current "liberal" mentality. Neo-liberalism is far from Classical Liberalism. Good luck in whatever you pursue, I honestly don't see us having a constructive conversation here lol. (at least not in a forum setting, I have no doubt we would have plenty to learn in true conversation from each other).

Considering that book was published only a few years before I was born, and Thomas Jefferson himself said he considered his views comparable to that of Libertarianism in a letter he wrote in 1801, I'd say the "ideals" were clearly understood and developed long before Robert Nozick was born. The problem is that modern libertarian ideals do not match the initial establishment of the movement 300 years ago. Hell, liberals today subscribe the hijacking of was what was called Classic Liberal ideals. Which, btw, was libertarian. Today's neoliberal party, or the left, is not what liberal ideal originally stood for. Classic Liberals, who were called Libertarians, believed in Constitutional limits on the federal government, the basis of which is clearly defined by the Libertarians in the 10th Article of the constitution. So I will bow to this, I am not a modern Libertarian, a hijacked movement that is relatively new, stealing the name to try to sound like they care about the founding principles our state was built on. I guess you can say I'm more akin to Classic Liberalism, aka Libertarianism of the 1800s. The modern definition of liberals, libertarians, and conservatives is completely different than the founding of our country. So I will give you that, perhaps I should stop calling myself a libertarian and start calling myself a Classical Liberal, or as you said a Constitutionalist. As I said before, you know we are heading the wrong direction when today's political parties think the founding fathers were radical, because that means we are making movements towards the government our founding fathers were originally trying to escape from. In short, taking a book written centuries after the formation of an idea and attributing the founding of a new idea with the same name doesn't prove or even show relevance to anything. It's like saying a republic is akin to communism because in 1941 Mao Zedong declared that China will forever be called the "People's Republic of China". Just because you take one idea and label it something else doesn't make it true. China is anything but a republic, and it sure as hell doesn't belong to the people. I'd recommend that if anyone wants to actually understand principles developed over the centuries, that they read texts belonging to those time periods, not books written in the last 4 decades. Not to say that the book doesn't make very valid points and has some excellent arguments in response to John Rauls "Theories of Justice" (I think that's right, I haven't read up on it since around 1994), I'm just saying that there are better sources to learn about the true principles of an ideal as opposed to the hijacked rhetoric using misappropriated and misunderstood labels to try to gain favor or recognition to a specific crowd.

Edit: I decided there wasn't a point in restating what I have already said here so I'll remove it. Good luck finding truth guys, it seems some people are lost in the hype lol. I would encourage you guys to revisit and reread some of the founding documents this country is founded on. You might find relevance in places outside the news and bumbling political rhetoric.

Unfortunately the vast majority of Americans do THINK Ron Paul is the libertarian poster boy. And I don't know who you are hanging out with, but I literally meet thousands of people throughout my travels who do in fact quote and think the Constitution is relevant. Hell, our service members are sworn to uphold the Constitution against foreign and domestic threats regardless of title or position. There is a reason I said he strikes me more of the mutualist type. It doesn't matter what misquoters believe about the foundation of the Libertarian mindset is, you can find it in the letters of Thomas Jefferson, prints from Benjamin Franklin. It's funny how people think this stuff is so old, I remember my Great Grandmother telling me about how when she was a child her Grandmother spoke about meeting Thomas Jefferson when she was younger. This stuff isn't that old, that's a separation of 2. (granted, it was more than 2 generations, but the point is that generations overlap and the actually separation of time wasn't that much). The only reason why people are so caught up with how long ago it is, stems from how long they currently have been alive. It's easy to think ideas from men who died 180 years ago is removed from today's thinking when you have only lived a couple decades or less. By time you live to be 80+, you will think that the bridge between your first decade of life and last isn't so far removed as to say that your values from then to now have change or are any less relevant. Right now, my total life span is only 1/6th of the total time since Jefferson's death, by time I die (assuming I live to be 80+), my total remembered personal history will be 1/3rd the time since his death. This might not make much since, but fact is it's very little time. We compare the validity and relevance of past events and ideals based on our current known experiences, as time passes your sum of events will grow to a size that the time from then until now will not seam so large, and the views of times you would never had considered relevant will over time become more and more relevant to your thinking and history. I know I just kind of spoke in a huge circle and it might be hard to follow, but this concept isn't new, and the concepts our Constitution speaks about are not that old. It's still relevant, and the answers are there. Our government is grow out of control, more government IS NOT the answer. As we have created more government, we have created more problems, I'm just saying that maybe it's time to back off on the big government and get back to the roots. Rather than trying to tackle issues with forced solutions and plans, simply approach them with perspective and the solutions become self evident. They knew that back then, why can't we see this now?

It's different types of coding. PHP is a server based scripting language, while HTML is a markup that uses the browsers dom to display information. CSS is just another markup that specifies how styling is applied to HTML. The important thing about learning PHP is to learn the concept of object oriented programming, too many websites are coded top down which puts a lot of overhead on the system. The more robust you make your libraries and code, the more is can be reused and thus reduces your overhead. Most of the time it's not about the language, it's about the techniques and quarks that makes or breaks the usefulness of code.

Well, HTML is a markup language. C is a syntax, so you can branch off into other syntaxes that are likened to it (such as PHP). The real question is what is your goal in learning these? Most people don't really "know" the languages, they just know the rules and syntax operation. This way you can be more flexible in what you do. Most of us keep cookbooks of code and libraries we frequently use. HTML is for web development, C and C++ is more for programming. Where do you see yourself heading in the industry? Application, web development, networking, security, desktop support? There is a vast array of disciplines to branch into. Don't be surprised if you find yourself in multiple roles.

You do know that's how we got the Bill of Rights? Initially it was all tossed off the table and the states came together and said no, we want it. Are you sure you are a Libertarian? The backbone of the Libertarian's ideals is the Constitutional Freedoms and Liberties guaranteed us by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. That the Constitution is still relevant today, you sound more like a leftist or mutalist than a Libertarian. BTW, in response to the ad hominem, of course I went that route. He directly associated something I said in speaking about the general population and the Congressional Class as being his own. So here is another latin term, Mens Rea, which is what he displayed and took the mantle of when he decided to tell me what I thought of him by associating what I said about a general group and applying it solely to himself, despite me telling him it wasn't the case. My response was solely to him in that post.

I would highly recommend you re-read my posts. I've done nothing but quote the constitution and pose the solutions to the current issues in Congress. I've spent over a decade serving this country and have served with, and commanded, some of the finest critical thinkers I've had the pleasure of meeting. Don't pretend for a single moment that you have a clue as to how I think or am capable of thinking. If you had half a wit you would be able to read and see that what I have argued and said is spot on. Or perhaps in your 5 years of adulthood you have it all figured out. Re-read what I stated as you jumped to a conclusion of what I thought of you personally based on a clearly stated generalization that I excluded you from! I'll even quote and bold it for you so you can see it: All I said was you are part of the crowd I'm speaking to, not that you portray the traits I'm referring to. Listen, I have never said that I know all of it or am capable of fermenting some sort of movement to fix it all. I've simply stated that there are solutions and I've provided evidence, along with means, to find those solutions. I was making my way back from my second deployment, where I was in charge of over 240 troops, by time I hit 23. So believe it or not, willing or not, I've a pretty hard grasp on these things. Agree or disagree, this isn't a partisan or age specific concept, we need to reform our Congressional Class and redevelop the mindset of Statesmen. Thomas Jefferson was only 33 years old when he wrote the Declaration of Independence. To give you an idea of the age of our founding fathers, here are their ages at the time of the signing on July 4th, 1776 James Monroe: 18 Alexander Hamilton: 21 James Madison: 25 John Adams: 40 George Washington: 44 Samuel Adams: 53 The oldest was Benjamin Franklin who was 70. I bring that up because our nation was founded by the young blood of critical thinkers that were all revolutionaries ahead of their age and time. The Senior Statesmen such as George Washington and Benjamin Franklin, were men these young leaders looked up to as examples, they themselves didn't see their own example as anything note worthy because they were the same age as you and I. In contrast, the youth today, all the way up through their 30's, regurgitate and yell talking points. Myself, I don't even have cable. I haven't watched a newscast in over a year. I do glance over news stories to simply get an idea of what has happened, but do not allow the spewed lists of reasons and opinions of the posters to skew the reality of the occurrence of an event. I gather together the opinions and "facts" of sources both liberal and conservative, and then apply my knowledge and experience (and believe me, my experience is vast) to form my own ideas on what is happening in the world today. That is the hallmark of critical thinking, being able to discern the difference between the facts of an event occurring and the opinions of why in those stories and events. Everything I have listed in this thread as to the reasons behind whats going on and how we got there is compiled from years and years of experiencing the development, and learning how to tell and remembering the whys myself. TL;DR version: Drop your assumptions, they are unfounded. I didn't point anything at you, if anything I excluded you from it. I'm now reconsidering my assumption of excluding you based on your "argument". BTW, Constitutional Libertarianism is the conglomeration of the founding Federalist Anti-Federalist views in application that the Federal government be limited, while the States hold sovereignty, and the people hold the power. The fact that you even think this is sensationalism is ludicrous. This was the views our founding fathers held. And guess who thought they were radical and sensationalist? The very King that they ran away from to form this country. So I would think about that for a moment and realise the the fact that upholding the Constitution can even be considered radical shows that our nation is moving in the wrong direction. I'm a hold a voice of reason, not of fear mongering and sensationalism. Hell, the sensationalist are the ones who claim logic and reason are unrealistic.

To me you are part of the younger crowd I'm referring to. Just old enough to get a grip on what is being said and repeat it, but still young enough to believe what is said without utilizing critical thinking skills to discern the difference (you see this all the way up into your 30s). Not speaking you specifically, but generally. It's SIR Thomas More. But I don't understand how you could have read the book a few times and actually understood what was written, and make the comment you made. Unless you disagree completely with the assessment he made on that if you really want Utopia (perfection) then you must have someone decide what perfection is, and then forcibly impose it on the masses. The emotional sensationalist love this idea because it means that they can decide what is best and rather than just exercise it privately, they can force everyone to abide by what they feel to be true and just, thereby extinguishing personal liberties in place of slavery to a government that someone doesn't wish to be a part of. This kind of thinking, the chase for perfection as opposed to the chase of liberty and freedom, leads to the oppression of the masses under a minority ruling governing class. Freedom hurts, if you do stupid you feel the pain. But it's these experiences and being allowed to have them that leads to wisdom and enlightenment. If not allowed, you end up with spoiled, dependent, and mindless brats.

I know it seems like a lot, but it's actually pretty streamlined. The Users table has a list of users with their contact info, along with the ID of the asset they are assigned. The Assets table has a list of assets with their information along with the type of asset fed from the AssetTypes table (printer, wifi card, laptop, etc) The Incidents table is where the Incident's Request Form will save it's data The Projects table is where the Project Request Form will save it's data Incident and Project types feed their respected form's request type. For now I'm just going to add users and assets into the tables manually via import, but eventually I'd like to also set up a control form to add/remove assets and users.

Here is the structure of the database, it will reside in the same file as the forms: (EDIT: updated the image to actually reflect the database) The forms will be as follows: Incident Request Form: When submitted, send below fields to the Independents table with an auto incremented ID User: Drop down from Users (Users.FullName) Asset: Drop down from Assets (if user field is blank, drop down from Assets.ServiceTag, if user field is filled then fill from Users.AsseignedAsset of the associated ID, auto if possible?) Incident Type: Drop down from IncidentTypes.Type (is it possible to tooltip a description from IncidentTypes.Description?) User Complaint: Memo Actual Problem: Memo Resolution: Memo Report Date: Would be great if it auto filled with the current date, but allowed me to select a date with a calendar if I need to back fill a request Report Time: Again, would be awesome if it auto filled the current time but also allowed me to edit it if needed Resolution Date: Same as Report Date Resolution Time: Same as Report Time Projects Request Form: When submitted, send the below fields to the Projects table with an auto incremented ID User: Drop down from Users (Users.FullName) Asset: Drop down from Assets (if user field is blank, drop down from Assets.ServiceTag, if user field is filled then fill from Users.AsseignedAsset of the associated ID, auto if possible?) Project Type: Drop down from ProjectTypes.Type (again, is it possible to tooltip a description from ProjectTypes.Description?) Reason: Memo Resolution: Memo Start Date: Auto fill the current date if possible, if not then a calendar or type in or whatever. End Date: Same as start date Hours Worked: Number And I don't know how reporting works, but I would love to be able to have my boss be able to quickly pull up a report of projects and incidents by date range. Also to be able to pull up a list of assets to see when they were last serviced would be awesome too. One of the Project Types is Computer Maintenance, is it possible to have the end date from the projects form fill into Assets.LastServicedDate in the project type is Computer Maintenance on that request? Like I said, all this is so easy if I could just program it, but I don't know the limitations of Access, how robust it is/isnt, or even how the data connections between table fields are actually set up. That diagram is pulled straight out of Access, so hopefully the key's are set correctly. In the future I want to be able to also have a report spit out all assets that haven't been serviced in the last 60 days. I know it's very specific lol, but I'm anal about organisation. EDIT: something I forgot, for the incident and project asset list, I'd like to be able to have the asset type listed with the ticket, maybe in another field or just concatenated with the asset (ID: servicetag - asset type) So if it's a printer, or desktop, or laptop, it tells you

Here is my issue, I'm making a ticketing system for personal use at work so I can keep track of the rediculous amount of requests I get. In the future I would love to expand it into scheduling and reminders for maintenance needing to be done on computers. But for now, I just need the ticketing system. The problem is I can't use what I normally would, which is to write a program with SQL support for the data. Instead I HAVE TO use Access because that's what one of the bosses knows how to use. So I have to have a database, with Access forms to be able to create tickets, and look up tickets. I have the database structure set up, that's easy. The problem is that I have never used Access, don't care to use Access outside of this, and have never set up a form in Access. I know Access is by far the least efficient way of doing this, but working in Government I suddenly hit a wall with the boss man and have to conform to what he wants. Anyone proficient with Access forms on here that I can hook up with to get some quick help? If it's easiest for you, I can always host a interviewer session and we can talk over voip so you can just see the file I'm working with. My guess is this is a quick set up and I just need someone to help me get it going. (before anyone asks, yes I've already tried google and tutorials, I'm honestly running 8 different directions on projects right now and just don't have the time to band-aid together multiple pieces out of several tutorials to try to make this work correctly, I'm at a point now where I have 0 man-hours to devote to it and will have to do it on my free time, so I want to make this fast)