I’ve been searching for this for the longest time…somehow when Win7 was in their beta release I was able to do this, but in the Ultimate Edition I was unable to…until now.

So, you like Windows XP’s Quick Launch? You used to have a folder shortcut pinned down there by dragging and dropping a shortcut and it would stay. but Windows 7 doesn’t let you do this, pinning an open windows just pines Explorers default “Library” window (which doesn’t help you) and you can’t place shortcuts. Other sites tell you to do some dumb tool bar junk that just doesn’t feel like home.

So how can you get a “pinned” icon down there in the Quick Launch to point to a specific folder that you want?

 

Right click on your desktop

New > Shortcut

In the prompt type

explorer.exe /e,/root,C:\path\to\folder

Click Next, give it a name like “Path To Folder” and hit finish.

A shortcut will be placed on your desktop.

No, here comes the hard part

Drag and drop it to the Quick Launch area

and it (I hope, or I am a liar) will stay. You can delete the shortcut from your desktop if you wish.

 

Go ahead, click the new icon… then after your done jumping around the room in excitement, “like” this page on FB, share a link to this page on Facebook and G+ with all your peps, and post a link to it on all your other less important social networking sites. Maybe even donate me some much needed cash for the holidays (paypal of course, cjohnweb@gmail.com)? I could sure use some new shoes about 2 months ago :)

And don’t forget who told you about it first!

You can read further about explorer.exe and the command line type interfaces you can pass it: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/152457

{ 0 comments }

So I was thinking about the Freedom From Religion Foundation and their pursuit to tear down every religious symbol in the country.

A few critical points that make things really simple and put the situations into perspective: This country was founded on the right to choose and practice your own faith. That goes for everyone, obviously. The other part of this is the “separation of church and state”. Here is the problem. The FFRF, for example, finds any thing related to Christianity or God, like old crosses or statues that are on state funded lands, and sues to have them removed under the pretense of “separation of church and state”. But this isn’t what the separation of church and state is, this isn’t what that means. The separation of Church and state is the idea that the state can not pass laws that tell individuals how to worship or practice their religion. For example, the government can not pass a law requiring individuals to go to church on a specific day. The government can’t say, “You can’t read your bible”. So the FFRF has twisted and perverted the meaning of the separation of church and state from “Freedom OF Religion” to “Freedom FROM religion”.

You have the freedom OF religion, not the freedom FROM religion. That’s the point. I mean, look at it like this: My religion is closely nit to my culture, what words I say, how I act, what music I listen to, how I respond to person or situation, it affects how I spend my money, it affects what I eat and what I do on the weekends, and my business practices. Everything is affected by my religion. My religion is something specific, and it is everything I am. And like wise, each person is directly affected by their religion. Each person acts, speaks, eats and breathes according to their religion. The music you listen to is religious, no matter what they are singing about. Religion is basically your personal culture, in a sense. So when I walk into a grocery store and hear music that talks about things, even in obscure ways, that I don’t agree with, it is someone else’s religion being “forced” upon me. I can either not shop at the store or I can deal with it and do my best to ignore it. I’d say the music does in fact offend me many times and is in a direct contradiction to my religion, my personal culture, everything I am and represent. So am I supposed to complain because it’s a public place? No, of course not. If someone hears Christmas music on the local Transit, would it offend a Jew? Would it offend a Christian? Would it offend an Athiest? The fact is, it doesn’t matter. EVERYTHING IS RELIGION when you break it down. You have the right, if you don’t like what you see or hear, to walk away, to close your eyes, to wear ear plugs, or to not support the specific establishement. You don’t have to listen, you don’t have to ride that buss, you don’t have to go to that grocery store, you don’t even have to leave your house if you really don’t want to be exposed to everyone else’s religion – BUT THIS IS AMERICA, the land of the free, the land of freedom of expression, freedom to choose your own religion, to practice it, to share it with others if you so desire and the freedom to choose weather or not to worship one GOD or another god or no god. I see Satanic things on the TV, Internet and Radio all the time, like sex and drugs, why is the FFRF not attacking those things? The FCC (part of our government) allows these things. They are of a religious nature to many people. I’ve meet “really religious” people who take part in orgies, of course their religion is not the same as mine. I’ve seen pornographic ads on websites – I was not informed of the content I would be exposed to, yet am I complaining and suing to remove those offensive things? No, Why not? It’s their right to express themselves as such if they so desire. The backbone of the internet is controlled and ran by the government, EVERY SINGLE domain name purchase sends funds to ICANN. The internet is a public place – so why is pornography allowed in the first place? My point is that the FFRF is not persuing Freedom From Religion, they are pursuing “Freedom From God”. That’s their right to believe what they will, it is not their right to seek to remove religious icons because they don’t agree with what they stand for or represent. It’s their right to simply choose weather or not they agree or disagree with the message the icon represents.

The core of the issue:

If an Atheist sees a religious icon on land that a Government office or program is run, then they might complain to have it removed because it “offends them.” At the same time homosexual Atheists prancing down the streets nearly naked proclaiming that they have sex with men (That is part of their religion) – which deeply, severely, and religiously offends me – I complain and I am told that I must “tolerate” them because it’s their right.

WHY? How are my rights less important than anyone else’s? Why is my religion offensive? Is my life style offensive? I display nothing but compassion for other people? I’m clothed, I do not cuss, I do not use drugs, I’m clean, I shave my face regularly. Is it my love for other peoples well being that offends an Atheist?

It offends me that an Atheist (or anyone else) wants to remove icons, religious or otherwise, that are mine, that are yours, your kids and their children – our history, our heritage, our culture. It’s like finding the red wood forest offensive so they want to burn it down.

You know what offends me? That an Atheist complains about a Religious icon and WE tolerate them. They are attacking EVERYONE’s rights to freedom of religion. I am offended that MY rights are not protected, my rights are not enforced. I am offended that sick, disturbing people are allowed to hike up and down my street mostly naked, even exposing themselves and I am told to tolerate it. I am offended that people let these things happen. I am sick and disgusted that police do not take MY rights – to not be sexually assaulted or offended – seriously. I am disgusted that people out there are so blind they think that they are entitled to destroy what is not theirs because they don’t like what it represents.

The next time you hear about the FFRF, or any other “anti-religion” group bringing a case to court to remove our Christian or other religious heritage, our historical sites, markers, and points of interest, send them a message and speak your mind. They will tolerate our history, our rights and our religion. There will be consequences for their actions.

I don’t know about you but I would die before I tolerate these people doing what they are doing.

{ 1 comment }

Why prefix MySQL column names?

November 10, 2011

Some people dislike using underscores ( _ ) in their column or table names. I have personally found a few great reasons why prefixing tables and columns is better than not prefixing. I want to quickly review this list: Organization,  visual organization, easy to remember, never worry about using MySQL reserved words and more! MySQL Tables [...]

Read the full article →