Slashdot Mirror

When one specific religion
says that you have to commit violence and they will kill you if you try to leave and no other religion or social order is allowed to exist, maybe that one religion is more of a problem than the others.

Mishandling secret documents is a grave offense, even if nobody broke into the server. Spoiler alert: foreign intelligence agencies were all over it. It was a windows server computer and the program was **Microsoft remote desktop**. No shell requirement to get into her shit. It was that **easy**.

The only reason the Clintons were not frog marched in cuffs for numerous felonies over the years was the swamp and the fact that the elites in both parties have been covering for each other for decades. Ask any active duty military. If they had done what Hillary did with her email server and classified emails, they would be in jail. Just like Reality Winner. Nearly all politicians are crooked, but to try to claim that the Clintons are not outright mobsters is laughable to anyone who has been paying attention. Hell, Bill Clinton straight up raped several women and got away with it.

Some of the greatest discoveries have resulted from finding nothing. The Michelson-Morley experiment for example. Often quoted in discussions on logic and reasoning is the instance of The Dog that did not Bark in a Sherlock Holmes story.

Yeah, but bots and fake accounts are REALLY important to the right.

Calling every right-leaning user a bot is REALLY important to the left. It's the narrative they cling to after Trump got elected. Meanwhile, the left uses bots and propaganda too:

https://www.nytimes.com/intera...

https://www.americanthinker.co...

Hey ya go snowflake: https://www.poynter.org/news/2...

https://www.americanthinker.co...


Do pussy hats help with your butthurt?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci...

http://yournewswire.com/top-sc...

https://www.naturalnews.com/04...

http://www.thenewamerican.com/...

http://www.americanthinker.com...

Vote Hillary in 2016.

Here is some bonus material that jumped out -
Lib Journalist: Conservatives Get Ready, We’re Sending Bombs Soon
Blatant Hate: Comedy Central Writer Wishes Justice Kennedy ‘Had Been Shot’
For the left, 'Year of the Woman' is all about blocking, assaulting, and attacking them

Not to worry, the SJW's will make sure it ends up racist against white and males before long.

https://www.usatoday.com/story...
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/0...
https://www.americanthinker.co...
https://www.theaustralian.com....

Apparently you are one of those sad people that thinks history doesn't exist before you were born.

Maybe you should look into the Muslim invasions of Europe, India, south-west Asia, and other areas. Here is a hint - they all occurred before the US existed.

The Greatest Murder Machine in History

What you refer to as "blowback" is comparatively a minor annoyance. Of course if your faction keeps chipping away at things we might see a return to that.

Yep! 100% correct! After all, there is nothing divisive about telling people to sit in the back of the bus. That is really inclusive, isn't it? No - don't answer. You just sit in the back and be quiet...

The so called government shutdown the left likes to try to pin on Junior Senators Cruz and Lee from the then minority party of the Senate.

You mean the shutdown that Cruz and Lee took credit for, and still say they supported?

Hey, just because now they pretend to be against Democrats doing what they did, doesn't mean they didn't do it. And I still remember the 1990s shutdown, and I know who was at fault then too.

They were more afraid of the media lies than pushing the truth and forcing negotiations and compromise. And they've kept on doing the same.

They were afraid of the truth, that their shutdown threats were not getting the people's support, and they had to reign in the zealots instead. The House did indeed pass a repeal bill, and REFUSED to negotiate with Democrats on it at all, and Mike Lee and Ted Cruz decided to try to force it upon the Senate.

Yes they do CAVE, and have done so repeatedly.

They don't negotiate, they don't talk, and they keep on demanding more and more. Sorry, but it's true.

Yes Trump is very centrist, he's been a Democrat at times.

Trump has pretended to be a Democrat, but he pretends about everything, the one guiding star he has is that he's a constant self-promoter.

It makes the objections of the left rather amusing because they really couldn't have asked for a more malleable Republican President out of the candidates.

Trump is indeed malleable. That's a flaw, not a virtue.

Gov Christie might have been about on par.

Please, Mr. Bridgegate and now Beachgate? That's your suggestion? You discredit yourself with that one.

But their non-stop outrage has pushed him quite a ways to the right on many issues.

Nope, he's JUMPED to the right just because it gets him the fawning praise he wants.

If the GOP Establishment would use the majorities they have in both houses and actually push an agenda they could accomplish a lot, but they cave time and again, resulting in nothing happening.

You have it wrong, the problem is their agenda, which they've pushed for, is one they know they can't make work, so they end up with nothing, since it would be destructive to actually pursue.

Of course, their problem is that their majorities aren't legitimate, but a carefully gerrymandered facade built on empty outrage, but that's a different problem.

Repeal the ACA and then invite the left to negotiate a replacement with compromises.

Mitch McConnell is treating having to negotiate a replacement with Democrats as a threat get his own senators in line, so no, that won't happen. But that repeal idea is ALL THEY HAD for SIX YEARS. That's their own fault.

But no, they just Cave or worse, they try to do the same thing the Dems did when they passed the ACA in the first place, keep it hidden and then bring out a massive bill and not give sufficient time to digest and evaluate it before demanding a vote.

Well, at least you admit what they're doing is worse, but um, that is not what Democrats did, unless you have completely forgotten all the town halls, all the hearings, all the scorings, and even the false claims about it.

Meanwhile, the actual GOP effort has been...hidden, hasn't it? Kinda makes your apologia nauseating when you think about it.

As to Trump's fiscal policies, I really don't care. The House sets the budget and fiscal policy, not the President.

Nope.

Yeah, the very idea of providing affordable phone service to everyone in America.

Yes, you got it. In a free country, government must not be able to compel anybody to provide service to any one else. It can only be voluntary — motivated either by profit or sincere benevolence.

It would have been much, much better to have private companies only running phone lines to well heeled customers

Of course, it would've been! When the cell-phones finally appeared, they were for "uber wealthy" as well. In 10 years they become affordable to middle class, in 20 became ubiquitous, and now they are handed-out to homeless

.

Without Capitalism to create, your beloved Socialism would not even know, what to mandate ...

Requiring that a private security company carry appropriate licenses

What "appropriate licenses"?. For those posing under the "SLOW CHILDREN" sign. The very fact, that activities like surveillance and research of online posts by others require a license is an outrage.

These weren't uniformed guards — armed or not — who may be mistaken for official law-enforcement and for that reason can be subjected to licensing requirements. They served no warrants or documents — it was research and connecting the dots. This should not require a license.

Any attempts to limit research of anything online would be for EFF's to fight. The rest — for ACLU, if the two organizations really stood for liberty, rather than Left "progressivism".

not a violation of the Constitution, so the ACLU doesn't care

ACLU are full of shit — if they cared about the Constitution, they would've fought anti-weapon laws nation-wide. Forget "assault weapons" — you can't even possess a knife or a slingshot in some parts of the country. Pompous hypocritical assholes...

"Brutality and killing has only ever resulted in MORE people being brutalized and killed, is never actually a solution."

Spoken like a true, brainwashed, ignorant liberal... Apparently you failed history class. Here are a few highlights of the exact opposite: WW2 ended "new Socialist" Hitler's bid for world domination and extermination of around 8 million people of "lesser races", Korea stopped the brutalization and murder of millions of south Koreans (see what happened when the US failed in Vietnam and the millions of people brutalized and 7.5 million murdered there after we left http://rebirthofreason.com/Art... ), Desert Storm (the people of Kuwait were saved from brutalization and murder), even the crusades for all their faults, stopped the bloody, violent, imperialist expansion of Islam http://www.americanthinker.com... .

Trumps intelligence was underestimated by a lot of people, including you, apparently. How smart he actually is will be determined by his record.

Considering your own apparent lack of basic history, I suggest you may better use your time reading up on history so that in the future you can make a more reasonable argument.

I'm quoting you: "...repressive government and the wrongful imprisonment of dissenters".

As I seem to have to continually remind people on Slashdot, Hillary is not president.

Who exactly has Trump imprisoned wrongfully? Or are you saying it is wrong to imprison people who set cars on fire and loot shops? I know many on the left bellive this to be true but I had hoped that rot had not spread to the more rational denizens of Slashdot.

It's just their sheeple, drink the Kool-Aid given to them and think the other is more evil.

While that is indeed true of many Statists, it's not really true of the other more libertarian side of that equation - which only makes sense as the larger a government gets, the more unfeeling and cruel it becomes... so you can imagine what happens in essentially a world-wide government.

Unlike liberals, who were going to filibuster Gorsich for what, altruistic reasons?

Ruling that a trucking company was right to fire a worker for....not freezing to death alone disqualifies him. Since you're obviously a partisan hack, I'll point out I said in 2010 that Elena Kagan had no business being on the Supreme Court after she argued you have no right to not be framed by cops for a crime you didn't commit.

Claiming the Dems use of the nuclear option was for "good reasons" and the Republicans for "pure politics simply makes you a hypocrite.

Pretending the first proposed filibuster (Trump's other nominees got up-or-down votes) is equivalent to 8 years of obstruction makes you an idiot as well as a partisan hack.

Success is fine. Corporate espionage/subversive behavior is not.

You're not familiar with the American character then.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2008/02/americas_enduring_love_for_und.html

Pull your head out of your ass.

I'm not the one denying reality.

President Trump's claims of the imminent collapse of Obamacare might not be so far fetched when leaked documents claim that the Obama administration seized the profits of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, with the alleged intention of using it to fund Obamacare at the cost of fewer Americans becoming home owners.

Wasn't it less then ten years ago that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were the ones responsible for fewer americans being home owners? Something something housing crisis?

I mean, how can you take any politician seriously when they openly advocate to let their own constituents die to save money?

What, you mean this guy that listens to (supposedly) regular joes? You wouldn't know that watching CNN because they mysteriously lost their connection the moment people started discussing their personal problems that came about because of the ACA.

Soon after Nancy Pelosi tweeted asking for people to share their Obamacare stories and the replies were mostly negative. Just because it improved things for some people doesn't mean it's a good thing if it's at the cost of the majority.

President Trump's claims of the imminent collapse of Obamacare might not be so far fetched when leaked documents claim that the Obama administration seized the profits of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, with the alleged intention of using it to fund Obamacare at the cost of fewer Americans becoming home owners.

Just read a fine article by oil analyst Craig Schwartz. It is a fascinating explanation how foreign governments cravenly manipulate oil markets for the own benefit (by the way, many of the anti-pipeline groups are funded by the Saudis). Check it out Border Adjust Oil.

Just another example of Corporate Arrogance

Without the Capitalism in general and the greedy KKKorporation$ in particular, how would the gentle and human-faced Socialism even know, what to mandate?

From flush toilets, to personal automobile, to "EpiPen" — wonderful things get made and offered for sale by the folks seeking to profit from the sales.

Some of these wonderful inventions are then mandated by the government — for example, in most of the US an apartment can not be offered for rent without a) refrigerator; b) stove; c) flush toilet. But without the greedy (and arrogant) corporations making those things available — and affordable — first, how would these regulators even know, what to mandate?

Can you supply any references for the debunked consensus? When I originally looked into the matter, I found several papers confirming the consensus, but it has been a few years since I looked

Comment on ‘Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature
a 2016 survey of american meteorological society members about climate change Initial Findings graph on page 11 shows 33% of AMS members believe the climate change is at least equally or more attributable to natural causes.
Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the literature: A re-analysis
Climate Consensus and ‘Misinformation’: A Rejoinder to Agnotology, Scientific Consensus, and the Teaching and Learning of Climate Change
Climate Consensus Con Game
Sorry, global warmists: The ‘97 percent consensus’ is complete fiction
The claim of a 97% consensus on global warming does not stand up
Global Warming “Consensus”: Cooking the Books
Climategate 3.0: Blogger Threatened for Exposing 97% "Consensus" Fraud

Actual data from the GAO shows that illegal and legal immigrants commit murder at a much higher rate than citizens. Per the Federal Government's own data. And of the two categories, illegal immigrants lead the way with the most number of murders per capita.

Reminds me of a 3 year old throwing a tantrum because they didn't get a toy they wanted in Walmart.

I was going to say Hillary Clinton , but hey we're both right.

FTFY

http://www.americanthinker.com...

http://www.killclimatedeniers....

http://www.climatedepot.com/20...

Calling upon the government to execute those with a different point of view is something I'd consider a death threat.

It was Republicans that gave women the vote in the first place.

The way it's supposed to work, you're supposed to own land in order to vote. So called skin in the game. Today the left wants foreigners, often illegal aliens to vote - for them of course. Bus people from voting place to voting place to pack the ballot box. http://www.americanthinker.com...

Of course now we know about the Clinton campaign and their paying people to beat up people at the Trump rallies, http://www.washingtontimes.com... . Goes on and on and on.

Yet some people will vote for Hillary anyway.

his supporters claim that Clinton freed a rapist and laughed about it, and that her husband (?!) is worse.

Except she did laugh about it, and her husband was impeached (and paid off $850,000, and lost his law license) over sexual assault. But I guess boasts are worse than actual actions, eh? Better to kill a dozen people than just talk about it! Better to arrest and blame an innocent video maker about the cause of four people's deaths (including an ambassador in her direct command) than to simply talk about it, eh?

Good little Hillary youth repeat and believe the propaganda .
I am voting for Trump because I want to maintain a health democracy.
The media is one of the strongest weapons in showing the world the devastating effects of corruption and shining a light on those who would use their entrusted power for personal gain. An independent and free media is a cornerstone of democracy and a crucial component of a healthy governance system.

Glenn Greenwald( Pulitzer prize winner) hates trump and hillary both but at least he is ethical.

Glenn Greenwald found ABC,NBC,CBS,CNN, NYT,Bumberg,HuffyPost,NewYanker,Politico, New Yanker taking marching orders from the Clinton Campaign.
https://theintercept.com/2016/...

Clinton has corrupted this and turned it into a propaganda arm for her campaign.

This should scare the hell out of the american people if they know their history.

I was voting for Hillary until I found this out it is worse than anything Trump has done.
Trump makes we want to vomit but he would last 4 years and it would clean out the political system a bit. Think off it as a cleanse, nasty going down but it cleans out all the crap.

I am voting Trump, not because I like him, he makes me vomit, but because the press will do their job, to find government corruption. We will have a health democracy with Trump. If Trump goes 2 dollars over on expense report it will be front page news for a week. Hillary nope, she will tell them what to write. Trump will last 4 years but the crap will be gone.

Also here are some more fun ones.

Funny how they came out yesterday saying wikileaks was propaganda, notice how all of the above repeated it, like good little hillary youth.
https://theintercept.com/2016/...

Washington Post shilling for Hillary.
http://www.americanthinker.com...

Hillary Clinton public and private opinion : wall street and lobbyist ended slavery She lies about lying. That what she we actually saying. Read actual leak, not her lies.
Nope it is a Fox anchor. You guys will be crying about the moderator.

  Obama likes to expose himself.Go check out his 'Agent' as they call it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

You really are repeating the echo camber of propaganda that hillary has created and didn't read anything. I posted a story for Glenn Greenwald and you called in right wing. You are fucking insane if Glenn Greenwald is right wing now.

The media is one of the strongest weapons in showing the world the devastating effects of corruption and shining a light on those who would use their entrusted power for personal gain. An independent and free media is a cornerstone of democracy and a crucial component of a healthy governance system.

Glenn Greenwald( Pulitzer prize winner) hates trump and hillary both but at least he is ethical.

Glenn Greenwald found ABC,NBC,CBS,CNN, NYT,Bumberg,HuffyPost,NewYanker,Politico, New Yanker taking marching orders from the Clinton Campaign.
https://theintercept.com/2016/...

Clinton has corrupted this and turned it into a propaganda arm for her campaign.

This should scare the hell out of the american people if they know their history.

I was voting for Hillary until I found this out it is worse than anything Trump has done.
Trump makes we want to vomit but he would last 4 years and it would clean out the political system a bit. Think off it as a cleanse, nasty going down but it cleans out all the crap.

I am voting Trump, not because I like him, he makes me vomit, but because the press will do their job, to find government corruption. We will have a health democracy with Trump. If Trump goes 2 dollars over on expense report it will be front page news for a week. Hillary nope, she will tell them what to write. Trump will last 4 years but the crap will be gone.

Also here are some more fun ones.

Funny how they came out yesterday saying wikileaks was propaganda, notice how all of the above repeated it, like good little hillary youth.
https://theintercept.com/2016/...

Washington Post shilling for Hillary.
http://www.americanthinker.com...

Hillary Clinton public and private opinion : wall street and lobbyist ended slavery She lies about lying. That what she we actually saying. Read actual leak, not her lies.
Nope it is a Fox anchor. You guys will be crying about the moderator.

  Obama likes to expose himself.Go check out his 'Agent' as they call it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Hillary has created the most effective propaganda arm ever made.

Hillary Propaganda Divisions ABC,NBC,CBS,CNN, NYT, Bumberg, Huffy Post, NewYanker, Politicon, Politifalsehoods, Last Twit Tonight,Washington Post
https://theintercept.com/2016/...
http://www.americanthinker.com...
  http://dcleaks.com/emails/cApR...

whose president (Obama) and SecState (Hillary Clinton) jailed a YouTube filmmaker (who had NOTHING to do Libya) as a scapegoat for the Benghazi debacle. and then kept him in prison for a year, even while his prison was letting-out violent offenders in order to get into compliance with a prison overcrowding court ruling, and even had him transferred to a Texas prison so he'd remain behind bars as the California prisons were still overcrowded.

No need to start an effort to free him now; he is out of jail and now living as a poor homeless man whose life is in ruins.

I find it interesting that nobody in Hollywood ever took up the cause of the jailed filmmaker - they all rant about "free speech" and yet are Hillary bots.

Ted Kennedy enlists Soviet aid against Reagan in 1984

The whiners today can shove this right up their collective asses. It's just repeating past Democratic behavior.

Your slur on my qualifications is misplaced and only convinces me further that something is very wrong with this supposed 'science'. In fact it's a point I forgot: the incredible hostility you occasionally encounter in these discussions. There was even this guy:

http://www.americanthinker.com...

Just... wow. So how comes this is considered a science and not a religion?

The only actually *REAL* controversy that exist among scientific is about the minute details of interpretation (like the exact expected decimals at the end of the predicted number), not about the broad existence of climate change.

Ah, thanks for clarifying. So it is now Ok, in your opinion, to imprison the remaining deniers and to erase (or otherwise keep inaccessible) the raw data, that has once lead our betters to these universally-accepted conclusions?

Or do you still agree, criminal prosecution of dissenters (however unreasonable they may be themselves) is wrong and unavailability of the data — suspicious?

Please, confirm. Thank you!

Now, boffins from Sweden and the UK have cast doubt on the quality of the science

Is not it great, that such Scientific scepticism remains legal and the raw data remains available for anyone trying to replicate the earlier findings of others?

Funny that I keep hearing that, and yet every time the media and pollsters open their mouths the opposite happens. Jumping back to the recent past, you even had the flappy headed media and pollsters saying that Trump wouldn't succeed to make it to October of last year. Ol'Nick at 538 got so up set he threw a hissyfit and started acting like a child. Media? Same deal.

Funny, I've been saying that Trump would succeed, that the vacuous drones for the GOP nomination would not have the charisma to do anything about him, and that's what I heard, that he was saying and doing all the things that would be popular with the GOP.

Even if they were nothing more than blowhard rants.

That sort of stuff does work, and if anybody didn't realize that, I'd consider them fools. Yeah, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich, they had to claim otherwise, because who wants to admit defeat, but I figured as soon as Trump jumped in, he'd be on top.

But then, I felt the same way about Perot. He was saying all the right things to get a chunk of voters behind him.

Hillary and Sanders supporters? Well some of them opted for open violence along with illegals. Some news organizations? Vox and Huffpo are all for rioting and using violence against Trump.

Keep going guys, you're proving Trump right.

Oh no, some few people are engaging in violence. What a new political development, completely unknown in history. And this country, it surely would not be formed after the result of going to the extreme.

Oh wait, no, both are truly part of our history. You can regret it, and find it misguided or even outright wrong, but I wouldn't be able deny it was considered necessary at times.

Meanwhile, Trump does nothing on his end that even suggests violence is a good idea. He's truly a man of peace.

You know, except for his general bombastic belligerence. He's chosen to be provocative himself.

And neither he, nor liberals are the only ones. You can find plenty of individuals across the political spectrum who have called for riots, revolution, and secession.

What, are you going to disavow it? Noble of you, if so. But I think your intent is to pretend it only sullies one side.

In any case, you didn't read that HuffPost editorial, did you? You relied on its title, a provocative one to be sure, but its substance, yeah, you should really examine it in full. I bet you can't even process the conclusion:

Last, I want to briefly note the problematic nature of people with privilege condemning violent resistance to Trump as an absolute moral failing, or denying its logic. Whether you would personally engage in violent conduct matters little to your ability to understand where it comes from. Some people have the privilege to consider the implications of Trump’s rise in the abstract and negotiate which means are necessary. That’s not true for everyone. And when those who hold that privilege dismiss the potential validity or logic of violent resistance, it’s effectively an effort to dictate the rules under which oppressed peoples respond to existential threats, and to silence forms of resistance disagreeable to privileged sensibilities. Don’t be that liberal.

His lead in the opinion polls against Trump is in the double-digits range whereas Clinton vs Trump figures are within the margin of error.

Funny that I keep hearing that, and yet every time the media and pollsters open their mouths the opposite happens. Jumping back to the recent past, you even had the flappy headed media and pollsters saying that Trump wouldn't succeed to make it to October of last year. Ol'Nick at 538 got so up set he threw a hissyfit and started acting like a child. Media? Same deal. Hillary and Sanders supporters? Well some of them opted for open violence along with illegals. Some news organizations? Vox and Huffpo are all for rioting and using violence against Trump.

Keep going guys, you're proving Trump right.

How about we leaving the teaching to the teachers

How about we let parents choose, how and where their children study?

Whichever approach public schools take, it will be a single one — certainly so per state and, with the increasing power of the Federal Department of Education, for the entire nation.

At best, it will be the right one for a majority of pupils, but even that's a lot to hope for. And, when the government makes a mistake (such as declaring "fat is evil"), it makes the same one for all of us.

Slashdot used to be very cautious against monocultures — why are so many people here able to recognize its dangers in technology, but not in education, for example?

81.2%, only slightly lower than the all time high of 84.6% right before the dotcom bubble popped.

That 3.4% is huge, actually... The 1-decade drop among people older than 16 (your kid is exempt) is only 3% — and that is troublesome. Note, how proud Obama was of every 0.5% reduction of unemployment. Thanks for the citation.

One, it is pointless because it won't happen.

If you told me 20 years ago, that a self-identified "Democratic Socialist" (and a bona-fide Communist underneath) will soon have a fair shot at becoming President of the US, I would've dismissed it with the same derision... But today's youth does not care any more — the Socialism/Communism's 100 years of failure (and mass-murder) are not taught in schools.

Two, it is a pointless claim because there are no democrats currently in Washington who are willing to propose anything that even slightly resembles an initiative to "give control of healthcare to the government".

Currently is the caveat-emptor, is not it? Look on this very board — numerous people speak in favor of "single payer", and they all vote...

Even the most socialized of all medical systems still give the physicians at least as much autonomy as our system does.

TFA is not about "authority" — it is about incompetence. When doctors become government-employees — as they are in Cuba so beloved by the likes of Bernie Sanders and Michael Moore, and other worker paradises — the healthcare will suck just as it does there.

And we are on our way — by many indications, Obamacare was designed to fail, and is failing as "CO-OPs" go bankrupt, and major commercial insurers threaten to withdraw. It did not "bend the curve" of the costs either — the grows of healthcare costs is accelerating.

It will continue to suck. Which will allow the next "progressive" President to claim "the market approach has failed" — and turn to a government-owned (euphemistically called "single payer") system. Obama himself would've done it — with enthusiastic support from morons like certain anonymous cowards replying to you — but "the nation was not ready" so he simply laid down the ground work for the future:

"I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care program. I see no reason why the United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, spending 14 percent of its gross national product on health care, cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody. And that's what Jim is talking about when he says everybody in, nobody out. A single-payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. That's what I’d like to see. But as all of you know, we may not get there immediately. Because first we've got to take back the White House, we've got to take back the Senate, and we've got to take back the House."

In other words, you are just parroting standard slashdot conservative FUD.

You seem like the kind, who'd be trying t

So you wanna explain how you are gonna manufacture all these phones and cars and fridges and laptops with ZERO carbon output? Because if you say "cap and trade" allow me to educate you, its even having its "rules" written by the one who created credit default swaps, you know, one of the biggest scams in financial history?

So lets here how you are gonna manufacture all this stuff with ZERO carbon output, without using a magic bean scam like crap & trade, because I want to hear this. I wanna hear how you are gonna turn the first world into the first world with NO energy expended that creates carbon and NO carbon output in manufacturing. Can't use hydro-electric, because that kills the fishes and the greenies are blocking building of new damns, can't use nuclear either because the greenies are blocking those too....so lets hear it, because i have a feeling its gonna be as much bullshit as solar fricking roadways.

See, that's the problem: I don't think "equal opportunity" means anything in conservative rhetoric. It's simply a way to handwave away the problems inherent in the conservative value system by claiming you support equality in some abstract sense which has no effect on the actual, extremely inequal outcomes. That would be fine if this was just some philosophical debate, but people have to live with those outcomes.

Look, your argument is stupid. Words have meaning and in this case opportunity != outcome. I find it interesting how you have this considerable willful misunderstanding of someone's argument while this AC summed you up quite well.

The current push amongst the "social justice" left is equality of outcome, not equality of opportunity.

It reminds me of Vox Day's three laws of the Social Justice Warrior: always lie, always double down, and always project. You willfully misinterpret someone's words in order to make an embarrassing terrible rhetorical argument and then double down through your above rationalization.

Note in particular, your claim that what you think of it is what matters. It is irrelevant that you think that "equal opportunity" doesn't mean anything in conservative rhetoric. What matters in that regard is what the users of the rhetoric think their words mean. And as I noted in my earlier reply, that meaning is rather clear. You have implied here that your thinking on the rhetoric corresponds with the conservatives' thinking on the rhetoric. That is projection.

Thus, I find it interesting that you demonstrate all three degenerate behaviors described by Vox Day's three laws.

You don't hang out on "those kind of websites" -- i.e., web sites that apply critical thinking to the assertions promoted by James Hansen, the assertions promoted by Michael Mann, the assertions promoted by Al Gore, etc.

Restricting oneself to uncritical, non-diverse sources of information -- a filter bubble, an echo chamber -- is a problem, is it not?

The datasets that do show warming have received far more corrections than the UAH satellite dataset. So by your criteria, they are more suspect than the UAH satellite dataset.

So which country do you wish to murder? India? China? Because to get to the numbers they are claiming we need to reach you will have to kill a couple billion because they will have to live in conditions similar to what cave people lived in, with all the disease, starvation, and mass culling that implies.

Of course the REAL reason many are against those preaching AGW is NOT because they don't believe we have a problem, its because their "solution" is nothing but snake oil designed to enrich a few 1% insiders by pulling a reverse robin hood on the poor and middle class. Its actual effect on the climate? Will be about as much as buying my "climate fixing rocks" which I will be happy to sell you for the low low price of $10K per person.

Is dumping more carbon in the air bad? Yep, dumping too much of anything is bad...and the alternative is? Unless someone comes up with fusion technology or some other near limitless energy? You have several countries with billions of people that aren't gonna happily die in squalor just so you can keep your iCrap. They want to live in nice homes, have electricity and phones and laptops and fridges...you know, all the things your first world behind takes for granted? And to give them those things WILL require ever increasing carbon.

So unless you are willing to go "final solution" on the third world? Not really any more we can do than what we are doing now, in fact what we have done now is simply cripple our own country to benefit a handful of global elite. after all you can pass all the climate laws you want, they can simply go to a third world country and have their widgets made, dump as much toxins in the air and water there as they please (because to the locals its better than starvation) and then simply slap the widgets on a ship and sell it your your little green flag waving self. All these laws you pass? Not gonna cost them a dime because they are not gonna follow them, as long as your government allows so called "free trade" they can always find another country they can pollute.

So all you are buying is snake oil and bullshit designed to make you feel better about yourself, while screwing the poor and enriching the elite...all so you can put a "hastag i'magreen" on your tweets.

Where I can [sic] sign up for this?

You can start here... And some people have claimed to support the sitting President for the sole reason of having received such a phone. Racist but true.

Capitalists made the cell phones (and WiFi) possible, Socialists are making it a civil right .

I don't believe your statement to be true. The local public radio (at least here) gets the majority of its money from "underwriters" (local business) and member donations. This funds both local programming and NPR subscriptions. There are other states where public radio is funded by local universities. In other regions that don't have as much money - Corp for PB helps subsidize operations so that "everyone" has access to public radio.

"More than 90% of VPR's funding comes from the local community." and "Less than 10% of VPR's funding comes from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting government"

Others have pointed out that tax deductible donations are a form of gov't funding. But even then it is estimated to be 25% - not 50% (even Fox news quotes 25%) Using the same math - Religion is costing taxpayers $71 billion / year. I don't think one can compare NPR total $166MM budget to $71 billion / year.

http://digital.vpr.net/support...
http://www.americanthinker.com...
https://www.washingtonpost.com...

http://dailycaller.com/2015/10...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
http://www.americanthinker.com...
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ge...
http://nypost.com/2016/02/09/e...
https://pjmedia.com/homeland-s...
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/ho...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
http://www.thelocal.dk/2016012...
http://www.politico.eu/article...
http://www.express.co.uk/news/...
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2...
http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...

From Professor Singer of Virginia. http://www.americanthinker.com...

Updates on the stories that matter. Anyone want to make a submission?

Will the Trans-Pacific Partnership Force Us to Fund the Paris Climate Agreement?

Saginaw [Michigan] County Board calls on Congress to oppose Trans-Pacific Partnership

Poll: Donald Trump trails Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders in matchup

(This one may seem random, but is perhaps the most on-topic to this discussion of the bunch. People got killed but she didn't join Daesh at least? USA #1!) Suspect in Vegas crash said she was stressed living in car

Sanders Campaign Suspends Two More Staffers Over Data Breach

Global Trade Faces Fragmentation Risks From TPP, TTIP, TiSA

John Stewart did a frightening but very insightful sketch drawing direct comparisons between the American Tea Party and the Taliban. It was funny and chilling at the same time.

Not at all. Why should I find the rule of law, reduction of the extent and power of the US federal government, or responsible fiscal policy to be something to fear? This reminds me of Vox Day's three rules, behavior exhibited by someone incapable of understanding certain contrary beliefs or viewpoints and imbued with a certain passive aggressive behavior:

1) Always lie.
2) Always double down.
3) Always project.

We see all three behaviors exhibited here. Core beliefs of the Tea Party movement have long been advertised and it is well known that there are non-religious members. So why not only lie that the Tea Party is only about religious beliefs and then double down by comparing the resulting Tea Party strawman to the Taliban with a woodenly delivered list of negative attributes that are to some degree shared by the not particularly self-aware, Stewart?

These are immature behaviors of someone who lacks wisdom not something to respect.

There are lots of people of all sorts of beliefs and ideologies who are concerned about government overreach, such as NSA spying, extending globally the stranglehold of excessive IP protection, and feeling people up at US airports. At some point, if you aren't a complete fool, you have to realize that the religious aren't your enemies, they are your neighbors, your friends and relatives, and your natural political allies on some really important issues.

The Tea Party is not a reenactment of the Handmaiden's Tale. It's in response to some serious problems that threaten the future of the US. I believe we should wonder why so many people are working so hard to discredit them on such flimsy pretexts.