Slashdot Mirror

" those that drove and continue to drive our economy head first into the ground"

WTF? Is that the new gop line that totally forgets about the recession beginning during GW Bush's presidency and the recovery under Obama's?

You are a different universe than the rest of us buddy, time to wake up to reality
http://money.cnn.com/2014/12/0...

Well at least it is a dry heat.

Actually it's not, that's the problem. The humidity is around 30% during the day, which may not sound like a lot, but at 47C that's a heat index of over 55C! That's well into the extreme danger zone, you will get heat stroke extremely easy, even without being in the sun. And then of course the humidity will jump up during the night, so it may only be 30C outside, but the heat index is still in the 40s.

This weather is a very nasty combination of heat and humidity. You're basically looking at a sauna at times. Which is all well and good when you can leave the sauna, but even in the best of health the human body struggles to deal with these kinds of heat indexes over an extended period of time.

The "ways" aren't exactly mysterious. You live in the great plains, you're going to get floods and tornadoes.

Sure - be serious! But since we're here, my thoughts on exactly why places like yours tend to the religious.

A drive through the countryside in my area will show a lot of farms with presumably fundamentalist religious owners, if the signs are to be believe. Plenty of "The wages of sin is death" friendly reminders to see.

Giving some thought to the matter, who more likely to be really religious. Religion is the desire to influence events that you have no influence over. A Farmer has to have some sort of trust that the rains will come, the temperatures will moderate, and the crops will grow. Economic and some times actual life critical.

So they pray a lot, and in earlier times, when weather patterns were not known, it was not outside the realm of reason that abundant years were signs of Godly approval, and bad years were signs of offense.

But then you have the odd happening of the "faithful" being hammered by nature like this. Then it becomes silly season. The leaders scurry to find blame and attach it to the usual sources (Katrina, The mess in New Jersey, and Haiti come to mind).

So we have the elite, gay loving people of the northeast getting pummeled by a hurricane as proof of gawd's wrath against homosexuals, and it's accepted by the devout.

And there will be some insane excuses regarding these floods in Texas and Oklahoma that might be completely opposite in nature, but likewise gobbled up as proof of gawd's something something.

But let's take Haiti. One of gawd's mouthpieces, Pat Robertson gave the massive earthquake in Haiti as divine retribution http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/01/...

Now the fact that haiti sits on a shallow plate of geology that has been there long before there were those Hatians that presumably made a pact with the devil, apparently has nothing to do with it.

I wonder what Pat's comments on the present day mess in Texas and Oklahoma are? It will probably be along the lines of having to purge the sinners among the faithful, or if not fully prepared, back to the old "Mysterious ways" catchall.

So back to Oklahoma and Texas. They don't want to believe they have no control over these disasters, they see the destruction, and since humans have this strong approval blame thing going on, they feel they need to do something. Religion to the rescue.

Whereas the smart money says move elsewhere.

I know a "proper" caste system is wrong on several levels

But you like it anyway. That student grades are most dependent on the financial status of one's parents isn't a sign of inequality, it's a sign that we should bring back the system where you are an aristocrat, a member of the bourgeois, or an Untouchable.

If you're mother flipped burgers, the best you will do is flip burgers. If you're fuckup that goes so far as to kill people in a DUI? Forgiveness and an eventual corporate position for you.

Seen any suspicious rainbows lately? This might fill you in on what the governmen is doing I hear it targets Christians:

Actually, there was a big stunning double rainbow over Dublin last week as the people of Ireland rejected the teachings of the Church and approved same sex marriage.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/u...

Texas, on the other hand, outlawed gay marriage and got deadly floods and tornadoes.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/26/...

Coincidence?

If you look at Chattanooga, TN, then it seems to be working quite well. http://money.cnn.com/2014/05/2...

Are those "Netflix issues that plagued Verizon customers" the ones where traffic from Netflix was being throttled to force them to pay extra for Verizon's customers to receive the data from Netflix that the customers were already paying both of them for?

The market is there. The market exists. It is here, now. The toy manufacturers are catering to an already demonstrated predilection. Mattel didn't create the tendency for little girls to like one kind of thing and little boys to like another. At most, they reinforce those tendencies. Mommies and daddies apparently approve of those tendencies, because they also reinforce them.

We have some rather vocal female member here at slashdot. Maybe you should take a survey, to see what the worst obstacles they had, when they decided to pursue geekish careers. How many do you suppose were shot in the face, for daring to pursue male careers? http://www.pbs.org/newshour/ex... How many had acid thrown in their faces? http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WO...

Let's put things in perspective here. We do NOT ban women from any occupation, unlike some more barbaric societies seem to do. Nor do we ban men from any occupation. You are free to do whatever the hell you want to do.

Except, in this case, sexist assholes passing themselves off as "enlightened" are busy trying to tell women that they must enter the STEM careers. Women who CHOOSE to be home makers have no value.

Social engineering. Google is actively trying to change society, in effect, telling us all that we don't measure up to some standard that Google has set for us.

Arrogant bastards. I don't have to measure up to their standards, and neither do my sons or daughters, or grandsons or granddaughters.

Were you paying attention to what two idiots did with pressure cookers in Boston a few years ago? Or what another idiot tried to do with a propane tank, which this story says may also have been in the vehicle?

I would not be the least bit surprised for there to be many instances of people having left one in their car.

I own both of those items. I've transported them within my vehicle many times. What I haven't done is parked my fucking car outside the local Federal building and left it unattended with those items inside. Should I have to think that way? No. Is that the sad reality of the world we live in today? Yes.

Jesus Fucking Christ, look up what "common sense" means sometime. Stop trying to rationalize this as some sort of oppressive Governmental action. This is called an "abundance of caution," and is perfectly understandable to anyone that hasn't been living under a rock for the last twenty years.

and the miscarriage of justice is wanton and unnecessary destruction of valued personal property

Which he'll likely be reimbursed for, notwithstanding the fact that he was illegally operating the vehicle immediately prior to this happening. A pressure cooker costs ~$30, a rear window ~$400, and a propane cylinder ~$30. We're not even talking one thousand dollars worth of damages here.

So let me get this straight:
FDR caused a world-wide depression two years before he took office. He never had economic control over most of the world, but he nonetheless made the global depression worse. He was a commie in the 30s and early 40s, despite the fact he never sent anyone to the Gulag (kinda the defining aspect of Communism in the 30s and early 40s), the business community fought him tooth and nail the whole way (at one point forcing him to seize Montgomery Ward's entire company because the Chairman preferred forcing a strike and ending his war production to dealing with his unions) but he enriched his friends in business, etc.

That makes almost as much sense as claiming ObamaCare hasn't kept costs in line. It has. Of course you did preface it by saying "cheaper," so you will probably weasel your way into a claim that it was supposed to reduce cost-growth not keep cost-growth within inflation; but then it was never sold as a way to reduce overall costs. If that had been the sales pitch there would have been no need for new money to fund it. It was sold as a way to cut costs for individuals, and (thanks to the subsidies) it's mathematically impossible for it to fail at that task.

First, pharma companies make very little on vaccines

Bullshit, bullshit

How on earth can opening the footage to the public NOT compromise privacy?

Check the article. They provide examples of over-redacted footage. Had you looked at them, you wouldn't be asking the questions you are.

I asked a cop on a streetcorner for directions the other day, he gave them, I thanked him and went on my way, no problem. I consider that to be a private conversation (it reveals my whereabouts that day and tells where I was trying to go). I don't want video of it to be a public record open to "fishing expeditions" by random jerks

All audio is removed from the over-redacted footage and techniques are used to ensure that people are not readily identifiable. Seriously, just go look at the examples.

And I hate to break it to you, but any video recorded of you by an officer already is a matter of public record. Those "random jerks" just need to file a FOIA request to get the video. And in some states, such as Washington, they can even file those requests anonymously. Any interaction you have with a police officer is a matter of public record, whether you like it or not. This doesn't change that.

Unless there's an actual dispute involving the person requesting the video, nobody (including the police department and the cop wearing the camera) should be allowed to see the video and it should be deleted after 1 year.

Oh, definitely. Great plan. Hey, I think the following people may want to review any available footage the police have regarding their "disputes", but for some reason none of them are speaking...oh, that's right, it's because they were all murdered at the hands of police officers. And what do you know? In the two cases below where footage was available, the police officer is facing murder charges, while in the third one, they aren't. How strange.

1) Walter Scott
2) David Kassick
3) Michael Brown

Those were just off the top of my head. But while simply trying to dig up links for those three, I found out that Olympia, Washington police shot two unarmed brothers at a grocery store yesterday, that a rookie cop in New York fatally shot an innocent, unarmed man who just happened to step out of an apartment at the wrong time, that a cop in South Carolina shot an unarmed man at a traffic stop when the man turned to grab his driver's license, that Anaheim, California cops fatally shot two unarmed men in back-to-back days...the list goes on.

Honestly, it's really depressing. I'm finding more articles about shootings I didn't know about than I am about the high-profile ones I was already aware of. And all of those but the last one are from just the last eight months.

Suffice to say, I vehemently disagree with you.

How on earth can opening the footage to the public NOT compromise privacy?

Check the article. They provide examples of over-redacted footage. Had you looked at them, you wouldn't be asking the questions you are.

I asked a cop on a streetcorner for directions the other day, he gave them, I thanked him and went on my way, no problem. I consider that to be a private conversation (it reveals my whereabouts that day and tells where I was trying to go). I don't want video of it to be a public record open to "fishing expeditions" by random jerks

All audio is removed from the over-redacted footage and techniques are used to ensure that people are not readily identifiable. Seriously, just go look at the examples.

And I hate to break it to you, but any video recorded of you by an officer already is a matter of public record. Those "random jerks" just need to file a FOIA request to get the video. And in some states, such as Washington, they can even file those requests anonymously. Any interaction you have with a police officer is a matter of public record, whether you like it or not. This doesn't change that.

Unless there's an actual dispute involving the person requesting the video, nobody (including the police department and the cop wearing the camera) should be allowed to see the video and it should be deleted after 1 year.

Oh, definitely. Great plan. Hey, I think the following people may want to review any available footage the police have regarding their "disputes", but for some reason none of them are speaking...oh, that's right, it's because they were all murdered at the hands of police officers. And what do you know? In the two cases below where footage was available, the police officer is facing murder charges, while in the third one, they aren't. How strange.

1) Walter Scott
2) David Kassick
3) Michael Brown

Those were just off the top of my head. But while simply trying to dig up links for those three, I found out that Olympia, Washington police shot two unarmed brothers at a grocery store yesterday, that a rookie cop in New York fatally shot an innocent, unarmed man who just happened to step out of an apartment at the wrong time, that a cop in South Carolina shot an unarmed man at a traffic stop when the man turned to grab his driver's license, that Anaheim, California cops fatally shot two unarmed men in back-to-back days...the list goes on.

Honestly, it's really depressing. I'm finding more articles about shootings I didn't know about than I am about the high-profile ones I was already aware of. And all of those but the last one are from just the last eight months.

Suffice to say, I vehemently disagree with you.

http://money.cnn.com/interacti...

Stagnated? It is almost higher than it ever has been adjusted for inflation.

The topic at hand is industrial espionage. Either point out actual cases of this or STFU.

Perhaps you have not been paying attention to current events. Oh, it's easy to complain when someone else does it to YOU, isn't it?

You assume that not being officially poor means you're doing OK - it doesn't. In fact, a single person can make as little as $11k per year, and a couple as little as $15k without being categorized as poor in the US:

http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/14...

That's not the kind of money that could make people think the Republicans might better serve their interests. And for the purpose of this argument (at least), it doesn't matter if poor Americans aren't starving like poor Chinese or Brazilians - they're not making good money:

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/03...

You're obviously doing quite well for yourself though, if you think this is a planning and budgeting problem.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/17/...

http://www.theguardian.com/wor...

Why the FUCK are my tax dollars going to support this idiot organization? Why the FUCK are my tax dollars being wasted on a train service that almost no one uses? If some tiny number of dumbasses cannot afford a car or refuse to just because they prefer to eat granola and hug trees, then let them PAY FOR IT THEMSELVES.

Of course, the incompetent democrat in the white houseopposes all common sense, but at least there is one party working for taxpayers instead of against us.

Instead of defunding Amtrak, maybe it's time to properly fund Amtrak. You seem worried about your tax dollars, but don't seem to mind the billions of them spent on subsidizing air travel and highways and even waterway traffic. What is really lacking in the US is a cohesive transportation policy.

But, hey, it's easier to shout "Defund Amtrak" then it is to actually fix the infrastructure and transportation problems in this country.

Why the FUCK are my tax dollars going to support this idiot organization? Why the FUCK are my tax dollars being wasted on a train service that almost no one uses? If some tiny number of dumbasses cannot afford a car or refuse to just because they prefer to eat granola and hug trees, then let them PAY FOR IT THEMSELVES.

Of course, the incompetent democrat in the white houseopposes all common sense, but at least there is one party working for taxpayers instead of against us.

For decades launching these rockets was not a problem for Russia.

The problems at Roscosmos couldn't have anything to do with financial irregularities and misuse of funds, or financial pressures caused by the current economic crisis. Nope. Nothing to see here. Move along.

You don't pay for public education so you can be educated, you pay for it so your society gets educated.

Ah, the cry of the modern fascist.

"Am I not a part of society?"
"No, there is no 'I', there is only 'society'! Society is the not-you, and their good is the only thing that you are allowed to be concerned with."

Do you see how this rapidly turns every human being into a slave to anybody else who cares to make a claim?

That's why people who didn't go to school and have no kids are still asked to pay it

Yes, and if they *had* kids, they would not be denied the educational service. It seems your basic education is lacking if you can't understand this simply idea.

And, as far as government having the right to tell people what they can and can't do with their bodies based on what "society" determines is "good for society," are you completely okay with anti-abortion laws, as long more than 50% of society supports banning abortions?

After all, if government has the right to dictate what I MUST do with my body based on what society has determined are in society's best interests, consider this poll:
http://politicalticker.blogs.c...

58% of Americans believe that abortion should be completely banned or "only allowed in some cases." Folks who are anti-abortion have a majority - when can we expect to see you join them in lobbying for an overturn of Roe v. Wade?

I am merely pointing out they have no scientific evidence to justify that strong claim.

No evidence? That is itself a pretty strong claim.

Here's some really quick ones:

Effective: http://www.vaccines.gov/basics...
Safe: http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/01/...

These are just two of them. These results are so well-known (especially with people who lived when measles was rampant) that citations are generally regarded as unnecessary to provide -- anybody can look up the source on their own. You can maybe find a vaccine (particularly one not yet FDA-approved) that isn't safe and effective because it's a broad category -- it's like asking whether "liquids are safe and effective at quenching thirst", and the answer is yes, but don't drink mercury or poison or anything that isn't safe and effective.

Yeah, everyone wants to be the next Keurig. Everyone who wants to pretend to know stuff without actually knowing anything at all. You know. Marketroids and the like.

California's southern border situation is far, far more dangerous than a few un-immunized natives. Immunization rates in central and south America are far, far lower than here in the US. But the right wants cheap labor and the left wants illegal votes, so we have no representation in this area. One naturally wonders why the obsession with immunization when public health is manifestly less important than open borders.

Bunk, on two accounts. Both as "PeterM from Berkeley" stated (facts), and from a logical standpoint. Measles has a 90% rate of infection. If you were correct in your assumption about migrant workers (and poor) carrying all these diseases and having terrible vaccination rates, then we'd be hearing (frequently) in the news things like, "15 found dead in migrant worker home from Measles outbreak." (they're often packed like sardines; two or three families per ROOM in a house) But you don't. Why? For the same reason that Mississippi has the highest vaccination rate, but is also the lowest median income and highest poverty. Poor people can't afford to miss work. You miss work, you don't get paid. You don't get paid, you can't feed your kids and you fall behind on bills VERY quickly. Getting deathly ill is not an option.

Last night, some football fans in Argentina managed to smuggle a whole drone into a stadium and flew it over the field (see picture 3/11) just before to start an epic disturb.

Does anyone still think "oh wow, airmiles!!!" ? What's a million airmiles worth? 3,000.00 to $6,500.00

This is like the guy who says "I lost my wallet with $1,000.00 in it. I'll pay $100.00 to whoever finds it!" Someone else immediately says "I'll pay $200.00"

I guess the ACA had nothing to do with this then.

http://politicalticker.blogs.c...
http://www.weeklystandard.com/...

Heck, even WalMart workers here unionized.

I see rampant plumbing problems in the near future for your area.

Yep, all that stuff is gone. Only 10-15 years ago I think, Porter-Cable tools were still made in the US, but that's been moved to Mexico..

However, if you want to find some American-made stuff at Home Depot, go to the electrical aisle, and look at all the dirt-cheap electrical sockets (the kind you install in your walls) and light switches (again, the kind you install in house walls). They usually cost less than a dollar each (unless you get some fancy kind), and they all said "made in USA" last time I checked. Of course, those products are not made for a global market (they're only usable in North America: Canada and Mexico has the same standards; not sure about South America, but everywhere else uses entirely different electrical hardware), and since this is easily the largest market for construction goods like that, and also since there's probably a large amount of automation involved in their manufacture, it probably hasn't made sense to move production offshore yet.

There's actually still a lot of stuff being made in the US these days, it just depends. US manufacturing today is generally heavily automated, so it doesn't involve much labor; anything requiring too much labor gets moved offshore to where labor is cheap. But here's a few things off the top of my head that are still made here:
- Tesla cars (california of all places)
- Many other cars (I heard Volvo is opening a new plant in South Carolina I think; lots of foreign automakers have plants in the southern states)
- manufactured homes (too big to transport across the ocean)
- specialty/high-end products (here's an article I ran across, lots of stuff like custom-make bicycles, high-end clothing/bags, etc.: http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/13/...)
- here's a whole website for you: http://www.stillmadeinusa.com/

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/08/...

Widespread corruption led to many records of Shor's actions being "lost" or outright deleted.

As we all know, not a smidgen of corruption was involved in the disappearance of certain e-mails at the IRS recently. And the only emails deleted by the former Secretary of State from the private server she illegally used were those about yoga routines and the like.

So, if America's public figures can lose important records without being corrupt, why are we automatically making such accusations against the little Moldova?

They've already released the type and size of the knife, and that knife is not illegal in Baltimore. The arrest was almost certainly illegal.

I haven't seen any stories that said that the knife was legal in Baltimore, but in the context of determining if the arrest was legal, the legality of the knife isn't the main driver.

If you're arrested for something and are later found not guilty, that doesn't retroactively make the original arrest illegal. Police arrest based on probable cause, not absolute guilt or even reasonable doubt. The question we need to answer to determine if the arrest was legal is: Would a reasonable police officer (not the arresting officer--a reasonable one!) have thought that the knife was probably illegal to carry?

In this case, proving that probable cause was lacking is going to be a seriously uphill battle. If you look at the stories coming out about the knife, a police investigation has determined that the knife was illegal. Don't waste your breath, I realize that a court would have to determine that if Gray were still alive and facing charges over the knife, but the important thing is that in the comfort of a police station (rather than out in a field), a group of officers found the knife to be illegal. That means that the officers out in the field who also determined that it was probably illegal almost certainly were reasonable in that determination. It will be unlikely that the prosecution will be able to show the absence of probable cause.

Now, the officers still should have treated Gray like a human being, so they probably are guilty of something, but they are going to get a lot more latitude since the arrest was legal.

sometimes that happens but I mostly just see cops justifiably shooting violent dangerous thugs

You mean like Walter Scott? He was pulled over for a broken tail light.

Don't be so melodramatic. The ones who died at the hands of the cops are those with multiple infractions and long rap sheets who physically resisted arrest. Or waved around what appeared to be a weapon and refused to drop it when ordered to do so.

Tell that to Walter L. Scott. The proximate cause for the traffic stop was a broken tail light. Call me weird, but I just don't think that is deserving of deadly force.

Hiring David Plouffe was a smart move for Uber. The man knows, how to improve pubic perception of anything. Not that I disapprove of his current employer, but to sell the country the shit-sandwich we have in the White House today — that's a sign of a true master.

While we are repeatedly told to hate on rich donors like Koch brothers, it is people like Mr. Plouffe, who really run the country...

Of course, the first sign of his coming onboard at Uber was the spike of spamming by the company. And not just the specials and discounts, which are legitimate things a business may send to existing active customers, but propaganda crap like "women equality at Uber" or "Uber for safer cities". I was disgusted and now begin my search for a ride with Lyft, but it must've been a win with most of their customers...

Apparently it does require courage or at least a certain meager measure of empathy.

Build a floating city in the upper atmosphere of Venus.

Maybe you live in a mythical world where your imagination allows you to create arguments using rare occurrences. I mean if we are going to use exceptions to asses the situation then I don't know what to tell you. BTW, not only school zones require 40km/h zones. There are plenty of residential areas where kids are present in numbers that justify 40km/h as a deterrent for speeding since the fines are high.

It's not creating an argument, it is a single example that you theory of "speed enforcement is science" is bunk. I have plenty more, but you seem to already be aware of this with your comment "kids are present, the speed limit should be 40" comment. So much for the science eh? Speed laws are mostly emotive and political.

Yes it was but some did believe and push that agenda. Regardless there are other examples like earth being the center of the universe...

So this automatically makes you right somehow? I'm failing to see how this adds any weight to your argument

Re: self driving cars: http://www.bloomberg.com/slide... http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/28/... http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

Yes we're all familiar with the current robot car tech, the gap which you don't seem to be aware of is that there is a LONG, LONG, road between concept and mainstream reality. Even if the Tech was perfect, which it isn't, it will still take another 20 years to get past the legal and political hurdles. http://www.technologyreview.co...

Neither did I but you can't deny the need for speed limits.

Never did. Speed laws are mostly emotive and political, not science.

It's funny how socialism has such a bad reputation in 'merica. It's automatically equated to "evil" Commmunism.

Of the top 10 most prosperous countries, half are socialist countries. Norway, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, and Netherlands. Of the top 10 most happiest countries, the majority are socialist countries.

It's funny how much happier people are when they don't have worry about things such as primary and university education, housing, health care, insurance, transportation, etc. It's also interesting how that correlates to a more productive society, making the country in general more prosperous.

Denmark often ranks in the top 5 year after year on both lists. While they have a 60% income tax, the people still manage to have more money in their pocket than the typical American. Why? The costs of their necessities are ridiculously low because it's distributed amongst the entire population. Their net income is higher than a typical American who has to eat the high costs of living (for the typical American, almost 50% of your income goes immediately into housing [rent, mortgage, etc.], then tack on health insurance, car insurance, loan debt, etc.) While Americans are racking up quarter million dollar debts just to go to school, Danes get paid to get a Master's Degree at University. Or rather, they're getting their collective investment returned to them when they go to school.

ACA is a good step forward. If everyone pays for health insurance, the costs will come down. You'd think fiscal conservatives would be all over that. Well, they were when Romney did it, but then suddenly were against it "just because."

What size is the population of the countries you are talking about? Norway 5.0 million, Denmark 5.6, Finland 5.4, Sweden 9.5, Netherlands 16.8 million.
How many are in the US... 318 million. We have states (California 38.8 million Texas 26.6 Florida 19.89 and New York 19.7)with larger populations than the largest of these countries Netherlands, in fact 22 states have a larger population that Norway hell there are more people in New York City than Norway.

How homogeneous culturally and racial are these countries? Very.

You are comparing tiny homogeneous groups of wealthy countries to a large continent spanning ethnically and culturally diverse mass that is the US.

Apples and Oranges.

You would be better off comparing the US (318 million) to all of Western Europe (397.5 million). Only that isn't a fair comparison either as Europe has a several thousand year head start on its development of infrastructure, its road system for example first started by the Roman Empire.

Why didn't the reporters do the same thing with a Jr Senator from Illinois? Remember, he was just a couple years into his first term as Senator, voting "present" more often than anything else.

Because what you allege is factually untrue unless you want to redefine 3% as "more than anything." Senator Obama voted "present" 129 times which is 3% of the 4,000 votes he cast. This is why no major news picked it up; it wasn't really news and it wasn't true. Second, in the Illinois Senate, the "present" vote is often used to as disapproval of measure without having to vote "no." Simply put it: Your facts are wrong.

Red Flags abounded, but he was "black" and "dynamic". Having the first "campaign" meeting at the house of two former (or still) radicals wasn't a hint of things to come

So you are alleging is that having a meeting at someone's house is a wringing endorsement of everything about the host? That must mean that Ted Cruz is most definitely gay. Are you really that naive in thinking that when raising funds you can only attend functions with people you agree with 100%. Seriously are you that naive? Or do you recognize that you need a broad consensus and support for offices like Senator.

While Palin was new to the National scene, she didn't get elected Governor because she was a woman,

And I have never said anything about her gender up until now. You are the first to mention it. Being a woman wasn't her problem. Being Sarah Palin was her problem.

she pissed off a lot of people both (D) and (R) up there. She was just too "small town" for national appeal.

No, she didn't get elected because people thought she was dumb. I personally believe the stories that she didn't know the difference between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. That she didn't know there were two Korean countries. That she didn't know the Queen of England does not actually run the UK. These are simple things that she could have known if she was basically aware of history or the world. Now the if the average American does not know these things it is merely a shame; someone wanting to run the country needs to know these things.

The (D) and (R) power brokers love fancy city slickers ... that is unless you're Bill Clinton ;)

Really, is that why George W Bush was President? Or why retired Naval Captain John McCain is a Senator.

> One might point out that makes 2 massively egotistical women on the campaign trail, then?

As opposed to massively egotistical men? If massive ego is a dealbreaker for you, you might as well stay home on election day.
The question here is whose leadership resulted in a massive wake of destruction and demoralization in her wake... and was rewarded for leaving.

"The stock is up a bit on the fact that nobody liked Carly's leadership all that much," said Robert Cihra, an analyst with Fulcrum Global Partners. "The Street had lost all faith in her and the market's hope is that anyone will be better."

We're not talking about censure. We're talking about inclusion. Muslims are exposed to plenty of bigotry and hate every day from the people in their communities without special events with cash prizes from organized hate groups. Yes, they're even exposed, from their perspective, to near-continuous blasphemy. Do we really need an event to send the message "the people here hate you so much that we're holding a party intended to upset you and further isolate you from our community"?

If you want fewer extremists, integration is the best approach. By isolating them, belittling them, and then provoking them you're creating the problem you're pretending to solve. This is true for any group of people, of course, not just Muslims, as we've recently seen. Oppressed groups tend to fight against oppression.

Oppression also tends to promote group unity. It's why you see so many groups seek any excuse to believe their oppressed, or look for opportunities to show some form of oppression. You've very likely seen this from both Christian groups and atheist groups. You've also seen how it calls the rank-and-file to sometimes violent action.

I'm amazed at the nonsense posted here. It's like seeing Klansman claim that if they burn enough crosses and hold enough marches "them **** will learn their place!" It's foolish and counterproductive. (Unless, of course, your real goal is to further oppress them. Hmmm...)

yes several individuals who set up this event are (unlike the Charlie Hebdo staff) known asshats.

Is it really okay for you to support the actions of "known asshats" if you don't actually join the club? How does that work? "I'm no Klansman, but those asshats sure do a good job! Keep it up boys!" What does that say about you and your beliefs?

The event was sponsored by the American Freedom Defense Initiative, which is considered an anti-Muslim group by the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks hate groups.

The group said it specifically picked the venue, a public school-owned facility, because it was host to a event denouncing Islamophobia in January.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/03/...

So it was a hate-group out to ruin an event intended to promote unity.

They promote violent reactions because far too many Moslems are violent maniacs.

What pushes them to violence? It's not because they're all just "maniacs". It could just be the continuous provocation, social isolation, and the bigotry and abuse that they suffer daily than leads some to react violently.

When a Baltimore community reacts similarly in response to years of abuse at the hands of the police, only the bigots say that black people are "violent maniacs". When it's two Muslims reacting violently to long-standing, daily, oppression, what makes you think you're not just a closed-minded bigot when you make statements like that?

How would you react if an event was hosted specifically to feature pictures of your mother molesting children or whatever might upset you? What if you and your family were subject to daily abuse and social isolation, and these sort of events were regularly held with the sole intent of provoking you? Would that make you more likely to lash-out or less likely?

This has nothing to do with free speech, and everything to do with bigotry and hate. Let's stop pretending that the known hate-group responsible for this absurd event has the moral high-ground.

It's funny how socialism has such a bad reputation in 'merica. It's automatically equated to "evil" Commmunism.

Of the top 10 most prosperous countries, half are socialist countries. Norway, Denmark, Finland, Sweden, and Netherlands. Of the top 10 most happiest countries, the majority are socialist countries.

It's funny how much happier people are when they don't have worry about things such as primary and university education, housing, health care, insurance, transportation, etc. It's also interesting how that correlates to a more productive society, making the country in general more prosperous.

Denmark often ranks in the top 5 year after year on both lists. While they have a 60% income tax, the people still manage to have more money in their pocket than the typical American. Why? The costs of their necessities are ridiculously low because it's distributed amongst the entire population. Their net income is higher than a typical American who has to eat the high costs of living (for the typical American, almost 50% of your income goes immediately into housing [rent, mortgage, etc.], then tack on health insurance, car insurance, loan debt, etc.) While Americans are racking up quarter million dollar debts just to go to school, Danes get paid to get a Master's Degree at University. Or rather, they're getting their collective investment returned to them when they go to school.

ACA is a good step forward. If everyone pays for health insurance, the costs will come down. You'd think fiscal conservatives would be all over that. Well, they were when Romney did it, but then suddenly were against it "just because."

Try Again. Also CompSci is somewhere around 10% of conferred degrees and shrinking.

And that 40km/h zone suddenly gets applied outside of school hours too without warning, at 3am at night and on weekends. Yet strangely in wealthy suburbs with lots of lawyers their schools are somehow exempt. I'd love to hear your scientific theory for why that is?

Maybe you live in a mythical world where your imagination allows you to create arguments using rare occurrences. I mean if we are going to use exceptions to asses the situation then I don't know what to tell you. BTW, not only school zones require 40km/h zones. There are plenty of residential areas where kids are present in numbers that justify 40km/h as a deterrent for speeding since the fines are high.

Earth was supposed to be flat,

That's a well worn myth.

Yes it was but some did believe and push that agenda. Regardless there are other examples like earth being the center of the universe...

we weren't supposed to go on the moon

Says who?

There are some today that still push the idea that we never landed on the moon.

and flight was never going to become an important method of transportation.

Says who?

History of the Wright brothers. And it wasn't the first time they were told this.
Wilbur told Orville on the train ride back to Dayton, "Not within a thousand years would man ever fly."

A flying car would be extremely convenient

Explain because as far as I recall it cost a lot more energy to keep the vehicle above ground than it does to power a 1000 HP truck engine and that doesn't include the thrust you need to go forward, turn and stop.

No they aren't.

Re: self driving cars:
http://www.bloomberg.com/slide...
http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/28/...
http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

As I said in my first post, road safety is not as simple as speed bad, slow good.

Neither did I but you can't deny the need for speed limits.

Whatever you do, don't tell someone to shut up, you will get sued for that.

When it comes to stuff like this, it's better to go straight to the source, rather than repeat things you've heard.

Senator Reid did not "all but admit" to lying. Take a look at the actual interview, starting at 2:45 in the video:

Bash: "So no regrets about Mitt Romney about the Koch brothers ... because some people even call it McCarthy-like"
Sen. Reid: "They can call it whatever they want... Romney didn't win, did he?"

There is no admission of deceit, just an admission that it was politically motivated.

Honestly though, if HP released web cameras which couldn't see black folks, I find this strangely unsurprising.

Apparently people who build these things assume everyone is the same shade of pasty white.

The show Better Off Ted addressed something like this in their episode Racial Sensitivity when Veridian Dynamics installs new security sensors in the building, which detect employees based on the light reflecting off their skin and they can't detect black people. Veronica assures Ted that the company cares about the issue:

Ted: The system doesn't see black people?
Veronica: I know. Weird, huh?
Ted: That's more than weird, Veronica. That's basically, well... racist.
Veronica: The company's position is that it's actually the opposite of racist, because it's not targeting black people. It's just ignoring them. They insist the worst people can call it is "indifferent."
Ted: Well, they know it has to be fixed, right? Please... at least say they know that.
Veronica: Of course they do, and they're working on it. In the meantime they'd like everyone to celebrate the fact that it sees Hispanics, Asians, Pacific Islanders, and Jews.

Though, as true for most corporations, only cares just so much...

Veronica: "Money before people," that's the company motto. Engraved on the lobby floor. It just looks more heroic in Latin.

Honestly though, if HP released web cameras which couldn't see black folks, I find this strangely unsurprising.

Apparently people who build these things assume everyone is the same shade of pasty white.

To the contrary, I said very clearly that the consent of the minor was utterly irrelevant. When you say "it doesn't mean it isn't willing" that is true. It doesn't in fact matter. Statutory rape means consent is irrelevant.

If you have sex with a ten year old, the fact as to whether the ten year old was willing or not is fucking irrelevant. Lets say you're her father... and she loves you. And you ask your 10 year old daughter to spread her legs for you. And she does willingly.

Is that rape?

Of course it is... because the consent of a minor in a statutory rape case is by definition fucking irrelevant.

As to case of forcible rape... okay...
http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/09/...

Its a real thing.

The problem with men in these situations is that first men are DRAMATICALLY less likely to report such an incident than are women. Women are told from a young age that this is wrong when it happens to them. Men are socialized in a completely different way. Thus when a man or boy is sexually assaulted by a woman, we shrug it off or try to rationalize it as a positive thing. But if it came against our will or due to some sort of coercion that is considered rape when it happens to a woman.

If you're married to the status quo for men, then we could just apply that to women as well. That's the other way to get equality if you insist? So if a woman gets raped, we can just tell her to stop being such a baby or ask her if she got aroused at any point during the incident. That's what men get asked when they report this sort of thing.

  I was reading a conversation between some women and a guy that was talking about this and the woman said "how could you have sex if you didn't want to have sex?"... which is roughly up there with a rapist noticing his female victim has gotten wet at some point and thus concluding that really she wanted it all along.

Literally.

The double standard on the issue is frankly pathetic.