Slashdot Mirror

That might be a good reason to live in a decent country instead of fleeing to some hell hole to cook drugs and nail jailbait.

I don't want to pre-judge this. But it is hard not to think of Hans Reiser.

You might wonder why someone with so much money would live so far from town down such a difficult road. Rounding a sandy curve it quickly became obvious: the staggering beauty of the Belize Barrier Reef coast.

McAfee's view is worth a fortune. An endless stretch of blue sky overhangs an ocean of pastel greens and blues framed by coconut palms. Next to a long wooden dock with chairs at its end sits a fast-looking boat with twin outboards.

The day before, I met "Tiffany" here. She claimed to be one of McAfee's girlfriends, one of seven. They all live together, sharing McAfee's houses and fantasies. He's 67. Tiffany says she's 23 and they have been lovers for three years. The girl beside her gives no name and only says she's 19.

Tiffany says she's not seen or heard from McAfee in nearly a week -- not since the neighbor, Greg Faull, was discovered dead and McAfee went into hiding.

Now a day later the 23-year-old had vanished too.

Half a dozen dogs lie sorry-looking or listless in the yard -- thin, hungry and thirsty. They're lucky to be alive.

Dogs just might be the key to this mystery.

Officials say their barking and aggressive behavior was a frequent source of friction between McAfee and Faull, a 52-year-old contractor who retired to Belize from Florida and lived next door.

On November 9, McAfee told police someone poisoned four of his dogs. Tiffany said to put them out of their misery he shot each one in the head and buried them.

Then two days later someone shot Faull in the head in his own living room. A 9mm shell was found on the second step on the first floor, and Faull was found dead on the second floor.

And McAfee had vanished.

This almost daily "catch me if you can" game is wearing thin on investigators. The longer it all goes on, the more suspicious police become.

So five days ago they dug up his dogs. I found the partially exposed graves next to a trash pit in the back behind his priceless ocean view. The flies led me there. I asked a caretaker if he was here when the police came for them. "Yes" he said, then added another tick up the strange-o-meter by revealing, "They cut off their heads."

Since only the heads had bullets, the investigators put the rest of the remains back in the holes, then hurriedly and poorly recovered them.

A source close to the investigation said authorities probably want to see if the slugs in the dogs match the one in Faull.

A bizarre visit to John McAfee's pleasure palace in Belize

Yesterday they posted on CNN that he wasn't the prime suspect and that they had 3 others detained. Also he thinks the cops are going to kill him, http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/18/world/americas/belize-mcafee-killing/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

Yeah, it's a common lie in the US that we have "high taxes" when we have low taxes, especially on the rich.

Unless math has changed recently, both 33% and 35% are > 29%.

2011 Tax Computation Worksheet—Line 44

At least $100,000 but not over $174,400 = 28% rate
Over $174,400 but not over $379,150 = 33% rate
Over $379,150 $ = 35% rate

U.S. corporate tax rate: No. 1 in the world

Assuming that security costs at least $2 a person

It's $2.50 per leg of a trip and the flying public already pays it. Any high speed rail would be paying those sorts of costs as well. I don't know why people think that terrorists are never going to target trains, especially when they've had great success at doing so in the recent past.Seems awful weak to assume trains will remain safe merely because the fad is blowing up airplanes at the moment.

Nor do I see a rationalization for why security would be any cheaper per passenger for a train station than it would be for an airport.

What people are saying is that considering the massive imbalance in passenger rail vs. air, it's probably time to expand rail some.

Why should there be balance? My view is that until someone drops the cost of the rail infrastructure itself, say to around $10 million per mile in current dollars, it will never make sense economically to balance rail and air.

I sure seem to recall a lot of squawking about that and in the end, since no

    one would take the prisoners, Gitmo couldn't be closed.

That's highly unlikely. It would be trivial to transfer the prisoners into a specially built high security prison on some abandoned US military base in the middle of Nowhere, USA. Once the civilian trials had taken place, the facility could be handed over to some state government to become a regular prison.

Sadly, when it comes to addressing the human rights abuses committed by America in its witch hunt on turban wearing brown people,

  Obama is just full od hot air like most Americans.

Here's a reference to the opposition I spoke of:

Some conservatives, however, don't like the idea of bringing suspected terrorists the government calls dangerous to the U.S. mainland.

"There's really no place in the United States that can replicate the sort of operational security features that Guantanamo has," said David Rivkin, a former Justice Department official.

Here's something else:

On May 20, 2009, the United States Senate passed an amendment to the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2009 (H.R. 2346) by a 90-6 vote to block funds needed for the transfer or release of prisoners held at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp.[12] President Obama issued a Presidential memorandum dated December 15, 2009, ordering the preparation of the Thomson Correctional Center, Thomson, Illinois so as to enable the transfer of Guantanamo prisoners there.[13]

I sure seem to recall a lot of squawking about that and in the end, since no
    one would take the prisoners, Gitmo couldn't be closed.

That's highly unlikely. It would be trivial to transfer the prisoners into a specially built high security prison on some abandoned US military base in the middle of Nowhere, USA. Once the civilian trials had taken place, the facility could be handed over to some state government to become a regular prison.

Sadly, when it comes to addressing the human rights abuses committed by America in its witch hunt on turban wearing brown people,
  Obama is just full od hot air like most Americans.

Here's a reference to the opposition I spoke of:

Some conservatives, however, don't like the idea of bringing suspected terrorists the government calls dangerous to the U.S. mainland.

"There's really no place in the United States that can replicate the sort of operational security features that Guantanamo has," said David Rivkin, a former Justice Department official.

They do not have things like mass, heat, flow, friction, stress, wear, corrosion, and a dozen other things that gears and hinges have.

True, but the control systems which drive those are typically software driven.

when a CS or software guru makes a mistake, things don't blow up and hurt people.

Mars Orbiter was due to improper units. Stuxnet software was impressive. Siberian oil pipeline explosion due to malicious software. Or medical eqipment software configured to deliver fatal x-rays, remote exploits with pace makers. Airbush crash due to software. How about software which drives Wall Street trades, surely that affects many more people? What about power outages due to improper software configurations? Here is a nice list of issues involving software.

Hard-science engineers are educated for a reason. Diligence is not optional.

Also why people who build things where lives are on the lines are licensed and bonded.

Additionally, the Administration and Democrats allowed several working groups to work behind closed doors for *months* to try to come up with plans. And in the end, the Republicans on those groups could not deliver a single vote, no matter what the proposal was.

Not true. Olympia Snowe voted yea on the initial committee: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/HealthCare/senate-finance-committee-approves-health-care-bill/story?id=8817603
She also seemed genuinely interested in working in a bipartisan fashion to reform healthcare (to the chagrin of Republican leadership). But after jam packing it with 1000 pages of nonpartisan goodies, they couldn't even hold her support: http://www.politico.com/blogs/politicolive/1209/Sen_Olympia_Snowe_to_POTUS_Give_us_more_time_on_Health_Care.html

they stubbornly refused to accept any Republican input unless it was in line with their ideology

This simply untrue.

Then why does it look that way? Snowe alienated her base from the start -- she had no particular love for political grandstanding or walking the political line. Yet Obama (and the Dems) refused to work even with her. They were more focused on cramming as much stuff into the bill as possible and getting it passed as quickly as possible to score political points (funnily enough, the exact same way the stimulus bill went down: http://money.cnn.com/2009/02/13/news/economy/house_final_stimulus/index.htm).

The truth is that they wasted an entire Congress that they could have been improving the bill,

I totally agree an entire Congress was wasted, but that Congress was wasted on some asinine belief by Democrats that they had some kind of "mandate" from the people to ignore Republican input at all costs. Hell, even Obama himself multiple times said "they tried it their way, and their way didn't work"/"we're driving the car now, they can sit in the back and come along for the ride". These are not the kind of remarks from a person looking for bipartisan solutions...

Let's just be clear for a minute. The tax hike is happening on January 1st, unless new legislation is passed. So your characterization is wrong. What Pres. Obama wants is to pass new legislation keeping the existing tax code for those up to 250k, and then for those over, letting the rates revert to Clinton-era levels

By definition, " letting the rates revert to Clinton-era levels" is a tax hike. Only dogmatic stubborness would keep you from agreeing with that. Or is a tax hike really a "tax refund adjustment"? Please don't try to turn this into a terminology spat. When all the dust is settled (all old legislation expired, all new legislation passed), are their taxes going up? Ifso, it's a hike.

In the last 7 days, the leadership has for the first time started to float ballons that "revenue is on the table" - meaning more revenue via changes to the tax code.

This was pitched in earlier negotiations as well, in the first "grand bargain" in fact: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/magazine/obama-vs-boehner-who-killed-the-debt-deal.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
. "Or, to put it another way, Boehner was proposing to increase the governmentâ(TM)s haul by the same amount you would get if you reversed Bushâ(TM)s tax cuts for the most affluent Americans, but he was proposing to do it by lowering rates and elim

The workers thought management was bluffing but oddly they really did not have large bags of gold they slept on.

Some of them did:

"Within a month of taking over, Rayburn had to preside over a public-relations fiasco. Some unsecured creditors had informed the court that last summer -- as the company was crumbling -- four top Hostess executives received raises of up to 80%."

"Hostess pays Rayburn $125,000 a month, according to court filings. At the same time Rayburn became CEO, Gephardt's son Matthew, 41, the COO of the Gephardt Group, was put on the Hostess board as a $100,000-a-year independent director"

Source: http://management.fortune.cnn.com/2012/07/26/hostess-twinkies-bankrupt/

And this was going on last year at the same time that the company was headed into bankruptcy again and management was asking for even more deep concessions from workers. From this and other things I have read, I get the impression that Hostess is a typical large company dealing with typical liability and productivity problems that couldn't manage through it.

But what is the alternative? Accept the paycut and you'll be at the same table 6 months later, only this time it won't be a 10% pay decrease, it will be 50%.

As the OP said, take the pay cut and find a new job. Don't stick around waiting to see if things work out.

Why not demand the owners of the company step up and invest a few million into it? Or that instead of the workers giving up their pensions, the management returns all the money it's been paid since the company started losing money?

Well, when you strike you should demand this. No one said immediately roll over and accept pay cuts. As some point you have to realize your not going to win though and it's better to capitulate than to try and hold out for something that will not come. If they took the pay cut they would all have jobs and could more comfortably look for new employment. Now their just screwed. (Of course hindsight is 20/20. But basically the Union killed the company instead of just having everyone who didn't like the conditions quit. Seems some preferred unemployment to working which truly is sad.)

$1 for two (300 calories). That's a pretty normal price for a snack. Cheaper than Doritos.

Any fool on the street can fit a 300 calorie snack into a healthy diet. You could even lose a lot of weight with a diet composed largely of Twinkies. There's nothing unhealthy about it, other than that it's empty calories.

Have you done the math? Hostess employs 18K people. Assuming they earn minimum wage, which varies between states so lets just assume its $8 hr, thats $148,000 an hour for salary. Or about $1.1 million per day on salary. Even if all of the executives are pulling $100M a year total, cutting the CEO salary to total of $1M total, would only pay the salaries of everyone else for about 3 months. At the end of it all, the total executive salary is a small portion of a multi-billion dollar company. There is a lot more problems than just a few executives making big bucks. I know it doesn't seem fair that one person makes millions and another doesn't. That doesn't mean that's the problem. It was the bakers union that went on strike. Even the other unions involved were upset with the bakers union for their strike for fear it would cause the company to collapse. So its not like this is just management vs union battle. This was one union making a decision that effected the entire company. This was one union ignoring a lot of other facts about the business.

This had little to do with unions.

This is just typical vulture capitalism. Hedge funds bought the company, loaded it with debt to repay the 1 percenters and are now selling off the corpse and union busting all in one smooth move.

Please read and learn instead of playing into the hands of those that would pit workers against workers.
http://management.fortune.cnn.com/2012/07/26/hostess-twinkies-bankrupt/

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/16/1162235/-Private-equity-owned-Hostess-blames-striking-workers-as-it-liquidates

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/11/09/apple-its-mojo-and-doug-kass/

LOL that is the funniest think I ever read. Its market share drop is due to Apple performing less well than they expected [Apple were not the only one down, Google to name one were down]. The main reasons were poor sales of the iPhone 5, The iPod market vanishing, and lower gross profit %.

Except its well know the value loss came from insider manipulation that people are demanded be investigated. http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/11/09/apple-its-mojo-and-doug-kass/

It shouldn't be too surprising that some people will die after they get their name on the ballot but before the election. I know a dead senator got re-elected back in 2000, and this article about it says that at least 3 House members have been elected while deceased.

dom

apple is making more money than any corporation

The last annual statements available doesn't even put them in the top 100 global companies by revenue. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2011/full_list/index.html and here are the global 500 by profits http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2011/performers/companies/profits/

I do believe, however, that Apple is by far the biggest company by hype.

apple is making more money than any corporation

The last annual statements available doesn't even put them in the top 100 global companies by revenue. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2011/full_list/index.html and here are the global 500 by profits http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2011/performers/companies/profits/

I do believe, however, that Apple is by far the biggest company by hype.

"When it comes to APT, the de facto perpetrator is China .. some examples of advanced and persistent threats, including Stuxnet, Operation Aurora, the RBN and more".

Stuxnet: US/Israeli malware

Operation Aurora only worked because the US government put a backdor in gmail and RBN wouldn't be in business if it wasn't for Windows.

Read the first one all the way through.

Then, to back up my overall position that the 'raising corporate taxes' is just a facade for "OMG, not a Democrat!", read this.

US has the highest corporate tax rate in the world.

Canada top tax rate is 29%, vs 35% in the US (as of 2011). In California, home to a lot of VC-funded companies, high state taxes make this considerably worse. Also, Canadians get health care with their tax payments. In the US, we don't. The Canadian government and the governments in the provinces are more efficient, less corrupt, and much less anti-business than in the US. Your stereotypes about Canada and the US are out of date.

Every EU country and every Asian country has lower corporate taxes than the US. Around the world, the trend has been toward lower taxes except in countries that have enacted austerity plans and in countries with hardening socialist governments, like France and the US.

It's no secret which places are the best ones to invest.

Hmmm well according to this something like two thirds of America's debt is owed to other Americans. Some of them will not be impressed if the government tries to welsh on the debt. And I highly doubt you're going to turn the army on them.

One of the reasons it's difficult to make a choice about Syria is they were one of the nations torture was outsourced to

What makes Syria difficult is that they have fairly strong support from both Russian and China, Iranian troops fighting for the Syrian government, a heavily armed army, the possibility of drawing support and fighters from Hezbollah, an open threat of using chemical and biological weapons, uncertain prospects for the rebels, and Al Qaida militants fighting with the rebels. I don't think the possibility of Syria announcing that in addition to the thousands and thousands of people they have killed and tortured that they volunteered to mistreat a few outsiders is much of a threat. I would consider the possibility of a Syrian army chemical warhead or biological bomb falling into Al Qaida rebel hands is a much bigger problem.

Also I'm astonished that you think that the total number of highly classified interrogation sessions using waterboarding would be published in the press

The fact that an activity was highly classified doesn't seem to have been much of an impediment to its being leaked over the last 10 years as classified program after program was leaked to the press. For example, the NSA surveillance programs, financial protocols to track terrorist funding, the enhanced interrogation programs, and more were all leaked. When the Obama administration took office, it released a variety of materials regarding the terrorist interrogation programs, including the interrogation protocols, against the strong recommendations of several former CIA Directors. If the number three was actually wrong I have little doubt we would have heard of it by now.

I can understand how it might seem that it must be more. There has been a mighty mountain range of outrage and denunciation made out of the actual molehill of fact.

As for "review any link, reference, or citation" - come out of that coma and read a fucking newspaper or listen to the radio instead of just watching some cocaine addled ex-DJ on Fox.

Allow me to draw your attention to the sources I reference above: The Dawn in Pakistan, ABC News (US, not Australian), and National Review magazine. In this post, CNN. No Fox at all. As to your sources, it appears, In short, you've got nothing. All right then. Cheers.

The evidence is in:

http://money.cnn.com/2012/11/09/news/economy/gun-control-obama/index.html

There is even precedent.

It seems Americans will vote pretty much anyone into office. Really, I've heard worse ideas. Zombie Feynman 2016, anyone?

The best clown of a clown show is still a clown. Yet they got 48% of the popular vote. Seriously, what kind of victory did they throw away by not running a serious candidate? By running a serious candidate they could have had a major landslide.

As far as total sales, I'm not sure about the statistics for specific manufacturers, but Mashable and CNN have some interesting numbers on Android vs iOS market share.

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/08/19/man-bites-dog-google-sues-apple-for-patent-infringement/

Along these lines there is a report that up to 3300 people have been killed by our drone attacks in Pakistan, while only 41 were the intended Al Qaeda targets. This is another situation that could blowback on us.

So you are saying in Canada, that if the budget for an operation is used up, you have to wait until next year?

Whereas in the US, if you don't have health insurance, you NEVER get the procedure performed.
If you DO have health insurance, you get the procedure performed and then spend 2 years fighting the insurance company to actually pay for it.
Or you go broke (60% of bankruptcies are due to medical costs, and 3/4 of those had insurance), or both.

So, yeah... Canada's version doesn't sound so bad, all in all.

I challenge you to cite any poll that shows one of the other candidates doing better than Romney in a comparison poll.

I can show you an equal:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/16/cnn-poll-obama-tied-with-romney-paul-in-november-showdowns/

He also had a lead in favorability:
http://www.dailypaul.com/248818/attention-rnc-delegates-ron-paul-beats-obama-and-romney-with-58-favorability-in-national-poll

He also had a lead among independents:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2012/01/09/cbs-poll-independents-prefer-ron-paul-vs-obama/

If the Republicans didn't coup him into nonexistence, he would have beat Obama.

I have done quite a bit of research actually.

Right...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jun/20/obama-asserts-executive-privilege-over-ff-docs/?page=all
http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/News/page/univision-news-investigation-operation-fast-furious-weapons-revealed-17352963
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/11/the-benghazi-drip-drip-drip/
http://www.examiner.com/article/retired-officer-obama-watched-benghazi-attack-happen-sources-say
http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/20/more-than-500-economists-5-nobel-laureates-back-romneys-economic-strategy/
http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/25/news/economy/obama-congress-grades/index.htm
http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/tygrrrr-express/2012/oct/2/real-obama-economic-policy-record/
http://www.ijreview.com/2012/07/10891-top-4-most-wasteful-michelle-obama-vacations/ http://obamagolfcounter.com/

Note the many right-wing sources like CNN and ABC News.

I saved the apology tour for last, as I found several quotes you'll no doubt enjoy:

- At a Summit of the Americas, Obama regretted how “at times we sought to dictate our terms.” In an op-ed about policy toward the America’s, Obama declared: “Too often, the United States has not pursued and sustained engagement with our neighbors.”

- Speaking to the Turkish parliament, Obama rationalized: “The United States is still working through some of our own darker periods in our history.”

- Addressing CIA employees about an administration report which castigated the use of enhanced interrogation techniques against terrorist suspects, the President urged: “Don’t be discouraged that we have to acknowledge potentially we’ve made some mistakes.”

- In a speech, Obama denounced the techniques used in the war on terror: “Instead of strategically applying our power and our principles, too often we set those principles aside as luxuries that we could no longer afford. And during this season of fear, too many of us – Democrats and Republicans, politicians, journalists, and citizens – fell silent.”

- In that same address at the National Archives, he went into full apology mode over Guantanamo: “There is also no question that Guantanamo set back the moral authority that is America’s strongest currency in the world. Instead of building a durable framework for the struggle against Al Qaeda that drew upon our deeply held values and traditions, our government was defending positions that undermined the rule of law.”

0's rhetoric and actions have weakened America considerably, which is reflected in the actions of the PRC and Russia in particular.

You'd be surprised how many Republican-leaning voters are not social conservatives at all ...I'd say 1/3rd of the total...

No, I'm just surprised at how little influence they seem to have over the party. Fiscal conservatism, that makes plenty of sense to me. Social conservatism makes absolutely no sense to me. But it's all the republicans seem to be serious about on at the national level, gay marriage and abortion. I thought after W that "Cut taxes, worry about cutting spending when it's someone else's problem" would have run it's full course. Yet even with the debt ceiling and other issues, the party wasted it in favor of attacking democrats, and the balanced budget amendment went nowhere with the GOP.

Such a finding was required by the use of force legislation pushed through Congress, so Bush signed a letter to that affect.

The Letter

If I can avoid it, I will never vote for anyone who supported that war again.

You can probably find them if you have access to various journals. Those are not priamry source but report in general press. If you don't take the time to look it up yourself, I don#t see why I should. Example :

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44460161/ns/health-childrens_health/t/pants-wearing-sponge-blamed-kids-poor-attention-spans/
"The study, published online Monday by the journal Pediatrics, found watching a snippet of a SpongeBob cartoon negatively affected 4-year-oldsâ(TM) attention spans. Watching a more realistic PBS cartoon did not."

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/07/05/games.attention/index.html
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/07/05/games.attention/index.html


Most study don't show a causation, they are only good enough to show a correlation. But since you asked about correlation it is good enough.

You can probably find them if you have access to various journals. Those are not priamry source but report in general press. If you don't take the time to look it up yourself, I don#t see why I should. Example :

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44460161/ns/health-childrens_health/t/pants-wearing-sponge-blamed-kids-poor-attention-spans/
"The study, published online Monday by the journal Pediatrics, found watching a snippet of a SpongeBob cartoon negatively affected 4-year-oldsâ(TM) attention spans. Watching a more realistic PBS cartoon did not."

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/07/05/games.attention/index.html
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/07/05/games.attention/index.html


Most study don't show a causation, they are only good enough to show a correlation. But since you asked about correlation it is good enough.

Romney would have won if we didn't have the electoral college (according to the popular vote), sooo...

Nope, Obama got the popular vote too:
http://www.cnn.com/election/2012/results/race/president?hpt=elec_racenav

An hour ago when you posted Obama was behind but he's ahead now. The only states still counting votes are the ones that Obama is winning so he'll stay in front.

Which is too bad in the sense that if the electoral vote and popular vote were split maybe there would be some momentum to get rid of the electoral college.

inevitable problems involved with trying to securely collect information from tens of millions of people on the same dayk

Some problems are inevitable. But most of the ones we have are avoided by other major democracies.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/05/opinion/frum-election-chaos/index.html

There was an article on CNN about the US voting system. http://edition.cnn.com/2012/11/05/opinion/frum-election-chaos/index.html

Pretty sad to be honest. We take voting system for granted here (Australia), it is run pretty smoothly, and even though it is paper ballots still, the results are known within hours unless it is pretty close. I have never heard of vote disputes. Usually recounts when the result is too close but that's about it.

Are you implying that Apple was trying to protect user privacy?

http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+is+Tracking+its+iPhone+iPad+Users+Every+Move/article21429.htm

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-04-20/tech/iphone.tracking_1_iphone-users-apple-devices-location-data?_s=PM:TECH

http://www.businessinsider.com/ifa-apples-iphone-tracking-in-ios-6-2012-10

See, Google has an interest in your location because they want to provide you relevant local ads, or provide better maps so that you are "branded" to google services. Latitude is opt-in.

Google tracks you with cookies,login data and IP addresses. You can change these by a simple delete or relogin, deleting your account, or wiping/rooting the device. Bam, you're a "unique user" again.

On the Apple side, they use the UUID, tied to your specific device. You can wipe the phone all you want but tracking data for that device is always connected to that device in a database.

What is Apple's reason for tracking location? Or what was it back then? Why was the feature opt-out rather than opt-in?

But how would you feel if you were the most successful salesman in your company, working on a 6% commission, and the boss came to you claiming he needed to pay everyone their "fair share"? Therefore, since you were the most successful, he was reducing your commission to 3% so that he could raise everyone else's to 10%? This is what a progressive tax does.

Poor analogy because it implies that rich people work proportionately harder for their extra share; but lets play with your analogy a little. Assume your average salesman earns 30k per year. Now given the statistic that US executives earn 380 times the average salary (see link at the bottom) we know that you Mr successful salesman earns.
Your example successful salesman earns a staggering 11,400,000. But he loses a horrific 3% of his income because he's so successful and suffers only taking home 11,058,000, boo-hoo his life is now ruined and now the other commie bastard employees unfairly gain 4% income now take home an extra 1200 giving a grand total of 31200. Maybe they can buy some clothes for their kids now. What kind of perverted society would do this? Luckily we live in a society where mister executive pays little to no tax and so the average wage guys have to pay a third of theirs to make it up.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/04/19/news/economy/ceo-pay/index.htm

He's going to eliminate Obamacare on day 1? It's going to be an uphill battle to do it at all unless the gop take the senate too. Doing it on day 1? Dream on.

He won't do it at all - his ideas on healthcare are remarkably similar to Obama's.

Apparently Estonians vote online too:

http://techcrunch.com/2012/09/24/report-america-ranks-behind-estonia-in-internet-freedom-heres-why/

http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/08/tech/web/online-voting/index.html

[Canada], Sweden, Latvia and Switzerland are among the countries that have tested Internet voting.

But when it comes to national elections, Estonia is the clear leader.

The tiny Baltic nation (its population of 1.3 million is roughly the size of San Diego) has allowed online voting for all of its citizens since 2007. In this year's election, nearly one in four votes was cast online, according to its elections commission.

Note that they have a national ID card, reasoning that it's better to have *one* government controlled database that they can control and monitor, rather than to have a zillion databases that are unconnected and contain various levels of information.

Sure. You can fire anyone you want. Whether you'll win a lawsuit is a different matter. That said, look here for an example of a religious organization doing so.

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/06/21/politics/bio-germ-investigation/index.html
You have to wonder how many labs, private labs within larger complexes got federal grant cash for exploring 'dirty' bits.
Lets hope a wave of fuel and human waste kept everything 'clean'
Bio-safety level 2 for all that extra funding :)

Here's an account from CNN:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/06/us/afghanistan-horse-soldiers-memorial/index.html

Also, I never said the SpecFor dudes taught the natives cavalry tactics. It was, indeed, more the other way around. The US troops just pointed them in the right direction.

See Dr. Joel Fuhrman: http://www.diseaseproof.com/archives/cold-flu-flu-and-nutrition-dr-fuhrman-responds-to-comments.html
"The idea that a person eating a nutrient-rich diet is just as likely to develop and suffer the dangerous consequences from an influenza virus as a cheese burgers and soda eating American is simply wrong. More importantly such opinions are dangerous as they may lead to tragic outcomes for those mistaking authority for knowledge. Let's review just a few articles from the scientific literature that further support this concept that nutritional.excellence can offer protection from viral attacks. I will show the reference and post some explanatory comments below each reference. ..."

Numerous citations there.

Also, on vitamin D:
And: http://www.naturalnews.com/029760_vitamin_D_influenza.html

Counter-evidence on vitamin D though:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/02/health/vitamin-d-colds/index.html

But elsewhere it's been said by Dr. John Cannell that vitamin D has only helped with some influenza strains and also by compairson that the amount in the previous study may still have been too low:
http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/news-archive/2009/h1n1-flu-and-vitamin-d/

Can you provide any substantial evidence to back up your claims to the contrary? Can you even cite any good evidence the flu vaccine to date has accomplished anything significant except put more aluminum in people's bodies? By contrast:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/11/does-the-vaccine-matter/307723/
"But what if everything we think we know about fighting influenza is wrong? What if flu vaccines do not protect people from dying -- particularly the elderly, who account for 90 percent of deaths from seasonal flu? And what if the expensive antiviral drugs that the government has stockpiled over the past few years also have little, if any, power to reduce the number of people who die or are hospitalized? The U.S. government -- with the support of leaders in the public-health and medical communities -- has put its faith in the power of vaccines and antiviral drugs to limit the spread and lethality of swine flu. Other plans to contain the pandemic seem anemic by comparison. Yet some top flu researchers are deeply skeptical of both flu vaccines and antivirals. Like the engineers who warned for years about the levees of New Orleans, these experts caution that our defenses may be flawed, and quite possibly useless against a truly lethal flu. And that unless we are willing to ask fundamental questions about the science behind flu vaccines and antiviral drugs, we could find ourselves, in a bad epidemic, as helpless as the citizens of New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina. ...
Jackson's findings showed that outside of flu season, the baseline risk of death among people who did not get vaccinated was approximately 60 percent higher than among those who did, lending support to the hypothesis that on average, healthy people chose to get the vaccine, while the "frail elderly" didn't or couldn't. In fact, the healthy-user effect explained the entire benefit that other researchers were attributing to flu vaccine, suggesting that the vaccine itself might not reduce mortality at all. Jackson's papers "are beautiful," says Lone Simonsen, who is a professor of global health at George Washington University, in Washington, D.C., and an internationally recognized expert in influenza and vaccine epidemiology. "They are classic studies in epidemiology, they are so carefully done."
The results were

I'm sure Romney will roll this back because the right-wing hates police states.

If you're under the impression that my comment is in support of Romney, you're sadly mistaken. I'm voting for Gary Johnson.

However, it is widely ignored by the left all the bad things Obama has done while in office, even surpassing GWB in many things that the left used to complain about with GWB. Apparently Obama gets a free pass because he has a (D) after his name.

Obama's drone strikes

Obama's medical marijuana raids.

Obama does not deserve the left's support, I would really encourage them to vote either Green Party or Libertarian Party this election if they find these types of things morally repugnant.

Google also has a bad habit of adding "suggestions" to instant search. When you google someone enough times, you can create horribly bad suggestions connected with that person. This is a huge danger .

I have had it happen to me - thanks to the scientology cult my name is tainted with horrible search terms. I have had several employers HR departments asking about it.

Example: http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2010/09/26/french-court-convicts-google-ceo-eric-schmidt-of-defamation/

You have a point: people have difficulty discerning the difference between a 7.0 and a 6.0 yet they are massively different in terms of threat to life and property but they don't appear much different.

I disagree with you on the "crying wolf" portion. Six Italian scientists were recently convicted of manslaughter for not warning citizens of an impending earthquake and because they made it seem innocuous. Crying wolf may be the safe thing to do for safety (e.g. better safe than sorry) and to avoid going to jail.

Source:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/23/world/europe/italy-quake-scientists-guilty/index.html